um
UramHgUl
* . . . f\ . ^ . \. .\ ,. \ v <- |
IHiEnK^
WM$wfflmm,
I
^$%$K$t&
rani
t; t:V
( ; V ;. " .
1 1-, fry- .-..; :
//v *
" < " ;
FROM-THE- LIBRARY OF
TRINITYCOLLEGETORONTO
FROM
THE WILLIAM CLARK
MEMORIAL LIBRARY
DONATED 1 9 2 e A. D.
ENCYCLOPAEDIA BIBLICA
A DICTIONARY OF THE BIBLE
VOLUME II
ENCYCLOPAEDIA
BIBLICA
A CRITICAL DICTIONARY OF THE LITERARY
POLITICAL AND RELIGIOUS HISTORY
THE ARCHEOLOGY GEOGRAPHY
AND NATURAL HISTORY
OF THE BIBLE
EDITED BY
THE REV. T. K. CHEYNE, M.A., D.D.
ORIEL PROFESSOR OF THE INTERPRETATION OF HOLY SCRIPTURE AT OXFORD
AND FORMERLY FELLOW OF BALLIOL COLLEGE
CANON OF ROCHESTER
J. SUTHERLAND BLACK, M.A., LL.D.
FORMERLY ASSISTANT EDITOR OF THE ENCYCLOPAEDIA BRITANNICA
VOLUME II
E to K
f|0rft
THE MACMILLAN COMPANY
LONDON : ADAM AND CHARLES BLACK
IQOI
All rights reserved
6s
COPYRIGHT, igoi,
BY THE MACMILLAN COMPANY.
KEY TO SIGNATURES IN VOLUME II
Arranged according to the alphabetical order of the first initial,
possible indicated thus ; A. B. 1-5 ; C. D.
Joint authorship is where
3S 6-10.
A. B. B. BRUCE, the late Rev. A. B. , D.D.,
Professor of Apologetics and New
Testament Exegesis, I- ree Church
College, Glasgow.
A. B. D. DAVIDSON, Rev. A. B. , D.D., Professor
of Hebrew and Old Testament
Exegesis, United Free Church New
College, Edinburgh.
A. E. S. SHIPLEY, A. E., M.A., F.Z.S., Fellow,
Tutor, and Lecturer at Christ s College,
Cambridge.
A. J. JULICHER, GUSTAV ADOLF, Professor of
Church History and New Testament
Exegesis, Marburg.
A. R. S. K. KENNEDY, Rev. ARCHIBALD R. S.,
M.A. , D.D., Professor of Hebrew and
Semitic Languages, Edinburgh.
C. C. CREIGHTON, C., M.D. , 34 Great Ormond
Street, London.
C. H. T. TOY, C. H., M.A. , Professor of Hebrew,
Harvard University.
C. H. W. J. JOHNS, Rev. C. H. W., M.A., Assistant
Chaplain, Queens College, Cam
bridge.
C. P. T. TIELE, C. P., D.D., Professor of the
Science of Religion, Leyden.
C. R. C. CONDER, Col. CLAUDE REIGNIER, R.E. ,
LL.D.
E. A. A. ABBOTT, Rev. E. A. , D. D. , Wellside,
Well Walk, Hampstead, London.
E. K. KAUTZSCH, E., Professor of Old Testa
ment Exegesis, Halle.
E. P. G. GOULD, Rev. E. P. , D. D. , Philadelphia.
F. B. BROWN, Rev. FRANCIS, D.D., Daven
port Professor of Hebrew a"nd the
cognate Languages in the Union
Theological Seminary, New York.
G. A. D. DEISSMANN, G. ADOLF, D. D. , Professorof
New Testament Exegesis, Heidelberg.
G. A. S. SMITH, Rev. GEORGE ADAM, D.D. ,
LL.D., Professor of Hebrew and Old
Testament Exegesis, United Free
Church College, Glasgow.
G. B. G. GRAY, Rev. G. BUCHANAN, M.A.,
Professor of Hebrew, Mansfield
College, Oxford.
G. F. M. MOORE, Rev. GEORGE F., D.D. ,
President and Professor of Hebrew in
Andover Theological Seminary, And-
over, Mass.
G. H. B. Box, Rev. G. H., M.A. (Oxon.),
London.
H. G. GUTHE, HERMANN, a.o. Professor of
Old Testament Exegesis, Leipsic.
H. v. S. SODEN, BARON HERMANN VON, Profes
sor of New Testament Exegesis, Berlin.
H. W. H. HOGG, HOPE W. , M.A., Lecturer in
Hebrew and Arabic in Owens College,
Manchester ; 4 Winchester Road,
Oxford.
I. A. ABRAHAMS, ISRAEL, London, Editor of
the Jewish Quarterly Review.
I. B. BENZINGER, Dr. IMMANUEL, Lecturer
in Old Testament Theology, Berlin.
J. A. R. ROBINSON, Rev. J. ARMITAGE, D.D. ,
Canon of Westminster.
J. W. WELLHAUSEN, JULIUS, Professor of
Semitic Philology, Gottingen.
K. B. BUDDE, KARL, Professor of Old Testa
ment Exegesis and the Hebrew
Language, Marburg.
K. M. MARTI, KARL, Professor of Old Testa
ment Exegesis and the Hebrew Lan
guage, Berne.
Lu. G. GAUTIER, LUCIEN, Professor of Old
Testament Exegesis and History,
Geneva.
M. A. C. CANNEY, MAURICE A., M.A. (Oxon.),
St. Peter s Rectory, Saffron Hill,
London, E.G.
M. G. CASTER, Dr. M. , 37 Maida Vale,
London, W.
M. J. (Jr.) JASTROW (Jun.), MORRIS, Ph.D., Pro
fessor of Semitic Languages in the
University of Pennsylvania.
M. R. J. JAMES, MONTAGUE RHODES, Litt.D.,
, Fellow and Dean of King s College,
Cambridge.
N. M. M LEAN, NOKMAN, M.A. , Lecturer in
Hebrew, and Fellow of Christ s College,
Lecturer in Semitic Languages at Caius
College, Cambridge.
N. S. SCHMIDT, NATHANAEL, Professor of
Semitic Languages and Literatures,
Cornell University, Ithaca, New
York.
0. C. CONE, Rev. Professor ORELLO, D.D. ,
St. Lawrence University.
0. C. W. WHITEHOUSE, Rev. OWEN C. , M.A.,
Principal and Professor of Biblical
Exegesis and Theology in the Countess
of Huntingdon s College, Cheshunt,
Herts.
P. V. VOLZ, Herr Repetant PAUL, Tubingen.
P. W. S. SCHMIEDEL, PAUL W. , Professor of
New Testament Exegesis, Zurich.
R. H. C. CHARLES, Rev. R. H., M.A., D.D.,
Professor of Biblical Greek in Trinity
College, Dublin ; 17 Bradmore Road,
Oxford.
S. A. C. COOK, STANLEY A., M.A. , Fellow of
Caius College, Cambridge ; Ferndale,
Rathcoole Avenue, Hornsey, London,
N.
S. R. D. DRIVER, Rev. SAMUEL ROLLES, D. D. ,
Regius Professor of Hebrew, Canon
of Christ Church, Oxford.
T. G. P. PINCHES, THEOPHILUS G., M.R.A.S.,
formerly of the Egyptian and Assyrian
Department in the British Museum.
KEY TO SIGNATURES IN VOLUME II
T. K. C. CHEYNE, Rev. T. R., M.A.. D.D., Oriel | W. H. K.
Professor of the Interpretation of Holy
Scripture at Oxford, Canon of Ro- W. J. W.
Chester.
T. N. NO LDEKE.THEODOR, Professor of Semitic
Languages, Strassburg. W. M. M.
W. E. A. ADDIS, Rev. W. E., M.A. , Lecturer in
Old Testament Criticism, Manchester
College, Oxford. W. R. S.
W. H. B. BENNETT. Rev. W. H., M.A., Professor
of Biblical Languages and Literature, W. T. T.-D.
Hackney College, London, and Pro
fessor of Old Testament Exegesis, New
College, London.
ROSTERS, The late W. H., Professor of
Old Testament Exegesis, Leyden.
WOODHOUSE, W. J., M.A., F.R.G.S.,
Lecturer in Ancient History and
Political Philosophy, St. Andrews.
MOLLER, W. MAX, Professor of Old
Testament Literature, Reformed Epis
copal Church Seminary, Philadelphia.
SMITH, The late W. ROBERTSON, Pro
fessor of Arabic, Cambridge.
THISELTON-DYKR, Sir WILLIAM TUR
NER. C.M.G..LL.D., F.R.S., Director
Royal Gardens, Rew.
LIST OF CONTRIBUTORS TO VOLUME II
Arranged according to alphabetical order of surnames.
ABBOTT, E. A.
ABRAHAMS, 1.
ADDIS, W. E.
BENNETT, W. H.
BENZINGEK, I.
Box, G. H.
BROWN, ! .
BRUCE, A. B.
BUDDE, R.
CANNEY, M. A.
CHARLES, R. H.
CHEYNE, T. K.
CONDEK, C. R.
CONE, O.
COOK, S. A.
CREIGHTON, C.
DAVIDSON, A. B.
DEISSMANN, Ci. A.
E. A. A.
LA.
W. E. A.
W. H. B.
I.E.
G. H. B.
F. B.
A. B. B.
E. B.
M. A. C.
R. H. C.
T. K. C.
C. R. C.
0. C.
S. A. C.
C. C.
A. B. D.
G. A. D.
DRIVER, S. k.
GASTEK, M.
GAUTIER, Lu.
GOULD, E. P.
GRAY, G. B.
GUTHE, H.
HOGG, H. W.
JAMES, M. R.
J ASTRO w (Jun. ), M.
JOHNS, C. H. W.
JULICHER, G. A.
RAUTZSCH, E.
RENNEDY, A. R. S.
ROSTERS, W. H.
M LEAN. N.
MARTI, R.
MOORE, G. F.
S. R. D.
MOLLER, W. M.
W. M. M.
M. G.
NOLDEKE, T.
T. N.
Lu. G.
PINCHES, T. G.
T. G. P.
E. P. G.
ROBINSON, J. A.
J. A. R.
G. B. G.
SCHMIDT, N.
N. S.
H. G.
SCHMIEDEL. P. W.
P. W. S.
H. W. H. SHIPLEY, A. E.
A. E. S.
M. R. J. i SMITH, G. A.
G. A. S.
M. J. (Jr.) SMITH, W. R.
W. R. S.
C. H. W. J.
SODEN, H. V.
H. v. S.
A. J.
THISELTON-DYER, W.T.
W.T. T.-D.
E. K.
TIELE, C. P.
C. P. T.
A. R. S. K.
TOY, C. H.
C. H. T.
W. H. K.
VOLZ, P.
P. V.
N. M.
WELLHAUSEN, J.
J. W.
K. M.
WHITEHOUSE, O. C.
0. C. W.
G. F. M.
WOODHOUSE, W. J.
W. J. W.
APK .
Crit. Bib. .
Ohnefalsh-Richter
SMAW
ADDITIONAL ABBREVIATIONS
V. Spiegel, Die alt-persischen Keilinschriften, 1862, < 2 > 81.
Cheyne, Critica Diblica (in preparation).
M. H. Ohnefalsch-Richter, Kypros, die Bibel, und Homer, 1893.
Sitsungsberithte der Koniglicken Akademie der Wissenschaften, Munich.
MAPS IN VOLUME II
ASIA MINOR
Asia Minor .
EGYPT
Egypt Proper
Valley of Nile
Nile and Euphrates
Geology of Egypt and Sinai
Egypt and Sinai in Pluvial Period
EXODUS
The Exodus ....
Goshen
GEOGRAPHY, HEBREW
(1) in the time of the Judges
(2) in the loth century B.C.
(3) in the 8th century B.C.
(4) in the 5th century B.C. j
Strabo s Map of the World
JERUSALEM
Contours and Walls
Site of Jerusalem
PALESTINE
Northern : Galilee and Esdraelon
Central : Mount Ephraim .
Southern : Judah and Judnea
Eastern: Gilead and Ammon
between cols. 1592 and 1593
,, 1240 and 1241
,, 1208 and 1209
,, 1205 and 1206
col. 14377.
col. 1759 /
between cols. 1696 and 1697
col. i6gif.
between cols. 2420 and 2421
col. 2410
between cols. 1632 and 1633
1312 and 1313
2620 and 2621
1728 and 1729
ENCYCLOPEDIA BIBLICA
E
EAGLE. The eagle of EV, the GREAT VULTURE
of RV m - (lyi ; deros), is identified by Tristram with
Gyps fulvus, the Griffon, not a true Eagle but a
member of the family Vulturidse. Griffons are still very
common in Palestine, which is about the centre of their
area of distribution, whence they spread across Asia,
around the Mediterranean area and through Northern
Africa. 1 They are noble birds of large size, and form
conspicuous objects in the landscape as towards evening
they perch on the peaks of rocks or cliffs (Job 39 28 29),
or when soaring. The comparison of invaders to a
swooping vulture is often employed in the OT (cp Dt.
2849 Job 826 Hab. 18 Jer. 4840 etc.). They are carrion
feeders and sight their food from afar. Their head and
neck are bald, a fact which did not escape the notice of the
prophet Micah (Mi. 1 16). They nest in colonies, some of
which contain a hundred pairs of birds. They are said to
be remarkably long-lived, probably attaining a century or
more (allusions in Ps. 103s and perhaps [see 65] in Is.
4631). The Himyarites had an idol nasr which was
in the form of a Vulture (cp ZDMG 29 600), and the
same worship among the Arabs is attested by the Syriac
Doctrine of Addai (Phillips, 24). 2
The Gr. aeros may be applied to vultures, and the Romans
seem to have classed the eagle among the family Vulturidce
(see Pliny, HN 10 3 13 23). Is there any connection between
atTOS and 13 ]V (see BIRD, i)? Possibly the bird found on the
Assyrian sculptures (see the illustrations in Vigouroux, s.v.
aigle ) and on the Persian (Xen. Cyr. vii. 1 4) and Roman (Plin.
HN 13 23) standards is meant to represent not the true eagle but
a vulture. In Christian art the Egyptian phoenix appears as
an eagle and becomes a symbol of the resurrection (see Wiede-
mann, Rel. qfAnc. Egyptians, 193). In the fifth century A.D.
the eagle became an emblem of John the evangelist (see Diet,
of Chr. Antiqq., s.v. Evangelists )- A. E. S. S. A. C.
EAGLE, GIER. See GIER EAGLE.
EANES (MANHC [BA]), i Esd. 9 21 = Ezra 10 21
MAASEIAH, ii. , n.
EARNEST (&PP&BCON). the warrant or security for
the performance of a promise or for the ratification of
an engagement, is used thrice in NT (z Cor. 122 5s
Eph. Ii3/. ), but always in a figurative sense of the
gifts of the Holy Spirit bestowed upon the apostles and
Christians generally, as a pledge that they should
obtain far greater blessings in the future. See PLEDGE.
EARRING. For Judg. 824 Prov. 25 12 etc. ( D ,
nezem} and Ezek. 16 12 etc. (^jy, dgll) see RING, 2,
and for Prov. I.e. cp BASKET. For Is.32o etc. (em 1 ?,
IdhaH) see AMULETS, RING, 2, and MAGIC, 3(3).
The tip of the ear (Tmn, tenuklf) was specially protected by
sacred rites (see SBOTon Is. 66 17).
EARTH AND WORLD. The conception of
universe is usually expressed in OT by heaven and
1 For hieroglyphic picture of vulture see EGYPT, 9, n. 12.
2 Cp the Syriac name anniW C" NSR " gave ), and see We.
Held. 20 (Heid.W 23), and WRS Kin. 209, Rel. Sem.V) 226,
n. 3 ; ZDMG 40 186 [ 86].
38 1145
earth (e.g. , Gen. li 2i 14 19), though there is a
still more complete expression : heaven above, earth
beneath, and the water under the earth 1 (Ex. 204, cp
Gen. 4925). So in Assyrian eldti u Saplati things
above and things below, or (Creation -tablet, i. if.)
the heaven above, the earth beneath, to which 1. 3
adds the ocean. There is also (Is. 4424 ; cp 45?) a
general term ^3, everything (iravra), corresponding
to Assyr. kullatu, gimru.
Earth of EV represents three Hebrew words. ( i )
jnx ( <?res), properly the earth, including Sheol ; hence
_. either the visible surface of our earth (Gen. 26,
, , , , and often) or the nether world (e.g. , Ex. 15 12
eartn. ls ^^ 2 9 4 ). ( 2 ) HCTN (dddmdh), [i.] the soil
which is tilled, Gen. 2s 817 etc., [ii.] the ground, Gen.
125 620 etc. (3) ~\ sy( dphar), properly earth as a material
(Gen. 27), then the earth (Is. 2 19), then dust (Gen.
814), then the nether world (Job 17 16 Ps. 30g [10] etc. ).
@ renders (but not universally) all three words by 777.
Whilst the AV uses world as a synonym for earth
both in OT and in NT, it is only in NT (see below, 3)
_,. that it occurs in the sense of universe. 1
, . , e , The reason is that Jewish writers had adopted
a much more convenient term than heaven
and earth to express an expanded conception of the
universe.
First, however, let us note the Heb. words rendered
world.
1- Tj$i heled, Ps. 17 14 49 2 [i]. If the text is correct, we
have here a singularly interesting transition from lifetime to
the world of living men ; for the primary sense of heled (if
the word exists at all) is life-time (Ps. 396 [5], 8948 [47], Job
11 17 and emended text of 10 20).! Unfortunately heled in Ps.
17 14 is certainly corrupt. From men of the world whose portion
is in life is an expression both obscure in itself and unsuitable
to the context. In Is. 38 ii heled is read only by critical con
jecture ; the text has hedel, which means neither world nor any
thing else : there is no such word.- The true reading is doubtless
tcbel world, and so too we should read in Ps. 49 2 [i]. Hymn-
writers do not generally select the rarest and most doubtful
words. There is but one pure Hebrew word for world (see 3).
2- !!!?, hedel, Is. 38 ii, on the assumption that cessation
(the supposed meaning) is equivalent to fleeting world. Many
critics, with some MSS, including Cod. Bab., read "Pn, heled.
See, however, no. i.
3. 73B, tebel, mother-earth ? a word of primitive mytho
logical origin (Gunkel, Hommel), hence never occurring with
the article. Once it is used in antithesis to midbar, desert
(Is. 14 17) ; but generally it is quite synonymous with /res,
earth. Thus in i S. 2 8 (RV)
1 In Job 11 17 it is an improvement to read "]~J:>n T3 , the
days of thy lifetime (shall be brighter than noontide), and in
10 20 iVn, Are not the days of my lifetime few ? but we
should most probably read -tart and Vart, thy fleeting days.
(Che. Exp. Times, 10381 [ 99]).
2 Cp Ps. 39 5 [4], where EV has how frail I am, but where
the Hebrew has, not frail, but ceasing (Dr. Parallel Psalter).
"rin, hddel, too, is probably not a real word.
1146
EARTH AND WORLD
For the pillars of the earth are Yahwe s,
And he hath set the world upon them ;
And Prov. 8 26 (RV),
While as yet he had not made the earth, nor the fields,
Nor the beginning of the dust of the world. 1
In Job 37 12 RV we have the strange expression the habitable
world (AV the world in the earth ); and in Prov. 831 RV
his habitable earth (AV the habitable part of his earth ).
The phrases are the same, and are due to corruption of the
text. ^ <& impartially renders both rn and ^n sometimes by
yij sometimes by rj oiieou^ie n/.
4- D^iy. oldm, a difficult word, meaning (i) antiquity,
(2) indefinite length of time. The etymology is doubt
ful. Most connect it with c^y, to hide ; but probably
D- -dm is a noun-ending (so Earth). Compare Ass.
tillu, remote, in the phrase ultu ulld from of old ;
ulldnu far-off time, i.e. , past time (Del. Ass.
HWB f>4/.). For a less probable view, see Lag.
Uebers. 115. Twice rendered world in AV : Ps.
73 12, Behold these are the ungodly, who prosper in
the world, RV (better) and being alway at ease
(D^iy 1^?n) I Eccles. 3n (so also RV), Also he hath
set the world in their heart (<5 H , cr6/j.iravTa. rbv aiwva),
a riddle which admits of more than one solution
(see Che. Job and Solomon, 210). However, even
if man is a microcosm we cannot expect to find this
advanced idea in Ecclesiastes, and the occurrence of
oldm, world, in Sirach is improbable. Ha oldm
needs to be emended. 3 We must give up the micro
cosm and the desiderium seternitatis and take in
exchange an assurance that the travail of the student of
God s works is good : I have seen the travail which God
has given to the sons of men to exercise themselves there
with. He has made everything beautiful in its time; also
he has suggested all that travail (pprr^STlK ; attests
Va) to the sons of men (read Q-JN 33^, not ^30 Da^a).
By NT times the word oldm must have received the
new meaning world, for aldiv = n^iy is used in this sense.
. We can doubtless trace this new develop-
,. ... e . am ? ment to the rise (under Persian stimulus)
of olam in f , ,/
fjm i- of a belief in new heavens and a new
times. eartll ^ see EscHATOLOGY, 88, and cp
Che. Intr. Is. 370 ; OPs. 405), and the intercourse of
educated Jews with Greek-speaking neighbours would
confirm the usage. It is true the sense of time is not
entirely lost ; but a new sense has been grafted on the
old. This oldm is not merely this age ; but the earth
which is the theatre of the events of this age, and the
coming oldm is not merely the great future period in
itiated by the Divine Advent, but the new earth which
will be the theatre of the expected great events. Hence
the author of Hebrews can even say (Heb. 12), By whom
also he made the worlds (TOVS aiuvas ; Del. and
Biesenthal niDSiynN), and again (Heb. 11 3), we under
stand that the worlds (ol auDves) have been framed by
the word of God. The phrase ol alwves means, not
the ages of human history (as in Heb. 926, cp i Cor.
10n), but the material worlds which make up the
universe 4 (iravra., Heb. 1 2 ; TO @\firofj.fvoi>, 11 36).
On the Jewish references to the two olilmlin see Dalman, Die
Worte Jesu (1898, pp. 121 ff.~), where it is pointed out that the
famous saying ascribed to Simeon the Righteous (circa 280 B.C.),
respecting the three things on which the world (aViyrt) rests,
cannot be authentic. Dalman also denies that Enoch 486
49 idff. 71 15, where the creation of the world is referred to,
belong to the original Book of the Similitudes. As to 71 15
there can be no question ; chap. 71 is most certainly a later
addition (Charles). At any rate, 45 5 refers to the renovation
1 The text needs emendation (see next note). Read probably,
Ere he had made the land and the grass (-rxm)
And had clothed with green (NBH<I) the clods of mother-earth.
P See Che. JQR, Oct. 1897, pp. i6/
3 The latest commentator (Siegfried, 1898) holds that D7Jn
means the future ; but this is hardly to be proved by 2 t6 3 14
96 12$. Somewhat more plausible, but still improbable, is
Dalman s paraphrase, die unabsehbare Weltzeit.
* Note also that oi/covjueVr) in Heb. 2 5 corresponds to alwv in
C 5 (Dalman).
1147
EARTH (FOUR QUARTERS)
of the heaven and the earth, on which see above. In 72 i 73 3 8
82 i 5 7, the conception of the created world no doubt occurs,
and in 4 Ezra saeculum (Syr. NoVj?) occurs frequently. From
the end of the first century A.D. onwards Q->IJ; is used so often
in the sense of world that we cannot doubt its universality.
It has even penetrated into the older Targums. Cp 6 TOU KOO>OU
/3acriA.evs (2 Mace. 7 9); 6 xvpios TOU KOOOU (2 Mace. 1814);
oWirdnK irdo-ijs rijs KTiVeus (3 Mace. 2 2). Lord of the world
occurs in Enoch 81 9 ; Ass. Mos. 1 n ; Jubil. 2023. These and
similar appellations are never found in NT (Dalman, 142).
In the NT we find (a) 77 olKovpfrr), (6) 6 /cicr/xos, (c)
.
(a) TI OIK. is the habitable globe (Mt. 24 14 Rom. 10 18 etc.) ;
also the Roman Empire (Acts 17 6) ; also =
4. Terms for a l^ v (Heb. 2 5), see above ( 3).
earth and (b) 6 KOO-/XOI is the earth, or its inhabitants
World 1 in NT. ((* Mt. 48 5i 4 Mk. 16i 5l Jn 129); also
the universe (TO o\oi> TOUTO, JPlat. Gorg. 408
A), as in ctTrb <ca.Taj3oAi7 KOO-JU.OV (e.g., Mt. 1835 [not in best
MSS.], cp 24 21) ; also with OUTOS= this oldm (Jn. 1 12, opp.
to fwij aiwcios ; so Jn. 18 36 i Cor. 3 19, 5 10 and Eph. 2 2, where
note the strange compound phrase Kara. TOV a uava. TOU xoV/xov
TOVTOU). 6 KOO-JUOS without OUTOS in i Jn. 215^ 817; and in
the derived sense of worldlings (cp the phrase, too probably
incorrect, "lP CTlp in Ps. 17 14). With OUTOS in Jn. 1231
14 30 [not Ti.] 16 ii i Cor. 819; without OUTOS in Jn. 771 Cor.
1 21 and often. Hence the adjective KOO-JOUKOS ; in Heb. 9i,
TO ayiov Koo>uK6V as opposed to the heavenly antitype of the
tabernacle ; Tit. 2 12.
(c) KTi o-ts, the universe (cp Wisd. 617 19 6), Mk. 106 13 19 ;
2 Pet. 3 4 Col. 1 15 Rev. 3 14. In Heb. 9 n this KTI O-IS, and in
Gal. 6152 Cor. 5 17, Kaiyri KTC O-IS. The latter phrase, however, is
applied morally and spiritually (cp Jn. 857 Rom. 64, and the
phrase /caivb? avSpiairos . . ., Eph. 215 424). In the sense of
the coming oldm it does not occur in NT (but see Enoch
72 1 Jubil. 1 29 ; and cp Bar. 32 6 4 Ezra 7 75). We have the new
heavens and the new earth, however, in 2 Pet. 813 Rev. 21 1 ; and
if we had to render ev TTJ TroAiyyei eo-i. iji (Mt. 19 28) into Aramaic
or Hebrew we should have to follow Pesh. which gives in the
new world (KD*?y)- The Greek phrase quoted is, in Dalman s
words, the property of the evangelist." On the elements of
the world (thrice in NT) see ELEMENTS. T. K. C.
EARTH (FOUR QUARTERS). Like the Baby
lonians, the Hebrews divided the world (i.e. , earth
, . and heaven) into four parts. We find
16 the phrase the four skirts (nisia, 1
Divisions.
TTT^pvyes) of the earth, Is. 11 12 Ezek.
7 2, cp JobSTsSSis; and in Rev.7i 208, the four
corners (yuviai) of the earth. Probably, too, the
four ends (nisp) of the earth could be said ; cp Jer.
4936, the four ends of the heaven. The four quarters
could be described also as the four winds (as in
Ass.): see Ezek. 37 9 (especially), Dan. 88 11 4 Zech.
26[io] iCh. 92 4 Mt. 2431. Similarly, to all winds
means in all directions (Jer. 4932 Ezek. 61012, etc.).
The east was called the front (en/:) ; the west, the
back part (ninx) ; the south, the right (pp ; Aq.
Sym., 5e%idv [Ps. 89 13]); and the north, the left
(^XDK 1 ). The N. is called also pss, which is perhaps
to be compared with Ar. saban (from sabawun, east
wind, E). 2 The S. is also D vn (root uncertain) ; the
E. usually rnip, the (region of the) sun-rising, and the
W. either tr, the sea, 3 or mj?p, the (region of the)
sunset ; sometimes also (^.^. , i Ch. 924), improperly,
3.3ji strictly the dry S. region of Palestine ; see,
further, GEOGRAPHY, 2. We now turn to the appli
cation and associations of the several terms.
2 North North and south are applied (a) to
and South c l uarters of tne heavens. So Job 26?
(crit. emend. )
1 Cp the Ass. phrase kippat same irsitim, usually, the ends
of heaven and earth (Del. Ass. HWB, s.v. rps). The ideogram
SAG-GUL, however, elsewhere =sikkftni, bar (Del.) or possibly
hinge (Stucken). Perhaps the Ass. phrase means the bars
(or hinges) of heaven and earth (Stucken, Astralmythen, 1 38),
and consequently the parallel Hebrew phrase the bars (or
hinges) of earth.
2 So Earth, Etym. Stud. 26 ; Ko. Lehrg. 2 128 ; but cp
GEOGRAPHY, 2. At any rate fgs is to hide, not to be
hidden. East in Hebrew may mean NE. The interchange
of 3 and 3 is, of course, no difficulty.
3 <B nearly always renders D^, 6d\a<rcra., even where west is
meant.
1148
EARTH (POUR QUARTERS)
(Before him) who had stretched the north region (of the
heavens) upon space,
Who has suspended the earth upon nothing. 1
The passage has been well explained (after Del. ) by
Davidson : 2 The northern region of the heavens, with
its brilliant constellations, clustering round the pole,
would naturally attract the eye, and seem to the
beholder to be stretched out over the " empty place, "
i.e. , the vast void between earth and heaven.
See DEAD, 2 (a) for an explanation of the context.
The N. region of the heavens is the station of Bel.
Also Job 37g (crit. emend.),
From the chambers of the south (comes) the storm,
And from the north-star cold,
(When) by the breath of God ice is given,
And the wide waters are straitened.*
There is no south pole in Babylonian astronomy
corresponding to the north pole (cp Jensen, Kosmol.
25) ; but there is a region of Ea, and this is called in
Job the south, as the region of Bel is called the
north. The constellations in the region ( path ) of
Ea are called the chambers of the south.
EV has in v. gl>, And cold out of the north. North =
D lID, which Ges. Di. explain (after Kimhi) as the scattering
a name for the north winds, which dispel clouds and bring
cold. Not very natural. We evidently require a constellation.
The Heb. m2zarii may perhaps be the Ass. (kakkab) inisri.
Read IB D \ he corruption was caused by a reminiscence of
mazzdroth.* The (kakkab) miSri, which we provisionally
translate, with Hommel, the north-star, was associated with
cold, hail (?), and snow by the Babylonians (Jensen,
Kosmol. 50). Vg. ab Arcturo ; <@ 0.77-6 aicpwnjpiW (read
apxTwait). On Ezek. 14 Eccles. 16, see WINDS.
N. and S. are applied (6) to quarters of the earth.
Ps. 89 12, The north and the south, thou hast created
them. Here north and south represent all the four
quarters of the earth.
The N. was encompassed with awe for the Hebrew.
(1) From the N. came the invaders of Palestine, and
the north is a symbolic term for Assyria (Zeph. 213), or
Babylonia (Jer. 1 14 466102024 Ezek. 267 Judith 164).
(2) Religious considerations added to the feeling of awe.
In the mountainous north th people localised the
mountain of El5him, of which tradition spoke (Ezek.
14 Is. 14 13; some would add Ps. 48 2 [3]); and since
God dwelt there, a poet says that manifestations of
God s glory came from the N. (Job 37 22, crit. emend. :
see CONGREGATION, MOUNT OF, and cp BAAL-
ZEPHON, i). According to Ewald (Alterth. 59), this
was the reason why sacrificial victims were to be slain
before Yahwe 1 on the north side of the altar (Lev.
In). Yet, according to the older Israelitish view,
which lasted into post-exilic times, the sacred mountain
of Yahwe was not in the N. but in the S. The
mountain of God was Horeb (Ex. 3i 4 27, etc.);
Yahwe s progress into Canaan was from Seir (Judg.
64 cp Dt. 882), or, as a late Psalmist says, from Teman
(Hab. 83). See WINDS.
Of E. and W. less has to be said. East and
west, in Mt. 811, represent all the four quarters of the
earth> like north and south in Ps -
east
west s a
3. East and
West
symbolic expression for an immense dis
tance (Ps. 103 12). When all mankind unite in festivity,
thou makest the outgoings of morning and evening to
ring out their joy (Ps. 658 [9], Driver). The expression
has been admired ; but it is only the morning sun that
goes forth. The true reading, could we recover it,
would probably be finer. 5 The Babylonians believed
that the celestial vault had two gates, one by which the
sun went forth in the morning, and another by which
1 flD ^a is commonly taken to be a compound (Ko. Lehrg.
2418), but without any adequate grounds. The right reading
must be D 73n ; the plur., to express intense vanity 1 (cp
Eccles. 1 2).
2 Budde and Duhm, perhaps unwisely, follow Dillmann.
3 Che. JBL 17 io 5 /: [ 98].
4 Ibn Ezra (and so Michaelis) identified mezdrim with
MAZZAROTH and MAZZALOTH (gq.v.). Aq. has u.a.Covp.
5 See Che. Ps.M, ad loc.
"49
EARTHQUAKE
he came in in the evening. In the E. was the isle
of the blessed, with Par(?)-napisti, the hero of the
Deluge-story ; in the E. , too, was the Hebrew paradise
(Gen. 28). The W. had no such pleasing associations,
for there was the entrance of the realm of the dead ; *
there, too, the great Lightgiver disappeared.
Still, a Psalmist in the full confidence of faith can declare
(Ps. 1399, crit. emend.),
If I lifted up the wings of the sun, 2
And alighted at the utmost part of the west (D lit. sea),
Even there thy hand would seize me, 3
Thy right hand would grasp me.
He does not say (as MT and AV may suggest) would lead
me to my own peace and happiness. At any rate, it is much
that he is not cut away from Yahwe s hand. He whom God
grasps cannot go to destruction. T_ K. C.
EARTHENWARE. See POTTERY.
EARTHQUAKE (B?in, ceiCMOC, cyNceiCMOC-
Syria and Palestine abound in volcanic appearances
(cp PALESTINE). Between the river Jordan and
Damascus lies a volcanic tract, and the entire country
about the Dead Sea presents unmistakable tokens of
volcanic action and of connected earthquake shocks
vaster and grander than any that are known, or can be
imagined, to have occurred in the historic period.
At the same time, the numerous allusions in the Bible to
phenomena resembling those of earthquakes show that
the writers were deeply impressed by the recurrence of
severe seismic shocks. Not improbably some of these
were recorded in the lost royal annals.
i. Real or supposed historical earthquakes. (a)
1 S. 14 15 And there was a terror in the camp, in the
1. Real or sup- g arrison - and amon S a11 the P^ple,
posed historical and the raiders also wer< ! terrifi ed- 4
earthquakes. lhl f was on account of Jonathan s
exploit. Suddenly the earth quaked,
whence there arose a supernatural terror. Doubtful.
(b] Am. 1 1 prophecy of Amos, two years before the
earthquake. Doubtful. On this and on (c) see AMOS, 4.
Josephus (Ant. ix. 104) draws on his imagination, (c)
Zech. 14s Ye shall flee as ye fled before the earth
quake in the days of Uzziah king of Judah. A post-exilic
notice, (d} Am. 4 1 1 I have wrought an overthrow among
you, as at the overthrow of Sodom and Gomorrah.
Historical, (e) Jos. Ant. xv. 5 2. In the seventh year of
the reign of Herod, there was an earthquake in j udaea,
such as had not happened at any other time, and brought
great destruction upon the cattle in that country. About
ten thousand men also perished by the fall of houses.
The calamity encouraged the Arabs to acts of aggression
(see HEROD). For later catastrophes see Renan, L Ante-
christ, 336.
ii. Unhistorical narratives. (a) Gen. 1925 and he
overthrew those cities. Possibly implying a primitive
2 Unhistorical tra< ^ t on f an earthquake. See, how-
narratives ever DiIImann and C P SODOM. (6) The
giving of the Law(Ex. 19i8). (c) Story
of Korah (Nu. 1631). (d) Elijah at Horeb (i K. 19n).
It is the earthquake that the pious imagination constantly
associates with a theophany. See ELIJAH, 2. (e) The
crucifixion. The earth quaked ; and the rocks were rent ;
and the tombs were opened, when Jesus yielded up his
spirit (Mt. 27 si/. ). Not in the other gospels. Accord
ing to Mk. , the cry which Jesus uttered when he gave
up the ghost so impressed the Roman centurion that he
exclaimed, Truly this was a Son of God (Mk. 1639
RV m &-). Mt. , however, explains this confession as the
result of fear at the earthquake and the accompanying
phenomena. Similar portents are said to have marked
1 Cp Karppe, Journ. asiat. 9 139 ( 97).
2 MT has "in^, the dawn ; but of a bird of the dawn we
know nothing ; and how does the dawn alight in the west ?
Read surely Din (Job 9 7), and cp Mai. 3 20 [4 2].
3 Reading 3n^B (Gra., Duhm).
4 The text is corrupt. See SLING.
EAST, CHILDREN OP THE
the death of Julius Caesar, revered as a demigod (Virg.
Georg. \w\ff.} However, the evangelist may have
thought not only of the divinity of Christ but also of the
exceptional wickedness of those who put Christ to death.
Shall not the land tremble for this, and every one mourn
that ilwelleth therein? (Am. 8 8). (/) Paul and Silas at
Philippi (Acts 16 26). The essence of the story is that
I .ml and Silas were praying with such earnestness that
all in the prison could hear, and that an extraordinary
answer to prayer was granted. No stress is laid on the
earthquake.
The references in prophecy and poetry are imagin
ative in character and symbolise the dependence of the
earth on its Creator : Judg. 64 Am. 88 Hos. 4s Is. 296
Ezek. 38 19/ Joel 2io Nah. Is Hab. 36 Zech. 144 Ps.
18 7 [8] 296 97 4 H4 4 Rev. 61285 Ili3l6 8.
Jerome (on Is. 15) writes of an earthquake which, in the time
of his childhood (circa 315 A.U.), destroyed Rabbath Moab or
Areopolis (see AR). Mediaeval writers also
3. Later earth- S p c .ik of earthquakes in Pajestine, stating
quakes in that they were not only formidable, but also
Palootino frequent. That of 1202 (or 1204) was among
the worst. Baalbek, being so near the
Lebanon and Antilibanus, has always suffered much from
earthquakes; that of 1759 did great damage to the ruins. In
1834 an earthquake shook Jerusalem and injured the chapel of
the Nativity at Bethlehem. The great earthquake of 1837
(Jan. i) did little harm at Jerusalem, which was not near enough
to the centre of disturbance. Safed and Tiberias, however, were
nearly destroyed. Cp Tristram, Land of Israel, 581.
T. K.C.
EAST, CHILDREN OF THE (Dlf) M3 ; 01 yioi
KAe/v\ [BXAQ]) is a general term for the people,
whether Bedawln or pastoral tribes, of the country E.
(or NE., Gen. 29 1 AN&TOAcON [ADEL]) of Palestine,
who were regarded by the Israelites as near relations,
descended from Abraham by Hagar, Keturah, and other
concubines (Gen. 256 D"l ]HN ; eic fHN ANATOAooN
[ADEL]). For textual criticism see REKEM.
In Ezek. 264 ([5]i)[/x]rvid.) I0 they appear to the E. of
Ammon and Moab (crj Is. 1114); in Jer. 4928 they are men
tioned with the Kedarites. In Judg. 8 10 (aXKo$v\<av [B], viol
ai aroAoii [AL]) the phrase has a wider reference, including all
the Bedouin (Moore), and in Job 1 3 (riav a<f> TjAi ou avaroMav
IBNA]), i K. 430 [5io](ira.i TiavapxaCtaviLV0p<aw<av[ B\L])lt seems
to include the Edomites, for the Edomites of Teman were re
nowned for their wisdom. Cp MAHOL. T. K. C.
EAST GATE (rn{n 1WJ>), Neh. 829. See JERU
SALEM.
EASTEE (TO TTACX&). Actsl2 4 AV. See PASS
OVER, and cp FEASTS.
EASTWIND (DHjrn-n), Ex. 10 13. See WINDS,
EARTH (FOUR QUARTERS), and GEOGRAPHY, i.
EBAL (?T|? ; plausibly connected with Bel by Wi.
Gf 1 120 n. 2 ; Gray, Acad, aoth June 1896 ; r-AjBHA
[BADEL] ; cp EBAL, MOUNT).
1. One of the sons of Shobal b. Seir the Horite ; Gen. 8623
i Ch. 1 40 (yao/3i)A. [A], ovjSaA [L]).
2. A son of Joktan i Ch. 122 (where eleven MSS [Kenn.] and
Pesh. read "?aiN ; om. B, ye/xtai/ [A], r)/3j)A [L], Jos. Ant. 1.64
T)/3aAo ; HEBAL). In Gen. 1028 the name appears as OHAL
(VjiV, Sam. n J?, om. ADE ; euoA [MSS ; see HP], ye/3aA
[Compl., MSS], yai/3oA [L] ; EBAL). Halevy connects with
the local name Abil in Yemen (Mtl. 86). Cp Glaser, Skizze,
2426. The name may be a miswritten form of ^ND^N, which
follows (Che.).
EBAL, MOUNT ?yu 1H ; O ROC r<MB&A [BAFL] ;
Jos. Ant. v. 1 19 HBhAoc [> i fHBHAoc] ; Ant. iv. 844
Bo YAH ; MO.VS HKBAL}. Possibly Ebal should be
Ebel ; -bel may be a divine name, ... of Bel. The
dedication of a mountain to Bel in primitive times would
not be surprising. Cp Ebal (above), Harbel (Num. 34 n,
see RIBLAH). There is of course no connection between
Ebal (i, above) ben Seir and Mount Ebal.
Ebal is a mountain 3077 ft. above the sea-level, which,
with Gerizim (on the south), incloses the fertile valley
in which Shechem lies. Both the mountains and the
city were doubtless sacred from remote antiquity. There
is an indication of this, so far as regards Ebal, in the
EBER
direction respecting the solemn curse to be deposited
there, ready to fall on the disobedient ( Dt. 11 29 cp 2713-26),
and respecting the placing of the great stones inscribed
with the (Deuteronomic) Law and the erection of an
altar to Yahwe on the same mountain (Dt.2?4-8). The
latter passage is specially important. As Kuenen (Hex.
128) and Driver (Dt. 295) have pointed out, there was an
injunction respecting a national sacrifice on Mt. Ebal 1 in
the older work (JE) upon which the late Deuteronomic
writer builds. The view that any disparagement to
Ebal was intended by Dt. 1129 is therefore in itself
improbable, nor can it be said that the mountain is
even now sterile to the degree which a popular prejudice
demands.
Maundrell in 1697 observed that neither of the mountains
has much to boast of as to their (its) pleasantness. Corn grows
on the southern slopes, and there are traces of a thorough system
of irrigation in ancient times. 1 Mt. Ebal is 228 ft. higher than
Mt. Gerizim, and commands a more extensive view, which is
fully described by G. A. Smith (HG 119-123). Its position was
thoroughly but not unnaturally misunderstood by Eus. and Jer.
On this and other points, see GERIZIM. In the Pap. Anast.
(Travels of an Egyptian in Syria, Palestine, etc.), Chabas
and Goodwin render (i. 21 6) Where is the mountain of Ikania?
who can master it ? (RPN 2 1 1 1). This should rather be, Where
is the mountain of Sakam(a) or Shechem? i.e., either Ebal or
Gerizim (As. u. Eur. 394). In the fourteenth century B.C. the
latter names do not seem to have been widely known.
EBED ("1217, i.e., servant [of God], 50;
[AL]).
1. Father of Gaal (Judg. 926-41, i<o/3)A [B] v. 31 ajSeA. [A],
35 o-ajSer [A]) according to MT ; but see GAAL.
2. b. Jonathan of the B ne ADIN in Ezra s caravan (see EZRA i.,
2 ; ii., 15 [i]<O Ezra 86 (a>/3r)0 [B], laftf, [A], [A/xii/] aa|3 [L]) =
i Esd. 832 (OBETH, ou/V [B], <o/37)e [A], [A/our] aa/3 [L]).
EBED-MELECH ( vP^^i servant of the king
[i.e. God], 41 ; occurs also in Phoen. ; aBAe/weAex
[BKAQ]). An Ethiopian eunuch at the court of
Zedekiah, who obtained leave to draw up Jeremiah from
the cistern into which he had been cast by the princes
(Jer. 887^). He was rewarded by a prophetic assur
ance that he would be preserved at the capture of Jeru
salem (39 is/:).
Jewish legend reckons Ebed-melech among the nine (or,
some say, the thirteen) who entered Paradise without passing
through death (see Gaster in MGIVJ, 1881, p. 413).
EBEH (H2N), Job 926 AV n e-, RVe- REED(?.I/. 5).
EBEN-EZER pWrrjnK, the stone of help,
ezep [BAL]).
1. The site of the battle in which the Philistines slew
the sons of Eli and took the ark (i S. 4i 5i, afievve^tp
[A]; in 5i, -vvrjp [B]). The battle seems to have
been followed by the destruction of Shiloh (cp Jer. 7
12 14), and the subjugation of central Canaan by the
invaders. This Eben-ezer was near Aphek, which lay
in the northern part of the plain of Sharon.
2. The stone which Samuel set up between the
Benjamite Mizpah and Shen in commemoration of his
victory over the Philistines (i S. 7 12). This is quite
a different part of the country from that in which (i)
lay, and the two Eben-ezers cannot be made one without
inventing a new Aphek. See APHEK, 3 (c\ On the
other hand there is no reason why more than one sacred
stone should not have borne so appropriate a name as
the stone of help ; 3 the story of i S. 7 comes from
a document of no historical value, and is probably an
aetiological legend giving an innocent explanation of
what was really a rude stone idol. w. R. S.
EBER ("ay, eBep [BADEL]). i. That Eber is not
an actual personage, but an ethnological abstraction,
is shown elsewhere (see HEBREW LANGUAGE, i).
He is in fact the eponym of all the Hebrew peoples
1 The Samaritan reading on Mt. Gerizim, adopted by
Kennicott, is obviously a sectarian alteration of the text.
2 See Early Travels in Pal., ed. Wright, 433 ; Conder,
Tentwork, 1 67 ; Rob. BR 3o6 ; Grove-Wilson, Smith s DBV\
1828.
3 Cp Abnll, stone of El, RSV], 210, n. i.
1152
EBEZ
ECBATANA
all the sons of Eber (Gen. 102i ; tfiop [E]). Genea
logically he is the father of Peleg and Joktan, and the
grandson of Arpachshad (i.e. , the Hebrew peoples
came from Chaldaea ; see ARPHAXAD), Gen. 1024/1
i Ch. 1 iS f. 24 f. ; cp Gen. 11 13-16. _The name is
properly a geographical term in:n 13J?. Eber han-nahar
i.e. , the farther (?) bank of the river which appears
in Ass. in the form ebir nari (first indicated by Wi. GJ
1223, n. i ; cp Hommel, AHT 196, 255, 326), l and,
Hommel thinks, was originally applied by the Canaanites
to the region on the W. bank of the Lower and the Middle
Euphrates, including Uru (or Ur) and Borsippa. The
designation Eberites or Hebrews would naturally still
adhere to those tribes which came westwards into
Canaan. According to this scholar, the name Eber
is also used once in the OT (viz., in Nu. 2422-24;
ej3paiovs [BAFL], efiep [F a m -]) of Palestine and Syria
with the exception of AshurorS. Judah (see ASSHURIM).
His arguments are, however, not very solid. It is
not certain that ebir nari in the inscription really
denotes Palestine ; Hommel shifts his ground in the
course of his book (see AHT 196, 326) ; and after
all it is not a Canaanitish inscription that he gives us.
It is even more questionable whether Hommel can
claim i K. 424 [54] as proving an early Israelitish use
of Eber han-nahar as an expression for Palestine.
This passage, together with iK. 42i[5i], seems to
belong to a late idealistic editor, who lived at a time
when Eber han-ndhdr ( Abarnahrd], or, in old Persian,
Arbciya, was the constant phrase for the region between
the Euphrates and Gaza (see CCELESYRIA, i).
Hommel s restoration of Nu. I.e. may be sought in his book
(AHT 245/1). He is not wrong in supposing that the text
needs emendation ; but in deference to an archaeological theory
he has unfortunately neglected the most important recent
suggestion viz., that of D. H. Miiller(see BALAAM, 6) which
makes Nu. 24 23^ an oracle on the kingdom of Sam al (NE. of
the gulf of Antioch). Starting from this, it will be plain that
Assyria and Eber must be referred to in the little poem as the
enemies of the N. Syrian kingdom. 2
The sense of Eber has to be obtained from the
context. It may mean either the region beyond the
Euphrates, or that on this side the river, near Aleppo
(Ass. Halvan). In defence of the rival theory (that of
Hommel) it is urged that the phrase Ibr-nahardn
(pn: -nj?) in a Minasan inscription means the region
E. and N. of Asur, practically therefore the trans-
Jordanic country and Syria (Glaser). Winckler, how
ever (AOF Is37/i ; (7/1 174, n. 2, and 192), thinks that
the Mincean Eber han-nahar was the land of Musri
(see MIZRAIM, z b), which received a second name
from the stream that formed its frontier, whilst
Marquart (Fund. 75) is of opinion that Ibr-naharan
can only be the Persian province, Abar nahra (see
above).
2. b. Elpaal, in a genealogy of BENJAMIN ( 9 ii. j3), one of
the founders of Ono and Lod and its dependencies, i Ch. 8 12
(HSrji [BA], a(3p [L]).
3. A priest, the head of Amok, temp. Joiakim (EZRA ii.,
6 6, n), Neh. 12 2o(aj3eS [N c a mg - inf L], om. BN*A).
4. AV HEBER (RV EBER), in a genealogy of GAD, i Ch. 5 13
(u>/M [B], ico/3. [A]).
5. AV HEURK (RV EBER), b. Shashak, a Benjamite, i Ch.
8 22 (u/SSij [B], wfrfi [A], a/3ep [L]). T . K . C.
EBEZ
, Josh. 1920 RV, AV ABEZ.
EBIASAPH (*)DN), i Ch. 623 [8], etc. See ABI-
ASAPH.
EBONY (Kt. D^aiH ; Kr. D32n ; true vocalisation
uncertain ; Egypt, heben [Lieblein, AZ,, 1886, p. 13],
1 Its use eBeNOC ( not in - but in Symm. Ezek.
27 15), HEBEN VM; a loan-word). The
word occurs in MT only once (Ezek. 27 15) ;
but there are traces of it in perhaps four other
passages (see below, 2). From i K. 1022 we may
almost certainly learn that Solomon imported ebony
1 Cp also Wi. Mu$ri, Meluhha, Ma tn, pp. 51^! [ 98].
2 See Che. Exp. T. 8 520 (Aug. 97), and 10 309 (June 99).
"53
as well as ivory, and from i Ch. 29 2 that he was be
lieved to have used it in the decoration of the temple.
If our emendation of Is. 2i6 is right (below, 2^),
ebony was especially used at Jerusalem in the construc
tion of thrones, for Isaiah appears to threaten destruc
tion to thrones of ebony. Possibly Solomon s famous
throne (i K. 10 18) was made of ivory inlaid with ebony.
The passage that needs no emendation (below, 2 a)
occurs in Ezekiel s grand description of Tyrian commerce.
Ebony, as well as ivory, was brought to Tyre by De-
danite.or possibly Rhodian, merchants (see DOUANIM).
The uses to which ebony was put by the Egyptians
are well known. It was employed both for sacred
and for secular purposes ; shrines, palettes, and many
objects of furniture were made of it. From the time of
Ti (tomb at Sakkara) to that of Ptolemy Philadelphus it
finds frequent mention in the Egyptian records (Naville,
Deir el-Bahari, 1 24 [ 94]). The Babylonians and
Assyrians too knew this wood, if Jensen (AT? 837)
is right in supposing that it is meant by the term usu,
which is applied to a precious kind of wood, derived by
the patesi, or priest-king, Gudea, from Meluhha, or NW.
Arabia.
There seems no reason to doubt, notwithstanding Sir
Joseph Hooker s hesitation, that the ebony of Ezek.
is the heartwood of Diospyros Ebenum, a large tree of
S. India and Ceylon, which has been exported from
early times. It was no doubt one of the articles of
Phoenician commerce through the Red Sea, like so
many other products mentioned in OT.
We will now examine the biblical passages in which
reference is perhaps made to ebony.
(a) Ezek. 27 15 was understood in very different ways by the
ancients. s bSovra.? eA.e<ai/T<.Vovs indeed supports n p ; but
TOIS elo-a-yofie i/oi? implies some word beginning
2. Biblical with *?, and Pesh. reads the whole phrase filJIp
evidence. njiaSl JOBS horns of oil and frankincense. Still
the ordinary text and the ordinary rendering are
probably correct ; Smend, Cornill, and Bertholet are, on this
point, agreed.
(b) The present text of i K. 10 22 cannot be correct. BL only
gives (as its rendering of MT s Q"3ni D E1/?1 D 3njB ) * at Ai Swf
TopevTwy K<xi TreAotijTO)! (an-cA. [L]) i.e., it read the first word
D 33K- This is probably older than the reading substituted for it
in <B A ; but although the Chronicler may have read DW 33N for
D SniB* [see (c)], MT is probably nearer the true text. Only,
following Ezek. 27 15, we should restore D }3ni |B i , ivory and
ebony (see Gesenius and Rodiger, Thes.). It is not very probable,
however, that Q"3nl D SID s correct, ingenious as the explana
tions given of these words elsewhere (Ai fi) certainly are. n"DH
has probably arisen out of a dittographed rj 33,Yl (it is remarkable
that in Ezek. 27 15 Tg. actually reads Q"3in instead of MT s
G 33in) D Slp ma y in like manner have arisen out of an early
scribe s correction of the text ; he probably wrote flWp- If so >
we should read the whole phrase G 33ni \W DUIpl f]D31 3HI>
gold and silver, and horns of ivory and ebony.
(c) In i Ch. 292 Dnfe" 33N, onyx -stones, which does not
come in very naturally in the list of David s building materials,
should rather be C 33W J2*. Perhaps 2 Ch. 9 21 originally made
the ships of Tarshish bring cnty J3N, not Q3,tjtf. See Che.
Exp. T. 10 240 (Feb. 99).
(d) In Cant. 3 10, where EV has, absurdly, the midst thereof
being paved with love, we should certainly read its centre
inlaid with ebony (o ]3n for rQnx). See LITTER.
(e) In Is. 2 166 monn nV3B" cannot possibly be right. The
whole verse should probably be read thus (SBOT, Addenda),
f tprt nbDnX Sa Sj- l, and on all palaces of ivory,
D 33n niND3 -l 73 Vyi, and on all thrones of ebony.
Cp Am. 3 15, and, on thrones of ebony, see above ( i). A similar
emendation seems to be needed in Ps. 48 7 [8], where rivw
B> Ehn should almost certainly be D ytJH niaiD. Cp. OPHIR.
T. K. C.
EBRON (P?r), Josh. 1928f, RV. See ABDON.
EBRONAH (nrqr), Nu. 33 34 AV, RV ABRONAH.
ECANUS, RV ETHANUS (Ethanus), a scribe (4 Esd.
1424). The name possibly represents ETHAN [4].
ECBATANA (CKBATAN A [BNAVL]; Jos. Ant. x. 11 7
xi. 46) is the Gk. form of the name (i Esd. 622 Judith
"54
ECCLESIASTES
ECCLESIASTES
1 1 f. 2 Mace. 9 3 Tob. 3 7 ) which appears in Aramaic
(Ezra 5 17) as ACHMETHA. Its modern equivalent
is Hamaddn. See further GEOGRAPHY, 22, and
PERSIA.
ECCLESIASTES
Name ($ i). Date ( 11-13).
General Character (8 2/). Integrity ( 14).
System of Thought ( 4-8). Canonicity ( 15).
Character of Author ( <)/.). Literature (8 16).
Koheleth, EV Ecclesiastes or the Preacher (Heb.
J"l/np, Kohtleth, eKKAHClACTHc[HNAC], Jerome, Con-
j, . cionator), is a word of rather uncertain
. ame, etc. meanm g being the /em. participle (in
the simple form) of a verb usually employed in the
causative and signifying to gather together an assem
bly. It possibly means he who addresses an assembly,
as English, the Preacher. It was taken in this sense
by the Greek translator and by Jerome. The name
is applied to Solomon (lua). The fern, form of the
word has been variously explained. By some it is
supposed that Koheleth is -wisdom (which is/em.) per
sonified ; but, Koheleth is construed as a masc. (7 27
should be. read dmar hak-Kohtleth, as 128), and wisdom
would hardly say I applied my heart to search out by
wisdom (1 13 ; cp 1 17 23). It is easier to suppose that
ihe/em. is to be understood in a neuter sense, the subject
which exercises the activity being generalised, that which
addresses, with no reference to its actual gender (Ezra
25557), the form having possibly an intensive sense, as
in Arabic. The book is written in prose, though inter
spersed all through with poetical fragments, when the
author s language becomes more condensed and elevated.
It is only in comparatively modern times that any
real progress has been made in the interpretation of
, , ,. Ecclesiastes. The ancients were
2. Interpretation. too timid to allow the Preacher to
speak his mind. Modern interpreters recognise a strong
individuality in the book, and are more ready to accept
its natural meaning, though a certain desire to tone
down the thoughts of the Preacher is still discernible in
some English works. One thing which has greatly con
tributed to the misunderstanding of the book and the
character of the Preacher is the introduction of Solomon.
To consider all those passages where the Preacher refers
to himself as king in Jerusalem and the like to be in
terpolations (with Bickell) may be unnecessary ; but it
is necessary to understand that, as in all later literature,
Solomon is merely the ideal of wisdom and magnificence.
It is in this character alone that he is introduced.
Neither his idolatry nor his supposed licentiousness (the
term skiddah, 2 8, RV concubines, is of uncertain
meaning) 1 is alluded to ; nor is his penitence. The con
ception of a Solomon in his old age, a sated and
effete voluptuary, looking back in penitence upon a life
of pleasure, and exclaiming Vanity I is wholly unlike
the Preacher of the book. There is not a word of
penitence in the book. The Preacher is anything but
weary of life. He has the intensest desire for it and en
joyment of it (11?), and the deepest horror of death and
the decay of nature (122/1). Far from being outworn
and exhausted, he complains throughout the book that
the powers of man have no scope : he is cabined, cribbed,
confined by a superior power on all sides of him. Neither
his natural nor his moral being has free play. Indeed,
in his consciousness of power the Preacher appears to
demand a freedom for man nothing short of that prom
ised in the words Ye shall be as God.
Amid all the peculiarities of the book certain things are
clear, i. The book has a general idea running through
3 General il> and is no mere collec tion of fragments
character. or of occasional thoughts. The connec
tion of the reflections sometimes seems
1 (Many analogies suggest that nilEM ,TTE> is only a mis-
written repetition of niTO) D"W, men- singers and women-
singers. ]
"55
loose, the author was not a literary artist, but there
is in his mind a general idea, which all his musings and
examples illustrate.
2. From the name which the author assumes it is
evident that he desires to play the part of an instructor.
He has his fellow -men before him, and feels that he
has a lesson to convey to them. True, there is a large
personal element in the book it is the author s con
fessions, and he takes his readers largely into his con
fidence ; but he is not solitary in his perplexities, and
he has social and religious considerations which he de
sires to address to his contemporaries.
3. Further, the author is everywhere in earnest. He
is not a mere clever dialectician playing intellectually
with great problems or human interests, setting up
opinions only to overturn them, or broaching theories
only to reduce them ad absurdum. If he sometimes
appears to speak on both sides of a question it is due to
this, that the conditions and stations of human life such
as poverty or riches, servitude or ownership, royalty or
the place of subjects have two sides, and in his prac
tical philosophy, which consists in inculcating a spirit
of equanimity, he sometimes seeks to show the good
that there is even in things evil, and on the other hand
the drawbacks incident to those things which men covet
most. He has also, perhaps, different moods. He is
so overcome by the thought of the miseries that oppress
human life that he thinks it better to die than to live, or
best of all never to have lived ; but at other times his
mood brightens, and he counsels men to throw them
selves into whatever activity offers itself to their hand and
to pursue it with their might, and to seize whatever enjoy
ment is yielded by the labour or by its reward. The
ground-tone of his mind is certainly sombre. He is
oppressed by the intellectual and the practical limita
tions to which human life is subject. Man cannot under
stand either the world in which he lives or the work of
God amid which he is set ; neither can he by his efforts
accomplish anything which is a permanent gain either
to himself or to the world, nor break the fixed and in
exorable order of all things, of which order he himself
is part. His chain is very short, permitting only the
narrowest range of work or of enjoyment, and all he
knows is that this work and enjoyment is the portion
which God has assigned to him. This is the funda
mental idea of the book, repeated many times, and the
author s position appears to remain the same throughout.
Although his mood varies, his verdict or judgment is
stable (128). There is no evidence of a struggle in his
mind between faith and doubt, in which faith achieves
a victory ; much less are the apparent discrepancies of
view in the book to be explained on the assumption
that it contains the utterances of two voices, one
doubting and the other believing.
The book consists of what might be called the author s
two philosophies, his theoretical philosophy and his
4 Main P ract ca ^ The theoretical principle is : All
principles s vanitv : what S ain > result > is there to man
in his labour or life? The practical prin
ciple is really all that is left possible by the theo
retical one : Life has no gain ; but God has given life
to man, and he has to live it. Therefore, there is nothing
better than that a man eat and drink and let himself
enjoy good, for this is God s gift to him. Naturally
there is a third thing. This enjoyment of good is the
only sphere in which a man has a certain freedom :
it partly depends upon himself and his own demeanour.
Some principle to regulate his conduct and mind in life
is therefore necessary. This regulating principle the
Preacher calls wisdom. As a mental quality it is prac
tical sagacity, insight into things and situations, enabling
a man to act prudently ; as a temper it is equanimity
and moderation. These three ideas or conclusions had
already been arrived at before the author sat down to
write his book ; they are constantly present to his own
mind, and much of the obscurity of the book arises
1156
ECCLBSIASTES
from his insisting upon them not separately but simul
taneously.
Without circumlocution the Preacher states his funda
mental idea : All is vanity : what gain is there to man
.in all the labour in which he labours
5 - Theoretical under the sun? , In other words>
pmiosopny. human life is w i t hout result. In this
it is like the whole order of things, which goes on in an
eternal round, accomplishing nothing. All things recur,
and there is nothing new under the sun (1 i-n). Then,
in chap. 1 f. , he gives an account of the experiments
which led to this conclusion. He inquired into all
that is done under the sun, by which he means not
merely the whole variety of human activity, but also all
the events that happen to man in his life, and he found
that all was without result. He found, too, that the
knowledge gained during the enquiry was equally result-
less : In much wisdom is much grief (1 12-18). Then
he tried pleasure, not as a sensualist, for his wisdom
remained with him (23-9), but as an experimental
philosopher, and he found pleasure equally barren of
result : I said of laughter, It is mad, and of mirth,
What doeth it? (22). Wisdom, indeed, carries a certain
advantage with it ; but it is no permanent gain to a man,
for as the fool dieth, so dieth the wise man. There
fore, there being no profit or permanent gain in life,
howsoever it be lived, the practical conclusion is, Let
yourself enjoy good (224).
Such is the author s meaning when he says that all
is vanity. It is not, as we are apt to suppose, that
the world is unsatisfying and that the human soul craves
something higher than the world can give. All is
vanity because man is confined by a fixed determination
of everything on all sides of him by God. All the
events of human life are in the hand of God : man has
no power over them more than he has over the wind
(88). There is a time to be born, and a time to die ;
a time to weep, and a time to laugh ; a time to love
and a time to hate. All is in the hand of God ; whether
it be love or hatred man knovveth it not all is before
them (3 1-9 9 1). It is absurd to suppose that this means
that there is a proper or suitable time for everything ;
it means that there is a time fixed by God for every
thing, a time, not when things should be done, but
when they must be done. Even the injustice in the
judgment seat and the oppressions against which men
are helpless are ordinations of God. There may be a
time for judging them -there is a time for everything ;
but their object in God s hand is to bring home to
man a true idea of what he is that he is nothing
and that God is all. Their object is to prove men and
teach them to fear God, and that they may learn that
they are but beasts ; for one event happeneth to them
and to the beasts : all go to one place, all are of the
dust, and all turn to dust again (3 16-20) Who knoweth
the spirit of man whether it goeth upward, and the
spirit of the beast whether it goeth downward to the
p . . earth? (821 RV). Obviously nothing
MI v! is left to man but to take what jy out
sopny. of life is posses, for that is his portion
(224 81222 5i8-2o 815 Qy-io llgfi). Even over this
man has no power : it also is in the determination
of God (7is/). Power to enjoy life is the gift of
God (224/ 813 5 19) ; and, though it may generally be
assumed that he desires men to have this enjoyment
(9y), there are instances where he denies them the gift
(226 62-8). The Preacher is, of course, no sensualist.
The good, enjoyment of which he recommends, consists
of the simple pleasures of life : eating and drinking, the
consolations and supports of wedlock, the pleasure to
be derived from activity in work or in business (9 7-10 11
1-6910). How could the pleasures recommended be
those of riot and excess when they are the gift of God,
the portion he has given to man in the life which he
spends as a shadow ? It is just in these enjoyments that
man comes nearest to God : he meets God in them, feels
"57
ECCLESIASTES
his favour, and knows that in them God is responding
to the joy of his heart l (5 20). This is the old view of
the Hebrew mind, which looked on prosperity and the
blessings of life as in a sense sacramental, as the seal
of God s favour. The Preacher is a God-fearing man
(56/8 12), a man of righteous life (8 13), thoughtful, and
dwelling by preference on the serious side of life (7i-6).
He believes in God, and in a moral rule of God, who
judges the righteous and the wicked. No doubt this
rule is incomprehensible and full of what seem moral
anomalies. It appears arbitrary (226) : under it all
things happen alike to all, to the godly and to the
ungodly (9 1-3): the race is not to the swift nor the
battle to the strong (9n): there be righteous men
unto whom it happeneth according to the work of the
wicked, and the contrary (814). Nevertheless, the
Preacher will not abandon the general idea of such a
moral rule (8i2/. ), though he laments that the delay
and uncertainty of God s judgment encourages men
in their wickedness (811), and increases the evil and
madness which are in their hearts (9s) ; for, though God
made man upright, man has sought out many inven
tions (729). Such anomalies in Providence, however,
always drive the Preacher back to his practical counsel :
Wherefore I commend mirth ; for a man hath no
better thing under the sun than to eat and drink and
to be merry (815).
Man is speculatively unable to. comprehend the world
(3 ii 724 817), and practically helpless to obviate its
evils ; he is bound within an iron system which is un
alterable. From a modern point of view it might be
asked, Does the Preacher acknowledge the possibility of
a progress of the individual mind within the bounds of
the system which fetters him, of a culture or discipline
within the limitations imposed on him by God? He
does so in a certain sense. The evil of life, man s
ignorance of what is to befall him, teaches him to fear
God (814) ; and in his survey of the work that is done
under the sun he acquires wisdom, or, to.use a common
phrase, culture. But the vanity, the resultlessness
of life, lies here : in that a man can neither
retain these gains nor transmit them, and,
after all, life is without profit. ( i ) Man cannot retain
his gains, for death surprises him : the wise man dieth
even as the fool, and there is no remembrance of either
of them for ever (2i6 ; cp 217-23) ; in the grave there
is no work, no knowledge, no wisdom (9io) : the dead
know not anything, neither have they any more a
reward (9s). The Preacher strikes here the saddest
note of his feeling. It is obvious that his complaint
that life has no profit because man cannot retain its
gains is a complaint that man cannot retain himself
What shall it profit a man if he gain the world and
lose himself? The Preacher s cry is for continuity of
the individual life, that he may still carry with him the
gains which his spirit has accumulated. He appears
to be aware that immortality of the individual spirit is
believed in by some ; but either the ground-tone of his
own mind is too sombre for him to accept the idea, or
the evidence for it seems insufficient (819-21 9i-6).
His book is unintelligible if this belief formed part of his
creed. Hence he has been called a sceptic. The word
is relative. All the OT saints, if they lived now, might
be called sceptics. The belief in immortality was not
until very late times an assured doctrine of the OT (cp
ESCHATOLOGY, 33). We observe it in the process
of arising, as the necessary issue of two things the
living fellowship of man with God here, of which it is the
continuance ; and the anomalies of providence, of which
it is the reconciliation. The Preacher is unable to reach
it on either line. 2 (2) Further, life is without result
1 Probably we should render a difficult phrase thus with
Delitzsch.
2 The use of the word spirit in the OT is obscure, (i) It
means the breath, the visible sign, of life. (2) It is what we
call the principle of life. Life and the continuance of life
1158
7. Death.
ECCLESIASTES
ECCLESIASTES
because the wise man cannot transmit the fruits of his
labour or of his wisdom : the man that cometh after him
may be a fool. The idea of an advance of the race
through the accumulated gains contributed to it by
individuals does not occur to the Preacher. The tide
of personal life flows too strong in his heart to permit
him to acquiesce in his own absorption into the race,
even if the race had a great destiny before it. Of this,
moreover, he sees no evidence. To his mind, in the
mood in which we find him, mankind has neither a pro
gress nor a goal. The analogy of nature oppresses him.
Its monotonous daily round of sunrise and sunset, of
veering winds and rushing streams, produces no result.
The history of mankind is the same one generation
goeth and another generation cometh. The universe has
no goal; God has no purpose, and mankind no destiny.
This general scope of the Preacher s logic (howsoever his
heart recoils from it) defines the sense in which he
speaks of God s judgment. He hardly has the idea of
a general judgment, such as that of the day of the Lord
of the prophets, when God brings in his perfect kingdom
and bestows eternal blessedness on his people. The
Preacher s individualism, common to him with all the
writers of the Wisdom, makes this unlikely. Neither
could he have spoken of the universe as a continuous
flux without a point of attainment if he had thought of
it as moving towards this great goal. The judgment
is to him merely part of the moral government of God,
which he maintains, howsoever imperfectly he is able to
perceive it.
We have seen already that besides his theoretical
and his practical philosophy the Preacher had a regula-
8 Princinle tive P rmc P le f conduct, which he called
of d ct w s d m - Much of the book is devoted
to showing the advantage of this prin
ciple. It teaches a man how to bear himself before
God. Even in religion a man ought to be calm and
meditative, and to restrain over -impulsiveness (5 1-7
7 16/. ). So in regard to rulers : even if despotic and
evil, a wise man will not act hastily, seeing that power
is on the side of the ruler ; nor will he rashly enter into
plots or conspiracies. Discretion is the better part of
valour. He who digs a pit may fall into it. Skill is
better than force. If you have trees to fell, grind your
axe rather than put to more strength (81-9 10i-n).
And be not surprised if you are oppressed and plun
dered. Society, or at least government, is an organised
oppression : those who oppress you are oppressed by
those above them, and these again by their superiors,
and so on to the top of the pyramid (58). Wisdom, how
ever, perceives the vanity of all this : for example, he
that loveth money will not be satisfied with money, and
he that increaseth his substance increaseth those who eat
it (610-69). Wisdom, on the contrary, is as good as an
inheritance, or better than that ; for it preserves the life
of him who has it (7 12) ; it supplements the defects of
righteousness, and avoids the falsehood of extremes
(7 15-22) ; it is stronger than ten rulers in a city (7 19) ;
and preserves men both from sentimental dreaming
over the good old days and from over -anxious fore
casting how their business ventures will turn out (11 1-6).
There is much, however, that wisdom is not equal to
even in human things (7 24), and no wisdom can find
out the work of God (817). Moreover, the wisdom
of the poor man is neglected or forgotten (9 13-16), and
a little folly is stronger than much wisdom, even as a
dead fly will cause a pot of ointment to stink (10 1).
are the effect of a divine influence; the cessation of life is the
withdrawal of this influence. The spirit in this sense is
nothing but an effect. All questions where this spirit 1 goes
when taken away by God are irrelevant. It goes nowhlre :
taking away of it is merely the cessation of the divine
influence of which it is the effect. (3) It is the immaterial
subject (not substance) in man, which lives. The boundary
lines between (2) and (3) are confused. The passage 3 21 seems
to incline to (3), though without firmness (5 19), whilst 12 7 prob
ably goes back to (2), being on a line with Ps. 104 20 f Job 34x4
Cp, further, LSCHATOLOGY, ig/., and SPIRIT.
"59
Occasionally the author uses the term wisdom in the
sense of comprehension of the universe or work of God.
For this man is altogether incompetent (cp Job 28).
The above analysis shows the Preacher s main ideas.
The Preacher himself is more difficult to explain. The
__ difference between him and earlier writers
of the Wisdom lies in his tone. To catch
this truly would be to find the key to his book. The
existence of the book is evidence of dissatisfaction, of a
sense of want. The Preacher is driven to acknowledge
that man is like a beast with lower pleasures : he could
not have added with lower pains. His book all
through is a cry of pain just that he has no portion
but lower pleasures. His conclusions are in a way
positivist; but his whole book is a protest against his
conclusions not against the truth of them, but against
the fact that they should be true. Job flung himself
against the moral iniquities of Providence ; to the
Preacher the crookedness of things is universal. Job
raged ; the Preacher only moans and moralises. Job is
an untamed eagle, dashing himself against the bars of
his cage ; the Preacher looks out with a lustreless eye
on the glorious heavens, where, if he were free, he
might soar. He knows it cannot be, and he ventures
also to murmur some advice to men : Enjoy good ; do not
think (620). His admonitions to himself and others are
quite sincere, not ironical ; they are the human soul s
efforts to ancesthetise itself dull narcotics numbing
pain. The Preacher s mood may be a complex thing :
partly temperament, partly a mode of religion, and
partly due to the wretched conditions of human life in
his time. It was an evil time. Judges were corrupt,
rulers despotic and debauched, the people oppressed ;
10. A product of
OT religion.
and society was disintegrated. It is
unnecessary to have recourse to Greek
philosophy to explain the Preacher s
ideas and feelings (cp HELLENISM, 6, and see below,
13). The practical wisdom which he recommends
may have a certain resemblance to the unperturbed-
ness," the mean, and the nothing too much of the
philosophers ; but both it and all other things in the
Preacher are a natural development of the native
Hebrew Wisdom. There is nothing in Ecclesiastes
which is not already in Job and the older Wisdom.
Indeed, one may say that the OT religion was bound to
produce, at some time and in some cases, a phenomenon
like the Preacher. The OT religion consists of two
things : first, ideas about God ; and, secondly, a living
faith towards him and sense of fellowship with him.
Without the latter the former brings little comfort to
the human mind, even though certain fundamental
beliefs such as the personality of God and the moral
being of man be still retained. For, first, the
fundamental principle of Hebrew religion that God is
in all things that happen, whilst in times of prosperity
and well-being it gave unspeakable joy to the pious
mind, with a vivid sense of its fellowship in life with
God, when the times were evil and articles of a creed
had taken the place of an emotional piety, gave rise to
a sense of impotency in the mind. Man felt environed
on all sides by a fixed order which he could do nothing
to ameliorate. God became a mere transcendent
force outside of human life, pressing upon it and
limiting it on every side. The different feeling which
the same conception of God produced in the pious
mind and in the reflective mind, respectively, will appear
if Ps. 139 be compared with Ecclesiastes. It would be
false to say that God to the Preacher was nothing
more than what the world or nature, or that which
is outside a man, is to many minds now. His faith in
a personal God is never shaken ; atheism or materialism
is not conceivable in an ancient Oriental mind. At the
same time, his faith is no more suffused with the life-
colours of an emotional confidence, and he could not
have said with the Psalmist, Nevertheless I am con
tinually with thee 1 (Ps. 7823), nor with Job, I know
1160
ECCLBSIASTES
ECCLESIASTES
that my Redeemer liveth, and that I shall see God
(1925). Secondly, it was from piety, the sense
of fellowship with God, not from reflection, that all the
great religious hopes in regard to man s future arose.
They were projections, corollaries, of an emotional
personal religion such as the hope of immortality, the
faith in a reign of righteousness, and the incoming of a
kingdom of God upon the earth. When piety declined,
and reflection took its place, these hopes of the future
could not sustain themselves. They survived in the com
munity, whose life was perennial ; but the individual
ism of the Preacher felt them slipping from its grasp.
The date of Ecclesiastes cannot be determined with
certainty. It is later than Malachi, for the priest called
_ , in Malachi messenger of the Lord (Mai.
. e. 2 7 ^ j s s i m ply named the messenger in
56. It is probably earlier than Ecclesiasticus (circa
200), for, though many of the coincidences usually
cited have little relevancy, Ecclus. 186 seems certainly
a reminiscence of Eccles. 814, and Ecclus. 4224 of
Eccles. 7 14. The book may belong to the oppressive
times of the later Persian rule, or it may be a product of
the Greek period. Perhaps the language would rather
suggest the later date (see next ). In the beginning
of the book the experiments on life are represented as
being made by Solomon ; but this transparent disguise
is speedily abandoned. Solomon is mesely the ideal of
one who has unbounded wisdom and unlimited resources
with which to experiment on human life a man whose
verdict of vanity, therefore, is infallible. In the
Epilogue the Preacher is merely one of the wise (129).
The state of society amid which the author lived has
no resemblance to the state of society in the times
of Solomon. There was corruption in the judgment
seat (3i6), cruel oppression from which there was no
redress (4i^), and a hierarchy of official plunderers
one above another (58), with a system of espionage
which made the most private speech dangerous (102o).
The author had witnessed revolutionary changes in
society and strange reversals of fortune slaves riding
on horses and princes walking on foot (104-7).
Such a time might be the late Persian period. It
could not well be the early Greek period when the Jews
enjoyed the beneficent rule of the early Ptolemies. It
might, however, be the more advanced Greek period,
when Palestine became the stake played for by Antioch
and Alexandria, a time when the people suffered severe
hardships, and when the upper classes, especially the
religious leaders, were deeply demoralised and self-seek
ing. On the other hand, the book must be earlier than
the uprising of the national spirit in the time of the
Maccabees. Gratz indeed places the book in the time
of Herod (8 B.C.) ; but the date is part of his theory of
the book, which has no probability. The most probable
date perhaps is the latter part of the third century B.C.
(cp, however, Che. Jew. Rel. Life, ch. v. ).
Both the language and the modes of religious thought
in Ecclesiastes suggest that it is one of the latest books
12. Language.
in the canon. The language has the
peculiarities of such late books as
Chronicles- Ezra -Nehemiah, and Esther. Indeed, it
belongs to a much more degraded stage of Hebrew
than either of those books exhibits ; and in the forms of
words, in the new senses in which older words are used,
and in the many new words employed, it has many
similarities to the Targums and Syriac, especially to the
Mishna (circa 200 A. D. ).
The characteristic forms of Hebrew syntax, such as the van
conversing have almost disappeared ; constructions of classical
Hebrew have given place to those of Aramaic ; and in general
the language has lost its old condensed character, and become
analytic, with a multitude of new particles. Details may be
seen in Driver s Introd., and in the commentaries of Delitzsch,
Nowack, or Wright.
The ideas and the mode of religious thought in the
1 1 THn book also bear witness to the lateness of its
date. In the Preacher the religious spirit of
Israel is seen to be completely exhausted. It can no
more, as in Job and Ps. 49 and 73, use the problems of
life in order to rise to lofty intuitions of its relation to
God. It sinks back defeated, able only to offer a few
practical rules for ordinary life. The idea of Tyler,
who is followed by Plumptre, that the book is a blend of
the Stoic and Epicurean philosophies, seems extra
ordinarily superficial, and is supported mainly by what
appears misinterpretation of its language.
The passage 3 if., there is a time to be born (etc.), does not
inculcate the doctrine of living conformably to nature, or teach
that there is a fit time for doing everything : it teaches that
there is a necessary time, for the time of everything has been
determined by God. Even the most astute opportunist would
have difficulty in securing that he should be born and should die
at the fitting time. Again, the passages 19815 and many others
certainly teach that there is nothing new under the sun, no
progress in nature or history, that things recur ; but they teach
nothing about recurrent cycles. Determinism is, of course, a
prevailing idea in the book. That, however, is just the funda
mental idea of the Wisdom, or indeed of the Hebrew mind that
God is the causality in all things with the inevitable develop
ment which time gave it. At first sight the phrase to do good
in the sense of to see good, to enjoy life (3 12), has a startling
resemblance to the Gk. e5 irpaTTeiv ; but, after all, the senses
of the two phrases are somewhat different, and there is no
reason to suppose the Hebrew expression to be an imitation ;
though not occurring elsewhere, its opposite, to do badly (i.e.,
be sad), is used in early literature (2 S. 12 18, and perhaps Eccles.
5 i [4 17 (5 i)]), and possibly the phrase itself may be ancient.
(H. Zirkel, Unters. iib. den Prediger, 1792, was the first to dis
cover Graecisms in Ecclesiastes.)
There have been attempts to identify the old and
foolish king (4 13^) and the city the siege of which
was raised by the poor wise man (9 13^), and to
verify the possible historical reference in the passage
(104-7) about slaves on horseback and princes walking
on foot, and in such passages as 810, with a view to
fixing the date of the book more accurately ; but nothing
has resulted beyond conjectures more or less plausible.
The ingenious theory of Bickell that the apparent
want of connection in many parts of Ecclesiastes is the
resu ^ f an accident which befell the
T t \
. integr ty.
at some ear iy time, and threw the
sheets into confusion, has little probability: 1 the want
of connection complained of disappears in many cases
before a more careful study of the author s line of
thought. In a book such as Ecclesiastes, however, the
line of thought and (particularly) the tone of which
diverge so greatly from the other OT writings it was
to be expected that there would be some interpola
tions : qualifications which the reader or scribe felt
constrained to add to the author s somewhat strong
statements. The probability that 11 9^ is an addition
rests not so much on the idea expressed as on its
unnaturalness in the context ; for the view of some that
the passage means that God will bring into judgment
any one who neglects to enjoy the natural pleasures of
life is too absurd. There is less objection to 817
(perhaps the last word of the verse should be read sdm,
hath appointed ). 8 10 i2/. also are in some way
corrupt. So, certainly, 12 1, Remember thy creator.
The words disturb the connection between 11 10 and the
rest of 12 1. The reading suggested by Gratz, Re
member thy fountain ( = thy wife, Prov. 515-19). strikes
a lower note than is heard anywhere in the book, and is
to be rejected.
The Epilogue falls into two parts, 12g-i2 and 12 is/ ;
and it is questionable whether either part (especially the
second) is original. 2 On the one hand, the book reaches
its natural conclusion in 128, where the burden of it is
restated : All is Vanity ; and, secondly, whilst in the
rest of the book the author speaks in the first person,
in w. 9-12 he is spoken about. On the other hand,
though the verses contain some peculiar expressions,
their general style agrees with that of the rest of the
book, and it is quite possible that the author, dropping
1 The theory of dislocation was first proposed by J. G. van
der Palm in his Ecclesiastes philologies et critice illustratus,
Leyden, 1784. The theory and arrangement of Bickell is repro
duced in Dillon, Sceptics of the OT, 95.
2 On interpolations in Eccles., see also CANON, 55, col. 671,
n. 4.
1162
ECCLESIASTES
his literary disguise of Solomon, might have added some
account of himself in his actual character. The picture
is certainly not just that which would have suggested
itself to a mere reader of the book : it implies a fuller
acquaintance with the author than could be got from
his work. In w. 13 f. the whole matter is said to be :
Fear God and keep his commandments, for this is the
whole of man. The last words may mean, This absorbs
or should absorb man : all his powers should be directed
toward this ; or they may mean, This exhausts man : his
powers reach no further e.g. , to understand the work
of God (Job 28). Verse 14, which says that God will
bring every work into judgment, attaches itself better
to the first sense. The judgment also seems a larger
and more general one than that seen in God s ordinary
moral rule of the world. Possibly, therefore, w. 13 f.
come from the same hand as llej^. If the verses be
an addition, they are still comparatively early, for they
are referred to in the disputes of the Jewish teachers
over the canonicity of the book.
15. Canonicity. Ecdesiastes is not quoted in the NT(
and even in the second century A. D. its right to a place
in the collection of sacred books was a subject of
controversy in the Jewish schools. The exact state of
the dispute appears to be this : Practically the book had
long been combined with the other sacred writings ;
but voices which expressed doubt of the propriety
of this combination continued to be heard. That this
is the state of the case appears from the facts (i) that
Ecclesiastes must be included in the twenty-four books
of 4 Esdras, and in the twenty-two of Josephus, toward
the end of the first century A.D. ; and (2) that in the
time of Herod the Great and of Gamaliel it is quoted
as scripture (Bab. Bathra, 43, Shabb. 30$), whilst the
objections to it continued to be heard 100-120 A.D.
(Yad. 85). The school of Hillel held that it defiled
the hands (was canonical) ; that of Shammai rejected it.
The former opinion finally prevailed. See CANON, 55.
In addition to general works such as Driver s Introd. and
Kue. s Ond. ( 2 ) iii. may be named the comms. of Ew. Dichter
des Alt. B unties ; Hitzig, Exeg. Hand.,
16. Literature. 47, ( 2 ), by Now. 83; Ginsburg, Cofie-
leth, 61 ; Gratz, Koheleth, 1871 ; Del.
Hohesliedu. Koheleth, 1875 (translated); Plumptre, Ecclesiastes
or the Preacher (Cambridge Bible), 1881 ; Renan, L EccUsiastc.
1882; Wright, The Book of Coheleth, 1883; Volck, Kurzgef.
Kotnm. (Strack u. Zockler), 1889 ; Sam. Cox, in Ex. Bib., 1890.
Helps of a more general kind : Nold. Die AliLit., 1868 ; Bloch,
Ursprung, etc., des Buches Koh., 1872 ; Tyler, Ecclesiastes,
1874 [( 2 ) 99]; Taylor, Dirge of Koheleth, 1874; Engelhard,
_ Ueber den Epilog des Koh. .S*. A>., 1875; Kleinert, Sind
in B. Koh. ausserheb. Einfliisse anzuerkennen ? St. Kr., 1883 ;
Bickell, Der Prediger, 1884 ; Schiffer, Das B. Koh. nach der
Auffassung der Weisen des Talmud, etc., 1884 ; Bradley, Lect.
on Eccles., 1885 ; Pfleiderer, Die Philos. des Heraklit, 1886 ; A.
Palm, DieQohclet Literatur, 1886 ; Che.JobandSolomon, 1887 ;
Jew. Rel. Life, Lect. vi. 1898 ; S. Euringer, Der Masorahtext
des Koh., 1890 ; Wildeboer (in KHC 98). On the Gr. text, Di.
SBA W, 1892 ; E. Klostermann, DeLib. Coh. Vers. Alex. 1892 ;
Tyler, Koh. 1899. A. B. D.
Ond.ffl 104, 105 ( 93 ; Germ, transl. Einl., 93): note especially
the discussion of proposed dates later than 200 B.C. ; Haupt,
The Book of Ecclesiastes, Oriental Studies (Or. Club of
Philadelphia, 94), pp. 242-278, holds that the contents have
been deliberately disarranged, and that many glosses have in
truded into the text ; he gives a translation of the final section
as restored by himself.
Ko. Einl. ( 93), 432 jTt, and Leimdorfer (Das heil. Schrift-
werk A ohelet, 92) ably plead for a date in the reign of Alex-
ander Jannaeus.
Siegfried (in HK. 93) also thinks that Eccles. is full of con
tradictions, indicating the work of at least five writers. A
redactor attempted, with little success, to bring order out of
chaos. He gave the superscription (1 1) and a concluding word
(128); 129-19 is due to three epilogists. The date of the
original book is placed soon after 200 B.C. The glossators may
have gone on till nearly 100 B.C. ; allusions to the Essenes (see
e.g., 9 2 /*) also point to this period. The kernel of the work
may have been known to Ben-Sira (after 170 B.C.).
Che. Jew. Rel. Life ( 98), 183-208, favours Gratz s hypo
thesis, and while admitting that the date of Ecclesiastes needs
further examination, he finds no period which so fully illus
1163
ECCLESIASTICUS
trates the book as that of Herod the Great. He admits great
disarrangement and interpolations.
It may be added that the text of Eccles. is in a bad state.
There are still gleanings to be had in some of the most difficult
passages, which may considerably affect the criticism of the
book (see Critica Biblica, and cp KOHELETH). Bickell s
emendations have hardly been appreciated enough. He has
further done good service, not only by his suggestive rearrange
ment, but also by his attention to the poetical passages, e.g., no
one has made so clear to the eye the most probable meaning of
11 ioa and 12 la (cp Che. Jew. Rel. Life, 192).
Wi. s essay on Date and Author of Koheleth (AOFW 143-
159) gives a general sanction to Siegfried s analysis, and as
cribes the kernel to ALCIMUS [y.v.]. The old and foolish
king is Antiochus Epiphanes. The statement on p. 146 that
the author must have been either one of the kings of the
Herodian house or else one of the heretical high priests before
the Hasmonaean dynasty is a valuable recognition of the period
within which, as more and more critics think, the date of the
original book must be placed. T. K. c.]
ECCLESIASTICUS
Title, etc. ( i/)
Text, etc. ( 3-6).
Date ( 7-9).
Fortunes ( 10).
Structured uf.)
Sources ( 13-15).
Form and Contents ( i6_/!)
Religious teaching ( 18-22).
Ethical ( 23).
Greek thought ( 24).
Literature ( 26).
Ecclesiasticus (abbrev. Ecclus. ) is the usual Latin
and English name of one of the deuterocanonical books
of the OT (see APOCRYPHA, 28). It is not probable
that the author himself gave his book a title ; later it is
_,.,. referred to under various names. In the
Talmud it is cited simply by the name of
the author, as Ben-Sira (NTD p)> or by the formula
the sages say (though this last may point not im
mediately to our book, but to material from which it
drew). Jerome (Prczf. in Libr. Sal. ) declares that he
had seen a Hebrew copy entitled Parabolas (o Vrc),
and this designation, natural and appropriate, is
employed also by Saadia. 1
In the LXX the book is called Wisdom of Jesus,
Son of Sirach (2o0a Irjcrov viov 2[e]tpdx [NAC] ; B
incorrectly 2. S. ; but in the subscription B agrees with
NA. The title of the Prologue in C is irpoXoyos St/mx).
This form (found also in the Syriac Versions and in some MSS
of the Vet. Lat.) was the one generally used by the Greek writers,
as is expressly stated by Rufinus (Vers. Or. Horn, in Nu.
xviii. 3). The title 2o$i a occurs also in other combinations:
in the honorary name All-virtuous Wisdom (^ Travaperos 2o<|u a)
given to the book in patristic writings (Jer. Prczf. in Lib. Sal.),
as also to Proverbs (Clem. Rom. i Cor. 57; Clem. Alex. i. 1085;
Eus. HE iv. 22) and to Wisd. of Sol. 2 (Epiph. iii. 244) ; and
in the more general designations Wisdom (Orig. In Matt. 184)
and Wisdom of Solomon (Cypr. Test. iii. 20).
With regard to the term HDDH applied in the Talmud
to the work of Ben-Sira it is uncertain whether it is
used as a title ; but it appears to have been employed
as a descriptive term. Possibly it was an old Jewish
designation, which was adopted by the Greek Christians
as a title ; in the case of the Book of Proverbs Hege-
sippus (in Eus. HE 4zz) refers the term to unwritten
Jewish traditions.
On the Talmudic use cp Blau (in J?E/35zi), who cites Jer.
Sota, 2+c : after the death of R. Eliezer the rtD3rlfl D was
buried (TJJJ). It seems probable that the expression n D
includes Ben-Sira.
Whilst the Greeks thus named the work from the
nature of its material, the Latins preferred a title descrip
tive of its relation to the Church services. The term
dKK\ri(naa TiK6s is used by the Greeks of the KO.VUV of
the Church (Clem. Alex. Sir. 6125), and generally of what
was in accord with the Church. Adopted by the Latins,
the term was employed by them in a like general way
(pacemecclesiasticam, Tert. De Pudicit. 22), and came to
be used especially of books which, though not canonical,
were regarded as edifying and proper to be read in
the churches (Ruf. Comm. in Symb., 38, Vers. Orig.
1 The Oxford editors of the Hebrew Fragments (see below,
8 4) refer (Preface, ix, n. 4) to a statement of Saadia (S adyah)
( 17Jn 130 e d- Harkavy, p. 151, /. \if.~), that Ben-Sira wrote a
Book of Instruction (IQIO IBD^- This expression, however,
seems to be rather a description than a title.
2 Probably given first to Proverbs, and then to all the supposed
Solomonic wisdom-books.
1164
ECCLBSIASTICUS
in Num. 183 ; Ath. Ep. Fest., sub fine). So high was
the esteem in which our book was held that it was
termed Ecclesiasticus, the liber ecclesiasticus par ex
cellence (Cypr. Test. 2i 3i ; Aug. De Doct. CAr.2i3).
The name of the author is given variously.
The Hebrew text has, in 5027, Shim on b. Yeshua b.
Eliezer b. Sira (so also Saadia, I^Jfl D US 1 ), ar >d in 61.30 the
same formula, and also Shim on b. Y., called
2. Author, b. Sira ; B 5027 ITJO-OUS v. veipax (cripa^ [A],
a-eipa/c [N]), eAeafap [in other MSS -pos or -pou] ;
S a K subscription : Yeshua b. Shimeon, who is called Bar
Asira fin some MSS Sirak ], and in the title Barsira ; S w al,
title : Y. b. Shim on Asira, and also Bar Asira ; Book of the
Bee (A need. Oxon., Sem. Series i. 279): Shim on b. Sira ;
Talmud, Ben-Sira.
In this medley of readings two things seem clear. The
author s name proper was Yeshua (Jesus) : so he is called
by the Greek translator in his prologue ; and his familiar
surname was Ben-Sira, as all ancient authorities attest.
The significance of the other names is less clear.
The Hebrew text and Saadia must be changed so as to read
Yeshua b. Shim on (cp Zunz, GV 106), and the whole name,
as given by them, may then be accepted (so Harkavy, Stud. u.
Mittheil. 6200; Blau in REJ^zo, and Kautzsch). In that
case we may suppose that and S have abridged the genealogy,
and that the form in the Book of the Bee is defective. This
seems to be the most natural construction of the data. It is
less probable that Shim on (Simon) and Eleazar are scribal
additions, the former made in order to connect the author with
the famous high priest of that name (50 i), 1 the latter in order
to connect him with the high priest (the brother and successor
of Simon I.) to whom, according to the Letter of Aristeas,
Ptolemy Philadelphus sent his request for the translation of the
Torah (Fritzsche). This sort of invention of a genealogy would
be very bold, and would hardly be called for by Ben-Sira s
position as a sage. Nor is it likely that Eleazar is another
name of Sira (Krauss, in JQR, Oct. 1898). It is simpler to
suppose that Simon and Eleazar (the names are common) were
men otherwise unknown father and grandfather of the author. 2
We may thus assume that the name of the author
in the Greek Version, Yeshua Ben-Sira, rests on a good
tradition. The origin and signification of the Ben-
Sira are not clear ; the most probable view is that it is
a family name, though we know nothing of how it arose.
Blau (in REJ 35 20) refers to the family names Bcnc Hezir
(Chwolson, Corp. Inscr. Heb. 65) and Bcne Hashnwnai. Of
Sira nothing is known ; the word (apparently Aram.) may mean
coat of mail or thorn ; it does not occur elsewhere in this form
as a proper name. The Asira of Pesh. seems to be a scribal
error (cp the Barsira of the title in S la g). Krauss, however
(in JQR, Oct. 1898), holds Sira to be an abbreviation of an
original Asira = Heb. TDK; bound, which occurs in lists of
priests (Ex. 6 24 i Ch. 3 17). This is possible (Krauss cites ex
amples of similar abridgments); but the testimony of the primary
Vss. is against it ; and the Ar. Vs. (as Edersheim points out),
which commonly follows Syr., has Jesu b. Sirach. The Gk.
form, with final x (or K), is best explained as intended to show
that the foreign word is indeclinable (see Dalm. Gram. 161, n.
6); cpaKeASa/ouxx = NOT ^pn (ACELDAMA, i).
The genealogies in 50 27 51 30 have only the authority
of tradition they are not from the hand of the author.
He is described in 50 27 in the Greek and Latin Vss.
as a Jerusalemite, a statement in itself not improbable
it is in keeping with the detailed description of the
high-priestly ritual in 50 ; but since it is not found in
the H. and S. it cannot be regarded as certain. One Gk.
MS calls him a priest ; but this is merely a scribal error.
Instead of lepocroAvjuem)? N* has tepeus o <roA. This error seems
to have given rise to further unwarranted statements (see below).
Cp the argument of Krauss in JQR, Oct. 1898.
As to Ben-Sira s life we have only the general conclu
sions which may be drawn from the nature of his thought
and from a few references which he makes to his ex
periences. He seems to have been a Palestinian sage,
a philosophical observer of life, an ardent Israelite and
devoted lover of the Torah, but probably neither a priest 3
1 So Bar-Hebrseus.
2 On the Eleazar b. Irai (Iri) from whom Saadia ( l^jrj D
ed. Hark. 178) quotes a saying which is attributed in the Talmud
to Ben-Sira and is found in our Greek (32if.), see Bacher,
Agad. d. pal. Amor. 2 n n. 5, C. and N., Eccles. n, and Blau,
in R JT/3524. It seems likely that Irai is a corruption of
Sira (see the full name in the Hebrew); the work cited by
Saadia was possibly a different recension of Ben-Sira (Blau).
But this Eleazar cannot be the Talmudic doctor Eleazar b.
Pedat, who frequently cites Ben-Sira (Harkavy, Bacher).
3 Schiir. (Hist. 5 25), referring to the erroneous statement of
1165
ECCLESIASTICUS
(Zunz, Noldeke) nor a safer (Fritzsche) (see SCRIBE),
unless that term be understood in a very wide sense (see
21 ). He had too wide a circle of interests to be easily
identified with either of those classes, though he was in
close relation with them both ; and he may perhaps be
best described as one who sympathised with that mode
of thought which after his time developed into Saddu-
ceeism. He early devoted himself to the pursuit of
wisdom, travelled much, was often exposed to danger,
and sometimes near to death (34n/. 51), and his book
was probably composed in his riper years.
Until quite recently the work was known to modern
scholars only in scanty citations and in translations (Gk. ,
^ r and vers ons derived from
3. Original
language.
them). According to the Greek trans-
lator s preface, it was originally written in
Hebrew, a term which might mean either Hebrew
proper or Aramaic. On this point the citations of
Rabbinical writers (Pirke Aboth, Pirke of R. Nathan,
etc. ) sometimes without acknowledgment, sometimes
under the name of Ben-Sira, sometimes in Hebrew,
sometimes in Aramaic or debased form were not de
cisive, since it was not certain that they came from a
Hebrew original ; and even the quotations of Saadia
(loth cent.), which are in classical Hebrew, were
similarly open to suspicion. After this the traces of a
Hebrew text of Ecclesiasticus become indistinct, and
knowledge of such a book did not reach the Christian
world (see Cowley and Neubauer s Ecclesiasticus}. Still,
that its language was Hebrew, not Aramaic, had been
inferred by critics from certain obvious errors in the
Greek Version for example, 24 27, light for Nile
(IN>) ; 25 15, head for poison (tn) ; 46 18, Tyrians
for enemies (nns). It was thought probable, also,
that, since the Palestinian vernacular of the time was
Aramaic, and Hebrew was a learned language, the
author s vocabulary, whilst based on the Hebrew Sacred
Writings (with which he was familiar), would contain
late-Hebrew and Aramaic words and expressions.
Under these circumstances it was natural that the
discovery of a Hebrew text of part of the book should
4 Wphrpw M?<? awaken keen interest. One leaf
rew MSS. (containing 39 I5 _ 40 ^ with a hint of
v. 8) was brought from the East to Cambridge by
Mrs. Lewis, 1 and in a box of fragments acquired for
the Bodleian Library (through Sayce) Cowley and Neu-
bauer found nine leaves, apparently of the same MS
(409-49n); eleven 2 leaves (363-7 2 9 <z 1134-5 12a-1626
of a second MS [A], 30n-31n 32ifc-333 35g-2o 36 1-21
3727-31 38 1-27 49 12-51 30 of the first MS [B]) were dis
covered by Schechter in the fragments brought by him
from the Cairo gZnizah ; and in matter recently acquired
by the British Museum other fragments (of MS B) were
found (31 12-31 3622-3726) ; these all together give the
greater part of chaps. 3-7 12-16 30-32 35-51, about
one-half of the book. 3
The texts discovered down to the end of 1899 4 appear
to belong to at least two different MSS, A and B.
Syncellus (Chron. ed. Dindorf, 1, 525) that Ben-Sira was high
priest, remarks that it must have arisen from the fact that in the
Chronicle of Eus. (ad Ol. 137^), which Syncellus used, Ben-Sira
is mentioned (though only as the author of Sapientia) just after
the high priest Simon II. Other untenable opinions are that
he is the unworthy Jason (=Jesus, high priest 175-172 B.C.), or
that he was a physician (inferred by Grotius from 38 1-15). See
Wette, Spez. Einl. in d. dwterokan. Bitcli., Edersheim.
1 The recognition of this text is due to S. Schechter, Reader
in Talmudic at the University of Cambridge, now also Professor
of Hebrew in University College, London.
2 On the two leaves discovered later, see below, n. 43.
3 The first Cambridge leaf and the Oxford leaves were pub
lished by Cowley and Neubauer, with the Gk., Lat. and Syr.
texts ( 97), the eleven Genizah fragments by Schechter and Taylor
( 99), and the Brit. Mus. fragments by G. Margoliouth (mJQR,
Oct. 99). See below, 26 a.
4 [a. Early in 1900 Schechter found two leaves (<x. 4231$ y>f.
64-7 9-13 36 iqa ; j3. 25 si 13 17-24 26 i 20) of, apparently, a
third MS (CSchech. : published mJQR 12456-465 [Ap. 1900]).
b. About the same time I. Levi discovered fragments of two
MSS : (i.) apparently a third leaf of the MS just spoken of,
Schechter s C (Lvi calls it D), containing 6 is-7 25 in a recension
1166
ECCLESIASTICUS
The one, A (chaps. 3-16), is written without metrical division
of lines, its marginal notes, corrections of obvious scribal errors,
are few (only four, beskles the iii>crtion of an omitted ver-M:), and
its abbreviation of the divine name is triangular (,O I the other,
B (chaps. 30-51), is written stichometrically (except 4617-20),
part of it (to 45 8) has numerous glosses (among them four in
Persian), and its abbreviation of the divine name is horizontal
(>V). In A there is predominant agreement with the Syriac ;
in B (except in chaps. 50 /,) the agreements with the Greek
against the Syriac are more numerous ; in chap. 51, after v. 12
is inserted a hymn which is not found in the Vss.l
The MSS (assigned by Cowley and Neubauer, and
by Schechter, provisionally, to the nth cent. ), with the
exception of a few passages, are very carelessly written,
abounding in errors, not all of which are corrected.
The scribes appear to have been not very well acquainted
with Hebrew ; they sometimes make several futile attempts at
the correction of particular words or expressions. In the glossed
portion the annotator seems to have been a man whose ver
nacular was Persian ; at 85 20 he notes in Persian the omission
of a verse ; at 40 22, where the margin gives a saying ascribed
in the B. Talmud (Sank, icoi) to Ben-Sira, he remarks that
this was probably not in the original copy [of Ben-Sira] ; and at
the point where the glosses cease (458) he explains that this
MS reached thus far. This last remark appears to mean that
the MS which he was copying ended here ; and in that case it
is probable that the remainder (through chap. 51) belongs to
another MS. With the supposition that the copyist or
annotator lived where Arabic was spoken accords the fact that
several Arabisms occur in the MS : p^n in the sense of create,
81 13 (doublet), 31 33 (doublet), 38 i 3925 40 i ; perhaps njn as
= honour, 38 i ; in 43srf Vtyo U"j*+ presenting one s self,
is an explanation or correction of the word in the text, tislD
Hi. of p-\\y as = shine, 43 9 (marg.) ; perhaps in 42 lie a scribe
understood .0^.0 as Arabic ( lattice ). The MS has evidently
not only suffered from the ordinary carelessness of copyists, but
also passed through the hands of an ignorant Arabic-speaking
man who freely inserted terms of his Arabic vocabulary.
If we omit Arabisms and other scribal faults, the
diction of the text is that of a man who, while his
vernacular is that of an incipient late-Hebrew, similar
to that of Koheleth (Eccles. ), is familiar with the greater
part of the Hebrew OT, and freely quotes or imitates
its language. 2 According to Bacher (JQR, 1897) and
Schechter (of. fit. 28) the text exhibits post-Talmudical
mosaic (paitanic) features, that is to say, a number of
ready-made expressions and phrases borrowed from the
OT. This, however, seems to be too strong a state
ment the language of Ben-Sira rarely produces the
impression of being artificial or lacking in spontaneity.
Nor can it be said to contain midrashic elements (so
Schechter, op. cit., 29 /f), if by midrash is meant the
style of the Talmud.
As examples of mosaic work Bacher cites 45 n (cp Is. 54 12)
46 9 (cp Dt. 23 29) 39 27 (cp Job 9 5) 47 20 (cp Gen. 49 4) 44 2 1 (cp
Ps. 72 8) 48 2 (cp Lev. 26 26), etc. ; Schechter, 4 28 (cp Ex. 14 14)
14 23 (cp Judg. 5 28) 35 15 (cp Lam. 1 2) 49 16 (cp Is. 44 13), etc.
These are cases of adoption and adaptation ; but they hardly
deserve to be called mosaic work.
political)--!! may be based on Job 42 3 ; puns (6 17^ a 22 i) are
common in OT : 15 9 (cp Ps. 33 i) and 47 22<r (cp Ps. 145 20) are
commonplace inferences; in 167 the allusion (Gen. 61-4) is
not to the sons of the Elohim but to the Nephllim (cp Ezek.
32 27) ; the lesson derived in 38 5 from Ex. 15 24 is very simple-
there are many such interpretations in Wisd. of Sol., and so
different from that in Camb. MS A : the text is abridged by the
omission of 620-2729-34367: 73 5 6<r-i6 17-1922 ; (ii.) a leaf of
apparently, a fourth MS (CUv.), containing 36 24-88 i : it is thus
parallel to most of the second Brit. Mus. fragment (of MS B) and
the upper part of the following Camb. leaf (of B). It gives in
its text some of the glosses on the margin of the Camb. B and
has one verse (37 3) punctuated and accentuated.
Both Uvi s fragments are published (with facsimile of the new
MS [n.]) in REJ 40 1-30 [antedated Jan.-Mar. 1900]
c. Lastly, E. N. Adler discovered the two leaves of MS A
musing between A 2 v and A 3 r- v iz., 7 2 9 -12 . (82 showing A>.
Kl^h" T, e K V 7 a .:, t \ emg , s PPMed with vowels and accents) :
published I (with facsimile) in JQ K 12 466-480 (Ap. TOOO).]
1 For detailed descriptions of MS B see Cowleyknd Neu-
bauer Smend L*vi (befow | 26 a i.) ; for description of MSS
A , and B, Schechter and Taylor (below, 26 a ii ) [For the
other MSS see preceding note.]
2 Schechter, in , his Ben Sira, I3 ^, g i ves a l ong list of paral
lelisms, some of wh.ch, however, are common expressions
familiar to every educated Jew. In the prologue Ben-Sira "s
said to have been a diligent student of the Scriptures.
1167
ECCLESIASTICUS
of the legend possibly alluded to in the obscure statement in
44 16 ; the borrowing, in 45 15*:, of the expressions of Ps. 89 30
is not remarkable ; that Samuel was a Aazirite (46 13*:) is a
natural inference from i S. 1 u there is no need of the formal
Rabbinical rule niB* ,TPU and the simile in 47 2 (cp Ps. 89 20
Lev. 4 8) is equally natural for a man interested in the temple-
ritual ; text and translation of 47 loc are doubtful (the couplet is
lacking in S.), and the comparison with the Talmudic legend (of
Uavid awaking at midnight, Bcr. 3 b) is precarious ; 49 i may
be based on Cant. 1 3 (so Schechter), or, what is equally probable,
it may come from the same literary tendency that produced the
simile in Canticles. The passages above cited may be taken to
show the beginning of the mode of thought that later produced
the Talmudic midrash. In this sense only can we adopt
Schechter s conclusion : if he thought like a Rabbi he wrote
like a Paitan. 1
Over and above these characteristics of the Hebrew
MSS the question has been raised whether the text is
Relation substantially the original Hebrew or
to Original nl ^ a trans l at i n and both views are
strenuously maintained by competent
critics. Those who regard it as a translation refer it
either (i. ) to a Persian or (ii. ) to a Syriac source.
i. The opinion that it is the rendering of a Persian
version (which itself is held to have been derived from
the Syriac and the Greek) is based partly on the
presence of Persian glosses, partly on the supposition
that certain doubtful or incorrect expressions result from
the misunderstanding of Persian words ; the hypothesis
is that the Syriac version used was revised from the
Greek, and this revised text was rendered from Persian
into Hebrew by an unintelligent Persian Jew who knew
neither Syriac nor Greek. This theory is incompatible
with the known facts : the agreements (often literal)
and the disagreements of the Hebrew with the primary
Versions make it practically inconceivable that it could
have arisen in the way described. The alleged explan
ations of obscure Hebrew expressions as misunder
standings of Persian terms must be regarded as
accidental coincidences, or, possibly, as in some cases
due to a Persian-speaking scribe. So far as . the theory
supposes a Syriac-Greek basis for the Persian version it
falls in with the other view that the Hebrew is a
translation of the Syriac, on which see below.
The argument for a Persian origin of the Hebrew is made by
D. S. Margoliouth in his essay The origin of the original
Hebrew (>fEcctesiasticus(i%i)i)). His points are not convincing.
The Persian glosses merely show the hand of a Persian copyist
or annotator, who was a critic, as appears from his remark on
the addition at 4022 (see above, 4). The absurd or impossible
Hebrew words cited by Margoliouth are scribal errors, and may
be got rid of by emendation (e.g. 40 2fo 16 43 6 17^ 22 42 14 41 12
47346ii); cp Smend and Kautzsch. Prof. Margoliouth does
not distinguish between author and copyist ; the latter may
have used Arabic words (43981/4). The most striking case of
apparent rendering from Persian is in 43 13, where G has snow
(Pers. *_ jf) and H 2 lightning (Pers. Ji^) obviously,
says Margoliouth, H misunderstood the Persian ; but the force
of this argument is practically destroyed by Margoliouth s
remark that is corrupt and should read storm, which may
represent an original Hebrew p-Q. Other such cases cited are
forced (4326174:22). Margoliouth adds (Exp. T., Nov. 1899)
that the Cairene text cannot be genuine, since it was known to
no mediaeval author but Saadia ; 3 in reply Konig, Schechter,
and Abrahams point out (Exp. T., Dec. 1899) that such
ignorance of a book is no proof that it did not exist (e.g., Rashi
seems not to have known the Jer. Talmud), and that Ben-Sira
was probably used by the Synagogal hymnologists (paitanim).
ii. The apparent dependence of the Hebrew on the
Syriac presents a more serious problem. There are
certain cases in which the reading of H seems inexplic
able except as a misunderstanding of S. The cases are
few in chaps. 1-16 (which are written as prose), more
numerous in 30-51 (written stichometrically). On the
other hand H sometimes agrees with G against S,
sometimes differs from both, sometimes appears to
account for one or both. Further, in a considerable
number of cases certain Greek MSS (especially j< c - a ,
and No. 248 of Holmes and Parsons) agree with H
(and often with S and L) against the Vatican Greek
1 On the pa.ita.ns, the late Jewish hymn-writers, see Zunz
Even this he now questions (JQR 12 502-531 [Ap. 1900], The
Seplter Jta-GalSy ). Cp Noldeke in Z/i TW 20 81-94.
1168
ECCLESIASTICUS
text. Add to this that not a few citations in the
Talmud and in Saadia agree with H (sometimes against
and S), and it becomes probable that H represents
a genuine Hebrew text of Ben-Sira, which, however,
has been altered in some places so as to agree with the
Syriac, and bristles, besides, with errors of copyists.
The result is that many passages present perplexing
problems, and the details of the history of the text have
yet to be made out.
The following are examples of passages in which H
seems to follow S :
3 13 aitp= pardon, after S patj> (unless y be late Heb.);
31 15, H = (B nearly (for rixjB read J\*wy)i and doublet of IS<T =
S to this last is attached the line = S 160. with marginal
variant nearly = S 16^ ; of 5 16 there is a doublet very corrupt.
Margoliouth (Origin, etc., 157^) cites 42 ne, where H a^tt N
lattice ) may be a misunderstanding of S pat? (in Arab. =
lattice ), and 43 2, H no as misunderstanding of S KJO (but H
may be merely a scribal error). Levi (REJ, July 1899) regards
the acrostic in chap. 51 as translated from S : v . 28 the unintel
ligible Q ai is a misunderstanding of S JD (? 2 ?)i and is
transposed so as to obscure the initial jy of i*. 28, and v. 14 = 8
which is composed of lines belonging to two different couplets ;
there are doublets in which one verse = G, the other S (30 17 20,
etc.); and in 30 20 H jDNJ = faithful (a sense here inapposite)
is a reproduction of S N3DTID eunuch (which the connection
requires). Bickell (in WZKM, 18251-256 [ 99]) takes the same
view of the acrostic as Levi, and further instances 12 n, where H
HNJp jealousy, he holds, is a misunderstanding of S flNJlp has
made black (from /cuaveos).
These examples (to which others might be added)
appear to show, not that H is a translation of S, but
that it has passed through the hands of a man or of
men (of some of whom Arabic was the vernacular)
familiar with S, and in places has been conformed
thereto in text or margin.
Where the three (HGS) agree, no conclusion as to priority
can be drawn. Where only two agree, the third may be
preferable, as in 6 22 where S fools suits the connection better
than HG many. The numerous cases, however, in which H
agrees, wholly or in part, with G against S indicate a Hebrew
text independent of S: see, for example, 5 $6a 1^ 12ioi8
14 1017 l>2yC 17 16 6 323 15 39 16. It is possible in such cases
to suppose a correction of H after G ; but the hypothesis of
emendations derived from both S and G is a complicated one.
Moreover, in some passages H seems to be better than G and
S : cp 4 6 roc 14 26f. 161419 1614.
On the inferences to be drawn from the still (March,
1900) unpublished fragments (see above col. 1166, n.
4), see SIRACH.
Of the ancient Versions the Greek and the Syriac are
__ . renderings of Hebrew texts, the Latin is
6. Versions. a translation from the Greek.
Critical editions of the Greek and Syriac texts are still
desiderata, though valuable remarks are made by Fritzsche,
Edersheim, Levi, Bacher, and others.
The Hebrew, soon after its composition, was translated
into Greek by the author s grandson (see his prologue),
who had gone to live in Egypt, and desired to make
the work accessible to his Greek-speaking fellow-citizens.
He was clearly a man of piety and good general culture,
with a fair command of Hebrew and Greek a consistent
Jew, yet probably not unaffected by Greek influences.
His translation is not seldom obscure from its literalness
and compression ; in the prologue his style is freer and
more ambitious. His name and history are unknown.
By Epiphanius (I.e.) he is called Jesus, and in a second pro
logue or preface, found in the Synop. Script. Sanct. of Pseudo-
Athanasius (and in Cod. 248 and Comp. Polygl.), Jesus son of
Sirach. Neither Epiphanius nor the confessedly late second
prologue (see Fritzsche s Comm.) can be considered authoritative
on this point. The statement may be true, but is more probably
a guess, or based on a misunderstanding of Ecclus. 50 27.
The Greek represents a faithful translation of the
original ; but its text is not in good condition, and in
many cases it is hardly possible to do more than give a
conjectural emendation. A similar remark applies to
the Syriac, which likewise is based on the Hebrew, but
may in some places have been influenced by the Greek. l
1 The book has been translated into Heb. by J. L. Ben-Zeeb
(Breslau, 1798 ; Vienna, 1828) [by Joshua b. Sam. Hesel from
German (Warsaw, 1842)], and by S. J. Fraenkel (Leipsic, 30) ;
chap. 24 by Bishop Lowth (reproduced in Fritzsch s Comm.) and
by Wessely ; chap. 51 by Bi., and some verses by D. S. Mar
goliouth (Place of Ecclus. in Sent. Lit., Oxf., 90).
1169
ECCLESIASTICUS
For an account of the MSS of G see Fritzsche, Edersheim,
Hatch, Schlatter, Nestle (in PKEP), s.v. Bibeliibersctzungen),
and Kautzsch (below, g 26). All appear to go back to one
archetypal text, for the displacement of chapters (see below) is
found in all except No. 248, and this has probably been cor
rected, (a) The great uncials, B, K, C, and partly A, though
comparatively free from glosses, give an inferior text ; (ft) the
better form is preserved in V (Cod. Venetus=No. 23 of Holmes
and Parsons), in c a > in part of A, and in certain cursives, of
which the most remarkable are Nos. 248 (followed in Compl.,
Poly, and Eng. AV) and 253 (which agrees strikingly with
S H ), though these have many glosses. The history of these
two subdivisions is obscure ; the first (a) has been called
Palestinian, the second (|3) Alexandrian ; but this is not certain. 1
With the second agree largely L and S. These Vss. then appear
to represent a text earlier than that of the Greek uncials ; and
our Hebrew fragments, which so often accord with S, may have
a history like that of the Greek cursives they may represent
an early text which has been greatly corrupted by glosses,
though they have suffered more than the Greek from scribal
miswriting. The Gk. glosses resemble those of in Proverbs ;
they are expansions of the thought, or Hellenizing interpreta
tions, or additions from current collections of gnomic sayings.
The Peshitta Syriac is now considered by scholars, with
scarcely an exception, to be a translation from the Hebrew ;
see especially Edersheim. It is a generally faithful and
intelligent rendering, not without misconceptions, expansions,
condensations, and glosses, but on the whole simple and intel
ligible. In some cases (as in 43 2/.) it agrees curiously with
the Greek ; but it is a question whether in such cases S follows
G or the two follow the same Hebrew.
The Vss. derived from are valuable primarily for the establish
ment of the Gk. text, sometimes also for the Heb. For particular
discussions (Old Lat., Copt., Eth., Hexapl. Syr., Arm.), and
for Pesh. Syr. see Edersheim, Nestle, and Kautzsch.
In the body of the work there is only one mark of
date : the list of great men (44-50) closes with the name
of the high priest Simon, son of Onias,
who, because he stands last and is
described at great length and with great enthusiasm,
may be supposed to have lived somewhere near the
author s time. There were two high priests of this
name : Simon I. , son of Onias I. (circa B.C. 310-290), and
Simon II., son of Onias II. (circa 218-198): lack of
material makes it hard to determine from the name
which of the two is here meant.
(a) Of the first, Josephus relates (Ant. xii. 2 5) that, on account
of his piety and kindliness, he was surnamed the Just ; the
second (Ant. xii. 4 io_/C) intervened in the quarrel of the sons
of Tobias and the banished Hyrcanus, though it does not follow
that he was friendly to the worse side of the party. 2
(6) Another datum is found in the Mishna-tract Aboth, i 2, in
which it is said that Simon the Just was one of the last members
( TB n) of the Great Synagogue ; the Talmud, further, surrounds
this Simon with a halo of legend. Though the Great Synagogue
is largely or wholly legendary (cp CANON, 18), the high priest,
Simon the Just, is doubtless a historical and important personage ;
but is he to be identified with Simon I. or with Simon II.? Jose
phus favours the former possibility ; but the authority of Josephus
on such a point is by no means unimpeachable. In the Talmudic
tradition Simon seems to represent a turning-point in the national
fortunes : after him, it is said, the signs of divine favour in the
temple service began to fail ; but this condition of things may be
referred, not without probability, either to Simon I. (Edersheim)
or to Simon II. (Derenbourg). In the list of bearers of the tradi-
tion in Aboth Simon is followed by Antigonos of Soko, and he by
the two named Jose, who belonged in the second cent. B.C. ; this
would point clearly to Simon II. as the Just, if the chronology
of the tract could be relied on ; this, however, is not the case
7. Date : Simon.
the letter of Antiochus the Great (Jos. Ant. xii. 13 3) concerning
the finishing of the temple, thinks that this identifies Ben-Sira s
Simon with Simon II. ; Edersheim answers that the city needed
fortifying in the time of Simon I., but not under Simon II. ; and
Bois insists that, though the temple may have been finished
under Simon II., it may none the less have been repaired under
Simon I. Compare Halevy (Rev. Sent. July, 99) and Kautzsch.
(d) Halevy (I.e.) argues for Simon I. on the jjround that a
considerable time between author and translator is required in
1 In fifty-six quotations by Clem. Alex, from Ben-Sira
Edersheim found five which corresponded markedly with the
text of No. 248.
2 The story of him in 2 Mace. 3 is obviously a legend, but may
perhaps bear witness to the esteem in which he was held in later
times.
3 Cp A. Geiger, Nachgelassene Schriften, 4 286.
4 Simon is not called the Just in the present text of Ecclus.,
perhaps (Bois) because the epithet had not yet been applied to
him. Gratz, however, discovers the term in 6024, following the
Syriac ( with Simon instead of with us ), only reading ,TDn
for rnon (Gesch. tier Juden, 2235 n.).
1170
BCCLESIASTICUS
order to account for the errors in the Greek text and for the
fact that the translator had lost the tradition of the meaning of
the Hebrew. This ground is not decisive. Whether in the
translator s time the exegetical tradition had been lost cannot
be determined till we have a correct Hebrew text ; and the
scribal errors of <8 are due to copyists after the translator s time.
Further, on Halevy s own ground, an interval of fifty or sixty
years would account for much.
(e) Finally, the connection of Ben-Sira s discourse may seem
to point to the earlier high priest, for Simon (50) really follows on
Nehemiah (49 13), the intervening verses interrupting the chrono
logical order, 1 and we should then naturally think of Simon I. ;
but here, again, the Jewish conception of chronology makes the
conclusion uncertain : the author may easily have passed on a
century later.
Of these data the most that can be said is that
they slightly favour the second Simon as the hero of
Ben-Sira s chap. 50.
A more definite sign of date is found in the preface
of the Greek translator, who says that he came to Egypt
_ in the thirty - eighth year iirl rou
8. fcuergetes. ^ fpy ^ TOV 0acriX<?wj. This, it is true,
may mean either the thirty-eighth year of the life of the
writer or the thirty-eighth regnal year of Euergetes ; but
there seems to be no reason why the translator should
here give his own age, whilst the mention of the king s
year (the common OT chronological datum) is natural. 2
If this interpretation be adopted, the date of the
translation is approximately given. Of the two Ptolemies
called Euergetes, the first reigned only twenty-five years
(247-222) and is thus excluded ; the second, surnamed
Physcon, reigned fifty -four years in all, partly as co-
regent (170-145) and partly as sole king (145-116). It
appears that in his thirty-eighth year, 132 B.C., the
translator reached Egypt, and the translation was in that
case made a few years later. The author s date may
thence be fixed ; for in the prologue the translator calls the
author his irdirwos, a term which is here most naturally
taken in its ordinary sense of grandfather. 3 The com
position of the book would thus fall in the first quarter
of the second century a date which agrees with that of
the high priest Simon II.
This date is further favoured by indications (i) in the
book itself : by the picture of national oppression given in
9 Internal 233 33 " 3 36 16-22 (EV 36 1-17) (up to the
. , end of the third century the Jews enjoyed
evidence , f , ,
comparative quiet, and for the Maccabean
period we should expect a more poignant tone of suffer
ing) ; by the traces of Greek influence on the thought
as in the personifications of wisdom in chaps. 1 24 and
by the acquaintance with Greek customs, as the having
music at feasts, 35 3-6 ; (2) in the translation, by signs of
acquaintance with the LXX version of the Torah, as in
17 17 (after the Greek of Dt. 328/), 44i6 4 (<& Gen. 624) ; 5
and (3) in the translator s preface by the reference to
three divisions or canons of the Hebrew Scriptures. 6
1 The section 49 14-16 seems to be an addition by a scribe or by an
editor (possibly by the translator) for the purpose of introducing
names (Enoch, Joseph, Shem, Seth, Adam) omitted by the author.
Chap. 44 16 (Enoch), wanting in the Syr., may be a late addition.
In the Hebrew a scribe has repeated 173 in i6; in the rest (55 =
H, except that for riyT (perhaps taken as = thought ) it has
|ierai/oi a; (perhaps an error for tyyotoc) ; 166 seems to be in part
copied from 49 14, in part a repetition from 44 14. The expression
an example of knowledge (or thought) to all generations is
strange ; we should in any case omit knowledge (with <B 2 53 S H ).
2 The Greek construction (absence of article before CTTI) has
been objected to as hard ; but Hag. 1 1 2 i, Zech. 1 7 7 i, i Mace.
18 42 14 27 prove that it is possible (see note by Ezra Abbot in
Amer. ed. of Smith s DB). For examples of this use of firl
in inscriptions see Deissmann, Bibelstudien, 255^ [ 95].
3 It sometimes means ancestor ; but in such cases the con
nection usually indicates the wider sense (Seligmann).
4 Ecclus. 44 16 is, however, probably an interpolation (see
above, 7, last n.).
5 See also 20 29 (Dt. 16 19) 44 17-21 (Gen. 69 17 4 22 18) 45 8/
(Ex. 38 35 y: ?) 49 7 (Jer. 1 10) 46 19 (i S. 12 3, cp Gen. 14 23).
8 This, of course, does not imply that the canons were com
pleted in his time. The omission of the names of Ezra, Daniel,
and Mordecai in the list of great men is to be noted. Daniel, if
he had been known to the author, would certainly have been
mentioned just before or after Ezekiel (498/1); 49i2./, near
which we should expect the other two to appear, are not found
in our Hebrew fragments, but the versions show no sign of a lost
passage. I f the three had been inadvertently omitted, they would
probably have been added, as are Enoch, Joseph, Shem, Seth, and
H7I
10. Fortunes of
the book.
ECCLESIASTICUS
(4) Another note of date might be drawn from the relation
of Ecclus. to the books of Proverbs and Ecclesiastes ;
but to exhibit it clearly would require a detailed examina
tion of those two books. The three appear, by their
thought (Proverbs in its latest recension), to be the pro
duct of a well-advanced stage of Grasco-Jewish culture. l
The book was never admitted into the Jewish and
Christian canons (CANON, 39, 47). Among other
reasons it is enough to mention that, un-
likesome other late books (Cant. , Prov. ,
Dan. , Eccles. ), it was not issued under
the authority of a great national name : the schools
accepted from Solomon what they would not accept from
Joshua ben-Sira. The work, though not canonised, was
highly esteemed, and is frequently cited in Talmud and
Midrash, sometimes byname, sometimes anonymously. 2
There are also many coincidences of thought between
Ecclus. and the Talmud, which, however, do not neces
sarily show that the latter borrowed directly from the
former. Further, not all the citations in the Talmud
are now to be found in our text and versions of Ecclus. ;
these latter are perhaps incomplete, or perhaps Ben-Sira
became a name to which anonymous proverbs were
attached. Later he is cited by Nathan (gth cent.) and
Saadia (loth cent.). There is a second collection, en
titled The Alphabet of Ben-Sira, 3 apparently compiled
late in the Talmudic period, in which, along with genuine
material (cited in the Talmud), there are sayings that
seem not to belong to Ben-Sira. The translation of
some of his proverbs into Aramaic and the spurious
additions to his work show the estimation in which he
was held by his co-religionists. 4 He was not less
esteemed by the early Christians. It is not clear that
he is cited in the NT ; 5 but he is frequently appealed to
in post-biblical Christian writers, under a variety of
names, or anonymously, and with different introductory
formulas. Though his book was never formally recog
nised as canonical (it is found in no canonical list), it
is quoted as scripture, divine scripture, prophetical,
and was appealed to in support of church doctrine.
The first example of its use is found in the Ep. of Barnabas,
19; cp Ecclus. 431. After this it is quoted by Clem.Alex.,
Orig., Cypr., August., Jer., Greg.Naz., Greg.Nyss., Chrys.,
Cyr.Alex., Joan.Damasc., Theophyl., Leo the Great, Greg. I.,
Alcuin, though not by Justin, Iren., or Eus. Athan. (/*. Fest.
39) distinguishes it from the books called apocryphal, and
August. (Civ. Dei 17 20) declares that only the unlearned ascribed
it to Solomon. Jer. seems to have been the first to draw the line
sharply between it and the canonical books. Aelfric, Archbishop
of Canterbury (see Westcott, Bible in the Church, 209), speaks of
the book as read in the churches. By Luther and other Protestant
writers of the sixteenth cent, it was treated with great respect.8
The book naturally divides itself, according to the
subject-matter, into sections. Chap. 1 is a general
Adam, in 49 14-16. The natural inference is that our books of
Daniel, Esther, and Ezra did not exist in Ben-Sira s time.
Noldeke (ZA TW, 2088 /.) would add to these Chron.
1 For further discussions of the date of Ecclus. see Fritzsche s
Comm. (in KGH), Derenbourg (Geogr.), Seligmann (U eisk. d.
Jes. Sir.), Edersheim (Comm. on Ecclus. in Wace s Apocr.), Bois,
Orig. de la phil. judeo-alex. ; Kautzsch (Af>okr.\ Halevy (Rev.
Sem., 99) ; and, for the relation between Ecclus. and Proverbs, O.
Holtzmann in CK/(Oncken s series), 2 202 ; Che. Job and Sol. 184.
2 For a list of quotations from Ecclus. in Talm. and Rabb.
literature see Ecclus., ed. Cowley and Neub., where also are
given references to Bacher, Gaster, Schechter, and others. Cp,
further, Dukes, Rabbin. Blumenlese, GdgeT,Al>ot/i (in his Nach-
gelass. Schrift. iv.). In his Secrets Charles cites passages in that
work which appear to be taken from or based on Ecclus. ; cp
Ecclus. 1 2 with Secrets, 47 5 ; 24 with 51 3 ; 7 3 32 with 42 1 1
51 1 ; 14 19 with 65 n, etc.
3 See Zunz, Gottcsd. Vortr.; Dukes, ut sup.\ Cowley and
Neub., Ecclus.; Steinschneider, Alphabet. Sirac. utnimquc.
The work consists of two alphabetical lists of proverbs, one Aram.,
the other Hebrew, with commentary. Another late collection
is given by J. Drusius, Proverbia Ben Sira, Franeker, 1507.
4 The Talmud seems not quite sure of the work, placing it
sometimes among the external and forbidden books, sometimes
among the c ^lriD (citing it with the formula TJNJC )-
5 Among the more promising passages are Ja. 1 2-4(cp Ecclus.
2 1-5), Lk. 12 \gff. (cp Ecclus. 29 i2/.) and Ja. 1 19 (cp Ecclus.
5n).
6 On the attitude of modern churches towards the OT Apocr.
see Bissell, Apocr. (Gen. Introd.), and Zockler, Einl. in vol. ix.
of Strack and Zockler s Kurzgef. Koinm.
1172
ECCLESIASTICUS
introduction ; 33 (361-17) is a prayer for Israel ; 42 15-
5626 is a separate discourse (praise of great men) ;
11 Structure 50 * 7 2 9 is a colophon (probably by an
editor) ; and 51 is an appended prayer
and exhortation. In the body of the work new starting-
points are indicated at 1624 [22] 24 1 and 39 12, and there
are further paragraphal divisions (marked by the address
my son ) at 2 1 3 17 4 1 6 18 23 32, etc. , besides the sub
divisions obvious in the subject matter (see the headings
in the Greek Version). Beyond this paragraphal
and sectional arrangement it seems impossible to dis
cover any plan in the book. 1 It consists, like Proverbs,
of a mass of observations on life, put together in the
interests not of logical order but of edification.
A curious arrangement of material is found in most
10 TV 1 f Greek MSS (in all hitherto examined
I1L on this point except No. 248 of Holmes
and Parsons) : the section 33 16-36 n is placed after 30 24.2
The right order is given in the Pesh., the Latin, the Armenian,
and the G MS No. 248 (which is followed by Complut., as this
last is followed in EV). The cause of the derangement was prob
ably the displacement of rolls of the G MS from which most
existing MSS are derived, 3 or possibly of the Heb. MS from
which the Gk. translation was made. Similar instances of dis
placement are mentioned by Fritzsche (Comm. 170) and
Edersheim (Comm. i54>. 4 The Pesh. was made from an inde
pendent Heb. MS, which had the right order. The Latin may
have been made from a G MS earlier than that from which our
present G texts are derived ; it may have been corrected after
the Heb. ; it may come from a corrected G text like that of
No. 248.
As to the author s sources nothing very precise can
be said. Whilst his own experience and observation
13 Sources P roDa kly furnished a great part of his
material, it is possible that he drew also
from books or from unpublished discourses of sages.
There are not a few resemblances between him and
Proverbs ; but the most of these are best explained as
independent treatment of common material. The same
thing is true of the points of contact between Ecclesiasticus
and Ecclesiastes. 5 If our author quotes those two books,
he apparently treats them as wisdom-books having no
more authority than he himself claims. There was,
no doubt, much that might be considered common
property, which different moralists would use each in
his own way : the maxim, for example, that the be
ginning (or root, or completion, or crown) of wisdom is
the fear of God must have been an axiom in the teach
ing of the Palestinian sages. A comparison between
Ecclus. 24 and Prov. 8 shows how differently the two
books treat the same general conception.
The traditional account, which represents the book
as composed by one man, seems on the whole to be
supported by the character of the contents. There are,
indeed, differences of tone, as in various paragraphs on
14 Dnitv women (25 and 26), and on the happiness
*" and misery of life (39 16-35 and 40 i-n), and
in general there is a contrast between the geniality of
some passages and the cynicism of others, and between
the conceptions of wisdom, on the one hand as a
universal divine influence, and on the other as common-
sense shrewdness. The diversities, however, do not go
beyond the bounds of a single experience, and in the
book as a whole there is an evident unity of tone the
attitude toward God, life, wisdom, theTorah, is the same
throughout. 6 The authenticity of chap. 51 has
1 For proposed plans see Eichhorn (Einl.), Ew. (Gesch. 4300),
Fritzsche (Einl. in his Comm.), Deane (^.r^w. 1883), Edersheim
(Introd. in his Comm.), and cp remarks of Herbst in his Einl.
2 Or, according to the verse-numbering in Swete s Sept. , the
two sections 3025-33 IT,O. and 33 13^-86 160. have changed places.
3 This, Fritzsche s suggestion, is now generally accepted.
See Deane, Expos. 1883, and Swete, Sept. vol. ii. p. vii.
1 Tisch. retains the Greek order ; Swete gives the Latin.
B The comparison between Ecclus. and Proverbs is made most
fully by Seligmann (Weisheit d. Jes. Sir.), and that between
Ecclus. and Eccles. by Wright (KoheletK). See also Montefiore,
in/@/e 2430.^, and Toy, Proverbs (in Internal. Crit. Com.).
The difference between Ben-Sira and Pirke Aboth in form and
style indicates an earlier date for the former.
6 On the enigmatical Eleazar ben-Irai, a possible double of
Ben-Sira, see above, 2 (n. 2).
"73
ECCLESIASTICUS
been questioned ; but the case has not been made
out.
There seems to be nothing out of keeping with the rest of the
book, and, as to the insertion of a prayer, we may compare the
one (very different in tone from this) in Wisd. Sol. (9). There
is, indeed, a striking resemblance between Ecclus. 51 13-30 and
Wisd. Sol. 7 1-14 ; but if there be imitation here, it is not clear
that it is on the part of the passage in Ecclesiasticus.
The psalm (an imitation of Ps. 13C) which is found in the
Hebrew after v. 12, and does not appear in the Vss. , may be
doubtful. Schechter suggests that it was omitted in the Greek
because the mention of the Zadokite priestly line was considered
to be inappropriate under the Maccabees. This consideration,
however, would not apply at all to the Syriac Vs., and the
omission of a single couplet would have sufficed in the Greek.
How far the author s work has been added to by
scribes and editors is a more difficult question. It
IB Intesritv s c ^ ear that tlle Hebrew anc ^ tne versions
^ *" have suffered in the process of trans
mission (see above, 4). In various passages one or
another of the texts shows additions or omissions ; each
case must be treated by itself. In general, as between
a Greek conception in one text and a Jewish in another,
the preference is to be given to the latter ; though it is
obvious that this rule must be applied carefully, so as
not to prejudge the question of a Greek influence on the
author. When the final text obtainable by MS. evidence
has been reached, there will still remain the question
whether this gives the author s thought accurately, or
has itself been coloured by editors. By some the Greek
translator is supposed to have made additions to his text
in the interests of Jewish Alexandrian philosophy ; others
see evidence of Christian interpolation. The evidence
for those conclusions is not distinct.
Alexandrian passages need not be additions of the translator,
and of the cases cited by Edersheim (Comm. 23), 1 T,f. and 24 31
are not non-Jewish, whilst to call 28 2 ( forgive and thou shall be
forgiven ) a Christian addition on internal grounds is to prejudge
the question. The evidence is stronger in the case of 4827
(^JH Nl.T, TO irav ecrnv OVTOS) and 44 16 (Enoch is called mx
fljn, i;roSeiyjua jxeTaiWas [evvoias]), both omitted by Pesh. The
first expression is Hellenising, and may be an addition by the
author, or by a Hebrew scribe, or it may have been made first
in <S, and thence transferred to H ; the second, something like
a parallel to which is found in Philo (De prtzm. et pa?n.,
Mangey, 24io_/;, where Enoch is explained to be true man
hood, based on hope in God), may be Jewish (see Siegfried,
Drummond, Bois), or may be a Hellenising expression of the
author, or an allegorising remark by a scribe. (The expressions
was found perfect and knowledge appear to be scribal addi
tions.) After the omission of all probable additions, however,
there remains enough to fix the author s relation to Greek thought
(see below, 24).
The book is arranged in short discourses or para
graphs, each of which consists in general of distichs or
16 Literarv tetrast cns I tne une s are mostly ternary
, ^^ (with three ictus) or quaternary, though
in this respect there is considerable
variety. The parallelism is less antithetic and looser,
and the discourse more flowing than in Proverbs.
Bickell (Zt.f. kath. Theol. 1882) regards 51 1-20 (in the
Heb. ) as forming an alphabetic psalm. x The attempt
to discover metre in the work (Bickell, Margoliouth)
must be pronounced unsuccessful. 2
An irregular strophic arrangement results from the
author s method of dividing his material by subjects (cp
Prov. 1-9 22-29 ). 3
Ecclesiasticus belongs to the category of Wisdom -
literature ( Hokma) , which, in contrast with the prophetic,
priestly, and legal points of view (for all of which the
17 p a. i nation Israel is the centre), gives a uni-
versal moral-religious criticism of life.
The history of the genesis and development of the Hokma
demands a separate treatment. (See WISDOM LITERA
TURE. ) The nationalistic tone of a few passages in
1 Bickell worked with his translation into Hebrew from the
Greek ; Taylor (in Schechter and Taylor s Ben Sira) goes over
the lately discovered Hebrew text, and discusses the initial
letters of the couplets, in support of Bickell. The acrostic
form is in itself not improbable (Prov. ends with an alphabetic
poem), but it is not yet clearly made out.
2 On metre in OT Heb. see the works of Ley, Bickell, Briggs,
Gunkel, D. H. Miiller, and the art. of Grimme in ZDMG, 604.
3 For an attempt to make out a regular division into groups
of 50 or too couplets see Schlatter (below, 26 a, i.).
1174
ECCLESIASTICUS
Ecclesiasticus does not affect the general character of the
book. The material is so varied and so loosely arranged
that a table of contents would take more space than can
here be given. It deals with all the ordinary social and
religious duties (cp Che. Job and Sol. 190-193). The
style is for the most part bright and vigorous, and not
without a gleam of humour. The author shows wide
acquaintance with men and things, and his advice is
usually full of good sense. Without claiming for him
self special inspiration, he speaks as an independent
teacher of religion and morals, citing no external
authority for what he says, but, like the sages in Pro
verbs, assuming its truth and obligation, and making
his appeal to reason and conscience.
In accordance with the tone of the later Judaism, Ec
clesiasticus regards God as the lord of the whole world of
A T? r things and men, the absolute, righteous
18. f\. KeilgiOUB of
. . j udgC( the author of all conditions
" and changes of life (chaps. 16-18 33/ ).
It has not the full conception of divine fatherhood ; but
it gives a description of divine forbearance toward men
(181013) which is identical in spirit with that of Ps. 103.
Concerning itself with the visible facts of life, Ecclesi
asticus (like Prov. ) takes little account of subordinate
... . supernatural beings. Angels are not
mentioned in the Hebrew (not in 43 26),
and in the Greek only in citations from the OT. In
38 140 the intercession that in Job 8826 is ascribed to a
heavenly being is ascribed to a physician. In 4821 (a
statement taken from 2 K. 1935), in which the Gk
(followed by Lat. ) has dyyeXos, the Heb. has nsis>
plague, and the Syr. JK^> jicuoo, a heavy
blow. In another passage (17 17), quoted freely from
Dt. 328/. as in (S, 1 the term ruler (rryovfj-evov) seems
to be substituted for < angel (Kara api.Qij.bv ayyt\wv)
here a divine (angelic ?) head of every nation except
Israel, whose guardian is Yahwe. Spirits, good or evil,
are nowhere mentioned. 2 Whether there is mention of
Satan is doubtful. In 21 27, where (5 has The ungodly,
when he curses rbv traravav, curses himself, the context
(see v. 28) and Syr. favour the sense, adversary, or a
reading, neighbour, for aa.Ta.vav (and for ungodly
we should probably read fool ). Further, the author,
if (as Cheyne thinks) he means Satan, seems to identify
him with the man s own evil impulse, a conception
foreign to the whole pre-Christian time 3 as well as to
the NT. In general, Ecclus. may be said to anticipate
Sadduceeism in holding aloof from angels and demons,
whose agency in actual life it does not recognise.
The central moral - religious idea of the book is
wisdom, in the conception of which Ben-Sira is sub
stantially at one with Proverbs. He treats sometimes
20 Wisdom, the human attribute, sometimes the
divine. As a quality of man it is theo
retical knowledge of the right and ability to embody it in
life. Nothing is said of the origin of this capacity (it
is treated as an ultimate fact); but it is identified with
the fear of God (1 14, etc.) that is, the wise life is
directed according to the divine commandments, or, as
it may perhaps be put, human wisdom comes from the
communion between the mind of man and the mind of
God. The unity of the divine and the human attributes
(implicitly contained in the book) appears to involve the
conception that the divine wisdom fills and controls all
things, including man s mind, and thus manifests itself
in human thought.
1 MT has VNIC" 33, for which BAL reads c rt^N J3, clearly
the right reading.
2 The vvn^ara of 39 28 (Syr. JL*O>, Heb. almost obliter
ated) are winds | (so Fritzsche) ; iv. 29 f. give, not the definition
of the term spirits, but a parallel list of natural agencies.
3 Cheyne (Job and Sol. 189, cp 297) and Edersheim (Comitt.)
refer to a Talmudic passage (Bafia Bathra, \da) which identifies
Satan with the jn ns ; cp also Weber, System der altsyn.
Theol. 228f. The y-\ is appears to be personified (Trocrjpbv
trMfOgUL) in 37 3 ; but H and S are here very different, and
the text seems to be corrupt beyond recovery.
"75
ECCLESIASTICUS
As a quality of God, wisdom is almost always personi
fied. It is called eternal (li), universal (246), un
searchable (16), the formative creative power in the
world (243), yet created (14 24g) and established in
the midst of Yahwe s people in Jerusalem (24io_/i),
where alone there was obedience to Yahwe s law. 1 This
nationalistic conception of wisdom (involved, but not
explicitly stated, in Proverbs) is noteworthy, but not
unexpected : the pious Jews of that time could hardly
fail to find the highest expression of the divine wisdom
in the guidance of Israel through the Law. Ben-Sira s
treatment of divine wisdom is personification (as in Prov.
and Wisd. Sol.), not hypostatisation. In one passage
(243, I ... covered the earth as a mist ) there
appears to be an approach to this position 2 : wisdom is
identified with the creative word, as Wisd. Sol. further
identifies it with the Stoic Logos. Like Wisd. , Sol. , and
Philo, however, Ben-Sira lacked a historical figure with
which to identify his philosophical conception.
Greater prominence is given to the Law of Moses in
our book than in Proverbs. It is glorified in the per-
T , T sons ^ M ses and Aaron (45 1-22) and
21. ineijaw. gimon (50i-2i). The author was by no
means indifferent to the ritual of sacrifice and song.
He dwells with enthusiasm on the details of the high
priest s costly dress, on the offering and the singers;
he counsels men to come with full hands to the altar
(32[35] i-u), though he adds a warning against attempt
ing to bribe God with unrighteous gifts (v. 12). His philo
sophical view of life does not prevent his taking joyous
part in the outward service of God, which he possibly
regarded as being a symbol as well as a prescribed duty.
He shows similar friendliness toward the scribes (8824-34
39i-n), who, in contrast with handicraftsmen, devote
themselves to the study of the law, the prophets, and
paroemiac sayings (a reference to parts of our book of
Proverbs?), listen to the discourses of famous men
(teachers in the legal schools), travel in foreign lands to
find out good and evil among men, open their mouths
in prayer, and ask forgiveness for their sins. This, the
earliest extant description of the life of a safer, gives a
picture of wide activity, and shows that the law-students
of that time did not confine themselves to Palestine.
With such scribes, not hagglers over words and letters,
but cultivated and liberal students of the earlier
literature, our author would naturally find himself in
hearty sympathy. As to the term law, it appears
that, when used of the Israelitish code, it may stand for
all the Jewish sacred books ; but it is sometimes em
ployed for law in general, as in 35 [32] 24 36 [33] 1-3.
The preceding citations show Ben-Sira s warm national
feeling. This is expressed most distinctly in chap. 33 [36],
in which he bemoans the afflicted state of Israel, and
prays that, in fulfilment of his promise, God would
22 A n gather all the tribes of Jacob and make the
. . ^ people possess its land as in times of old (cp
4421 47 1 1 48 10). He looks for no special
deliverer (not even in 44-50), and hopes only, in general
accordance with the earlier prophets, for national quiet
and prosperity. 4 He is so much absorbed in this desire
that he does not think of the conversion of foreign nations
to the worship of Yahwe. We have no right to take
him as the representative of the whole nation in this
regard ; but we may fairly suppose that he expresses a
current opinion. 6
1 Wisdom seems not to be exactly identified with the Mosaic
Law. The Greek text of 24 23 is difficult (raura m-ayra in app.
with j3t 0Aos), and we should perhaps read, with Pesh., in the
book." On the other hand, cp Bar. 83641, and see notes of
Edersheim (on Ecclus. 24 23) and Bois (O rig. zoo/.).
2 Ecclus. 243-6 is an imitation of Prov. 822^, from which
L here introduces additional matter. The mist may be taken
from Gen. 26, or it may be an independent figure.
3 The sin-offering is not mentioned.
4 In 51 10 H and S show that the reading of <E>, the father of
my lord (cp Ps. 110 i), is erroneous.
5 In the generally peaceful and prosperous life of the third
century B.C., the Jews seem for the time to have given up the
expectation of a special interposition of God in their behalf.
1176
BCCLBSIASTICUS
Ben-Sira s scheme of life, like that of Proverbs, or
Ecclesiastes, of the Law, and of the prophets, is confined
to the present world. In Vtwf. he repeats the senti
ment of Is. 38 iSf. He speaks neither of the resurrection
of the body 1 nor of the immortality of the soul (14 16
21 10 41 4, etc.). He belonged to the conservative
priestly party (though probably not himself a priest)
which adopted the social but not the religious ideas of
Gentile neighbours. He retained the old Hebrew con
ception of ShSol (see SHEOL), whilst the progressive
portion of the nation (represented later by the book of
Daniel) adopted or developed the idea of resurrection.
Ben-Sira s ethical scheme is that of the greater part
of the OT (if we omit, that is, such passages as Jer. 31 33
23 6 Ethical ^ z ^ 2fi ^ s ^ ^ m s the trans S res
j . . sion of the divine law ; righteousness is
Meas conformity thereto. The moral life is
considered in its external aspect as a
mass of acts. Nothing is said of the inward life, of
disposition of mind, of motives, ideals, aspirations,
struggles. Those were, doubtless, not absent from the
author s thought ; but he does not regard them as practi
cally important. What is important is the outcome : men
are known by their fruits. Sin is accepted as a fact,
which began historically with the first woman (the same
view is given in i Tim. 2 14 in contrast with that of Rom.
5) ; but there is no attempt to explain its psychological
origin. Conscience, freedom, and responsibility are
assumed (15 11-17 and pass. ). On the other hand (as
throughout OT and NT), the absolute control of man by
God is everywhere taken for granted, and in one place
(8813) distinctly affirmed. The motive for righteous
living is the well-being it secures : the good man prospers,
the bad man suffers, in this life. There is no reference
to inward peace, consciousness of rectitude, and com
munion of soul with God. Ben-Sira s point of view
(sometimes called hedonistic or utilitarian) is that of
Proverbs and the OT generally. It is determined partly
by the old Semitic external conception of life, partly by
the absence of belief in ethical immortality (cp Wisd. Sol.
2-5). The old nationalism of the prophets it rejects in
favour of a pronounced individualism : it does not recog
nise the well-being of humanity as an aim of life. The
moral code of the book is that of the OT : it inculcates
honesty, truthfulness, purity, sympathy, kindness 2 all
the virtues of the civilised society of that time. The limit
ations are either those of the time (national narrowness,
24 3 ; treatment of slaves as chattels, 8824-31) or those of
all time (selfish prudence, 12 1-5). Pride is denounced
(10? 12 f. ) as in Proverbs, and humility (3 18) and forgive
ness (282) are enjoined. Almsgiving (as in Tob. 49-11
Dan. 427 [24] Mt. 61) is identified with righteousness a
conception that naturally arose when the care of the
persecuted poor became the most pressing moral-religious
duty ; 4 but this does not exclude in Ben-Sira the higher
idea of righteousness. His treatment of social relations
and duties is fuller than that of Proverbs. He lived in
the midst of a highly developed civilisation, and is in
terested in all sides of life. He gives directions for the
governing of the household, the training of wife, children,
and servants, dealing with debtors and creditors, deport
ment in society(daily intercourse, feasts), bearing towards
rulers and rich men he recognises many distinctions
and classes of men he is familiar with the temptations
of city-life, and praises agriculture. He gives special
warnings against sexual licentiousness, against becoming
security for other men s debts, against involving one s
self in other people s affairs ; in general he counsels an
attitude of caution toward men, on the ground of personal
1 The raising of the dead by Elijah (48 5) has nothing to do
with the doctrine of resurrection, and 19 19, which speaks of
immortality, occurs in a paragraph (p. 18 f.) which is found
only in No. 248 of <B, and appears to be an interpolation.
- On its ethical-religious vocabulary see Merguet and Hatch
(as below, 26). The golden rule does not occur.
3 50 2$f. (though in H<SS) is probably an interpolation.
* So the position assigned to almsgiving by Mohammed was
suggested by the conditions of the Arabian society of his time.
39 1177
ECCLESIASTICUS
comfort (3222/. ). On the same ground, he advises the
observance of the social proprieties, such as a decent
show of mourning for the dead, failure in which brings
one into ill repute (38 16/ ). He is friendly to physicians
seems, indeed, to defend them against doubts and
objections and approves of music and the temperate
use of wine. See especially chaps. 7 13 18 31/. 38, and
Seligmann, Deane, and Cheyne. He is generally acute,
sometimes a little cynical, never pessimistic.
A real, though not very well defined, Greek influence
is to be recognised in the book. The author does not
24 Relation acce P l the Greek philosophy (his thought
to Greek s in the main of the P ractical unphilo-
thoueht sophic Jewish type); but he is affected by
general Greek culture. In this respect he
stands between Proverbs and Wisd. Sol. , but much
nearer to the former than to the latter. Palestine was
at this time (c. 180 B.C.) not without a Greek atmo
sphere, and Ben-Sira had travelled in Greek-speaking
countries (cp Che. ). The traces of Greek influence are
found in certain general conceptions in his book. He
does not, it is true, go so far as Wisd. Sol. and Philo ;
he does not allegorise, as they do, nor make so near an
approach to hypostatisation. His conception of human
liberty and divine predetermination and his reference to
Enoch (44 16), if it be genuine, are probably Jewish. We
| cannot adduce particular words and phrases in proof of
j Greek influence, for these may be scribal additions. The
expression in 4827, for example (bon Kin, TO irdv iffriv
ai/ros), found in the Heb. and the Gk. , though not in the
Syriac, might be regarded as of doubtful genuineness, and
in general the possibility of editorial modification must be
admitted. After we allow for such a possibility, however,
there remain broad touches which cannot well be re
garded as spurious, and which have a Greek tone. The
most marked is the identification of virtue with knowledge
(a point for the full treatment of which see WISDOM
LITERATURE). This conception, though not without
roots in the older thought, has here been developed
under the stimulus of Greek philosophy, with, however,
a marked Jewish colouring. There are, according to
Ben-Sira, only two classes in society, wise men and
fools. These are often identified with the righteous and
the wicked ; but the intellectual basis of men s natures
and judgments is constantly insisted on. The divine law
is recognised as the rule of action ; but it is not different
from the wise man s thought. Hence the importance
attached to instruction, the one thing necessary for men
being discipline in the art of right thinking ; and all
God s dealings with men may be viewed as divine train
ing in the perception of moral truth. Similarly, the
stress laid on moderation in action (821-24 31 /! ) reminds
us of the fj.-r]dev &yat> of Koh^leth and of the Greeks.
In another direction we have the conception of wisdom
in chap. 24 (nearly identical with that of Prov. 8), which
contains the Greek ideas of the cosmos and the logos
(cp tK6<rfj.i]ffti>, 1627 422i ; in 42zi Heb. has pn).
A complete critical edition is yet in the distance.
Only about a half of the Hebrew text being known, we
25 Critical are ^S^Y dependent on the Vss. , the
edition texts of which are not in good condition.
A selection of works on Ecclesiasticus is all that can be given.
(a) For the text of the Hebrew fragments : (i.) The Oxford
fragments and first Cambridge leaf: Cowley and Neubauer, The
original Hebrew of a portion of Ecclesi-
26. Literature, asticus, etc. [ 97] (also collotype facsimile
ed. [ 97]), and R. Smend, Das hebr. Frag
ment d. Weisheit d. JS [ 97] ; Schlatter, Das neugefundene
Heb. Stiick des Sirack [ 97] ; cp Israel Levi, L Ecclesiastigue,
tcxte original hebreu [ 98] ; and see the critical remarks on
the text in REJ, Jan. -Mar. 97 ; the Expositor, May 97 ;
WZKM\\ [ 97]; cp the literature cited in AJSL, 1642 n. 2
[ 98]; Kau. Apokr. 1257-9. ( i-) The 1897 eleven Cambridge
leaves : S. Schechter and C. Taylor, The H isdont of Ben-Sira,
Portions of the Book of Ecclesiasticus from Heb. MSS in
the Cairo Genizah [ 99] ; two new leaves, JQR 12 456-465 [Ap.
1900]. (iii.) The two British Museum leaves : G. Margoliouth,
JQR 12 1-33 [Oct. 99] (also separately [Williams and Norgate]).
(iv.) The two Paris leaves : I. Levi, REJ 40 1-30 [1900]. (v.) The
two Adler leaves : E. N. Adler, JQR 12466-480 [Ap. 1900],
ECLIPSE
(b) Among commentaries, those of Frit/sche (Kurzge/. Ex.
1 1 Much.) and Edersheim (in Wace s Apocrypha) are especially
to be commended ; Bretschneider (1806) is full of material
and suggestion.
(c) For text-criticism, see Horowitz in MGWJ 14; Dyser-
inck, De Spreuken van J. den Zoon v. Sir. [ 70] ; Hatch,
Essays in Bibl. Grk. [ 89] ; Bickell in ZKT, 82 ; D. S. Mar-
goliouth, Place of Ecclesiasticus, etc. [ 90] (criticisms of Mar-
goliouth s position by Dr. in Oxford Mag., Che. in Acad., Schiir.
in TLZ, and reply by Margoliouth in Expos., all in 1890); H.
Hois, Essai sur torig. d. I. j>hil.-jud. alex. [ 90] ; I. Levi,
L. Ecclesiastique [ 98] and art. in REJ, July 99 ; Margoliouth,
2081-94 (1900).
(d) General works : Hody, De Bibl. text. orig. [1705] ; A. T.
Hartmann, Die enge Verbind. d. AT tnit d. JVeutn [ 31];
Zunz, Gottesdienstl. Vortr. d. Juden [ 32], new ed. [ 92] ; Del.
Gesch. d. hebr. Poesie [ 36] ; Derenbourg, Hist, et Gfog. de la
Pal. [ 67].
^iicenienre aes D.jes. oir. l 74J ; oengmann, ir eisneii a. j es.
So/in d. Sir. in s. Verhdlt. zu d. Salomon. Sprtichen, etc. [ 83] ;
Deane in Expositor, 83 ; Che. Job and Sol. [ 87] (sections on
Sirach).
(/) On Greek, especially Alexandrian, elements in Ben-Sira :
Gfrorer, Philo [ 31); Dahne, Darstel. d. jifd.-alex. Religions-
phil. [ 34]; J. F. Bruch, H eisheitslehre d. Heb. [ 51]; Frankel,
Einfluss d. paliist. Exeg. auf d. alex. Hermeneutik[ s\\\ A.
Geiger, U rschrift [ 57] ; Nicolas, Doctr. relig. d. JuifsV] [ 66] ;
Siegfried, Philo i>. Alex, als Ausleger d. AT [ 75] ; Drummond,
Phiio-jud. [ 88]; Bois, Orig., etc. [ 90].
(j?) On other versions : H. Herkenne, De vet. latinct Eccclesi-
astici capit. i.-xliii. Una cunt notis ex ejusdem libri translatt.
sEth. Arm., Copt., Lat., alt. Syro-Hexaplari dcpromptis.
Dr. Norbert Peters, Die Sahidisch-Koptische Uebersetzung
des Buches Ecclesiasticus, Biblische Studien [ 98].
C. H. T.
ECLIPSE. It is possible that the words of Amos
(89), To cause the sun to go down at noon, and to
_ _. . . . darken the earth while it is yet day, 1
. istoricai re j- er j eclipse of the sun on
eclipses, Am. 89
Jer. 15g?
JunC|
ASSYRIA, 19).
AMOS _
If so, the prophet, in reproducing from memory the discourses
which he had delivered in N. Israel, introduced a reference to
a subsequent event, which seemed like the beginning of the
end spoken of in S 2. Amos, who is so fond of references to
contemporary circumstances, may very well have referred to
this particular eclipse, which is also specially recorded by the
Assyrians. Possibly, too, one of the details in Jer. log may be
suggested by the famous solar eclipse of Thales in 585 B.C.
(Herod. 1 54 Pliny 24 2 53). I v. 6^-9 may have been written (by
whom we cannot venture to say 2 ) in the year after the fall of
Jerusalem.
No other prophetic passages can safely be taken to
relate to any particular eclipses. The phenomenon of
2 Figurative an ecli P se was a P eriodic ally recurring
, 6 excitement to the unscientific mind,
language. and Am g jg 2o M;C g g Zeph 1 15 Ezek
30i8 327/ Is. 13io 242 3 Joel 2io 37 815 Zech. 146
cannot with any probability be connected with historical
eclipses. The language is conventional. It pre
supposes the phenomena of eclipses, but is merely
symbolic, and such as naturally suggested itself in
descriptions of judgments. Is. 388 (in a late report of
a supposed prophecy of Isaiah) has been much mis
understood by Bosanquet. To his theory that the solar
eclipse of 689 B.C. is referred to there are strong
chronological as well as text - critical and exegetical
objections (see Che. Intr. Isa. 227, and DIAL).
Almost all modern scholars have found a reference
to the phenomena of eclipses in Job 858 31 13. Thus
Davidson paraphrases the blackness of the day (Job
85 AV; all that maketh black the day, RV) eclipses,
supernatural obscurations, and the like, and remarks
on v. 8 and 26 13 that there is an allusion to the popular
mythology, according to which the darkening or eclipse
of the sun and moon was caused by the serpent throw
ing its folds around them, and swallowing them up
(Job, I9/. ; similarly 185). Unfortunately the two
1 Reading DV lijO ( C p Jer. 15 9). See Che. Exf. T. 10336
(April 1899).
- Giesebrecht, too, doubts Jeremiah s authorship of vu. 6l>-ga.
1179
EDER, THE TOWER OF
most significant words in w. 58 appear to be corrupt, 1
and the illustrative material derived from Babylonian
mythology is inconsistent with the view that the Hebrews
(like the Indians) believed in a cloud-dragon which
seeks to swallow up the sun and moon. What we
have before us, as Gunkel was the first to show fully,
is one of the current applications of the myth of Tiamat.
The text of Job 3 is a matter for critical discussion.
See Dillmann and Budde(on the conservative side), and
see further DRAGON, 5, BEHEMOTH, zf.
Most of the NT references (Mt. 2429 Acts 220 Rev.
6128 12) are sufficiently explained as the conventional
i NT rAfprAnP a phraseology of prophetic writers.
* Nor would most persons hesitate to
explain the darkness over the whole earth 2 (or land,
Mk. 15 33 Mt. 27 45) as an addition to plain historical
facts involuntarily made by men brought up on the
prophetic Scriptures, and liable, too, to the innocent
superstitions of the people. When Yahwe was sore
displeased with his people, the prophets constantly
described universal nature as awestruck, and poets like
David had a similar sense of the sympathy of nature
when great men died (2 S. l2i). It is Lk. , a non-
Israelite, who involuntarily rationalises the poetic tra
dition of a sudden darkness over the earth at the
Crucifixion. In Lk. 234S/ we read (in RV) according
to the best form of the Greek text, A darkness came
over the whole land [or earth] until the ninth hour, the
sun s light failing (rov i)\iov eVXetTrovros). No doubt
the evangelist believed that a solar eclipse was the cause
of this naively supposed phenomenon, though, according
to his own narrative, Jesus died at the Passover season
when, there being a full moon, a solar eclipse was im
possible. Origen indeed ( Comm. in Matth., Opera,
ed. Delarue, 892/1) rejected the reading now adopted
by the Revisers on this very ground, regarding it ae a
falsification of the text. Lauth (TSBA, 4245) frankly
admits that no ordinary eclipse can be meant, and
thinks that the darkness was probably caused by the
extinction of the star of the Magi. T. K. c.
ED (11?, witness ), the name of an altar of the
eastern tribes in EV of Josh. 2234 (not in MT or ).
The text being imperfect, and the choice of a name
partly open, Dillmann would supply GALEED (q.v. , 2).
It is at any rate impossible to identify the Witness Altar
with Karn Sartabeh, (i) because this bold bluff is on the
western side of the Jordan, and (2) because it is not certain
whether any part of the story of the altar belongs to either of
the great narrators J and E. See GALEED, 2.
EDAR, TOWER OF. See EDER, TOWER OF.
EDDIAS deAAiAC [A]), i Esd. 826 AV = Ezra 102 5
AV, JEZIAH.
EDDINUS (eAAtejiNoyc [BA]), i Esd. Ii 5 RV,
AV JEDUTHUN.
EDEN (H#). A Levite, temp. Hezekiah (2 Ch. 29 12,
tuSav [BA], -ua.8. [L]; 31 15, o8o/x[BA], ia5av [L]). The
right form is probably JEHOADDAN (q.v. ). T. K. C.
EDEN (py). For Gen. 28, etc. (Garden of Eden)
see PARADISK. For Amos 1 5 ( House of Eden EV) see BETH-
EDEN (so RVmg-)- F r Ezek. 27 23 see CANNEH.
EDER (TW, flock ; Ap &[BJ, eApAi [A], eBep [L]),
a city in the S. of Judah, close to Edom (Josh. 15 21) ;
probably no more than a village with a tower of the
flock (see below); cp Nu. 1819 2 K. 188 2 Ch. 26 10.
EDER (AV Edar), THE TOWER OF (-niT^p,
i.e. , tower of the flock ), a place (perhaps a village)
to the S. of Ephrath 3 (see BETHLEHEM, 3), beyond
which Jacob pitched his tent after the death and burial
of Rachel (Gen. 35 21). It was so called from a watch-
1 1"1D3 is improbable, because there is no genuine root 173
to be black ; DV, because the parallelism requires D\ sea,
ocean (cp Ps. 74 13/1 Is. 27 1. See Che. Expos., 97 a, p. 404^).
2 The rendering earth is to be preferred ; the crucifixion
had a significance for more than the little country of Juda;a.
* See, however, EPHRATH.
1180
Name
a e.
EDER
tower built for the protection of the flocks against robbers
(see EDER i. , and cp CATTLE, 6), and according to
Jerome (OS 101 19) was about i R. m. from Bethlehem.
The same phrase is rendered in Mic. 4 8 tower of the
flock, no actually existing tower being referred to. The
description is symbolical. Either Jerusalem is in siege,
standing alone in the land, like one of those solitary
towers with folds round them (GASm. ; cp Is. 18), or,
on the analogy of Is. 32 14, we have before us a picture
of the desolation of the already captured Jerusalem,
which is no longer a city but a hill on whose slopes
flocks may lie down. The latter view is preferable,
even if, with G. A. Smith, we assign Mic. 48 to
Micah as its author (see Che. Micah^ [Camb. Bib.],
1882, p. 38; cp p. 33/- ) Micah has previously said,
not Zion shall become like a tower of the flock,
like a besieged city (cp Is. I.e.), but Zion shall be
ploughed as a field.
In (5 there is a similar variety of rendering. In Gen. 35 16
{the notice is transferred thither from v. 21 ; see Di.) we have
(e7reK>/a) TOV irvpyov ydSep [BDL], . . . -yajSep [E] ; in Mic. 48
f H \ 1
EDER (VU;, eAep [AL]).
1. Apparently a post-exilic Benjamite sept, mentioned along j
with Arad and many others; i Ch. Sist (BENJAMIN, 9 ii. /3): |
AV ADER (T$ ; wSrjS [B], coSep [A], aSap [L]).
2. A Levitt: iCh. 232 3 ("-^a.9 [B]) 24 30 (rjXa [B]). The
name may be derived from EDER i.
EDES, RV EDOS ( H Aoc [B]), i Esd. 9 35 = Ezra 10 43 ,
RV IDDO (ii. ).
EDNA ( eA N& [BAN] i.e., nrw ; ANNA), the wife
of Raguel and mother of Sara Tobias s bride (Tob.
72, etc.).
EDOM
Name and origin ( 1-4). History ( 6-10).
Country ( 5). Civilisation, etc. ( 11-13).
Edom (am ; eAcoM [BAL], lAoyM&iA [BNAQF], 1
whence AV IDUMEA in Is. 34s/ Ez. 35 15 36s), and EV
IDUM^EA in Mk.38 [Ti. WH, lAoyM&iA]).
from an older form addm, may possibly be
rightly treated by Baethgen 2 as a variation of dddm
mankind (origiiftilly adam) ; similar terms have, in
fact, often been used as national names. As applied to
the nation, Edom always has a collective sense, the only
exception being the somewhat late passage (Ps. 137?) in
which the Edomites are called sons of Edom. The
resemblance between the national name Edom and the
name of the god contained in D~IN~QJ; (traditionally read
OBED-EDOM [y.w.], but of uncertain pronunciation) is
probably an accident. On early traces of a name equiva
lent to Edom, see below, 3.
The Edomites, according to the OT, were descend
ants of Esau, who is represented as identical with
Affi + f Edom, the eponym of the nation, just
2. Affinities oi as j acQb is represented as identical
au with Israel. The story of the rival
brothers Esau and Jacob symbolises the history of the
peoples of Edom and Israel respectively, in their varying
relations to each other (cp EsAU, 2). In form it is
purely legendary, and Esau, with whom we are here
specially concerned, has been identified by Tiele ( Verge-
lijk. Gesch. 447) and many others with the Phoenician
mythic hero Usoos (OiVwos ; Philo Bybl. , ap. Eus.
PrcBp. Ev. i. lO?). The statements of Philo must, no
doubt, be received with caution. His work, as far as
we know it, is by no means purely Phoenician in origin,
though he claims for it the authority of the ancient
writer Sanchuniathon. It is a medley of Phoenician
and Hellenic myths, combined with theoretical inter
pretations and arbitrary fancies of his own. Never
theless, it appears certain that Usoos was borrowed by
Philo not from the OT but from Phoenician tradition,
and several parallelisms in the story of Esau and in
1 In several places and in more than one MS lovSaia. and
ISovfiaia are confused in <S.
2 Beitr. 10 ; cp ZDMG 42 470 [ 88].
1181
EDOM
that of Usoos seem to the present writer to point to a
common origin of the two legends. 1 In this case the
original form of wy or Usoos will probably have been
~\vy, Osau (cp ESAU, i, HOSAH). Another suggestion
has been made by W. M. Miiller. He connects Esau
with the desert-goddess Asiti, a Semitic name mentioned
in two Egyptian inscriptions (As. u. Eur. 316 f.}. It
is, at all events, probable that Esau was originally a god
whom the Edomites regarded as their ancestor ; Israelite
patriarchs, Abraham and Jacob, also seem to have
been gods at a very early period (cp ABRAHAM, 2,
JACOB).
According to an Egyptian papyrus, some of the Sasu
(a term nearly equivalent to Bedouins ) belonging to
_ . (the land of) Aduma (i.e. , Edom) 2
/ J C6S received permission, in the twelfth
of Edom or
Seir.
century B. c. , to pasture their cattle in
a district on the Egyptian frontier (see
WMM As. u. Eur. 135) precisely what happened in
the case of the Israelites according to the tradition
contained in the OT. About 1200 B.C. the Sasu of
Sa ai ra were defeated (ib. 136). Here Sa ai ra is, of
course, Seir 3 (Heb. Se ir) ; but whether the Edomites
or some older inhabitants of those mountains are meant
is uncertain. In any case, it is not permissible to
infer (with WMM op. cit. 137) that the Edomites took
possession of the district in question only a short time
before the period of the Israelite kings : the list of
Edomite kings (see 4), with the names of places con
tained in it, bears witness to the contrary.
It is true that, according to Gen. 146 8620 Dt. 21222,
the mountains of Seir were occupied, before the time of
1 In both stories we have a strife between two brothers.
Usoos, like Esau, is a hunter ; his brother is <ra;iiT)jU.po{JjU.os 6 <cai
v^iovpa.vio i, where the former name is obviously CfTO CB*. The
myth of the stone of Jacob (Gen. 28 12 17) may perhaps here be
compared. The stone lies at the foot of the heavenly ladder,
and may thus represent the gate or entrance of heaven.
2 [Name of Edom. The equation Edom = (the land of) Udumu
or Udumi (for Assyrian references see KA T(%) 150 = COT 1 136)
is undisputed. But it is unwise, wherever a name resembling
Edom occurs in the Assyrian or the Egyptian inscriptions, to
insist on identifying the two names. In the Amarna tablets
(iSth cent. B.C.) we find a city in the land of Gar called Udumu
(Wi. 237 [L 64] 24). It would be bold, however, to speak of this
city as the city of Edom (so Sayce, Pat. Pal. 153; cpWi. below),
and to proceed to a further combination of both names with
Adumu, the capital of mat Aribi, conquered by Sennacherib
(see DUMAH, i). Yakut, the Arabic geographer, knew of several
places called Duma, and it is probable that a similar name had
several references in antiquity. Even in the famous passage,
Pap. Anast. vi. 4 14, where a high official (temp. Merneptah^II.)
asks permission for the entrance into Egypt of tribes of Sasu
(Bedouin) from the land of Aduma (Brugsch, GA 202; WMM
As. it. Eur. 135), there is still a doubt as to the reference of
Aduma (Wi. Gl 1 189). More reason is there to question
the identification proposed by Chabas, Brugsch, and Maspero
of the land of Adim or Atuma (so read by these scholars in the
story of Senuhyt ; RP& 2 n ff.) with the land of Edom. As
E. Meyer (GA 182) and other good judges (including Maspero
himself) now assure us, the right reading of the name is not
Adim but Kdm (see KEDEMAH), and Prof. Sayce has, therefore,
in Pat. Pal. 206, silently retracted what he said in his earlier
attack on criticism (Crit. ATon. 203). Winckler (I.e.) thinks it
not impossible that the Edomites may have derived their name
from the region of the city of Udumu (he calls it here Adumu),
where they may by degrees have formed settlements. This he
illustrates by the often-quoted passage in the Harris Papyrus,
where Rameses III. claims to have destroyed the Saira among
the tribes of the Sasu (Brugsch, 203; WMM I35./; cp 240).
Here the name Saira is evidently later than the name (Mount)
Seir. Winckler does not, however, adhere to his own suggestion,
and thinks the two names Adumu and Udumu are more probably
unconnected. It only needs to be added here that in 1879
Mr. Baker Greene brought the passage in the Anastasi Papyrus
into connection with the settlement of Hebrew tribes, such
as the Josephites and, as he thinks, the Kenites, in Egypt
(Hebrew Migration, 37, 117, IQO, 310); and that W. M. Miiller
considers that the Saira of the Harris Papyrus are a race distinct
from the Edomites. According to this scholar, the Saira are
the same as the Horites the aboriginal inhabitants of the land
of Seir. This involves bringing down the conquest of Seir by
the Edomites much later than is consistent with Dt. 3 Nu. 20.
T. K.C.]
3 According to" Zimmern (ZA 6251), Seir seems to occur in
the Amarna tablets in the expression mat scri.
1182
EDOM
EDOM
the Edomites, by the sons of Seir the Horite or the
Horites. W. M. Miiller (I.e.), however, rightly observes
that the word Hori i.e. , Troglodyte (cp Job 306) is
not properly the name of a nation, and serves only to
express the idea entertained by later generations con
cerning their predecessors. In like manner, the sons
of Seir can scarcely be regarded as a national name,
since Seir denotes nothing more than the mountain
range in question. We must, however, suppose that
among the Edomites, as among the Israelites, there
survived remnants of older peoples ; and the lists
in Gen. 36 seem clearly to indicate that, after the
analogy of what happened in Israel, the Horites
frequently mingled with the Edomites just as, on the
other hand, we find manifold traces of a mingling of
Edomites and Horites with the neighbouring Israelite
tribes (see Nold. Unters. 178 /. and We. De gent. 29,
38 f. ). It should be noticed, in particular, that
remnants of the small nation known as Kenaz were to
be found both among the Edomites and among the
Israelites (see K.ENA7.). Similarly, a portion of the
Amalekites was merged in the Edomite people (see
AMALEK, 4).
It is shown elsewhere (see ESAU, 2) that the Israel
ites had a consciousness of their lateness as a people
__. in comparison with the Edomites. The
n ^ s> tradition, which was sound, illustrates
Tribes, Clans.
the statements in Gen. 8631-39. Even
if the first four of the kings there enumerated are
mythical (see Nold. Unters. 87 n. ), the last four
are certainly historical. There is, however, a doubt
whether they are arranged in strict chronological
sequence, and whether all of them ruled over the whole
nation (see BEL A ii. , i). The other lists in the same
chapter also are of great historical value, though the
details are often obscure. 1 That inconsistencies occa
sionally appear is quite in accordance with what we
should expect in lists drawn up at various times or
under the influence of conflicting notions ; for it would
be a great mistake to suppose that the tribes and
families were separated, by absolutely rigid limits, one
from another. So far as we can judge, however, there
is no reason to believe that the traditions embodied in
the lists above mentioned are later than the overthrow
of the kingdom of Judah. Of the localities enumerated
in Gen. 36, either in the form of tribal names or as
possessions of the various chieftains (see especially vv.
40-43), all those which can be identified are situated in
the ancient territory of Edom, not in the region occupied
by the Edomites after the fall of Judah. The antiquity
of the title (IJ^K. alluph, EV DUKE [q.v.]) given to the
Edomite princes in this chapter appears to the present
writer to be proved by Ex. 1615.
In the OT the territory of Edom (properly speaking)
is Mount SEIR (q.v. , i). It is, of course, to be supposed,
_ , however, that the Edomite country
IM t s ) s P read out both to the east and to the
" west of the mountains, and probably
varied in dimensions at different periods. The sites of
a very few Edomite towns can be determined with pre
cision ; the sites of others (for example, that of Teman
i.e., south, southern place which is often mentioned,
and appears also as a grandson of Edom) can be deter
mined at least approximately. In general, however,
the country of Edom is still very imperfectly known.
The name Seir, applied to the mountain-range, signifies
hairy, a meaning to which the narratives in Gen. allude
on several occasions (Gen. 25 25 27 1123). If we may
judge by analogy, hairy must here be equivalent to
wooded, or at least covered with brush-wood : in
Arabia there are two distinct localities where we find a
mountain called by the equivalent name al-As ar, the
hairy, whilst a neighbouring mountain is known as
al-Akra or al-Ajrad the bare (cp the mountain called
Sa rfo in Assyria).
i [Cp WRS / Phil. 9 V)ff. ; Ndld. ZDMG 40 168^ ( 86).]
1183
At the present day the region of Seir is, for the most
part, barren ; but it contains some fruitful valleys, and
in the country immediately to the E. of it are to be
found districts covered with luxuriant vegetation, as both
ancient and modern authorities attest (see Buhl, Edomi-
ter, i$/. [ 93]). It is, therefore, hardly necessary to take
the prophetic utterance on Edom in Gen. 27 39 (see ESAU,
2) as any thing other than a blessing which is the most
obvious interpretation. Nor is the benediction incon
sistent with the fact (which agrees with the conditions of
life to-day in some mountainous districts of Arabia)
that the Edomites were largely dependent upon the
chase for their sustenance.
According to Gen. 324 368, Esau took up his abode
on Mount Seir. Hence it is that in one passage Jacob,
, , when on his journey from Gilead to
Israel : earlier
times.
Shechem, passes southward over the
Jabbok, although in reality he had
nothing to do in that region and would
gladly have avoided Esau ; the story, however, requires
that the two brothers should meet. See JABBOK, 2.
What were the relations between the Israelites and
the Edomites at the time of the Exodus is a matter
about which the narratives of the Pentateuch leave us
in doubt. According to one story, the Israelites
marched straight through the Edomite territory (cp
Nu. 3337/! 42/1 ) ; according to a more detailed account,
they avoided it altogether by performing a circuit to
the south (cp WANDERINGS, 13). It must be re
membered, however, (i) that it is quite uncertain
whether at that time the Edomites were already in
possession of the country which they afterwards occupied,
and (2) that the immigration of the Israelite tribes was
probably not a single united movement, but a series of
separate undertakings which followed different lines of
march (see ISRAEL, 7).
One of the ancient kings of Edom is said to have
defeated the Midianites on the Moabite table-land (Gen.
8635 ; see MIDIAN, and cp BELA ii., i). Whether the
brief mention of Saul s victory over the Edomites in i S.
1447 is historical we cannot determine: the fact that
his chief herdman was DOEG the Edomite ( i S. 2 1 7 [8]
22 [BA, offvpos]; cp Ps. 522) does not, of course, imply
any dominion of Israel over Edom. David, however,
subdued the Edomites after a severe contest.
A short account of this war may be obtained by combining
2 S. 8 \if. (where the text is in part very corrupt ; cp B) with
i Ch. 1811-13 a "d Ps. 602 ( omits Edom ), to which we
should add i K. 11 15^; but much still remains obscure. A
great battle was fought in the Valley of Salt, by which is prob
ably meant the northern extremity of the vast barren lowland
usually called the Ariibah (cp Buhl, Edomiter, 20 ; but for
another view see SALT, VALLEY OF). Joab, David s general,
is said to have extirpated all the male Edomites in the course
of six months. This is unquestionably a gross exaggeration,
for had such been the case the nation could never have re
appeared in history. There can be little doubt, however, that
David s conquest gave rise to the deadly hatred afterwards
manifested between Edom and Israel or at least between Edom
and Judah. See DAVID, 8 c.
A prince of the royal house contrived to escape to
Egypt (on cnxD, cp HADAD i. , 2), and his son GENU-
BATH (q.v. ) regained the sovereignty of Edom after
David s death (i K. 1114-22, to which last verse <@ BL
rightly appends the second half of v. 25, with the read
ing Edom fcnx or oi.x] instead of Aram [DIN])- The
statement that Solomon included Edomite women among
his wives (i K. 11 1) does not seem irreconcilable with
the foregoing account ; but the extensive traffic which he
carried on with Ophir from the port of Elath (at the
NE. extremity of the Red Sea) certainly implies that he
was master of the intervening territory. We may
suppose that the kingdom of Genubath included only a
part of the Edomite country, or else that the new king
recognised the king of Judah as his superior. In
any case, the Edomite state cannot, at this time, have
been really powerful : a few generations later we find the
same seaport in the hands of Jehoshaphat king of Judah,
and it is expressly stated that the Edomites were then
1184
EDOM
EDOM
7. Time of
divided
without a king (i K. 2247 [48] /. ). It would,
therefore, seem that the narrative of the
campaign undertaken by Jehoram and
uiviucu jehoshaphat against Mesha king of Moab
arcny. can scarce ]y jj e correct in representing a
king of Edom as taking part in the expedition (2 K. 3).
This story, as a whole, doubtless rests on genuine
tradition ; but it contains much that is fabulous (cp
JEHORAM, $/.}. The utmost that can be conceded is
that the king of Edom was a prince subject to Judah.
Moreover, the statement in i K. 22 47 [48] must be
taken in connection with another, according to which
the Edomites rebelled in the time of Jehoshaphat s son
Jorani and set up a king of their own. The attempt to
subdue them afresh proved a failure. (The details of
the narrative in 2 K. 820-22 = 2 Ch. 2l8-io again present
difficulties of interpretation. ) The Blessing upon
Esau (Gen. 27 39 f- ), at least in its present form, probably
dates from this period of independence Esau will serve
Jacob [cp Gen. 2623] but the following words, presum
ably added somewhat later, state that if he makes an effort
he will shake off the yoke. The narratives of Genesis
assign the pre-eminence to Jacob, nor do they fail to re
cognise the enmity between the two brothers ; but, at the
same time, the character of Esau is treated with respect,
and much stress is laid upon the final reconciliation.
All this seems to represent the feeling of those who
desired to see peace permanently established between
the two peoples ; or, possibly, the sentiments here
expressed may proceed rather from subjects of the
Ephraimite kingdom, to whom the dominion of Judah
over Edom appeared a matter of no great importance.
On the other hand, the Judahite prophets Joel and
Amos of whom the first is now usually regarded as
post-exilic, whilst the second undoubtedly belongs to
the period which we are at present considering threaten
the Edomites with a severe chastisement from God
on account of their crimes against Israel (Joel 3 [4] 19
Am. ln/i). The view that the latter passage is not
really by Amos (see AMOS, 9) does not commend
itself to the present writer ; but, with regard to Am.
9 11-15, which predicts, among other things, that
Judah is to dispossess the remnant of Edom (<S 1!A -i
TU>V dvdpuTruv), it is plain that there is grave cause for
doubt. This was the period of the war in which
the hostile Moabites burned the bones of a certain
king of Edom to lime (Am. 2i). There is reason to
believe that a great trade in slaves was then carried on
by the Edomites : we read of whole troops of exiles
being delivered over to Edom by the inhabitants of
Gaza and Tyre (see We. on Am. 169).
Amaziah king of Judah again subdued Edom and
captured the town of Sela i.e. , Rock" (see AMAZIAH,
i, JOKTHEEL, 2). Buhl s denial of the equivalence of
Sela and Petra is hardly justified (see PETRA). Whether
this conquest was maintained and, if so, by what
means through all the disturbances which soon after
wards arose in Judah we cannot say. In the reign
R Tarpr ^ -^ az Rezm king of Damascus restored
da s of Elath to the Edomites ( 2 K - 166, where
monarchv we shou ^ d read Edom [DIN] and Edom-
" ites [cranx] with): hence we may conclude
that till then the men of Judah had been in possession not
only of the town in question but also of the country to
the N. of it, or at least of some route whereby it could be
safely reached, a route which perhaps lay partly outside
of the Edomite territory. The statement in 2 Ch. 28 17
seems to be a modified form of the tradition relating
to those events. To the same (or possibly to a much
earlier) period we may assign the ancient fragment which
is found in Ps. 608-n [10-13] ( = Ps. 108 8-n [10-13]), em
bedded among quite late pieces : here occur the scornful
words, Over Edom will I cast my shoe (see SHOES,
4 [6]), and Who will lead me to Edom? l Moreover,
1 In the critical analysis of Ps. 60 the present writer agrees,
in the main, with Ew., who assigns ZT . 1-5 10 (except wilt not
1185
several of the discourses uttered by the prophets against
Edom appear to date from about this time, after the
nation had recovered its independence e.g. , the piece
which (as Ew. pointed out) is partially reproduced by the
post-exilic prophet OBADJAH (q. v. , ii. ), as well as by his
predecessor Jeremiah (ch. 497-22). The details of the
prophecy, however, are no longer intelligible. Similar
utterances are found in Is. 11 14 Jer. 925 25 21 497-22 (cp
Jer. 27s). On the other hand, the author of Deuteronomy
emphatically teaches that Israel has no right to the ter
ritory of Edom, and likewise recommends a friendly
treatment of the kindred nation (Dt. 2 5-8 23? [8]/. ).
In the Assyrian inscriptions Kaus-malak king of Edom
appears, together with his contemporary, Ahaz king of
Judah, as a tributary of Tiglath-pileser III. (745-727
B.C.); see KB ii. 21. Similarly, Malik-ram king of
Edom (ib. 291) paid tribute to Sennacherib (705-681
B.C. ), and Kaus-gabr king of Edom, as well as Manasseh
king of Judah, paid tribute to Esarhaddon (681-668
B.C.) and to Astir-bani-pal (668-626 B. c. ) : ib. 149 and
239 ; cp Del. Par. 295, Schr. KATW 149 /
At the approach of Nebuchadrezzar, the nations
bordering on Judah the Edomites among them
... sent envoys to Jerusalem to consult
and ost to ether (J er - 27 3>- After the destruc -
tion of their royal city, many Jews sought
me times. refuge jn Edom ( j en 40ll ). but the
Edomites, as was natural, hailed with delight the over
throw of the kingdom of Judah (Obad. 11-14 Lam. 4 21
Ps. 137?). They seized the opportunity to occupy part
of the territory of Judah (Ezek. 863), though perhaps
another partial cause for the migration may be suggested
(see NABAT.*:ANS). At a later period we find them in
possession of S. Judaea, to which the special name of
Idumaea was given ; this term occurs as early as 312
B.C. (Diod. Sic. xix. 98, a passage based upon the
contemporaneous testimony of Hieronymus of Kardia).
Hebron, the ancient capital of the tribe of Judah,
within an ordinary day s march of Jerusalem, became
an Edomite city (r Mace. 065 Jos. BJ iv. 9 7). 1 We
can scarcely doubt that from the time of the Babylonian
Exile the Edomites held this territory, which, though
for the most part not very fertile, was preferable to
their original home.
The exilic and the post-exilic prophets and poets of
the Israelites, as we might have expected, denounce the
Edomites in no measured terms (see Ezek. 25 12-14 35 14
863 Obad. Lam. 4 21 Is. 34 63 1-6 Ps. 137? Mai. 1 2 - S ).
Similar were the sentiments of Jesus Ben-Sira (who wrote
about the year 190 B.C.) ; in 5026 the Cairo Hebrew
fragment (see ECCLESIASTICUS, 4) has TJW acr; 2
we must suppose the author to have made use of an
antiquated phrase no longer applicable to the Edomites
of his own time. The author of the book of Daniel
(167 or 166 B.C.) 3 appears, on the contrary, to have
been less unfriendly to Edom, as well as to Moab and
Ammon, following in this the example of his predecessor,
the Deuteronomist (see Dan. 11 41). There is, it may
be remarked, no ground for the assumption that the
Edomites had, during the intervening period, retired
from S. Judaea and had afterwards taken possession of
it a second time (see Buhl, Edomiter, 77). The list of
places in Neh. 11 25-36 is, at any rate, not contemporary
with Nehemiah, and if authentic in any sense must be
borrowed from a pre-exilic source. 4
thou, O God, which, RV mg.) ii f. (EV s numeration) to a
psalmist shortly before Nehemiah, and irv. 6-9, and the opening
of v. 10, to David (warring against the Aramaeans). The Davidic
origin of those words is, however, highly questionable. (Cp
PSALMS.)
1 [On the Edomites in Judah in the early post-exilic period
see Mey. Entst. 114^.]
2 It has now been proved therefore that Fritzsche and others
were fully justified in reading Seir (oTjei p).
3 [See Mold. A T Lit. 223 ( 68) ; but cp DANIEL ii., 18.]
4 [Several critics e.g., Torrey, Francis Brown, and E. Meyer
have lately come to the conclusion that the catalogue in ques
tion is a fiction of the Chronicler.]
1186
EDOM
EDREI
Judas the Maccabee fought against the Edomites on
the territory which had formerly belonged to the tribe
of Judah (i Mace. 6365). They are mentioned as
enemies in Ps. 887 [6], which was composed about this
time. Cp Judith 78 18 of the same period.
At length Judah gained the victory over Edom. John
Hyrcanus first wrested ADORA (q.v.) and MARESHAH
_ , (q.v.) out of the hands of the Edomites
f Ed (J S> Ant - X " i- 9l> BJL 26 ) - Ab Ut the
01 om. en[ j Q J. t ^ e seconc j cen tury B.C. he compelled
the whole Edomite nation, it is said, to adopt the practice
of circumcision, and the Jewish Law (Ant. xiii. 9 1 xv. 7 9).
Henceforth they were included among the Jews (ib. ,
Strabo, 760). Idumaen is several times mentioned as a
district belonging to Judaea (e.g. , Jos. BJ iii. 85)-
The conquest, however, did not prove a blessing to
the Jews ; for, in consequence of those events, it came
about that the ill-starred family of Antipas, the dynasty
of the Herods, whom we should no doubt regard, in
accordance with the common opinion, as of Edomite
origin (see Jos. Ant. xiv. lOa, BJ i. 62 ; cp Mishna.
Sota, vii. 8), made themselves masters of Judrea and of
all Palestine, and thus were enabled to plunge the Jews
into great misfortune. The Edomites also had reason
to regret their union with their former rivals. Consider
ing themselves Jews in the fullest sense, the fierce and
turbulent inhabitants of Idumeea (Jos. BJ iv. 4i 5i)
eagerly joined in the rebellion against the Romans, and
played a prominent part both in the intestine struggles
and in the heroic but altogether hopeless resistance to
the enemy (ib. iv. 4/ 81 9s/ v. 92 vi. 26 82). Thus
Edom was laid waste with fire and sword, and the
nation as such ceased to be. Even the fact that the
Edomites had at length become Jews was soon completely
forgotten by the exponents of Jewish tradition. The
frequent denunciations of Edom in the OT caused the
name to be remembered only as an object of hatred,
and hence the Jews came at an early date to employ it
as a term indicating Rome, the most abhorred of all
their enemies. And yet many of the Jews, it would
seem, must have had Edomite blood in their veins ; for
we may reasonably assume not only that the Edomites,
after they had adopted Judaism, intermarried largely
with their co-religionists, but also that those Edomites
who survived the final catastrophe, whether in the con
dition of slaves or otherwise, were regarded as Jews both
by themselves and by the outer world (cp CHUZA).
With respect to the habits and intellectual culture of
the Edomites we possess scarcely any information. In
_. ... .. spite of their ferocity, to which the
ai. oivi isation. QT ^^^5 ^ well ^ the account s
of the closing struggle bear testimony, the Edomites,
and especially Teman, appear, strangely enough, to
have enjoyed a reputation for great wisdom (Obad. 8 =
Jer. 49?). It is not without reason that in the Book of
Job the sage who occupies the foremost place among
Job s friends is called Eliphaz of Teman, after two of
the most important clans of Edom, Eliphaz being the
first-born of Esau and Teman the first-born of Eliphaz.
Perhaps Job himself also is to be regarded as an
Edomite, since his country, the land of Uz (q.v. ; see
also JOB [BOOK], 4), is mentioned in connection with
Edom (Lam. 4 21 [<S omits Uz], cp Gen. 3628). At all
events, we may conclude that at a tolerably early period
some portion at least of this people acquired a certain
civilisation, as was the case with the later occupants of
the same district, the NABATVEANS (q.v. ). In all
probability this was largely due to the fact that the
trade route from Yemen to Palestine and Syria passed
through the country in question.
Of the ancient religion of the Edomites nothing
definite is known. Whatever legends they may have
_ .. . possessed concerning their ancestors,
mgion. Abraham Sarah| and Esau> have w holly
perished. Josephus (Ant. xv. 7 9) mentions A ose as an
Edomite deity ; the name has been identified with that
1187
of the Arabian god A ozah sacrificed to in the neighbour
hood of Mecca, after whom the rainbow was called by
the Arabs the bow of Kozah (cp WRS, Kin. 296).
Nothing more has been ascertained respecting him.
Still less do we know about the god who figures
in several Edomite proper names under the Assyrian
form A aul, in Kau$-malak and Kaus-gabr, and the Greek
form Kos, in Kostobaros (Jos. Ant.xv.7g) and some
other names, which, however, are not actually stated to
be Edomite ; the same god appears in the Nabatoean
inscriptions at al-Hegr as op in jruop. Kocrvdravos (i.e. ,
Kos has given ) whilst in the Sinaitic inscriptions the
name is spelt nip, in -nyoip (i-t-, Kos has helped ).
Malik, king, in the proper name Malikram (see above,
8), is a general title of Semitic deities. The heathen
feast celebrated at Mamre near Hebron, at length sup-
preated by Constantine (see the interesting account in
Sozom. HEI^}, was perhaps mainly of Edomite origin.
It is even possible that on this soil, hallowed by patri
archal legend, there may have survived some rites which
had teen practised long before in ancient Israel, rites
which might well seem heathenish both to the later
Jews and to the Christians.
From the statement that the practice of circumcision
was imposed upon the Edomites by John Hyrcanus
(Jos. Ant. xiii. 9i) it might be concluded that there was
no such custom among them previously. This, however,
is extremely improbable. The OT assumes that all
descendants of Abraham were circumcised, and since, in
later times at least, this practice was universal among
the Arabs, we can hardly believe that the whole Edomite
nation had abandoned it in the course of ages. Prob
ably Josephus was here misled by a statement that the
Edomites had adopted the religious customs of the
Jews, and himself added, with his usual inaccuracy, the
special reference to circumcision, which was considered
the most important characteristic of Judaism. Or per
haps we are to understand that the Jewish rite of circum
cision shortly after birth was substituted for the rite in use
among the kindred peoples, namely circumcision shortly
before puberty (cp CIRCUMCISION, 4/. ), the former
alone being recognised as real circumcision by the Jews.
How thoroughly the Edomites were at length trans
formed into Jews is shown, for example, by the fact
that among the very few names which are mentioned as
having been borne by Edomites in those times, that of
Jacob (the brother and rival of Esau !) occurs twice
(Jos. BJ\\. 96 v. 61 vi. 26 83). We find, moreover,
the characteristically Jewish names, Simon (ib. v. 61
vi. 26), John (ib. v. 65), and Phinehas (ib. iv. 42).
The language of the ancient Edomites probably
resembled that of Israel at least as closely as did the
.. language of the Moabites. It is pos-
13. Language. & ^ Q {hat the Discovery O f some in
scription may throw further light on the subject ; at
present our information is derived solely from a few
proper names of persons and places. In the later
period of their history the Edomites, like the Jews,
doubtless spoke the Aramaic language, which was in
common use throughout all Syria. T. N.
EDOS (HAOC [B]), i Esd. 9 35 RV, AV EDES.
EDREI (^ITTtN, deriv. uncertain ; cp Arab, midhra ,
land between desert and cultivated soil ; also Aram,
jm to sow, as if analogous to ?NJT)T* ; cp Bedawi
name below ; eAp&eiN [B], -M [A], &Ap<M or eA- [L])-
(i) A chief city of Bashan, one of the residences
of Og who dwelt at Ashtaroth and at Edrei (Josh.
124 181231 ; cp also Dt. 14, in Ashtaroth at Edrei,
where probably and has fallen out). Along with Salcah,
which lay far to the E. , it is given as the frontier of Og s
kingdom (Dt. 3io). According to the deuteronomist,
Israel reached it on the way to Bashan, and found Og
and all his people planted there to meet them (Dt. 3i
Nu. 2133-35 Josh. 1812); Og was defeated and slain.
The town fell to the half-tribe of Manasseh (Josh. 1831 P),
1188
g
fr
EDRBI
but is not mentioned again. It appears to be the Otara a
of the Egyptian inscriptions (WMM As. u. Eur. 159).
Edrei was the "Adpa. of Ptolemy, the Adpaa or Adra
of Eusebius and Jerome, and the Adraha of the Peutinger
Tables. The position to which it is assigned by all
these (Ptolemy puts it due E. of Gadara, Eus. 24 or
25 R. m. from Bosra, and the Tab. Pent. 16 m. from
Capitolias, the modern Beit-er-Ras) closely agrees with
that of the modern Edraat (Adri dt, Der dt, Der d,
Deraa; in the Bedawi dialect Azradt}, about 22 m.
NW. from Bosra, 6 m. SE. from el-Muzeirlb, and 15
NE. of Beit-er-Ras. The site is strong, on the S. of
the deep gorge that forms the S. boundary of the plain
of Hauran, 6 m. E. from the present Hajj road. This
agrees with the data given above, that it was a frontier
town, and on the way into Bashan. The gorge winds,
and, with a tributary ravine, isolates the present city
on all sides but the S. The citadel is completely cut
off, on a hill which projects into the gorge and may
have held the whole ancient town. The ruins, probably
from Roman times, cover a circuit of two miles.
The most prominent are those of a large reservoir, fed by the
reat aqueduct (Kanat Fir aun, Pharaoh s aqueduct) which runs
rom a small lake near Yabis in Hauran via Edrei to Gadara, a
distance as the crow flies of 40 m. ; but the aqueduct winds. There
is a building, 44 yards by 31, with a double colonnade, evidently
the Christian cathedral of Bosra, but now a mosque. Some
Greek inscriptions are given by Le Bas and Waddington : the
present writer found another of the year 165 A.D. (HG 606, n. 2).
The most notable remains, however, are the caves
beneath the citadel. They form a subterranean city, a
labyrinth of streets with shops and houses, and a
market place (Wetzstein, Reisebericht, 47 f.: cp Porter,
Five Years in Damascus).
Wetzstein says, The present city, which, judging from its
walls, must have been one of great extent, lies for the most part
directly over the old subterranean city, and I believe that now,
in case of a devastating war, the inhabitants would retire to the
latter for safety.
The OT makes no mention of so great a marvel,
which probably dates, in its present elaborate form, from
Greek times ; but such refuges must have been always
a feature of a land so swept by Arab raids.
It is puzzling that Edrei appears neither in the E. campaign
of Judas the Maccabee(i Mace. 5); nor is it in Pliny s list of the
original DECAPOLIS (g.v.). However, it was early colonised
by Greeks, and (on the evidence of a coin) De Saulcy dates its
independence from as far back as 83 B.C. (Numism. de la Terre
Sainte, 374^). After Pompey it belonged to the Roman
province of Syria, and after Trajan to that of Arabia. Its
inhabitants worshipped Astarte and the Nabatsean god Dusara.
Eus. and Jer., who describe it as a notable town of Arabia (OS
1184 21837), place it in Bararaia. Its bishop sat at the Councils
of Seleucia, Constantinople (381) and Chalcedon (451). The
Crusaders who besieged it (Will. Tyr. 16 10) called it Adratum.
Other authorities are : Porter, Five Years in Damascus, whose
theory (( 1 ),222i/: ; (2), 271^), that Og s city is the modern Ezra
or Zorawa on the W. limit of the Leja, is unfounded ; Schu
macher, Across Jordan(\^off.)\ Wright, Palmyra and Zenobia,
284 ff.; Merrill, East of Jordan, 349^; A. G. Wright, PEFQ,
95. P- T*ff\ cp. ZDMG 29431435.
2. An unidentified site, one of the fenced cities of
Naphtali (Josh. 1837: acnrctpei [B], eSpaet [A], a3.
[L]). Conder suggests Ya tir (PEF Mem. 1203205).
G. A. S.
EDUCATION
I. Before Ezra ( 1-4).
II. Ezra to ben-Shetach
III. To end of Jewish state
( 13-23).
i. Elementary ( 14-20).
Synagogue ( 6). Teachers, etc. ( 15-17).
Scribes and the Wise Studies, etc. ( 18-20).
( lf-\ ii. Scribes College ( 21).
Prov. and Ecclus. ( g/.). Education of girls ( 22).
Greek influence ( n). Conclusion ( 23).
Details 1 ( 12). Bibliography ( 24).
Systematic education among the Jews may be traced
to the influence of Hellenism. The foundation of
i i>.._;..j n Alexandria was an event as important
1. Periods. ,. . .
lor education as for the development
and enrichment of Jewish thought. Consequently
there are, properly, two periods in the history of Jewish
education in biblical times, the first lasting to the end
1 For Hebrew terms sea 3.
EDUCATION
of the Persian rule, the second beginning with the
Greek and continuing into the Roman. Within the
first period there are two notable breaks, the one
caused by the growth of commerce and luxury among
the pre-exilic Israelites, the other by the rise of Judaism
as a book-religion ; within the second there is but
one break, marked by the reported introduction of
compulsory education by Simon ben-Shetach (noe*)-
We have so little definite knowledge, however, about
the early part of the first period that we may con
veniently group the facts which we can collect under
three heads, viz. : (I.) down to the time of Ezra; (II.)
from Ezra to Simon ben-Shetach; and (III.) from
Simon ben-Shetach to the end of the Jewish State.
On oral instruction see below, 3, 12, 20.
I. Before Ezra. In primitive times education was
purely a domestic and family concern (see FAMILY, 13).
2 Earliest ^ e ^ ome was tne on ty scn ol and the
Practice P arents trie only teachers. The parental
authority and claim to reverence forms
part of the earliest legislation (Ex. 20 12, cp also 21 1517
in the Book of the Covenant ) and is reiterated in the
later literature (Prov. 1926 2620 and often). In the
purely agricultural stage it must have been a primary
object with fathers to train up their children to share
the labours of husbandry, or to carry on the skill in
useful arts which had become hereditary in certain
families. We may be sure, however, that even such
instruction was given in a religious spirit. Among
the Israelites, as among other early peoples, tradi
tional methods of work were traced to a divine origin
(cp AGRICULTURE, 14). For this idea we may
compare the parable of the ploughman, Is. 28 23 ff,
(which, whatever be its date, is antique in feeling 1 ),
and the evidently primitive stories in Genesis about
the rise of civilisation (see CAINITES, "$ff.).
The religious sense, however, was no doubt specially
cultivated in the minds of the children. The boys
would in due time be initiated (-;:n) in religious rites
(cp Ex. 138 Dt. 4g, etc. ; see CATECHISE, and cp DEDI
CATE), and all children would be instructed by the
mother in the primary moral, as distinguished from the
ritual and institutional, elements in the old religion
(e.g., reverence for elders, and the like). At a later
time the mother is expressly mentioned as the giver of
moral instruction (see below, 5) ; this is clearly a
survival of a more ancient custom. The omen (JON ;
RV nursing father ) or iraidaywy6s (tutor) was also
no doubt an instructor of the children under his charge 2
(see NURSE).
The introduction of commerce with its attendant
luxury brought about great social changes by the time
3 Higher ^ t ^ le ear " est prophets whose discourses
,. are preserved to us. According to Isaiah
grave social evils had arisen (WRS
Proph. N, 204; OTJCW, 349_/\); but we may venture
to assume that the high culture of which this prophet
is himself an example was not unconnected with the
inrushing of new ideas and habits caused by an in
creased knowledge of other peoples (see WRITING).
A knowledge of books, it is true, is not now, and never
has been, essential to culture in the East. The ideal
of instruction is oral teaching, and the worthiest shrine
of truths that must not die is the memory and heart of
a faithful disciple, and the term Torah, which ultimately
came to be applied to the Written Law, was originally
applied to an oral decision (OTJCW 299^). Cp
ISRAEL, 61 ; LAW AND JUSTICE, i ; LAW LITERA
TURE, PRIESTS.
Not much can be said here on the specialised training
1 That the ancient sentiment lingered late may be seen from
the fact that several treatises of the Mishna deal with agriculture
(cp Vogelstein, Die Landiuirtttschaft in Palastina zur Zeit d.
Misc/tna, i. 94).
2 Cp the later identification muSayiayos Gi;nB) = ?1DN = wisdom
= Torah (Buxtf., 1698), which illustrates Gal. 824 (see Taylor,
Pirke AbothW, 173).
1 190
EDUCATION
of certain persons, such as craftsmen, prophets, and
priests (see HANDICRAFTS, PROPHETS, PRIESTS). It
is enough to remark that prophets and priests were in a
very true sense stays (Is. 3i) of the social structure,
not only on account of the awe they inspired but also
because of the teaching which they gave to their disciples
and hearers.
It is well known that in Mishnic Hebrew the characteristic
word for both to learn and to teach is rMB i s&nak, to
repeat ; whilst njtyOi "ilnah (prop. repetition ) is instruc
tion (see further below, 20). It is noticeable that in Bib.
Hebrew .-ijgf does not occur in this special sense. The biblical
words are -\j^j, lainadh, to learn (Pi. to teach ); nes
iinnen, to inculcate ; min, horah (v/m )> to instruct (mid
mdreh, teacher ) ; pan, hebhtn ([ 30, mebhln, teacher ) ;
S DK ,1, hisktl, also meaning to teach." In this connexion the
following quotation from the final tablet of the Babylonian epic
of Creation (Reverse 1. 22./C) is interesting :
Let them stand forth (?) let the elder enlighten ;
Let the wise, the learned, meditate together \
Let the father rehearse (sdn&, sunnii= njc 1 ), make the son
apprehend \
Open be the ears of Shepherd and Flockmaster (z .^.,the king).
The publication of the Book of Deuteronomy (621
B.C. ) had far-reaching consequences for popular educa-
4 Systematic tio " Th f pu f blic rec g nitio " ^ing
J . and people of a written code of law
which was intended to cover the whole
nstruction. life of a dtizen( both on its re ii g j ous
and secular side (C. G. Montefiore, Hibb. Lect. 188)
involved a conception of life which was akin to, and
prepared the way for, the later Judaism. Under its
influence, some time in the seventh century, an attempt
was perhaps made to enforce upon each Israelite the
necessity of instilling right religion and morality into his
children and household (Che. Jew. Rel. Life, 130, citing
Gen. 18 17-19 which probably belongs to this period).
The exhortations in D to instruct children in the sacred
history and law (4g 6720 11 19) point in the same
direction, though the date of these passages may be
later than 621 B.C., and the ideal which they set forth
was not fully carried out till after the time of Ezra.
There were also in the pre-exilic period some anticipa
tions of the wisdom ideas, first expressed by Isaiah
(312), which later played so important a part in the
development of the educational system (see further Che.
op. cit. 130 f.).
II. From Ezra to Simon ben-Shetach (75 B.C.).
The period which extends from the fall of Jerusalem
to the arrival of Ezra was a period of extraordinary
_ , activity, both moral and intellectual,
o. becona m the C h j cest p^ ^ tne j ew j sn
Pe t ri 75B C Zra P e P le - <The task which now de
.O. volved on the nation was the inventory
ing of the spiritual property of Israel (Cornill, Proph.
Isr. 125). Hence quite naturally there arose a
literary class, the SCRIBES (q.v.}, who were not only
students but also teachers of law and sacred literature,
and may perhaps be connected with the growth of an
institution closely identified at a later time with the
educational movement viz., the SYNAGOGUE 2 (q.v. ).
Henceforth the Jews became emphatically the people
of the book. The sacred writings became the spell
ing book, the community a school, religion an
affair of teaching and learning. Piety and education
were inseparable ; whoever could not read was no true
Jew ( Wellhausen). Surely we may say that we are now
assisting at the birth of a truly popular education, rooted
and grounded in morality and religion. Even if the ac
count of Ezra s introduction of the Law in Neh. 8 is not,
as it stands, historical (see EZRA i. , 8), it may serve as
a record of the beginnings on Palestinian soil of the
synagogue, of which Ezra is the traditional founder.
(Note the description of the reading and exposition of
the Torah by Ezra and the Levite teachers, especially
1 Ball, Lis^ht from the East, 17. The opening expression is
uncertain (Del. Wcltschdff. 160).
- Cp Montefiore, op. cit. 230.
IIQI
EDUCATION
the phrase 0*3*30, * caused [the people] to under
stand. )
As to what constituted the new popular education, we
may safely say that it led up to an accurate knowledge
of the sacred history and the Law.
It may be regarded as highly probable also that
however prominent was the part taken by the father 2
in the early religious instruction of the child, the mother,
as in the earlier period (see above, 2), and always,
exercised an important influence.
My son (i.e., my disciple), says a wise man, keep the
commandment of thy father, and forsake not the instruction
(rnin) f tn V mother (Prov. 20 ; other passages speaking of
the torah of the mother are 1 8 623 ; cp 31 1-9, which seems to
be a poetical embodiment of such). A NT writer refers (2 Tim.
1 5) to the religious influence exercised on Timothy by his mother
and grandmother.
Throughout, it is oral instruction that is presupposed
(see esp. Dt. 67). No doubt reading, and in a less
degree writing, became increasingly important and more
widely diffused as time went on (see below, 19).
The importance of the synagogue, from the edu
cational point of view, lies in its character as a teaching
_, institution. Schiirer remarks (GJV 2 357^
Svnasoie ET4 /-). that the main object of the
J < * & " * sabbath day assemblages in the synagogue
was not public worship in its stricter sense i.e. , not devo
tion but religious instruction, and this for an Israelite
was, above all, instruction in the Law. With this agrees
the evidence both of Philo and of the NT. The former
calls synagogues houses of instruction in which the
native philosophy was studied and every kind of virtue
taught ( I it. A fas. 827) ; whilst in the latter a character
istic word applied to the activities centred in the syna
gogue is SiddffKfiv (Mt. 4 23 and often).
The scribes (D"IBID, sophtrim i.e. , homines literati)
were, from theMaccabean timesonward, the real teachers
TVi <! V> of the people, and what complete sway
>es> they bore over the people s life may be
seen from the NT. We must remember, indeed, that
the scribes of the Herodian age were in some respects
very unlike the earlier scribes ; but the point in which
the scribes of all ages agreed was their character as
teachers.
Teachers and scholars are proverbially opposed in i Ch.
25 8 b (cp DISCIPLE, i). Teachers of the people (C^ ^ 2C P)
i.e., probably, scribes are mentioned in Daniel (11 33 35 12 3),
and a company of scribes (crvi aytoyr) ypa/u.^aTeW) in i Mace.
7 12. For the references to the scribes in Ecclus. see next
section.
Were the scribes, then, the only teachers? The
wise men of Proverbs, who cultivated the art of teach-
_ ,^jj. , ing with so much enthusiasm and in
Prov. 5 13 are actually called teachers
(DHa^p, D"ib), were hardly scribes. They were ear
nestly religious men, who, feeling that wisdom was
a practical thing, devoted their energy to instilling it
into the minds of the young.
The disciples are to them as their own children (Prov. 1 8 2 i
3 i 4 1, and often; cp Ps. 34n[i2]); and the teaching which
they impart is called the words of the wise (n CDn "m> Prov.
I622i7[cp 2423], Eccles. 9 17 12 n ; cp the Mishnic >iai
DHS1D, applied to the dicta of scribes of a former age.
These sages, no less than the scribes, seem to be
regarded as a special guild (Prov. 16 13i4 22i7 24z3
Eccles. 12n), though we are left almost entirely in
the dark as to the formation and constitution of these
societies, the extent and the methods of their investiga
tion (Kautzsch, Outline of Hist, of Lit. of OT 151 ;
cp also BDB Lex. , s.v. DDH). On the other hand, the
guild of the wise was already organised in pre-exilic
times (see Che. Job and Solomon, 123, and elsewhere) ;
1 Neh. 7 7. The same phrase is rendered teachers in Ezra
8i6RV.
2 According to the later enactments, as soon as a child could
speak (i.e., in his third year) he was to be instructed in the
Torah by his father (Sitkka, 42 a). In the Talmudic period the
child did not attend the elementary school before his sixth year
(Kethutoth, 50 a \ see further below, 18).
IIQ2
EDUCATION
EDUCATION
in the later period their attitude to the Law, though
by no means unsympathetic (see Che. Jew. Rel. Life,
138 /.), was hardly that which would characterise the
disciples of Ezra. 1 On the whole it is best, perhaps,
to suppose that the soph/trim and the wise formed
two distinct but allied classes in the Persian and the
early Greek periods, but that by the time of Ben-Sira
the distinction had largely disappeared (so We. //Gl 1
154, n. i ; sage and scribe are identified in Ecclus.
382 4 /.; cp6 3 3/ 9i 4 / 14 2o/).
Though distinct, however, the earlier sophZrlm cannot
have bpen uninfluenced by the wise ; they may even
sometimes have adopted their literary style (see Che.
OPs. 348), and in any case were saved from the barren
literalism which begins to characterise the scribes of
the post-Maccabean age. For the victory of the Law
which crowned the Maccabean struggle foreshadowed
the close of the OT literature. Contrast, from a literary
point of view, the Pharisaic Psalms of Solomon (written
63 B.C. ?) with the canonical Psalms.
Whatever be the true view as to the mutual relation be
tween scribes and wise, the latter played a great part
p , .in educational matters during the period
, 1 under review. Some of the results of
wisdom \ i
p their psedagogic experience are enshrined
in the Book of Proverbs. These can
only be summed up briefly here.
Ihe idea of life as a discipline (inusar, ^D^O> thirty times in
Prov.) is fundamental in the book ; God educates men and men
educate each other (Holtzmann, quoted in Driver, Introd.)
404). The foundation of all instruction is emphasised in the
precept The fear of Yahwe is the beginning or the chief part
(RVm^-) of knowledge (I?) ; the instructors of the child are
his parents, reverence towards whom is again enforced (184 1-4
6 20 13 i SOi;).
The development of the child s character is to be
studied (20 ii ), and the educational means employed are
to be adjusted accordingly.
Among these means the use of the rod is constantly recom
mended (13 24, he that spareth the rod hateth his son ; cp
23 IT,/. 291517); but the correction is not to be too strict
(19 18 RV), and it is recognised that to an intelligent child a
rebuke is of more avail than a hundred stripes (17 10). The
sovereign remedy, however, for expelling the innate foolishness
of children is the rod (22 15). A fool who does not prove
amenable to this treatment seems to have been considered hope
less by the Jewish teachers [2V 22, even if thou pound a fool in
the midst of his fellows thou wilt not remove his foolishness from
him (crit. emend.); see Che. Jew. Rel. Life, 136]. Cp FOOL.
The importance of a good education is repeatedly
emphasised. A well-educated child is a joy to his
parents (lOi 2824 ; cp 1725). In wealthier families (cp
Ecclus. 5128) the child, if he aspired to wisdom,
would pass from the parents to professional teachers
(013) viz., the sages who would inculcate the higher
teaching current in the circles of the wise (for an
account of this see Che. Jew. Rel. Life, iss/. ).
The other great manual of posdagogic principles is the
work of Ben-Sira (200-180 B.C.), who in spite of his
10 Ecclus ^ ate anc * cosmo P o l tan training seems to
have been comparatively uninfluenced by
the surrounding Hellenism (for which see below, n).
As is the case in Proverbs (on which his book is
modelled) the wisdom of Joshua ben-Sira or Ecclesi-
asticus is an ethical manual. The same points are
insisted upon as in the earlier book, sometimes with
added emphasis.
Thus, e.g., the fear of the Lord is not only the beginning
of wisdom (1 14), but also wisdom s fulness (1 16) and crown
tly
standing, get thee betimes unto him, and let thy foot wear out
the steps of his doors. Cp 8 &/. 9 15, etc., and Aboih 1 4).
Though perhaps there are more direct references to
organised religion (e.g. , 7 29 : Fear the Lord with all
thy soul ; and reverence his priests, cp 2423) than in
Proverbs, the religious and ethical tone of Ecclesi-
asticus is distinctly lower. Of this the unbending
1 On the priestly character of the earliest sopherlm see We.
Sketch of Hist, of Isr. and Jud. ( 91), 131.
"93
severity recommended towards sons and daughters is an
instance (7 23 f. 30i-i3). Among other points that call
for mention here are the interesting reference to oral
instruction ( 4 24^ : instruction by the word of the
tongue ), and the disparagement of manual labour, as
being inconsistent with the pursuit of knowledge, which
cometh by opportunity of leisure (8824; with 8825,
however, how shall he become wise that holdeth the
plough ? contrast 7 15). Among the subjects of his dis
course is the etiquette of dining (31 16-21). The im
portant references to the scribes have already been
pointed out ( 8).
The Greek period, which commenced with Alexander
the Great s conquest of the Persian empire (332 B.C.)
_ k mar ^ s ^ e r se f wholly new educational
. ;. influences. The Palestinian Jews were, how-
mnuence. eyer> affected by this far less than their
brethren abroad, especially those who became citizens
of the new Greek city of Alexandria. Still the reflex
influence of the Greek- Egyptian capital (not to speak of
the Greek towns that began to grow up on Palestinian
soil) must, for nearly a century and a half after 332,
have been considerable even in Judaea. Slowly but
surely Hellenic ideas penetrated to the centre of Judaism
till the crisis that precipitated the Maccabean revolt
was reached. In the reaction that followed, Hellenism
was so far overcome that it ceased to be dangerous to
to the root-ideas of Judaism (see ISRAEL, 68ft).
There is good reason to suppose that during this
critical time Greek educational methods found their way
to Jerusalem. This may be inferred from the fact that
just before the Maccabean rising there was there a
gymnasium ephebeum (i Mace. 1 14 /! 2 Mace. 4912).
Doubtless, too, the education afforded to his children
by the notorious Joseph, son of Tobias (Jos. Ant.
xii. 46), was of the Greek type. At a later time Herod
also probably attended a school of similar character (see
below, 14). A good instance of the ultimate extent
and limitations of Greek influence can be seen in the
author of Ecclesiasticus, who wrote when Hellenising
influence was at its highest in Judaea. In essentials he
is untouched by it. Still his emphasizing of leisure as
the condition of wisdom (8824) is distinctly Greek, no
less than his comprehensive view of a wise man s culture
(39i-s).
To the questions as to practical details that suggest
themselves only hesitating answers can be given. The
scribes, doubtless, gave instruction in the
s y na gg ues = the Talmud speaks of the
bells which were rung at the beginning of
the lessons (Low, Die Lebensalter, 287, 421 [ 75],
quotes Shabb. 58^). From Prov. l2o/. we might infer
that the city-gates or the adjacent city-squares or
broad places on which the streets converged, were
the places where the wise men awaited their disciples.
Perhaps, however, it was in private houses that instruc
tion, both by scribe and by sage, was most often given
(cp Ecclus. 626 quoted above, 10, and the other re
ferences there given). Regarding the methods employed
there is greater uncertainty. Oral instruction ( Ecclus.
4.246) and, probably, frequent repetition, would be in
vogue. The use of acrostic (Ps. 119, etc.) and other
mnemonic devices, such as Athbask 1 (cp Jer. 2626 51 1)
and the numerical proverbs (Prov. 30 11-31, cpA&otA 5)
also may be assigned to this period. 2 That reading
was a widespread accomplishment at the beginning of
the Maccabean age ( 167 B. c. ) appears from i Mace. 1 57.
III. Simon ben-Shetach (75 B.C.) to End of Jewish
State (70 A. D. ). The ideal of education is well ex
pressed by Josephus. Contrasting
13. Third period
75 B.C.-70 A.D.
the Israelitish system of culture with
that of the Spartans, on the one
1 The reader substitutes for each Hebrew letter in a word a
letter from the other half of the alphabet, the letters inter
changed being equidistant from the extremes. Thus in English
A and Z, B and Y would interchange.
2 So Kennedy, as cited, 24.
1194
EDUCATION
EDUCATION
hand, who educated by custom, not by theoretic in
struction (ZOtaiv (Trai8fi>ov, ov\6yois), and, on the other,
with that of the Athenians and the rest of the Greeks,
\\lio contented themselves with theoretic instruction, and
neglected practice, he says : But our law-giver very care
fully combined the two. For he neither left the practice
of morals silent, nor the teaching of law unperformed
(c. Ap. 2i6 /. quoted by Schiirer). The knowledge
and practice of the Law thus set forth was to be the
common possession of the whole nation, and the life-
work of every Israelite. It began in early youth in the
family circle, was carried (as we shall see) a stage
further in the school, and continued in the synagogue,
to which was also attached (for higher studies) the
scribes college (Beth ham-midrash ; see 21). 1
We have already seen that the necessity of (orally)
instructing the children in the written Law was insisted
Th upon comparatively early (see the exhorta-
elementary tionsinD enumerated above, 4). This,
, ,., J as has been pointed out, would be, as a
rule, the duty of the parents. From the
great importance attached to the early education of
children, however, even in Proverbs (e.g. 226) and
this would naturally be enhanced with the elaboration
of scribal traditions it was inevitable that some system
of popular elementary education should be organised.
When, then, was this effected? According to the
Jerusalem Talmud (Ktthubuth, 8n, p. 32 b} it was the
work of the famous scribe Simon ben-Shetach, the
brother of Queen Alexandra (reigned 78-69 B.C.).
Simon s ordinance runs thus : That the children shall attend
the elementary school (ison JV3 1 ? J sSin mpimn Vn tf)- I
has been pointed out (e.g., by Kennedy, as cited, 24) that
the meaning of the regulation is not free from ambiguity. It
may also be interpreted to mean that attendance on schools
already existing was henceforth to be compulsory.
In view of the fact that Simon s enactment is the
second of three (apparently closely connected) marriage
regulations added by him to the statute-book (see
the passage in full in Derenbourg, Hist. 108), it is
natural to suppose that it refers to attendance at existing
schools rather than to the institution of such schools for
the first time. The context certainly suggests that a
hitherto neglected or half-performed duty was to be
henceforth rigidly enforced. If, as is possible, for
the higher (professional) teaching of the scribes, colleges
(BTIDH Ti3 ; see below, 21) had already come into
existence, it is hard to suppose that preparatory schools
for these had not been organised already, especially when
it is remembered that schools of the Greek type had been
established in Jerusalem for a long time (see above, 1 1 ).
It is quite in accordance, also, with the forward movement
of the Pharisaic party in the reign of Alexandra that
measures should have been taken for extending the
scope of these schools, and thus more widely diffusing
Pharisaic principles among the people (cp ISRAEL, 80^).
May it not, too, have been designed by means of them
to check and counteract the more extreme forms of the
surrounding Greek education ? There seems, therefore,
no good reason for rejecting the tradition respecting
Simon s efforts on behalf of popular education, though
Schiirer dismisses the famous scribe s claims" with un
usual curtness. This Simon ben Shetach, we are
told, is quite a meeting-point for all kinds of myths
(GJV 2353 = ET 449). The same scholar following the
tradition of the Babylonian Talmud (Bdbd Bathrdzia]
ascribes the complete organisation of the elementary
school to Joshua ben-Gamla (Gamaliel), who was high
priest about 63-65 A.D.
1 Unfortunately the earliest Hebrew literature dealing with
these subjects (the Mishna), though it contains earlier material,
was not as a whole compiled and written down till the second
century A.D. The quotations from the .Mishnic treatise Pir^e
Al oth (cited as A both) are numbered in this article according to
Strack s edition of the Hebrew text.
2 Heb. icon rt 3 bfthhassipher 1 House of the Book. For
other names see 17 end.
"95
The passage nins as follows: Truly may it be remembered
to this man s credit ! Joshua ben-Gamla is his name. If he
had not lived, the Law would have been forgotten in Israel.
For at first, he who had a father was taught the Law by him, he
who had none did not learn the Law. . . . Afterwards it was
ordained, that teachers of boys should be appointed in Jeru
salem. . . . But (even this did not suffice, for) he who had a
father was sent to school by him, he who had none did not go
there. Then it was ordained that teachers should be appointed
in every province, and that boys of the age of sixteen or seventeen
should be sent to them. But he whose teacher was angry with
him ran away, till Joshua ben-Gamla came, and enacted that
teachers should be appointed in every province and in every
town (-]>jn vy *?331 .i:"IDl fUHD *?33). and children of six or
seven years old brought to them.
As the measures of Joshua obviously presuppose that
there had been boys schools for some time (Schiirer,
ibid. ) the two traditions are not really inconsistent.
It is not unreasonable to suppose that Simon s earlier
efforts, especially as regards the provincial schools, had
been attended with only partial success, owing to the
political and religious troubles of the time. Certainly
if Josephus s statement regarding Herod s attendance
at school (Ant. xv. 10s) be correct though doubtless
the school in question conformed to the Greek rather
than to the Jewish type we may fairly infer that some
time before 40 B.C. schools had been instituted, at any
rate in the larger towns. That they existed in the time
of Jesus, though not as a general and established
institution, is admitted by Schiirer. It is decidedly
curious that the word school should not occur before
the NT, and in the NT only once viz. , of the lecture
room of a Greek rhetorician at Ephesus (crxoXi?, Acts
199). J The explanation, probably, is that the school
(in both its elementary and its higher forms) was so
intimately associated with the synagogue that in ordinary
speech the two were not distinguished. The term
synagogue included its schools. 2
Thus it is said {Jalfcnt Jes., 257) that the synagogues in
Jerusalem had each a Beth Sefher and a Beth Taint fid (i.e., the
lower and the upper divisions of the school).
The statement that Jerusalem was destroyed because schools
and school children ceased to be there (Shabbath, 119), is
obviously only a rhetorical way of emphasising the importance
attached to the school in the Talmudic period ; as also the
similar one : Jerusalem was destroyed because the instructors
were not respected (ibid.). According to the Jalkiit Jes. (I.e.)
Jerusalem, about the same period, possessed 480 schools !
There is no doubt that during the period under
review either the synagogue proper (which was to be
found in every Jewish town and village of any import
ance) or a room within its precincts was used for school
purposes (the references are BZrdkhoth, ija, with Rashi,
Ta anith, 23^, Kiddushln, 300).
The teacher s house also was sometimes requisitioned (hence
the name N1SD 1V3 teacher s house i.e , school : Hamburger).
Special buildings also were built as children s schools, but how
early is quite uncertain. According to the Targum (Jerus. i.
Gen. 33 17) the patriarch Jacob erected a college (Numo 3) n
Succoth !
The classical passage for determining the gradations
of the teaching profession is found in the Mishnic
treatise Sotd 9 15 (ed. Surenh. 3 308 ;
the passage can be seen also in Buxtorf,
Lex., ed. Fischer, 3780).
It runs as follows: R. Eliezer the Great says: Since the
destruction of the Temple the sages (i>rD3n) have begun to be
like the scribes (NHSD), and the scribes like the master (of the
school, Njtn), ar >d the master like the uneducated. It has been
usual to identify the hazzan (master) of the school with the
hazzan (minister) of the synagogue (npJSH |}n = vinqpirris
minister, Lk. 4 20). Thus Buxtorf (I.e.) renders the second
clause of the above et scribae sicut minister synagogse. It has
been pointed out, however, by the latest writer on the subject
1 The schoolmaster (iraiievrrjs, Rom. 2 20) is however men
tioned, as well as the tutor (Traiiaywyds), and the teacher
(i6<i(rcaAos).
2 Curiously enough in the Latin documents of the Middle
Ages the synagogue was also termed Scola (school) ; J. Jacobs,
Javish Year Book, 96, p. 191. So also J. Simon (L ediica-
tion cliez les Juifs) who, speaking of the synagogue as it existed
in France in the early Middle Ages, says : La synagogue etait
une ecole autant qu un lieu de culte. La priere n avait d ef-
ficacite que si elle 6tait accompagnee de 1 etude.
1196
15. Teachers,
EDUCATION
(Kennedy) that Jin is a word of general application, meaning
"overseer," "inspector," or the like ; and its exact significance
has to be decided by the context. 1 The context of the above
passage, as also of the other Mishna passage usually cited in
this connection (Shalilxith 1 3), in the absence of the qualifying
word riD33n ( synagogue ), requires us to render overseer or
master (of the school). That the two offices were not identical
further appears from the fact that, whereas the hazzdn of the
synagogue occupied a low position in the social scale (he was a
kind of sexton, and his duties included such menial offices as
the whipping of criminals {Makkath 3 12]), the hazzdn of the
school, being a teacher ; would share the social prestige attaching
to the teaching profession.
The three grades of teachers, then, are sage and
scribe (who taught in the scribes college), and the
elementary school teacher officially designated hazzdn
(the general term is nipirn nD^D or nn^D alone). From
the manner in which the three classes are connected in
the above-cited passage Kennedy infers that \hehazzdn,
no less than the scribe and the sage, belonged to the
powerful guild of the scribes, called in the NT doctors
of the law, vofj.odi5d<TKa\oi.
This would help to explain the fact that doctors of the law
or teachers were, according to Lk. (5 17), to be found in every
village (KU/J.JJ) of Galilee and Juda:a. Whilst every village
would, with its synagogue, possess an elementary school, it is
impossible to suppose that there were colleges for higher
teaching in equally large numbers.
The extraordinary honour in which the teaching
16 Their P r f ess on was ne ^ in this period is shown
status ky tne respectful form of address employed
by the people.
The usual formula was Rabbi ( 3i, rabbi, never a title in NT)
my great one = my master (see further under RABBI). Rab
gradually acquired the meaning teacher. It is thus used in a
saying attributed to Jeshua ben-Perachiah (2nd cent. B.C.):
make unto thyself a Rab (Aboth 1 6). In the Mishna Ral>
and Talmud are master and scholar (see e.g., the passage cited
below).
In the interview with Nicodemus, Jesus himself
recognises the high distinction of the teacher s office
(Jn. 3io): Art thou the teacher (6 5i5d<rKa\os = a2n,
the highest grade) in Israel ?
In later times this was carried to an even greater extent.
Thus R. Eliezer (and cent. A.D.) says : Let the honour of thy
disciple (Talmld) be dear unto thee as the honour of thine
associate and the honour of thine associate as the fear of thy
master (Kab) ; and the fear of thy master as the fear of Heaven
(A both 4 12). The honour to be paid to a teacher even exceeded
that due to parents (Hdrdyoth 13 a). [See further on this
subject the notes in C. Taylor, AiotMtyji, or Spiers, School
System of the Talmud, idf. ( 98).]
17 Oualifica- ^ ie ^ ater ru ^ es re & ardm g tne personal
t ions . qualifications and competency of the
teacher are elaborate (see Spiers, op. cit.
I3/)-
For our purpose little can be quoted. According to a saying
ascribed to Hillel, piety and learning go together ; and an even
temper is essential to a teacher (Aboth. 2$). So according to
i Tim. 822 Tim. 2 24 Tit. 1 7 an en-iV/con-os should be SI&XKTIKOS
and not opyi Aos (Taylor op. cit. 31). The former of HillePs
maxims may be illustrated also from Aboth de Rabbi Nathan, ii. :
Woe to him who is occupied with the Torah and has no fear
of God. According to a dictum ascribed to R. Eliezer an
unmarried man was not permitted to teach in the schools (o
D lfllD ID 1 ? 11 N 1 ? new I 1 ? TNt? Mishna, Kiddushln 413). A woman
also was ineligible (ibid.).
According to the rule of the profession all the work
of the scribes, both educational and judicial, was to be
gratuitous. 1 Make not them (the words of Torah) a
crown to glory in ; nor an axe to live by (Aboth 4 56),
well expresses the principle. In practice its observance
was difficult perhaps possible only in the case of
judicial work (cp Mishna, Btkhdroth 46). It is impossible
to suppose that the elementary school teachers in the
provinces can have laboured without fee or reward.
Paul (i Cor. 93-18 etc.) certainly claimed the right of mainten
ance from those to whom he preached, though he preferred to
live by practising his trade. Similarly the teachers of the Law
1 In the inscriptions of Tiglath-pileser III. J^azdnu is the
regular official designation of the governor of a city. Similarly
in the Amarna letters it is an official title of honour ( =
governor ).
2 So the modern teachers at the great Cairo " university " [el-
Azhar]. (Che. Job ami Sol. 124.)
1197
EDUCATION
especially, perhaps, some of the rich doctors in Jerusalem
may have sometimes taught gratuitously. This, however, can
hardly have been the rule, though the rabbis, like Paul, had
usually learned and practised a trade. The combination of
study with a handicraft is strongly enforced {Aboth 2 2 :
Excellent is Torah study together with worldly business, for
the practice of them both puts iniquity out of remembrance.
Contrast Ecclus. 38 25 f. : How shall he become wise that
holdeth the plough, etc.). See HANDICRAFTS.
In the Aramaic of the period *O2D (=Heb. ns lD scribe )
probably already means teacher, since NiSD jv3 (i.e., house of
the teacher ) is one of the early names of the elementary school.
Cp also i Ch. 25 8 Targ. Another apparently a general and
later name for school is 1 ^13DN = < X ^ ?- The supposed mention
of schools in Sdhi9g (Surenh. 8291) rests upon a mistake.
The passage states that since the time of Jose (? 140-130 B.C.) the
niSlDOK ceased; but niSl3DN here can hardly mean schools.
See Schurer, GJVW 2, 25 n. 135 [ = ET4 357 n. 135], (3) 25,
iv. n. 16.
(a) Entrance -age and previous training. As to
18 Organiza- entrance a S e the available evidence is
unfortunately of too late a date to be
of much value for our purpose.
The passage usually cited here forms an appendix to Aboth
(621), and belongs to the post-Talmudic period (Schurer). It
runs as follows : At five years old, Scripture (npo) I at ten,
Mishna ; at thirteen, the commandments ; at fifteen, Talmud ;
at eighteen, the bridal, etc. The universal Talmudic rule is
expressed in the advice of Rab (Abba Areka, begin. 3rd cent.
A .D.) to the elementary schoolmaster: Do not receive a boy
into school before his sixth year (Kethuboth 50 a).
A certain amount of instruction had, however, been
given in the earlier period by the father, from whom
the child would learn to repeat the first verse of the
SMma (Dt. 64), and other short sentences of Scripture
(Bdbd Bathrd 21 a, Sukkd 42 a). Though the Law was
not in the strict sense binding upon children they were
accustomed to its requirements from an early age.
Thus, according to the Mishna, the elders were to enjoin upon
children sabbath observance (Shabbdth 16 6); one or two years
before the legal age fasting preparatory to the requirements of
the Day of Atonement was to be begun (Ydmd 8 4). Children
were bound to the usual prayer (an earlier form of the Shcmdneh
Esreh), and to grace at table (pTBH H313, Berakhoth 3 3).
The utilisation of certain rites, within the domestic
circle, for educating the child s religious consciousness
is already a feature of the pentateuchal precepts (Ex.
1226 /. 138, passover; cp. Dt. 620, Josh. 46). 1 This
was also extended to public worship. Boys had to be
present at the tenderest age in the Temple at the chief
festivals (Chag. 1 1) 2 ; a boy who no longer needs his
mother must observe the feast of tabernacles (Sitkkd
28). At the first signs of puberty (Niddd 6 n) the young
Israelite was bound to the strict observance of the Law,
and henceforth was (what in the later period was called)
a Bar-misvah (nisD 13, i.e., subject to [son of] legal
requirements [the commands]).
As knowledge of the Law was the chief thing, and as
great importance was attached to the public reading
19 Subiects f k in the s y na gS ue a privilege which
f <3t H was P en to an y competent Israelite (cp
y * Lk. 4i6/.) it follows that reading was
one of the principal subjects of instruction in the
elementary school (cp Actsl52i). Writing also was
taught.
With this agrees the testimony of Josephus, who says : He
(Moses) commanded to instruct children in the elements of
knowledge (ypaju/u.aTa = the elements of knowledge, reading and
writing), 3 to teach them to walk according to the laws, and to
know the deeds of their forefathers (c. A/>.li2; for other
passages see Schurer, op. cit. 2357 [ET447_/]).
It must be remembered, however, that writing, being
a much more difficult art than reading, would be less
widely diffused.
1 The questioning by the child, only in an expanded form, is
still a feature of the Passover rite. Cp The Revised Hagada,
ed. A. A. Green, 27.
2 It may be inferred from Lk. 242 that those who dwelt at a
distance from Jerusalem would not take part in the pilgrimages
till their twelfth year.
3 In Jn. 7 15 ypapnaTa. means(sacretf) book /frtr? ^-(especially
as pursued by the scribes; cp ypajuju.aTev s) rather than the
elements of learning. Cp Acts 2*124.
1198
EDUCATION
EDUCATION
The swift writer of the Psalmist (TTO 1S1D> P S - 45 i [2]) no
doubt belonged to a learned class. In the period of the Mishna
also, the writers evidently formed a special guild, something
like that of the scriveners of the Middle Ages (cp Shabbiith
\2 where the writer ["T 2J^ = libeUarius} with his reed
[iD!07ip3 = KoAafiO] is mentioned. Such a statement, therefore,
as that during the Bar-Kokhba revolt the cry of the school
youth in Hethar was : If the enemy comes against us we will
go up against them with these writing styli in order to poke out
their eyes (Git tin 60 a), must he read critically.
Probably the elements of arithmetic also were taught
in the elementary school.
See Ginsburg in Kitto, Bibl. Cyc., art. Education, and note
that a knowledge of the arithmetical method of exegesis called
geinatria^ [N"ncD3 = y e lJ M f pt(i] is presupposed on the part of his
readers by the writer of Rev. 13 17 f. See NUMBERS.
As the name House of the Book implies, the one
text-book of the schools was the sacred writings ; and
this to a Jew meant and means above all else the
Pentateuch, which has always enjoyed a primacy of
honour in the Jewish canon. That the rest of the OT
also was read and studied is shown (to take an in
stance) by the large use made of the prophetic literature
and of the Psalms, for popular purposes, in the pages
of the NT.
Not improbably instruction in the Law at this period
(as later) commenced with Leviticus, acquaintance with
which would t>e important to every Jew when the
Temple sacrifices were actually offered. When these
had ceased the reason given for beginning with Leviticus
was a fanciful one ( Sacrifices are pure, and children
are pure [from sins] ; let the pure be occupied with that
which is pure Midra.sk Rabba).
Great care was evidently taken that the texts used
at any rate of the Pentateuch should be as accurate
as possible (cp Mt. 5i8, Pisdchim, 112 a; and note
that the LXX conforms to the received Hebrew text in
the Pentateuch more strictly than elsewhere). This care
would extend, too, to the reading aloud of the Sacred
Books, accuracy of pronunciation, etc., being insisted
on ; the books themselves were, of course, read (as in
the public services) in the original sacred tongue
(Hebrew), though the language of everyday life in
Palestine was already Aramaic, which was employed
(in the synagogues) in interpreting the sections of
Scripture there read (see TEXT).
Though it is evident from the statements of Jose-
phus (Ant. xx. 11 2) that the systematic study of foreign
languages formed no part of a Palestinian Jew s regular
education, the fact that, during this period, the popula
tion of Palestine outside Judrea was without exception
of a mixed character, consisting of Jews, Syrians, and
Greeks intermingled, whilst Jerusalem itself was con
stantly being visited by foreign - speaking Jews and
proselytes (cp Acts 2 sf. ), who even had their own syna
gogues in the Holy City (Acts 6 9), makes it practically
certain that Greek at least cannot have been altogether
unfamiliar to the (Aramaic -speaking) Judaeans (cp
HELLENISM, 3).
For the abounding indications of indirect Greek influence on
Jewish life of the NT and earlier period see Schiirer, 2 26 f. (ET
3 29_/). On the question discussed above, his conclusion is, it
is probable that a slight acquaintance with Greek was pretty
widely diffused, and that the more educated classes used it
without difficulty." It should be noted that the inscription on
the cross was written in Hebrew, Latin, and Greek (Jn. 19 19/1).
According to tradition (Sank. 170) a knowledge of Greek was
essential in order to qualify for membership of the sanhedrin.
Possibly Hebrew with an admixture of Greek words (cp the
language of the Mishna) was still spoken in learned circles. To
illustrate the later estimation of Greek two quotations must
suffice : What need, says Rabbi (i.e., Judah the Holy, Compiler
of the Mishna, 2nd cent. A.D.), has one in Palestine to learn
Syriac (i.e., Aramaic, the language of the country)? One
should learn either Hebrew or Greek (Sotfi 49*1). The Torah
may be translated only into Greek, because only by Greek can
it he adequately rendered (Jerus. MtgillaJk 1 8).
Both the extent and the limits of Greek influence on
1 The reader substitutes for a word another the sum of the
numerical values of whose letters is the same. Thus 666
Casar Nero (pi: -p).
"99
Palestinian Jewish life can be very well illustrated by
the Jewish view of games, gymnastics, etc. (see
HELLENISM, 5). It is well known that the erection
of a gymnasium in Jerusalem by the Hellenisers in the
Maccabean period called forth the indignant protest of
the strict party (see above, n). This continued to
be the attitude of legal Judaism, even Josephus de
nouncing the theatre and amphitheatre as un-Jewish
(Ant. xv. 81). In time, however, even the most pious
modified this rigid puritanism, and tales are actually
told of the gymnastic skill of famous Rabbis (e.g. , Simon
ben-Gamaliel, Sukkd, 58 a). The bath, originally a
Greek institution, became entirely naturalized, and was
given a Hebrew name (j rre)- We even find a Talmudic
precept enjoining every father to teach his son swimming
(Kiddfishin, 290)*
The characteristic method both of teaching and of
M rh ri f ^ e!irn ^ n S wa - scons ^ anfre f >e ^^ on - Hence
., nyp, prop, to repeat, comes to mean both
Study, etc. , . /
J to teach and to learn (see above, 3).
The following dictum is ascribed to R. Aklba (2nd cent. A.D.) :
The teacher should strive to make the lesson agreeable to the
pupils by clear reasons, as well as by frequent repetitions, until
they thoroughly understand the matter, and are able to recite it
with great fluency ( F .rnbln 54 b). The pupil was to repeat the
lesson aloud : Open thy mouth that the subject of thy study
may abide with thee and live (Erfibin, 54 a).
Oral instruction is often referred to in NT e.g. , in
Rom. 2i8; cp Lk. 14 (cp CATECHISE). In Jerome s
time (4th cent. A.D.) Jewish children in Palestine had
to learn by heart the alphabet in the regular and the
reverse order. He reproaches the Pharisees with always
repeating, never reflecting.
Jerome notes the remarkable powers of memory thus de
veloped : In childhood they acquire the complete vocabulary
of their language, and learn to recite all the generations from
Adam to Zerubbabel with as much accuracy and facility, as if
they were simply giving their names (see S. Krauss in JQR
6231^, where the reff. are given). The endless genealogies
of i Tim. 1 4 may be a further illustration (but see GENEALOGIES
i., 4, second note). Repetition with fellow scholars is recom
mended (Ta iintth 7 a). In teaching, mechanical devices for
assisting the memory were used (nieinoria technica : cp Mishna,
Sliekallm v., and elsewhere, and Buxt. Lex. [ed. Fischer, 677 b\
s.v. ppnou)-
The idiosyncrasy of the pupil was to be considered
(Prov. 226, AbBdA Zdrd 19 a). Instruction was to be
methodical and givenjwith a high sense of responsibility
(Pfsdchim 30, and Aboth 3 n).
Regarding school discipline the later rules are elaborate.
Perhaps the following may be mentioned. Partiality on
the part of the teacher was to be avoided (Ta anith 24^).
Punctuality is insisted upon (Kcthfibdth 1 1 1 b). Punishments
were mild, the Rabbinical rules in this respect showing a marked
advance on the ideas of Ben-Sira. Thus reliance in the case of
older scholars who proved refractory was placed in the chastening
effect of the public opinion of class-fellows (Bdbd Bathra 21 a).
In the case of young children, when punishment was necessary
it was to be administered with a strap (ibid.).
The pa;dagogic ideal of the period was realised in R. FJiezer-
a preceptor of R. Aklba who is compared to a plastered
cistern that loseth not a drop (Aboth 280).
That the usual position of the scholar was on the
ground, facing the teacher, appears from Acts 22 3
(wapa roi>s TroSas Ya/j.a\Lr)\).
Cp Lk. 246 1039, anc l tne saying ascribed to R. Jose: Let
thy house be a meeting-place for the wise ; and powder thyself
in thedust of their feet (Aboth 14). Benches (^ys^ = svbsellia)
were a later innovation (Bfrnkhoth, 28 a). In some cases it
would be convenient for teacher or taught to stand (Acts 13 16
Mt. 182); but this was not the rule. These remarks largely
apply to the scribal college.
Besides the elementary school there were also colleges
for higher training, where those who were to devote
_ ., , themselves to the study of the Law (both
. ben B wr ; Uen an( j ora i) attended (emen rva,
Colleges. B - fh ham . midr a sht -house of study ;
another name is pan a, Mtgilld 280). These, too,
were usually attached (at any rate when the system had
been developed) to the synagogues. No doubt they
grew out of assemblies in private houses (cp Aboth 1 4
cited above), which probably still continued to be used
in some cases for this purpose. In Jerusalem the
temple (i.e. , the colonnades or some other space of the
EDUCATION
outer court) was often so utilised (Lk. 246 Mt. 2X23
etc. ). Thus the famous scribes and doctors of the
law taught, their instruction being chiefly catechetical
a method which has left its impress upon the style of
the Mishna. Questions, asked and answered by teacher
and disciple alike, counter-questions, parables, debates,
allegories, riddles, stories such were the methods em
ployed. They throw an interesting light on NT forms
of teaching.
Thus (for instance) the Rabbinic parables, like those of the NT,
are commonly introduced by some such formula as To what is the
matter like? (Y rtoS)- The fuller consideration of these and
other points (.e.g., the extent of the studies pursued in the Beth
Hammidrash) belongs to the article SCRIBES (ff-v.).
What has been said above applies exclusively to boys.
For the education of girls no public provision was made.
ot TM f From birth to marriage they remained
Of (Ms under the mother s care - With their
brothers they would learn those simple
lessons in morality and religion which a mother knows
so well how to instil. Special care would, of course, be
given to their training in the domestic arts ; but the
higher studies (both sacred and secular) were considered
to be outside a woman s sphere. Reading, however,
and perhaps writing, were taught to girls, and they
were made familiar with the written, but not the oral,
Law. Strangely enough, too, they were apparently
encouraged to acquire a foreign language, especially
Greek (/. Pe dh. 26). That great importance was
attached to girls education from an early period appears
from Ecclus. 7 247. , 26 io/., 42g/
Above all, the ideal of Jewish womanhood was that of
the virtuous (or capable) wife, actively engaged in the
management of her household, and in the moral and
religious training of her children (Prov. 31 10-29).
It must not be supposed that the system of education
sketched above was the only one to be found in Palestine
23. Conclusion. J Uring th f P eriod ; As ^already
been pointed out, there were doubtless
Jewish as well as Greek-speaking centres within the
Holy Land where schools of the Greek type flourished.
Among the Jewish communities abroad, too, which
doubtless possessed schools with their synagogues,
Greek influence would be especially felt. Still, in all
Jewish centres the dominant note was the same. Educa
tion was almost exclusively religious. Its foundation
was the text of Scripture, and its highest aim to train
up its disciples in the fear of God which is based
upon a detailed knowledge of the Law. The noble
precept Train up a child in the way he should go, and
even when he is old he will not depart from it ( Prov.
226) is re-echoed, in more prosaic language, in the
Talmud : If we do not keep our children to religion
while they are young, we shall certainly not be able to
do so in later years ( Yomd 82 a). The means by which
this could be accomplished as the Jewish teachers were
the first to perceive was a system of definite religious
training in the schools.
In thus endowing its children with a possession which
lived in intellect, conscience, and heart, Judaism en
trenched itself within an impregnable stronghold. For
it is undoubtedly the love of sacred study, instilled in
school and synagogue, that has saved the Jewish race
, from extinction. The beautiful saying, attributed to
R. Judah the Holy: The world exists only by the
breath of school-children, has its justification at any
rate as regards the Jewish world in the later history of
the Jewish people.
On the subject generally the following works may be referred
to : Oehler, Padagogik d. AT, in Schmid s Encyclof>ddie
d. gesammten Erziehungs- und Unter-
24. Bibliography, ricktswtttn. vol. 5 ; Hamburger, REJ,
96 (reprint), vol. 1, art. Erziehung ;
2, Lehrer, Lehrhaus, Schule, Schiller, Unterricht, etc.
(a mine of information, but mainly for the later period) ;
Schurer, C/K(3), 2 305 ff., Die Schriftgelehrsamkeit (ET,
Div. ii. vol. 1, 25), 24197?. Schule und Synagoge (ET,
Div. ii. vol. 2, 27, where the literature is given); Ginsburg
In Kitto s Bibl. Cyclop.$), art. Education (conservative, but
EGLATH-SHELISHIYAH
is also discussed in Edersheim, Sketches of Jewish. Social
Life, etc. (chaps. 7 /.), Life and Times of Jesus, etc. \ 225/1,
and History of tlie Jewish Nation (ed. White), 277^: [ 96],
(Jewish philosophy, art, and science are also fully discussed in
this volume); Laurie, Historical Survey of Pre-Christian
Education, 69-105 [ 95] ; L. Low, Die Lebensalter in d. jiid.
Literatur, iy>f. [ 75] ; and S. Schechter, Studies in Judaism,
343/1 The relevant sections in Benzinger and Nowack (HA),
also, should not be overlooked.
Of monographs and special treatises the following are the
most important : J. Lewit, Darstellung d. theorctischen u.
praktischen Piidagogik in jud. Altertum, 96; E. van Gelder
Die Volkschulc d. jud. Altertums, 92 ; J. Simon, L Education
et f instruction des En/ants chez les Anciens Juifs 1 ?}, 81 ;
Seidel, Ueber die Padagogik d. Pr&ierbien, 75 (with which
compare Che. Jew. Rel. Life); M. Duschak, Schulgesetzgebung
und Methodik d. alien Israeliten, 72.
For the Talmudic period (in English) Spiers, The School
System of the Talmud 1 ^), 98, may be mentioned. There are
many books on Jewish education of this later period (see Strack,
Einl. in den ThalmudP), 128 titles). Other references have been
given in the body of the present article. G. H. B.
EGG (fl-PS), Deut - 226 ; see FOWLS, 4, SCORPION.
EGLAH (rPjy, young cow, 68 ; & r \& [AL] ; in
?S. Aip-AA [B], - r &c [A] ; in i Ch. A A<\ [B], er . [L] ;
|~A.AA [J os -])- Mother of David s son ITHREAM (y.v. ),
28. 85 i Ch. 83. It is doubtful whether wife of
David in 2 S. 3 5 is correct or not. David might be
a scribe s error for some other name ; Abigail (v. 3) is
called wife of Nabal (her first husband). So Well-
hausen, Driver, Budde. According to a late exegetical
tradition, however (see Jer. Qucest. Hebr. on 2 S. 3s
623, and Lag. Proph. Chald. p. xviii. ), Eglah was
Michal, daughter of Saul, David s first wife. This
view is also that of Thenius and Klostermann, and is
plausible. To stop short here, however, would be
impossible. No early writer would have written
Eglah meaning Michal. The most probable explana
tion is suggested by 2 Ch. 11 18. n^y is a corruption of
V rraNp Abihail, the name given to the mother of
JERIMOTH (q. v. ), or rather Ithream, ben David, in
2 Ch. I.e. We now understand B s reading arya\
(cu^aX?) in 28. 3s, and can do justice to the late
Jewish tradition respecting Eglah. For almost certainly
SaD ( Michal ) also is a corruption of rrrax, Abihail.
See ITHREAM, MICHAL. T. K. c.
EGLAIM (Dv?N, probably place of a reservoir ?
or a softened form of DvJJJ? on form of name see
NAMES, 107 AfAAeiM [B], -AA[e]i/v\ [NAQ],
GALLIM], a town of Moab (Is. 158), mentioned together
with BEER-ELIM in such a way as to suggest that it lay
on the S. frontier. Beer-elim, however, should rather
be read in Elealeh (close to the N. frontier). Eglaim
must therefore have been on the S. border, and Eusebius
and Jerome identify it with a-yaXAet/x ( Agallim), a village
8 R. m. S. from Areopolis (OS, 228 61 98 io). T. K. c.
EGLATH-SHELISHIYAH (
tioned in the RV of the prophecy against Moab, Is.
15 5 (AAM&AIC . . . TRIGTHC [BXAQF]) Jer. 48 3 4
UrreAiAN c<\AAceiA [B], om. N*, <\. eic c*Aic<\
[N c a ], -AlA [AQ], CAAlCIA [A], CAAACIA [Q])-
The rendering adopted by Graf and others the
third Eglath implies that there were three places of
this name near together. Whether such a title as
1 the third Eglath is probable in a poem the reader
may judge. Duhm and Marti take the words to be an
insertion from Jer. I.e. ; Cheyne, however (see LUHITH),
supposes .TB ^B rtay to be a corruption of c ^Jj; rtSyc.
the ascent of EGLAIM [ff.v.~\, cancelling as a dittogram
the ascent of LUHITH [q.v. ]. According to the
rendering of AV and of RV m e- ( an heifer of three
years ) the crying of Moab is compared to a thwarted
heifer, one which in its third year is on the point of
being broken in ; others regard heifer as a meta-
EGLON
phorical description of Zoar (cp Hos. 10n) ; but one
expects npVrip rtajj, cp Gen. ISg. 1
EGLON Cfh^tf, 77 ; cp EGLAH, EGLAIM, erAooM
[HAL]), the king of Moab, who oppressed Israel for
eighteen years. He was finally killed by the Ben-
jamite EHUD \tj.v. , \. (i)], who at the head of his
tribesmen destroyed all the Moabites W. of Jordan
(Judg. 3 12-30). That Moab was aided by Ammon and
Amalek is probably an exaggeration due to D ; cp Bu.
Ri.Sa. 99. From the fact that Eglon seized Jericho
(v. 13) it is often assumed (cp e.g., Jos.) that this was
the scene of his assassination. This, however, does not
agree with the finale, and since Gilgal lies between
Jericho and the fords of Moab, we must assume from
w. i8/". 26 that his residence was E. of Gilgal, most
probably in Moab. See JUDGES, 6, i6(beg. ); SEIRATH.
EGLON (|V??1J ; 1!AL commonly oAoAAAM : 5 L in
Josh. 1036 12 12 1639, epAcoN), a town in the ShCphelah
of Judah, mentioned with Lachish and Bozkath (Josh.
1539 lAe<\A<\AeA [BA]). Debir, its king, joined the
league against Joshua which was headed by ADONIZEDKK
EGYPT
[g.v.], and perished with the other kings (Josh. 10i-37
\y. 5 oSoXXox (A) ; v. 36 BAom.] ; cp 12i2 aiXa,u [B],
ty\uv fF], -/J. [A]). That Adullam takes its place in <
of Josh. 10 is plainly a mistake, which has led Eusebius
and Jerome astray (OS 253 45 118 21). The name of
Eglon survives in that of A A. Ajlan, 1 16 m. NE.
of Gaza, and 2 m. N. of Tell el-Hesy (LACHISH).
On this site, however, there is very little extent of
artificial soil, very little pottery, and what there is shows
Roman age. On the other hand, there is a tell, 3^ m.
S. of Tell el-Hesy, the site of which Petrie considers
only second in importance to that of Tell el-Hesy, and,
though he has not explored it, he pronounces it to be
the ancient Eglon. So far as can be seen on the
surface, Tell Nejileh (so it is called) is of the same age
as Tell el-Hesy, though it may have been ruined earlier
(PEFQ, 90, p. 162). Unluckily, however, it is wholly
covered with an Arab cemetery (Flinders Petrie PEl- Q,
90, p. 226). Tell Ajlan may represent the ruins of
a later town, built after the overthrow of the ancient
city ; this is a suggestion which may or may not be
confirmed by excavation. T. K. c.
E G Y P T. 2
Name (8 i).
Description ( 2-9).
People, Language, etc. ( 10-12).
Religion (88 13-19).
Literature ( 20-26).
CONTENTS.
Institutions (8 27-32).
Trade, etc. ( 33-35).
Art ( 3 6/.).
Miscellaneous (8 38-40).
History ( 41-44).
MAPS
1. Egypt proper (after col. 1240).
2. Oases (see Nos. i and 4).
3. Course of Nile (after col. 1208, No. i).
4. Nile and Euphrates (ib., No. 2).
Old Empire (88 45-48).
Middle Empire ( 49-52).
New Empire (88 53-60).
Dynasties 20-25 ( 61-66).
Dynasties 26-34 ( 67-74).
5. Geological (after col. 1208, No. 3)
6. Egypt and Sinai, pluvial period (col. 1205).
The name used by us, after the example of the
classic nations, 3 for the country on the banks of the
Nile, seems to have been really the designa-
t i ono f the capital Memphis Ha(t}-ka-ptah,
cuneiform Hikubta (Am. Tab. nos. 53, 37), translated
H0euoT/a = Egypt and more primitively that of its
.-
1. Name.
1 See Dietrich in Merx, A rchiv, 1 342^
2 Repertories for Egypt in general are Jolowicz, Biblioth.
Aeg. 1858-61, and Prince Ibrahim Hilmy, The Lit. of Egypt
ami the Sudan, 1886-88. The current literature is given in the
Orientalische Bibliographic. For scientific investigations, the
following journals must be consulted: Zt. f. Acg. Sprache .
Altertutnskunde (Leipsic), Recueil tie trav. rel. a la philol. et
arch. Egypt, et Assyr. (here cited as Rec. trav.), and Rev.
Egypt. (Paris), and Sphinx (Upsala). In England, scattered
contributions, especially in TSBA and PSBA and Archa-ologia,
etc. On the monuments of Egypt, the memoirs of the Mission
Franchise au Caire, of the Egypt Exploration Fund (through
which also the admirable Archaeological Survey of Egypt has
been set on foot), and Prof. Flinders Petrie s Egypt Research
Accounts, as also the Catalogue des Monuments et Inscriptions,
begun recently by the Egyptian Government (edited by De
Morgan), are in progress of publication. Of older works,
Lepsius, Denkiiiiiler aus Aeg. u. Aeth. (1849-58, a large and
beautiful publication), Rosellini, Monutncnti dell Egitto, etc.
(1842-44, faithful), Champollion, Monuments, etc. (1855-45, with
Notices Manuscrits as supplement), also the publications of the
Museums at London (Select I apyri, etc., ed. by Birch), Leiden
(by Leemans, 1839, foil.), Berlin, Turin (Papyri by Pleyte and
Rossi), Bulak (Mariette), are most useful for illustrations and
inscriptions ; the Descr. tie I Kgypte of Napoleon s expedition is
in part quite antiquated, and, generally, hardly anything earlier
than Champollion continues to be of use. Philological studies
very quickly become antiquated owing to the rapid progress of
the young science. So far, none of the popular books on Egypt
in relation to the Bible can be recommended (this is true of
I .rugsch, Steininschrift utu/ Bibehvort. 1891). Ebers, Aeg. u.
ifie Biicker flfosis, 1868 (antiquated), was never completed. An
Egyptological counterpart to KA T is promised. Here only
a selection from the immense mass of literature can be made,
preference often being given to the less highly specialised
works, and those written in English or translated into it.
3 Aiyvn-Tos (Lat. .Egyptus) occurs first in Homer, where it
denotes, as a feminine noun, the country, as a masculine, the
river Nile.
1203
chief temple (see NOPH). 2 On the Semitic name 3 see
MIZRAIM, i. Poetical names in the OT are Rahab
and land of Ham (see RAHAB, HAM, i. ).
The Egyptians themselves called their country
Kemet* Coptic KH/v\e or XHM S (Northern Coptic
KHMl) i-e-, the black country from its black soil
of Nile mud, in contrast with the surrounding deserts,
the defret or red country. This etymology is given
correctly by Plutarch (De hide 33, xw a = fJ-f\<iyytios ;
see also "Ep/jioxti/juos, Steph. Byz. , by the side of jueXd/u-
/SwXos). Poetic names were, e.g. , (P}-to-mere, (the) land
of inundation (Steph. Byz. IlTt/iiyjjj, equal to AAra),
in later time Beket (perhaps land of the baket
shrub ). The most common designation was, how
ever, simply the two countries, tout, 6 referring to the
division of Egypt into S. and N. country (see below,
43)-
Egypt is situated in the NE. corner of Africa ; but
the ancients reckoned it more frequently to Asia than
2 Land to< Libya i.e., Africa. It lies between N.
lat. 31 35 (the Mediterranean) and 24
4 23" (the first cataract at Asuan). Longitudinally
its limits may be given as from Solum, 28 50 E. , to
Rhinocolura, the modern el- Arish (see EGYPT, RIVER
OF )> 33 5 E. ; but the limits of cultivable ground
1 The mod. Ajlan occurs frequently to the E. of Jordan (cp
EGLAIM).
2 First proposed by Brugsch, Geog. Inschriften, \ 7383. For
the manifold senseless etymologies from Greek, Semitic, etc.,
see the classical dictionaries, s.v. Cp also Reinisch, SWAW
30 397 8647, On the names of Egyrjt.
3 It occurs in hieroglyphics only in names of foreigners, such
as Ma-sa-r-Ai.c., Hfesrai (Rec. de Trav. 1462).
. Rrtigsch s Diet. Gfog. (1877-80) contains the
g^ names of Egypt, its divisions, cities, etc. (to be
& used with caution ; his Geographische Inschriften,
1867, is antiquated).
s Absolutely unconnected with Noah s son HAM (q.v. i).
6
1204
EGYPT
would rather fix the frontier at about 32 32 (the site
of ancient Pelusium). It is not correct to include in
Egypt the large deserts of stone and sand lying on both
sides, or even the N. parts of the Sinaitic peninsula
regions of more than 1,000,000 sq. m. , which are
wandered over by only a few foreign nomads. Egypt
is, strictly, only the country using Nile water, N. of
Syene (Asuan), as it was correctly defined even by
Herodotus (2 18). If we reckon only cultivable ground
(Nile Valley and Delta), Egypt has an area of not much
more than 13,000 square miles. 1
The extent of land really under cultivation changes continu
ally. Under the bad government of the Mamluks in 1797, it
SKETCH MAP OF
EGYPT, SINAI, &c.
in the Pluvial Period,
after Map in
The Survey of Western Palestine.
Scale of Miles
40
MEDITERRANEAN
Bay of
Lower Egypt
Longitude East 33 of Greenwich
was estimated at 5469 sq. m. ; recently, over 11,000 were assumed
as cultivable, of which 9460 were really in cultivation. The
census of 1887 gave 20,842 sq. kil. (12,943 sq. m.) as arable, of
which Upper Egypt (some parts of Nubia even being included)
has the smaller half. In antiquity, the amount was certainly
not more, probably less.
The surrounding deserts make access to Egypt
difficult, and explain its somewhat isolated history.
The shape of the country may be likened to that of
a fan with a long handle. The handle, Upper Egypt,
from Memphis to Syene, is a narrow valley, averaging
12 m. in width (near Thebes, only 2^-4 m.).
The view of ancient writers that Egypt north of
Memphis, the so-called Delta (from its form, like an
inverted Gr. A), was originally a gulf of the
3. Geology.
sea and was filled in by the deposits of the
1 The total area of Belgium is 11,373 square miles, of the
Netherlands 12,648, and of Switzerland 15,976. See the
Statesman s Year Book.
1205
EGYPT
Nile, is correct (see the accompanying sketch-map :
fig. i) ; but it is an exaggeration to place this process
within historic time. 1 As far as our historical know
ledge goes, the country has always been the same ; the
yearly deposits have raised the bed of the Nile slightly.
(On exaggerations of the fact that the river had formerly
a greater volume of water than now, see below, 7,
note. )
The fact that the level, e.g., of ancient Alexandria is now
below that of the sea is to be ascribed to a sinking of the sandy
north coast. The Burlus and Menzaleh Lakes are indeed, in
part, recent formations, caused by the influx of the sea, although
the Edku and Maryut (Mareotis) lakes are old, and ancient
inscriptions speak continually of the swamp-lands, n-aif/tou ,
Na0w (Herod.) Neovr (Ptol.)
in the N. Strabo knows the
Balfih lakes.
The substratum of the
Northern Nile valley and
the characteristic stone
of the tableland of the
Libyan (Western) 2 desert
is limestone in different
formations ; the material
of the great pyramids is
tertiary nummulitic lime
stone. The valley is shut
in by limestone crags,
about 300 ft. in height,
which sometimes come
very near to the river.
Above Edfu, the sand
stone formation that pre
vails through Nubia be
gins, forming also the
first natural frontier of
Egypt, the mountain-bar
at Silslleh. This quartzy
stone furnished the excel
lent material used for most
of the ancient temples.
The first cataract at
Aswan is the result of the
river being crossed by a
bar of red granite, syenite,
and other rock, from
which the famous obelisks
were taken. The
Eastern (Arabian) desert
is of varying formation,
full of mountains which
rise in part to a height
of over 6000 ft. (The
highest point is Jebel
Gharib. ) See geological
map (no. 3) facing col.
I207/
These mountains furnished
the rich material for the finer
sculpturesof the ancient Egyp
tians diorite (near Hammfi-
milt), dark red porphyry (Jebel Dokhan, 6900 ft.), black granite,
alabaster (near Asyut), and basalt. Emeralds (Jebel Zabara)
and gold (Wady Allaki) also were found there, but few useful
metals (there were some iron and insignificant copper mines in
Nubia). In antiquity, therefore, metals were imported. Other
1 [Cp Report on Boring Operations in the Nile Delta," Proc.
Roy. Soc. 97, p. 32. The Royal Society carried out borings in
the Delta to try to get down to the bed rock. At ZakazTk they
reached 345 feet or 319 feet below sea-level without striking
solid rock. At 115 feet there was a noteworthy change. Below
that depth was a mass of coarse sand and shingle, with one
band of yellow clay at 151 feet; above 115 feet it was blown
sand and alluvial mud. Totally different conditions must have
ds is not yet determined. I he pebbles ot
which they are composed all belong to the rocks found in situ
in the Nile Valley. The coast at the mouths of the Nile
appears to be sinking, the coasts in the Gulf of Suez to be
rising.]
2 Cp Zittel, Ceol. der lilysclten Wiistc, 83.
1206
- EGYPT
minerals, such as salt, alum, natron (this from the Natrun
valley S. of Alexandria), come more from the Libyan desert.
The Oases (avdfffis, Egyptian wah, modern Arabic
_ wah, meaning unknown) of the Libyan
desert are depressions in this barren table
land where the water can come to the surface and create
vegetation. See maps after cols. 1240 and 1208.
Their present names (from N. to S.) are : (i) Slwah (Oasis of
Amon ; perhaps also called sekhet atnu, date-field ; but this is
quite doubtful), very far to the west ; (z) Bahriye, the small
oasi.s ; (3) Farilfra (7 o-e/ie, cowland ); (4) Dakhela (Zeszes) \
(5) The (ireat Oasis, now called the exterior oasis, el-
khar(i)geh (anciently Heb, Hibis, or the Southern Oasis).
In ancient times these islands in the desert be
longed politically to Egypt (from Dyn. 18?) ; but their
inhabitants were Libyans and became Egyptianised only
later. The population of the remote oasis of Amon,
however, although it adopted the Egyptian cult of
Amon, remained purely Libyan, and has retained to
the present day the Libyan (Berber) language.
The population of these five oases is, at present, about 58,000.
The Fa(i)yum also (see below, 50) is really an oasis. On the
Wady Tiimilat, see GOSHEN i. ; on the Fa(i)yum, below, 50.
The climate is extremely hot, but has great changes,
especially during the night. The ancient Egyptians
_ _,. prayed that after death, as in life, they
5 Climate. , - . ,
might have the cool north wind, consider
ing this the greatest comfort. This wind blows in
summer for six months. On the other hand, at intervals
during the fifty days preceding the summer solstice,
there blows a terrible hot wind, now called Hamstn
(i.e., fifty ), full of sand from the Western desert.
At most other times, proximity to the deserts renders
the air very dry and salubrious. The yearly inundation
has dangers which explain why so frequently, from the
time of Moses onwards, the plague has found a home in
Egypt (Am. 4 10). Eye diseases caused by the abundant
dust were, and are, very common.
The Nile, the only river of Egypt, seems to have its
present name (Gk. NetXoj) from the Semitic nahal
.... (Sm), stream, this designation (*nehel} 1
being probably due to the Phoenicians.
The Egyptians called it Ha pi (w0t, of uncertain ety
mology),- in poetry ueru ( the great one ) ; but in the
vernacular language it was simply the river yetor
(later after 2000 B.C. pronounced ye-or, yd or], or
else the great river" ye(t}er-o, yar-o, Coptic eiepo.
Of the last two expressions the former became in
Hebrew -ijr, whilst the second, according to the N.
Egyptian pronunciation (i&po), is found in the Assyrian
Yaru u, Nile. On the Heb. name Shihor, and on the
phrase the river of Egypt, see SHIHOR, and EGYPT,
RIVER OF.
This river is the second longest in the world 3 (its
source now being assumed at 3 S. lat. ; for the whole
course of the river see map 2, on opposite page),
although not so majestic and voluminous (1300 ft.
wide at Thebes, 2600 at Asyut) as some shorter rivers.
It forms the principal characteristic of Egypt, the gift
of the Nile (Herod.). The Egyptians believed that
it sprang from four sources at the twelfth gate of the
nether-world, at a place described in ch. 146 of the Book
of the Dead, and that it came to light at the two whirl
pools of the first cataract, the so-called Kerti (Kp>(f>i and
fj.u><t>i, Herod. ). Even in the latest times, when they
knew the course of the river beyond Khartum, 4 their
theology still held that primitive view.
The Nile divides N. of Memphis. Of the seven
branches, however, which once formed the Delta (see
large map after col. 1240), only two 5 are really
1 The asterisk indicates a conjectural form.
2 Later theology combined it with the Apis (Hapi) bull. He
was allowed to drink only from wells, not from the Nile.
* Perthes, Taschen-Atlas, statistical tables.
4 But hardly the source from the mountain of the moon,
known in Roman times.
6 Viz., the first and the third, counting from the west con
tinued, however, in their lower portions, in the channels of the
second and the fourth respectively. The latter, the Bolbinitic
1207
EGYPT
left, the rest being more or less dried up. A branch
(now called Bahr-Yusuf), 1 losing itself in the Libyan
desert, forms the oasis of the Fa(i)yum in Middle Egypt.
The annual inundation is produced by the spring
rains in the Abyssinian highlands and the melting of the
_ . mountain snow, which cause an immense
. " increase of the Eastern or Blue Nile (now
P" el-Bahr el-Azrak, from its turbid water),
whilst the principal stream, the White Nile (el-Bahr el
Abyad, from its clearness), has a more steady volume of
water. In Egypt the increase is felt in June ; July
brings rapid swelling of the reddening turbid stream ;
the slow subsidence of the waters begins in October.
During winter, the stagnant water remaining on the
fields dries up, and the Nile mud, originally the dust
washed from the Abyssinian mountains, settles upon
the soil, acting as a valuable fertilizer. Thus in course
of innumerable years the sand or stone of the valley has
been covered with from 30 to over 40 feet of black soil.
This shows, usually, an astonishing fertility : Egypt
looks like one great garden (Gen. 13io) ; but a small
Nile i.e., an insufficient inundation has always
brought years of dearth. 2 Even a great Nile, 3
however, cannot cover the whole valley and reach all
fields. Dykes have to be built, and canals dug, in
order that the water may be distributed. A good
government has to give great care to such public con
structions, the neglect of which will make the desert
reconquer vast regions. Higher fields always had to be
watered by (primitive) machinery, such as the con
trivance called at present shaduf. (On Dt. 11 10 see
below, col. 1225, n. 10. )
After all, Egypt had much more regular harvests than
Palestine and Syria, where the only irrigation, by rain,
very often failed. The abundant inundation of Egypt
was proverbial among the Hebrews: cp Am. 88, and,
as some think, Is. 59 19 6 (SBOT). We repeatedly
find Egypt s Asiatic neighbours depending upon its
abundance of grain. The Egyptians knew quite well
that their country owed its existence entirely to the good
god Nile, whom they represented as a fat androgynous
blue or green figure. 4 Being nearly (but not
completely) rainless, Egypt depends upon the Nile not
only for the irrigation of its fields, but also for its drink
ing-water (which is very palatable, and was kept cool,
then as now, in porous vessels). The OT prophets know
no worse way of threatening Egypt with complete ruin
than using the symbolical expression, The Nile will
be dried up. The river was also the chief highway
of the country.
The flora 8 was poor in species. Ancient Egypt had
not such a cosmopolitan vegetation as the modern.
8 p. Forests were quite unknown. Besides fruit-
" trees viz., the date-, dom- (now only above
Asyut) and argiin-palm, fig, sycomore, nabak (Zisyphits
Spina Christi, the so-called Lotus-tree), and pomegran-
and the Bucolic mouths, are said to have been artificial canals (?).
The Bucolic of Herodotus (217) is called Phatnitic or rather
Pathmetic(thns Ptol.and Pomp. Mela) j>.,the Northern (fa-to
m/iitf) by other writers.
1 Not from the biblical Joseph.
2 Such calamities, sometimes in several successive years, are
mentioned repeatedly. A legend from the Ptolemaic period
(inscription at the first cataract, found by Wilbour, translated by
Brugsch, Die Biblischen 7 Jahre der Hungersnot, 1891, and
by Pleyte) reports seven years of famine before 3000 B.C. The
strange water-marks on the rocks of Nubia, 25 ft. above the
modern level, are difficult to explain. They cannot well be
used as a proof that former inundations were so much higher,
for that would involve our assuming that all ruins now existing
were, in antiquity, under water.
3 Of the so-called Nilometers wells with measures marked
for use in official estimates of the rise that of Phils remains
from antiquity.
(wearing water flowers on the head, and offering
fresh water and water flowers).
8 See especially Loret, La Flore PharaoniqucV-} [ 92];
Woenig, Die Pflanzcn iin alt. Aeg. [ 86] ; and various essays
by Schweinfurth.
1208
MAPS OF (i.) COURSE OF NILE, AND (ii.) NILE AND EUPHRATES
INDEX TO NAMES
Parentheses indicating articles that refer to the place-names are in certain cases added. The alphabetical arrange
ment ignores prefixes : el ( the ), J. (Jebel, mi. ), L. (lake), tell ( mound ), -wady ( -valley ).
Abu Hamed, i. 64
Abu Simbel, i. A3 (EGYPT, 37)
Abydos, i. A2 (EGYPT, 44)
Alasia, ii. A.2 (CYPRUS, i)
L. Albert, ii. A5
Alexandria, i. Ai
tell el- Amarna, i. Aa
Amor, ii. A.2 (CANAAN, 8)
(Anti), i. B 3 (ETHIOPIA, 4)
Arko (Island), i. A4
Aswan, i. A3
Asyut, i. A2 (EGYPT, 3, 6)
Atbara (river), i. 64
Babil, ii. 62
Bahr el-Ghazal, ii. AS
Bahren 1. , ii. B3
jebel Barkal, i. A4
el-Behneseh, i. A2
Beni Hasan, i. A2 (EGYPT, 50)
Berber, i. 84
Bitter Lakes, i. Ai
Blue Nile, ii. A4
Cairo, i. Ai
i Cataract, i. A3
2 Cataract, i. A3
3 Cataract, i. A4
4 Cataract, i. A4
5 Cataract, i. B4
6 Cataract, i. B4 (ETHIOPIA, 4)
Dakke, i. A3
Damietta, i. Ai
L. Demba a, ii. A4
Dendera, i. A2
ed-Derr, i. A3
Kkhmim, i. j\2
el-Faiyum, i. A2 (EGYPT, 6, 50)
el-Farafra, ii. A3
Fashoda, ii. A4
Gutu, ii. Ba
wady Haifa, i. A3
wady Haminamat, i. 62
el-Hejaz, ii. B3
Heta, ii. A2 (HITTITES)
Hierasycaminus, i. A3
Ibrim, i. A3
el-Khartum, i. A4 (ETHIOPIA, 4, 5 a)
Khor, ii. A2
Kordofan, ii. A4 (ETHIOPIA, 5 a)
Korosko, i. A3
Korti, i. AS
Ko s, ii. A3 (EGYPT, 50)
Kummeh, i. A3 (EGYPT. 50)
el-Kurneh (Pyramid), i. A4
Libyans, ii. A.2, 3
Lullu, ii. 82
Mallus, ii. A2
Mazay, i. B4, ii. A4 (ETHIOPIA)
Mecca, ii. 83
el-Medina, ii. 63
Medum (Pyramid), i. As
Memphis, i. A2
Meroe, i. 64 (ETHIOPIA, 5 1>)
Mittani, ii. B2
Negroes, ii. A4, 5
Niiri (Pyramid), i. A4
Oases (five), ii. A3 (EGYPT, 4)
Pnubs, i. A3
Port Said, i. Ai
Punt, i. B3, ii. A^, 4 (EGYPT, 48)
Pselchis, i. A3
Rosetta, i. Ar
Ruins, i. A4
Ruins, i. A4
Ruins, i. A4
Ruins, i. 64
Ruins, i. B4
Semneh, i. A3 (EGYPT, 50; ETHIOPIA,
4)
Sennar, ii. A4 (ETHIOPIA, 4)
Shaba, ii. 64
J. Silsileh, i. A3
Soleb, i. A3
Somali, ii. B4 (EGYPT, 48)
nahr Subat, ii. AS
Suez, i. A2
Tankassi (Pyramid), i. A4
Thebce, i. A2
Timsah (L. ), i. Ai
Troglodytae, i. Ba, 3 (ETHIOPIA, 4)
L. Victoria, ii. AS
Wawat, i. A3, ii. A3 (EGYPT, 50,
ETHIOPIA, 2)
White Nile, ii. A4
Edfu, i. A2
Naharin, ii. Ba (ARAM-NAHARAIM)
Zahi, ii. A.2
I. VALLEY OF NILE
II. NILE AND EUPHRATES
. ady Haifa
id.Caiaract)
En s lish Miles
9 .... 5,0 .19
Reference to lettering in Maps
I. and II:-
Biblical Names -CUSH
Arabic Asyut
Egyptian JiVawat
Classical ABYDOS
Modern. ....(Cairo)
A East of38Greenwicl
III. GEOLOGY
OF
EGYPT AND SINAI
Alluvium
Limestone
Sandstone.
Crystalline Rocks
For index to names see back of map.
ENCYCLOPAEDIA BIBLICA.IQOt.
II alter & Cocterell sc.
EGYPT
ate 1 only a few tamarisks (ose\_i], cp WN), willows,
and, especially, various kinds of acacias (sonsef uiONT ,
cp nap, Egyptian loan-word ; see SHITTAH) grew.
Timber had mostly to be imported from Nubia and
Syria. As principal fuel, dung was used, as now. The
vine was always cultivated ; but the national beverage
was a kind of beer. The chief cereals were barley (yot),
most important of all, wheat (SHO), and the African millet
or sorghum, now called dura (bodef). Cp Ex. 9si/. flax,
barley, wheat, spelt (this perhaps for dura ?). The
principal food-stuffs of the modern inhabitants, legumin
ous plants viz., lentils (Egyptian arsan), and beans
(Egyptian////), perhaps also peas (Coptic <\poo). lupines,
and chick-peas have Semitic names, and were declared
unclean by the priests even in Roman times ; but
among the peasants they had already become popular
as early as the i4th century B.C. Of vegetables, onions,
leeks, and garlic were as much in demand then as now ;
there were also radishes, melons, gourds, cucumbers,
bamia (Hibiscus esculentus ; resembles American okra),
meluhiya ( Corchorus olitorius ; a mucilaginous vegetable
[somewhat] resembling spinage ), etc. ( Cp the lamenta
tion of the Israelites over the lost delicacies of Egypt,
Nu. lls.) Of ily plants, sesame and olives were not
very popular, olive oil being mostly imported from Asia.
Unguents were taken from several balsam -shrubs, especi
ally the baket ; for cooking and burning, castor oil (see
GOURD) was most commonly in use, as now among the
Chinese. The cultivation of flax was very extensive ;
whether cotton also was grown is quite doubtful.
Wild vegetation grew only in the many marshes the
common reed (see REED, FLAG), the papyrus (see
PAPYRUS), and the beautiful blue or white lotus-flower
(so[s~\sen, from which Hebrew |BhE> ; see LILY). The
papyrus and the lotus-flower are now found only in the
Sudan. 2 All these wild plants were utilised even the
lotus, the seed of which was eaten. The papyrus, 3 in
particular, was of the greatest importance for ancient
Egypt, furnishing the material, not only for writing on,
but also for making ropes, mats, sandals, baskets, and
small ships (cp Ex. 2s ; Is. 18z ; Job926). The desert
vegetation consists mostly of a few thorny shrubs.
Of domestic animals, the ass, an African animal, was
used more as a beast of burden than for riding. Horses
. 4 (sesmet, 5 later htor), introduced by the
9. /.ooiogy. Hyksos after jgoo BC) for chariot s of
war and of pleasure, were never very common, pasture
being scarce ; but their race was good. Cp Dt. 17i6
i K. 1028/ (but see MIZRAIM, 2 ; HORSE, 3). The
biblical passages which speak of the camel in Egypt
(Gen. 12 16 Ex. 9s) seem to need criticism, for this un
clean animal was, to all appearance, foreign to ancient
Egypt and became a domestic animal only after the
Christian era (see CAMEL, 2). Cattle, of a hump
backed race, were more common than now ; likewise
goats ; but sheep (es ou, Sem. word, nb, Arab. Xd. ) were
rare. Swine (rire], the most unclean of animals, offen
sive to the Sun-god, seem to have been kept, in biblical
times, only in the nomos of Eileithyia (now el-Kab),
perhaps because of Nubian elements in the population.
In the earliest period they seem to have been more
generally bred. The dog was held in esteem. Strong
greyhounds for hunting were imported from the southern
1 That this tree, at least, was an importation from Syria
in historic times is shown by the name (k)erman i.e., }E>\ The
persea (faubet ; Coptic, soue\be\, Mimusops Schimperi, after
Schweinfurth) and other trees may have had a similar history.
2 Whether the Eragrostis abyssinica, a species of grain,
called tef in A.byssinia, the poisonous oshar (Calotropis pro-
cera), and other plants of modern times were known is uncertain,
but probable, as they are African plants.
3 Pa-p-yoor, the (plant) of the river. Cp Bondi, in ZA
3064 [ 92].
4 Not much investigated. Hartmann s studies, ZA 1864,
were not continued.
5 The word is related to o^p (Assyrian sisii, Aram, susya, etc.) ;
but the relationship is not (juite clear.
40 1209
EGYPT
countries. The cat became a domestic animal first in
Egypt (but rather late), perhaps by the side of the weasel
and ichneumon. 1
Noblemen undertook hunting expeditions into the desert
where most wild animals of Africa were found. The various
antelopes of the steppe (especially the gazelle), the oryx,- the
ibex, 2 etc., were caught and then domesticated, or, at least,
fattened at home. It is not certain whether the hare was eaten.
Of wild animals the jackal, the fox, the hyaena, and the
ichneumon reached Egypt ; in the earliest times also (but
only occasionally) the lion, the lynx, and the leopard.
The tusks of the elephant and of the rhinoceros (both
called Yebu*) were only imported from Nubia Yeb(u),
Elephantine (i.e. , ivory place ), on the first cataract,
being the emporium for this important trade. The Nile
was infested by malicious hippopotamuses 5 and
crocodiles, both now extinct. That the name Behemoth
(Job 40 15) is by no means a Hebraised Egyptian word,
as has frequently been asserted, may be noted in passing
(so, independently, BEHEMOTH, i).
The marshes were covered with innumerable birds in winter
especially wild geese, cranes, fishing birds (such as the pelican, 8
the ibis, and others), and smaller birds of passage from Europe.
The pursuit of these was both a favourite sport and a useful
occupation ; they were fattened at home, but (with the exception
of the pigeon) not domesticated. The domestic fowl became
known, it would seem, only in Greek times Diod. (1 74) and
Pliny (1054) describe hatching-ovens as in common use in their
day. Of rapacious birds, the bald-headed vulture 8 was most
common. Bats in immense numbers filled the mountain clefts.
Many kinds of fish (as also the soft tortoise, trionyx) were
obtained from the Nile, and were incredibly cheap cp C3n, for
nothing (Nu. lls; cp Is. 19s); but they are not praised by
modern travellers. Some e.g., the oxyrhynchus 9 (i.e. , sharp-
snouted ), and the na r^ (a silurus) were unclean. The later
theology, at least in ./Ethiopia, tried (though without success) to
declare all fish unclean. 11 Air-dried fish were much eaten.
Multitudes of frogs, lice, flies, scorpions, and locusts remind us
of the ten plagues. Of poisonous serpents, the uraeus ( ar at) 12
enjoyed special veneration (see SERPENT, 3).
Owing to the fertility of the country, it has always
been very thickly peopled : the present population
amounts to six millions i.e. , it exceeds
10. People.
even that of Belgium in density (cp 2).
The ancient writers who speak of 30,000 towns (!), and
seven (or even seven and a half : Jos. BJ ii. 16 4) millions
of people, somewhat exaggerate.
The race of the ancient Egyptians, who called them
selves romet, i.e., men is admirably determined in
the Table of Nations (Gen. 106), where they are
classified with the Hamites i.e. , the light - coloured
Africans. They were consequently relations ( i ) of the
Libyans (see LUBIM, LEHABIM), extending from the
Senegal to the Oasis of Sfwah, at present interrupted
by many Arab immigrants ; (2) of the Cushites (in
linguistic, not in biblical, sense), who now extend from
the desert of Upper Egypt to the equator, comprising
(a) the Bisharln and Hadendoa, (b] the Afar (Danakil),
and Saho on the coast of Abyssinia, (c) the Agaii tribes
of Abyssinia (Bogos or Bilin, Khamir, Quara), in the
S. called Siddama (Kafa, Kullo, etc.), and (d) the
Somali and Galla.
Anthropologically, the Egyptians seem to have been
more closely akin to the Cushites who all show a slight
admixture of Negro blood, received at a very remote
date than to the purely white Libyans. They were
1 jinn, later Hebrew for weasel (TSSA, 9i6i, and see
CAT), Egyptian Hatul, oeoA ichneumon (cpPSBA, 7 194
[64])
4 Compared by some scholars, following erroneous transcrip
tions, such as abu, with Heb. Q anOeO ivory. Etymological
connection is not probable.
5 6
1OT
11 Worshippers were always advised to abstain
from fish some time before appearing before the
gods to sacrifice. See below ( 19), on the laws
of purity. See FISH, 8^
EGYPT
tall and lean, with strong bones, small hands, thin
ankles, reddish -brown skin (coloured, on their own
paintings, in the case of men, dark red, and in the case
of women, yellow), with long but slightly curled black
hair, scanty beard, very slightly prognathous chin, full
lips, almond-shaped black eyes, and long (?) skulls.
Linguistically, Egyptian is not the bridge between
Libyan and Cushitic, as one might expect it to be : it
forms, rather, an independent branch. The Libyan-
Cushitic and the Egyptian branches both show affinity
with Semitic, apart from the strong Semitic influence
upon both, an influence which dates partly from pre
historic periods, partly from about 1000 B.C., and partly
from Islamic times. 1 Which branch separated itself
first from the Proto-Semites (in Arabia?) remains to be
shown. (In Egypt, however, no Asiatic immigration
can be found in historical times : see 43. ) Some
Egyptian traditions point correctly SE. , not to Nubia
(erroneous traditions of Greek time), but to the coasts
of the Red Sea i.e., Punt (see below, 48) and
indicate affinity with the Hamitic Trog(l)odytes. On
the other neighbours in the South viz., the Nigritic
Nubians see ETHIOPIA, -z/.
The language 2 was, therefore, by no means a
primitive stammering, or a monosyllabic language
T like the Chinese, as was asserted by
11. Lia gu ge. ear jj er sc holars who derived false con
ceptions from the writing. Egyptian has preserved
something of the vocalic flexibility of the Libyan and
Semitic against the agglutinative tendencies of the
Southern Hamitic languages. It shows the system of
triliterality more clearly than any other Hamitic branch.
The assertion that it contains elements from Negro
languages is unfounded : the Hamito-Semitic roots
only underwent great changes. The sounds (e.g., Ain,
h, ft, s) confirm the view of the relation of Egyptian
here adopted. The vernacular dialect used from
1400 to 1000 K.C. in letters, etc., is called by modern
scholars Neo-Egyptian. 3 The inscriptions tried more or
less to preserve the archaic style of the earliest periods
not always successfully, after 500 B.C. wretchedly.
For the rest, even the earliest language is less concise
and much less obscure than, e.g. , Hebrew. On the
many loan-words from Semitic, 4 see below 7 , 39 (end).
Coptic i.e., the language of Christian Egypt (Arabic
Kibt, Kobt] is the same language as that which used
to be written in hieroglyphics, but much changed (many
forms, e.g. , being shortened), as might be expected,
after a development of 3000 years. 5
1 Nothing trustworthy has been written on these relations,
nothing at all on the position within the Hamitic family. It
is to be wished that the only competent scholar, Prof.
Reinisch of Vienna, would address himself to this question
soon. Ethnographers (e.g., Hartmann, Die Nigritier) generally
exaeeerate the fact that all white Africans pass gradually
oerman anu n,ngusn;. rsrugscn s iiicrogiypniscn-LJcmoiiscncs
WSrterbuch, 1867-80, is the leading dictionary, but must be
used with the greatest possible caution. Those of Birch (in
Bunsen, vol. 5), Pierret, and S. Levi, cannot be recommended.
A Thesaurus verborwti sEgyptiacorutn by Erman and other
scholars is in preparation. The stage reached by Egyptian
philology is best characterised by the statement (after Erman)
that the age of deciphering is at an end, we [begin to] read.
It is, however, a great exaggeration to state, as some have done,
that we read Egyptian as a Latinist reads his Cicero. See, e.g.,
below (col. 1232, note i), on the difficulties of transliteration.
A better analogy would be the way in which good Phoenician
inscriptions are read ; but the greater excellence and abundance
of his material gives the advantage, to a considerable extent,
to the Egyptologist.
8 See Erman, Neuagyptische Gramtnatik ( 80), who has also
published a treatise on the earlier vernacular style, Die Sprache
ties Tapyrus I f estcar ( &&lt;)).
* A small collection by Bondi, Dem hebriiisch-plwnizischcn
S prachzivcige angclwrige LehnwSrter, etc., 1886. An exhaus
tive dictionary by the present writer is in preparation.
6 The standard grammar is Stern, Koptische Grain. (1880).
(Steindorf s small grammar in the Porta series [ 94] may also
be used : no older book). The best dictionary is still that of
Peyron, Lex. Lingua Copticcf, 1835 (reprinted 1896) ; but a new
EGYPT
Coptic has four principal dialects (Sahidic i.e., $a Jdl or
Upper Egyptian Middle Egyptian, represented best by the
papyri of Akhmim, Fa(i)yumic formerly wrongly called Bash-
niuric and Boheiric or Lower Egyptian), diverging sometimes
strongly ; already about 1300 B.C. a payrus states that a man from
the N. frontier cannot well understand an Egyptian from Ele
phantine. (On Coptic dialects, see further TEXT, 37).
As the vowels in ancient Egyptian were in general
not indicated, their determination, though it is sometimes
_, possible through late Egyptian (Cop-
ICB- tic), and, in the case of some proper
names (see below, col. 1232, n. i), through Greek and
other authors, cannot usually be effected with precision.
Certain grammatical terminations ( and i), however, were
sometimes indicated by the signs for the consonants iv and y, and
later the ideographic sign for the dual assumed a vocalic value
(i or I).
Foreign words, however, demanded exceptionally
complete representation of the vowels.
In the Middle Empire, accordingly, sprang up the practice of
using the symbols for w, K, and and the signs for certain
syllables ending in these consonants, to indicate the vowels
in the transliteration of foreign words, often in direct imitation of
the cuneiform vowels. This has been called the syllabic system. 1
The 24 consonants distinguished in the script were
originally the following :
) (N, not always consonantal, never = ain), I (better y, to ex
press both and [later] K ! the Middle Empire created a special
y)> i " i btfi/i ft, u, r (distinguished from /only in Demotic),
//, h, h, h (from very early times not distinguished from K), s (from
early times not distinguished from s), s, s, >fr, k,g, t, t (an unknown
sibilant), d (not, as sometimes maintained, originally = e), 2 d
(better z or /), similar to Semitic s (cp the Ethiopian s later (s).
The principles of transliteration of Semitic names
in the New Empire have not been completely explained
yet (see As. u. Eur. chap. 5); but the following
are the commonest equivalences that are not obvious.
N is represented by the /; 3 by f (K) or k; -\ by d; \ by t, s;
Bbyf(orrf); D by 1 (rarely s) ; tj by / or (never [in early texts]
initially)/; x by rf (2 or .?) ; iy by j (/) ; and y by s or (before two
consonants, etc.) s.
The hieroglyphics which constitute the national system
of writing (called the scripture of sacred words, and
_ . . said to have been invented by the god
12*. Writing. Dhout j w i; r _ a name less correctly
written Thot) have arisen from a pictographic system
very much like that of the Mexicans, just as did the
Babylonian (to which it is very strikingly analogous)
and the Chinese writing. Our rebus is based upon
the same principles.
A man Vy& (route f), a head fi\ (def), or a tree
(am) can easily be painted entirely. Wood (hct) can be
represented by a twig **^-r~ , water (inou) by three water lines
/vww>> and here we pass over more and more to symbolism
1 night by star-on-heaven ^ * , to go by legs _f\^, to
bring (inet) by a vessel + going l\ , to give (dy) by
sacrificial cake (?) in a hand
to %h ( /: ) by weapons
in use [_h J> to write (ss) by the writing materi;
Thus a great many ideas may be symbolised.
This would lead, however, to top many combinations, besides
leaving it uncertain how to read signs which admit synonymous
translations, and providing no means for the expression of any
inflection. Some further contrivances, therefore, were necessary.
Hence, just as an English pictograph might perhaps express I
by an eye J^^. , homophonous words are expressed by one
sign, heny to row \^, e.g., standing also for henu (to be)
turbulent. Thus this symbol becomes a syllabic sign, /;.
Similarly II kap, claw, is used also for kop to hide,
kope to fumigate, etc. i.e., as a syllabic sign = ty, etc.
Finally, some of these syllabic signs, consisting of only one
firm consonant, 3 came to be used for single consonants. In this
way, e.g., *^c=*^fay (three consonants, but two of them semi
vowels; in Heb. letters something like ;), slug (originally
one is a crying need (those of Tattam and Parthey are un
trustworthy).
1 Cp WMM, As. u. Eur. 58-91.
2 Finally, all sonant consonants were confounded.
3 The only exception is N s, from sts(~>), bar of a door.
The popular explanation by an acrophonic principle is incorrect.
EGYPT
EGYPT
bearer ), became the simple,/; ^d, kay, high ground (repre
senting a declivity), became the letter k, p ; and so on. By such
letters (from 24 to 26 ; Plutarch, 25), all inflections, and many
words, were written. (On the treatment of the vowels see above,
I2.)
As an additional safeguard a syllabic sign, such as
mentioned above, is commonly followed (sometimes preceded)
by an alphabetic sign (in this case an) for the sake of clearness
\ >J
V-< fyn
(thus XT hn + ). This is the so-called phonetic complement.
/WWW
The last element of the system consists of what are called de
terminatives, the method of employing which will appear from
the following examples : Thus, e.g., Tjlol means to write.
Followed by the determinative man, thus rjl i Vwi . it means
writer i.e., scribe. If we place after it a book, ll, thus
, it means writz,f i.e. , book (both words from a stem ss,
r/g^ j ( .
a > nno, but differently vocalised). Again ^jj-j) ^T^i *-f-,
an elephant + a piece of skin (where the second sign, the de
terminative, could also be omitted), means elephant (jrebu);
but in
the sign of a city indicates that Yebu, the
city (Elephantine), is meant. Similarly M marks the end of
every man s name, _w that of a woman s name ; words for small
plants receive ^Jv at the end, trees M , and so on. This is a
great help to the reader, and compensates somewhat for the
absence of vowels.
Thus a very perfect system was formed whereby, by
the employment of several thousand signs (of which,
HIERATIC.
,LYPHIC EMPIRE
D
a
*
B
n
a
lii
a
n
a
J
DEM
OTIC.
FIG. 2. To illustrate the development of Egyptian writing.
Partly after Erman and Krebs.
however, only a few hundred were in common use),
anything whatever might be expressed a complicated
system, it is true, but not so complicated and ambiguous
as, e.g. , the later Babylonian cuneiform writing. The
accomplishments of reading and writing were not rare. 1
The hieroglyphs, or sculptured writing-signs, were
admirably suited for monumental and ornamental
purposes ; but when used for writing books upon
papyrus, they had to be abridged and adapted to the
pen, exactly as our written letters differ from the printed
forms, (i. ) Thus the picture of a lion
1 Such papyri of non-magic character as are found in the
tombs are mostly old copy-books used by the deceased in
their schoolboy days. The mention of women bringing the
meals for their sons to the school proves that the poor also
aspired to the advantages of education.
2 This word may be taken as an illustration of the old con-
1213
became in cursive writing y , the man Vfp, C^ , and
so on. This is called Hieratic writing so called as
being, like the hieroglyphic, a sacred script, though not,
like it, designed for monumental use. (ii. ) In course
of time was developed, by the progress of abridgment,
a regular shorthand, called by the Greeks Demotic
or popular, because in their time it was the style of
writing used in daily life. 1 It is also called epis-
tolographic, or letter-style (Egyptian shay-en-$ay). In
this script the lion becomes / or / . The illustration
(fig. 2) gives three letter signs and two word signs : in
hieroglyphs, in five forms of hieratic, and in demotic.
All cursive writing runs from right to left (like
Heb. etc. ), hieroglyphics in both directions (though
never bustrophedon) ; but originally both ran mostly
from top to bottom, like the oldest Babylonian and like
Chinese. The opinion 2 that the Semitic (Phoenician)
letters were derived from the hieratic script has become
very popular, but is in every way improbable. The
latest hieroglyphic inscription is one at Esneh, giving
the name of the Roman emperor Decius (250 A. D. ) ; the
latest demotic text is one at Philae, dated 453 A. D. If
the earliest translations of the Christian Scriptures into
Coptic i.e. , Egyptian in its latest form were made, as
is usually assumed, about 200 A. D., 3 there should be
a continuous tradition. As a living language, Coptic
died out about 1500 A. D. ; at present only a very few,
even of the Coptic priests, possess any understanding of
the Coptic liturgic service. Coptic is written with
Greek letters and six demotic signs ( CJ f, <gK h,
O h, *. dj, O gj [a palatal sound of doubtful
value, later pronounced like //or ^.], ft- ii}.*
The knowledge of the earlier systems of writing was com
pletely lost, 5 after the whole country was subjected to
Christianity. The key to the decipherment of the hiero
glyphic and demotic was at last recovered by F. Champqllion 6
in 1822, by the help of the Rosetta stone with its trilingual
inscription (a decree of Ptolemy V. Epiphanes in Egyptian [in
hieroglyphic and demotic characters] and in Greek ; found in 1799,
now in the Brit. Mus.). Thus the decipherment was indirectly a
consequence of Napoleon s expedition to Egypt in 1798.
The chief writing material of ancient Egypt was papyrus,
a kind of paper made from papyrus stalks, which were sliced,
beaten, and pasted together. Its colour was brown or
yellowish brown. The chief defect was its brittleness ; never
theless, the writing was often washed off and the papyrus
used again. Both sides could be written on. Red ink marked
divisions and corrections, as in mediaeval MSS. Books were
in roll form. (Among the Hebrews the same writing material was
in common use : cp Jer. 8023.) Documents of great importance
were written on leather, drafts mostly on potsherds (pstraca).
The religion 7 of Ancient Egypt, always retaining so
many remnants of barbarous primitive times, stands in
_ . ... striking contrast to the high civilisation
13. rrmutive of tha{ country Originally it was not
gion. ver Different from the low animism or
nection between Hamitic and Semitic (cp n) ; it is prehistoric
in Egyptian and may have sounded lawe(). Cp Hamitic lubak
(Saho and Afar), libdh (Somali), with Semitic lain lion (which
migrated back to Egypt as A&BOl), Heb. N 27.
1 The Demotische Gram, of H. Brugsch ( 55) is quite anti
quated. The scholar who has paid most attention to demotic
lately is E. Revillout {Chrtstomathit Demotique, etc. ; to be
used with caution).
hieroglyphic letters. See WRITING.
3 See, however, TEXT, 36, 38, where a later date (circa 300)
is argued for.
4 Dialects preserve the ancient /; <JJ "^ as ^^
5 The few traditions about the hieroglyphics found in Greek
writers (especially Horapollo, Hieroglyphica)s.rzno\\ recognised
as being all more or less correct ; but for the decipherment they
were in various respects insufficient.
6 The attempts of Th. Young (1819), which came near finding
the key, but nevertheless missed it, have been well estimated by
Le Page Renouf, PSBA Ifi88 [ 96].
7 Le Page Renouf, Lect. on the Origin and ..Growth of
Religion [ 82] ; Wiedemann, Die Rel. der alien Agyfter ( 90,
1214
EGYPT
fetishism of the negro races. Every locality had its
own spirit haunting it.
Such a demon appeared here as a jackal, there as a lion, bird,
frog, or snake, or in a tree or a rock. We can understand why, in
the lakes of the Fa(i)yiim and in the whirlpool of the first cataract
at Elephantine, a crocodile was the local deity (Sobk and Hnumu) ;
why the god Amip(u), leading the dead to Hades, originally (it
would seem) in the Memphitic (!) necropolis, was the black jackal
of the desert ; and so on. We cannot easily understand, however,
why , at Busiris, a wooden fetish of strange form, 1 the Dad, signified
the highest local god, and why at a later date a he-goat represented
there the soul(?) of the Dedi (Bi-n-ded[i], MfVfys Dedi
meaning inhabitant of the Dad"), or why the earliest symbol of
Osiris was a wine(V)-skin on a pole 2 (which caused the Greeks
to identify this dead god with their joyful Bacchus), and so on.
Originally, sun, moon, and stars were considered to
be divine ; but, with the exception of the sun-god Re , 3
the local gods had more temples and enjoyed more
worship and sacrifices. At Memphis, the chief god was
Ptah,* styled by his own priests the master-artisan,
and, therefore, the creator, who with his hammer opened
the chaotic egg-shaped world ; but even the western
suburb of the city belonged to a different god, Sokari,
a hawk sitting in a sledge shaped like a ship. 5 Thus
the gods were almost innumerable in the earliest times.
Their forms (human, animal, or mixed), colours (Xeith
is green, Amon blue, and so on), symbols, etc., are of
perplexing variety.
Fortunately, the superior splendour of the deities in the
large cities, with their great temples, led to the worship
of the tutelary gods of the villages and
14. unanges. snia u towns being more and more
abandoned. Am(m)on, 9 .j r . , the god of the later capital
Thebes (called NO-AMON \_q.v. ~\, Amon s city, in the
OT), thus became the official god, and so the highest
in the whole kingdom, circa 1600 B.C. (sacred animal
the ram). The Egyptians themselves, indeed, seem to
have been puzzled by their endless pantheon. They tried
to reduce it by identifying minor divinities with great
and popular ones, treating them as one being under
different appearances e.g. , the lion -headed Sohmet
(wrongly called Sehet or Paht) 7 of Leontopolis and the
cat of Bubastus were identified, the one being explained
as the warlike, the other as the benevolent, form. Very
old is the system of uniting several local gods into a
family, usually as father, mother, and child (in Thebes,
e.g. , the solar Amon and Miit, and the lunar Honsit].
Subsequently, out of such triads, circles especially of
nine divinities (enneads) were formed, and whole
genealogies elaborated.
Even in prehistoric times, the progress of thought
showed itself in the tendency to make forces of nature,
especially solar divinities, out of the old meaningless
fetishes ; but these attempts did not lead to a reason
able, complete system.
To enumerate some of the earliest results : Osiris 8 of Abydos
becomes, as the setting sun, the god of the lower world, king
and judge of the dead. In this function he is assisted by the
Moon-god Thout (Dhouti), an ibis or an ibis-headed god 9 origin-
ET g6; useful), brief; also Brugsch, Rel. K. Myth. [1884-88]
(the fullest, but labouring under the great defect of following by
preference the systems of the latest Egyptian theology) ; Lie-
blein, Egyptian Rel. [ 84] ; Maspero, La myth. gyptiennc [ 89 ;
critical]; Petrie, Religion and Conscience in Anc. Egypt
[ 98]; Lange in Chantepie de la Saussaye, Rel.-gesch.V}, vol. i.
For pictures the best work of reference is Lanzone, Dizionario di
MitohgiaEgizia [ 8i](cp alsoChampollion, PantheonEg., 25).
On vocalisation, see below, 40 n.
The Tomb of Osiris, discovered near Abydos in i? . .
is an ancient royal tomb. According to some scholars,
Osiris is mentioned as "TDK (read * TDK) in Is. 10 4,
and Apis as *F)n in Jer. 4615. On these readings see notes
in Heb. edition of SSOT. Cp also AHIRA, PHINEHAS, ASSIR,
APIS, HUK, HARNEMIER, and NAMES, 68.
1215
EGYPT
ally god of Hermopolis who becomes a god of wisdom and
writing. Aim bis ! assists, leading the dead to OsirU, like
Hermes Psychopompos. Osiris himself (son of the goddess
Nut) had been sent down to the dark region i.e., murdered by
his wicked brother Set, 2rj0 (Typhon in Greek), the local god of
N. Ombos, 2 who is figured as a poorly-sculptured ass(V). s This
malicious god, who eventually (though only very late) became
a kind of Satan, was explained as god of thunder and clouds
(therefore identified with the cloud (?)-serpent Apop), in the latest
period also as the sea or the desert i.e., all nature hostile to
man. He is punished by Hor(us)4 (of Edfu), the young son of
I sis (HCG), 5 the wife of Osiris (worshipped especially at Phila,
often identified with Sothis, the Dog-star), who reunites the body
of Osiris (the sun), hewn in pieces (the stars) by Set. The form
of the myth which makes Isis go to Phoenicia in search of Osiris
body, carried to Byblus by the Nile and the Ocean, is evidently
quite late, identifying her with Heltis-Astarte. She educates
Hor, hiding herself from Set and his seventy-two followers (later
explained as the seventy-two hottest cays) in the Delta-marshes.
Her sister Nephthys* (Nel>t-h6t) is the wife of Set and the
mother of Anubis (by Osiris).
It was this circle of divinities that gained most
popularity and became known even outside of Egypt.
Possibly it is simply by accident (?) that we possess only
fragments of the myths that grew up, representing those
connected with the Osirian circle ; the rest of the gods
might not look quite so lifeless if we knew the mythology
referring to them.
We can see under what difficulties Egyptian theology laboured.
Not only had it to admit that in the morning the sun was called
Hej>re1 (a beetle rolling its egg across the heavens), later Hor (a
cleity of whom there are seven forms), at noon AV, 8 both Hor
and Re being hawks and evidently representing the sun flying
across the heavens, and in the evening Atuin (at Heliopolis,
where he was represented in human form sailing in a ship across
the heavenly ocean) ; but it had also to acknowledge that
other solar divinities were appearances of the same being.
Some were cosmical gods
Nun (Nouv) or Nuu is the abyss from whom all gods and
things came chaos. The earth is the god Seb (or Ceb !) ; the
heaven or celestial ocean bows herself over him as a goddess,^
Nut; w their child is the sun ( = Osiris). The space between
them is the god Su (Sow, 2ws), a lion. His companion, Te/nut,
represents, perhaps, the celestial moisture.
Other gods assume other special functions
On Thout (Dhouti, moon) and Ptah as protectors of scribes and
scholars and of artisans and builders, see above ( i -26, 1 3). Imhotep
of Memphis was the god of physicians. Ithyphallic Min 11
became a harvest deity, like the serpent Remute(t), and as god
of Coptos, the master of the Trog(l)odytes in the Nubian desert,
just as Neit of Sais 12 ruled over the Libyans. The cow Hat-
/tar (i.e., abode of the Sun-god) 13 became mistress of love and joy,
but showed her solar nature in ruling all Eastern countries.
Warlike gods were Onhur of This, Mantu of Hermonthis, and
above all, the malicious Set, whose worship was abandoned more
and more after 1000 B.C. (see above [first small type passage
in this section]). This distribution of functions, however,
is so contradictory that nowhere does an intelligent system
result.
The sacred animals belonged to two categories
Some, such as the black bull called Apis 14 (IJapi) at Memphis,
that called Mnevis at Heliopolis, and the crocodile Sobk (Sovxos),
were considered miraculous incarnations of the local god (pure
fetishism) ; but at other places every cat was sacred (as at
Bubastus), 15 or every letos-fish (as at Letopolis), and so forth
(totemism?). So, while the crocodile was worshipped at some
places (e.g., Ombos), it was sometimes persecuted from a sense
of religious duty, even in a neighbouring city (as, e.g., at Edfu).
ta*
2 He must have played a most important
part in prehistoric times. The sceptre
which all divinities hold in their hands
, seems to bear his head. His sacred colour was red,
and red-haired men were despised as typhonic.
The heaven is, besides, frequently represented as a cow-,
because the abyss on which the earth in its chaotic state floated
was the cow Meht-weret.
J * (fetish aoo- ). 12 Symbol
! On a probable OT ref. to Apis see above, col. 1215, n. 8.
15 Hence the large cat cemetery near the modern Zakiizlk (now
commercially exploited for manure).
1216
EGYPT
EGYPT
The great mass of the people never advanced beyond
the traditional worship of the local idol (the town god )
_ , . . or sacred animal. Among the priests,
15. ran sm. thg most a( j vance( j thinkers came, it
is true, to the result that all gods are only different forms
of the same divine energy, a conclusion which, how
ever, did not lead them to monotheism, as might have
been expected, but to a kind of pantheism. Such ad
vanced thought remained, of course, the property of a few
educated persons, though it was not treated as a mystery.
Other rationalists followed somewhat euhemeristic lines,
treating all gods as deified pharaohs of the earliest period.
On early traces of the deluge- and the paradise-traditions,
see DELUGE, PARADISE ; of borrowing from Asia there
is here no question.
In the sphere of cosmogony no reasoned system was
ever developed : besides Ptah, the potter Hmtm(u) of
Elephantine, 1 as well as other gods, claimed to have
been creator. Nowhere can any uniform dogma be
found (cp CREATION, 8).
It is interesting that, after 1600, the Egyptians had
a strong tendency to increase their already end-
p . less pantheon by adding foreign divini-
., ties, especially gods of a warlike char-
CUltiS - acter. 2
We find the god Suteh 3 of the Hittites (not of the Hyksos ;
see 52) so popular as almost to displace Set. The Semitic
god Raspu ( lightning, f]Bh), the goddesses Anut, Astart
(rratfj;), Kedesh ( the holy one, Bhp), Beltis of BybJus-Gebal,
Aslt, Adorn, etc. were recognised. Ba al and Astarte had their
temples at Thebes and Memphis. Whether the strangely figured
Bes* was a foreign (Babylonian ? Arabian ?) divinity is doubtful.
This protector against wild animals and serpents, and patron of
dancing, music, and the cosmetic art, had at least a much earlier
cult. 5
If we find various accounts of the creation of the
world and of man, various explanations of the daily
course f ^ e sun . etc., we need not
wonder that the belief in life after
death 6 was never reduced to a dogma.
According to the opinion of later times, the dead went
down to the dark lower world (Amentet, A.fj.tvdris i.e. ,
the west), passed obstacles of every kind, opened many
closed gates, and satisfied various guardians of monstrous
form by the use of magic formulas previously placed in
the coffins for this purpose. Finally the dead man
reached the great judgment hall (iveshet) of Osiris, into
which he was introduced by Anubis. His moral life was
tested in a cross-examination by the forty-two monstrous
judges (the answers denying the forty-two cardinal sins 7
were ready prepared in his magic book), and by the
weighing of his heart in the balance of Me it, the
goddess of justice. 8 Those who were declared to be
wicked were sent to a hell full of flames, and were
tortured by evil spirits (some seem to have supposed
that they assumed the form of unclean animals). The
good were admitted to the fields of Aaru- (or YaaruJ)
plants, where they sowed and reaped on fields irrigated
by the Nile of Hades. Small figures of slaves, or rather
substitutes for the dead, made of porcelain or other
material, were placed in the coffin to assist the deceased
in this peasant life. Originally it may have been only
persons belonging to the highest classes who claimed
to ascend to heaven upon the ladder of the Sun-god,
and to become companions of the sun during his daily
voyage over the heavenly ocean ; but, later, this was
anticipated for every one who should be found pure.
2 See Ed. Meyer, ZDMG 31 717 [ 77] ; WMM
As. u. Eur.
17 life after
death
3 On his representations see Griffith, PSBA
168 7 [ 94].
5 But Hat-hor has nothing to do with Astar ; nor
has the (Nubian?) deity Anuket f at Elephan
tine anything to do with Onka, a )| as Semitists
have sometimes asserted. \\
6 Wiedemann, The Ancient Egyptian Doctrine of t!ie Im-
m -rtality of the Soul ( 95), a popular manual by
E A. W. Budge, etc.
7 Murder, adultery, slander, theft, fraud, robbery
of the dead, sacrilege, etc.
1217
Every deceased person was even expected to become
Osiris himself, and is addressed as Osiris So-and-So.
The dead were allowed to visit the earth occasionally
not at night but in the day-time assuming the form of
different animals. 1 At night they returned to their
tombs, or to the lower world, places which are rarely
distinguished in a clear way.
Various conflicting doctrines are intermingled e.g., the belief
that the souls of the departed are the stars or dwell in the stars
(which are by others explained as the dispersed members of the
slain Sun-god Osiris : see above, 14), that all shadows 2 must
live in darkness and misery in the nether-world, persecuted by
evil spirits, so that it is best for the dead person to become, by
witchcraft, one of these evil monsters himself, and that the soul,
in the form of a half-human bird 3 (bat), lives in or near the
grave, hungry, and dependent entirely upon the offerings of
food and drink deposited at the tomb. Sometimes the oases of
the Western desert are identified with the fields of the dead.
The Egyptian priests never put themselves to any trouble to
harmonise these and other contradictory traditions ; they con
tented themselves rather with providing that magic formulas
and prayers adapted to each of them were made and collected.
On these collections, see below, 20.
The care bestowed upon the worship of the dead is
very remarkable. The huge pyramids of the most
ia W V anc ent kings, the detached tombs of
of thedead P their officials < now called ^ Eg y pt -
legists mastabas an Arabic word), the
interior of which was covered with sculptures, and the
long rock-galleries, especially at Thebes, testify that the
Egyptians devoted greater zeal than any other nation on
earth to the abodes and the memory of their dead, and
to the sustenance of their souls by sacrifices. This
care is shown also in the practice of embalming ; * cp
EMBALMING.
Originally only the nobles were able to pay for mummifica
tion, with its costly spices (and natron) and its skilful wrapping
in layers of linen, by which means some mummies have sur
vived 4000 years without great change. Later, however,
cheaper methods, such as dipping the body into hot asphalt,
made the custom almost universal. The forty days of embalm
ing (Gen. 50 3) after removal of the intestines (which were then
placed in the four jars, erroneously called canopes, representing
often four tutelary demons) and the brain, and the seventy days
of lamenting, are usual. The face was frequently gilt ; the
wrapped body was put in one or two cases of wood or carton-
nage, of human form, more or less painted and ornamented ;
wealthy people enclosed these, again, in large stone sarcophagi.
All this seems to point to a primitive belief that the
soul would live only as long as the body existed, though
this is indeed nowhere expressly stated. Later, the
reason was given that the soul liked to be near the
body, and would sometimes even return into it or into
a statue of the dead. The distinction between the soul
(bai], the shadow (haibef), and the double (ka] which
always accompanies a man in life and seems to receive
the soul after death, was by no means clear even to
Egyptian dogmatists, and is quite obscure for us.
The tombs had annexed to them a chapel for offering
to the statue of the ka, 6 which stood in an adjoining
small, dark room, the latter connected with the chapel
by a small window or hole in order to let the smell of
incense, etc. , penetrate to the soul in the statue.
Besides real offerings, pictures of food were given ; these
had the advantage of durability, and were, by the help of
magic, as efficacious as real bread and meat. Often a basin
of water before the tomb furnished drink for the soul, and
trees were planted round it, that the soul might sit under their
shady branches. The sarcophagus was deposited in a pit,
which was filled up with stones and sand (except in the case of
rock tombs, already safe enough). The poor were, of course,
less luxuriously housed. They were massed in simple pits
leased by undertakers. All tombs were situated in the desert,
the arable land being much too scarce and costly.
Whilst it can hardly be proved that the religious ideas
of the Egyptians ever influenced the belief of the Hebrews
(the so-called golden calves [see CALF,
2] were certainly no imitation of the
Apis cult, all kinds of animals being sacred at one place
or another in Egypt), it cannot well be denied that the
1 This was misunderstood by the Greeks. A migration of
souls in the Indian sense was unknown to the Egyptians.
2 Ci 3 6\ 4 See The Mummy, by E. A. Wallis
iv\ Kudge, 1893.
&fflfc 50r; ^LJ.
1218
19. Ritual.
EGYPT
ritual laws and laws of purity of the Hebrews often
seem to follow the analogy of the later Egyptian customs.
The priests had to observe scrupulous cleanliness, to
shave all hair (hence their bald heads, imitated in the
Roman tonsure), to wear only linen, and to abstain
from all unclean food, this being very much the same as
among the Hebrews. 1 See above ( 9) on the unclean-
ness (especially) of the swine.
Some parts of every animal (the head ?) were forbidden. Eggs
were not to be eaten. Contact with dead bodies defiled, notwith
standing the cult of the dead. Embalmers, therefore, were
unclean. Circumcision, for which, as for all ritual purposes,
only stone knives were to be used (cp Josh. 5 2), was general
for both sexes from time immemorial (see CIRCUMCISION). The
method of killing and offering animals, the burning of incense
(upon bronze censers of ladle form 2 ), the ablutions, and many
other ritualistic details, were similar to those practised among the
Israelites. Human sacrifices occurred in the earlier times (see
ISAAC) ; later, cakes in human form seem to have been sub
stituted.
The priests, called the pure, 3 u lb(u), formed a
well -organised hierarchy in four (later five) classes
(<j>v\a.l), with many degrees, from the common priest
to the high-priest ruling over the principal temple of
the nomos or over the temples of several nomes. 4 The
priestly career seems to have been open, theoretically, to
every boy of Egyptian descent who studied the canon of
sacred books (forty-two, according to Greek tradition) in
the temple-school ; whether this was the case in practice
we do not know. The highest dignities at least were
more or less in the hands of certain families of the
aristocracy. 5 Women were not admitted to the regular
priesthood. Priestesses appear later only under the title
of singers of the divinity. They formed the choirs.
The religious literature was not so rich as the masses
of manuscripts from the tombs might lead one to suppose.
. _ .. . The catalogue of the library of the
20. USURIOUS , , r* ,r
... . large temple at Edfu enumerates only
1 a ure< thirty -six books, mostly ritualistic.
The earliest texts would be the old books from which
come the inscriptions (of about 3000 lines) in five
pyramids belonging to dynasties 5 and 6 (see below,
46) which were opened in 1881. More than any other
religious texts, they bear a magical character. After
2000 B.C. another large collection came into use, the
1 Book of going out in daytime, now commonly called
the Book of the dead. 6 This is not a theological
compendium, the Bible of the Ancient Egyptians, as
it has been very unsuitably designated. It contains
mostly magic formulae, often of a very nonsensical
character, for the protection and guidance of the dead
in the lower world, and the confusion of doctrines of
which we spoke above. Thousands of copies some
over a hundred feet long and with very elaborate pictures,
and others brief extracts, giving one or two of the
chapters are among the chief attractions of our
museums of antiquities. 7
1 These laws were less scrupulously observed in earlier times.
See above ( 9 n.) on the restrictions with regard to fish. Those
offering sacrifices had to abstain also from game, evidently be
cause it was not properly bled.
3
* The Ptolemaic documents and Clem. Alex., Strom. VI.,
would give us the following classification : high priest, prophet,
stolist (superintending the clothing of the idols and the offerings),
two classes of sacred scribes (the higher one being that of the
irrepo<6poi or feather- wearers), the horoscopist (the name has
been wrongly explained as meaning astronomer ; the correct
meaning seems to be a priest officiating only occasionally ), the
singer. This classification is neither exhaustive nor applicable
to earlier times.
5 The fact of the king officiating as priest at sacrifices confirms
the view that there was no priestly caste.
6 De Rouge incorrectly called it le rituel funeraire.
7 The text was published after very late and bad copies by
Lepsius and De Rouge (both reprinted by Davis, 94). Of fac
similes in colours the Papyrus of Ani in the Brit. Mus. ( 93,
etc.) is best known (also Deveria, Pap. Sutimes, a copy in
Leemans, Monuments; Pap. Nebked, etc.). The great edition
of Naville ( 86) has shown the immense textual corruption of
all manuscripts, which leaves much work to future scholars.
Best translation by Le Page Renouf, The Egyptian Book of the
1219
EGYPT
The Book of respiration (Tay n sonsen), the book May tny
name flourish, and the Book of passing through eternity \ are
shorter imitations. The large Book of that ivhich is in the nether
world (atni-duat, Lanzone [ 79] 2) a very fanciful and mysterious
book, more of pictures than of texts, which ornaments many sar
cophagi still awaits a critical edition (abridg. version, Jequier).
The scientific side of theology is represented by a
fragment of a commentary (Berlin); other commentaries,
consisting of symbolical expositions, form part of the
ttuok of the Dead (ch. 17). Sacred geography was a
favourite study (Pap. of Tanis and of Lake Moeris). 3
Rituals such as that for burial (ed. Schiaparelli, 82),
that for embalming (Maspero), and that for the cult of
Amon and Mut (Berlin) are found, and many hymns in
praise of gods or temples. They are of little originality. 4
On contemplative and speculative religion not one line
has been preserved, and certainly there was not much of it.
The priests were too content with the old traditions.
The didactic literature bears a practical character and
is entirely secular. The Exhortations of Any (Pap.
, TV-J A- Bulak 4, transl. by Chabas in / E evpto-
21. Didactic , . ,, , , , ,
, logie ; also by Amelmeau in La Morale
literature. gy p t ^ are a really beautiful collection
of moral rules. Small demotic ethical papyri have been
published by Pierret and Revillout. 5
The Praise of Scholastic Studies (Pap. Sallier 2,
Anast. 7) is full of sarcastic humour, but too prosy for
modern taste ; the Papyrus Prisse (Chabas, Virey,
partly Griffith ; see f Vorld s Best Lit. 5327) is of stilted
obscurity. All these works belong to the classical
period of the Middle Empire.
Several later imitations of the Praise of Scholastic Studies
were frequently used as copying exercises for schoolboys, in
order to instil love of study. For the rest, the many school-
books contain .exercises of rhetorical aim. The Story of the
Eloquent Peasant (Griffith it,), and The Man tired of Life
(Erman [ 96]) belong to this category.
We see from inscriptions and other representations
that the Egyptians had a tolerable knowledge of
22. Science, astronomy-the high priest of Heliopolis
was called the chief astronomer. We
owe to them our modern (Julian) calendar ; but they
themselves used in common life a year of twelve months
(of thirty days each) and five epagomena, or additional
days (without any intercalation). The astronomical
year, called Sothic because marked by the rising of
Sothis (Sirius), was known, but not in popular use. 7
Ptolemy III. found a reform of the calendar to be an urgent
need. His attempt to effect it, however, in 238 B.C., proved a
failure. Much superstition in regard to these matters is dis
cernible ; cp the Calentiar of lucky and unlucky days (transl.
Chabas, 70). The hours were determined by observing the
position of the celestial bodies with the instrument figured
below. 8 No scientific astronomical work has come down
to us ; but we have a mathematical handbook (London, ed.
Eisenlohr) which shows that the Egyptians were not so far
advanced in mathematics as, e.g., the Babylonians. 9 High
admiration of Egyptian medicine was shown throughout the
ancient world, and even mediaeval medicine is full of Egyptian
elements. 111 The medical papyri (Berlin ed. Brugsch ; un-
Dead, 06 (those by Birch, "67, and Pierret, 82, are antiquated ;
Budge, 98, is less critical).
1 These three books have been edited by Brugsch, Lieblein,
and Von Bergmann respectively.
2 Also in Bonomi, Sarcophagits of Oitneneptah ( 64), and
(from the walls of the royal tombs) Mission franc. II. and III.
3 Petrie and Mariette ; the second discussed by Brugsch and
Pleyte.
4 That on Amon, translated by Grebaut, is considered the
best. It is, however, anything but an original composition. It
is reprinted in RP 2 121. (This English work gives translations
of almost the whole literature of Egypt ; but in the first series
these are often of very questionable character. The second
series shows improvement in this respect. Excellent translations
by Griffith of a large part of the Egyptian literature have just
appeared in The World s Best Literature [1897], p. 5225^ [the
hymn in question, p. 5309].
8 In Rec. de Trar. 1, and Rn;. Egypt. 1.
6 Transl. by Maspero in his Etudes sur If genre fpistolaire.
7 The astronomical and the common year coincided every
1460 years a so-called Sothic period (see CHRONOLOGY, 19).
g | j^__- ] * Arithmetical fragments also in Griffith s
T Kahun papyri.
lo Shown first by Le Page Renouf, ZA 11 123
[ 73]. How this came (through the Arabs?) is discussed by G.
Ebers, ZA 33 i [ 95].
EGYPT
EGYPT
published MSS ot Berlin and London ; treatises on female
diseases and veterinary art in Griffith s Kahun papyri ; above
all, the great papyrus Ebers at Leipsic, written about 1600 B.C.)
show, however, little practical knowledge, and a surprising
ignorance of anatomy, as against an abundance of superstition
and silly sorcery. 1
There are a good many books of magic (with many
religious and some medical elements) partly lawful
TVT ma g c ( C P> *> Chabas, Le pap. Magique
Harris, 57), partly forbidden witchcraft
( Leyden ). The latter was threatened with capital punish
ment (cp pap. Lee). Thus we see that the country of
Jannes and Jambres (2 Tim. 3 8) was the true home of all
kinds of magic (Is. 19s). It would be quite wrong,
however, to ascribe the miracles performed by the
pharaoh s magicians (Ex. 7, etc. ) to anything else than
jugglery (see SERPENT, 30), for there was far less
knowledge of natural science in Egypt than, e.g. , in
Greece.
Even historiography was not highly developed.
There were chronicles of single reigns a panegyric
_.. . specimen has been preserved in the great
* papyrus Harris I. , referring to Ramses III.
(about the largest papyrus in existence ;
ed. Birch) ; on the lists of kings see below, 41 ; but
no larger works of
scientific character were
in the hands of ManStho
when he undertook to
compose a history of
Egypt for the Greeks
(see below, 41 ). The
poverty of his material
forced him to use even
popular novels as
sources. Nor was
grammar ever studied
in a scientific way, or
textual criticism ap
plied to the sacred
writings. All literary
works were, accord
ingly, more exposed to
corruption than they
were in any other
country of antiquity.
If we find all ancient
nations filled with bound
less admiration for Egyp-
tian science, 2 we can ac
count for this only by the
mysterious difficulty of all
Egyptian writing, into the
secrets of which a foreigner
could rarely penetrate.
In fact, the Babylonians as well as the Greeks were far superior
to the Egyptians in everything that required serious thinking.
What Egypt produced, however, in the way of litera
ture designed to amuse and entertain is worthy of our
OK To loo ST.A highest admiration. The number of
<iO. J.O.16S cillCl r -r i . -, .. ,,
etrv fanciful tales, very similar to those of
the Arabian Nights, and of historical
novels (with much imagination and little true history) is
considerable, 3 and some e.g. , that of The Doomed
Prince (a papyrus in London) are of charming form.
Moreover, in their popular poetry, especially in their
love songs, the Egyptians come much nearer to our
taste than do most oriental peoples. 4 Many hymns
in praise of kings and their deeds have survived. The
only attempt at an epic, however, is the song, inscribed
upon so many temple walls, commemorating the battle
1 They seem to show that Herodotus s assertion about special
ists for every part of the body is exaggerated.
2 Soine_ find evidence of this also in the apparent pride with
which it is stated that Joseph had married a priest s daughter
from On. See also i K. 4 30 [5 10] Acts 7 22.
3 They need not be enumerated here, as they can be consulted
easily in the collections of Maspero, Contes pop. de FEgypte
anc. [ 82], and Petrie, Egyptian Tales [ 95].
4 Collected by Maspero, Journ. As. [ 83], and by WMM,
Die Liebespoesie der alien Agypter [ 99].
FIG. 3. Asiatics bringing tribute ; a painting (fragment) in the
British Museum.
of Kadesh, won by Ramses II. ; for modern taste it
lacks vigour and is too long. The other eulogies do
not come up to it.
A satirical poem on bad minstrels, 1 and a collection of stories
on animals, embodying ^Esopic fables (which seems to show that
these fables originated, possibly, in Egypt), are to be found
only in demotic copies. All poetry followed the parallelism of
members (like Hebrew poetry) and certain rude rhythms (count
ing only words with full accent, and disregarding the number of
syllables) ; it sometimes observed alliteration, but never rhyme.
Much more may be expected from recent finds.
Of the music connected with this poetry we cannot say much.
All oriental instruments were known the simple monochord, 2
the large harp, s the flute, the tambourine, etc. Clapping of
26 Music nan cls and shaking of the sistrum (ereio-Tpoi , a
metal rattle) 4 accompanied the simple tunes.
The professional musicians were mostly blind men. See Music.
The government was the most absolute monarchy
known to antiquity. The despotic power of the king
27 Go rn was S reatest; m dynasties 4 to 5 and 18
, to 20 (also 26) the periods of complete
centralisation. On the decentralising
tendencies of the counts or nomarchs (hereditary under
weaker dynasties), and on the changing royal residences
etc., see below, 41^ The most influential officer of
the kingdom, the administrator of the whole empire, or
grand-vizier, was the
erpati. The (a ti had
the general adminis
tration of justice.
Among the titles of
courtiers that of Fan-
bearer at the left of the
king" carried with it the
greatest honour. After
dynasty 18 the cup-bear
ers (wate, uba) of the
king, although often only
foreign slaves, became as
influential as the Mamluks
of the Middle Ages, be
cause they were charged
with the most confidential
commissions. The titles
of the court and of the
officials of the royal
palace, harem, stable,
kitchen, brewery, etc., are
just as abundant as the
offices for the administra
tion of the country and
its counties (f.g., royal
scribes, inspectors of the
granaries, clerks of the
soldiers, scribe of the
nomos, etc.). Most of
these scribes were at the
same time priests. The
king generally gave aud
iences from a balcony of
the palace.
Of the laws we do not know much. We have
sufficient material in the shape of legal documents only
_ , in demotic papyri from dynasty 26 down-
wards. 5 These documents are based upon
the code of laws given or collected by the great legislator
Bocchoris (about 730 B.C. ; see below, 65).
Former institutions are less known. 6 We find (only
after 2000 B.C.) the remarkable institution of the jury, 7
a committee of officers and priests i.e. , educated men
appointed by the government for every day to sit in
judgment. They were paid by the litigants.
On criminal law 8 we possess acts relating to spoliations of
1 Ed. Revillout and Brugsch. The satirical vein of the
Egyptians is often discernible in art (see caricatures in the
papyri of Turin, partly given in Lepsius, A usiuaht) and literature.
5 Several works of E. Revillout on these Chrestomathic
Detnotiqite ( So), Nouvelle direst. Demotique, etc. The de
cipherment is in part much disputed ; cp 12. For some
earlier material, see Griffith, Kahun Papyri.
6 What Diod. writes about Egyptian laws is not all certain.
On those of the Greek period, see Wessely, SIVA IV, Bd. 124,
Abh. 9.
7 Earlier inscriptions speak of thirty judges for the country.
8 Spiegelberg, Stud. u. Mat. zuin Rechtsivesen ( 92).
EGYPT
EGYPT
tombs, to conspiracy against the king, and to forbidden sorcery.
Criminals were examined by means of torture and blows. The
rod was used as much as the kurbaj is at present. Bastinado (up
to 100 strokes) upon hands and feet, cutting off the nose and
the ears, deportation to frontier places (khinocolura, e.g., see
EGYPT, RIVER OF, g i had its name from the exiles with muti
lated noses ), to the oases, or to the gold mines in the glowing
Nubian desert, and impalement ( hanged, KV of Gen. 4022 is
incorrect), were the punishments. In the case of persons of higher
rank suicide was allowed to take the place of capital punishment.
In civil law, we are struck with the fact that woman
was on a perfect equality with man and occupied a higher
position than she did in almost any other country of the
ancient world. For example, a married woman could
hold property of her own, and might lend from it to her
husband upon good security, such as his house.
In marriage, the greatest divergence from later Hebrew
custom was in sister-marriage, which in Egypt was as
__ . common as marrying the cousin is among
29. marriage. the Semites The ma j or ity had their
sisters as wives : there seem to have been no forbidden
degrees of relationship. Polygamy was permitted, but
occurred rarely. Marriage was usually concluded on
the basis of a financial agreement, such high indemnities
being fixed for the wife in case of divorce or polygamy
judge by the many complaints, the great host of officers
in the service of the king or the temples were even
more corrupt than the bureaucracy of other oriental
states. Speaking generally, neither bravery nor honesty
seems to have been a national virtue. 1
Even in the cult of the dead strange contradictions are
visible. Paupers, of whom there were many, broke into most of
the tombs of the wealthy soon after burial, and no military
protection could prevent even the royal tombs from being
ransacked. Even the educated, who expected to be examined
by Osiris if they ever disturbed the rest of any dead person,
would often appropriate for their own mummies the property,
tomb, or equipment of a deceased person who was unprotected.
Foundations of real estate for the support of the dead i.e., for
furnishing the sacrifices never lasted long.
The best part of the population, undoubtedly, was
to be found, not in the haughty scribes and priests
(ideas for the most part coinciding), but in the peasants.
These were just as simple in their habits, just as laborious,
just as poor, and just as patient under their continual
oppression, as the modern felldhin. Most of them were
serfs of the king, or of temples, or of landowners.
Their worst oppression was the hard taskwork described in
Ex. 1. Serfs were branded with the owner s name. The
cities held a large proletariate the free working men. 2
30. Character.
FIG. 4. Ramses II. storming the Hittite fortress of Dapur
See interpretation in Erman,
that expelling her without the most serious reasons
should have become impossible. A wife with such
legal security was called mistress of the house, and
well distinguished from the concubine (called sister ).
Nobles maintained secluded harems intheAsiaticmanner;
but the wife always enjoyed as much liberty inside
and outside of the house as our women, as is shown by
the story of Potiphar s wife. 1 Veiling the face was
unknown. Adultery was followed by capital punish
ment for both offenders (contrast Gen. 39 20, J).
It will be seen, especially from our review of the
literature, that the prevalent views with regard to the
national character of the Egyptians are
erroneous. They were quite religious
(i.e. , superstitious) according to the views of such super
stitious nations as the Greeks and the Romans. Far
from being contemplative, however, they were rather
superficial not only in religion, but also in science,
literature, etc. and more inclined to the gay side of
things. We nowhere find deep thinking, everywhere
full enjoyment of life. Their art is full of humour ;
even the walls of their eternal abodes or tombs are
partly covered with drinking and playing scenes and
with jokes for inscriptions. Their morality was rather
lax. Drunkenness seems to have been not rare. To
1 Accordingly, no evidence has been found, thus far, that
eunuchs were kept. Lepsius, Dcnkm. 2 126, etc., represents
fat old men, not eunuchs. This fact has not yet been considered
in its relation to the designation of Potiphar as D lD in Gen. 39 1.
1223
{Da-pu-ni)\ from a wall picture on his temple at Thebes.
, 533. After Lepsius.
It was formerly assumed that there were castes.
This is, however, a mistake. The sons of the many
priests would naturally acquire more easily than
_. others the learning which distinguished
8> their fathers. The eldest son, too, of a
soldier inherited, with the field of his father, which was a
fief from the government, also the duty of serving as
/j.dxitAost.c. , soldier, or policeman. The tombstones,
however, frequently represent families of whom one
member was a soldier, another a priest, another an
artisan, and so on. If, in the time of Herodotus, 3 the
shepherds were despised and did not intermarry with the
rest of the people, the explanation lies in their unclean
foreign descent ( A me, Asiatic, was synonymous with
shepherd ; cp Gen. 4832). Swineherds had a still
lower position. The same may hold good of the
sailors, merchants, and interpreters of foreign origin ; at
that time, too, the soldiers were mostly descendants of
foreigners (Libyans).
Formerly, when foreign elements in the country were
few, the distinctions just referred to were less marked ;
. only the soldiers always had a strong foreign
^ element. The Egyptians were not warlike,
1 Cp the characteristic explanation in Steph. Byz. alyvirna^etv
ra navovp ya. Kal 6Ata KOI vTrovAa Trpdrrfiv.
2 Interesting accounts of great strikes of the working men
employed by the government have come down to our time. Cp
Spiegelberg, Arbeiteru. Arbeiterbczvegung (^f)^).
3 He gives seven classes ; Plato and Diodorus, five.
1224
EGYPT
and, even in the earliest times, they employed by prefer
ence mercenaries.
The first to be employed were negroes and brown Africans (the
name of the Mazoy archers from the Red Sea became synonymous
with police ); after 1500 B.C. Syrians and Europeans; after
1200 B.C., in increasing numbers, Libyans (MasawaSa, etc.), who
became the privileged mercenaries, and rebelled continually
against the competition of Carians and Greeks after 650 B.C.
(cp the mixed armies of Egypt, Jer. 4(5 9 Ezek. 27 10, etc.). The
charioteers, 1 however, were mostly Egyptians. 2 Besides small
fiefs of ground, the native soldiers seem to have received at
least their maintenance during active service. The mercenaries
had agricultural holdings also as part of their pay. Horses
and equipment were lent by the government. The officers passed
through a training school (zahabu, Semitic ?) as youths.
The national weapons were bow, throwing - stick 3
(only before 1600), war -axe, club, 4 scythe - formed
sword, 5 short spear (rarely javelin), and straight sword. 6
Apart from the shield, 7 not much armour (coats-
of-mail of leather, or thick linen, sometimes with
metal scales) was used, except in the case of the
charioteers. In sieges, the testudo and the battering-ram
of the ancients appear, but none of the complicated war-
machines used by the Assyrians. The soldiers marched
to the sound of long hand-drums and at trumpet-signals.
They were divided into regiments, each with its own
standard, usually a god or divine symbol upon
Rosellini.
Lack of personal courage made the sea-trade of the
Egyptians also very insignificant.
The import of olive oil (from Palestine), wine (from Phoenicia),
beer (Asia Minor), wood, metal, wool, etc., and the export of
grain (usually monopolised by the govern-
33. Comm6rC6. ment), linen, papyrus, small works of art in
glass, porcelain, metal, and ivory, were mostly
in the hands of the Phoenicians. Naval expeditions on the Red
Sea for incense were
rare, owing (partly) to
the great scarcity of wood
in Egypt and on the
desert coast of the Red
Sea, where the ships had
to be constructed.
Not till Persian
times did the import
ant commercial posi
tion of Egypt as
forming the connect
ing link between the
Red and the Mediter
ranean Seas, and be
tween Europe, Asia,
and Africa begin to
be realised.
The majority of the
people always had
agricultural occupa
tions. Originally, the
holdings of the priests
(and soldiers) were
exempt fromtheheavy
taxation of one-fifth
(Gen. 47 20 ff. ; see
JOSEPH ii. , 9) ; later this immunity was interfered with
because it withdrew too much from the income of the
34 Aeri S overnment - In agriculture, the most primi-
culture live implements were always used, such
as wooden hoes, 8 and ploughs 9 drawn by
oxen or by men. Such simple appliances presupposed
the softening of the ground by the yearly inundation.
The irrigation of the higher fields was likewise effected
2 Riding on horseback was unknown
as among most nations of ancient Western
Asia.
4 f\ This combines
^- X club and axe.
See AGRICULTURE,
3, fig- i-
122^
EGYPT
with simple machinery. 1 Harvesting (in March with
some growths two harvests are possible), treading out
the grain by cattle (rarely threshing with the threshing-
wain, nic). winnowing, etc., were carried out very much
in the same way as in Palestine (cp also AGRICULTURE,
2-10). On the granaries 2 see PITHOM.
The industries were highly developed. The renowned
Egyptian linen (the best kinds being called pa, fjfaffos
, , , , . a Semitic word it would seem and
35. Industries. . . T-> T \
e>&, Egyptian ses ; see LINEN) was manu
factured especially by the poor bondsmen of the temples,
shut up at certain times in an athu or workhouse for
weaving. The temples drew a large portion of their
income from this linen manufacture. Cp Is. 19g (and
v. 10, where read .Tntf with , see SHOT, ad loc.), Pr.
7i6 Ezek. 27?. In pottery only the more common
ware was made. Glass seems to have been not a
Phoenician but an Egyptian invention (cp PHOENICIA,
GLASS, i ). The so-called Egyptian porcelain or glazed
pottery (faience), mostly green or blue, in imitation of
the two most precious stones (malachite and lapis lazuli),
furnished the material for small figures, amulets (especi
ally in the form of scarabs beetles that were supposed
to bring good luck), and other ornaments, which found
their way, through the Phoenicians, westwards even to
Spain. The products of the goldsmiths, who also em
ployed enamel very skilfully, are admirable ; the ivory-
carvings were renowned. In general, the smaller articles
(utensils, ornaments, etc. ) display the best taste ; all
minute ornamentation was the delight of the Egyptians.
The art 3 of Egypt exercised a most powerful influence
upon all surrounding countries, especially upon Phoenicia,
Art wnere an imitation of the Egyptian style
became the national art. Solomon s temple
was in Egyptian style. The Egyptian ornaments, derived
from the plants and flowers of the country, especially the
lotus and papyrus,
penetrated the whole
ancient world. The
paintings 4 ( preserved
mostly as wall deco
ration) have a very
childish appearance,
from their lack of
perspective and of
shading; 5 but they
possess the merit of
great faithfulness
e.g. , in all represent
ations of animals,
foreign nations, etc.
(compare Fig. 3).
The decorative sculp
tures (rarely in
relief, mostly incised
or in a sunk relief,
always painted) ex
hibit the same odd
principles of per
spective, in accord
ance with which, e.g.,
the face was always
represented in profile, but the eye as though seen from the
front, the shoulders from the front, the legs in profile,
and so on. This was not awkwardness, but a principle
traditionally handed down from the childhood of art ;
1 Cp 7. Water-wheels cannot be proved to have been
known. The explanation of Dt. 11 10 as referring to such wheels
turned with the foot is questionable ; most probably watering
with the foot means carrying water.
2 HO 3 Consult Perrot and Chipiez, Hist, of Art
[\| Ji_y| in Anc. Egypt (ET), 2 vols. 1883; Maspero,
Egyptian A rchceology (ET), 93 ; Fl. Petrie,
Egyptian Decorative Art, 95.
4 The colours are in part made of ground glass (blue and
green), and are all very durable.
5 Petrie, Amarna, pis. i, 12, is no exception, but an imitation
in painting of sunk relief.
1226
Fir,. 6. Statue of Ramses II. at
Turin. After Riehm-Lepsius.
EGYPT
and we can still observe how some sculptors struggled
against this strait -jacket. In spite of this disad
vantage, some artists of the earliest times (dyns. 4-6)
drew scenes full of vivacity and of delicate execution,
much superior to the similar Assyrio - Babylonian and
archaic Greek sculptures (which all had, by the way,
similar perspective). Later, art became more and
more conventionalised. The superiority of the earliest
period appears also in the statues. The realism of some
of the earliest portraits was never again attained. As
early as 1600 u.c. the portraits began to lose in vigour
and to betray a suspicious similarity one to another.
The New Empire, in marked contrast with the Middle
Empire (dyn. 12), looked more to quantity than to
quality. After dynasty 26, art sank to a very low
level. (On the realism of the Reformation period, 1
and the archaic renaissance in dynasty 26, see below,
67. ) Of course, the statues (almost invariably painted)
have only a few conventional positions. The technical
FIG. 7. Ramses II. s Great Rock Temple at Abu-Simbel.
perfection, however, was always great (see Fig. 6), and
it was for a long time a mystery how diorite and basalt
could have been cut and polished with copper, bronze,
and flint instruments. It seems that for the hardest
work diamond or corundum cutters were used (see
DIAMOND, i ). (On the excellent material available for
sculptors, see above, 3. ) It may be mentioned here that
in daily life flint instruments were, for reasons of economy,
used long after 2000 B. C. The stone and the bronze ages,
therefore, coincided, and touched upon the iron age (iron
prevailing after 1000 B. C. , copper preceding the bronze). 1
The architecture is well known for its massiveness.
This was relieved by the abundance of ornaments upon
walls and pillars, and by the polychromy.
That the ornamentation was originally derived from the forms
of certain plants is seen especially in the ornamental columns -
__ *__t.j with capitals. 3 They represent the lotus-
61 Ar C*"- fl ow er both in full bloom and in bud, bundles
tecture. of papyrus, and palm-trees (often strongly con-
EGYPT
ventionalised), and betray that their origin is to be sought in ancient
wooden constructions. 1 The sloping walls show that originally Nile
mud was another material in general use for all kinds of buildings.
The arch was known from the earliest times(dyn.6?), but was rarely
used for stone structures. The elliptic arch was preferred in the
caseof buildings ofbrick. The foundations of temples, threatened
by infiltration of ground water, were laid on thick layers of sand.
Some characteristic features of temple architecture
may be mentioned.
A pair of obelisks 2 stood at the entrance (the surface often
gilt, the pyramidal top frequently of metal : their religious
probably solar meaning was forgotten ; but they remind us of
the iiiassirbas of the Semites ; cp Is. 19 19 Jer. 43 13 3 ) ; galleries
of sphinxes* the symbol of wisdom and of similar sacred
beings led to the gate which was crowned by the symbol of the
winged disk;* broad pylons " resembling fortress-walls pro
tected the entrance on either side.
The largest existing temple, that of Karnak, was
originally only a modest building of dynasty 12. Every
great king added a new court or a hall, and the entrance
pylons finally came to stand in the interior of the
complex. Many temples had a. similar growth. The
divinity, however, dwelt
not in these courts or
halls, but in a small dark
chapel in the centre,
where it usually sat in
a sacred boat. Sacred
lakes near the temples
were frequent.
The principal temple ruins
are at Karnak, Luxor,
urna, Medlnet Habu (all
included in ancient The
bes), Abydos, Edfu, Esneh,
Ombos, Philae ; in Nubia
at DabOd, Kalabsheh, Bet
el - Wali, Dendur, Gerf
Husen, Dakkeh, Sebua,
Amada, Abu-Simbel, Soleb.
Jebel-Barkal (Napata) and
Meroe are imitations by
Ethiopian kings.
Secular architecture
was much lighter, the
only materials used be
ing wood, and Nile mud
mixed with stubble (Ex.
5 n ) made into sun-dried
bricks. The many royal
palaces have on this ac
count all disappeared,
although some of their
sumptuous ornamenta
tions (mosaics and glazed
tiles) have remained.
1 Bronze was called hesmen, a word connected with 7CB n
Brugsch), which may be an Egyptian loan-word (cp METALS).
2 rt V t7 5 After the manner of the caryatides of
A M A Greek art, figures of Osiris are frequently
Li ii ii used ; but these always lean against a pillar.
Wealthy subjects had the same kind of house (with an
open court in the centre) that we still find in the modern
East ; the poor dwelt in mere clay huts, such as those
occupied by the modem felldhln.
The tombs had an architecture of their own. Where possible,
they were long galleries hewn in the rock (especially at Thebes).
The pyramid was the characteristic form of royal tombs from
dyn. 3 to dyn. 12, and was frequently imitated by private persons
on a smaller scale, and in brick instead of stone.
The question has very often been asked how the
Egyptians erected edifices of such stupendous size, and
monolithic monuments 8 that would tax the skill even of
our age of improved mechanical appliances. It would
be very wrong to ascribe these achievements to the use
of complicated machinery. Everything was done in
the simplest possible way, by an unlimited command of
1 This can be said also of the famous fluted columns of Beni-
hasan, which remind one strongly of the Doric column.
3 So Wi. ; see BETH-SHEMESH, 4 ; and
tehen. cp MASSEBAH.
\
Female sphinxes (re-
presenting queens)
are rare.
The head of Hathor (with cow s ears)
(perhaps origin
ally an ox-skull) as a capital for columns is the only other ancient
instance of the human form being employed in architecture.
; __ a
7 A . 8 F r example, an obelisk at Thebes 108 feet
I \ high, or the colossus of Memnon (height 64 feet,
r S weight 1175 tons). Fragments of a statue found at
Tams indicate a figure originally 80-90 feet high.
Each of these objects was sculptured from one stone.
1228
EGYPT
EGYPT
human forces ; and we have to admire far more the
energy than the engineering skill. Pictures show how
immense monolithic monuments were moved over wooden
rollers, smaller stones on a sledge (see Fig. 8).
The influence of Egyptian civilisation upon Syriaappears
strongly in its metrology. For example, the Egyptian
38 Measures corn - me asureEphah (otyi, Egyptian
dpe[t]i.e., measure ) and the liquid
measure Hin (Egyptian Aain(u), pot ) were adopted by
the Hebrews. The weight system (i deben i.e. , 90-96
grammes or Ib. had 10 kidet of 140 grains) was
decimal, in opposition to the Babylonian sexagesimal
system. The cubits, however, the large or royal cubit
of 0.525 metres (about 20^ inches), and the small cubit
of 0.450 metres (about 17^ inches), which existed side
by side (subdivisions being the span, palm, finger, etc. )
- are said to be borrowed from Babylonia (?). The
subject is very complicated, and some measures such
as the largest measure of area, the ffxqivos (said to
contain 12,000 cubits?) present great difficulties.
On the other hand, it is certain that in Egypt a form
of money very similar to our present coin was used
rings or thick wire in spiral form (deben) l originally of
The shape of garments constantly varied, according to fashion ;
but we can observe that in the earliest times men were satisfied
with simple raiment, a short skirt being sufficient even for noble
men. Later, these wore several suits, one over another, skilfully
plaited. The fanciful and archaic dress of the king, with his
manifold double and triple symbolical crowns, 1 would require a
chapter for itself. Dignitaries were distinguished by their staffs, 2
also by the flagellum, 3 the signet-ring, 4 and the necklace. 8
For men and women alike the commonest adornment
was the wearing of ornaments of precious metal, or at
least flowers," round the neck. Such collars of gold
were the principal decoration given by the king as a
reward to faithful officers or brave soldiers. Princes
and some priests had their hair tied in a tress 7 on one
side of the head. Painting of the eyelids, which in
Syria was reserved for women (2 K. 930), was practised
by both sexes. A black stripe, formed by the so-called
stibium (see PAINT), outlined the eyes above, a green
stripe below. 8 Unguents for the hair and body played
a great part. Sandals (especially of papyrus) were
common ; shoes were rare. At night, the African head
rest 9 was used (originally in order not to disarrange the
artificial head-dress), and the face covered.
The Egyptians were just as ceremonious as other
Orientals. The common mode of salutation was by
dropping the arms ; 10
prostration ( kissing the
ground ) marked highest
respect ; in prayer the
hands were lifted up. 11
Of their amusements the
following may be men
tioned : fowling (with the
snare, or with the boomerang _
or throwing-stick), fishing,
and various games, such
as that called mora by the
modern Italians, and a kind
of checkers, of which they
were so fond that they sought
to secure it by magic for the
souls of the dead. Dancing
was left chiefly to women,
for the delight of spectators.
Although religion de
clared all foreigners un
clean, the Egyptians were
-T,, , , , ,. ., , not hostile to foreign
The statue, resting on a sledge, is being dragged by four rows of men supposed to be in parallel . . .
lines on the ground. Above them are the whole population of the city come out to do homage. The associations and inhu
man standing on the knee of the statue gives the signal to the men below ; the man on its foot pours ences. In dynasties 18-
water on the ground in front of the sledge. Above the latter is Her-heb with a vessel of incense (?). 2 o indeed imitation of
Below the statue are men with water-buckets and wood, also three overseers ; behind the statue the . .
retinue of the governor. Asiatic manners became
FIG. 8. Dragging a statue of Dhut-hotep. After Lepsius.
copper, later also of gold, finally of silver. This metal,
white gold, 2 not being found in Africa, had originally
highervalue than gold, but after 1600 B.C. it became more
frequent, and soon was the common standard of money.
The manners and customs of Ancient Egypt, 3 which
the Greeks found to be in as direct opposition as possible
__ -. to their own, were less different from
39. Dress, etc. ., r ., .., , ~,
those of the settled Semites. The
Egyptians prided themselves on their great cleanliness
(cp Gen. 41i4). They shaved their faces and clipped
their hair (the priests shaved it off), wearing artificial
beards 4 (at least at religious ceremonies) and wigs.
Indeed, the chief decoration of the upper classes
consisted of wigs of enormous size. Garments were
made not, as with the Semites, of wool, but mostly of
cleanly white linen.
1 ) 2 This is what the hieroglyphic expression
_ means. It would seem that electron, gold with
- an admixture of silver, called ivesein (the initial is
doubtful, the connection with do->;/xos improbable)
also had higher value than gold.
3 On this and most of the preceding subjects see Erman,
Egyptian Life (ET 1894). The admirable pioneer work of
Wilkinson, Manners and Custotiis ( 36), is, in its text at least,
completely antiquated ; as also is the second edition, by Kirch
( 78). Very concise, and (in part) very readable, is Brugsch,
Die sEgyptologie ( 81) ; but he is too much averse from Erman s
critical division of periods. It would be out of place
here to attempt to trace the various developments of
Egyptian manners during 3000 years ; the biblical period
(1600 to 500 B.C.) is what chiefly concerns us.
1229
J
such a fashion that the
educated had to a large extent Semitic names and spoke
a mixture of Egyptian and Canaanitish. A strong re
action, however, seems to have set in especially after
800 B.C.
The names used by the Ancient Egyptians 12 were less
poetic than those of the civilised Semites. Simple
names, such as little (sery) sometimes
even . dwar f ( WOTi ^] r ^)_.f a j r f ace> .big
headed (sisoy), cross-eyed (komen), prevail, especially
in the earlier period. I wished; I saw, he cried, etc.
refer to circumstances of birth, etc. Maternal uncle (sen-
mau[et], mother s brother ) is not uncommon (see KIN
SHIP). Some names are intended for good omens or to
express parental pride : hou nofer, the good day ;
nefer- (or was-}hau, good (or prosperous) circum-
M
40. names.
A
c\ (originally the
common sign of
c, boyhood)- 6
The Asiatic custom of painting the nails red with
hennah was also known.
12 The material is collected in Lieblein, Diet, efe noins ( 71
and 92). The fullest discussion, comparatively speaking, will be
found in Erman, Egypt.
1230
EGYPT
stances ; usertesen, their wealth (i.e., of the parents) ;
mother s ornament (bcs-n-mauet), the land in joy
(ta-m-refout), gold in Heliopolis, gold on the way,
coming in peace (or luck, y-m-hotep). Names
of animals of all sorts are used: not only lion,
monkey, dog, frog (krur), tadpole (hefe/iu), etc.,
but also names of unclean animals : mouse (pin) and
pig (riret) are favourite girls names. Comical
names, such as we should have expected a superstitious
nation to dread as ill-omened, are met with. Thus, e.g.
(Liebl. 1784), an unfortunate infant retained for life the
designation offal-swallower ( m-bwd ). The Egyptians
evidently attached less importance to the name than
was usual with other nations. The many senseless
syllables mere babblings, such as Ay, Ata, Teye
which can be explained only as pet names (like the
English Bob, Tom, and Dick) confirm this.
Names with a religious signification were, of course,
quite frequent. They praise a god (Ptah is beautiful,
powerful, etc.) e.g. , Set-naht(e) S. (is?) strong.
A men-em-he t, Amon in the first place, extols a
local god over the others. Beloved by or loving
a god (mer [vulgar, mey-, mi-~\ Amun, 1 me(r)-en(e)-
Ptah), Amon is satisfied (Amen-hotep), etc., are
common ; even dog of Horus occurs. Sobk-em-saitf,
the god S. (stands) behind him, and the like, boast
of divine protection. The sons and daughters of
all possible gods are very common ; but of brothers
of a god only two or three doubtful examples are known.
Amenv, Setoy, of Amon, of Set, 1 ns(i)-Bi-n-dede,
belonging to Mendes, and the thankful p-ed-Amun,
whom Amon gave, belong to the same category. Amon
in (his) ship, in (his) festival (cp Har-em-Jiebe, of Horus),
and in (his) rising, may be intended as comparisons.
In Isis in the marshes and Horus in the lake we
have examples of mythological allusions Ra-mes-su
( Pa/xecrcr^s), the sun begot him, Dhut(i)-mose, the
god Thout born (i.e. , incarnate), say a good deal.
Very remarkable is the late usage of employing the
name of the divinity itself e.g. , /sis, Hor (not Osiris,
which would be too ill-omened), Har-pe-hrad (H. the
child), Har-si-esc (H. the son of Isis), Hons(u) deities of
the Osirian circle and the goddess of love Hat-/wr,
(paraphrased in mistress of Byblos ; cp 14) being, in
particular, very common. 2
The more complicated names were introduced, for
the most part, by the kings (e.g. , Nefer-ke-re , fine
is the double of the Sun, etc.), who, from dynasty
5 onwards, always had two names ; these and the
various regular titles and surnames were imitated or
exaggerated by loyal subjects. Loyalty is frequently
expressed by names such as King X. is satisfied, well,
powerful, which were regarded as specially suitable for
holders of office. Sometimes these names are as long
as Babylonian names. Of foreign names, Semitic
formations were quite popular from dynasty 18 onwards
(see 39), Libyan names even before dynasty 22 ; later
we meet with Ethiopic and other names.
In treating the history 3 of Egypt, we find the
greatest difficulty 4 in the chronology. The Egyptians
1 Standing alone, or at the end of a compound name, the
god s name was probably pronounced Amon, later Amun (Copt.
AMOyN); elsewhere (cp Heb. construct state), Amen.
2 In the earliest examples, however, the possessive - ending
y may be supplied. This could be suppressed in writing, as
as the case in the earliest Hebrew orthography.
3 Maspero s huge History of the Ancient Orient (three
material and the best available work in English. An English
Meyer, however, i.e., a readable history by the side of the
English Wiedemann (Petrie), is still a desideratum.
4 Another great difficulty is the transcription of names. The
reader must hear in mind that Egyptian was written (like primi
tive Hebrew, only still more defectively ) without vowels. It
is full of abbreviations ; letters (especially liquid consonants) are
often suppressed ; and some confusion of and , r and 1, etc., is
1231
EGYPT
had no eras, but reckoned by the years of their kings.
41 Sources For P ractical use lon g lists of kin 8 s
of Hi torv ^ ac * to ^ kept- ^ e on y l st preserved
* (at Turin) is very fragmentary, and the
extracts from Manetho (Mave^uiv; Maveflujs in Euseb. ),
a priest of Sebennytos, 1 about 270 B.C. , the only Egyptian
historian in the Greek language, have come down in a
greatly corrupted state. 2 Besides, even in their original
state, both sources (especially Manfitho) seem to have
been far from the attainment of absolute correctness.
For convenience sake, we retain Manfitho s reckoning of
thirty-one dynasties (down to the Ptolemies), although his
dynasties are not always correctly divided, and his
FIG. 9. Part of Sety I. s tablet of kings at Abydos. The king,
preceded by his son Ramses II. wearing the princely lock
of hair over his ear, advances, censer in hand, to present
offerings to Ptah-sokar-Osiris on behalf of 76 famous
ancestors.
First line : Mny, Tty, etc.
Second line : Merenre -Meht-m-saf, Neterkare , etc.
Third line : Sety I. repeated.
chronological data cannot be safely used without a
searching criticism. The attempts to use astrological
dates e.g. , the fixed or Sothis year (see CHRONOLOGY,
19) have been, so far, not very successful. 3
Champollion placed the beginning of dynasty i in 5867 n.c.,
Roeckh in 5702, Mariette in 5004 ; Petrie has placed it in 4777 ;
Lepsius brought it down to 3892 ; and some have tried to bring
it down much lower than 3000 B.C.
An accurate chronology for Egypt is possible,
accordingly, only after 700 B.C. (CHRONOLOGY, 20).
Approximate dates can be given thanks to the
synchronism afforded by the Amarna tablets back
to about 1600 (ib., 22). Thus far, there is no hope
that the gaps in the Hyksos period and the preceding
allowed. The Coptic forms are our greatest help towards re
covering the pronunciation ; but they frequently differ from the
ancient language as much as might be expected after a develop
ment of 3000 years. Hence the greatest confusion reigns in
Egyptological literature, some names being current in as many
as a dozen forms. Every change of philological theory brings
about a change of transliteration, and those who see the
trouble which this causes are returning, as much as possible, to
the Greek transliterations, where there are such, of Herodotus,
Manetho, etc. Where, as often, there are none, this way of
escaping the difficulties of wild guessing at the pronunciation
fails. [How a different theory, which has the same object, works
out, may be seen from Petrie s History already referred to.] The
present writer has tried to be as conservative of customary forms
as possible.
1 Hardly high priest of Heliopolis, as later sources state.
His dynasties are arbitrary groups of kings disagreeing with
those, e.g., of the Turin papyrus.
2 Extracted by Julius Africanus, Eus., and Sync, (also partly
in Jos.). Handy editions in C. Miiller (Historici Gra-ci
Minores, ii.) and Bunsen, Egypt s Place in Universal History,
i. The Turin fragments are best edited by Wilkinson [ 51].
Selections of kings names in the tablets of Abydus (2)(Seti I. ;
see above, fig. 9), Sakkarah (private, temp. Ramses II.) and
Karnak (Thutmosis III.). Cp De Rouge, Recherches sur Ics 6
premiers dynasties [ 66]. Also Brugsch and Bouriant, Le livrt
des Rot s [ 87] (Lepsius, Kffnigsbuch [ 58], antiquated).
3 Lepsius, Chronologic der Agyptcr ( 49), etc., all antiquated.
Recent attempts by Mahler, ZA, 897^, are followed by some,
e.g., by Petrie, but disputed by others ; cp 50, 56.
1232
42. Periods.
3 They were
called ?S*Q \\ _
(pronounce approximately ebyati).
Griffith in Kenihasan 3, 9 (Arch. Survey, v.).
1233
EGYPT
dynasties (13 and 14) will ever be filled up so as to
allow similar certainty for the earliest times, although,
e.g. , dynasty 12 is fairly well known now [but see
col. 1237, n. 3]. Modern writers have therefore, for the
most part, given up trying to form complete chrono
logical systems. The material at command is in
sufficient. At present the efforts of scholars are directed
to finding minimum approximate dates.
Apart from the division into thirty-one dynasties
(down to Alexander, according to Mangtho), Egyptian
history is commonly divided into three
great periods : i. the Ancient Empire
(Memphitic), dynasties 1-6 ; dynasties 7-10 may already
be reckoned to ii. the Middle Empire : dynasties 11-13
(Theban period) ; the New Empire, from dynasty 17-18
to the end (Theban, Bubastide, Sai tic, etc. periods).
The earliest history (before King Menes ; see below) is
filled by Egyptian tradition thus : first with the successive
reigns on earth of the various gods (on the chronology
the Egyptians, of course, disagreed very greatly), and
then for 13,400 years with those of the Semsu-Hor,
followers of (the Sun-god) Horus an expression
absolutely equivalent to ancestors (Mangtho renders
it awkwardly by v^-i/ey or ?}/>wej). Egyptologists are
agreed that most probably this long period of kings too
obscure to be enumerated, was the time during which
Egypt was still divided, and that the first historic king
was the ruler who united the two kingdoms ; but see
below on MENES, 44.
The Egyptian traditions are unanimous that originally
there were two kingdoms. The first was that of the
43. Prehistoric. Southem Land *"*( ) ? with
the twin cities Nehbet (Eileithyia, now
El-Kab) and Nehen (Hieraconpolis, opposite Eileithyia)
for capital, and a king styled s(nf)tni, who wore the
white crown. 1 It had as emblem a kind of rush. 2 The
second kingdom, whose rulers 3 wore the red crown, 4
and resided in Buto (anciently Pe), was to-emJivt(i), the
Northern Land, which had as its emblem the lotus(?) 5
plant. B Even the Roman emperors were still styled
king of the Upper and the Lower country, 7 and were
represented as such with the two crowns combined. 8 It
is unlikely, however, that any monument yet discovered
goes back to the period of the separate kingdoms.
Still older is the division of Egypt into forty -two
vofjioi or counties (thirty-six to forty-seven in Roman I
times after many changes), twenty-one of Upper and j
twenty-one of Lower Egypt. Each nomos had its own
god (and totem?) and its own capital, and kept its dis
tinct frontiers, its coat of arms, etc. down to very recent
times. We may see in these counties, accordingly,
traces of prehistoric kingdoms or tribes.
The beginnings of Egyptian civilisation reach back
to this remote period. On the other hand, some
barbarous survivals from it may be found in the later
religion (see above, 13), as also, among other things,
in the decoration of the king, who always wore a leather
appendage fastened to his short skirt 9 (the whole re
minding one of a lion s skin with tail). The recent
attempts, especially those of Hommel, to prove the proto-
Babylonian ( Sumerian ) origin of the whole primeval
culture of Egypt, imply, at least, great exaggerations.
Some Semitic (not Sumerian) elements of culture seem
to be noticeable in prehistoric times, and one or another
trace of indirect Babylonian influence (through the
Semites) might be admitted ; but all these influences
are very insignificant in comparison with the elements
of native origin. Thus the general conception of
EGYPT
pictographic writing might perhaps be borrowed from
the Euphrates valley ; but not a single sign taken
from the Babylonian system can be found. Egyptian
writing bears a thoroughly African stamp, no less than
Egyptian art, manners, etc.
Recent investigations have revealed many traces of
the earliest population that of about the time of the first
44 First historical dynasty- 1 The Egyptians
_. , . were more pastoral then than later ; their
ynas les. f 00( j > tne j r b ur j a i customs, and so forth
were still barbarous. 2 Already, however, they possessed
the art of writing (greatly differing in detail, indeed, from
the later system), and, at least at the courts of the kings,
most arts were practised (though not as highly developed
as in dyn. 3). It is still an open question whether the
tomb (not the burning-place) of the first historical king
Meny (Menes of the Greeks) has recently been discovered
at Nakadeh, 3 near the old city of ftubt (or Nebut, the
same name as Ombos), the abode of the god Set (cp
15 ; fig. 9 shows a tablet found at the same place
bearing in archaic writing the word mn). 4 Tombs of
FIG. io. So-called Tablet of Menes.
An ivory plate found by De Morgan at Nakadeh : a, from a
photograph ; fr, outlined from a photograph (/ after L.
Borchardt, Sitzungsberichte der Berliniscken Akademie
tier Wissenschaften, 8810547: [ 97]). It figures and de
scribes the funereal outfit of the deceased king.
eight kings (of about dyn. i ) have been excavated near
Abydos (at Umm el-Ga ab) and the names of several
other kings found there. 5 We see now why Mangtho
said that dynasty i proceeded from This (Egyptian
Tini, modern Girgeh?), near Abydos. That would
explain the superiority of Upper Egypt over the northern
country, perhaps also the spread of the Osiris-worship
of Abydos over all Egypt. As regards the unification
of Egypt see 42, although it may be that the later
1 See (with reserve) De Morgan, Recherches sur les origines
tie F I -gypte ( 96 and 97). He correctly refers Petrie s excavations
in Nagada and Ballus ( 96) here.
2 For example, even the hyaena was fattened and eaten. The
cannibalism that some have alleged, however, seems to be only
the second burial (i.e., reburial after cleaning the bones of flesh),
a practice that is still to be found, e.g., in New Guinea, and is
to be connected with the first attempts at embalming. Cutting
the dead in pieces in imitation of the fate of Osiris (cp 14)
was also customary during the first dynasties. That several
early kings were burned with their whole tomb, although the
later Egyptians dreaded nothing more than incineration, is a
theory that has not been confirmed. Most of the cities of Egypt
go back to this primeval period; within it, Heliopolis (On) was,
evidently, the most important city ; at least, its religious author
ity reached far.
:) De Morgan, Recherches, ii. ( 97), and SB A W, 97, p. 1054.
4 The word inn seems (so Wiedemann) to designate the tomb,
not the king.
5 Amelineau, Fouilles cT Abydos ( 96^); more exhaustively,
99. Quibell s finds at Hieraconpolis, 1900, Petrie, Royal Toinl<s.
An accurate arrangement and chronological determination of
the earliest names of kings is not yet possible ; neither can their
names be transliterated with certainty.
1234
EGYPT
Egyptian scholars, in beginning history with Menes, I
acted arbitrarily or on unknown grounds, omitting those
of Menes predecessors whom they were unable to
classify. It is not impossible that some of the ancient
kings of This precede him. On the tradition that
Menes built Memphis, and on the great sphinx near that
city, cp MEMPHIS.
Of dynasty 2 (six to nine kings) we knew before
only that the temple and worship of the kings Sendy
(Sethenes in Manetho) and Per-eb-sen are mentioned
perhaps a century later.
From dynasty 3 (nine kings) we have on monuments (hardly
contemporary) the cult of Neb-ka or Ncbkau-re . King /.oser
built the remarkable stepped {i.e., unfinished) pyramid at
Sakkfirah. (The pyramid as a form of royal tomb does not seem
to have been known in dynasties i and 2.) His name has been
found engraved upon the mountains of the Sinaitic peninsula.
We may conclude that the copper-mines of the Sinaitic desert,
from which the Egyptians drew almost all the copper so neces
sary for tools in the copper age, were already in the hands even
of more ancient pharaohs. Later, various stories were carried
back to the kings of the first three dynasties ; sacred books were
reported to have been written by them, or found by, or under,
them ; but all these traditions seem to be apocryphal.
The lists of kings drawn up in the fourteenth century
B.C., upon which we have to rely for many names, are
mere selections (not trustworthy even for the succession
of the names). The whole period of dynasties i to 3,
therefore, probably included at least 600 years (779,
Manetho), possibly double that time. Thus Menes
might be placed near 4000 B.C.
Dynasty 4 lies in the full light of history (soon after
3000 B.C.?). King Snefru(i), who founded it, seems
,. _. to have been a great ruler. Later
45. ten BJH. stories report that he had to fight
with Asiatic tribes attacking Egypt near Memphis,
where already earlier pharaohs had to build a large
fortification, the king s wall, against raids through
Goshen. Some places founded there by Snefru(i)
confirm the essentially historical character of these
reports. At Wady Magharah in the Sinaitic peninsula,
he opened a new mine for copper and greenstone
(malachite, which the Egyptians held in strange esteem).
His tomb is the irregular pyramid of Meidum.
The next kings, the Cheops, Chephren, and Mycerinus
of Herodotus (Hufu(i), Ha f-rc , and Men-ka(u)-re of
the monuments), are the builders of the three largest
pyramids at Gizeh, stupendous works which were never
surpassed (see MRMPHIS). Evidently the strength of
Egypt was overtaxed by these gigantic constructions,
for the pyramids of all subsequent kings (Rd-ded-f,
epses-ka-f, 1 etc.) show a considerable falling-off.
Dynasty 5 is called Elephautinic by Mangtho. This
would indicate that the warlike Nubians, already em
ployed as mercenaries in that early
46. 5th Dyn.
time, acquired sufficient influence to
establish their leaders as kings. 2 This dynasty (nine to
eleven kings, reigning about 150 years) marks the zenith
of Egyptian art (see above, 36). The last king, Unas
( \Venvs ; Onnos, ManStho), built the earliest of the five
pyramids at Sakkarah which have preserved in the in-^
scriptions on the walls of their burial chambers so valu
able a collection of religious and magical texts (see
above, 20), texts dating in part from prehistoric times,
and already in dynasty 5 not all perfectly intelligible. 3
Unas has left, in the so-called Mastabat-el-Far aun (Pharaoh s
bench), near Sakkfirah, the basis of one of those strange colossal
1 The romantic queen NitOcris of Herodotus is legendary.
She is a disfigured princess of dynasty 26.
~ The hypothesis that Egypt was ever conquered by Nubians
or Trog(l)odytes as a nation cannot be upheld. The soldiery of
Egypt, however, was derived mostly from the southernmost
counties, where the people, from the mountain range of Silsileh,
were of some what mixed character (exactly as now), and therefore
more warlike.
3 Maspero, Les Inscriptions ties pyramided de Saqqaralt,
1894 (reprinted from Recueil, 3 to 14), gives these texts along
with meritorious attempts at full translations. The grammar
of the pyramid-texts remains to be written. Their archaic style
has preserved many inflections lost in later Egyptian.
"35
EGYPT
monuments of half -pyramidal character 1 which were erected
by many of the kings of that time. Their purpose is obscure;
we only know that they were, like the obelisks, for the cult of
the Sun-god.
Dynasty 6 (five kings, about 140 years, beginning
with Tety or Atoty) had powerful rulers, especially Pepy
47 6th Dvn (read Apopy? > ! " a great builtler
* the founder of Memphis proper. He
waged war, not only with the sand-dwelling nomads
of the Sinaitic desert, but also in Palestine, which he
seems to have been the first (?) to claim as tributary terri
tory. a The kingdom, however, was more and more
decentralised, and at the end of dynasty 6 went to pieces.
It must be mentioned that under Pepy (Apopy) II. Nefer-
ka-re (reigning, according to the best traditions, ninety-
four years, perhaps the longest reign in the world s
history) we find records of a great commercial expedition,
a nomarch of Elephantine being sent by the king to the
Sudan near Khartum to obtain one of the dwarfs from
the woods of Central Africa for the sacred dances. *
Most kings of dynasties 3-6 (Manetho calls dynasty
2 as well as dynasty i Thinitic, dynasties 3, 4, and 6
Memphitic) had their residences near Memphis, though
not at the same place ; many kings built their city
afresh, a work rendered easy by the light material
employed.
The practice was for each king to build his pyramid west of
his own city, in the desert ; it is this alone, in fact, that enables
us to guess the site of the city. Gradually Memphis proper
became the permanent capital.
Dynasties 7 to 1 1 form an obscure period (only about
twenty-five kings known, many more lost), full of the
_ struggles of the Nomarchs, the princes
48. .Uyns. 7-11. of the small counties
Dynasties 7 and 8 are called Memphitic, 9 and 10 came from
Heracleopolis in Middle Egypt (see HANKS). These Heracleo-
politans had unceasing wars with rival kings in Thebes, whom
they seem never to have completely subdued. Manetho mentions
only one great king among the Heracleopolitan kings, Achlhoes
(Egyptian, Hty ; pronounce Ehtoy), whom he describes as cruel
i.e., a powerful warrior.
Finally, the Theban rulers from whom the eleventh
dynasty descended gained the superiority.
Almost all these kings, whose number is doubtful (Petrie nine,
others five or six) had the name Antef or that of Mentuhotep.
Of the last king^ of this dynasty, S anh-ka-re . we know that he
sent an expedition through the desert east of Koptos to build a
ship on the Red Sea and to sail to Punt for incense. Such ex
peditions to Punt (the Abyssinian and Somali coast of our days)
occur under several kings of the next (twelfth) dynasty : the
earliest mentioned is one under Assa (Yssy) of dynasty 5.
The new line, of seven kings, was founded by A men-
em-he t I. , who subdued the rebel nomarchs after hard
./.i-uT-v fighting. One of the classic books, the
49 12til L)VH. f . * * * / -
J instructions of Amenemhet (i.e., in
structions how to rule), 4 professes to have been written
by him when, tired of reigning, he abdicated after
escaping a conspiracy against his life. His son Usertesen
(Wesertesen) /. erected the temple of which the obelisk
of Heliopolis is the only trace. He was buried in
the pyramid of Lisht. Usertesen II. , who succeeded
Amenemhe t II., built the pyramid of Illahun. His
workers inhabited the city on the spot now called Kahun,
where Petrie found valuable antiquities. 8
Usertesen II. seems to have begun to favour the part of
Egypt now called Fa(i)yum i.e. , the lake, in antiquity
r rwn to-sei, the lake-country the Arsinoite
l> nome of the Ptolemies . This is a de
pression in the Libyan desert into which the branch of
the Nile now called Bahr-Yusuf flows, forming a lake,
now called Birket-Karun, and irrigating one of the most
fruitful parts of Egypt (properly an oasis ; see above,
1 t\ A similar monument from dynasty 5 has been found
I ^ near Riga.
2 See the so-called inscription of Una, RPC& i i-io. For the
reference to Palestine, see WMM, As. n. Kur. 33. Petrie found
in Deshfisheh pictures from a similar war, which seem to belong
to the same time (OLZ 1 248).
3 Tomb at Aswan ; inscription first published by Schiaparelli.
4 Best translation, Griffith, ZA, 97, p. 35 ; World s Best Lit.
5323.
8 The collection of the Petrie or Kahun papyri (ed. Griffith,
97), to which we have so often to refer.
1236
EGYPT
4). The Nile had been flowing into this depression
even in prehistoric times ; 1 but some improvements must
have been made in irrigation by the kings of dynasty 12,
especially by Amenemhet III. , who succeeded Usertesen
III. At least he is the king Moeris to whom Herodotus
erroneously ascribed even the digging (!) of Lake
Moeris (thirty-five miles long even now, much more in
antiquity); his two pyramids (i.e., large bases), with
colossal statues of king Moeris, 1 were discovered by
Petrie near Biahmu. 2 The pyramid of Amenemhe t III.
stands at Hawara, where only insignificant remains
betray the site of the labyrinth built by the same king.
The classical writers describe it as a gigantic structure
equal to the pyramids of Gizeh. Amenemhe t JV. and
a queen Sebk-nofru (or -rtef/vzv) close this dynasty (194
years, beginning about 2100 B.C.?), 3 which the Egyp
tians, not without justice, considered as the greatest of all.
The land was flourishing, art well developed, and
literature in its golden age, at least according to
Egyptian taste. Most of the works used as classics in
the schools were written while this dynasty reigned (see
above, 21). Many temples and public construc
tions were erected. Conquests were made in Nubia (not
in Syria ; 4 only the old copper mines near Sinai were
used). All kings were active in subduing Wawat (N. of
Nubia) and Kosh (Cush of the Bible, in the S. ) for the
sake of the gold mines of that country ; Usertesen III.
finally fixed his frontier south of the second cataract
and fortified it by two large fortresses (now called
Semneh and Kummeh) on the two banks of the Nile.
For the student of the OT the most interesting monument of
this period is the famous wall-painting of Beni Hasan (part of
it given in colours in Riehm, HlVBV i) which was formerly ex-
Slained as representing the immigration of Abraham or Jacob (cp
OSEPH ii. , 8). The inscriptions that accompany the painting
inform us, however, that a caravan of 37 Asiatics from the
desert-country came, not as immigrants, but as traders 9 with
metallic eye-paint (inesdcniet ; cp 39), evidently from the
copper mines near Sinai. The chief, Ab-sa(y) (i.e., ABISHAI?),
presents two ibexes to his customer, the nomarch. In Middle
Egypt such direct commercial relations seem to have been less
frequent than in the north. The illustration of the costumes
of the age of Hebrew immigration is most valuable (observe the
weapons, the war-axe, the boomerang an elaborate one, as the
sign of the chief the travelling shoes, the lyre, etc.).
Dynasties 13 and 14 again show the consequences of
decentralisation anarchy, wars of nomarchs competing
51 13th a d ^ or l ^ e crovvn> some kings ruling only a
14th Dyns.
few months, altogether at least 140 princes,
many evidently contemporaneous. The
names of many kings, which imitate the names of dynasty
12, or at least point to the Faiyum and its god Sobk
(such names as Sebk-sauf, Sebk-hotep], show that they
claimed descent from dynasty 12. Dynasty 14 is said
to have come from Xois, in the W. Delta, and perhaps
shows us Libyan elements penetrating into Egypt.
At the height of this confusion (about 1800 B.C.?)
came the foreign invasion of the so-called Hyksos (or
Hykussos?), who overran Egypt easily.
62. Hyksos.
Much has been conjectured as to the
origin of these mysterious strangers ; but nothing certain
1 Maspero, Dawn of Civ. 447.
2 Petrie (Illahfin) thinks, with Major Brown, that the special
merit of these kings consisted, not in digging basins, but in
dyking off ground from the lake. The inscriptions furnish no
evidence one way or the other. At present, the surface of the
lake is considerably below the level of the sea. Some urge
that this is due to the hollowing out of the bed, and that, in
antiquity, it may have been high enough to allow use of the
lake as a reservoir for the irrigation of the country with the
help of sluices, as described by classical writers (Strabo, etc.).
This view, however, is now more and more abandoned.
3 Recently discovered papyri seem to furnish (by a dated
rising of Sirius) an exact astronomical date for Usertesen III.
According to this the beginning of his reign fell between 1876
and 1873 B.C. This would assign to the i2th dynasty the period
1996-93 to 1786-83.
* It is very questionable whether the story of the Egyptian
nobleman Se-nuhyt (spelt also Sanehat, etc.) who, under User
tesen I., fled to Palestine, and as adventurer became a prince
there, contains any considerable historical element. It is trans
lated in KPV) 2 ii.
S See WMM, As. u. Eur. 36.
1237
EGYPT
can be stated. It seems that they were not Semites (the
etymology Hyk[u]-sos, shepherd -kings, is probably
not from Mangtho himself), but Mitannians, Hittites, or
similar intruders from Eastern Asia Minor, who con
quered Syria and then Egypt. 1 The Hyksos kings
Heydn, etc. (seven mutilated names in Manetho) ruled
over all Egypt and northwards as far as N. Meso
potamia. Later, they permitted Upper Egypt to have
its own viceroys of Egyptian blood. These viceroys
of Thebes (dynasty 17, three to five kings) finally threw
off the yoke of the Hyksos Apopy II. The kings Skenen-
re (III.?) and Ka-mes (or -mose) died (the former, it
would seem, in battle) during the long war ; finally
Amosis I. ( Ah- or Y ah-mose) took the last stronghold
of the foreigners, their large fortress Avapis ( Ha[t~\wa ret],
on the eastern frontier S. of Pelusium, somewhat after
1600 B.C. (Mahler- Petrie, 1583).
The duration of the Hyksos period is very uncertain ;
it seems necessary to abandon Manfitho s corrupted
traditions (500 to 800 years in three dynasties) and to
estimate it at about 200 years (?). 2 The foreigners are said
to have worshipped their own (?) war-god ; 3 in all other
respects they were soon Egyptianised. The immigra
tion of Israel has been assumed by patristic writers
and many modern scholars (partly on very feeble grounds)
to have occurred during their rule (under an"A7rw</>ts).
Amosis I. (see above), the founder of dynasty 18,
begins the New Empire, a period in which Egypt shows
53 18th Dvn ^ er P ower as a conquering nation.
^ The warlike spirit had been aroused
by the long war of independence ; an army had been
created ; and the country was thoroughly centralised (the
hereditary monarchs having given place to royal officers).
All energy turned outwards, especially towards Asia.
Amosis pursued the Hyksos, and conquered Palestine
and Phoenicia. Amenophis I. (Amenhotep, circa 1570
B.C. ; Mahler -Petrie, 1562) occupied Nubia again, at
least to the third cataract. This king and his mother
Nofret-ari (or -ere] became, later, divine protectors of a
part of the necropolis of Thebes, and are, therefore,
frequently painted black as divinities of the nether
world. Thutmosis I. (Dhut[i]-mose; the transliteration
Thothmes found in many books is not correct), circa
1560 B.C., completed the conquest of Nubia and pene
trated into Syria as far as to the Euphrates. We may,
however, doubt whether he gained lasting results in the
North. Even during his lifetime, the princess ffa t-
sepsut (or sepsewet, but not Hatasu, as was formerly
read) or Makare came into power, and, after his
death, she reigned, recognising her co- regents Thut
mosis II. and III. 4 at best as puppets.
After her death Thutmosis III., in fierce hatred, tried to blot
out her memory. Many monuments show her as a male
king (with beard, etc.), a fact which has been explained perhaps
too seriously. Formerly Egyptologists concluded that she had
an unusually strong and active mind ; she may have been only
an instrument in the hands of a court-party. She built the
magnificent temple of Amon at ed-Der el-Bahrl, commemorating
in it, as one of the greatest events, the sending of several ships
to the divine country, the frankincense coast of Punt (cp 48).
1 The only inscription referring to their nationality (Stabl-
Antar, Rec. trav. 6) states that they brought with them many
ante i.e., Syrians or Palestinians but were themselves
foreigners i.e., of a different race. All alleged sculptures
with Hyksos portraits really belong to earlier periods : no
Hyksos type has yet been found. The Kassite invasion of
Babylonia hardly reached so far west. See on these questions,
WMM, Mitt. I orderas. Ges. 98, p. 107^
2 If we adopt the recently proposed date for the i2th dynasty
( 50 n.) we can assign the Hyksos only about 100 years, or
even less, beginning about 1680 H.C.
3 We have, however, no evidence that they tried to force this
cult as a monotheism upon the Egyptians. The later tradition,
that their god had the Hittite name Sutek, seems erroneous : he
was nothing but the Egyptian form of Set worshipped in Auaris.
* The succession and relationship of these three regents have
recently been much disputed. According to some, they were
all children of Thutmosis I., and Ha t-sepsut, the legal heiress
to the crown, was married to Thutmosis III. More probably
she was the wife of Thutmosis II. and the aunt of his son (by
a concubine), Thutmosis III.
1238
EGYPT
Thutmosis III. (who reigned alone from about 1515
B.C. [Mahler, 1480], his official 23rd year) was, of the
84 Th th Pharaohs, the greatest warrior. He de-
. Jiy fcated an alliance of the Syrians at
rnosis ill. Megiddo and made Syria ^ far ^ the
Euphrates tri
butary, taking
Carchem ish,
and ravaging
even north
western Meso
potamia (Mil
an n i ; see
ASSYRIA, 28,
and MESOPO
TAMIA). Hisre-
ports of fourteen
campaigns, 1
and his lists of
subjugated
Palestinian
cities, 2 of em
bassies from
Asiur, Sangar
(middle of N.
Mesopotamia),
Cyprus, etc. ,
are valuable
sources of in
formation on
FIG. ii. Amenhotep IV. Supposed head of ancient West-
the mask that covered the mummy (?). . ~,,
(After Petrie.) ern Asia. 1 he
enormous spoils
and the tribute he commanded enabled him to be an
active builder, especially in Karnak.
Amenofihis II. (about 1485; Petrie, 1449) maintained his
Syrian dominion, which n-ached to the city of Ni (on the
Kuphrates or Orontes?), subduing revolts; so did Thutmosis
Jl r ., who also fought in Nubia. The latter, in consequence of
FIG. 12. Amenhotep IV. (and his wife) worshipping the solar
disk ; the rays proceeding from which end in hands. (After
Krman-Lepsius.)
a dream, dug out from the sand which covered it the great
sphinx near the pyramids a pious act which was, of course,
1 Translation* tf/>(l)2i 7 (doubtful); Griffith in Pctrie s
History.
2 See KP) .125, but with caution. The editors are not
Egyptologists. Maspcro treated parts in Trans. I ict. lust.
and /.A, 1881, p. 119. The present writer hopes to publish a
detailed study.
1239
EGYPT
Amenophis (Amen-hotep] III. (1450?) is remark
able for the love shown by him everywhere to his
fair wife Teye, a (Libyan?) woman not of royal blood.
The great find of Tell el- Amarna, an archive of
_ Amarna cune ^ orm taDlet s * containing despatches
Tablets fr m P rinces of N s y ria Assyria, Baby
lonia, Cyprus (Alasia), and from Amen
hotep s vassal-kings in Jerusalem, Megiddo, etc., gives
us a wonderful insight into his diplomatic relations, and
into his marriages e.g. , with two princesses of Mitanrii
(Osroene, capital probably Harran) but also shows a
growing neglect of his Syrian provinces, which fell to
pieces under his successor. Amenophis III. built a
large temple, before which were erected the famous
colossal statues one of which became the singing
image of Memnon of the Greeks.
As we may conclude even from his portraits (figs. 10
and n), Amenophis IV. (i4is 2 B.C.) was no ordin-
56 Amen arjr man- Being dissatisfied with the
hot jy " confused religion of Egypt, he had the
" amazing boldness to introduce the wor-
ctrca 141 c. , . ,. .
ship of the sun-disk as the only god, 3
persecuting especially the worship of Amon, whose
name he tried to have erased from all monuments
where it occurred. He changed his own name, in
consequence, into Ahu-n-aten (or Yeh(u)-n-aten),
splendour (or spirit) of the sun -disk. This great
religious reform was accompanied by a revolt against
the traditional conventionalism in art, which was
supplanted by a bold and ugly realism. The change
in religious literature is not less remarkable. The
hymns now composed in praise of the Sun-god are the
best productions of Egyptian religious literature.
Amenophis even gave up his palaces at Amon s city of
Thebes, and built a new capital (at the modern el-
Amarna in Middle Egypt), called horizon of the
sun-disk. All these changes met with much resistance,
and hardly had he died (about 1397) when all the results
of his life-work were lost. His successor, Ay, had to
return to the old traditions ; the temples of the sun-disk
and the monuments of the heretical king were razed
to the foundations, and Egyptian religion became more
than ever mummified.
Amenhotep IV. s son-in-law Sinenli- (others read S a-) kn-re ,
the former priest ( divine father, a low rank) Ay, and Tuet-
anh-iimun did not reign long in this turbulent time ; f far-cut-
lu bi (1380 B.C.?), formerly general and governor, established
peace and a firm government. To the delight of the priests,
he completed the religious reaction.
With Ramses (Ra messu) I. we begin dynasty 19
(about 1355 ; Petrie, 1327). Sethos I. (often called
>Setil gyP tian Set y X 35 B-C-). like
his father, did not reign very long ; but
he was active as a builder (Abydos, Thebes) and
in foreign politics. He drove nomadic tribes (re
minding one of the Midianites and Amalekites of
the OT) away from S. Palestine, and tried to
regain Middle Syria. The Hittites (Heta of the
1 Best and most complete translations in KB 5 by Wi. ( 96).
Knudtzon has published the results of a fresh collation of the
tablets in licitr. zu Ass. 4101-154 I 991- The language of these
letters is Babylonian (the pharaoh s own foreign despatches were
written in this language of diplomacy), mixed with Canaanitish
words or phrases ; often in a very faulty style. Some specimens
of the non-Semitic languages of Mitanni and Cyprus occur.
a This approximate date, serving as a basis for our chronology
of dynasties 18 and 19, is inferred from the Babylonian synchron
ism (see CHRONOLOGY, g 22). BurnaburiaS II. and Amenhotep
IV. seem to have come to the throne about the same time.
Assyriolonists must obtain a better agreement on Burnahurias
II. and Iris predecessor KadaSman-Bel. From an exclusively
Kgyptological standpoint, the present writer would determine
about 1380 (Petrie, 1383) as the minimum date. 1415 may be a
trifle too high, but not much. Wi. s date for Burnaburias (14^6
B.C.) seems decidedly too high ; likewise Host s date (Mitt.
I orderas. Ges. 2228), 1438.
3 This must not be ascribed to Asiatic influences. Although
the Syrians were advanced enough to recognise the forces of
nature in their gods more clearly than the Egyptians, the
monotheistic idea was entirely a new creation.
1240
57 Dvn 19
>>> iL ^ > >.
l/T-y ST _ a* ~ C ff 6
~< f 3- ~ s. > 3 P c
g s>, q < - q r C.
- = = * . T i ~
C ~ ~, r T-. -~ 2. 57 ?i
<" bo P 3 > T . ET -
9 a n ? z r 5 r
< < - ? r r J
i - 4 ^ M "
f ! ?
-* *-. w ^
>!? > > 0* ^-^>-
= = 5- E. -3- =r . :r
l s M fe P *
ntheses indi
prefixes . .-t
//iii ( prom
- - .-.
S ~ 5"
~ "C -
C H
3T ~ L CT C:
g g- i S .
on* s - M
K> N. _ C *-
? LJ-I
s ^.S;
fer^l 1
I i SI
,.* t-4
> > a R. *T y
= 3 1 ~ 8 ^.
- ~ - e
Z ~ > S^ -
e-names are in
lr ( well ), el (
day, ralley ).
K3 (BAAI.-ZEI-HO
= i ll* s
S- r ^ I" -=
.- 2. x - r -
s " M rr ?
? T MS
- ?
> a
x
^ I
C o
X
2 W
s o
^n n; ^ ^ -m ni
AOtftPP iJ ?3 ^
5 3 r.
f Iff rii lli* ?
*! 1 i s *|?s
ifc P i " g (T^ j 1 X S> -
|gt
i 7---
re
- ?
PI
J!
T" rt ~
- > .= -" <; -
-* ^\ ^. T*
^l^ga-f =
K 7> T
C 5 > *
<- 2 S *
~ *;
N u>
^ I
^ u* >
P. # C
R.R
3_3|= 8M?-g.|.?-&|3frl "s.
rrangemen
Nahr, riv
w
"a ~" rf^V ~ ^rL ^ " *y^t
Th-f O ? -?
-j
I ;; ^
S r ~ L
^ -t/: -
P - 1 J
p 2- R
r 2 s < r
rt ^ L t^ 3 ,
v; P a
p ft
(/) -?T"
3" P g 5 2
.S -" 3 c
K c to
O O
,2 U
^ S
O O
? 3
_ cr
k^ C/l
C O O rti n
O K
~ S
s- ai sr S
? 5 =
O
U c
fc-S C
r r r si
S g s 4-
o j? r
.4- c
.f %
.T- t
X ?S
c
m 3
7; 7^ .
, 3 a
"I 8 J
7^ 7"
4- c GI
1 f o
? r 5
2. i 5
el-Khal
Khesou
7^
A
/
f
1
- 5 1 -^ ?
C 5" DH Q
i r,
3- Cn
O
Cn
v| 2.
11
"^ ^ g|
? pi
>X S> i
"=
3 H W
fs
B
|B
9
*
^t
_-1
i? 9
fi
>
<
P g
of
.-
P c
t
g.
i? w i
s
10
c 3
r^
R
j
VJ ^
o
7.
c
* I
~
o
Ul
s
OS
E
>
~
ft
S 2
Si
2. 2.
5^ T"
P. r ji
v- - r
S
^
> ^
j] a> - g| "
2
p p.
o.
o * > c
"- K S
Ui _.
> ^ -
? 0^ p ,
= s s;
3 . w ft
i: S
2
S 1
2"
2 2*
~ "x.
2.
iT
#
-, 1 1 !
o " ^
1 1
*r<
- 4*
S. < - x ~ .
B n. g 2.
P r C S .
_ <* w p *r
? - g-
B jl , -
- ^ P
f l|
S _, re
S C 3" .
(T W -
ol"
< 3
fin P
O < "
+- "C p"
i g
57 ff
--- "-t
ri "
3" i
o w
0<
o
t*
H"
O
(/i
w, 3
Ul
? c
^ OJ
b 9
< c
O
i/i
P. _H
> 3
?; p"
3^3
<*> ^
H ^
9 t
r 7
W N
X >
^ T:
K *
C
c - m
^1 10
> X
X
OJ
> $s
H
"^
-r
5 tr
c
3
*
100
-
X "^
c
o
-
<,
VI
>
w.
i
H
5
< ~"
**
N
7.
D
>*
W.
p]
X
T T
T "B t!
^ *^3
i *e 3> 3
*^C "^3 *T!
T3 "0 t
M
*0
13 T^
~r
L c
r 1
K P
00
2. 6 S.
nT -~ : rT
3 E
S. 5 - 1 "
" w
Si_ |
B S- jJ
c x w
; J ? j
: a K ?
hakusa L
harbjwthu
hilee, E8
"n 2-
c c"
P c p
c 3 c
3* - ^
n
E
&
anopolis,
athnit-tic
"S
o
%
^
- S C
L L
<| 2. SL 8
v: c/; ^ ^A "H" C/: a< y- c/; T: ^ -v: -y. -JT y y
^L :7" v* G ?* n T- <!~r* rtr rr* rr * -t .-
B.i-is*s
- a = ^ g" rf"
^g S | |l
a ^
W oo
? 9
9 ^
C w.
c ^
/K
r
n
B
^
C
H
to p;
lit \
< r. T ;
2 M CjJ "
?f ^
n\
r
Vicus Judaeorum, D
C -H 5!
a, S w ""
3 -1 X rt
" p o ."
- o ,
C OS ?
* ^ w 3
D
H
7-
w
M
:
9
1
- : 1 -r
c 9 3
B* 8 S.
" 3- n
K 2 ; r
sj " ^t
n g
w o.
B
O
Tini, D6 (EGYPT, g 4.
/ BAAL-ZEPHON)
n
B
^
M
10
S
a
<
9
_:
5-
D
w
R
^3
_
3
i
H -
3- 3-
5- gi
O - 8
|ft
? ?
H <
o
H
-
9
r
^ tT
M
i
O
_)
V
r
c
CA
XX.
o
o| M
to -
o
w a-
^ 9
33-
cn* ^ "CJ
O X
N
EGYPT
EGYPT
Egyptians, Hatte of the Assyrians) from E. Asia
Minor (Cappadocia) had conquered N. Syria,
beginning in the reign of Amenophis IV. when
"Egypt was too weak to resist them. Their influence
reached even to Palestine, and Sethos became en
tangled with them in a war, waged in the Lebanon
_ ._ region south of Kadesh. This war
was taken up more energetically by
T 34 73- Ytis son Ram(e]ses II. (Sesostris, circa
1340-12736.0.; see figs. 6, 12, and 4). He reconquered
Phoenicia as far as Beirut in his
second year, and in his fifth at
tacked the most important city
of central Syria Kadesh in the
Amorite country (i.e. , near the
N. end of the Lebanon , on the Or-
ontes). His victory there over
the Hittite force of war-chariots
became (greatly exaggerated)
the subject of many pictures
and inscriptions (on the epic,
see above, 25), because the
king was (against his will) per
sonally engaged in the fight.
The war went on, however, till
his twenty-first year, and Egypt
was not always victorious
otherwise all Palestine would
not have revolted. Ramses
had to take the strong mountain-
cities of Galilee (year 8), to
punish the territory of Ephraim
ar *d Dan, and even to storm
Askaluna (Askelon) and Gezer
in the S. The treaty of peace
(engraved upon a silver plate
and preserved in a copy) was,
however, favourable, leaving
Palestine (inscriptions of Ram
ses have lately been found east
of the Jordan) 1 and half of
Phoenicia to Egypt. Ramses
married a daughter of Hetaser
the great king of the Hittites.
The rest of his long reign
(sixty-seven years altogether)
was peaceful. The conquests
from Scythia to India, there
fore, ascribed to him (Sesos-
FIU.IS. MummyofRam- tr j s ) b y t h e Greeks, are pure
g e raph. Afteraphotl> fiction-a mere inference from
his many buildings.
As a builder (temples of Luxor, the Ramesseum,
Abydos, etc. ) Ramses surpassed all other pharaohs,
although the amazing multitude of monuments bearing
his name is largely due to his erasure of the names of
the ancient builders and usurpation of their works.
Nubia also, which as far as Ben-Naga, S. of Khartum,
had long before his time become an Egyptian pro
vince, was favoured with many constructions e.g. ,
the huge rock-temple at Abu-Simbel (see fig. 7). The
special favour of this great king, however, was directed
towards the land of Rameses or Goshen (see GOSHEN,
i. 4). This desert-valley, which was formerly reached
only very irregularly by the Nile, he rendered fruitful
by a canal, colonised it (with Syrians, too, and among
them the Apuri, frequently alleged to have been
Hebrews), and built several cities in it, including a
royal residence, the city of Rameses. Thus he would
seem to be, according to Ex. In, the pharaoh of the
oppression ; and his son Menephthes (Me\r~\neptah ,
see fig. 13; about 1273 B.C.) has, thus far, been
generally assumed to be the pharaoh of the Exodus.
1 The so-called stone of Job, ZDPV, 92, p. 206, ZA, 31 100
( 93). An Egyptian officer worshipped a Canaanitish goddess
(called approximately .7-aa(?)-2(or f)apant) on this spot.
41 12.11
59. Israel.
The recent discovery of Meneptah s inscriptions
mentioning Israel as defeated, and evidently dwelling
in Palestine, makes this view very
questionable. It is the opinion of the
present writer that any chronological system of the
Exodus must, at least,
sacrifice Ex. 1 n (Pithom .^-*
and Raamses), which f -
might be a gloss, and f \
other details. Attempts / IT
to discover the name /
of Moses (the alleged
1 Mesu ) in the time of
Rameses II. have failed.
There are indications ^
that the Israelitish nation
or, at least, some tribes FIG. 14. Head of Meneptah, from
e.g., ASHER (q. v. , a bas-relief at Thebes. After
i) were resident in Lepsius.
Palestine at the beginning of dynasty 19, perhaps earlier
(cp ISRAEL, 2). It must be left to future excavations
to determine how far the biblical accounts need a critical
revision, and whether the Exodus can be referred to
earlier periods. 1 That the Habiri of the Amarna
tablets (under Amenophis III. and IV., see above,
SSf ) are identical with the immigrating Hebrews
does not, however, seem to be satisfactorily proved (cp
ISRAEL, 3).
Me(r)neptah had for long to fight hard both with
Libyans, who plundered the western part of the Delta,
60 MeneDtah and with P irates who rava S ed th e
, " coasts of Egypt and Syria. Finally
these pirates from Asia Minor (Jsakarusa
and Luku i.e. , Lycians) and Europe (Sardena, Akai-
wasa and Tur(u)sa i.e. , Sardinians, Achasans, and
Etruscans,) 2 joined the Libyans and marched against
Memphis, in sight of which they met with a crushing
defeat. 3
The reigns of kings Sethos II., Aiiten-inesse, Meneptah If.
or Siptah were short and inglorious. One of them is called a
Syrian usurper, which points to his being a royal officer who
had originally been a Syrian slave or mercenary. Perhaps the
reference is to Meneptah II., who became king by marrying
queen T-usoret. After years of anarchy, dynasty 20 united
the country again, under King Setnaht(e) and his son
Ram(e)ses III.
Ram(e)ses III. (somewhat before 1200 B.C.) cleared
the Western Delta of the Libyans, who had settled
there. Several attacks were repelled, the
Syrian provinces maintained, and the
territory of the "Amorites and of petty
Hittite kings N. of Palestine ravaged.
(The great kingdom of the Hittites had broken up.)
He fought also against the piratical Pulaste or Philistines
who had settled in Palestine 4 (in the territory of the
Avvim, Dt. 223), and ravaged Phoenicia as well as the
Egyptian coasts.
Ramses III. sought to imitate also the architectural achieve
ments of Ramses II. during his reign of thirty-two years; but
his buildings (especially Medlnet Habu in Western Thebes)
cannot be compared with those of his predecessor. The kings
who followed Ram(e)ses IV. -XI I., the so-called Ramessides
were short-lived and weak rulers (they ruled hardly over eighty
years).
The Egyptian possessions in Syria were lost. For
400 or 500 years, with small intermissions, Palestine
had been tributary to the pharaohs, and Egyptian
garrisons had occupied several fortified cities (e.g. ,
1 Manetho s Exodus-narrative is a worthless distortion of the
Hebrew account.
2 The DTH of Gen. 102 (read D1in> Turs). They are no
where else mentioned in MT. [Perhaps, however, the name
originally stood also in Ezek. 38 2 39 i. See ROSH, 1.]
3 Me(r)neptah s wars with Palestinian revolters do not seem
to have been important. The Israel inscription speaks of
Ashkelon, Gezer, and Yenu ama. The last mentioned place
seems to have been in S. Lebanon (but cp JANOAH, 2). There
is another new text (A*, trav. 17 159), which speaks of him,
as forcing down Gezer. This looks as if S. Palestine was
at the head of a rebellion against the Egyptian dominion.
4 See now MVG, 1900, i.
1242
61. Ramses
III., etc.
circa 1200.
EGYPT
Zaratuna ; see ZARETHAN). It must not, however, be
assumed that this loose relation influenced the in
habitants of Palestine in any considerable measure.
The Egyptians did not often interfere in the continual
feuds of the many petty kings. For evidence of this
and the unsafe character of the land, see the Amarna
letters.
A fact of importance for the Exodus question is that
the Apuri, for whom a connection with the Hebrews (nay
"ny) has so often been claimed, still appear in great
numbers in Egypt under these kings. Under Ram(e)ses
III. they inhabited whole towns near Heliopolis i.e. , at
the western opening of Goshen. The last word on this
question has, evidently, still to be said, and it is not
safe to decide either for or against the Hebrew
records.
In this period, the paupers of Thebes began systematically
to plunder the royal tombs, as is shown by many documents
referring to spoliations and the measures taken to repress them.
The weakness of the later kings
was largely due to the fact that the
temples had amassed an unreason
able amount of property by bequests
the high priest of Amon possessed
such a large part of the country,
owing chiefly to the liberality of
Ram(e)ses III., that he surpassed
the pharaoh in wealth. 1 This led
finally to the deposition of Ram(e)ses
XII. by the high priest Herihor
(about 1 100 B. C. or somewhat later),
who himself assumed the crown. 2
. Herihor, however,
62. Dyn. 21. was not able to
maintain it ; and king Smendes
(Nes-bi-n-dedi) of Tanis (Zoan,
Egyptian Sa ne) founded a new
dynasty, the twenty -first (seven
kings, some 130 years), about 1090
n.C. These princes were prudent
enough to give the important
jffice of the Theban high priest to
EGYPT
Solomon s empire he made an expedition against both
Judah and Israel (perhaps to secure the throne to
Jeroboam?), an expedition recorded in i K. 14zs and
on the monuments of Karnak (see the extract given
in Fig. 14). Cp SHISHAK.
It is very doubtful whether the other kings of the
_ Libyan, or twenty-second, dynasty (from
64. Dyn. 22. ^ubastus? 1 ) retained a hold on Palestine.
They bear for the most part Libyan names Sosenk (the name
of four kings altogether), Osorkon (Wasarken, two or three
kings), Tikel<Xore?)ti (Greek Takelothis: two kings), Pemay(one
king) and the whole dynasty seems to have reigned (nominally)
about 200 years. On the Zerah of Chronicles cp ZEKAH, 5.
They first mark a tolerably quiet period of Egyptian
history; but about 800 B.C. their dominion began to
become weak. The generals commanding the large
garrisons of Libyan soldiers in the great cities assumed
the role of the ancient nomarchs or counts, and the
pharaoh had little power over them.
FIG. 15. One line from Sosenk s list of Palestinian places on a wall of the great temple
at Karnak. After Lepsius. The names (nos. 14-31) read thus :
14 Ta an(a)kfi (TAANACH), 15 Shanema (SHUNEM), 16 Biti-sanra, 17 Ruhaba (REHOB),
18 Hapuruma (HAPHAKAIM), 19 Ad(e)rumam (?), 20 . . ., 21 Shawad(i), 22 Mahan(ai)ma,
._ r 23 K(e)ba ana (GIBBON), 24 Biti-hwarun (BETHHORON). 25 KadfrtW Kar]t(e)m (KiRiA-
their own sons. Nevertheless, the AIM), 26 A(i)yulun, 27 Mak(e)do (MF.r.mno), 28 Adir(u), 29 Yud-h(a)maruk (Yad-ham-
melek?; see SHISHAK). 30. . ., 31 Ha-u-n(e)-m.
Tanitic dynasty was not strong.
circa 950.
By these kings, all that remained of the mummies of the kings
of dynasties 18-20 were finally hidden in the hole near Der-e!-bahri
where they were discovered in 1881 so powerless were they to
protect the royal necropolis. To their prudence we thus owe
the preservation of the bodies of Ram(e)ses II. and III., Thut-
inosis III., etc. 3
After the time of Ramses III. the immigration of
Libyans began again, and Libyan mercenary troops
had now become so numerous that the generals of the
Masawasa (a Libyan tribe) came next to the king in
power. About 950, one family of Libyan officers had
become so influential (also by intermarriage with the
high priests of Memphis) that they could venture to
i . V T P ut one ^ tnemse ^ ves u P n the throne,
Sosenk I. This pharaoh, the con
temporary of Solomon and his son (see
SHISHAK), who reigned at least twenty-one years, was
more energetic, and again exercised influence upon
Syria. He seems to have assisted Israel against the
Philistines, who evidently still raided the Egyptian
coasts (see i K.. 9i6 and cp DAVID, 7); possibly
he was the pharaoh (it was hardly his predecessor
P-sii-(ia-m-ni or Psusennes II. ) who gave his daughter
to Solomon as wife (see, however, GEZKR, i). A
loss friendly attitude is shown in i K. 11 18 (but see
HADAD i. ,3; TAHPENES) ; and after the division of
1 For a suppressed rebellion of the high priest against
Uam(e)ses IX. or his predecessors, see Spiegelberg, Rec. Trav.
Wot.
2 The papyrus GolenischefT (WMM As. u. Eur. 395) reports
the adventures of an embassy sent by Herihor to king Zakarba al
uf Byblus (to buy Lebanon wood ), which visited also Dor, Tyre,
and the queen of Cyprus. [See nowAVc. trav. 276, Mi G, 1900.]
3 On this great find see Maspero, Les Mommies royales, 1889,
frlfm. Uliss. I- ran(. i. pt. 4.
1243
This weakness of the kingdom caused the Ethiopians
to attack Egypt. Ethiopia (q.v. ) had been an Egyp-
r+vr l an P rov i nce down to the beginning
65. Ltm pian of dynasty 2I since that timei owing
Supremacy. tQ the struggle between the secular
rulers and the high priests of Thebes, it had become
an independent kingdom. The kings of Napata
were able to take possession of Thebes. Middle and
Lower Egypt were, nominally, under the dominion of
dynasty 23, the successors, or rather the contemporaries,
of the last members of the twenty-second (Bubastid) 2
dynasty. Really the country was divided among about
twenty petty rulers of Libyan descent. About 75o(?)
B.C. the Ethiopian king P(i) anhy tried to subdue them.
He met with little resistance from the nominal ruler,
Osorkon III. of Bubastus ; but the prince Tefnaht(e) of
Sai s, who had already subjugated central Egypt, was a
formidable enemy. He submitted nominally to the
Ethiopian, after the latter had taken Memphis; but the
Delta remained in his hands, and Tefnaht(e) s son Bok-
en-renf (Bocchoris of the Greeks) was able to extend his
power again southwards. Bocchoris left the reputation
of having been a great legislator (cp above, 28). The
new Saitic Dynasty 24 (consisting, in Manetho, only of
1 Naville, Bu/ astis, questions their being from this city.
2 Manetho seems to be wrong in calling them Tanitic. They
reigned in Bubastus. His enumeration of four kings must be
viewed with suspicion. The third (*aixju.ous) and the fourth
(Xrjr ; read EJJT) seem to be simply the Ethiopians P anhy and
his son Kseta (or Kesta), contemporaneous with dynasty 24.
Consequently, only Pedubast (reigning at least nineteen years)
and Osorkon III. remain, apparently belonging to a branch of
dynasty 22. Their chronological relation to these kings (Sosenk
IV.) is not certain.
1244
EGYPT
Bocchoris), however, was shortlived. The Ethiopian
, . king Sabako, the son of Kesta, invaded
l6 ^O^ - the country N. of Thebes, and took
Hocchoris prisoner (according to one tradition he had
him burned alive) about 7o6(?). Now, for the first
time, the Palestinians and Phoenicians, who observed
the approaching Assyrian colossus with growing anxiety,
saw in the new dynasty of Egypt (25th) a power
equal to the Assyrian, to which they could appeal
fur help. 1 On . the ambassadors sent by Hoshea (to
the governor of Lower Egypt), and on the governor
Seve, who appeared in Syria to asbi.it king Hanno
( Hanunu) of Gaza, but was defeated at Raphia, S. of
Gaza (ISRAEL, 34, SARGON), see, however, So.-
About 696 Sabako :i seems to have been followed by
Sabatako (the Sebichos of Mantho?), who in 691 was
66 A Taharko su PP lanted b ? the usurper T(a)harko (see
TIRHAKAH) in Napata. At first the new-
king was compelled to be passive as far
as northern affairs were concerned. This was the time
of the revolt of the Philistines and of Hezekiah from
Assyria (702) ; see ISRAEL, 34. Whether the kings
of Musri who came in 701 to save Ekron from the
Assyrians and met with a complete defeat at Altaku
(Eltekeh) were Ethiopian vassals from the Delta (or
Arabs ?) is again doubtful. On the plague in Sen
nacherib s army, by which, according to 2 K. 19 35,
Jerusalem, and consequently also Egypt, were saved,
and on the distorted Egyptian tradition in Herodotus
(2i4i), see HEZEKIAH, 2. The tranquillity of Egypt,
however, was soon to be disturbed. In 671 or 670
B.C. , after Taharko had instigated the Phoenicians (Baal
of Tyre) to a new but fruitless revolt, the Assyrian king
Esarhaddon marched against Egypt ; in his passage
through the arid desert west of the brook of Egypt,
which always formed Egypt s best protection, he was
supplied with water by the Arabs. It seems that an
earlier attack upon Egypt (in 673) had failed. Now,
however, the Assyrians had a complete success. Taharko
was driven into Nubia ; Memphis was stormed ; and
Egypt was parcelled out among twenty kings, descend
ants of those Libyan nobles whom we have already met
( 63^). Among them Necho (Niku) of Sa i s, of the
family of the princes forming the twenty-fourth dynasty,
again stood first. Thus ManCtho dates the twenty-
sixth dynasty even from his grandfather Stephinates
( =Tefnahte; see 65). Taharko invaded Egypt again
about 669 or 668 (see TlEHAKAH), and his nephew
and successor Tan(u)tamon (in cuneiform writing Tan-
damani, not Urdamani) in 667 ; * but the Assyrians on
both occasions maintained the Delta, quelled revolts of
the Egyptians in Sai s, Mendes, and Tanis, and finally
drove the Cushites back to Nubia. The reason was that
the Ethiopian kingdom alone, with its scanty population,
was unable to raise armies equal to those of Assyria,
as it had always been powerless against united Egypt.
Necho s son Psa(m)etik (Psammetichus) 5 began his
reign (663) as a vassal of the Assyrian king Asur-bani-
67 Psametik pal !t Illay have been about 66
: "- (but this is uncertain) that he felt strong
circa 660. .
enough to renounce his allegiance. As
syria was, in fact, sinking. The rival kings, the Dodec-
1 Whether the 1000 soldiers from Musri, who assisted the
allied Syrian powers at Karkar in 854, were Egyptians (sent by
Sosenk II.?) is, however, very questionable; later, the small
kingdoms had no power to meddle in Syria. See MIZKAIM,
8 2 (a\
2 Wi. Ml G, 1891, p. 28, assumes with probability that the
governor Sili i-So represented an Arab kingdom. The usual
chronology (Sabako 728, T(a)harko 704) is certainly improbable.
! The chronology is not clear in every detail. (Cp Wi.
Unters. 91 jff. and see CHRONOLOGY, at).
4 Wi. AOf ltfi.
5 The name is written -]E rDB. with Aramaic letters (CfS 2 no.
148). It isof Libyan(not Ethiopian) derivation. Onthealleged
intermarriages between the Sa ites and the Ethiopians see ZA
35 29 [ 97].
1245
EGYPT
archs of Herodotus, had, of course, been previously
subjugated by him, with the help (it would seem) of
Carian troops, sent to him, perhaps, by Gyges of Lydia. ]
He strengthened unmilitary Egypt by introducing a great
quantity of Greek and Carian mercenaries. The terrible
Cimmerian invasion was warded off by bribes and
presents (about 620?).
The new (26th) dynasty is a period remarkable for
the revival of art (largely following archaistic tendencies)
and architecture. In general, this last period of
Egyptian independence seems to have been flourishing.
The days of Egypt as a conquering power, were, how
ever, past. Nekau or Neko II. (the Pharaoh-Necoh of
fiS N h IT 2 K. 2829), w ho succeeded Psammetik in
609, tried to profit by the distress of the
Assyrian empire during the ravages of
the northern barbarians (see ASSYRIA, 34). It was
easy for Necho to occupy Syria as far as the Euphrates
in 608. On his victories over king Josiah 2 (and the
Assyrian governors), and on the taxation which followed
the victory, see JOSIAH i, 2/ ; JEHOIAKIM. The
Egyptian conquest, however, lasted only to 604.
Defeated at Carchemish by Nebuchadrezzar, the
Egyptians were driven back for good (2 K. 24?), and
had no better policy than that of first instigating the
Syrians to rebel, and then letting them suffer through
Egypt s remissness.
The most important construction undertaken by Necho was
his digging the canal (completed : not, as Herodotus believed,
abandoned) through Goshen to the Red Sea, partly on the
track of the canal which Ramses II. had led from the Nile
only to the Bitter Lakes. In connection with this, he sent
Phoenician ships to circumnavigate Africa. He was followed
by his less energetic son Psam(m)etik II. 594-588 B.C. Whether
the second or the first Psammelik led an expedition against
the weak Ethiopian kingdom is uncertain (Greek inscriptions at
Abu Simbel).3
Apries(Uah-eb-re ), 588-569, took the last active steps
to check the Babylonians, by aiding the Tyrians and the
Jews in their resistance to Nebuchadrezzar
69. Apries.
588-569.
(cp BABYLONIA, 66). An interruption
was thus caused in the siege of Jerusalem
(Jer. 37s). The revolt against GEDALIAH (q.v. , i)
also must have been instigated from Egypt, whither so
many Jews fled. From a fragment of his records it
would appear that Nebuchadrezzar was still at war with
the Egyptians in his thirty-seventh year (568-567).
Whether he attacked Egypt herself is not quite certain ; 4
at any rate, the expectation of the prophets that he
would punish faithless and insolent Egypt was not
fulfilled in the measure expected. Defeated and
humbled everywhere, Egypt maintained her independ
ence. One more reign has to be chronicled, and
then follows the catastrophe. Amasis II. ( Ahmose),
1 That he besieged Azotus (Ashdod ?) in Philistia for twenty-
nine years (Herod. -157) is a statement of very suspicious
character.
- At present the preference is mostly given to the Magdolun
of Herodotus (2159) over the Megiddo of the Hebrew text
(Wi. and already Mannert and Rosenmiiller). At any rate,
Migdal could not be the Egyptian town. Josiah was unable
to penetrate through Idumaea and the desert and to invade
1898, p. 163. Josiah fought (it would seem) at Megiddo as
subject of the Assyrian governor.
3 The report of the migration of 240,000 (!) warriors to Ethiopia
under Psammejik I. must be greatly exaggerated (Herod. 2 30).
Still, desertions on a moderate scale are known to have occurred
(see ZA, 228693 [ 84]; the garrison of Elephantine, for
Hamites).
4 The fragment (published by Pinches, TSBA 7 218; better by
Strassmaier, NabucJwdonossor, 194) has been discussed in
greatest detail by Wi. (AOF\ 511). It seems to speak only of
the preparations for war by king (Am)asu. The hypothesis of
Wiedemann (Gesc/i. Aeg. von Psamntetich /. etc., 169), that
Nebuchadrezzar conquered Egypt as far as Syene, is now
generally rejected (cp Maspero, ZA, 2287-90, Brugscb, ib.
93-97 [ 84])-
1246
70. Persians.
EGYPT
who dethroned Apries 1 in 569, was a man of low birth,
who obtained the crown through a rising of the native
warriors against the Greek mercenaries. Amasis placed
restrictions both on the mercenaries and on Greek
commerce, but very prudently left Naucratis to the
Greek merchants as a port and settlement. He closed
a prosperous reign in 526, and was succeeded by his
son Psammetik III., who did not reign one full year.
In 525, after the battle of Pelusium, Cambyses con
quered Egypt. Apart from the (possibly unhistorical)
cruelties of Cambyses, the treatment of
the province of Egypt by the Persians
was at first not unfair. In particular, Darius I. (521-
486) built temples (the largest in the S. Oasis, which
he or Cambyses? seems to have conquered); he
repaired Necho s canal to the Red Sea, in order to
make Egypt more accessible. Under Xerxes (see
AHASUERUS, i) the Libyan class of warriors, led by
Khab(b)ash, rebelled for the first time in 487, and
drove the Persians from Egypt. They could not,
however, long hold out against Xerxes ; the country
was again reduced to submission. A new revolution
was set on foot (460-450) by Inarus, a Libyan of
Marea (near Alexandria), who was aided by the
Athenians. A more successful rebellion was that of
Amyrtceus in 404, which made Egypt independent down
to 342. This period was filled not only with hard
fighting against the Persians (Artaxerxes II. Mnemon
[405-362] and III. [362-338]), who continually tried to
win Egypt back, but also with internal discord. Three
dynasties (28-30 ; from Tanis, Mendes, and Sebennytus),
and at least nine kings, of whom only Nectanebus I.
(better -nebis ; Egyptian Neht-har-heb) and Nectanebus
II. (Nehte-nebf) are remarkable, are mentioned. The
Greek soldiers constantly made their influence felt, and
showed their bad faith during these troublous times.
Because of the incapacity of Nectanebus II. 2 (360-343),
Artaxerxes III. Ochus (362-338) conquered Egypt
again, and punished her cruelly. It is not surprising
_ . that the destroyer of the Persian Empire,
71. ureeKS. Alexander (336-323), was welcomed in
Egypt (332 B.C.) as a deliverer. The
history of Egypt after Ptolemy I. the son of Lagus had
in 305 become a king instead of a Macedonian governor
or hsatfapan i.e., satrap (as he is styled in an
Egyptian inscription of 314 B.C.) belongs to that of
the Hellenistic world. Under the Macedonian kings
or Ptolemies, 3 the Egyptians were perhaps less op
pressed than they were under the later Persians ; but
as a class they were always treated as inferior in legal
position to Macedonians and Greeks. They were never,
therefore, completely Hellenised. They were also
severely taxed. The great contrast between the native
people and the foreign rulers who, for the most
part, did not condescend even to learn the language
of their subjects, and from Alexandria, their Hellenic
capital, followed anything but an Egyptian policy
was but little mitigated during the rule of this last
dynasty. Hence the various revolts.
The great re volution of the native soldier-class against Ptolemies
IV. and V. deserves special mention. It lasted twenty years
(206-186) and, for the last time, placed nominal kings of Kgyptian
speech on the throne of the ancient pharaohs. Those who held
their ground the longest ruled in the Thebaid. This revolution
was quenched in torrents of blood in 186 B.C. As a punish
ment for assistance sent by the Ethiopians to the rebels, the
N. of Nubia was occupied. Previously, the kingdom of Meroe
(Napata was abandoned as capital some time before) had been
on good terms with the Ptolemies ; economically weak, it naturally
fell under Egyptian influence.
Ptolemy II. caused a marvellous development of the
1 The theory that the battle at Momemphis only forced Apries
to accept Amasis as co-regent (Wiedemann, Gesch. A eg. von
Psam. 120) is successfully attacked by Piehl, ZA 28g [ go].
2 Said to have fled to Ethiopia. Cp, however (on his tomb
near Memphis), Rec. trav. 10 142.
3 On the succession and chronology of the Ptolemies, see
below, 73 ; Mahaffy, The Empire of the Ptolemies, 1895 ;
Petrie, Hist, v.; Strack, Die Dynastic der Ptolemiier^i).
1247
72. Jews.
EGYPT
trade on the Red Sea, exploring and colonising the
African coasts. The growing commercial importance
of Egypt increased the immigration of Jews
and s arnar it a ns. They gathered especially
at Alexandria and on the Eastern frontier, in the ancient
Goshen. 1 Under Ptolemy VI. they even built at Leon-
topolis a great Jewish temple (see DISPERSION, 8).
In Alexandria they became strongly Hellenised : hence
the Alexandrian version of the Scriptures ; hence too
the gnostic tendencies in Judaism. See ALEXANDRIA,
2 ; DISPERSION, 7, 15^ ; HELLENISM, 10 ;
TEXT.
The Ptolemies possessed Palestine from 320 down
to 198 B.C., when Ptolemy V. Epiphanes lost it to
Antiochus III., the Great, of Syria, Already his father
had defended it against the Syrians with difficulty, and
had kept it only by winning the battle of Raphia
(216 B.C.), whilst Ptolemy III. Euergetes had been
able to conquer the whole Syrian empire for a short
time in 238.
The succession is as follows : Ptolemy I. Soter (323-284).
Ptolemy II. Philadelphus (so called because, after the Egyptian
custom, he married his own sister Arsinoe),
73. Ptolemies, to whom the exploration of Eastern Africa
was due (285-247). Ptolemy III. Euergetes,
the husband of the famous Berenike (a princess of Cyrene),
the conqueror among the Ptolemies (247-222). Ptolemy IV.
Philopator (222-205) waged war with Antiochus the Great. It
was under this dissolute, cruel, and incompetent ruler that the
great revolution began. Ptolemy V. Epiphanes came to the
throne at the age of five, in 205, under the tutorship of the
dissolute Agathocles. After the murder of his guardian by the
Alexandrian mob, other generals held the post.* The Asiatic
provinces were all lost, although Ptolemy retained their revenue
by marrying Cleopatra, the daughter of Antiochus III., the
Great, of Syria. After subjugating the rebellious Egyptians,
Ptolemy became more and more dissolute ; he was poisoned
while preparing war against the Syrians. Ptolemy VII. 3
Philometor (181-146) was a nobler personality, but unfortunate.
Antiochus IV. Epiphanes, of Syria, took him captive at
Pelusium, and would have conquered Egypt had it not been for
the brusque intervention of the Romans (171). Ptolemy Philo
metor had to accept as co-regent his younger brother (Euergetes,
ironically called Kakergetes or Physcon), by whom he was
exiled in 163 ; the Romans, however, brought him back. The
ambitious Euergetes became the ruler of Cyrene. After the
death of his brother Philometor (killed while intervening in
the struggles of Syrian princes) and after the short reign of
Ptolemy VIII. Neos Philopator, the restless Euergetes came back
to Egypt as king. In 130, however, he was expelled, and his wife
Cleopatra (widow and sister of Philometor) assumed the supreme
power. In 127 Euergetes (Ptol. IX.) returned from Cyprus. After
his death (117) ensued a long period of ceaseless struggle, which
strengthened the influence of Rome. Ptolemy X. Soter II. ruled
from 1 17-81, his brother Ptol. XI. Alexander I. (against him) 106-88,
Ptol. XII. Alexander II. 81-80, Ptol. XIII. Neos Dionysps (or
Auletes) 80-51. The history of all these rulers is complicated
and repulsive. The famous Cleopatra ruled first with her brother
Ptol. XIV. under the guardianship of the Roman senate ; ex
pelled by Ptolemy in 48, she was brought back by Caesar in 47.
Her younger brother Ptol. XV., co-regent 47-45, was murdered
by her, and Ptol. XVI. Ctesarion, her son by Caesar, became
her nominal co-regent. For ten years (41-31) she captivated the
Roman triumvir Antony, and thus maintained her kingdom as a
typical Ptolemaic ruler, not less able than wicked.
74. Rome. The sea-fight at Actium and Cleopatra s tragic
death brought Egypt s independence to an end.
It now became a Roman province under prefects (o-Tparrryoi), and
its history 4 is devoid of interest, till the Arab conquest in 640 A.D.
(preceded by a Persian conquest in 619-629). Many, but insig
nificant, rebellions (one as early as 30-29 B.C.), chiefly directed
against the excessive taxation, could be enumerated. On the
popularity of Egyptian religion in Western countries, see 14.
On the introduction and. progress of Christianity, and
on the Egyptian or Coptic versions of the Bible, see
TEXT. In 62 Annianus was bishop of Alexandria
(Mark was the legendary first bishop). The last
remnants of heathenism were suppressed by Justinian
(527-565) on the island of Philae, where the rapacious
Ethiopian barbarians (the Blemmyans and Nobates)
had maintained the worship of Isis. \v. M. M.
1 On Jewish settlers in the Fayum and the Thebaid, see
Mahaffy, 86 ; on Samaritans, 178 ; on their infrequency in
Memphis, 358.
- The alleged guardianship of the Roman senate does not
seem to be a historical fact.
3 Here Ptolemy Eupator is inserted as sixth king in official
documents. He does not seem to have reigned.
* Compare J. G. Milne in Petrie, Hist. v. ( 98 ; very readable).
1248
EGYPT, RIVER OF
EGYPT, RIVER OF. The Wady (or Torrent )
of Mizraim (D nVP ^ ; AV RIVER, or [Is. 27 12]
STREAM, OF EGYPT ; RV BROOK
1. Identification. OF EcypT . but both versjons of
TT1J are misleading), or simply the Wady (n?HJ,
with !T of direction ; AV RIVER ; RV BROOK), Ezek.
47 19 4828 (see RV, and cp Toy, Ezekiel, SBOT), is
frequently mentioned as marking the boundary of
Canaan towards the SW.
See Josh. 164 [P] <j>apdyyos aiyvirrov [BAL] ; 1047 \eifjidppov
aiy. [BAL]; Nu. 84s [P] -ppov aiy. [A], -ppovv aiy. [BFL] ;
i K. 865 e<os TTOTO/UOV aiy. [BA], e. bpiov TTOT. aly. [L] ; 2 K. 247
airb rov \eifidppov [BAL]; 2 Ch. 78 eals \. aiy. [BAL]; Is.
27 12 eio? pivoicopovpiav [B b XAQF].
The identification suggested by ( a in the last-cited
passage and adopted by Saadiah in his version of Isaiah
is manifestly correct. The Wady of Egypt is not the
Wady Ghazza (the torrens ^Egypti of William of
Tyre, and perhaps Milton s stream that parts Egypt
from Syrian ground ) but the Wady el- Arish, which
with its deep water-course (only filled after heavy rains)
starts from about the centre of the Sinaitic peninsula
(near the Jebel et-Tlh), and after running N. and NW.
finally reaches the sea at the Egyptian fort and town of
el- Arish. Here, in late classical times, was an emporium
of Nabataean traffic, to which the name Rhinocorura or
Rhinocolura was given. Here, too, travellers halted
on the route from Gaza to Pelusiurn. Titus rested here
on his way to Jerusalem (Jos. BJ iv. US) and as late as
the fourteenth century A. n. the place was much visited
by travellers (Ibn Batuta). Owing to the fact that as
the boundary of Egypt and Canaan we find in two OT
passages (Josh. 183 i Ch. 13s ; see SHIHOR OF EGYPT)
an arm of the Nile (the Pelusiac), and in a third passage
(Gen. 15 18) the river (in:) of Egypt (which surely
must mean the Wady el- Arish), some (following Abul-
feda, Descr. sg., ed. Michaelis, 1776, p. 34, no. 68 ) 2
have supposed that the Wady el-Arish was taken
for an intermittent channel of the Nile (cp Jer. on Am.
6 1 ; Reland, Pal. 285/1 9 6 9^)- Niebuhr the traveller,
on the other hand, seeks the Torrent of Egypt in the
largest of three small streams that run into the
Mediterranean from the large lake (baheire] which, he
says, extended from Damietta eastwards towards Gaza
(Descr. de V Arable, 360^). All this speculation is need
less. If a stream in the neighbourhood of el-Arish is
referred to, it can only be the wild torrent-stream that in
December suddenly covers the banks of the Wady el-
Arlsh with verdure (cp Haynes, Palmer Search-expedi
tion, 262), which could never have been confounded
with a channel of the Nile (so also Ebers). As for the
expression the river of Mizraim ( D nnj) in Gen. 15 18,
either the original reading was Sro vvady, torrent
(Lagarde, Ball), which was altered into inj, river (of ),
by an idealistic editor, who placed the SW. boundary
of Canaan at the Nile, or else, if Winckler s inference 3
from a Minasan inscription (Hal. 535) is correct, -in:
was applied in N. Arabia and its Palestinian neighbour
hood to the Wady el- Arish, which historically at any
rate was not undeserving of the name. The latter view
seems preferable. It seems to derive support from
Gen. 8637 Nu. 22s when emended (see REHOBOTH,
PETHOR).
We have still to account for the name ( The Wady
[or Torrent] of Mizraim ). The ordinary explanation
2 Name ma ^ es l equivalent to the wady which
parts Canaan from Egypt. At the mouth
of the wady la) an Egyptian fortress, which might seem
to neutralise the fact that the wady belongs geographic
ally to N. Arabia. That this explanation was prevalent
1 Cp Epiphan. Hter. 2 83, Pti/OKOpoupa yap ep/nrji-eueTai NeeA
(Sm>.
2 See Ritter, Erdkunde, xiv. 8141^ ; Guerin, Judee, 2 240-
249.
* AOF\ 36 337 ; GI \ 174, n. 2.
1249
EKRON
in later Jewish times is certain ; but does it correctly
represent the original meaning of that phrase? This
question cannot be answered without considering the
Assyriological data. That the nahal Musur of inscrip
tions of Sargon and Esarhaddon 1 means, not the
Egyptian wady, but the wady which runs through the
N. Arabian land of Musri, seems to us beyond doubt,
unless, indeed, it can be shown that the extended use
of the term Musri or Musur had gone out in that king s
time. To assert this, however, would be entirely
contrary to the evidence. Mizraim should rather be
Mizrim . The land of Musri or Musur in N. Arabia
was repeatedly referred to by the OT writers ; but the
references were misunderstood by the later scribes.
See MIZRAIM, 2 (6). T. K. c. s. A. c.
EHI ( PIS ; Arx ic [BA], - 6IN [D], AAXeic [L]), in
the genealogy of Benjamin (Gen. 462if) ; see AHIRAM, i,
and BENJAMIN, 9, i. i Ch. 86 has T1PIN, EHUD, ii.
EHUD O-1PIN, AcoA [BAL]), a Benjamite name,
which, according to We. (GGN, 1893, p. 480; cp Gray, ffPJV,
26, n. 4) is from NiV3l< Abihud (also Benjamite). Probably
n-TK should be read ; cp Pesh. ihiir i Ch. 7 to ; abihfir, ib. 86
and -ny K for iTJ7 3K
i. b. GERA \q.v. ], a Benjamite, the champion of
Israel against Moab ( Judg. 3 12-30 ; avu8 [superscr. v]
B a - b in 830 4i). The story is thoroughly archaic in
tone, and is a popular tradition (so Moore, Bu. ). It
tells how Ehud, with a sword concealed under his
garment, came bearing tribute to Eglon, king of Moab,
at his residence E. of the Jordan, and sought a private
audience. Being left-handed he was able to get hold
of his sword without exciting the king s suspicions.
In this way he quickly wrought Israel s vengeance, and
made good his escape. Fleeing by way of Gilgal and
the pillars there (see QUARRIES) he called the Israelites
to arms and, by seizing the Jordan fords, cut off the
retreat of the Moabites on the W. of the river, and
slew them every one. See EGLON.
The historicity of the narrative was questioned in 1869 by No.
(Untersuch. 179), mainly on the ground that both Ehud and
Gera are clan-names (cp 2, below). More recently, Wi. (Gesch.
1 158) has drawn attention to the improbability of a Benjamite
having been tribute-bearer for Ephraim, and points out that
there is little to support the existence of Benjamin before the
time of Saul. But the mention of Ehud s origin is due, it
would seem, to R D (so Moore, SBOT), and may very probably
be a later trait. That the kernel of the story itself is not
homogeneous has been shown by Wi. (Alttest. Vnt. 5$ ff.) ,
a satisfactory analysis has yet to be made. Cp BENJAMIN, 4.
2. b. Bilhan, in a genealogy of BENJAMIN (a.v. 9 ii. a) i Ch.
7 10 (aoofl [BL], a/ueiS [A], ihfir [Pesh.]).
EHUD p-irtN, A coA [BL], OJA [A] ; AttAud[Pesh.]),
in genealogy of Benjamin (i Ch. 86f). Gen. 46a
has EHI, on which see AHIRAM, and BENJAMIN, 9, i.
The name is doubtless the same as HHN (see above).
EKER ("l^I/, the pointing is uncertain ; Pesh. reads o
in the first syllable ; &KOP [BA], IK&P [L]), ben Ram,
a Jerahmeelite (i Ch. 227).
EKREBEL (erpeBH\ [B]), Judith 7 i8f. See AKRA-
BATTINE (end).
EKRON (ppr; AKKARGON [BAL]; so Jos. also
A(K)K&PO>N ; these [cp the Assyr.] suggest the pro
nunciation pipy, Akkaron).
The gentilic is Ekronite ( ^IpViJ) : Josh. 13 3 (cue/capo^ e]tn)s
[BAL]), i Sam. 5io (ao p icaAwi [e]iT))s [BAL] ; see below, 2).
Ekron, the most northerly of the five cities of the
Philistines, was first identified by Robinson with the
.. modern Akir, in 3i5i.s N. lat. , 4^ m. E.
1. Site. f TQm Yefrnd (JABNEEL, i) and 9 m. from the
sea ; in a pass which breaks the low hills that form the
northern boundary of the Philistine plain (PEF map,
Sh. xvi. ). Its position, inland, and not on the trunk,
but on a branch, of the great line of traffic northwards,
is probably the explanation of the fact that its name
1 See Del. Par. 310; Wi. Musri, Meluhtja, Main [ 98], $f.
1250
EKRON
is found in the early Egyptian records of conquest and
travel only once (Lists of Thotmes III. tfPW, 650) as
Aqar. Not 25 rn. from Jerusalem as the crow flies,
it lay nearer Israel than did any of its sister towns ; but,
though it was assigned to Judah, with its towns and
villages from Ekron to the sea (Josh. 1545/1 [P]), and
again to Dan (ib. 1943 [P]). we find (ib. 132 [D, but
probably from older sources]) all the regions of the
Philistines as far as the north border of Kkron which is
counted to the Canaanite specified as part of the much
land that still remained to be possessed after the
conquest, and this last representation best accords with
all the known facts.
Like her sisters Ekron possessed, along with a market,
the shrine and oracle of a deity BAAL/.EBUB (q.v.),
w . . 2 K. la. In i S. 5 10 612 / 16 it is said
2. History. that from Ekron the ark was returned to
the Israelites by the level road up the Vale of Sorek
to Beth-shemesh, not 12 m. distant. <5 BI -, however,
in this passage reads X<TKO.\UV in each case for Ekron
(cp 6 17 and see Dr. , H. P.Sm. , ad loc. ). Padi, king of
Ekron, remained aloof from the general revolt of
Philistia in 704 B.C. against Sennacherib, whose
prism-inscription gives the name as Am-kar-ru-na.
Padi s subjects delivered him to Hezekiah ; but
Sennacherib in 701 restored him to his throne.
The next notices of the town are by Esar-haddon
(KAT(-), 164) and Asur-bani-pal (Del., Par. 289); and
the next (apart from the general history of Philistia, Jer.
2520 Zeph. 24) not till i Mace. 10 89 (cp Jos. Ant. xiii.
44), where it is said to have been given in 147 B.C. by
King Alexander Balas to Jonathan the Maccabee for
services against Apollonius the general of Demetrius II. ,
an incident supposed by some, but on insufficient
grounds, to be referred to in Zech. 95-7 (see, however,
ZECHARIAH, BOOK OF).
After the destruction of Jerusalem by the Romans Jews settled
in Ekron. See OS (91 6 218 57) where it is spoken of as a large
( grandis, fteyion;) village between Azotus and Jamnia, Jerome
adding that some identified Accaron with Tunis Stratonis
(Caesarea). In noo A.D. King Baldwin marched from Jerusalem
to Ascalon by Ashdod inter quam et Jamniam, qua; super mare
sita est, Accaron dimisimus (Fulch. Carnot, 23, in Gest. Dei 404,
quoted by Robinson ; cp Brocardus, 10 186 ; Marin. Sanut. 165).
When visited by the present writer in 1891 Afa rwHS a small but
thriving village. It lies in a slight hollow by a well ; Petrie
doubts whether the ancient city can have been of much size
(PEFQ, go, p. 245). Built of mud, like most of the towns on the
plain, it contains hardly any ancient remains (Robinson and
PEFM 2 408). The plain about it is fertile but only partially
cultivated ; the railway from Jaffa to Jerusalem passes to the
north. G. A. S.
The connection between Hezekiah and Ekron has
long attracted the attention of students. Sennacherib,
TT V Vi w h se reference to Padi, king of Ekron,
la has been already mentioned, states in the
cincl xjKron. ,
same inscription that as a punishment for
Hezekiah s revolt he cut off parts of his territory and
gave them to certain Philistine kings, one of whom was
the king of Ekron. This statement has been taken by
M Curdy to refer to certain towns and villages originally
Philistine which Uzziah had taken from the Philistines
(as the Chronicler probably means to assert in 2 Ch.
266), which Ahaz had lost (2 Ch. 28 18) and which, as
we may infer from 2 K. 188 were retaken by Hezekiah.
The earlier statement respecting the surrender of Padi
implies, according to the same scholar, that Hezekiah
was recognised by the people of Ekron as their suzerain
(Expos., 1891 b, 389/1). So much at least appears to
be highly probable, that in the early part of the reign
of Hezekiah the king of Ekron was a vassal of the king
of Judah, and that he regained his independence only
through the humiliation inflicted on Hezekiah by Sen
nacherib. Hezekiah, however, might console himself
by the reflection that Ekron had been captured by the
Assyrians and Jerusalem had not.
In the reigns of Esarhaddon and Asur-bani-pal we
hear of a king of Ekron called Ikausu (with which
WMM compares the name Achish), or Ikasamsu, who
1251
ELAH, VALLEY OF
paid tribute to the great king (COT 241 KB 2149 240).
Soon after this a Hebrew prophet declares that Ekron
shall be rooted up, suggesting an etymology natural
from an Israelite point of view, names being taken as
prophetic of the fortunes of their bearers. The modern
name Akir suggests the far more probable meaning
1 sterile (so Guthe ; cp Ar. akara, Heb. atdr). The
dreary nature of the plain close to Ekron may serve to
account for the name. G. A. s. , if. ; T. K. C. , 3.
EL (^X), ELOHIM (D H^N). See NAMES, \\f.
ELA. i. (N^N) i K. 4i8 RV, AV ELAH. (q.v. 6).
2. (7)Aa IBA]) i Esd. 927; = Ezra 1026 EI.AM ii., i.
ELADAH, RV ELEADAH (fini^X 35 ; A&&AA [B],
\AAA [A], -A [L]). a clan-name in a genealogy of
El HRAlM (q.v. i., 12) individualised (i Ch. 7 20). On
the story of an ancient border contest in which Eladah
fell, see BERIAH, 2.
Other forms of the name are found : EI.EAD, r>. 21 ("1J//N ; om.
B, fAeoi [A], AooS [L]) and LADAN -.<. 36 RV (f^ S, for J^N ;
\aSSav [B], yoAaaia [A], \aSav [L]); cp also ERAN, EzER
ii., 3. See further, KPHKAIM i., 12.
ELAH (H7K, and i K. 4i8 fcON, an abbreviation of
some name beginning with ?N ; 51 ; HA& [BAL],
HAANOC [Jos.]).
1. An Edomite duke or perhaps clan (Gen. 3(141 rjAos [ADELJ,
i Ch. 152 ijAas [BA]); no doubt it is the well-known EI.ATH
(Aila), cp EL-PARAN (wilderness of Paran, Gen. 14e; see
PARAN) and ELOTH(I K. 9z6 2 K. 16e; see ELATH). See Di.
Gen., ad loc., and Tuch, ZDMG 1 170.
2. Son of Baasha, king of Israel in Tirzah. After little more
than a year he was killed by Zimri ; his armed men and captains
were busied at the time in the siege of Gibbethon, a Philistine
city: i K. 1>6 8 13^ (r)Aaai/ [B v. 6] Jos. Ant. viii. 124).
3. Father of Hoshea, king of Israel (2 K. 1^30 17 1 18 i 9).
4. A son of CALEB (f.v.) : i Ch. 415 6is (aAa [A], aSai, ofia
[B]). See KENAZ.
5. b. Uzzi in list of Benjamite inhabitants of Jerusalem (see
EZRA, ii. 5 [<*] 15(1! a), i Ch. 9s (om. B. TjAo [A], r)Aou [L]) ;
not mentioned in || Neh. 11.
6. Father of SHIMEI [3] (i K. 4i8 N^N RV ELA). His name
should be restored in 2 S. 23 n in place of the MT reading NSN
(see A<;EE), .and possibly also in v. 33 for Shammah. Cp the
ingenious discussion in Marq. (Fund. 20 f.).
ELAH, VALLEY OF (PI^P) pOtf, Valley of the
Terebinth, cp <S AI -), the scene of the combat between
David and Goliath (i S. 17 2), and of the rout of the
Philistines (2l9[io]).
(S s readings are : in i S. 17 2, tv TJJ KoiAaSi auroil [BA], njs
Spvo<; OVTOI KO.I OVTOI [L], <c. T>] Spuos (Aq. Theod.]; in v. 19
ec TTJ K. Trft fipuos [AL, om. B] ; in 21 g[io] K. TjAa [BAL].
Assuming that in Ephes-dammim and in the
valley of Elah mean the same thing, we have the
names Socoh and Azekah (5i) to guide us in de
termining the locality, also the implied fact that the
valley ran westward. No doubt the valley meant is the
\Vady fs-Sanf, one of the landmarks of the country,
which begins near Hebron, runs northward as far as
Shuweikeh, and thence westward by Gath and Ashdod,
to the sea, joining the N. Sukerer. On the positions
of the opposed armies, see EPHF.SDAMMIM. Accord
ing to W. Miller, 2 who has made a special study
of the country, the valley of Elah, or of the terebinth,
is the gentle ascent with a watercourse which leads
up from a break in the line of heights to Bet Nettif
(nearly opposite Shuweikeh, but more eastward).
In the valley beneath barley is already ripening.
The torrent is nearly dried up (see EPHESDAMMIM),
its bed is strewn with smooth white pebbles, and
the red sides of the bed are in places so steep that
you might call it a valley "within a valley." It is
this torrent-bed which the narrator, with perfect know
ledge of the country, refers to under the name of the
ravine; "the ravine" (N jn), he says, "was between
them." The suggestion for the explanation of N<:n
1 Read OVTOI ? (,lVt<)
~ The Least of all Lands, iy>ff. \ so Che. Aids. S$/.
3 Che. Aids, 8s/
1252
ELAM
is due to Conder (PEFQ, 75, 193). Some of his
other identifications are hardly correct (see EPHES-
DAMMIM, SHAARAIM, i) ; but he has here thrown great
light on the narrative. See also GASm. HG 226 ff.
One advantage in Miller s theory of the valley of Elah (see
above) is that it offers a simple explanation of the twofold name
of the valley which was the seat of war. A very fine specimen
of the butm-tret (terebinth) grows on the slope leading up to
Bet Nettlf. It is conceivable that the name of the great valley
as a whole was, even in antiquity, valley of the acacias (sant =
acacia, or rather mimosa). Wellhausen supposes the Wady es-
Sant to be meant by the Valley of Shittim in Joel 3[4]i8. It is
a pity that we can hardly explain Q m n D DT DEN as a corrup
tion of O BE - See EPHES-DAMMIM. T. K. C.
ELAM(DW; AiAAM[BKADQL]). Geographically,
the name describes the great plain E. of the lower
Tigris and N. of the Persian Gulf,
together with the mountain districts
which enclose it on the N. and E. , and to which the
Hebrew name Elam and the Assyrian Elamtu 1 (note
fem. ending) refer. It is nearly equivalent to the Susiana
and Elymais of the Greeks, and the mod. Khuzistan.
The native kings of this country called themselves lords
of Ansan (or Anzan) ; so late a king as Cyrus still calls
himself king of Ansan. This name was originally
borne by a city, the conquest of which by Gudea, vice
gerent (patesi) of Lagas, between 3500 and 3000 B.C.,
is recorded in an inscription (KB 3 39); it afterwards
designated a district in Elam (see CYKUS, i). Leav
ing the geography of this region, which has been fully
treated from cuneiform sources by Fried. Delitzsch (Par.
320-329), we pass to the references to Elam in the OT.
The earliest of these is that in Is. 226 (e\a,u.[e]iTcu
[BANQ]), where Elam and Kir are mentioned together
1. Geography.
2. Biblical
references.
as entrusted with the duty of blockading
Jerusalem. The difficulty in this passage
is that the Elamites were never loyal
subjects of the Assyrians, and are never mentioned in
the inscriptions as serving in an Assyrian army, but
often as allies of the Babylonians (Del., Par. 237;
Che. Intr. Is. 133; cp Proph. Is. 1132/1 ). Inter
polation has been suspected ; but this is not the only
admissible theory (see Isaiah, SBOT}. The next
certainly dated passage is Ezek. 8224 (eXa/i. [Q]), where
Elam and all her multitude are mentioned in a grand
description of the inhabitants of ShS5l. The fate of
Elam preoccupied more than one of the prophets ; all
the kings of Elam are referred to in Jer. 25 25 (om.
N*A*) immediately before all the kings of Media,
and a special prophecy against Elam is given in Jer.
4934-39 ( v - 3 6 eXa/* [X*]) ; but we cannot with any
certainty ascribe these to Jeremiah (see JEREMIAH,
BOOK OF). In Is. 21 2 (eXa/^eJcrcu [BANQ], late
exilic) Elam is named with Media as the destroyer
of Babylon, and a plausible emendation introduces
Elam ( go up, O Elam ) into a passage of similar
purport in Jer. 50 21 (late). In Dan. 82 (tuXa/i [BAQG
Theod.], f\v/j.a.i5i [87]) Shushan is referred to as in
Elam, though in Ezra 4 9 (ijXa/xcuoi [BA], aiXa/ztrcu
[L]) it is seemingly distinguished from it ; and according
to Is. 11 ii (cuXa/ufeJmoi [BA], eXa/a. [KQ], late),
Esth. 96i 3 (Shushan) Acts 2p (eXa^emu [Ti. WH]),
Jewish exiles resided in Elam in the post-exilic period.
We come lastly to Gen. 1022 [P] (cuXaS [E]), where
Elam is mentioned immediately before Asshur as a
son of Shem. How is this to be accounted for?
Not by the supposition that the Elamites were Semitic
(as we now use the word) either in language or in
physical type, or that at least a primitive Semitic popu
lation was settled in the lower parts of Elam. Not
by referring to the early conquest of Babylonia by the
Elamites ; this might account for the description of
Babylonia as a son of Japheth, but not for the case
before us : nor yet by the fact that a Kassite dynasty
1 Jensen connects Elamtu (Elam) with illamu, front, and
explains east region (ZA, 96, p. 351).
1253
ELATH
ruled in Babylonia in 1726-1159 B.C. a reference
which would only be in point if P were pre-exilic ; but
rather by the undoubted fact that Elam was repeatedly
chastised by the Assyrians, and that parts of it were
annexed by Sargon (A Z?2y3). P was enough of a
historian to know this ; he may indeed have inferred
it from Is. 226. The view of De Goeje (Th. T.,
70, p. 251) that Elam in Gen. lOza is the Persian
Empire is therefore to be rejected. As De Goeje
himself remarks, it is strange that, if Elam has this
meaning, Media should be a son of Japheth (v. 2). It
is true, however, that the prominence of Elam in the
Persian empire explains the precedence which it has
among the sons of Shem, and the insertion of Lud (i.e. ,
probably Lydia) after Arphaxad may receive a similar
explanation (see LUD, i).
The history of Elam is closely interwoven with that
of primitive Babylonia, and subsequently with that of
the Assyrian, the Babylonian, and the Persian empires.
See ARIOCH, 3; ASUR-BANI-PAL, 6; BABYLONIA,
42^; CHEDORLAOMER, CYRUS, NANEA, PERSIA,
SHUSHAN. T. K. c.
ELAM
[BA], M \. [Lj).
i. The b ne Elam were a family, 1254 in number, in the great
post-exilic list (see EZRA ii., 9, 8c), Ezra 2 7 (juaAan. [B],
atA. [AL])=Neh. 7 12 (eAajj. (K], cuA. [BAL])=i Esd. 612
(icuAafios [B]). In a passage from the memoirs of Ezra (Ezra
727-834; see EZRA ii., 5) the number of those in Ezra s
caravan (see EZRA i., 2 ; ii., 15 [i] d) is given as seventy,
Ezra 87 (i7Aa [B])=i Esd. 8 33 (aaju. [B], eA. [A]). One of the
best known members of this clan was SHECANIAH (g.v., 4),
(see EZRA i., 5, end), Ezral026=i Esd. 927 (ijAa [BA]); and
the clan was represented among the signatories to the covenant
(see EZRA i., 7), Neh. 20 14 [15].
The name Elam for a Jewish family or temple-guild
is highly improbable. There is abundant evidence that
names containing the root-letters ohy were Benjamite.
One of these is nD^y (Alemeth) which may have been
written cby. If the mark of abbreviation were over
looked it would be natural to insert or i after y.
Alemeth is identical with Almon, the name of a priestly
city in Benjamin (Josh. 21 18 P). Notice also the
occurrence of the name in 3 below.
2. The children of the other Elam (inN D^ j;) n Ezra 231
= Neh. 734 (Ezra, rjAajutap [BA], Neh. rjAajnaap [BA] ; [vioi]
aiAafi ere pou [L]) are unmentioned in || i Esd. 5, and seem to
have arisen from a needless repetition of v. 7 ; the numbers are
identical (cp Be.-Ry. 18).
3. b. Shashak, in a genealogy of BENJAMIN (g.v., 9, ii.) :
i Ch. 8 24 (aiAa^. [B], ar,A. [A], i,A. [L]).
4. A Korahite doorkeeper ; i Ch. 26 3 (twAa/u.) [BA]).
5. A priest in the procession at the dedication of the wall
(see EZRA ii. 13^), Neh. 12 42 (om. BN*A, euAa/u. [Kc.a mg.]).
T. K. C.
ELASA (&AACA [A]), i Mace. 9 5 RV. see BEREA.I.
ELASAH (nt2>lpK, God hath made, 31 ; cp
Asahel; 6 Ae\CA [ALQ]).
1. b. PASHUR (q.v., 3) in list of those with foreign wives (see
EZRA i., 5, end), Ezra 10 2 2(r)Aao-a)= i Esd. 9 22 (TALSAS, RV
SALOAS ; <raA0as [B], -Aoas [A]).
2. b. Shaphan, together with GEM ARI AH (i), was sent by Zede-
kiah to Nebuchadrezzar, king of Babylon and bore also at the
same time Jeremiah s letter to those in exile there ; Jer. 29 3
[<& 36 3] (eAeao-ai/ [B*H -ap [B am - ], -(rap [A]).
3. EV ELEASAH, b. Helez, a Jerahmeelite, i Ch. 239.7:
(cuas [B]).
4. EV ELEASAH, a descendant of Saul mentioned in a gene
alogy of BENJAMIN ( 9, ii. |3) ; i Ch. 837 (eorjA [B])=943
(rar)A [B], e<n)A [A]). Cp LAISHAH.
ELATH (J"l, cp nN in the Sinaitic Inscr. [Eut.
551]; AlAAG [BAL]; Dt. 28 AiAoJN [BAFL] ; 2 K.
1422-co [B], eAu)9 [A] ; 166 AiAAM [A]), also ELOTH
(ni^N, i K. 926 2 K. 166 A |AAM [A]; 2 Ch. 817
262, AlA&M [B]), an important Edomite town, whose
connection with Elah the phylarch or clan in Gen.
8641 is fairly obvious. Elath or Eloth (i.e., great
trees, perhaps date-palms?) is probably but a later
I2S4
EL-BERITH
designation of EL-PARAN (see PARAN) i.e., Elath
which lies on the desert of Paran. It was situated on
the NE. arm of the Red Sea, in the J\a.n\l\c Gulf
(which has derived its name from the place itself), and
was close to EZION-GEBKR (<j.v. ).
According to Pliny v. 11 12) it was situated 10 m. E. of Petra
and 150 m. SE. of Gaza. The region has always been famous
for its date-palms (cp Strabo, Iti 776) ; and Mukaddasi Ibn
el-Benna (1000 A.D.) in his geography says that Waila (Elath)
is the harbour of Palestine and the granary of Higaz rich in
palms and fishes (cp ZDPV1 171, and Wetzstein in Del. If oh.
u. Koh. 168). Owing to its commanding situation and central
position the possession of Elath has in all ages been fiercely
contested. According to Hommel (AHT 195), the ancient
town and port Mair mentioned upon old Bab. contract-tablets,
which gave its name to ships and textile fabrics, is the same as
Elath.
Apart from its occurrence under the form EL-PARAN
(see PARAN) (Gen. 146), it is mentioned as one of the
last stages of the Israelites (Dt. 28 ; see WANDERINGS,
4, ii, 13). It is mentioned also in I K. 926 2 Ch. 817,
in order to mark the position of EZION-GEBER (g.v. ).
It passed through various vicissitudes. It was repaired
by Azariah (2 K. 1422; see UZZIAH, i,), but was at a
later time recovered by Edom (2 K. 166 : with Kloster-
mann cancel Rezin and read Edom for Aram,
and Edomites [kr.] for Aramites [kt.] ; but cp
EDOM, 8). Jerome and Eusebius state that Elath
(Ailath, cu\a,u) in their time was a place of commercial
importance, and the seat of a Roman legion (OSW 8425
21075). It was renowned for its trading with India
(Theod. Qucest. in Jerem. 10049; Procop. Bell. Pers.
Ii 9 ).
Elath was the residence of a Christian bishop and of a Jewish
colony. After suffering at the hands of Saladin it dwindled
away. Abulfeda (1300) knows of it only as a place deserted
save for a castle which was built to protect the pilgrims who
journeyed along by Elath between Cairo and Mecca on the road
made by Ahmad ibn-Tulun, who reigned in Egypt in the latter
half of the ninth century. 1 It is known now as Akaba ( de
clivity ). Little is left of the former gate of Arabia but
some heaps of ruins, and the castle, which is still occupied by a
few soldiers. 2
EL-BERITH (Jin? ?N), Judg. 9 4 6 RV. See BAAL-
BERITH.
EL-BETHEL (^X JV3 h$, the god of Bethel 1 ),
the name given by Jacob to the sacred spot at Luz
where he had built an altar (Gen. 35?). @ ADEL , Vg. ,
Pesh. read simply Bethel ; but this is against Gen.
28ig. Perhaps we should read El-berith ( covenant-
God ), or El-berith-Israel, Israel s covenant-God.
T. K. c.
ELCIA(eAKei&[BXA]). Judith 81 AV, RV ELKIAH.
ELDAAH (H1TJ7I? God calls ? cp the Sab. form
"jKjrr, ZDMG2764.3 87399), a son of MIDIAN (Gen.
25 4 ; i Ch. 1 33 ).
(5 s readings are : in Gen., flepya^ia [A], i.e., Togarmah ;
(0)epn-afi(a) [B], pnafna [> rescr.], paya [L], ap. [E*], eop.
[EaL] ; and in Ch. A.Aa5a [B], A.Saa [AL].
ELDAD ("n pX, 28 ; eAA&A [ BAFL ] ; see ELIDAD
and cp DOD, NAMES WITH) and Medad (TVD, Sam.
Yll, cp MOOAAA [BAFL], whence read "HID, loved
one ? 56 ; cp ALMODAD) were two Israelites who
prophesied without being locally in contact with Yahw&
in the Tent of Meeting (or Revelation) where Yahwe
was present in the cloud (Nu. 1 1 26-29). Moses rejoiced
at the favour accorded to them, and longed that, not
only the guides and directors of Israel, but all Yahwe s
people might become prophets. The story (which is
related to Ex. 887-11 Nu. 11 16/. 12 1-15 ; see MIRIAM,
i) was written by one of the latest members of the
Elohistic school, whose aspirations are most nearly
paralleled by Jer. 3l3 4 Ezek. llig/. Joel 228/[3i/]
1 Cp Rob. BR \ 237 241 ; Niebuhr, Beschreibungen von
Arabien, 400; Buhl, Eciomiter, 39 f. ; and for an illustration of
this castle see Ruppel, Reise in ffubien, 248.
2 According to Jos. (Ant. viii. 64, lAaveus, ix. 12 i, TjAaOovs,
ed. Niese), Elath in former times was called Berenice. The
ordinary editions, it will be noticed, refer this remark to Ezion-
geber, which is less suitable.
1255
ELEAZAB
(Kue. Hex. 247/1). The names Eldad and Medad
(which perhaps do not belong to the original narrative)
were probably selected from a store of old traditional
names for the sake of assonance (cp Bera, Birsha ;
Jabal, Jubal, etc). It is not at all certain that the names
are almost identical. See APOCRYPHA, 23.
In its present form the prominent feature of the story is that
these two men (alone of tne seventy elders) for some unknown
reason remained behind, and prophesied without going into the
tent. Moses answer shows clearly that the real point is that
prophecy is not to be restricted to the few. In v. 26 the words
nSriMil IKS N^l D^inDn nani are probably a gloss. 1 A late
scribe took exception to the idea that the power of prophecy
could be given to anyone outside the seventy elect, and so in
serted the gloss with the above effect. The inclusion of Eldad
and Medad among those that were written down does not
seem, therefore, to belong to the original form of the story.
ELDERS (D^pT), Ex. 3i6. See GOVERNMENT, 16,
19 ; LAW AND JUSTICE, 8 ; and (for the Christian
eldership) PRESBYTER.
ELEAD OlPN), i Ch. 721. See ELADAH.
ELEADAH
, i Ch. 720 RV, AV ELADAH.
ELEALEH (iTX, and NN Nu. 32 37, God is
high ; eAe<\AH [BNAL]), a Moabite town always
associated with Heshbon (Is. 154 169, eA&AHCeN
[B ab AQ cp Sw. ad loc.~\ ; Jer. 4834 om. BS, eAe&Ah
[AQ]), and assigned in Nu. 32s 37 to the Reubenites.
Eusebius (0S< a > 26833) places it i R. m. N. from
Heshbon.
Probably Elealeh should be restored for the questionable
D Sx INta! in Is. 15s. To invent a place-name Erelayim
(Perles, Marti) is imprudent. It is quite true, however, that
the initial 3 ought to be the preposition.
Elealeh seems to be the modern el- A I ( the lofty ), an
isolated hill, with ruins, ^ hr. NNE. of Heshbon. See
SPli6-ig; Tristr. Moab, 339 /. ; Bad. 3 > 174.
T. K. C.
ELEASA, RV Elasa UA&CA [A], eA- [KV] ; ,l
Elesa [It.], Laisa [Vg.]), an unknown locality in the
neighbourhood of Jerusalem, where Judas the Maccabee
encamped before the encounter which resulted in his
defeat and death (i Mace. 9s). Josephus (Ant. xii. 11 1)
places Judas s camp in Berzetho (the readings vary :
frOu, jiLpfaOw, pap. and (3-r)p.); but this may be in
error for the Syrian camp which (i Mace. 94) was at
BEREA [i] (Syr. Birath}. A suggested identification is
Kh. n asd between the Beth-horons (PEFM 3 115).
Reland, however, suggests ADASA (q.v.).
ELEASAH (nb^N) i Ch. 2 3 9/ 837 EV. See
ELASAH, 3, 4.
ELEAZAR OTtf pX- God has helped 23, 28, 84 ;
eAe&Z&p [BAFL] ; cp Eliezer, Lazarus, and Phoen.
"ITJHOE N, iTjDjn, etc. , Sin. "HyDIp, etc. ). BothEleazar
and Eliezer are very common names, especially in post-
exilic times and in lists of priests ; with regard to the
authenticity of the latter see EZRA i. i, 2, 5 end ; ii.
J 5 (iK *3&
i. The third son of Aaron and Elisheba (Ex. 623
[P]) is mentioned often in P, but only twice in JE,
according to Driver viz., in Dt. 106 and Josh. 24 33. 2
What we learn of him is to this effect. He discharged
priestly functions together with Aaron and his brothers
Nadab, Abihu, and Ithamar (Ex. 28i), and after the
two elder brothers had died childless Ithamar and he
were left to carry on the duties alone (Nu. 84), Eleazar
himself becoming the prince of the princes of the
Levites and superintending those that had the charge
of looking after the sanctuary (Nu. 832 ; cp 1637^!
[17 2 ^] 19 3 /). His special duty with respect to the
.T applied to persons is a late expression, and the
words nSriNrt INS N 1 ?! are omitted in H-P 16, 52, 73, 77 and in
the first hand of 131.
2 From Dt. 106 Di. and Dr. infer that JE, as well as P, knows
of Aaron as a priest, and of Eleazar as Aaron s successor.
Robertson Smith, however, holds (OT/Cf 2 ), 405, n. 2) that Dt
1256
ELEAZAR
things necessary for the sanctuary and its service is de
tailed in Nu. 4 16. Shortly before Aaron s death he
was invested on Mt. Hor with his father s garments of
authority (Nu. Wtisff. ; cp Dt. 106 [D]). He now
appears as Moses coadjutor, taking the place of Aaron ;
together they took the census of the people (Nu. 2663),
and divided the spoil of the Midianites (Nu. 31 12^). It
was to them that the daughters of Zelophehad came
to sue for an inheritance (Nu. 27 1^), and the b ne
Reuben and b ne Gad for a pasture-land for their
flocks (Nu. 32 2 /~.). 1 The charge was given to Joshua
in the presence of Eleazar, who was to inquire for him
by the judgment of Urim before Yahwe (Nu. 27 & / ) ;
just as his son Phinehas is said to have done, previous
to the assault on Gibeah (Judg. 2028). 2 Henceforth in
the accounts of the dividing of the land etc. Eleazar
is mentioned before Joshua (Nu. 8228 34 17 Josh. 14 1
1?4 19si 21 1). 3 At his death he was buried at Gibeah
of Phinehas (Josh. 24 33 [E]), which had been given to
his son in Mt. Ephraim. He married one of the
daughters of Putiel (Ex. 625), and the priesthood is said
to have remained in his family till the time of Eli, and
again from Zadok till the time of the Maccabees state
ments which need a strictly critical examination. See
ZADOK, i. s. A. c.
2. Son of Abinadab, temp. Samuel. According to
a comparatively late story the ark was deposited for
twenty years in the house of Abinadab at Kirjath-jearim
under the guardianship of his son Eleazar (i S. 1 if.}.
Eleazar in this idealisation of history is intended as
a contrast to that other son of Abinadab (Uzza) who
proved wanting in the reverence essential to a minister
of the ark (2 S. 636). His name is probably meant
to suggest this contrast. Observe that Eleazar was
specially sanctified for his functions. See ARK, 5.
T. K. c.
3. b. Dodo the Ahohite (i Ch. 11 12), or b. Dodai
b. Ahohi (2 S. 23g ; but see AHOHITE [2]), one of
David s three heroes. His great exploit (which was in
the valley of Rephaim : see PAS-UAMMIM) is recorded
in 2 S. 23g/. (@ 1! , however, has e\eai>av) and i Ch.
11 13/1 In both passages the text has to be emended ;
but there is much difference among critics (cp Klo. ,
Marq. Fund. 16, and H. P. Smith). The name of
Eleazar does not appear in i Ch. 27 4, though we
expect to find him, not Dodai, in high command in
David s army. Compare, however, DODAI, and note
that an Eliezer b. Dodavahu occurs in 2Ch.2(>37.
See ELIEZER (3).
4. A Merarite : i Ch. 232i/ (cXtafap v. 21 [A]) 2428.
5. i Esd. 8 43 = Ezra 8 16, ELIEZEK [10].
6. In Ezra 8 33 an Eleazar, son of Phinehas, is mentioned as
superintending the weighing out of gold and silver in the
temple: i Esd. 863 and (om. BN*A, but eAec^ap N c - am ff- L)
Neh. l-2 4 2.
7. A priest in the list of those with foreign wives (see EZRA i.,
Send), i Ksd. 9 19 (eAeaxpos [BA]) = Ezra IDiS, ELIEZER (7).
8. An Israelite (i.e., a layman), son of Parosh : Ezra 1625
i Esd. 926.
9. The fourth son of Mattathias (i Mace. 2 5), who bore the
surname Avaran (cp AuRANUs). 4 According to 2 Mace. 823^."
(the words after Moserah ) is plainly a late and unauthor
ised gloss ; he refers to v. 8, where the institution of the Levitical
priesthood is assigned to a later stage of the wanderings. It is
of ELIKZER that the older tradition speaks, as a son, however,
not of Aaron, but (together with Gershom) of Moses. In fact,
in JE, Moses has the prior claim to the priestly office, and in J
Aaron originally is not mentioned at all. In the genealogies of
P even, one main branch of the tribe of Levi is still called
Gershom, and another important member is called Mushi i.e.,
the Mosai te (see We. Prot.W i&S; ET i^f.).
1 32 1-17 is of composite origin. How much belongs to P
(more precisely Po) is disputed ; but the mention of Eleazar the
priest beyond question comes from this source (see Dr., Intr.
64; Holzinger, flint., Tabellen, 10).
2 Judg. 20 in its present form is post-exilic, and vv. 2-jb, z8a
are no doubt glosses (see Moore, Judges, 434 ; Kue. Einl. 20,
n. 10).
3 All in P ; in JE on the contrary Joshua is always represented
as acting alone ; cp 146 17 14 etc.
4 [ANV] avapav, Jos. (Ant. xii. C i) avpav, apayand afiapav ;
Syr. pin- In 643 gives a-avpav which is probably a mistake
1257
ELEMENTS
his brother Judas appointed him to read aloud the sacred book,
and with a variation of his own name as watchword ( the Help
of God ) he led the first band of the army against Nicanor and
completely defeated him; in 2 Mace. 1815 this is credited to
Judas himself. In the fight near Beth-zacharias against An-
tiochus Eupator(i63 u.c.) Eleazar nobly sacrificed his life (see
1 Mace. 643).
10. A learned scribe, who at the age of ninety years suffered
torture and martyrdom at the hands of Antiochus Epiphanes,
2 Mace. 618-31 (eAeafopo? [VA]). He was designated by the
early Christian fathers proto-martyr of the old covenant,
foundation of martyrdom (Chrys. Horn. 3 in Mace, et al.).
The narrative in 3 Mace. (5 has apparently borrowed the name
Eleazar from this scribe. See APOCALYPTIC, 66.
11. Father of JASON (<?.i>., 3), i Mace. 817.
12. Sirach Eleazar, father of Jesus (Ecclus. 6027) ; see
ECCLF.SIASTICUS, 2.
13. b. Eliud, placed three generations above Joseph (Mt. 1 15).
S. A. C. , I, 3fr ; T. K. C. , 2.
ELEAZURUS, RV ELIASIBUS (eAi&ciBoc [A]),
i Esd. 924 = Ezralfj2i ELIASHIB, 4.
ELECTRUM (^Wn), Ezek. 1 4 RV m e-, EV AMBER.
EL-ELOHE-ISRAEL (S?^ <i n t ?N ^S, God, the
God of Israel ), the name given by Jacob to the altar
which he had built at Shechem (Gen. 33 20). Perhaps
we should read God of the tents ( <l ?nN) of Israel ;
1 -TiT .
his tent (iVnx) precedes in v. 19. T. K. C.
EL ELYON (i l^l? *?N), Gen. 14 18. See NAMES,
118.
ELEMENTS (CTOIXEIA; elementa). "LroLxelov, from
crroixos,. a row, a line, a rank, means literally what
_ , belongs to a row or line, a member of a
8ra . series, a part of an organism. This funda-
is ory menta i meaning gives the key to the ex-
ceedingly interesting history of the word from
its use in Plato down to Modern Greek. All the special
senses in which it is employed, whether usual or
occasional 1 some of them very remarkable can be
carried back to this, though between the meanings one
of a row and demon is a long way. It conduces to
clearness if we keep in mind its three special concrete
applications.
(a) It denotes a letter, as one of the series of letters
constituting a word or even a syllable i.e. , not a
written sign (ypa-n^a.} but a speech-sound (Plato, Deff.
414 E : CTOixeToj <f>wvfjs <f>uvji dcriVfleros : similarly
Arist. Poet. 20). Thus, for example, the letter p is rd
pcD rb ffTotxe tov (Plat. Crat. 426 D), the alphabet is T&
<rroixe?a, and alphabetical is /card (TTOIX^OV.
This concrete meaning explains the metonymy by which the
plural is so frequently used to denote the beginnings, rudiments,
or elements of a science or art the ABC as we say ; cp the
by-name Abecedarians given to a group of Anabaptists at the
Reformation, and see the Oxford Engl. Diet., s.r. It is enough
to recall the title of Euclid s work (oroixeta) on the Elements
of Geometry. Many other examples are to be found in the
Lexicons.
In this sense the word is met with only once in the
Bible, ye have need again that some one teach you the
rudiments of the first principles of the oracles of God (ret
(TToixela. TTJS apxfy r ^ v ^oyiwv rov 0eoC), Heb. 5 12,
where the words T?}S dpxys intensify the idea, the be
ginnings of the elements. 2
(6) Shadow of the sundial (e.g., Aristoph. Eccl. 652 :
orav 77 deicd-irovv rb ffToi-xelov, when the shadow
measures ten feet ). The shadow is here doubtless
thought of as a line which hour by hour grows longer
or shorter and by degrees marks the progress of the
day. SiTotxeiov, properly speaking, is a fraction of this
line, and then by synecdoche becomes the line itself.
This meaning is not met with in the Bible.
(c) Groundstuff , element, as constituent part of
an organism. In this sense it was not used (so ancient
for eAeafapos avpav , <SN V corrects to avpav. The meaning
is doubtful. Some connect with -|in be white and refer it to
Eleazar s white complexion ; others understand it to mean
beast-sticker ; see Stanley, Jewish Church, 8318.
1 On this distinction see H. Paul, Prinzipien d. Sprach-
gesch.V), 1898, p. 68^ ; cp ET of 2nd ed. (Strong, 90, p.
2 Cremerl 8 ), 909.
1258
ELEMENTS
tradition has it) before Plato ; but from his time onward
it became a current meaning. The early philosophers
assumed sometimes one, sometimes more than one,
primary constituent element of the universe. Em-
pedocles reckoned four fire, water, earth, and air.
Many citations from non-biblical writers will be found
in the Lexicons ; and Philo and Josephus also use the
word in this sense. In the Greek Bible the following
examples occur : Wisd. 7 17, For he himself gave me
an unerring knowledge of the things that are ; to know
the constitution of the world and the operation of the
elements (avcr-aaiv /crfcr/iou Kal Ivepyeiav aroi xtlwv} ,
19 18, the elements changing their order one with
another (Si favrCiv yap TCL aroi^la. ne6apfj.o&fj.fva) ;
4 Mace. 12 13 [the tongues of men] of like passions
with yourself, and composed of the same elements
(roi>j opoioTraOe is Kal fK T&V avrCiv yeyovAras aTOi\eluv ;
cp 2 Mace. 7 22, the first elements [ffroixeiuffiv] of
each one of you ); and, according to most exegetes,
2 Pet. 3 10, the day of the Lord will come as a
thief ; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a
great noise (0Toix a ^ Kawovneva XvOr/fferai [AKL,
etc., \vd-qffovTai\), and the earth and the works that
are therein shall be burned up ; also v. 12, the day
of God by reason of which the heavens being on fire
shall be dissolved, and the elements shall melt with
fervent heat (5i* T)P oupavol Trvpov/Mevoi \v8r)<rovTat
Kal ffTOfXfla. Ka.vffovneva. T-f]Kfrai). The rendering
elements here gives an excellent sense, and it would
be mere pedantry to ask why the elements are named
along with the heavens and the earth ; the writer s
purpose is to depict the last day in the boldest colours,
and he seeks to heighten the effect of his picture by
bringing in the ffroLxeia. At the same time the inter
pretation which takes the word here to refer to demonic
life-spirits (see below, 2) is entitled to attention. Though
the sense of rudiments or beginnings, alluded to
above, is hardly to be traced to this last concrete
application of the word, the very usual metonymic sense
of fundamental condition, thesis, principle, rule
of which there is no example in the Bible is doubt
less to be taken from this meaning. On the other hand,
the biblical passages receive much light from another
part of the history of the word : the concrete sense in
which in late Greek the word ffTOixfta is specialised to
mean the planets (as being the elements and so to
say supports of the heavens) 1 and, more widely,
the stars. 2
Now every element has its god ; 3 so also every star.
In the Orphic Hymns the personified ether is called the
noblest element, orotxeio^ apiffrov (64), Hephaestus
is called the perfect element, ffroixelov afie^es (604),
in the great Paris magic- papyrus v. 1303 the moon-
goddess is the immortal element, ffToixtiov &&lt;f>6apTov,
and in the so-called nymph of the world, the K6pr)
K0(r/j.ov of Hermes Trismegistus (ap. Stob. Eel. i.
385 12^! ), the aroi.\f.l.o. come as gods before the supreme
God, and make their complaint of the arrogance of
men. 4 Conceptions such as these perhaps owe their
origin to eastern influences ; but at any rate they have
their analogues in the Jewish idea that all things as, for
example, fire, wind, clouds, stars -have their proper
angels or spirits, 5 a thought which is operative in
primitive Christian literature also ; see Rev. 7 1 (four
angels standing at the four corners of the earth, holding
the four winds of the earth), 14 18 (another angel . . .
which hath power over fire), 16s (the angel of the waters ;
1 Dieterich, 61. The present writer regards as much less
probable the conjecture (see Pape s WorterbucK) that the planets
are so called as having a controlling influence upon the affairs
of men.
2 It is further applied to the signs of the zodiac, and even to
the entire heaven with its system of stars ; the metonymic signi
fication, great stars = great men, also occurs.
3 Dieterich, 57, 6t.
* All the above examples are taken from Dieterich, bof.
5 Spitta, Der zit-eite Brief des Petrus und der Brief ties
Judas, 1885, p. 265^ ; Everling, 70^!
1259
ELEMENTS
cp Jn. 64), 19 17 (an angel standing in the sun). It is
from these notions probably that we ought to explain
the peculiar meaning of ffroixeiov, in which it stands,
by synecdoche, for divine being, spirit, demon,
genius. At what period this use first arose is obscure ;
but doubtless it is comparatively old. Our main ex
amples l are found in the Testamentum Salomonis (see
APOCRYPHA, 14), which in its present form bears
evidence of Christian editing, and by K. A. Bornemann
is attributed to the time of Lactantius. 2
Seven female spirits (n-i/ru/iara) come to Solomon, and,
questioned, reply : We are some of the thirty-three genii of the
ruler of the underworld . . . and our stars are in heaven . . .
and we are invoked as goddesses (WKI? e<rfiei> fK riav rpiaxov-a
Tpiiav <rrOL\eiiav rov KOiTfj.oKpdropO ; rov CTKOTOVS . . . <cai ra
iarpa yfiiav iv ovpai/to et<rix . . . Kal uis Seal KaAovficda ;
Fleck, 3 I2o_/). Afterwa rds come six and thirty spirits (n-i/ev/naTa)
to Solomon, and, questioned, make answer : We are the thirty-
six genii, the rulers of this underworld, . . . since the Lord
God has given thee power over every spirit, in the air, upon
the earth and below the earth, therefore we also like the rest
of the spirits stand before thee (i^ieis fa-fiev ra rpiaKovra iff
(TTO<.\(ia oi KO<Tfj.oKpaTopfi; rov GKOrovs TOUTOU . . . iirei&r)
Kvpios o $eby UStaKC <rot TTJV fovo~iav firl iravros irvfVfj.aro ;
acpiov re Kal iiriyfiov Kal Kara\9oviov, Sia rovro Kal I7fift
irapitrra.fj.eda. ivuiniov <rov o ra XotTra irveyfiara). The first
calls himself the first decan of the zodiac circle (rrpuiTos
&fKavo<; rov <a5iaKOv KVK\OV , Fleck, I29/.). Plainly stoicheion
here is absolutely synonymous with god and spirit, and we
are here dealing, in part, with star-gods. Further, the usage
of writers of the Byzantine period has to be noticed. Sophocles
(Greek Lexicon of the Roman .and Byzantine periods, memorial
edition, 1888, p. 1012) gives under trrot\dov genius, the
spirit guarding a particular place or person, also talisman,
Theoph. Cont. 379 14, Leo Gram. 287, Anon. Byz. 1209 C.
Cp the same Lexicon also, s.w. aroixeioAaTpijs, <rroi.xti.6ia ( to
perform talismanic operations upon anything ), <rroix.o>p.ariK6<;
( talismanic ), 0Tocx wo-t? ( the performing of talismanic opera
tions upon anything ), and o~roi\ei<i)TiK6$ ( talismanic ). Most
instructive of all, however, is the usage of modern popular
Greek. The ordinary name by which the local tutelary spirits
are designated in modern Greece is (rroi^fio (TO) i.e., o-roixfiov,
element. 4 Skarlatos, AefiKOK . . ., gives the meaning <c<rroi-
KiSia Saifioi La f/ fyavratrfiara {it.). All sorts of trroixtia occur ;
the oToixeio of the threshing-floor, the rock, the river, the bridge,
and so on (ib. 187-9); <rroi\tuaii.evos may mean one under the
protection of a oroi^eio (it. 196). This employment of the
word for tutelary spirit is a specialisation of the more general
meaning of spirit, and speaks for the relative antiquity of the
latter use ; in the ideas and vocabulary of the common people,
as Jacob Grimm among others has shown, the conception of a
remote antiquity will often be found to survive.
Here then is the historical line of progression from
the original meaning of the word to that of tutelary
spirit : member of a series, element, elemental deity,
deity (demon, spirit), tutelary deity.
In Gal. 43, where Paul says : ... so we also, when
we were children, were held in bondage under the ele-
_ . . ments of the world (uirb ra ffTot\eta rou
r.ni 9a? K6ff/j.ov), and in v. 9, where he says, But
now that ye have come to know God, . . .
how turn ye back again to the weak
and beggarly elements (tiri TO, dcrOfvij Kal
a) whereunto ye desire to be in bondage
roixeia is taken by most interpreters as
meaning rudiments (so RV) in the sense indicated
above (i a) ; Paul is supposed to mean the crude first
beginnings of religion in those who belong to the /c6o>tos.
Others, however, start from the meaning given in i c
and take Paul to be speaking of the elements of the
world, world being here taken in its well-known
ethical sense ; kosmos is the central idea ; under the
elements of the world (virb ra. ffroixeia TOV
l. 282
(and 2 Pet.
3 10 12)
over again,
1 Dieterich (Atra.ras, 61) holds that in Wisd. 7 17 (see above)
demon is a possible rendering as well as element ; this, how
ever, is not probable, the jri/tv/tara (not winds but spirits )
being named in v. 20.
2 Ztschr. fur die hist. Thcol., 1844, Hft. 3, 15. An edition
and discussion of this hitherto much-neglected writing would
be very welcome and, in view of recent discoveries in the field of
oriental Greek magic, most opportune.
3 F. F. Flecki Anec(iota(l*\p*\c, 1837)= F. F. Fleck, IVissen-
schaftlichc Reisedurchdas stidl. Deutschland, /(alien, Sicilien,
Frankreich, 23.
4 Bernh. Schmidt, Das Volkslebcn der Neugriechcn u. das
hellenische Alterthum, 1 183 ( 71). For the history of the word
Schmidt refers to Korais, "ATOKTO, iii. 2 549.
1260
ELEMENTS
is merely an amplification for under the world
rbv icb<r/j.ov).
This last interpretation is certainly open to the objection that
in v. g only o-roixeta are mentioned, whereas if Ko<7/iios had been
the main idea, we should have expected the shortened phrase to
run VTTO TOV . . . Ko<rfj.ov and not virb TO. . . . oroixeia. The
first interpretation also, however, is not free from difficulty. In
v. 3 it is the law, in one sense or another, that is being spoken
of: this is shown by the context (cp especially v. 5 : vn-o vo/j.ov) ;
but in : . 9 the topic is the gods of the Gentile Galatians. It is
not easy to understand how Paul can here be speaking of the
law as rudiments after he had so shortly before been referring
to it (3 24) as a tutor (iraiSayiayos) and likening it (4 2) to
guardians and stewards (en-tYpon-cu and <H<COI>O/OUH) ; nor is it
easy to see how he can say of rudiments that they are aaSevij
(cat 7TTa>x<* ; a weak and beggarly ABC is not a very happy
phrase. Further, the whole context in both places points less
to conceptions of material objects than to personal beings ; see
especially v. 9.
In view of these difficulties, there is much to be said
for the interpretation which takes the word in the other
sense (see if, end) of spirit, demon. Paul, in this
view, is speaking of cosmic spiritual beings, and by them
he understands, in v. 3 the angels by whom, according
to 3 19, the law was ordained, and in v. g the heathen
deities whom the Galatians had formerly served. Jewish
bondage to the law, as being bondage to angels, and
Gentile service of strange gods as being bondage to
demons, are alike slavery to the powers of the world
(die kosmischen Machte). This interpretation, the
essence of which consists in taking <rroixoa as meaning
personal powers (personliche Machte) has been upheld
with a large variety of modifications by Hilgenfeld, 1 A.
Ritschl, 2 Holsten, 3 Klopper, 4 Spitta, 5 Everting, 6 A.
Dieterich," whose allusion to all the modern theological
commentators seems hardly called for.
It may fairly be conjectured that the phrase the elements
of the world (oroide la. TOV KOCT-JU.OU) is a technical expression
which does not owe its origin to Paul. That it was a current
(T
KOO>iOKpaTOpos.
In Col. 2820, also, this last interpretation seems
preferable to the rendering elements of the world
or rudiments of the world. The context is in both
places similar to that in Gal. 43. By the (rrotxe?a rov
K6fffj.ov, which he brings into sharp contrast with Christ,
Paul intends in one sense or another the law ; but he.
mentions, instead of the law, the personal cosmic powers
standing behind the law, the angels ; whom indeed, he
goes on expressly to name in Col. 2 15 as the princi
palities and the powers (rds apx&s /cat rds f fowri as).
We thus obtain a surprising light upon the much-
disputed passage in Col. 2i8, where mention is made
of a worship of angels (0pr/ffKfla rCiv dyyt\ui>) : by
the angel service of the Colossians he means their law
service (cp Gal. 819) ; all the learned discussions about
one particular kind of angel worship or another now
become superfluous.
That in 2 Pet. 3 10 12 the rendering elements is an
adequate one has already been shown ( i c). Yet it is
not impossible that personal powers might be meant
here also, as Spitta 8 and Ktihl 9 suppose. The main
objection that the expressions dissolve and melt
(\v0ri<reraL, Tr/Kerui) could hardly be used of personal
spirits is well met by Spitta, by a reference to the
Test. xii. Pair. , Levi, 4 (ed. Sinker, 140), where, in a
similar way, in the description of the judgment day, it
is said the whole creation being agitated and the
invisible spirits melting (xal irda-r/f Kricrews K\ovovf^vi)s
Kal rCov dopdruv Trvevfjidruv TTIKO^VUV}.
Literature. Resides the commentaries on Gal. and Col., and
various occasional contributions on the subject, cp Schnecken-
burger, Theol. Jahrbb. 7 ( 48), 445-453 ; Kienlen, Beitr. z. d.
1 DerGalaterbr., 1852, p. 66; ZWTh., 1858, p. 99; 1860, p.
208 ; 1866, p. 314.
2 Christl. Lehrc von der RcchtfertigungC*\ 2 252^ ( 89).
Das Evangel, ties Paulus, i. 1 i68/ ( 80).
* Der Br. an die Kolosser, 360^ ( 82).
As above, 265^ 6 p . JOj f. 7 p . 6iy c
8 As above, 265^. 9 Meyer s Kotitm.^) 12 4507-: (97).
1261
ELEPHANT
theol. WisscMschaflcn, ed. Reuss and Cunitz ( 51), 2 133-14-;
Schaubach, Commentatio qua exponihir i/iii,/ oroiYfia TOW
KotTiiov inNTsibi vclint, 1862; Blom, 7V;. 7 , 1883, iff. ; Ever-
ling, Die faulinische Angelologie u. Diitnonologic ( &&), 66 ff~.
Albrecht Dieterich, Abraxas; Stitdien ziir Rel.-gesch. del
s/>iiterenAltertn}>is( <)i), bojff.; Cremer, Bibl.-theol. Worterb.W
[9Sl, 97^- : K- v - Hincks, The meaning of TO. aroixfia TOV
Koo-fiov in JBL 15 ( 96) i^ff. ; Hermann Diels, Elementuiit
K/ne Vorarbeit ztim yriec hisclicit und lateinischen Thesaurus,
99. This work provides abundant material for the history of
o-ToixeiQK and elcmentum, if it does not contribute anything
really neV bearing on the biblical passages. The present article
was written before the appearance of Diel s book ; but, on the
whole, it represents as far as it comes into touch with this far
more comprehensive work the same ideas. GAD
ELEPH (*]?Nn, Ha-eleph, i.e., the thousand, Josh.
1828) is supposed to be a Benjamite town, and, according
to Conder and Henderson, is the modern Lifta ; see,
however, NEPHTOAH.
<S> reads KO.I oTJAeAa^) [Al, K. creAaeAa^ [L], to which apparently
corresponds B s (reArjKaf (variants from H-P are oTjSoAeA^
erijAaAejii, o-eAaAajc, <rt>a\eO xeAaeAe^) ; Pesh. has NT3J perhaps
punctuating as *]?K a chieftain ?
Before identifying, it would have been well to
examine the text. The two names before Jebus
in < B are /cat ffe\rjKa.v (cat dapetjXa i.e. nSsnm y^ ;
KO.V is a duplication of /cat ; <re\ri corresponds to jj^.
Zela and Taralah therefore answer in " to Zelah and
Ha-eleph in MT. Ha-eleph (which is an impossible
name) must be a corruption of Tar alah or rather (see
TARALAH) of Irpeel (Wv) ; p,S comes straight from
7NS. T. K. C.
ELEPHANT (eAe<J)Ac). The word elephant occurs,
outside the Apocrypha, only in the AV m e- of Job 40 15
1 Early for BEHKMOTH [</* -. i] and in the
references AVmp of r K 1022 2 ch - 921 ( <el -
i C1C1 CULL-Cb. i ) IIV/-T r -
phant s teeth ) for IVORY [g.v.]. It is
an elephant of the Indian species that appears on the
Black Obelisk (see below) ; but the African elephant also
was no doubt known.
The two species, Elcfihas indicus (tnaximus ) and E. afri-
canns, together with such fossil forms as the Mammoth (name
probably from Behemoth),! the Mastodon, and others, consti
tute the Mammalian order Proboscidea. The Indian elephant
is now found, in a state of nature, in India, Burmah, the Malay
Peninsula, Assam, Cochin China, Ceylon, and Sumatra, frequent
ing the wooded districts ; its African congener lives throughout
Africa south of the Sahara desert, but is retreating before the
approach of civilised man. In Pleistocene times it spread as far
north as Europe.
The Indian species has been domesticated since pre
historic times and is still largely used in the service
of man. The male alone as a rule has tusks. The
African elephant is, in the male, larger than the Indian,
the ear-flaps and the eyes are larger and the forehead
more convex, there are two finger-like processes on the
trunk instead of one, and the pattern on the teeth is
different ; both sexes have tusks. In temper this species
is usually fiercer and the animal is undoubtedly more
powerful and active than its Indian relative.
It is certain that elephants were known to the old
inhabitants of Egypt and Assyria, by whom they were
sometimes hunted for the sake of their ivory and their
hides (KB 1 39 , Tiglath-pileser I. ; As. it. Eur. 263,
Thotmes III. ; Houghton, TSBA 8 123^ ). There is an
elephant among theanimals figured on the Black Obelisk 2
of Shalmaneser II. (858-824). Of course there may
have been more than one elephant in the tribute from
the land of Musri ; but one was enough for the purpose
of representation.
Elephants in warfare first appear among the Persians.
Darius at Arbela (331 B.C.) employed 15 of them.
2 Use in They were often used by the Seleucids,
warfare frec l uent mention of them being made in
the Maccabean wars (cp i Mace. 834 630
86 Ils6 2 Mace. 11 4 1815 etc.). These elephants,
The b may have become tn through Slavonic influence.
2 The term used for elephant in Shalm. Obel. Epigr. III.
is baziati. The word al-af> also occurs, but in the sense of ox
not elephant (Wi. KB 1 151). Houghton suggests the wild
buffalo. Cp IVORY.
1262
ELEUTHEROPOLIS
some of which carried towers (i Mace. 637/1 ), were
almost certainly of the Indian species. Special mention is
made of the Indian driver (6 Ivd&s, i Mace. ib. ). The
war elephants were placed under the care of a special
officer (2 Mace. 14i2). In classical times the African
species was tamed by the Egyptians and took part
both in the Carthaginian wars and in the Roman shows.
Since in recent times the natives of Africa have not
shown sufficient ability to tame this somewhat restive
animal it has been suggested that the Carthaginians
imported their animals from the East ; J but there is
little reason to doubt that the true E. africanus was
employed in the Punic wars and even accompanied
Hannibal s army across the Alps. The presence of
African elephants in modern menageries proves that
this species is capable of domestication and education
in the hands of competent trainers. The elephant
rarely breeds in captivity. A. E. s. S. A. C.
ELEUTHEROPOLIS (eAeYOeporrpAic, free cit y.
with play on double meaning of DHH, Horites and
_. . free men ? cp Ber. rabba, 42), the name
1. History. Bestowed about A.i>. 200 by the emperor
Septimius Severus on Betogabra, now Beit Jibrin, an
important place in Judaea, mentioned already (see BEN-
HESED, 2). How central it was appears from the fact
that Eusebius in the Onom. often reckons the distances of
other towns with reference to it. It was in fact the capital
of a large province during the fourth and the fifth cen
turies of our era. It was also an episcopal city of
Palestitia Prima (Notifies Ecclesiastics, 6). In the
Talmudic period it had a large Jewish population, and
produced some eminent Rabbins.
The Talmudic name is Beth-gubrin (Neub. Geog. 122^).
The Doctrine of Acldai (yd cent. A.D.) expressly refers to
Eleutheropolis as called Betgubrin in the Aramaic tongue
(Nestle, I Efr Q, 79, p. 138 ; see ELKOSHITE, 3). The name
Betogabra OaiVoya./3pa) is given to it by Ptolemy (v. 16 6). It
also appears in the Peutinger Tables as Betogubri, and we can
hardly be wrong in correcting, in Niese s text of Jos. BJ iv. 8 i,
UijrajSpip into Br)Taya/3pti . Whether the name alludes to pre
historic giants, is beyond our knowledge.
For some centuries the Grnjco- Roman name sup
planted the older designation ; but when, 150 years after
the Saracenic conquest, the city was destroyed, the latter
revived (Reland, Pal. 222, 227 ; Gesta Dei per Francos,
1044).
On this site, which they called Gibelin (a corruption of Ar.
tBeth-]gebrim), the Crusaders in the twelfth century built a
castle. After the battle of Hattln (1187 A.D.), it fell for a time
into the hands of Saladin. Retaken by Richard of England, it
was finally captured by Bibars, and remained in possession of
the Saracens until its destruction in the sixteenth century ; ruins
of it still remain (see Porter, Syria and Pal., 256^).
The site of Eleutheropolis, in spite of the minute
definitions of early writers, passed so completely out of
., mind that Robinson had to discover it. All
the early statements point to Beit Jibrin,
which is now a large village, N. of Merash, situated in
a little nook or glen in the side of a long green valley.
Near it begin the famous caverns, to the excavation of
which the limestone of the adjoining ridges was very
favourable. We may not follow the Midrash which
ascribes their origin to the HORITES [</.v.] ; but the
antiquity of their use can hardly be doubted.
Jerome already noticed their wide extent (Comm. in
Obad. 1), in which indeed they rival the catacombs of
Rome and Malta. They have been explored by Robin
son, and more fully by Porter, who compares them to
subterranean villages.
Eleutheropolis, or Beth-gubrin, stands in close histori
cal connection with MARESHAH (q.v. }. G. A. Smith
has put this in a very forcible way (HG 233). If from
the first to the sixteenth centuries Beit Jibrin ( = Eleu
theropolis) has been prominent, and Mareshah forgotten,
we may infer that the population moved under com
pulsion from the one site to the other. On the caves
1 At all events there seems a close resemblance between nagt
and n&ga, the Ethiopic and Indian words respectively for
elephant (Meyer, CA 1 226).
1263
ELHANAN
spoken of above, besides Robinson and Porter, compare
Lucien Gautier (Souvenir de la Terre-Salnte, 63-67).
He is of opinion that such caves have been in use for
different purposes at many periods. Elsewhere a refer
ence to them has been traced in a corrupt name in i K.
4 10, in the original text of which Mareshah may have
been designated Beth-Horim (see BEN-HESED, 2).
T. K. c.
ELEUTHERUS (eAeyeepoc [ANY]), a river of
Syria (i Mace. 11?), the mod. Nahr al-Kebir. See
PHOENICIA.
ELHANAN (($$ El is gracious, 28 ; cp Baal-
hanan and I alm. jrVfl73, |lTfl7y3 ; eACAN&N
1 In Sam t BA ] CAAAN&N [L] ; Jos. <pAN [var.
N6<J)&N]). (i) The slayer of Goliath;
one of David s warriors (ben-Jair). The MT of 2 S.
21 19 reads (RV), And there was again war with the
Philistines at Gob ; and Elhanan the son of Jair the
Bethlehemite slew Goliath the Gittite, the staff of whose
spear was like a weaver s beam. The document to
which the passage belongs (2 S. 21 15-22, and 288-39)
is an extract from an ancient Israelite roll of honour,
and deserves more credit than the later story which
ascribes the slaying of Goliath to the youthful David.
It is scarcely necessary to criticise the theory of Sayce (Mod.
Rev. 5 169^.), which is a development of Boucher s, that David
and Elhanan are the same person (cp Solomon Jedidiah). This
is in fact precritical in its origin. The Targ. on 2 S. 21 19 states
that Elhanan was David the son of Jesse, who wove the curtains
(cp Jaare-oregim) of the sanctuary ; cp also the Targ. on i Ch.
205(EAA<xi-[B]).
We have next to remark that definite information as
to the time when Elhanan slew Goliath is wanting ; in
fact the meagreness of tradition as to the details of the
Philistine war has excited a very natural surprise (see
DAVID, 7). All that is certain is that David was no
longer in the prime of life, for an exploit similar to that
of Elhanan was performed by the king s nephew Jonathan
(2 S. 2l2i), and in another episode of the same struggle
David s warriors vowed that he should no longer en
counter the risk of a single combat (v. 17).
The place where Elhanan fought is mentioned ; but
the reading is uncertain. MT says that it was at GOB
(q.v.) , but the first of the three combats related (v. 18)
was possibly, and the third certainly (v. 20), at Gath.
We may feel sure that Gob in v. 19 is a false reading.
The name of Elhanan s /ather also is slightly un
certain. In 2 S. 2824 i Ch. 1126 we read of Elhanan
ben-Dodo, of Bethlehem. It is true, this Elhanan is
sometimes (e.g. in BDB ; but not in SS) distinguished
from the slayer of Goliath ; but the grounds do not
seem to be conclusive. DODO is certainly a personal,
JAIR (q.v. , ii. ) may be a clan-name. It is tempting to
suppose that the circumstance that, according to one
tradition, Elhanan s father bore the name DODO (i. ),
facilitated the transference of Elhanan s exploit to the
youthful David.
The description of three out of the four single combats
related in 2 S. 21 15-22 recurs in nearly the same form
_. in i Ch. 204-8. It is to this version (see
2. In Cn. v ^ ^ t j iat we are j nc jebted for a correction
of the impossible name Jaare-oregim in 2 S. 21 19 ; the
name should undoubtedly be read Jair (i.e. not nj? but
vjr). The surprising appendage oregim (i.e. weavers )
is an accidental repetition of the closing word of the verse.
The statement of Chronicles that Elhanan slew Lahmi
the brother of Goliath need give us no trouble. The
words TIN DfiS (Lahmi the brother of) have been intro
duced by the Chronicler to harmonise this passage with
the story of David and Goliath. l At the same time the
Chronicler omitted the statement that Elhanan was a
Bethlehemite (betk-hallafimi). Naturally enough ; for
from the latter part of this designation he obtained the
name which he affixed to Elhanan s giant. He would
not however deny that the giant had some connection
1 This, however, is denied by Klostermann.
1264
ELI
ELIAB
with Goliath and so he (or his authority) made Lahmi
Goliath s brother. All this is to be regarded not as
conscious depravation of the text, but as a supposed
restoration of what must have been the historical fact.
The only way to avoid this conclusion would be to
assume that Lahmi was derived from the names of the
gods Lahamu, Luhmu, mentioned at the beginning of
the Babylonian epic of creation (Jensen, Kosmologle,
268, 274 ; cp RPV\ 1133), already brought into con
nection (not unplausibly) 1 with the name Bethlehem by
Tomkins (PEFQ, 1885, p. 112). For other discussions
of this subject see Ewald, Hist. 870 ; Stade, Gesch. 1228;
Kohler, Bibl. Gesch. ii. 1294; Che. Aids to Criticism,
10 8 1 125. Compare Driver, TBS, 272 ; Budde and
Kittel in SBOT. See also GOLIATH.
2. One of David s thirty heroes ; mentioned second on the
list (ben Dodo); 2 S. 2824 i Ch. 11 26. Perhaps the same as
no. i above. It is very improbable that David had two warriors
of equal rank, both named Elhanan, and both Bethlehemites.
Compare the case of SIBBECHAI (the slayer of Saph), also given
in the list of the thirty ; cp Jos. Ant. vii. 122. T. K. C.
ELI (hi), high, 49; cp Palm. ^, and Nab.
?Nvy, El is high, and the numerous Sab. names com-
H tor pounded with vJJ [cp Ges. ( n > ad loc. ]; the
*" un- Hebraic character of the names Eli,
Hophni, and Phinehas may be remarked ; nAei [BAL],
but HAei- i S. Ig [A], 4n [A* vid], and Aeyei. 14s
[BA]), priest of Yahwe at the temple of Shiloh, the
sanctuary of the ark, and at the same time judge over
Israel an unusual combination of offices, which must
have been won by signal services to the nation in his
earlier years, though in the account preserved to us he
appears in the weakness of extreme old age, unable to
control the petulance and rapacity of his sons, Hophni
and Phinehas (i S. 1-4 143 i K. 227). While the central
authority was thus weakened, the Philistines advanced
against Israel, and gained a complete victory in the great
battle of EBENEZER \_q.v. , i], where the ark was taken,
and Hophni and Phinehas slain. On hearing the news
Eli fell from his seat and died. According to MT he
was ninety-eight years old, and had judged Israel for
forty years (i S. 4 1518). gives but twenty years in
v. 18, and seems not to have read v. 15, which is either
a gloss or the addition of a redactor (cp SBOT, ad loc. ).
After these events the sanctuary of Shiloh appears
to have been destroyed by the Philistines (cp Jer. 7, and
see SHILOH), and the descendants of Eli with the whole
of their clan or father s house subsequently appear
as settled at NOB (i S. 21 1 [2], 22 uff., cp 14s). The
massacre of the clan by Saul, with the subsequent de
position of the survivor Abiathar from the priestly office
( i K. 2 27), is referred to in a prophetic passage of deuter-
onomistic origin, such as might (the narrator thought)
have been uttered in the days of Eli ( i S. 227 ff. 3 1 1 ff. ;
see Bu. SBOT).
Now Zadok (from whom the later high priests claimed
descent), who appears in i Ch. 612 [638] as the lineal
2 The descendant of Aaron through Eleazar and
.,. Phinehas, was not of the house of Eli
priesthood. (lK-227 . 35) . and in lCh 24 Ahime .
lech, son of Abiathar, is reckoned to the sons of Ithamar,
the younger branch of the house of Aaron. Hence the
traditional view that in the person of Eli the high-priest
hood was temporarily diverted from the line of Eleazar
and Phinehas into that of Ithamar (cp Jos. Ant. v. Us
viii. 13, and for the fancies of the Rabbins on the cause
of this diversion, Selden, De Succ. in Pontif., lib. i.
cap. 2). This view, however, is at direct variance with
the passage in i S. 2 which represents Eli s father s
house or clan as the original priestly family, and pre
dicts the destruction or degradation to an inferior
position of the whole of this father s house, not merely
the direct descendants of Eli. Ahimelech, moreover,
1 The place-names of Palestine must in many cases have an
origin very different from what the later inhabitants supposed,
and a primitive divine name, famous in Babylonian mythology,
is likely to have found a record in Palestine.
who is the only link to connect Eli with Ithamar, is an
ambiguous personage, whose name has arisen from a
textual corruption (see ABIATHAR, end), and it is evident
that the priestly genealogy in i Ch. 5 f. merely en
deavours to show that the sons of Zadok derived their
origin in an unbroken line of descent from Aaron. The
book of Chronicles wholly ignores the priesthood of Eli.
[So much at any rate is indisputable that in the
pre-regal period the family of Eli discharged priestly
functions at the sanctuary of Shiloh. That it had a
levitical connection is implied in the name of Phinehas
borne by one of Eli s sons (HOPHNI is only a variation
of this), and also in i S. 227-36. Eli s sons, however,
do not appear to have entered into the original tradition ;
they are only introduced in the interests of later theory.
That Eli belonged to the family of Moses is at any rate not
impossible. The explanation of HOPHNI as an outgrowth
of PHINEHAS leads to the suggestion that for ^y, Eli, we
should perhaps read TJlPVjIi Eliezer = iryVx, Eleazar.
Eleazar and Eliezer are both Levite names, though the
former is the ordinary name of the father of Phinehas. ]
See further LEVITES, PRIEST, ZADOK, zff. As HELI
(i) Eli comes into the genealogy of Ezra (2 Esd. 1 1).
w. R. s. T. K. c.
ELI, ELI, LAMA SABACHTHANI, and Eloi,
Eloi, Lama Sabachthani. The last words of Jesus
( = Ps. 22 1 [2]) according to Mt. 27 46, Mk. 1534; 1
followed by a translation, My God, my God, why hast
thou forsaken me. Evang. Pet. , however, gives (ch. 5),
[ And the Lord cried out. saying] My power, my power,
thou hast forsaken me (i) di/va/jiis /aou, i] d6va/MS,
/careXeti/ ds /J-f), 2 which is quite different. The number
of various readings of the text of Mt. and Mk. is sur
prisingly large.
As to the word for my God, in both Mt. and Mk. WH give
eAcoi,; Treg. prefers rjAi, in Mt., eAun in Mk. ; Ti. and Zahn
prefer rjAei in Mt., eAon in Mk. For the verb all agree in adopt
ing a-apaxOavfi. (Zahn -vi, an unimportant variation).
Epiphanius (Haer. 6968) remarks on Mt. 2746 that
the words 17X1 7/Xi were spoken by Jesus in Hebrew, the
rest of the passage in Syrian.
Lagarde, too (GGA, 82, 329), referred to this passage as
proving the systematic correction to which even our oldest MSS
had been subjected. Certainly eAwi (or, more completely
Aramaic, eAai. , or aAai ) is what we should have expected ; but
in citing a passage like this it was not unnatural to use the well-
known Hebrew term 7K el.
Dalman, who holds this word from the cross to be
historical, thinks that Jesus most probably used the
Hebrew form ( elt), just because it is a little less obvious.
The variation a<0ai 3 ; n D Lat. both in Mt. and in Mk.
is very singular. o-a/Sax&n/ei is good Aramaic = 3Ep3C>.
a$0a.i/ec, or rather a.a<j>6avei, is a Hebrew substitute for the
Aramaic verb, due to one who wished to make the whole
passage a quotation from the Hebrew. The original reading
aa<j>8a.vfi. was presumably altered into (Ja^Oarei = ^risyi (rendered
uivei$ia-<i<; fie in cod. D., Mk. 1634) by scribes who only under
stood Syriac. See Chase, Syro-Lat. Text of the Gospels, 107,
JTh.S 1 278, and E*p. T 11 3347: T . K. C.
ELIAB pN^X, God, or my God is father, 1 25 ;
cp ^N3K ; eA[e]iAB [BANL]).
1. b. Helon, prince of Zebulun (Nu. lg 2? 72429
10 16).
2. b. PALLU (q.v. ), father of Nemuel, Dathan, and
Abiram (Nu. 16 i 12 268 Dt. 116).
3. Son of Jesse and brother of David. According to
i S. 166 i Ch. 2 13 he was the eldest son of Jesse (cp
171328). In i Ch. 27 18 mention is made of a certain
ELIHU (q.v. , 2) as one of the brethren of David (this
name is inserted by Pesh. in i Ch. 2 13 and occupies the
seventh place, David being eighth). Elihu, however, is
1 In Mt. See fiov flee uou, iva-ri [Lva. TI, WH] jte eyicaTe Aiire?
[Ti. WH] ; in Mk. 6 Oeos u.ov 6 Seos MOV, eU TI evcaTe AiTre s u
[Ti. WH].
2 Syriac (Pesh., Sin., Hcl.) in Mt. gives the words of the
exclamation alone, but in Mk. adds a translation as in the Gk.
3 The_ transliteration of 3 by <j> before 6 is analogous to that
of p by \,in <ra.^a.\Qavf(.. See Dalm. Gram. 304.
1266
ELIADA
undoubtedly a variant for Eliab ; so @ BAL and Jer.
Quasi., ad loc. His daughter ABIHAIL (q.v. , 4) is
mentioned in 2 Ch. 11 18 (EXiav [B]), where, however,
Eliab b. Jesse may be incorrect (see ITHREAM,
MICHAL).
4. b. Nahath, a Kohathite, a descendant of Korah (i Ch.ii 27
[12] BAL). In v. 34 [19] the name appears as ELIEL (q.v., 5),
and in i S. 1 i as Ei.mu (q.v., 2).
5. One of David s warriors; i Ch. 129 (see DAVID, n []
iii.).
6. A Levite porter and singer; i Ch. 15 18 (eAio/3a [BNi 1 )],
eAi/3a[N*]), 15 20 16 5.
7. b. Nathaniel, an ancestor of JUDITH, Jud. 81 (ei/o0
tKl).
ELIADA (yTvtf, 32, God knows. or whom El
deposits, see BEELIAIJA ; also a Sabean name [Halevy] ;
eAeiAA [B], -AiAA. [AL]).
1. A son of DAVID [q.v. n d (&)}, 2 S. 5 16 (/3oaAei M a9 [BA],
-AiAafl [L]); i Ch. 38 (eAi8a [A]). In i Ch. 14 7 he is called
BEELIADA (q.v.) his true name.
2. A Benjamite captain, temp. Jehoshaphat (2 Ch. 17 17).
3. AV Eliadah, father of REZON, i K. 1123 (eAiafiae [A],
om. BL). Winckler (Alt. V at. 74) supposes that the name is a
Hebrew translation of the Aram, name SxaD. TABEEL (i).
ELJADAS (eAiAAAC [BA]), i Esd. 9 2 8=Ezra 10=7.
ELIOENAI, 5.
ELIADUN, RV ILIAUUN ([e]iAi&AoyN [BAL]),
i Esd. 5 58. See MADIABUN.
ELIAH (n T jl ?X). i. Ezra 1026 AV, RV ELIJAH, 3.
2. i Ch. 827 AV, RV ELIJAH, 4.
ELIAHBA (KjjinvX, God hides or protects, 30 ;
cp HABAIAH, JEHUBBAH ; but compound names where
an imperf. follows a divine name are rare and chiefly
late : * cp Gray, HPA zi-j, who suggests JOIT?^), the
Shaalbonite(seeSHAALBiM), one of David s thirty (2S.
1832 GMACOY [B]. eAlAB [A], CAAABA0 [L] ; i Ch.
1133 CAMABA [B], 6AM. [K]. eAlABA [A], -AlB. [L]). 2
ELIAKIM (D^K, God establishes, 31, 52;
eAiAK[eli/v\ [BKAQFL]).
1. b. Hilkiah, a governor of the palace, and grand vizier
under Hezekiah (2 K. 18 18 19 2 Is. 36 3 22 37 2). See RAB-
SHAKEH, SHEHNA.
2. b. Josiah (2 K. 2834 2 Ch. 864). See JEHOIAKIM.
3. A priest in the procession at the dedication of the wall (see
EZRA ii. 13 g), Neh. 1241 (eAiaxifx [Nc.amK.], o m. BN*A).
4. b. Abiud ; Mt. 1 13 (eAtacei> [Ti. WH]), and
5. b. Melea (Lk. 3 30), in the genealogy of Joseph. See
GENEALOGIES ii., 3.
ELIALI (eAiAAeic [B], eAiAAei [A], cp Eliel, i Ch.
820?), i Esd. 934 = Ezra 1038. BINNUI, 5.
ELIAM (D^ 1 ?^ 4 6 - God is kinsman ; cp AMMIEL
and Phoen. DJPX [CIS 1 1. no. 147, /. 16] ; eAlAB
[BAL]).
1. b. Ahithophel the Gilonite (see GII.OH); one of Davids
heroes; 2 S. 2834 (oveAi<x0 [A], o eaAaaju. [L])=i Ch. 1136
(where Eliam the son of is omitted before Ahijah the Pelonite,
itself a corrupt reading ; see AHITHOI-HEL, end), and perhaps
the same as 2 (below).
2. Father of Bathsheba (2 S. 11 3 ; called in i Ch. 3 5 AMMIEL,
a/oiit|A [BA], )Aa [L]). See AHITHOPHEI..
3. Possibly to be restored for ANIAM (q.v.).
ELIAONIAS (eAiAOONiAC [A]), i Esd. 8 31 = Ezra
84, EHEHOENAI, 2.
ELIAS (HAeiAC), Mt. 11 14 AV, RV ELIJAH (q.v.).
ELIASAPH (SlD^vN, God increases [i.e., the
family ], 27, 44 ; eA[e]lCA(J> [BAFL]).
1. b. DEUEL or REUEL (2) ; chief of Gad ; Nu. 1 14 (-$a.v [L]),
2 14 (-<|>[a>>] [L]), 74247 1020.
2. b. LAEL; chief of Gershon (Nu. 824).
ELIASHIB (3WN, i.e., God brings back, 31,
62, 82 ; but <5 L except in no. i reads 211^^ N, God
1 In all the Aramaic inscriptions only two examples of this
form occur, viz. jnvrta a d jrvnSi?3> both Palmyrene.
2 For these forms cp Marq. Fund. 20, who shows that the
initial <r is, in each case, due to the following <raAo/3a> t, and
that the \L is a corruption from Ao (M=AA); thus e/j.acroi ,
0-afj.a.^a, etc., stand for eAao/3ou ( = inbN)i aAaajSa, etg.
1267
ELIEL
returns (or turns ); cp Is. 528, and prop, name
JASHUB, old Aram. dmS K, Assur returns, CIS 2,
no. 36, and Sab. ?K3in, Hal. 485 ; eAl&COyB [L].
A[e]iAC6iB[ASB]).
1. A descendant of Zerubbabel ; i Ch. 824 (a<m/3 [B],
lAiacr. [L]).
2. Eponym of one of the priestly courses : i Ch. 24 12
(eAuijSmlB]).
3. High priest in list of wall-builders (see NEHEMIAH, \f.,
EZRA, ii. 16 [i], 15 d), Neh. Si (eA(e)to-oi;/3 [BNA]); 3 2 o/
(^r)6-eA(e)icrovj3 |I l, -aiAeio-ou and -ouAierou/3 [N], -eAei a.(rerovfi
and -eAicKTou/J [A] aA- [L]) mentioned in pedigree of Jaddua
(see EZKA, ii. 6 l>), 12 10 (eAia<ri^ [K]). In Xeh. 10 he is not
mentioned among the signatories to the covenant.
4. 5, and 6. A singer, Ezra 1024 (eA(e) t <Ta^ [BKA]>= i Esd.
924, AV ELEAZURUS, RV Eliasibus (eAcao-t/Sos [B], -i^os [A]);
one of the b ne Zattu, Ezra 1027 (A(e)io-ou|3 | BA], Arou [N])
= iEsd. !)28 ELISIMOS, RV Ellasimus (eA(e)ia<r()iMo [BA]);
and one of the B ne Bani, Ezra 1036 (eAeicrfi^> [B])=iKsd.
834, ENASIBUS (i>a(r(e)i/3os [BA], x Atotrou/3 [L]); all in list of
those with foreign wives (see EZRA i., 5, end).
ELIASIS (eAl&ceiC [BA]). i Esd. 9 34 = Ezra 10 37,
JAASAU.
ELIATHAH (HnX^N*. in i Ch. 25 27 !"in$N ; 35 :
cp, however, HKMAN ; HAl6<\ [L]).
A son of Heman, the name of the twentieth of the classes of
temple singers, I Ch. 204 (TjAioflofl [B], tAioSa [A]), also v. 27
(ai t i.ada [B], eiAaS [A]; Pesh. ^- N V/) i-t-, Eliab; Jerome,
Quo-si., Eliba); but see HEMAN.
ELIDAD (Tvh$. 28 ; AA&A [BAFL]), a Ben
jamite prince, Nu. 342i,f P). The name seems
traditional (cp ELDAU) ; its meaning is disputed.
Some connect it, like BILDAU and BEDAD, with the
divine name Dad ( Ramman) ; thus it would mean
Dad is (the clan s) god : the name Dad-ilu is borne
by a king of the land of Kaska (Schr. COT 1 244 /. ;
Del. Par. 298). However, Elidad may also mean God
has loved ; cp Sab. htrrn. D. H. Miiller, ZDAfG, 1883.
p. 15 ; and see NAMES, 28. Incidentally this avoids
the apparent incongruity of giving a heathen name to
an Israelite ; but heathen names such as Elidad, Hur,
Ash-hur, Ash-bel (?), may have been borne by men
who knew nothing of the heathen gods whose names
entered into their own, or who at any rate did not
worship them (cp MoRDECAl, i). Gray s explanation
(HPN, 61) a kinsman (uncle) is God seems less
probable ; see DOD [NAMES WITH]. T. K. C.
ELIEHOENAI (so RV ; ^l?in^>N ; also written
Tl?vbx ; the spelling in MT may be intended to
emphasise a particular view of the meaning of the
name ; for the [probably] true name see ELIOENAI).
1. AV ELIOENAI (eAiwi/ais [B], -u)i<ai [A], -tavaj. [L]). A
Korahite Levite, one of the doorkeepers of the sanctuary, i Ch.
263.
2. AV ELIHOENAI (eAiavo [BL], -iaav. [A]), one of the
b ne Pahath-Moab in Ezra s caravan (see EZRA i., 2 ; ii., 8 5
[i]if); Ezra 84=1 Esd. 831, ELIAONIAS (eAioAufias [B], -a.iav.
IAJ, eAia/a [L]). Compare ELIOENAI.
ELIEL (?KvK, eX[e]iijX [BAL]) ; a man s name
somewhat frequent in Chronicles, but not found else
where in the OT. It means My God is El, 38 ; or,
perhaps, El is God. In i Ch. 634 [19] Eliel is sub
stituted for Elihu ( = He [Yahwe] is God 1 ). Both
names are virtually identical with Elijah ( Yahwe is
God, or, my God ). Compare the royal name
Iluma-ilu, llu is god, where the second ilu takes
the place of this king s special deity (KB 884, Hommel,
1. The Mahavite [q.v.} (C ]nSH ; A[ t ]i^A |BK], ceAirjA [A],
injA [L]), one of David s warriors (i Ch. 11 46!), and
2. Another of David s warriors (SaAeujA [B], aAiijA [A]),
iCh. Il47-t See DAVID, n a, ii.
3. A Manassite prince (i Ch. 62 and st).
4. In a genealogy of BENJAMIN (y.T.. 9 ii. 3): b. Shunei,
i Ch. 8, and (eAt^A[e]i [BA]), p. 20. t b. Shashak (<rAo;A
[BA]), 22.t
5. A Kohathite (eAia/3 [L]), i Ch. 634 [19]. Cp ELIAB [4],
EI.IHU, 2.
6. A Gadite, one of David s warriors ; perhaps identical with
1268
ELIENAI
(i) or (2); but the name is eA[e]ta|3 in BA though tAiijA in L
(iCh. 12n).t Cp ELIAB, and see DAVIU, n a, iii.
8. A son of Hebron, one of David s Levites (enjp, ->/A [L!],
-nA. at>e\T)n []), I Ch. 15 9 n.t
9. One of Hezekiah s Levites (ie[e]i7)A [BA]), 2 Ch. 31 i 3 .f
(TrvN ; otherwisevocalisedasELiOENAi),
b. Shimei in a genealogy of BENJAMIN (q.v. , 9, ii. /3) ;
1 Ch. 820 (eAiooAiAA [B], -coeNAi [A], HAICONAI [L.])-
ELIEZER CVjr^J, God of help, or God (or,
my God ) is a helper ; see EUCAZAR ; eA[e]iezep
[BAXL]).
i. Abraham s chief slave and steward (Gen. ISa).
The clause in which he is referred to is a piece of
E s work and perhaps originally followed v. -$0. (Bu. ).
It states that Abram s most trusted servant, in lieu
of a son, would inherit his property (cp i Ch. 234^).
It should be noticed, however, that the other narrator
(J) does not give the name Eliezer (see 242), and the
text is evidently in some disorder. The most probable
way of emending seems to be to read yy> ^,-TN J3!T31
and my tent-dwelling will be deserted (see Che. Exp.
T.. 11 47 [Oct. 99]).
Kalisch thought that the full name of the steward was
Danunesek Eliezer, and RV implies the same theory. Gram
matically the rendering is Dammesek Eliezer ((5 OL , euros
Aafj.a<TK.o<; EAie(Jep) is no doubt inevitable ; but how absurd it is !
The text, therefore, must be incorrect. The words pi; ^ *"!,
he (or it) is Damascus, are taken by some to be an intrusive
marginal gloss on the word pOB which the glossator misunder
stood (although it is difficult to see how he would have construed
Tl 3 pt?Q~l Kin)- So, long ago, Hitzig and Tuch ; unfortunately
the existence of a word pjs O (or ^B D) possession is extremely
doubtful. Hall s rendering and he who will possess my house
is a Damascene Eliezer, is not much more plausible than
that of Hitzig. See Exp. 7 ., I.e. T. K. C.
z. Second son of Moses and Zipporah (Ex. 222), so
called because the God of my father was my help
(184). The Chronicler assigns him an only son
Rchabiah (i Ch. 23 I5 17 26 25 /). See ELEAZAK (i), n.
3. A prophet, b. Dodavah of Mareshah, temp. Jehoshaphat :
2 Ch. 20 37 (eAeiaSo. [B]). Gray (I/PN 232) suggests that the
name may have been derived from a good historical record ;
but the prophets of Chronicles are often of such doubtful
historicity that the suggestion seems hazardous. Was not the
name more probably suggested by Eleazar b. Dodai (or Dodo)
in 28. 23 9 iCh. 11 12? See ELKAZAR (3).
4. A Reubenite prince (i Ch. 2V 16).
5. A Benjamite (BENJAMIN, 9, ii. a), i Ch. 7s.
6. A Levite(iCh. 15 24).
7. 8, and 9. A priest, Ezra 10 18 = i Esd. 9 19, ELEAZAR [7]
(eAeafapos [BA]); a Levite, Ezra 1023 (eAiafap [N])=i Esd. 023
IONAS [2] (iwapa? [BJ, laj^as [A]) ; and an Israelite, b. Harim :
Ezra 1031 = 1 Esd. 9 32 ELIONAS [2] (eAiuSa; [B], -wrat [A]), in
list of those with foreign wives (see EZRA i., 5 end).
10. Head of family, temp. Ezra (see EZRA i., 2; ii., 15 [i] ii),
Ezra 8i6(eAeaap [BA])=i Esd. 843, ELEAZAR [5] (-pos).
11. Son of Jorim, in the genealogy of Jesus (Lk. 829 eAicfep
[Ti. WH]). See GENEALOGIES ii., 3.
ELIHOENAI Ortfin^N), Ezra 8 4 AV, RV EI.IE-
HOENAI (2).
ELIHOREPH (sp ri^K ; eAiAcp [B], eN& P e<J> [A],
eAl<\B [L] ; true name perhaps Elihaph [cp @ i! ], i.e. ,
God is Haph [Apis, see AIMS], of which Elihoreph
may be an alteration on religious grounds ; cp Ahi-
shahar, from Ahi-hur? so Marquart), one of Solomon s
scribes, son of Shisha (i K. 4s). The text of
vv. 1-20, however, is in much disorder, and v. 3 needs
emendation. } r . 2 promises a list of princes. The
first prince (v. 2) is Azariah, son of the priest Zadok.
The next should be Elihoreph (Elihaph?) and Ahijah
sons of Shavsha the secretary ( Klost. ). See SHAVSHA.
T. K. c.
ELIHU (N-inVN, 1 God is He [Yahwe]; eAloy
[AL], in Job - c [BXAC]).
i. One of the interlocutors of the Book of JOB
( /., 9)-
1 The final N is omitted in i Ch. 20? (Kt.), 27 18 (Kt.), and
once or twice in Jon.
1269
ELIJAH
2. b. Tohu, in the genealogy of Samuel (i S. ]i
ijXetou [B], etAi [L]). Samuel s pedigree, however, is com
posite (see JEROHAM [i], TOHU), and Elihu of the clan
of Tahan (so, forTohu ; cpEi HKAiMi., 12) corresponds
to ELK AN AH [q.v. , i] of the clan of Jerahmeel (so for
Jeroham). In i Ch. 627 [12] Elihu is called ELIAB
(q.v., 4) and in i Ch. 634[i9] Eliel (q.v., 6); whilst
conversely ELIAB (q.v. , 3), David s eldest brother,
seems to be called Elihu in i Ch. 27 18, where BAL
reads Eliab. Perhaps some early divine name has
been excised (in various ways) by editors ; the name,
e.g. , may have been Elimelech (cp REGEM-MELECH
beside RAAMIAII), and it is probable that this, rather
than Elkanah, was the true name of Samuel s father.
So Marq. Fund. 12 f.
3. A Manassite, one of David s warriors; i Ch. 12 20 [21]
(eAi^ovfl [BN], eAiovS [A]). See DAVID, g n, a, iii.
4. A porter of the temple, i Ch. 207 (evvov [B]).
ELIJAH, in Mt. 11 14 AV, ELIAS (lil^N [sixty-three
times], 38, or, as in 2 K. 1 3 4 8 12 and in Mai. 823
(4s), HvX ; i.e. , Yahwe is God, 1 cp Joel ; HA[e]lAC
[BAL, Ti. WH]) was among the greatest and most
original of the Hebrew prophets ; indeed it is in him that
Hebrew prophecy first appears as a great spiritual and
ethical power, deeply affecting the destiny and religious
character of the nation. He lived and worked under
Ahab (circa 875-853), contending with heroic courage
for Yahwe as the sole god of Israel, and refusing to
make any terms with plans favoured at the royal court
for uniting the worship of the national god with that of
the Tyrian Baal. Thus he vindicated the true character
of the religion of Israel, and is not unworthy of a place
by the side of Moses. We shall be better able to appre
ciate his position, however, when we have examined the
legendary narratives in which his history is enshrined.
i. In i K. 17-19 we have a varied and singularly
vivid account of his conflict with the foreign Baal-
1 Date of worsm P- II i s from tlle hand of one who
1 K 1" 19 was a sut) J ect of the northern kingdom,
and must therefore have written before the
conquest of Samaria in 722 B.C. Otherwise in mention
ing Beer-sheba (19s) he would scarcely have taken the
pains to tell his readers that it belonged to Judah, or at
least would not have expressed himself in that way.
Again the type of his religious thought is clearly older
than that of Hosea or even Amos. Not only does he
speak, or make his hero speak, with reverence of
Yahwe s altars in N. Israel (19 10), but, in spite of
abundant occasion, he makes no protest against that
worship of Yahwe under the accepted symbol of an ox,
which provoked Hosea s bitter scorn. Accordingly, we
may acquiesce in Kuenen s suggestion (Ond. i. 225)
that he may have flourished in the ninth century, within
a generation or two at furthest from the lifetime of
Elijah. Only we must allow time for the creative work
of popular fancy and the rise of partial misconception
as to the points at issue in the deadly struggle.
The narrative has been mutilated at the beginning,
and hence the abruptness with which the prophet
appears on the scene : otherwise we might have attri
buted to dramatic art the sudden introduction, adapted
as it is to the meteor-like character which Elijah s appear
ances preserve throughout. The story must have begun
with some account of the quarrel and its origin in
Ahab s religious innovations ; but the editor of the Book
of Kings had already given an account of Ahab s de
fection (1629-34) in his own way and naturally refrained
from explaining the matter over again in the words of
the older document which he used. Hence Elijah of
Tishbeh in Gilead ( BAL 17 1; but cp JABESH [i.])
is brought at once before us as if we were already familiar
with him and with his cause. 1 He confronts the king
1 [The statement that Elijah was of the inhabitants (rather,
sojourners ) of Gilead is vague and improbable. Either we
must read of Tishbeh in Gilead, or else (cp JABESH i., i) the
1270
ELIJAH
with a message from Yahwe before whom he stands in
constant service. No rain or dew is to fall for these
years save at the prophet s will or declaration. Straight
way the scene changes to a lonely wady called Cherith (?)
(so most ; but see CHERITH). Here, in or near the wild
and pastoral land of his birth, Elijah is shielded for a
time from the famine which followed the drought.
Ravens, forgetting their natural voracity, bring him
bread and flesh morning and evening. Thus his supply
of food was constant and beyond the needs of life in the
East, where flesh is eaten only on festal occasions. In
time, however, the stream of water fails, and Elijah at
the bidding of his God passes beyond Yahwe s land to
Zarephath, a Phosnician city to the S. of Sidon (but
here again the name and situation of Elijah s place of
refuge is disputable : see ZAREPHATH). At the gate
of the city, where markets were held and remnants
might be strewed about, a widow, who worshipped
Yahwe 1 (i K. 171224), was gathering sticks. Water
she gives at the prophet s request, but being asked
for bread, protests that she has but a handful of meal
and a little oil, with which she is about to prepare for
her son and herself the last food they will ever eat.
Finally, however, she does the prophet s bidding and is
rewarded by the fulfilment of his promise that neither
meal nor oil shall fail while the drought lasts. Nay,
when her son dies, not of famine but of natural sickness,
the man of God bending over the corpse brings back
by his prayer the life which had fled.
Elijah returns to Israel at the divine command and
meets the prefect of the palace, Obadiah. This courtier,
2. The contest , who { f^ Yahw f and had saved * e
with Ahab es a lmndred prophets from the
fury of Ahab s queen, was engaged like
his royal master in seeking fodder for Ahab s horses and
mules. He falls down in reverence before the prophet,
but refuses to consent to let Ahab know where Elijah is,
till the prophet has sworn that he will keep his tryst,
instead of suffering himself, after his work is finished, to
be carried away by the spirit of Yahwe and thus leave
Obadiah to bear the brunt of Ahab s disappointment.
Is it thou, says Ahab, thou troubler of Israel ? I
have not troubled Israel, is the fearless answer, but
thou and thy father s house, in that ye have forsaken
Yahwe and thou hast followed the Baalim. Thereupon
Elijah, the solitary champion of Yahwe, challenges the
450 prophets of Baal ( the 400 prophets of the Asherah
have been added by an interpolator in 1819 and in the
<S BL text of v. 22) to a memorable contest (see CARMEL,
3 ; DANCING, 5). One bullock is to be laid on the
wood for Baal, another for Yahwe, and the god who
without human aid kindles the fire of his sacrifice is to
be the God i.e. , the sole recognised God of Israel.
In vain Baal s prophets invoke him with wild dances
and cries, and gash themselves with knives to appease
the burning fury of the sun-god, while Elijah mocks
their pains. Then they desist and at Elijah s prayer
the lightning of Yahwe consumes the victim on his
altar and licks up the water which had been poured
over and round the altar to enhance the marvel. Baal s
prophets are slain by the Kishon, and now that the
heart of the people is turned back, the rain will come.
Already the prophet listens in spirit to its welcome splash.
* - yet in spirit only. He crouches down on Carmel with his
small as a man s hand. Soon the heavens are black, the king
drives at full speed to Jezreel, fleeing before the terror of the
storm. Borne by Yahwe s hand, Elijah runs on foot the whole
whole description must be read thus, Elijah the Jabeshite, of
Jabesh in Gilead (Klost.). The latter is the more probable view.
In either case, the second part of the description seems to be a
gloss]
1 [It is usual to suppose that the widow was of a strange
religion ; so e.g. Strachan in Hastings, DB 1 688 b. This, at
any rate, cannot be proved by her words Yahwe thy God,
which are merely an acknowledgment of the superior religious
standing of the prophet (i S. 15 30 2 K. 194).]
1271
ELIJAH
distance of something like 16 m., but, true to his Bedouin in
stincts, refrains from entering the city.
The momentary triumph at Carmel does but fan the
persecuting zeal of Jezebel ; and Elijah sets out for
Horeb, as if Yahwe had forsaken his land and with
drawn to his ancient dwelling-plnce. In the wilderness
beyond Beersheba (see MIZRAIM, 26), weary and
desperate, he sits down under one of the retem bushes
(the retem is a species of broom ; see JUNIPER) common
in that region and prays for death. The angel of Yahwe,
however, bids him rise and eat. He finds at his head
a cruse of water and a cake baked on the coals, and in
the strength of that he travels for forty days and nights
to Horeb, the mountain of God. (If the text is right 1
the narrator is remarkably vague here, for the distance
between the southern boundary of Palestine and the
Sinaitic peninsula is only about 50 geographical in. , and
the earlier view of Horeb made it not very far from the
S. border of Canaan. ) Here on the sacred mount, when
hurricane, earthquake, and lightning have cooled the air,
Elijah in the rustling of a gentle breeze discerns Yahwe s
presence. He had believed that the cause which he had
held dearer than life was lost, and that he had better cease
the unavailing struggle and die. Not so. He is to
anoint new kings and inaugurate new dynasties for
Damascus and Samaria. He is to anoint Elisha as his
own successor. Each of these changes is to hasten the
calamity which hangs over Israel, and only the 7000 who
have not bowed the knee to Baal are to escape. Here,
as at the beginning, the narrative fails us a second time.
We do indeed learn how Elijah calls Elisha to the
prophetic office ; but in the text of the Book of Kings
as it has come down to us, Elisha takes no part in the
deeds of violence which brought Hazael and Jehu to the
throne. On the early and very striking story of Elijah s
ascent (2 K. 2) see ELISHA, 3 ; and on the true
scene of the legendary narrative in i K. 171-78-24
194-i8, see CHERITH, ZAREPHATH, JUNIPER.
2. Little need be said concerning the prediction of
Ahaziah s death when he consulted Baal-zCbub of Ekron
3. Other in his sickness - and tne nre fr m heaven
stories which consumed two companies of soldiers
sent to arrest the prophet. The story
(2 K. la-i/) with its perverse supernaturalism and
sanguinary spirit may safely be assigned to a period when
the true notion of prophecy had grown confused and
dim. The portrait of Elijah with his robe of goat s or
camel s hair and his leathern girdle is, perhaps, the
solitary fragment of genuine tradition which it contains.
Very different in value and in date is the striking history
of Naboth s judicial murder in i K. 21 1-18 20 (to be
compared with and partially corrected by 2 K. 925/1).
Naboth, probably on religious grounds, refused to sell
his ancestral vineyard at the king s desire. He was
condemned, on a false charge of treason against the
god and the king of Israel, by the elders of his city ;
for the kingly power in Israel was no Oriental despotism,
and the authority of the city sheiks, who had replaced
the sheiks of the tribes, had to be respected (cp
GOVERNMENT, 24). Death was the penalty, and it
fell, according to the custom of the time, not only on
himself but also on his family. There was a judgment,
however, higher than that of the earthly court. In after-
days Jehu remembered how he heard the divine sentence
pronounced against the unrighteous king : I have seen
yesterday the blood of Naboth and his sons it is the
oracle of Yahwe and I will requite thee on this plat.
3. Such in brief outline are the early legends of the
prophet s life, but we have still to estimate the residuum
of authentic history and through the mist of tradition
to see the prophet as he was. We must not charge
1 [Wi. (67 1 29 n.) plausibly suggests that forty days and
forty nights are a later insertion. A later glossator, who may
have had a different view of the general situation of Sinai, can
more easily be accused of geographical vagueness than the
original narrator.]
1272
ELIJAH
ELIPHAL
Ahab with conscious apostasy from Yahwe. He had
great merits as well as great faults. He was a chival
rous and patriotic king, and in the very names which he
gave to his children he professed his allegiance to the
god of his people. Nor can we believe that even
Jezebel seriously endeavoured to exterminate Yahwe s
prophets. Some four hundred of them gathered round
her husband at the muster for his last and fatal cam
paign (i K. 226), and the success of Jehu s revolution
proves that only a very small minority of Israelites could
have devoted themselves to the foreign worship. Ahab,
however, did build a temple of Baal in his capital. No
doubt it seemed to him the natural and fitting acknow
ledgment and consecration of the alliance between
Israel and Tyre. Elijah would brook no such
amalgam of worships radically diverse. He was not
indeed a monotheist after the fashion of the later
prophets. To him Yahwe was the sole god of Israel,
in whose land Yahwe was all or nothing. No wonder
then that he looked on the drought as a sign of Yahwe s
anger. Here by the way we are on firm ground. The fact
of the drought is attested independently by Menander
of Kphesus (ap. Jos. Ant. viii. 182), according to whom,
however, it lasted only one year and was stayed by a
procession of Phoenician priests (cp HISTORICAL LIT. ,
5)-.
Elijah s devotion to Yahwe was something infinitely
higher than mere patriotic attachment to hereditary
religion. To him Yahwe and Baal represented two
principles viz. , worship of national righteousness and
the sensual worship of nature. Again, the sons of
the prophets, like bands of dervishes, stirred the
enthusiasm of the people, and encouraged them to
believe that Yahwe must fight for Israel. Elijah, in the
best and earliest accounts, stands alone or with a single
disciple. He saw Yahwe s work not so much in national
victory as in national calamity. He was able to believe
that Hazael, the scourge of Israel, had been raised to
power by Yahwe himself. Thus he opened a new era
in the religion of Israel. Malachi speaks of him, 823
[4 5], as the minister of judgment and purification within
Israel, the herald of Yahwe s great and terrible day.
)esus beheld the spirit of Elijah revived in the stern
and solitary Baptist, and on the holy mount Moses
and Elijah, representing the law and the prophets, bore
conjoint testimony to the transfigured Christ. For the
closing scene of Elijah s life, see ELISHA, 3.
A few words, supplementary to the article KINGS
( 8), may be added on recent criticism of the Elijah-
rm. m" v. narratives. The late character of the
4. Tne Elijah- .. T , ,
narratives narraUve m 2 K - l*-i7 generally
admitted ; but Kautzsch in his essay
on the Book of Kings in Ersch and Gruber (Allgem.
Encyk. ) attributes the rest of the biography to one writer.
On the other hand Wellhausen and Kuenen separate
1 K. 17-19 21, where the prophet stands alone, from
2 K. 2i-i8 (which, however, Kuenen observes, can
hardly be much later than i K. 17-19) where, instead of
being a wanderer, he has a home with Elisha at Gilgal,
and where, too, he is associated with the sons of the
prophets. Further, Kuenen separates i K. 17-19, where
Elijah contends against Baal-worship, from 21 where the
contest turns upon a judicial murder without so much
as a passing allusion to foreign idolatry. The reason
is far from cogent, and there is a similarity of language
between 17 17 and 21 1, 18 1 and 21 17 (cp Benzinger, p.
106). In St. Kr., 1892, Rosch has endeavoured to
show (cp Stade, GVK^ 1522, n. ) that all the narratives
are post-exilic, a theory which in the face of the reasons
given above seems absolutely untenable (cp KINGS,
8 ; Konig, Einleitung, 266).
[In Moslem traditions Elijah is identified with the mythical
personage el-Hadir i.e., the evergreen or youthful prophet (for
fables see Weiland, Legenden, 177) who has become the
guardian of the seas, but was at an earlier time spoken of as
dwelling at the confluence of two seas (rivers?), as the guide
of the Israelites at the Exodus (equivalent therefore to the
42 1273
Eillar of fire and cloud). Originally he was probably the rescued
ero of the Deluge-story. See L)ELU<;E, 15 (col. 1062), and
cp Clermont-Ganneau, Key. arch. 32388^]
The monographs on Elijah are mostly out of date. His life
and character are given from a critical point of view in the recent
Histories of Israel by Stade (vol. i.), Kittel
5. Literature, (vol. ii.), and Wellhausen ; also in Smend s
AT Relig. (152 ff.^\ 175^). See also
Cheyne s Hallowing of Criticism ( 88), and Gunkel s article on
Elijah, Preuss.Jahrb. 98, pp. 18-51. On the apocryphal Apoca
lypse of Elijah and its interesting connection with i Cor. 2 9
and Eph. 5 14, see Harnack s Altchristliche Litt. 853^, and
APOCRYPHA, 20. Fabricius, Cod. Pseudepigrapk. VJ\ 1070^,
has illustrated the place of Elijah in Jewish folklore.
2. A priest, temp. Ezra; Ezra 10 21 (eA[e]m [BA], -s [L]).
Omitted in i Esd. 92i ; (0L ) however, has Aeias.
3. A layman, temp. Ezra ; Ezra 10 26 (AV ELIAH : ^Ata [AB],
-S [L]), called in i Esd. 9 27 AEDIAS (aijS[e]ias [BA], rjAias [L]).
4. A Benjamite (BENJAMIN, 9 ii., /3), i Ch. 827 (AV ELIAH,
rjAia [BAL]). w. E. A.
ELIKA (Ni2 > ?N ; probably corrupt). In the first
of the two lists of David s thirty we find (2 S. 2825
MT) Elika the Harodite (rather, Aradite). This item
is absent from (5 BL (but <S A gives evaKa), and from
the list in i Ch. 11. Hence Driver (note on 2 S. 2839)
would omit it, thus making the number of David s
minor heroes exactly thirty, but reducing the total
of the heroes (including in this the five major ones)
to thirty-five. The total given in v. 39 may be due
to a late editor. Marquart (Fund. 19) agrees, regarding
Elika the Harodite as an (incorrect) gloss on v. 33^.
Wellhausen and Budde, however, retain Elika the
Harodite, remarking that the framer of the list likes,
when he can, to couple two warriors from the same
district. (Arad and Beth-palet, however, may very
well be combined. ) Another name, it is true, is still
wanting to produce a total of thirty-seven. See
ELIPHELET, 2, and cp DAVID, ii a, i. T. K. c.
ELIM (D^N; AiAeiM [BAL]; Elim ; Ex. 15 27,
Nu. 889), the second station of the Israelites after
crossing the sea, where there were twelve fountains
and seventy palms (the term Elim covers palm-trees ;
see ELATH). On the usual theory of the route of the
Israelites, Elim is now generally identified with the
beautiful oasis in Wady Gharandel, 63 m. from Suez,
7 from Ain Hawwara (Ordnance Survey of Sinai , 1 151).
ELIMELECH (^Ip^X. God (or, my God ) is king,
24, 36, cp Malchiel; A.Ai/y\eA6K [A], ABeiMeAex
[B], eAi- [L]), a Bethlehemite, husband of Naomi
(Ruth 1 2 ). See RUTH.
ELIOENAI COWK and J, 34, i.e. , towards
God are mine eyes, or [We.] Elioeni [Eliaueni], God
brought me forth [from Aram. Ntf* = Ny*], but
analog} suggests that the word is corrupt. The true
name may be yotrW (Che. ) <y coming from &, and
j from D (cp JUSHAB-HESED) ; eAicoHNAi [A], -CGNAI
[L])-
1. b. Neariah, i Ch. 323_/C (eAeiOara, -v [B], 7>. 24 f\uavva.i
[A]).
2. A prince of SIMEON, i Ch. 436 (eAiwfat [B], -1071 [A]).
3. b. BECHER in a genealogy of BENJAMIN (g.~ . 9, ii. a),
i Ch. 7 S ((\ei6aivav [E]).
4. One of the b ne PASHHUR (q.v. 3) among the priests in the
list of those with foreign wives (see EZRA i., 5, end), Ezra
1022 (eAiwi/a [B], -tcuoyai [L])=i Esd. 922, KLIONAS (eAuoi ais
[B], -as [A]).
5. One of the b ne ZATTU in list of those with foreign wives
(EzRA i., 5, end), Ezra 1027 (eAiuii/a [B], e\i<ai>av [x])=
i Esd. 928, ELIADAS (eAiafia? [BA]).
6. A priest in the procession at the dedication of the wall
(see EZRA ii., 13 g), perhaps the same as (4), Neh. 1241 (om.
B). See ELIEHOENAI, ELIENAI.
7. i Ch. -26 3 AV, RV ELIEHOENAI.
ELIONAS (eAicoNAC [A]).
1. i Esd. 9 22 = Ezra 1022, ELIOENAI, 4.
2. i Esd. 932 = Ezra 1031, ELIEZER, 9.
ELIPHAL (^S^N), i Ch. 11 35 ; AV m e- ELIPHELET
(q.v., 2).
1274
ELIPHALAT
ELISHA
ELIPHALAT. i. i Ksd. 9 33 (eAei(J)<\AAT [BA])
= Ezra 1033 ELIPHKLET, 5.
2. i Esd. 839 RV (e\cuf><i)<.a. [B])=Ezra 813, ELIPHELET, 4.
ELIPHALET. i. (D^7|J) 2 S. 5i6, RV ELI-
PI I HI, KT, I.
2. i Esd. 8 39 AV = Ezra 8 13, ELIPHELET (4).
ELIPHAZ (TSvN, probably a corruption of an old
name, but see 38; eA(e)i<}>*.C [AL in Gen., B in
Ch. ], -A.Z [AL in Ch. , E in Gen.] ; z rarely becomes c)-
1. Son of Esau, and father of Teman, Omar, Zepho, Gatam,
Kenaz, and Amalek (Gen. 864 [-<a, L], 10-16 [v. n -<j>a6, E ;
v. 15 -<t>a, D], i Ch. 1 3$S-)- See AMALEK, 4, EDOM, u.
2. A Temanite, one of Job s friends (Job 2 n [cA[f]ica(J ,
BNAC], and often). See JOB i. and ii.
ELIPHELEH, RV Eliphelehu (in^N, 27;
eAidi&A [L]). A Levite name, i Ch. 15 18 (eAei<t>efsi<\
[BN], eAKHAA [A]) ; 21 (eiM<t>AN[AllAC [BN], eAi-
<J>&A<M<\C [A]).
ELIPHELET (D?D^N, God is a deliverance, 30 ;
eA[e]l({>&AeT [ANL]. According to Cheyne a similar
name, Ahiphelet, was borne by the Gilonite, David s
treacherous counsellor, /<//, deliverance, being altered
by tradition into tophel i.e. , lit. , brother of insipidity
or folly ; cp 2 S. 1531).
i. A son of David born to him in Jerusalem (z S.
5 16 i Ch. 38 147). According to 2 S. , David had eleven
sons born to him in Jerusalem ; but by a textual error
(which occurs also in (5 BL of S. ) this number is increased
to thirteen, by the addition of NOGAH and another
Kliphelet: i Ch. 36 14 5 (oSs^K, ELPALET [AV],
ELPELET [RV]). The latter is omitted by Bertheau,
Thenius, and Wellhausen (Gesch.W, 216, ET it. ).
(5 s readings are 2 S. 5 16 eA[e]i(|>aa0 [BA it s], eA<f>aAaT
[BA], -Jar, <fAi<f>aAaa [L] ;1 i Ch. 38 eAet^aAa [B], eAt(J)aa6 [L] ;
i Ch. 14; ju0aAeT[B], ey. [N], eAi^aAar [L] ; I Ch. 3 6 eAet<J>aA)0
[B], e\i<f>a9 [L] ; i Ch. 14 5 eAei^aAefl [B]. See DAVID, n (d).
z. One of David s thirty (2 S. 2834 ; in i Ch. 11 35
the name is given by error without the last letter : MT
Eliphal, VET^N)- The name of his father is variously
given as Ahasbai (28. in MT) and as Ur (i Ch. in
MT) ; see DAVID, n (a) i. /
Both forms, however, are evidently corrupt ; and to recover
the original name we must not (with We.) omit * the son of
before the Maachathite. p and 713, ri3 and ri 3 were easily
confounded; the words which now follow 3DnN, Ahasbai,
in MT should probably be read (according to Klo.) n3JPB,Tn 3,
a man of Beth-maachah. And, if Klo. is right in
supplying HEPHER (ii., i) before the gentilic noun, we can
hardly doubt that he is right also in regarding ^onN 73 (EV
son of Ahasbai ) as a corruption of a gentilic noun formed
similarly to r)3J?Cn"n % 3- If SC S tne original list ran thus, Eli-
phelet, a man of Beth - ; Hepher, a man of Beth-maachah.
The number thirty-seven in 2 S. 23 39 is thus accounted for (Che.).
The Ur of i Ch. might be a corrupt fragment of the lost
place-name. For a more tentative view see Driver, Sam., 284,
and for a bolder but very ingenious view Marquart, Fund. 22.
The versions are equally obscure (2 S. 2834; aAei^oAefl [B],
<>4>eAAt [L.I ; i Ch. 11 35, e\<j,ar [BN], eAic^aaA [A], -<J>aeA [L]).
3. b. Eshek in a genealogy of BENJAMIN (q.v., 9, ii. /3),
i Ch. 8 3 9(<:Ai<f>aAs[B]).
4. One of the b ne ADONIKAM (?.<.) in Ezra s caravan (see
EZRA i., 2 ; ii., 15 [i.] d), Ezra S 13 (aAei</>aT [B], eA^aAa
fletrjA, for Eliphelet and Jeuel [A], eAi^aAar [L])=i Esd. 839
ELIPHALET, RV ELIPHALAT (eAet^aAa [B], eAt^aAaros [A]).
5. One of the b neHASHUM(y.7>.) in the list of those with foreign
wives (see EZRA i., 5, end); Ezra 1033 (eAei^ai-eS [B], -<aA.
[BabN], eAia<>aAeT[L])=j Esd. 9 3 3, ELIPHALAT (A<f)aAaT).
ELISABETH (eAe i CABer [Ti. WH] ; i.e. , ELISHEBA
[y.f.]), the righteous and blameless wife of Zacharias,
and mother of John the Baptist (Lk. \sff.).
ELISHA (UK^N : God is salvation, 28; the name
JK^N occurs on a seal from Amman, prob. of seventh
1. Relation to c T mry " rT^^r L 5 ?* - ( 97 ^
eAeiCAie [B] -Aicc- [AL] ; in NT
eAic[c]<MOC). Elijah s successor in
Eliiah
1 See also DAVID, n (a), col. 1032. The copy upon which
L based his translation seems to have been corrected to agree
with Ch.
1275
his prophetic work, and for about half a century
the father and guide of the northern kingdom in its
struggle for national life and independence. We
have in the books of Kings a considerable collection
of anecdotes illustrating his history. We cannot be
surprised that much of this material from which we have
to construct our view of the manner of man he was,
bears clear marks of its legendary nature. In this
respect the traditions about Elisha do not differ from
those about his master (cp HISTORICAL LITERATURE,
5). Unfortunately, however, in the case of Elisha it
is much harder to recover the kernel of literal fact,
and we miss the clear and bold lines in which the
portrait of the true Elijah stands out on the canvas.
The difference springs from the vastly superior origin
ality of Elijah. The ideas which came straight to the
master s heart were taught to the disciple by outward
word and example. He learnt as others might learn.
Moreover, he sympathised more than Elijah had done
with the natural thoughts and desires of his countrymen,
and was much more on a level with them. For these
reasons there is great difficulty in distinguishing the
genuine history of Elisha from the overgrowth of
popular imagination.
Reference is made elsewhere (see KINGS, BOOKS
OF, 8) to the disorder and chronological confusion
_.. , , which characterise the bundle of anec-
31 dotes on Elisha s life. It may be
the Anecdotes. well to add a few details
In 2 K. 5 the story of Naaman s cure implies that the rela
tions between the Aramaean and the Israelite kingdoms were
ostensibly peaceable. Then, without any explanation of the
change, we are introduced in 68-23 to tne very midst of the
warfare between the nations. In the closing verse of this section
we are told that the Aramaeans made no further invasion of
Israelite territory, whereupon in 624 we find the Aramaean king
besieging Samaria. In 5 26 ./I Gehazi, Elisha s servant, is said
to have been struck with life -long leprosy, which, however,
does not offer any obstacle to his familiar intercourse with the
king in 8 1-6.
There is no unity therefore in the stories as a whole,
though some of them are, no doubt, connected with each
other (so 816 48-37 38-41 42-44. See also KINGS, 8).
Further, it is uncertain whether the editor made his
selection on any definite principle, for the assertion that
he has related twelve and only twelve miracles of
Elisha cannot be maintained save on an arbitrary
method of reckoning. In any case he failed to under
stand Elisha s connection with contemporary events.
By placing all the anecdotes, with one exception, before
Jehu s revolt, he has reduced the greater part of Elisha s
public life to a mere blank. Yet how energetic and
fruitful in result that life was, we learn with unimpeach
able evidence from the exclamation of the king who
stood by the aged prophet s death-bed (2 K. 1814).
Nevertheless the stories, despite their legendary char
acter, are early in date. They belong to the literature
of the Northern Kingdom and to the eighth century
B.C. Thus, even when they cannot claim to be treated
as. sober history, they are of great value for the light
they throw on the manners and beliefs which prevailed
at the time when they were written ; and sometimes at
least we are justified in the confidence that we have
before us fragments of tradition which will bear the
test of criticism.
Elisha was the son of Shaphat and belonged to ABEL-
MEHOLAH (q.v. ) : it was there that Elijah found him.
.. . , .. The meeting occurred some time after
3. Elisna s call. Eli j ah . s return from Horeb . for the
route from Horeb to Damascus (i K. 19 15) would not
lead through Abel-meholah, and the word thence in
v. 19 must refer to some place mentioned in a section of
the narrative which stood between w. 18 and 19, but has
been omitted by the editor. Elisha had twelve pair of
oxen ploughing in the field before him, and was himself
driving the twelfth pair. This implies that he was a
man of substance, and far (therefore) from the common
temptation to prophesy for a piece of bread (Am.
1276
ELISHA
7 12). Still, when Elijah threw his mantle upon him, he
was ready to leave all and only asked leave to bid his
parents farewell. The leave was given, but with the
added warning to remember the sacred service to which
he was now bound by the fact that Elijah had thrown
his mantle over him (for this seems to be the meaning
of the obscure words in i K. 19 20). Returning, Elisha
slew the oxen, kindled a fire with the wood of the
plough, and made a sacrificial meal for the people about
him. From that time forth he was known as Elijah s
disciple, as one who had poured water on his hands
(2 K. 3n). His call had come mediately, through
Elijah, not immediately from Yah we. So also by
Elijah s instrumentality he was perfected for the graver
and more independent duties which awaited him when
his master was gone.
He is said to have followed his master, when his end was
near, from Gilgal in the centre of Palestine ! to the sanctuary
of Bethel and thence to Jericho. Elijah smites the Jordan
with his mantle and the two comrades cross dry-shod. Ask
what I shall do for thee, says Elijah, before I am taken from
thee. The disciple indulges no idle hope of becoming a second
Elijah ; but he would receive a double portion of his master s
spirit i.e., the portion of the first-born, comparing himself with
other sons of the prophets, not with his and their mighty
father. Even that is a hard thing to ask ; but he is to gain
this pre-eminence if he is enabled to behold the parting form,
as it is borne upward in the storm and lightning. He sees the
wondrous ascent ; he gazes on his father till he vanishes in
the height, and rends his clothes in grief for his bereavement.
Then he lifts the mantle which had fallen from the ascending
prophet s shoulders, smites the river with it and divides the
waters in the strength of Elijah s God. Other members of the
prophetic guild seek anxiously for their lost leader in hill and
dale. Elisha has the calm assurance that Elijah is gone and
that he is the heir.
The ascension of Elijah introduces a group of miracles.
One miracle is stern and cruel ; he curses the youths at
. __. , Bethel who mock him, and forty- two of
4. Miracles. ,
them are devoured by two she-bears
(223-25). Another has at least a penal character ;
Gehazi is struck with life-long leprosy for his covetous-
ness (52o_^). The rest are deeds of beneficence.
Elisha heals with salt the waters of Jericho (2 19-22), makes
poisonous gourds (see GOURDS [WILD]) wholesome by sprink
ling meal upon them in time of famine (4 38-41), multiplies bread
to feed a hundred guests (442-44) and oil to save the poor
widow of a prophet from the creditor who would have seized her
sons for debt and made them slaves (4 1-7) ; he brings the bor
rowed axe up from the river-bed and makes it swim on the
water (6 1-7). With exquisite tact he enters into the sorrows
of the Shunamite woman who had given him hospitable enter
tainment, and restores the life of the son whose very birth had
been a token of the prophet s power and gratitude (4 8-37). He
cleanses the leprosy of NAAMAN (?.v.) the Aramaean statesman
(chap. 5) ; and even after he has been laid in the grave the
touch of his bones restores a dead man to life (13 20 f.)
It may be noted that these miracles are in part
connected with the prophetic colonies, that they are
modelled to some extent on the wonders ascribed to
Elijah (cp 2 K. 2 14 with v. 8 ; 2 K. \ ff. with i K.
Vl^ff. ; 2 K. 432/1 with i K. 17 ^ff. ; 2 K. 810^ with
14), and that so far as they embody the spirit of active love,
they contribute a Christ-like element (which is missed,
however, in Ecclus. 48 12-14) to the ideal of prophecy.
Though both Elisha and his master were wonder
workers and champions of Yahwe s exclusive worship,
5 Polit 1 Elisha s career presents points of marked
influence con trast to that of Elijah. Instead of
appearing and disappearing like a meteor
flash, Elisha could be found readily enough by the people
who consulted him in the leisure of New Moons and
Sabbaths (2 K. 423), or by princes who sought him in
person (2 K. 812 633). The strife with Baal was over
and Elisha exercised decisive power in court and camp.
Thus, Elisha accompanied the combined armies of Israel,
Judah and Edom, then a vassal state under Judah, in an ex
pedition against Moab, and saved them from perishing of thirst.
1 2 K. 2 i. We have assumed that the Gilgal here intended
is Jiljilia SW. of Shiloh. See further, GILGAL, 4. If we
identify Elisha s Gilgal with the famous sanctuary by the
Jordan, then we must suppose that there is some confusion in
the text, and make Elisha start from his home in Samaria.
Robertson Smith (KINGS, BOOKS OF, in EB) held this to be the
original intention of the narrator (see v. 25).
1277
ELISHAH
The story is historical in substance (cp JEHORAM, g "$/.) The
allied army marched round the Dead Sea and crossing the
Nahal ha- Arabim (see ARABAH ii.) attacked Moab from the
S. This was just the course which would suggest itself. Moab,
as we now know from Mesha s altar-stone, had recovered and
fortified cities on the N., the Arnon presented an obstacle to
invasion from that quarter, and the Aramaeans farther N. still
might have cut off all possibility of retreat. Dig trenches on
trenches in this valley, said the prophet, a rational method of
reaching the water which filters through the sand to the rock
beneath, and one which still gives its name to the Wady el-
Ahsa at the S. end of the Dead Sea (see W. R. Smith, OTJCV)
147). We may perhaps doubt whether the Moabites really
mistook the water under the sun for blood shed in the quarrel
of the allies among themselves, though Stade (GVI 1 536) sees
no reason to question the truth of even this feature in the
narrative.
For his political influence, however, Elisha paid a
heavy penalty. He felt, and was sometimes worsted by,
the temptation to use means which his predecessor would
surely have disdained. We may, indeed, on consider
ing the relations between Samaria and Damascus,
question the representation in 87-15 that he was largely
responsible for the murder of Ben-hadad by Hazael ;
but he certainly was a prime mover in the revolt by
which the crafty and murderous Jehu, a man with no
character for religion (note especially 10 18), seized the
throne of Israel (see JEHU). He bore a nobler part
under other kings of Jehu s line.
If we follow Kuenen s plausible conjecture (Onderzoek, 1 2,
25, n. 12, but see JEHORAM, 2), it was in the time of
Jehoahaz that the Aramaeans besieged Samaria, till the famine
within the walls made women devour their children, and the
king, despairing of help from Vahwe and attributing the evil to
Elisha s supernatural power, sought the prophet s life. Elisha,
we are told, with a confidence like that of Isaiah, predicted
victory and plenty. His prophecy was fulfilled ; the Aramaeans,
terrified by a rumour that their own land was invaded (see
JEHORAM, 2), fled and left their supplies behind.
There came a turn in the tide. The Aramceans,
struggling for life against Ramman-nirari III., could
no longer hope to subjugate Israel ; and Elisha, now
stricken in years, saw in spirit the dawn of a brighter
day.
It is said that on his death-bed he bade king Joash stand by
the open window and shoot an arrow eastward. The prophet
laid his own aged hands on the hands of the young king, and
cried, as the arrow sped : An arrow of Yahwe s victory ; yea,
an arrow of victory over Aram. Moreover he told the king to
strike the ground with the arrows and when he did so declared
it was the sign of three battles to be won, chiding him, however,
because he did not double the strokes and so double his success
against the foe.
Well might Joash lament over Elisha : My father,
my father ! Israel s chariots and horsemen (art thou) !
His guiding and animating spirit had been worth
many a troop to his people. Here lay Elisha s
strength and here also its limitations. No new idea
came to the birth through him. He was a faithful
disciple, a true patriot, a man of loving heart. He
worked for Israel, scarcely through Israel for the world ;
and it is not, perhaps, by mere accident that in the
NT he is mentioned only once (Lk. 427).
All the modern histories of Israel especially those of Stade,
Kittel, and Wellhausen treat of Elisha; Smend, AT Relig.,
also may be consulted. w. E. A.
ELISHAH (ilKN ; eA[e]ic& [BADEL], in L of
Gen. 104, eAlCC6.). a son f Javan, occurs elsewhere
only in the combination N *?.N, Ezek. 27?, coast-lands
of Elishah (ismccoN eA[e]iCAl [BAQ]), whence violet
and purple stuffs were brought to Tyre. The two most
plausible identifications are that with S. Italy and
Sicily, where were Greek colonies (Kiepert, Lag., Di.,
Kau. ; cp TIRAS, end), and that with Carthage or,
more widely, the N. African coast (Schulthess, Stade,
E. Meyer \GA, 1282]). Both regions were famous for
the purple dye (cp PURPLE). The latter is favoured by
the name ; Elissa, princess of Tyre, was the legendary
founder of Carthage, which was perhaps originally called
Elissa. On the other side Dillmann quotes the gloss in
Syncellus, Elissa, whence the Sicelots ( Atercra ^ oO
cri/ce\ot ; Eus. Chron. Arnten. 213); but this seems
to tell against the identification of Elishah and Sicily.
1278
BLISHAMA
Dillmann urges that Carthage, being a Phoenician
colony, would not be represented as descended
from Japheth ; but this would have as much force
against Tarshish or Tartessus (cp TIRAS). It may
be granted, however, that N "K, coast-lands of Elishah,
would be perhaps more natural of S. Italy and Sicily ;
Tg. on Ezek. 27? indeed explains this phrase by the
province of Italy. A decision is difficult ; but perhaps
Carthage has the more in its favour. F. B.
ELISHAMA (VDB^N, my God hath heard, 32 ;
eA[e]iCAMA [BAL]).
1. b. Ammihud, prince of EPHRAIM (q.v., i.) (Nu. 1 10 2i8
7 48 53 10 22), i Ch. 7 26 (eA(i^a<rat [B]). Cp TRIBES.
2. Son of David (28. 5i6 lavaB era/uvs [L] ; i Ch. 38 147,
<^r itrafj.it [B]), and
3. Another son of David, mentioned in i Ch. 36 (eAi<ra
[B]) = aS. 615 i Ch. 14s, EI.ISHUA, which name should be
restored here, as it is scarcely conceivable that two of David s sons
should bear the same name. See DAVID, n_(rf). _
4. A Judahite, son of Jekamiah, i Ch. 241, identified by some
with
5. Grandfather of the royal prince ISHMAEL [2], 2 K. 2625,
(fAio-a/iai/ [L]) Jer. 41 i (, 48 1; Aa<ra [B], -e<ra [K], <Aea<ra
{Q]>. Cp Sayce, Crit. Mon. 380^
6. Jehoiakim s scribe, in whose chamber Jeremiah s roll was
laid up, Jer. 30 12 20 21 ( 43, cAtto-a w. 202i[B]).
7. A Levitical priest introduced, by the Chronicler, into his
life of Jehoshaphat, aCh. 178.
ELISHAPHAT (DQ ^N, God [or, my God] hath
judged, 35 ; cp Jehoshaphat and Ph. BCKvlH ;
eAeiC<Mj>AN [B], eAlCA({>AT [AL]), b. Zichri, a
captain in the time of Jehoiada (2 Ch. 23 1).
ELISHEBA (inK^X, God is an oath, or perhaps
rather God is health (Che.), see ABISHUA, ELISHUA,
and cp BATHSHEBA, BATHSHUA; similarly ELISABETH,
JEHOSHEBA, 33, 50 ; eA[e]ic&Be9 [BL], -Ber [A],
-Be [A*F]), wife of Aaron and daughter of Amminadab
{Ex. 623!?). She is also styled sister of NAHSHON,
and Nahshon b. Amminadab in P is the well-known
chief of Judah in the desert march. P hardly derived
the Aaronids from a Judahite mother. Sister of
Nahshon is, therefore, most probably a gloss (Rp)
which has arisen from a confusion of Elisheba s father
with the Judahite. It was, possibly, to avoid this con
fusion that the writer of i Ch. 622 [7] mentions a son
of Kohath (Aaron s grandfather) named Amminadab,
whose place, however, is elsewhere taken by Izhar (cp
ib. 28). The tribal connection of Aaron s wife, there
fore, is as obscure as that of the wife of his famous son
ELEAZAR [q.v., i].
The name Elisheba may well be pre-exilic (see, Gray, HPN,
206), and with regard to the difficult question of the origin of
Levitical names it may be pointed out that in this case a name
of parallel formation is borne by a devout follower of Yahwe,
the wife of the priest Jehoiada of Judah. See JEHOSHEBA.
ELISHUA (INE^K, God is a help, 28 ; cp
Elisha; eAlCOye [L]), a son of David [q.v., n</(/3)]
(28. 615, eA[e]icoyc [BA] ; i Ch. 14 S , KT<\e [B],
eAic&y E A ])- In J Ch. 36 for ELISHAMA (q.v., 3)
Elishua should be restored (so @ B eXacro).
ELISIMUS, RV ELIASIMUS (eA[e]ic[e]i/v\OC [BA]),
i Esd. 928 = AV Ezra 102 7 ELIASHIB, 5.
ELIU (HAeioy [UNA], HAioy [B c ], i.e., N-IH^N,
ELIHU), a forefather of Judith (Judith 81).
ELIUD (eAioyA [ Ti - WH ]. **-. T-IH^. God [or
my God ] is glorious ; cp Ammihud, Abihud), sixth
from Zerubbabel in the ancestry of Joseph (Mt. IH).
See GENEALOGIES ii. , 2 (c ).
ELIZAPHAN (|By?K. i.e., God [or, my God]
shelters ; cp Elzaphan ; eA[e]lCA(J)AN [BAL]).
1. A Kohathite prince, according to Nu. 830 P ; but in i Ch.
158 his name is co-ordinated with that of Kohath (eAi<ra</>aT
IB]). He is also named in 2Ch. 29 13. See GENEALOGIES i.,
7 (i-).
2. A prince of ZEBULUN, Nu. 342$ P. See PARNACH.
ELIZUR p-W^K, God [or my God ] is a rock,
1279
ELKOSHITE
29; cp ZURIEL, PEDAHZUR; eA[e]icoyp [BAL]), a
Reubenite prince (Nu. Is 2 10 73035 10 i8f). See
ZUR, NAMES WITH.
ELKANAH (HK. God hath created (him) or
God hath bought him, 36 ; eAKANA [BAL]).
1. The father of the prophet Samuel (i S. li). He
was the son of Jerahmeel (see JKKOHAM [i]) according
to one form of the genealogy of Samuel ; but the name
of Samuel s father is also traditionally given (it would
seem) as Elihu or rather (see ELIHU, 2) Elimelech.
2. Eponym of one of the three divisions of the Kora-
hite Levites (Ex. 624; see KORAH [3]), the others being
ASSIR (i) and ABIASAPH. In i Ch. 6 the genealogy
of the sons of Korah is given in two forms, both differ
ing from that of Exodus, and Samuel s father is repre
sented as a descendant of the Korahite Elkanah. This
may mean either that the descendants of Samuel were
actually incorporated after the exile in the Korahite
guild under the name of sons of Elkanah, and that an
older Elkanah, son of Korah, was inserted to give
symmetry to the genealogical tree, or simply that the
Korahite guild of Elkanah was led by its name to
claim kinship with the prophet Samuel and incorporate
his ancestors in its genealogy. See GENEALOGIES i. ,
7(i i.)-
3. A Levite : i Ch. 9 16 (i)Aai>a [B]).
4. One of David s warriors, i Ch. 126 (qAxava [BAL]). See
DAVID, ii (a).
5. A Levitical door-keeper for the ark: i Ch. 1623 (TJA-
KO.VO. [BNA]).,
6. A Judahite noble : 2 Ch. 287 (eiAitaca [B]). \v. R. S.
ELKIAH(eAKeiA,[BNA]; AVELCiA i.e., Hilkiah),
an ancestor of Judith (Judith 81).
ELKOSHITE, THE (^p^NH, Ginsb., with most
MSS and editions ; "WppKn, Baer, with the small MS
Massora; ^p^NH and ^p ^XH also are found in
V T V T
MSS.; eAKeCAlOC [BKAQ]), a gentilic noun, derived
from Elkosb, the name of the town to which the prophet
Nahum belonged (Nah. li).
According to Peiser [ZA TW, 7 349 ( 97)], the word contains
the name of the deity, jyjp [cp KISH], which he finds likewise in
the name Kushaiah [i Ch. 1617], and in Prov. 8031 [he reads
Sfrp*?* for DIpSx]).
Three sites have been proposed.
a. There is an el-Kus not far from the left bank of the
Tigris, two days journey N. of the ancient Nineveh,
where the grave of the prophet Nahum is pointed out.
According to Friedrich Delitzsch and A. Jeremias, 1 this is
the place referred to in Nah. 1 1. This theory involves
the assumption that Nahum belonged to the ten tribes
and was born in exile, and has been thought to be
favoured by the prophet s (presumed) accurate know
ledge of local details respecting Nineveh. On the one
hand, however, the N. Israelitish exiles were not settled
in Assyria proper (2 K. 176 18 n), and we find no trace
in Nahum of any hope of a return home such as an
exile would certainly have expressed somewhere (cp
Kue. , Ond.W ii. , 75, n. 4) ; and, on the other, quite
enough was known of Assyria in Palestine in the time
of Nahum to enable a prophet of such power to
sketch the picture that we have in chap. 2. We must
rather suppose that it was at a later day that the graves
of the two prophets who prophesied against Nineveh
were sought in the neighbourhood of that city. Whilst
a resting-place for Jonah was found in Nineveh itself
(Nebi Yunus), the village called el-Kus seemed, in view
of Nah. 1 1, to be appropriate for the grave of Nahum.
That there was a village there, however, in the seventh
century B. C. cannot be shown. The earliest reference
to it, according to Jeremias, is in the eighth century
A.D. ; nor is the grave mentioned before the sixteenth.
b. A ruined site in Galilee, Elcese, was shown to
Jerome as the birthplace of the prophet, and is attested,
1 See the treatise by Billerbeck and Jeremias cited under
NAHUM (beg.).
1280
ELLASAR
with slight variations, as E\/ce<re also by the Greek
fathers. As t\Keffaios is also the form of the name
in Nah. 1 1 (f\Kaifffov [N*], -KCfffov [K c - b ]) il is
possible that nrp^N was a collateral form by the side of
ppW (Kue. ), or, rather, that the name of Nahum s
birthplace was ntyp^N, not t?pW Indeed, since the
l of the scriptio plena is in no case binding, e p jKn might
itself be read B>p^Krt and derived from nerj)h- In this
case the name would have nothing to do with the deity
B*?p. If, then, the tradition reported by Jerome be cor
rect, we must suppose that Nahum, assuming that he
lived in the seventh century (see NAHUM, 2), was born
in Galilee amongst the Israelites left there in 722, and
then, as the book itself refers us to Judaea, removed
thither at a later date (cp further CAPERNAUM, i, 5).
c. Against the statement of Jerome, however, is to be
set that of the Vita Prophetarum of Pseudo-Epiphanius.
The text of the latter is indeed unfortunately very un
settled, and in its common form the eX/cecret of Nahum
is located E. of the Jordan. Nestle, however, has made
it very probable that lopSdvov eh is due to a corruption
of the text, and that the genuine text says that Elkese
lay beyond Betogabra ( = ELEUTHEROPOLIS, the mod.
Bet Jibrln) in the tribe of Simeon (ZDPV 1 2-22 ff.
[ 78]; transl. inPEFQ, 1879, PP- 136-138 ; cp Marg. u.
Mat.226/., 43 /f [ 93]). Beyond question a place in
Judah would be much more in harmony with the age
and contents of the book (cp We. A7. Proph. 155
[( 3 >, 158], who asserts that Nahum was at all events a
Judaean from Judah ), and it should likewise be con
sidered that all similar names of places point to the
S. viz., npnSx, fipffyf, iVwSx to the kingdom of Judah ;
n.^y pK to the S. part of the trans-Jordanic district.
Certainty is, however, unattainable. K. B.
ELLASAR OD|K, eAAACAR [D], ceAA. [A], eA<v
[L], {m^f, Ponti [gen.]), the land or city and district
ruled over by ARIOCH (Gen. 14 1). It was natural to
think, with Mdnant and others, of Asur, the old capital
of Assyria, and its territory. Ellasar might very well
be a Hebrew transliteration of the Assyrian alu Asur
(city of Asur) ; Assyrian (not Babylonian) / (a] is re
presented in Hebrew by s (D). Most scholars, however,
have rightly adopted Sir H. Rawlinson s view that Ellasar
means Larsa or Larsam, the ancient Babylonian city of
the sun-god, the ruins of which are still to be seen at
Senkereh, (cp BABYLONIA, 3), because the name
(Arioch) of the king is identified with Eri-aku, son
of Kudur-mabuk, and vassal-king of Larsa. This, no
doubt, requires one to assume either a slip on the part
of the writer or a corruption of the text ; 1 but, since
the narrator speaks of allies or vassals of the Elamitic
over-king Chedorlaomer, it is clear that he must mean,
not Asur, but Larsa. See Del. Par. 224, and, on the
historical value of the account, CHEDORLAOMER, 4/.
, c. P. T.
ELM, a misleading rendering of rPN in Hos. 413
AV, for TEREBINTH [g.v.]. Palestine is too warm for
elms.
ELMODAM or better RV Elmadam (eA/v\<\A&M
[Ti. WH]), six generations above Zerubbabel in the
genealogy of Joseph (Lk. 828).
Pesh. (cp Arm.) gives Elmodad ; cp. ALMODAD (Gen. 10 26), a
poor early conjecture. Read Elmatham i.e., Elnathan(see A
aK. 248); d and th were confounded, see <S s readings of
ELZABAD. Cp GENEALOGIES ii., 3.
ELNAAM (Dl?3?N, God is graciousness, 38, cp
Phcen. DWU, C/Slno. 383) in David s army list (i Ch.
1 Ordinary processes will not account for the change of
Larsa to Ellasar. If it were a Greek document, we could
understand such a change better, as the Greeks take great
liberties in the transcription of Semitic names; but the Hebrews
are more accurate. [Ball (SBOT) suggests as the original -al
Larsa*", the city of Larsa. ]
1281
BL-PARAN
1U6; eAAAAM [B], -AM [K vid -]. eANAAM [A], GA.M.
[L]). Cp JOSHAVIAH, and see DAVID, n (a) ii.
ELNATHAN (jn^N, God has given, 24, 27,
i. Grandfather (on the maternal side) of Jehoiachin ;
designated, Elnathan of Jerusalem ; a K. 248 (e\Xa-
va.6a.fj. [B], -/juQafj, [A], -vaOav [L]). Most probably
the same as Elnathan b. Achbor, Jer. 8612 ([@ 44 12],
twvaOav [B], v. [AQ*]), who was sent by Jehoiakim
to fetch Uriah out of Egypt, Jer. 2622-24 ([8822-24],
om. B), and is mentioned again in connection with the
burning of Jeremiah s roll (8625 vaOav [A]).
2. Three men of this name are mentioned in Ezra 8 16. Two
were chief men (Q<B-JO) and the third, one of the DTIID or
teachers, RV (a\<avafi, eAi/a0af, eai/. [BA], eAii/., e\v. [L,
who gives only two]). In i Esd. 844 there are only two names,
ALNATHAN, RV ELNATHAN (evaarav [B]), and EUNATAN,
a misprint which is corrected in the RV ENNATAN (twarav).
ELOHIM (0rfrfl), see NAMES, n 4 /
ELOI (eAcoi), Mk. 15 34 . See ELI, ELI.
ELON (fl? 11 ^, i.e., [sacred] oak, 69 ; cp ALLON).
i. One of the cities assigned to Dan in Josh. 1943,
where it is mentioned along with Shaalabbin, Aijalon,
Timnah, and Ekron. (@ has : ai\wv [B], eX. [A], ia\.
[L], but <@ L e\ui> for Aijalon in v. 42 a case of
transposition. ) The site has not been identified ; but it
is obviously to be looked for in or near the Valley of
Sorek ( W. Sardr). The same Elon is referred to in
i K. 4 9 (crit. emend.), where it follows Shaalbim and
Bethshemesh. See ELON -BETH -HAN AN (where 65 s
readings are given).
2. See AIJALON, 2 ; and cp below, ELON ii., \f.
ELON (pb, Gin. Ba. ; A AA60N [BAL]). i. A son,
that is, family or clan, of ZEBULUN : Gen. 46 14 (a<rpwv
[B]) = Nu. 2626 (a\uv [L]) ; perhaps the same as
2. One of the six minor judges, most of whose
names appear to be those of clans rather than of
individuals (Moore, Judges, xxviii. ) : Judg. 12 n/.
(Gin. pS N, Ba. J^N, euXwyu. [BL], -v [A] ; Ahialon}.
Elon is really the heros eponymos of Aijalon (or rather
Elon; see AIJALON, 2), in the land of Zebulun. The
gentilic is Elonite, U^N ; Nu. 26 26 (aXXwv[e]i [BAF],
aXaw [L]).
3- (pV Mi Gin. Ba. ; properly a place-name ; see NAMES, 69),
a Hittite, father of BASHEMATH (i), one of Esau s foreign wives :
Gen. 26 34 (<UA*>/* [AL], -5w/a [/>]), called father of ADAH, 2:
Gen. 862 (eAio/u. [ N ], ouSta^ [D], -AO>V [E], -p [L]). See BASHE
MATH, T, BEERI, i.
ELON-BETH-HANAN (PJITI II ji^N ; but some
MSS have J2 for JV2, and others prefix 1 ; eAcoM 660C
BH6AAMAN [B], AIAACOM 6COC BH0AN&N [A], AlAcON
660C BA.I6N&&M [L]). A name, or rather names, at
the end of the description of Solomon s second prefec
ture (i K. 4g). @ is probably right in reading . . .
and Elon as far as B. (cp v. 12, end). Elon is prob
ably the first ELON (i. , i) mentioned above, though it
is also possible to read Aijalon. Beth-hanan, if a
frontier town is meant, can hardly be right ; some
well-known name is wanted.
Possibly we should, with Klostermann, read BETH-HORON, an
important place, marked out by nature for a frontier-town.
Conder s suggestion of Beit Anan (Socin, Bet Enan, a village
8J m. from Jerusalem, on the road to Jimzu (PEFM. 3 16),
Beit Hanfin, 2 h. NE. of Gaza (BR 2371), may be mentioned.
ELOTH (ni^N), i K. 926 2 Ch. 817. See ELATH.
ELPAAL fafa, 31 : <\A((>AAA. eA X AAA [B],
*.A(1>AA. -A., eA<J>. [A], eAei<t>- [L]), a name in a
genealogy of BENJAMIN (q.v. , 9 ii. /3) ; i Ch. 8 n
/ 18. See JQR 11 102/1, i. Cp EPHLAL.
ELPALET (B ( ?S t ?N), i Ch. 14s ; or RV Elpelet
(i Ch. 14s) see ELIPHELET (i).
EL-PARAN ( J1NS ^N, i.e. , the tree [ terebinth ;
better, palm-tree ] of Paran ; 600C THC T6pe/v\lN6OY
1282
EL-ROI
THC d>\P&N [(A) (D)], . T . TepMIN90y T. <J>. [E],
e. repeBiNGoy T. d> [L] Gen. 146). See PARAN.
(Onk. , Sam. plain [KIE^D] f Paran ; see MOREH,
ZAANAIM. )
EL-ROI (^Nl SN), Gen. 16 13, RV m e- ; see NAMES,
116, and cp ISAAC, 2.
EL-SHADDAI ("W ^N), Gen. 17 1 ; see NAMES,
"7-
ELTEKE or ELTEKEH (NpJjpK or npljfajt, Assyr.
Al-ta-ku-u, eAGeKOO [A]), a town of the Judaean low
land, mentioned with Ekron and Timnah, in the book
of Joshua (1944, &AK&6<\ [B], eAGeKeiN [L]). was
(21 23 eAKO>e<MM [B], eASeKA [L]) a Levitical city in
the inheritance of Dan. It was taken and destroyed by
Sennacherib on his way to Timnah and Ekron after his
defeat of the Egyptian forces that had come to the help
of the Ekronites (see his prism inscription, Schrader,
KATW, 1717. , 289, 292 [ET, iS9/.. 282, 285]). The
army overthrown by Sennacherib probably consisted of
Jews as well as Ekronites and Egyptians, and a likely spot
for them to unite and take their stand would be up the
Wady Sarar (Vale of Sorek) on the high road between
Ekron and Jerusalem, at the foot of the hills a position
which equally suits the data in Joshua. Sennacherib
might reach it from the coast and the neighbourhood of
Joppa (where he was previously), by the vale of Aijalon
and the easy pass from the latter to the Vale of Sorek.
No trace of the name, however, has been discovered here
or elsewhere. Khirbet Lezkd, 7 m. SW. of Ekron and
near the great N. road (PEF map, Sh. xvi. ; see map to
JUDAEA) suits the data of Sennacherib s inscription, but
seems incompatible with those of Joshua. Beit Likia
in Aijalon (Conder) is too far N. (cp Guthe, Zukunfts-
bild d. Jesaia, 48). See CHRONOLOGY, 21.
G. A. S.
ELTEKON (JpJftS : GeKOyM [B], eAOeKGN [AL]),
a town in the hill-country of Judah (Josh. 1659),
mentioned in a small group of six along with Halhul
(Halhul), Beth-zur (Burj Sur) and Gedor (Jedur). The
site is therefore to be sought, most probably, somewhere
on or near the route from Hebron to Jerusalem. The
reading 6eKovp. of B suggests that the element "? in
this name was sometimes taken to represent the definite
article (cp ELTOLAD). Some have thought of this
Eltekon as the site of Sennacherib s victory of Altaku,
and indeed, in spite of what Schrader says (JCATW,
ijif.), the spelling of the latter is nearer Eltekon than
Eltekeh ; but the geographical reasons he gives in
favour of Eltekeh are well grounded. See ELTEKE.
ELTOLAD OTirvPN), one of the cities of Judah in
the Negeb near the border of Edom (Josh. 1630,
eAGcoA&A [A], -u>A&A [L], eABooNAAA [B]), but in
Josh. 19 4 (eA9oyA&A [A], -A&A [L], -A& [B]) assigned
to Simeon. In i Ch. 429 the name is TOLAD (nVm ;
0wAa3 [A], 0ou\a^ [B], 0oXa0 [L]), the prefixed
Arabic article ^N being omitted (so at least Kon. 2417,
but apparently not Ges. -K. 35 m; cp ELTEKON, above).
ELUL (W?K. eAoyA [B b NA<i] ; in Assyr. Ululu ;
see Schr. KA T 380, and cp ?1?N in Palm, [de Vogue,
Syr. Cent. no. 79]) occurs in Neh. 6 15 (eAoyA [B],
AAoyA [L]) and i Mace. 1427 (eAoyA [VA], om. N) as
the name of a MONTH (q.v., 5).
ELUZAI ( TJIl^N, i.e., God is my refuge? 29;
&ZAI [B], eAioozi [A], eAiezep [L]), one of David s
warriors, i Ch. 12sf. See DAVID, n (a) iii.
ELYMAIS (eAMyMAic [B]). i. In, i Mace. 6 1/
AV has, king Antiochus, travelling through the high
countries, heard say that Elymais in the country of
Persia was a city greatly renowned for riches, silver,
and gold, and that there was in it a very rich temple,
etc. (cp NANEA). RV, however, reads, . . . that in
1283
EMBALMING
Elymais in Persia there was a city, etc. AV follows
TR ; RV represents tv EXvpaiSi 4v rrj Ilfpaidi ; @ B
reads ev eXi>/utis (eXi /nes [A]) tv rij irtpff. Whether RV
is justified in adopting this text seems doubtful ; tv
before eXu/iau may be the correction of a scribe who
knew that there was no city bearing the name of
Elymais. Polybius (31 n), it is true, states that the
temple on which Antiochus had designs was in Elymais ;
but 2 Mace. 92 places it at Persepolis, which was not in
Elymais, but in Persia proper.
G. Hoffmann (Ausziige aus Syr. Akten Pers. Mdrtyrer,
i-yzf.), quoting a passage TO TTJS AprefjuSof iepbv TO. \fapa,
assumes that \\<Japa is the city referred to, and identifies Aapa
with the Ar. Azar, which is in Khusistan, SE. of Susa, one day s
journey on the road from Ram-hormuz to el-Ahwaz (cp al-
Mukaddasi, ed. de Goeje ( 419 13). Possibly, however, the real
name was one which admitted of being mutilated and corrupted
so as to produce DT# Elam. Gratz (MGWJ, 1883, p. 241
ff.) seeks a clue in the obscure passage Dan. 1145; but it
seems hazardous to assume that lyiEK (EV his palace, which
does not suit >V.TN the tents of) is equivalent to Am^aSapo, the
name of an Elamite city in Ptolemy, for Gratz himself holds
that the rest of the clause is deeply corrupt. Compare, how
ever, Vg. and Aq. in Dan. I.e. ; both take K to be a proper name.
Elymais recurs in Tob. 2 10, where RV m e- certainly
adopts the correct reading. For the statement that
ACHIACHARUS went to Elymais (eh TT\V EX(X)i>/xcu3a
[BNA] possibly et s yrji> E. ) support has been found in
the semi-apocryphal romance which bears his name
(Rendel Harris, Story of Ahikar, Iii.). Dillon, however,
ingeniously suggests that the name has arisen from the
underground cell the original narrative had some
derivative of oSy in which Ahikar hides himself from
the wrath of Sennacherib and Nadan (Contemp. Review,
March 1898). It is to be noted that the allusion to
Achiacharus has little bearing upon Tobit at least in
its present form (see TOBIT).
ELYMAS (eAyMAC [Ti. WHJ), Acts 13 8. See
BARJESUS.
ELYON (P^r), Gen. 14 18 RV m e- See NAMES,
118.
ELZABAD H917V God has g ven . 2 7 : cp Palm.
nSTliiX de Vogiie , Syr. Centr. no. 73. Ili-zabadu, a
Jewish name of fifth century B.C., has been found on
a tablet from Nippur [Hilprecht]).
1. One of David s warriors ; i Ch. 12i2 (eAiafe/s [B],
probably only a scribe s error, eXefa/iaS [A], tXeapaS
[L]). See DAVID, 11(0) iii.
2. b. Shemaiah, a Korahite door-keeper, 1 i Ch. 26?
(eA7tfa/3a0 [B] ; eXfaa5 [A] ; te f. [L]).
ELZAPHAN (fSy 1 ?^ El conceals 1 or defends,
30 ; cp Zephaniah ; eAlC&d>&N [BAL]), b. Uzziel, a
Kohathite Levite (Ex. 622 Lev. 104). Cp ELIZAPHAN.
EMADABUN (HMAAABOYN [BA]), i Esd. 5 5 8 RV,
AV MADIABUN.
EMATHEIS (e/v\&6eiC [A]), i Esd. 92 9 RV = Ezra
1028, ATHLAI.
EMBALMING. The Egyptian belief in the con
tinued existence after death of the human Ka (see
EGYPT, 18) seems to be of very great antiquity. To
make this existence happy precautions of every kind were
taken ; food and drink were placed in the grave that
the Ka might not starve ; his favourite movables in
like manner were buried with him ; but above all
the body had to be preserved so that the Ka could
resume possession at pleasure. Hence the very ancient
practice of embalming.
A minute description of the methods employed in his
own time is given by Herodotus (286^:) ; with this may
be compared the account of Diodorus Siculus (Igi).
According to Herodotus embalming was the business
of a special guild. He distinguishes three methods.
1 Read and Elzabad and his brothers with and some
Heb. MSS (Ki.).
1284
EMBROIDERY
1. In the costliest of the three the brain was with
drawn through the nose with an iron hook and the
cavity filled with spices. Then an incision was made
in the abdomen on the left side with an Ethiopic
stone (flint knife), the bowels removed and washed
with palm wine, the cavity filled with myrrh, cassia,
and other drugs, and the opening sewed up. Next
the body was kept for seventy days in natron (ac
cording to modern analysis, sub-carbonate of soda),
then finally washed and skilfully swathed in long strips
of byssus smeared with gum. The mummy was usually
enclosed in a sort of case which showed the outlines of
the body, and lastly in a wooden coffin of human shape,
occasionally also in a stone sarcophagus.
2. The second method was simpler, and correspond
ingly cheaper. Cedar oil was introduced into the body
and removed after it had decomposed the viscera ; the
body was then laid in natron, which, according to Hero
dotus, wholly consumed the flesh, leaving nothing but
the skin and bones.
3. The third and cheapest method substituted for the
cedar oil of the second some less expensive material.
Broadly speaking, the statements of Herodotus are
confirmed by what we learn from Egyptian sources and
from examination of the mummies themselves. 1 Ex
tant mummies, however, exhibit more methods of em
balming than the three just described. In particular
those of the New Empire show a marked advance in the
art, as compared with those of the Old. According to
Erman, however (Egypt, 315), accurate details as to
this are still wanting. One of the main innovations was
in the treatment of the viscera. In the New Empire
these were removed ; the heart was replaced by a stone
scarabaeus (the scarabaeus, as a peculiarly mysterious
and holy creature, was supposed likely to be of essential
use to the dead). The heart, lungs, liver, and other
remaining viscera were set aside in four vases, usually
(from an old misunderstanding) called Canopic. Each
vase was under the protection of a special daemon all
four daemons being sons of Osiris -and the lid of each
took the form of the head of that daemon : man,
jackal, hawk, cynocephalus. The special function of
the daemon was to ward off hunger.
This custom of embalming was specifically Egyptian.
The Hebrews did not practise it. It is only as being
an Egyptian custom that the narrator speaks of it as
applied in the cases of Jacob and Joseph (Gen. SQzf.
[J 2 ], 5026 [E]). With his statement that the embalming
lasted forty days (50s) may be compared that of Diodorus
(Igi) which makes it at least thirty days. Ordinarily,
however, it seems to have taken seventy days. There
is a statement of Josephus (Ant. xiv. 74), referring to
a later period a statement which stands by itself that
the body of Aristobulus was embalmed with honey so as
to allow of its being afterwards removed to Jerusalem.
See Wilkinson, Anc. Eg. \\. 1 4,$\ ff. ; Maspero, Mem. sur
quelqucs papyrus du Louvre, II. : le rituel de reinbauiite-
incnt ; J. Czermak (as in note); articles in Winer, Riehm, and
} ; Erman, Egypt, chap. 13. I. B.
EMBROIDERY
Italian (ricamare) and Spanish (recamar). (P has n-oiKiAcu,
77 froiiuAia TOU pcujuievrou, ipyov TronaAroO, jroi/a Aos. In Ex.
28 4 AV has a broidered coat for f3E>Pl njha ; RV a coat of
chequer work. See TUNIC, and observe that, though in Ps.
45 15 [14] niOp"]7 (RV in, or upon, broidered work ) is plainly
corrupt, the reference to brocade-work in i>. 14 [13] is un
questioned (see Che. Ps.ft)).
Embroidery was regarded by the Romans as peculiarly
a Phrygian art 1 (vestis Phrygia ; opus Phrygium].
, Pliny (848) even states that embroidery
2. Home of 3 v
EMBROIDERY. RV s substitute for the needle
work of AV in Judg. 5 30 Ps.45 14 [15] ( "10/T! broidered work ),
and virtually in Ex. 26 3621 16 2839 8637 38 18
1. Hebrew 39 2 9(Qp i ruj-yo). EV gives broidered work
terms
in Ezek. 161013 ( l " a i? ?)i their broidered gar
ments in 26 16 (DnppT H33). The Heb. word (rikmali) is used
metaphorically in Ezek. 17 3 (feathers of an eagle) and i Ch.
29 2 (ornamental stones, or mosaic work). The cognates of nopl
are Eth. rekem, Ar. rakama to embroider, also to write ( to
make points ), with which the Targ. NnDfT) coloured spots, and
the Syr. tarktmatha red pimples, may be compared, from which
it seems to follow that the first step towards embroidery was mak
ing points, or little strokes ; diversity of hue would be sought for
in the next stage. In its usual specialised sense of needlework-
ornamentation of woven fragments, Ar. rakama has passed into
1 Compare especially the results of Czermak s physiological
examination of two mummies at Prague, in SWA W, 1852.
1285
tirfc
art.
with the needle was invented
the
Phrygians. More probably the Phrygians
derived the art indirectly from Babylonia. According
to Perrot and Chipiez (Art in Chaldcza and Assyria,
2 363) the Chaldasans first set the example of wearing
richly embroidered stuffs, as we know from the most
ancient cylinders, from the Telloh (Tell Loh ?) monu
ments, and from the stele of Marduk-nadin-ahi.
Should this statement be correct, it practically decides
the question as to the origin of the art of embroidery.
The Latin expression for an embroidering-needle (acus
Babylonia] would seem to point in the same direction.
It is true, the ancient Babylonian cylinder -seals
hardly supply any confirmation of the statement of
historians. In the magnificent records of De Sarzec s
excavations, however, there is (pi. I. bis, fig. la) a
representation of a standing figure clothed in a garment
covered with diagonal lines which form lozenges. In
this we may most probably see an example of exceed
ingly early embroidery (3000 or 4000 B.C.), which
would naturally assume a very simple form. Our next
important example is that of Marduk-nadin-ahi (about
1120 B.C.), in which the robe of the king is very
elaborately wrought. The finest specimens of all,
however, are the designs on the robe of the Assyrian
king Asur - nasir - apli (885 B.C.), which are most
interesting and instructive with regard to this subject.
The sculptures representing him show that his dress
was embroidered with most varied designs, representing
men, deities, and animals, as well as the king himself
performing ceremonies before the sacred tree, etc.
The borders and ornaments (generally floral, the chief
subject being the sacred tree) are extremely good (see
Layard, Monuments of Nineveh, and Perrot and
Chipiez, Chaldaa, figs. 253-259, and text).
In the inscriptions we cannot at present say with
certainty that either needlework or woven embroidery
is spoken of. Garments and woven stuffs are indeed
referred to ; we even have lists of garments ; but the
precise signification of the words employed is often
obscure. Very possibly, however, the phrases (subatu)
fa ina asagi barru and (subatu} sa ina kunsilli barru
refer not to garments torn with thorns, or other
objects of that kind, but to cloth ornamented or
embroidered with a thorn (? needle) and with a
shuttle (?) respectively.
Egyptian embroidery is known only through late
specimens ; but from these we can safely infer the
production of similar fabrics in earlier times. Herodotus
(847) mentions that Amasis (570 B.C.) sent totheAthena
(Minerva) of Lindos a linen corslet inwoven with figures
and embroidered with gold and cotton; and Ezekiel
(27 7), addressing Tyre, says Of embroidered byssus
from Egypt was thy sail. Lucan (10 141-143) speaks of
Egyptian embroidery. The thread is called Sidonian,
the silk is from the Seres, the needle is Egyptian
(Nilotis).
In Greece the invention of the art was ascribed to
Athena : hence the offerings of foreign work of this kind
to her temple (see above). Embroidery with the needle
cannot be shown to be mentioned in the Homeric
poems. Almost always the terms used are those ap
plicable to weaving (//. 3 125/1 22 4 4o/ ; Od. 19 225^).
1 It is said that the toga picta worn by the emperor on festal
occasions, by the consuls on entering office, by the magistrates
when giving public games, and by the Roman generals on their
triumphs, was of Phrygian embroidery.
1286
BMEK-KBZIZ
To the value set on embroidery in ancient Palestine
Judg. 530 supplies an eloquent testimony ; it is presum-
_.,.. . ably Babylonian work that the poet
3. .DlOilCtll
references.
refers to. At any rate, Achan s mantle
was Babylonian (Josh. 7 21 24). In
the account of Hezekiah s tribute (Taylor cylinder,
834^), there is no mention of embroidered garments ;
but, though we may perhaps assume that the veil of the
temple (see below) was not Jewish work, it is probable
(especially if P is late) that the art of embroidery was
practised in Judaea. The account of the process of
preparing the gold thread for the embroiderer, in Ex.
393, deserves notice. And they beat out the plates of
gold, so that he could cut them into wires, to work
these into the blue, and the purple, and the scarlet, and
the fine linen, the work of an artist. In this passage
the word yon, hoseb (EV cunning workman ) takes
the place of cjn, rokcm (EV embroiderer ) ; another
similar but perhaps higher class of work may be meant.
According to the Talmudists nDp1> or embroidery, was when
the design was attached to the stuff by being sewn on, and
visible, therefore, on one side only, and the work of the 3^n
was that in which the design was worked in by the loom,
appearing on both sides. 1 The correctness of this, however,
may be doubted, for the statement that the l&n worked golden
threads and also cherubim into the fabric (Ex. 26 i 31 86835),
implies that he, too, was a needle-worker (cherubim being
probably much too difficult for a loom-worker at that period),
and moreover an artist," not only on account of the more com
plicated nature of the work he executed, but also because he
worked from new and much more varied designs than the rjp>
Josephus (Ant. xii. 5 4 BJ v. 5 4) speaks of the
wonderful veils both of the first and of the second
(Herod s) temple. Clermont-Ganneau has suggested 2
that the veil of the first, which Antiochus Epiphanes
certainly took away, was the curtain of the sanctuary
of Olympia, of Assyrian workmanship, dyed with
Phoenician purple, and given by Antiochus. Josephus s
description of the highly artistic veil in Herod s temple,
sets us wondering where it was made. He calls it
a Babylonian curtain. It is doubtful whether any but
priests families remained on the site of ancient Babylon ;
but of course the art of embroidery may have been
practised in other cities of Babylonia. T. G. p.
EMEK-KEZIZ, AV The valley of Keziz (pOl?
rVl? - AM6KACIC [B] -KKA. [A], M. [L])!
an unidentified city in the territory of Benjamin (Josh.
18 21), enumerated between BETH-HOGLAH and BETH-
ARABAH, 2. The name KZsis sounds like the word
Kesds, another name of the W. Hasdseh, between
Tekoa and En-gedi (see Ziz) ; but this Wady could
not belong to Benjamin. If B is right in reading
Beth-abarah in Josh. /. c. , we may conjecturally identify
Emek - keziz with the broad and deep Wady en-
Nawaimeh, NW. of the modern Jericho, which
Robinson explored on his way from Jericho to Bethel.
The place intended was possibly near the springs of
A in ed-Diik (see Docus). T. K. C.
EMERALD (cM&p&rAoc, sutaragdiu) 3 represents
in & (see, however, PRECIOUS STONES) the Heb. njTQ,
bdrtketh (Ex. 28i; 39 10) or n,Ti3, bdt f kath (Ezek. 2813).
1 Name II s also the renderin of RV m ?- ; EV,
wrongly, has CARBUNCLE. Targg. and
Pesh. retain the Heb. word : Nnpna [Jerus. Jon.], jp-Q
[Onk.], j^jj^ [Pesh.]). The Gk. name, which occurs
also without the initial letter, seems to be the same as
the Hebrew ; but the ultimate origin of the word is un
known. The Semitic root barak, to lighten, readily
suggests itself ; but cp Sans, marakata, marakta. In
Arabic two varieties of emerald are distinguished,
sabarjad and zumurrud.
1 In Phcen. 3E- n = weaver (Ges. l3).Bu.(2)). Cp WEAVING.
I KFQ 1878, pp. 79-81.
3 Whence emerald, through (presumably) smaraldus.
1287
EMERODS
The emerald is classed mineralogically with the beryl (see
BERYL), from which, however, it differs in having a fine green
colour, attributed to the presence in it of
2. Description, chromium sesquioxide ; it also never presents
the internal stria; often seen in the beryl. 1
It occurs in six-sided prismatic crystals of the hexagonal system,
the edges of which not unfrequently show various modifica
tions. The emerald is transparent or translucent, and has a
vitreous, rarely resinous lustre. It was highly valued by the
ancients (see Pliny, NH iTt 5). Various virtues were ascribed to
it ; it was said to be good for the eyes, to colour water green, to
assist women in childbirth, and to drive away evil spirits ;
in the East it is still credited with talismanic and medicinal
properties.
Besides being mentioned in Ezek. 2813 as one of the
precious stones with which the king of Tyre was decked,
_., .. . and in Ex. 28 17 39 10 as among the gems
3. lilt icai in the high priest > s breastplate, the
:ences. emerald is allude d to in Tobit 13 16
Judith 102i Ecclus. 326 Rev. 4s (ffpapdySivos, of the
rainbow), and Rev. 21 19.
2. In Ex. 28 18 39 ii Ezek. 27 16 28i3,t EV has
emerald for -jsj, nophek, but RV m - renders carbuncle.
The resemblance between the letters of Heb. nophek and
Egypt. mfk(f\ or, as commonly written, mafkat, may be urged
in favour of emerald as at any rate a better rendering otnopliek
than carbuncle. The Egyptian word represents, according
to WMM, a green stone, not however the emerald, but malachite.
It is not less plausible to identify nophek and mafkat with the
htfakku -stones in the Amarna Tablets (202, 16), sent by the
prince of Ashkelon to the king of Egypt. In S. Philistia, where
the roads from Sinai terminated, it would be easy to obtain
jitafkat from the Egyptian mines. If we follow in Ezek.
27 16 and read Edom (nix) for MT s Aram (DIN), it will
appear that ndphek&s well as other precious stones came from
Edom. This too is quite consistent with the equation nophek=
mafkat (so WMM, OLZ, Feb. 1899, p. 39^".). Maspero, how
ever, interprets mafkat as turquoise.
EMERODS, 2 , RV tumours, except in Dt. 2827;
but see mg. (DvDl?, ffdlim; < BAL H eAp&, Al GAp&l :
in I S. 56 eiC T&C 6AP&C [A] N&yC [ B ] > t* 010
renderings combined in L), mentioned with other
diseases in Dt. 2827 [EV] and in the account of the
affliction of the Philistines (i S. 66912 6^f. n 17).
According to the ordinary view, Sfdlim became at length
a vulgar word, and Kre therefore substitutes the more
seemly word C ^na, tlhorim, which is also to be found
in the late insertions i S. 6n3 17-180 (see Budde, Sam.
SHOT). Since, however, tthdrim is no euphemism at
all, 3 and analogous Kre readings (see HUSKS) have
been argued to be corrupt, it has been proposed to
read for the improbable and unpleasant word nnne,
D nm ( = D rntf, ulcers). Kre is therefore not a
euphemism but a gloss (Che. ).
The reading tehSrim must, it is true, have been an early one,
for it seems to be implied in the e fipat of <S>, not, however in Ps.
7866, where a small corruption has obscured the true sense. 4
Tradition has in fact radically misunderstood the meaning of dpha-
lii, which (like the gloss rfthahtni) must be a descriptive term
for the disease, and probably means tumours (so RV ; cp ophel,
hill ). This suits the (almost certainly correct) reading,
irnEJ l, of the verb in i S. 5 9^ (for MT s lini^ l). 5 According to
the emended text the passage runs thus and he smote the
men of the city, both small and great, and tumours broke out
upon them. 6
That hasmorrhoidal swellings in ano are referred to
is rendered possible by the usage of the Ar. aft (see Ges.
1 The chemical composition of the emerald may be represented
by the formula 6SiO^,Alo,Oa,3GfO. It has an uneven and con-
choidal fracture, a hardness of 7.5-8, and a specific gravity of
2.67010 2.732.
2 Emerods is found only in AV. The nearest approach to
the form is emeraudes, Mid. Eng. in the Promptoriunt
Parvuloruin of 1440, which is nearly the same as old Fr.
emeroides i.e., haemorrhoids (or piles).
3 See BDB and Ges. -Buhl, s.v. nnu-
4 For Tj l read afc l l, And made his foemen turn back. Re
treating and ignominy are constantly connected in the Psalms
(e.g., 610 [n]).
8 Cp Ex. $gf. , S ar >d B I n an d n were confounded (Che.).
6 This happens to be H. P. Smith s rendering, but it is put
forward by him as a mere conjecture. The lexicographers, on the
other hand, seek to justify the sense of break out (cleave)
by comparing Ar. Satara ( to have a cracked eyelid ).
would have been more natural.
1288
EMIM
Thes. ), and by the case of the alleged punishment of
the Athenians for dishonour done to Dionysos (schol.
ad Aristoph. Acharn. 243). The sense of plague-
boil (RV s second rend., Dt. 2827 mg. ) is favoured
not indeed by the (imaginary) symbolism of the mouse
-but by the statement of the rapid spread of the
disease among the Philistines. The most decisive
passage is i S. 612, And the sick (D eyKan, Klo. ) that
died not were smitten with the tumours, and the cry
of the city went up to heaven ; i.e. , as soon as the
ark reached Ekron there came on the whole population
a plague which killed some at once, while the rest were
afflicted with painful tumours, so that a cry of mourning
and of pain resounded through the city. Plague-boils
in the technical sense of the expression, however, occur
only in the groins, the armpits, and the sides of the neck ;
tlhorim therefore cannot be so rendered. Plainly a
thorough treatment of the text is a necessary preliminary
to a consistent and natural explanation of the narrative
in i S. 5. As the text of i S. 64 f. 17 f. now stands,
golden tumours, as well as golden mice, were sent by
the Philistines as a votive offering to Yahwe. H. P.
Smith however thinks that the original narrative men
tioned only golden tumours, the mice wherever they
appear being the result of late redactional insertion. This
view is certainly preferable to that of Hitzig, who thought
that the only golden objects sent were symbols of the
pestilence which bad devastated the Philistine cities
(Ashdod, Gath, and Ekron) in the form of mice, a
theory which, being so widely accepted, ought to be
correct, but is unfortunately indefensible. The idea
of golden tumours is very strange, however. Votive
offerings, both in ancient and in modern times, re
present not the disease from which the sick man has
suffered but the part of the body affected. Indeed it
could hardly be otherwise ; for most morbid conditions
do not admit of plastic representation so as to be dis
tinguishable by untrained eyes." So Dr. C. Creighton,
who proposes to interpret dfdlim in i S. 6 a,f. and t&horlm
in v. 17 of the anatomical part of the body affected, and to
make the disease dysentery ; but it is plain from (> that
the narrative in i S. 5 f. has been interpolated, and
it would seem that not only i S. 6 17 i8a but also the
references to golden tumours in w. $f. must be late
insertions. 1 na[D]j; and ^sy are not very unlike ; out of
a false reading a false statement may have developed.
T. K. c.
EMIM, THE (D^KH, DNH, as if the terrors ;
probably corrupted from D^pVI^n, the strong ; cp
ZuziM ; in Gen. royc COMAIOYC [A], COMM. [E],
6MM. [L] I in Dt. pi OMM6IN [BFL], OOMM6IN,
OMMieiN [A]), prehistoric inhabitants of Moab (Gen.
14$ Dt. 2io/f). See SHAVEH-KIRIATHAIM, REPHAIM
(i.).
Schwally(Z^i T1-VI8 135 [ 98]) compares Ar. ayyun, serpent,
as if serpent-spirits were meant (cp ADAM AND KVE, col. 61,
n. 3) ; but the text is more probably corrupt. The parallel
names all admit of simple explanations. *r. K. C.
EMINENT PLACE (3|), Ezek. 1624. See HIGH
PLACE, 6.
EMMANUEL (eMMANoyHA [Ti. WH]), Mt. 1*3
AV ; RV IMMANUEL.
EMMAUS (eMMAOYC [Ti. WH] ; deriv. uncertain ;
cp nsn, hot [spring], 1 see HAMMATH ; or itVfon,
spring, fount, see MOZAH and cp below, no. 2).
i. A city in the plain, at the base of the mountains
of Judaea, near which was the scene of the defeat of
Gorgias at the hands of Judas, 164 B.C. (i Mace. 840,
a / u j ua[o]u[i ] [ANV]; 57,a/i/u>v/i[A],-j[N], eytiyiuious [V]);
43, e/j.fJLaov/j. [AK c - ac - b ], vafj.fj.aow [N*], a/JifJ.. [V]). It
was among the strongholds afterwards fortified by
Bacchides (ib. 9 50 a/j.fj.aovs [N*], a/j.fj.aov/j. [K c - a V], e/u/x.
1 Possibly the original reading in i S. 617 was
was displaced by the If ire.
1289
Vi which
ENAIM
[A]). Emmaus, mod. Amwds, was situated 22 R. m.
from Jerusalem on the road to Joppa, and 10 m. SSE.
from Lydda. In Roman times it was the seat of a
toparchy, and frequently enters into the history of that
period (cp Jos. Ant. xiv. 112; BJ i. llz, ii. 5i 204,
iv. 8 1, v. 16). From the third century it bears the
name Nicopolis, the origin of which is variously ex
plained (see Schiirer, GVI l$nff., ET, 2zs3/. ), and
in Christian times it was an episcopal see. Emmaus
was renowned for a spring believed to be endowed with
miraculous powers (cp Mid. KoMleth 7 7), from the exist
ence of which it may have derived its name. Eusebius
and Jerome (OS 257 21 121 6), whom early writers followed,
agreed in identifying Emmaus-Nicopolis with 2.
2. The Emmaus of Lk. 24 13 (referred to, but un
named, in Mk. 1612), a village (KW/XIJ), 60 (N and
some others read 160) stadia from Jerusalem. The
identification has found supporters in modern times
(notably Robinson LBR 147 ff.), but is unlikely.
Emmaus was too important a city to be called KW/XT; ;
and, not to mention other reasons, the supposition that
the disciples accomplished so long a journey (for no
specific purpose) is at variance with the narrative. It is
very evident that the reading 160 is an intentional
alteration to harmonise with the tradition shared by
Eusebius and Jerome. Emmaus is to be sought for in the
immediate neighbourhood of Jerusalem, and it is agreed
that it can be no other than the Emmaus of Josephus
(BJ vii. 66) 30 (so Niese ; others read 60) stadia from
Jerusalem, which Vespasian colonised by assigning to it
800 discharged veterans. Now about 34-35 stadia to
the NW. of Jerusalem lies Kuloniyeh, a little village,
which derives its name, it would appear, from
colonia and reminds us of the 800 veterans above. *
In close proximity is the ruined Bet Mizza, probably the
Benjamite njran of Josh. 1826, which according to the
GSmara on Sukk, 4s was also a colonia (see MOZAH).
The close resemblance between the names nsarr (Bet
Mizza] and Emmaus is sufficiently striking, and since it
is almost the required distance from Jerusalem, there
can be little doubt as to the identity of Kuloniyeh and
the Emmaus of Josephus. The further identification of
Kuloniyeh and the Emmaus of Lk. becomes equally
probable, and is accepted by most moderns ( Hi. , Caspari,
Buhl, Pal. 186, Schultz, PREW 11 769 771, Wolff in
Riehm HWB, Wilson in Smith s DB^ ; see also Sepp,
Jer. u. d. heil. Land, 1 54-73 ). 2
By those who adopt the less accredited distance of 60 stadia,
several sites have been proposed for Emmaus. (a) Conder {HB
326 f., PEFJlf336ff.)finds\t in the name el-Khamasa (according
to him Emmaus), SW. of Bittlr (see BETHER i.) ; the antiquity
of the place is vouched for by the existence of rock-hewn tombs.
El-Khamasa, however, is 72 stadia from Jerusalem direct, and
the distance is even greater by road. (6) el- Kubebeh about 64
stadia from Jerusalem, W. of Neby Samwll. Further support
for this is claimed in the tradition (which, however, is not older
than the I4th cent.) associating this place with Christ s appear
ance (cp Baed.( s ) 16, 115, and esp. Zschokke, D. neutest.
Emmaus [ 65]). (c) Kariet el- Enab (or Abu Gosh), to the S. of
el-Kubebeh, about 66 stadia from Jerusalem (cp Williams, Diet.
Gk. and Rom. Geog:, Thomson LBV) 534, 666 / ; and see JPh.
4262). Cp KlRJATH-JEARIM, 2. S. A. C.
EMMER (6MMHR [A]), i Esd. 821 = Ezra 1020.
IMMER ii.
EMMERUTH (eMMHpoyQ [A], etc.), i Esd. 624
RV = Ezra 237, IMMER ii. , i.
EMMOR (e/v\MO>p [Ti. WH]), Acts 7x6 AV, RV
HAMOR.
ENAIM (D^tt i.e. , probably place of a fountain,
101, 107, cp ENAN ; AINAN [ADEL]), mentioned
only in Gen. 881421 RV (AV m - Enajim), where AV
following Pesh. , Vg. , and Targ. (see Spurrell s note) 3
1 See KULON. A little to the WSW. is Kastal, whose name
also bears a trace of a former Roman encampment.
2 It is interesting to recall that, according to Wilson,
Kuloniyeh was, and still is, a place to which the inhabitants of
Jerusalem went out for recreation.
3 The apoc. Book of Jubilees (chap. 41) omits the name. OSC 2 )
(93 18 221 18) follows , anim, acetju.
1290
EN AN
EN-GANNIM
treat the word as an appellative, an open place.
Enaim, however, is obviously a place ; it lay between
Adullam and Timnah, and is the Enarn (cry ; rjvaein
[AL], fjuuavei [B]) named in Josh. 1534 in the first group
of towns in the lowland of Judah. The fuller form of the
name in Gen. and Josh, is probably Tappuah of Enaim
(or, of Enam) ; see TAPPUAH, i, and NKPHTOAH. The
Talmud mentions a place called Kefar Enaim (Pesik.
Rab. 23), and here and elsewhere distinctly states that
Enaim is a place-name, on the authority of Rab (Sota,
10 a). Conder s identification with Kh. Wady Alin
does not suit the reference in Genesis. T. K. C.
ENAN (P" 1 !?, 101, cp ENAIM, HAZAR-ENAN ;
AINAN [BAFY]).
i. Father of AHIRA (Nu. l 15 229 [ai^oc A] 778 83 102 7 , P).
See ANER, i.
ENASIBUS (eNAc[e]lBoc [BA]), i Esd. 9 3 4 = Ezra
1036, ELIASHIB, 6.
ENCAMPMENT (Prvp), Gen. 25 16 Ezek. 254 etc.,
RV; see CAMP, i ; CATTLE, i, n. 2.
ENCHANTER, ENCHANTMENTS
See MAGIC, 3 ; DIVINATION, 3.
, etc.).
ENDIRONS (D^DS?), Ezek. 40 43 AV m sr- See
HOOK (7).
ENDOR ("in pi? [Josh. iS.], "INI pi? [Ps.],
ACNAcop [BSARTL ; Euseb.], eNAoopON Jos.), (a)
Endor appears in Josh. 17 " (MT)among those Manassite
towns within the territory of Issachar from which the
Manassites were unable to expel the Canaanite inhabit
ants ; but it is not mentioned in (f BAL (unless eSwp
[fja.bmg.] i s a trace of the name) nor in the || Judg. 127,
and has evidently slipped into MT through the simi
larity of the name to that of Dor (cp Bennett, SBOT,
Josh., ad loc.).
(b) Saul s visit to the witch of Endor before the
battle of Gilboa is related in i S. 285-25 (aeXdup [B],
vrjvSup [A]). Although the name Endor was recog
nised in the fourth century A.D. as attaching to a
large village 4 R. m. S. of Tabor (OS 259 70 ; 22625),
and though this fourth-century name still lingers at
Endur, a miserable village on the N. slope of the
Nabi Dahi, the question arises whether the narrator of
i S. 287-25 did not mean a village called En-harod,
close to the fountain spoken of in Judg. 7 1. The true
order of events in these narratives probably is : ( i ) the
Philistines muster their troops at Aphek (in Sharon), and
Achish promises to take David with him, while Saul
musters at En Harod (28 iff. 29 1); (2) Israel encamps in
the plain of Jezreel, and the Philistines send David
away, etc. (292-n ); (3) the Philistines penetrate as far
as Shunem (284); (4) Saul seeks an oracle and finds
it by night at Endor (283-25 ; so Budde). Note that in
i S. 28s it is said that Saul s heart trembled exceed
ingly (mm ; cp Harod) ; how naturally after this, if
our conjecture is right, comes the speech of the servants
of Saul in v. ^ respecting the wise woman at the Well
of Trembling (En-Harod) ! Almost certainly En-dor
in i S. 28? should be emended as proposed.
(c) In Ps. 83 10 [n], they perished at Endor does not
accord with the mention of Sisera and Jabin. At Endor
(-|NT"jn) is obviously corrupt. The context requires
without survivors, and we should probably read
Tifc^j Ki : v and N are liable to be confounded (Che.
Ps.W). Gratz s conjecture at the fountain of Harod
(-nn j j?a), adopted by Winckler and Wellhausen, only re
moves a part of the difficulty. It is suggestive, however.
Formerly Gratz read En-dor for En-harod in Judg.
7 1, and < BA s Endor in i S. 29 1 may come from
En-harod (see HAROD, WELL OF, 2).
The village of Endur (not Endur) is 7 or 8 m. from
the slopes of Gilboa, partly over difficult ground (Grove-
Wilson). Nor is it quite beyond question that there
1291
was a place called Endor in pre-exilic times. There
may perfectly well have been two spots called En-harod.
The fourth-century village of Endor may have owed its
name to a corruption of the text of i Samuel.
The meaning of im is by no means perspicuous, and the con
fusion of -INI and -nn was easy. At any rate we need not
speculate as to whether one of the caves in the calcareous cliff
on the slope of which Endur stands, was the scene of the visit
of the unhappy Saul to the wise woman (so J. L. Porter, in
Kitto s Bib. Cyc. s.v. Endor ). What Harod really means is
uncertain (cp HARODITE). Perhaps we should read Ador (-ITIN),
from which -|jn I C P Dor ] would come even more easily than
from -nn- T. K. C.
EN-EGLAIM (Dtf pi?, fountain of Eglaim =
Eglam, i.e., calf - place ? on form of name, see
NAMKS, 101, 104, 107) ; eNAr^AeiM [BA],
AiN&r&AeiAA LQ] ENGALLIM], one of the two points
between which fishing in the former Salt Sea was to
be carried on when Ezekiel s vision was fulfilled (Ezek.
47 10). Since the vision relates to the land W. of the
Jordan, and the other point mentioned is En-gedi, we
naturally look for En-eglaim near the influx of the
Jordan into the Dead Sea. At present, the salt water
and the fresh intermingle some way above the mouth of
the river, and fish that are carried down are thrown up
dead on the beach (cp DEAD SEA, 4). It will there
fore be in the spirit of the vision if, with Tristram
(Bible Places, p. 93) we identify En-eglaim with Ain
Hajleh about i hr. from the N. shore of the Dead Sea,
which is regarded by the Bedouins as the best fountain
in the Ghor. It is hardly too bold to emend the text
and read for Eglaim, Hoglah (n*?jn) ; see BETH-HOGLAH.
T. K. C.
ENEMESSAR (eNe/v\ecc&p[oc] [BXA], SALMAN-
ASAR, Tob. 12 13 15/1 ; a corruption of SHALMANESER
(which the Syr. reads).
ENENIUS, RV Eneneus (CNHNIOC [BA]) i Esd.
5s = Neh. 7?, NAHAMANI.
ENGADDI (Ecclus. 24 14, AY). See EN-GEDI, n.
EN-GANNIM (D^l pi?, *.<?., fountain of gardens,
101.
i. A city in the first group of towns in the lowland
of Judah (Josh. 1534 adiaBaei/j. [A], if we follow the
Hebrew order ; but this really represents D TVij? oft/. 36;
rjyovveifj. [L], <5 B apparently t\oi 0w0, unless this form
represents Tappuah) ; according to Clermont-Ganneau,
the modern Umm Jina, W. of Beth-shemesh. Jerome
and Eusebius (0,512126, Engannim ; 25966, Hvyav-
vifj.} say now a village near Bethel.
2. A Levitical town of Issachar (Josh. 19 21, ituv
/ecu ronfJMV [B], -rjvyavvi/j, [A], iayavvei/j. [L] ; 21 29,
irriyijv ypa.fj.jj-a.Tuv [BAL], 1 Trrjyrjv ya.vvi.fj. [Aq. Sm.
Th.]). The parallel passage in i Ch. 673 [58] has
ANEM (opy, ava/j. [A], aivav [L], B om. v. ) which
seems to be a mere corruption (Be., Ki. ). There is
mentioned in Egyptian texts a place called Kina ( WMM
As. u. Eur. 174), which Budde (differing from Miiller)
would identify with En-gannim (see HEBER, i). In
Am. Tab. 164 17 21, we find a district called Gina.
En-gannim is the Tivdri, Tr)fj.a, or Tivaia of Josephus
(BJ \\\. 84 and elsewhere), on the frontier of Galilee,
and, though no ruins of the ancient place are still left,
we can hardly doubt that it is the modern Jentn*
This is a large and picturesque village 17 m. N. from
Shechem, at the entrance of a valley which opens into
the plain of Esdraelon. The slopes at the foot of which
it lies are covered with plantations of olive trees and
fig trees, and the houses of the village are surrounded
with gardens fenced by hedges of cactus. A few palm
trees add to the charm of the place. The secret of this
1 Apparently reading 1BD ] ]!. Compare 71-0X15 yp<my.a.Tiav
(i.e., nso mp) in Josh. 1649 for KIRJATH-SANNAH.
2 Stade s spelling Jennin is less accurate, and his doubt as to
the reading En-gannim seems unnecessary (GK/1 542).
EN-GBDI
luxuriance is a spring, or rather torrent, which rises in
the hills behind the village and sends its waters in
many rivulets to fertilise the gardens and meadows, and
at last disappears in the undulating plain of Esdraelon.
The name of the place was therefore well chosen, and
the author of the ancient song (Cant. 4 12-15) might
almost have been thinking of En-gannim when he made
the newly-married husband liken his fair young wife to
a garden and a fountain of gardens (o |_a ] yn).
The historical associations of Jenin are scanty. It is
hardly probable that the fountain in Jezreel referred
to in i S. 29 1 is the great fountain of En-gannim,
Jezreel being intended for the whole district (GASm.
HG, 402) ; see HAROD, 2 ; but most scholars (not,
however, Conder) agree in identifying BETH-HAGGAN
(q.v. ), in the direction of which Ahaziah fled from Jehu,
with Jenin, and therefore with En-gannim. Josephus
(Ant. xx. 6 1 BJ ii. 12s) describes a fatal dispute
between the Galilasan pilgrims to Jerusalem and the
Samaritans which took place at Ttvdij, a village of the
Samaritans, and thereby illustrates the unfriendly re
ception accorded to Jesus in just such a village (Lk.
952^). T. K. c.
EN-GEDI (H| fl? [so also outside pause, Ezek.
47 10 for "HI V], i.e., fountain of the kid, 101, 104 ;
6NrAAA[e]l [BXAC]), the modern Ain Jidl (overlook
ing the western shore of the Dead Sea), 680 ft. below
sea-level, and 612 ft. above that of the lake. The
beautiful fountain bursts forth at once a fine stream
upon a narrow terrace or shelf of the mountain. It
was, and is, a spot of rich vegetation in a severely
desolate wilderness. Its vineyards and henna flowers
are referred to in Cant. 1 14, whilst an allusion to its
palm-trees is preserved in its alternative name,
HAZAZON-TAMAK (q.v. ) in Gen. 14? 2Ch. 202, and
also in Ecclus. 24 14 ( I was exalted like a palm tree in
Engaddi ). 1 Hazazon may be connected with the
modern Wddy Hasaseh, up which runs one of the main
roads from Engedi to the interior (cp 2 Ch. 20 16, and
see Ziz, ASCENT OF). Engedi was one of the scenes
of the wanderings of David (i S. 23 29 [24 1] ya5Si [L]).
The cave which plays a part in this narrative is de
scribed as being not at Engedi, but somewhere in the
wilderness. In the oasis itself the present writer found
only insignificant caves ; but Tristram mentions in the
neighbourhood a fairy grotto of vast size. The
strongholds which David and his men inhabited
must have lain about the fountain ; the narrow shelf
could be easily made impregnable, and it is here that
most of the ruins are scattered. Solomon appears to
have fortified Engedi ; for the MT of i K. 9 18 reads
Tamar [Kt.] (not Tadmor [Kr.]) in the wilderness in
the land(?) (cp Josh. 156i/ avKadrjs [B], t)i>yaS5i [A],
ayyaddei [L], in the wilderness . . . En-gedi ). It was
worthy of fortification, for it commands one of the roads
from the Dead Sea Valley to the interior of Judah, and
by it the Edomite invasion of Judah seems to have been
made in the reign of Jehoshaphat (2 Ch. 20, evyaSfi
[B], eyyaSdi [L]). It is mentioned once, if not thrice, in
Ezekiel s vision of the renovated land (Ezek. 47 10, ivya.8-
eiv [B], evyaSd. [Aj, aivyaSai/jt, [Q] ; see TAMAR, i. ).
Josephus praises its fertility, especially its palms and
balsam (Ant. ix. 1 2), and says it was the centre of a top-
archy under the Romans (BJ iii. 3 5) ; but Pliny omits it in
his list of the toparchies (HN5 1470). To Pliny it was
known as Engadda, a place supplied with palm-groves
and a centre of the Essenes (//7V5i5[i7]). It is
mentioned by Ptolemy (v. 168). In the fourth century,
according to Eusebius and Jerome, it was still a very
large village, whence opobalsamum was obtained
OS 119 15 2546;) and with vines (Epit. Paulae, xii.).
1 This particularly apt parallel is spoilt by RV, which follows
BA in reading tv aiyioAois (as against ev cvyaSSoit N c - a , Pesh. ,
and presupposed by Vg.), and renders I was exalted like a
palm tree on the sea shore.
1293
ENOCH
During the Crusades there were vineyards held by a
convent under Hebron (Rey, Colonies Franques en
Syrie, 384), and to these times probably belong most
of the ruins. The site was recovered by Robinson in
1838 ; it is held and cultivated by the Rushaideh Arabs ;
but there are now neither palms nor vines. The great
staircase for no other name adequately expresses the
steepness of the ascent from the spring to the plateau
is hard for beasts of burden, and the camel-drivers who
bring salt from Jebel Usdum prefer to go farther N.
before turning up to Jerusalem.
For further description see Robinson, BR l^y^ff. , Lynch,
Narr., 282; Tristram, Land of Israel, 286; Conder, Tent Work,
new ed. 265^ ; Bad.* 3 ), 200 ; GASm. HG, 269/1 G. A. S.
ENGINE (p3B>n, lit. invention, from 3KT1, see
Eccles. 729), in the expression engines invented by
cunning men pt^ lil n^BTUp JTOhtpH, MHXANAC
M6MHXANeYMeNAC AOflCTOY [BA], M. M. AOflC-
MOIC [L]), diversi generis machinas), to denote contriv
ances for hurling stones and arrows, 2 Ch. 26 15 ; see
SIEGE.
For the i^p <nD (AV engines of war, RV battering
engines ) of Ezek. 26 9 1 and the n^D (EV mount, AVmg.
engine of shot ) of Jer. 66 8224 Ezek. 268 (28.2015, AV
bank ), see also SIEGE.
ENGRAVE (PinS, Ex. 28 n Zech. 3 9 , etc.,
2 Cor. 87); Engraver (J3N tthn, Ex. 28 u, etc.); Engraving
rnfi3 Ex.28n, etc.); or GRAVE (nnS, iK. 736 2 Ch. 21487,
EV ; asn, Job 19 24 ; npn, Is. 49 16 ; ppn, Is. 22 16 ; ehn, Jer.
17 i ; mn, Ex. 32 16 [all EV]); GRAVING (rnns, Ex.396 AV,
Zech. 3 9 2 Ch. 2 14 EV ; nijj3D [plu.], i K. 7 31 EV) ; GRAVING
TOOL (B^n), Ex. 324. See HANDICRAFTS, SEAL, WRIT
ING, and on GRAVEN IMAGE (70S), see IDOL, i d.
EN-HADDAH (PHPI }T, 99. 101 ; HNAAAA [A],
AN. [L], AIMAR6K [B]), in the territory of Issachar
(Josh. 192if), apparently not far from En-gannim
(Jenin}. The identifications with the mod. KefrAdhan,
to the W. of Jenin (Conder), or with Ain Judeide, on the
E. side of Mt. Gilboa (Kn. ), assume the accuracy of
MT. For spring of Haddah J we should perhaps read
Spring of Harod (mn for mn), the most probable
site of which, Ainjdlfid, is nearly 10 m. NNE. from
Jenin. See HAROD. s. A. c.
EN-HAKKORE (tOiprrfW, 101, 104 i.e.,
spring of the partridge, but, in the legend, spring of
the caller ; nHfH TOY eiriKAAOYMeNOY P*], TT-
erriKAHTOC [AL]), the name of a fountain in Lehi
(Judg. ISiSig). Identifications of the site are fanciful
(see LEHI).
EN-HAZOR pin |W, 101 ; rmrH ACOR [BA],
-cop KAI leccop [L])- a fenced city of Naphtali (Josh.
19 37 ), possibly to be identified with Hazireh to the W.
of Kedesh (but see Guerin, Galil. 2n8). The name,
Hazor, however, is not uncommon in Upper Galilee ;
see HAZOR, i.
EN-MISHPAT (BBKip |W, 101), Gen. 14 7. See
KADESH i. , 2.
ENNATAN (CNNATAN [BA]), i Esd. 8 44 RV =
Ezra8i6, ELNATHAN, 2.
ENOCH (ifOn, ^in ; CNOOX [ADEL and Ti. WH],
HENOCH). The name of the best-known Enoch seems
to be distinct from the names of 2 and 3. It has
probably a Babylonian origin (see CAINITES, 6),
though to a Hebrew ear it suggested the meanings of
dedication" and instruction. 2
i. A hero or patriarch mentioned in Gen. 17 f.
[L cvws in both w.~\ 6181921-24 (i Ch. 13); also in
Ezekiel (emended text), in the Apocrypha, and in the
1 Gesenius s interpretation of flin, sharp i.e., rapid
must be deemed improbable.
2 See CATECHISE, DEDICATE, -jjn and its derivatives, how
ever, are found only in late passages.
1294
ENOCH
ENOS
NT. It is shown elsewhere (see CAINITES, 6, NOAH)
that Enoch played a great part in a legend of which
fragments alone remain. Confirmations of this view
will be supplied presently.
The Genesis - passages need no further comment ;
but the restoration of Enoch in passages of Ezekiel is
R"M i * nterest n S t t* 6 passed over. In
refereS }*T of Ezek. 14 ,4-. Noah Daniel, and
Job appear as proverbial for their
righteousness, and in Ezek. 283 the prince of Tyre is
said, poetically, to be wiser, and to have more insight
into secrets, than Daniel. This strikes one as strange.
The personage referred to should be a hero of legend,
and would most naturally be of the same cycle as Noah.
The name Daniel, however, is not at all suggestive of this.
The type is not ancient, in spite of the occurrence of
Daniel in i Ch. 3i as the name of a son of David (the
reading is corrupt, see DANIEI, i. 4). It is extremely
probable that the name was introduced into Ezekiel by
a mistake similar to that which has been conjectured in
Gen. 222 (see ISAAC, 2 ; MORIAH). The name is spelt
not *?N>n but Sxri ; this must surely be a misreading of
]N:n i-t. , Hanak (Enoch). This acute suggestion
is due to HaleVy (ItEJ\b 20 f. ). It is supported by
the discovery of the true text of Ecclus. 44 14 (see
below), and supplies fresh material for the criticism of
Daniel and Job, and the exegesis of Ezekiel (cp Expositor,
July 1897, p. 23).
We pass now to the NT passages. The notice in
the genealogy in Lk. 837, and the description of Enoch
as the seventh from Adam in Jude 14, need not
detain us. Note, however, that the description in Jude
is borrowed from Enoch 60 8, and is followed by a quota
tion (v. 14 / ) from Enoch 1 9 64 27 2. Heb. 11s
mentions Enoch s translation (^Tertdr) ; translatus
est), and refers to Gen. 5 22 24 in @ ADEL s rendering
furiptffr-rjffe ry 6e as by implication a testimony to
Enoch s faith, for without faith it is impossible to
please [God]. The translation of Enoch is also twice
mentioned by Sirach (Ecclus. 44 16 np^[ ]l. nerer^d-rj ;
49 14 dvt\ri/j.(f>d-rj [A fj.eTfTtOr) ] curb rijs 7175 ; cp <S BAL ,
2 K. 2 10 d.va\afj.j3av6/j,fvov = rip 1 ?, v. n dveXij/u.^ij =
Vjn, also Mk. 16 19 etc). Ecclus. 49 14 merely extols the
unique destiny of Enoch; but 44 16, after stating that
he was taken, adds the notable phrase njn nix.
The Syriac version omits the whole verse, the Greek
instead of an example of knowledge gives inr6Setyfj.a
HfTavolas an example of repentance," as if nawn ni
(cp Heb. 4 ii, vwodfiy/na airfideias). Noldeke suggests
reading tvvola.s for /ueracofas (see also ECCLESIASTICUS,
7 (^), n. ) ; but the Greek translator may have drawn the
same uncritical inference from Gen. 622 ( Enoch walked
with God after he begat Methuselah ) which was drawn by
some of the later Rabbis 1 (see the sayings quoted in Ber.
Rabba, 25 ; Wiinsche, nzf. ), and seems to have arisen
out of hostility to the Book of Enoch, rijn, however,
seems to mean wisdom (Prov. 1727); the writer
must surely have heard the tradition of Enoch s wisdom
alluded to (as has been shown) in Ezek. 283, and largely
developed by subsequent writers.
We have thus found that the later belief in Enoch s
wisdom is traceable in Ecclesiasticus and even in
Ezekiel. The Secrets of Enoch (a phrase used as the
1 For parallels see ENOS (i., end), NOAH (end). The Alex
andrian scholars seem to have interpreted Knoch s supposed moral
crisis in a good sense (cp Philo, De Abrah., 3); those of
Palestine (so Frankel) in a bad, as if Enoch were on the point
of repenting of his former pious life when God in mercy took
him. In Wisd. 4 10-14, however, nothing is said of Enoch s
repentance or change of life ; he was caught away (r/pirayrt),
lest wickedness should change his understanding (irvvetriv),
where the wickedness is that of Enoch s contemporaries. See
Edersheim on Ecclus. I.e. \ Frankel, Einflvss der paldstin.
Exegese ( 51), 44 /. ; Geiger, Urschrift^ 198 ; Drummond,
Philo Judceus, 2 323 ; and, on the connection of the antipathy
of certain rabbis to Enoch, Hal. REJ, 14 21. Cp also
APOCALYPTIC, 10 n. i.
I29S
title of an apocryphal book, see APOCALYPTIC, 33^)
receive their first record in an exilic prophet, and the
... prophetic recorder even takes it for granted
, .. , that Enoch s story is well known in
Phoenicia. That the later belief is not a
mere accretion on the older Enoch-story will be plain
to those who recognise the solar origin of the original
hero ; a child of the all-seeing sun must be wise as
well as pious. At the same time speculative inferences
must be largely responsible for the details of the later
beliefs.
To this subject we now address ourselves. It was the belief
of the later Jews, adopted by Christians and Mohammedans
(Eus. Pra-p. Ev. 917; d Herbelot, Or. Bibl. 1 624/), that Enoch
invented writing, arithmetic, and astronomy. The Book of
Jubilees says, He was the first among men who learned writing
and knowledge and wisdom, and who wrote down the signs of
heaven according to the order of the months in a book. And
he was with the angels of God these six jubilees of years, and
they showed him everything on earth and in the heavens. And
he was taken from among the children of men, and we conducted
him into the Garden of Eden in majesty and honour (Chap. 4,
Charles s transl.). Very similar statements are made in Enoch
(note the phrase scribe of righteousness, 124); probably the
writers of both books drew from, and amplified, a still living
tradition (see CAINITES, j} 2, 6). It will be noticed that Enoch s
translation, according to Jubilees (cp Enoch VOi 60s; cp
Charles s note), is to Paradise. This reminds us of the story
of Par(?)-napistim (DELUGE, g 2). The Palestinian Targum,
however, says that Enoch ascended to the firmament. This
agrees with the story of the hero Etana, who was carried to the
heaven of Anu by an eagle (ETHAN, i). The Targum also
states that Enoch s name was called Metatron, the great
writer. Now the Metatron, 1 as the divine secretary, sits in
God s inner chamber, where, acccording to Enoch 14i4/, not
even Enoch can presume to enter. Enoch, then, grew in honour
as time went on. Mohammed, too, declares of Idris (the in
structed ) that he was a confessor, a prophet, and that God
raised him to a lofty place (Koran, Sur. 19s?).
The early Church was not behindhand in its respect
for the patriarch. It regarded him, for instance, as
one of the two witnesses 2 of whom such great things are
said in Rev. 11, who finally went up to heaven in the
cloud. That some share in the accomplishment of
God s purposes should be allotted to those who had
left the earth long ago without tasting death, seemed
natural. The other witness was Elijah, and in Enoch
70 1 the translation of Enoch is described in terms
suggested by 2 K. 2 n. In fact, the same idea underlies
the traditions of the disappearance of both personages
(cp Che. OPs. 383). Why Noah, who was equal in
piety to Enoch, was not also said to have been translated,
is a problem on which criticism has been able to throw
some light (see CAINITES, 6 ; NOAH). On the
composite Book of Enoch, see ApocALYFnc LITERA
TURE, i8/:
2. The third son of Midian, Gen. 25 4 (EV Hanoch ), I Ch.
1 33 (AV Henoch, RV Hanoch ).
3. The eldest son of Reuben (EV Hanoch ), Gen. 46 9 Ex.
(i 14 Nu. 26 5 i Ch. 63. Not improbably ofi shoots of the Midian-
itish clan of Enoch became Israelitish. The name can hardly
be connected with (i). Kn. compares that of the village called
Hanakiya by I5urckhardt (Trav. in Arab. 2396), and Hena-
kiyeh by Doughty (Ar. Des. 2183185), which formerly be
longed, says the latter, to the great nomad tribe of el- Anezy.
It is not far to the NE. of Medina. T. K. C.
ENOS, or rather (so RV)Enosh( 1 JN, man ; 6N60C
[BADEL]). Son of Seth, and grandson of Adam (Gen.
4 26 5 7 9- 1 1 i Ch. 1 1 Lk. SsSf). It was he who began to
call on the name of Yah we ((, Vg. , B. Jub. ; so We.,
reading Srn ni) i.e. , Enos introduced forms of worship.
He is thus represented as the first and greatest of
founders, worthy to be the father of a city-builder (see
CAINITES, 3). This tradition cannot, however, be
very ancient. Early myths always ascribe forms of
worship to the teaching of a god ; cp the statement (see
CAINITES, 3) that Marduk erected the temples, and
the epithet given to the Moon-god, mukin nindabe,
appointer of sacrifices (4 R. 9 33 ; see Del. Ass.
HIVB, s.v. nindabu ). Enos, therefore (a name that is
merely a synonym of Adam, man ), which Hommel
1 See Weber, Altsynag. Pal. Theof., iji/. (ed. 2, p. 178^).
2 See e.g., Jerome, Ep. ad Marcellatit ; Aug. De Gen. ad
lit. 96.
1296
BN-RIMMON
traces to the Amelon ( =Bab. ami!, man ) of Berossus,
must have been substituted for some other name. On
the original position of Gen. 4 as/, see CAINITES, 12.
The MT reading, Sm,1 IN, is possibly (DL), if not certainly,
to be rendered Then was profaned, the object being to avoid
contradiction of the statement in Ex. 6 3 (P). Such a phrase,
however, as jnin with IK is unparalleled in the Genesis narratives.
7(1.1, began, occurs again in 9 20 108, where, it is true, accord
ing to R. Simon (Ber. robba 23), it has the sense of profanation.
The alteration of 7rn into ?ron involved a disparagement of
Enos similar to that inflicted upon ENOCH ( i, end) and NOAH
([., end) in certain circles. According to an Aggada, in the
time of this patriarch, and in that of Cain, the sea flooded a
great tract of land (Ber. rabbet, as above). The same extra
ordinary view of 7l"fln is implied in Tg. Onk. and Jon. and is
adopted by Rashi. T. K. C.
EN-RIMMON (ftt-n pi?, 95, fountain of Rimmon
i.e. , the god Ramman [see RIMMON i. ] ; pe/WMCON
[BAL]), mentioned in a list of Judahite villages (EZRA ii.
5 M. 15 E 1 ] ). Neh - H 2 9 (peMMiON [N c - a < m e->],
BA omit), but also referred to in Josh. 15 32 (Ain and
Rimmon; eptOMCoe [B], AIN KAI peMMON [L]), 19?
(epeMMCON [B], AIN KAI pe/v\MC00 [A]) and i Ch. 432
(Ain, Rimmon, eNp- [L]), Zech. 14io ( from Geba to
Rimmon, south of Jerusalem ). En-rimmon is the
Epe/ot/3wi or Eremmon of Eusebius and Jerome (OS
25692; 1206), described by them as a very large
village 16 m. S. from Eleutheropolis. It is usually
> identified with modern Umm er-rumdmin, 9 m. N.
of Beersheba. Zech. 14 10, however, suggests that it
lay farther to the S. Elsewhere (HAZAR-ADAR) it is
suggested that Azmon, a place on the extreme S. of
Judah (Nu. 344/. Josh. 154) is a corruption of En-
rimmon, and that this is represented by the once highly
cultivated el- Aujeh in the Wady Hanein, called by Arab
tradition a valley of gardens (E. H. Palmer).
EN-ROGEL (Vri pl>, 101; TTHI-H pcofHA [BAL],
H p. [B in i K. 1 9 ], H TTHYH TOY P- C L in 2 S. i K.]),
a famous land-mark near Jerusalem. It was the hiding-
place of David s spies, Jonathan and Ahimaaz (2 S.
17i7), and lay close to the stone ZOHELETH where
Adonijah held a sacrificial feast when he attempted to
assert his claims to the throne (i K.I 9). In later
times it was one of the boundary marks between Judah
and Benjamin (Josh. 15? 18 16). The obviously sacred
character of the spring (cp also GIHON [i], i K. 138)
suggests that it is the same as the Dragon Well of
Neh. 2 13 (cp DRAGON, ^g; but see ZOHELETH).
There can be little doubt of its antiquity, and it may
well have been a sacred place in pre-Israelite times.
The meaning of the name and its identification are
uncertain.
The interpretation Fuller s Well does not bear the mark
of antiquity, and is rightly omitted in G.(13) ; Wl, fuller,
is nowhere else found in biblical Hebrew (see FULLER,
ROGELIM). It is probable that, like Zuheleth, the original
name had some sacred or mythic significance.
Two identifications of the place have met with considerable
favour : (i) the Virgin s fountain ( Ain Sitti Maryam), now Ain
Umm ed-Deraj, the only real spring close to Jerusalem,
exactly opposite to which lies ez-Zehweleh, perhaps Zoheleth
(Clermpnt-Gaimeau, PEFQ 1869-70, p. 253) ; and (2) Bir-Eyyub,
otherwise known as the Well of Nehemiah, at the junction of
the W. er-Rababi and Kedron (Robinson, BRV) 1 332). Against
(2) (which has found recent support in H. P. Smith, Sam., and
15enz., Kings) it is urged that Bir-Eyyub is a well, not a spring, 1
that it lies too far from ex-Zehweleh, that it is in full view of
the city, and does not suit the context of 2 S. 17 17, and that
its antiquity is uncertain. The chief points in favour of (i)
(which Baed.( 3 ) identifies with GIHON [i]) are : its antiquity (cp
CONDUITS, 4) and the evidence of Jos. (Ant. vii. 144), who
places the well in the royal gardens. 2 Other arguments based
upon the fact that in later times the well was used by fullers
are necessarily precarious. S. A. C.
* H. P. Smith, however, observes that water flows into the
well, sometimes coming over the top, so that it might readily
be called a spring (Sam. 354).
2 The identification of En-rogel with epwyrj (Ant. ix. 10 4 ;
see Grove, Smith s DB(Zf) seems difficult ; the reading is sub
stantially the same in all MSS (see Niese), and appears to be
based upon ajroppij-yn/fit which follows.
1297
ENSIGNS AND STANDARDS
ENROLMENT (&norpA<t>H, Lk. 2 2 Acts 5 37, AV
taxing ); to be enrolled (ATTorPA<J>ec9Al ; Lk.
2135, AV taxed ; Heb. 1223, AV written ; cp
3 Mace. 4 15). See QUIRINIUS, TAXATION.
RV has enrolled also in i Tim. 69 ((caraAe yo/xai, AV taken
into the number ) and in 2 Tim. 2 4, o-TpaToAo-ye u ( enrolled him
as a soldier, AV chosen him to be a soldier ).
EN-SHEMESH (K>DB> pl>, fountain of the sun, J
9 , 15; josh. 15 7 [TTH]THC H \IOY [BAL]; 1817
TTHTHN BAI0CAMYC [B], TT. CAME [A], [nHlfMN
CAMGC [L]), on the border of Benjamin, between EN-
ROGEL and ADUMMIM. The favourite identification
with the modern Ain el- Hod or Apostles shrine 2 near
Bethany is questioned by Baed.l 3 149, who seems to
prefer the tradition which identifies the Well of the Sun
and the Dragon s Well with Ain Sitti Maryam (see EN-
ROGEL). Van Kasteren, however (ZDPVI3u6 ; see
also Buhl, Pal. 98), would find En-shemesh in Ainer-
Rawdbi in an offshoot of the Wady of the same name,
situated on the ancient road to Jericho.
ENSIGNS AND STANDARDS. Two questions
have to be considered here : ( i ) how are the Hebrew
terms to be rendered, and (2) what inferences are to be
drawn from the historical passages containing these
terms ?
(<z) DJ, ncs (crrj/j.eioi> , cn i<r<T7)/j.oi> ; also a"rjfj.aia and
(Tij/xe/wcris [BXAL etc. ]).
In Is. 626 11 10 (<B ap^ei!/) 12 183 30 17 31 9 (text corrupt ; see
SBOT) 03 is rendered by EV ensign, but in Jer. 46 (
i^euvere) 2 1 (d5 (^cvyopraf ) 50 2 51 if 27 stand-
1. Renderings, ard ; AV also gives the latter in Is. 49 2 2
02 10, and RV in Nu. 21 8 f. Banner is
adopted by AV in Is. 132 (RV ensign ) and by EV in Ps. 604
[6] (see below), also by EVmg. in Ex. 17 15 (<S KaTaAuyi}). In
Nu. 21 e/. AV gives pole, RV standard.
Banner, being still in common use, seems the best
rendering for D: except in Nu. 21 8/1 , where pole is
more natural. Banner is required also in Ex. 17 is/. ,
where Moses is said to have named an altar Yahwe-
Nissi, Yahwe is my banner (see jEHOVAH-Nissi), and
to have broken into this piece of song :
Yea, (lifting up) the hand towards Yahwe s banner,
(I swear that) Yahwe will give battle to Amalek everlastingly.
Here, too, we must not pass over four disputed passages
in which AV (and in some cases RV) assumes the
existence of a denom. verb from DJ, viz., (a) Ps. 664 [6]
( a banner . . . that it may be displayed ); (/3) Is. 10 18
(ooi, EV standard-bearer, RV m s- sick man ; (y) Is.
59 19 ( lift up a standard, so RV m - ; but RV [which]
. . . driveth, AV m e- put to flight ); (5) Zech. 9i6
( lifted up as an ensign, but RV lifted up on high,
RV m s- glittering ). All these four passages must be
regarded as corrupt, (a) Ps. 60 4 [6] should probably
be read thus, Thou hast given a cup [of judgment] to
thy worshippers that they may be frenzied because of
the bow" (?Wmn^) ; C P J er - 25 16. In compensation
Ps. 11613 becomes, I will raise the banner (D: for oia)
of victory. (/}) Is. 10 18 Dp3(< <f>evyuv) should apparently
be puj;:, a thorn-bush. (y) Is. 59 19, u nDDi should
probably be u naBU (Klo. , Che. ), when Yahwe s breath
blows upon it. (5) The text of Zech. 9 is/- needs some
rearrangement (see Che. JQR 10582). Stones of a
diadem lifting themselves up over his land is nonsense.
In mDDlJriD probably D should be s. Glittering stones,
used as amulets (see PRECIOUS STONES), are meant.
(6) ^n, dtgel, is rendered by EV banner in Cant. 24,
(<S5 ra^are), by standard in Nu. 1$2 22, etc. (all P;
rdy/jia [BAFL]). EV also finds a denom. verb from ^i
in Ps. 20s [6] Cant. 5106410. Gray thinks (JQR 11 92^)
1 Schick (ZDPV, 19 157) observes that the name Ain. esh-
shcms, eye of the sun, is popularly given to holes in prominent
rocks.
2 The name dates from the fifteenth century. It is the last well
on the road from Jerusalem to Jericho before the dry desert is
reached, and it is therefore assumed that the apostles must have
drunk from it on their journey.
1298
ENSIGNS AND STANDARDS
EPHAH
that the context of all the passages in Nu. is fully
satisfied by the .meaning company," whilst in some of
them the sense standard is plainly unsuitable. The
sense of company, however, is even more difficult to
justify than that of banner. 1 "?n in Nu. 1 2 10 is
probably a corruption of iri3, troop or band ; the
sense of the word in i Ch. 7 4 aCh. 26 n is strikingly
parallel. No other course is open, for all the other
passages adduced for the sense of banner are, with
the possible exception of those in Numbers, corrupt.
This applies not only to Cant. 24, but also to the
passages in which a denom. verb is assumed (<S
TCTa.yjj.tvat, Cant. 6410). For an examination of these
passages see Che. JQR 11232-236.
In Cant. 24 read, Bring me (so <S) into the garden-house
); I am sick from love. Stay me, etc. As to Ps.
20 5 [6], it is safe to say that to set up banners in the name
of Yahwe is an unnatural phrase (read 7*33, we exult ). The
bridegroom in Canticles (5 10 etc.) is not marked out by a
banner above ten thousand (RVmtf.) ; he may perhaps be
called one looked up to, admired ; but more probably he was
described in the original text as 7 73 perfect (in beauty).
The bride on her side is not called terrible as bannered [hosts],
but awe-inspiring as towers ; so at least a scribe, but not the
poet himself, wrote. The corruption was a very early one.
The scribe, seeking to make sense of half-effaced letters which
he misread IS *?, terrible, bethought him of the figure in 8 10,
and inserted 11171333 as towers.
(c) nix, oth, is rendered ensign by EV in Nu. 22
(ffri/j.tia or a-r]fiala [BAF], o-ty/xacrla [L]), Ps. 744 (cm)/j.ftov
[B a - b m s- " f - KRT]). In the latter passage the ensigns
have been supposed to be military standards with
heathen emblems upon them, 2 which reminds us of a
similar theory respecting the abomination of desola
tion in Mt. 24 15. The context of the passage in Ps. ,
however, is very corrupt. 3
Of all the above passages there are only two which
are at once old and free from corruption viz. , Ex.
2 Historical 17l5/ " Nu " 218/ The pole in the
,. latter passage was probably such as
interpretation. ^ co F mmc f nly ^ for s y ignals to
collect the Israelites when scattered ; the banner in the
former was a pole with some kind of (coloured?) cloth 4
upon it to attract attention.
Other terms which might be used for banner were
JTB, toren (Is. SOiy), and nNb O, mas eth (Jer. 61, RV
signal }. That ^3? also was so used in early times is
more than can be stated safely, nor can we tell what
distinction there may have been between oth and nes. s
Tg. Jerus. (pseudo-Jon. ) tells us that the standards were
of silk of three colours, and had pictured upon them a
lion, a stag, a young man, or a cerastes respectively.
History to the writer of this Targum was not essentially
different from poetry. T. K. c.
Banners are frequently found on the Egyptian and
the Assyrian monuments. Apart from the royal banner,
p ... each battalion or even each company in
Egypt had its own particular emblem,
which took the form of a monarch s name, a sacred
boat, an animal, or some symbol the meaning of which
is more or less doubtful. 6 The standard was borne aloft
npon a spear or staff, and carried by an officer who
wore as an emblem two lions (to symbolise courage)
1 It may be mentioned that Friedr. Del. (Heb. Lang. 40 ; Prol.
59-61) went too far in rendering Assyr. diglu, banner ; it
simply means, as his own Ass. HWB states, the object of gaze,
or of attention (on the Arabic and Syriac roots, cp Gray, I.e.).
2 The Jews certainly regarded the n-porojiiai on the Roman
standards as idols ; see below, 3.
3 For an attempted restoration, see Che. Ps.(ty.
4 In Is. 8823 EV rightly renders D3 sail ; a coloured,
decorated sail is meant (Ezek. 27 7).
8 Mr. S. A. Cook suggests that the n inN in Nu. 2 2 may
refer to clan-marks (cp CUTTINGS, 6).
6 See Goblet d Alviellas s Migration of Symbols, 220 Jf. In
some cases the symbols may have been mere totems ; for
analogies cp Frazer, Totetnisi, 30.
1299
and two other devices apparently representing flies.
The standard of the Heta-fortress of Dapuru which
figures in a representation of a siege consists of a shield
upon a pole pierced with arrows (see EGYPT, fig. 4,
col. 1223). Reference is made elsewhere (ISRAKL, 90)
to the courtesy with which the Roman procurators,
in deference to Jewish prejudice, removed from the
ensigns (<rrifj.aia.i) the effigies (wpoTo/jutl) of the
emperor. It was not the ensigns themselves but the
presence of the additional Trporo/J.a.1 that was the cause
of the Jewish sedition against Pilate (cp Jos. Ant. xviii.
3 1, DJ\\. 92/. ). See further, art. Signa Militaria
in Smith s Class. Diet. , and art. Flag in EBW.
T. K. c. s. A. c.
EN-TAPPUAH (nisrrpr; nHrHN e&&lt;j>eu>e [B*],
etc.), Josh. 17?. See TAPPUAH, z.
EP^NETUS (en<MN6TOC [Ti. WH]), my beloved,
the first-fruits of Asia 2 unto Christ, as he is described
in the salutation sent to him in Rom. 16s, appears to
have been Paul s first convert in Ephesus, as Stephanas
and his household were in Corinth ( i Cor. 16 15). From
his not being designated kinsman it has been inferred
that he was a Gentile. The name is of not uncommon
occurrence in the East ; cp CIG, 2953 (Ephesus), 3903
(Phrygia). For the bearing which this name has upon
the criticism of the epistle, see ROMANS, 4, 10. Cp
COLOSSIANS, 4.
In the lists of the seventy disciples by the Pseudo-Dorotheus
and Pseudo-Hippolytus (see DISCIPLE, 3), Epaenetus figures
as Bishop of Carthage or Carthagena (Kapflaye i^s, Cartaginis).
In the Greek Church he is commemorated with Crescens,
Silas, and Andronicus on 3oth July.
EPAPHRAS (eTTA(J>pAC [Ti. WH], an abbreviated
form of EPAPHRODITUS [g.v.]), a faithful minister
Sid/covos), and bond-servant (SoOXos) of Christ (Col.
1? 4 12), founder of the church at COLOSSE [g.v. ,
2], and teacher in the neighbouring towns of Laodicea
and Hierapolis (see 413). Epaphras visited Paul in his
captivity, and it is probable that the outbreak of false
teaching in the Colossian church may have led him to
seek Paul s aid with the result that the epistle to the
COLOSSIANS (see s,/) was written. Did Epaphras
share Paul s imprisonment during the writing of the
epistle, or does fellow-prisoner (6 (rwaiXAiXwTos ;
Philem. 23) refer to merely a spiritual captivity? Cp
the term fellow-soldier (art. EPAPHRODITUS) below,
and see Milligan in Hastings DB.
EPAPHRODITUS (emuJjpoAiTOC [Ti. WH.].
charming ), the delegate (d7r6crToXos, see APOSTLE,
i n. , 3) of the Philippians, visited Paul during his
imprisonment at Rome and remained with him to
the detriment of his health (Phil. 225^ 4i8). Paul s
estimate of him is summed up in the eulogy my brother
and fellow - worker and fellow - soldier (dde\(f>bi> KO.I
ffvvepybv Kal ffw<7Tpa.TiwTr]v fj.ov ; 225). On his return
Epaphroditus no doubt took with him the epistle to
the PHILIPPIANS, the grave warnings of which (82)
may have been due to the report he had brought (cp
EPAPHRAS). It is by no means necessary to identify
Epaphras and Epaphroditus : indeed, though they have
several features in common (note, e.g. , fellow-soldier
and fellow-prisoner ) these are far outweighed by
the points of difference. Epaphroditus is a common
name in the Roman period. 3
i. Perhaps rather ns"5? or rrjrj;, a Midianite clan ;
Gen. 254 (ye<t>ap [A], yai<p. [DEL]) ; i Ch. 1 33 (yaffp
[B], yaitpap [A]). With Midian it is mentioned in Is.
"-its. Amelias ^cp /\v ) is certainly wrong , sec _rv_nrti.n v^ llv v-
3 Notably the one to whom Josephus dedicated his Antiqui
ties (.Vita, 76 ; Ant. Pref., 2 ; c. Ap. i. i).
4 According to Halevy (Jotirn. As. ;th ser. 10394/1), nsy
occurs as a personal name in the Safa inscriptions.
1300
EPHAH
606 as being rich in camels, and as bringing gold and
incense from Sheba. See MIDIAN.
2. and 3. Calebite names ; i Ch. 2 46 (yai<j>a.i)\ [n-oAXouo)] [B*],
yai<f>a [T) jr.] [BbA], r) yaufxx [TT.] [L]) ; V. 47.
EPHAH (HQWN; oi<J>[e]l [Lev. 5n 620 Nu. 5i 5
28s Judg. 6 19 Ruth 2 17 i S.I 24 17 17 Ezek. 45 13*],
M6TRON [Dt. 25 M/. Pr. 20 10, Am., Zech., Ezek.,
etc.]). See WEIGHTS AND MEASURES.
EPHAI ( BW, Kr. ; Bti?, Kt. ; a><t>e [N], -T [A],
I60(j>e [B], -6 [Q m g- s "W ut vid.]_ oyw . Syr. Hex."*-
i*S>a*), according to MT, a man of Netophah, whose
sons were among the adherents of Gedaliah (Jer. 40 8f).
In the parallel text, 2 K. 2523, wy 331 is not found.
Apparently sons of . . . ( Sijna) is a corruption of
a duplication of the following word Netophathite,
DSiBJn (Che. ) ; note the warning Pasek which pre
cedes. The Netophathite meant is SERAIAH (q.v., 3).
EPHER ("1B17, gazelle, 68, cp EPHRON ;
[BADEL].
i. A Midianite clan, Gen. 254 (a^eip [L]) ; i Ch.
1 33 (otpep [BA], 70. [L]). Knobel and Delitzsch com
pare the Banu Gifar of the stem of Kinana in Hijaz ;
but if HANOCH (q.v. , i) has been rightly identified,
Epher may very possibly be the modern Ofr, which is
near Hanakiya, between the Tihama mountain range
and Aban (so Wetzstein ; see Di. ). Glaser (Skizze,
2449), however, prefers to connect the name with the
Apparu of the inscriptions of Asur-bani-pal (.#".52223).
From its mention in connection with Judah, E.
Manasseh, and Reuben (see below), it is possible that
various layers of the tribe of Epher were incorporated
with the Israelites at a later time (cp Mold, in Schenkel,
BL 42i8. See MIDIAN).
2. b. Ezrah, of JUDAH, i Ch. 4 17 (ya</>ep [A], e</>p [L]) ; cp
El HRON L, 3.
3. A head of a subdivision of MANASSEH, i Ch. 5 24 (o</>ep
[BA]) ; cp EPHRON i., 2. S. A. C.
EPHES-DAMMIM (D EH DDK; ecpep/v\eM [B],
A(becAo/v\/v\eiN [A], &&lt;bec[A<vlMeiN [L^ ; ^safloi3
[Pesh.] ; N TT6PATI Ao/V\ei/v\[Aq.], in finibus dommim
[Vg.]; cp OS 35 ii, 9623, 226 18), or, if epkes be
taken to mean end [of], Dammim is, according to
MT, the name of a spot where the Philistines encamped,
between SOCOH i, and AZEKAH (iS. 17 1). By Van
de Velde (who is followed in Riehm s HWB] it is
identified with Damun, on the N. side of the Wady
es-Sant, E. of the Roman road to Bet Nettlf ; but a
different name for this ruin was obtained in the
Ordnance Survey, and the name Damun, if it occurs
at all, seems to belong to a site nearer the high hills.
Conder (PEFQ, 1875, p. 193), on the other hand, finds
an echo of the name in Bet Fased ( a place of bleeding ),
which is close to Socoh (Shuweikeh} on the SE. This
will not do for the site of the encampment for the
reason given in Che. Aids, 85, n. i but Conder s
view is not that Bet Fased represents the site (Buhl,
Geogr. 90, n. 92), but that it is an echo of a name of
the great valley of Elah (see ELAH, VALLEY OF) which
arose out of the sanguinary conflicts that frequently
occurred there. This is too fanciful a conjecture.
We must, it would seem, either regard in Ephes-
dammim in i S. 17 1 as (on the analogy of PASDAM-
MIM) a corruption of o K2i pDjn in the valley of
Rephaim (or Ephraim ; see REPHAIM), or else take
-dammirn to be a corruption of some proper name,
ephes being in this case also a corruption of pay, valley.
The latter view is less probable, but hardly impossible.
The Philistines appear to have encamped on the southern,
and the Israelites on the northern side of the valley of Elah (see
Che. A ids, 85), and, considering how often the same valley has
more than one name, we may conjecture that the site of the
Philistine encampment was described as in the valley of X =
in the valley of Elah (or, terebinth-valley ). In i S. 17 2
some point in the valley of Elah is mentioned as the site of the
encampment of the Israelites ; but in the valley of Elah would
1301
BPHESUS
not improbably be inserted by the redactor from v. 19, which
verse seems to have come from another version of the tradition
(see Klo.).
The present writer, who prefers the former of the
alternatives suggested above, supposes (i) that in the
valley of Rephaim (or Ephraim) is a discrepant state
ment of the scene of the fight with Goliath, and (2)
that it is the correct statement. Others may have an
insuperable objection to this, and for their benefit
another suggestion is made. It is not inconceivable
that Valley of the Terebinth (tjmn] was the name of
j \ T .. T /
that part of the valley in which David won his victory,
whilst a larger section of the valley was called Valley
of the red-brown [lands] ; cp the ascent of the red-
brown [hills], Josh. 15?; red-brown in each case is
D GHN. Large patches of it (the ploughed land in the
valley of Elah) were of a deep red colour, exceptional,
and therefore remarkable (Miller, The Least of all
Lands, 125). From D DIN to o DT is an easy step.
H. P. Smith is hardly decisive enough in his rejection
of Lagarde s D<DH 1BD3- 1 The torrent was of course
dried up, and no longer a landmark. See ELAH,
VALLEY OF. T. K. c.
EPHESIANS. See COLOSSIANS AND EPHESIANS.
EPHESUS (ecbecoc [Ti. WH] ; gent.
EPHESIAN) lay on the left bank of the Cayster (mod.
P . Kuchuk Mendere, Little Mseander), about 6
, . . ^ m. from the sea, nearly opposite the island
of Samos. Long before the Ionian im
migration the port at the mouth of the river had
attracted settlers, who are called Carians (Paus. vii. 26),
but were probably the Hittites whose centre of power
lay at Pteria in Cappadocia ; see HITTITES, n /. To
the E. of Mt. Koressos, in the plain between the
isolated height of Prion (or Pion) and the eminence
at the foot of which the modern village stands, there
arose a shrine of the many-breasted Nature-goddess
identified by the Greeks with their own Artemis (see
DIANA). The population lived, in the primitive
Anatolian fashion, in village groups (/oD/Mu) round the
shrine, on land belonging to it wholly or in part, com
pletely dominated by the priests. With the coming of
the lonians, who, after long conflict, established them
selves on the spur of Mt. Koressos now shown as the
place of Paul s prison (ancient Athenaeum), began an
obstinate struggle between the Oriental hierarchy and
Hellenic political ideas, which were based upon the
conception of the city (?r6Xts). The early struggles of
the immigrants with the armed priestesses perhaps gave
rise to the Greek Amazon-legends. Even after actual
hostilities had ceased, and the two communities had
agreed to live side by side, this dualism continued to be
the key to Ephesian history. The power of the priestly
community remained co-ordinate with, or only partially
subordinate to, that of the civic authorities ;
the city and the temple continued to be
2. Govern
ment. f orma iiy distinct centres of life and govern
ment (cp Curtius, Beitr. z. Gesch. u. Top. Kleinas., 14).
The situation of the shrine, near one of the oldest ports
of Asia Minor, at the very gateway of the East (Strabo,
663) brought the worship into contact with allied Semitic
cults. These and similar influences gave the Ephesian
worship that cecumenic character which was its greatest
boast (Acts 1927 ; Paus. iv. 318 ; Hicks, Inscr. Brit.
Mus. 482, see Ramsay, Class. Rev. 1893, P- 7% /)
Even apart from the existence of the hieron, the greatness
of Ephesus was assured ; for, admirably placed as were
all the Ionic cities (Herod. 1 142), none were so fortunate
as Ephesus, lying as she did midway between the Hermos
on the N. (at the mouth of which was Smyrna) and the
Mceander on the S. (port, Miletus). On the downfall
of Smyrna, before the Lydians, about 585 B.C., and
1 See BN-jd, and cp tfbers. 76. For the grounds of this
reading see Dr. TBS ixxviii., 292, and note Dr. s criticism on
Lag.
1302
EPHESTJS
the ruin of Phokaia and Miletus by the Persians in 494
B.C. , she inherited the trade of the Hermos and Maeander
valleys. The port had always suffered from the alluvium
of the Cayster, and its ultimate destruction from that
cause had been rendered inevitable by an unfortunate
engineering scheme of Attalus II. Philadelphus, about
a century and a half before Strabo wrote ; yet in Strabo s
time and in that of Paul the city was the greatest em
porium of Asia (Str. 641, t/j.w6piot> oiVa /jLtyurrov rCiv
Kara rr)i> A-ffiav TTJV Ivrbs TOV favpov ; reflected in Rev.
1811-14). Shortly after Paul s visit the proconsul
Barea Soranus tried to dredge the port (61 A. D. ;
Tac. Ann. 1623). Its commercial relations are illus
trated by the fact that even the minium (fjdXros) of
Cappadocia was shipped from Ephesus, not from Sinope
(Str. 540), and by the travels of Paul himself (Acts 18
19-21 19 1 ; cp 1824). Kphesus was the centre of Roman
administration in Asia. The narrative in Acts reveals
an intimate acquaintance with the special features of its
position. As the Province of Asia was senatorial (Str.
840), the governor is rightly called proconsul. 1 Being
a -free city, Ephesus had assemblies and magistrates,
senate (/SouATj), and popular assembly (tKK\r)<rla) of its
own ; but orderliness in the exercise of civic functions
was jealously demanded by the imperial system (Acts
194o; cp Bull. Corr. Hell., 1883, p. 506). The
theatre, which was probably the usual place of meeting
for the assembly,- is still visible. Owing to the decay
of popular government under the empire, the public
clerk (ypafj.fjia.Tfus TOV STI/J.OV) became the most import
ant of the three recorders, and the picture in Acts
of the town-clerk s consciousness of responsibility, and
his influence with the mob is true to the inscriptions
(e.g. , CIG 2994, 2966, etc. ). From its devotion to
Artemis the city appropriated the title Neokoros (Acts
1935: v(WK6po$, lit. temple -sweeper ), and, as the
town-clerk said, its right to the title was notorious.
The word Neokoros was an old religious term adopted and
developed in the imperial cultus, i.e., under the empire the title
Neokoros, or Neokoros of the Emperors, was conferred by the
Senate s decree at Rome, and was coincident with the erection
of a temple and the establishment of games in honour of an
Emperor. When a second temple and periodical games were,
by leave of the Senate, established, in honour of a later Emperor,
the city became Sis Netoicopos ( twice Neokoros ), and even
(rpis N.) thrice Neokoros in inscriptions and on coins.
Hence under the empire not only Ephesus but also Laodiceia
and other Asiatic cities boasted the title. See Rams. Hist.
Phryg. 1 58 ; Biichner, <ie Neocoria.
Naturally Ephesus was the head of a conventus, i.e. ,
it was an assize town (Plin. 627, Ephesum vero, alterum
3. Importance. ! umen Asia ! remotiores conveniunt ) ;
hence in Acts 19 38 the courts are
open (cp Jos. Ant. xiv. 102i, Strabo, 629). From its
position as the metropolis of Roman Asia Ephesus was
naturally a meeting-point of the great roads.
On the one side a road crossing Mt. Tmulos ran north-east
wards to Sardis, and so into Galatia (cp GALATIA). More
important was that which ran southwards into the Maeander
valley. Ephesus was, therefore, the western terminus of the
back-bone of the Roman road system the great trade route
to the Euphrates by way of Laodiceia and Colossa; (Rams.
Hist. Geogr. of A 71/49), anc ^ tne sea en d of the road along
which most of the criminals sent to Rome from the province of
Asia would be led (Rams. Ch. in R. Kmp. 318) ; hence Ignatius,
writing to the church there, says, ye are a high road of them
that are on their way to die unto God (Eph. 12, irdpoWs dare
Ttav ets 0ebi/ avaipovfj-fviav ; cp Rev. 17 6).
It was, in part, by the route just described, that
Paul on his Third journey reached Ephesus from the
interior, avoiding, however, the towns of the Lycus
valley by taking the more northerly horse-path over the
Duz-bel pass, byway of Seiblia (Acts 19 1, die\d6vra TO.
1 Acts 19 38, at SvTraroi ; the plural is generic, although others
take it to allude to P. Celer, imperial procurator, and the freed-
man Helius, who may have remained in Asia with joint pro
consular power after murdering the proconsul Junius Silanus at
the instigation of Agrippina, in 54 A.D. Tac. Ann. 13 i ; Lewin,
Fasti Sacri.
2 Cp Jos. A nt. xix. 8 2, Agrippa at Ca;sarea : Tac. Hist. 2 go,
turn Antiochensium theatrum ingressus, ubi illis consultare mos
st . . . ; Jos. Bf vii. 3 3 ; Cic. Pro Place 7, 16 ; Philostr. Vit.
A poll. 4 10 (p. 147), >}-yei/i7Ai<u a jro<raf err! TO Bearpov, of Ephesus.
1303
EPHESUS
iKa /dpi). See Rams. Ch. in R. Emp. 94).
True to his principle, Paul went to the centre of Roman
life ; and along the great lines of communication, with
out his personal intervention, his message spread east
wards into the Lycus valley (see COLOSSE, HIERAPOLIS,
LAODICEA). All the seven churches 1 of Rev. 1-3
were probably founded at this period, for all were great
trade centres and in communication with Ephesus. The
labours of subordinates were largely responsible for their
foundation, perhaps in all cases, though it is only in one
group that evidence is forthcoming (Col. \-j 412-17).
The position of Ephesus as the metropolis of Asia is
clearly reflected in her primacy in the list (Rev. In 2i).
In this way, all they which dwelt in Asia heard the
word . . . both Jews and Greeks (Acts 19 10).
Jews we should expect to find in great numbers at
Ephesus. As early as 44 B.C., Dolabella in his consul
ship had granted them toleration for their rites and
Sabbath observance, and safe conduct in their pilgrimage
to Jerusalem (Jos. Ant. xiv. 10 12) ; they must then have
been a rich community to have been able to buy these
favours. Their privileges were confirmed by the city
(ibid., 1025), and subsequently by Augustus (id. , xvi.
627). To them, as usual (cp ACTS, 4), was Paul s
first message on both visits (Acts 1819 198); but the
good-will with which he had been welcomed on his
4. Attitude to firs j aPPearance (Acts 1820) cooled,
Christianity. <d he was compelled at last to take
his teaching from the synagogue to the
philosophical school of one Tyrannus (Acts 199,
8ia\ey6/j.evos tv TT) <rx^77 Tvpdvvov from the fifth
to the tenth hour added by D * . e. , after the usual
teaching hours; cp Bull. Corr. Hell., 1887, p. 400;
Rams. Expos. March, 1893, p. 223).
Soon Paul came into collision with the beliefs and
practices peculiar to the place in a twofold manner.
Ephesus was a centre of the magical arts of the East.
It is significant that the earliest Ephesian document extant
deals with the rules of augury (6th cent. B.C. ; Inscr. Brit. Mus.
678). The so-called Ephesian letters ( E^eVia ypafj.na.Ta.) were
mystic symbols engraved upon the statue of the goddess (Eustath.
Od. 14) ; they were inscribed upon tablets of terra-cotta or other
material, and used as amulets (Athen. 12548, iv oxvrapi oi?
pa7TTOt<Ti <f>fp<av E<|>ecrjjia ypdfj.fj.aTa. KaAoi). When pronounced
they were regarded as powerful charms, especially effective in
cases of possession by evil spirits (cp Plut. Syif>. vii. 5 4 : oi
fj-dyoi, TOWS SaijU.ovtjJbjUieVous (ceAeiiouai ra E<e (7ia ypdfj.fj.aTO.
KaraAe yeti/ xai bi>Ofj.dcLv). The study of these symbols was an
elaborate pseudo-science.
The miracles ascribed to Paul were therefore clearly
designed to meet the circumstances ; they were
special (Acts 19n : ov ray Tuxowras) the expulsion
of diseases and of evil spirits by means of hand
kerchiefs or aprons (crovddpia % o-ifj.udv6ia,) which
are, possibly, to be connected with Paul s own daily
labour for his living (i Cor. 4 12 : KOTriwfj.(v (pya6/j.evoi
TCUS ISiais \tpalv , i Thess. 2 9). Especially was his
power brought into comparison with that claimed by
the Jewish exorcists (see EXORCISTS), as previously in
Paphos (Acts 136) ; although in the story of the sons
of Sceva and the burning of the treatises on magic
there are considerable difficulties the writer is here
rather a picker-up of current gossip, like Herodotus,
than a real historian (Rams. Si. Paul, 273).
In the second place, the new teaching came into
collision with the popular worship. Even before
the great outbreak, fierce opposition must have
been encountered from the populace (i Cor. 1632:
6r)pi.o/j.a,xr]ffa., I fought with beasts a word which
contains a mixture of Roman and Greek ideas : the
Platonic comparison of the mob to a beast, Rep. 493,
and the death of criminals in the circus ; cp i Cor. 49 :
6 6e6s r)fjia.s TOVS diro<rT6\ot j (ffxo-Tovs dirfdei^ev, us
fwidavarlovs, and v. 13). In the conviction that a
great door and effectual was opened in the province,
in spite of there being many adversaries ( i Cor.
1 [ From the seven letters, chap. iyl, we see how carefully
the author had studied the situation in the Christian com
munities accessible to him. Julicher, Einl. in das NT, 169.]
1304
EPHESUS
16 8/), the apostle had resolved to remain at Ephesus
until Pentecost (of 57 A. D. probably). The great festival
of the goddess occurred in the month Artemision (C1G,
2954) = Mar. -Apr. ; but whether it must be brought into
connection with the riot or not is uncertain. The
opposition did not originate with the priests, but was
organised by the associated tradesmen engaged in the
manufacture of shrines (vaol), led by Demetrius who
was one of the chief employers of labour (Acts 1924 ;
see DIANA, 2). Such trade-guilds (Zpya, tpyacriaC)
were common in Asia Minor. 1 It is clear, however, that
the riot was badly organised (see Acts 1932).
The watchword, Great is Artemis (M^dXr; ij
"A/JTfyUis) raised by the workmen, diverted the excite
ment of the populace, and the demonstration became
anti- Jewish (v. 34) rather than directly and especially
anti-Christian. The nationality of Gaius and Aristarchus
(Macedonians, AV ; Aristarchus alone Macedonian
according to some few MSS, Gaius in that case being
the Gaius of Derbe of Acts 204; cp GAIUS, 2 ) would tend
in the same direction so long as Paul remained invisible
(if. 30), as, apart from the Romans, the Jews formed the
only conspicuous foreign element in the city, and one
notoriously hostile to the popular cult. The solicitude
of certain Asiarchs (v. 31 ; cp Euseb. HE 4 15 ; see
ASIARCH) for the apostle is significant, as they were
the heads of the politico -religious organisation of
the province in the cult of Rome and the Emperor ;
whence we must infer that neither the imperial
policy nor the feeling of the educated classes was
opposed to the new teaching as yet. The town-clerk s
speech is virtually an apologia for the Christians.
It is true that a very different view has been
suggested (Hicks, Expos. June 1890; cp Rams.
Expos. July 1890), in which Demetrius the silversmith
is identified with the Demetrius named as President of
the Board of Neopoioi ( temple-wardens, Inscr. Brit.
Mus. 578). Hicks supposes that the priests persuaded
the Board to organise the riot, and that the honour voted
in the inscription to Demetrius and his colleagues was
in recognition of their services in the cause of the god
dess. Apart from the doubt attaching to the restoration
^ T [eo7^oloi], and to the date of the decree, the theory
does not show why the priests acted by intermediaries
who were civil not religious magistrates ; nor how trade
interests were affected i.e. , it involves the assumption
that the author of Acts misconceived the situation, and j
in recasting his authority altered veowoibs AprejtuSos into ;
Trotub vaoi)j dpyvpovs Apre/it5oy. Further, in order to j
explain the difference between the friendly attitude of j
the Asiarchs and the supposed hostility of the priests, it
is necessary to assume that the Asiarchs represented a
different point of view from that of the native hierarchy.
There is no evidence that they represented the point of
view of the Roman governors, and probably they had
themselves previously held priesthoods of local cults
before becoming Asiarchs : they represented the view
of the upper classes generally, one which prevailed out
side Jewish circles wherever Paul preached (for com
plete discussion, see Rams. Ch. in Rom. Emp. 112 /.).
The short visit during the voyage from Corinth to
Csesarea at the close of the Second journey, and the two
and a half years labour there during the Third journey,
together with the interview with the Ephesian elders at
Miletus on the return voyage (Acts 20 17), form the
only record of Paul s personal contact with Ephesus,
unless we admit the inferences drawn from the Pastoral
Epistles. 2
1 Cp CIG 3208 : oi ft> E$eVu> epya.TO.1, TrpOTnAetrai. See
especially Thyatira, where we have, among others, x a ^ Ke ,
Xa^icoTUTToi. Possibly classification by trade was pre-Greek
Herod. 1 93 the tribe being a Greek introduction ; Rams. Hist.
Pkryg. 1 105. Cp Oxyrhyncris Papyri, vol. i. p. 85 returns of
stock in trade by Egyptian guilds, KOIVOV T>V xoAjcoKoAATjTwi ,
TU>V tji9oma\u>v, etc. See Menadier, Ephes. 28.
2 [The Pastoral Epistles, though they may possibly contain
fragments of genuine letters of Paul (worked up with freedom),
EPHOD
Philem. 22 ( prepare me also a lodging ; cp Phil. 2 24)
expresses an expectation of visiting Colossat, which inevitably
implied a visit to Ephesus. i Tim. 1 3 implies that this in
tention was realised, and perhaps there are hints also of a fourth
visit : some reconstruct the fragmentary picture of these years
so as to give even a fifth or a sixth visit (Conybeare and Howson
2 547./T) before the final departure for Nicopolis by way of
Miletus and Corinth (2 Tim. 4 20).
On the destruction of Jerusalem the surviving apostles
and leading members of the church found refuge in
Asia, and tor a time Ephesus became virtu-
5. Post-
Christian
ally the centre of the Christian world.
43
1305
,. ANDREW and PHILIP, with Aristion and
Unes> JOHN the Elder, had their abode here ; in
this circle Polycarp passed his youth.
The modern name of Ephesus (Ayasalule) is a corruption of
Ayos Theologos ("Aytos fc)eoA6-yos), the town being named in
Byzantine times from the great Church of St. John the Divine,
built by Justinian on the site of an earlier edifice : its ruins are
visible on the height above the modern village (cp Procop. de
sEJ. 5 i ; Rams. Hist. Geogr. AM, no). This church became
the centre of a town, Ephesus itself being gradually abandoned.
The plain has thus reverted to its original condition, the miserable
remnant of the population now occupying the site of the sanc
tuary of Artemis founded by the prehistoric settlers, whilst the
site of the Greek and Roman Ephesus is a desert (Rev. 2 5).
See Wood, Disccrveries at Ephesus, 1877, for the excavations
(now resumed in the town by the Vienna Arch. Inst. ; cp
r>-v T _ _i Athenteum, no. 3677 ; Class. Rti . April,
6. Bibliography. I90o) F< ; r his 3 t o 7 ry ; Curtius, Beit,-, z.
Gesch. u. Top. Kleinasiens, 1872; but Guhl s Ephesiaca, 1843,
is still valuable. The epigraphic results of Wood s labours are
given in Greek Inscr. of Brit. Mus. 3. Consult also Zimmer-
mann, Ephesos im ersten christ. Jahrhundert ; Weber, Guide
du Voyageur a Efhese (Smyrna, 1891), with good maps (plan of
Ephesus after Weber in Handbook to Asia Minor, Murray,
1895, p. 96); good article, with good views and maps, by Benn-
dorf ( Topographische Urkunde aus Ephesos ), in Fcstsc/iriftfiir
H. Kiepert, 1898. W. J. W.
EPHLAL (7?DX, meaning ?), a Jerahmeelite name,
I Ch. 2 37. The MT is virtually supported by ( a.(f>a/nri\ ,
-rj5 [B], o<p\a8 [A] A, M from A ), but the name was per
haps originally theophorous. Read, therefore, hs^x, an
abbreviated form of aSs Stf (see ELIPHELET), or, more
probably, ^3^>N ( C p L eX0aeX). See ELPAAL, and
cp ( s readings there cited. s. A. c.
EPHOD (TISK, ibN; in Pent. BAL , enooMic,
Vg. superhumerale ; in Judg. and i S. ecpOyA, e4>U)A,
ephod ; in 2 S. 6 14 i Ch. 1627 croAH, but ecfcoyA [L]
in i Ch. ; Hos. 84 lep&TGlA [BAQ]), a Hebrew word
(ephod] which the English translators have taken over as
a technical term. The word is used in the historical
books in two meanings, the connection between which
is not clear.
The boy Samuel ministered before Yahwe, girt with
a linen ephod (13 -psx Tun, iS. 2i8); in the same
. garb, David, when he brought the ark up
to Jerusalem, danced before Yahwe with
garment. a]1 his mjght ( 2S6l4; j n iCh. 152 7
the words are a gloss). It was long the accepted
opinion that the linen ephod was the common vestment
of the priests; but in i S. 22 18 linen (bad) is a
gloss (see (5 B , as also @ L in i S. 2i8), and the other
passages usually alleged in support of the theory speak
of bearing or carrying the ephod, not of wearing it (see
below, 2). This ephod was manifestly a scanty gar
ment, for Michal taunts David with indecently exposing
himself like any lewd fellow. It was probably not a
short tunic, as is generally thought, but a loin-cloth
(Tre/^fw/xo.) about the waist ; Samuel s tunic fyyo) is
mentioned separately, and the verb rendered gird (-un)
is used in Hebrew not of belting in an outer garment,
but only of binding something (girdle, sword-belt, loin
cloth) about the loins ; additional support is given to
this view by the shape of the high priest s ephod (see
below, 3). David s assumption of this meagre garb
on an occasion of high religious ceremony may perhaps
have been a return to a primitive costume which anti
quity had rendered sacred, as the pilgrims to Mecca
are un-Pauline in language and in theological position, nor can
they be fitted into a chronology of the life of Paul. See
Jiilicher (op. cit., 13), and cp PASTORAL EPISTLES. ED.]
1306
EPHOD
to-day must wear the simple loin-cloth (izdr; see
GIRDLE, i), which was once the common dress of the
Arabs.
The ephod was used in divining or consulting Yahwe.
Of this there is frequent mention in the history of
o o^nH Saul and David (* S - 14z8 *" [1 :
2. The ephod- cp v ^ 2 36 9 30 7 ); see also Hos.:3 4 .
Dracle. From the passages in i S. it appears
that the ephod was carried bythe priest (14 318 5,
cp 236) ; to carry the ephod is the distinction of
the priesthood (22 18 <@). one of its chief prerogatives
(228). When Saul or David wishes to consult Yahwe,
the priest brings the ephod to him ; he puts an inter
rogatory which can be answered categorically (14 37
23 io- 12 308), or a simple alternative, or a series of
alternatives narrowing the question by successive exclu
sion (1436-42, cp 1020-22). The priest manipulated the
ephod in some way ; Saul breaks off a consultation by
ordering the priest to take his hand away (14 19). The
response, as we should surmise from the form of the
interrogatory, was given by lot ; in 14 t,\f. (, cp 18) the
lot is cast with two objects, named respectively Urim
and Thummim (see URIM). That the ephod was part
of the apparatus of divination may be inferred also
from its frequent association with the TERAPHIM [q. v.~\
(Judg. 17/. Hos. 3 4 ; cp Ezek. 21 2I [26] Zech. 102).
The passages in Samuel, whilst leaving no doubt
concerning the use of the ephod, throw little light upon
its nature. They show, however, that it was not a
part of the priests apparel ; it was carried, not worn
(n sfi never means wear a garment ; cp also 236, in
his hand ), and brought (r art, bring near ) to the
person who desired to consult the oracle. Other pass
ages seem to lead to a more positive conclusion. At
Nob the sword of Goliath, which had been deposited in
the temple as a trophy, was kept wrapped up in a
mantle behind the ephod, which must, therefore, be
imagined as standing free ( i S. 21 9 [io]).- In Judg. 17 f.
ephod and teraphim in one version of the story are
parallel to pesel and massekdh (idol) in the other. It is
natural, though not necessary, to suppose that the ephod
was something of the same kind, and the association of
ephod with teraphim elsewhere (Hos. 84) is thought to
confirm this view. Gideon s ephod (made of 1700
shekels of gold) set up (rsn, cp i S. 52 28.617 [of the
a rk] ; cp iSptieiv) at Ophrah, where, according to the
deuteronomistic editor, it became the object of idolatrous
worship Judg. 827), was plainly an idol, or, more pre
cisely, an agalma, of some kind. Many scholars infer
that the ephod in Judg. 827 \1 f. and i S. 21g was an
image of Yahwe ; 3 and some think that a similar
image is meant in all the places cited above where the
ephod is used in divining. 4 We should then imagine
a portable idol before which the lots were cast. See
below, 3 (end), 4.
In P the ephod is one of the ceremonial vestments of
the high priest enumerated in Ex. 28 4. The pattern
TVi v> - Vi f r tne e phd is given in 28 6 ft ; the
. \, ? ~, fabrication is recorded in 39 2 _ff. (=g
lests epnod 3 g 9 ^ the investiture of Aaron in
29s Lev. 87. The description is not
altogether clear ; nor do the accounts of those who had
(probably) seen the high priest in his robes afford much
additional light. 5
1 MT (so A) substitutes the ark (pin), as in i K. 2 26. See
ARK, col. 305, n.
2 It is possible, however, that ephod has here been substituted
for another word (perhaps dron, ark ), for reasons similar to
those which led to omit the words altogether (they have been
introduced in many codd. from Theodotion).
3 See Moore, Judges, 381.
4 If the words before me OjsS) in S. 2 28 are original, they
exclude this hypothesis ; see, however, BAL anc j Pesh.
6 Ecclus. 45 io Heb. ; Ep. Arist., ed. Schmidt, in Merx,
Archil , 1 27i_/; ; Philo, De Monarch. 2 $/. (ii. 225^ Mangey),
Vit. Mosis, Siijf. (ii. 151 ft); Jos. BJ \. 67; Ant. iii. 7 5.
See also Jerome, Ad Fabiolam, ep. 64 15 ; Ad Marcellam,
ep. 29.
1307
BPHOD
Braun (De vcstitit sacerdotuiit, 1698, p. 462^!), whom most
scholars since his day have followed, held that the ephod con
sisted of two pieces, one covering the front of the body to a little
below the waist, the other the back ; two shoulder straps (rtlEro)
ran up from the front piece on either side of the breastplate,
and were attached to the back by clasps on the shoulders ; a
band, woven in one piece with the front of the ephod, passed
around the body under the arms and secured the whole.
Others conceive of the ephod as an outer garment covering
the body from the arm-pits to the hips, firmly bound on by its
girdle, and supported by straps over the shoulders, something
like a waistcoat with a square opening in front for the insertion
of the breastplate. 1 This view is incompatible with the descrip
tions in Exodus, especially with the directions for the making
and the use of the band (:>S 8 27 ii!) 5) ; against Braun s theory it
must be noted that nothing is said in the text about a back piece,
nor is there anything to suggest that the ephod was made in two
parts ; 28 8 again seems to exclude such a construction.
As far as we can now understand the description,
the high priest s ephod appears to have been a kind
of apron, tied around the waist by a band or girth
(arn = con, cingulum) ; from the corners of the apron
two broad shoulder-straps (nisro) were carried up to
the shoulders, and there fastened (to the robe, h yz) by
two brooches set with onyx stones. 2 The oracle- pouch
(ccrn jerii EV breastplate of judgment ; cp BREAST
PLATE ii. col. 607) was permanently attached by its
corners to the shoulder-straps, filling the space between
them, and on its lower border meeting the upper edge of
the ephod proper. The high priest s ephod may then be
regarded as a ceremonial survival of the primitive loin
cloth (ephod bad ; see above, i) worn by Samuel and
David, 3 precisely as a Christian bishop at one time wore
as the Pope does still over his alb a succinctorium
with its wma, the two ends falling at his left side. 4
The fact that the apparatus of the high -priestly
oracle, the ESSTD Jt?n, with the sacred lots, was per
manently attached to the ephod recalls the use of the
ephod by the priests of Saul and David in divining (see
URIM) ; and the most natural explanation is that it
also is a survival. This is, of course, impossible if the
ephod in Samuel was an image (see above, 2) ; but
the latter conjecture is not so certainly established that
the evidence of P may not be put into the scales against
it. 5
Various hypotheses have been proposed to connect
the different meanings and uses of ephod in the OT.
Att t rl ^ s P ss bl e t lat t ^ le primitive ephod
. ,P a corner of which was the earliest
exp ana ions. p OC j cet was use( j as a receptacle for
the lots, from which they were drawn, or into which
they were cast (see Prov. 1633) ; and that when it was
no longer a common piece of raiment it was perpetuated
in this sacred use, not worn, but carried by the priest ;
the ephod and oracle-pouch of the high priest would
then preserve this ancient association. The ephod of
Gideon perhaps also the ephod in the temple at Nob
was, however, an agalma of an entirely different
character ; what relation there may be between the
ephod - garment and the ephod-idol, it is not easy to
imagine. 6 In both cases we must admit the possibility
1 Dillmann, Ex. u. Lev. (3) 334 ; Nowack, HA 2 u8/ ;
Driver in Hastings DB, s.v. ; cp Saadia, Abulwalid. The
figures in Lepsius Denkindler (3 224 a d, 222 h, 274 6), in which
Ancessi, followed by Dillm. and others, would see an Egyptian
ephod of this form, represent, not a ceremonial dress, but simply
body armour of two familiar types.
2 The interpretation shoulder-cape, Schulterkleid, found
in some recent works is a mechanical mistranslation (through
Old Latin and Vg. superhumcrale) of eirio/ou s, which is not
a garment covering the shoulders, but one open on the shoulders
and supported by brooches or shoulder-straps (en-co/ui6e<;).
3 Rashi (on Ex. 284^ 40 end) likens the ephod of the
high priest to a woman s surceint, two pieces of cloth, in front
and behind, on a band or belt.
4 See Marriott, Vestiarimn Christianum, 153, i6s_/C ; that
the original use of the succinctorium was not forgotten, see
Innocent III., De sacro altaris tnysterio, lib. i, c. 52.
6 The alternative is that the union-of the ephod with the Urim
and Thummim is an artificial combination suggested to the
author of P by the passages in Samuel themselves. P, it is
thought, knew nothing about the true nature of the old ephod
or the Urim and Thummim.
6 For the etymological explanation by J. D. Michaelis, see
below ; cp also Smend, A T Rel.gesch. 41 n.
1308
EPHPHATHA
EPHRAIM
that ephod has supplanted a more offensive word,
possibly llohim; cp the substitution of aron, ark, 1
for ephod in i S. 14 18 i K. 226. See ARK, 6, n. i.
The etymology of ephod is obscure ; the verb nax
(Ex. 29s Lev. 87) is generally regarded as denominative.
Lagarde s derivation from a root 131 is formally un
impeachable ; but his explanation, garment of ap
proach to God, is inadmissible (Uebers. 178). J. D.
Michaelis conjectured that Gideon s ephod-idol was so
called because it had a coating (msx, cp Ex. 288 392)
of gold over a wooden core (cp Is. 3022). 1 This theory
hns been widely accepted, and extended to the whole
class of supposed oracular ephod-idols ; but the com
bination is very doubtful. Even in Isaiah it is quite
possible that an actual garment may be meant.
See the authors cited above in the notes, and in Moore,
Judges, 381. Older monographs : B. D. Carpzov, De Ponti-
ficum Hebra;orum vestitu sacro, in Ugolini,
5. Literature. Thesaurus, 12785^; Ugolinus, Sacer-
dotium Hebraicum," Tttts. 18135^ (opinions
of Jewish scholars in extenso) ; cp Maimonides (Keic hainiq-
dash 9 9 ff.), ib. 8 1002 ff. ; especially Braun, De Vestitu
Sacerdotum, ii. 6 ; Spencer, De Leg. lib. iii. diss. 7, c. 3 ; further,
Ancessi, Annales tie philos. chretienne, 1872 ; Konig, Rel.
Hist, of Israel, 107 ft. , Sellin, Beitr. zur isr. u. j ied. Rel. ii.
1 ngyl ; van Hoonacker, Le sacerdoce Lcuitique, y;off. (99).
G. F. M.
EPHPHATHA (e4xj>A9,\ [Ti. WH]), an Aramaism
used by Jesus according to Mk. 7s4t- It is glossed by
SiavolxOilTi, and is properly the passive (Ethpe el or
Ethpa al opinions differ) of nns, to open.
The assimilation of the n before 3 can be paralleled in later
Aramaic ; but it would perhaps be simpler to suppose that
the older reading was (correctly) 664>&6&. See Kau. Gram.
10, Dalm. Gram. 202, 222.
EPHRAIM
Name ( i/)
Land ( 3 /.)
People ( s/
Origin ( 6-8)
History ( gf.~)
P s statistics ( 10-12)
Ephraim (Q^"1DX ; 100 ; on meaning of name see
below, 2 ; ecJ>p<MM, occasionally Aid>. or -g/v\ ; 2 on
1. Application gentilic Ephraimite, Ephrathite see
of names below - * [ end ] 5 i-). the common
designation in Hosea (originally oftener
than now) of the northern kingdom of Israel. This usage
was not confined, however, to northern writers. It occurs
also in Isaiah and Jeremiah 3 and in post-exilic prophets
and poets. 4 There is no evidence that the name was used
by other nations. The Moabites called the northern
kingdom Israel (.VII, I. 5) ; the Assyrians called it Bit
Humri (cp OMRI), or Israel (cp Ahabbu Sir ilai). Nor
does Ephraim in this sense occur in the earlier
historical books. 5 The explanation probably is that it
was not a correct, formal style. An orator may speak
of England ; a diplomatist must say Great Britain.
The form of the name suggests that it is really geo
graphical (cp the many place-names ending in aim
[NAMES, 107], and, for the prefixed N, such names as
Ahlab, Achshaph ; cp also Achzib).
Land of Ephraim (c"lBX pN), it is true, occurs only once,
late (Judg. 1215), and Wood of Ephraim may be corrupt
(see EPHRAIM [Woop OK]) ; but Mount Ephraim (Q"iSN in) 6
occurs over thirty times (cp Mt. Gilead), and it is significant
that we never hear of house of Ephraim (as we do of house
of Joseph ). 7
1 See IDOL, 5.
2 The following forms occur in Josephus : for the eponym
e^pcup. ; for the tribe e<pai/i;. ; variants e^par;?, -afir), -a.9i], -avti,
-ajurj, -ai^rj.
3 Ezekiel is uncertain.
4 Cp Ecclus. 472i, out of Ephraim a kingdom of violence
(son nrrap D^SNO ; and ?/. 23).
Statistics as to the occurrence of the name may now be
found conveniently collected in W. Staerk, Studien, 1 84-86.
8 For K -in we have in Obad. 19 K mb 1 - If the text of these
two words is correct (see NF.GKR), we must give n-\jy the mean
ing it has in Assyrian (satfii), viz. mountain (for other cases see
r IELD, i).
7 The late passage, Judg. 10 9, cannot be considered an
exception. The phrase is artificial, modelled after others. <SB
1309
Against the view that Ephraim is the name of a
district the absence of such a place-name from the
Egyptian records is of no significance. They mention,
on the whole, towns rather than districts. Nor need
we consider seriously the suggestion (Niebuhr, Gesch.
1251) that there may be in Egypt a trace of Ephraim
as the name of a people viz. in the (A)pury, repeatedly
discussed in relation to Israel (the Hebrews ; cp
HEBREW, i), since Chabas called attention to them,
in 1 8(32 (Mil. Egypt. 42 _ff~.). 1 The objections to such
a view initial ain for aleph 2 and certain facts about
the (A)pury are obvious (so, strongly, WMM).
The occurrence in a document of Egyptian ain 3 for initial
Semitic aleph, is not indeed impossible, as is proved by the
singular case of the similar name Achshaph (see above); but
that must be regarded simply as a blunder of the scribe who
wrote the papyrus (WMM As. u. Eur. 173). The name (A)pury
occurs too often for there to be any uncertainty about its
spelling and it is always with ain. 5
Phonetically, therefore, the equation is indefensible. Nor is
there in favour of it any positive argument. We find (A)pury in
the time of Ramses II. (cp EGYPT, 58) in the (eastern) borders
of Egypt where a persistent tradition says that Joseph, which,
as we shall see, is practically equivalent to Ephraim, was
settled (cp JOSEPH i.) ; but (A)pury are mentioned as early as
the thirteenth and as late as the twentieth dynasty," and there
is nothing to suggest their being connected with a special
movement towards Canaan.
It is most probable, therefore, that Ephraim is
strictly the name of the central highlands of W.
Palestine. The people took the name of the tract in
which they dwelt, just as their neighbours towards the
S. were called men of the south, sons of the south
(see BENJAMIN, i). Ephraim would thus be simply
the country of Joseph ; called his son, as Gilead is called
the son of Machir. It is just possible that Machir, too,
was at one time used in a wider sense, more nearly
equal to Joseph; J s story says (Gen. 37 28 / cp454)
that it was because Joseph was sold (FJOV nN VOD i) that
he was found living in Egypt (TDD, Machir = sold ). 7
Whenjoseph was regarded as consisting definitely of three
collections of clans Machir (Manasseh), Ephraim, and
Benjamin the main body retained the name Ephraim.
The gentilic occurs seldom (Judg. 12s i S. 1 1 i K. 1126) in
MT, and the text is doubtful (see below, 5, i.). Analogy would
lead us to expect Ephrite (nSN* , cp i-j^D from Q luD j 3"in
from G Jln) ! but the form used is Ephrathite ( JT1BN), as if from
a noun Ephrah. Ephraimite (Josh. 16 10 [AV] Judg. 1246
[AVJ, v. 5 [EV]) is an invention of EV. Ephrathite in Judg.
12 5 is probably genuine (e^pafletnjs [B], CK TOV e<paijx, [AL])
in the sense of belonging to Mount Ephraim.
i. From the days of Hosea (13 15, uns ) and the Bless
ings of Jacob (Gen. 49) and of Moses (Dt. 33) men
.y, . have seen in the name Ephraim a fitting
of a a designation for the central district of
Palestine, 8 fair and open, 1 fertile and
well-watered ; and modern scholars (e.g. , We. , Abriss
d. Gesch. 5) regard the name as originally a Hebrew
omits house of. The Chronicler speaks of the sons of
Ephraim ( ^3), 2 Ch. 28 12.
l For the literature see reff". in Kittel, Gesch. 1 166 n. 2, Marq.
Chronologische Untersuch. 57 n. 124.
* Another phonetic objection, that medial 3 is normally repre
sented by y not / (so WMM, As. u. Eur. 93), is not decisive.
P also appears, for example, Ba -tj-tu-pa-ira = T2D jva (pap.
Anast. i. 22 3).
3 Brugsch compared theMidianite Epher, -^y(ZA 76, p. 71).
4 Achshaph occurs in the list of towns in Upper Rtnu of
Thotmes III. (no. 40) normally as -k-sap\ but in pap. Anast.
i. 21 4 it appears as -k-sa-pu (initial y).
6 As the Egyptian pronunciation of ain was less emphatic
than the Canaanite it might be thought possible that an emphatic
Semitic aleph should sometimes be represented in Egyptian by
ain. What is found, however, is the converse effect Egyptian
aleflh for Semitic ain, and it is hardly possible to believe that
in the case of people for many centuries in the employment of
the Egyptians a name which was spelled by the Egyptians
with initial y invariably, really began with K.
6 It has even been argued that (A)pury is never a race name
(Meyer, GA, 297, n. 2; Maspero, Hist. anc. 2443, n. 3; but
not so Erman, W. M. Miiller).
7 The place of the incident of the sale in the life of Joseph is
referred to elsewhere. See JOSEPH ii. 3.
8 E applies the etymology differently (Gen. 4152: fruitful
in the land of my affliction ["jy]); and again, Josephus (Ant.
ii. (i i [ 92]): restoring (O.TTO&I.SOVS), because of the restoration
(5td TO a.iro$o9rji>a.i) to the freedom of his forefathers.
1310
3.
EPHRAIM
appellative meaning fertile tract. 1 Formally this is
plausible (see above, i), and, as we shall see ( 3/. ),
such a name is fitting -it would be eminently
fitting on the lips of Hebrew immigrants from the
Steppes. The Arabs called the beautiful plain of
Damascus 2 the gitfa, and this has become a proper
name (el-Ghiita). Compare the (very different) name
given to the parched tract S. of Judah (see NEGEB).
Other possible explanations, however, should not be
overlooked.
ii. If HBN means earth, 3 Gesenius in connecting Ephraim
.with HSN may have been wrong only in interpreting the termina
tion aim as a dual ending, and Ephraim may have meant the
loamy tract. The Assyrian epru may be iSNj not ^u 4 -
iii. A slightly different explanation would be reached if we
followed the hint of the Mishnic Hebrew 1BN (Buxt. 12N) ; cp
BesaSy: Domestic animals (niW3) are suc ^ as pass the
night in the city (TJH), pastoral animals (nvq-|D) are such as
pass the night in the open (13x3) ; also Pesikta S/> : [Exod.
34 24] teaches that thy cow may pasture in the open (nsxa).
If this sense for -fix was old, Ephraim might mean the
country where the earlier settlers in Palestine had not yet
built (many) cities (cp below, 7 ii.). JODN, mSN " tne Talmud
means meadow.
On the other hand, the interpretation of geographical
names is proverbially precarious (cp CANAAN, 6,
ARAM, i) ; we must take into consideration the possi
bility that the name Ephraim as it has reached us may
owe its precise form in part to popular etymology such
as, it is thought, has turned (conversely) Chateau vert
into Shotover (hill).
Ephraim is generally called Mount Ephraim 4
( N in) i-e., mountainous -country 6 of Ephraim.
, This was no mere form of speech. From
. acoar the ]ain of Megiddo to Beersheba is a
and extent. ,
great mountainous mass, ninety miles in
length, called the mountain. Mountain of Ephraim
will mean that part of this great mountain mass which
lies within the (fertile) tract called Ephraim viz. the
northern part. It is impossible not to see that Ephraim
differs from the less fertile tract that extends down to Beer
sheba. The change is patent. It is more difficult, how
ever, to say where it occurs (see, further, end of this ).
In fact, there is not really a definite physical line of sec
tion, any more than there was a stable political boundary.
It has been suggested elsewhere (BENJAMIN, if.) that
this made easier the formation of an intermediate canton
called the southern [Ephraim] i.e. , Benjamin. The
OT nowhere defines the extent of Ephraim. It is likely
that there was always a certain vagueness about its
southern limits. There can be little doubt, however,
that it included Benjamin (see BENJAMIN, i). All
that follows the word even in Judg. 19 16 is probably
an interpolation (to magnify the wickedness of the Ben-
jamites ? ; so Bu. ad loc. ). The northern boundary is
clearer. When Joseph us tells us (Ant. v. 122 [83]) that
Ephraim reached (from Bethel) to the great plain (TO
fj.^ya Trediov) he may mean the plain not of Megiddo
but of the Makhneh (see below, 4) ; but he is speak
ing of the seat of the smaller Ephraim tribe. The
general character of the OT references and the cities
assigned to Mt. Ephraim (see below, 13) make it
probable that it reached to the plain of Megiddo.
The only serious argument against it is the rather obscure
passage Josh. 17 14-18 (on the text of which see Che. Crit. Bib.,
1 On the view of Gesenius see later ( 2 ii.). G. H. Skipwith
suggests (JQK 11 247 [ 99!) that Q-|JN is the masculine equivalent
of (n)rP2N. an appellation of Rachel, signifying her that
maketh fruitful (see RACHEL).
2 Cheyne has conjectured that the plain below Jerusalem
similarly received the name Ephraim, corrupted by transposi
tion of letters into REPHAIM [y.v.]. Bethlehem (or a place
near it), only two or three miles distant, seems to have been
called Ephrath.
3 So Barth, Etytn. Stud. 2oyC, comparing Ar. gubar, which,
however, means dust ; also Ges.( 13 )-Bu.( 2 )
4 Twice mount Israel, Josh. 11 1621 [D] ; on Ezekiel s
frequent mountains of Israel ( in), see HIGH PLACE, 2.
5 Looked at from the sea, indeed, or from across the Jordan,
it presents the aspect, as G. A. Smith says, of a single moun
tain massif.
1311
EPHRAIM
and cp REPHAIM). The house of Joseph, complaining that Mt.
Ephraim is too small for them, are told to clear for themselves
a settlement in the wood in the land of the Rephaim and the
Perizzites. It has been supposed that this refers to the northern
part of the western highlands from Shechem to Jenin (so Stade,
Steuernagel, van Kasteren, MDPVqs, p. 28^); but it is more
likely that the passage is to be connected with the story of
Josephite colonies settling E. of the Jordan (cp JAIR, etc.;
REPHAIM [WOOD]); so Bu. RiSa, 34 ff. 87 ; KfiC ad loc.,
Buhl, Pal. 121 n. 265). See MACHIK, MANASSEH, and, on the
relation of Ephraim to other tribes, below,, 5.
The places expressly said to be in Mount Ephraim
are : in the south, Ramath(aim), perhaps Bet Rlma (see
RAMATHAIM), Zuph, and Timnath-heres (Josh. 19so
2430 Judg. 2g), perhaps et-Tibnah (see TIMNATH-
HEKES) ; in the centre, Shechem (Josh. 20? 21 21 i K.
1225 i Ch. 6 67 [52]) ; in the N., SHAMIR [q.v. ; Judg.
10 i) ; also the hills ZEMARAIM, S. of Bethel (2 Ch.
184), and GAASH, near Timnath-heres (Judg. 2g, etc.).
The Ephraim highlands differ from those of Judah
in several respects. 1 In Judah we have a compact and
fairly regular tableland deeply cut by steep defiles,
bounded on the E. by the precipices that overlook the
depths of the Dead Sea, and separated on the W. from
the maritime plain by the isolated lowland district of
the Shgphelah (see JUDAH). In Ephraim this gives place
to a confused complex of heights communicating on
the E. by great valleys with the Jordan plain, and letting
itself down by steps on the W. directly on to the plain
of Sharon, cut across the middle by a great cleft (see
below, 4, end) and elsewhere by deep valleys, and en
closing here and there upland plains surrounded by hills.
The change in the western border occurs about Wady
Malaka, directly west of Bethel ; the change in the
character of the surface not till the Bethel plateau ends
(some 5 or 6 m. farther N. ) at the base of the highest
peak of Ephraim -on which the ruins of Tell- Asur
probably mark the site of BAAL-HAZOR whose waters
running east through the W. Samiya and west through
the W. en-Nimr and the W. Der Ballut empty them
selves into the Jordan and the Mediterranean by the
two Aujas.
Geographically, as well as historically, the heart and
centre of the land is Shechem. Embosomed in a
forest of fruit gardens in a fair vale
4. Plains,
sheltered by the heights of Ebal and
wadys, etc. Gerizimi ; t sends out j ts roa ds, like
arteries, over the whole land, distributing the impulse
of its contact with foreign culture.
1. Northwestwards the W. esh-Sha lr winds past the
open end of the Samaria plain down to Sharon.
From the plain of Samaria, whose island city-fortress the
sagacity of Omri made for centuries the capital, one gets by the
valley up to near Yasid and then down the W. Abu Kaslun, or
by a road over the saddle of Beyazid, into the upland plains
of Fandakumiyeh and Marj el-Garak, and on to Sahl Arrabeh,
Dothan, and the plain of Megiddo.
2. The E. end of the vale of Shechem is the plain of
Askar.
If one turns to the left, the steep, rugged gorge of W. Bedan
(with its precipitous cliffs, surmounted by Ebal on the left and
by Neby Belan on the right) takes one down northwards to the
great crumpled basin which collects the waters of the W. Fari a,
the main avenue of access from Gilead 2 by the ford of ed-
Damieh, less than 20 m. off.
W. Fari a turns off to the right (SE). Straight on (NE.)
past Ain Fari a is the road to Reisan in the Jordan plain,
passing by the large village of Tubas (identified by some with
THKBEZ, q.v.), which lies (10 m. from Nablus) looking down
the \V. Buke , by Teyasir (identified by some with ASHER [q.v.,
ii.]) in a secluded and fertile open valley near the head of the \V.
Malih and by Kb. Ibzik (BEZEK), and through the W. Khashneh,
with its hills thickly ciothed with wild olives.
On the left all along the road is the watershed, with the
heights of Talluza (1940 ft. ; a village on a knoll commanding
a fine view of W. Fari a), the barren rounded top of Ras el-
Akra (2230 ft.), and Ras Ibzik (2404 ft.), which rises 1400 ft.
above Teyasir.
3. Straight in front of the E. exit from Shechem the plain
1 When Josephus says loosely that they do not differ at all
(BJ iii. 84 [(&/.} ; KO.T ovSev Sid^opos) he explains his meaning
thus : they are made up of hilly country and level country
( opeii>ai icai irfSidSc;), are moist and fertile, etc.
2 Note that it is just opposite the W. Zerka, that great cleft
in the Gilead plateau.
1312
MAP OF EPHRAIM
INDEX TO NAMES
Parentheses indicating articles that refer to the place-names are in certain cases added to non-biblical names having no biblical
equivalent. The alphabetical arrangement usually ignores prefixes: abu ( father of), ain ( spring ), beit ( house ),
beni ( sons ), birket ( pool ), dahret ( summit ), der ( monastery }, el ( the ), ghor ( hollow ), jehir ( hole ), karn
( horn ), kasr ( castle ), kefr ( village }, khan ( inn ), khirbet ( ruin }, makhddet ( ford }, mejdel ( castle }, merj
( meadow }, neby ( prophet ), rds ( summit ), sheikh ( saint ), taTat ( ascent ), tell ( mound ), thoghret ( pass }, wddy
( valley ).
Abel-Meholah, CD 3
Chephirah, 64
ain el-Hod, 4 (ENSHE-
el-Lubban, B 3 (EPHRAIM,
W. es-Sant, B 4
wady el-Abyad, D 3
Chesalon, 64
MESH)
4 [4])
Sanur, 82 (BETHULIA)
Adamah or Adam, D 3
wady el-Humr, C 3
Ludd, A 4
Sar a, A4
wady el- Adeimeh, D4
W. abu Dab 4 (ZEBOIM)
Lydda, A4
W. es-Sarar, AB 4 (MAK-
Adummim, C4
tal at ed-Dam, C4
wady Ibten Ghazal, D 3
KEDAH)
khan el-Ahmar, 4 (ADUM
ed-Dfimieh, D 3
Kh. Ibzlk and ras Ibzik, C2
Madmenah, 64
karn Sartabeh, C3
MIM)
thoghret ed-Debr, 4 (DE-
(EPHRAIM, 4 [2])
MakhmSs, 4
Sebustiyeh, 82
Ai, C4
BIR)
W. el-Ifjim, C 3 (EPHRAIM,
el-Makhna, BC 3
Seilun, C3
Aijalon, and valley, B4
beit Dejan, 3 (DAGON)
4)
W. Malakeh, B 4 (EPHRAIM)
ghores-Seiseban, D4(8ETH-
kal at rSs el- Ain, A 3
der DlwSn, C4
Kh. Il asa, B 4
ain Malih, and W. el-Malih,
PEOR)
"Ainun, Cs
Docus, 04
W. Imeish, B 4 (BETH-
2 (ABEL-MEHOLAH)
W. Selhab, BCa (DOTHAN)
\V. Ajliin, D2 3 (BITH-RON)
Dothan and tell Duthan, B2
IIORON)
W. el-Malih, AB 2
W. Selman, AB 4 (BETH-
rSs el- AkrS, 2 (EPHRAIM,
ain ed-Uiik, 04
el- Isawiyeh, 64
W. el-Maty ah, C 4 (Ai)
HORON)
4)
wildy Ish ar,BC 3 (EPHRAIM,
Mazra at, C 3
Sha fat, 84
Akrabeh, C 3 (EKRKBEL)
Mt. Ebal, C 3
4)
W. nahr el-Mefjir, Az
W. esh-Shn ir (EPHRAIM,
jehir Akrabeh, 3 (PH-
Eleasa, B4
wady Ishkar, A 3 (KANAH)
(KANAH)
4) and ain esh-Sham-
RAIM, 4)
Emmaus i, A4 ; 2, 64
jebel Islamlyeh, C 3
W. Meidan, D 4
siyeh, 82
Alemeth, C4
Ephraim 2, C4
Meithalun, 2 (ARRELA)
Shechem, C3
tell der Alia, D 3 (GiLEAD,
Ephron i, C 4
Jabbok, D 3
W. el-Mellaha, CD 3 , 4
ain Shems, A4
7)
Eriha, 4
Jabesh Gilead, Da
Meselieh, Cz
Sheri at el-Keblreh, Di-4
Almit, 4
Kh. Erma, 84 (KiRjATH-
ras Jadir, Cz
Michmash, 4
Shiloh, C 3
Amateh, D 3
JEARIM)
Janohah, C 3
Michmethah, BC 3
wSdy ShubSsh, CD 2
Amwas, A4
Esora, C 3
Jeba , 62 (GEBA, 2)
Midieh, AB 4
abu Shusheh, A 4 (GEZER)
beit AnSn, 64 (ELON-
Eshtaol, 64
Jeba 4 (GEBA, i)
Kh. beit Mizza, 64
wSdy es-Sidr, D 3
BETHHANAN)
Eshu , C 4
Kh. Jedireh, A4
Mozah, 64
wady abu Sidreh, D 3
Ananiah, B4
AnatS and Anathoth, 4
Annabeh, A4
Antipatris, A 3
Aphek, A 3
Archi and ain Arik, 64
Arrabeh, 82 (DOTHAN)
Artuf, A4 (ETAM, ROCK
mejdel-beni-Fadel, C 3 and
Fandakurniyeh, B2 (EpH-
RAIM, 4)
ain Kara, Kh. Fara, and
W. Fara, C4(EupHRATEs)
ain el-FSri a, C2 (EPHRAIM)
W. FSri a, 3 (BETH-
BARAH)
Jericho, Crusaders , C4
Jericho of OT, C 4
Jerusalem, B4
Jeshanah, B4
tell Jezer, A4
el-Jib, B 4
wady el-Jib, 83, 4
Jibia, 64
W. Mukelik, C 4
Naarath, 4
Nablus, C 3
W. abu Nar, 82 (APHEK, 3 )
W. Nawa imeh, CD4
(EMEK)
beit Nebala, A4
ain Sinia, B 4
Sinjil, C 3 (EPHRAIM, 4 )
beit Sira, 84 (BETH-HORON)
Kh. Sirlsia, 83
ain es-Sultan, C4
ain Suwemeh, D4
khirbet Suwemeh, 04
W. es-Suwemt, 4 (GEBA)
OF)
wadv P^asail C^
Jiljilia, B 3 (GiLGAL, 4)
Neballat, A4
Arumah, C 3
Asher, 2
Asiret (el-Hatab), C 3
Askar, C 3 (EPHRAIM, 4)
Fejja, A 3
Fer ata, B 3
tell el-Ful, B 4
Jiljulieh, A 3 (GiLGAL, 6 a)
birket Jiljuliyeh, C 4
Jimzu, A4
Jordan, Di-4
Nephtoah, B4
W. en-Nimr, BC 4 (EPH
RAIM, 4)
tell Nimrin and W. Nimrin,
Taanath-Shiloh, C 3
et-Taiyibeh, C 4
jebel Tammun, C-2
Ta na, C 3
tell Asur, C 4
Geba, 4
wady el-Jorfeh, D 4
D 4
wady abu TSra, D 4
Atara, 84
Ataroth-addar, 64
eastern Gederoth, A4
Mt. Gerizim, C 3
W. el Jozeleh, D 3
Juleijil, 3
beit NubS, B4(IsHB!BENOB)
nebi Nun, C 3 (JANOAH)
et-TawSnik, C 3 (EPHRAIM,
4)
Kh. Atuf, C2
W. el- Aujeh, CD4
"Awarta, C 3 (GlBEAK, 2)
wady Ayun Musa, D4
el- Azariyeh, B4
Gezer, A4
merj el-Gharak, C2 (EPH
RAIM, 4)
Gibeah, 84
Gibeah of Phinehas, B4
esh-sheikh Kamil, C 3
Kanah, AB 3
W. Kanah, AB 3
J. Karantel, 4 (JERICHO)
nebi Nun, 2 (JOSEPH)
Ophrah 3 , B 3 ; 2, 4
Kh. el- Ormeh, C 3
et-Tell, C 4
Teyaslr and Thebez, 2
Kh. kefr Thilth, B 3 (BAAL-
SHALISHA)
Tibneh, B 3
Azmaveth, 64
el-Ghor, Di, 2, 3 (JORDAN)
Karawa, CD 3 (JERICHO)
Parah, C4
Timnath-heres, 8 3
wady Ghnweir, D4
ain Karim, B 4
\V. et-Tin, AB 2
Gibeon, 64
Karyat el- Inab, 84
et-Tireh, A 3 (ANTIPATRIS)
Baal-Hazor, 4
Baal-shalisha. 83
Gilgal ( 4), B 3 ; ( 2), C 4 ;
( 5), C 3
W. abu Kaslan, BC 2 (Epn-
RAIM, 4)
Raba, 2
Rabbith, C 2
jebel et-TOr, C 3
Tubas, C2
W. der Ballut, B 3 (EPH
Gimzo, A4
jebel el-Kebir, C 3
er-RSm, B 4
RAIM, 4, 7)
Keflra, 64
Ramah i, B 4 ; 2, B 3
. . _
ras el-Bedd, C 2
W. Beidfin, C 3 (EPHRAIM,
4)
Benin, B4
esh-sheikh BeiySzid, B2 and
neby Belan.Cs (EPHRAIM,
ain el-Habs, B4 (JOHN THE
BAPTIST)
Hadid, A4
Haditheh, A4
Kh. Haiyan, 4
tell el -Hajar, 4
tell el-Kefrein, D 4
W. el-Kefrein, D 4 (ABEL-
SHITTIM)
wady el-Kelt, C4
W. el-Kerad, C 3 (EPHRAIM,
4)
Ramallah, 84
er-Rameh, 82
tell er-Rameh, 04
ras er-Rammali, C 2
ain er-Rawabi and W. er-
Rawaby, C$ (ENSHEM-
merj ibn Umer, Ar> 4
Umm el- AmdSn, Da
rSs Umm el-Kbarrubeh, C3
dahret Umm el-Kubeish, Cz
ras Umm Zoka, D2
beit Ur el-Foka, B 4
beit Ur et-Tahta, B 4
4)
ain Hajla, 64
Kesla, B4
ESH)
Bethany i, B4
Beth-aven, 4
Bethel, B 4
kasr Hajla, 4
makhadet Hajla, D4
tell Hammam, L)4
W. el-Khashneh, 2 (EPH
RAIM, 4)
W. el-Khudera, A2
wady er-Retem, D 3 , 4
beit Rima, B 3
er-Rujeb, D 3
wady Yabis, D2
Yalo, 15 4
Beth-haccerem, 84
Beth hoglah, 4
the Beth-horons, 64
Beth-nimra, D 4
beit Hanina, 64
W. beit Hanina, B4(IsRAF.L,
7)
kefr Haris, B 3 (GAASH)
Kibbiah, 84 (GIBBETHON)
Kilkilieh, A 3 (Gn.c;Ai.,6a)
Kirjath-jearim, 64
el-Kubab, A4 (Gon)
wady er-Rujeb, D 3 (ARGOB)
Rujlb, 3 (EPHRAIM, 4 )
kefr Saba, A3 (ANTIPATRIS)
Kh. YSnun, C 3
YSsid, 2 (EPHRAIM, g 4)
Yasnf B 3 (JOSEPH)
Yerzeh, C2 (P>HRAIM, 7)
Beth-shemesh, A4
Hazor 2, B4
el-Kuds, B 4
tell es-Sa Idryeh, D2
Bethulia, C2
Kh. Hazzur, 84
Kuloniyeh, B 4
ain es-Sskut, D2
Zarethan, C 3
Bezek, C2
W. Hesban, D 4 (BETH-
Kuzah, B 3 (CHUSi)
Sslim, 3 (EPHRAIM, 4 )
Valley of Zeboim, C 4
el-Bireh, B4 (BF.EROTH)
PEOR)
Samaria, 82
blr ez-Zeit, 84 (AZOTUS)
W. el-Buke , CD 3 (ErH-
wady el-Himar, D2
T.aishah, 64
ain Samieh, C 4
W. Zemir, A8 2
RAIM, 4)
el-Hizmeh, C4
f.ebonah, B 3
wSdy Samieh,C 4 (EPHRAIM)
N. ez-ZerkS, D 3
Burka, BC 4
el-Hod, D 4
Lifta, B 4
nebi Samwil, 84
Zorah, A 4
English Miles
2 "f
MOUNT EPHRAIM.
Kilometres
5
HEIGHT IN Ftn
11 a ikt i & Cectt nil i
For index to 7iaifS ypp lack oftnep.
ENCrCLOPAEOIA BlBLlCA 1901,
EPHRAIM
BPHRAIM
of Askar connects with the plain of Salim leading on to Ta na
(TAANATH-SHILOH) at the head of W. el-Kerad, which leads
through the steep W. Ifjim down to the Jordan.
4. On the right the plain of Askar (see SYCHAR) leads S.
into the plain of Rujib and the plain of Makhneh, the route to
the S. passing on across ridges and valleys through the deep
plain of Lubhan, round the heights of Sinjil leaving up on the
left, shut in between high bare mountains, the ancient temple-
city of Shiloh (near it the open plain of Merj el- Id) on through
the W. el-Jib, under the heights of Tell Asur (E. of which is
the enclosed plain of Merj Sia), up to the plateau of Betin
(Bethel) and el-Bireh, and so on to Jerusalem and the south.
5. West of the line just described, leading south from
the plain of Askar, a maze of valleys gradually simpli
fies itself into the great arterial wadys that lead down to
the maritime plain and finally unite in the lower course
of the Auja..
These are the W. Kanah, the W. Deir Ballut, and the W.
Malakeh : the Deir Ballut, with its two [or three] great con
verging branches (the straight W. Ish ar beginning in a little
plain south of the village of Akraba upon the main watershed,
and the deep W. en-Nimr) ; the W. Malakeh, with its deep
head valleys beginning below el-Bireh. South of the W.
Malakeh is the W. Selman, the country drained by which is
enclosed in the great sweep of the W. Sarar, which, beginning
just below el-BIreh, describes a semicircle and enters the sea
as N. Rubin due W. of er-Ramleh.
6. South of Gerizim the watershed lies east of the
traveller s route. Just as, north of the W. Fari a,
we have seen, there runs along the watershed a suc
cession of valleys or plains, so from the S. foot of
et-Tawanik (2847) the Jehlr Akrabah runs S. as far
as Mejdel - beni -Fadel (2146), overlooked by Yanun
(JANOAH) in the northern part, and by the modern
village of Akrabeh (2045) about midway. Then,
however, the system becomes more complex, till at
Tell Asur we reach the Bethel plateau.
7. The district of the open valley of Fandakiimiye
and the enclosed plain Marj el-Garak is, we saw, partly
separated from the Samaria valley by the Bayazld range.
Farther north are the plains of Dothan, Arrabeh, and
the W. Selhab. If the W. Fari a was the route of the
invasions from the east (Nomads, Aramseans, Assyrians),
the upland plain of Dothan was the great route across
from Sharon to the east end of the plain of Megiddo.
There were other routes (W. Ara, etc.) farther NW.
By these routes the armies of Egypt and the other great
states passed and repassed for centuries and centuries.
The low hill-land beyond the plain of Dothan culmin
ates in the height of Sheikh Iskander, north of which
the W. Ara divides it from the still lower hill -land
called Bilad Ruha which stretches across to W. el-
Milh, beyond which rises the range of CARMEL [y.z .].
Mt. Ephraim is thus divided across the middle (by
the great valleys that continue the vale of Shechem)
into a northern and a southern half. The northern of
these again is divided by the great line of plains and
valleys that reaches from the Jordan plain near Gilboa
southwestwards to the Makhneh. The NW. quarter
is remarkable for its plains ; the NE. for its series
of parallel valleys (especially the great W. Fari a)
running down SE. to the Ghor. In the southern half
the SW. is remarkable for its maze of wadys (note the
long straight W. Ish ar that runs down thirteen miles
without a bend SW. from Akrabe) coagulating at the
base of Tell Asur and below el-Bireh, and its great
valleys converging into the Auja ; the SE. for its
heights, plains, and plateaus, and the series of deep
rugged wadys (note in particular the deep W. el- Aujah
leading up to Tell Asur and the W. Kelt - Suwenit
leading up to the Benjamin plateau) that furrow its
eastern declivity.
Such is Ephraim ; a land well watered and fertile, a
land of valleys, plains, and heights, a land open to
the commerce, the culture, and the armies of the world.
i. Relation to Manasseh. Not all the Ephraim
district, however, was regarded as belonging to the
6 Inhabitants E P hraim tribe I P art was peopled by
men of Machir- Manasseh (see MANAS
SEH). Their towns were apparently chiefly in the
1313
N. A writer of disputed date tried to delimit a
northern portion to be assigned to Manasseh (see
below, n) ; but from the fragments of another
account (id. ) it would seem that there was in reality no
geographical boundary. The whole highland country
was Ephraim ; certain towns were specially Manassite.
The fact that in the whole OT there is scarcely a case
of a man being called an Ephraimite suggests that
Ephraim was hardly ever a tribe name in the ordinary
sense : the leading men were men of Ephraim unless
they were otherwise described.
The two cases occurring in the MT are those of (a) Jeroboam
and (ff) Elkanah the father of Samuel. Both are doubtful.
(a) Jeroboam is called an Ephrathite (e(/>pa#[]<. [BAL]) in
1 K. Il26( = MT); but in L 1228 = " 122 4 ^, in the other
recension of the story (see KINGS, 3), he is only a man of
Mount Ephraim (ef opou? E^paiju. [BL]).l
(l>) The genealogy of Samuel (i S. 1 1) is corrupt (see ELIHU,
2 ; ELKANAH, i). <E> A follows MT (wiou SOUTT E<f>paeaios) ; but
<B BI - read Ephraim (viou 2<oc e opovs E<pouju. [L] ; tv Nao-eijS
E$PCUJU. = N rr:33, > N ^IIS p> son of Zuph of Ephraim [B]).
The mutual relations of the branches of Joseph
are somewhat perplexing (see MANASSEH, and cp
JOSEPH i. ).
J, E, and P appear to agree in representing Ephraim as the
younger (Gen. 48 1 8 [J], 41 51 [E], Josh. 17 i [P]) ; but whilst J
and E lay stress on the preeminence attributed by Jacob-Israel
to the younger (Gen. 48 14 196 [J], v. 2o [E]), P usually speaks
of Manasseh and Ephraim. 2
The significance of the distinctions just referred to has
been explained in various ways.
It has been supposed that in the seniority of Manasseh lay
a reference to early attempts at monarchy (GIDEON, JEPHTHAH,
ABIMELECH) ; whilst in the blessing of Ephraim lay a reference
to the undisputed preeminence of the monarchy established by
Jeroboam I. Of this latter reference there can be no doubt.
The meaning of the seniority of Manasseh is not so certain,
especially when we bear in mind how in Israelitish legend
preference of the younger is almost universal. Jacobs has
acutely argued that this preference is simply a survival of the
forgotten custom of junior birthright, which the later legend -
moulders misunderstood.
There is a rather obscure allusion in Is. 9 21 [20] to
discord between Ephraim and Manasseh. The reference
may be to conflict between rival factions in the last years
of the northern kingdom. Legend told of rivalries also
in the pre-historic period (see JEPHTHAH, GIDEON).
The currents that stirred the troubled waters of Samarian
politics cannot now be fully traced : Shallum and Pekah may
have been Gileadites (see JABESH, 2 ; ARGOB, 2), Menahem was
perhaps a Gadite 3 (see GAD, 10). The family of Jehu may
have belonged to Ephraim (see, however, ISSACHAR, 4). 4
ii. Relation to Joseph. If there is some difference
of usage in regard to the order of the tribes Ephraim
and Manasseh, there is agreement as to their being
brothers. Still there is at times a tendency to regard
them as a single tribe (see JOSEPH i. ). The question
therefore arises whether their distinctness was on the
increase or on the decrease. Did they unite to form
Joseph, or did Joseph split up into Ephraim and
Manasseh (for a similar question see BENJAMIN, if. } ?
In the Blessing of Jacob as we find it in our
Genesis, Ephraim and Manasseh do not appear ; 6 they
are represented by Joseph. There is indeed a play on
the name Ephraim (v. 22) ; 6 but as there is no reference
to Manasseh, Ephraim might be not part but the whole
of Joseph. This may be so. On the other hand the
Song of Deborah already recognises two tribes ; Ephraim
1 See, further, Cheyne s theory of Jeroboam s origin on the
mother s side (JEROBOAM, i).
- Sometimes, however, P gives the other order. See, es
pecially, Gen. 48 5. See, more fully, MANASSEH.
3 Baasha was an Issacharite ; Tibni may have been a
Naphtalite (see GINATH). It was, according to Cheyne, against
the Ephraimite city of Tappuah that Menahem took such cruel
vengeance (see TIPHSAH). It has been conjectured that Omri
also was of Issachar (Guthe, GVI, 138). Cp ISSACHAR, 4.
4 It is to be noted that in this family the name Jeroboam recurs.
& The same is true of the Blessing of Moses (Dt. 33). V. i-jb
is a gloss.
6 Cp We. C77(2) 3 22, (3)324. C. J. Ball, however, would
transfer the word rns to the saying on Naphtali (PSBA 17 173
[ 95]). For other views see Di. s commentary. Cheyne s sug
gested restoration of the passage is mentioned in the next note.
EPHRAIM
EPHRAIM
S ttl t
and Machir seem (already) to be found side by side
W. of the Jordan. l
Whether the designation of Benjamin as a brother,
and of Ephraim and Manasseh as sons of Joseph implies
a popular belief that when Benjamin definitely separated
from Joseph, Manasseh was not yet distinguished clearly
from Ephraim we cannot say ; nor yet whether such a
belief, if it existed, was based on any real tradition (cp
MANASSEH).
The general result is : on the whole, Joseph was in
early times equated with Ephraim, which included
Machir -Manasseh and Benjamin (cp above, 3 ;
JOSEPH i. ). On the other hand, it must not be forgotten
that Joseph was doubtless originally a group of clans.
There seems to have been much speculation as to
how Ephraim came to be settled where he was. The
great sanctuaries would have their legends.
At GlLGAL ^^ in the plain f Jerich
%vhichl thou g h not in the hi g hland s.
belonged to N. Israel, priests may have
told how a great Ephraimitish hero, after erecting their
sacred circle of stones (Josh. 4 20, E) and leading the
immigrant clans from Gilead against JERICHO and other
places, had encamped for long by their sanctuary (Josh.
1015 = 43: (5 om. ; perhaps late), and how there
Yahwe had instructed the tribes to what part of the
highlands they were to ascend to find a home (Judg.
li). Up on the plateau, at the royal sanctuary of
Bethel, it was told how their fathers had effected
an entrance into the city (Judg. 125), and how the
mound that now stood two miles off in the direction
of Jericho had once been a royal Canaanite city,
till their fathers, with much difficulty, had stormed
it and made it the heap it now was (Josh. 828).
At the great natural centre of the land, home of many
stocks, conflicting stories were told of quiet settlements,
of treaties, of treacherous attacks, of a legal purchase
(cp DINAH, 3), of a great assembly gathered to hear
the last admonition of the veteran Ephraimite leader
(Josh. 24), and how he had set up the great stone under
the terebinth (v. 26). Shiloh, too, must have had its
settlement stories to tell, especially how the great
Ephraimitic shrine (see ARK) had been there ; but
these stories have perished (for a possible trace of a late
story see MELCHIZEDEK, 3). When its temple was
lying in ruins there was written (in circles of students
who had never seen Shiloh) a book which explained
that after Israel had conquered the whole of Canaan,
they were assembled there by the successors of Moses
and Aaron to set up a wonderful sacred tent and to
distribute by lot the holy land (Josh. 18 i 14 i).
Timnath-heres boasted that it was the resting-place of
the great leader of Ephraim (see below). Shechem
even claimed that near at hand were buried the bones of
the great eponym of the house of Joseph (Josh. 24 32, E).
The legendary history was carried back still farther.
Joseph, though he entered by way of Gilead, came from Egypt,
where Kphraim and Manasseh were born. 2 In fact they were
really Egyptian ; but Jacob-Israel had adopted them (Gen. 48
E). 3 Even before that, Joseph had been at Shechem and
Dothan (JOSEPH i. 3), Jacob-Israel had founded the royal
sanctuary at Bethel (Gen. 8614 [J], and 28 18 [E]), and reared
the sacred pillar at Shechem 4 (Gen. 33 20 [E]), and Abraham had
built altars at Shechem (Gen. 12 7 [J]), and at Bethel (v. 8 [J]).
It is pretty clear that Ephraim had forgotten how he
came there. Some seem to have thought that before
the Israelites known to history settled in Ephraim there
were others, who eventually moved southward (see
SIMEON, LEVI, DINAH, JUDAH). It was remembered
that there had been more Danites on the western slopes
of Ephraim than there were in later times (D.\N, "2ff.}.
It is unlikely that it was believed that there had been a
1 It has been suggested that in an earlier form of the text the
Blessing of Jacob also perhaps mentioned not Joseph but
Ephraim and Manasseh (Che. PSBA 21 243/1 [ 99]).
2 This, however, may be merely an incident in the story, un
avoidable since Joseph, the hero, never left Egypt.
3 Cp Bertholet, Stellung, 50.
4 On Jacob s well see SYCHAR.
I3IS
settlement of Amalekites. l On the other hand, it has
been suggested that there may be a trace of an ancient
tribe in the neighbourhood of Shechem (see GIRZITE).
The evidence for the preponderating Canaanite element
in Shechem has been referred to already. The ancient
Canaanite city of Gezcr, once an Egyptian fortress,
which, we are told, became Israelite in the days of
Solomon, was hardly in Mt. Ephraim ; but it belonged
to Ephraim (see GEZER). Issachar may have been re
presented on Mt. Ephraim s NE. slopes (see ISSACHAK,
8). There were late Israelitish writers who thought
that Asher, too, had its claims, and it has recently
been suggested that there may really be traces of an
early stay of people of Asher south of Carmel (see
ASHER, 3). Timnath-heres is said to have been
settled by Joshua (see JOSHUA i. ). Of a clan of this
name in historic times we have no evidence, and the
same is true of RAHAB \<j.v.\ On the extraordinarily
meagre Ephraimite genealogy in Chronicles and on
its points of contact with other tribes, see below ( 12).
The extra-biblical hints are vague in the extreme
and difficult to turn to account.
i. The long list of places conquered
, Jh. . _ a " by Thotmes III. probably contains some
biblical data, g^ in centn / Ephraim .
Flinders Petrie (Hist. Egypt 2 323-332) proposes a consider
able number of identifications, including, e.g., Shechem and
several places near it ; Yerzeh, Teyasir, and Raha in the NE ;
and not a few places in the SW, from W. Der Ballut southwards.
When the land of Haru was added to the Egyptian
Empire it can hardly have sufficed to seize the towns
on the margin : Y-ra-da (?), Mi-k-ti-ra (Mejdel Yaba?
so WMM), Gezer (Ka-d i-ru, 104). Even if we could
identify with certainty, however, many names of towns,
we should still know nothing about the people who
occupied them. Special interest and importance,
however, attaches to two unidentified sites which, it
would seem, must be in Ephraim the much-discussed
1 Jacob-el and Joseph-el. The reading Jacob may
be treated as fairly sure ; but that of Joseph is
questionable (see JOSEPH i. i). For the interpreta
tion of these names we must be content to wait for
more light (see, for a suggestion, JACOB, i). We may
hope, however, that they have, something to tell us of
the origin of Ephraim.
ii. As the report of the early expedition of Amen
hotep II. contains nothing that casts light on our
present problems, 2 our next data belong to the time of
Amenhotep IV. Unfortunately, though the Amarna
correspondence tells us a good deal about the fortified
towns in Palestine 3 and their conflicts, it sheds little
light on the central highlands. Knudtzon s proposal
to read m Sa-ak-mi for Winckler s mdt-su la-a(l)-tni in
letter 185, /. 10, however, brings the Habiri into
connection with the land of Shechem 4 in a very
interesting way. 5 Moreover, we must remember that
the tablets rescued from destruction are only some
of those that were found at Tell el-Amarna. Those
that were allowed to perish may have referred to
other Ephraimite places. If, however, there really
were few (if any) Egyptian fortresses in that tract,
1 On Judg. 614 see below, 8; on Judg. 12 15 ( mountain
of the Amalekite ), see PIRATHON, i.
2 We have no details of Syrian expeditions of Thotmes IV.
Amenhotep III. was engaged in other concerns.
3 Ashkelon, Bif-Ninib (see IR-HERES), Aijalon, Zorah, Gimti
(see GATH), Gezer, perhaps Beth-shean (see Knudtzon, Beiti:
z. Assyr. 4iu), Megiddo.
4 The passage remains obscure. Knudtzon^.cOsaysthat^tablet
185 is a continuation of 182. In addition to reading Sakii
for mat-su /-(?)-;/ he reads jna-sar-tii for Winckler s ma-ku-ut
in /. 7, and provisionally renders lines 6 <$-i i (KB 5 no. 185) thus:
and the people of Ginti are a garrison in Bitsfmi, and, indeed,
we have to do (in the same way?) after Labaya and Sakmi have
contributed (cp no. 180 /. 16) to the Habiri (so Knudtzon kindly
informs the present writer).
5 Are we to compare with this the story of Gen. 34? Accord
ing to Marquart (Philologvs, suppl. bd. 76SoJf.), the Habiri
immigration is to be brought into connection with the settlement
of the Leah-tribes : Joseph came later. Cp Steuernagel, Josua,
151 (in //A )- See JUDAH.
1316
EPHRAIM
EPHRAIM
the Habiri might be already settling there without our
hearing of them. 1
iii. The contests of Seti I. were in S. Phoenicia and
Galilee. When we again get a glimpse of Palestine in
the time of Ram(e)ses II. it is once more the border
towns that are named : Heres, Luz, Sa-ma-sa-na. 2
iv. To Ram(e)ses successor we owe what is perhaps
the most interesting statement of all. Israel, says
Merenptah, is devastated; and Israel, it is to be
noted, is not a place but a people. If we assume that
the people referred to were settled in Ephraim, nothing
very definite can be urged against the assumption
or for it 3 (cp ISRAEL, 7 ; EGYPT, 59).
The cities mentioned in Ram(e)ses III. s list seem to
be Amorite, north of Galilee (As. u. Eur. 227).
Until hieroglyphic or cuneiform (or Hittite) records
shed some more light on the scene, accordingly, we
must remain without definite information as to the
early history of Ephraim. It is clear, however, that
the girdle of Canaanite cities was of remote antiquity
and practically certain that there were already towns up
in the highlands Shechem, perhaps Luz, and others.
The population was no doubt mixed ; Habiri, although
we have no certain mention of them, may have immi
grated there also.
The earliest incontestable fact that Ephraim remem
bered was the great fight with Sisera ; 4 but they may
.. . have known no more about who he was
Memories than we do (see SlSERA >- What P art
Ephraim played in the great conflict, the
condition of the text in Judg. 5 14 does not enable us to
say with certainty. 5 Perhaps we should read : Out of
Ephraim they went down into the plain. It is not
likely that Ephraim supplied the leader (see DEBORAH).
It was not only along its northern border that Ephraim
was exposed to attack. The open valleys and easy
fords, 6 which, when circumstancesfavoured, united it with
Gilead, exposed it to the inroads 7 of the still nomadic
peoples of the east. Stories were told at OPHRAH
[q. v. ] and elsewhere of heroic fights (see GIDEON),
and of spirited colonies sent out (see MANASSEH).
PiRATHON 8 and SHAMIR, an unidentified place in
Mount Ephraim, seem to have boasted that they had
produced heroes in the time of old (see ABDON, TOLA).
The Shechemites even told of how they came, for a time,
to have a. tyrannos, and how they got rid of him again
(ABIMELECH, 2).
Of greatest historical importance was the life-and-
death struggle with hated non-Semitic rivals (see PHILIS-
9. Transition. T1N f > . N rth , E P hr f aim claimed
a share in the glory of the struggle
of those dark days ; but when the cloud lifts the
1 C. Niebuhr also suggests that the Habiri were already
settled in Mt. Ephraim (Der alte Orient\6o).
2 The pap. Anast. I., however, appears to mention again the
mountain of Shechem (As. u. Eur. 394, note to pp. 172-175).
3 It has even been suggested that Yi-si-ra-al maybe not really
Israel at all (see JEZREEI. i. i). On the other hand Marquart
(I.e.) inclines to explain the name as referring to the Leah-tribes,
supposed to be still resident in central Palestine (see JUDAH).
* S. A. Fries (Sphinx, 1 214 [Upsala, 97]), and Hommel
(AHT, p. xiii n. 3) find a genuine tradition of a still earlier event
in the quaint story in i Ch. 721^-25. See, however, below, 12
(towards end) and cp BERIAH.
5 J. Marquart (Fund. 6 [96]), following Winckler (AOF
1 193) reads,
pojn ray nnsx jo
pppno ITV -no :p
Out of Ephraim they descended into the plain
Out of Machir went down leaders."
So also Budde, A"//C ad loc. P. Ruben (JQR 10 ssoyC) reads
n.rpnj;? ;o J3D nn [xns -\iy] D TBM JD . . .
6 There are said to be, between the Lake of Galilee and the
Dead Sea, 54 fords : 5 near Jericho, the rest between
W. ez-Zerkfi and the Lake of Galilee (Guthe, C/> /4 7 ).
7 We read of attacks by Ammon, Moab, Midian, and Assyria,
in addition to the Philistines and the Egyptians. Judah often
escaped.
8 Even if the view advocated in the article PIRATHON be
adopted, Abdon may perhaps be claimed for Mt. Ephraim.
Abdon is Benjamite.
hegemony is passing to Benjamin. If the monarchy
thus involved a loss to N. Ephraim, there was also a
gain ; Gilead and Ephraim were bound together more
closely (on earlier relations see JEPHTHAH, 3, 5
[end] ; GAD, 2 ; MACHIR). Indeed when the
disaster of Gilboa laid Israel once more at the feet of
the Philistines, the connection with Gilead was found
to be very valuable (see ISHBAAL, i). How, exactly,
Ephraim was brought under the sway of the state that
was rising beyond the belt of Canaanite cities to the S. ,
is not very clear (see DAVID, 6, ISHBAAL, i, ABNER,
ISRAEL, i6fr). The skill and energy of David
must have been great. It is difficult to believe, however,
that he effected in Ephraim all that has been attributed
to him by Winckler. Still the change must have been
profound. How far there may have been an influx of
people from the S. we cannot tell. Others besides
Absalom (2 S. 1823) may have acquired possessions in
Mt. Ephraim. Although we must on general grounds
assume that there were dialectical differences, chiefly in
pronunciation, between the various Hebrew-speaking,
as between other, communities peculiarities of the
Shibboleth type are universal they cannot have had
any effect on freedom of intercourse. The fixing of
the capital at Jerusalem was most politic. It was
perhaps in a belt hitherto unclaimed, scarcely ten miles
from Bethel. Ephraim might regard it and the other
Canaanite cities annexed as a gain in territory. The
fairs at the great Ephraimite sanctuaries would now be
open to people from Mt. Judah and the Negeb in a
way that would hardly have been possible before.
Ephraimite legend became enriched. Abraham, e.g. , it
came to be said, had built an altar at Shechem (Gen.
12 7 [J]) and at Bethel (v. 8 [J]).
Many interesting questions arise.
When did the general interweaving of legends take place?
How was it possible to deposit the great Ephraimite shrine
in Jerusalem? (see ARK). How did Ephraim act in the
Absalom rebellion and in that of Sheba? How was Solomon s
overseer of the whole house of Joseph related to his prefect
of Ephraim? The former, of course, had his official residence
at the natural centre of the land, Shechem. The latter, whether
or not he was a son of Zadok and of Beth-horon (see BEN-HUR),
may have resided nearer Jerusalem (see also below, 12).
The final schism cannot have taken anyone by
surprise (JEROBOAM, i ; SOLOMON, 2 ; ISRAEL,
10. Monarchy. 28 > The old royal city of Shechem
.* was naturally the scene of the negotia
tions and the first seat of the monarchy of Ephraim. 1
The links between Gilead and Ephraim, geographical
and historical, were too close to be severed now. The
kingdom of Ephraim included Gilead. That is to
say, Gilead, if it befriended David (against Judah? see
MAHANAIM), would not go out of its way to help
his sons. For two eventful centuries Ephraim main
tained a real or nominal independence. How it sub
ordinated Judah, contended with Aram, allied itself
with Phoenicia, was distracted by constant dynastic
changes and yet reached a high level of civilization
and produced a wonderful literature, is told elsewhere.
Shechem, indeed, centre of the land though it was,
was not able to maintain itself as the capital. It may
not have been quite suitable from a military point of
view. It had to yield to Tirzah (an important but
somewhat tantalising place-name, see TIRZAH) and then
to Samaria, which was well able to stand even a regular
siege. In historical times the great sanctuaries were
Bethel and Gilgal. See also GIBEON, SHILOH. That
any attempt was made to centralise religious festivals at
one sanctuary in Ephraim there is no evidence.
A. DufF, however, has propounded 2 the interesting theory
that such a project had been conceived, that indeed the kernel
of the book of Deuteronomy originated in Ephraim, and that the
(now) unnamed sanctuary meant in it was originally that of
Shechem (see now Theol. ofOT, 225 39 n., 50 n., sgf.).
* On the Egyptian incursion see SHISHAK.
2 In a paper read before the Society of Historical Theology,
Oxford ( 96).
1318
EPHRAIM
EPHRAIM
However that may be, there must have been other
great thinkers besides Hosea. Ephraim produced a
DECALOGUE and a longer code (see EXODUS ii.
3), and must have had otherwise a share in
the development of that mass of ritualistic prescrip
tion which was ultimately codified in Judah (see
LAW LITERATURE). If it had its Elis, 1 Samuels,
and Elishas, whom legend loved to glorify, we must
not forget the men of name unknown whose only
memorial is their work : the work of its story-tellers,
annalists, poets, and other representatives of social or
religious movements, whose achievements are dealt
with elsewhere. We probably under-estimate rather
than over-estimate the debt of Judah to Ephraim. 2
See HISTORICAL LITERATURE; POETICAL LITERATURE;
ELISHA ; ELIJAH ; PROPHET ; IDOLATRY.
The accessibility to the outer world, however, to
which Ephraim owed its rapid advance, occasioned also
its fall. In the struggle with Aram, it lost much ; and
when Aram was swamped in the advancing tide of
Assyrian conquest another great turning-point in
Ephraim s history was at hand. How, precisely, it was
affected by the Assyrian conquest, how it fared when the
Semitic Empire passed to Persia, what befel it during
the long struggles between Ptolemy and Seleucid,
Seleucid and Maccabee, Palestinian and Roman, will be
discussed elsewhere (see SAMARIA, and cp ISRAEL).
On the late notion of a Messiah called Ephraim, 3 or son of
Ephraim, * or son of Joseph, etc., alongside of the son of
David" (TH 73 n B D) see Hamburger, RE, artt. Messias-
leiden and Messias Sohn Joseph ; cp MESSIAH; JOSEPH
[husband of Mary].
Great difficulty in the way of a true knowledge of the
history of Ephraim is occasioned by its rivalry with
p, . , Judah. This has distorted the
. if 8 iun ary. p ers p ect ; vei broken the outlines, and
tinged the colour, of the picture that has reached us.
A. Bernstein tried to show how Ephraimite patriotism
might account for many points in the patriarch stories.
It is certain that Ephraim has suffered at the hands of
the writers of Judah. The account of the occupation
of the Ephraim highlands in Joshua is surprisingly
meagre. All that lies N. of Bethel is passed over in
silence (cp JOSHUA ii. 9). The indications of the
boundary of Ephraim as they appear in the post-exilic
book are very incomplete and only partly intelligible.
The critical analysis is still disputed. Great confusion
prevails, and the text is bad. Apparently the southern
border is represented as reaching from the Jordan
at Jericho up to Bethel (Be tin), to Ataroth Addar
( Afdrd?; see ARCHITES, ATAROTH, 2), down west
wards to the territory of the Japhletite ( PALTI ) and of
the BETH-H6RONS (Bef Or), and on to GEZER (Tell
(jezer) and the sea. The northern boundary is given
eastwards and westwards from [the plain of] MICH-
METHATH (el-Makhnal). Eastward it reaches to
TAANATH-SHILOH (Tana), on to JANOHAH (Kh.
Ydnun), Ataroth (unidentified), NAARATH ( Ain
Sdmieh ?), Jericho and the Jordan ; westwards it pro
ceeds from Asher of the Michmethath (see ASHER ii. )
east of Shechem southwards to EN-TAPPUAH, and the
course of the KANAH ( W. Kanah ?), and on to the
sea (ITy-g). One of the writers who have contributed
to the account just sketched, however, is aware that this
representation is somewhat arbitrary (cp above, 5, i. ),
and so he proposes (Josh. 16 9) to give a list of
Ephraimite cities beyond the Manassite border. Some
editor has unfortunately removed the list. The list of
Ephraimite cities, too, that E must have given has been
removed.
P s genealogy of Ephraim is not only very meagre
1 Are we to add Moses? Guthe says yes (Gl fzz).
2 A. Duff throws out the suggestion that Nahum may have
been of northern descent (op. cit. 2 36 46).
DIX rt 5 D DHSX- See the statements in Pesikta. Rabbathi
(ed. Friedmann, 161 6).
4 Targ. Jon. on Ex. 40 n.
1319
T T t
(cp above, ii) but also somewhat obscure. We have
12. Genealogies. k in two f orm . s I* in . Nu ^ 2635 ^ and>
as reproduced by the Chronicler, in
i Ch. 720-25.
A study of the variants in and Pesh. and of the re
petitions (noticed by A. C. Herveyp in MT, leads to
the following hypothetical results (reached independently
of Hervey ; see further JQK vol. 13, Oct. [1900]).
Bered (? . 20) should be deleted as a corruption of BKCHER
[//.?>. J, which has strayed hither from the genealogy of Benjamin.
Zabad is simply a duplicate of Bered, and Ezer of Elead. J he-
middle letter (s/i) of Resheph (zi. 25) belongs really to the next
name, Telah. What is left Reph is a duplicate of Rephah
(see below). Thus emended the list stands
i. (v. 20) Shuthelah, Tahath, Eleaclah.
2. 3 to, 21) Tahath, Shuthelah, Elead (or Ezer).
3. (z>. 25) Shuthelah, Tahan, Ladan.
We have thus simply a triplet written thrice. The third name
may be really Eleadah or (so Pesh. in v. 21) Eleazer : Azariah,
Klostermann has suggested, may have been the name of
Solomon s prefect over Ephraim, perhaps of Beth-horon (cp
BEN-HUR) ; see below, and above, 9 (end).
The middle name appears here and elsewhere (in the gene
alogy of Samuel ; and in that of Reuel the Midianite) in many
forms : Tahath, Tohu, Tahan, Nahath. The last may be what
the Chronicler wrote : note the story of the Ephraimites who
descended against Gath (nnj = < descend ).
The triplet is followed by an appendix the prince of
Ephraim and its great hero.
The Ephraimite clans mentioned in the historical books are
few : Nahath or Tahath, Zuph (in one genealogy of Samuel ;
the first also a son of Reuel, Gen. 3(5 13 17), Nebat (cp JERO
BOAM i.). On the story in w. at / -a-; see BF.RIAH, vf.
Between the recurring triplets and the genealogical appendix
there is a list of towns : the Beth-horons (see above, ii) and
. . . and Hepher (?), founded perhaps by Eleazar. 4 In the blank,
MT has Uzzen-sheerah. Perhaps we should read Ir-serah (cp
(B 1 -) or Ir-heres. The degree of probability of the suggestions in
12 varies. Several seem almost certain.
To the genealogical list are appended two geogra
phical lists : v. 28, a pentad of Ephraimite border towns
11 *^ in Joshua, with the addition
of Ai ; and v. 29, a pentad of towns
which Manasseh was unable to occupy (=Josh. 17 n =
Judg. l2 7 ).
Of other towns that must have been in Ephraim we
find mention of MICRON (Alakrun), GiBEAH of Phinehas
(Jfbid), GlBBEATH - HA - ARALOTH, BAAL - HAZOR.
Ramah (er-Ram) was fortified by Baasha against Judah.
It has been suggested that Jericho was fortified by Jehu
against the Aramaeans (JEHU, 3).
Many of the most famous Ephraimite sanctuaries
were in the part of Ephraim that was called BENJAMIN
(q.-v. , 6) ; but the holy mountains EBAL, GERIZIM,
and CARMEL must always have had a high place in
the regard of Israel. Ramah (Beit-Klmd), Shiloh,
Shechem, Ophrah, Timnath-heres, and Samaria must all
have had important sanctuaries. We perhaps learn
incidentally of the destruction of some unnamed
Ephraimite sanctuary in the story of the founding of
Dan. H. W. H.
EPHRAIM (Dn?N, 100, 107; edjp&iM [BA],
|~o4>p. [L])i a city near Baal-Hazor (see HAZOR, 2),
mentioned in the story of Absalom (2 S. 1823 ; see
Dr. TBS, ad loc.). Possibly the name should be
Ephraim, with ain for aleph (Q IEJ? ; 6 cp (S5 L ), and the
place identified with Ephron in 2 Ch. 13 19 (see EPHRON,
i. i). So, cautiously, Buhl (p. 177), who also thinks
the same city may be meant (i) in i Mace. 1134 (where
the governments of APHEREMA [q.v. ], Lydda, and
Ramathem are said to have been added to Judaea from
Samaria) ; (2) in Jn. 1154 (where Jesus is said to have
withdrawn to the country near the wilderness, to a
city called Ephraim [typaifi, all editors, but NL, Vet.
Lat. , Vg. , Memph. e<pe/t]) ; and (3) in Jos. BJ\v. 9g
1 The omission of it in Gen. 46 [MT] may be due to P s
mentioning only grandsons of Jacob (cp MANASSEH).
2 The Genealogies of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ,
361-364 [ 53].
3 L gives the names in line 2 in the same order as in i and 3.
4 For rr\WO 1ml : ID S read perhaps Kin itf N : W3 or rather
rn NI,I : irra-
8 On the proverb about bringing straw to Ephraim
), see JANNES.
1320
EPHRAIM, GATE OF
(Bethel and E<j>paifM, two small cities taken by
Vespasian).
A village called Kfrem is defined by Jerome (OS 94 7) as
being 5 R. m. K. of Bethel ; Eus. (222 40) writes the name
a</>pr)A.(?). We also hear (11830) of an Efrjea, 20 R. m. N. of
Olia. This position agrees well with that of the modern ef-
Taiyibeh, which occupies a splendid (and no doubt ancient)
site crowning a conical hill on a high ridge 4m. NE. of Bethel
(BR 2 121 427). See OI-HKAH.
These identifications, however, are by no means all
certain. The site of Baal-hazor, and therefore also of
Ephraim in 2 S. /. c. , cannot be said to be fixed.
Indeed, the reading may perhaps be questioned (for
analogies see MAHANAIM) ; Gratz would read in the
valley (pcya) of Rephaim. The city in Jn. 11 54 also
is very doubtful (for different views see Keim, Jesu
von Nazara, 3 7, n. 2). It is even possible that the
Greek text is corrupt, and that etppai/j. arose out of an
indistinctly written tepetx^- 1 By this hypothesis we
can reconnect Jn. with the Synoptic tradition. Keim s
remarks (Jesus von Nazara, 87) may be compared with
those of Ewald in Gesch. Christus, 416. The round
about journey of which Ewald speaks may be
avoided by the view here proposed. There is nothing
in the context of Jn. 11 54 to favour the view that the
evangelist is at all influenced by Lk. s statement
(952/. ) that Jesus took the route by Samaria to Jeru
salem. Cp JERICHO. T. K. c.
EPHRAIM, GATE OF (Dn?N 11?^), 2 K. 14i 3
Neh. 8 16. See JERUSALEM.
EPHRAIM, WOOD OF; or (RV) FOREST OF
(DHDX TIT). The scene of the battle between the
people of Israel and the servants of David (28.
186f). For Ephraim (typai/j. [BA]) <S L has paaivav
Mahanaim, which Klostermann adopts. Certainly it
is not very probable that Ephraim should have given its
name to a wood or jungle on the eastern side (GASm.
HG 335) ; the reference to Judg. 124 implies a doubtful
view of that passage (see Moore, ad loc. ). Maha
naim, however, has the appearance of an attempt at
correction. More probably the original reading was
D NBi, Rephaim. Where should we more naturally
expect to find this name ? The converse error has been
pointed out in Is. 17s (SBOT, Isaiah, Heb. 195).
Jungle (so H. P. Smith) seems hardly the best word
(cp Tristram s and Oliphant s descriptions of the forest of
"Ajlun). The site cannot be determined without a study
of the whole narrative. See MAHANAIM. T. K. c.
EPHRAIN (p_?y). 2 Ch.l3i9 AV RV"*, RV
EPHRON i. i.
EPHRATH
Gen. 48 ?t) or Ephrathah
rnQK, AV Ephratah; e(J>p<\e<\ [ BNAL ]).
1. The place near which Rachel died and was buried
is called in MT Ephrath (Gen. 35 16 19 48 7) ; but we
should probably read Beeroth (nixn). See RACHEL,
2 ; JOSEPH i. 3.
2. Another name of BETHLEHEM [g.v. , 3], or per
haps rather a name of the district of Bethlehem, Ps. 1326
(ev<ppaOa [A] -TO. [R vid -]), Mic. 5i Ru. 4n Josh. 1659
(only <. etypaQa. [BAL]) ; ethnic Ephrathite ( rnsN,
efipaOaios [BAL]), Ru. 12 i S. 17 12 (e<j>pa.0a.i- ov [A]).
In Ps. I.e. and Mic. I.e. the reading is uncertain. On
i S. li i K. 11 2 6 Judg. 12s, see EPHRAIM i. 5, i.
3. Wife of Caleb, i Ch. 2 19 (e<ppa0 [BL], <ppa0
[A]) 24 (see CALEB-EPHRATHAH) 50 44. The passages
reflect the post -exilic age, when the Calebites had
migrated from the Negeb of Judah to the districts sur
rounding Jerusalem. Was Ephrath a clan-name ? See
CALEB, 3.
1 The phrase the Jews in Jn. 11 54, as usually in the Fourth
Gospel (so Plummer, St. John, 72), means the opponents of
Jesus among the Jews (cp JEW). The people of Jericho seem
to have been to a large extent friendly to Jesus, and were there
fore in so far Israelites indeed, rather than Jews. Strabo,
too (162), speaks of the mixed population of Jericho, like that of
Galilee and Samaria.
1321
EPICUREANS
EPHRON (fn?i;, Kt.; pSy, Kr.; e<J>P60N [BAL]).
1. One of the places won by Abijah, king of Judah,
from Jeroboam, king of Israel (2 Ch. 13 19 RV, AV
EPHRAIN). Since the ending -aim or -ain sometimes
interchanges with -on, and since Ephron or Ephrain
(RV m s-) was near Bethel, some critics identify it with
the city of Ephraim (although Ephraim in MT begins
with not y ; see EPHRAIM ii. ).
2. Ephron (e<ppuv [ANV] ; cp the Manassite EPHER,
3), a city on the E. of Jordan, between Carnaim and
Scythopolis, attacked and destroyed by Judas the Mac-
cabee in his expedition to Gilead (i Mace. 646-53 2 Mace.
122T f. ; cp Jos. Ant. xii. 85) is probably the -yt<ppovs
or ye<ppo^ii (cp ye<pvpovv, 2 Mace. 12 13) of Polybius
(v. 70 12). We are told that it lay in a narrow pass
which it dominated in such a manner that the Jews
must needs pass through the midst of it. This
description will not suit Kal at er-Rabad with which
Seetzen identified it, but agrees perfectly with the watch-
tower called Kasr Wady el-Ghafr, which completely
commands the road at a certain point of the deep
Wady el-Ghafr (W. of Irbid, towards the Wady el-
Arab), on which see Schumacher, Northern Ajlfin,
pp. 179, 181. So first Buhl, Geog. p. 256 ; Topogr.
d. NO Jordan landes, 17 /. See CAMON, GEPHYRON.
3. MOUNT EPHRON (jViEj; in ; eippuv [BAL]), a dis
trict on the northern frontier of Judah (Josh. 15g)
between Nephtoah and Kirjath-jearim (cp the Judahite
name EPHER, 2). If the latter places are Lifta and
Karyat el- Enab respectively, Mt. Ephron should be
the range of hills on the W. side of the Wady Bet-
Hanlna, opposite Lifta, which is on the E. side (see,
however, NEPHTOAH). Conder, however, thinks (in
accordance with his identifications of Nephtoah and
Kirjath-jearim) of the ridge W. of Bethlehem, and (in
Hastings DB) does not even mention any rival view.
According to MT the district in question had cities. HJJ is
supported by (5 L [em. /coi/ias opovs e<j>p.] and apparently by <S A
[opovs e<p-]) ! but ny may be a dittogram of T,T (Che.) ; <5 B
does not express cities. Two other (probable) mentions of
mount Ephron should be noticed. One is in Josh. 15 10 (see
JEARIM, MOUNT); the other is Judg. 1 2 15 (see PIRATHON).
EPHRON (fn?y, young gazelle ? see EPHER ;
68, 77 ; ecbpOON [BADEFL]), b. Zohar, a Hittite, the
seller of the cave of Machpelah, Gen. 238^ 2694929 f.
[P]. As to the question in what sense, or with how
much justice, he is called a Hittite, see HITTITES, if.
EPICUREANS (01 eTTiKoypioi [Ti. WH]), Acts
17i8. What opinions the Epicureans really held do
not now concern us, but only what faithful Jews or
Jewish Christians believed them to hold. This is how
Josephus describes the Epicureans, who cast provid
ence out of life, and deny that God takes care of human
affairs, and hold that the universe is not directed with a
view to the continuance of the whole by the blessed and
incorruptible Being, but that it is carried along auto
matically and heedlessly (Ant. x.lly). Some, both in
ancient and in modern times, have thought that the
system, thus ungently characterized, is referred to in
ECCLESIASTES \_q. v. , 13]. Jerome remarks (on Eccles.
97-9), Et hasc, inquit aliquis, loquatur Epicurus, et
Aristippus et Cyrenaici et casteras pecudes Philoso-
phorum. Ego autem, mecum diligenter retractans,
invenio, J etc. According to Jerome, then, the author
of Ecclesiastes only mentions the ideas of these
brutish philosophers in order to refute them. In
later times certainly the leaders of Judaism could find
no more reproachful designation for an apostate than
DiTip SK Epikuros. The author of Ecclesiastes, how
ever, is not a sufficiently fervent Jew to justify us in
assuming that he would altogether reject Epicurean
ideas, if they came before him. A fervent Christian,
like Paul, doubtless did reject them, if he ever came into
contact with them. Did he, then, encounter these ideas ?
1 Opera, ii. (1699), Contm. in Eccles.
1322
EPILEPTIC
From Acts 17 18 (if the narrative is historical) we only
learn that certain Epicurean and Stoic philosophers met
with him (avv^a\\oi> avrip) 1 observe in passing the
precedence given to the Epicureans. There is nothing
in the sequel to suggest that he held any conferences
with them ; the speech beginning Men of Athens
("Avdpes AO-rjifaioi) is plainly not intended for them.
It looks as if the reference to the philosophers were
merely a touch suggested by the writer s imagination,
which he did not permit to exercise any influence on
the following narrative. That Paul had examined and
rejected Epicureanism elsewhere, is probable enough.
See ATHENS, 2, HELLENISM, 9. T. K. c.
EPILEPTIC (ceAHNiAzo/v\eNOc), Mt. 4 24 I7is
RV. See MEDICINE.
EPIPHANES (enicJxMMHc).
ANTIOCHUS, 2.
Mace. lio. See
EPISTOLARY LITERATURE
Letters and Epistles ( 1-3). Letters ( 6/.).
Extra-biblical ( 4). Epistles ( 8/)/
OT terms ( 5). Literature ( 10).
For the understanding of any document a knowledge
of its true character and object is essential. Thus,
1 Thenroblem for exam P le if Egyptian exploration
brings to light a papyrus fragment
containing a negotiation between a Roman emperor
and an Alexandrian gymnasiarch, 2 we cannot under
stand or appreciate it accurately until we know the
general character of the writing to which it presumably
belonged. If it is a fragment from the record of an
actual negotiation in which a Roman emperor took
part, it becomes a historical document of first import
ance ; if it is merely a scrap from a work by a writer of
fiction, it falls into a wholly different category.
The NT contains a large number of writings which
are usually referred to as Epistles. The designation
seems so plain and self-evident that to many scholars
it has suggested no problem at all. A problem,
nevertheless, there is, of great literary and historical
interest, underlying this seemingly simple word. We
cannot go far in the study of the history of literature
before we become aware that alongside of the real
letter, which in its essential nature is non-literary,
there is a product of art, the literary letter, which may
for convenience be called the epistle. The problem is
in each case to determine the category to which such
writings belong : are they all letters ? or are they all
epistles ? or are both classes represented? First, let
us realise the distinction more clearly.
The function of the letter is to maintain intercourse, in
writing, between persons who are separated by distance.
lvr . Essentially intimate, individual, and per-
. , sonal, the letter is intended exclusively
,. ,, , for the eyes of the person (or persons)
to whom it is addressed, not for publica
tion. It is non-literary, as a lease, a will, a day-book
are non-literary. It differs in no essential particular from
a spoken conversation : it might be called an anticipation
of telephonic communication. It concerns no one but
the writer and the correspondent to whom it is addressed.
So far as others are concerned, it is supposed to be
secret and sacred. As with life itself, its contents
are infinitely varied. The form also exhibits endless
variety, although many forms have specialised them
selves in the course of the ages and are not unfrequently
met with in civilisations widely separated and seemingly
quite independent of each other. Neither contents nor
form, however, are the determining factors in deciding
1 EV s rendering encountered him is to be preferred to
Ramsay s engaged in discussions with him. Cp Acts 20 14;
Jos. Ant. i. 123. Would not discussed with htm be trvvi-
/SaAAoc Trpb? UVTOV (see Acts 4 15)?
2 Cp Grenfell and Hunt, Tlie Oxyrhynchus Papyri, pt. i.,
p. 62 ff., no. xxxiii. verso [ 98], with Deissmann s observations
in TLZ 23 602^ ( 98).
1323
EPISTOLARY LITERATURE
whether a given writing is to be considered a letter or
not. Equally immaterial is it whether the document
be written on clay or on stone, on papyrus or on parch
ment, on wax or on palm-leaves, on scented note-paper
or on an international post-card ; whether it be couched
in the conventional forms of the period ; whether it be
written by a prophet or by a beggar ; all such con
siderations leave its special character unaffected. 1 The
one essential matter is the purpose it is intended to
serve frank intercourse between distant persons.
Every letter, however short and poor, will from its
very nature be a fragment of the vie intime of mankind.
The non-literary, personal, intimate character of the
letter must constantly be borne in mind.
There is a sharp distinction between the letter as thus
understood and the literary letter which we find it
3. Meaning ^nient to designate by the more
f , 6 technical word epistle. The epistle ;s
, . ,. , a literary form, an expression of the
P artistic faculty, just as are the drama,
the dialogue, the oration. All that it has in common
with the letter is its form ; in other respects they differ
so widely that we might almost resort to paradox and
say that the epistle is the exact opposite of the letter.
The matter of the epistle is destined for publicity. If
the letter is always more or less private and confidential
the epistle is meant for the market-place : every one
may and ought to read it ; the larger the number
of the readers, the more completely has it fulfilled its
purpose. All that in the letter address and so forth
is of primary importance, becomes in the epistle
ornamental detail, merely added to maintain the illusion
of this particular literary form. A real letter is seldom
wholly intelligible to us until we know to whom it is
addressed and the special circumstances for which it
was written. To the understanding of most epistles
this is by no means essential. The epistle differs from
the letter as the historical play differs from a chapter
of actual history, as the carefully composed funeral
oration in honour of a king differs from the stammering
words of comfort a father speaks to his motherless child,
as the Platonic dialogue differs from the unrestrained
confidential talk of friend with friend in a word, as
art differs from nature. The one is a product of
literary art, the other is a bit of life.
Of course intermediate forms will occur ; such as the professed
letter, in which the writer is no longer unrestrained, free from
self-consciousness in which with some latent feeling that he is
a great man, he has the public eye in view and coquettes with
the publicity which his words may perhaps attain. Such
letters are no letters, and with their artificiality and insin
cerity exemplify exactly what real letters should never be.
A great variety alike of letters and of epistles has
come down to us from antiquity. The survival of a
... letter is, strictly speaking, non-normal
. C. en anc i exce ptional. The true letter is from
letters and
. ,, its very nature ephemeral ephemeral
epis es. as t j je nanc j w hi c h wrote it or the eye
for which it was meant. It is to piety or to chance
that we owe the preservation of such letters. The
practice of collecting the written remains of great men
after their death is indeed an old one.
In Greek literature, the earliest instance of publication of
such a collection is held to be that of the letters of Aristotle
(ob. 322 B.C.), which was made soon after his death. Whether
the still extant Letters of A rist otle 2 contain any fragments of
the genuine collection is indeed a question. On the other hand
the letters of Isocrates (ph. 338 B.C.) which have come down 3 to
us are probably genuine in part ; and we have also genuine
letters of Epicurus (pt>. 270 B.C.), among them the fragment of a
perfectly charming little note to his child, 4 worthy to be compared
with Luther s letter to his little boy Hanschen. 8 Among
the Romans it will be enough to refer to the multitude of letters
1 See Deissmann, Bibelstudien, 190.
2 Published by Hercher (Epistohgraphi Gra-ci, 172-174 [ 73]).
3 See Hercher, o/>. cit. 319-336.
4 See Usener, Epicurea, 154 ( 87); also Deissmann, Bibel-
stui/ten, 219 f.
6 See Luther- Brief e in A usivahl und Vebcrsetzting, herausg.
von C. A. Hase, 224/1 ( 67).
1324
EPISTOLARY LITERATURE
of Cicero (ob. 43 B.C.) of which four collections, brought together
and published after his death, have come down to us.
As compared with such letters of famous men a value
in some respects still greater attaches to the numerous
letters of obscure men and women, dating from the
third century B.C. to the eighth A.D. , which have
become known to us through recent papyrus finds in
Egypt. 1 They have, to begin with, the inestimable
advantage that the originals themselves have reached
us. Nor is this all. The writers had absolutely no
thought of publication, so we may take it that their
self-portraiture is wholly unconscious and sincere. The
light they throw upon the essence and the form of the
letter in ancient times 2 is important, and is of value in
the investigation of the letters found in the OT or the
NT.
That ancient epistles have survived in large numbers
is not surprising. The literary epistle is not intended
to be ephemeral. From the outset it is published in
several copies and so has less chance of disappearing
than the private letter. The epistle, moreover, is a
comparatively easy form of literary effort. It is subject
to no severe laws of style or strict rules of prosody ; all
that the essay needs is to be fitted with the requisite
formulae of the letter and to be provided with an
address. Any dabbler could write an epistle, and
thus the epistle became one of the favourite forms of
literature, and remains so even at the present day.
Among ancient Epistolographers we have, for example,
Dionysius of Halicarnassus and Plutarch in Greek, and L.
Annaeus Seneca and the younger Pliny in Roman, literature,
not to speak of the poetical epistles of a Lucilius, a Horace, or
an Ovid.
Specially common was the epistle in the literature of
magic and religion.
Another fact of literary history requires notice here :
the rise of pseudonymous epistolography. In the early
period of the empire, especially, epistles under names
other than those of the real authors were written in
great numbers, not by impostors, but by unknown
literati who for various honest reasons did not care to
give their own names. 3 They wrote Epistles of Plato
and Demosthenes, Aristotle and Alexander, Cicero and
Brutus ; it would be perverse to brand ofthand as frauds
such products of a certainly not very original literary
activity. Absolute forgeries undoubtedly there were ;
but it is equally certain that the majority of the pseud
onymous epistles of antiquity are products of a. widely
spread, and in itself inoffensive, literary custom. 4
We now come to the question whether the biblical
epistles admit of being separated into the two distinct
classes just mentioned.
The immense masses of cuneiform writing which have
recently been brought to light abundantly show that
/IT t epistolary correspondence was exten
sively practised by the people using
that script from very early times. It is not surprising,
therefore, to find frequent mention of letters in the OT.
The Hebrew terms so rendered are (i) : "ISP, sepher, 2 S. 11 14
2K. 65 Jer. 29 1 ; in Is. 37 14 39 1, where MT gives D ISD, the
text is corrupt (see SBOT, Isaiah, Heb.); letters = D"1SD>
s phdrim, i K. 21 8 Esth. 1 22, etc.
(2) Djns, pithgam, Esth. 1 2 o(see Meyer, Entst. 23); in Bibl.
Aram. Ezra 4 17 5 7 Dan. 4 14 [17], etc.
(3) P^y ^ nisii ivan, Ezra 47 7 n (see Meyer, op. cit. 22);
in Bibl. Aram. Ezra4i8, etc.
(4) n !5^> igSfreth, Neh. 2 7 Esth. 9 26, etc. (see Meyer, op. cit.
22); in Bibl. Aram. N1JX, Ezra 4 8 n 56.
1 A selection of such papyrus-letters will be found in Deiss-
mann, Bib.-stuii., 209-216.
2 There is thus a promise of good results in the theme pro
posed for its prize essay by the Heidelberg Faculty of Philosophy
in 1898-99 : On the basis of a chronological survey of the Greek
private letters which have been brought to light in recent
panyrus finds, to characterise and set forth historically the forms
of the Greek epistolary style.
3 Cp Deissmann, Bid. -stud. i<y)jff.
* A well-known modern instance is that of the famous
Letters of Junius.
1325
7. NT letters.
The Ass. terms for letter are duppu (tablet ; cp Syr. dappa),
whence dupsarru (Heb. IDSD), scribe, and egirtu (cp no. 4
above). In Ant. Tab. 50 rev. 30 supa.ru message or missive
is virtually duppu letter (rev. 17). This suggests that sepher
(see i) may be a loan-word; cp SCRIBE. In , besides eirt-
a-ToAr;, we find /3i/3Ai oK (28.1114), /3i /3Ao? (Jer. 2< i), pijtrij
(Ezra!>7), 6iaTayfia(Ezra7 n), <^opoAoyos(Ezra4 18), and ypajjijia;
cp Acts 28 2 1 (pi.).
Special interest attaches to the cases in which the
actual text of the letters is professedly given, as in
nT , ., 28. 11 15 (David s letter to Joab about
* Uriah), iK.2l9/. (Jezebel to the
elders about Naboth), 2 K. 5s/. (king of Aram to king
of Israel), 2 K. K>2/. 6 (Jehu to the authorities of
Samaria).
On the letter of Jeremiah in Jer. 29, see JEREMIAH ii.; on
that of Elijah in 2 Chr. 21 12-15, see JEHORAM, 2; on the
official letters in Ezra49^f". 17 ff. 67 ff., see EZRA, ii., 6; and
on the letter of Nebuchadrezzar in Dan. 4, see DANIEL ii.
Many instances occur also in the apocryphal and
pseudepigraphic books of the OT, especially in Macca
bees. In the last-named books in particular, we find,
exactly as in Greek and Roman literature, 1 letters,
mostly official, embodied word for word in the historical
narrative. It would be wrong to cast doubt on the
genuineness of such insertions on this ground alone.
In many cases, it is true, they are in all likelihood
spurious (cp MACCABEES, FIRST, 10) ; but in some
instances we are constrained to accept them. The de
cision must rest in each case on internal evidence alone.
Turning now to the NT, we find in Acts two
letters which, like those in Maccabees, are introduced
into a professedly historical narrative :
the letter of the apostles and elders to
the Gentile Christian brethren in Antioch, Syria, and
Cilicia (1523-29), and that of Claudius Lysias to Felix
(2826-30). The question of their genuineness must be
decided by the same rules of criticism as apply to the
cases mentioned in the preceding section (see, for
example, COMMUNITY OF GOODS, i6/). In both
cases the documents, at any rate, claim to be true letters.
Turning next to the other writings which frankly bear
the designation epistolce in the N.T, we must again
bear in mind the distinction already established between
letters and epistles. It is accordingly not enough
if we are able merely to establish the existence of a
group of episiolce ; the question as to their definite
character remains. The answer must be supplied in
each case by the writing itself. In some cases not
much reading between the lines is necessary for this ;
and even in those cases where the answer is not quite
obvious, it is, for the most part, possible to arrive at
something more than a mere non liquet.
(a) To begin with, the Epistle to PHILEMON stands
out unmistakably as a letter, and it is as a self-revelation
of the great apostle that it possesses a unique value for
all time. If (as seems very probable) Rom. 16 is to be
taken as being in reality a separate letter, addressed by
Paul to Ephesus, it also is an unmistakable example of
that class of writing. (V) PHILIPPIANS also is a true
letter ; it becomes intelligible only when referred to a
perfectly definite and unique epistolary situation. The
same remark applies to THESSALONIANS, GALATIANS,
COLOSSI ANS (and EPHESIANS). They are indeed more
didactic and general than those previously mentioned ;
but they too are missives occasioned by perfectly definite
needs of the Pauline churches, not fugitive pieces com
posed for Christendom at large, or even for publicity in
a still larger sense of the word. To the same class in
like manner belong the first and the second extant epistles
to the CORINTHIANS. What is it in fact that makes
2 Corinthians everywhere so difficult? It is that it is
throughout a true letter, full of allusions to which we,
for the most part, have not the key. Paul wrote it
with all his personality ; in deep emotion and thankful
ness, and yet full of reforming passion, of irony, and of
1 Cp Deissmann, op. cit. 220.
1326
EPISTOLARY LITERATURE
stinging frankness, i Corinthians is quieter in tone ;
but it too is a real letter, being in part, at least, an
answer to one from the Church of Corinth. 1
(c ) In the case of ROMANS, one might perhaps at first
hesitate to pronounce. Its character as a letter is un
deniably much less conspicuously marked, much less
palpable, than in the case of 2 Corinthians. Still,
neither is it an epistle written for the public, nor for
Christendom at large, designed to set forth in com
pendious form the apostle s dogmatic and ethical system.
In it Paul has a definite object to prepare the way for
his visit to the church in Rome ; such is his aim in
writing, and it is that of an individual letter-writer.
He does not yet know the church to which he writes,
and he himself is known to it only by hearsay. The
letter, therefore, from the nature of the case, cannot be
so full of personal detail as those he wrote to com
munities with which he had long been familiar, such
as Corinth and Philippi. Our first impression of
Romans, perhaps, may be that it is an epistle ; but this
judgment will not stand scrutiny.
We need not hesitate longer then, to lay down the
broad thesis that all the Pauline epistles hitherto
enumerated (the genuineness of none of them is doubted
by the present writer) are real letters. 2 Paul is a true
letter-writer, not an epistolographer. Nor yet is he a
rn an of letters. His letters became literary products
only after the piety of the churches had made a collection
of them and had multiplied copies indefinitely till they
had become accessible to all Christendom. At a later
date still they became Holy Scripture when they were
received into the New Testament, then in process of
formation. As an integral part of the New Testa
ment they have exercised a literary influence that
is incalculable. All these later vicissitudes, however,
cannot alter their original and essential character.
Paul, who with ardent longings expected the coming
of the Lord, and with it the final judgment and the life
of the coming age Paul, who reckoned the future of
this present world, not by millennia or centuries, but
by a few short years, had not the faintest surmise of the
part his letters were destined to play in the providential
ordering of the world. It is precisely in this untram
melled freedom that the chief value of his letters consists ;
their absolute trustworthiness and supremely authorita
tive character as historical records, are guaranteed there
by. The letters of Paul are the (alas, only too frag
mentary) remains of what would have been the immediate
records of his mission. Each one of them is a piece of
his biography ; in many passages we feel that the writer
has dipped his pen in his own heart s blood.
(d] Two other real letters in the NT remain to be
mentioned the SECOND and the THIRD EPISTLE OF
JOHN. 3 Of 3 John we may say with Wilamowitz-
Moellendorff, It was a quite private note, and
must have been preserved from the papers of Gains
as a relic of the great presbyter. 2 John does not
present so many of the features of a letter in detail ;
but it also has a particular object in view just as a
letter has, even if we do not find ourselves able to say
with complete confidence who the lady addressed
may have been whether a church or some distinguished
individual Christian. That the letter was addressed to
the Church at large seems hardly admissible. Both
writings are in point of form interesting, as in many
respects clearly exhibiting the ancient epistolary style of
their period.
No instance of an epistle is met with in the canonical
books of the OT ; but we have several in the Apocrypha
and the Pseudepigrapha. i. The most instructive ex-
1 Cp. Job. Weiss, Der Eingang des ersten Korintherbriefs,
St. Kr. 1900, pp. 125-130.
2 The Pastoral Epistles, also, may perhaps contain fragments
from genuine letters of Paul.
3 Cp U. von Wilamowitz-Moellendorff, Lesefriichte in
Hermes, 33 529 ff. ( 98), (specially instructive on the question
of form).
1327
ample is undoubtedly the (Greek) Epistle of Jeremiah,
8 ADOcrvnhal a PP ended to Lamentations (so in ),
EpistS r . l Baruch (in Vg> as Baruch 6 >
This short composition, which certainly
was originally written in Greek, contains a warning
against idolatry, which is held up to scorn and refuted
by every kind of argument. A comparison of this
epistle with the genuine letter of Jeremiah (Jer. 29) to
the Jews in Babylon furnishes an excellent illustration
of the difference between a letter and an epistle.
In the Greek epistle we observe that the address is adven
titious, and that Jeremiah has been chosen as a covering
name merely at the pleasure of the undoubtedly Alexandrian
author. This by no means constitutes a forgery ; the author
is simply availing himself of a generally current literary artifice.
His intention is to put his co-religionists on their gunrd against
idolatry and he therefore makes Jeremiah the speaker. Five
hundred years after the lifetime of Jeremiah 3 it could not occur
to any one to suppose that the writer was seeking to represent
himself as editor of a newly discovered writing of the ancient
prophet.
ii. Another epistle in the category now under con
sideration is the (Greek) Epistle of Aristeas, which
contains the well-known legend as to the origin of the
LXX version ; it also was the work of an Alexandrian of
the time of the Ptolemies. 4 iii. The Epistle of Baruch
to the nine and a half tribes in exile (appended to the
Apocalypse of Baruch) also ought to be mentioned here
unless indeed we are to regard it (which is quite
possible) as a Christian writing. 6 iv. Finally, that epis-
tolography was a favourite form of literary activity with
Grecian Jews is shown perhaps by the 28th Epistle of
Diogenes, 6 and by some of the epistles that pass current
under the name of Heraclitus. 7
We can define certain writings in the NT as epistles
with just as great security as we have been able to call
9 NT Epistles the writin S s of Paul real letters. Most
clearly of all do the so-called catholic
epistles of JAMES, PETER, and JUDE belong to this
category.
That they cannot be real letters is evident from the outset
by their addresses ; a letter to the twelve tribes scattered
abroad could not be forwarded as a letter. The author of the
epistle of James writes after the manner of the Epistle of Baruch
(see above, 8, iii.) addressed to the nine and a half tribes,
which were across the Euphrates. In both cases it is an
ideal catholic circle of readers that the authors have in view ;
each dispatched his en-icrToAij not, as we may presume Paul to
have dispatched the letter to the Philippians, in a single copy,
but in many.
The Epistle of James is essentially a piece of literature,
an occasional writing intended for all Christendom an
epistle. In accord with this are its entire contents :
nothing of that detail of unique situations which meets
us in the letters of Paul ; nothing but purely general
questions such as, for the most part, might be still con
ceivable in the ecclesiastical problems of the present
day. So with the Epistles of Peter and Jude. They
too bear purely ideal addresses ; all that they have of
the nature of a letter is the form.
At this point we find ourselves standing at the very
beginning of Christian literature in the strict sense of
that word. The problem of the genuineness of these
epistles becomes from this point of view much less
important than it would undoubtedly be on the assump
tion of their being letters. In them the personality of
the writer falls entirely into the background. It is a
great cause that addresses itself to us, not a clearly
distinguishable personality as in the letters of Paul.
1 Swete, 3379-384.
2 Schiirer, GV1V) 3 344 (98).
3 The epistle most probably belongs to the second or to the
last century B.C.
4 Latest edition by M. Schmidt in Merx s Archiv, 1 ( 69). A
new edition, founded on material collected by L. Mendelssohn,
is in prepaiation by P. Wendland, for the Bibliotheca Teubneri-
ana. A German translation of this has already appeared in
Kau. Apokr. u. Pseudcpigr. 2 1-31.
6 Greek text in Fritzsche, Libri VT pseudepigraphi selecti
( 71), i22_/f! ; for Syriac text, with ET, see Charles, Apocalypse
of Baruch, i-^ff. ( 96).
6 Cp J. Bernays, Lucian u. die Kyuiker, <)(>ff. ( 79).
7 J. Bernays, Die heraklitischen Briefe, diff. ( 69).
1328
ER
ESAIAS
Whether we know with certainty the name of the author
of each of these epistles is of no decisive importance for
our understanding of them. In this connection it
deserves to be noticed that the longest of all the NT
epistles, that to the Hebrews, has come down to us
without any name at all, and even its address has dis
appeared. Indeed, were it not for the word tirtffTfi\a
( I have written a letter ) in 13 22 and a few slight
touches of epistolary detail in 13 23^, it would never
occur to us to call the writing an epistle at all. It
might equally well be a discourse or an essay ; its own
designation of itself is \6yos rrjs Tra/xx/cXTjcrews ( a. word
of exhortation, 1822) ; all that seems epistolary in its
character is manifestly only ornament, and the essential
nature of the whole is not changed though part of the
ornament may have fallen away.
The so-called First Epistle of JOHN has none of the
specific character of an epistle, and still less is it a letter.
Though classified among the epistles it would be more
appropriately described as a religious tract in which a
series of religious meditations designed for publicity are
somewhat loosely strung together.
The so-called pastoral epistles to TIMOTHY and TITUS
are in their present form certainly epistles. It is probable,
however, as already indicated (above, col. 1327, n. 2),
that some portions of them are derived from genuine
letters of Paul. As we now have them they are mani
festly designed to lay down principles of law for the
Church in process of consolidation, and thus they mark
the beginnings of a literature of ecclesiastical law.
To speak strictly, the APOCALYPSE of John also is an
epistle ; the address and salutation are obvious in 1 4,
and 222i constitutes a fitting close for an epistle. This
epistle in turn contains at the beginning seven smaller
missives addressed to seven churches of Asia -Ephesus,
Smyrna, Pergamum, Thyatira, Sardis, Philadelphia,
Laodicea. These also are no real letters such as we
might suppose to have been actually sent to each of
the churches named and to have been afterwards brought
together into a single collection. On the contrary,
they are all of them constructed with great art on a
uniform plan, and are intended to be read and laid to
heart by all the churches, not only by that named in
the address of each. They seem to the present writer
to represent a somewhat different kind of epistle from
any we have been considering. Their writer has
definite ends in view as regards each of the individual
churches ; but he wishes at the same time to produce an
effect in the Christian world as a whole, or at any rate
on that of Asia, In spite of the intimate character they
formally possess, they serve a public literary purpose,
and therefore ought to be classed among the epistles,
rather than among the letters, of ancient Christianity.
In judging the numerous epistolo: which have been handed down
in the Christian church outside of, or later in date than, the NT
canon, it is equally necessary to settle in each case the question
whether the writing ought to be classed as an epistle or a letter ;
but this investigation lies beyond the limits of the present work.
G. A. Deissmann, Bibelstudien : Beitrage, zumeist aus den
Papyri u. Inschriften, zur Geschichte tier Spracke, des Schrift-
tums u. der Religion des hellenistischen
10. Literature. Judentums . des Urchristenttims ( 95);
Abh. 5 : Prolegomena zu den biblischen
Brie/en, u. Episteln ; K. Dziatzko, art. Brief in Pauly s Rcal-
encyklopdfiie der classischen Altertumswissenschaft, ed. Wis-
sowa ; F. Zimmer in ZKIVL, 7 ( 86), 443^!; J. Rendel Harris,
A Study in Letter- Writing, Ex/>. 98^, i6i_^?l ; see also Christ.
Johnston, The Epistolary Lit. oftkcAss. and Bab. ( 98).
G. A. D.
ER C\l}. H p[BADEFL]). i. A Judahite subdivision
of Canaanite (i.e. , non-Tsraelite) origin, which at a
later time became merged in the more important
brother-clan SHELAH [i] (the genealogical details in
Gen. 883-7 [J]. Gen. 46 12 Nu. 26 19 [P], i Ch. 2 3 [in the
second occurrence ai>rjp (A)] 42i) ; see JUDAH.
2. Anamein the genealogy of Joseph (Lk. 828; rjp [Ti. \VH]);
see GENEALOGIES ii. 3.
ERAN (|Ty, 77), the Eranites (7T1?PI). an Eph-
raimite clan, in the one case individualised, in the other
1329
regarded as a tribal group, Nu. 2636. The name re
minds us of the Judahite ER (see above) ; but in the
parallel Ephraimite list, iCh. 720-27, it is ELADAH(mj;Si,
v. 20), of which another form is LADAN (pj^>, v. 26).
Probably the list in Nu. 26 originally had neither Eran
nor El adah, but La dan, and we should read ny 1 ? and
iil^n- See further, EPHRAIM, 12.
The initial V in pj, ^> may have been mistaken for a preposition,
just as in i Ch. 23 7-9, B has tSav for py 1 ? throughout. The i
is vouched for by Sam. Pesh. py, and also by (0 (eSey, 6 Se>/[e]c
[BAFL]), cp Gen. 46 20 (eSe/ut [AD], -a./* [L] ; om. MT).
Ladan is doubtless shortened from Elad(d)an (p^N ;
Cp pJjri.T). S. A. C.
ERASTUS (ep&CTOC [Ti. WH]), the treasurer
(oiKONOMOc) of the city [of Corinth] 1 (Rom. 1623;
cp 2 Tim. 4 20), is probably mentioned as one of those
that ministered to Paul (Acts 1922) and as having
been sent by him with Timothy from Ephesus on some
errand into Macedonia. This combination of passages,
however, is plausible only if Rom. 16 was originally a
letter to the church of Ephesus.
ERECH C^IN, opex [ADEL], ARACH, classical
Opxori, Ass. Arku, Uruk) is named in Gen. 10 10 as
one of the four cities originally founded by Nimrod in
Babylonia. The explorations of Loftus (Travels in
Chaldea and Susiana, 162 ft) established its site at the
mod. Warka, halfway between Hilla and Korna. The
enormous mounds and ruins scattered over an area six
miles in circuit testified to a large population in ancient
times ; but the discoveries did little to restore the history
of the city. The earliest inscriptions recovered were
those of Dungi, Ur-Bau, and Gudea, kings of Ur (which
lay 30 m. SW. ). The next in date were those of Sin-
gasid and another, kings of Erech as an independent
state. Erech was then capital of the kingdom of
Amnanu. The later kings of Babylon (Merodach-
baladan) also left traces of their buildings and restora
tions. Many commercial documents of all periods
down to 200 B.C. attest the continuous prosperity of the
city. As if to make up for the lack of historical docu
ments furnished by the site itself, we have perpetual
reference to the place in the Assyrian and Babylonian
literature. No place had a greater hold on the affection
and imagination of the literati. The author of the
Creation Tablets (non- Semitic version) ascribes its
foundation to the god Marduk. It is the theatre of the
Gilgames or Nimrod epic (see DELUGE, 2). Its poetical
names (3 R. 41 15 ff.} show how often it was the theme
of story and legend. Some of them e.g. , the en
closure (suburu], the seven districts seem justified
by its ruins. Surrounded completely by a wall, inter
sected by many canals, flanked by two large streams, and
probably then, as now, almost inaccessible for most of
the year, it was a secure refuge. Later in its history
perhaps in Assyrian times, certainly in the Parthian
period it became a sort of national necropolis.
The city deity was the goddess Nana, whose statue
had such strange vicissitudes (see NANEA). _ During
her absence a goddess, Istar, whose temple was E-ulmas,
seems to have taken her place. Continual reference is
made to Uruk even by Assyrian kings (KB i. and ii. ,
passim}. Their correspondence (Harper, ADI. passim),
when fully published, will throw much light on the city
life of Uruk during the Sargonid period. At present it
would be premature to attempt to write its municipal
history. c. H. w. j.
ERI Cny, surely not watcher, &AA(e)l [BAFL, cp
Samar. Pent.]), a subdivision of GAD ( 13), Gen. 46i6
(AHA(e)ic ADL]), Nu. 26i6 [ 25]) ; ethnic Erites
( Tim, Nu. I.e.; OAAA(e)l [BAFL]).
ESAIAS (HCAI AC. ISAIAS), 4Esd.2i8 EV; Mt.33,
etc., AV, RV ISAIAH (q.v., i.).
1 Notice that Cenchreae is mentioned in v. 2.
1330
ESARHADDON
ESARHADDON (pin-lpX, ACOPAAN [HA], AX O.
[L] ; A.C&P&XOAA&C, Jos.; CAXepAONOC, Ptol. ;
1 Earlv AC&piAlNOC; Ass. Asur-ah-iddina, i.e.,
i. iany -_\g ur j ms given a brother ), son and
History. successor o f Sennacherib on the throne of
Assyria (2K.1937; Is. 3738, &xopA&N [O], N<\X.
[N*Q "-] ACOp. L^ c b Q*J)- His brother Asur-nadin-
sum, who had been made king of Babylon by Sennacherib,
was carried away captive alter a reign of six years by
Hallusu king of Elain 694 B. c. ( A7?2 278). Ardi-Belit was
then regarded as crown-prince (mdrsarri) in Nineveh, as
appears from a contract tablet dated Sept. -Oct. 694 B. C.
For another son, Asur-munik, Sennacherib built a palace
in the suburbs of Nineveh (see ADRAMMELECH, 2). The
so-called Will of Sennacherib l (3 R. 16, No. 3) records
some rich gifts to Esarhaddon and the wish that his
name should be changed to Asur-edil-ukln-apla (Asur-
the-hero has established the son). In the Hebrew
notice of Sennacherib s murder, two sons of Sennacherib,
named ADKAMMELECH ( 2, q. v. ) and SHAREZER (i,q.v.),
are referred to, occasioning a historical difficulty, which
is dealt with elsewhere. The expressions of the Baby
lonian Chronicle have led some to think that Esarhaddon
himself was the parricide 2 (Edwards, The Witness of
Assyria, 149). It is certainly singular that in no in
scription set up in Assyria (yet published) does Esar
haddon refer to the event. On the stele found at Sam-
alla, however, he distinctly calls himself the avenger of
the father who begat him (mutlr gimilli abi alidiSu}.*
Sennacherib died on the aoth of Tebetu, B.C. 682,
and Esarhaddon was crowned on the 28th of Adar,
B.C. 682-1.
The chief sources for the history of Esarhaddon s reign
are his cylinders (KB li^of.}. The opening paragraph
of the broken prism (KB 2 141 /. ) has usually been taken
to refer to his struggle with his brother for the throne.
It is a very fragmentary account, as remarkable for its
gaps and omissions as for its information. From it we
learn that, presumably early in his reign, Esarhaddon,
who was evidently away from Nineveh, was called to
face a formidable foe. He could not take all his troops
with him. The march was made hastily and under
difficulty in the winter-month of Sabatu. His enemy
met him at Hanirabbat and was signally defeated.
That it was a right for the throne is clear from the fact
that the enemy said of their leader, This is our king.
On a more or less plausible combination of this account with
the biblical data it has been asserted that Esarhaddon was in
command of an expedition to Armenia. The time of year is
against this supposition. Hanirabbat was near Malatya, and
therefore a great distance from both Nineveh and Armenia (see
map in KB 2 and in vol. i. of this work between cols. 352 and
353). If Esarhaddon had left the bulk of his forces behind
on the confines of Armenia it is not easy to see how the rebels
could have escaped thither. Winckler (GKA 259) argues better
that Esarhaddon was in Babylon at the time of his father s
death. 4 The Babylonian Chronicle states that on the 2nd of
Adar the revolt in Nineveh was at an end. This gives six
weeks for Ksarhaddon s receipt of the news and march to
Nineveh. On his arrival the regicides and their party must
have retreated and, doubtless with reinforcements, he pursued
them at once. They made their stand at Hanirabbat, and on
their defeat escaped to Armenia. Esarhaddon seems then to
have returned to Nineveh and ascended the throne on the 28th
of Adar (682-1 B.C.), about eight months after the murder of his
father.
Esarhaddon s residence in Babylon before his accession
may account for his friendly treatment of the fallen
capital. He made good the damage
caused by SENNACHERIB [q.v.~\, brought
2. Adn .8-
tration. back the gods> and repe0 pi ed the city .
During the reign of Merodach-baladan Chaldean sup
porters of that king had dispossessed the native Baby
lonians ; after Babylon had been rendered helpless, the
Chaldeans continued to encroach. Esarhaddon expelled
1 This document is not dated, but has been used to support
the contention that Esarhaddon was the favourite son.
2 Cp the Hebrew version of Tobit (PSBA 18260), which
ascribes the murder to Esarhaddon and Sharezer.
;! Ansgrabiingen in Sendschirli, 36.
* He was appointed regent there by his father in 681 B.C.
1331
ESARHADDON
the Chaldeans from the neighbourhood of Babylon and
Borsippa, and crippled their power.
This policy of restoration extended to Erech. At Nineveh
too, the king built a great palace (cp Layard, Nin, and Bab.
634); also palaces at Kalah and Tarbisi, l he last for his son
Asur-bani-pal (i R. 48, Nos. 4 and 5; AW ^150; cp Lay. op.
fit. 19). Throughout Assyria and Mesopotamia he rebuilt some
thirty temples.
It was perhaps due to this antiquarian taste, so
strongly developed in his son Asur-bani-pal, that Esar
haddon, first of the Sargonids, lays claim to ancient
royal lineage. He calls himself the descendant of
Bel-bani, son of Adasi, king of Assyria, and offspring
of Asur (KB 2 120, n. i).
As a fighting king Esarhaddon was not behind
any of his race. At the very beginning of his reign he
was threatened by the Gimirrai (see GOMER, i). His oft-
sent requests to the sun-god Samas (Knudtzon, Gebett,
72-264) mention his fears of Kastarit of Karkassi,
Mamiti-arsu the Mede, the Mannai (see MINNI), and
other branches or forerunners of the great Manda
horde. The peril culminated in an actual invasion of
Assyria by the Gimirrai, who were, however, defeated
before the fourth year of this reign (KB 2282). The
next year was a busy one. An expedition penetrated
the Arabian desert, conquering eight rulers in the
districts of Bazu and Hazu (cp Buz, i ; HAZO). Sidon
having revolted was taken and destroyed, a new city
Kar- Esarhaddon being built to overshadow it. The
king of Sidon, Abdi-Milkuti, and Sanduarri a Cilician
prince who had sided with him, were captured and
beheaded.
Following up this success, the Assyrian king
received the submission of all Syria and Palestine.
Of the vassal kings who then paid him homage Esar
haddon has left us a very important list (AT? 2 148).
Among them are Baal king of Tyre, and MANASSEH
[?.f.], king of the city of Judah. The terms of the
agreement between Esarhaddon and Baal king of Tyre
are recorded on the tablet K. 3500 from which Hommel
gives some extracts (AHT 196 ; the full text is now given
by Winckler, AOF2 10). These events occurred in
677-6 B. c. The Chronicler also tells us of a colonisa
tion of Samaria by Esarhaddon, Ezra 42 (acrapeaduv
[B], -paSdwv [A], va%op8a.v [L]) ; but the accuracy
of this statement has been questioned (see SAMARIA,
SAMARITANS). Being now in full possession of the
route to Egypt, Esarhaddon made a reconnaissance of
it in 675 B. c. He returned next year to the attack. In
672 B.C. he lost his queen and seems to have remained
a year or more at home. In 670 B.C., leaving the
government in the hands of his mother, 1 he departed
for a supreme struggle with Egypt, in which he was
completely victorious (see EGYPT, 66). As a hard
lord he ruled over the Egyptians, 2 garrisoning some
cities with Assyrian troops, and in others installing
native dependent rulers. He returned home by way of
Samalla, where he set up the stele mentioned above.
Esarhaddon was not allowed to rest long. A
revolt broke out in Egypt, and he set out to repress
it. However, he never saw Egypt again. On the way
he fell ill and died; it was on Arahsamna (November ;
see MONTH, 35) the loth, 669 B.C. (not, as usually
stated, 668). He divided his kingdom, giving Asur-
bani-pal Assyria and the Empire, but making Samas-
sum-ukin king of Babylon under him. A third son,
Asur-mukin-palia, was raised to the high-priesthood ;
the youngest, Asur-edil-same-u-ersitim, was made
priest of Sin at Harran. Another son, Sin-iddin-aplu,
seems to have died before his father. We find the
names of a daughter, Serua-etirat, and a sister, Matti.
The name of Esarhaddon s mother is best read Nakia.
1 To this lady Nakia are addressed many letters from the
provincial governors (Harper, ABL). During her regency
occurred the Elamite invasion of 675 B.C., which threatened
Sippara. The gods of Agade were carried off by the Elamites.
2 See Is. 192, according to one interpretation (see Che. Intr.
Is. ii 4 /).
1332
ESAU
which is rendered in Assyrian by Zakutu, and seems to
be Hebrew, the pure one. She survived her son,
and on his death issued a proclamation to the Empire,
demanding its allegiance to the princes Asur-bani-pal
and Samas-sum-ukin. 1 C. H. W. j.
ESAU 2>P ; HCAY[ BAL 1)-
i. A popular etymology, which may, however, be
correct, is suggested in Gen. 2625 (J) : And the first
-^ came out tawny, all over like a hairy mantle ;
and his name was called Esau.
As Budde (Urgesch. 217, n. 2, incorrectly reported by Di.)
has pointed out, tawny ( 3B~IN, admOni)^ cannot have been
the original word, Budde s own conjecture, however (that it
displaced some rare word meaning hairy ) is not probable.
It may have arisen out of Q DlNn. twins, which intruded from
the margin where it stood as a correction of Q Dlfl (? 24).
Miswritten as Q DinN, it would be easily changed into jiDIN
(Q and <;j are frequently confounded) ; cp v. 30.
We must assume a root nby, to have thick hair, 3
and regard -\wy the shaggy, as the equivalent of Seir
the hairy. (fiJ}y = Ty}y, Gen. 27 n), which appears to
have been regarded by J as a synonym for hunter (Gen.
2625, cp v. 27). In this, as in the former case, J really
appears to have hit upon a sound interpretation.
It seems impossible to show that the mountain district
of Seir (whether E. or even W. of the Arabah) was
hairy in the sense of wooded, nor would the sense
wooded accord with the gloomy oracle of Isaac.
The probability is that Esau and Seir are names of a
hunter - god ; 4 and though the hero Usoos in Philo
of Byblus (Eus. Praep. Ev. i. 107) ma y conceivably be
simply the personification of Usu (Palaetyrus), 5 it seems
more probable, since his brother Samemrumos is a
divine hero of culture, that Usoos represents a hunter-
god, 6 after whom the city of Usu was named. Certainly
Philo of Byblus describes Usoos as entering into con
flict with wild beasts, though also as the first who
ventured on the sea (as if a personification of Old Tyre).
However this may be, Esau never displaced Edom as
the Hebrew name for the people of Mount Seir. The
phrase sons of Esau is found only in late writers
(Dt. 24 Obad. 18) ; Esau the father of Edom 1 (Gen.
86943) also is late (see Holzinger s analysis).
The early traditions on Esau are given in Gen.
2621-34 27 1-45 314-22 381-17; these belong to JE.
The editor has done his best to cull
> the finest parts from both J and E.
At the beginning he depends solely on J, unless we may
assume with Dillmann and Bacon (Genesis, 152) that
the admonl ( tawny ) of Gen. 2625 (see above) was
taken by the editor from E, who, however, surely knew
and had to account for the name Esau. The fore
shadowing which JE gives of the differences of national
fortunes (cp Mai. l2/) and national character in the
story of the two tribal ancestors is most effective. That
1 See Johns, Assyr. Deeds and Documents, vol. 2.
2 This verse gives J s explanation of the name Edom. Let
me quickly eat some of that edoin, for I am faint ; therefore his
name was called Edom. For D1NH n ~IMn read O lNri ; CD Ar.
T T T T V : T
iddm, a by-dish, as vegetables, etc. So T. D. Anderson,
with the assent of Dillmann.
3 It is difficult not to compare Ar. athiya, to have thick or
matted hair, a tka, having thick hair (Lane), though
Fleischer (in Levy, NHIVB 3 732) points out that this com
parison violates the ordinary laws of phonetic changes.
4 Prasek assents to this view (forscli. z. Gcsch. d. Alt. [ 98]
2 33>-
6 See HOSAH, and. cp note in ZATW, 1897, p. 189. The
present article, including the above view, is of older date than
that note. The writer has since found that the identification of
Usu belongs to Prasek, and that Halevy has already connected
Usoos and Usu, though in conjunction with the improbable
theory that Usu = the KS^IK of the Talmud, which he identifies
with Umm el Awamld (see HAMMON, i). Enough remains to
justify the writer s claim to have advanced the investigation by
a new suggestion.
6 Whether the Syrian desert goddess Aslt, whose name is
connected by W. M. Miiller with that of Esau (cp EDOM, 2) is
a female form of this hunter god, we can hardly venture to say.
Nor can we make any use of the divine name Esu, apparently
of foreign origin, found in a cuneiform text (Pinches, PSBA
18255).
1333
o
ESAU
the two brothers strove in the womb is a purely etymo
logical myth (see JACOB, i) ; Edom is an independent
people when tradition first brings it into contact with
Israel. That the older people was gradually eclipsed
by the younger, however, and that nevertheless the
older people at length achieved its liberation, are facts
which agree exactly with the legend. How naturally,
too, and with what regard to primitive sentiment, that
legend (cp ISAAC, 5) is told ! Of conscious purpose
on the narrator s part there is not a trace. It seems as
if by a kind of fate the course of future history were
prescribed by the forefathers, who in their blessings
and cursings discharged divine functions. 1
That writers like J and E, who have infused so much of the
pure prophetic religion into the traditional material, should not
be without traces of primitive superstition, will startle only those
who are fettered by an abstract supernaturalism. J and E un
hesitatingly believe that by his blessing or his curse a father
may determine the fate of his children ; at any rate the fore
fathers of Israel could do this. These writers certainly mean us
to regard the oracles in Gen. 27 287^ and 39/1 (which are im
aginative reproductions of what Isaac would be likely to have
said) as creating history. The latter oracle has often been mis
understood. It should run thus, Surely, far from fruitful
ground shall be thy dwelling, and untouched by the dew of the
heaven above ; by thy sword shall thou live, and thou shall
serve thy brother ; but when thou shall revolt, a ihou shall shake
off his yoke from thy neck. For another view of the blessing
(shared by Vg. and AV) see EDOM, 5.
Most readers sympathise more with Esau than with
Jacob. This may perhaps be to some extent in accord
ance with the wishes of the narrators. Surely J and E
must have condemned the fraud practised by Jacob at
his mother s bidding upon his aged father. Whether they
would have condemned Jacob s shiftiness (apart from
the special circumstances) as immoral, may, however, be
doubted. The later prophets, it is true, denounce
shiftiness in no measured terms ; 3 but the contemporaries
of J and E were not so far from the old nomadic period,
and not so open to new moral ideas, as to do the same
(see Che. Aids, 35). To them the quiet, cautious,
calculating character of Jacob seemed to be more praise
worthy than the careless, unaspiring, good-natured,
passionate character of Esau ; Jacob, they said, was a
blameless 4 man (en), dwelling in tents (Gen. 2627 [J]).
What P thought of these stories does not appear ; he
confines his attention to Esau s marriages (Gen. 26 34/.
[cp 2746 (R)], 286-9), and to geographical and statistical
information respecting the Edomites (chap. 36 ; but how
much is P s, is uncertain).
The author of the Epistle to the Hebrews presents Esau as
the type of a profane person, on the ground that he sacrificed
his birthright for one mess of food (Heb. 12 16). He addresses
Hebrews who were tempted to barter their privileges in the
church for the external satisfaclions of ihe lemple services. As
a matter of facl, however, it is only J who makes Esau willingly
resign his birthright ; E apparently knows only the second
of the two accounts of the loss of the irpojTOToiaa. It is
obvious that J despises Esau for his conduct (see 2634 in the
Hebrew). To him Esau represents Edom. To the later Jews
Esau becomes the symbol of the heathen world (see a striking
Haggada in Weber, Jiid. Tlteol. 401).
2. i Esd. 529 (r)<rau [BA]). See ZiHA, i. T. K. C.
1 See BLESSINGS AND CURSINGS. Robertson Smith points
out that Jacob, when seeking the paternal benediction, wears
the skins of sacrificial animals. His father is a quasi-divine
being. So the priests in Egypt wore the skins of sacred
animals (cp LEOPARD), and several examples of this can be indi
cated within the Semitic field (Ret. Se/n.fi) 437 ; cp 467). The
antique flavour of the narrative in Genesis now becomes much
more perceptible. (Sayce has already connected the dress of
Jacob with the robe of goat s skin, the sacred dress of the
Babylonian priests, Hibb. Led. 87, p. 285). See DRKSS, 8.
2 For the impossible -pin read -ncn, of which another cor
ruption is TiNn C Book of Jubilees, JQR 0734). It may be
added that TJ in Hos. 12 i, 1JT] in Jer. 231, and TnN in Ps.
55 3 are also demonstrably due to corruption.
3 Hosea does not indeed mention this action, but he accuses
the Israelites of a deceitfulness which he traces back to Jacob s
overreaching of his brother in the womb (Hos. 12 [3] 4; cp
JACOB, 2).
4 Or, harmless (innocent of acts of violence). It was said of
Esau, By thy sword shall thou live. CJJ may have begun to
acquire a specialized sense in popular use. In Job 9 22 CJJ and
psih are opposed.
1334
ESCHATOLOGY
CONTENTS.
(Short Subject Index at End of Article.)
A. HEBREW OLD TESTAMENT WRITERS.
I. THE INDIVIDUAL ( 1-33).
Antique elements ( 1-21).
Practices relating to the dead ( 3-6).
Beliefs about the dead ( 7-9).
Sheol ( 10).
Soul and Body ( 12-18).
Spirit ( i 9 /).
Resume ( 2 1).
Rise of individualism (Jer., Ezek.
etc., Eccles., Job ; 22-27).
Gleams of future life ( 28).
The Psalms ( 29-32).
Result as to individual immortality
( 33).
II. THE NATION ( 34-38).
Day of Yah we ( 34).
i. Popular idea (also Nah.. Hab. ;
3S/).
2. Earlier prophetic (also Is.,
Zeph.; 37-39).
3. Exilic (Je.r-, Ezek. ; 40-42).
4. Universalistic (Exilic and post-
exilic ; 43/-)-
5. Nationalistic (post-exilic ; J
45-48).
III. SYNTHESIS (8 49./T).
Doctrine of resurrection ( 49_/.).
B. APOCRYPHAL AND APOCALYPTIC WRITERS.
Review (51).
Comparative eschatology ( 52).
Method of sketch ( 53).
Ecclus. and Tobit ( ^ff.)
Hasidim ( 56).
I. SECOND CENTURY B.C. ( 57-63).
(a) General development ( 58).
(b) Writers : Dan., Eth.-Enoch 83-90,
Test. xii. Patr., Judith ( 59-62).
(f) Special conceptions ( 63).
II. LAST CENTURY B.C. ( 64-70).
(a) General development ( 64).
(b) Writers :
Ethiopic Enoch 91-104 ( 65).
Eth.-Knoch 37-70 and i Mace.
( 65).
Psalms of Solomon ( 67).
Sibylline Oracles ( 68).
2 Mace. ( 69).
(c) Special conceptions ( 70).
III. FIRST CENTURY A.D. ( 71-81).
(a) General development ( 71).
(b) Writers : Jubilees ( 72), Ass.
Mos. ( 73), Philo
(74), Slav. -Enoch
( 75), Wisd. (S 76), 4
Mace. ( 77), Baruch
and Apoc.-Bar. (78),
4 Esd. ( 79), Josephus
( 80).
(c) Special conceptions ( Ei).
Introduction ( 82).
THE SEVERAL WRITERS ( 83-101).
Synoptic Gospels ( 83-87).
Apocalypse ( 88).
2 Pet., Jude, James ( 89-91).
Hebrews ( 92).
Bibliography ( 104-106).
A. HEBREW OLD TESTAMENT.
C. NEW TESTAMENT WRITERS.
Johannine ( 93).
Petrine ( 94-96).
spirits in prison, etc. ( 96).
Pauline ( 97-101).
i and 2 Thess. ( 98).
i Cor.
2 Cor., Rom. ( 100).
Phil., Col., Eph. ( 101).
II. SPECIAL CONCEPTIONS.
Soul and Spirit ( 102).
Places of abode ( 103).
In studying a great religion the inquirer naturally
seeks to trace an organic connection between its central
_ . ... conceptions and the most remote portions
E S2Sl f tS s > stem - He ex P ects to find a
gy. certa j n degree of logical coherence be
tween all its parts. In dealing with such religions as
Christianity, Mohammedanism, or Buddhism, his ex
pectations are not disappointed. In these religions the
eschatology or teaching on the final condition of man
and of the world follows in the main from the funda
mental doctrines. The early religion of Israel, however,
must not be approached with such an expectation.
There is an organic connection between its theology
and that portion of its eschatology which deals with the
nation as a whole ; but this connection does not extend
to the eschatology concerning the individual.
I. THE INDIVIDUAL. The ideas about the future
life which prevailed in the earliest times and were current
indeed in some degree down to the second century
B.C., were in many respects common to Israel and to
some other Semitic nations. They were not the out
come of any revelation. They were survivals. With
these antique elements advancing thought was at strife
centuries before it succeeded in completely expelling
them and in furnishing in their stead a doctrine of the
future life in harmony with its own character. Such a
doctrine, though foreshadowed in the earlier literature,
was not definitely taught till the fourth century B.C.
The antique elements belong in all probability to the
system of belief and practice known as ancestor worship.
. .At first this phase of religion dominated
2. Ancestor tQ a ^^ degree the life of the i sra elite.
>mp> The religion of Yahwe, however, as it
developed, engaged with it in irreconcilable strife.
Still, for several centuries, many of those primitive
tenets and usages were left unaffected. Early Yahwism
had no distinctive eschatology regarding the problem
of the individual ; it concerned itself only with the nation.
The individual, accordingly, was left to his hereditary
1335
beliefs, which, as we have said, were connected with
ancestor worship. 1
In this system the departed were not regarded as in a
full sense dead. They shared in all the vicissitudes of
their posterity, and possessed superhuman powers to
benefit or injure. With a view to propitiating these
powers the living offered sacrifices. The vitality of the
dead was thus preserved, and their honour in the next
world upheld. A man made sacrifice naturally only
to his own ancestors ; these with their living descendants
formed one family.
That such beliefs prevailed in Israel is shown by
_ , . customs observed with regard to the
^ dead. 2 The mourning usages have a
1 religious, not merely a psychological
significance. They indicate reverence for
the dead and a confession of dependence upon them.
1. The mourner girt himself with sackcloth (2 S. 831 i K. 2031
Is. 824 163 22 12 Jer. 626), or laid it on his loins ((ien. 8734
Jer. 4837). This practice expresses submission to a superior;
it is thus that the servants of Benhadad go forth from Aphek to
Ahab(iK. 20 3 i/).
2. The mourner put off his shoes (28. 1630 Ezek. 2417).
This is explained by the removal of the shoes required in
approaching holy places (Ex. 35_/ Josh. 615).
3. Mourners cut off the hair (Is. 22i2 Jer. 729 Am. 8 10
MIC. 1 16 Ezek. "182731), or the beard (Jer. 41 5), or both (Is. 152
Jer. 4837) ; and made baldnesses between the eyes (Dt. Hi/I).
The hair was designed as an offering to the dead (see CUTTINGS
OF THE FLESH, 3, and SACRIFICE). These rites are con
demned as idolatrous in Dt. 14 1./ ; but they are mentioned by
the prophets of the eighth century without any consciousness of
their impropriety (cp Am. 810 Mic. 1 16 Is. 152 22 12). They
appear still to have been the universal custom (Jer. 41 5).
4. Mourners made cuttings in their flesh for the dead. Such
incisions were regarded as making an enduring covenant with
the dead (WRS Rel. Sem.ft) 322/). They were made by the
priests of Baal (i K. 1828). They were forbidden by the
Hebrew law (Dt. 14 i Lev. 19 28) on the same grounds as in the
case of 3.
1 Cp Schwally, Das Leben nach tiem Tpde, chap. 1, Der
alte Glaube ; Stade, GVI \^lff.; Marti, Gtsch. d. israel.
Rel.$\ 22-26, 30,40-43, 48, 103. The conclusions of thesescholars
are attacked by Frey, Tod, Seelenglaube und Seelencttlt im
alten Israel, 1898, but on the whole without success.
2 See Stade, GVI 1387^ ; Schwally, op. cit. 9-16.
1336
I
ESCHATOLOGY
5. The covering of the head by the mourners (28. 1830 Esth.
612 Jer. 143) is probably to be regarded as a substitute for
cutting off the hair ; similarly the covering of the beard re
presents its removal (Ezek. 24 17). This practice expresses
reverence for the dead. The same custom was observed by the
worshipper in approaching God (cp the case of Elijah at Horeb),
and is universal in the synagogue and the mosque at the present
day.
6. The mourner offered sacrifices to the dead (Ezek. 241722
aCh. 1614 2119). They are probably implied in Is. 819 193;
for when a man wished to consult the dead, he would naturally
present an offering. Their object is clear from Dt. 2(314 J er -
167 (?); it was to give sustenance to the dead and to win their
favour. In later times they came to be regarded as mere
funeral feasts. This had not come about in the second century
B.C., however ; for sacrifices to the dead appear to be commended
in Ecclus. 733 ( For a dead man withhold not a gift [eirl
vexpia fir) aTrofcioAuoT)? ^apti/]) and in Tob. 4 17 ( Pour out thy
bread on the burial of the just ), though they are derided in
Ecclus. SOisy: Ep. Jer. 3 i/ Wisd. His 193 Or. Sibyl. 8382.^
In Jubilees 2217 they are referred to as prevailing among the
Gentiles.
The teraphim mentioned in Gen. 35 were household
gods. 1 They are called strange gods, and their
4 Bv the worsn P s regarded as incompatible with
worshirj of tllat Yahwe. Their sacred character
TfiraDhim a PP ears ^ rom l ^ e r being buried .under a
sacred tree, the terebinth. An earlier
mention is in Gen. 31 19 30-35, where Rachel steals the
teraphim of her father. In Ex. 21 2-6 we have another
passage attesting their worship. According to this
section there was in private houses a god close to the
door, to which the slave who desired enrolment in his
master s family had to be brought. Originally this
meant admission to the family cult with all its obliga
tions and privileges (see statement of Eliezer s position
below, 5). Later the teraphim, which were of human
form (iS. 19 13), were regarded as images of Yahwe
(cp Judg. 17s, and ISi?.^ ; see also i S. 19i3-i6) ; for
it is difficult to believe that David, the champion of the
religion of Yahwe, would have worshipped the tSraphim
in their original character as household gods. In
Hos. 84 and Zech. 102, however, they seem to retain
their original character as images of ancestors (cp
TERAPHIM).
In Dt. 15i2-i8 the rite of initiation mentioned in
Ex. 21 is, by the omission of the term god, robbed
of all its primitive religious significance, and given a
wholly secular character.
It is ancestor worship that explains the importance
of male offspring. The honour and wellbeing of the
5 Bv imrjort dead depended on the worship rendered
P. and the sacrifices offered by their male
dllOc OI IIld.16 i i T-, . , _
offs descendants. Even in the after life,
therefore, men could be punished by
Yahwe by the destruction of their posterity (Ex. 20s
34? Nu. 14 18 Dt. 5g) ; for the sacrifices then ceased to
be made. 2 If a man failed to have male offspring, the
difficulty could be surmounted by adoption. The
adopted man passed from his own clan to that of his
adopted father, and thereby took upon himself all the
obligations attaching to the latter. Even a slave could
be so adopted (see FAMILY, 2). Eliezer is regarded as
Abraham s heir in default of male issue (Gen. 15a/. ).
It is to be presumed that he had already been adopted
into the family cult. The right of inheritance is thus
derived in principle from ancestor worship ; only the
son and heir could fulfil its rites (see LAW AND
JUSTICE, 18). Illegitimate sons, therefore, could not
inherit (Stade, GF/l^i); their mother had not been
admitted by marriage into the cult (cp Judg. 11 2).
In Nu. 3G the law has already undergone a change. A
daughter is allowed to inherit if she has married a man be
longing to her father s family or tribe. In Athens, on the other
hand, the property descended to the next male heir ; but he
was obliged to marry the daughter of the deceased (Stade, id.).
1 On Stade sand Schwally s identification of the teraphim with
an ancestor image (accepted by Budde on Judg. 17s, Holzinger
on Gen. 31 19, Nowack on Hos. 84, etc.), see TERAPHIM.
2 On the same principle a man destroyed his enemy and all
his sons with the object of depriving him of respect and worship
in the lower world.
ESCHATOLOGY
It is thus clear that the living and the dead formed
one family, and the departed participated in all the
vicissitudes of their living descendants. Rachel in her
grave shared in the troubles of her children in northern
Israel (Jer. 31 15).
The necessity of a son who should perform the
family ancestor worship gave birth to the levirate
6 By levirate law A man must mari T the childless
law and widow of ms deceased brother. Where
nature of clan ! h ,? deceased had no brother - the duty
fell on the nearest male relation. The
firstborn son of such a marriage was registered as the
son of the deceased, who was thus secured the respect
and the sacrifices which could be rendered only by a son
legitimately begotten or adopted. This law appears
to be assumed as in force in Gen. 8826 ; but its
significance is forgotten in Dt. 25 5-10. According to
old Israelitish views, Tamar fulfilled a duty of piety
towards her dead husband (Stade 1394) ; similarly
Ruth. Even the daughters of Lot may have had the
same end in view.
The fact that, even in David s time, the clan consti
tuted a sacramentally united corporation (18.2029)
points back to an earlier worship of ancestors.
The customs just considered ( 3-6) regulate the
conduct of the living. We have now to consider more
7. Beliefs about directl y the beliefs regarding the dead
the dead themselves, their place of abode and
the nature of their existence there.
These beliefs are no less essentially connected with
ancestor worship ; but they had a much more extended
lease of life. Long after the practices we have described
had become unintelligible or sunk into complete abey
ance, the beliefs flourished in the high places of Judaism ;
they claimed the adherence of no small portion of the
priesthood down to the destruction of the temple by
Titus.
As in the religions of Greece and Rome, burial was
8. Importance
held to be indispensable to the com-
44
1337
of burial f rt f the de P arted - II was hardly
ever withheld.
Criminals who were hanged (Dt. 21 2^) or stoned (Josh.
7 24-26), and suicides (Jos. Bell. Jud. iii. 8 5), were accorded
burial ; as were even the most hostile of foes (Ezek. 39 12).
Of the calamities that could befall a man the lack of
burial was one of the most grievous.
Such was the sentence of punishment pronounced on Jezebel
(2 K. 9 10). It was the fate that awaited the enemies of Yahwe
(Jer. 2633). Even the materialistic writer of Ecclesiastes (63),
if the text is correct, regards such a misfortune as outweighing
a whole lifetime of material blessings. 1
This horror at the thought of being unburied cannot
be explained in the same way as in the religions of
Greece and Rome, where it involved exclusion from
Hades : according to Hebrew viesvs all without excep
tion descended to Shfiol. It may be explained on two
grounds. (i) In earlier times unless the dead had
received burial no sacrifice could be offered to them.
The grave, in ancestor worship, was in some measure
the temple. (2) In later times, when such conceptions
were forgotten, to be deprived of burial entailed a
lasting dishonour and subjected the dead in Shfiol to
unending reproach (Ezek. 28 10 32 21).
Not simply burial, however, but also burial in the
family grave, was the desire of every Israelite. Hence
9 In the tne fr ec l uent statement that a man was
family crave & athered to his fathers (Gen. 15 15 Judg.
61 2io) or to his people (Gen. 4929-33 Nu.
27 13). The departed must be introduced into the
society of his ancestors. In the earliest times the
abode of this society was conceived to be the family
grave or its immediate neighbourhood. Everyone
wished to be buried with his father and mother
1 [The context is against this reference to the loss of burial.
We must perhaps either strike out the entire phrase and more
over he have no burial (with Ilitzig), or else the negative (with
Wildoboer).]
1338
ESCHATOLOGY
(28. 1723 1937 [38]). Jacob and Joseph are said to have
directed that their bodies should be carried back to
Canaan to be buried in the family grave (Gen. 47 30
5025 Ex. 1819). This was originally in the house. It
was there, e.g. , that Samuel was buried (iS. 25i);
similarly Joab (i K. 34). As no family stood in
isolation, however, but was closely united with others,
and as these together made up the clan or tribe,
and these tribes in due time were consolidated into the
nation, a new conception arose ; all the graves of the
tribe or nation were regarded as united in one. It was
this new conception that received the designation of
Sheol.
In all probability, therefore, the Hebrew Shgol was
originally conceived as a combination of the graves of
ft _ . . the clan or nation, and thus as its final
.; ev-x-i abode. In due course this conception was
naturally extended till it embraced the de
parted of all nations, and became the final abode of all
mankind. It has already reached this stage in Ezek. 32
Is. 14 Job 30 23. Strictly regarded, the conceptions of
an abode of the dead in the grave and of one in Shgol
are mutually exclusive. Being popular notions, however,
they do not admit of scientific definition, and their
characteristics are treated at times as interchangeable.
The family grave, with its associations of ancestor wor
ship, is of course the older conception. As burial in
the family grave enabled a man to join the circle of his
ancestors, so burial with honour was a condition of his
attaining an honourable place in Sh6ol i.e. , joining
his people there. Otherwise he is thrust into the
lowest and outermost parts of the pit (Ezek. 8223).
When, however, Shgol is said to have distinct divisions
(Prov. 727), the statement may be merely poetical.
Regarding the condition of the dead in Shgol (on
which see below, 15-18) it will here be sufficient to
point out two main characteristics.
(a) In early times (and down to the fourth century
11 Two char B C- there was little chan S el ) Sh661
. r". was quite independent of Yahwe and
IC8> outside the sphere of his rule.
Yahwe was originally the god of the tribe or nation, and his
sway for long after the settlement in Canaan was conceived to
extend, not to the whole upper world, much less to the lower
(Sheol), but only to his own people and land. The persistence
of this conception of Sheol for several centuries side by side
with the monotheistic conception of Yahwe as creator and
ruler of the world is, for the Western mind, hard to understand,
the conceptions being mutually exclusive. It is clear, however,
that Israel believed that when a man died he was removed from
the jurisdiction of Yahwe (Ps. 885 [6] 31 22 [23]), and relations
between them ceased (Is. 38 18).
(6) As independent of Yahwe, Shg5l knew nothing
of the moral distinctions that prevailed on earth.
According to the OT death means an end of the
earthly life, not the cessation of all existence : the
, _ . , person still subsists. As the nature of this
, 1 , , , continued existence depends on the OT
theory of man s composite personality, it
will be necessary at this point to make a study of that
theory. In its most primitive form it regards man as
consisting of two elements, soul (nephesh] and body
(itifdr). What was thought of the body does not con
cern us here (see, however, 18).
Regarding the soul we may note four points.
i. The soul is identified with the blood.
As the shedding of blood caused death, the soul was con
ceived to be in the blood (Lev. 17 n a), or it was actually iden
tified with it (Dt. 1223 Gen. 84^). Hence men avoided eating
blood ; they offered it to God. Hence, too, blood unjustly
spilt on the earth the soul cried to heaven for vengeance
(Gen. 4 10).
Again, since the soul was the blood and the
central seat of the blood was the heart/ the heart was
regarded as the organ of thought. A man without
1 Though God s power is conceived from the eighth century
onward (cp Am. 9 2 Job 26 6 Prov. 15 n Ps. 139 j/.) to extend to
Sheol, yet SheOl maintains its primitive character. In the
earlier centuries the powers that bore sway in SheOl were the
ancestors of the living.
1339
, ,
"
ESCHATOLOGY
intelligence was a heartless man (Hos. 7"); when
a man thought, he was said to speak in his heart.
Thought is not ascribed directly to the soul, however,
though a certain limited intelligence is.
2. To the soul are attributed not only purely
animal functions such as hunger (Prov. 10 3), thirst
13 Feeling ( Prov - 2625), sexual desire (Jer. 224), but
also psychical affections such as love (Is.
42i), joy ( Ps. 864). fear (Is. 15 4 ), trust (Ps. 57 1 [2]),
hate (Is. 114), contempt (Ezek. 36s). 1 To it are
ascribed also wish and desire (Gen. 23 8 2 K. 9 15 i Ch.
289), and likewise, but very rarely, memory (Lam.
820 Dt. 49) and knowledge (Ps. 139 14). As the seat
of feeling and desire (and, in a limited degree, of in
telligence) it becomes an expression for the individual
conscious life. Thus my soul (-ITS:) means I," thy
soul means thou, etc. (Hos. 94 Ps. 3 2 [3] 7 2 [3] 11 1).
So many souls means so many persons (Gen. 46 18
Ex. 1 5). This designation of the personality by soul
(nephesh] shows how meagre a conception of personality
prevailed in Israel, nn ( rny spirit ) was never so
used in the OT.
3. The soul leaves the body in death (Gen. 35 18
i K. 172i 28. lg Jn. 43), not necessarily immediately,
_ . but (apparently) at least on the appearance
of corruption. In certain cases, after out
ward death the soul was regarded as still in
some sense either in or near the body ; a dead person
was called a nephesh (Lev. 1928 21 1 224 Nu. 96710
Hag. 2 13) or a dead nephesh (na B>S: ; Nu. 66 Lev. 21 n).
4. The soul therefore also dies. Its death, how
ever, is not absolute. Moreover, we must note the
, T , .... prevalence in Israel of two incon-
15. Its condition sjstem views _ a fact (not hitherto
leatm. fu]ly brought to ij gn t)2 that has
forced its recognition on the present writer in the
course of the present study (a) an older view, which
attributes to the departed a certain degree of knowledge
and power in reference to the living and their affairs ;
(&) a later view, which denies this. 3
(a) According to the older view the departed possessed
a certain degree of self-consciousness and the power of
speech and movement (Is. 14) ; a large
measure of knowledge hence their
name, Q jijn , the knowing ones (Lev.
19si 20 6 Is. 193 ; cp DIVINATION, 4,
iii. ) ; acquaintance with the affairs of their living
descendants and a keen interest in their fortunes thus
Rachel mourns from her grave for her captive children
(Jer. 31 15) ; ability to forecast the future (whence they
were consulted about it by the living ; i S. 28 13-20
[where observe that the dead person invoked is called
Elohlm] Is. 819 294) ; whence the practice of incuba
tion 4 (Is. 604). As we have already seen that the
departed were believed to have the power of helping or
injuring their descendants (see 2), we need only ob
serve here that it follows from Is. 63 16 that Abraham
and Israel were conceived as protectors (see Cheyne
and Duhm, etc., in loc.).
The relations and customs of earth were reproduced
in Shgdl.
The prophet was distinguished by his mantle (i S. 28 14),
kings by their crowns and thrones (Is. 14), the uncircumcised by
his foreskin (Ezek. 32). Each nation preserved its individuality
and no doubt its national garb and customs (Ezek. 32). Those
slain with the sword bore for ever the tokens of a violent death
(Ezek. 32 25), as likewise those who died from grief (Gen. 42 38).
Indeed the departed were regarded as possessing exactly the
same features as marked them at the moment of death. We
can appreciate, accordingly, the terrible significance of David s
1 These are so essentially affections of the soul that they
are hardly ever attributed to the spirit (nil) , yet see 19.
- Only Stade appears to have apprehended the fact, and that
but partially as far as we may judge from his published works.
3 It follows logically from the doctrine of man s nature,
unknown in pre-prophetic times, which is set forth in Gen. 2/1;
see below, 16.
4 i.e., the practice of sleeping in a temple in the hope of re
ceiving a communication or a visit from the god.
1340
_ ..
6. ar ler
17. Later view
of death.
ESCHATOLOGY
departing counsel to Solomon touching Joab ; Let not his hoar
head go down to Sheol in peace (i K. 26).
In many respects the view just sketched is identical
with that which underlies ancestor worship. This
worship had withdrawn entirely into the background
before the prophetic period ; but, as we have said
( 7), many of its presuppositions maintained themselves
in the popular belief till late in the post-exilic period.
The most significant fact to observe is the comparatively
large measure of life, movement, knowledge, and power
attributed to the departed in Shfiol. How important
this is becomes obvious when the earlier view is con
trasted with the later and antagonistic view.
(6) The later view follows logically from the account
in Gen. 24^-3, according to which it was when animated
by the spirit that the material form
became a living soul : the life of the
soul is due to the presence of the j
spirit, death ensues on its removal. 1 Death, however, I
even here does not imply annihilation, though it logic
ally should imply it : the soul still subsists in some
sense. The subsistence, however, is purely shadowy
and negative : all the faculties are suspended.
Sheol, the abode of the shades, is thus almost a synonym for
abaddon or destruction (Job2ti6 Prov. 15 n). In opposition to
the older view that in Sheol there is a certain degree of life,
movement, and remembrance, the later view teaches that it is
the land of forgetfulness (Ps. 88 12), of silence (Ps. 94 17 115 17),
of destruction (Job 26 6 2822); in opposition to the belief that
the dead return to counsel the living, the later teaches that the
dead cannot return (Job 7 9 14 12); in opposition to the belief
that they are acquainted with the affairs of their living de
scendants, the later teaches that they no longer know what
befalls on earth (Job 14 2 1) ; in opposition to the belief in their
superhuman knowledge of the future as the knowing ones
the later teaches that all knowledge has forsaken them (Eccles.
9 5), that they have neither device nor knowledge nor wisdom
(Eccles. 9 10). Whereas the older view permitted their being
invoked as Elohlm, the later view regards them as dead
ones ( D no) (Is. 26 14 Ps. 88 10 [n]). 2 See DEAD, 2.
Finally the relations of the upper world appear to be
reproduced, if at all, more faintly ; the inhabitants of
ShgSl, king and slave, oppressor and oppressed, good
and bad, are all buried in a profound sleep (Job3 14-19).
All existence seems to be at an end.
Thus we read in Ps. 39 13, O spare me, that I may recover
strength, before I go hence, and be no more ; and in Job 14 7 to,
There is hope of a tree, if it be cut down, that it will sprout
again but man giveth up the ghost, and where is he? 3
5. Though in death the soul leaves the body and
departs, the departed in ShSol are never designated
18 Shadowv s m P 1 > r sov ^ s - 4 The early Israelites were
, , ^ metaphysically unable to conceive the
body without psychical functions, or the
soul without a certain corporeity. The departed were
conceived, accordingly, as possessing not only a soul
but also a shadowy body. This appears in the use of
the term shades (rifphdim), which was current in all
ages (see REPHAIM i. ). Elohlm, the title by which in
earlier times the shades were addressed, passed out of
use. In later times, when such a doctrine of man s
being as that underlying Gen. 2 4<J-3, became current,
1 This view strikes at the root of the worship of ancestors.
The deceased can have no vitality or power ; for the spirit is .
the spring of life, and the departed are only souls that are
dead i.e., souls in which every faculty is dormant. Gen. I
243-8, which did not originate till the prophetic period, is the
outcome of monotheism, whether we regard it as being of
Hebrew or of foreign origin. It is needless to add that, when
monotheism emerged, for various reasons ancestor worship
became impossible.
2 The term shades Q-N31 (used also in the Phoenician
religion) was applied to the departed in both systems ; but
possibly with a difference (contrast Is. Ug f. 261419 with
Ps. 88 10 [n] Prov. 2 18 9 18 etc., where it is synonymous with
the dead).
3 It will be observed that the currency of the later view is
attested by the second Isaiah, by Ezekiel, Job, and Ecclesiastes.
In these books the teaching in Gen. 2 4^-8 has reached its logical
consequence. That teaching is implied in Is. 4ii 5 Ezek. 37 aff.
Job 27 3 334 Eccles. 127 the spirit shall return to God who
gave it (yet it is doubtful if this verse belongs to the text ;
cp3 2 i).
* We seem to find in Job 14 22 Ps. 16 10 such a use, or at all
events the preparation for it.
1341
ESCHATOLOGY
the epithet dead ones was employed. To designate
the dead simply souls without any qualification
would hardly have been possible ; according to the
later view, souls in Sheol were bereft of all their natural
psychical functions.
The Hebrew writers speak, however, of a spirit as
well as of a soul, and we must consider briefly the
_ ~ . .. . relation of the terms to each other.
.. " . Originally they were synonyms meaning
.. .
ear ler view .
. breatn or w j nc j The primitive con-
.... ception was arrived at by observation.
my When the breath i.e., the nlphesh or
ruah left the body, the body died. The nfyhesh or
ruah was, therefore, regarded as the principle of life.
As Stade has remarked (GVICQ 1419), rtia/t probably
designated specially the stronger and stormier emotions :
the custom of personifying the psychical affections
generally as ntphesh, once introduced, led to the practice
of naming the stronger expressions of this personification
ruah. Thus anger is an affection of the ruah (Judg. 83,
see below). So long as a man was wholly master of
his powers, he possessed his ruah ; but when he became
lost in amazement (i K. 10s) or despair (Josh. 2n), or
when he fainted (i S. 30 12 Judg. 15 19), his ruah left
him. On his reviving it returned (Gen. 4627).
In keeping with this view of the spirit (ruah) it is said to
be the subject of trouble (Gen. 41 s), anguish (Job 7 n), grief
(Gen. 26 35 Is. 546), contrition (Ps. 51 17 [19] Is. t>6 2), heaviness
(Is. 61 3). It is the seat of energetic volition and action the
haughty spirit (Prov. 16 18), the lowly spirit (2923), the
impatient spirit (Prov. 1429), etc.
As its departure entails a paralysis of voluntary power (see
above) the ruah expresses the impulse of the will (Ex. 35 21).
The purposes of man are "... of the ruah nn niSj?D(Ezek.ll 5);
the false prophets follow their own spirit rather than that of
Yahwe (Ezek. 183); God tries men s spirits (Prov. 162).
Rfiah seems also to express character, the result of will in
Nu. 14 24, Caleb . . . had another " spirit " with him. By this
development in the application of the term ruah it has become
the seat of man s highest spiritual functions.
To sum up : soul and spirit are at this early stage
identical in essence and origin ; the distinction is one of
function.
(b] This primitive view was in part superseded by a
later doctrine (later from the point of view of the
genesis of ideas), taught in Gen. 24^-3. *
The most complete story of the creation of man 2 represents
that Yahwe Elohim formed man of earth from the ground, and
. . , blew into his nostrils breath (iitshama) of
oplITD . j;f e ( c ,, n j-|Ojj) so that man became a living
later view : soul (*#**), Gen- 2 7. The neshama of
man a 27 is called ruah (o"n nil) in 6 17 7 15.
trichotomy ^ nere are therefore in man three elements :
* soul (nephesh), body (bdldr), and spirit or
ruah (nl"l)i which last, in the later theory, is simply that which
gives life to the soul. 3 This spirit of life (n"n nn) s n
the lower creation as well (Gen. 6 17 7 15 22 Ps. 104 30), and by
virtue of it they too become living souls."
According to the story worked up by a late priestly
writer (Gen. 1 24) the brute creation is only indirectly
the product of divine creation ; whereas man is so
directly. Angels, however, are never, either in the
canonical or in the apocryphal books, said to have
souls, though occasionally the term is used in regard
to God : he swears by his soul (Am. 6 8 ; cp Is. 42 1
Lev. 261130 cp below, 63). In the account of the
relation of soul to body and spirit, in Gen. 2/.
the spirit has become quite distinct from the soul
in essence and origin. It is the divine element in man.
According to the older view the difference was one of
1 [Into the historical relation of this doctrine to the Hebrew
conceptions of CREATION [q.v.] we cannot here enter at
length. It cannot be denied that the statement in Gen. 2 7 is of
early origin. That remains a fact, even if the narrative in Gen.
2 4^-3 has passed through more than one literary phase. Critics
are of opinion, however, that the myth of creation utilized for
didactic purposes in that narrative was not very widely spread
among the Israelites, and that the religious ideas attached to
the myth but slowly became operative in the popular mind.]
2 [On the references to creation, whether in narratives or in
other forms, see CREATION ; on the question as to the early
or late date of the ideas in Gen. 278 see preceding note.]
3 Cp below, 81 (i).
1342
ESCHATOLOGY
ESCHATOLOGY
function, hardly of essence, certainly not of origin. Now
1 spirit is the life-giving power in the body. When it
enters the material form the man becomes a living soul.
Without ruah there is no life (Hab. 2 19). In death the
soul, robbed of every vital function, descends into Shcol
and practically ceases to exist. The spirit (ruti/i) never
dies ; it merely leaves the body and returns to God
who gave it (Ps. 1464 Eccles. 1*27). J Of this view the
logical result is the scepticism of Ecclesiastes and of the
Sadducees.
We have found that the Israelite derived from the
circle of ideas underlying ancestor worship his views as
_, , to the nature of soul" and spirit, and
. K si me. Qf y ngol and tne conc jition of the departed
there. On these questions no light was thrown for
many centuries by anything distinctive of the religion of
Yahwe, which had originally no eschatology of its own
relating to the individual. Looking back, however, on
the far-off days of the origins of the religion of Yahwe,
we can see that the beliefs connected with ancestor
worship were doomed to extinction by their inconsistency
with that religion, though centuries had to elapse
before the doom was fully accomplished.
The preparation for a higher doctrine of the future
life was made essentially when a new value came to be
set on the individual. The early
Israelite was not alarmed by the
22. No
individual
.... prosperity of the wicked man or the
itriDution. calamities of the righteous: Yahwe
was supposed to concern himself only with the well-
being of the people as a whole, not with that of its
individual members. It seemed natural and reasonable
that he should visit the virtues and vices of the fathers
on the children (Ex. 20s Lev. 20s Josh. 724 i 8.813),
of an individual on his community or tribe (Gen. 12 17
20 18 Ex. 1229). Indeed, in postponing the punishment
of the sinner till after death and allowing it to fall on
his son, 2 Yahwe showed his mercy (i K. 11 12 21 29).
Towards the close of the kingdom of Judah, the
popular sentiment expressed itself in the proverb, The
fathers have eaten sour grapes, and the children s teeth
are set on edge (Jer. Slag). Explicitly this denied the
responsibility of the people for the overthrow of the
nation a view that naturally paralysed all personal
effort after righteousness and made men the victims of
despair. Implicitly it expressed, not a humble sub
mission to the divine judgments, but rather an
arraignment of the divine method of government.
In opposition to this popular statement Jeremiah
answered as follows : In those days they shall no
23. Jeremiah s
more say, The fathers have eaten sour
?-"""""" grapes, and the children s teeth are
individualism. ^ Qn gdge . bm eyery Qne ^ die
for his own iniquity (Jer. 31 29 f. ). At an earlier date
the same prophet had delivered a divine oracle of
a very different import, I will cause them to be tossed
to and fro among all the kingdoms of the earth, because
of Manasseh the son of Hezekiah (Jer. 154). The new
departure in his teaching recorded in the later passage
is to be explained by the new covenant described in
Jer. 31 31-34 (see COVENANT, 6 (v. )). Jeremiah foresaw
ii new relation between Yahwe and his worshippers a
relation determined by two great facts : man s incapacity
to reform himself, and God s repugnance to any but a
spiritual worship (see JEREMIAH i. , 4).
Jeremiah s idea was further developed by Ezekiel.
Every soul is God s and is in direct and immediate
94. iwiivirinai relation to him (Ezek. 18 4). If the
11 individual is faithful in this relation,
Ezeidel and : he is unaffected b X his own P ast
1 (1821-28), or by the sins or the
righteousness of his fathers (1820
1 Cp below, 102 (i) b note.
2 Rewards and punishments were necessarily conceived as
limited to the earthly life ; for Sheol was regarded as outside
Yahwe s jurisdiction.
1343
25. Criticism.
14 12-20). Righteousness raises him above the sweep
of the dooms that befall the sinful individual or the
sinful nation. 1 Since the achievement of this righteous
ness is possible for him, he possesses moral freedom,
and his destiny is the shaping of his own will (1830^).
There is, therefore, a strictly individual retribution, and
the outward lot of the individual is exactly proportioned
to his moral deserts.
This doctrine rooted itself firmly in the national
consciousness. It is taught and applied in detail in
those great popular handbooks, the Psalter and the
Book of Proverbs. Though the righteous may have
many afflictions, Yahwe delivers him out of them all ;
all his bones are kept, not one of them is broken ; but
evil slays the wicked ( Ps. 34 18 [19]^ , see also 37 28 etc. ).
The righteous and the wicked are to be recompensed
on earth ( Prov. 1 1 31). Life is the outcome of righteous
ness; death, of wickedness (Prov. 221 /. 10211 19 1524/.
19i6etc.).
Such a doctrine was, naturally, a continual stumbling-
block to the righteous when trouble came. Doubts as
to its truth were freely expressed,
notably in the Psalms. Nor was it to
the sufferer alone that this difficult view was an impedi
ment. The doctrine of an adequate retribution in this
life blocked the way that led to a true solution of the
problem of prosperity and adversity. Indeed it denied
the existence of any problem to solve ; the righteous as
such could not suffer. As long as this was regarded as
the orthodox doctrine, the doctrine of a future life could
not emerge, and progress was impossible.
It was only some of the elements in Ezekiel s teaching
that were sanctioned by subsequent religious thought ;
others were opposed. It is his undying merit that he
asserted the independent worth of the individual ; but
he fell into two errors. He taught (a) that the individual
suffers not for the sins of his fathers, but for his own,
and (b] that the individual s experiences are in perfect
keeping with his deserts. In other words, sin and
suffering, righteousness and wellbeing are, according to
Ezekiel, always connected ; the outward lot of the
individual is God s judgment in concrete form. 2
Now as regards a, the experience of the nation
must have run counter to this statement. It was
evident that the elements in a man s lot which lie out
side the sphere of his volition are shaped for better or for
worse in accordance with the merits or demerits of his
father and people. The older view accordingly continues
to be attested in Jewish literature (see Ps. 109 13 Ecclus.
2825 40 15 416, and especially Dan. Q?/., Judith7z8.
Tob. 83, Ass. Mos. 85, Baruch 1 18-21 226 38, Apoc.
Bar. 7734io): it is freely acknowledged that men are
punished for the sins of their fathers and brethren.
Ezekiel s second error (6), that the individual s
experience agrees with his deserts, is the corollary of
a. It gave birth to a long controversy, of which two
notable memorials have come down to us in Job and
Ecclesiastes. Eccles. is much the later ; but we w ill for
convenience sake deal with it first.
Against the statement () that the experience of the
individual is in perfect keeping with his
deserts, the writer of Ecclesiastes enters a
decided negative. He declares, in fact,
that there is no retribution at all. 3
He asserts that sometimes evil prolongs a man s days, and
righteousness curtails them (7 15) ; that the destinies of the wise
man and of the fool (2 14), of the righteous and the wicked (9 2)
are identical ; that the wicked attain to the honour of burial,
whilst this is often denied to the righteous (Sio). If any one
1 That there is an inconsistency between Ezek. 83-6 and
21 $/. cannot, however, be denied.
2 Both a and b seemed to Kzekiel to follow logically from
God s righteousness, and rightly, if there was no retribution
beyond the grave.
3 The passages where judgment is threatened (3 17 11 g/> 12 14)
are, according to an increasing number of critics, intrusions in
the text, being at variance with the entire thought of the writer.
812 is no longer in its original form.
1344
26. Protest
of Eccles.
27. Of Job.
ESCHATOLOGY
complains of the shallowness of Ecclesiastes, 1 is not Ezekiel on
the opposite side equally shallow?
In the book of Job the principal elements of Ezekiel s
teaching reappear. The doctrines of man s individual
worth and of a strictly individual retribu
tion, however, are shown to be really irre
concilable (see JOB, BOOK OF, 5-8). Conscious in
the highest degree of his own worth and rectitude, Job
claims that God should deal with him in accordance
with his deserts. Like his contemporaries his belief is
(for Job and the author of the dialogues may be
identified) that every event that befalls a man reflects
God s disposition towards him ; misfortune betokens
God s anger, prosperity his favour. This belief, how
ever, is not confirmed by the fortunes of other men
(21 1-15), and, with the added insight derived from a
sad personal experience, Job concludes that, as the
world is governed, righteousness may even be awarded
the meed of wickedness. Faith, in order to be sure of
its own reality, claims its attestation by the outward
judgments of God, and Job s faith receives no such
attestation. Still it does not entirely give way ; from
the God of circumstance, of outer providence, Job
appeals to the God of faith (by Job, as we have said,
we mean the author).
The fact that Job does not seek to solve the problem
by taking into his argument the idea of a future life,
na , - shows that this idea or belief had not
28. Gleams of , i-
- , .., yet won acceptance among the religious
mture me. thinkers of Israel _ The main views
and conclusions of Job, however, point in that direction.
The emphasis laid on man s individual worth, with his
consequent claims upon a righteous God claims which
are during life entirely unsatisfied should lead to the
conclusion that at some future time all these wrongs
will be righted by the God of faith. Such a conclusion,
however, is never explicitly drawn.
The poem of Job cannot be said to teach the doctrine
of a future life. Still, the idea seems for a moment to
have gleamed on Job s mind, and the fancy expressed in
14 13 f. became the accepted doctrine of later times. If
the Hebrew text of 1925-29 is sound, perhaps there also
ShSol is conceived as only an intermediate place. At
any rate Job declares in this great passage that God
will appear for his vindication, and that at some time
after his death he will enjoy the divine vision face to
face. It is not indeed stated that this vision will endure
beyond the moment of Job s justification by God. Never
theless the importance of the spiritual advance here made
cannot be exaggerated. The soul is no longer regarded as
cut off from God and shorn of all its powers by death,
but as still capable of the highest spiritual activities
though without the body. A belief in the continuance
of this higher life is certainly in the line of many of
Job s reasonings. On the other hand, if Job had not
merely -wished but also been convinced that this idea
was sound, would it have been possible for him to
ignore such an all-important conviction throughout the
rest of the book ? There are likewise textual difficulties,
which recent critics have considered to justify a very
radical treatment of the text.
The words rendered in RV And after my skin hath been thus
destroyed, yet from my flesh shall I see God, 2 are specially
doubted. RVmg. gives two alternative marginal renderings for
the first part of this passage, and for from my flesh suggests
the widely different rendering without my flesh, which is that
generally adopted by those scholars who adhere to MT. Cp
illmann ad loc., and, on the other side, JOB, 6.
[Siegfried (Job, SBOT, Heb.) looks upon v. 25^ as a later
gloss, in which the resurrection of the just is regarded as a
possibility, contrary to the opinion put forth in the Book of Job
with regard to Sheol (ib. 3 etc.). The result, however, is not
satisfactory. Siegfried appeals to & ; but we have a right to
suspect theological glosses in the Alexandrian Jewish version.
1 Cp ECCLESIASTES.
2 nxnEpj -iiy nnxi
1345
ESCHATOLOGY
Something different must have stood where our present v. 25 f.
stands, and it is the work of the textual critic to trace its relics.
See also Budde, ad loc., and Che. s criticism, Expos., 1897*1,
p. 410.2?:]
In spite of this criticism it is true to say that this
great poem suggests the doctrine of a future life. Later
students may or may not have found it in 1413-15
1925-29 ; but in any case the rest of the book presents
the antinomies of the present so forcibly that thinkers
who assimilated its contents could not avoid taking up
a definite attitude towards the higher theology. Some
made a venture of faith, and postulated the doctrine of
a future life ; others, like the writer of Ecclesiastes,
made the great refusal and fell back on unbelief and
materialism. We have arrived at the parting of the
ways. x
It remains to consider whether there is evidence of a
belief in the immortality of the individual in the Psalter.
29 I the ^ s un f rtunate tnat the text of this book
_ . should be so far from accurate as (from textual
Hga.ltng- ... . .
criticism) it appears to be. The psalms
that chiefly have to be considered are 16, 17, 49, and
73. Here we find one of the most recent critics receding
from his original conclusion (in favour of the existence
of the hope of immortality), on the ground that a
searching textual revision is adverse to it. As regards
the first two, at any rate, of the psalms just referred to,
the evidence, even if we assume the trustworthiness of
all that the unemended text contains, is inadequate to
prove the point.
In Ps. 16 there is nothing that necessarily relates to an indi
vidual future life. The psalm appears to express the fears and
T, hopes, not of the individual, but of the community.
30. In PSS. In Ps. 17 likewise the Psalmist speaks not as an
16-17. individual (cp the plurals, w. 711), but as the
mouthpiece of the Jewish people, whoare to Yahwe
as the apple of the eye (? . 8) ; in fear of a foreign invader (vv.
9 13) the Psalmist prays for help. This being so, however, in
stead of I shall be satisfied, when I awake, with thy likeness,
we should expect some reference to God s help. In any case the
context does not admit of a reference to a future life. a
In Ps. 49 the present text admits of two interpretations. In
v. i4[i5]yC the speaker announces speedy destruction for the
wicked but complete redemption from death
31. In Ps. 49. for himself; but who is the speaker? Does
the I here denote the Psalmist as a repre
sentative pious Israelite, or the righteous community? In
favour of the collective meaning it is argued that those for
whom the Psalmist speaks are the righteous poor who are
oppressed by the wicked rich; that r . 10 [n] states that all
die, alike the wise man (i.e., the righteous) and the fool ; and
that when the individual is undoubtedly intended (?/. 16 [17]) he
is addressed as thou. The escape from death is therefore, on
this interpretation, that of the righteous community. 3 On the
other hand, it seems to be in favour of a reference to immortality
that, as Cheyne has pointed out, Sheol appears in v. 14 [15] as
a place of punishment for the wicked rich. 4 As such it could
never become the abode of the righteous. It ii reasonable
therefore to expect that the speaker should somewhere state
his own consciousness (as a representative pious Israelite) of
exemption from this fate. This seems to give us the key to the
words, Surely my soul God will set free ; for from the hand
of Sheol will he take me. 6
We must, therefore, lay stress on the naturalness
1 On the belief in retribution in early Judaism, see especially
Che. OPs. 381-452 ; Jew. Rel. Life, 229-247. For translations
from the psalms, cp Wellh. s and Driver s recent works. A
complete translation from a critical text of Job is still a
desideratum.
2 So Smend, ZA TWSg 5 [ 88] ; Che. few. Rel. Life, 2 4 o/
3 So Smend, Schwally, and now Cheyne.
4 This is one of the results reached in OPs. by Cheyne ; who
(going much beyond previous writers) regards Ps. 49 as incident
ally a protest against the old Hebrew notion of Sheol, with its
disregard of moral distinctions, and confirms this view by the
parallelisms between Ps. 49 and chap. 102 f. of Enoch (written
probably between 134 and 94 B.C.). The rich man holds that neither
in life nor in death has he to fear a judgment ; but all the details
of this pleasant dream the psalmist contradicts. The moral
significance of the descent of the rich into Sheol is still more
visible in Cheyne s attractively emended text (few. Rel. Life,
238). This conception of the penal character of Sheol is all the
more credible from the reference mnde in the OT to two other
places of punishment for special offenders the so-called pit
(Is. 242i_/C), and a place strikingly resembling Gehenna for
Jewish apostates (Is. 6624).
5 The present writer is of opinion that to the authors of Pss.
49 and 73 Sheol is the future abode of the wicked alone, heaven
that of the righteous.
1346
ESCHATOLOGY
of our own interpretation, that there is in Ps. 49 a
reference to immortality, an interpretation which is in
fact that maintained, with fulness of argument, by
Cheyne himself in his Origin of the Psalter.
In Ps. 73, as in Ps. 49, the wicked enjoy prosperity ;
but they are speedily to meet with unexpected retribution
32 In Ps 73 ( l8 - 20 ) A* for the g hteous . their
highest good and blessedness consist
in communion with God. In comparison with God the
whole world is to them as nothing (22-25). He is their
portion. Despite deadly perils they can safely trust in
him (25), and all the more assuredly that he destroys
the wicked (27). A new thought, however, emerges in
v. 24. God, we are told, will guide the righteous
with his counsel, and afterwards take him to (or, with)
glory. 1 In the latter phrase, if we may acquiesce in
the received text, there must be a reference to the story
of Enoch (Gen. 624), which was very popular in post-
exilic times (see ENOCH, i), and the whole passage
is an assertion of individual immortality (so Delitzsch,
Davidson, Baethgen, and originally Cheyne), for the
text would be unfairly treated if we restricted the
reference to this present life. On grounds which he
has not yet fully stated, but which, from the note of
Wellhausen on the passage, 2 we may assume to be
partly grammatical, Cheyne now regards v. 24 b as
corrupt, and reads, And wilt make known to me the
path of glory. 3 Assuming, however, with Konig 4
that the grammatical difficulties can be overcome, can
we show that the new thought of which we have spoken
is thoroughly consistent with what follows? 6 To the
present writer no incongruity is visible. He would
venture to rest his case on the impassioned words of
v. 2512, which prove that the speaker felt assured of the
continuance of his union with God not only on earth
but also in heaven. For themselves the righteous make
no claim to material prosperity either here or hereafter ;
they look for and indeed possess something far higher.
As a corollary of the truth of the justice of God, how
ever, they do expect retribution for the wicked, both
here (vv. 18-21 27) and (apparently) hereafter (v. 19 f. ).
We have now done with the question of individual
immortality so far as it is dealt with in the OT. In
Job it emerges merely as an aspiration.
oo Tfoaiilr ao - "
di. iiesuiL as Only in pss 49 and 73 ^ if Qur interpre .
in ivi ua tat j on j s yalid) joes it rise to the stage
^ of conviction. The evidence, there
fore, in favour of an origin not later than 400 B.C. is far
from strong. Even were it wholly wanting, however, we
should be obliged, by the logical necessities of thought,
to postulate the doctrine. The doctrine of an individual
immortality of the righteous, and the doctrine of the
Messianic kingdom are presupposed as the chief factors
of the complex doctrine of the Resurrection which was
developed towards the close of the fourth century or at
latest early in the third century. With the evolution of
this resurrection hope, however, the entire doctrine of
individual immortality falls absolutely into the back
ground, and is not again attested, till the growing
dualism of the times leads to the disintegration of the
resurrection hope into its original elements about 100
B.C. (see 64). Indeed, never in Palestinian Judaism
down to the Christian era did the doctrine of a merely
individual immortality appeal to any but a few isolated
thinkers. The faithful looked forward to a blessed
future only as members of a holy people, as citizens of a
righteous kingdom that should embrace their brethren.
II. THE NATION. When we turn to the eschato-
1 H. Schultz (A T Theol. 760) rejects these translations.
With glory is that adopted by Driver (Par. Ps. 211) and
formerly by Che. (Psalttts). * Psalms, SOT(Heb.) 88.
8 i.e., the glory of God and of Israel and its members in the
Messianic age (Jew. Rel. Life, 240).
4 Syntax, 319 (pointed out to the writer by Prof. Cheyne).
5 Schwally (Das Leben, etc., 128 f.) denies this. For a much
fuller statement of the present writer s view see his Doctrine of
a Future Life, 73-77.
1347
ESCHATOLOGY
logical ideas that concern the nation as a whole we can
A t-^v*^i hardly venture to go beyond the
34. Eschatology , ,
retrardine the f:icts and hopes contamed m the P r -
nation phecies. In the main these cluster
at the outset round the familiar con
ception of the day of Yahwe. The day of Yahwe in
itself, however, constitutes not the blessed future, but
only the divine act of judgment which inaugurates it.
Hence the eschatology of the nation centres in the future
national blessedness introduced by the day of Yahwe.
This future was variously conceived. According to
the popular conception down to the eighth century, it
was merely a period of material and unbroken pros
perity which the nation should enjoy through Yahwe s
overthrow of Israel s national foes. This conception
gave place, however, in the eighth century, to the pro
phetic doctrine of the coming kingdom, for the realisa
tion of which two factors, and only two, were indis
pensable. This kingdom was to be a community of
Israelites first and chiefly, and in the next place a
community in which God s -will should be fulfilled.
Whether this kingdom was constituted under monarchi
cal, hierarchical, or purely theocratic forms was in itself
a matter of indifference. Since the Messiah formed no
organic part of the conception, he was sometimes con
ceived as present at its head, sometimes as absent.
How far the eighth century prophets foretold this
kingdom is still an unsettled question. As regards the
day of Yahwe there is no such critical difficulty. Our
study of the eschatology of the nation will begin with
this unquestioned element in Israel s expectations. It is
with a development of some complexity that we shall
have to deal a complexity most marked in exilic and
post-exilic times, where, as we have seen, the individual
no less than the nation began to maintain his claims to
righteous treatment. Ezekiel s attempt to satisfy these
claims will demand our attention afterwards. Some
centuries later what he had essayed to do was achieved
in a true synthesis of the eschatologies relating to the
nation and to the individual respectively (see 49).
The day of Yahwe concerns the people as a whole,
not the individual. It is essentially the day on which
_. f Yahwe manifests himself in victor} over
38. iJay ot , c A . ,!, uu
V IT
. . ,
popular idea.
f es - Amongst the Hebrews, as
sometimes among the Arabs, day had
Definite signification of day of
battle (e.g. , Is. 9 3 [4] the day of Midian ; see WRS
Prophets^, 397). The belief in this day was older
than any written prophecy. In the time of Amos it
was a popular expectation. Unethical and nationalistic,
it was adopted by the prophets and transformed into a
conception of thoroughly ethical and universal signifi
cance. It assumed the following forms.
(i. ) Popular conception ; a judgment on Israel s
enemies. This conception orfginated, no doubt, in the
old limited view of Yahwe as merely the national god
of Israel. We can distinguish two stages.
(a) In its earlier form it was held by the contem
poraries of Amos (8th century B.C.). The relation of
Yahwe to Israel in their minds was not ethical ; to a
large extent it was national (Am. 82). Israel s duty
was to worship Yahwe and Yahwe s was to protect
Israel. As the Israelites were punctual in the perform
ance of ceremonial duties (4s 5521/1), they not only
confidently looked forward to, but also earnestly prayed
for, the day of Yahwe as the time of his vindication
of them against their enemies. 1 Not so, says the
prophet. It is a day in which, not the claims of Israel,
but the righteousness of Yahwe, will be vindicated
against wrong-doing whether in Israel or in its enemies.
(b) The primitive conception of the day of Yahwe
_ . . was revived by Nahum and Habak-
_:r T W 1 : kuk : there was to be a judgment of
fe y Nah - Hab - Israel s enemies i. e. . the Gentiles
1 This belief that Yahwe must save his people survived,
despite the prophets, till the captivity of Judah in 586 B.C.
1348
ESCHATOLOGY
(650-600 B. C. ). It was the bitterness and resentment en
gendered by the sufferings of the Israelites at the hands
of their oppressors that led to this revival. The grounds,
however, on which the expectation of the intervention
of Yahwe was based were somewhat different. Accord
ing to the primitive view Yahwe was bound to intervene
on behalf of his people because of the natural affinities
between them. According to Nahum and Habakkuk, 1
the affinities are ethical. In fact, such was the self-
righteousness generated by Josiah s reforms that neither
Nahum nor Habakkuk makes any mention of Israel s
sin. In this they represent their people, who felt them
selves, in contrast with the wickedness of the Gentiles,
relatively righteous (see Hab. 1413). Hence the im
pending judgment will strike not righteous Israel, but
the godless Gentiles. Here we have the beginnings of
the thought that Israel is right, regarded as over against
the world the beginning, for in Nahum and Habakkuk
this view is applied only to a singJe nation, not, as in
later times, to all Gentiles. The later usage of designat
ing the Gentiles absolutely as the godless (o yy-i) and
Judah as the righteous (opns) is only the legitimate fruit
of Habakkuk s example. Cp Is. 26 10 Pss. 9 5 [6] 16 [i 7 ]/.
102-4 58io[n] 68 2 [ 3 ]/ 125s. In most subsequent
representations of the future the destruction of the
Gentiles stands as a central thought.
(ii. ) Prophetic pre-exilic conception. The prophetic
conception also passed through several stages.
(a) A day of judgment directed mainly against Israel.
For Amos, as we have seen, the day of Yahwe 2 is the
_ . day in which Yahwe intervenes to vindicate
, ,f himself and his righteous purposes. It
" P appears in this prophet only in its darker
ideas. side ( cp 5l8 }_ other nations will feel it in
proportion to their unrighteousness ; but unrighteous
Israel, being specially related to Yahwe, wfll experience
the severest judgments (82). Hosea is of one mind
with Amos. 3 He does not use the phrase the day of
Yahwe ; but he describes in awful terms the irreversible-
ness of the judgment (Hos. 1812-14 [11-13]). (AMOS,
i8/., HOSEA, 7 /.).
(3) Mainly against Judah. In Isaiah 4 and Micah
the day of Yahwe receives a new application ; it is
_ , _ directed against Judah. Not that warnings
T , of judgment against Israel are neglected
1 (26-2! 8 1-4 98 \_i\ff. 176-n 28 1-4). The
prophet takes all the chief surrounding nations within
his range ; but he does so only in relation to the judg
ment on his own people. Although he declares that
Yahwe s purpose of breaking Assyria concerns all
the nations (1425/1 ), there is no evidence to show that
he arrived at the conception of a universal or world
judgment. In 3 13, where there appears to be a reference
to it, the text is corrupt. 5 The idea of its universality
seems to be given in 2 11-21 ; but the language is
poetical.
Isaiah had now and then gleams of hope, and at all
times believed in a remnant, however minute. In
124-26 he even anticipates a second and happier Jewish
state. Micah, on the other hand, as far as the evidence
goes, was persistently hopeless. Jerusalem was to
become a ruin, and the temple -hill like a height
1 On the interpolations in these prophets, see NAHUM,
HABAKKUK.
2 This day of Yahwe, in its double character as a day of
punishment and a day of blessing, is also spoken of as that
day (Is. 17? 302 3 285 29 18 Hos. 2i8 Mic. 24 46 Siofo] Zech.
9i6 14469), that time (Jer. 31 1 8815 50 4 Zeph. Siof. Joel
3 [4] i), the day (Ezek. 7io Mic. 3e), the time (Ezek. 7 12).
3 On the interpolated passages, see AMOS, ?,_ff~., HOSEA, 4.
4 The present article builds on the critical results of the
article ISAIAH [the book] ; see also ISAIAH [the prophet].
Hence the following passages which deal with the Messianic age
and the Messiah are rejected as interpolations (they are assigned
to the exilic or post -exilic period by Cheyne ; generally also by
Duhm, Hackmann, Marti, and Vnlz) ; Is. 2 2-4 4a-6 7 14-16 9 1-7
[823-96] 11 16s ^ 18-25 256-9 28i629 17-24 35 i-io. On the age
of the conception of world -judgment, cp Che. Intr. Is., 53 246.
6 For croy read, with , ioy (see SBOT, Heb., ad loc.*).
1349
ESCHATOLOGY
crowned with brushwood (Mic. 3 12 ; see Nowack). Cp
ISAIAH i. , MICAH ii.
(c\ Against the whole world resulting in a survival
of a righteous remnant of Israel, the Messianic kingdom.
39. Later;
Zeph.
_ In the prophets with whom we have dealt
(except Nah. and Hab. ) the judgment of the
Gentiles is never conceived independently of
the judgment on Israel or Judah. In Zephaniah for the
first time it appears to be universal. It deals with the
whole earth, including the brute creation (l2/. ) : with
Jerusalem (18-13); with Philistia, Ethiopia, and Assyria
(2i-6) j 1 with all nations (38) ; with all the inhabitants
of the earth (Ii8). There is, however, a certain incon
sistency in the picture. The instruments of judgment
are a mysterious people, called the guests of Yahwe
(1 7 , probably the Scythians), who do not themselves
come within the scope of the judgment.
The conception is thus wanting in definiteness and
clearness. Zephaniah moves in the footsteps of Isaiah
in the account of the impending judgment ; but whereas,
in Isaiah, judgment on Israel and the nations stands in
inner connection with the prophet s conception of the
divine character and purposes, in Zephaniah it is with
out definite aim ; 2 its various constituents appear to
represent eschatological expectations already current,
while its wide sweep shows the operation of the prevail
ing monotheism. One point in the description is that,
in order that Yahwe s anger may destroy them, the
nations are to be assembled (3 2). We meet with this
idea here for the first time.
Later prophets make it very prominent (Ezek. 38 f. Is. 45 20
636 6616 34 1-3 Zech. 123^C 14 zf.) ; earlier prophets are wont to
mention definite and present foes (e.g., the Assyrians in Is.
17i2yC). In later prophets, the scene of this judgment on the
Gentiles is Jerusalem (Zech. 14 2 12-18 ; Joel3[4]2 Is. 6615).
A small righteous remnant will be left in Israel (3 11-14).
(iii. ) Exilic conception; judgment of Israel, man by
man, and of the Gentiles collectively ; restoration
40 At th
_ ..
m tne Messianic kingdom
and destruction of Gentiles. 3 The indi
vidualising of religion in Jeremiah and
Ezekiel (see above, 23 f.) was the precondition of the
restoration of Israel after the fall of Jerusalem.
According to Ezekiel, in God s visitations only the
wicked in Israel should be destroyed. When a new
Israel was thus created, Yahwe would further intervene
to vindicate his honour and his sole sovereignty over
the world, Israel should be restored to its own land,
and the Gentiles be destroyed.
A synthesis of the eschatologies of the nation and the
individual was in this way attempted wholly within the
sphere of this life. We are thus entering on a new
period in the development of eschatological thought.
Israel is already in exile or on the eve of exile ; but
Yahwe s thoughts are thoughts of peace, not of evil
(Jer. 29 n) : the exile will be temporary. The day of
Yahwe assumes a favourable aspect almost unrecognised
in pre-exilic prophecy. Israel shall be converted and
brought back to its own land and an everlasting Mes
sianic kingdom established. This kingdom will be
ruled over by Yahwe or by his servant the Messiah,
who is apparently mentioned here for the first time.
1 This idea of the destruction of the nations hostile to Judah
thus appears first in the prophets of the Chaldean age ; cp Jer.
2515-24. In the earlier prophets it is the destruction of definite
present or past foes that is announced. In the later it is that of
the nations generally : cp the Jewish reviser s addition in Jer.
25 32./: Ezek.38yr, fifth-century passages in Is. 34 63 1-6 Zech.
12 1-3, and the much later writings Is. 6616 18-24 Zech. 14 1-3
12-15.
2 Interpolations must be carefully separated (see ZEPHANIAH,
BOOK OF).
3 This is true only of Ezekiel. There is nothing in the
genuine Jeremiah about the destruction of the Gentiles as a
whole, and there is rjrobably in 16 19 (but not in 3 17) a genuine
prophecy of the ultimate conversion of the nations. See also
42 12 15. Only the impenitent Gentiles will be destroyed (12 17).
Jeremiah and Ezekiel are here fundamentally at issue. It is
their agreement on other points that led to their joint treatment
here.
1350
ESCHATOLOGY
ESCHATOLOGY
Although the judgment of Israel is not strictly
individualistic in Jeremiah as it is in Ezekiel, we shall
give the eschatological views of the two together ; they
can hardly be considered apart ; Ezekiel s are built on
Jeremiah s. In Jeremiah l the day of Yahwe is directed
T _ first and chiefly against Judah the
. . enemy will come upon it from the north
aian - (1 11-16); the city and temple shall be
destroyed (376-io) although account is taken also
of other nations (2515-24 ; cp 1 18). There is, however,
a hopeful outlook ; Israel shall be restored (23 7 f.
24 5 /. ). The restoration is to be preceded by
repentance (813 19-25), and accompanied by a change
of heart (3133/1). Restored to its own land, Israel
shall receive from Yahwe a king, a righteous Branch of
the house of David, who shall deal wisely and execute
judgment and justice (23s/! ). 2
The individualism appearing in Jeremiah is developed
in Ezekiel to an extreme degree. Judgment on Israel
42 In Ezekiel sha11 P roceed individually (only on
!1 the Gentiles is it to be collective).
Yahwe will give Israel a new heart (1117-21 8625-32)
and restore Israel and Judah to their own land, where,
in the Messianic kingdom (1722-24), they shall be ruled
by the Messiah (2127), by one king, namely David 3
(3423-31 3721-28). As for the Gentiles, referred to as
Gog, they shall be stirred up to march against Jerusalem
and shall there be destroyed (38). On the surviving
Gentiles no gleam of divine compassion shall ever light. 4
Monotheism has become a barren dogma. Particular
ism and Jewish hatred of the Gentiles are allowed free
scope.
(iv. ) Universalistic Conception of the Kingdom (550-
275 B.C.) ; redemption and earthly Messianic blessed-
, _ , ness for Israel and thus for the Gentiles. 5
43. oeconu -.,r . .
_ . , We are now to consider (a) the second
B la Isaiah and (&) later writers.
(a) According to the second Isaiah (Is. 40-48) and
his expander (Is. 49-55) there is in store for Israel not
punishment but mercy.
Already she has received double for all her sins (402). Cyrus
shall overthrow Babylon (4125 43 14 45-47 48nf.), and the
exiles shall return (463-5432-74820-22 49s). Jerusalem shall
be gloriously rebuilt (54 n f.), and its inhabitants become (like
the prophetic writer, 604) disciples of the divine teacher (54 13).
Never more shall it be assailed (4924-26 548-io 14-17).
Further, the salvation of Israel does not end in itself.
The author of the Songs of the Servant 6 reaches the
great conception of Israel as the Servant of Yahwe
(423/1 49 1-6 504-952i3-53i2), through whom all nations
shall come to know the true religion. In these writers
the legitimate consequences of monotheism in relation
to the Gentiles are accepted.
(6) A somewhat similar representation of the future
appears in the post-exilic passage Mic. 4 1-3 ( = Is. 22-4)
44 Other later and the later additions in J en 3l 7/>
.. according to which all nations, laying
aside wars and enmities, are to be con
verted and to form under Yahwe one great spiritual
empire with Jerusalem as its centre. 7
1 See JEREMIAH [Book of], and JEREMIAH [th prophet].
Interpolations must be separated, before Jeremiah can be
properly understood.
2 On this passage, as well as on other late Messianic prophecies,
see Che. few. Kel. Life, Lect. iii. Cp also MESSIAH.
3 The Messiah is not conceived here as an individual but as
a series of successive kings ; cp 458 46 16.
* Some scholars find in 17 23 a promise that the Gentiles will
seek refuge under the rule of the Messiah ; but 1724 shows that
this interpretation is unsound. The Gentiles are symbolized,
not by the birds of various wings in 17 23, but by the trees of
the field (17 24). As the cedar (17 23) represents the kingdom
of Israel, so the trees of the field represent the Gentile
kingdoms. The only object with which the latter seem to be
spared is that they may recognise the omnipotence of Yahwe.
8 See Che. Jew. ReL Life, lect. iii. and vi.
6 A like conception is probably at the base of the post-exilic
Is. ll9 = Hab. 2 14 (both editorial additions?), which declare that
the earth shall be filled with the true religion.
7 See ISAIAH ii., 5, and cp Che. Jew. Rel. Life, lect. iii.
I3SI
The same thought 1 is set forth in the Psalms.
See 2227-31 [28-32] 867 and note the fine expressions thou
confidence of all the ends of the earth 2 (65 5 [6]), and to thee
doth all flesh come as to one who hears prayer (05 2 [3]). In
Ps. 87 we have a noble conception which sums up in itself all the
noblest thought of the past in this ilirection. Jerusalem is to be
the mother city of all nations, the metropolis of an ideally
Catholic Church (Che.). Whole nations shall enter the Jewish
Church (874). So shall also individuals (? . 5).
Only two more passages, Is. 19 16-25 and Mai. In
call for attention ; but these are beyond measure re
markable. In Is. 19 16-25 (275 B.C.; Che.) the hopes of
Ps. 87 reappear but are far surpassed in universality.
Jerusalem, though the source of spiritual blessedness to
Egypt and Assyria (Syria), is neither nationally nor
spiritually paramount ; rather do these nations form a
spiritual and national confederacy in which Israel holds
not the first but the third place.
The widest universalism of all, however, is found in
Mai. In, where in regard to the surrounding nations
the prophet declares From the rising of the sun even
unto the going down of the same my name is great
among the Gentiles ; and in every place incense is
offered unto my name, and a pure offering. Here, as
most critics recognise, we have a testimony to the work
ing of the one divine spirit in non-Jewish religions (cp
MALACHI, 3). Similar universalism had already, it
appears, been expressed by Zoroastrianism. 4
( v. ) Narrmv Nationalistic Conception of the Kingdom
(about 520 to 300 B.C.); deliverance and Messianic
4B N t" 1 Blessedness for Israel: 5 (a) ministry or
* + p 1 bondage, or (6) destruction (partial or
tion 106 " com P lete ) for the Gentiles. 6 Concur
rently with the large-hearted universalism
(of the post-exilic writers) just described, there were
narrow one-sided views, which held more or less closely to
the particularism that originated with Ezekiel. Such were
the views most widely current in Judaism. According to
these the future world, the Messianic age, belonged to
Israel to Judah and Israel reunited (Hos. 3 5 Mic. 53[2j^
post-exilic) under the Messianic descendant of David
(Is. 9i-6 [823-95] 11 1-8 Mic. 52-4 [1-3]; all exilic or
later) ; the Gentiles had either no share at all, or only
a subordinate share as dependents or servants of Israel.
Their destiny was subjection or destruction- generally
the latter, always so in the case of those that had been
hostile to Israel.
(a) The Gentiles are to escort the- returning Israelites to
Jerusalem and become their servants and handmaids, Is. 14 1-3"
(cp 66 12-20). They shall build up the city walls (60 ip), bow and
be subject to Israel, 60 14 (or perish, (>0i2), becoming Israel s
herdsmen and ploughmen and vinedressers (61 5)."
(b) Still more frequently what is predicted for the Gentiles is
destruction. In 34_/J (450-430 B.C. ; Che.) there is described a
universal judgment in which all of them are thus involved
(34i-3). 9 In the fifth-century fragment 59 15^-20 those hostile
to Yahwe and Israel 1(l are singled out, whilst those that fear the
name of Yahwe are spared 59i8yT 6616 19 f. (666-16 18^-22
belong to the age of Nehemiah and Ezra); I 1 but in another
1 Cp also the addition in Zeph. 3 9 /
2 Cp also 256 in the small apocalypse in Is.24 256-8 26 zof.
27 i 12 f. This Che. assigns to the fourth century, Duhm to
the second. The later date would help to explain the very
advanced eschatology appearing in 2421-23, which speaks of a
preliminary judgment and then after a long interval of the final
judgment. On the latter judgment follows the theocratic
kingdom (24 23).
3 On the expectation of proselytes see also Is. 14 i 256 6636
and cp STRANGERS, PROSELYTE.
* Che. OPs. 292, 305 f.
5 There are many passages in the post-exilic additions to Is.
which speak of Israel only in relation to the Messianic age ; cp
4 2-6 29 16-24 35 i-io.
6 The only exception is Malachi.
7 Cheyne regards these verses as alien to 132-1421.
8 These passages are post-exilic ; 60 and 61 about 432 B.C.
(Che.).
9 We have a world-judgment described in 186-13, though the
judgment is there directed primarily against Babylon (cp
185 n), just as in 34 it is specially directed against Edom.
1" In the post-exilic (?) passage 9 1-7 it is the Messiah who
destroys the oppressors of Israel (e r . 4). This active role of the
Messiah is rare in the OT.
11 Cp the world-judgment in the fourth-century apocalypse in
Is. 24 256-8, where, after the judgment (2418-23), tne surviving
1352
ESCHATOLOGY
fragment of the same date (G3i-6), which closely resembles the
preceding passage in subject and phraseology, only destruction
is announced for all.
In Haggai and Zechariah," where the establishment of
the Messianic kingdom is expected on the completion
of the temple 1 (Zech. 8 15), to be rebuilt by the Messiah, 2
a pre-condition is the destruction of the Gentile powers.
We have, thus, a further development of that opposition
between the kingdom of God and the world-kingdoms
which appears in Ezekiel and is presented in its sharpest
features in Daniel. See, e.g. , Zech. 1 19-21 [22-4] 61-8,
Hag. 2 21 /.
In Joel (4th Cent. ; cp JOEL, 4) the enemies of
Judah who are not present foes but the nations generally,
are to be gathered together in order to
46. In Joel, etc. te annihilated ( 3 [ 4 ] ^ Even the
place of judgment is mentioned the valley of Jehosha-
phat, the choice being obviously determined by the
etymological meaning of the name. Yahwe will sit in
judgment (3 [4] 12) and all the Gentiles shall be destroyed.
This is a nearer approximation to the idea of a final
world-judgment than there is elsewhere in the OT save
in Dan. ?9/. Still the judgment is one-sided. The
day of Yahwe does not, as in the pre-exilic and
some exilic prophets and the exceptional post-exilic
Mai. 82-5 4 1-3 5 [3 19-21 23], morally sift Israel ; it serves
to justify Israel (225-27 3i6/. ) against the world (cp
the interpolation in the Second Isaiah, i.e., 4625). See
JOEL, 6.
With Joel and his successors prophecy is beginning
to change into apocalypse. The forecasts do not, as
a rule, stand in a living relation with the present ;
frequently they are the results of literary reflection on
earlier prophecies. This lack of organic relation with
the present, such as we find in the earlier prophets, is
specially clear in Joel s day of Yahwe.
According to the late post-exilic fragment Zech. 12 1-
13 6, 3 all the Gentiles while making an attack on
Jerusalem shall be destroyed before it (12s/ 9), whereas
in the still later fragment, chap. 14, it is only the hostile
nations that are to be annihilated (Zech. 14 12 f. ), the
remnant being converted to Judaism and led to attend
the yearly feast of Tabernacles (Zech. 14? 16-21). This
fragment is peculiar also in postponing divine intervention
till Jerusalem is in the hands of the Gentiles (14/1 ).
In the apocalypse of Daniel there is a great advance
on the eschatological ideas of its predecessors. When
the need of the saints is greatest (7 2i/.
12 T in the time of Antiochus Epiphanes)
the Ancient of Days will intervene ; his tribunal shall be
set up (7 9) ; the powers of this world shall be over
thrown (7n/-), and everlasting dominion given to his
holy ones (7 14 22 27). These will destroy all rival powers
(244), and become lords of all the surviving nations
(7 14). To the contrasted fates of the faithful and the
unfaithful in Israel who have deceased (12 1-3) we
shall return ( 59).
In defiance of historical sequence we have reserved
to the last the consideration of the composite chapters
T C^ f Is ^ f- Tne Y cal l f r special treat -
oo/. ment because they seem to present a
new development as regards the scene of the Messianic
kingdom there are to be new heavens and a new earth. 4
47.
Gentiles shall be admitted to the worship of Yahwe 25 6. It is
very remarkable that in 242iyC we read of an intermediate
place of punishment. The judgment, therefore, appears to be
conceived as consisting of two distinct acts. The clause 25 8a
declaring the annihilation of death appears to be an interpola
tion. It is against the general drift of the content, and wholly
alien to the thought-development of the period.
1 For Yahwe the temple is indispensable as his dwelling-place.
This thought is apocalyptic. It is not through moral reforma
tion but through divine intervention that the kingdom is to be
introduced.
2 After the example of Jer. 23s 33 15 Zechariah names him
1 the Branch (6 12 38 /). He identifies him with Zerubbabel (cp
Hag. 26-9 23).
3 See ZECHARIAH ii., T,ff.
* Cp Che. OPs. 404 jf.
1353
ESCHATOLOGY
We must not be misled by appearances, however.
When, in chap. 65, Jerusalem is to be especially blessed
it is to be transformed into a blessing (65 18) the
reference is apparently not to a New Jerusalem. It
is the same material Jerusalem as before, but super -
naturally blessed ; men still build houses and plant
vineyards (652i/~. ), sinners are still found (6620), * and
death still prevails. 6617, therefore, where the creation
of new heavens and a new earth is proclaimed, seems
out of place. In the Messianic times here foreshadowed
men live to a patriarchal age, and the animal world, as
in an earlier prophecy (11 6-9), loses its ferocity and
shares in the prevailing peace and blessedness (6525).
In 666-16 I &b f. we have a fragmentary apocalypse (see
Che. Intr. Is. 374-385) which describes the judgment
of the hostile nations (6616
Those of the Gentiles who escape are to go to the more
distant peoples and declare the divine glory (Ofi 19). Thereupon
the latter are to go up to Jerusalem, escorting the returning
exiles.
This apocalypse concludes with a remarkable reference to the
new heavens and the new earth, which is all but unintelligible.
Does the new creation take place at the beginning of the
Messianic kingdom? or at its close? By neither supposition can
we overcome the inherent difficulties of the text. If the new
creation is to be taken literally, it can only be supposed to be
carried out at the close of the Messianic kingdom ; but this
kingdom has apparently no close. Either, then, the expression
is used loosely and vaguely, or and the present writer inclines
to this view 6622 is a later intrusion. 2
III. SYNTHESIS. Concurrently with the establishment
if the Messianic hope in the national consciousness (see
8 34) the claims of the individual had,
49 Synthesis.
J as we have seen, pressed themselves
irresistibly on the notice of religious thinkers so irre
sistibly in fact that no representation of the future
which failed to render them adequate satisfaction could
hope for ultimate acceptance. The two questions
naturally came to be regarded as essentially related.
The righteous individual and the righteous nation must
be blessed together or rather the righteous man must
ultimately be recompensed, not with a solitary im
mortality in heaven or elsewhere but with a blessed
resurrection life with his brethren in the coming
Messianic kingdom. If, as we have seen, the doctrine
of an individual immortality failed to establish itself in
the OT, the grounds of such a failure were not far to
seek, and the very objections against the belief in a
blessed immortality of the righteous man apart from
the righteous community are actual arguments in favour
of the resurrection of the righteous to a share in the
Messianic kingdom.
The doctrine of a resurrection is clearly enunciated in
two passages of great interest, (a) as a spiritual concep
tion in Is. 261-19, and (6) as a mechanical conception in
p Dan. 12. (a) Is. 26 1-19 forms an inde-
50. Kesurrec- p enc j ent writing composed, according to
tionmis./b Cheyne about 334 BC The writer>
Dan. 1-. who S p ea k s ; n the name of the people,
looks forward to the setting up of the kingdom, with a
strong city, whose walls and bulwarks are salvation, and
whose gates will be entered by the righteous nation
(26 1/.) ; and since the nation is but few, the righteous
dead shall rise and share the blessedness of the regenerate
nation (26 19). This notable verse should, with Duhm
nnd Cheyne, be read as follows: Thy dead men
(Israel) shall arise : the inhabitants of the dust shall
1 Unless 652o is a gloss, as Haupt thinks (SBOT, Heb.
ad loc.).
2 Is. 51 16 and 60 19 can hardly be quoted in support of 6617
1)622, for in the last two passages the language is obviously meant
to be literal, whereas in the former it is metaphorical.
A synthesis of these two eschatologies, of the individual and
of the nation, was attempted by Ezekiel wholly within the sphere
of this life. The reconciliation, however, was achieved only
through a misconception and misrepresentation of the facts of
the problem. Still this doctrine of retribution gave such general
satisfaction that the need of a theory that would do justice to
the facts of the problem was not experienced save by isolated
thinkers till the close of the fourth century K.c.
1354
ESCHATOLOGY
awake l and shout for joy ; 2 for a dew of lights is
thy dew, and the earth shall bring to life the shades. 3
This positive belief in the resurrection of the right
eous did not win its way into acceptance, however,
till over a century later. Still, that it gained some
currency and underwent some development in the
interval is obvious from the next and only remaining
passage which attests it in the OT.
(l>) In Dan. 122(168 B.C.), which seems to be based on
Is. 26i9, 4 there is an extension of the statement. The
resurrection here is not only of the righteous but also
of the wicked, 5 who are to rise in order to receive their
due reward shame and everlasting contempt. 6 The
resurrection moreover ushers in the Messianic kingdom
(12 1). This spiritual form of the resurrection doctrine
is the genuine product of Jewish inspiration ; for all its
factors are indigenous to Jewish thought.
Between the rise of the doctrine enunciated in Is. 26
and Dan. 12 a considerable period must have elapsed,
sufficiently long to account for the loss of the original
significance of the resurrection as a restoration, in the
next world, of the life of communion with God which
had been broken off by death. During this interval the
spiritual doctrine passed into a lifeless dogma. In Is. 26
it was the sole prerogative of the righteous Israelite,
now,, it is extended to the pre-eminently good and the
pre-eminently bad in Israel. Without any consciousness
of impropriety the writer of Daniel can speak of the
resurrection of the wicked. Thus severed from the
spiritual root from which it grew the resurrection is trans
formed into a sort of eschatological property, a device
by means of which the members of the nation are pre
sented before God to receive their final award. The
doctrine must therefore have been familiar to the Jews
for several generations before Daniel.
B. APOCRYPHAL AND APOCALYPTIC
LITERATURE (200 B.C.-IOO A.D. )
Before entering on the further development of Jewish
eschatology, it will be helpful to sum up shortly the
_ . results arrived at by the writers whom we
01. Keview. have already cons idered. We find in
them an eschatology that to a large extent takes its
character from the conception of Yahwe. As long as
his jurisdiction was conceived as limited to this life,
there could be no such eschatology with reference to
the individual. When at last, however, Israel reached
real monotheism, the way was prepared for the moral -
isation of the future no less than of the present. The
exile contributed to this development by making possible
a truer conception of the individual. The individual,
not the nation, became the religious unit. Step by step
through the slow processes of the religious life, the
1 The designation of death as a sleep did not arise from the
resurrection hope. It is found in books that are unacquainted
with that hope. Death is described as sleep in Gen. 47 30
Dt. 31 16 Job 7 21 14 1 2, as the eternal sleep in Jer. 6139 57. In
the later period, therefore, in which the belief in the resurrection
was finally established, when the state of the departed is
described as a sleep, the word must in no case be taken in its
literal meaning.
- vn ar >d 71^33 are omitted by these scholars as interpolations,
and instead of Urn J3J they read Wrn pni.
3 See Che. Intr. Is. 158, and cp OPs. 403 f.
* Cp the inhabitants of the dust shall awake and many that
sleep in the land of dust shall awake.
5 This resurrection to punishment, or a belief perfectly akin,
is found in contemporary work; 24 256-8 262oyC 27 1 12 f., a
fragmentary apocalypse of 3^4 B.C. (Che.). Thus in 242I./I, the
host of heaven i.e., angelic rulers of the nation and the kings
of the earth are to be imprisoned in the pit and, after many
days, to be visited with punishment. Cp Eth. En. 549025.
According to later views God does not punish a nation until he
has first humiliated its angelic patron (Shir-rabba 276). More
over the future judgment of the Gentile nations will be preceded
by the judgment of their angelic chiefs (Beshallach 13 [see Weber,
L. d. Talmud, 165]).
6 The many who are condemned here are Jewish apostates.
The place into which they are cast is evidently Gehenna, though
the term does not appear in OT with this special penal sense.
The place is referred to also in Is. 6624 and probably in 50 n.
1355
ESCHATOLOGY
religious thinkers of Israel were led to a moral concep
tion of the future life and to the certainty of their share
therein. These beliefs were reached, not through
deductions of reason, as in Greece, but through spiritual
crises deep as the human personality and wide as
human life.
[At this point a caution must be offered to the student.
The study of the religious content of eschatological
52 Com ideas is to some extent distinct from
tive Eschat ttlat ^ ts * rm< nor can e i tner religious
. " or literary criticism (to the latter of
which special attention is given here)
enable us to dispense with the help of the comparative
historical study of the religious ideas of those peoples
which came most into contact with the Jewish. Some
excellent introductions to Biblical Theology are based,
consciously or unconsciously, on the principle that the
movement of religious thought in Israel was completely
independent of external stimulus. There can be no
greater mistake. Students of Jewish religion can no
longer avoid acquainting themselves with Babylonio-
Assyrian, Egyptian, Zoroastrian, and Greek religion,
and using any further collateral information that they
can get. 1 The abundance of fresh literary material for
the study of eschatology as it took form in Jewish minds
is our excuse for not, in this article, bringing Jewish
eschatology into relation to other eschatologies, more
especially Babylonian and Persian. The article would
have become disproportionately long if we had adopted
the course which is theoretically the only right one. It
must also be remembered that the spiritual crises
referred to above were conditioned by crises in the
history of the nation. We are far from denying that
the spirit as well as the wind, breatheth where it
listeth. Even the spirit of revelation, however, cannot
work on unprepared minds. Jewish eschatology there
fore can be fully sketched only on a canvas larger than
is here at our disposal, and this article must be supple
mented by reference to a group of other articles, includ
ing especially ANTICHRIST and PERSIA (the part dealing
with religion). On the narrative in Gen. 24*5-3 which
influenced directly or indirectly so many later writers,
reference should be made, for the mythic form of the
ideas, to CREATION, 20 (c). ED.]
In the writings (Apocryphal, Apocalyptic, etc.) that
we are now to consider, the eschatological ideas of the
_ ... later prophets are reproduced and further
f Mth d devel P ed - We sha11 find il convenient
to deal with this literature in three chrono
logical periods ; I. 200-100 ( 51-63), II. 100-1 B.C.
( 64-70), III. i-ioo A.D. ( 71-81). In treating
each of these periods, after (a) a general account of its
thought and (/>) an account of the various works it pro
duced, we shall show in detail (c) the development of
certain special conceptions viz. (i) Soul and spirit, (2)
Judgment, (3) Places of abode for the departed, (4)
Resurrection, (5) Messianic kingdom, Messiah, Gentiles.
Unlike the rest of the apocalyptic and apocryphal
books, Ecclus. and Tobit, instead of reproducing and
_ . p . developing the ideas we have just summar-
d T h t sed> re P resent tne older and more conser-
vative views. As lying off the main path
of religious development and witnessing to still surviving
primitive elements in Judaism, we shall consider them
together at the o*utset.
In Ecclus. the problem of retribution takes a peculiar
form. On the one hand it is purely conservative. All
_ . retribution without exception is confined
. CC US. to t j^ s j-f e . tnere j s . no inquisition of life
1 See Charles, Doctrine of a Future Life, pp. 24-25 n., 33 n.,
34 n., 57 n., on the relation of the religion of Babylonia to that
of ancient Israel ; pp. 116 n., 134-136, on the relation of Zoroas-
trianism to Judaism ; pp. 24 n. , 26-27 n -> 34 n. , 40 n., 57 n. , on
the analogies between the primitive religion of Israel and that
of Greece; and pp. 79 n., 137-151, on the development of the
doctrine of immortality in Greece as contrasted with that in
Palestine.
1356
ESCHATOLOGY
ESCHATOLOGY
in ShC6l (414). On the other hand it supplements
Ezekiel s theory of exact individual retribution with the
older view which he attacked, and seeks to cover its
obvious defects with the doctrine of the solidarity of the
family.
A man s conduct must receive its recompense in this life
(see especially 2ioyC and cp 23-9 9i2 Ylzf. also 1126). Obvi
ously, however, all men do not meet with their deserts. Hence
a man s sins are visited through the evil remembrance of his
name and in the misfortunes of his children after him (1128
2824-26 40 1 5 415-8). Similarly the posterity of the righteous is
blessed (447-15). Sheol is the abode of the shades and the region
of death 1 (9 12 14 12 16 41 4 48 5), where is no delight (14 16), no
praise of God (1717-28): man is plunged in an eternal sleep
(4619 22n 30i7 8823).- As regards the future of the nation,
the writer looks forward to the Messianic kingdom of which
Elijah is to be the forerunner (48 10), when Israel shall be
delivered from evil (5023_/T), the scattered tribes restored (8813 =
AV 3lin), the heathen nations duly punished (32 22-24 = AV
35isy;). This kingdom of Israel will last for ever (3725
[so Gk. and Eth. but wanting in Syr.]) 44 13 [so Gk. and Eth. ;
Heb. and Syr. read memorial instead of seed ]).
The eschatology of Tobit is very slight. Like the
earlier books, it entertains high hopes for the Jewish
_. , ... people. Jerusalem and the temple shall be
rebuilt with gold and precious stones, the
scattered tribes shall be restored, and the heathen, for
saking their idols, shall worship the God of Israel
(13io-i8 144-6). Sh.651 is taken in the traditional sense
eternal place, 1 6 aiuvios rtiiros, 3 6. As in Job and in
Ecclesiastes, Hades (cp 3io 182) is a place where exist
ence is practically at an end.
Sarah, the daughter of Raguel, prays : Command my spirit
to be taken from me, that I may . . . become earth . . . and
go to the everlasting place (36). This description is accounted
for by the writer s acceptance of the later doctrine of the spirit
( 17)-
We now pass to the writings of the Hasids or Assi-
deans, a small but important body of zealous Jews, first
referred to as a religious organisation
1 in Eth. En. 906 (see note in Charles s
ed. ). Its rise may be placed at about 200 B.C. 3 The
Hasids first appear as the champions of the law against
the Hellenizing Sadducees ; but they were still more the
representatives of advanced forms of doctrine about the
Messianic kingdom and the resurrection. The arrange
ment we shall adopt has been explained already ( 53).
58. Second I. SECOND CENTURY B.C.
Cent. B.C. Authorities.
Ethiopic Enoch 1-36 (ApocA- Sibylline Oracles Prooem-
57
LYPTIC, 27).
Daniel ( 59).
Ethiopic Enoch 83-90 ( 60).
mium and 3 97-818. 4
Test. xii. Patriarchs Some of
its apocalyptic sections( 61).
Judith (?) ( 62).
(a) General esckato logical development. It was under
the pressure of one of the most merciless persecutions re-
1 In 21 10 thoughts of the penal character of SheOl do not
seem to be quite absent.
2 The reference to Gehenna in 7 17 (e/cSiKTj(ris acre/Sous irvp
Kal o-KioAjjf) is probably corrupt (om. Syr. Eth. [best MSS]).
The Hebrew has nDI t?13N JYIpn 3-
3 On the earlier association of pious Jews called Q"jj; (the
humbled or humiliated), QIJJ; (the humble), QTDn (the pious,
covenant-keepers) cp PSALMS ; and on the AcriScuoi of Mace, cp
ASSIDEANS ; ISRAEL, 73.
4 This, the oldest, portion of the Sibylline oracles dates from
the latter half of the second century B.C. Since, however, it
belongs to Hellenistic Judaism, its evidence is not of primary
interest in the story of Palestinian eschatology, and may ad
vantageously be relegated to a note. Broadly speaking, we may
say that it combines^ though not always consistently, various
earlier descriptions of the future. It shows no trace of original
thought. Its eschatological forecasts are confined to this world.
Though so limited, it gives a vivid account of the Messianic
kingdom. Very soon the people of the Mighty God will grow
strong (3 194-198), and God will send from the east the Messiah,
who will put an end to evil war, slaying some and fulfilling the
Cromises in behalf of others, and he will be guided in all things
y God. The temple shall be resplendent with glory, and the
earth teem with fruitfulness (8652-660) [cp Che. OPs. 23].
Then the nations shall muster their forces and attack Palestine
(8660-668); but God will destroy them, and their judgment
shall be accompanied by fearful portents (8669-697). Israel, how
ever, shall dwell safely under the divine protection (3 702-709) ;
and the rest of the cities and the islands shall be converted, and
unite with Israel in praising God (8710-731). The blessings of
the Messianic age are recounted (8744-754; cp also 8367-380,
1357
corded in history that much of the eschatological thought
of this century was built up. In order to encourage the
faithful, various religious thinkers consolidated and devel
oped into more or less consistent theodicies the scattered
statements and intimations of an eschatological nature
in the OT. In these theodicies there is no vagueness or
doubt as to the ultimate destinies of the righteous and
the wicked. Faith rests in the reasonable axiom that the
essential distinctions between these classes must one
day be realised outwardly. The certainty of judgment
on the advent of the Messianic kingdom, accordingly, is
preached in the most emphatic tones, and the doctrine
is taught that at death men enter immediately in Sheol
on a state of bliss or woe which is but the prelude of
their final destiny. The righteous, both living and
dead, shall be recompensed to the full in the eternal
Messianic kingdom established on earth with its centre
at Jerusalem. Within the sphere of Judaism it is in
this second century B.C. that the eschatologies of the
individual and of the nation attain their most complete
synthesis (cp below, 82). The firm lines in which
these eschatological hopes are delineated mark the great
advance achieved in this period by religious thought.
(b) The theodicies of the several writers. Eth. En.
1-36 has been described in detail elsewhere (see APOCA-
59 Eth En LYPTICi 2 ?)- with re g ard to Daniel,
1-36; Daniel.
as the right point of view for studying it
has been given elsewhere (DANIEL ii. ),
and we have already noticed its main eschatological
conceptions (above, 47), we need only observe that
in it, as in Eth. En. 1-36, the Messianic kingdom is
eternal, its scene is the earth, and all the Gentiles are
subject (7i4). There is no Messiah. Those Jews who
are found written in the book J [of life] shall be
delivered during the period of the Messianic woes.
At the resurrection only those Jews who are pre-eminently
righteous and wicked shall rise from the land of dust " 2
(i.e., Sh661) to receive their deserts: the righteous to
inherit aeonian life, the wicked to be cast into Gehenna 3
(12 2). For the pre-eminently righteous in Israel, there
fore, Sh25l has become an intermediate abode, though
for the Gentiles it continues to be final. The risen body
seems to possess its natural appetites (as in Eth. En.
1-36). The Messianic kingdom of which the righteous
are members is one that bears sway over peoples.
The writer of Daniel makes a very special use of the belief in
angelic patrons of nations, of which another application will be
found in the almost contemporaneous work to which we turn
next viz., Eth. En. 83-90.
The author of Ethiopic Enoch 83-90, which was
written a few years later than Eth. En. 1-36 (on which
see APOCALYPTIC, 27), was a Hasld
. c . , , .
and a supporter of the Maccabean
(B C 166 161) movement - His eschatology is de-
" " veloped at greater length than that of
the Daniel apocalypse, to which in many respects it is
so closely allied. The belief in angelic patrons of
nations is common, as we have seen, to both writings ;
but our author applies it in a peculiar way.
en
OU.
-.
691-723). The kings of the earth shall be at peace with one
another (3 755-759)-
In the later section of this book the forecast is somewhat
different. Though in the earlier part, as we have seen above,
it was the Messiah that conducted the war against the hostile
nations, in this it is the prophets of God. Thus God will
establish a universal kingdom over all mankind, with Jerusalem
as centre (3 767-771), and the prophets of God shall lay down the
sword and become judges and kings of the earth (3-?&if.), and
men shall bring offerings to the temple from all parts of the
earth (3 jyz/.).
1 On this eschatological term see Charles, Enoch 131-133. In
the earlier passages in which it occurs it stands in connection
with temporal blessings only.
2 We assume that the reading 1BJ7 riD"IN is correct. For this
description of Sheol cp Job 17 16, Ps. 22 15, with Cheyne s note
referring to a similar Assyrian phrase. If this interpretation is
correct, Sheol, though it has become a temporary abode for the
righteous, still retains its traditional character.
3 Cp Che. OPs. 406.
1358
xii. Patr.
ESCHATOLOGY
The undue severities that have befallen Israel are not from
Clod s hand ; they are the doing of the seventy shepherds (.i.e.,
angels) into whose care God had committed Israel (8959) for
the destruction of its faithless members. These angels have not
wronged Israel with impunity, however; for judgment is at hand.
When their oppression is at its worst there shall be formed a
righteous league (i.e., the Hasldim ; 906), out of one of the
families of which shall come forth Judas the Maccabee(!X)7-i6),
who shall war victoriously against all the enemies of Israel.
While the struggle is still raging, God will intervene
in person.
The earth shall swallow the adversaries of the righteous
(90 18). The wicked shepherds and the fallen watchers shall
then be cast into an abyss of fire (i.e., Tartarus; 9020-25), ant
the blinded sheep i.e., theapostate(Jews) into Gehenna (90 2<>).
Whether the apostate Jews already dead are to be transferred
from Sheol does not appear.
Then God himself will set up the new Jerusalem
(9028/. ). The surviving Gentiles shall be converted and
serve Israel (90 30), the dispersion be brought back,
and the righteous Israelites be raised to take part in
the kingdom (9033). When all is accomplished, the
Messiah, whose role is a passive one, shall appear
(9037), and all shall be transformed into his likeness.
Until a critical edition of the XII. Patriarchs is
published, that composite work cannot be quoted as an
_ , authority. It belongs to very different
periods. It contains apocalyptic sections
that appear to belong to the second century
B.C. ; but the body of the work seems to have been
written about the beginning of the Christian era.
There are, moreover, numerous (Christian) interpola
tions. Many of the apocalyptic sections appear to have
constituted originally a defence of the warlike Macca-
bean high priests of the latter half of the second century
B.C., whilst others 1 seem to attack the later chiefs of
that family, in the last century B.C.
It is hardly possible to interpret otherwise such a statement
regarding Levi as that in Reub. (i ail fin. . He shall die for us
in wars visible and invisible ; cp Sim. 5.
Whilst one or more of these sections may be of an
earlier date, many of them may belong to the last
century B.C. Since, however, their eschatological
thought in some respects belongs to the second century
B. C. , we shall for the sake of convenience deal with it
here, though in no case shall we build upon it as a
foundation. 2
Levi has been chosen by God to rule all the Gentiles with
supreme sovereignty (Reub. 6). The Messiah of the tribe of
Levi, who will appear at the close of th^ seventh jubilee, will
possess an eternal priesthood 3 (Levi 18 ; apoc. sections of Levi =
J-5 8 10 14-18). This will endure till God comes and restores
Jerusalem and dwells in Israel (Levi 5). This Messiah will
judge as a king ; he will bind Beliar, open the gates of Paradise
and give his saints to eat of the tree of life (Levi 18 cp Eth. En.
264-6). To the Messianic kingdom on earth, all the righteous
patriarchs shall rise (Sim. 64 Zeb. 10 Jud. 25). Then the spirits
of deceit shall be trodden under foot (Sim. Zeb. 9) and Beliar
destroyed (Levi 18 Jud. 25). There shall be only one people
and one tongue (Jud. 25). The surviving Gentiles are in all cases
to be converted, save in Sim. 6 where they are doomed to anni
hilation. According to Benj. 10 there is to be a resurrection,
first <if the OT heroes and patriarchs, and next of the righteous
and of the wicked. Thereupon is to follow judgment, first of
Israel and then of the Gentiles. It is doubtful whether we are
to regard this resurrection as embracing Israel only or all man
kind.
The designation of Michael in Dan. 6 (cp Lev. 5
Judith 25) as a mediator between God and man is
noteworthy.
It may be permitted in conclusion to refer to the
book of Judith. The words in which the Gentile
B2 T H th enermes f Israel are threatened (1617)
1 obviously refer to Gehenna, and remind us
of the very late appendix to Is. 66 (v. 23 /.), which
however refers to unfaithful Jews. The view of
Gehenna as the final abode of the Gentiles is not again
attested till the first century of the Christian era (in Ass.
1 Cp Levi 14 16 (beg.). These passages resemble the Psalms
of Solomon that assail the Sadducean priesthood.
- In the references here made we shall use the better readings
of the A rmenian Version.
3 Sometimes a Messiah of the tribe of Judah is spoken of.
There is nothing against the Jewish origin of such passages ;
but others which combine the two ideas are Christian.
1359
ESCHATOLOGY
Mos. 10 10 4 Ezra 7 36). In so far, the date (circa 63
B.C.) given elsewhere for this book (see JuniTH, 5)
seems preferable to the earlier one advocated by Schurer.
(c) Development of special conceptions in second century
K. c. i. Svtiland Spirit. The later view of the spirit
63 Snecia.1 ( see 2O ) ^ the divine breath of life
conceptions, jf*^ H un <J erlle t Ecdus ^ Bar - 2 7
( the dead also who are in Hades, whose
spirit is taken from their bodies ); see also Tob. 36 l
Judith 10 13. Elsewhere in the second century we
can trace only the older Semitic view (above, 19),
according to which soul and spirit are practically
identical. The apocalyptic use, however, diverges
from the more primitive ; what is predicated of soul
can be predicated also of spirit. In Daniel indeed we
always find, not soul but spirit, even where soul
could have been used with perfect propriety. 2
In Enoch 1-36 the inhabitants of Sh661 are spoken of
as souls in 22s (cp 9s), but generally as spirits
(22 5-7 9 11-13). We even find the strange expression
spirits of the souls of the dead 3 (9io). Here also,
therefore, soul and spirit are practically identical.
Fallen angels and demons are always spoken of as
spirits (the former in 136 154 6/., the latter in
169 ii 16i). Indeed soul is never in Jewish litera
ture used of angels, fallen or otherwise (cp above, 20).
2. Judgment. The judgment, which is preliminary
and final, involves all men living and dead, the faithless
angelic rulers, and the impure angels. It will be on the
advent of the Messianic kingdom. These points mark the
development of the second century B. c. upon the past.
There is the further development that the judgment is
sometimes (?) conceived as setting in, immediately after
death, in an intermediate abode of the soul. In Eth. En.
1-36 there is a preliminary judgment on the angels who
married the daughters of men, and likewise on all men
who were alive at the deluge (10 1-12). The final judg
ment before the advent of the Messiah s kingdom will
involve the impure angels (10 12/), the demons who
have hitherto gone unpunished (16 i), and all Israel with
the exception of a certain class of sinners. In Daniel
there is a preliminary judgment of the sword executed
by the saints (244 722), as well as the final world-judg
ment (7g a /. ), which will introduce the Messianic kingr
dom by God himself. There is no mention of judgment
of angels ; but judgment of the angelic patrons of Persia
and Greece may be assumed. In Eth. En. 83-90 there
is the first world-judgment of the deluge (89), the judg
ment of the sword executed under Judas the Maccabee
(90 19 16), and the final judgment on the impure angels
and on the faithless angelic patrons (9020-25). The last
serves to introduce the Messianic kingdom on the present
earth.
3. Places of abode for the departed. i. Sh&ol. Sheol
undergoes complete transformation in the second
century B.C. and becomes an intermediate place of
moral retribution for the righteous and the wicked.
(The traditional sense probably survives in Dan. 122,
but not in Eth. En. 22. ) All the dead who die before
the final judgment have to go to Shgol. It has four
divisions ; two for the righteous and two for the wicked.
From three of them there is a resurrection to final judg
ment ; but from the fourth, where are the wicked who
met with violent death, there is no rising. Sheol has in
this last case become hell.
ii. Paradise. In the second century only two men,
Enoch and Elijah, were conceived as having been
1 How thoroughly life was identified with the presence of the
spirit appears from this verse ; Command my spirit to be taken
from me, that I may be released, and become earth.
3 In Dan. 7 15 it has generally been thought that the spirit is
spoken of as enclosed in the sheath (njnj) of the body ; but we
should no doubt, with Buhl and Marti, read rip [ 33 because
of this. (587 which gives (v TOVTOIS, and Vg., imply rt]"l 133.
3 In these references the Gizeh Greek text has been followed.
In the Ethiopia text the term soul is used instead of spirit in
223 9 n^, but corruptly.
1360
ESCHATOLOGY
ESCHATOLOGY
admitted to Paradise on leaving this world (Eth. En.
87s/ 8952). 1 The cause is manifest. See ENOCH, i.
iii. Gehenna. Gehenna is definitely conceived in
Dan. 122 Eth. En. 27 1/. and 9026 /. (?) as the final,
not the immediate, abode of apostates in the next
world.
iv. The abyss of fire. 2 This is the final place of
punishment for the faithless angelic rulers and for the
impure angels (Eth. En. 18n-19 21 90 21-25). In Eth.
En. 18n-i6 21 1-6 the fiery abyss for the impure angels
is distinguished from another fiery abyss mentioned in
2l7-io. This latter may be for the faithless angelic
rulers.
4. Resurrection. -In Eth. En. 83-90 (see 90 33) there
is a resurrection only of the righteous ; in Dan. 122 f.,
of those who are righteous and wicked in a pre-eminent
degree ; and in Eth. En. 22 of the righteous and of
such of the wicked as had not met with retribution in
life. Thus in Eth. En. 83-90 the older and spiritual
form of the doctrine is preserved. In all cases the
righteous rise to participate in the Messianic kingdom.
5. Messianic kingdom. In Dan. and Eth. En. 1-36
the scene of the Messianic kingdom is the earth. In
Eth. En. 83-90 its centre is to be, not the earthly
Jerusalem, but the new Jerusalem brought down from
heaven. This is the first trace in the second century
B. c. of a sense of the unfitness of the present world for
Messianic glory. The kingdom is to be eternal. Its
members are to enjoy a life of patriarchal length (Eth.
En. 5 9 256), or to live for ever (9033). In Dan. 122/.
the point is left doubtful. Besides the Messiah in Sibyll.
Or. 3 652-654 there is no mention of the Messiah in the
second century B.C. except in Eth. En. 83-90 (see 9037),
where, however, his introduction seems due merely to
literary reminiscence.
6. Gentiles. According to Eth. En. 10 21, all the
Gentiles are to become righteous and worship God.
Only the hostile Gentiles are to be destroyed (Dan. 2244
7 n/ Eth. En. 909-i6 18). The rest will be converted (?)
and serve Israel (Dan. 7 14 Eth. En. 9030).
64. Last H- LAST CENTURY B.C.
Cent. B.C. Authorities for 104-1 B.C.
Ethiopia Enoch 91-104 ( 65). Psalms of Solomon ( 67).
Ethiopia Enoch 37-70 ( 66). Sibylline Oracles 3 1-62 "
i -Maccabees ( 66, end). 2 Maccabees ( 69).
(a) General eschatological development. A great
gulf divides the eschatology of the last century B.C. as
a whole from that of its predecessor. The hope of an
eternal Messianic kingdom on the present earth is all
but universally abandoned. 3 The earth as it is, is mani
festly regarded as wholly unfit for the manifestation of
the kingdom. The dualism which had begun to assert
itself in the preceding century is therefore now the
preponderating dogma. This new attitude compels
writers to advance to new conceptions concerning the
kingdom.
(i. ) Some boldly declare (Eth. En. 91-104), or else
imply (Pss. Sol. 1-16 2 Mace. [?]), that the Messianic
kingdom is only temporary, and that the goal of the
risen righteous is not this transitory kingdom but heaven
itself. In the thoughts of these writers the belief in a
personal immortality has disassociated itself from the
doctrine of the Afessianic kingdom, and the synthesis of
the two eschatologies achieved in the preceding century
(see 58) is anciv resolved into its elements.^ This is a
natural consequence, as we have said, of the growing
dualism of the times.
i Cp Che. OPs. 414.
" Cp PERSIA (the part dealing with religion).
3 Only in Pss. Sol. 17 f. of this century does the Messianic
kingdom seem to be of eternal duration on the present earth
(cp 17 4). Since the Messiah himself, however, is only a man,
his kingdom is probably of only temporary duration (see below,
67 [i.], and APOCALYPTIC, 85).
4 On the synthesis effected in the NT, see 82; on the
exceptional anticipation of this in Eth. En. 27-70, see 66.
1361
(ii. ) Quite another line of thought, however, was
possible. The present earth could not, it is true, be
regarded as the scene of an eternal Messianic kingdom ;
but a renewed and transformed earth could. The
scene of the eternal Messianic kingdom would be such
a new earth, and a new heaven, and to share in this
eternal kingdom the righteous should rise (Eth. En.
37-70). Here the idea of a new heaven and a new
earth, which appeared illogically in Is. 65 f. ( 48), is
applied with reasonable consistency.
It is further to be observed that writers of the former
class (i. ) anticipated a resurrection only of the righteous,
a resurrection of the spirit not of the body (Eth. En.
91-104 Pss. Sol. ) ; but writers of the latter class (ii. )
looked forward to a resurrection of all Israel (Eth. En.
37-70) at the close of the temporary, and the beginning
of the eternal, Messianic kingdom. In 2 Mace., which
diverges in some respects from both classes, a bodily
resurrection of the righteous, and possibly of all Israel,
is expected.
Again, in contradistinction to the preceding century
there is now developed a vigorous, indeed a unique,
doctrine of the Messiah, the doctrine of the supernatural
Son of Man (Eth. En. 37-70).
Finally, the present sufferings of Israel at the hands
of the Gentiles are explained as disciplinary (2 Mace.
(5 12-17 cp Jud. 827 Wisd. 1222).
Israel is chastened for its sins lest they should come to a
head ; but the Gentiles are allowed to fill up the cup of their
iniquity (cp Gen. 15 16 Dan. 8 23 9 26).
(b) Eschatologies of the several writers. We have said
that the eschatology of the last century B. C. introduces
= Tui. T- us into a world of new conceptions (S 70).
65. Etn. En. TTTu-i t ... f \" i-
91 104 Whilst in the writings of the preceding
century the resurrection and the final judg
ment were the prelude to an everlasting Messianic king
dom, in Ethiopic Enoch 91-104 they are adjourned
to the close. The Messianic kingdom is thus, for the
first time, conceived as temporary. It is therefore no
longer the goal of the hopes of the righteous. Their
soul finds its satisfaction only in a blessed immortality
in heaven. The author acknowledges that the wicked
seem to sin with impunity ; but he believes that this is
not so in truth ; their evil deeds are recorded every day
(1047), and they will suffer endless retribution in ShSol
(99n), a place of darkness and flame (for ShCol is here
conceived as hell), from which there is no escape (98310
103 7 /)-
In the eighth week, the Messianic kingdom (but without a
Messiah) shall be established, and the righteous shall slay the
wicked with the sword (91 12 967961 98 12 9946). To this
kingdom the righteous who have departed this life shall not
rise. At its close, in the tenth week, snail be held the final
judgment ; the former heaven and earth shall be destroyed,
and a new heaven created (91 14-16). The righteous dead, who
have hitherto been guarded by angels (100 5), in a department
of Sheol (? cp 4 Ezra 441), shall be raised, 91 10 923 ( not .
however, in the body, but as spirits ; 103 }/.), and the portals
of heaven shall be opened to them (1042); they shall joy as
the angels (1044), becoming companions of the heavenly host
104e), and shining as the stars for ever (1042).
The interest of the author of Eth. En. 37-70 is in the
sphere of the moral and spiritual. This is manifest
FtVi V even m h s usua l name for God, the
, Lord of Spirits, and in the peculiar turn
07 "7n o nn
1 M that he gives t0 the trisa S ion in 39 12
1 liacc. . j_T o iy ( holy, holy is the Lord of spirits :
he filleth the earth with spirits. His views are strongly
apocalyptic and follow closely in the wake of Daniel.
Unlike the writer of chaps. 91-104 ( 65), however, he
clings fast to a future kingdom of (righteous) Israel,
destined to endure for ever, to which the righteous shall
rise. The righteous individual will thus find his con
summation in the righteous community.
In addition to the eschatological details given elsewhere
(APOCALYPTIC, 30) we should observe the following points:
The Son of Man is to judge all angels, unfallen and fallen (61 8
564), and men righteous and sinners (62 2/i), kings and mighty
(623-11 681-411). The Messiah is for the first time represented
as a supernatural being, Judge of men and angels. The fallen
1362
ESCHATOLOGY
angels are to be cast into a. fiery furnace (546), the kings and
the mighty to be tortured in Gehenna by the angel of punish
ment (53 3-5 54 i_/), and the remaining sinners and godless to be
driven from the face of the earth (38 3 41 2 45 6) ; the Son of
Man shall slay them by the word of his mouth (022). Heaven
and earth shall be transformed (45 $/.), the righteous shall have
their mansions therein (39 6 41 2), and live in the light of eternal
life (083). The elect one shall dwell amongst them (444), and
they shall eat and lie down and rise up with him for ever (t>2 14).
They shall be clad in garments of life (6 2.is/.), and become
angels in heaven (51 4) ; and they shall seek after light and find
righteousness (58 if.), and grow in knowledge and righteousness
(58 5).
i Mace, is quite without eschatological teaching, if
we except the writer s expectation of a prophet in 446
144I. 1
In considering the Psalms of Solomon the eschato
logical system of the last two psalms (17 /.}, which
differs in many important respects from that of Pss.
1-16, may be taken first.
i. The eschatology of Ps. Sol. 17/. is marked by a
singular want of originality.
There is hardly a statement relative to the hopes of Israel
that could not be explained as a literary reminiscence. Where
_ . these psalms are at all original their influence
67. irsalms ; s distinctly hurtful ; the proof that the popular
Of Solomon, aspirations with which they connect the Messiah
BC 70-40. were injurious to the best interests of the nation
was written in fire and blood (see MESSIAH).
The following is the account of the Messiah (who is
specifically so called in I7s6 186 8).
He is to be descended from David (17 23), a righteous king
(1^35), pure from sin (1741). He will gather the dispersed
tribes together and make Jerusalem holy as in the days of old.
No Gentile shall be suffered to sojourn there, nor any one that
knows wickedness. The ungodly nations he shall destroy with
the word of his mouth (1727 cp 173941). The remaining
Gentiles shall become subject to him (IT ^if.); he will have
mercy on all the nations that come before him in fear (17 38).
They shall come from the ends of the world to see his glory,
and bring their sons as gifts to Zion (17 34).
The Messianic kingdom is apparently of temporary
duration. There is no hint of the rising of the righteous
who have died ; only the surviving righteous are to
share in it (cp 17 50). We might infer the transitory
nature of the Messianic kingdom from the fact that the
Messiah is a single person, not a series of kings. The
duration of his kingdom is to be regarded as conter
minous with that of its ruler.
ii. In Pss. Sol. 1-16 there is hardly a single reference to
the future kingdom and none to the Messiah. Since,
however, they paint in glowing colours the restoration of
the tribes (834 11 3-8), they look for a Messianic kingdom
at all events a period of prosperity, when God s help
should be enjoyed (7 9). Beyond prophesying vengeance
on the hostile nations and on sinners, however, the
psalmists do not dwell on this coming time. For them
the real recompense of the righteous is not bound up
with an earthly kingdom. The righteous rise, not to
any kingdom of temporal prosperity, but to eternal life
(3i6 13g) ; they inherit life in gladness (146), and live
in the righteousness of their God (15 15). There seems
to be no resurrection of the body. As for the wicked,
their inheritance is Hades (here = hell), and darkness
and destruction (146 cp 15 n), whither they go
immediately on dying (162). The eschatology of Pss.
1-16 thus agrees in nearly every point with that of
Eth. En. 91-104 ( 6s). 2
In Sibylline Oracles 81-62, written before 31 B.C.
(see APOCALYPTIC, 85), God s kingdom is expected
and the advent of a holy king who
shall sway the sceptre of every land a
(849). This Messianic king is to reign
for all the ages (850). These words
must not be pressed, however ; for, a few lines later, a
universal judgment on all men is foretold (853-56 dof.).
For a similar limitation cp Apoc. Bar. 40s 73 1.
1 Cp Che. OPs. 40 n.
" Cp APOCALYPTIC, 8 85. The sketch there given is merely
to justify dividing Pss. 1-lti from 17./C
* 7jei 6" ayi/bs afa Traorjs yrjs (TKTJTTTpa KpaTjjcrcov.
1363
81-62
ESCHATOLOGY
There is in 2 Mace, only one direct reference to a
Messianic kingdom : the youngest of the seven brethren
__ prays that God may speedily be gracious
9. 2 mace. to the nation . ^ 37 j The hope of it is
implied, however, in the expectation of the restoration
of the tribes (2i8). The righteous rise in the body to
share in the kingdom where they will renew the common
life with their brethren (729). The kingdom is to be
eternal ; for God has established his people for ever
(14 15). There is certainly no hint of a Messiah. Thus
the eschatology is really that of the second century B. C.
(58^).
Since the Messianic kingdom here implied is to be of a
material character and therefore presumably on earth for the
righteous rise to an eternal life (7 9 36), in a body constituted as
the present earthly body (7n 22^ 1446) we may reasonably
infer that the eternal kingdom thus expected was to be upon the
present earth, as in Eth. En. 83-00 ( 60). Thus the eschatology
of this book belongs really to the second century B.C. as the
epitomizer claims.
On the other hand the doctrine of retribution, present
and future, plays a significant role. Present retribution
follows sin, for Israel and for the Gentiles. In the case
of Israel its purpose is corrective ; but in that of the
Gentiles it is vindictive (6 13 ff. ). To enforce his doctrine
the writer reconstructs history, and corrects the im
perfect assignment of destiny to the heathen oppressors,
Epiphanes (7i7 95-12) and Nicanor (1632-35), and to the
Hellenising Jews, Jason (67-10) and Menelaus (138).
Even the martyrs confess their sufferings to be due to sin
(7 18 33 37), and pray that their sufferings may stay the wrath
of the Almighty (738). Immediate retribution is a token of
God s goodness (G 13). Our present concern, however, is mainly
with retribution beyond the grave. The righteous and the
wicked in Israel enter after death the intermediate state (Hades)
(15 23), where they have a foretaste of their final doom (6 26),
which takes effect after the resurrection. There is to be a
resurrection of the righteous ("911 14 23 29 36), perhaps even of
all Jews (1243_/), but not of the Gentiles. These remain in
Sheol. Possibly its torments are referred to in 7 17. When the
heathen die they enter at once on their eternal doom (7 14).
(c) Development of special conceptions in the last century
K.C. i. Soul and Spirit. As in the preceding century,
so also in this, the doctrine of soul
and spirit follows a i most w j t hout ex-
. .
70. hpeciai
concept S. ce p t j orlj the older Semitic view (above,
19). The exceptions are in 2 Mace. lizf.
In v. 22 the mother of the seven martyred brethren declares :
I did not give you spirit and life (TO Tri-eC/ua ai -n\v /^(ar^y).
Here, as in Gen. 2 4/>-3 (above, 20), the nvev^a is the life-giving
principle of which the o>rj is the product. The same phrase
recurs in v. 23 and in 14 46. The withdrawal of this spirit, how
ever, does not lead to unconsciousness in Shepl ; the departed
are still conscious (6 26). The writer is, thus, inconsistent ;^for
the ordinary dichotomy of soul and body is found in 630 7 37
14 38 15 30.
In all the remaining literature of this century there is
only a dichotomy either spirit 1 and body, or soul and
body. Some writers use one of these pairs, some use
both ; in none is the spirit conceived as in Gen. 24^-3.
In the oldest writing of the century the departed in Sheol are
spoken of as spirits (Eth. En. 98 10 103 3 4 8) or as souls
(102s ii 1087). On the other hand, in the Similitudes and the
Pss. Sol. (nearly contemporaneous works), the term spirit is
not used of man at all. only soul ; see Eth. En. 453 63 10,
Pss. Sol. passim, but particularly 9 7 and 9 9 where the highest
spiritual functions are ascribed to the soul. Finally in the
of the wicked (108 3 6) and of the righteous (r>v. 79 n).
2. Judgment. The judgment is final and involves
all rational beings, human and angelic. It will be
either at the advent of the Messianic kingdom, or (and
this is the common view) at its close.
It is only in Eth. En. 37-70 that it is regarded as introducing
the Messianic kingdom, and here it differs from the conception
which prevailed in the second century, in that it ushers in the
Messianic kingdom, not on the present earth, but in a new
heaven and a new earth.
The main difference, however, between the judgment in the
eschatologies of the last century and in those of the second is
that all (?) other writers of the last century, except Eth. En.
1 In Eth. En. 154 the antithesis between the spiritual and the
fleshly is strongly emphasized ; but the contrast is not between
two parts of man but between the nature of angels and of men.
1364
ESCHATOLOGY
37-70, conceived it as forming the close of the temporary Mes
sianic kingdom (so clearly in Eth. En. 91-104 and Pss. Sol. 1-16,
probably also in Ps. Sol. 17 f. and 2 Mace. ; see above, 65
67). There is, however, in Eth. En. 91 12 95 7 96 i 98 12, etc., a
preliminary judgment of the sword which (as in Dan. 244) is
executed by the saints. In Ps. Sol. 17_/? this Messianic judg.
ment is executed forensically by the Messiah.
3. Places of abode of the departed. i. Paradise.
Paradise, which in the preceding century had been
regarded as the abode of only two men ( 63 [3] ii. ),
has come to be regarded as the intermediate abode of
all the righteous and elect; Eth. En. 61 12 702 ff.
(Noachic Fragment, 608). In the Similitudes the
righteous pass from Paradise to the Messianic kingdom.
ii. Heaven. For the first time in apocalyptic litera
ture heaven becomes, after the final judgment, the
abode of the righteous as spirits (Eth. En. 10424
103 3 /).
iii. Shgol. There is a considerable variety in the
views entertained about Sheol ; but most of them have
been met with earlier.
(a) It is the intermediate abode of the departed
whence all Israel (?) rises to judgment (Eth. En. 51 1). 1
In 2 Mace, this is the only sense (6 23). It is noteworthy that
the writer regards a moral change as possible in Sheol (see
12 42-45). According to Eth. En. 100 5 the souls of the righteous
are preserved in a special part of Sheol (? cp 4 Ezra 4 41).
(6) Sheol is Hell.
Eth. En. 63 10 56 8 99 n 1037 and always in Pss. Sol. [14 6
15 ii 16 2]. Note how in Pss. Sol. Sheol is associated with fire
and darkness ; it has drawn to itself attributes of Gehenna. In
the Similitudes Sheol is an intermediate abode for all that die
before the advent of the Messianic kingdom (51 i). The wicked
that are living on its advent shall be cast into Sheol ; but
Sheol then becomes a final abode of fire (63 10).
(c) ShCSl is Gehenna in the interpolated passage,
Eth. En. 568.
iv. Gehenna. Two new developments of this idea
appear in the last century B. c.
(a) The first is referred to in Eth. En. 48 9 SiiyC 62i2yi
According to the prevailing view of the second century B.C.,
Gehenna was to be the final abode of Jewish apostates whose
sufferings were to form an ever present spectacle to the righteous ;
but in the Similitudes (37-70) Gehenna is specially designed for
kings and the mighty, and it is forthwith to vanish for ever with
its victims from the sight of the righteous. This latter idea is
due to the fact that in the Similitudes there were to be, after the
judgment, new heavens and a new earth.
(b) The second development is attested in Eth. En. 91-104,
where Gehenna is a place only of spiritual punishment, whereas
hitherto it had been a place of spiritual and also of corporal
punishment ; in 98 3 we read of spirits being cast into the
furnace of fire (cp also 103 8). In this writer Sheol and Gehenna
have become equivalent terms (see 99 n 1087, also 100 9). The
same conception is found in the Essene writing Eth. En. 108 6.
v. Burning furnace. In Eth. En. 546 (cp 18n-i6
21 1-6) the final abode of the fallen angels is a burning
furnace.
4. Resurrection. The views of the last century B.C.
on the resurrection show a great development on those
of the preceding century. In Eth. En. 91-104 ( 65) and
the Pss. Sol. (67) the resurrection is still only spiritual ;
but 2 Mace, puts forward a very definite resurrection of
the body (7n 1446), as does also Eth. En. 37-70. Only,
the body is a garment of light (62 is/ ), and those who
possess it are angelic (51 4). Similarly Eth. En. 91-104
and Pss. Sol. agree in representing the resurrection as
involving only the righteous, and Eth. En. 37-70 and
2 Mace. (?) in extending it to all Israel.
5. (a) Messianic Kingdom. See 64.
(b} Messiah. In the preceding century the Messianic
hope was practically non-existent. Under Judas and
Simon the need of a Messiah was hardly felt. In the
1 Eth. En. 51 i is difficult. Both Sheol and hell (i.e., Jiaguel
-destruction) are said to give up their inhabitants for judgment.
Are we therefore to regard Sheol and hell as mere parallels here,
or is Sheol the temporary abode of the righteous and hell that
[ t] 16 wicked ? The fact that Paradise is the intermediate
abode of the righteous in the Similitudes (see above, i.) would
favour the former alternative. Sheol would then in all cases be
a place of punishment intermediate or final in the Similitudes.
The connotation of Sheol, however, in this section may not be
fixed. The second alternative, therefore, seems the true one ;
for She5l and hell appear to hold both good and evil souls.
1365
ESCHATOLOGY
first half of the last century B.C. it was very different.
Subject to ruthless oppressions, the righteous were in
sore need of help. As their princes were the leaders in
this oppression, the pious were forced to look for aid to
God. The bold and original thinker to whom we owe
the Similitudes conceived the Messiah as the super
natural Son of Man, who should enjoy universal
dominion and execute judgment on men and angels
(cp MESSIAH, SON OF MAN). Other religious
thinkers, returning afresh to the study of the earlier
literature, revived (as in Pss. Sol.) the expectation of
the prophetic Messiah, sprung from the house and
lineage of David (17 23). See above ( 67); also
APOCALYPTIC, 32. These very divergent concep
tions took such a firm hold of the national consciousness
that henceforth the Messiah becomes generally, but not
universally, the chief figure in the Messianic kingdom.
6. Gentiles. The favourable view of the second
century B.C., as to the future of the Gentiles, has all
but disappeared. In Eth. En. 37-70 annihilation ap
pears to await them. In Ps. Sol. 17 32 they are to be
spared to serve Israel in the temporary Messianic king
dom. This may have been the view of the other
writers of this century who looked forward to a merely
temporary Messianic kingdom.
71. First III. THE FIRST CENTURY A.D.
Cent. A.D. Authorities.
Book of Jubilees ( 72). Apocalypse of Baruch ( 78).
Assumption of Moses ( 73). Book of Baruch 1 (see APOC-
Philo ( 74). RYl HA, 6).
Slavonic Enoch ( 75). 4 Esdras ( 79).
Book of Wisdom ( 76). Josephus ( 80).
4 Maccabees ( 77).
(a) General eschatological development. The growth
of dualism which was so vigorous in the last century B. c.
now attains its final development. The Messianic
kingdom is not to be everlasting ; in one work it is to
last 1000 years (see below, 75) ; in some writings it
is even wholly despaired of ( Apoc. Bar. 1824, Salathiel
Apoc. [ 79, e], 4 Mace. ). According to another work
some of the saints will rise to share in it ( the first
resurrection ). The breach between the eschatologies
of the individual and of the nation which had begun to
appear in the last century B.C. ( 64) has been widened,
and the differences of the two eschatologies have been
developed to their utmost limits. The nation has no
blessed future at all, or, at best, one of only temporary
duration. This, however, is a matter with which the
individual has no essential concern. His interest centres
round his own soul and his own lot in the after-life.
The great thought of the divine kingdom has been
surrendered in despair.
The transcendent view of the risen righteous which
was sometimes entertained in the preceding century
( 65) becomes more generally prevalent. The resur
rection involves the spirit alone (Jubilees, Ass. Mos. ,
Philo, Wisd. , 4 Mace. ) ; or, the righteous are to rise
vestured with the glory of God (Slav. En.), or with
their former body, which is forthwith to be trans
formed and made like that of the angels (Apoc. Bar. ,
4 Esdras ; see also the Pharisaic doctrine in Jos. BJ
814).
Several writers reveal a new development in regard
to the resurrection of the spirit. Instead of being
preceded by a stay in Sheol till after the final
judgment, the entrance of the righteous spirit on a
blessed immortality is to follow on death immediately.
This view, however, is held only by Alexandrian writers
(Philo, Wisdom 3 1-4 42710, etc., 4 Mace. ) or by the
Essenes (see Jos. 5/28 n, cp ESSENES, 7). The
only exception is Jubilees (see chap. 23). The older
view survives in the first century A.D. in Ass. Moses
lOg, in Slav. En. and (partly) in Eth. En. 108.
Finally, the scope of the resurrection, which in the past
1 The earlier part of this work may be as old as the second
century B.C.
1366
72. Jubilees.
73. Assumption
of Moses
ESCHATOLOGY
was limited to Israel, is extended in some books to all
mankind (Apoc. Bar. 31z 4Ezra73237>. For the Gen
tiles, however, this is but a sorry boon. They are
raised only to be condemned for ever with a condemna
tion severer than that which they had endured before. 1
(&) Eschatologies of the several writers. In the Book
of Jubilees there is not much eschato-
logical thought. Levi is given a special
blessing ; from him are to proceed princes and judges
and chiefs (31 15). From Judah there seems to be
expected a Messiah.
Isaac blesses Judah thus : Be thou a prince thou and one
of thy sons over the sons of Jacob ... in thee shall there be
the help of Jacob, etc. (31 J8_/C). There is a detailed description
of the Messianic woes (23 13 19 22). These will be followed by
an invasion of Palestine by the Gentiles (23 23./). Then Israel
will begin to study the laws, and repent (2326). As the nation
becomes faithful, human life will gradually be lengthened till
it approaches one thousand years (23 27 ; cp 23 28). This period
is the great day of peace (25 10). Whether the blessings
granted to the Gentiles through Israel (18 16 20 10 27 23), how
ever, are to be referred to the Messianic age, is doubtful.
Finally, when the righteous die, their spirits will enter into a
blessed immortality (2831). And their bones shall rest in the
earth and their spirits shall have much joy, and they shall know
that it is the Lord who executes judgment, etc.
The day of the great judgment (23 n) seems to
follow on the close of the Messianic kingdom.
Mastema and the demons subject to him shall be judged
(10s). On the restriction of the resurrection to the spirit (2831),
see above ( 71, a). The question arises, Where do the spirits of
the righteous who die before the final judgment go? It cannot
be to Sheol, for Sheol is ordinarily conceived in this book as
the place of condemnation into which are cast eaters of blood
and idolaters (7292222). It must be either, as in the Simili
tudes, to an intermediate abode of the righteous, such as Para
dise, or else to heaven. All Palestinian Jewish tradition
favours an intermediate abode.
The Assumption of Moses (7-29 A.D. ) is closely allied
to Jubilees in many respects. Where
as Jubilees, however, is a manifesto
in favour of the priesthood, the As
sumption, proceeding from a Pharisaic
quietist, contains a bitter attack on them (7).
The preparation for the advent of the theocratic or Messianic
kingdom will be a period of repentance (1 18). 1750 years after
the death of Moses (10 12) God will intervene in behalf of Israel
(107) and the ten tribes shall return. There is no Messiah ; the
eternal God alone . . . will punish the Gentiles (107). In this
respect the Assumption differs from Jubilees. The idealisation
of Moses leaves no room for a Messiah. During the temporary
Messianic kingdom Israel shall destroy its national enemies
(10s), and finally be exalted to heaven (10 9), whence it shall see
its enemies in Gehenna (10 10).
It is noteworthy that the conception of Gehenna,
which was originally the specific place of punishment
for apostate Jews, is here extended, so that it becomes
the final abode of the wicked generally. Finally, there
seems to be no resurrection of the body, only of the
spirit.
Philo. W r e shall only touch on the main points of
the eschatology of Philo. He looked
forward to the return of the tribes from
captivity, to the establishment of a Messi
anic kingdom of temporal prosperity, and even to a
Messiah.
The loci classic! on this subject are De Execrat. 8f. (ed.
Mang. 2435 f.) and De Proem, et Poen. 15-20 (ed. Mang.
2421-428). The former passage foretells the restoration of a
converted Israel to the Holy Land. The latter describes the
Messianic kingdom. The Messiah is a man of war efeAevcreTai
yap avOpwiros, $T\<J\V 6 xprjajios (Nu. 24 17), Ka.Taa Tpa.Tap\iav xat
The inclusion of the Messiah and the Messianic king
dom, though really foreign to his system, in Philo s
eschatology, is strong evidence as to the prevalence of
these expectations even in Hellenistic Judaism. Appar
ently Philo did not look forward to a general and final
judgment. All enter after death into their final abode.
The punishment of the wicked is everlasting (De
Cherub, i) ; even the wicked Jews are committed to
Tartarus (De Execrat. 6). As matter is incurably evil,
there can be no resurrection of the body. Our present
1 So Eth. En. 22 19 Apoc. Bar. 30 4/ 36 n 4 Esd. 7 87.
1367
ESCHATOLOGY
life in the body is death, for the body is the sepulchre
of the soul (Quod Deus immut. 32) ; our aCip-a. is our
<rij/*a (Leg. Alleg. 1 33 ).
According to the Slavonic Enoch 1 (1-50 A.D. ), as
the earth was created in six days, its history will be
75 Slavonic accom P lisne d in 6000 years ; and as the
Enoch s x ^ avs ^ crea tion were followed by one
1 50 A D ^ rest> S0 tne 6oo vears f tne world s
history will be followed by a rest of 1000
years the Millennium or Messianic kingdom. Here for
the first time the Messianic kingdom is limited to 1000
years (whence the later Christian view of the Millennium ),
at the expiration of which time will pass into eternity
(322-332), and then will be the final judgment.
That event is variously called the day of judgment (39 i
513), the great day of the Lord (186), the great judgment
(52 15 685 667), the day of the great judgment (004), the
eternal judgment (7 i), the great judgment for ever C>04),
the terrible judgment (48s), the immeasurable judgment
(40 12).
Before the final judgment the souls of the departed
are in intermediate places.
The rebellious angels awaiting judgment in torment are con
fined to the second heaven (7 1-3). The fallen lustful angels are
kept in durance under the earth (18 7). Satan, hurled down
from heaven, has as his habitation the air (29 t,f.). For the souls
of men, which were created before the creation of the world
(23 5), future places of abode have been separately prepared (49 2
58 5). The context of 58 5 appears to imply that they are the
intermediate place for human souls. In 32 i Adam is sent to
this receptacle of souls on his death, and is transferred from it
to paradise in the third heaven after the great judgment (42 5).
Even the souls of beasts are preserved till the final judgment in
order to testify against the ill-usage of men (.08 5 6).
The righteous shall escape the final judgment and
enter paradise as their eternal inheritance (8 9 42a 5 6X3
65 10). The wicked are cast into hell in the third heaven
where their torment will be for everlasting (10 40 12 41 2
42 if. 613). There is apparently no resurrection of the
body the righteous are clothed with the garments of
God s glory (22 8; cp Eth. En. 62 16 108 12). Theseventh
heaven is the final abode of Enoch (55 2 67 2) ; but this
is an exception.
In the Alexandrian Wisdom of Solomon there is no
Messiah ; but there is to be a theocratic kingdom, in
__. , which the surviving righteous shall judge
)m> the nations (3 7 8), forensically (cp i Cor.
62), not by the sword. Here is a mark of progress.
The body does not rise again ; it is a mere burden taken
up for a time by the pre-existent soul (cp Slav. En. ).
It is the soul that is immortal (81-4 etc.). The wicked
shall be destroyed (419), though not annihilated (4 19
5i). The true judgment of the individual sets in at
death (41014). For further details see WISDOM OF
SOLOMON, 17.
4 Maccabees is a philosophical treatise on the supre
macy of reason. 2 The writer adopts, as far as possible,
77 4 M l ^ e tenets f stoicism. He teaches the
eternal existence of all souls, good and
bad, but no resurrection of the body. The good shall
enjoy eternal blessedness in heaven 3 (98 152 17s);
but the wicked shall be tormented in fire for ever (9 9
10 15 12 12).
On the composite Book of Baruch see BARUCH ii. ,
and cp APOCRYPHA, 6, i. Here we only note that
78 Ba h m 2 7 Hades still possesses its OT con-
rucn notation. The Apocalypse of Baruch also
,. g ^ . (50-80 A.D. ) is a composite work (APOCA-
LYPT1C, 10 f.\ for a summary of
contents see ib. 8), 4 the six or more independent
constituents of which may, when treated from the stand
point of their eschatology, be ranged in three classes.
i. The Messiah Apocalypses A,, A 2 , A 3 (27-30 1, 36-
40, 53-74). This part differs from the rest of the book
in being written before 70 A.D. and in teaching the
1 For further details see Morfill and Charles s editio prince fs
of this book ; also APOCALYPTIC, ? 33-41-
2 See MACCABEES (FOURTH), 2, 7, and cp Che. OPs. 29.
Cp Che. OPs. 414, 443.
4 For a fuller treatment see Charles, Apocalypse of Baruch.
1368
ESCHATOLOGY
doctrine of a personal Messiah. In A p however, his
rdle is a passive one, whereas in A 2 and A 3 he is a
warrior who slays the enemies of Israel with his own
hand. In all three apocalypses the Messiah-kingdom
is of temporary duration.
In AS the Messiah s principate will stand "for ever" until
the world of corruption is at an end (40 3); in Ag his reign is
described as the consummation of that which is corruptible and
the beginning of that which is incorruptible (74 2). During it
there will be no sorrow nor anguish nor untimely death (73 2f.).
The animal world will change its nature and minister unto man
(736). In A.^ and A;J the kingdom is inaugurated with the judg
ment of the sword (39 7-40 2, 72 2-6). The Gentiles that have
ruled or oppressed Israel shall be destroyed ; but those that have
not done so shall be spared in order to be subject to Israel
(72 2-6).
The final judgment and the resurrection follow on the
close of these kingdoms.
ii. In Bj (1-9 1 43-44 7 45-466 77-82 86/.) the
writer (who is optimistic) looks forward (69) to Jeru
salem s being rebuilt (after it has been destroyed by
angels) lest the enemy should boast (7i), to the restora
tion of the exiles (776 78;), and to a Messianic kingdom
(Is 466 77 12); but he does not expect a Messiah.
Little consideration is shown for the Gentiles (822-7).
iii. In B 2 (13-25 30 2 -3541/. 448-i 5 47-52 75/ 83),
written after 70 A.D. , the writer has relinquished all
expectation of national restoration and all hope for the
present corruptible world. He is mainly concerned with
theological problems and the question of the incorruptible
world that is to be.
The world shall be renewed (32 6) ; from being transitory
(48 50 85 10) it shall become undying (51 3) and everlasting
(48 50) ; from being a world of corruption (21 19815; cp 40 3 74 2)
it shall become incorruptible and invisible (51 8 44 12). Full of
world -despair, the writer looks for no Messiah or Messianic
kingdom, but only for the last day when he will testify against
the Gentile oppressors of Israel (13 3).
In the meantime, as men die they enter in some degree
on their reward in Sheol, the intermediate abode of the
departed (23s 48 16 522; cp 566), in which there are
already certain degrees of happiness or torment.
For the wicked Sheol is an abode of pain (30 5 36 1 1), still not to
be compared with their torments after the final judgment. The
righteous are preserved in certain chambers or treasuries in
Sheol (4 Ezra 4 41), where they enjoy rest and peace, guarded
by angels (Eth. En. 100 5 ; 4 Ezra 7 15).
At the final judgment the righteous issue forth to
receive their everlasting reward (302).
As regards the resurrection B 2 teaches as follows :
In answer to the question, Wilt thpu perchance change these
things [i.e., man s material body] which have been in the world,
as also the world ? [49 3], he shows in chap. 50 that the dead shall
be raised with bodies absolutely unchanged, with a view to their
recognition by those who knew them. This completed, the
bodies of the righteous shall be transformed, with a view to an
unending spiritual existence (51 1 3 7-9). They shall be made
like the angels and equal to the stars, and changed from beauty
into loveliness, and from light into the splendour of glory (51 10) ;
they shall even surpass the angels (51 12).
The Pauline teaching in i Cor. 1535-50 is thus in
some respects a developed and more spiritual expression
of ideas already current in Judaism.
In B 3 (chap. 85) there is the same despair of a national
restoration as in B 2 , and only spiritual blessedness is
looked for in the world of incorruption (85 4/).
In dealing with 4 Esd. we shall adopt provisionally
some of the critical results attained by Kabisch (cp
79. 4 Esdras. EsDRAS [FOURTH]). Of the five inde
pendent writings which he discovers in it,
two were written before 70 A. D. and three after.
i. The two former he designates respectively an Ezra
Apocalypse and a Son of Man Vision.
a. The Ezra Apocalypse consists of 4 52-5 13*1 613-25
726-44 8 63-9 12 and is largely eschatological.
The signs of the last times are recounted at great length (5 1-12
62i/: 9 1-3 6), the destruction of Rome (63), and the advent of
the Messiah the Son of God (5 6 726). Certain saints shall
accompany the Messiah (728)1 here we seem to nave the idea
ot a first resurrection of the saints to the temporary Messianic
kingdom, the general resurrection taking place at its close
3 1 ./) and all the faithful who have survived the troubles
that preceded the kingdom shall rejoice together with the
1 The same idea is probably to be found in 13 52.
45 1369
ESCHATOLOGY
Messiah 400 years. 1 Then the Messiah and all men shall die
(7 29), and in the course of seven days the world shall return to
its primeval silence, even as in the course of seven days it was
created (7 30). Then the next world shall awake, the corruptible
perish (731), all mankind be raised from the dead (7 32) and
appear at the last judgment (7 33), and Paradise (the final abode
of the righteous) and Gehenna be revealed (7 36). The judgment
shall last seven years (7 43).
b. The Son of Man Vision (chap. 13) was composed
probably before 70 A. D.
Many signs are to precede the advent of the Messiah (1832),
who will appear in the clouds of heaven (13 3 32). The nations,
a multitude without number, shall assemble from the four
winds of heaven to attack him (13 5 34) ; but the Messiah will
destroy them not with spear or weapon of war (18928), but
bya flood of fire out of his mouth and a flaming breath out of his
lips (181027), ar >d by the law which is like fire (183849).
The new Jerusalem shall be set up (1836). The Messiah
shall restore the ten tribes (184047) and preserve the residue of
God s people that are in Palestine (1848).
ii. The other three constituents of 4 Esd. were com
posed between 70 and 100 A.D.
c. The Eagle Vision (10 60-1235). Here is predicted (1233)
the destruction of Rome through the agency of the Davidic
Messiah (1232 ; so Vv. except Lat.), who will save the remnant
of God s people in Palestine, and fill them with joy to the end,
the day of judgment (12 34).
d. An Ezra Fragment (14 i-ija 18-27 36-47)- Ezra is to be
translated and to live with the Messiah till the twelve times are
ended (Hg). Ten and a half haveelapsed already (14 ii). Great
woes have befallen ; but the worst are yet to come (14 i6/.).
Does 14 9 imply that when the times are ended there will be a
Messianic kingdom like that in the Ezra Apocalypse discussed
above (a)? This is not improbable if we compare 14 9 with 7 28.
The parts of chap. 14 under consideration, therefore, may belong
to that apocalypse.
e. The Apocalypse of Salathiel (3 1-31 4 1-51 5 13^-6 10 630-
7 25 7 45-8 62 9 13-10 57 1 2 40-48 1 4 28-35). The world is nearly at
an end (4 44-50). As it was created, so it is to be judged, by God
alone (5 56 6 6). Very few shall be saved (7 47-61 8 zf.\ Judg
ment and all things relating to it were prepared before the
creation (7 70). It will come when the number of the righteous
is completed (4 36) ; the sins of earth will not retard it (4 39-42).
In the meantime, retribution sets in immediately after death
(7 69 75 80 86 95 14 35). The souls of the righteous, who are
allowed seven days to see what will befall them (7 ioo/ .), are
guarded by angels in chambers (775 85 95 121) till the final
judgment, when glory and transfiguration await them (795 97).
The souls of the wicked in torment roam to and fro in seven
ways (viat) which answer to the seven ways of joy for the
righteous (7 80-87 93)- After the judgment their torments become
still more grievous (7 84), and intercession, permissible now
(7 106-111), can no longer be allowed (7 102-105), a l things being
then finally determined (7 113-115). This world now ends,
shine as the sun, and be immortal (7 97). Paradise shall be their
final abode (7 123).
The teaching of this book is closely allied to that of
Apoc. Bar. B 2 .
Josephus, a Pharisee, gives a fairly trustworthy
Pharisaic eschatology in Ant. xviii. 1 3 (cp SCRIBES). 2
80. Josephus T he account in j5/iii - 8 S s in a high
37-101 A.D de & ree misleading. In reality, Josephus
believed in an intermediate state for the
righteous, and (see Ant. iv. 65) in a future Messianic
age. 3
(c) Development of special conceptions in first century
81 Snecial A 1- ^oul and Spirit. There is
conceptions. Jf^ * 7"* f what w f e ^ ave calle ^
( 20) the later doctrine of the soul and
the spirit in the Jewish literature of the first century A. D. 4
1 This number has originated as follows: According to Gen.
15 13 Israel was to be oppressed 400 years in Egypt. Ps. 90 15
contains the prayer, Give us joy ... for as many years of
misfortune as we have lived through (We. SBOT). From a
combination of these passages it was inferred that the Messianic
kingdom would last 400 years. Compare this view with that of
the looo years broached in Slav. En. ; see 75.
2 A treatment of this passage of Josephus, with regard to its
eschatological contents will be found also in Cheyne s OPs.
3 It is Josephus the courtier who speaks in BJ vi. 64.
4 In Baruch 1-38, which belongs in eschatological character
to the OT, this teaching appears, and the term spirit is used
in its later sense in 217, The dead that are in Hades whose
spirit is taken from their bodies. Still in 3 i spirit and soul
are treated as synonymous according to the popular and older
view. This part of Baruch may belong to the second or the
last century B.C.
1370
ESCHATOLOGY
In Jubilees 23 31 the departed are spoken of as spirits. So
likewise in Ass. Mos. (see Origen, In Jos. homil. 2 i). On the
other hand Slav. En. speaks only of souls ; see 235685.
Again, whereas Apoc. Bar. uses in reference to the departed
only the term soul cp 30 3 4 (51 15) the sister work 4 Esd.
uses both soul (7 75 93 99^) and spirit (7 78 80).
The author of Wisdom was clearly influenced by Gen.
24<J-3 ; but his psychology is independent, and more
nearly agrees with the popular dichotomy (14 8igf.
915). In the next life the soul constitutes the entire
personality (3i) ; spirit is clearly a synonym (cp 158
and 1 5 16 ; also 1614). There is, therefore, no trichotomy
in 15 ii. The difference between an active soul (tyvxty
fvepyovffav) and a vital spirit (irveu/jLa fum/cov) lies
not in the substantives but in the epithets. 1 The soul
here is not the result of the inbreathing of the divine
breath into the body but an independent entity, synony
mous with the spirit derived directly from God.
2. Judgment. This century witnesses but little change
in the current beliefs on this head. There is to be a
preliminary judgment in all cases where a Messianic
kingdom is expected (in Jub. , Ass. Mos., Wisdom, and
all the different constituents of Apoc. Bar. and 4 Esdras
save BS and B 3 of the former and the Apoc. Salathiel of
the latter). The final judgment is to be executed on
men and angels (Jub. , Slav. En. and Apoc. Bar. ) at the
close of the Messianic kingdom, or, where no such
kingdom is expected, at the close of the age (Apoc.
Bar., B 2 B 3 ), or when the number of the righteous is
completed (4 Esdras, Apoc. Sal.). In 2 Mace, and
Philo, however, no final judgment is spoken of. Each
soul apparently enters at death on its final destiny. In
this last respect alone is there a definite divergence from
the beliefs of the last century B.C.
3. Places of abode of the departed. There are many ;
but they have, for the most part, their roots in the past.
i. Heaven (or Paradise). The final abode of the righteous
(Jub. 2831, Ass. Mos. lOg, Apoc. Bar. 51).
ii. Paradise, (a) The final abode of the righteous (Slav. En.
%>f. 423 5 etc.; 4 Ezra 7 36 123). (b) The intermediate abode of
the righteous (Jub. ?).
iii. SheOl or Hades, (a) The abode of all departed souls till
the final judgment (Apoc. Bar. 23s 48 16 52 2 ; 4 Ezra 441;
Josephus [see above]). Sheol thus conceived, however, had
two divisions a place of pain for the wicked (Apoc. Bar. 30 5
36 1 1), and a place of rest and blessedness for the righteous (cp
4 Ezra 44i).2 This was called the treasuries (cp Apoc. Bar.
30 2 ; 4 Ezra 7 75 85 95). (6) Hell (Jub. 72 9 22 22 ; 4 Ezra 853).
iv. Gehenna. This is now generally conceived as the final
place of punishment for all the wicked, not for apostate Jews as
heretofore (Ass. Mos. 10 10 ; 4 Ezra 7 36). It seems to be referred
to in Wisdom (cp 4 19). In Slav. En. it is in the third heaven
(cp!040 1 2 41 2). 3
4. Resurrection. (a) Resurrection of the saints to
the Messianic kingdom. This is apparently the teaching
of 4 Esdras 728. (6) General resurrection. According
to all the authorities of this century as enumerated above
(except Apoc. Bar. and 4 Esdras), there is to be a
resurrection of the righteous alone. In B 2 of Apoc.
Bar. (30a-5 so/) and in the Ezra Apoc. in 4 Esd.
(732-37) the resurrection involves all men. A resurrec
tion or an immortality only of the soul is found in
Jubilees, Ass. Mos. , Philo, Wisdom and 4 Mace.
5. (a) Messianic kingdom. See above ( 71).
(b} Messiah. We remarked above (705) that from
about 50 B.C. the Messianic hope rooted itself so firmly
that henceforth the Messiah became, on the whole, the
central figure in the theocratic kingdom. It may startle
some to find that only five of the books we. have
dealt with express this hope (cp MESSIAH). The ex
planation, however, is not far to seek. Against the
secularisation of the hope of the Messiah, favoured (see
APOCALYPTIC, 85) by the Psalms of Solomon, an
1 Thus the resemblance to Gen. 2 7 is merely verbal.
2 The statement that "the treasuries" are a department of
Sheol is based on the Latin version of 4 Esdras 4 41. The
present writer, however, is now inclined to regard this statement
as false on various grounds, one reason being the fact that the
Syr. and Eth. versions of the passage agree against the Latin.
3 In the fragmentary Christian apocalypse in the Ascension
of Isaiah (813-432) Gehenna is regarded as the final abode of
Beliar. See 414 and cp ANTICHRIST, 13.
1371
ESCHATOLOGY
emphatic protest was raised by a strong body of Phari
sees, Quietists like the ancient Hasids (above, 57), who
felt it to be their sole duty to observe the law, leaving it
to God to intervene and defend them. This standpoint
is represented by Ass. Mos. , and later by the Salathiel
Apoc. in 4 Esdras. Among the Jews of the dispersion,
too, this view naturally gained large acceptance. Hence
we find no hint of the ideas it protested against in the
Slav. En., the Book of Wisdom, and 4 Mace. This
opposition to the hope of the Messiah from the severely
legal wing of Pharisaism at length gave way, however,
and in Apoc. Bar. 53-74 (i.e., A 3 ) we have literary
evidence of the fusion of early Rabbinism and the
popular Messianic expectation. How widespread was
the hope of the Messiah in the first century of the
Christian era may be seen not only from Jubilees (?),
Philo, Josephus and the various independent writings
in the Apoc. Bar. and 4 Esdras, but also from the NT
and the notice taken of this expectation in Tacitus
(Hist. 513) and Suetonius ( Vesp. 4).
Since in all cases only a transitory Messianic kingdom
is expected in this century, the Messiah s reign is natur
ally conceived as likewise transitory.
The Messiah is to be of the tribe of Judah (Jub. 31 18 /.,
4 Esd. 12 32). According to Apoc. Bar. 27-30 i and 4 Esd. 7 28
(i.e., Ezra Apoc., see above 79, a) he is to play a passive part.
In the former passage he is to appear at the close of the Messianic
woes ; in the latter, at the time of the first resurrection. He is not
usually passive, however ; in Apoc. Bar. 36-40 53-70 and 4 Esd.
10 6o-12 35 he is a warrior who slays his enemies with the sword.
Other writers, more loftily, substitute for a sword the invisible
word of his mouth (4 Esd. 13 10 ; cp Ps. Sol. 17).
6. Gentiles. In most works written before the fall of
Jerusalem only the hostile nations are destroyed (see
e.g. , Apoc. Bar. 40 1 /. 72 4-6) ; but in later works (see
4 Esd. 13) this fate is suffered by all Gentiles. In no
case have they any hope of a future life. They descend
for ever either into Sheol or into Gehenna. If, any
where, they are represented as having part in the resur
rection, it is only that they may be committed to severer
and never-ending torment (4 Esd. 7 36-38).
C. NEW TESTAMENT
In entering the field of the NT we find at once a dis
tinguishing peculiarity. The ideas inherited from the
past are not in a state of constant flux
in which each idea in turn appeals for
acceptance, and enjoys through the system which it
generates a brief career. The ideas are subordinated
to the central force of the Christian movement.
In the next place we have to note that the teaching of
Christ and of Christianity at last furnished a synthesis
of the eschatologies of the race and the individual.
The true Messianic kingdom begun on earth is to be consum
mated in heaven ; it is not temporary but eternal ; it is _not
limited to one people but embraces the righteous of all nations
and of all times. It forms a divine society 1 in which the
position and significance of each member is determined by his
endowments and his blessedness conditioned by the blessedness
of the whole. Religious individualism becomes an impossibility.
The individual can have no part in the kingdom except through a
living relation toils head ; but this relation cannot be maintained
and developed save through life in and for the brethren, and so
closely is the individual life bound to that of the brethren that
no soul can reach its consummation apart.
Of the large body of Jewish ideas retained in the
system of Christian thought many undergo a partial or
complete transformation, and it is important at the out
set to place this relation in a clear light. We cannot
expect Christianity to be free from inherited conceptions
of a mechanical and highly unethical character, 2 when
we remember that in the Hebrew religion there were
for centuries large survivals of primitive Semitic religion.
1 The joyous nature of the fellowship of this kingdom is set
forth in the gospels in the figurative terms of a feast ; but all
idea of the satisfaction of sensuous needs in the consummated
kingdom of God is excluded by the only account of the risen life
of the righteous which comes from the triple tradition.
2 Among those in Christianity which historical criticism com
pels us to assign to this class are the generally accepted doctrine
of Hades, and the doctrine of eternal damnation.
1372
82. NT writers.
ESCHATOLOGY
ESCHATOLOGY
Nor can we be surprised to find ideas which belong to
different stages of development, not only in the NT as a
whole, but also in the mind of the same NT writer. The
fundamental teaching of Jesus, assimilated (it may be)
more by one writer than by another, could not all at
once transform the body of inherited eschatological
ideas. The development of Paul will, if our results are
correct, supply an instructive commentary on this
axiomatic truth.
In what follows we shall deal first ( 83-101) with
the books and groups of books in the order that will
best bring to light the eschatological development. We
shall then ( 102 /.), as before, deal with the develop
ment of special conceptions.
I. THE BOOKS AND GROUPS OF BOOKS. i. The es-
chatology of the Synoptic Gospels deals with the consum-
Th mat i n of the kingdom of God. This
_, , . kingdom is represented under two aspects,
SvnoDtic
jj *j now as present, now as future ; now as in
ward and spiritual, now as external and
manifest.
Thus in Mt. 633 7 13 11 12 12 28 2131 Lk. 17 21 it is already
present, whereas in Mt. 6 10 8n 2629 Mk. 9i Lk. 927 V&z&f.
14 15 it is expressly conceived as still to be realised.
The two views are organically related, and are com
bined in a well-known saying of Jesus (Mk. 10 15),
which declares that entrance into the kingdom as it
shall be is dependent on a man s right attitude to the
kingdom as it now is.
We shall deal next with the three great events which
are to bring about the consummation of the kingdom :
(a) the parusia ( 84/), (6) the final judgment ( 86),
and (c) the resurrection ( 87).
a. The parusia l or second advent introduces the con
summation of the divine kingdom founded by the Messiah .
_, It is certainly to take place at the close of
. the age (<rvvT^\ft.a TOU aluvos), Mt. 13 y)f. 49
it. j 24s 2820. When we seek a more precise
at hand. , .r . . , . ,
definition of time, however, we find in the
Gospels two apparently conflicting accounts.
(i. ) The parusia is within the current generation and
preceded by certain signs. This was very natural,
because in the OT the foundation and the consummation
of the kingdom are closely connected. Hence Jesus
declared that this generation (r\ yevea avrij) should
not pass away till the prophetic description had been
realised (Mt. 2434). The description referred to (see
Mt. 24 and Mk. 13 ; Lk. 21 5-35) is no doubt full ; but
these chapters appear to be derived in part from Jesus
and in part from a Judaistic source. They identify two
distinct occurrences, the destruction of Jerusalem and
the end of the world. 2
This is sometimes explained by the well-known theory of
prophetic perspective (see PROPHECY) ; but the explanation
is unsatisfactory. Illusions of the bodily eye are gradually
corrected by experience until at last they cease to mislead ; but
it is not so with prophecy as regards either the prophet or those
who accept his prophecy : both are deceived. That Jesus did
expect to return during the existing generation (Mt. 10 23
162777 Mk. 9 i Lk. 926_/C) is proved beyond question by the
universal hopes of the apostolic age. To speak of error in this
regard, however, is to misconceive the essence of prophecy. So
1 The idea of the parusia could not but arise in the mind of
Jesus when he saw clearly the approaching violent end of his
ministry. As a fact, it is first expressed in connection with
Christ s first prophecy of this great event (Mk. 8 38 Mt. 1(3 27
Lk. 826).
2 Among attempts to analyse the chapters that of Wendt
{Die Lehrejesu, 10-21) deserves attention. He traces Mt. 24 1-5
23-259-1332^ 36-42 (i.e., Mk. 13 1-621-239-13 28X32-37) to Jesus,
and the rest of this chapter to a Jewish Christian apocalypse
written before 70 A.D. Cp also ABOMINATION OF DESOLATION.
The present writer is of opinion that the solution of the difficulty
must be found in some such theory as that of Wendt, which is
a modification of that of Colani (Jesus Christ et les Croyances
Messianiques de son Temps, p. 201 ff. [ 64]). According to the
Jewish apocalypse just referred to, the parusia was to be
heralded by unmistakeable signs, but this view is irreconcilable
with another which teaches that the parusia will take the world
by surprise (Mk. 13 33-36 Mt. 24 42-44 Lk. 12 35-40). This latter
doctrine goes back undoubtedly to Jesus ; the former is derived
from traditional Judaism.
1373
far as relates to fulfilment, it is always conditioned by the course
of human development. OT prophecy and Jesus own inner
consciousness as God s Messiah pointed to the immediate con
summation of the kingdom ; but there was still possibility that
it might be long delayed (Mt. 2448 Lk. 12 45, also Mk. 1835 Lk.
1238 Mt. 265), and he expressly declared that the day and the
hour of his return was known only to God (Mk. 1832). This
determination God had withheld from him because it was
dependent not on the divine will alone but also on the course of
human development. He could indicate, however, the signs
of his coming, such as the appearance of many false Messiahs
(Mt. 24 5 Mk. 13 22), deceived by whom the nation would
finally arise in arms against Rome, complete the national guilt,
and entail on themselves destruction (see also ABOMINATION OF
DESOLATION) (Mt. 2836). These things would be as cer
tainly prophetic as the growing greenness of the fig-tree (Mt.
24 32). The return of the Son of Man to judgment would be
imminent (24 29-31). It should be noted, however, that docu
ments from two very different sources appear to be combined
here. See note 2 below.
The same expectation is attested in Mt. 1023, where
Jesus declares to his disciples that they will not have
gone through the cities of Israel before the coming of
the Son of Man, and likewise in Mt. 1627^ Mk. 838
9 1 Lk. 926/. , where it is said that some shall not taste
of death before that time. It must be abundantly clear
from the evidence that the expectation of the nearness
of the end formed a real factor in Jesus views of the
future. There are, on the other hand, many passages
which just as clearly present us with a different forecast of
the future, and this view demands as careful attention.
(ii. ) The parusia will not take place till the process
of human development has run its course, and the
Gospel has been preached to Jew and Gentile.
The kingdom must spread extensively and intensively : exten
sively, till its final expansion is out of all proportion to its
original smallness (cp the parable of the
85. At the end. mustard seed) ; intensively, till it transforms
and regenerates the life of the nation, or
rather of the world (cp the parable of the leaven, Mt. 1831-33).
This process has its parallel in the gradual growth of a grain of
corn; the ripe fruit is the sign for harvest (Mk. ^26^.). The
preaching of the Gospel too must extend to the non-Israelites
(Mt. 228yC). To the Jews, who were on their last trial, it would
appeal in vain (Lk. 13 T,ff.\ In the coming days the kingdom
of God should be taken from them and given to others who
would bear appropriate fruits (Mk.l2g Mt. 21 41 43 Lk. 20 16);
their city should be destroyed (Mt. 227), the times of the
nations should come in (Lk. 21 24 only), and the glad tidings of
the kingdom should be carried to all nations before the end
should come (Mk. 13 TO and Mt. 24 14! [cp 24 9] Mt. 28 19).
This representation of the future obviously presupposes
a long period of development. No less than that
of the near parusia, it goes back to Jesus. The con
tingency that the more sanguine view, which is derived
from OT prophecy, might not be realised, is acknow
ledged in Mt. 2448 Lk. 1245, 2 also in Mk. 1835 where
the possibility of an indefinitely long night of history
preceding the final advent is clearly contemplated. It
is hardly possible to avoid the conclusion that discourses
relating to different events and from absolutely different
sources are confused together in Mk. 13 = Mt. 24 = Lk.
21 (see 84, n. ).
1 It is possible, as Weiss (Marcus-ev., 417) thinks, that the
original form of this statement is to be found in Mt. 10 18 and
that its present form is due to Mk.
2 Beyschlag (NT Theology, ET 1 197 ./) points out that
the words of that day or that hour knoweth no man, etc.
(Mk. 13 32 Mt. 24 36) cannot be reconciled with the words that
precede them, This generation shall not pass away, till all these
things be accomplished. Accordingly he refers the latter to
the destruction of Jerusalem (cp Mt. 2836) and the former to the
final judgment of the world. An interesting discussion of these
chapters is given by Briggs (Messiah of t lie Gospels, 132-165).
Weiffenbach (Wiederkunftsgedanke fesu, 1873), like Colani,
Pfleiderer, and Keim, seeks to show that in Mk. 13 ( = Mt. 24 =
Lk. 21) there is a Jewish-Christian apocalypse interwoven with
the genuine words of Jesus. This apocalypse consisted of three
parts (i) Mk. 13 7 f. giving the beginning of woes, (2) Mk. 13
14-20 giving the tribulation, (3) Mk. 1824-27 giving the parusia.
Wendt s modification of this theory has been referred to already.
He and other scholars think that this is the oracle referred
to by Eusebius (Hist. Eccl.\\\.f>-$). It is impossible to treat
seriously the statement of Weiss (NT Theology, 1 148) that there
is no contradiction between Mk. 13 32 and 13 30 because the
time of the current generation presented a very considerable
margin for the determining of the day and hour. This would
be tantamount to saying, It will be within the next thirty or
forty years ; but I am not acquainted with the exact day or
hour."
1374
ESCHATOLOGY
b. The parusia was to be likewise the day of judgment
(Mt. lOis 11 22 24 1236), -also called that day (Mt. 7 22
24 36 Lk. 623 10 12 2134)-
Christ himself will be judge; 1 for all things have been
delivered by the Father into his hand
86. The (Mt. 11 27). All nations shall be gathered
judgment. before him (Mt. 263^. He will reward
every man according to his works (Mt.
1841-43 40^ 1627 22 11-14).
Amongst the judged appear his own servants (Lk. 19 22 f.
Mt. 2614-30), the Israelites (Mt. 1928), the nations (Mt.
25 32), not only the contemporaries of Jesus, but also all the
nations of the past, Nineveh, the Queen of Sheba (Mt. \1\if.
Lk. 11 y.f.\ Sodom and Gomorrah (Mt. 11 20 24). The demons
probably are judged at the same time (Mt. 8 29).
c. The kingdom is consummated, comes with power
(Mk. 9i), on the advent of Christ. The elect are
gathered in from the four winds (Mt.
87. The
resurrection.
2431), and now, after being, we must
assume, spiritually transformed, enter
on their eternal inheritance (Mt. 2534), equivalent to
eternal life (Mk. 10 17). The kingdom, therefore, is of
a heavenly, not of an earthly character : the present
heaven and earth shall pass away on its coming (Mt.
5i8 243s). The righteous rise to share in it ; but only
the righteous : the resurrection is only to life. Those
who share in it are as angels in heaven (Mt. 22 30
Mk. 1225), are equal to the angels and sons of God,
being sons of the resurrection (Lk. 2036). Only those,
therefore, attain to the resurrection who are accounted
worthy to attain to that world, and the resurrection from
the dead (Lk. 2035). Elsewhere the third evangelist
speaks of the resurrection of the just (14 14). The
entire context of Mt. 222 3 - 33 ( = Mk. 1218-27 Lk. 20 27-40)
points clearly to the conclusion that the resurrection
is conceived as springing from life in God. In such
communion man is brought to the perfection to which
he was destined. The righteous thus in an especial
sense become sons of God, inasmuch as they are
sons of the resurrection (Lk. 20 36).
In the resurrection, therefore, the wicked have no
part. It has been said by some scholars that there
must be a resurrection of all men in the body because
all must appear at the final judgment ; but the final
judgment and the resurrection have no necessary con
nection.
In Jubilees there is a final judgment but no resurrection of the
body, and in Eth. En. 91-104 there is a final judgment, but a
resurrection only of the spirits of the righteous (91 10 92 3 103 3-4).
The fact that demons and other disembodied spirits (Mt. S 29)
are conceived as falling under the last judgment is further evi
dence in the same direction.
As the righteous are raised to the perfected kingdom of
God, the wicked, on the other hand, are cast down into
Gehenna (Mt. 629 / 10 2 8 Mk. 9 4 3 45 47/)- The fire
spoken of in this connection (Mt. 622) is not to be con
ceived sensuously ; it is a vivid symbol of the terrible
wrath of God. The place or state of punishment is also
described as the outer darkness (Mt. 812), the place
of those who are excluded from the light of the kingdom.
The torment appears to be a torment of the soul or
disembodied spirit. See above, 70 (3 iv. ).
Though in conformity with Jewish tradition the
punishment is generally conceived in the Gospels as
everlasting, there are not wanting passages which
appear to fix a finite and limited punishment for certain
offenders, and hence recognise the possibility of moral
change in the intermediate state.
Thus some are to be beaten with few, others with many stripes
(Lk. 1246-48). It is not possible to conceive eternal torment
under the figure of a few stripes. Again, with regard only to one
sin is it said that neither in this world (atoii/) nor in that which is
to come can it be forgiven (Mt. 12 32). Such a statement would
be not only meaningless, but also in the highest degree mislead
ing, if forgiveness in the next life were regarded as a thing
impossible. It may not be amiss to find signs of a belief in the
possibility of moral improvement after death in the rich man in
Hades who appeals to Abraham on behalf of his five brethren
still on earth (Lk. 16 27-31).
1 In the parables sometimes God himself is judge (Mt. 1832
208 22 ii Lk. 187), sometimes the Messiah (Mt. 1830 2450
25 12 19).
1375
ESCHATOLOGY
2. In considering the Apocalypse, the whole of which
(see APOCALYPSE) is eschatological, our attention must
_,, be confined to a few of its character -
. , istic doctrines, the obvious meaning of
P ^ which is independent of the various
conflicting methods of interpretation that have been
applied to the book. The book is remarkable for the
large survivals of traditional Judaism which it attests.
Its main object appears to be to encourage the perse
cuted church to face martyrdom. With this purpose its
editor draws freely on current Jewish eschatology, some
elements of which we shall notice in the sequel. We
shall deal with its teaching under four heads.
(a) Parusia and Messianic judgment. Every visit
ation of the churches, every divine judgment in regard
to them is regarded as a spiritual advent of the Messiah
(2s 16 83 20) ; but this invisible coming ends in a final
advent, visible to all. Its date is not revealed ; but it
is close at hand (3n 22 12 20).
At Messiah s coming all families of men shall wail (1 7). In
chap. 14 his coming is in the clouds of heaven, and the judg
ment appears under various symbolical figures. Thus he reaps
the great harvest with a sharp sickle (14 14-16) ; he treads the
winepressof the wrath of God (14 17-20 ; cpl9is). Thejudgment
of the great day the great day of God Hi 14) is presented
under the image of illimitable slaughter, before the beginning of
which the birds of prey are summoned to feast on the bodies
and blood of men (19 17-19 21 cp 14 20). At ARMAGEDDON (f.v.)
ANTICHRIST! \q.v. ] and his allies are annihilated (16 16), the
beast and the false prophet are cast into the lake of fire (19 20),
and all their followers slain with the sword (19 21).
(l>) First Resurrection, Millennium, uprising and de
struction of Gog and A/agog (cp GOG).
With the overthrow of the earthly powers, Satan the old
dragon, the old serpent is stripped of all his might, and cast in
chains into the abyss where he is imprisoned for a thousand
years 2 (20 1-3). Thereupon ensues the Millennium, 3 when the
martyrs 4 (and the martyrs only) are raised in the first resurrec
tion and become priests of God (cp Is. 61 6) and Christ, and
reign with Christ personally on earth for a thousand years
(20 4 -6) with Jerusalem as the centre of the kingdom. At the
close of this period Satan is loosed, and the nations Gog and
Magog the idea is, with certain changes, derived from Ezek.
38 2 39 16 (see GOG) are set up to make a last assault on the
kjngdom of Christ. In this attack they are destroyed by God
himself, who sends down fire from heaven (209). The devil is
then (as in the fully developed Zoroastrian belief) finally cast
into the lake of fire (20 10).
(c) General resurrection and judgment. These follow
the Millennium, the destruction of the heathen powers,
and the final overthrow of Satan.
Contemporaneously the present heaven and earth pass away
(20 ii ; cp 21 i). God is judge ; but in some respects the Messiah
also (22 12 ; cp also 6 i6f.). All are judged according to their
works, which stand revealed in the heavenly books (20 12).
The wicked are cast into the lake of fire (21 8 ; see also 19 20
20 10). So likewise are Death and Hades 5 (20 14). This is the
second death (20 14 21 8). (See also 2 n 20 6.)
1 Observe that, whereas in the Johannine epistles Antichrist
denotes the false teachers and prophets, in the Apocalypse it
designates Rome. In 2 Thess., on the other hand, Rome is a
beneficent power which hinders the manifestation of Antichrist.
2 On the origin of the conquest of the dragon (ANTICHRIST,
14, PERSIA [Religion]), and on the older Jewish view (of myth
ical origin) that this and other sea monsters were overcome in
primeval times by God (cp Prayer of Manasses, 2-4), see DRAGON,
SERPENT, BEHEMOTH, with references there given.
3 The idea of a temporary Messianic kingdom first emerged
at the beginning of the last century B.C. (see above, 6*/.). Its
limitation to a thousand years is first found in Slav. En. 33 (see
above, 75).
4 This idea also is mainly Jewish. In Is. 26 19 the reference
may perhaps be to the bodies of Jews who had died for
their religion in the troublous times of Artaxerxes (so Che.
Intr. Is. 158; Isaiah, SBOT, ad foe.). In 4 Ezra 7 28 the
saints who accompany the Messiah on his advent probably
include the martyrs. In Rev. 204 it is said with reference to
these saints, (1 saw) the souls of them that had been beheaded.
8 Hades seems to be the intermediate abode of the wicked
only ; for it is always combined with death (see 1 18 68 20 I3/).
The souls of the martyrs have as their immediate abode the
place beneath the altar (69-11). The rest of the righteous were
probably conceived as in Paradise or in the Treasuries of the
righteous (see 4 Ezra).
6 The second death is the death of the soul, as the first is the
death of the body. It is the endless torment, not the annihila
tion, of the wicked that is here meant. The expression is a
familiar Rabbinic one; see Tg. Jer. on Dt.336. The occupa
tion of the martyred souls in the intermediate state reminds one
1376
ESCHATOLOGY
(d) Final consummation of the righteous. The scene
of this consummation is the new world the new heaven
and the new earth (21 i 5), the heavenly Jerusalem
(21IO-2!). 1
The ideal kingdom of God becomes actual. The city needs
no temple ; God and Christ (the Lamb) dwell in it (21 22). The
citizens dwell in perfect fellowship with God (22 4), and are as
kings unto God (22 5). The Messiah does not resign his
mediatorial functions as in the Pauline eschatology. See 7 17
21 22/).
3. 2 Peter and Jude. 2 Peter is closely related to
Jude in fact presupposes it.
Like Jude, 2 Peter recounts various temporal judgments which
the author treats as warnings to the godless of his own day. Thus
he adduces the condemnation of the fallen
89. 2 Peter, angels to TARTARUS [?.? .] (where they were to
be reserved till the judgment) (24), the Deluge
(258 6), the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah (2 6). These,
however, were but preliminary acts of judgment. The final
day of judgment (2 9 3 7) is impending. Meantime the un
righteous are kept under punishment ((coAa^bneVous) i.e., in
Hades (2 9). The ultimate doom of the wicked false teachers
and their followers will be destruction (aTnoAeia, 87); it is
coming speedily upon them (2 3) ; they have brought it on
themselves (2 i) ; they shall assuredly be destroyed (212). At
the final judgment the world as it is shall perish by fire (3 7 10),
as formerly by water (2 5 3 6), and new heavens and a new earth
shall arise (3 i2_/I). All this, however, shall not be till Christ s
parusia (1 16 84 12). The last days are already come (84), and
the parusia is postponed only through the longsuffering of God
with a view to the repentance of the faithless (3 9), and their
salvation (3 12). By holy living and godliness Christians could
prevent any further postponement of the parusia (3 12). With
the parusia the eternal kingdom of Christ (1 n) begins in the
new heavens and the new earth, wherein the perfect life of
righteousness shall be realised (3 13).
In Jude, the divine judgments in the history of the
past are but types of the final judgment (e.g., Israelites
90 Jude n l ^ e Desert, Sodom, Korah, and the
angels who were guilty of unnatural crime).
Everlasting bonds under darkness (v. 6), punishment of
eternal fire (v. 7), are the terms employed for the preliminary
punishments of sinners. The judgment of the great day (y. 6)
is described in the well-known quotation from the patriarch
Knoch. The extension of it to the angels is found also in 2 Pet.
and in i Cor. 6 3 ; but for at least 300 years it had already been
an accepted doctrine of Judaism. At this final judgment with
which Jude menaces the godless libertines of his own day the
faithful will obtain eternal life, through the mercy of Christ
(v. 21).
4. James. James is a production of primitive Jewish
Christianity in which Christ s religion is conceived as
91 Ja ea l ^ e f u ^l ment; f the perfect law, promi
nence being given to the doctrine of
recompense.
Hence, whilst the fulfilment of the law under testing afflictions
(Treipourniot) led to a recompense of blessing (1 ia 5n), failure
for those who are subjects of the perfect law, the law of liberty,
entails an aggravated punishment (2 12 ; cp 1 25). None, how
ever, can fulfil the law perfectly (3 2), and so claim the crown
of life as their reward. Men who need forgiveness now (5 15)
must need a merciful judge hereafter. By the law of recompense
only the merciful will find God to be such (2 13 ; cp Ps.
18 25). Moreover the judgment is close at hand. It is a
day of slaughter for the godless rich (5 5). The advent of the
Messiah who will judge the world is close at hand (5 B/.). He
alone can save or destroy (4 12). As faithful endurance receives
life (1 12), so the issue of sin is death (1 15). A fire will consume
the wicked, 63 (does this mean Gehenna?). Nor is it only to a
death of the body that they will be delivered ; it is a death of
the soul (5 20). The faithful will enter into the promised
kingdom (2 5).
5. There is a large eschatological element in Hebrews.
The final judgment ( the day ) is nigh at hand (10 25).
92 Hebrews ** * s mtroduce ^ by the final shaking of
heaven and earth (1226 compared with
122529) and by the parusia. God is judge (lOso/. ),
the judge of all (12 23). The second coming of Christ
is coincident with this judgment ; but he does not
judge (9 2 7/. 10 3 7).
Retribution is reserved unto this judgment (1030), which will
be terrible (10 31) and inevitable (1225). The righteous expect
Christ to appear not for judgment but for salvation (9 28). Their
recompense is to be in heaven (6 19 /.), where they have an
of the departed spirits in Eth. En. 91-104 : their whole prayer is
for the destruction of their persecutors.
1 Quite inconsistently with the idea of a new heaven and a
new earth the writer represents Gentile nations as dwelling out
side the gates ; cp 22 15.
1377
ESCHATOLOGY
eternal inheritance (9 15), a better country (11 16), a city which
is to come (1814), whose builder and maker is God (11 <)f.).
Then the present visible world (11 3), which is already growing
old (1 10-12), will be removed, and the kingdom which cannot be
shaken will remain (12 26-28). Into this new world the righteous
will pass through the resurrection. There is apparently to be a
resurrection of the righteous only. 1 This follows from 11 35 :
that they might obtain a better resurrection. These words,
which refer to the Maccabean martyrs (2 Mace. 7), set the
resurrection in contrast with a merely temporary deliverance
from death, and represent it as a prize to be striven for, not as
the common lot of all. The blessedness of the righteous is
described as a participation in the glory of God (2 io)and in the
divine vision (12 14).
As regards the wicked, their doom is destruction (1039).
This is something far worse than mere bodily death (827). It
is represented as a consuming fire (1027 l- 2 9> C P 68). The
destiny of the wicked 2 seems to be annihilation.
6. The sources for the Johannine eschatology are the
93 The Fourth Gospel and the epistles. The
Johannine A P ocal yP se ( T 4-i7) springs from a
E h t 1 s-v different author, and belongs to a differ -
Y ent school of eschatological thought.
Though these writings do not present us with any
fresh teaching about hades and hell, their author
furnishes us with principles which in themselves necessi
tate a transformation of the inherited views regarding the
immediate and the final abodes of the departed. Thus
when he teaches that God so loved the world as to give
his only son to redeem it (Jn. 3i6), that God is love
(i Jn. 48), that he is light, and in him is no darkness
at all, hades, which is wholly under his sway, must
surely be a place where moral growth is possible. The
conception of a final eternal abode of the damned
seems to find no place in a cosmos ruled by such a
God as this writer conceives.
Whilst in a certain sense in the Johannine teaching
the kingdom has already come, the Christ is already
present, the faithful already risen, and the judgment
already in fulfilment, we have to deal here not with these
present aspects, but with their future consummation.
The salient points of the Johannine eschatology may
be shortly put as follows, (a) The parusia is close at
hand. (6) It ushers in the resurrection of the dead and
the final judgment, (c) Thereupon believers enter into
the perfect life of heavenly blessedness and through the
vision of God are transformed into his likeness.
(a) The parusia is foretold in Jn. 14s, where Jesus
promises that he will return from heaven and take the
disciples unto himself that they may be with him where
he is i. e. , in heaven. 3
That 14 2yC cannot be interpreted of his coming to receive his
disciples individually on death is shown by 21 22. According
to the NT writers death translates believers to Christ (2 Cor.
5 8 Phil. 1 23 Acts 7 59) ; he is nowhere said to come and fetch
them. This parusia is at hand ; for some of his disciples are
expected to survive till it appears (21 22), though Peter must first
be martyred (21 i8yC). Even in extreme old age the apostle
still hopes to witness it together with his disciples, whom he
exhorts to abide in Christ that they may not be ashamed before
him at his coming (i Jn. 2 28). The close approach of the
parusia is likewise shown by the appearance of false prophets
and teachers who deny the fundamental truths of Christianity.
In these the Antichrist manifests himself. Such a manifestation
must precede the parusia (i Jn. 2 18 22 4 i 3). Hence this is the
last hour (i Jn. 2 is).
1 In 6 2 we have set forth the alternatives awaiting all men
on the one hand resurrection for the righteous, on the other
eternal judgment ((cpi /xa aldviov) for the wicked.
2 In the above the traditional views of scholars have in the main
been followed ; but this has not been done without some hesita
tion. The eschatology might be differently construed. Judg
ment sets in immediately after death in the case of each individual
(9 27). In 6 2 11 35, as in Pss. Sol. and elsewhere, the resurrection
spirits (12g). An Alexandrian origin for the epi!
would favour this view. The expression spirits of just men
made perfect (12 23) points in the same direction ; for if the
perfection meant is moral, these spirits must have already
reached their consummation. If they have reached their con
summation as spirits, however, the writer (as an Alexandrian)
seems to teach only a spiritual resurrection. The chief obstacle
in the way of this interpretation is the meaning of the words to
perfect" and perfection. See Weiss, Bib. Theol. of NT 123.
3 In a spiritual sense Christ has come already (i Jn. 5 12) :
he that hath the Son hath the life.
1378
ESCHATOLOGY
ESCHATOLOGY
(6) On the last day Jesus himself, as the resurrection
and the life (Jn. lias), raises his own to the resurrection-
life (639 /. 44 54 1125), a life that believers indeed al
ready possess 1 (624/1 851 ; cpSis/.). Resurrection of
all the dead is taught in 5 28 /!
It is clear, however, from the leading thoughts of the Fourth
Gospel that a resurrection of the wicked i.e., a resurrection of
judgment can be nothing more than a deliverance of the
wicked to eternal death at the last day. b?%f. which teach
a general resurrection of the dead are most probably interpolated
(see Wendt, Lehre Jesu, 1249-251 ; Charles, Doctrine of^ a
Future Life, 370-372). In the Fourth Gospel the resurrection
is synonymous with life. Hence in some form the resurrection
life follows immediately on death, though its perfect consumma
tion cannot be attained till the final consummation of all things.
It is Jesus also who executes the final judgment. This is the
result of his unique mediatorial significance. The Father
judgeth no man but has committed all judgment to the Son
(5 22 27). 2 In a certain sense believers do not incur judgment
(3 18 624) ; but this judgment is that which is present and sub
jective, 3 and in this respect the world is judged already (3 18
1231). The final result of this daily secret judgment must how
ever one day become manifest ; believers must appear at the
final judgment. They shall, however, have boldness there
(i Jn. 228 417). A man s attitude to Christ determines now,
and will determine finally, his relation to God and his destiny
(Jn. Si8f. 9 39 ).
(c) The final consummation is one of heavenly
blessedness.
After the resurrection and the final judgment the present world
shall pass away (i Jn. 2 17), and Christ will take his own to
heaven (Jn. 142^); for they are to be with him where he is
(12261724). Eternal life is then truly consummated. Begun
essentially on earth, it is now realised in its fulness and perfected.
The faithful now obtain their full reward (2 Jn. 8). As
children of God they shall, through enjoyment of the divine
vision, be transformed into the divine likeness (i Jn. 3 2_/I).
7. Acts 3 12-26 may be accepted provisionally as repre
senting the teaching of Peter (cp, however, ACTS, 14) ;
94. The Petrine " r u d ^ ^ *" y reas at a11
_, , , . for hesitating to receive i Peter as
10gy fully Petrine (cp, however, PETER
[EPISTLES], 5). The passage in Acts is, at any rate,
of great historical value as embodying a highly Judaistic
view, and as showing how much in this view had eventu
ally to yield in the Christian church to distinctively
Christian principles. The speech ascribed to Peter
anticipates that the kingdom of God will be realised
in the forms of the Jewish theocracy (cp Acts 16), and
that the non-Israelites will participate in its blessings
only through conversion to Judaism (826). Hence also
Jesus is conceived, not as the world-Messiah, but as the
predestined Messiah of the Jews, 820 (rbv irpoKfx el -P lff
/j.tvov vfuv Xpiarbv Iijffow). We now see clearly what
the much-tortured phrase the times of the restoration
(dTro/cardcTTcurts) of all things in 821 cannot be. It
has nothing to do with such a speculative question as
the ultimate and universal destiny of man. Acts 10,
if it proves anything, proves this that Peter was un
acquainted with the destination of the Gospel to the
Gentiles. The restoration must mean either the
renewal of the world, or else, much more probably,
the moral regeneration of Israel (see Mai. 46, and
Jesus application of the passage in Mt. 17 n).
Jewish hearers are urged to repent that they may be forgiven,
and so hasten the parusia. The parusia and the seasons of
refreshing (3 19) are connected. Either the aTroicaTdcrracris is
preparatory to the parusia or else it is synonymous with the
seasons of refreshing, and if so it would appear to belong to an
earthly Messianic kingdom. *
1 Eternal life is at times described as a present possession : he
that believeth hath eternal life, Jn. 647, cp 5 nf. This divine
life cannot be affected by deajh. He that possesses it can
never truly die, 8 51 11 25 f. This phrase is used of the future
heavenly life in 4 14 6 27 12 25. Cp ETERNAL, 4.
2 In 8 50 there is a reference to God as executing judgment ;
but in 5 22 it is said that the Father judgeth no man. Wendt
(Teaching of Jesus, lys^f.) rejects as interpolations in an
original Johannine source 5 2%/. as well as portions of 639^
44 54, and 1248 relating to the Messianic judgment.
3 The judgment besides being future and objective is also
present and subjective. It is no arbitrary process, but the work
ing out of an absolute law, whereby the unbelieving world is self-
condemned. Cp 3 17-19 624 12 47_/C
* The phrase xaipoi ayai^ufews is hardly intelligible on any
other theory ; but the word avd^vg is should probably here be
1379
In i Peter, as in Acts 3, believing Israelites still form
the real substance of the Christian church ; but here
95 1 Peter note l ^ e ste ^ m a< ^ vance tms church
embraces all who come to believe in
Christ, non-Israelites equally with Israelites, in this
world or the next (81946). Further, it is not an
earthly consummation of the theocracy, but one re
served in heaven, that is looked for (14). The goal,
then, of the Christian hope is this salvation ready to
be revealed at the last time (Is), which salvation or
consummation is initiated by the revelation of Jesus
Christ and the judgment of the world. Though God
is declared in general terms to be the judge (li? 223),
this final judgment is expressly assigned to Christ (4s).
Still the end of all things is near (4?), for judgment
has already begun with the house of God 1 i.e. , the
church of believing Israel (4 17).
Persecution is sifting the true from the false members of the
Church. Such afflictions, however, will last but a little while
(165 10). Then Christ will be revealed (17 64), to judge both
the living and the dead (4 5), both the righteous and the wicked
(4 17 f.t). The approved disciples will share with their lord in
eternal glory (5 10), they will receive the crown of glory
(5 4), and live such a life as that of God (4 6).
The question of chief importance in the Petrine
eschatology has still to be discussed. It centres in
,... . the two difficult passages which describe
p , , the preaching to the spirits in prison
(819-21), and the preaching of the
gospel to the dead (4s/.). 1 The interpretations are
multitudinous. The majority attribute a false sense
to the phrase the spirits in prison. This phrase can
be interpreted ordy in two ways. The spirits in question
are either those of men in ShS51, or the fallen angels
mentioned in 2 Pet. 24 Jude 6. In the next place the
words in prison denote the local condition of the
spirits at the time of preaching. Hence, according to
the text, Christ in the spirit (i.e., between his death
and his resurrection) preached the gospel of redemption
(for so only can we render licf}pv%ev) to human or angelic
spirits in the underworld.
With the more exact determination of the objects of this mission
we are not here concerned ; for, however it be decided, we have
here a clear statement that, in the case of certain individuals
human or angelic, the scope of redemption is not limited to this
life.
We have now to deal with 4s/., . . . who will
have to give account to him that is ready to judge the
living and the dead. For with this purpose was the
gospel preached even to the dead, that they might be
judged according to men in the flesh (body), but live
according to God in the spirit. The doctrine we found
stated above in 3 19-21 is here substantiated, as being
part of the larger truth now enunciated. Christ is ready
to judge the living and the dead the latter no less than
the former ; for even to the dead was the gospel
preached 2 in order that though they were judged in
the body they might live the life of God in the spirit.
Thus it is taught that when the last judgment takes
place the evangelium will already have been preached
to all. As to how far this preaching of redemption
succeeds, there is no hint in the Petrine teaching.
rendered rest or relief; for it is (B s rendering of rnn
in Ex. 8 15. If it is taken so^ it finds a perfect parallel in
2 Thess. 1 7 where Paul uses ai>e<ris in the same connection.
This rest is promised also in Asc. Is. 4 15.
1 For the various conflicting interpretations that have been
assigned to these passages from the earliest times, see Dietel-
maier, Historia Dogmatis de Descensu Christi ad Infcros
litteraria (1741 and 1762); Giider, Die Lehre vcn d. Er-
scheinung Christi unter den Toien ( 53) ; Zeyschwitz, De
Christi ad Inferos Descensu ( 57); Usteri, h inabgefahren cur
Holle , Schweitzer, Hinabgefah>en zur Hillc; Hofmann,
Schriftbeiveis, 2335-341; Salmond, Christian Doctr. of
Inttnort. 450-486 ( 96) ; Spitta, Christi Predigt an die Geister;
Kruston, La Descente du Christ aux En/ers( t)-f), as well as
the Commentators in loc.
2 The tense of evTjyyeAicrfty creates no difficulty here. This
preaching is regarded as a completed act in the past, because,
as 4 7 declares, the end of all things is at hand. Even if this
were not so, the aorist can be used of a continuous practice (cp
i Cor. 920 Jas. 26).
1380
98. 1 and
2 Thess.
ESCHATOLOGY
These passages in i Peter are of extreme value.
They attest the achievement of the final stage in the
moralisation of Shfiol. The first step in this moralisa-
tion was taken early in the second century B. c. , when it
was transformed into a place of moral distinctions ( 3 [3])
having been originally one of merely social or national dis
tinctions (10-18). This moralisation, however, was very
inadequately carried out. According to the Judaistic
conception souls in Sheol were conceived as insusceptible
of ethical progress. What they were on entering Sheol,
that they continued to be till the final judgment. From
the standpoint of a true theism can we avoid pro
nouncing this conception mechanical and unethical?
It precludes moral change in moral beings who are
under the rule of a perfectly moral being.
8. In the writings of Paul we find no single eschato-
logical system. His ideas in this respect were in a
07 ThP Pauline State f devel P ment - He be S an with
r t i an expectation of the future inherited
tscnatoiogy. largely from trad i t i ona i Judaism ; but
under the influence of great fundamental Christian con
ceptions he parted gradually from this and entered on a
process of development in the course of which the
heterogeneous elements were silently dropped.
Four stages are marked out. Even in the last Paul
does not seem to have attained finality, though he was
still working towards it. It is permissible, therefore,
for his readers to develop his thoughts in symmetrical
completeness and carry to its conclusion his chain of
reasoning.
The various stages are attested by (i. ) i and 2 Thess.
( 98); (ii. ) i Cor. ( 99); (iii. ) 2 Cor. and Rom.
( 100); (iv.) Phil., Col., Eph. ( 101).
(i. ) The Epistles to the Thessalonians (on the criticism
and contents of which cp THESSALONIANS) present us
with^the earliest form of the Pauline teaching
and eschatology. They constitute, in fact,
the Pauline apocalypse. In this apocalypse
the salient points are (a) the great apostasy and the
antichrist ; (6) the parusia and final judgment ; (c) the
resurrection and blessed consummation of the faithful.
In his teaching on these questions Paul appeals to
the authority of Christ. What he puts before his
readers in i Thess. 415-17 is derived from the Lord (see
v. 15). There is, however, a fixity and rigidity in the
teaching of the apostle which is not to be found in that
of Jesus.
(a) The apostasy and the antichrist. Paul starts from
the fundamental thought of Jewish apocalyptic. When
the forces of good and evil in the world have reached
their limit of development, God will intervene. There
will therefore be nothing sudden, nothing unethical in
this. The conditions of the crisis are moral, and those
who, morally speaking, can, and those who cannot be
saved, will be distinguished gradually and surely. The
day of the Lord cannot come till the antichrist (a figure
found only in the early Paulinism) and the atroaraffLa.
have become facts.
The antichrist is described as the man of sin, the son of
perdition, whose coming is according to the working of Satan
or, as is also said, with all unrighteous (untruthful) deceit for
those who are perishing (2 Thess. 239 _/C). The avo^ia. which
already works (2 Thess. 2 7) must reach its climax in a person
in the antichrist whose manifestation or parusia (2 Thess. 2 9) is
the Satanic counterfeit of the true Messiah s. This person is also
described as the antithesis of every known divine form, because
he places his throne in the temple in Jerusalem, setting himself
forth as God (2 Thess. 2 4). Now, the time of the end is come ;
the Lord will at once descend and slay him with the breath of
his mouth, and consume him with the manifestation of his
parusia (2 Thess. 2 8).
Whence antichrist was to proceed whether from
Judaism or heathenism 1 it is difficult to determine.
1 See ANTICHRIST. Weiss (Theol. of NT, ET 1305-311)
maintains the Jewish origin of antichrist. He argues that an
apostasy, in strictness, was impossible in heathenism. The
real obstacle to the spread of the teaching of Christ lay in
fanatical Jews, the unreasonable and evil men of 2 Thess. 82
(cp also i Thess. 2 18), who having mostly remained unbelieving
(Acts 1862 Thess. 1 8), had always pursued Paul with persecution
1381
ESCHATOLOGY
That the apostle did not conceive him as proceeding
from Rome is clear ; for 6 Karfyuv is none other than
Rome 1 (see ANTICHRIST, 7).
(d) Parusia and final judgment. We have seen
when Christ s parusia (i Thess. 813 2 Thess. 2 1) is to
come. The precise day is uncertain : it comes as a
thief in the night (i Thess. 62 ; cp Mt. 2443) ; but the
apostle expects it in his own time (i Thess. 4 15 17).
With what vividness and emphasis he must have preached
the impending advent of Christ is clear from i Thess. 5 1-3, as
well as from 2 Thess., where he has to quiet an excitement
almost bordering on fanaticism. When Christ descends from
heaven (i Thess. 1 10 4 16 2 Thess. 1 7), angels will accompany
him as his ministers (2 Thess. 1 7), and his glory will then first
be fully revealed.
The parusia is likewise the day of judgment, as the
designations applied to it show. It is beyond doubt
meant by the phrases the day of the Lord, the day,
that day ( i Thess. 6242 Thess. 1 10). This judgment
deals with antichrist and all the wicked, whether Jews
or Gentiles, whether simply careless or actively hostile.
The doom of the wicked is eternal destruction
(6\e0pos aluvios, 2 Thess. lg, cp i Thess. 63; cp
aTrwXeta, 2 Thess. 2io).
We see here the intolerance of the inherited eschatology.
Later it is not the consummation of human evil but the triumph
of Christianity that ushers in the fulness of the times and the
advent of Christ. To the apostle s maturer mind God so shapes
the varying destinies of Jew and Gentile that he may extend
his mercy unto all (Rom. 11 32).
(c) The resurrection and the blessed consummation of
the faithful. There was an apprehension among Paul s
young converts that those who died before the parusia
would fail to share in its blessedness. Hence the
apostle refers them to a special statement of Christ
on this subject (i Thess. 4. 15). The dead in Christ
are to rise first ( i Thess. 4 16 ; but the teaching on
this point is not quite clear), 2 by which is meant a
contrast, not between a first and a second resurrection,
but rather between two classes of the righteous who
share in the resurrection. The first are those who have
died before the parusia ; the second, those who survive
to meet it. Both are caught up to meet the Lord in
the air. Thus the elect are gathered together to Christ
(2 Thess. 2 1 ; cp Mt. 24 31). There is no reference to
a resurrection of the wicked in these two epistles. 3 It is
and calumny (Acts 9 23^". 29 18845) and stirred up the heathen
against him (1850 1425 19 17s 13). These men, who had slain
Christ and the prophets, were now the relentless persecutors of
his Church. When we further observe that the false Messiah or
antichrist regards the temple at Jerusalem as the dwelling-place
of God (2 Thess. 24), the Jewish origin of the antichristian
principle seems in a very high degree probable. Sabatier, The
Apostle Paul (ET 119-121), however, is now less confident
than formerly of the correctness of this view. His present
opinion reminds us somewhat of Beyschlag s (NT Theology,
ET2257/).
1 The power of Rome had repeatedly protected the apostle
against the attacks of the Jews (Acts 17 5-9 18 12-16; cp ACTS,
5). In Rom. 184 the Roman magistracy is God s minister.
Later, this distinction between the power of Rome and anti
christ disappeared. Thus the emperor is the Beast, and Rome
the mystery of avofiia. in Rev. 13 17.
2 According to i Thess. 3 13 the dead are to accompany Christ
at his parusia that is if we take a-yioi here as^ the faithful
(usage suggests this) and not as the angels. 2 Thess. 17
speaks of angels, but purely as agents of the divine judgment.
That we are to understand i Thess. 3 13 of men, not of angels,
is clear from i Thess. 4 14. According to 813414, therefore,
the resurrection of the faithful dead is coincident with the advent ;
but according to 4 16 it is subsequent to the advent.
3 Indeed there could not be a resurrection of the wicked
according to Paul s views (see 99 [/>]). The statement attributed
to Paul in Acts 24 15 that there shall be a resurrection both of
the just and of the unjust cannot therefore be regarded as an
accurate report. To share in the resurrection according to the
all but universal teaching of the NT writers is the privilege
only of those who are spiritually one with Christ and draw
their life from the Holy Spirit. There are two passages Jn.
5 28 f. and Rev. 20 12 that attest the opposite view ; but the
latter is hardly here admissible as evidence of distinctively
Christian doctrine, and the former contradicts the entire drift of
the Fourth Gospel in this respect. In all Jewish books that
teach a resurrection of the wicked, the resurrection is conceived
not as a result of spiritual oneness with God but merely as an
eschatological arrangement for the furtherance of divine justice
or some other divine end.
1382
99. 1 Cor.
ESCHATOLOGY
to be inferred that after the resurrection the world, from
which the righteous have been removed, is given over
to destruction, whilst, for the righteous, there is now
the final boon of being for ever with the Lord (i
Thess. 417). Christ s people, who are organically
connected with him,, will be raised even as he (i Thess.
414), and therefore not to an earthly life, but to the
obtaining of the glory of our Lord Jesus Christ (2
Thess. 214) in the completed kingdom of God (i Thess.
2 12 2 Thess. 1 5).
(ii. ) The second stage in the development of the
Pauline eschatology is to be found in i Corinthians.
In many respects the teaching of this epistle
is in harmony with that of the epistles to
the Thessalonians ; but it is without antichrist. Other
divergencies will appear in the sequel. Three subjects
are prominent : (a) the parusia and the final judgment ;
(6) the resurrection ; and (c) the consummation of the
blessed.
(a) The parusia and final judgment. Paul looks
forward to the parusia of Christ * ( i Cor. 4s 1 1 26
15 51 1622), which will be preceded by severe trials
(7 26 28 ). 2 The interval preceding the parusia will be
shortened in order that the faithful may keep themselves
free from the entanglements of this life (7 29, cp Mt.
2422). This second coming will immediately manifest
Christ s glory and bring the world to a close (\jf.,
cp 2 Cor. lis/. ). With it is connected the final judg
ment, at which the judge will be Christ (44/. ). 3
That the second coming is conceived as one of judgment is
seen also in the designations elsewhere applied to it ( the day
of our Lord Jesus Christ, 18 ; the day, 8 13 ; the day of the
Lord, "5 5). From the above facts it follows that Paul did
not expect the intervention of a millennial period between the
parusia and the final judgment, as some have inferred from
1 Cor. 1622-24. According to this passage every power hostile
to God in the world is stripped of its influence by the time of the
parusia. With the resurrection which ensues thereupon is
involved the destruction of the last enemy, death (15 26). Thus
the parusia, accompanied by the final judgment and the resur
rection, marks the end of the present age and the beginning of
the new. The angels are to be judged ; but their judges are the
righteous (i Cor. 63; see, on Bk. of Wisd., above, 76).
(b) The resurrection. The resurrection of man is
connected organically with that of Christ. As God has
raised up Christ, so also he will raise us (i Cor. 614, cp
2 Cor. 414).
The doctrine of man s resurrection had been denied by certain
members of the church of Corinth, who did not question the
resurrection of Jesus. To these the apostle rejoined that both
were indissolubly united and stood or fell together. The ground
of man s resurrection-hope was his living fellowship with Christ
(15 22). The relation manifestly in each case is the same. As
it cannot be natural and genealogical it must of necessity be
ethical and spiritual. Furthermore, from the position of the
words (> T<3 ASafji ndfTfi a.Tro6vr)<TKOv<ri:v) the in Adam must
be connected with all. Hence it is equivalent to all who
are in Adam. Similarly all in Christ = all who are in Christ. *
Thus the verse means : as all who are ethically in fellowship
with Adam die, so all who are spiritually in fellowship with
Christ shall be made alive. This being made spiritually alive 5
((Jiooiroieio-Oat) involves the being raised (cp Rom. 811).
There can be no resurrection but in Christ.
That the righteous alone are raised we shall be forced
to conclude also from Paul s teaching on the origin of
the resurrection body in 1535-49.
In answer to the question how the dead are raised, Paul
rejoins : thou witless one, that which thou sowest is not
brought to life, except it die (1536). That is, a man s own
experience should overturn the objection that is raised. The
death of the seed consists in the decomposition of its material
wrappings. By this process the living principle within it is set
1 So also in Phil. 320/C, yet he had always before him the
possibility of meeting death. This is perhaps the case in i Cor.
LBaiA
2 This is the nearest approach to the terrible picture of the
future troubles in Thess.
3 As in Thessalonians (see above, 98). This doctrine appears
also in 2 Cor. 5 10 the judgment seat of Christ. The judgment
is also spoken of as the judgment of God (Rom. 14 10). Cp also
Rom. 25/^86 14 12. In Rom. 2i6 the two views are recon
ciled ; God will judge the world through Jesus Christ.
* For similar constructions see 15 18 i Thess. 4 16.
B That this is the meaning of ftoojroieia-Oai appears to follow
from its use in 1636, where, as in 1522, the reference is to the
fresh inward development of life, not to its outer manifestation.
1383
ESCHATOLOGY
free and seizes hold of the matter around it wherewith it forms
for itself a new body.l In like manner the resurrection is
effected through death itself. What appears as the obstacle is
actually the means. The spirit of man must free itself from the
body which contains it before it fashions for itself a body that
is incorruptible.
We are next instructed as to the glorious nature of
the resurrection body (1542-44). The sowing here
cannot mean the burying of the body in the grave : such
a meaning of sow (cnreipeiv) is wholly unattested : it
is rather the placing the vital principle or spirit in its
material environment here on earth, where the spirit of
man, like a seed, gathers and fashions its body from the
materials around it. The life of man in this world from
its first appearance to the obsequies that attest its de
parting is analogous to the sowing of the seed in the
earth.
That this is Paul s meaning will become clearer if we con
sider the opposing members in the various contrasts drawn in
1042-44. Thus, it is sown in corruption (1542). This descrip
tion is no doubt applicable to the interment of the body | but
the first members of the following antithesis are quite inap-
I Hrabll i The phrase in corruption is especially Pauline in
reference to the present life of man. This life is in the bondagt
of corruption (Rom. 821), and the living body is undergoing
corruption (2 Cor. 4ie). Furthermore flesh and blood, the
constituents of the present living body, are declared in i Cor.
1550 to be corruption. In dishonour denotes the miseries of
this earthly life ; which we experience in this body of our
humiliation (Phil. 821). Weakness is another fitting descrip
tion of the body as an agent of the spirit the spirit is willing
but the flesh is weak. See also i Cor. 23/1 2 Cor. 129/1 for the
contrast weakness and power as here. To apply such a term
as weakness to the dead body would be absurd. Finally,
this present body is psyc 
