This is a digital copy of a book that was preserved for generations on library shelves before it was carefully scanned by Google as part of a project
to make the world's books discoverable online.
It has survived long enough for the copyright to expire and the book to enter the public domain. A public domain book is one that was never subject
to copyright or whose legal copyright term has expired. Whether a book is in the public domain may vary country to country. Public domain books
are our gateways to the past, representing a wealth of history, culture and knowledge that's often difficult to discover.
Marks, notations and other marginalia present in the original volume will appear in this file - a reminder of this book's long journey from the
publisher to a library and finally to you.
Usage guidelines
Google is proud to partner with libraries to digitize public domain materials and make them widely accessible. Public domain books belong to the
public and we are merely their custodians. Nevertheless, this work is expensive, so in order to keep providing this resource, we have taken steps to
prevent abuse by commercial parties, including placing technical restrictions on automated querying.
We also ask that you:
+ Make non-commercial use of the files We designed Google Book Search for use by individuals, and we request that you use these files for
personal, non-commercial purposes.
+ Refrain from automated querying Do not send automated queries of any sort to Google's system: If you are conducting research on machine
translation, optical character recognition or other areas where access to a large amount of text is helpful, please contact us. We encourage the
use of public domain materials for these purposes and may be able to help.
+ Maintain attribution The Google "watermark" you see on each file is essential for informing people about this project and helping them find
additional materials through Google Book Search. Please do not remove it.
+ Keep it legal Whatever your use, remember that you are responsible for ensuring that what you are doing is legal. Do not assume that just
because we believe a book is in the public domain for users in the United States, that the work is also in the public domain for users in other
countries. Whether a book is still in copyright varies from country to country, and we can't offer guidance on whether any specific use of
any specific book is allowed. Please do not assume that a book's appearance in Google Book Search means it can be used in any manner
anywhere in the world. Copyright infringement liability can be quite severe.
About Google Book Search
Google's mission is to organize the world's information and to make it universally accessible and useful. Google Book Search helps readers
discover the world's books while helping authors and publishers reach new audiences. You can search through the full text of this book on the web
at jhttp : //books . qooqle . com/
SOO *0O SOO 200 100
U-J I I L L
600
— I —
IO00YOS
Dr. William Smith 's
Dictionary of the Bible
William Smith
IMBP Sg Digitize'
rTTTTt'TtT
'
TapDan Presbyterian
I LIBRARY
E
Association \
\ (Presented by VI • ' ' \fl ' :
L
^iAiAAAAAAJ-^*-"
ifci^l***- 1 ***
I
J>
■
■
I
■
I
^
Digitized by VaOOQ IC
BS
Digitized by VaOOQ IC
DICT
AKT:
Digitized by VaOOQ IC
DR. WILLIAM SMITH'S
DICTIONARY OF THE BIBLE;
ooMPiaatxa m
ANTIQUITIES, BIOGRAPHY, GEOGRAPHY,
AND NATURAL HISTORY.
■IV USD 1» EDITED BT
PROFESSOR H. B. HACKETT, D. D.
WITH TUB OOOPEBATIOB OF
EZRA ABBOT, LL. D.
unun uiBttiiw or babtabb aouan.
VOLUME II.
GENNESARET, SEA OF, to MARKET.
BOSTON:
HOUGHTON, MIFFLIN AND COMPANY.
Wtp Kiteratoe )9rr*tf, Cambrioge.
1892.
Digitized by VjOOQ IC
Entered, according to Act of Congress, in the year 1869, by
Hubd and Houghton,
in the Clerk's Office of the District Court for the Southern District of New York.
RIVERSIDE, CAMBRIDGE!
STEREOTYPED AND PRINTED BT
H. O. HOUGHTON AND COMPANT.
Digitized by LjOOQlC
*-5--/f 3 2
WRITERS IN THE ENGLISH EDITION.
Very Rev. Henry Alford, D. D., Dean of Canterbury.
Rev. Henry Bailey, B. D., Warden of St. Augustine's College, Can
terbury ; late Fellow of St John's College, Cambridge.
H. B. Rev. Horatius Bonar, D. D., Kelso, N. B.; Author of "The Land
of Promise."
[The geographical article!, signed H. B-, an written by Dr. Bonar : thoaa on other nibjeata,
atgned H. B., an written by Mr. Bailey.]
A. B. Rev. Alfred Barry, B. D., Principal of Cheltenham College ; lata
Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge.
W. L. B. Rev. William Latham Bevan, M. A., Vicar of Hay, Brecknock*
shire.
J. W. B. Rev. Joseph Williams Blakeslet, B. D., Canon of Canterbury ; late
Fellow and Tutor of Trinity College, Cambridge.
T. E. B. Rev. Thomas Edward Brown, M. A., Vice-Principal of King Wil-
liam's College, Isle of Man ; late Fellow of Oriel College, Oxford.
R. W. B. Ven. Robert William Browne, M. A-> Archdeacon of Bath, and
Canon of Wells.
E. H. B. Right Rev. Edward Harold Browne, D. D., Lord Bishop of Ely.
W. T. B. Rev. WIlliam Thomas Bullock, lit. A., Assistant Secretary of the
Society for the Propagation of the Gospel in Foreign Farts.
8. C. Rev. Samuel Clark, M. A., Vicar of Bredwardine with Brobury,
Herefordshire.
F. C. C. Rev. Frederic Charles Cook, M. A., Chaplain in Ordinary to the
Queen.
G. E. L. C. Right Rev. George Edward Lynch Cotton, D. D., late Lord Bishop
of Calcutta and Metropolitan of India.
J. LL D. Rev. John Llewelyn Dayies, M. A., Rector of Christ Church,
Marylebone ; late Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge.
G. E. D. Prof. George Edward Day, D. D., Yale College, New Haven, Conn.
E. D. Emanuel Deutscr, M. R A. S., British Museum.
W. D. Rev. William Drake, M. A., Chaplain in Ordinary to the Queen.
E. P. E. Rev. Edward Paroissien Eddrup, M A., Principal of the Theolog-
ical College, Salisbury.
C. J. E. Right Rev. Charles John Ellicott, D. D., Lord Bishop of Glouces-
ter and Bristol.
F. W. F. Rev. Frederick William Farrar, M. A., Assistant Master of Har-
row School ; late Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge.
3. F. James Fergusson, F. R S., F. R. A. S., Fellow of the Royal Insti-
tute of British Architects.
E. 8. Ff. Edward Salusbcrt Ffoulkes, M. A., late Fellow of Jesus College,
Oxford.
W. F. Right Rev. William Fitzgerald, D. D , Lord Bishop of Killaloe.
' iii >
Digitized by LjOOQlC
LIST OF WRITERS.
F. G.
F. W. G.
G.
H. B.H.
E.H— 8.
H. H.
A.C. H.
J. A.H.
J. D. H.
J.J.H.
W. H.
J. S.H.
E.H.
W. B. J.
Am £L L.
8. L.
J. B. L.
D. W. M.
F. M.
Oppert.
E. R. 0.
T. J. 0.
J. J. 8. E
T. T. P.
H. W. P.
R.H.P.
K.S.P.
R.S. P.
J. L. P.
Rev. Francis Garden, M. A., Subdean of Her Majesty's Chapeb
Royal.
Rev. F. William Gotch, LL. D., President of the Baptist College.
Bristol ; late Hebrew Examiner in the University of London.
George Grove, Crystal Palace, Sydenham.
Prof. Horatio Bai.cu Hackett, D. D., LL. D., Theological Institu-
tion, Newton, Mass.
Rev. Ernest Hawkins, B. D., Secretary of the Society for the Propa-
gation of the Gospel in Foreign Farts.
Rev. Henry Hayman, B. D., Head Matter of the Grammar School.
Cheltenham ; late Fellow of St. John's College, Oxford.
Yen. Lord Arthur Charles Hervey, M. A., Archdeacon of Sud-
bury, and Rector of Ickworth.
Rev. James Augustus Hebsey, D. C. L., Head Master of Merchant
Taylors' School.
Joseph Dalton Hooker, M. D., F. R S., Royal Botanic Gardens,
Kew.
Rev. Jambs John Hornby, M A., Fellow of Brasenose College, Ox-
ford ; Principal of Bishop Cosin's Hall.
Rev. William Houghton, M. A., F. L. 8., Rector of Preston on the
Weald Moors, Salop.
Rev. John Saul Howson, D. D., Principal of the Collegiate Institu-
tion, Liverpool.
Rev. Edgar Huxtable, M A., Subdean of Wells.
Rev. William Basil Jones, M. A., Prebendary of York and of St
David's ; late Fellow and Tutor of University College, Oxford.
Austen Henry La yard, D. C. L., M. P.
Rev. Stanley Leathes, M A., M R S. L., Hebrew Lecturer in
King's College, London.
Rev. Joseph Barber Lightfoot, D. D., Hulsean Professor of Divinity,
and Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge.
Rev. D. W. Marks, Professor of Hebrew in University College, London
Rev. Frederick Meyrick, M. A., late Fellow and Tutor of Trinity
College, Oxford.
Prof. Jules Oppert, of Paris.
Rev. Edward Redman Oroer, M. A., Fellow and Tutor of St
Augustine's College, Canterbury.
Yen. Thomas Johnson Ormerod, M A., Archdeacon of Suffolk;
late Fellow of Brasenose College, Oxford.
Rev. John James Stewart Perownk, B. D., Vice-Principal of St
David's College, Lampeter.
Rev. Thomas Thomason Perownk, B. D., Fellow and Tutor of
Corpus Christ! College, Cambridge.
Rev. Henry Wright Phillott, M A., Rector of Staunton-on-Wye,
Herefordshire ; late Student of Christ Church, Oxford.
Rev. Edward Hayes Plumptbe, M A., Professor of Divinity in
King's College, London.
Edward Stanley Poole, M R A. 8., South Kensington Museum.
Reginald Stuart Poole, British Museum.
Rev. J. Leslie Porter, M. A.. Professor of Sacred Literature, Assent
Digitized by
Google
LIST OF WRITERS. «
brjr*s College, Belfast ; Author of " Handbook of Syria and Palestine,"
and " Five Yean in Damascus."
C P. Rev. Charles Pritchard, M. A., F. R. S., Hon. Secretary of the
Royal Astronomical Society ; -late Fellow of St. John's College, Cam-
bridge.
6. R Rev. George Rawlenson, M. A., Camden Professor of Ancient His-
tory, Oxford.
H J. R Rev. Henry John Rose, B. D., Rural Dean, and Rector of Houghton
Conquest, Bedfordshire.
W. S. Rev. William Selwtn, D. D., Chaplain in Ordinary to the Queen ;
Lady Margaret's Professor of Divinity, Cambridge : Canon of Ely.
A. P. S. Rev. Arthur Penrhyn Stanley, D. D., Regius Professor of Ecclesias-
tical History, and Canon of Christ Church, Oxford ; Chaplain to His
Royal Highness the Prince of Wales.
C E. S. Prof. Calvin Eixu, cJtowk, D. D., Hartford, Conn
J. P. T. Rev. Joseph Farrish Thompson, D. D., New York.
W. T. Most Rev. William Thomson, D. D., Lord Archbishop of York.
8. P. T. Samuel Prideaox Tregellea, LL. D., Author of " An Introduction
to the Textual Criticism of the New Testament," &c
EL B. T. Rev. Henry Baker Tristram, M A., F. L. 8., Master of Greatham
HospitaL
J. F. T. Rev. Joseph Francis Thrupp, M A., Vicar of Barrington ; late Fel-
low of Trinity College, Cambridge.
E. T. Hon. Edward T. B. Twisleton, M. A., late Fellow of Balliol College,
Oxford.
Rev. Edmund Vbnables, M. A., Bonchurch, Isle of Wight
Rev. Brooke Fobs Westcott, M. A., Assistant Master of Harrow
School ; late Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge.
Rev. Christopher Wordsworth, D. D., Canon of Westminster.
William Alois Wright, M. A., Librarian of Trinity College, Cam-
bridge.
ET,
B. F. W.
C.W.
W. A.W.
8.C.B.
T. J. a
G.ED.
G. P. F.
F. G.
D. R.G.
BL
J. a
F. W. H.
A. H.
WRITERS IN THE AMERICAN EDITION.
Ezra Abbot, LL. D., Assistant Librarian of Harvard College,
Cambridge, Mass.
Prof. Samuel Colcord Bartlett, D. D., Theol. Sem., Chicago, HI.
Rev. Thomas Jefferson Conant, D. D., Brooklyn, N. Y.
Prof. George Edward Day, D. D., Yale College, New Haven, Conn.
Prof. George Park Fisher, D. D., Yale College, New Haven, Conn.
Prof. Frederic Gardiner, 1>. D., Middletown, Conn.
Rev. Daniel Raynes Goodwin, D. D., Provost of the University of
Pennsylvania, Philadelphia.
Prof. Horatio Balch Hackett, D. D., LL. D., Theological Institu-
tion, Newton, Mass.
Prof. James Hadley, LL D., Yale College, New Haven, Conn.
Rev. Frederick Wiiitmoke Hoi land, F. R. G. S., London.
Prof. Alvaii Huvcy, D. D., Theological Institution, Newton, Mam.
Digitized by LjOOQlC
LIST OF WRITERS.
■AMU.
Pro£ Asahel Claxk Kendrick, D. D., University of Rochester, N. T
Prof. Charles Marsh Mead, Ph. D„ TheoL Sem., Andover, Mass.
Prof. Edwards Amasa Park, D. D., Theol. Seminary, Andover, Mass.
Rev. William Edwards Park, Lawrence, Mass.
Prof. Andrew Preston Peabodt, D. D., LL. D., Harvard College,
Cambridge, Mass.
Rev. George E. Post, M. D™ Tripoli, Syria.
Prof. Rensselaer Datid Chanceford Robbws, Middlebnry Col
lege, Vt
Rev. Philip Schaff, D. D., New York.
Prof. Henry Boynton Smith, D. Dm LL. D, Union Theological
Seminary, New York.
Rev. Calvin Ellis Stowe, D. D., Hartford, Conn.
Prof Daniel Smith Talcott, D. D., Theol. Seminary, Bangor, Me.
Prof. Joseph Henry Thayer, M A., TheoL Seminary, Andover, Mass.
Rev. Joseph Parrish Thompson, D. D, New York.
, Rev. Cornelius V. A. Van Dyck, D. D., Beirut, Syria.
Rev. William Hayes Ward, M. A» New York.
Prof. William Fairfield Warren, D. D., Boston Theological Sem-
inary, Boston, Mass.
Rev. Samuel Wolcott, D. D., Cleveland, Ohia
President Theodore Dwiqht Woolbey, D. D., LL. D., Yale College,
New Haven, Conn.
• # « The new portions in the present edition are indicated by a star (•), the edi-
torial additions being distinguished by the initials H. and A. Whatever is enclosed
in brackets is also, with unimportant exceptions, editorial. This remark, however,
does not apply to the cross-references in brackets, most of which belong to the origi-
nal work, though a large number have been added to this edition.
K1TUI t
A. C. K.
C. M.M.
E. A.P.
W. E. P.
A P. P.
G. E.P.
R. D. C. I
P. S.
H. B. S.
C. E. S.
D. S. T.
J. H. T.
J. P. T.
C. V. A. 1
W. H. W.
W. F. W.
& W.
T. D. W.
ABBREVIATIONS.
Aid. The Aldine edition of the Septuagint, 1618.
Alex. The Codex Alexandrinus (9th cent), edited by Baber, 1816-98.
A V. The authorized (common) English version of the Bible.
Comp. The Septuagint as printed in the Complutensian Polyglot*, 1614-17, published
1822.
PA. The Codex Friderico-Augustanus (4th cent), published by Teschendorf it
1846.
Rom. The Roman edition of the Septuagint, 1687. The readings of the Septuagin
for which no authority is specified are also from this source.
Bin. The Codex Sinaiticus (4th cent), published by Teschendorf in 1862. Thil
and FA are parts of the same manuscript
Vat The Codex Vaticanus 1209 (4th cent), according to Mai's edition, published
by Yercellone in 1897. " Yat H." denotes readings of the MS. (differing
from Mai), given in Holmes and Panons's edition of the Septuagint, 1798-
1827. " Yat 1 " distinguishes the primary reading of the MS. from - Vat' "
or " 2. m.," the alteration of a later reviser.
Digitized by LjOOQlC
DICTIONARY
Of
BIBLICAL ANTIQUITIES, BIOGRAPHY, GEOGRAPHY,
AND NATURAL HISTORY.
GENNESARET, SEA OF
GBNNES'ARET, SEA OF (tfjar, IWir
tapir, Luke t. 1; ttap TtvrqoAp, 1 Mace. zi.
ST), called in the 0. T. " the Sea of Chinnereth,"
or " Cinneroth," Num. xxxiv. 11; Josh, xii. 3),
from a town of that name which stood on or near
its ■bora (Joah. xix. 36). In the later Hebrew
we always find the Greek form ~ID3 , 3, which ma;
possibly be a corruption of n*]33, though some
derive the word from Gannah, " a garden," and
Sharon, the name of a plain between Tabor and
this lake (Onom, s. v. 'iapt&v, Reland, pp. 193,
359). Josephns calls it TtrrnaaMTir Kinr/jr (Ant.
xviii. 2, § 1); and this seems to have been its com-
mon name at the commencement of our era (Strab.
xvi. p. 756; Plin. v. 16; Ptol. v. 15). At its
northwestern angle was a beautiful and fertile plain
called " Gennesaret " (yfly VfvvnBapir, Matt. xiv.
34), from which the name of the lake was taken
(Joseph. B. J. iii. 10, $ 7). The lake is also called
in the N. T. &d\cur<ra Tijj TaKiKalas, from the
province of Galilee which bordered on its western
side (Matt. iv. 18; Mark vii. 31; John vi. 1); and
BAXeurira ttjt Tiffcpiitos, from the celebrated city
(John vi. 1, [xxi. 1]). Eusebius calls it A(/i»T)
Ti&tpiii {Onom.n. v. XapAv\ see also Cyr. in Je».
i. 5). It is a curious fact that all the numerous
names given to this lake were taken from places on
its western aide. Its modem name is BaJtr Tuba-
■iad, (xj^Jb js!).
In Josh. xi. 9 " the plains south of Chinneroth "
are mentioned. It is the sea and not the city that
is here referred to (comp. Deut. iii. 17 ; Josh. xii.
3) ; and " the plains " are those along the banks of
the Jordan. Most of our Lord's public life was
spent in the environs of the Sea of Gennesaret.
On its shores stood Capernaum, " his own city "
(Matt. iv. 13); on its shore he called his first dis-
ciples from their occupation as fishermen (Luke v.
1-11); and near its shores he spake many of his
parables, and performed many of his miracles.
This region was then the most densely peopled in
all Palestine. No less than nine cities stood on the
very shores of the lake; while fimerous large vil-
lages dotted the plains and hillsides axnr'd (Por-
ter, Handbook, p. 434).
The Sea of Gennesaret is of an oval shape • out
geographical miles long, and sis b"oad.
67
GENNESARET, SEA OF
Josephus gives the length at 140 stadia, and Ua
breadth forty (#. J. iii. 10, $7); and 1'liny sayi
it measured xvi. m. p. by vi. (//. N. xiv.). Both
these are so near the truth that they could scarcely
have been mere estimates. The river Jordan enters
it at its northern end, and passes out at its southern
end. In fact the bed of the lake is just a lower
section of the great Jordan valley. Its most re-
markable feature is its deep depression, being no
less than 700 feet below the level of the ocean
(Robinson, BibL Rrt. i. 613). Like almost all
lakes of volcanic origin it occupies the bottom of a
great basin, the sides of which shelve down with a
uniform slope from the surrounding plateaus. On
the east the banks are nearly 2000 feet high, des-
titute of verdure and of foliage, deeply furrowed by
ravines, but quite flat along the summit ; forming
in fact the supporting wall of the table-land of
Bashan. On the north there is a gradual descent
from this table -laud to the valley of the Jordan;
and then a gradual rise again to a plateau of nearly
equal elevation skirting the mountains of Upper
Galilee. The western banks are leu regular, yet
they present the same general features — plateaus
of different altitudes breaking down abruptly to
the shore. The scenery has neither grandeur nor
beauty. It wants features, 'and it wants variety.
It is bleak and monotonous, especially so when the
sky is cloudless and the sun high. The golden
tints and purple shadows of evening help it, but it
looks best during a thunder-storm, such as the
writer has often witnessed in early spring. The
cliffs and rocks along the shores are mostly a hard
porous basalt, and the whole basin has a scathed
volcanic look. The frequent earthquakes prove
that the elements of destruction are still at work
beneath the surface. There is a copious warm
fountain near the site of Tiberias, and it is said
that at the time of the great earthquake of 1837
both the quanti'7 and temperature of the water
were much increased.
The great depression makes the climate of the
shores almost tropical. This is very sensibly felt
by the traveller in going down from the plains of
Galilee. * In summer the heat is intense, and even
in early spring the air has something of an Egyp-
tian balminess. Snow very rarely falls, and though
it often whitens the neighboring mountains, it
never lies here. The vegetation la almost of *
tropical character. The thorny lote-tna grow*
(897)
Digitized by
Google
898
GBNNEU8
imoog the basalt rooks; palms flourish luxuriantly,
sod indigo is cultivated in the fields (comp. Joseph.
B. J. iii- 10, § 6).
Toe water of the lake is sweet, cool, and trans-
parent; and as the beach is everywhere pebbly it
has a beautiful sparkling look. This fact is some-
what strange when we consider that it is exposed to
the powerful rays of the sun, that many warm and
brackish springs flow into it, and that it is supplied
by the Jordan, which rushes into its northern end,
a turbid, ruddy torrent. The lake abounds in fish
now as in ancient times. Some are of the same
species as those got in the Nile, snch as the Silurut,
the ifngil, and another called by Hasselquist Spa-
rut Galliums {Reise, pp. 181, 412 f. ; comp. Joseph.
R. J. iii. 10, § 7). The fishery, like the soil of
the surrounding country, is sadly neglected. One
little craay boot is the sole representative of the
fleets that covered the lake in N. T. times, and
even with it there is no deep-water fishing. Two
modes are now employed to catch the fish. One is
a hand-net, with which a man, usually naked
(John xxi. 7), stalks along the shore, and watching
his opportunity, throws it round the game with a
jerk. The other mode is still more curious. Bread-
crumbs are mixed up with bi-chloride of mercury,
and sown over the water; the fish swallow the
poison and die. The dead bodies float are picked
up, and taken to the market of Tiberias ! (Porter,
Handbook, p. 432.)
A " mournful and solitary silence " now reigns
along the shores of the Sea of Gennessret, which
were in former ages studded with great cities, and
resounded with the din of an active and industrious
people. Seven out of the nine cities above referred
to are now uninhabited ruins ; one, Magdala, is oc-
cupied by half a dozen mud hovels; and Tiberias
alone retains a wretched remnant of its former
prosperity. J. L. P.
GENNETJS (rWaTot, Alex. r«moj: Gen-
nana), father of Apollonius, who was one of several
generals (tnparriyol) commanding towns in Pales-
tine, who molested the Jews while Lysias was gov-
ernor for Antiochus Eupator (2 Mace. xii. 2).
Luther understands the word as an elective (ytr-
ytSot = well-born), and lias "des edleu Apollo-
nius."
GENTILES. I. Old Tettament. — The He-
brew ^B in sing. = a people, nation, body politic;
in which sense it is applied to the Jewish nation
amongst others. In the plural it acquires an ethno-
graphic, and also an invidious meaning, and is ren-
dered in A. V. by Gentiles and Heathen.
0^3, the nations, the surrounding nations, for-
eigners, as opposed to Israel (Neh. v. 8). In Gen.
x. 6 it occurs in its most indefinite sense = the far-
distant inhabitants of the Western Isles, without
the slightest accessory notion of heathenism, or
larbarism. In Lev., Deut., Pa., the term is ap-
plied to the various heathen nations with which
Israel came into contact; its meaning grows wider
in proportion to the wider circle of the national ex-
perience, and more or less invidious according to
the success or defeat of the national arms. In the
prophets it attains at once its most comprehensive
and its most hostile view ; hostile in presence of
victorious rivals, comprehensive with reference to
the triumphs of a spiritual future.
- Notwithstanding the disagreeable connotation of
Mm term, the Jews were able to use it, even in the
UEON
plural, in a purely technical, geographical sense Ss
Gen. x. 5 (see above); Gen. xiv. 1; Josh. xii. S3
Is. ix. 1. In Josh. xii. 23, " the king of the na
tions of Gilgal," A. V. ; better with Uesenlus " the
king of the Gentiles at Gilgal," where probably, as
afterwards in Galilee, foreigners, Gentiles, were set-
tled among the Jews.
For " Galilee of the Gentiles," comp. Matt. i»
16 with la. ix. 1, where A. V. « Galilee of U»
nations." In Heb. Q^H Vba, the « circle of
the Gentiles;" aw" <(ox<". ''V ?•?> h*-Getali
whence the name Galilee applied to a district ahich
was largely peopled by the Gentiles, especially the
Phoenicians.
The Gentiles in Gen. xiv. 1 may either be 'Jw
inhabitants of the same territory, or, as suggested
by Gesenius, " nations of the West " generally.
II. New Testament. — 1. The Greek (Bros in
sing, means a people or nation (Matt. xxiv. 7 ; Acts
ii. 5, Ac.), and even the Jewish people (Luke vii.
5, xxiii. 2, Ac. ; comp. ^3, supr.). It is only in
the pi that it is used for the Heb. D^O, heathen,
Gentiles (comp. (By as, heathen, ethnic): in Matt.
xxi. 43 ftwi alludes to, but does not directly stand
for, " the Gentiles." As equivalent to Gentiles it
is found in the Epistles of St. Paul, but not always
in an invidious sense («. g. Rom. xi. 13 ; Eph. iii
1,6).
2- "EAAqc, John vii. 35, f/ tiacrropi t&v 'E\-
Ar/ray, " the Jews dispersed among the Gentiles,"
Rom. iii. 9, 'lovtalovs «al 'EAAqrai, Jews and
Gentiles.
The A. V. is not consistent in its treatment of
this word ; sometimes rendering it by Greet (Acta
xiv. 1, xvii. 4 ; Kom. 1. 16, x. 12), sometimes by
Gentile (Rom. ii. 9, 10, iii. 9; 1 Cor. x. 32), in-
serting Greek in the margin. The places where
"EAAi>i» is equivalent to Greek simply (as Acts xvi.
1, 3) are much fewer than those where it is equiva-
lent to Gentile. The former may probably be
reduced to Acts xvi. 1, 3; Acta xviii. 17; Rom. 1.
14. The latter use of the word seems to have
arisen from the almost universal adoption of the
Greek language. Even in 2 Mace. iv. 13 'EAAipriP-
pis appears as synonymous with iWod>v\uru4s
(comp. vi. 9); and in Is. ix. 12 the LXX. renders
DTlttJ 7S by "EAArjrat ; and so the Greek Fathers
defended the Christian faith wphs 'EWtivas, and
Kalf 'EAAffiwr. [Ghekk; Heathkh.]
T. E. B.
GENU'BATH (nja? [«</>, Ges.]: raw|-
fii9: Gemiiath), the son of Hadad, an Edomit*)
of the royal family, by an Egyptian princess, the
sister of Tahpenes, the queen of the Pharaoh who
governed Egypt in the latter part of the reign of
David (1 K. xi. 20; comp. 16). Genubath Tai
bom in the palace of Pharaoh, and weaned by ibe
queen herself; after which he became a mercier
of the royal establishment, on the si me footing as
one of the sons of Pharaoh. The fragment irf
Edomit* chronicle in which this is contained is
very remarkable, and may be competed with that
in Gen. xxxvi. Genubath is not again mention*:
or alluded to.
GE'ON {rv&y- Gehon), 1. e. Gmo.f, one of
(he four rivers of Eden ; introduced, with the Jordan,
and probably the Nils, into a figure in the prilaa
Digitized by
Google
UERA
A wisdom, Ecclus. xxit. 37. Thii l« merely the
3reek form of the U'brew name, the nine which
■ wed by the LXX. in !>en. ii. 13.
OK'RA (N^S [orain, littk wtiyht, Gee.]:
Cnpi; [in 1 Chr. viii. 5, Rom. Tat VtpA- O'ern]),
one of the " eons," •'. «. descendants, of Benjamin,
enumerated in Gen. xlvi. 21, aa already living at
the time of Jaoob'a migration into Egypt. He
was eon of IieU (1 Chr. nil. 3). [Bela.] The
tot <*f thia last passage is very corrupt; and tho
different Gents there named seem to reduce them-
selves into one — the same aa the son of Bela.
Gera, who is named Judg. iii. 15 aa the ancestor
of Ehud, and in 3 Sam. xvi. 5 as the ancestor
of Shirnei who cursed David [Beciiek], is prob-
alJy also the same person. Gera is not men-
tioned in the list of Denjamite families in Num.
xxvi. 38— 10 j of which a very obvious explanation
is that at that time he was not the head of a sep-
arate family, but was included among the Belaites ;
it being a matter of necessity that some of Beta's
sons should be so included, otherwise there could
he no family of Belaites at all. Dr. Katisch has
some long and rather perplexed observations on the
discrepancies in the lists in lien. xlvi. and Num.
xxvi., and specially as regards the sons of Benjamin.
But the truth is that the two lists agree very well
as for aa Benjamin is concerned. For the only dis-
crepance that remains, when the absence of ISecber
and Gera from the list in Num. is thus explained,
hi that for the two names TIN and U7NTI (Khi
and Rosh) in Gen., we have the one name 0"VrTN
(Ahiram) in Num. If this last were written DH1,
as it might be, the two texts would be almost
identical, especially if written in the Samaritan
character, in which the thin closely resembles the
mem. That Ahiram is right we ore quite sure,
from the family of the Ahiramites, and from the
non-mention elsewhere of Rosh, which in fact is
not a proper name. [Rohh.] The conclusion
therefore seems certain that U?S~)VrW in Gen.
Is a mere clerical error, and that there is perfect
agreement between the two lists. This view is
strengthened by the further fact that in the word
which follows Rosh, namely, Muppim, the initial
si Is an error for th. It should be Shuppim, as in
Num. xxvi. 39 j 1 Chr. vil. 12. The final m of
AUram, and the initial th of Shnppim, have thus
jeen transposed. To the remarks made under
Bkcher should be added that the great destruction
it the Benjamites recorded in Judg. xx. may ae-
sonnt for the introduction of so many new names
In tho later Benjamite lists of 1 Chr. vii. and viii.,
sf which several seem to be women's names.
A. C. H.
GERAH. [Measures.]
GE'RAR ("H? [onto, dttrid, Fiirst j abode,
tddenee, Sim., Ges.] : Ttpafi. [ot- ripapa; in 3
GERAR VALLEY OF
899
« The well where Isaac and Abimelech covenanted
a) distinguished by the LXX. from the Beer-sheba
whan Abraham did so. the former being called QpJap
torn, the latter 4plap ipavitoS.
• The stopping wells Is a derlm still resorted to by
as* Bedouins, to make a country un 1-ii'ole by a neigh-
tarofwhom tbey wish to be rid.
« • In his J*j». Orogr. (p 128) Robinson says
* r that toil roller m doul> -m " torn* portion or
Chr., TtSdp: Gtrarai) Joseph. Ant I. 13, ( 1,
a very ancient city south of Gaza. It occurs chiefti
in Genesis (x. 19, xx. 1, xxvi. 1, 6, [17, 20, 2fiJ)
also incidentally in 3 Chr. xiv. 13, 14. In GenesL
the people are spoken of as Philistines; but tbeii
habits appear, in tliat early stage, more pastors,
than they subsequently were. Vet they are even
then warlike, since Abimelech was " a captain of the
host," who appears from his fixed title, " Phichol,"
like that of the king, " Abimelech," to be a per-
manent officer (comp. Gen. xxi. 33, xxvi. 26, and
Ps. xxxiv., title). The local description, xx. 1,
" between Kadesh and Shur," is probably meant
to indicate the linuts within which these pastoral
Philistines, whose chief seat was then Ueror, ranged,
although it would by no means follow that their ter-
ritory embraced all the interval between those cities.
It must have trenched on the " south "or " south
country " of later Palestine. From a comparison
of xxi. 32 with xxvi. 33, 2G,<> Keer-sheba would
seem to be just on the verge of this territory, and
perhaps to be its limit towards the N. E. For its
southern boundary, though very uncertain, none is
more probable than the wadies tl-ArUh (■' River
of Egypt" [torrent, bnj]) and cl-'Ain; south
of which the neighboring •' wilderness of Paran "
(xx. 15, xxi. 22, 34) may be probably reckoned to
begin. Isaac was most probably bom in Ueror.
The great crops which be subsequently raised attest
the fertility of the soil, which, lying in the maritime
plain, still contains some of the best ground in
Palestine (xxvi. 12). It is possible that the wells
mentioned by Robinson (i. 190) may represent
those digged by Abraham and reopened by Isaac
(xxvi. 18-22).t Williams (/My City, i. 46) speaks
of a Joorf el-Gerar as now existing, three hours
S. S. E. of Gaza, and this may probably indicate
the northern limit of the territory, if not the site
of the town ; but the range of that territory need
not be so for narrowed as to moke the Watlg
RtJiaibeh an impossiMe site, as Robinson thinks it
(see his map at end of vol. i. and i. 197), for
tiehoboth. There is also a Wndy el-Jerir laid
down S. of the wadies above-named, and running
into one of them ; but this is too far south (Robin •
son, i. 189, note) to be accepted as a possible site
The valley of Gerar may be almost any important
wady within the limits indicated ; but if the above-
mentioned situation for the wells be not rejected, it
would tend to designate the Wady et-'Ain. Robin-
son (ii. 44) appears to prefer the Wndy tt-ShtrXuk^
running to the sea south of Gaza. c Eusebius (''<•
Sit. if Norn. Luc. Ihb. s. v.) makes Gerar 25 miles
S. from Eleutheropolis, which would be about the
latitude of Beer-sheba; but see Jerome, Lib. Qfiatt.
Heb. Gen. xxii. 3. Bered (xvi. 14) may perhaps
have Iain in this territory. In 1 Chr. iv. 39, the
LXX. read Gerar, «i's rV rVoapa, for Gedor; 3
substitution which is not without some claims tc
support. [Bkiikd; Beek-sheba; Gedor.]
H. II.
• GERAR, VALLEY OF. [Gerar.]
branch of these valleys south and southeast of Oasa.' 1
Van de Velde (il. 183) heard of " a site called Um <*■
Grrar, about 8 hours from Gaxa, and about the s&nifl
distance from the sea," though without any ruins fee
Indicate Its antiquity. Thomson says (Land ami Book,
II. 848) that Oerar bos not yet been d is covered, bu
can hardly Ml to be brought to light, « Jurt as soos «e
it Is safe to tra»el In that region." B
Digitized by
Google
900
GERASA
GERASA (Sipaaa, Ptol. ; r v <W«, Not
Eteles. : Anb. Jtratk, (jw«») • Thii name doei
Mt occur in the O. T., nor in the Received Text of
the N T. But it is now generally admitted that in
Matt. viii. 28 " Geruenes " supersedes " Gadarenes."
Genua was a celebrated city on the eastern borders
of Penea (Joseph. B. J. iii. 3, § 3), placed by some
in the province of Ccelesyria and region of Decapolis
(Steph. «. «.)> by others in Arabia (Epiph. adv.
liar. ; Origen. in Johcm .). These various state-
ments do not arise from ajy doubts as to the
locality of the city, but from the ill-defined bound-
aries of the provinces mentioned. In the Roman
age no city of Palestine was better known than
Gerasa. It is situated amid the mountains of
Gilead, SO miles east of the Jordan, and 25 north of
Philadelphia, the ancient Rabbath- Amnion. Several
MSS. read rtpaxrnvuv instead of Ttpytirnvuv, in
Matt. viii. 28; but the city of Genua lay too far
from the Sea of Tiberias to admit the possibility
of the miracles having been wrought iu its vicinity.
If the reading Ttpatrr\vwv be the true one, the
X&W, "district," must then have been very large,
including Gadara and its environs ; and Matthew
thus uses a broader appellation, where Mark and
Luke use a more specific one. This is not improb-
able; as Jerome (ad Obad.) states that Gilead was
in his day called Genua; and Origen affirms that
repcurncuv was the ancient reading (Opp. iv. p.
140). [Gadara.]
It is not known when or by whom Genua was
founded. It is first mentioned by Joscphus as
having been captured by Alexander Janneus (arc.
it. c. 85; Joseph. B. J. i. 4, § 8). It was one of
the cities the Jews burned in revenge for the mas-
sacre of their countrymen at Cresarea, at the com-
mencement of their last war with the Romans; and
it had scarcely recovered from this calamity when
the Emperor Vespasian despatched Annius, his
general, to capture it Annius, having carried the
city at the first assault, put to the sword one
thousand of the youth who had not effected their
■scape, enslaved their families, and plundered their
dwellings (Joseph. B. J. iv. 9, $ 1). It appears
to have been nearly a century subsequent to this
period that Gerasa attained its greatest prosperity,
and was adorned with those monuments which give
it a place among the proudest cities of Syria. His-
tory tells us nothing of this, but the fragments of
inscriptions found among its ruined palaces and
temples, show that it is indebted for its architec-
tural splendor to the age and genius of the Anto-
nines (a. d. 138-80). It subsequently became the
■eat of a bishopric. There is no evidence that the
city was ever occupied by the Saracens. There are
.io trices of their architecture — no mosques, no in-
scriptions, no reconstruction of old edifices, such as
are found in most other great cities in Syria. All
here is Roman, or at least ante-Islamic; every
structure remains as the hand of the destroyer or
the earthquake shock left it — ruinous and de-
serted.
The ruins of Gerasa are by far the most beauti-
ful and extensive east of the Jordan. They are
lituated on both sides of a shallow valley that runs
from north to south through a high undulating
plain, and falls into the Zurka (the ancient Jabbok)
at tho distance of about 5 miles. A little rivulet,
thickly fringed with oleander, winds through the
rafley, giving life and beauty to the deserted city.
The Brat view of the ruins is very striking; and
GERIZIM
'men at have enjoyed it win not sooe forgot tht
impression made upon the mind. The long colon-
nade running through the centre of the city, ter-
minating at one end in the graceful circle of tht
forum; the groups of columns clustered here and
there round the crumbling walls of the temples
the heavy masses of masonry that distinguish the
positions of the great theatres; and the vast field
of shapeless ruins rising gradually from the green
banks of the rivulet to the battlemented heights on
each side — all combine in forming a picture s.tch
as is rarely equaled. The form of the city is an
irregular square, each side measuring nearly a mile.
It was surrounded by a strong wall, a large portion
of which, with its Hanking towers at intervals, is
in a good state of preservation. Three gateway*
are still nearly perfect ; and within the city upward*
of lux> hundred and thirty columns remain on their
pedestals. (Kull descriptions of Gerasa are given
in the Handbook fur Syr. anil Pal ; Burckhardt's
Trarrli in Syiia ; Buckingham's Arab 7'ribtt ;
Hitter's Pal und Syr.) J. L. P.
GERGESE'NES, Matt. viii. 28. [Gadara.]
GER'GESITES, THE (oi r«/ry«r«uoi :
Vulg. omits), Jud. v. 16. [Giuoasiiites.]
GEKTZIM (always E'-na— in, har-Gtru-
zim, the mountain of the Gerizzites, from < ^™!3,
G'rizti, dwellers in a shorn (i. e. desert) land, from
T"^2., aaraz, to cut off; possibly the tribe subdued
by David, 1 Sam. xxvii. 8: rapiQv, [Vat. Alex.
-£tiv, exc. Alex. Deut xi.29, rafotiv] Garuim),
a mountain designated by Moses, in conjunction
with Mount Ebal, to be the scene of a great solem-
nity upon the entrance of the children of Israel
into the promised land. High places had a pecu-
liar charm attached to them in these days of ex-
ternal observance. The law was delivered from
Sinai : the blessings and curies affixed to the per-
formance or neglect of it were directed to be pro-
nounced upon Gerizim and Ebal. Six of the
tribes — Simeon, Levi (but Joseph being repre-
sented by two tribes, Levi's actual place probably
was as assigned below), Judah, Issachor, Joseph, and
Benjamin were to take their stand upon the former
to bless; and six, namely — Reuben, Gad, Asher,
Zebulun, Dan, and Naphtali — upon the latter to
curse (Deut. xxvii. 12-13). Apparently, the Ark
halted mid-way between the two mountains, en-
compassed by the priests and Levites, thus divided
by it into two bands, with Joshua for their cory-
phaeus. He read the blessings snd cursings succes-
sively (Josh. viii. 33, 84), to be re-echoed by tht
Levites on either side of him, and responded to by
the tribes in their double array with a loud Amen
(Deut. xxrii. 14). Curiously enough, only the
formula for the curses is given (ibid. ver. 14-26);
and it was upon Ebal, and not Gerizim, where the
altar of whole unwrought stone was to be built,
and where the huge plastered stones, with the words
of the law (Josh. viii. 32; Joseph. Ant. iv. 8, § 44,
limits them to the blessings and curses just pro-
nounced) written upon them, were to be set ur
(Deut. xxvii. 4-6) — a significant omen for a peo-
ple entering joyously upon their new inheritance,
and yet the song of Moses abounds with foreood
ings still more sinister and plain-spoken (Dent
xxxii. 5, 6, and 15-28).
The next question is, Has Moses defined the It
Digitized by
Google
GEHIZIM
; of Ebal end Gerizim? Standing on the
tide of the Jordan, in the land uf Moab
.Deut. i. 6), he asks: " Are they not on the other
ode Jordan, by the way where the sun goeth down
(i. e. at some distance to the W.jt in the land of
the Canaauites, which dwell in the champaign over
against Uilgal (t. e. whose territory — not these
mountains — commenced over against Gilgal — see
Patrick on Deut. zi. 30), beside the plains of Mo-
no,?" . . . These closing words would seem to
mark their site with unusual precision : for in Gen.
xii. S " the plain (LXX. ' oak 'J of Horeh " is ex-
pressly connected with "the place of Sichem or She-
them" (N. T. "Sychem"or "Sychar," which last
form is thought to convey a reproach. Kelaud,
Diueri. on Gerizim, in Ugol. Thetaur. p. doexxv.,
in Josephua the form is "Sicima"), and accordingly
Judg. ix. 7, Jotham is made to address his cele-
brated parable to the men of Shecbetu from " the
lop of Mount Uerixim." The " hill of Moreh,"
mentioned in the history of Gideon his father, may
have been a mountain overhanging the same plain,
but certainly could not have been further south
(comp. c vi. 33, and vii. 1). Was it therefore
prejudice, or neglect of the true import of these
passages, that made Euasbius and Epiphanius,
both natives of Palestine, concur in placing Ebal
and Gerizim near Jericho, the former charging the
Samaritans with grave error for affirming them to
be near Neapolis '/ (Keland. fiiuert., as above, p.
deexx.). Of one thing we may be assured, namely,
that their Scriptural site must have been, in the
fourth century, lost, to all but the Samaritans;
otherwise these two fathers would have spoken
very differently. It is true that they consider the
Samaritan hypothesis irreconcilable with Deut. xi.
30, which it has already been shown not to be. A
more formidable objection would have been that
Joshua could not have marched from Ai to She-
chem, through a hostile country, to perform the
above solemnity, and retraced his steps so soon
afterwards to Gilgal, as to have been found there
by the Gibeonites (Josh. ix. 6 ; comp. viii. 30-39).
Yet the distance between Ai and Shechem is not
so long (under two days' journey). Neither can
the interval implied in the context of the former
passage have been so short, as even to warrant the
modem supposition that the latter passage has been
misplaced. The remaining objection, namely, " the
wide interval between the two mountains ai She-
cbem " (Stanley, 8. <f- P. p. 338, note), is still more
easily disposed of, if we consider the blessings and
oases to have been pronounced by the Levites,
standing in the midst of the valley — thus abridg-
ing the distance by one half — and not by the six
tribes on either hill, who only responded. How
indeed could 600,000 men and upwards, besides
vomer, and children (comp. Num. ii. 32 with Judg.
XX. 2 and 17), have been accommodated in a smaller
space? Besides in those days of assemblies "sub
djo," the sense of bearing must have been neces-
sarily more acute, just as, before the aids of writing
and printing, memories were much more retentive.
We may conclude, therefore, that there is no room
PC doubting the Scriptural position of Ebal and
Gerizim to have been — where they are now placed
— in the territory of the tribe of Ephraim; tha
fetter of them overhanging toe city of Shechem of
Bicima, u Josephua, following the Scriptural nar-
■aiive, asserts. Even Eusebius, in another work of
tin (Prao. Evany, ix. 23), quotes soce lines from
rbradotiis, in which the true poeitios of Ebal and
ltF.RI7.TM
90]
Gerizim is described with great force and accuracy
and St. Jerome, while following Eusebius in th
Onomasticon, in his ordinary correspondence doa
not hesitate to connect Sichem or Neapolis, thi
well of Jacob, and Mount Gerizim (Ep. cviii. c
13, ed. Migne). Procopius of Gaza does nothing
more than follow Eusebius, and that clumsily
(Belaud, Paint, lib. ii. c 13, p. 603); but hill
more accurate namesake of Csesarea expressly as-
serts that Gerizim rose over Neapolis (Be jEdif.
v. 7) — that Ebal was not a peak of Gerizim (v.
Quaresm. Ehtad. T. 8. Kb. vii. Per. i. c. 8), but
a distinct mountain to the N. of it, and separated
from it by the valley in which Shechem stood, we
are not called upon here to prove ; nor again, that
Ebal was entirely barren, which it can scarce be
called now; while Gerizim was the same proverb
for verdure and gushing rills formerly, that it is
now, at least where it descends towards NabliM.
It is a far more important question whether Geri-
zim was the mountain on which Abraham was
directed to offer his son Isaac (Gen. xxii. 2 ff.).
First, then, let it be olwerved that it is not the
mountain, but the district which is there called
Moriah (of the same root with Moreh : see Corn,
a tapid. on Gen. xii. 6), and that antecedently to
the occurrence which took place " upon one of the
mountains " in its vicinity — a consideration which
of itself would naturally point to the locality,
already known to Abraham, as the plain or plains
of Moreh, " the land of vision," " the high land ;
and therefore consistently "the land of adoration,'
or "religious worship," as it is variously explained
That all these interpretations are incomparably
more applicable to the natural features of Gerizim
and its neighborhood, than to the hillock (in com-
parison) upon which Solomon built his temple,
none can for a moment doubt who have seen both.
Jerusalem unquestionably stands upon high ground :
but owing to the hills " round about " it cannot
be seen on any side from any great distance ; nor.
for the same reason, could it ever have been a land
of vision, or extensive views. Even from Mount
Olivet, which must always have towered over the
small eminences at its base to the S. W., the view
cannot be named in the same breath with that from
Gerizim, which is one of the finest in Palestine,
commanding, as it does, from an elevation of nearly
3,600 feet (Arrowsmith, Geograph. Diet, of the H.
8. p. 145), "the Mediterranean Sea on the W.,
the snowy heights of Hermon on the N., on the E.
the wall of the trans -Jordanic mountains, broken
by the deep cleft of the Jabbok " (Stanley, 8. # P.
p. 235), and the lovely and tortuous expanse of
plain (the Afukhna) stretched as a carpet of many
colors beneath its feet." Neither is the appearance,
which it would " present to a traveller advancing
up the Philistine plain " (ibid. p. 2o2) — the direr .
tin from which Abraham came — to be overlooked
It is by no means necessary, as Mr. Poller thinki
(.Handbook of 8. <f P. i. 339), that he should
have started from Beer-sheba (see (Jen. xxi. 34 —
"the whole land being before him," c. xx. 15).
Then, " on the morning of the third day, he would
arr've in the plain of Sharon, exactly where the
massive height of Gerizim ii visible afar off" (ibid
p. S51 ), and from thence, with the mount always
a • from the top of GetUn the traveller enjoys «
prospect uoiqus In the Holy I*nd." See It wall <k
serihM n. TrWtuo'f Land of bnul p. 151, 1st ed.
Digitized by
Google
902
OEKIZIM
b Ttat, he »juld proceed to the exact "place
•Mob. God hod toW Iiiiu of " in all solemnity — for
■gain, it is not necessary that he should have ar-
rived on the actual spot during the third day. All
chat is said iu the narrative, is that, from the time
that it hove in sight, he and Isaac parted from the
young men, and went on together alone. The
Samaritans, therefore, through whom the tradition
of the true site of Gerizim has been preserved, are
probably not wrong when they point out still — as
they have done from time immemorial — Gemini
as the hill upon which Abraham's " faith was made
perfect; " and it is observable that no such spot is
Htterapted to be shown on the rival hill of Jerusa-
lem, as distinct from Calvary. Different reasons
in all probability caused these two localities to be
10 named : the first, not a mountain, but a land,
district, or plain (for it is not intended to be as-
serted that Ueriruu itself ever bore the name of
Moriah; though a certain spot upon it was ever
afterwards to Abraham personally " Jebovah-
jireh "), called Moreh, or Moriah, from the noble
vision of nature, and therefore of natural religion,
that met the eye ; the second, a small bill deriving
its name from a special revelation or vision, as the
express words of Scripture say, which took place
" by the threshing floor of Araunah the JeLusite "
(2 Chr. iU. 1; comp. 2 Sam. xxiv. 16). If it be
thought strange that a place once called by the
••Father of the faithful" Jehovah-jireh, should
have been merged by Moses, and ever afterwards,
in a general name so different from it in sense and
origin as Gerizim ; it would be still more strange,
that, if Mount Moriah of the book of Chronicles
and Jehovah-jireh were one and the same place, no
sort of allusion should have been made by the in-
spired historian to the prime event which had
caused it to be so called. True it is that Josepbus,
in more than one place, asserts that where Abra-
ham offered, there the temple was afterwards built
(Ant. i. 13, § 2, and vii. 13, § 9). Yet the same
Josepbus makes God bid Abraham go to the moun-
tain — not the land — of Moriah ; having omitted
all mention of the plains of Moreh in his account
of the preceding narrative. Besides, in more than
one place he shows that he bore no love to the Sa-
maritans (ibid. xi. 8, $ 6, and xii. 5, § 5). St.
Jerome follows Josephus ( Quail, in Gen. xxii. 5,
ed. Migne), but with his uncertainty about the site
of Gerizim, what else could he have done? Besides
it appears from the Onomatticon (s. v.) that he
considered the hill of Moreh (Judg. vii. 1) to be
the same with Moriah. And who that is aware of
the extravagance of the Rabbinical traditions re-
specting Mount Moriah can attach weight to any
sue of them? (Cunseus, Dt Repvbl. Ueb. lib. ii.
12). Finally, the Christian tradition, which makes
the site of Abraham's sacrifice to have been on
Calvary, will derive countenance from neither Jose-
phus nor St. Jerome, unless the sites of the Tem-
ple and of the Crucifixion are admitted to have
been the same.
Another tradition of the Samaritans is far leas
'rustworthy; namely, that Mount Gerizim was the
pot where Melcbiaedech met Abraham — though
there certainly was a Salem or Shalem in that
neighborhood (Gen. xxxiii. 18; Stanley, 8. <f P.
p. 217 ff.). The first altar erected in the land of
Abraham, and the first appearance of Jehovah to
him in it, was in the plain of Moreh near Sichem
(G«l xii. 6); but the mountain overhanging that
4tf (assuming our view to be correct) had not yet
OEKIZIM
been hallowed to him for the rest of his life by Use,
decisive trial of his faith, which was made then
subsequently. He can hardly therefore be supposed
to have deviated from his road so far, which .ay
through the plain of the Jordan; nor. again h it
likely that he would have found the king of Sodom
so far away from his own territory (Gen. xiv. 17
ff.). Lastly, the altar which Jacob built was
not on Gerizim, as the Samaritans contend,
though probably about its base, at the head of the
plain between it and Ebal, '< in the parcel of a
field " which that patriarch purchased from the
children of Hamor, and where he spread his tent
(Gen. xxxiii. 18-20). Here was likewise his well
(John iv. 6); and the tomb of his son Joseph
(Josh. xxiv. 32), both of which are still shown:
the former surmounted by the remains of a vaulted
chamber, and with the ruins of a church hard b}
(Robinson, Bibl. Jiet. ii. 283) the latter, with "a
fruitful vine" trailing over its white-washed in-
closura, and before it two dwarf pillars, hollowed
out at the top to receive lamps, which are lighted
every Friday or Mohammedan sabbath. There is,
however, another Mohammedan monument claiming
to be the said tomb (Stanley, S. d- P. p. 241, note).
The tradition (Robinson, ii. 283, note) that the
twelve patriarchs were buried there likewise (it
should hare made them eleven without Joseph, or
thirteen, including his two sons), probably depends
upon Acts vii. 16, where, unless we are to suppose
confusion in the narrative, ain6s should be read
for 'AjBfiaaV, which may well have been suggested
to the copyist from its recurrence, v. 17; while
abrSs, from having already occurred, v. 15, might
have been thought suspicious.
We now enter upon the second phase in the his-
tory of Gerizim. According to Josephus, a marriage
contracted between Manasseh, brother of Jaddus,
the then high-priest, and the daughter of Sanlallat
the Cuthssan (comp. 2 K. xvii. 24), having created
a great stir amongst the Jews, who had been
strictly forbidden to contract alien marriages (Ezr.
ix. 2; Neh. xiii. 23) — San balk t, in order to rec-
oncile his son-in-law to this unpopular affinity, ob-
tained leave from Alexander the Great to build a
temple upon Mount Gerizim, and to inaugurate a
rival priesthood and altar there to those of Jerusa-
lem (AM. xi. 8, §§ 2-4, and for the harmonizing
of the names and dates, Prideaux, Conntct. i. 396
ff., M'Caul's ed.). "Samaria thenceforth," says
Prideaux, " became the common refuge and asylum
of the refractory Jews " (ibid. ; see also Joseph.
Ant. xi. 8, § 7), and for a time, at least, their
temple seems to have been called by the name of a
Greek deity (AnL xii. 5, § 5). Hence one of the
first acts of Hyrcanus, when the death of Antiochus
Sidetes had set his hands free, was to seize Shechem,
and destroy the temple upon Gerizim, after it had
stood there 200 years (Ant. xiii. 9, § 1). But the
destruction of their temple by no means crushed
the rancor of the Samaritans. The road from
Galilee to Judsea lay then, as now, through Sa-
maria, skirting the foot of Gerizim (John iv. 4).
Here was a constant occasion for rel'gious contro-
versy and for outrage. " Hr<v is it that Thou, be-
ing a Jew, askest to drink of me, which am a woman
of Samaria? " said the female to our Ixird at the
well of Jacob, where both parties would always be
sure to meet. "Our fathers worshipped in thit
mountain, and ye say that in Jerusalem is the pUer
where men ought to worship ? " . . . Subsequently
we read of the depredations committed «. that rests'
Digitized by
Google
GBRIZIM
aaa a part; of Galileans (AiU. xx. 6, § 1). The
jbaral attitude, first of the Saviour, and then of
lb disciples (Acta viii. 14), was thrown away upon
ill those who would not abandon their creed. And
Gerizim continued to be the focus of outbreak!
through successive centuries. One, under Pilate,
while it led to their severe chastisement, procured
the disgrace of that ill-starred magistrate, who had
crucified "Jesus, the king of the Jew*," with im-
punity (Ant. xviii. 4, $ 1). Another hostile gath-
ering on the same spot caused a slaughter of 10,600
of them under Vespasian. It is remarkable that,
in this instance, want of water is said to have made
them easy victims; so that the deliriously cold and
pore spring on the summit of Gerizim must have
foiled before so great a multitude (B. J. iii. 7, §
33). At length their aggressions were directed
against the Christians inhabiting Neapolis — now
powerful, and under a bishop — in the reign of
Zeno. Terebinthus at once carried the news of
this outrage to Byzantium: the Samaritans were
forcibly ejected from Gerizim, which was handed
over to the Christiana, and adorned with a church
in honor of the Virgin ; to some extent fortified,
and even guarded. This not proving sufficient to
repel the foe, Justinian built a second wall round
the church, which his historian says defied all at-
tacks (Procop. De jEdif. v. 7 ). It is probably the
ruins of these buildings which meet the eye of the
modern traveller (Handb. of 8. $ P. ii. 339).
Previously to this time, the Samaritans hi J been a
numerous and important sect — sufficiently so, in-
deed, to be carefully distinguished from the Jews
and Oelicolists in the Theodosian code. This last
outrage led to their comparative disappearance from
history. Travellers of the 12th, 14th, and 17th
centuries take notice of their existence, but extreme
paucity (Early Travels, by Wright, pp. 81, 181,
and 433), and their number now, as in those daya,
ia said to be below 300 (Robinson, Bibl. Res. ii.
882, 3d ed.). We are confined by our subject to
Gerizim, and therefore can only touch upon the
Samaritans, or their city Neapolis, so far as their
history connects directly with that of the mountain.
And yet we may observe that as it was undoubt-
edly this mountain of which our Lord had said,
" Woman, believe me. the hour cometh, when ye
shall neither in this mountain, nor yet at Jerusa-
lem (»'. e. exclusively), worship the Father" (John
iv. 31) -'-so likewise it ia a singular historical fact,
that the Samaritans have continued on this self-
same mountain century after century, with the
briefest interruptions, to worship according to their
ancient custom ever since to the present day.
While the Jews — expelled from Jerusalem, and
therefore no longer able to offer up bloody sacrifices
according to the law of Moses — have been obliged
to adapt their ceremonial to the circumstances of
their destiny: here the Paschal Lamb has been
offered up in .all ages of the Christian era by a
■nail but united nationality (the spot ia accurately
■Barked out by Dr. Robinson, BiU. Res. ii. 277).<<
Their copy of the Law, probably the work of Ma
naaaoh, and known to the fathers of the 3d and 3a
anliries (Prideaux, Connect i. 600; aid Robin-
ton, ii. 997-301), was. in the 17th, vindicated
tmn oblivion by Scaliger, Usher, Morinus, and
GBRIZIM
90S
T
a * the reader will find under Passoves (Amer. ad., |
farnettiar account of the manner In which the 8a-
■BBMana celebrate that gnat tatlval on Oenaha. On
> and the modern Samaritans lotenatlni infer- 1
others; and no traveller now viaita Palestine wilt
out making a sight of it one of his prime objects
Gerizim ia likewise still to the Samaritans what
Jerusalem is to the Jews, and Mecca to the Mo-
hammedana. Their prostrations are directed t>
wards it wherever they are; its holiest spot in theu
estimation being the traditional site of the taber-
nacle, near that on which they believe Abraham to
have offered his son. Both these spots are on the
summit; and near them is still to be seen a mound
of ashes, similar to the larger and more celebrated
one N. of Jerusalem ; collected, it ia said, from the
sacrifices of each successive age (Or. Robinson,
Bibl Ret. ii. 302 and 399, evidently did not see
this on Gerizim). Into their more legendary tra-
ditions respecting Gerizim, and the story of their
alleged worship of a dove, — due to the Jews, their
enemies (Reland, Diss, op. Ugotin. Thesaur. vii.
pp. dccxxix.-xxxiii.), — it ia needless to enter.
£. S. Ff.
* The theory that Gerizim is " the mountain on
which Abraham was directed to offer his son Isaac,"
advocated by Dean Stanley (S. f P. p. 248) and
controverted by Dr. Thomson (Land and Book, ii.
312), ia brought forward by the writer of the above,
on grounds which appear to us wholly unsubstan-
tial.
(1.) The assumed identity of Moreh and Moriah
cannot be admitted. There is a radical difference
in their roots (Robinson's Gesen. Heb. Lex. a. w.),
which is conceded by Stanley; and the reasoning
about "the plains of Moreh, the land of vision,"
" called Moreh, or Moriah, from the noble vision
of nature," etc., is irrelevant. Murphy (Oman.
in loc.). justly observes: " As the two names occur
in the same document, and differ in form, they nat-
urally denote different things."
(3.) The distance of Gerizim from Beer-eheba
is fatal to this hypothesis. The suggestion that
Abraham need not have "started from Beer-eheba,"
is gratuitous — the narrative fairly conveying the
impression that he started from his residence, which
was then at that place. [Bkkr-shkba.] From
this point Jerusalem is three days, and Gerizim two
days still further, north. The journey could not
have been completed, with a loaded ass, " on the
third day; " and the route by which this writer,
following Stanley, sends the party to Gerizim, ia
an unknown and improbable route.
(3.) The suggestion of Mr. Ffoulkes above, and
of Mr. Grove [Moriah], that the patriarch only
came in sight of the mountain on the third day,
and had an indefinite time for the rest of the jour-
ney, and the similar suggestion of Dr. Stanley,
that after coming in eight of the mountain he had
" half a day " for reaching it, are inadmissible.
Acknowledging "that from the time it hove in
sight, he and Isaac parted from the young men and
want on together alone," these writers all overlook
the fact that from this point the wood for the burnt-
offering was laid upon Isaac. Thus far the needed
materials had been carried by the servants and the
ass. That the young man could bear the burden
for a abort distance alone, does not warrant the
supposition that be could have borne it for a day's
journey, or a half-day's — in which ease it would
seem that the donkey and servants might have
■nation will be found in anus's Three Months' Residents
at NaUut, uoai. 1864 ; and In Mr. Grove t paper Ot
m J&xim Samaritans In Vacation Tbmitss tat 1881
R
Digitized by
Google
004
OXBIZITB8
been left at home. The company halted, appar-
ently, not very tar from the spot of the intended
(4.) The commanding position of Gerizim, with
the wide ptoepeet from its summit, ii not a noimstiry,
nor probable, element in the decision of the ques-
tion. It was to the laud at Horiah that the patri-
arch was directed, some one of the eminences of
which, apparent!; not jet named, the Lord was to
designate as his destination. In favor of Geririm
as an derated site, Stanley lays stress upon the
phrase, " lifted up his eyes," forgetting that this
identical phrase had been applied (Gen. xiii. 10)
to Lot's survey of the plain of the Jordan btlau
him.
(6.) The Samaritan tradition is unreliable.
From the time that a rival temple to that on Mo-
riah was erected on Gerizim, the Samaritans felt a
natural desire to invest the spot with some of the
sanctities of the earlier Jewish history. Their
substitution of Moreh for Horiah (Gen. xxii. 2) in
their version, is of the same character with this
chum. Had this been the traditionary site of the
scene in question, Josephus would hardly have
ventured to advance the claim for Jerusalem; and
though sharing the prejudices of his countrymen,
bis general fairness as a historian forbids the in-
timation that be was capable of robbing this com-
munity of a cherished site, and transferring it to
another. Moreover, the improbable theory that
Gerizim, and not Jerusalem, was the scene of the
meeting Between Abraham and Melchisedec, which,
though held by Prof. Stanley, Mr. Ffoulkes is com-
pelled to reject, has the same authority of Samar-
itan tradition.
The objections to the Moriah of Jerusalem as
the site in question, need not be considered here.
The theory which claims that locality for this sac-
rificial scene, has its difficulties, which will be ex-
amined in their place. [Mokiaii, Amer. ed.]
Whether that theory be accepted or rejected, the
claims of Gerizim appear to us too slightly sup-
ported to entitle them to any weight in the discus-
lion. S. W.
GER1ZITES, 1 Sam. xxvii. 8. [Gkhzitks.]
GERRHE'NIANS, THE (fa t*V Tiffa-
rm»\ Alex, ttvyrifm- ad Cerrenot), named in 2
Msec xiii. 94 only, as one limit of the district
committed by Antiochus Eupator to the govern-
ment of Judas Maccabeus, the other limit being
Ptoksmais (Accho). To judge by the similar ex-
pression in doftntng the extent of Simon's govern-
ment in 1 Mace. xi. 69, the specification has refer-
ence to the sea-coast of Palestine, and, from the
nature of the case, the Gerrhenians, wherever they
were, must have been south of Ptoleraais. Grotius
weuis to have been the first to suggest that the
town Gerrbon or Gerrha was intended, which lay
jetween Pelusium and Rhinocolura ( Wady eU
Ariik). But it has been pointed out by Ewald
(Gachichte, ir. 365, note) that the coast as tar
north as the latter place was at that time in pos-
session of Egypt, and he thereon conjectures that
the inhabitants of the ancient city of Gehah, S.
E. of Gaza, the residence of Abraham and Isaac,
are meant. In support of this Grimm (Kong.
Bandb. ad loc.) mentions that at least one MS.
mads Ftpapririp, which would without difficulty
3» oociupted to r# fUi)K»r.
It stems to have been overlooked that the Syriac
i (early, and entitled to much respect) has
GERSHON
Goxor (iL^)- By this may be intended
(a) the ancient Gkzeb, which was near the sea
somewhere shout Joppa; or (4) Gaza, which appears
sometimes to take that form in these books. Ii
the former ease the government of Judas would
contain hah", in the latter the whole, of the coast
of Palestine. The latter is most probably correct,
as otherwise the important district of Id.umea,
with the great fortress of Bkthsuba, would have
been left unprovided for. G.
GEB/SHOM (in the earlier books DB7"1|,
in Chr. generally O'lttHj}). L (rxocifi} Li
J»dg. rnpreV, [Vat M. "rapo-a/a, Vat H.] ami
Alex, rnpo-aiu; Joseph. Tvpvos- Genam, Get
torn.) The first-born son of Moses and ZipporWi
(Ex. ii. 22; xriii. 3). The name is explained in thee I
passages as if CQ7 "13 (Ger tham) — a strange
there, in allusion to Moses' being a foreigner 1>
Midian — "For be said, I have been a strange.
(Ger) in a foreign land." TTiis signification I
adopted by Josephus (AtU. ii. 18, $ 1), and also
by the I.XX. in the form of the name which they
give — Titpaifii but according to Gesenius (Thee.
p. 306 b), its true meaning, taking it as a Hebrew
word, is " expulsion," from a root B7"l|, being only
another form of Gershon (see slso Fiirst, Hanthcb.).
The circumcision of Gershom is probably related
in Ex. iv. 29. He does not appear again in the
history in his own person, but he was the founder
of a family of which mora than one of the mem-
bers are mentioned later, (a.) One of these was a
remarkable person — "Jonathan the son of Ger-
shom," the "young man the Levite," whom we
first encounter on his way from Bethlehem-Judah
to Micah's house at Mount Ephraim (Judg. xvii.
7), and who subsequently became the first priest to
the irregular worship of the tribe of Dan (xviii.
30). The change of the name "Moses" in this
passage, as it originally stood in the Hebrew text,
to " Manasseh," as it now stands both in the text
and the A. V., is explained under Manasseh.
(6.) But at least one of the other branches of the
family preserved its allegisnce to Jehovah, for when
the courses of the Levites were settled by king Da-
vid, the " sons of Moses the man of God " received
honorable prominence, and Shebuel chief of the
sons of Gershom was appointed ruler (T33) of
the treasures. (1 Chr. xxiii. 15-17; xxvi. 24-28.)
2. The form under which the name Gkkshos
— the eldest son of Levi — is given in several pas-
sages of Chronicles, namely, 1 Chr. vi. 16, 17, 20
43, 62, 71; xv. 7. The Hebrew is almost alter
natety CXD~$, and UWhSt ; the LXX. adhere to
their ordinary rendering of Gerahon; [Rom.] Vat
TtSciv, Alex. Tifpauv, [exc. vi. 43, Vat. Vulcav.
and xv. 7, Alex. Hnpami, Vat. FA. Titpaa/i'-l
Vulg- Genoa and Gertom.
3. (32H3 : r-npvdv, [Vat.] Alex, rqpo-aut
Oerjom), the representative of the priestly family
of Phinehas, among those who accompanied Ezra
from Babylon (Ezr. viii. 2). In Eadras the nan*
la Gkkson. G.
GER13HON CjltT-ia : in Gen. Itye-dv, ta
other books uniformly r<*o-ur; uid so also Alex
with three exceptions; Joseph. AtU. ii. 7, § 4
rnpre>n;: [Gerson]), Uie eldest of the three son
Digitized by
Google
GRRSHONITKS, THE
sf Levi, bom before the descent of Jacobs' family
brio Egypt (Gen. xlvi. 11; Ex. vi. 16). But though
Um eldest born, the families of Gershon were out-
■bipped in fame by their younger brethren of Ko-
hsth, from whom sprang Moses and the priestly
line of Aaron." Gershon's sons were Libmi and
Shimi (Ex. ri. 17; Num. iii. 18, 31; 1 Chr. vi.
17), and their families were duly recognized in the
reign of David, when the permanent arrangements
for the service of Jehovah were made (1 Chr. xxiii.
7-11). At this time Gersbon was represented by
the famous Asaph " the seer," whose genealogy is
given in 1 Chr. vi. 39-43, and also in part, 20, 21.
The family is mentioned once strain as taking part
in the reforms of king Hezekiah (2 Chr. xxix. 12,
where it should be observed that the sons of Asaph
aire reckoned as distinct from the Gershonites). At
the census in the wilderness of Sinai the whole
number of the males of the Bene-Gershon was
7,500 (Num. iii. 22), midway between the Kohath-
ites and the Merarites. At the same date the
efficient men were 2,630 (iv. 40). On the occasion
of the second census the numbers of the Levites
an given only in gross (Num. xxvi. 62). The
sons of Gershon had charge of the fabrics of the
Tabernacle — the coverings, curtains, hangings,
and cords (Num. iii. 25, 26; iv. 25, 26); for the
jansport of these they had two covered wagons
and four oxen (vii. 3, 7). In the encampment then-
station was behind (^OW) the Tabernacle, on the
west side (Num. iii. 23). When on the march they
went with the Merarites in the rear of the first
body of three tribes, — Judah, Issachar, Zebu-
Inn, — with Reuben behind them. In the appor-
tionment of the Levities! cities, thirteen fell to the
lot of the Gershonites. These were in the northern
tribes — two in Manasseh beyond Jordan ; four in
Issachar; four in Asher; and three in Naphtali.
411 of these are said to have possessed " suburbs,"
wd two were cities of refuge (Josh. xxi. 27-33 ; 1
Chr. vi. 62, 71-76). It is not easy to see what
special duties fell to the lot of the Gershonites in
the service of the Tabernacle after its erection at
Jerusalem, or in the Temple. Tho sons of Jedu-
thnn " prophesied with a harp," and the sons of
Heman "lifted up the horn," but for the sons of
Asaph no instrument is mentioned (1 Chr. xxv.
1-5). They were appointed to " prophesy " (that
is, probably, to utter, or sing, inspired words,
KJ3), perhaps after the special prompting of Da-
rid himself (xxv. 2). Others of the Gershonites,
sons of Laadan, had charge of the " treasures of
the boose of God, and over the treasures of the
holy things " (xxvi. 20-22), among which precious
stones an specially named (xxix. 8).
In Chronicles the name is, with two exceptions
(1 Chr. vi 1; xxiii. 6), given in the slightly differ-
ent form of Gersbom. [Gkrshom, 2.] See also
GsauRomTEs. G.
GBxVSHONITES, THE (>?nh|r!, * e.
*s Gershunnite: i Ttta&v, i rcoVr«rf [Vat. -w] ;
M TtSo-vrl [Vat. -ptt] ; Alex, [*i Josh, and 1
GBSHAH
Wfc
• 8s* en Instance of this In 1 Ch- vi. 2-15, where
lbs Una of Kohath Is given, to the exclusion of Uw
Chr.,] rnpvawi [Ot rm m UM , Ger*m,/ki Otr*mv
Gertom]), the family descended from Gbsshoi o-
Gershoh, the son of Levi (Num. iii. 21, 23, M
iv. 24, 27, xxvi. 67; Josh. xxi. 33; 1 Chr. xxiii
7; 2 Chr. xxix. 12).
" ThkGkbshositk" [rnpewt, Ttlctm; Vat
rnpo-aiixi, rnpo-oyira; Alex, r-tipaayti, rripauvt
Gersmm, Gcrtoidtet], as applied to individuals,
occurs in 1 Chr. xxvi. 21 (Laadan), xxix. 8 (Jehiel).
G.
GER'SON (TipcAr; [V* 1 - corrupt:] Ger-
aomtu), 1 Esdr. viii. 29. [Gkksiiom, 3.]
GER'ZITES, THE ("!"]??, or M"l?n_
(Ges. Tha. p. 301) — the Giraite, or the Gerizzite:
Vat. omits, Alex, mr rtQxtior- Gerri and Gtzn
[?], but in his Qiuut. fftbr. Jerome has Gttri:
Syr. and Arab. Godola), a tribe who with the
Geshurites and the Amalekites occupied the land
between the south of Palestine * and Egypt in the
time of Saul (1 Sam. xxvii. 8). They were rich in
Bedouin treasures — "sheep, oxen, asses, camels,
and apparel " (ver. 9; oorap. xv. 3; 1 Chr. v. 21).
The name is not found in the text of the A. V.
but only in the margin. This arises from its having
been corrected by the Masorets (ATeri) into Gijs-
ritks, which form [or rather Okzhitks] our trans-
lators have adopted in the text. The change is
supported by the Targum, and by the Alex. MS.
of tie LXX. as above. There is not, however, any
apparent reason for relinquishing the older form of
the name, the interest of which lies in its con-
nection with that of Mount Gerixim. In Ihe name
of that ancient mountain we have the only remain-
ing trace of the presence of this old tribe of Be-
douins in central Palestine- They appear to bars
occupied it at a very early period, and to have
relinquished it in company with the Amalekites,
who also left their name attached to a mountain
in the same locality (-ludg. xii. 15), when they
abandoned that rich district for the less fertile but
freer South. Other tribes, ss the Awim and the
Zemarites, also left traces of their presence in the
names of towns of the central district (see pp. 201 a,
277, note 4).
The connection between f-e Gerizitea and Mount
Gerizim appears to have been first suggested by
Gesenius. [Kurst accepts the same view.] It has
been since adopted by Stanley (S. a* P. p. 287.
note). Gesenius interprets the name as " dwellers
in the dry, barren country." G.
GE-SEM, THE LAND OF (-fi rW^:
terra Jeue), the Greek form of the Hebrew name
Goshen (Jud. i. 9).
GE'SHAM (,)&%, i. e. Geshan ifilthy, Ges.] .
larvrfe, Alex, rqpowu: ffesaa), one of the sons
of Jahuai, in the genealogy of Judah and family
of Caleb (1 Chr. ii. 47). Nothing further con-
cerning him has been yet traced. The name, as it
stands in our present Bibles, is a oorruption of the
A. V. of 1611, which has, accurately, Gbmajk,
Burrington, usually very careful, has Geshur (Table
xi. 1, 280), but without giving any authority.
• Tha hXX. has rendered the psssap ressrnd to
m isUows : — ml ito* 4 yn tmryntln Awe irr)*6m*>
>«W* TsAaitf •««(Usa. r<Aa*unwp) TtmxwpAwv
a corruption of the Hebrew mwlam . . Skunk (A. T
" of old . . to Staur n ), or It may contain a mratiOL
o. chs name Tetem or Telalm, a place In the extreme
south of Judah (Josh. xv. 24), which ben a prominent
part .a * former attack on the Amatakltet (1 8am. xv
4). In *he latter oaw r has been, rmd tor TV (S
•Km jqi AiyitTW The word IMnmr may bs i uancsri* ; Font's Hindu*, fee )■
Digitized by
Google
906
GBSHAN
* GR8HAN (1 Chr. li. 47), the comet form
of a name for which Gesham has been improper);
substituted in modem editions of the A. V.
A.
GE13HEM, and GASH1HTJ (CTr?., 10^3
[corporeality, Jirmneu, Flint] : rqiri^t : [Swtn,]
Cooem), an Arabian, mentioned in Neh. ii. 19,
»nd vi. 1, 2, 6, who, with " Saoballat the Horonite,
>nd Tobiah, the servant, the Ammonite," opposed
Neheniiah in the repairing of Jerusalem. Geshem,
we ma; conclude, was an inhabitant of Arabia
Petrtea, or of the Arabian Desert, and probably the
jhief of a tribe which, like most of the tribes on
the eastern frontier of Palestine, was, in the time
rf the Captivity and the subsequent period, allied
with the Persians or with any peoples threatening
the Jewish nation. Geshem, like Sanballat and
Tobiah, seems to have been one of the " governors
beyond the river," to whom Nehemiah came, and
whose mission "grieved them exceedingly, that
there was come a man to seek the welfare of the
children of Israel " (Neh. ii. 10) ; for the wandering
inhabitants of the frontier doubtless availed them-
selves largely, in their predatory excursions, of the
distracted state of Palestine, and dreaded the re-
establishment of the kingdom ; and the Arabians,
Ammonites, and Ashdodites, are recorded as having
" conspired to fight against Jerusalem, and to
binder " the repairing. The endeavors of these con-
federates and their failure are recorded in chapters
ii., iv., and vi. The Arabic name corresponding to
Geshem cannot easily be identified. Jasim (or
Gasim, |>J.>) is one of very remote antiquity;
and Jashuin U*i^-) is the name of an historical
tribe of Arabia Proper ; the latter may more prob-
ably be compared with it. E. S. P.
GE'SHUR (Tltt?? and rTWg, a bridge:
[r« Jo-olio, exc 2 Sam. iii. 3, Ttcvtp, Vat Ttattp;
1 Chr. ii. 23, Alex. Yvraovp, Ui. 2, Ttcovf- Oet-
$uri\ Arab. wm>, Jettur), a little principality
in the northeastern corner of Bashan, adjoining
the province of Argob (Dent. iii. 14), and the king-
dom of Aram (Syria in the A. V. ; 2 Sam. xv. 8 ;
eomp. 1 Chr. ii. 23). It was within the boundary
of the allotted territory of Manasseh, but its inhab-
itants were never expelled (Josh, xiii- 13; camp.
1 Chr. ii. 23). King David married " the daughter
of Talmai, king of Geshur" (2 Sam. Ui. 3); and
her son Absalom sought refuge among his maternal
relatives after the murder of his brother. The wild
acts of Absalom's life may have been to some extent
".%• results of maternal training ; they were at least
BhaActeristio - r the stock from which he sprung.
He remained la "Geshur of Jam" until he was
i^ken back to Jerusalem by Joab (2 Sam. xiii. 37,
it. 8). It is highly probable that Geshur was a
section of the wild and nigged region, now called
M-Lejak, among whose rocky fastnesses the Geah-
arites might dwell in security while the whole sur-
rounding plains were occupied by the Israelites.
On the north the Ltjah borders on the territory
of Damascus, the ancient Aram ; and in Scripture
Ike name is so intimately connected with Basban
aid Argob, that one is led to suppose it formed
part of them (Deut. iii. 13, 14; J Chr. ii. 18 ; Josh.
■tit U, 13). [Aboob-J J. L. P.
GETHSEMASE
* The bridge over the Jordan above toe sea of
Galilee no doubt stands where one must have stood
in ancient times. [Bridge, Amer. ed.] It may
be, says Robinson (Phyt. Gtogr. p. 156), " thai
the adjacent district on the east of the Jordan took
the name of Geshur ("W?), as if • Bridge-land ' •
at any rate Geshur and the* Geshurites were in this
vicinity." H.
GESHTJRI and GESHTJRITES 07«P9 :
[in Deut., Taoyaai, Vat. Alex. -mi ; Comp. r«o-
crovpl; in Josh., Alex. Vtaoupf, xii. 5, Ttpytvi,
Vat. -«•«; xiii. 2, 11, 13, r«npi, Vat. Ttatipti;
1 Sam., r«rip», Vat. -e-«i-", Alex. Ttertfti: Get-
luri.] L The inhabitants of Geshur, which see
(Deut. iii 14; Jos. xii. 5, xiii. 11).
3. An ancient tribe which dwelt in the desert
between Arabia and Philistia (Josh. xiii. 2; 1 Sam.
xxvii. 8); they are mentioned in connection with
the Gezrites and Amalekitee. [Gkzer, p. 909.]
J. L. P.
GETHER CVJ|: r«jr#> ; [Alex. roeVpO
Gether), the third, in order, of the sons of Aram
(Gen. x. 23). No satisfactory trace of the people
sprung from this stock has been found. The theories
of Bochart and others, which rest on improbable
etymologies, are without support; while {he sug-
gestions of Carians (Hieron.), Bactrians (Joseph.
Ant), and &&cLa» (Saad.), an not better
founded. (See Bochart, Pkateg, ii. 10, and Winer,
s. ».). Kalisch proposes Geshuh; but he does not
adduce any argument in its favor, except the sim-
ilarity of sound, and the permutation of Aranuean
and Hebrew letters.
The Arabs write the name oLc. (Ghathlr);
and, in the mythical history of their country, it it
■aid that the probably aboriginal tribes of Thonwod,
Tasur, Jadces, and 'Ad (the last, in the second
generation, through 'Ood), were descended from
Ghathir (Caussin [de Perceval], £aai, i. 8, 9, 83;
Abul-Kida, Hitl. Anteul. 16). These traditions
are in the highest degree untrustworthy; and, as
we have stated in Arauia, the tribes referred to
were, almost demonstrably, not of Semitic origin.
See Arabia, Aram, and Nabatilsass.
E. S. P.
GETHSEM'ANB (J13, gath, a « wine-
press," and 1"5r?, aAemen, "oil;" TtB<n)nartl
[so Tisch. ; Lachm. Treg. -r«7], or more generally
rfoVrquwij), a small " farm," aa the French would
say, " un bien aux champt " (x<tpioy =■■ oyer,
pradivm ; or as the Vulgate, rilln ; A. V. " place; "
Matt. xxvi. 36; Mark xiv. 32), situated across the
brook Kedron (John xviii. 1), probably at the foot
of Mount Olivet (Luke xxii. 39), to the N. W.,
and about ) or { of a mile English from the walls
of Jerusalem. There was a "garden," or rather
orchard (irqiror), attached to it, to which the olive,
fig, and pomegranate doubtless invited resort by
their " hospitable shade." And we know from the
Evangelists SS. Luke (xxii. 39) and John (xviii. 2)
that our Lord ofttimea resorted thither with hi)
disciples. " It was on the road to Bethany," says
Mr. Gretwett (Harm. Din. xiii.), "and the faniQj
of Lazarus might have possessions there; " but, if
so, it should have been rather on the S E side o*
the mountain where Bethany lies: part of which, I
Digitized by
Google
UBTHSEMANE
«*ey on remarked, being the property of the village
still, as it may well have been then, is even dow
called Uctluuiy (rl-Azniiyeh) by the natives" Hei.ce
the expressions iu S. Luke xxiv. 60 and Acts i. 12
an quite consistent. According to Josephua, the
suburbs of Jerusalem abounded with gardens and
plaaunire-grounds (wapaStltrott, B. J. vi. 1, § 1;
eomp. r. 3, § 2): now, with the exception of those
belonging to the Greek and Latin convents, hardly
the vestige of a garden is to be seen. There is
indeed a favorite paddock or close, half-a-mile or
more to the north, on the same side of the con-
tinuation of the valley of the Kedron, the property
of a wealthy Turk, where the Mohammedan ladies
pass the day with their families, their bright flowing
costume forming a picturesque contrast to the stiff
sombre foliage of the olive-grove beneath which
they cluster. But ( iethsetnane has not come down
to us as a scene of mirth ; its inexhaustible associa-
tions are the offspring of a single event — the
Agony of the Son of God on the evening preceding
Hu Passion. Here emphatically, as Isaiah had
UETHSKMANB
907
foretold, and u the name imports, were fulfilled
those dark words, " I have trodden the wiiie-press
'alone" (lxiii. 3; eomp. Kev. xiv. 20, ''tue wine-
press . . . idtlioul die cily"). "The period of
i the year,'' proceeds Mr. Oreswell, " was the Vernal
I Equinox: the day of the month alnut two days
before the full of the moon — in which case Die
moon would not be now very far past her meridian ;
I and the night would be enlightened until a late
hour towards the morning " — the day of the week
Thursday, or rather, according to the Jews, Friday
— for the sun had set. The time, according to
Mr. Greswell, would be the last watch of the night,
between our 11 and 12 o'clock. Any recapitulation
of the circumstances of that ineffable e>enl would
be unnecessary ; any comment* upon it uiiscasoii
able. A modern garden, in which are eight ven-
erable olive-trees, and a grotto to the north, de-
tached from it, and in closer connection with the
Church of the Sepulchre of the Virgin — in fact
with the road to the summit of the mountain run-
ning between them, as it did also in the days of
OM Olive-Trass In Oethsemane, from 8. JS.
Use Crusaders (Sanuti Secret. FiiM. Owe. lib. iii.
p. sir. c. 9) — both securely inclosed, and under
'ode and key, are pointed out as making up the
t: ne Gethsemane. These may, or may not, be the
spots which Eusebius, St. Jerome (LUter t/e Situ
tt Aouiuuffti*, a v.), and Adamnanus mention as
such ; but from the 4th century downwards some
such localities are spoken of as known, frequented,
and even built upon. Every generation dwells most
spot) what accords most with its instincts and pre-
Beetions- Accordingly the pilgrims of antiquity
say nothing about those time-honored olive-trees,
I whose age the poetic minds of a Lamartine or a
Stanley shrink from criticising — they were doubt-
l less not so imposing in the 6th century ; still, hai!
they been noticed, they would have afforded undy-
ing witness to the locality — while, on the other
hand, few modern travellers would inquire for, and
adore, with Antoninus, the three precise spots
where our Ix>rd is said to have fallen upon His
face. Against the contemporary antiquity of the
olive trees, it has been urged that Titus cut down
all the '-roes round about Jerusalem ; and certainly
this it no more than Josephus states in express
• • B-aaartjrs Is the Arable name, derived from
Bethany !• current only among foreigners,
i rt t- reign i nsjio. In thin Instance (he native I
language adopts the mors distinctive ChrUttso appalls
(son. H
Digitized by
Google
908 GETH8EMANB
terms (see particularly B. J. vi. 1, § 1, a passage
which most have neaped Mr. Williams, Holy ft'ty,
7ol. ii. p. 137, 2d ed., who only cites r. 3, § 2, and
ri. 8, § 1). Besides, (he 10th legion, arriving from
Jericho, were posted about the Mount of Olives
h. 2, § 3; and comp. ri. 2, § 8), and, in the course
of the siege, a wall was carried along the valley of
the Kedron to the fountain of Siloam (v. 10, § 2).
The probability, therefore, would seem to be, that
they were planted by Christian hands to mark the
spot: unless, like the sacred olive of the Acrop-
olis (Biihr ad Ifercd. viii. 55), they may have
reproduced themselves. Maundrell (Early Travels
'n Pat. by Wright, p. 471) and Quaresmius (Elucid.
T. 8. lib. iv. per. v. eh. 7) appear to have been the
first to notice them, not more than three centuries
igo; the former arguing against, and the latter in
ivor of, their reputed antiquity; but nobody read-
rug their accounts "vould imagine that there were
then no more than eight, the locality of Gethsemane
being supposed the same. Parallel claims, to be
sure, are not wanting in the cedars of Lebanon,
which are still visited with so much enthusiasm : in
the terebinth, or oak of Mamre, which was standing
in the days of Constantino the Great, and even
worshipped (Vales, ad Euseb. lit. Const, iii. 53),
and the fig-tree (Ficui elnttica) near Nerbudda in
India, which native historians assert to be 2,500
years old (Patterson's Journal of a Tour in Egypt,
4c, p. 202, note). Still more appositely there were
olive-trees near Lintemum 250 years old, according
to Pliny, in his time, which are recorded to have
survived to the middle of the tenth century (.Voureou
Diet. d*llUt. Nat. Paris, 1840, vol. xxix. p. 61).
E. S. Kf.
* Gethsemane, which means " olive-press " (see
above) is found according to the narrative in the
proper place; for Olivet, as the name imports, was
famous for its olive-trees, still sufficiently numerous
there to justify its being so called, though little cul-
tivation of any sort appears now on that mount.
The place is called also "a garden" (kijttos), but
we are not by any means to transfer to that term
our ideas of its meaning. It is to be remembered,
as Stanlsy remarks (S. d- P. p. 187, 1st ed.), that
" Eastern gardens are not flower-gardens nor private
gardens, but the orchards, vineyards, and fig-enclos-
ures " near the towns. The low wall, covered with
white stucco, which incloses the reputed Gethsemane,
is comparatively modem. A series of rude pictures
(utterly out of place there, where the memory and
the heart are the only prompters required) are hung
ip along the face of the wall, representing different
scenes in the history of Christ's passion, such as
the scourging, the mockery of the soldiers, the
sinking beneath the cross, and the like. The eight
•live-trees here, though still verdant and productive,
are s» decayed as to require to be propped up with
trap* of stones against their trunks in order to
prevent their being blown down by the wind. Trees
of this class are proverbially long-lived. Schubert,
the celebrated naturalist, decides that those in
Gethsemane are old enough to have flourished amid
a race of xmtemporaries that perished long cen-
turies igo (Jieite in dm Mort/entimd, ii. 521)."
Stanley also speaks of them " as the mart venerable
of their race on the face of the earth ... the most
GBTHSKMANB
affecting of the sacred memorials in or about Jew
aalem." (S. a* P. p. 450, 1st ed.)
There are two or three indications in the Gospel
history which may guide us as to the general situ-
ation of this ever memorable spot to which tin
Saviour repaired on the night of his betrayal. It
is quite certain that Gethsemane was on the western
slope of Olivet, and near the base of that mountain
where it sinks down into the valley of the Kedron.
When it is said that " Jesus went forth with his
disciples beyond the brook Kedron, where was a
garden " (John xviii. 1 ), it is implied that he did
not go far up the Mount of Olives, but reached the
place which he had in view soon after crossing the
bed of that stream. The garden, it will be observed,
is named in that passage with reference to the
brook, and not the mountain. This result agrees
also with the presumption from the Saviour's
abrupt summons to his disciples recorded in Matt
xxvi. 46: "Arise, let us be going; see, he is at
hand that doth betray me." The best explanation
of this language is that his watchful eye, at that
moment, caught sight of Judas and his accomplices,
as they issued from one of the eastern gates, or
turned round the northern or southern corner of
the walls, in order to descend into the valley. The
night, with the moon then near its full, and about
the beginning of April, must have been clear, ot
if exceptionally dark, the torches (John xviii. 13*
would have left no doubt as to the object of such
a movement at that unseasonable hour. It may
be added that in this neighborhood also are still to
be seen caverns and deserted tombs into which his
pursuers may have thought that he would endeavor
to escape and conceal himself, and so came prepared
with lights to follow him into these lurking-places.
The present iiiclosure known as Gethsemane
fulfills all these conditions; and so also, it may be
claimed, would any other spot similarly situated
across the brook, and along the westo n declivity in
front of Jerusalem. Teschendorf (Unite in den
Orient, i. 312) finds the traditionary locality " in per-
fect harmony with ail that we learn from the Evange-
lists." Thomson (Land and Book, ii. 284) thinks
it should be sought " rather in a secluded vale sev-
eral hundred yards to the northeast of the present
Gethsemane.'' Robinson alleges no positive reason i
against the common identification. " The authen-
ticity of the sacred garden," says Williams (Half
City, ii. 437), " I choose rather to believe than to
defend." But such differences of opinion as these
involve aii essential agreement. The original garden
may have been more or less extensive than tb«
present site, or hare stood a few hundred rods
further to the north or the south ; but far, certainly,
from that spot it need not be supposed to have
been. We may sit down there, and read the nar-
rative of what the Saviour endured for our re-
demption, and feel assured that we are near the
place where he prayed, " Saying, Father, not my
will, but thine be done; " and where, " being in
an agony, he sweat as it were great drops of blood,
falling down to the ground." It is altogether prob-
able that the disciples in going back to Jerusalem
from Bethany after having seen the I»rd taken up
into heaven passed Gethsemane on the way. What
new thoughts must have arisen in their minda
* * An argument for the great age of
■as bean drawn from the feet that a mtttino (an old
tmklsh coin) is the governmental tax paid on each
<me of tMa group, which was the tax on trees at the
tans of toe Saracenic conquest of Jerusalem, a. n. 680
Since that period the Sultan receives half of the train
of every tree as bis tribute. (See Baumsr, fataitim*
p. 809, 4U Aufl.i B
Digitized by
Google
GBUHL
•mat deeper insight into the mystery of the agony
mat have flaabed upon them, aa they looked once
nore upon that acene of the sufferings and humil-
iation of the crucified and ascended (tee. H.
GBtTEL (^r*»0, Sam. H>M« [<?«*>» m-
altation. Get]: IWSinA.; [Vat. Touo<i)A:] 6W),
■on of Machi : ruler of the tribe of Gad, and its
representative among the spies aent from the wil-
derness of Paran to explore the Promised Land
(Norn. xUX 15).
GB'ZEH C"ttg, in pause "ffj [tUtp place,
pncipict, Fiirst, Ges.] : Ta(ip, Tt(tp [Alex. 1 K.
ix. 15, 16], Tiiyt, [roftpdi Josh. x. 33. Vat.
rafijti 1 Chr. xiv. 16, FA. TaCapav-] Cnser,
\Gaer. Oazera] ), an ancient city of Canaan, whose
king, Horam, or Elam, eomiug to the assistance of
Lachiah, was killed with all his people by Joshua
(Josh. x. 33; xii. 19). The town, however, is not
said to have been destroyed ; it formed one of the
landmarks on the south boundary of Kphraim,"
between the lower Beth-boron and the Mediterra-
nean (xri. 3), the western limit of the tribe (1 Chr.
rii. SB). It was allotted with its suburbs to toe
Kohathite Levites (Josh. xxi. 21; 1 Chr. vi, 67);
but the original inhabitants were not dispossessed
(Judg. i. 89); and even down to the reign of Solo-
mon the Canaanites, or (according to the I. XX.
addition to Josh. xvi. 10) the Canaanites and Per-
izzitea, were still dwelling there, and paying tribute
to Israel (1 K. ix. 16). At this time it must iu bet
have been independent of Israelite rule, for Pharaoh
bad burnt it to the ground and killed its Inhabi-
tants, and then presented the site to his daughter,
Solomon's queen. But it was immediately rebuilt
by the king; and though not heard of again till
after the Captivity, yet it played a somewhat prom-
inent part in the later struggles of the nation.
[Gazbra.]
Ewald (ffesc*. iiL 380; oorap. ii. 427) takes
Gezer and Geshur to be the same, and sees in the
destruction of the former by Pharaoh, and the
simultaneous expedition of Solomon to Haraath-
aobah in the neighborhood of the tatter, indications
of a revolt of the Canaanites, of whom the Geshur-
Ites formed the most powerful remnant, and whose
attempt against the new monarch was thus frus-
trated. But this can hardly be supported.
In one place Gpb is given as identical with Gezer
(1 Chr. xx. 4, eomp. 2 Sam. xxi. 18). The exact
rite of Gezer has not been diseorured ; but its gen-
eral position is not difficult to infer. It must have
been between the lower Beth-horon and the sea
(Josh. xvi. 3; 1 K. ix. 17); therefore on the great
maritime plain which lies beneath the hills of which
Bdfir ct-iahta is the last outpost, and forms toe
regular eoast road of communication with Egypt
(1 K. ix. 16). It is therefore appropriately named
aa the last point to which David's pursuit of the
Philistines extended (2 Sam. v. 25; 1 Chr. xiv.
16 •», and as the scene of at least one shsrp en-
GIANT8
909
a If lachish be when Van de Velds and Porter
would pise* It, at Um LikU, near Oaaa, at hast 40
■alias from the aoutbarn boundarr of Kphraim, then
Is some (round for suspeotlng the jxtstenos of two
Scans, and this is conn-Tied by the order In which t
• mentioned in to* list of Josh. ill. with Hebron,
Igloo, and Debir. Them Is not, however, any meao<i
artestmlnlng this
• la that* two places the word, being at the and
at a period, baa, aeeotdlag to Hebrew custom Its first
counter (1 Chr. xx. 4), this plain being their owe
peculiar territory (corap. Jos. Ant. viii. v, J i, r»
food, t4)f rqt naAeuo-rfnw x&f* fcraVxsurai')
and aa commanding the communication betweec
Egypt and the new capital, Jerusalem, it was an
important point for Solomon to fortify. By Euse-
bius it is mentioned aa four miles north of Nicopo-
lis (Anucat); a position exactly occupied by the
important town Jinuu, the ancient Gimzo, and
corresponding well with the requirements of Joshua.
But this hardly agrees with the indications of the
1st book of Maccabees, Which speak of it as between
Emmaus (.dinted*) and Azotus and J annua; and
again as on the confines of Azotus. In the neigh-
borhood of the latter there is more than one sits
bearing the name Tas&r ; but whether this Arabic
name can be derived from the Hebrew Gezer, and
also whether an important a town as Gacara was in
the time of the Maccabees can be represented by
such insignificant villages aa these, are questions to
be determined by future investigation.' If it can,
then perhaps the strongest claims for identity with
Gezer are put forward by a village called Yarir, 4
or 5 miles east of Joppa, on the road to RawUk
and Lydd.
From the occasional occurrence of the form Ga-
zer, and from the LXX. version being almost uni-
formly Gazers or Gazer, Ewald infers that this was
really the original name. G.
GEZTIITES, THE (^ITSH, accur. the Giz-
rilt: [Vat. omits; Alex.] tof rtQxuoy- Gezri).
The word which the Jewish critics have substituted
in the margin of the Bible for the ancient reading,
"the Gerizzite" (1 Sam. xxvii. 8), and which has
thus become incorporated in the text of the A. V.
If it mean anything — at least that we know — it
must signify the dwellers in Gezer. But Gkzkk
was not less than 50 miles distant from the " south
of Judah, the south of the Jerahmeelites, and the
south of the Kenitea," the scene of David's in-
road; a fact which stands greatly in the way of our
receiving the change. [Gekzites, THE.]
GI'AH (rTa [uxUtr-faU, Fiirst; fountain,
Ges.]: Toi; [Comp. r«f:] vallit), a place named
only in 2 Sam. ii. 24, to designate the position of
the hill Amman — " which faces Giah by the way
of the wilderness of Gibeon." No traco of the
situation of either has yet been found. By the
LXX. the name is read as if M^J, t. e. a ravine of
glen ; a view also taken in the Vulgate.
GIANTS. The frequent allusion to giants to
Scripture, and toe numerous theories and disputes
which have arisen in oonsequenoe, render it neces-
sary to give a brief view of some of the main opin-
ions and curious inferences to which the menticL
of them leads.
1. They are first spoken of in Gen. vi. 4, under
the name NrphiUm (D^Vo}: LXX. ytyarrn
Aquil. tmrtwrorrn > Synun. 'fiuuof- Vulg. giga*
vowel U nithtnsd. and stands in tha taxt aa
and Id these two places only the name is so
to the A. V. But, to be consistent, the same
should have been made In several other
where It occurs In the Hebrew: «. g. Judg.
Josh. xvi. 8, 10 ; 1 K. ix. 16, ace. It would se
tor to render [represent] the Hebrew name all
the erne Kngllnh one, when the dtbVnoe*
nothing bat an emphatic secant.
■a
1. 2D,
mbet
lyebj
Digitized by
Google
910
GIANTS
us: Onk. S>*12i: Luther, Tyrannen). The word
w derived either from n?p, or M7^ (= " mar-
velous "), or, nil generally believed, from '£)>
either in the mom to throw down, or to mil
(= fallen angels, Jarchi, cf. Is. xiv. 19; Luke x.
18); or meaning "l)p««» hiventes " (Genu.), or
eoUapsi (by euphemism, Boetteher, de Inferit, p.
99); but certainly not " becauae men fell from ter-
ror of them " (as K. Kimchi). That the word
means "giant" is clear from Num. xiii. 39, 33,
and is continued by M^9?, the Chaldee name for
"the aery giant " Orion (Job. ii. 9, xxxviii. 31; Is.
xlil. 10; Targ.), unless this name arise from the
obliqui'g at the constellation (G'ea. of Earth,
p. 85).
But we now come to the remarkable conjectures
about the origin of these Nephilim in Gen. vi. 1-4.
(An I m men se amount has been written on this pas-
sage. See Kurtz, Die Ehen der Sdhne Gvttes, Ac.,
Berlin, 1857; Ewald, Jahrb. 1854, p. 196; Uovett's
Isaiah Unfulfilled; Faber's Many Mansions, in
the Journal of Sac. Lit., Oct. 1858, 4c.) We
are told that "there vert Nephilim in the earth,"
and that "afterwards (ical per' intiyo, LXX.) the
"sons of God" mingling with the beautiful "daugh-
ters of men" produced a race of violent and inso-
lent Gibborim (Q'H32). This latter word is also
rendered by the LXX. yiyavrts, but we shall see
hereafter that the meaning is more general. It is
dear however that no statement is made that the
Nephilim themselves sprang from this unhallowed
union. Who then were they ? Taking the usual
derivation (7SJ), and explaining it to mean
"fallen spirits," the Nephilim seem to be identical
with the " eons of God ; " but the verse before us
militates against this notion as much as against
that which makes the Nephilim the same as the
Gibborim, namely, the offspring of wicked mar-
riages. This latter supposition can only be ac-
cepted if we adnii* either (1) that there were two
kinds of Nephilhi., — those who existed before the
unequal intercourse, and those produced by it
(Heidegger, iiiit Pair, xi.), or (2) by following
the Vulgate rendering, postquam enim inyressi
sunt, etc. But the common rendering seems to be
xrrect, nor is then much probability in Aben
Em's explanation, that 72" , ~I?y ("after that")
means *?13nn "inM (i. t. « after the deluge "),
and is an allusion to the Anakims.
The genealogy of the Nephilim then, or at any
rate of the earliest Nephilim, is not recorded in
Scripture, and the name itself is so mysterious
that we are lost in conjecture respecting them.
9. The sons of the marriages mentioned in Gen.
ft 1-4, are called Gibborim (D"H3|, from "133,
o be strong), a general name meaning powerful
ABptffrcd jcal vajTOT bwepowrai jraAov, Joseph.
Ant. i. 3, § 1 ; -yrfr waiSf j top vovv iit$i0dtravrts
Tvi \ayl(to-Bai (c.t.A., Philo de Gigant., p. 970;
oouip. Is. iii. 2, xlix. 34; lie. xxxii. 91). They
were not necessarily giants in our sense of the word
Tueodoret, Unatt. 48). Yet, as was natural, these
powerful chiefs were almost universally represented
as men of extraordinaar stature. The LXX. ren-
ter the word ytyamtt, and call Nimrod a 7(705
nmrybi (1 Chr. i. 10); Augustine calls them <Sio-
OIANTS
turosi (de Ch. Dei, xr. 4) ; Chryaoston IJoot.
<u/tn«<i>, Theodoret wupfisr/ttt 15 (eomp. Bar. iii
96, tiiueyjim, 4ii<r-ri)Xfvoi wi\tuoy).
But crbo were the parents of these giants; whi
are " the sons of God " (DVrV^jSn >33) ? Ths
opinions are various: (1.) Men of power («;») Sir
yaoTsvoWw, Symm., Uieron. Unatt. lleb. ad loc. ,
NJ3TI3*1 ^B, Onk.; n->3nb» ^S, Samar..
so too Selden, Vorst, Ac.), (omp. Pi. ii. 7, lxxxH.
6, lxxxix. 97; Hie. v. 5, die.). The expression wili
then exactly resemble Homer's Aio-ytrsit QatrAijit,
and the Chinese Tidn-tseii, " son of heaven," as a
title of the Emperor (Uesen. s. r. ]3). But why
should the union of the high-born and low-born
produce offspring unusual for their size and
strength? (9.) Men with great gifts, "in the
image of God" (Ritter, Schumann); (3.) Calottes
arrogantly assuming the title (I'aulus); or (4.) the
pious Sethites (comp. Gen. iv. 26; Maimon. Afor.
Ifeboch. i. 14; Suid. s. rr. 2^9 and utaiyafiltu;
Cedren. Hist. Comp. p. 10; Aug. de Civ. Dei, xv.
93; Chrysost. Horn. 22, in Gen.; Theod. in Gen.
Quasi. 47; Cyril, c. Jul ix., Ac.). A host of
modern commentators catch at this explanation,
but Gen. iv. 26 has probably no connection with
the subject. Other texts quoted in favor of the
view are Deut. xiv. 1, 2; Ps. lxxiii. 15; Prov. xiv.
26; Hos. i. 10; Rom. viii. 14, Ac. Still the mere
antithesis in the verse, as well as other considera-
tions, tend strongly against this gloss, which indeed
is built on a foregone conclusion. Compare how-
ever the Indian notion of the two races of men
Suras and Asuras (children of the snn and of the
moon, Nork, Bram. und Rabb. p. 204 If.), and the
Persian belief in the marriage of Djemshid with
the sister of a dev, whence sprang black and im-
pious men (Kaliach, Gen. p. 176). (5.) Worship-
pers of false gods (woitu r&r 8*av, Aqu.) making
^JIS = » servants " (comp. Deut. xiv. 1; Prov. xiv.
96;' Ex. xxxii. 1 ; Deut. iv. 28, Ac.). This view is
ably supported in Genetit of Earth and Man, p.
39 f. (6.) Devils, such as the Incubi and Suo-
cubi. Such was the belief of the Cabbalists (Va-
leahts, de 8. Phibtoph. cap. 8). That these beings
can have intercourse with women St. Augustine
declares it would be folly to doubt, and it was the
universal belief in the East. ^lohammed makes
one of the ancestors of Balkia Queen of Sheba a
demon, and Damir says he had heard a Moham-
medan doctor openly boast of having married in
succession four demon wives (Bochart, Hierot, 1.
p. 747). Indeed the belief still exists (lane's Mod.
Egypt i. ch. x. ad in.) (7.) Closely allied to this
is the oldest opinion, that tbey were angels (aVyr-
\ot rov Btoi, LXX., for such was the old reading,
not viol, Aug. de, Ch. Dei, xv. 93; so too Joseph.
Ant. i. 3, § 1; Phil, de Gig. ii. 353; Clem. Alex.
Strom, iii. 7, § 69; Sulp. Sever. Hist. Scry*. «a
Orthod. L i. Ac.; comp. Job i. 6, ii. 1; Ps. xxix.
1, Job iv. 18). The rare expression " sons of God '
certainly means angels in Job xxxviii. 7, i. 6, ii. 1
and that such is the meaning in Gen. vi. 4 also
was the most prevalent opinion both in the JewiaV
and early Christian Church.
It was probably this very ancient view which
gave rise to the spurious book of Enoch and the
notion quoted from it by St. Jude (6), and alludes'
to by St Peter (9 Pet. Ii. 4; comp. 1 Cor. xi. 10
Tert. d* r%rg. Vtl 7). According to tub boss
Digitized by
Google
GIANTS
■nit by God to guard the earth
C lyptyopat, <t>i\aK*s), were jer^erted by the
beauty of women, " went after strange flesh,"
taught sorcery, finery (turnout lapilhrum, circulot
ex aure, Tert., etc.), and being banished from
heaven had sons 3,000 cubits high, thus originating
a celestial and terrestrial race of demons — " Unde
modo vagi subrertunt corpora multa " (Commodi-
ani Instruct 111., Culiiu Damonum) i. e. they are
still the souite of epilepsy, etc. Various names
were given at a later time to these monsters. Their
chief was Leuixas, and of their number were Hach-
sael, Aza, Shemchozai, and (the wickedest of them)
a goat-like demon Azael (oomp. Azazel, Lev. xvi.
8, iud for the very curious questions connected
with this name, see Bochart, Hierta. i. p. 652 ff.;
Kab. Eliezer, cap. 22; Berethitk Rob. ad Gen. vi. 2;
Seonert, de Gignntibut, Hi.).
Against this notion (which Havernick calls " the
silliest whim of the Alexandrian Gnostics and Cab-
alistic Rabbis") Heidegger eillist. Patr. 1. c.)
quotes Halt. xxii. 30; Luke xxiv. 39, and similar
testimonies. Philastrius {Adv. Hart*, cap. 108)
characterizes it as a heresy, and Chrysostom (Horn.
22) even calls it to /SAdVcVij/ia cVteiro. Yet Jude
is explicit, and the question is not so much what
can be, as what vai believed. The fathers almost
unanimously accepted these fablss, and Tertullian
argues warmly (partly on expedient grounds ! ) for
the genuineness of the book of Enoch. The an-
gels were called 'Zyptryopot, a word used by Aquil.
and Symm. to render the Chaldee "VS (Dan. iv.
13 ff.: Tulg. Vigils LXX. tip; Lex. Cyrilli, «W-
yi\oi I) oVvpi/x-roi; Fabric. Cod. Pteudeptgr. V. T.
p. 180), and therefore used, as in the Zend-Avesta,
of good guardian angels, and applied especially to
archangels in the Syriac liturgies (of. ~^f t Is.
xxi. 11), but more often of evil angels (Castelli
Lex. Syr. p. 849; Scalig. adKrueb. Chron. p. 403;
Gesen. s. v. T5), The story of the Egregori is
given at length in Tert. de Cult. Fern. I. 2, ii. 10;
Commodianus, Instruct, iii. ; Lactant. Div. Inst. ii.
14; Tettam. Patriarch. [Ruben,] c. v., etc. Every
one will remember the allusions to the same inter-
pretation in Milton, Par. Beg. ii. 179—
« Before the Flood, thou with thy lusty crew,
Vslw-Utled sons of God, roaming the earth,
Oast wanton eyes on the daughters of men,
And eoupled with them, and begat a race."
The use made of the legend in some modern poems
cannot sufficiently be reprobated.
We need hardly say how closely allied this is to
the Greek legends which connected the ttypia ipuKa
yiydVrw with the gods (Horn. Od. vii. 205 ; Pau-
san. viii. 29), and made Saiuoytt sow of the gods
(Plat. Apolog. 1,ul$tof, Cratyl. § 32). Indeed the
whole heathen tradition resembles the one before
on (Cumberland's Siinchomatho, p. 24; Horn. Od.
ri. 308 ff.; Hes. Theog. 185, Opp et D. 144;
Plat Rep. ii. § 17, p. 604 E; de Legg. ili. § 16,
p. 805 A; Or. Metam. i. 151; Luc. iv. 693; Lucian,
it DeA Syr., Ac.; cf. Grot, de Ver. i. 6); and the
Greek translators of the Bible make the resemblance
still more close by introducing such words as ito-
u*X<"> TT/"" '«i * D ^ eren TiTovt r, *" which last
Tosephua (L e.) expressly compares the giants of
Genesis (LXX Prov. U. 18; Pa. xlvUi. 2 [xUx. 2] •
1 Sam. v. 18; Judith xvi. 7). The fate too ot
these demon-ebiefa is identical with that of heathen
GIANTS
Ull
story (Job xxrl. 5; Ecclus. xvi. 7; Bar. 0L 26-38
Wisd. xiv. 6; 8 Mace. U. 4; 1 Pet. iii. 19). '
These legends may therefore be regarded as die
tortions of the Biblical narrative, handed down by
tradition, and embellished by the fancy and imagi-
nation of eastern nations. The belief of the Jews
in later times is remarkably illustrated by the story
of Asmodeus in the book of Tobit. It is deeply
instructive to observe how wide and marked a con-
trast there is between the incidental allusion of the
sacred narrative (Gen. vi. 4), and the minute friv-
olities or prurient follies which degrade the heathen
mythology, and repeatedly appear In the groundless
imaginings of the Rabbinic interpreters. If therr
were fallen angels whose lawless desires gave birth
to a monstrous progeny, both they and their intol-
erable offspring were destroyed by the deluge, which
was the retribution on their wickedness, and they
have no existence in the baptized and renovated
earth.
Before passing to the other giant-races we may
observe that all nations have had a dim fancy that
the aborigines who preceded them, and the earliest
men generally, were of immense stature. Berosus
says that the ten antediluvian kings of Chaldea
were giants, and we find in all monkish historians
a similar statement about the earliest possessors of
Britain (comp. Horn. Od. x. 119; Aug. de Civ. Dei,
xv. 9; Plin. vii. 16; Varr. op. Aid. GelL iii. 10;
Jer. on Matt, xxvii.). The great size decreased
gradually after the deluge (2 Esdr. v. 52-55). That
we are dwarfs compared to our ancestors was a
common belief among the Latin and Greek poets
(//. v. 302 ff.; Lucret. ii. 1151; Virg. JEn. xii.
900; Juv. xv. 69), although it is now a matter of
absolute certainty from the remains of antiquity,
reaching back to the very earliest times, that in old
days men were no taller than ourselves. On the
origin of the mistaken supposition there are curious
passages in Natalia Comes {Mglhohg. vi. 21), and
Macrobius (Saturn, i. 20).
The next race of giants which we find mentioned
in Scripture is —
3. The Kkthaim, a name which frequently oc-
curs, and in some remarkable passages. The earli-
est mention of them is the record of their defeat
by ChedorUomer and some allied kings at Ashte-
roth Kamaim (Gen. xiv. 5). They are again
mentioned (Gen. xv. 20), their dispersion recorded
(Deut. ii. 10, 20), and Og the giant king of Bashan
said to be " the only remnant of them " (Deut. iii
11 ; Jos. xii. 4, xiii. 12, xvii. 15). Extirpated, how-
ever, from the east of Palestine, they long found a
home in the west, and in connection with the Phil-
istines, under whose protection the small remnant
of them may have lived, they still employed their
arms against the Hebrews (2 Sam. xxi. 18 ff. ; 1
Chr. xx. 4). In the latter passage there seenra
however to be some confusion between the Rephaiu
and the sons of a particular giant of Gath, named
Kapha. Such a name may have been conjectured
as that of a founder of the race, like the names
Ion, Doras, Teut, etc. (Boettcher, de lnftrit, p. 96,
n. ; Kapha occurs also as a proper name, 1 Chr. vii.
25, viii. 2. 37). It is probable that they had pos-
sessed districts west of the Jordan in early times.
since the " Valley of Rephaim " (icoiAar riy Tirar
nw, t Sam. v ^8; 1 Chr. xi. 16; Is. xvii. 5; «.
vftr yiydmtr Joseph. Ant. vii. 4, $ 1), a rich
valley S. W. of Jerusalem, derived i* name iron
them.
That they were not Canaanites is clear fross
Digitized by
Google
912 GIANTS
•ha* being no allusion to them in Gen. x. IMi.
Tbey were probably oue of thoee aboriginal people
to whose existence the traditions of man; nations
teetify, and of whose genealogy the Bible gives us
no information. The few names recorded have,
as Ewald remarks, a Semitic aspect (Getchich. da
Vollcet Jtr. i. 311), but from the hatred existing
between them and both the Canaanites and He-
brews, some suppose them to be Japhethltet, <• who
somprised especially the inhabitants of the coasts
and islands " (Kslisch on Gen. p. 361).
D^SpH is rendered by the Greek versions very
variously ('Po$«f/», ylyamtt, yirywett, Otoud-
yoi, TiroVts, and laraol, Vulg. medici; LXX.
Ps. lxxxvii. 10; Is. xxvi. 14, where it is confused
with 0^9*1 ; cf. Gen. 1. 2, and sometimes rtitpol,
Ti9rT)K&rts, especially in the later versions). In
A. V. the words used for it are "Kephaim,"
.. giants," and " the dead." That it has the latter
meaning in many passages is certain (Ps. lxxxviii.
10; Prov. ii. 18, ix. 18, xxi. 16; Is. xxvi. 10, 14).
[Dead, The, Amer. ed.] The question arises,
how are these meanings to be reconciled ? Gese-
iiius gives no derivation for the national name, and
derives H = morttd, from N^, umwrit, and the
proper name Kapha from an Arabic root signifying
" tall," thus seeming to sever nil connection between
the meanings of the word, which Is surely most
unlikely. Hasius, Simonis, Ac., suppose the second
meaning to come from the tact that both spectres
and giants strike terror (accepting the derivation
from HDI, remitit, "unstrung with fear," K.
Bechai on Deut. ii.); Vltringa and Hiller from the
notion of length involved in stretching out a corpse,
or from the fancy that spirits appear in more than
human size (Hiller, Syntagm. Bermen. p. SOS;
Virg. jEn. ii. 77*2, Ac.). J. D. Hichaelis (»d
Lowth i. Poet. p. 466) endeavored to prove that the
Kephaim, Ac., were Troglodytes, and that hence
they came to be identified with the dead. Passing
over other conjectures, Boettcher sees in K$}"n and
nQ^ a double root, and thinks that the giants
were called D'MQ^ (langue/acti) by an euphe-
mism ; and that the dead were so called by a title
which will thus exactly parallel the Greek tra/ioWcr,
mkuijkotm (camp. Buttmann, LtxiL ii. 237 ff.).
His arguments are too elaborate to quote, but see
Boettcher, pp. 94-100. An attentive consideration
seems to leave little room fur doubt that the dead
were called Kephaim (as Uesenius also hints) from
some notion of Sheol being the residence of the
(alien spirits or buried giants. The passages which
leem most strongly to prove this are Prov. xxi. 16
(where obviously something more than mere physi-
cal death is meant, since that is the common lot of
til); Is. xxvi. 14, 19, which are difficult to explain
without some such supposition; Is. xiv. 9, where
the word ^WIJ (of tptarrti rijj -pit, LXX.)
if taken in its literal meaning of goat*, may mean
svil spirits represented in that form (cf. Lev. xvii.
7); and especially Job xxvi. 6, 6. "Behold the
tyantes (A. V. 'dead things') grown under the
vatera " (Douay version), when there seems to be
alear allusion to some subaqueous prison of rebel-
lious spirits like that in which (according to the
Hindoo legend) Vishnu the water-god confines a
Mas of giants (cf. m/Adox". *■ * u '* 6 of Neptune,
GIANTS
Hes. Thedg. 782; Nork, Bram. wtd Rabb. sj. (It
ff). [Do; Goliath.]
Branches of this great unkuown people wen
called Emim, Anakim, and Zuzim.
* In Prov. xxi. 16, it is said of the man whe
wanders from the ways of wisdom, that " be stud,
remain in the congregation of the dead " (properly
of the thadet, that is, disembodied spirits ; see art.
Dead). The meaning is, — that shall be the end
of his wanderings; there lie shall find his abode,
though not the one be seeks. But, as is said in
the preceding paragraph, "something more than
physical death is meant, since that is the lot of all."
This is well illustrated in Ps. xlix. 14, 15, 19. Of
the wicked it is there said : '• like sheep they are
laid in the grave ; " like brute beasts, having no
hope beyond it. " But God," says the righteous,
" will reueotn my soul from the power of the grave "
(certainly, not from subjection to physical death,
for no one could make so absurd a claim); while
of the wicked it is laid (v. 19), " they shall never
see light."
In Is. xxvi. 14, it is affirmed of the tyrannical
oppressors, whom God had cut off, that they " shall
live no more," " shall not rise again," to continue
their work of devastation and oppression on the
earth; while in ver. 19 is expressed the confident
hope of God's people, on behalf of its own slain.
Job xxvi. 6 should be translated thus: —
The shades tremble,
Beneath the waters and their inhabitants.
It is here affirmed, that God's dominion, with
the dread it inspires, extends even to the abodes of
departed spirits, beneath the earth, and lower than
the ocean depths, whirh sre no barrier to the ex-
ercise of his power.
We need not, therefore, resort to fabulous leg-
ends, for the explanation of these passages.
T. J. C.
4. Emih (D*0*M: LXX. "Ou^x, 'ItuuuoA
smitten by Chedorlaomer at Shaven Kiriathalm
(Gen. xiv. 6), and occupying the country after-
wards held by the Hoabites (Deut. ii. 10), whe
gave them the name O'O^N, "terrors" The
word rendered " tall " may perhaps be merely
"haughty" (l<rxiWti). [Emim.]
5. Anakim (D^JS). The imbecile terror of
the spies exaggerated their proportions into some-
thing superhuman (Num. xiii. 28, 33), and their
name became proverbial (Deut. ii. 10. ix. 2).
[Anakim.j
6. Zuzim (O^PT), whose principal town was
Ham (Gen. xiv. 6), and who lived between the
Arnon and the Jabbok, being a northern tribe cf
Kephaim. The Ammonites, who defeated them,
called them D'ISTtJT (Deut. ii. 20 ff. which is,
however, probably an early gloss).
We have now examined the main names applied
to giant-races in the Bible, but except in the case
of the two first (Nrphilim and Gibborim) there is
no necessity to suppose that there was anything
very remarkable, in the size of these nations, be-
yond the general fact of their being fiueiy propor-
tioned. Nothing can be built on the exaggeratioi
of the spies (Num. xiii. 33), and Og, Goliath
Ishbi-benob, etc. (see under the names themselves)
ire obviomuy mentioned as eioeptiou.il cases. Thi
Digitized by
Google
GIANTS
fori honw (milled by supposed relics) thought
Xherwise (Jonph. Ant. T. 3, | 8).
No one has yet proved by experience the possi
bifity of giant race*, materially exceeding in cue
the average height of man. iiere is no great va-
riation in the ordinary standard. The most stunted
tribes of Esquimaux are at lean four feet high, and
the tallest races of America (e. g. the Guayaquiliste
tad people of Paraguay) do not exceed six feet
mil a half. It was long thought that the Patago-
nians were men of enormous stature, and the asser-
•ions of the old voyagers on the point were positive.
For instance Pigafetta ( Voyage Round the World,
Pinkerton, xi. 314) mentions an individual Pata-
gonian so tall, that they " hardly reached to his
waist." Similar exaggerations are found in the
Voyages of Byron, Wallis, Carteret, Cook, and
Corster; but it is now a matter of certainty from
the recent visits to Patagonia (by Winter, Capt.
Snow, and others), that there is* nothing at all
extraordinary in their size. ,
The general belief (until very recent times) in
tbe existence of fabulously enormous men, arose
from fancied giant-graves (see Ue la Valle's Travels
M Persia, ii. 89), and above all from the discovery
of huge bones, which were taken for those of men,
in days when comparative anatomy was unknown.
Bran the ancient Jews were thus misled (Joseph.
Ant. v. 8, § 3). Augustin appeals triumphantly
to this argument, and mentions a molar tooth which
ht had seen at Utica a hundred times larger than
otalinary teeth (De Civ. Dei, xv. 9). No doubt it
ouce belonged to an elephant. Vives, in his com-
mentary on the place, mentions a tooth as big as a
fist, which was shown at St. Christopher's. In fact
this source of delusion has only very recently been
dispelled (Sennert, Dt Gigant. passim; Martin's
West. Islands, in Pinkerton, ii. 691). Most bones,
which have been exhibited, have turned out to be-
long to whales or elephants, as was the case with
the vertebra of a supposed giant, examined by Sir
Hans Sloane in Oxfordshire.
On the other hand, isolated instances of mon-
strosity are sufficiently attested to prove that beings
like Goliath and his kinsmen may have existed.
Columella (it R. iii. 8, § 3) mentions Navius Pol-
lio as one, and Pliny says that in the time of
Claudius Cesar there was an Arab named Gab-
baras nearly ten feet high, and that even be was
not so tall as Pusio and Secundilla in the reign of
Augustus, whose bodies were preserved (vii. 16).
Josephus tells us that, among other hostages, Arta-
bsans sent to Tiberius a certain Eleazar, a Jew,
sumamed " the Giant," seven cubits in height (Ant.
xviiL 4, § 5). Nor an well-authenticated instances
wanting in modem times. O'Brien, whose skele-
ton is preserve d in the Museum of the College of
Surgeons, must have been 8 feet high, but his un-
natural height made him weakly. On the other
hand the blacksmith Parsons, in Charles II.'s reign,
was 7 feet 3 inches high, and also remarkable for
his strength (Fuller's Worthies, Staffordshire).
For information on the various subjects touched
upon in this article, besides minor authorities quoted
In it, see Grot dt Vtrilnt. i. 16; Nork. dram.
mtd Rabb. p. 310 ad fin. ; Ewald, (Jeteh. i. 306-313;
Winer, s. v. Riesen, etc.; Gem. I. 1. tTS^"?:
Rossnmiiller, Kaliaeh, et Comment. eJ hen lit. ;
Itlisim Ifd i ffimiiil U.; Boettcber, s /yens, p.
W l; Heidegger, Hist. Patr. xi., Havemick's
to Ptntal. p. 345 f.; Home's Introd. i.
OIBKAH
918
148; Flier's Bn,npt. Lett Ui. T; Maltlknd'i Em-
vim Ong. of Pagan Idol. i. 317, in Maitlaad's
t'nltt Worship, 1-67; Pritchards .Vat. Hist, of
Man, v. 489 f.; Hamilton On the Pentat. pp. 18ft-
301 ; Papers on the Kephaim by Miss F. Corbaux,
Journ. njf Sacr. Lit. 1851. There are also mono-
graph! by Cassanion, Sangutelli, and Sennert; we
have only met with the latter (Dissert. Hist. PhiL
de Gijnntibu; Vittemb. 1663) ; it is interesting and
learned, but extraordinarily credulous. F. W. F.
GIB'BAR (152 [Aero, or high, gigantic]:
Tafiip; [Vat. Tuflep--] Gtbbar). Bene-Gibbar, to
the number of ninety-five, returned with Zerubba-
bel from Babylon (lizr. ii. 30). In the parallel list
of Neh. vii. the name is given as GinitCH.
GIB3ETHON Cl'Vl?? [eminence, hill: la
Josh.,] BtyMy, TtdeSiv, Alex. TaffaBoy, Tafit-
6wv; [in 1 K., VafiaB&v, Vat 1 K. xv. 37, r«-
Qauv. Gebbethon,] Gabathon), a town allotted to
the tribe of Dan (Josh. xix. 44), and afterwards
given with its "suburbs" to Ue Kohathite Levites
(xxi. 23). Bang, like most of the towns of Dan,
either in or close to the Philistines' country, it wu
no doubt soon taken possession of by them ; at any
rate they held it in the early days of the monarchy
of Israel, when king Nadab " and all Israel," and
after him Omri, besieged it (1 K. xv. 37; xvi. 17).
What were the special advantages of situation 01
otherwise which rendered it so desirable as a pos-
session for Israel are not apparent. In the Ono-
mnstioon (Gabathon) it is quoted as a small village
(voklxvn) called Gabe, in the 17th mile from Case-
area. Thin would place it nearly due west of Sa-
maria, and about the same distance therefrom.
No name at all resembling it ha*, however, been
discovered in that direction.
GIBT3A (Ky3? [hitt-mhubiUnt, Furst; hill,
Gesen.]: rat$i\: Alex. Tat$aa: Gabon). Sheva.
'• the father of Macbenah," and " father of Gibea,"
is mentioned with other names unmistakably those
of places and not persons, among the descendants
of Judah (1 Chr. ii. 49, oomp. 43). [Father.]
This would seem to point out Gibea (which in some
Hebrew MSS. is Gibeah; see Burrington, i. 316)
as the city Gibeah in Judah. The mention of
Madmannah (49, oomp. Josh. xv. 31 ), as well as at
Ziph (43) and Maon (45), seems to carry us to a
locality considerably south of Hebron. [Gibkah,
1.] On the other hand Madniannah recalls Mad-
meuah, a town named in connection with Gibeah
of Benjamin (Is. x. 31), and therefore lying some-
where north of Jerusalem.
GIB'EAH (n^52, derived, according to Ge
senius (The*, pp. 359, 360), from a root, 55|,
signifying to be round or humped ; oomp. tho lAtir
gibbm, English gibbous ; the Arabic J^ASfc, jebrl,
a mountain, and the German gipftl). A word em-
ployed in the BiLlu to denote a " hilt " — that is,
an emineuca of less considerable height and extent
than a " mountain," the term fur which is TTt
har. For the distinction between the two terms,
see Ps. cxlriii. 9; Prov. viii. 35; Is. ii. 3, xl. 4, Ac.
In the historical books gibeah is connnonly applied
to the bald rounded hills of central Palestine, es-
pecially in the neighborhood of Jerusalem (Stanley,
Apt § 25). I Jke most words of this kind it gats
its lutaut to several towns and places in Ptleitiu*
Digitized by
Google
914
GIBEAH
which would doubtless be generally on or near a
•ill. They me —
L Giii'kah (ra&aJ: Uabaa), a city in the
mountain-district of Judah, named with Maon and
the northern Carmd (Josh. zv. 57; and comp. 1
Chr. ii. 49, Ac.)- In the Oiiomatticon a village
named Gabatha is mentioned as containing the
monument of Habakkuk the prophet, and lying
twelve miles from Eleutheropolis. The direction,
however, is not stated. Possibly it was identical
with Keilah, which U given as eastward from Eleu-
theropolis (Eusebius says seventeen, Jerome eight
oiilea) on the road to Hebron, and is also mentioned
as containing the monument of Habakkuk. But
neither of these can be the place intended in Joshua,
since that would appear to have been to the S. E.
of Hebron, near where Camiel and Maon are still
existing. For the same reason this Gibeah cannot
be that discovered by Robinson as Jtba'h in the
IVady .t/ualrr, not far west of Bethlehem, and ten
miles north of Hebron (Bob. ii. 6, 16). Its site is
therefore yet to seek.
2. GWhATH (n?5a : TafruiB; Alex. TafiaaB:
Uabaath). This is enumerated among the last
group of the towns of Benjamin, next to Jerusalem
(Josh. xviiL 28). It is generally taken to be the
place which afterwards became so notorious as
u Gibeah-of-Benjamin " or "of-Saul." But this,
as we shall presently see, was five or six miles north
of Jerusalem, close to Gibeou and Kamah, with
which, in that case, it would have been mentioned
in ver. 25. The name being in the "construct
state," — Gibeath and not Gibeah, — may it not be-
long to the following name, Kirjath («'. e. Kirjath
jearim, as some MSS. actually read), and denote the
hill adjoining that town (see below, No. 3) ? The
obvious objection to this proposal is the statement
of the number of this group of towns as fourteen,
but this is not a serious objection, as in these cata-
logues discrepancies not unfrequently occur between
the numbers of the towns, and that stated as the
sum of the enumeration (comp. Josh. xv. 32, 36 ;
six. 6, Ac.). In this ver}' list there is reason to
believe that Zelah and ba-Kleph are not separate
names, but one. 'Hie lists of Joshua, though in
the main coeval with the division of the country,
must have been often added to and altered before
they became finally fixed as we now possess them,"
and the sanctity conferred on the " hill of Kirjath "
by the temporary sojourn of the Ark there in the
time of Saul would have secured its insertion
among the lists of the towns of the tribe.
3. (n^5Jrt: cVrpftnw?; [Alex. «-0oun.:]
m tiabna), the place in which the Ark remained
from the time of its return by the Philistines till
its removal by David (2 Sam. vL 3, 4; comp. 1
o tor Instance, Beth-marcaboth, " boose of char-
iots," and Hasar-euesb, " village of bom* " (Josh,
six. 6), would seem to dare from the time of Solomon,
when the traffic In these articles began with Egypt.
* |T"I5D, A. V. " meadows or Gibeah," taking the
vord [after the Targum and H. Kimchi] as MadreA, an
open field (Stsnley, App. § 19) ; the LXX. [Bom. Tat.]
feransfars the Hebrew word literally, Mupaayafi4 ; [6
MSS. load Mupd TafSai or tt« r. ; but Comp. Aid.,
with Alex, and about 15 other MSS., i-.h ivvs'r
•it l'afk*;] the Syria* has U_2k20 «=. cave. The
Jsbrew word for cave, JllairaA, diner* from that
to the A V. only In the vowel-point* ; and
GIBEAH
Sam. vii. 1, 2). The name has the definite art
icle, and in 1 Sam. vii. 1 [as here in the margii. of
the A V.] it is translated "the hill." (See No
8 above.)
4. Gib'eah-of-Bkn'jamu). This town dots
not appear in the lists of the cities of Benjamin
in Josh, xviii. (1.) We first encounter it in ths
tragical story of the Levite and his »ncubine, when
it brought all but extermination on the tribe (Judg
xix., xx.). It was then a "city " C^V) with ths
usual open street (SVT")) or square (Judg. xix. 15
17, 20), and containing 700 " chosen men " (xx
15), probably the same whose skill as slingers is
preserved in the next verse. Thanks to the pre-
cision of the narrative, we can gather some general
knowledge of the position of Gibeah. The Levite
and his party left Bethlehem in the "afternoon"
— when the day was coming near the time at
which the tents would be pitched for evening. It
was probably between two and three o'clock. At
the ordinary speed of eastern travellers they would
come "over againn Jebus'' in two hours, saj by
five o'clock, and the same length of time would
take them an equal distance, or about four miles, to
the north of the city on the Nabtit road, in the
direction of Mount Ephraim (xix. 13, comp. 1).
Kamah and Gibeah both lay in sight of the road,
Gibeah apparently the nearest; and when the sud-
den sunset of that climate, unaccompanied by more
than a very brief twilight, made further progress
impossible, they "turned aside" from the beaten
track to the town where one of the party was to
meet a dreadful death (Judg. xix. 9-16). later
indications of the story seem to show that a little
north of the town the main track divided into two
— one, the present Nnblm road, leading up to
Bethel, the " house of God," and the other taking
to Gibeah-in-the-field (xx. 31), possibly the present
Jtba. Below the city, probably, — about the base
of the hill which gave its name to the town, — was
the "cave* of Gibeah," in which the liers in wait
concealed themselves until the signal was given c
(xx. 33).
During this narrative the name is given simply
as " Gibeah," with a few exceptions ; at its intro-
duction it is called "Gibeah which belongetb to
Benjamin " (xix. 14, and so in xx. 4). In xx. 10
we have the expression « Gibeah of Benjamin," but
here the Hebrew is not Gibeah, but Geba— VD^_.
The same form of the word is found in xx. 33,
where the meadows, or cave, " of Gibeah," should
be "of Geba."
In many of the above particulars Gibeah agrees
very closely with Tuleil ei-Fil ["hill of beans"],
a conspicuous eminence just four miles north cf
there seems a certain coustetencj in an ambush con-
cealing themselves in a care, which in an open field
would be impossible.
• Bertheau (Sue* dtr Riduter u. Kul, p. 224) object
to the meaning " cave " that the liers-ia-wait are said
(ver. 29) to have been set " round about Gibeah." Ms
understands the last part of ver. 33 to mean that ths
men of Israel caiue forth from their ambush wtgen
dtr ErUbioMsung con Geba\ " en account of the com-
plete exposure of Geba" by the withdrawal of ths
Benjamites (vv. 81. 82). Buxtorf, TruneUius an*
others give nearly the same interpretation, randerinf
the last clause of the verse " post denudattoass*
Glbess." A.
' Jowphus, AM. v. 2, { 11.
Digitized by
Google
GIBEAH
(eruaalam to the risrht of the rood. Two miles
tayond it and full in view is tr-Ram, in all prob-
ibilitv the ancient Kamah, and between the two
the main road divides, one branch going off to the
right to the village of Jeba, while the other con
tiiiuea it* course upwards to Btittn, ths modern
representative of liethel. (See No. 6 below.)
(2.) We next meet with Gibeah of Benjamin
daring the Philistine wars of Saul and Jonathan
(1 Sam. xiii., xiv.). It now bears It* full title.
The position of matters seems to have been this :
rhe Philistines were in possession of the village of
Geba, the 1 present J eon on the south side of the
Wady Suineinit. In their front, across the wady,
which is here about a mile wide, and divided by
several swells I wer than the side eminences, was
Saul in the town of Michmash, the modern Mukh-
iwdj, and holding also "Mount Bethel," that is,
the heights on the north of the great wady — Dtir
Zh'mJn, Burka, TtU et-IIajnr, as fiur as BeitSn itself.
South of the Philistine camp, and about three
miles in it* rear, waa Jonathan, in Gibeah-of-Beu-
jamin, with a thousand chosen warriors (xiii. 9).
The first step was taken by Jonathan, who drove
out the Philistines from Geba, by a feat of arms
which at once procured him an immense reputation.
Rut in the meantime it increased the difficulties of
Israel, for the Philistines (hearing of their reverse)
gathered in prodigious strength, and advancing
with an enormous armament, pushed Saul's little
three before them out of Bethel and Michmash, and
down the eastern passes, to Gilgal, near Jericho in
the Jordan valley (xiii. 4, 7). They then estab-
lished themselves at Michmash, formerly the head-
quarters of Saul, and from thence sent out their
bands of plunderers, north, west, and east (vv. 17,
18). But nothing could dislodge Jonathan from
his main stronghold in the south. As far as we
can disentangle the complexities of the story, he
icon relinquished Geba, and consolidated bis little
force in Gibeah, where he was joined by his father,
with Samuel the prophet, and Ahiah the priest,
who, perhaps remembering the former fate of the
Ark, had brought down the sacred Ephod " from
Shiloh. These three had made their way up from
Gilgal. with a force sorely diminished by desertion
to the Philistine camp (xiv. 21), and flight (xiii. 7)
— a mere remnant ((tardAe ififta) of the people fol-
lowing in the rear of the little band (LXX.). Then
occurred the feat of the hero and his armor-bearer.
In the stillness and darkness of the night they de-
scended the hill of Gibeah, crossed the intervening
country to the steep terraced slope of Jtbn, and
threadiug the mazes of the ravine below, climbed
the opposite hill, and discovered themselves to the
garrison of the Philistines just as the day was
breaking.'
No one had been aware of their departure, but
tt was not long unknown. Saul's watchmen at
Tnkil el-Fil were straining their eyes to catch a
tUmpee in the early morning of the position of the
be; and a* the first rays of the rising sun on their
ight broke over the mountains of Gilead, and glit-
GIBEAH
9U
' 1 Sam. xiv. 8. In ver. IS the .rk Is add to have
Man at Qlbeah; but this Is Id dlnct contradiction to
fee statement of vil. 1, compared with 2 Sam. vl. 8, 4,
md 1 Ctar. xiii. 8; and aiso to those cf the LXX. and
Joseph n« at 4ilr place. Tne Hebrew norris tor ark and
»bod — ]T"1N and TICK — are wry aurrU-, a_d
■ay bars bean mistaken (be one another (Kwa-1,
Brae*, m 46. note; Stanley, p. 206).
tared on the rocky summit of Michmash, their prac-
ticed eyes quickly discovered the unusual stir In
the camp: they could see "the multitude melting
away, and beating down one another." Through
the clear jit, too, came, even to that distance, the
unmistakable sounds of the jondict. The muster-
roll was hastily called to discover the absentees.
The oracle of God was consulted, out so rapidly did
the tumult increase that Saul's impatience would
not permit the rites to be completed, and soon he
and Ahiah (xiv. 36) were rushing down (lorn Gibeah
at the head of their hungry warriors, joined at
every step by some of the wretched Hebrews from
their hiding places in the clefts and holes of lb*
Benjamite hills, eager for revenge, and for the re-
covery of the '• sheep, and oxen, and calves " (xiv.
32), equally with the arms, of which they had been
lately plundered. So quickly did the news run
through the district that — if we may accept the
statements of the LXX. — by the time Saul reached
the Philistine camp hi* following amounted to
10,000 men. On every one of the height* of the
country (0aft&6) the people rose against the hated
invaders, and before the day was out there was not
a city, even of Mount Ephraim, to which the
struggle had not spread. [Jonathan.]
(3.) As " Gibeah of Benjamin " this place is re-
ferred to in 2 Sam. xxiii. 29 [LXX. ra0a40: Vulg.
Gabnnlh] (comp. 1 Chr. xi. 31 [fiomis- GabaaUi]),
and as " Gibeah " it is mentioned by Hosea (v. 8,
ix. 9, x. 9 [LXX. ol $owot, i /JowcVj), but it
does not again appear in the history. It is, however,
almost without doubt identical with —
6. Gih'kaii-of-Sadl (bVE> nj53 : the
LXX. do not recognize this name except in 2 Sam.
xxi. 0, where they have ra$aiiv 3aov\, and Is. x.
30, w4\u SaoiK [Vulg. Gabaath Saulu), else-
where simply Ta/W or [Alex.] TafiaaSi)- This is
not mentioned as Saul's city till after his anointing
(1 Sam. x. 36), when he is said to have gone
" home " (Hebr. " to his house," as in xv. 34) to
Gibeah, " to which," adds Josephns (Ant. vi. 4, }
6), " he belonged." In the subsequent narrative
the town bears its full name (xi. 4), and the king
is living there, still following the avocations of a
simple farmer, when hi* relations c of Jabesh-Gilead
beseech his help in their danger. His Ammonite
expedition is followed by the first Philistine war,
and by various other conflicts, amongst others an
expedition against Amalek in the extreme south of
Palestine. But he returns, as before, "to his
bouse " at Gibeah-of-Saul (1 Sam. xv. 34). Again
we encounter it, when the seven sons of the king
were hung there as a sacrifice to turn away the
anger of Jehovah (2 Sam. xxi. 6 d ). The name of
Saul has not been found in connection with any
place of modern Palestine, but it existed as late as
the days of Josephus, and an allusion of his has
fortunately given the clew to the identification of
the town with the spot which now bears the name
of Tuttil d-FtL Josephns (B. J. v. 2, § 1), de-
scribing Titus's march from Cresaree to Jerusalem,
> We owe this touch to Josephus: iiroeVurovntt
4»« tv, fcifTxw (*»>■ rL 6, f 2).
e This Is a fc.tr Inference from the tact that the
wives of 400 out of the BOO Benjamltas who escaped
the massacre at Qlbeah came from Jaoesh-Quead
(Judg. xxi. 12).
d The word In this verse rendered " hill " Is not
gibeoA but Aar, La. " mountain," a atagular ehaoaa
and not quite Intelligible.
Digitized by
Google
016
GIBEAH
gives hi* rauta u though Samaria to Gophna,
Ihenee a day's march to a valley >< called by the
Jew» the Valley of Thorns, near a certain Tillage
called Gabat h taoule, distant from Jerusalem about
thirty stadia," i. e. just the distance of TuUU eU
FiL Here he ma joined by a part of Ms army
from Eramaus (Nicopolis), who would naturally
come up the rood by Beth-horon and Gibeon, the
wine which still falls into the northern road close
to TuUU el-Fit. In both these respects therefore
the agreement is complete, and tiihnh of Benjamin
must be taken as identical with Gilieah of Saul.
The discovery is due to Dr. Robinson (i. 677-79),
though it was partly suggested by a writer in Stud.
una* Kintilcen.
This identification of Gibeah, as also that of
Geba with Jeba, is fully supported by Is. x. 28-32,
where we ban a specification of the route of Sen-
nacherib from the north through the villages of
I he Benjamito district to Jerusalem. Commencing
with Ai, to the east of the present Betitti, the route
proceeds by Afuk/imds, across tbe "passages" of
the Wadu Swocinit to Jeba on the opposite side;
and then by er-Ram and TuUU U-Ful, villages
actually on the present road, to the heights north
jf Jerusalem, from which the city is visible. Gallim,
Madmenah, and Gebim, none of which have been
yet identified, must hare been, like Anathoth
(Anata), villages on one side or the other of the
direct line of march. The only break in the chain
is Migron, which is here placed between Ai and
Hichmasb, while in 1 Sam. xiv. 2 it appears to
have been five or six miles south, at Gibeah. One
explanation that presents itself is, that in that
uneven and rocky district the name " Migron,"
"precipice," would very probably, like " Gibeah,"
be borne by more than one town.
In 1 Sam. xxii. 6, xxlii. 19, mi 1, " Gibeah "
[LXX. Pavris- Vulg. Gabon] doubtless stands for
6. of SauL
6. Gib'ear-ib-the Field (fTT»5 ny53l :
ro£aa ir i-ype?; [Alex. r. n m a-y/w:] Gabaa),
named only in Judg. xx. 31, aa the place to which
one of the "highway*" (niboQ) led from
Giheeh-of-Beiuamin, — "of which one goeth up to
Bethel, and one to Gibeah-in-lhe-field." Sideh,
iie word here rendered " field," is applied specially
<a cultivated ground, " as distinguished from town,
descft, or garden " (Stanley, App. § 15). Cultiva-
tion was so general throughout this district, that
the tern affords no clew to the situation of the
place. It is, however, remarkable that tbe north
read from Jerusalem, shortly after passing TuUU
ti-FH, sejjarates into two branches, one running
on to Batin (Bethel), and the other diverging to
tbe right to Jeba (Geba). The attack on Gibeah
same from the north (comp. xx. 18, 19, and 26, in
which "the house of God" is really Bethel), and
therefore the divergence of the roads was north of
the town. In the case of Gibeah-of-Benjamin we
save seen that the two forms " Geba " and
* Gibeah " appear to oe convertible, the former for
the latter. If the identification now proposed for
(tilwab-in-the-neld be correct, the case is here re-
used, and 'Gibeah" is put for "Geba."
The " meadows of Gaba " (5?3 : A. V. Gibeah ;
judg. xx. 33) have no connection with the " field,"
the Hebrew words being entirely diflerent. As
■Sated above, the word rendered '• meadows " is
Kobably accurately " care." [Geba, p. 877 «.]
GLBKON
7. There are several other names eomaoutda*
of Gibeah, which are given in a translated form bj
the A. V., probably from their appearing not ta
belong to towns. These are: —
(1.) The • hill of the foreskins " (Josh. r. 3)
between the Jordan and Jericho; it derives its
name from the circumcision which took place there,
and seems afterwards to ba»e received the name of
Gilgal.
(S.) iTafiaap *Wf (Vat. ♦«,-); Alex. Aid.
raBcu\0 ♦. : Gabaath Phineei.] Tbe " hill of
Phinehas" in Mount Ephraim (Josh. xxir. 33).
This may be the Jibia on the left of the .VooUi
road, half-way between Bethel and Shiloh; ir the
Jeba north of Nnblut (Rob. ii. 265 note, 312).
Both would be " in Mount Ephraim," but there Is
nothing in the text to fix the position of the place,
while there is no lack of the name among tbe vil-
lages of Central Palestine.
(3.) The " hill of Moreh " (Judg. vii. 1).
(4.) Tbe "hill of God"— Gibeath ha-Bohim
(1 Sam. x. 5); one of tbe places in the route of
Saul, which is so difficult to trace. In verses 10
and 13, it is apparently called " the bill," and "the
high place."
(6.) [Vulg. 1 Sam. xxvi. 3, Gabaa Hachila.]
The " hill of Haciiilar " (1 Sam. xxiii. 19, xxvi.
i, m
(6.) The "hill of Ammaii" (2 Sam. ii. 24).
(7.) The "hill Gareb" (Jer. xxxi. 39).
GIBTSATH, Josh. xvui. 28. [Gibeah, ».]
GIB'EATHTTE, THE (ViyjBn • ,
rajSo0(ri|>; [Vat. FA. rf0w0(."-n>; Alex. TajSotr
rnt:] Gabaatliilet), i.e. the native of Gibeah (1
Chr. xii. 3) ; in this case Shemaah, or " the
Shemaah," father of two Benjamites, "Saul's
brethren," who joined David.
GIB'EON ittSyi, 1. e. belonging to a hUl:
ro/hufr; [Vat. 1 K. «. 2, raflcwS, Jsr. xli. 12,
Tafiaa ;] Joseph. TafiaA : Gaboon), one of the
four 11 cities of the HivrrBa, the inhabitant* of
which made a league with Joshua (ix. 3-15), and
thus escaped the fate of Jericho and Ai (comp. xL
19). It appears, as might be inferred from its
taking the initiative in this matter, to have been
the largest of the four — "a great city, like one of
the royal cities " — larger than Ai (x. 2). Its men
too were all practiced warriors (Gibborim, D^SS).
Gibeon lay within the territory of Benjamin (xviii.
25), and with iU " suburbs " was allotted to the
priests (xxi. 17), of whom it became afterwards a
principal station. Occasional notices of its existence
occur in tbe historical books, which are examined
more at length below ; and after the Captivity we
find the " men of Gibeon " returning with ZeraS-
babel (Neh. vii. 25: in the list of Ezra the name
is altered to Gibbar), and assisting Nebemiah in
the repair of tbe wall of Jerusalem (Si. 7). In the
post-biblical times it was the scene of a victory by
the Jews over the Roman troops under Cestios
Gallus, which offers in many respects a close parallel
to that of Joshua over the Canaanites (Jos. B. J.
U. 19, J 7; Stanley, S. f P. p. 212).
The situation of Gibeon has fortunately been
recovered with as great certainty as any ancient
site in Palestine. The traveller who pursues tin
northern camel-road from Jerusalem, turning off It
a go Josb. Ix. 17. Jossphw (Ant. v. 1, J lo; ess*
Besroth
Digitized by
Google
GIBBON
the Ik* at Tukil tLFti (Gibeah) on that branch
of it which leads westward to Jaffa, finds himself,
after crossing one or two stony and barren ridges,
in a district of a more open character. The hills
are rounder and more isolated than those through
which he has been passing, and rise in well-defined
mametons from broad undulating valleys of tolerable
extent and fertile soil. This is the central plateau '
of the country, the " land of Benjamin ; " and these
round hills are the Gibeahs, Gebas, Gibeons, and
Ramans, whose names occur so frequently in the
records of this district. Retaining its ancient name
almost intact, tt-lib stands on the northernmost
of a couple of these nmmelons, just at the place
where the rood to the sea parts into two branches,
the one by the lower level of the Wmly Sulriimin,
the other by the heights of the Ueth-horons, to
Guuso, Lydda, and Joppa. The road passes at a
*at distance to the north of the base of the hill
GIBBON
911
of tlJtb. The strata of the bills in this artist
lie touch more horizontally than those fiirthei south.
With the hills of Gibeou this ia peculiarly the case,
and it imparts a remarkable precision to their ap-
pearance, especially when viewed from a heiirltt such
as the neighboring eminence of Ntby S'lituctL The
natural terraces are carried round the hill like con-
tour lines ; they are all dotted thick with olives and
vines, and the ancient-looking houses are scattered
over the nattiah summit of the mound. On the
east side of the hill is a copious spring which issues
in a cave excavated in the limestone rock, so as to
form a large reservoir. In the trees further down
are the remains of a pool or tank of considerable
size, probably, says Dr. Robinson, 120 feet by WO,
i. e. of rather smaller dimensions than the lower
pool at Hebron. This is doubtless the ■' poc! of
Gibeon " at which Abner and Joab met together
with the troops of Ish-hnabeth and David, and where
Gibeon and Nebi Sunwfl, from X. »'.
that sharp conflict took place which ended in the
asath of Aaahd, and led at a later period to the
. treacherous murder of Abner himself. Here or at
the spring were the " great waters (or the many
waters, C'S j E*T3) of Gibeon," « at which
Johanan the son of Kareah found the traitor Ish-
nad (Jer. xH. 12). Round th|a water also, accord-
ing to the notice of Josephus (M tiki wrrvn rijr
waXcwt ova aro&r. An!, v. 1, § IT i, the five kings
«f the Amorites were ncamned when .losnua burst
nam them from Gilgal. The '■ wilderness of
Gibeon " (9 Sam. 11. 24 — the JrtdW, i. e. rather
the waste pasture-grounds — must hare be— i to the
•sat, beyond the circle or suburb of cultivated fields,
•ad toward* the neighboring swells, which bear the
* Ma here and hlK. 111. 4, .losennas substitute
«*»■» ft* (HTwoo (.Ant. x .9, | rj, tUI i, J U
I names of .h<l\rrh and Blr NtbaWth. Such ia toe
i situation of Gibeon, fulfilling in position every n
quiretuent of the notices of the Bible, Josephus
Ktisebiiis, and Jerome. Its distance from Jerusalem
by the main road is as nearly as possible 6} miles',
but there is n more direct rend reducing it to A
miles.
The name of Gibeon is most familiar to us in
connection with the artifice by which its inhabitants
obtained their safety st the hands of Joshua, and
with the memorable battle which ultimately resulted
therefrom. This transaction is elsewhere examined,
and therefore requires no further reference here.
[Joshua; Bktii-hommi.]
We next hear of it at the encounter between
the men of David and of lah-bosbeth under their
respective lenders Joab and Abner (2 Sam. ii. 1»
17 ). The meeting has all the air of bavin:.' !»■■»
Digitized by
Google
•18
GIBEON
Btvo-edfUtcd by l<oth partita, unless we suppose
tbat ■loab had heaid or the intention of the Ben-
jamites to revisit from the distant Mahanaim their
native villages, and had seized the opportunity to
try hi? strength with Abner. The details of thia
disastrous encounter are elsewhere given. [Joab.]
The place where the struggle began received a name
from the circumstance, and seems to have been
long afterwards known as the " field of vhe strong
men." [IIki.katii-iias-,zuk-m.]
We again meet with Uibeon in connection with
Joab; Kiis time as the scene of the cruel and re-
volting death of Amosa by his hand (2 Sam. ».
5-10). Joab was in pursuit of the rebellious Sheba
the son of Bichri, and his being so far out of the
direct north road as Gilieon may be accounted for
by supposing tbat he vn making a search for this
lJenjmiiite among the towns of his tribe. Tlie two
rivals met at " the great stone a which is in Gilieon "
— some old landmark now no longer recognizable,
at least not recognized — and then Joab repeated
the treachery by which he had murdered Abner,
but with circumstances of a still more revolting
character. [Joab; Aumh, p. 159.]
It is remarkable that the retribution for this
crowning act of perfidy should have overtaken Joab
close to the very spot on which it had been com-
mitted. For it was to the tabernacle at Uibeon
(1 K. ii. 28, 2!l; comp. 1 Clir. ivi. 39) that Joab
Red for sanctuary when his death was pronounced
by Solomon, and it was while clinging to the bonis
of the brazen altar there that he received his death-
blow from llenaiah the son of .lehoiada (1 K. ii.
28- 30, 34; and LXX. 29).
* Familiar as these events in connection with the
A history of Gibeon are to us, its reputation in Israel
4 was due to a very different circumstance — the fact
that the tabernacle of the congregation and the
brazen altar of burnt-offering were for some time
ocated on the " high place " attached to or near
the town. We are not informed whether this
11 high place " had any fame for sanctity before the
tabernacle came there: but If not, it would have
probably been erected elsewhere. We only hear of
It in connection with the tabernacle, nor is there
any indication of its situation in regard to the town.
Professor Stanley has suggested that it was the
remarkable hill of N*by Santiril, the most prominent
and individual eminence in that part of the country,
and to which the special appellation of " the great
high place" (1 K. iii. 4; nVrqrr fTpan)
wonid perfectly apply. And certainly, if " great "
is to lie understood as referring to height or size,
lb-re is no other hill which can so justly claim the
listinction (iSinm ami Pal. p. 21G). But the word
lias not always that meaning, and may equally
imply eminence in other res|wcU, t. //. superior
wnctity to the numerous other high places —
I !> 'hel, Ramah, Mizpeh, Gibeah — which surrounded
it on every side. The main objection to this identi-
« The Hebrew preposition (OS) almost implies
that they were ou or touchlug the stone.
& The various stations of the Tabernacle and the
ark, from their entry on the Promised land to their
Dual deposition ir toe Temple at Jerusalem, will be
examined under Tabzsmjcu. Meantime, with refer-
mee to the »»w, It may be said that though not ex-
pressly stated to have been at Nob, It may be con-
rlojavtly inlerrxl from the mention of the "shew
(1 Sam xxi. 6> The " eohod " (B) and the
UiBEOM
fication Is the distance of A">4y Samxtt rrom (MsM
— more then a mile — and the absence of atrt
closer connection therewith than with any other of
the neighboring places. The most natural position
for the high place of Gibeon is the twin mount
immediately south of rUB — so close as to be all
but a part of the town, and yet quite separate and
distinct. The testimony of Epiphanius, by which
Mr. Stanley supports his conjecture, namely, that
the " Mount of Gahaon " was the highest round
Jerusalem {Adv. Hartttt, i. 394), should be received
with caution, standing as it does quite alone, and
belonging to an age which, though early, was
marked by ignorance, and by the most improbable
conclusions.
To this high place, wherever situated, the >' taber-
nacle of the congregation " — the sacred tent which
had accompanied the children nf Israel through the
whole of their wanderings — had been transferred
from its last station at Nob.' The exact date of
the transfer is left In uncertainty. It was either
before or at the time when David brought up the
ark "Voni Kirjath-jearim, to the new tent which be
had pitched for it on Mount Zion, that the original
tent was spread for the last time at Gibeon. The
expression in 2 tin*, i. 5, " the brazen altar he put
before the tabernacle of Jehovah," at first sight
appears to refer to David. Hut the text of the
passage is disputed, and the authorities are divided
between CQ7="beput,"aiid DP' = " was there."
Whether king David transferred the tabernacle to
Gibeon or not, be certainly appointed the staff of
priests to offer the daily sacrifices there on the
brazen altar of Moses, and to fulfill the other re-
quirements of the law (1 C'hr. xvi. 40), with no
less a person at their head than Zadok the priest
(3D), assisted by the famous musicians Heman and
Jeduthun (41).
One of the earliest acts of Solomon's reign — it
roust have been while the remembrance of the
execution of Joab was still fresh — was to visit
Gibeon. The ceremonial was truly magnificent:
he went up with all the congregation, the great
officers of the state — the captains of hundreds an i
thousands, the judges, the governors, and the chief
of the fathers — and the sacrifice consisted of a
thousand burnt-offerings r (1 K. iii. 4). And thii
glimpse of Gil«on in all the splendor of its greatest
prosperity — the smoke of the thousand animals
rising from the venerable altar on the commanding
height of " the great high place" — the clang of
"trumpets and cymbals and musical instruments
of God " (1 (,'hr. xvi. 42) resounding through tht
valleys far and near — is virtually the Inst we have
of it. In a few years the temple at Jerusalem was
completed, and then the tabernacle was once more
taken down and removed. Again " all the men
of Israel assembled themselves " to king Solomon,
with the "elders of Israel," and the priests and
the Levitos broughtfp both the tabernacle and the
expression " before Jehovah M (6) prove nothing either
way. Joseph us throws no light on It.
c It would be very satisfactory to believe, with
Tnoueon {Lanft and Book, B. 547), that the prearnf
HWy £Wfifndw, I. e. " Solomon's valley," which ym-
mence* on the west aide of Gibeon, and leads down tr
the Plain of Sharon, derived its name from this That
But the modern names of places In Palestine oftea
spring from very modern persons or circumstance"
and, without confirmation or Investigation, tale ess
not be received
Digitized by
Google
OIBEONITBS, THE
■k, and "all the holy revels that wen in the
Sabemade " (1 K. viii. 3 : Joseph. Ant viii. 4, $ 1),
and placed the venerable relics in their sew home,
thete to remain until the plunder of the city by
Nebuchadnezzar. 'Die introduction of the name
of Gibson in 1 Chr. ix. 35, which seems to abrupt,
is probably due to the fact that the preceding verses
of the chapter contain, as they appear to do, a list
of the staff attached to the " Tabernacle of the
congregation" which was erected there; or if these
persons should prove to be the attendants on the
" now tent " which David had pitched for the ark
on its arrival in the city of David, the transition
to the place where the old tent was still standing
is b)th natural and easy. 0.
UIB'EONITES, THE (D^b^an : oi
i agaavtrai [Vat. -mi-] : Gnlymuta), the people
of Uibeon, and perhaps also of the three cities asso-
ciated with Gibeon (Josh. ix. 17)— Hirltes; and
who, on the discovery of the stratagem by which
they had obtained the protection of the Israelites,
were condemned to be perpetual bondmen, hewers
of wood and drawers of water for the congregation,
and for the bouse of God and altar of Jehovah
(Josh. ix. 23, 97). Saul appears to have broken
this covenant, and in a fit of enthusiasm or patriot-
ism to have killed some and devised a general mas-
sacre of the rest (2 Sam. xxi. 1, 8, 5). This was
expiated many years after by giving up seven men
jf Saul's descendants to the Gibeonites, who hung
them or crucified them " before Jehovah" — as a
kind of sacrifice — in Gibeah, Saul's own town
(4, 6, 9).° At this time, or at any rate at the
time of the composition of the narrative, the Gib-
eonites were so identified with Israel, that the his-
torian is obliged to insert a note explaining their
origin and their non-Israelite extraction (xxi. 8).
The actual name "Gibeonites" appears only in
this passage of 2 Sam. [Nktiiinim.]
Individual Gibeonites named are (1) Ismaiaii,
one of the llenjatnitcs who joined David in his dif-
ficulties (1 Chr. xii. 4); (2) Mki.atiah, one of
those who assisted Nehemiah in repairing the wall
of Jerusalem (Neh. iii. 7); (3) Hasa.niaii, the son
of Azur, a false prophet from Gibeon, who opposed
Jeremiah, and shortly afterwards died (Jer. xxriii.
1, 10, 1.1, 17). G.
GIBTLITES, THE O 1 ???'?, I t. singular,
'As Gibtite: Ta\ibe *u\t<mtlfi; Alex. Ta$\i [*•:]
eonfinia). The " land of the Giblite " is men-
Honed in connection with Lebanon in the enumera-
tion of the portions of the Promised Land remain-
ng to be conquered by Joshua (Josh. xiii. 5). The
indent versions, as will be seen above, give no help,
bet there is no reason to doubt that the allusion is
to the inhabitants of the city Gibal, which was
on the sea-coast at the foot of the northern slopes
of Lebanon. The one name is a regular derivative
from the other (see Gesenius, Tha. p. 258 A). We
nave here a confirmation of the identity of the
Aphek mentioned in this passage with Afkn, which
was overlooked Igr the writer when examining the
latter name [Ai-iiek, 2] ; and the whole passage
Is h»tructive, as showing how very for tin Emits
sf tha country designed for the Israelites exceeded
fuse which they actually occupied.
• • Dean Stanley o>—rlc«t the anJfles of toe ebo-
dgloal Ofbaonltet, and tha acts of revenge of thslr da-
•stalanl afsluit ths family of Saul, with bis wontsd
GIDEON 919
The Giblites are again named (though not a
the A. V. [except in the margin] ) in 1 K. v. IS
(D^bjan : [Rom. Vat omit;] Alex, oi BijSaioi
GiUii) as assisting Solomon's builders and Hiram'
builders to prepare the trees and the stones for
building the Temple. That they were clever artifi-
cers is evident from this passage (and comp. Ex,
xxvii. 0); but why our translators should have so
far improved on this *s to render the word by
" stone-squarers " [so the Bishops' Bible; ths
Genevan version has " masons "] is not obvious.
Possibly they fallowed the Tsrgum, which has •
word of similar import in this place. G.
C1IDDAI/TI 0^3? [/ have praued].
roSoAAaSf; [Vat. roSoAAodti, roSo/ioScii] Alex.
IVSoAAaSi, rtttt\Bi: Gedklthi, Gedelthi]), one
of the sons of Heman. the king's seer, and there-
fore a Kohatbite Levite (1 Chr. xxv. 4; comp. rt
33) : his office was with thirteen of his brothers to
sound the horn in the service of the tabernacle
(5, 7). He had also charge of the 22d division or
course (29).
GID'DEL (Vt2 [eery great, gigantic] : TO-
H\, \TalM\\; in Gzr., Vat. KfSsS; in Neh., Alex.
So.5t|a:] Gtvldel, [Getldel]). 1. Children of Giddel
(Btut-GiUtl) were among the Nethiuim who re-
turned from the Captivity with Zerubtuibel (Kzr. ii.
47; Neh. vii. 49). In the parallel lists of 1 Esdrat
the name is corrupted to Catiiua.
2. [TiHi\, ToMa; Vat. TsSqa, TaitnA (so FA.
in Neli.); Alex. r.SJnA, raJS?)*: GedtM,Jeddel.]
Bene-Giddel were also among the "servants of
Solomon " who returned to Judaea in the some
caravan (Ezr. ii. 56; Neh. vii. 58). In 1 Esdrat
this is given as Isdaki.
OirKEON (ywp, from 37^, a tucker, or.
better = « lieirer, i. e. a brave warrior; comp. Is.
x. 33; retittiv: Gwlron), a Manassite, youngest
son of Joasb of the Abiezrites, an undistinguished
family, who lived at Opbrah, a town probably on
this side Jordan (Judg. vi. 15), although its exact
position is unknown. He was the fifth recorded
Judge of Israel, and for many reasons the greatest
of them ail. When we first hear of him he was
grown up and had sons (Judg. vi. 11, viii. 20), and
from the apostrophe of the angel (vi. 12) we may
conclude that he had already distinguished himself
in war against the roving bands of nomadic robbers
who had oppressed Israel for seven years, and whose
countless multitudes (compared to locusts from
their terrible devastations, vi. 6) annually destroyed
all the produce of Canaan, except such as could be
concealed In mountain-fastnesses (vi. 2). It was
probably during this disastrous period that the
emigration of Ehmelech took place (Ruth i. 1, 2;
Jahn's ffebr. Comm. § xxi.). Some have identified
the angel who appeared to Gideon (d)dVrair/«a
riarlaitov pop<pji, Jos- Ant. v. 6) with the prophet
mentioned in vi' 8, which will remind the reader
of the legends about Maktchi in Origen and othel
commentators. I'auhia (Kxeg. Corucrt. ii. 190 ft)
endeavors to give the narrative a subjective coloring,
but rationalism is of little value in accounts likf
this. When the angel appeared, Gideon was thrash-
ing wheat, with a flail (tTonrrt, LXX.) in the wtoe*
vrtldness and skill (/fiifsry of Dm
28», and U. 88). See alto Bawia.
JewVi (Vm,i
Digitized by
Google
920
GIDEON
press, to xmeeal it from the predatory tyrant*.
Alter a natural Imitation be accepted the commis-
rion of a deliverer, and learned the true character of
hii visitant from a miraculous sign (vi. 12-33);
and being reassured from the fear which first seized
him (Ex. xx. 19; Judg. xiii. 22), built the altar
Jehovah-shalom, which existed when the book of
Judges was written (vi. 24). In a dream the same
night he was ordered to throw down the altar of
Baal and cut down the Asherah (A. V. "grove ")
upon it [Ashf.rah], with the wood of which he
was to offer in sacrifice his lather's " second bullock
of seven years old," an expression in which some
see an allusion to the seven years of servitude (vi.
26, 1). Perhaps that particular bullock is specified
because it had been reserved by his father to sacri-
fice to Baal (Roeenmiiller, SchoL ad loc.), for Joash
seems to have been a priest of that worship. Ber-
theau con hardly be right in supposing that Gideon
was to offer ticu bullocks (Richt. p. 115). At any
rate the minute touch is valuable as an indication
of truth in the story (see Ewald, Grsch. ii. 498,
and note). Gideon, assisted by ten faithful servants,
obeyed the vision, and next morning ran the risk
of being stoned : but Joash appeased the popular
Indignation by using the common argument that
Baal was capable of defending his own majesty
(comp. 1 K. xriii. 27). This circumstance gave
to Gideon the surname of v5J"V ("Let Baal
plead," vi. 32; LXX 'Uoo$ia\), a' standing in-
stance of national irony, expressive of Baal's impo-
tence. Winer thinks that this irony was increased
by the fact that bWV was a surname of the
Phoenician Hercules (comp. Movers, PhSniz. i. 434).
We have similar cases of contempt in the names
Sychar, Baal-zebul, etc. (Ughtfoot, Ifor. lltbr.
ad Matt. xii. 24). In consequence of this name
'some hare identified Gideon with a certain priest
'Itp6fif3a\ot, mentioned in Eusebius (Prcrp. Ktnng.
i. 10) as having given much accurate information
to Sanchoniatho the Berytian (Hochart, Phalerj, p.
778; Huetius, Dent. Jivang. p. 84, 4c.), but this
opinion cannot be maintained (Ewald, Grsch. ii.
494; Gesen. s. i,.). We also find the name in the
form Jerubbesheth (2 Sam. xi. 21 ; comp. Esh-baaL
1 Chr. viii. 33 with Ish-bosheth 2 Sam. ii. ff.).
Ewald (p. 495, n. ) brings forward several arguments
against the supposed origin of the name.
2. After this begins the second act of Gideon's
life, "Clothed " by the Spirit of God (Judg. vi.
34; comp. 1 Chr. xii. 18; Luke xxiv. 49), he blew
a trumpet; and, joined by " Zelmlun, Naphtali, and
even the reluctant Asher " (which tribes were
chiefly endangered by the Midianites), and possibly
also by some of the original inhabitants, who would
suffer from these predatory "sons of the East" no
teas than the Israelites themselves, he encamped on
the slopes of (iilboa, from which he overlooked the
plains of Esdraelon covered by the tents of Midian
(Stanley, S. <f P. p. 243). Strengthened by a
double sign from God (to which Ewald gives a
Strange figurative meaning, Getch. ii. SOO), be re-
o It Is curious to find " lamps and pitchers " in
as* for a similar purpose at ibis very day In the
tnets of Cain. The Zabit or Agha of the police
anu) with Inm at night " a torch which burns, soon
rfter It is lighted, without a flame, excepting when It is
raved through the air, when it suddenly biases forth :
■ Saerafbrs answers the same purpose as our dark
mean. S%» swwtRr out ii tometimu conceal*! <k <•
OIDBON
dneed his army of 32,000 by the usual pralamaUai
(Dent xx. 8; comp. 1 Mace, iii. 66). Ine expft*
son " let him depart from Mount Gilead " is per
piexing ; Dathe would render it " to Mount Gilead "
- on the other side of Jordan ; and Clericus reads
yi^a, Cilboa; but Ewald is probably right it
regarding the name as a sort of war-cry and gen-
eral designation of the Manassites. (See, too,
Gesen. Thtt. p. 804, n.) By a second test at " the
spring of trembling " (now probably 'Ain Jilid,
on which see Stanley, S. if P. p. 342), he again
reduced the number of his followers to 300 (Judg.
vii. 6 f.), whom Josephus explains to have been the
moet cowardly in the army (Ant. v. 6, § 3). Finally,
being encouraged by words fortuitously overheard
(what the later Jews termed the Bath Kol; comp.
1 Sam. xiv. », 10, I jghtfoot, //or. Hebr. ad Matt.
iii. 14) in the relation of a significant dream, ha
framed his plans, which were admirably adapted to
strike a panic terror into the huge and undisciplined
nomad host (Judg. viii. 15-18). We know from
history that large and irregular oriental armies are
especially liable to sudden outbursts of uncontrol-
lable terror, and when the stillness and darkness of
the night were suddenly disturbed in three differ-
ent directions by the flash of torches and by the
reverberating echoes which the trumpets and the
shouting woke among the hills, we cannot be as-
tonished at the complete rout into which the enemy
were thrown. It must be remembered, too, that
the sound of 300 trumpets would make them sup-
pose that a corresponding number of companies
were attacking them." For specimens of similar
stratagems see Liv. xxii. 16; Polyam. Strateg. it
37; Frontm. ii. 4; Sail Jug. 99; Niebuhr, Deter,
at tArabie, p. 304; ./own. At 1841, ii. 516
(quoted by Ewald, Koseuniuller, and Winer). The
custom of dividing an army into three seems to
have been common (1 Sam. xi. II; Gen. xiv. 15),
and Gideon's war-cry is not unlike that adopted by
Cyrus (Xenoph. Cyr. iii. 28). He adds his own
name to the war-cry,* as suited both to inspire con-
fidence in his followers and strike terror in the
enemy. His stratagem was eminently successful,
and the Midianitcs, breaking into their wild peculiar
cries, fled headlong " down the descent to the Jor-
dan," to the " house of the Acacia " (Beth-shittah)
and the "meadow of the dance" (Aliel-uieholah),
but were intercepted by the Ephraimites (to whom
notice had been sent, vii. 24) at tbe fords of Beth-
barah, where, after a stamd fight, the princes Oreo
and Zeeb ("the Haven" and "the Wolf") were
detected and slain — the former at a rock, and the
latter concealed in a wine- pi ess, to which their names
were afterwards given. Meanwhile the " higher
sheykhs Xebah and Zalmunna bad already escaped,"
and Gideon (after pacifying — by a soft answer
which became proverbial — the haughty tribe of
Ephraim, viii. 1-3) pursued them into eaitern Ma-
nasseh, and. bursting upon them in their fancied
security among the tents of their Bedouin country-
men (see Karkor), won his third victory, and
avenged on the Midianitieh emirs the massacre of
mall pot or jar. or covered with something else, whes
not required to give light " (Lane's Mod. Egypt. I. or-
It.).
t> • The war-cry was properly, " For Jehovah ens'
for Gideon." The A. V. Inserts " the sword," bnt thai
has no warrant, and restricts too much the Idea.
Digitized by
Google
GIDEONI
Mi kingly brethren whom they had slain »t labor
(*tB. iff.!- In these three battles only 15,000 out
«f 130,000 Midianites escaped alive. It is indeed
feted in Judg. riii. 10, that 120,000 Midianites
had already fallen ; but here as elsewhere, it may
merely be intended that such was the original num-
ber of the routed host During his triumphal re-
turn Gideon took signal and appropriate vengeance
on the coward and apostate towns of Succoth and
Peniel. The memory of this splendid deliverance
took deep root in the national traditions (1 Sam.
rii.ll; 1's.Uxriu. 11; Is. iz. 4,x.36; Heb.ri.S3).
3. After this there was a peace of 40 years, and
we see Gideon in peaceful possession of his well-
earned honors, and surrounded by the dignity of
a numerous household (viii. 38-31). It is not im-
probable that, like Saul, he had owed a part of his
popularity to his princely appearance (Judg. viii. 18).
In this third stage of bis life occur alike his most
noble and his most questionable acts, namely, the
refusal of the monarchy on theocratic grounds, and
the irregular consecration of a jeweled ephod, formed
out of the rich spoils of Midian, which proved to
the Israelites a temptation to idolatry, although it
was doubtless intended for use in the worship of
Jehovah. Gesenius and others (Thet. p. 135;
Bertheau, p. 133 f.) follow the Peshito in making
the word Ephod here mean an idol, chiefly on ac-
count of the vast amount of gold (1,700 shekels)
and other rich material appropriated to it. But it
is simpler to understand it as a significant symbol
of an unauthorized worship.
Respecting the chronology of this period little
certainty can be obtained. Making full allowance
for the use of round numbers, and even admitting
the improbable assertion of some of the Rabbis that
the period of oppression is counted in the years of
rest (riffs RosenmuUer, On Judg. in. 11), insuper-
able difficulties remain. If, however, as has been
suggested by Lord A. Herrey, several of the judge-
ships really synchronize instead of being successive,
much of the confusion vanishes. For instance, he
supposes (from a comparison of Judg. iii., viii., and
rii.) that there was a combined movement under
thrr* great chiefs, Ehud, Gideon, and Jephthah, by
which the Israelites emancipated themselves from
the dominion of the Moabites, Ammonites, and
Midianites (who for some years had occupied their
land), and enjoyed a long term of peace through
all their coasts. " If," he says, " we string together
the different accounts of the different parts of
brad which are given us in that miscellaneous col-
lection of ancient records called the book of Judges,
and treat them as connected and successive history,
we shall Call into as great a chronograpbical error
as if we treated in the same manner the histories
it Mercia, Kent, Essez, Wessez, and Northumber-
land, before England became one kingdom" (G«-
tvilog. of our Lord, p. 238). It is now well known
Jut a similar source of error has long existed in
the chronology of Egypt. V. W. F.
GIDEOITlCSb'l?, oronce^'iyia [aprot-
(rotor, mrrior]: ratiwyi; [Vat. TfSfurfi, To-
Itesrci, etc. :] Gedtonu [gen.]). Abidan, son of
Gideoui, was the Aief man of the tribe of Benja-
nm at the time of the census in the wilderness of
Voai (Mum. i. 11; u. 33; vii. 60, 65; z. 34).
GIDOM (D^na [a cutting down, desolating]:
CetaV; Alex. I'iAoo*; [Comp. Aid. raSad»), a
pikes named only in Judg. zz. 45, as the limit to
GIER-EAGLE
921
wmcn the pursuit of Benjamin extended after law
final battle of Gibeah. It would appear to bar
been situated between Gibeah ( Tukii el-Fit) acd
the cliff Rima-on (probably Rimrnon, about thrat
miles E. of Bethel) ; but no trace of the name, nor
yet of that of Menucah, if indeed that was a place
(Judg. zz. 43; A. V. " with ease " — but ate mar-
gin), has yet been met with. [Menucah, Amer.
ed.] The reading of the Alex. LXX., " Gilead,"
can hardly be taken as well founded. In the Vul-
gate the word does not seem to be r e pre s en ted.
GIER-EAGLE (Drn, rAch&m; npiTT,
rich&mili : kvkvos, wop<pvpit»y- porphyria), an
unclean bird mentioned in Lev. ri. 18 and Dent.
xiv. 17. There is no reason to doubt that the
r&ch&m of the Hebrew Scriptures is identical in
reality as in name with the racham ( iv^-v of the
Arabs, namely, the Egyptian vulture (Neophron
percno/Oerut); see Gesner, JM Aril), p. 176; Bo-
chart, Hieroz. iii. 56; Hasselquist, Trur. p. 195,
and Russell's Natural Hut of Aleppo, ii. 195, 3d
ed. The LXX. in Lev. L c. renders the Hebrew
term by " swan " (kokvoi), while in Deut. /. c. the
"purple water-hen" (Porphyria hyidnthinut) a
given as its representative. There is too much dis-
crepancy in the LXX. translations of the various
birds mentioned in the Initial! law to allow us to
attach much weight to its authority. The Hebrew
term etyniologicnlly signifies " a bird which is very
affectionate to its young," which is perfectly true
of the Egyptian vulture, but not more so than of
other birds. The Arabian writers relate many
fables of the Rncham, some of which the reader
may see in the Hitratoicon of Bochart (iii. p. 66).
The Egyptian vulture, according to Bruce, is called
by the Europeans in Egypt » Pharaoh's Hen." It
Egyptian Vulture.
la generally distributed throughout Egypt, and Mr
Tristram says it is common in Palestine, and breeds
in great numbers in the valley of the Cedron (/ot's,
i. 33). Though a bird of decidedly unprepossessing
appearance and of disgusting habits, the Kgyptiana,
like aii other Orientals, wisely protect so efficient a
scavenger, which rids them of putrefying carcases
that would otherwise breed a pestilence in their
towns. Near Cairo, says Shaw (Trav. p. 388,
folio), there are several flocks of the Ach Bobba,
" white father." — a name given it by the Turks.
Digitized by
Google
922
GIFT
partly out of the reverence they have for it, partly
from the color of iU plumage, — " which, like the
mem about our metropolis, feed upon the carrion
and nastiness that U thrown without the city."
Young birds are of a brown color with a few white
Feathers ; adult specimen! are white, except the pri-
mary and a portion of the secondary wing-feathers,
which are black. Naturalists hare referred this
vulture to the wspjcroVrcoor or hptnrtXapyos of
Aristotle {Hist. Atom. ii. 22, § 2, ed. Schneid.).
W. H.
* There are two birds known as (V^-) among
the Arabs m Egypt The first is the vulture known
as Neophron percnapttrut. It is found extensively
in all parte of Egypt, and is common in Palestine
and Syria. The adult has the front of the head
and the upper part of the throat and cere naked,
and of a bright lemon yellow. The plumage is a
dirty white, with the exception of the quill-feathers,
which are a grayish black. The appearance of this
bird soaring (in circles) over and around the towns
in Egypt, with its bright yellow beak and neck and
crop, and white body, and dark wing- feathers, is
exceedingly beautiful.
The second is the Peiecanus onocrotalut, found
in large numbers in Egypt, and about Lake HQleh
in Palestine. This is probably the bird intended by
Orn in Lev. xi. 18 and Deut xiv. 17, while the bird
there translated "pelican" should be "cormorant"
This seems altogether more natural when we consider
the context, and that it is grouped with the large
water-fowl. The word "ST^B*, translated "cor-
morant " in Lev. xi. 17 and Deut xiv. 17 more
properly suite the Diver ( Cotymbut), of which there
is a large species in Egypt G. E. P.
GIFT. The giving and receiving of presents
has in all ages been not only a more frequent, but
also a more formal and significant proceeding in
the East than among ourselves. It enters largely
Into the ordinary transactions of life : no negotiation,
alliance, or contract of any kind can lie entered into
between states or sovereigns without a previous
interchange of presents: none of the important
events of private life, betrothal, marriage, coming
of age, birth, take place without presents: even a
visit, if of a formal nature, must be prefaced by a
present. We cannot adduce a more remarkable
proof of the important part which presents play in
the social life of the East, than the fact that the
Hebrew language possesses no less than fifteen dif-
ferent expressions for the one idea. Many of these
•xprewons have specific meanings: for instance,
•unchak (nnjp) applies to a present from an in-
terior to a superior, as from subjects to a king
(Judg. ill- 15; 1 K. x.25; 2 Chr. xvii. 5); maseth
(HrttJTQ) expresses the convene idea of a present
Vom a superior to an inferior, as from a king to his
ubjects (Esth. ii. 18) ; hence it is used of a portion
of food sent by the master of the house to his in-
ferior guests (Gen. xliii. 34; 2 Sam. xi. 8); nitteth
(riNt&D) has very much the same sense (2 Sam.
six. 42); bertcah (Pt^?), literally a " blessing,"
Is used where the present is one of a complimentary
nature, either accompanied with good wishes, or
drew as a token of affection (Gen. xxxiil. 11 ; Judg.
. lt| 1 Sim xxv. 27, xxx. 26; 2 K. v. 16); end
GIFT
again, thoehad ( WjU) is a gift for the purpoas ol
escaping punishment, presented either to a jalgl
(Ex. xxiii. 8; Deut x. 17), or to a conqoerof
(2 K. xvi. 8). Other terms, at matt&n (]riD),
were used more genenJly. The extent to which
the custom prevailed admits of some explanation
from the peculiar usages of the East; it is clear
that the term "gift " is frequently used where we
should substitute " tribute," or " fee." The tribute
of subject states was paid not in a fixed sum of
money, but in kind, each nation presenting its
particular product — a custom which is frequently
illustrated in the sculptures of Assyria and Egypt;
hence the numerous instances in which the present
was no voluntary act, but an exaction (Judg. iii.
16-18; 2 Sam. viii. 2, 6; 1 K. iv. 21; 2 K. xvil.
3; 2 Chr. xvii. 11, xxvi. 8); and hence the expr as
■ion " to bring presents " = to own submission (Pi.
lxviii. 29, Ixxvi. 11; Is. xviii. 7). Again, the pres-
ent taken to a prophet was viewed very much in
the light of a consulting " fee," and conveyed no
idea of bribery (1 Sam. ix. 7, conip. xii. 3; 2 K.
v. 5, viii. 9 ) : it was only when false prophets and
corrupt judges arose that the present was prosti-
tuted, and became, instead of a minchah (as in the
instances quoted), a thochad, or bribe (Is. i 23, v.
23; Ez. xxii. 12; Hie. Ill- 11). But even allowing
for these cases, which are hardly "gifts" in our
sense of the term, there Is still a large excess re-
maining in the practice of the East: friends brought
presents to friends on any joyful occasion (Esth. ix.
19, 22), those who asked for information or advice
to those who gave it (2 K. viii. 8), the needy to the
wealthy from whom any assistance was expected
(Gen. xliii. 11; 2 K. xv. 19, xvi. 8), rulers to their
favorites (Gen. xiv. 22; 2 Sam. xi. 8), especially to
their officers (Esth. ii. 18; Joseph. Ant. xii. 2, §
15), or to the people generally on festive occasions
(2 Sam. vi. 19); on the occasion of a marriage, the
bridegroom not only paid the parents for his bride
(A. V. "dowry"), but also gave the bride certain
presents (Gen. xxxiv. 12; comp. Gen. xxiv. 22),
while the father of the bride gave her a present on
tending her away, as is expressed in the term ML
htcMm (D , rlvK7) (1 K. ix. 16); and again, the
portions of the sons of concubines were paid in the
form of presents (Gen. xxv. 6).
The nature of the presents was as various at
were the occasions : food (1 Sam. ix. 7, xvi. 20, xxv.
11), sheep and cattle (Gen. xxxii. 13-16; Judg. xv.
8), gold (2 Sam. xviii. 11; Job xlii. 11; Matt ii.
11 ), jewels (Gen. xxiv. 63), furniture, and vessels
for eating and drinking (2 Sam. xvii. 28), delica-
cies, such as spices, honey, etc. (Gen. xxiv. 53:
1 K. x. 25, xiv. 3), and robes (1 K. x. 25; 2 K.
v. 22), particularly in the case of persons inducted
into high office (Esth. vi. 8; Dan. v. 16; comn
Herod, iii. 20). The mode of presentation wiu.
with as much parade as possible; the presents »er«
conveyed by the hands of sen-ants (Judg. iii. 18),
or still better on the backs of beasts of burden
(2 K. viii. 9), even when such a mode of convey-
ance was unnecessary. The refusal of a present
was regarded as a high indignity, and thiw con-
stituted the aggravated insult noticed in Mau
xxii. 11, the marriage robe having been offered
and refused (Trench, Parabltt). No less an In
suit was it, not to bring a present when the pas
tion of the parties demanded it (1 Sam. x. 97;.
W.L.B.
Digitized by
Google
GIHON
CttHON (fVrS [dream]: rW; Ale.. IV
ay: Gehon). 1. The second river of Paradise (Gen.
i. 13). The name does not again occur in the
Hebrew text of the 0. T.; but in the LXX. it
'Svir] u used jn Jer. ii. 18, as an equivalent for
the word Shichor or Sihor, i. e. the Nile, and in
Ecclus. xxir. 27 (A. V. '< Geon "). AJ that can
be said upon it wUl be found under Edkm, p. 658 f.
2. CpP2, and in Chron. flTT?: [in 1 K.J
# Ti&¥, [Vat. Ttuav, Alex, o Tutv, in 2 Chr. xxxii.
30,] Ttmr, [Vat. itiuy, Alex. rw; in 2 Chr.
xxxiii. 14, xara riror, Comp. toS rtidf-] Gihon.)
A place near Jerusalem, memorable as the scene of
the anointing and proclamation of Solomon as king
(1 K. i. 33, 38, 49). From the terms of this pas-
sage, it is evident it was at a lower level than the
sky — "bring him down (H^Tpi - !) upon (by)
Gihon " — " they are come up pi vJP) to° m
thence." With this agrees a later mention (2
Chr. xxxiii. 14), where it is called " Gihon-in-the-
vaUey," the word rendered valley being nachal
(?rj3). In this latter place Gihon is named to
designate the direction of the wall built by Manas-
seh — " outside the city of David, from the west
of Gihon-in-the-valley to the entrance of the Fish-
gate." It is not stated in any of the above pas-
sages that Gihon was a spring; but the only re-
maining place in which it is mentioned suggests
this belief, or at least that it had given its name to
some water — " Hezekiah also stopped the upper
source or issue (N^pO, from NSi to ruth forth;
incorrectly "watercourse" in A. V.) of the waters
of Gihon " (2 Chr. xxxii. 30). If the place to
which Solomon was brought down on the king's
mule was Gihon-in-the-valley — and from the terms
above noticed it seems probable that it was — then
the '< upper source " would be some distance away,
and at a higher level.
The locality of Gihon will be investigated under
Jerusalem; but in the mean time the following
bets may be noticed in regard to the occurrences
of the word. (1.) Its low level; as above stated.
(2.) The expression "Gihon-in-the-valley;" where
U will be observed that nachal (" torrent " or
" wady ") is the word always employed for the val-
ley of the Kedron, east of Jerusalem — the so-
called Valley of Jehoshaphat; oe ("ravine" or
"glen") being as constantly employed for the Val-
ley of Hinnom, south and west of the town. In
this connection the mention of Ophel (2 Chr. xxxiii.
14) with Gihon should not be disregarded. In
agreement with this is the fact that (3) the Tar-
gum of Jonathan, and the Syriac and Arabic Ver-
sions, have Shilaha, i. e. Siloam (Arab. .dm-Shi-
ioha) for Gihon in 1 K. i. In Chronicles they
agree with the Hebrew text in having Gihon. If
Siloam be Gihon, then (4) " from the west of Gihon
to the Fish-gate " — which we know from St. Jerome
to have been near the present " Jafla-gate," would
inswer to the course of a wall inclosing " the city
rf David " (2 Chr. xxxiii. 14); and (S) the omis-
sion of Gihon from the very detailed catalogue of
Neb. iv. is explained. G.
GILBOA
928
• • Tula name arose from a misapprehension of Pi.
axis. 18 (12), as Jf Hermon and Tabor, being then
rpokau <ST together, must havs ben near each o hrr
Ml JfM c4-May Is not nwnttotwd in the Rible. as
GII/ALAI [3 syl.] 0%JJ [perb. uKioJty
powerful, Fiirst]: [Rom.] VtKuK; [Vat. Alex
FA.' omit: Gulalai]), one of the party of priests
sons who played on David's instruments at the eon-
secration of the wall of Jerusalem, in the company
at whose head was Ezra (Neh. xii. 36).
GILBO'A (yiV?, bubbling fountain, torn.
Vj and yffl : r«A/3<u>«"; [Alex. S Sam. L 6,
rcjSouf :] Gelbae), a mountain range on the eastern
side of the plain of Esdraelon, rising over the city
of Jezreel (comp. 1 Sam. xxviii. 4 with xxix. 1).
It is only mentioned in Scripture in connection with
one event in Israelitish history, the defeat and death
of Saul and Jonathan by the Philistines (1 Sao.
xxxi. 1; 2 Sam. i. 6, xxi. 12; 1 Chr. x. 1, 8).
The latter had encamped at Shunem, on the north-
ern side of the valley of Jezreel; the former took
up a position round the fountain of Jezreel, on the
southern side of the valley, at the base of Gilbnt.
The result is well known. Saul and Jonathan,
with the flower of their army, fell upon the moun-
tain. When the tidings were carried to David, he
broke out into this pathetic strain : " Ye mountain*
of Gilboa, let there be no rain upon you, neithet
dew, nor field of offering " (2 Sam. i. 21). Of tht
identity of Gilboa with the ridge which stretches
eastward, from the ruins of Jezreel, no doubt can
be entertained. At the northern base, half a mile
from the ruins, is a large fountain, called in Scrip-
ture both the " Well of Hand " (Judg. vii. 1), and
" The fountain of Jezreel " (1 Sam. xxix. I), and
it was probably from it the nam* Gilboa his de-
rived. Eusebius places Gilboa at the distance of
six miles from Scythopolis, and says there is still a
village upon the mountain called Gelbus (Onom.
s. v. r«3ou«V The village is now called Jelbon
(Kobinson, ii. 316), and its position answers to the
description of Eusebius : it is situated on the top
of the mountain. The range of Gilboa extends in
length some ten miles from W. to E. The sides
are bleak, white, and barren ; they look, in fact, as
if the pathetic exclamation of David had proved
prophetic. The greatest height is not more than
500 or 600 feet above the plain. Their modem
local name is Jtbel FyJcuuh, and the highest point
is crowned by a village and wely called Wtiar
(Porter, Handbook, p. 363). J. L. P.
* The mention of Gilboa. in David's touching
elegy on Saul and Jonathan, has given an imperish-
able name to that mountain. The account of the
battle which was so disastrous to the Hebrew king,
designates not merely the general scene of the ac-
tion, but various places connected with the move-
ments of the armies, and introduced in such a way
as to be in some measure strategetically related to
each other. It is worthy of notice, as a corrobora-
tion of the Scripture narrative, that all these places,
except possibly one of them, are still found to exist
under their ancient names, and to occupy precisely
the situation with reference to each other which the
requirements of the history imply. We have the
name of the ridge Gilboa, on which the battle was
fought, transmitted to us in that of Jetbin, applied
to a village on the southern slope of this ridge,
known to travellers as Little Hermon," but among
less It be the UiU of Horeh (Judg. vtt 1). Jerome, t
the 4th contuiy, Is the first who speaks of It as D«
mot. (8es Hob. Pkyt. Qeagr. p. 27.) a
Digitized by
Google
d21
GILBOA
Has native* a* Jebel tU-DAJiy. The ridge rise* out
af the plain of Eadraelon, and, running eastward,
•ink* down iulo the valley of the Jordan. The
Israelite! at first pitched their tent* at Juieui, the
present Zer'ln on the western declivity of Gilboa,
and near a fountain (1 Sam. xxix. 1), undoubtedly
the present 'Ain J&lud, exactly in the right position,
and forming naturally one inducement for selecting
that spot. The " high places " on which Saul and
Jonathan were slain would be the still higher sum-
mits of the ridge up which their forces were driven
as the tide of battle turned against them in the
progress of the fight. The Philistines encamped
at first at Sliunero (1 Sam. xxviii. 4), now called
Soldi*, on the more northern, but parallel, ridge
opposite to Jezreel, where they could overlook and
watch the enemy, and at the same time were pro-
tected against any surprise by the still higher
ground behind them. On the other hand, the
camp of the Philistines was visible, distant only
eight or ten miles, from the camp of Israel. Hence
when " Saul saw the boat of the Philistines, he was
afraid, and his heart greatly trembled." The Philis-
tines, in their proper home, dwelt in the country
south of Judith, and having in all probability
marched north along the coast as far as Carmel,
had then turned across the pkun of Ksdraelon, and
had thus reached this well-chosen camping ground
at Shunem." The Philistines are next mentioned
ss rallying their forces at Aphek (1 Sam. xxix. 1).
No place of this name has yet been discovered in
that neighborhood. Some suppose that it was only
another name for Shunem ; but it is more likely to
be the name of a different place, situated nearer
Jezreel, perhaps the one from which the Philistines
made their direct attack on the Israelites. Further,
we read that the conquerors, after the battle, carried
the bodies of Saul and his son* to Beth-shean, and
hung them up on the walls of that city. Beth-
shean was a stronghold of the Philistines which the
Israelites had never wrested from them. That
place, evidently, reappears in the present Beisdn,
which is ou the eastern slope of the Gilboa range,
visible in fact from Jezreel, and still remarkable for
its strength of position as well as the remains of
ancient fortifications.
The strange episode of Saul's nocturnal visit to
the witch of Endor illustrates this same feature of
the narrative. It is evident that Saul was absent
on that errand but a few hours, and the place must
have been near his encampment. This Endor, at
no one can doubt, must be the present Endor, with
its dreary caverns (Thomson's Land and Book, ii.
161), a fitting abode of such a necromancer, on
the north side of Duliy, at the west end of which
was Shunem. Hence Saul, leaving his camp at
Jezreel, could (teal his way under cover of the night
across the intervening valley, and over the moderate
summit which hn would have to ascend, and then,
after consulting the woman with " a familiar spirit "
it Endor, could return to his forces without his
departure being known to any except those in the
secret. All these places, so interwoven in the net-
work of tho story, and clearly identified after the
apse of so many centuries, lie almost within sight
»f each other. A person may start from auy one
H them and make the circuit of them all in a few
hours. The date assigned to this battle is B. c.
a • Poaribly the Philistines, Instead of taking the
asaritlme route, may have crossed the Jordan and
I north on that side of the river. H.
GILXAD
1065, later but a Utile than the tnutlonar/ tja of
the siege of Troy. It is seldom that a record of
remote events can be subjected to so anvere • sera-
tiny as this.
For other sketches which reproduce more or leal
fully the occurrences of this battle, the reader may
see Van de Velde ( Travels in Syr. J- Pal ii. 368
ff.); Stanley (S. f P. p. 339 f., Amer. ed.); Rob-
inson (Bil/. Ret. iii. 173 ff., 1st ed.); and Porter
(Handbook, ii. 856 ff.). Some of the writers differ
as to whether the final encounter took place at Jez-
reel or higher up the mountain. Stanley lias drawn
out the personal incidents in a striking manner
{Jewish Church, ii. 30 ff.). For geographical in-
formation respecting this group of places, see espe-
cially Hob. Phys. Vtogr. pp. 26-28, and Hitter's
Ueogr. of Palestine, Gage's transl., ii. 321-336.
H.
GII/EAD ("ȴ*?? [see below]: roWJ: Go-
load), a mountainous region east of the Jordan;
bounded on the north by Bashan, on the east by
the Arabian plateau, and on the south by Moan
and Amnion (Gen. xxxi. 21; Deut. iii. 12-17). It
is sometimes called " Mount Gilead " (Gen. xxxi
25, l^jftn in), sometimes "the land of Gil-
ead" (Num. xxxii. 1, T^ 1 ?? V^)? «nd some
times simply " Gilead " (Ps. Ix.' 7 j Gen. xxxvil
25); but a oomparisun of toe several passages shows
that they all mean the same thing. There is no
evidence, in fact, that any particular mountain was
meant by Mount Gilead more than by Mount Leb-
anon (Judg. iii. 3) — tbey both comprehend the
whole range, and the range of Gilead embraced the
whole province. The name Gilead, as is usual in
Palestine, describes the physical aspect of the coun-
try. It signifies " a hard, rocky region ; " and it
may be regarded as standing in contrast to Bashan,
the other great trans-Jordanic province, which is,
as the name implies, a " level, fertile tract"
The statements in Gen. xxxi. 48 are not oppewd
to this etymology. The old name of the district
was 13? ^2 (Gilead), but by a slight change in the
pronunciation, the radical letters being retained,
the meaning was made beautifully applicable to the
" heap of stones " Jacob and Laban had built up—
" and Laban said, this heap (73) is a witness (T2)
between me and thee this day. Therefore was tht
name of it called Cal~eed" (1578, the heup oj
witness). Those acquainted with the modern
Arabs and their literature will see how intensely
such a play upon the word would be appreciated
by them. It does not appear that the interview
between Jacob and his father-in-law took place ou
any particular mountain peak. Jacob, having
passed the Euphrates, " set his face toward Mount
Gilead j " he struck across the desert by the great
fountain at Palmyra; then traversed the eastern
part of the plain of Damascus, and the plateau of
Bashan, and entered Gilead from the northeast
" In the Mount Gilead Laban overtook him " —
apparently soon after he entered the district; rot
when they separated again, Jacob went ~i his waj
and arrived at Mahanaim, which must have beer
oonsideaably north of the river Jabbok (Gen. xxxii
1, 2, 22).
The extent of Gilecd we can ascertain with tol
erable exactness from incidental notice* in the HjIj
Scriptures. The Jordan was its western border (I
Digitized by
Google
GILKAD
lam. xifl. T; 2 K. i. 33). A. oomparlaon of a
lumber of passages shorn thai the river Hieromax,
the modem Shcriat tt-MancUiur, separated it from
Baahan on the north. "Half GUead" is said to
have been possessed b j Sihon king of the Amorites,
and the other half by Og king of Baahan; and the
river Jabbok was the division between the two
kingdoms (Deut. iii. 12; Josh. xii. 1-5). The
half of Gilead possessed by Og must, therefore,
have been north of the Jabbok. It is also stated
that the territory of the tribe of Gad extended along
the Jordan valley to the Sea of Galilee (Josh. xiii.
27); and yet "all Baahan" was given to Manasseh
(ver. 30). We, therefore, conclude that the deep
ijlei. of the Hieromax, which runs eastward, on the
parallel of the south end of the Sea of Galilee, was
the dividing line between Baahan and Gilead.
North of that glen stretches out a Sat, fertile pla-
teau, such as the name Balkan ("\V3, like the
Arabic JU£j, signifies "soft and level soil")
would suggest; while on the south we have the
rough and rugged, yet picturesque hill country, for
which Gilead is the fit name. (See Porter in Jour-
nal of Sac. Lit. vi. 284 ff.) On the east the
mountain range melts away gradually into the high
plateau of Arabia. The boundary of Gilead is here
not so clearly defined, but it may be regarded as
running along the foot of the range. The south-
ern boundary is less certain. The tribe of Reuben
occupied the country as far south as the river Ar-
non, which was the border of Moab (Deut. ii. 80,
iii. 12). It seems, however, that the southern sec-
tion of their territory was not Included in Gilead.
In Josh. xiii. 9-11 it is intimated that the "plain
of Medeba " (" the Mishor " it is called), north of
the Anion, is not in Gilead ; and when speaking
of the cities of refuge, Moses describes Bezer, which
was given out of the tribe of Reuben, as being
" in the wilderness, in the phin country («. t. in
the country of the Mukor," "lE^SH \T3$»
while Ramoth is said to be in Gilead (Deut. iv.
43). This southern plateau was also called " the
land of Jazer " (Num. xxxii. 1 ; 2 Sam. xxiv. 5 ;
compare also Josh. xiii. 16-25). The valley of
Heshbou may therefore, in all probability, be the
southern boundary of Gilead. Gilead thus extended
from the parallel of the south end of the Sea of
Galilee to that of the north end of the Dead Sea —
about 60 miles; and its average breadth scarcely
exceeded 20.
While such were the proper limits of Gilead,
the name is used in a wider sense in two or three
parts of Scripture. Moses, for example, is said to
lave seen, from the top of Pisgah. " all the land of
Gilead unto Dan " (Deut. xxxiv. 1); and in Judg.
xx. 1, and Josh. ixii. 9, the name seems to com-
prehend the whole territory of the Israelites beyond
the Jordan. A little attention shows that this is
snly a vague way of speaking, in common use
everywhere. We, for instance, often say " Eng-
land " when we mean ■' England and Wales." The
lection of Gilead lying between the Jabbok and the
Hieromax is now called Jtbtl Ajlin ; while that to
in south of the Jabbok constitutes the modern
latinos of Btlka. One of the most conspicuous
GILEAD
925
• • an-. Tristram regards the pmk called Jebrl 0*ha,
I eke a n s tm t Mount Oltaad, salu uy the people of the
asactr •» contain the tomb of Uosta. for a desa'--
peaks In the mountain range still retains lbs an
dent name, being called Jtbtl Jit Ad, " Mount
Gilead." " It is about 7 miles south of the Jabbok,
and commands a magnificent view over the whole
Jordan valley, and the mountains of Judah and
Ephraim. It is probably the site of Ramath-Mis-
peh of Josh. xiii. 26; and the " Mizpeh of Gilead,"
from which Jephthah " passed ovei -»to the chil-
dren of Ammon " (Judg. xi. 29). Ihn spot if
admirably adapted for a gathering place in time of
invasion, or aggressive war. Thi neighboring vil-
lage of M-SaFoccupies the site of the ohi " oHy
of refuge" in Gad, Ramoth-Giioad. [Kamois-
GlUEAD.]
We have already alluded to a special descriptive
term, which may almost be regarded as a proper
name, used to denote the great plateau which bir-
ders Gilead on the south and east. The refuge-
city Bezer is said to be "in the country of the
Mukor" (Deut. iv. 43); and Jeremiah (xlviii. 21)
says, "judgment is come upon the country of the
Sfithirr " (see also Josh. xiii. 9, 16, 17, 21, xx. 8).
Mukor ("Tltt^O and "IttTD) signifies a " level
plain," or "table-land;" and no word could be
more applicable. This is one among many exam-
ples of the minute accuracy of Bible topography.
The mountains of Gilead have a real elevation
of from two to three thousand feet; but their ap-
parent elevation on the western side is much greater,
owing to the depression of the Jordan valley, which
averages about 1,000 feet. Their outline is singu-
larly uniform, resembling a massive wall running
along the horizon. From the distant east they
seem very low, for on that side they meet the
plateau of Arabia, 2,000 ft. or more in height
Though the range appears bleak from the distance,
yet on ascending it we find the scenery rich, pictur-
esque, and in places even grand. The summit is
broad, almost like table-land " tossed into wild con-
fusion of undulating downs " (Stanley, S. <f P. p.
320). It is everywhere covered with luxuriant
aerbage. In the extreme north and south there
are no trees ; but as we advance toward the centre
they soon begin to appear, at first singly, then in
groups, and at length, on each side of the Jabbok,
hi fine forests chiefly of prickly oak and terebinth.
The rich pasture land of Gilead presents a striking
contrast to the nakedness of western Palestine.
Except among the hills of Galilee, and along the
heights of Carmel, there is nothing to be compare*,
with it as "a place for cattle" (Num. xxxii. 1).
Gilead anciently abounded in spices and aromatic
gums which were exported to Egypt (Gen. xxxvtt.
25; Jer. viii. 22, xlvi. 11).
The first notice we have of Gilead is in con-
nection with the history of Jacob (Gen. xxxi. 91
ff.); but it is possibly this same region which if
referred to under the name Ham, and was inhabited
by the giant Zuzims. The kings of the East who
came to punish the rebellious " cities of the plain,"
first attacked the Rephaims in Ashteroth Kamaun,
i. t. in the country now called Haur&n ; then they
advanced southwards against the " Zuzims in
Ham; " and next against the Emims in Shaven-
Kiriathaim, which was subsequently possessed by
the Moabites (Gen. xiv. 5; Deut. ii. 9-19). [Set
Emims; Rxphaim.] We hear nothing more of
Hon of the magnificent view
Land of Imul, p. 556, 1st ed.
from that summit, rm
Digitized by
Google
926
GILEAD
JOead till the invasion of the country by the
[•radius. One half of it wu then in the hands
*f Sihon king of the Amorites, who bad a abort
time previously driven out the Moabites. Og, long
of Baslian, had the other section north of the Jab-
bolt. The Israelites defeated the former at Jahaz,
and the latter at Edrei, and took possession of Gilead
and Bashan (Num. xxi. 23 ff.). The rich pasture
land of Gilead, with its shady forests, and copious
streams, attracted the attention of Reuben and Gad,
who " had a very great multitude of cattle," and
was allotted to them. The future history and habits
of the tribes that occupied Gilead were greatly
affected by the character of the country. Rich in
Bucks and herds, and now the lords of a fitting
region, they retained, almost unchanged, the nomad
pastoral habits of their patriarchal ancestors. Like
all Bedawln they lived in a constant state of war-
fare, ju«t as Jacob had predicted of Gad — " a troop
shall plunder him; but he shall plunder at the
but" (Gen. xlix. 19). The sons of Ishmaol were
subdued and plundered in the time of Saul (1 Chr.
v. 9 ff.); and the children of Ammon in the days
of Jephthah and David (Judg. xi. 33 ff. ; 2 Sam.
x. 12 ff.). Their wandering tent life, and their
almost inaccessible country, made them in ancient
times what the Bedavry tribes are now — the pro-
tectors of the refugee and the outlaw. In Gilead
the sons of Saul found a home while they vainly
attempted to reestablish the authority of their
bouse (2 Sam. ii. 8 ff.). Here, too, David found
a sanctuary during the unnatural rebellion of a
beloved son; and the surrounding tribes, with a
characteristic hospitality, carried presents of the
best they possessed to the fallen monarch (2 Sam.
xvil. 22 ff). Ehjah the Tishbite was a Gileadite
(1 K. xvii. 1); and in hu simple garb, wild aspect,
abrupt address, wonderfully active habits, and
movements so rapid as to evade the search of his
watchful and bitter foes, we see all the character-
istics of the genuine Bedawy, ennobled by a high
prophetic mission. [Gad.]
Gilead was a frontier land, exposed to the first
attacks of the Syrian and Assyrian invaders, and
to the unceasing raids of the desert tribes — " Be-
cause Machir the first-born of Manasseh was a man
of war, therefore be had Bashan and Gilead " (Josh.
xvii. 1). Under the wild and wayward Jephthah,
Mizpeh of Gilead became the gathering place of the
trans-Jordanic tribes (Judg. xi. 29); and in subse-
quent times the neighboring stronghold of Ramoth-
Gilead appears to have been considered the key of
Palestine on the east (1 K. xxii. 3, 4, 6; 2 K. viii.
28, ix. 1).
The name Galaad (raXatIS) occurs several times
In the history of the Maccabees (1 Mace. v. 9 If.);
and also in Josephus, but generally with the Greek
termination — raAaaovrit or roXaovvfi (Ant. xiii.
14, J 2; B. J. i. 4, % i). Under the Roman
dominion the country became more settled and
rivilked ; and the great cities of Gadara, Pella, and
lierasa, with Philadelphia on its southeastern border,
speedily rose to opulence and splendor. In one of
these (Pella) the Christians of Jerusalem found a
sanctuary when the armies of Titus gathered round
the devoted city (Euseb. ff. E. Hi. 5). Under
Mohammedan rale the country has again lapsed
Into semi-barbarism. Some scattered villages amid
■ • Probobljr a patronymic - "H^bs, a Oileadlte,
I Jephthah Is called both when first and last msn-
•net (Judf . xl. 1, and xtl. 7). The personal now
GILEADITE3, THE
the fastnesses of Jtbtl Ajlin, and a few Bene wan
dering tribes, constitute the whole population of
Gilead. They are nominally subject to the Porta
but their allegiance sits lightly upon them.
For the scenery, products, antiquities, and history
of Gilead, the following works may be consulted.
Burckhardt's Trnv. in St/r. ; Buckingham's Aral
Tribes; Irby and Mangles, Travels; Porter's
Handbook, and Fict Yean in Damascus ; Stanley's
Sin. and Pal ; Hitter's Pal. and Syria.
2. Possibly the name of a mountain west of the
Jordan, near Jezreel (Judg. vii. 3). We are in-
clined, however, to agree with the suggestion of
Clericus and others, that the true reading in this
place should be Saba, Gilboa, instead of I? 1 ??.
Gideon was encamped at the " spring of Hand,"
which is at the base of Mount Gilboa. A copyist
would easily make the mistake, and ignorance of
geography would prevent it from being afterwards
detected. For other explanations, see Ewald, Gesch.
ii. 600; Schware, p. 164, note; Geeeo. The*, p.
804, note,
* As regards Gilead (2), Bertbeau also (Back dtr
Richter, p. 120), would substitute Gilboa for that
name in Judg. vii. 3. Keil and Delitzacb hesitate
between that view and the conclusion that there
may have been a single mountain or a range so
called near Jezreel, just as in Josh. xv. 10, we
read of a Mount Sen- in the territory of Judah
otherwise unknown ( Com. on Joshua, Judges, and
Ruth, p. 341). Dr. Wordsworth has the following
note on this perplexed question : " Probably the
western half-tribe of Manasseh expressed its con-
nection with the eastern half-tribe by calling one
of its mountains by the same name, Mount Gilead,
as the famous mountain bearing that name in the
eastern division of their tribe ((Jen. xxxi. 21-25,
xxxvii. 25; Num. xxxii. 1, 40, Ac.). May we not
see ' a return of the compliment ' (if the expres-
sion may be used) in another name which has
perplexed the commentators, namely, the Wood of
Ephraim on the eastern side of Jordan (2 Sam.
xviii. 6)? Ephraim was on the west of Jordan, and
yet the Wood of Ephraim was on the east. Perhaps
that half-tribe of Manasseh, which was in the east,
marked its connection with Ephraim, its brother
tribe, by calling a wood in its own neighborhood
by that name." (See his Holy Bii/le tciOi Notes,
ii. pt. i. p. 111.) Cassel (Richter, p. 71) thinks
that Gilead here may denote in effect character
rather than locality: the Mount of GiUmi =iht
community of the warlike Manassites (Josh. xvii.
1), now so fitly represented by Gideon, sprung from
that tribe (Judg. vi. 15). The cowardly deserve no
place in the home of such heroes, and should sep-
arate themselves from them. H.
3. The name of a son of Machir, grandson of
Manasseh (Num. xxvi. 29, 30).
4. The father of Jephthah (Judg. xi. 1, 2). It
is difficult to understand (comp. ver. 7, 8) whether
this Gilead was an individual or a personification
of the community. 11
* 5. One of the posterity of Gad, through whom
the genealogy of the Gadites in Bashan is traced
(1 Chr. v. 14). H
GII/EAMTKS, THB (1^3 Judg. xU
of the lather being unknown, that of his
stands In place of It See Cassel, Richter ■>. Ruth h
Langs's Bihtlmrk, p. 102. II
Digitized by
Google
GILGAL
I, I, *»Ty , an: Judg. xfi. 4, 6, ra\aa»; Num.
mi. 89,' roAaaSf [Vat. -S«]; Judg. x. 3, 4
rMaitS; [Judg. zi. 1, 40, xU. 7; 8 Sam. zvIL 37,
rfx. 31; 1 K. ii. 7; Ezr. u. 61; Neb., vii. 63,] i
roKoaStrrit [Vat. ~8«-. exc. Judg. zi. 40, Vat.
PoXaaJj; Alex, a raAaaJint, a raAaao>m|i,
[and Judg. zii. 5, twSpn raAoaS:] Galnuclua.,
G<tlaaditt4, viri Ualiad). A branch of the tribe of
Manaaaeh, descended from Gilead. There appears to
have been an old standing feud between them and
the Ephraimites, who taunted them with being
deserters. See Judg. zii. 4, which nuy be ren-
dered, " And the men of Gilead smote Ephraim,
because the}" said, Runagates of Ephraim are ye
(Gilead is between Ephraim and Manaaaeh); " the
last clause being added parenthetically. In 2 K.
xr. 35 for "of the Gileoditea " the LXX. have larb
ni> rerpaxoaiar [V^S- deJMU (JalatdUarum].
GIL'GAL (always with the article but once,
?3?3rt, [the circuit, the rolling, see below]:
Td\ya\a (plural); [in Deut. zi. 30, roA-yA; Josh,
xhr. 6, Rom. Vat. roA-ytU:] Onlgnia [sing, and
prar.]). By this name were called at least two
places in ancient Palestine.
1. The site of the first camp of the Israelites on
the west of the Jordan, the place at which they
passed the first night after crossing the river, and
where the twelve stones were set up which had
been taken from the bed of the stream (Josh. iv. 19,
80, comp. 3); where also they kept their first pass-
over in the land of Canaan (v. 10).- It was in the
" end of the east of Jericho " (* rH(Q n^p3 :
A. V. " in the east border of Jericho " ), apparently
on a hillock or rising ground (r. 3, comp. !)) in the
Arboth-Jericho (A. V. " the plains "), that is, the
hot depressed district of the Ghor which lay be-
tween the town and the Jordan (v. 10). Here the
Israelites who had been born on the march through
the wilderness were circumcised ; an occurrence
from which the sacred historian derives the name:
u • Thii day I have rolled away (gnUiothi) the re-
proach of Egypt from off you.' Therefore the name
of the place is called Gilgal » to this day." By
Josephus (Ant. v. 1, § 11) it la said to signify
"freedom" (i\tv9iptav). The camp thus estab-
lished at Gilgal remained there during the early
part of the conquest (ix. 6, z. C, 7, 9, ID, 43) ; and
we may probably infer from one narrative that
Joshua retired thither at the conclusion of his
labors (ziv. 6, comp. 15).
We again encounter Gilgal in the time of Saul,
when it seems to have exchanged its military asso-
ciations for those of sanctity. True, Saul, when
driven from the highlands by the Philistines, col-
lected his feeble force at the site of the old camp
(1 Sam. xiii. 4, 7); but this is the only occurren.*
it all connecting it with war. It was now one of
the " holy cities " (oi rryiaonirm) — if we accept
the addition of the LXX. — to which Samuel rrg-
uarly resorted, where be administered justice (1
Bam. viL 16), and where bumt-oflerings and peace -
iSerings were accustomed to be offered "before
Jehovah " (z. 8, zi. 15, xiii. 8, 9-18, xv. 81); and
» one occasion a sacrifice of a more terrible da-
GILGAL
927
• Ttris dsrrratkm of tbs name jennet apply m w
•Ms of ttas other Qilgals menttoosd below. May It
set be the adaptation to Hebrew of a name previously
UMIibj m tha former langnags of the eonntry 1
» lash k tbs real faces «• ths Hebrew text (six. 40).
seription than either (xv. 83). The air of U*
narrative all through leads to the conclusion that
at the time of these occurrences it was the chief
sanctuary of the central portion of the nation (sea
x. 8, xi. 14, xr. 13, 31). But there is no sign of
its being a town ; no mention of building, or of its
being allotted to the priests or Levites, as was the
case with other sacred towns, Bethel, Shechem, etc.
We again have a glimpse of it, some sixty years
later, in the history of David's return to Jerusalem
(2 Sam. xix.). The men of Judah came down to
Gilgal to meet the king to conduct him over Jordan,
as if it was close to the river (xix. 15) and David
arrived there immediately on crossing the stream,
after his parting with Barzillai the Gileadite.
How the remarkable sanctity of Gilgal became
appropriated to a false worship we are not told, tut
certainly, as far as the obsc. . c allusions of Hoses
and Amos can be understood (provided that they
refer to this Gilgal), it was so appropriated by the
kingdom of Israel in the middle period of its
existence (Hos. iv. 16, ix. 15, zii. 11; Amos iv.
4, v. 5).
Beyond the general statements above quoted, the
sacred text contains no indications of the position
of Gilgal. Neither in the Apocrypha nor the X. T.
is it mentioned. Later authorities are more precise,
but unfortunately discordant among themselves.
By Josephus (Ant. v. 1, § 4) the encampment is
given as fifty stadia, rather under six miles, from
the river, and ten from Jericho. In the time of
Jerome the site of the camp and the twelve
memorial stones were still distinguishable, if we
are to take literally the expression of the Epit.
Paula (§ 12). The distance from Jericho was
then two miles, 'lie spot was left uncultivated,
but regarded with great veneration by the residents;
" locus desertus . . . ab illius regionis mortalibus
miro cultu habitus" (Onotn. Galgala). When
Arculf was there at the end of the seventh century
the place was shown at five miles from Jericho. A
large church covered the site, in which the twelve
stones were ranged. The church and stones were
seen by Willibald, thirty years later, but be gives
the distance as five miles from the Jordan, which
again he states correctly as seven from Jericho.
The stones are mentioned also by Thietmar, c A. D.
1217, and lastly by Ludolf de Suchem a century
later. No modem traveller has succeeded in elicit-
ing the name, or in discovering a probable site. In
Van de Velde's map (1858) a spot named Molvirftr,
a little S. E. of tr-ffiha, is marked as possible; but
no explanation is afforded either in his Syria, or
his Memoir.
2. But this was certainly a distinct place from
the Gilgal which is connected with the laut seem
in the life of Elijah, and with one of Klish.it
miracles. The chief reason for believing this is the
impossibility of making it fit into the notice of
Ehjah's translation. He and Elisha are said to
" go down" (VTV) from Gilgal to Bethel (8 K
ii. 1), in opposition to the repeated expressions ol
the narratives in Joshua and 1 Samuel, in which
the way from Gilgal to the neighborhood of Bethel
is always spoken of as an ascent, the fact being
that the former is nearly 1,300 feet below the latter
Thus there must have been a second Gilgal at »
» Asoordlng to this pilgrim, It was to these tbM
John tbs Baptist pointed when be said tbat God wat
n aOi» of that Uonrt to raise up ehunran over
Abraham » (Tblebaar, Ptrtgr. Ul
Digitized by
Google
928
OILOH
Mgh<r level than Bethel, and it IU probably that
at which Elisha worked the miracle of healing on
the poisonous pottage (2 K. iv. 38). Perhaps the
expression of 2 K. ii. 1, coupled with the " came
again " of ir. 38, may indicate that Elisha resided
there. The mention of Baal-shalisha (ir. 42) gives
a clew to its situation, when taken with the notice
of Eusehius ( Onom. Bethsarisa) that that place was
fifteen miles from Diospolis (Lydda) towards the
north. In that very position stand now the ruins
bearing the name of JiljUieh, i. e. Gilgal. (See
Van de VeMe's map, and Rob. iii. 139.)
3. The " KINO OF THE RATIONS OP GlMJAL,"
or rather perhaps the " king oi Goim-at-Gilgal "
(V?? 1 ? aVunrl?? = [flao-iAsh rrf rn* roAr
Wat! Alex. 0. rwtiu, rns r«A-y«a (comp. Aid.
raKyik): rex gentium Oalgal]),h mentioned in
the catalogue of the chiefs overthrown by Joshua
(Josh. xii. 23). The name occurs next to Dob in
an enumeration apparently proceeding southwards,
and therefore the position of the Jiljilieh just named
Is not wholly inappropriate, though it must be con-
fessed its distance from Dor — more than twenty-
five miles — is considerable : still it is nearer than
any other place of the name yet known. Eusebius
and Jerome ( Onom. Gelgel) speak of a " Galgulis "
six miles X. of Autipatris. This is slightly more
suitable, but has not been identified. What these
Gmm were has been discussed under Heathen.
By that word (Judg. iv. 2) or "nations" (Gen.
xiv. 1) the name is usually rendered in the A. V.
as in the well-known phrase, "Galilee of the
nations" (Is. ix. 1; comp. Matt. iv. 16). Possibly
they were a tribe of the early inhabitants of the
country, who, like the Gerizites, the Avim, the
Zemarites, and others, have left only this faint
casual trace of their existence there.
A place of the same name has also been discovered
nearer tho centre of the country, to the left of the
main north road, four miles from Shiloh (Seilun),
and rather more than the same distance from Bethel
(Beitm). This suits the requirements of the story
of Elyah and Elisha even better than the former,
being more in the neighborhood of the established
holy places of the country, and, as more central,
and therefore less liable to attack from the wan-
derers in the maritime plain, more suited for the
residence for the sons of the prophets. In position
it appears to be not less than SOU or 600 feet above
Bethel (Van de Velde, ifemoir, p. 179). (t may
be the Beth-Gilgal of Neh. xii. 29; while the Jil-
jilieh north of Lydd may be that of Josh. xii. 23.
Another Gilgal, under the slightly different form of
KWdlieh, lies about two miles E. of Kefr Saba.
*• [roA-ydA; Vat to AyoJ: Gatgala.] A
Gilgal is spoken of in Josh. xv. 7, in describing the
north border of Judah. In the parallel list (Josh,
xviii. 17) it if given as Geuloth, and under that
word an attempt is made to show that Gilgal, »". e.
the Gilgal near Jericho, is probably correct. G.
OIXOH (,n"7a [exile, Ges.; or, cattle, mount,
Dietr.li TyX/i/*, Alex. I>Aur; [Vat. om.; Comp.
ri\ti i] in Sam. ToAst, [Comp. rsA«4 : GUo] ), a town
in the mountainous part of Judah, named In the
first group, with Dehii and Kshtemoh (Josh. xv. 61).
Its only interest to us lies in the fact of its having
been the native place of the famous Ahithophel (2
Sam, xv. 12), where he was residing when Absalom
sent for him to Hebron, and whither he returned
at destroy himself after his oounsel had been set
GIRDLE
aside for that of Hushai (xvil. 28). The ttte lav
not yet been met with.
gi'lonitb, the ("oVan and ^bban
BtKtowl [Vet. -»«i], r«Asfr(rqt [Vat -yet-), Ass
TiAainuer, [r«A«n>irqr : iiikmitei] ), i. e. the na-
tive of GUoh (as Shilonite, from Shiloh): applied
only to Ahithophel the famous counsellor (2 Sam.
xv. IS; xxiii. 31).
OIM'ZO ("ftp? [place of sycamores]: 4,
r<utf*>; Alex, TaumCei. [Gamzo]), a town which
with its dependent villages (Hebrew "daughters")
was taken possession of by the Philistines in the
reign of Ahaz (2 Chr. xxviii. 18). The name —
which occurs nowhere but here — is mentioned with
Timnath, Socho, and other towns in the northwest
part of Judah, or in Dan. It still remains attached
to a large village between two and three miles S. W.
of Lydda, south of the road between Jerusalem and
Jaffa, just where the hills of the highland finally
break down into the maritime plain. Jimxu is a
tolerabla large village, on an eminence, well sur-
rounded with trees, and standing just beyond the
point where the two main roads from Jerusalem
(that by the Beth-horons, and that by W'ody Sn-
leiman), which parted at Gibeon, again join and
run on as one to Jaffa. It is remarkable for noth-
ing but some extensive corn magazines underground,
unless it be also for the silence maintained regard-
ing it by all travellers up to Dr. Robinson (ii. 249).
G.
GIN, a trap for birds or beasts : it consisted of
a net (ItE), and a stick to act as a springe (E? JT1D) ',
the latter word is translated "gin" in the A. V.
Am. iii. 6, and the former in Is. viii. 14, the term
" snare " being in each case used for the other part
of the trap. In Job xl. 24 (marginal translation)
the second of these terms is applied to the ring run
through the nostrils of an animal. W. L. B.
GITfATH (."13 > a [protection, Fiirst; or,
garden, Gesen.] : VotviS: Oincth ), father of Tibni,
who after the death of Zimri disputed the thront
of Israel with Omri (1 K. xri. 21, 22).
GINTIETHO (nn?J [gardener], i. e. Gin-
nethoi: fKom. Vat. Alex, omit; FA. 3 Vtrrn8o¥\
Comp. IV rafl«y:] Gent/ion), one of the " chief'
( , tTS^I= heads) of the priests and Levites who
returned to Judtea with Zerubbabel (Neh. xii. 4).
He is doubtless the same person as
GINTJETHON (fVm [as above]: rorrr
0«V, TavaBde; [in x. 6, Vat. TraroO, Alex. Toa»-
ra*W, FA. Ararat); in xii. 16, Vat. Alex. FA.l
omit:] Genthon), a priest who sealed the covenant
with Nehemiah (Neh. x. 6). He was bead of a
family, and one of his descendants is mentioned in
the list of priests and Levites at a later period (xii.
16). He is probably the same person as the pre-
ceding.
GIRDLE, an essential article of dress in toa
East, and worn both by men and women. Tht
corresponding Hebrew words are: (1.) TOQ or
rTnl2n, which is the general term for a girdle o>
any kind, whether worn by soldiers, as 1 Sam,
xviii. 4, 2 Sam. xx. 8, 1 K. ii. D, 2 K. iii. 91; or
by women, Is. iil. 24. (2.) "litS, especially uses'
of the girdles worn by men; whether by prophets
Digitized by
Google
GIRDLE
• E~ '- •, Jer. zliL 1; soldiers, H. v. 87; Ex. xxiii.
IB, c kings in their military capacity, Job xli. 18.
(8.) ntt? or ITTQ, used of the girdle worn by
men '.one. Job xiL 31, Pa. cix. 181 la. xxiii. 10.
(4.) 1*y2S, the girdle worn by the prist* and atate
offlco i In addition to these, VaVl?, Is. Bi.
24, u> a costly girdle worn by women. 'The Vul-
gate raiders it fascia pectoraiit. It would thus
seem C correspond with the Latin ttrophium, a
belt M n by women about the breast. In the
LXX. however, it is translated xituv fieatnrip-
fvpos, - a tunic shot with purple," and Geseuius
[Thet.j baa "buntet Feyerkltid" (corap. Schroe-
der, dt VaL MtU. pp. 137, 138, 401). The
D'H'lUP I mentioned in Is. iii. 20, Jer. ii. 83, were
probablj girdles, although both Kimchl and Jarchi
consider them as fillets for the hair. In the latter
passage the Vulgate has again fascia pectoraiit,
and the LXX. orntaSeo/tls, an appropriate bridal
ornament.
The common girdle was made of leather (3 K.
i. 8 ; Matt. iii. 4), like that worn by the Bedouins of
the present day, whom Curzon describes as " armed
with a long crooked knife, and a pistol or two stuck
in a red leathern girdle " (Motuut. of the Levant,
p. 7). In the time of Chardin the nobles of Min-
grelia wore girdles of leather, four fingers broad,
and embossed with silver. A finer girdle was made
of linen (Jer. xiii. 1; Ex. xvi. 10), embroidered
with silk, and sometimes with gold and silver thread
(Dan. x. 6; Rev. i. 13, xv. 6), and frequently
studded with gold and precious stones or pearls
(Le Bruyn, Fby. iv. 170; comp. Virg. JEn. ix.
359)." Horier (Second Journey, p. 150), describ-
ing the dress of the Armenian women, says, " they
wear a silver girdle which rests on the hips, and is
generally curiously wrought." The manufacture
of these girdles formed part of the employment of
women (Prov. xxxi. 34).
The girdle was fastened by a clasp of gold or
silver, or tied in a knot so that the ends hung
down in front, as in the figures on the ruins of
Persepolia. It was worn by men about the loins,
hence the expressions D*;30ZJ "TITH, Is. xi. 5;
D*'? , ?Q "I'TWi I"- »• 87. The girdle of women
was generally looser than that of the men, and was
worn about the hips, except when they were act-
ively engaged (Prov. xxxi. 17). Curzon (p. 58),
describing the dress of the Egyptian women, says,
"not round the waist, but round the hips a large
and heavy Cashmere shawl is worn over the yelek,
and the whole gracefulness of an Egyptian dress
consists in the way in which this is put on." The
military girdle was worn about the waist, the
sword or dagger was suspended from it (Judg. iii.
16; 9 Sam. xx. 8; Pa. xlv. 3). In the Nineveh
sculptures tie soldiers are represented with broad
girdles, to which the sword is attached, and through
which even two or three daggers in a sheath are
passed. Q. Curtios (iii 8) says of Darius, " zona
aurea nraliehriter dnctus acinaoem suspenderat, cui
ex gemma erat vagina." Hence girding up the bins
denotes preparation for battle or for active exertion.
In times of mourning, girdles of sackcloth were
GIEGASHITES, THE
929
a *In contrast with such girdles, John's was "a
leathern girdle" (Matt. 111. 4), In conformity with we
abasia habits which ofaareetrrlasd the start reform*
H.
58
worn as marks of humiliation and sorrow (Is. Hi
24; xxii. 13).
In consequence of the costly materials of wHoh
girdles were made, they were frequently given as
presents (1 Sam. xviii. 4 ; 3 Sam. xviii. 11), as if
still the custom in Persia (cf. Morier, p. 83).
Villages were given to the queens of Persia, to
suppiy them with girdles (Xenoph. Anab. 1. 4, § 9 ;
Plat. Ale. i. p. 133).
They were used as pockets, as among the Arabs
still (Niebuhr, Deter, p. 56), and as purses, one
end of the girdle being folded back for the purpose
(Matt. x. 9; Mark vi. 8). Hence "zonam per-
dere," " to lose one's purse " (Hot. Epitt. ii. 3, 40;
comp. Juv. xir. 397). Inkhoms were also carried
in the girdle (Ex. ix. 8).
The "2?3ri or girdle worn by the priests about
the close-fitting tunic (Ex. xxviii. 39; xxxix. 29),
is described by Josephus (Ant. iii. 7, { 3) as made
of linen so fine of texture as to look like the slough
of a snake, and embroidered with flowers of scarlet,
purple, blue, and fine linen. It was about four
fingers' broad, and was wrapped several times
round the priest's body, the ends banging down to
the feet. When engaged in sacrifice, the priest
threw the ends over his left shoulder. According
to Maimonides (de Vat. Sonet, c. 8), the girdle
worn both by the high-priest and the common
priests was of white linen embroidered with wool ;
but that worn by the high-priest on the day of
Atonement was entirely of white linen. The length
of it was thirty-two cubits, and the breadth about
three fingers. It was worn just below the arm-
pits to avoid perspiration (comp. Ex. xliv. 18).
Jerome (Ep. ad Fabiulam, de Vat. Sac.) follows
Josephus. With regard to the manner in which
the girdle was embroidered, the "needlework'
(Df? 1 *) ntPpn, Ex. xxviii. 39) is distinguished in
the Mishna from the "cunning-work" (*"*g*'**y*p
3B"TT, Ex. xxvi. 31) as being worked by the needle
with figures on one side only, whereas the latter
was woven work with figures on both sides ( Cod.
Joma, c. 8). So also Maimonides (de Vat. Sand
viii. 15). But Jarchi on Ex. xxvi. 31, 36, explains
the difference as consisting in this, that in the
former case the figures on the two sides are the
same, whereas in the latter they are different.
[Embroiders k.]
In all passages, except Is. xxii. 31, ttJJJMls
used of the girdle of the priests only, but in* that
instance it appears to have been worn by Shebna,
the treasurer, as part of the insignia of his office;
unless it be supposed that he was of priestly rank,
and wore it in his priestly capacity. He is called
" high-priest " in the Chrxmicon Patchak, p. 116 «,
and in the Jewish tradition quoted by Jarchi in loo.
The '• curious girdle " (3t(?n, Ex. xxviii. 8) was
made of the same materials and colors as the
ephod, that is of " gold, blue, and purple, and scar-
let, and fine twined linen." Josephus describes it
as sewn to the breastplate. After passing once
round it was tied in front upon .he seam, the ends
hanging down (Ant iii. 7, § 5). According to
Maimonides it was of woven work.
"Girdle" is used figuratively in Ps. cix. 19,
Is. xi. 6; cf. 1 Sam. U. 4; Ps. xxx. 11, her. 19:
Eph. H. 14. W. A. W.
GIK'GASHITES, THE CtPJ-jan, i. «. a*
Digitized by
Google
980
GIBGASITE, THB
oordtng to the Hebrew usage, singular — " the Gir-
gaahite; " in which form, however, it occurs in the
A. T. but twice, 1 Chr. i. 14, and Gen. z. 16; in
the latter the Gibgasite; elsewhere uniformly
plural, as above: 6 rtpyttratot, and so also Jo-
sephus: Ger gemot [but Deut. vii. 1, Gergeaaa] ),
one of the nations who were in possession of Canaan
before the entrance thither of the children of Israel.
The name occurs in the following passages: Gen.
x. 16, xv. 21 ; Deut. vii. 1 (and xx. el7 in Samar-
itan and LXX.); Josh. iii. 10, xxiv. 11; 1 Chr. i.
14; Neh. ix. 8. In the first of these "the Gir-
gasite" is given as the fifth son of Canaan; in
the other places the tribe is merely mentioned, and
that but occasionally, in the formula expressing the
doomed country; and it may truly be said in the
words of Josephus (Ant. i. 6, § 2) that we possess
the name and nothing more; not even the more
definite notices of position, or the slight glimpses
of character, general or individual, with which we
are favored in the case of the Amorites, Jebusites,
and some others of these ancient nations. The
expression in Josh. xxiv. 11 would seem to indicate
that the district of the Girgashites was on the west
of Jordan ; nor is this invalidated by the mention
of "Gergesenes" in Halt. viii. 28 (T<pyt<rr)rav
in Rec. Text, and in a few MSS. mentioned by
Epiphanius and Origen, Ttpyt<ral*v), as on the
east side of the Sea of Galilee, since that name is
now generally recognized as rtpcurr)rSr, — " Gera-
senes," — and therefore as having no connection
with the Girgashites. ~ G.
GIR'GASITB, THE (Gen. x. 16). See the
foregoing.
• GIS'CHALA [rtc-xoAa: Rabb. &H WO,
Guth Chalab: Arab. •j&k&.t, elJiih), a village
in Galilee on a bill about two hours northwest
from Saftd. It was fortified by order of Josephus,
and was the last fortress in Galilee to surrender to
the Roman arms (Joseph. B. J. ii. 2(1, § 6 : iv. 2,
§§ 1-5). It has been identified by Dr. Robinson
as the modern d-Jitli, which was destroyed by an
earthquake in 1837 (BiU. Ret. iii. 368 ft"., 1st ed.).
It must have been one of the towns in the circuit
of Christ's labors, and well known to his Galilean
disciples. There was a tradition that the parents
of Paul emigrated from this place to Tarsus. [See
Aijlab.] S. W.
GISTA (M?tr? [hearkening] : [FA.»] r«o-
+4; [Comp. Tfaipis; Rom. Vat Alex. FA.>
omit:] Gatpha), one of the overseers of the Ne-
thinim, in "the Ophel," after the return from
Captivity (Neh. xi. 21). By the LXX. the name
appears to have been taken as a place.
GITTAH-HETHER, Josh. xix. 18.
|Gath-Hkfher.]
OITTA1M (D^ri|, i. e. too wime-pretta:
K2 Sam.,] rsftuV, [Vstfrfu,] Alex. r«98«i/»;
Neh. xi. 83, Rom. Vat. Alec FA.i omit; FA.'
r<90i/i:] Gethmm), a place incidentally mentioned
in 2 Sam. iv. 3, where the meaning appears to be that
the inhabitants of tieeroth, which .was allotted to
Benjamin, had been compelled to fly from that place,
and had taken refuge at Gittalm. Beeroth was
one of the towns of the Gibeonites (Josh. ix. 17);
and the cause of the flight of its people may have
been (thuigh this is but conjecture) Saul's persecu-
te of the Gibeonites alluded to in 2 Sam. xxi. 2.
3att*lm is again mentioned [Neh. xi. 88] m Ae
IUZON1TE, THIS
list of places Inhabited by the Benjaadtel iftet
their return from the Captivity, with Ramah, Na>
ballat, Lod, and other known towns of Benjamin
to the N. W. of Jerusalem. The two may be the
same; though, if the persecution of the Berothitas
proceeded from Benjamin, as we most infer it did,
they would hardly choose as a refuge a place within
the limits of that tribe. Gittaim is the dud form
of the word Gath, which suggests the Philistine
plain as its locality. But there is no evidence for
or against this.
Gittaim occurs in the LXX. version of 1 Sam.
xiv. 83 — " out of Getthaim roll me a great stone."
But this is not supported by any other of the
ancient versions, which unanimously adhere to the
Uebr. text, and probably proceeds from a mistake
or corruption of the Hebrew word 01-^331 : A. V.
"ye have transgressed." It further occurs in the
LXX. in Gen. xxxvi. 35 and 1 Chr. i. 46, as the
representative of Avith, a change not so intelligible
ss the other, and equally unsupported by the other
old versions. Q.
GrrTITES (DVia, patnm. from n? :
[r<6<uoi, Alex, reflflmoi: GeHua]), the 600 men
who followed David from Gath, under Ittai the
Gittite (Van, 2 Sam. xv. 18, 19), and who prob-
ably acted as a kind of body-guard. Obed-edom the
Levite, in whose house the Ark was for a time
placed (2 Sam. vi. 10), and who afterwards served
in Jerusalem (1 Chr. xvi. 38), is called "the
Gittite" (Vnail). We can scarcely think, how-
ever, that he was no named from the royal city of
the Philistines. May he not have been from the
town of Gittaim in Benjamin (2 Sam. iv. 3; Neh.
xi. 33), or from Gath-rimmon, a town of Dan.
allotted to the Kohathite Levites (Josh. xxi. 24),
of whom Obed-edom seems to have been one (1
Chr. xxvi. 4)? J. L. P.
GIT'TITH (riVia) [see infra], a musical
instrument, by some supposed to have been used
by the people of Gath, and thence to have been
adopted by David and used in worship; and by oth-
ers i who identify i"VP3 with P3.a wine-press, or
trough, in which the grapes were trodden with the
feet) to have been employed at the festivities of the
vintage. The Chaldee paraphrase of fVFian 75,
occasionally found in the heading of Psalms, is,
On the instrument S~113*3 (Cinora), which was
brought from Gath." Rashi, whilst he admits
Gittith to be a musical instrument, in the manu-
facture of which the artisans of Gath excelled,
quotes a Talmudio authority which would assign
to the word a different meaning. " Our sages,"
says he, " have remarked ' On lie nation* who ore
in future to be trodden down Was a wine-prat.' "
(Comp. Is. Ixiii. 3.) But neither of the Psalms,
viii., lxxxi., or lxxxiv., wLich have Gittith for •
heading, contains any thing that may be connected
with such an idea. The interpretation of the LXX.
Mp T&r \i)*mr, " for the wine-presses," is con-
demned by Aben-Ezra and other eminent Jewish
scholars. Filrst (Concordance) describes GMu
ss a hollow instrument, from ATD, to deepen
(synonymous with Wl). D. W. M.
GI'ZONITE, THE W*W :« r.fe»tn|»,
Digitized by
Google
G1ZRITES
Vat aanupl;] Alex, a Taunt GezonUe$\. "The
■ana of Hashem the Gizonite " ue named amongst
the nnion of David's guard (1 vjhr. xi. 34). In
the parallel list of 2 Sam. xxiii. the word in entirely
emitted; and the conclusion of Kennicott, who
examine* the passage at length, is that the name
should be Godni [see Gum], a proper name, and
not an appellative (DiutrU pp. 199-203). [No
place corresponding to the name is known.]
• GIZ'RITES. [Gerzites.]
GLASS (iTS-IDT : SoAot : vitrum). The word
occurs only in Job xxviii. 17, where in the A. V.
it is rendered "crystal." It comes from tj JJ (to
6e pare), and according to the best authorities
means a kind of glass which in ancient days was
held in high esteem (J. D. Michaelis, HiiL Vitri
apud Htbr. ; and llamberger, //is/, fieri ex an-
tigmtate eruia, quoted by Gesen. $. v.). Sym-
roachus renders it kooo-toAAoi, but that is rather
intended by ttf'Oa (Job xxviii. 18, A. T. " pearls,"
LXX. yi&n, a word which also means "ice;" cf.
Pfin. H. N. xxxvii. 2), and IT?!?. (Ex. 1. 22). It
seems then that Job xxviii. 17 contains the only
allusion to glass found in the O. T., and even this
reference is disputed. Besides Symnrachus, others
also render it Suur/rj KpoVrraXAay (Schleusner,
Thaiur. s. v. SaAor), and it is argued that the
word SaKos frequently means crystal. Thus the
Schol. on Aristoph. Nub. 764, defines SoAos (when
it occurs in old writers) as StaQariis Kttot imniss
idkip, and Hesychius gives as its equivalent \lBot
rlfuos. In Herodotus (ill- 24) it is clear that ScAor
must mean crystal, for he says, ii ii trfi roWii
mi tltfnas ipimrrrcu, and Achilles Tatius speaks
(f crvstJ as SoAos bpaovyitirn (ii. 3; Baehr, On
GLASS
981
Herod. 1L 44; Heeren, Idem, ii. 1, 835). Othars
consider JTtp'OT to be amber, or electron, or
alabaster (Bochart, Hieroz. ii. ri. 872).
In spite of this absence of specific allusion to
glass in the sacred writings, the Hebrews must
hare been aware of the invention. There has been
a violent modern prejudice against the bdief that
glass was early known to, or extensively used by,
the ancients, but both facta are now certain, l'ronr
paintings representing the process of glassblowlng
which have been discovered in paintings at Beni-
Hassan, and in tombs at other places, we know
that the invention is at least as remote as the age
of Osirtasen the first (perhaps a contemporary ol
Joseph), 3,500 years ago. A bead as old as 15(H)
b. c. was found by Captain Hervey at Thebes.
" the specific gravity of which, 25° 30', is precisely
the same as that of the crown glass now made in
England." Fragments too of wine-vases as old as
the Exodus have been discovered in Egypt. Glass
beads known to be ancient have been found in
Africa, and also (it is said) in Cornwall and Ireland,
which are in all probability the relics of an old
Phoenician trade (Wilkinson, in Knwtinton'i Herod.
ii. 60, i. 475; Anc. Egypt, iii. 88-112). The art
was also known to the ancient Assyrians (Layard,
Nineveh, ii. 42), and a glass bottle was found in
the N. W. palace of Nimroud, which has ou it the
name of Sargon, and is therefore probably older
than B. c. 702 (id. JVin. and Bab. p. 197, 503).
This is the earliest known specimen of transparent
glass.
The disbelief in the antiquity of glass (in spite
of the distinct statements of early writers) is dif-
ficult to account for, because the invention must
almost naturally arise in making bricks or pottery,
during which processes there must be at least a
Egyptian CHass Blowers. (Wilkinson.)
mpeinciai vitrification. There is little doubt that
She honor of the discovery jelongs to the Egyptians.
Pliny gives no date for his celebrated story of the
iiaeovery of glass bom the solitary accident of some
Phoenician sailors using blocks of natron to support
heir saaoenans when ♦hey were unable to find
stones for the purpose 1 1. N. xxxvi. 65). But this
aseount is less likely than the supposition that
rftreoos matter first attracted observation from the
tsastom of lighting fires on the sand. " in a country
vodoong natron or subcarboiiate of *«fc. " (ltaw-
linson's Herod, ii. 82). It has been pointed out
that Pliny's story may have originated in the fact
that the sand of the Syrian river Belus," at the
mouth of which the incident is supposed to have
occurred, "was esteemed peculiarly suitable for
glass-making, and exported in great quantities to
the workshops of Sidon and Alexandria, long the
a • This Belus is the modem Ifakr Na'rnltn whlek
flows Into the Mediterranean just south of tkka, the
O. T. Anoho and las N T. Ptotamals. P
Digitized by
Google
•32 GLEANING
■cat mmou in the ancient world " (Did. of Ant.
srt. Vitrum, where everything requisite to the
Illustration of the classical allusions to glass may
he found). Some find a remarkable reference to
Qua little river (reapecting which aee Plin. H. N.
v. 17, xxxvi. 65; Joaeph. B. J. ii. 10, § S; Tac
But. v. 7) in the blearing to the tribe of Zebohm,
" they abaD suck of the abundance of the seas, and
rf treasure* hid in the sand " (Deut. xxxiii. 19).
Both the name Belua (Keland, quoted in Did. of
Otogr. a. t. and the Hebrew word Vlll, "sand"
(Calmet, s. e.) ham been suggested as derivations
for the Greek (SoAoj, which is however, in all prob-
ability, from an Egyptian root.
Glass was not only known to the ancients, but
used by them (as Winckelmann thinks) far more
extensively than in modern times. Pliny even tells
us that it was employed in wainscoting (vitreae
earners:, H. X. xxxvi. 64; Stat Sytc. i. v. 42).
The Egyptians knew the art of cutting, grinding,
and engraving it, and they could even inlay it with
gold or enamel, and " permeate opaque glass with
designs of various colors." Besides this they could
color it with such brilliancy as to be able to imitate
precious stones in a manner which often defied
detection (Plin. ff. ff. xxxvil. 26, 33, 75). This
is probably the explanation of the incredibly large
gems which we find mentioned in ancient authors ;
e. g. Lurcher considers that the emerald column
alluded to by Herodotus (ii. 44) was "du verre
colon! dont l'inteneur eiait detain? par des lampes."
Strabo was told by an Alexandrian glass-maker
that this success was partly due to a rare and val-
uable earth found in Egypt (Beckmann, Hilton/ of
Inventions, " Colored Glass," i. 195 f. Eng. Transl ,
also U1. 208 f., iv. 54). Yet the perfectly clear and
transparent glass was considered the most valuable
(Plin. xxxvi. 26).
Some suppose that the proper name fTlB"1tp!p
O'Jj (burnings by the waters) contains an allusion
to Sidonian glass-factories (Meier on Jos. xi. 8, xiii.
6), but it is much more probable that it was so
ailed from the burning of Jabin's chariots at that
place (Lord A. Hervey, On the Genealogies, p. 228),
or from hot springs.
In the N. T. glass is alluded to as an emblem
irf brightness (Rev iv. 6, xr. 2, xxi. 18). The
three other places where the word occurs in the
A V. (1 Cor. xiii. 12; 2 Cor. Ui. 18; Jam. i. 23),
as also the word " glasses " (Is. iii. 23), are con-
sidered under Mirrors. For, strange to say,
although the ancients were aware of the reflective
power of glass, and although the Sidonians used it
for mirrors (Plin. H. N. xxxvi. 66), yet for some
unexplained reason mirrors of glass must have
proved unsuccessful, since even under the empire
they were universally made of metal, which is at
once less perfect, more expensive, and more difficult
to preserve (Diet, of Ant. art. Speculum).
F. W. F.
GLEANING {JTV^fS as applied to produce
generiHy, tDf?V rather to corn). The remarks
under Corkier on the definite character of the
rights of the poor, or rather of poor relations and
dependants, to a share of the crop, are especially
exemplified in the instance of Ruth gleaning in the
laid of Boas. Poor young women, recognized as
tstog "bis maidens," were gleaning his field, and
GOAD
on her daim upon him by near affinity being mall
known, she was bidden to join them and not go t»
any other field ; but for this, the reapers it seems
would have driven her away (Ruth ii. 6, 8, 9). The
gleaning of fruit trees, ss well ss of cornfields, was
reserved for the poor. Hence the proverb of Gideon,
Judg. viii. 2. Maimonides indeed lays down ths
principle ( Conttitutiones de dunu paupemm, ess
ii. 1), that whatever crop or growth is fit for food,
is kept, and gathered all at once, and carried into
store, is liable to that law. See for further remarks,
Maimon. Conititutbma de donis pauperum, eap. It.
H. H.
GLEDE, the old name for the common kite
(Stihus ater), occurs only in Dent. xiv. 18 (rHjTI)
among the unclean birds of prey, and if ntjT? be
the correct reading, we must suppose the name to
have been taken from the bird's aeuteness of vision;
but ss in the parallel passage in Lev. xi. 14 we
find rTK^r, tmltur, it is probable that we should
read »WJ in Deut. also. The LXX. have yfy in
both places. W. D.
GNAT (jrs>rai|i), mentioned only in the prover-
bial expression used by our Saviour in Matt, xxjii.
24, " Ye blind guides, which strain at a gnat and
swallow a camel." " Strain at, in the A. V., seems
to be a typographical error, since the translations
before the A. V. had " strain out," the Greek word
SwAifw signifying to strain through (a sieve, etc),
to filter (see Trench, On the Auth. Vert., 1st ed.
p. 131) [2d ed. p. 172]. The Greek «aW6 is the
generic word for gnat. W. D.
OOAD. The equivalent terms in the Hebrew
are (1) "TO 1 ?!? (Judg. iii. 81), and (2) 1}~T}
(1 Sam. xiii. 21; EccL iii. 11). The explanation
given by Jahn (Archaol. i. 4, § 59) is that the
former represents the pole, and the Utter the iron
spike vith which it was shod for the purpose of
goading. With regard to the latter, however, it
may refer to anything pointed, and the tenor of
Eccl. xii. requires rather the sense of a peg or nail,
anything in short which can be fattened; while in
1 Sam. xiii. the point of the ploughshare is more
probably intended. The former does probably refer
to the goad, the long handle of which might be
used as a formidable weapon (comp. Horn. /£ vi.
135), though even this was otherwise understood
by the LXX. as a ploughshare (iy r$ iporpiroSi):
it should also be noted that the etymological force
of the word is that of guiding (from "TC!^. to teach)
rather than goading (Saalschiitz, ArchdoL i. 1(6).
There are undoubted references to the use of the
goad in driving oxen in Ecclus. xxxviii. 26, and
Acts xxvi. 14. The instrument, as still used in the
countries of southern Europe and western Asia,
consists of a rod about eight feet long, brought tc
a sharp point and sometimes cased with iron at ths
bead (Harmer's Observations, iii. 348). The ex-
pression "to kick against the goads " (Acts ix. 5;
A. V. " the pricks " ), was proverbially used by the
Greeks for unavailing resistance to superior power
(comp. iEsch. Agam. 1633, Prom. 323; Eurip.
Bacch. 791). W. L. B.
* The use of the goad in driving animals, whiek
is still common in the East, is implied in 2 K. iv
24, where it explains a slight obscurity in the vara*
as given in the A. V. Mounted on her donkey-
Digitized by
Google
UOAT
a* favorite mode of travelling with oriental ladiet -
lbs Shunammite, intent on the utmost dispatch,
direct* her servant, running by her aide, U urge
the animal with the goad to it* full (peed.
The long ox-goad, used in the field, with an Iron
point at one end, and an iron paddle at the other
to dean the plough in the furrows, often was, and
■till is, a massive implrny.pt. In the hands of a
strong and valiant man, like Shamgar, as repre-
sented in Judg. iii. ill, it would be a destructive
weapon. (See Hackett's Ilhistr. of Scripture, p.
158.) 8. W.
GOAT. 1. Of the Hebrew words which are
translated goat and she-goat in A. V., the most
common if tS = Syr. J Li, Arab, yxft, Phom.
gfo- The Indo-Germanie languages ba/e a similar
word in S-inskr. ag'a = goat, ag'a) •---• she-goat,
Germ, geis or genu, Greek aQ, aiyit- The deri-
vation from TT9, to be strong, points to he-goat as
the original meaning, but it is also specially used
far she-goat, as iu Gen. xv. 9, xxxi. 38, xxxii. 14;
Num. xv. 37. In Judg. vi. 19 DMS , "n is ren-
dered kid, and in Dent xir. 4 QMS JIB? is
rendered the goat, but properly siginner flock of
goats. CMS is used eUipticaUy for goali' hair in
Ex. xxri. 7, xxxvi 14, Ac, Num. xxxi. 2 , and in
1 Sam. xix. 13.
9. O^/S? are wild or mountain goats, and are
rendered wUd" goats in the three passages of Scrip-
tore in which the word occurs, namely, 1 Sam.
xxiv. S, Job xxxix. 1, and Pa, dr. 18. The word
ii from a root '?J> *> ascend or climb, and is the
Heb. name of the ibex, which abounds in the moun-
tainous parts of the ancient territory of Moab. In
Job xxxix. 1, the LXX. have TpaytKiipw wtrpat.
3. IpM is rendered the wild goat in Deut. xiv.
i, and occurs only in this passage. It is a con-
tracted form of mp3H, according to Lee, who
renders it gazelle, but it is more properly the tra-
gelaphm or goat-deer (Shaw. SuppL p. 76).
4. Tin?, a he-goat, as Gesenius thinks, of four
months old — strong and vigorous. It occurs only
In the plural, and is rendered by A. V. indifferently
goats and he-goats (see Ps. L 9 and 13). In Jer.
L 8 it signifies he-goals, leaden of the nock, and
hence its metaphorical use in Is. xiv. 9 for chief
asm of the earth, and in Zeeh. x. 3, where goats
—principal men, chiefs. It is derived from the
psot in?, to set, to place, to prepare.
6 *TOT? occurs in 3 Chr. xxlx. 81, and in Dan.
rlH 5, 8 — it is followed by CMS!!, and signifies
a ho-goat of the goats. Gesenius derives it from
"I3?> to leap. It is a word found only in the later
books U the O. T. In Ear. vi. 17 we find the
Cfcald. form of the word, "I"??.
g, ~i>Siy |a translated goat, and signifies prap-
Srly a he-goat, being derived from ~f^Vf, to stand
m end, to bristle. It occurs frequently in Leviticus
«d Numbers (DM^nTI "VStp), and is the goat
GOAT 988
of the sin-offering, Lor. ix. 8, 18, 1. 16. Tht wort
is used as an adjective w<th "^B^ in Dan. via. SI.
" — and the goat, the rough one, is the king of
Javan."
7. VhF\ is from a root &FI, o strike. It is
rendered he-goat in Gen. xxx. 86, xxxii. 15, Prov.
xxx. 31, and 8 Chr. xrtt. 11. It does not ooour
elsewhere.
8- ''WJS) scape-goat in Lev. xvi. 8, 10, 86
On this word' see Atonement, Day or, p. 197.
In the N. T. the words rendered goats in Matt.
v. 38, 83, are tpi&os and ipl<pior = * young
goat, or kid ; and in Heb. ix. 12, IS, 19, and x. 4,
rodyot = he-goat. Goat-sUns, in Heb. xi. 37, are
in the Greek, <V atytiots tipiuuri*; and in Judg.
ii. 17 alyas is rendered goats. W. D.
There appear to be two or three varieties of the
common goat (Hircus agagrue) at present bred in
Palestine and Syria, but whether they are identical
with those which were reared by the ancient He-
brews it is not possible to say. The most marked
varieties are the Syrian goat ( Copra Mambrica,
Linn.), with long thick pendent ears, which are
often, says Russell {If at. Hitt. of Aleppo, ii. 150,
3d ed.), a foot long, and the Angora goat ( Copra
Angorensis, Linn.), with fine long hair. The Syr-
ian goat is mentioned by Aristotle {Hist An. ix.
27, { 3). There is also a variety that differs but
little from British specimens. Goats have from the
earliest ages been considered important animals in
rural economy, both on account of the milk they
afford, and the excellency of the flesh of the young
animals. The goat is figured on the Egyptian
monuments (see Wilkinson's Anc. Egypt, i. 233).
Col. Ham. Smith (Griffith's An. King. iv. 808)
describes three Egyptian breeds: one with long
hair, depressed horns, ears small and pendent;
another with horns very spiral, and ears longer
than the head ; and a third, which occurs in Upper
Egypt, without boms.
Goats were offered as sacrifices (Lev. iii. 12, ix. 16;
Ex. xii. 5, etc.); their milk was used as food (Prov.
xxvii. 27); their flmh was eaten (Deut. xiv. 4; Gen.
xxvii. 9); their hair was used for the curtains of
the tabernacle (Ex. xxvi. 7, xxxvi. 14), and for
stuffing bolsters (1 Sam. xix. 13) ; their skins were
sometimes used as clothing (Heb. xi. 37).
The passage in Cant. iv. 1, which compares the
hair of the beloved to " a flock of goats that eat of
Mount Gilead," probably alludes to the fine bah*
of the Angora breed. Some have very plausibly
supposed that the prophet Amos (iii. 12), when be
speaks of a shepherd " taking out of the mouth of
the lion two legs or a piece of an ear," alludes to
the long pendulous ears of the Syrian breed (see
Harmer's Obser. ir. 162). In Prov. xxx. 31, a he-
goat is mentioned as one of the " four things which
are comely in going; " in allusion, probably, to the
stately march of the leader of the flock, which was
always associated In the minds of the Hebrews
with the notion of dignity. Hence the metaphor
in Is. xir. 9, " all the chief ones (margin, ' great
goats') of the earth." So the Alexandrine ver-
sion of 'he LXX. understands the allusion, -col
rp&yot liyoipifYos alro\lov. m
As to the ye'ellm (CbS* : T-xryAoaw, lAar
a f'mip. Theocritus, Id. viii. 49, 'O rpiyt, rear AlW
u> «»> irrp; and Tlrg. Bd. rk. 7, " Ttr frajb tjar
Digitized by
Google
084
GOAT
•ot : Bt<*< I ,: wild ^oats," A. V.), it is not at nil
Improbable, a* the Vulg. interprets the word, that
■ome species of ibex is denoted, perhaps the Cnpra
Sinnitiai (Ehreub. ), the 13eden or Jaela of Egypt
and Arabia. This ibex was noticed at Sinai 'by
Ehrtnberg and Hemprich (Syni. 1'hya. t. 18), and
by Burckhardt (Trav. p. 526), who (p. 405) thus
Long-eared Syrian goat.
•peaks of these animals : " In all the valleys south
of the Modjeb, and particularly in those of Modjeb
and El Ahsa, large herds of mountain goats, called
by the Arabs Bedtn ( ,jlXj ), are met with. This
is the steinbock" or bouquetin of the Swiss and
Tyrol Alps. They pasture in flocks of forty and
fifty together. Great numbers of them are killed
by the people of Kerek and Tafyle, who hold their
flesh in high estimation. They sell the large knotty
horns to the Hebrew merchants, who carry them to
Jerusalem, where they are worked into handles for
knives and daggers The Arabs told me
that it is difficult to get a shot at them, and that
the hunters hide themselves among the reeds on
the banks of streams where the animals resort in
the evening to drink. They also asserted that,
when pursued, they will throw themselves from a
aeight of fifty feet and more upon their heads with-
out receiving any injury." Hassclquist (Trin: p.
190) s]>eaks of roek goats ( Copra cervicapra, Linn.)
which he saw hunted with falcons near Nazareth.
But the C. cervicapra of Linnaeus is an antelope
{Antiliyte cervicapra^ Pall.).
There is considerable difficulty attending the
identification of the akkA (TS), which the I.XX.
Tender by Tpayi\a<pos } and the Vulg. tragelaphVM.
The word, which occurs only in Deut. xiv. 5 as one
of the animals that might be eaten, is rendered
" wild goat " by the A. V. Some have referred
the (iHv to the n/iu of the Persians, i. e the Ca-
Breohltpggnrgut, or the " tailless roe " (Shaw, Zool.
U. 287), of Central Asia. If we could satisfactorily
establish the identity of the Persian word with the
Hebrew, the animal in question might represent
GOB
the (Mr) of the Pentateuch, which might formerly
have inhabited the I^banon, though it is not found
in Palestine now. Perhaps the paseng ( Cap. aga-
yrut, (Juv.) which some have taken to be the parent
stock of the common goat, and which at present
inhabits the mountains of Persia and Caucasus,
may have in Biblical times been found in Palestine
and may be the akkd of Scripture. But we allow
this is mere conjecture. W. H
« The Oyro Sinaitica is not identical with the
•wiss ibex or steinbock ( C. / w >. though It is a closely
•Uted species.
Goat of Mount Sinai.
GOAT, SCAPE. [Atoxement, Day of.]
GO'ATH (nr'S [see infra]: the LXX. seem
to have had a different text, and read <{ ticKe/crar
Ai'tW: Goatka), a ilace apparently in the neigh-
borhood of Jerusalem, and named, in connection
with the hill Gareb, only in Jer. xxxi. 39. The
name (which is accurately Goah, as above, the th
being added to connect the Hebrew particle of mo-
tion,— Goathah) is derived by Gcsenius from TTSi,
" to low," as a cow. In accordance with this is the
rendering of the Targum, which has for Goah,
K^jy n?""?.? = the heifer', pool. The Syriac,
on the other hand, has JtOCi-^, Uromto, "to
the eminence," perhaps reading PN? (Fiirst,
llandicb. p. 209 *).<< Owing to the presence of
the letter Am in Goath, the resemblance between
it and Golgotha does not exist in the original to
the same degree as in English. [Golgotha.]
G.
GOB (3', and ^S. perhaps = a pit or ditch;
r«0, 'Pd/i, Alex, [in ver. 19] To)3; [Comp. N»j8:]
Goo), a place mentioned only in 2 Sam. xxi. 18, 19,
as the scene of two encounters between David's
warriors and the Philistines. In the parallel ac-
count— of the first of these only = in 1 Chr. xx.
4, the name is given as Gezkr, and this, as well as
the omission of any locality for the second event,
is supported by Josephus (Ant. vii. 12, § 2). On
the other hand the LXX. and Syriac have Gath
in the first ease, a name which in Hebrew mnc>
resembles Gob ; and this appears to be liome out
' * Fiirst makes the Syriac = Felshugel, rack-hili (not
as above). FJ.
Digitized by
Google
GOBLET
*y the account of a third and subsequent fight,
smich all agree happened at Gath (3 Sam. xxi. 30;
1 Chr. xz. tt), and which, from the terms of the
.narrative, seems to have occurred at the same place
as the others. The suggestion if Nob — which
Davidson {Hebr. Text) reports as in many MSS.
and which is also found in copies of the LXX. —
is not admissible on account of the situation of
that place. G.
GOBLET (]3N : xparnp: crater} joined with
"int? to express roundness, Cant vii. 2; Gesen.
The$. pp. 22, 39; in plur. Ex. xxiv. 6, A. V. "ba-
sons; " Is. xxii. 24, LXX. literally aywafth crate-
rct: A. Y. "cups "), a circular vessel for wine or
other liquid. [Basin.] H. W. P.
• GODLINESS, MYSTERY OF. [Bap-
tism, vii. 5, p. 239.]
* GOD SPEED is the translation of vaiptiv
in 2 John 10, 11, the Greek form of salutation. It
has been transferred from the Anglo-Saxon g6d-
•pedi'j, but with a different meaning there, namely,
" good-speed." H.
gog. l. (aia: Ttoy< [C° m P- AU - r«*y0
Gog.). A Keubenite (1 Chr. v. 4); according to
the Hebrew text son of Shemaiah. The LXX.
have a different text throughout the passage.
2. [Magog.]
3. In the Samarit. Codex and LXX. of Num.
xxiv. 7, Gog is substituted for Aqao.
GO'LAN 0!?H2 [a arch, region, Diet*.
Font; migration, Gee.]: Tav\Ar, [in 1 Chr. vl.
71, r«AdV; Alex, also in Josh. TwAay: Gaulon,
sxcDeot Goian]), a city of Bsshan 0^3 1^13,
Dent. iv. 43) allotted out of the half tribe of Ma-
nissrh to the Levites (Josh. xxi. 27), and one of
the three cities of refuge east of the Jordan (xx. 8).
We find no further notice of it in Scripture; and
though Eusebius and Jerome say it was still an im-
portant place in their time ( Onom. s. v. ; Reland,
p. 815), its very site is now unknown. Some have
supposed that the village of /fa ion, on the eastern
border of Jauldn, around which are extensive ruins
(see Handbook for Syr. and PaL), is identical
with the ancient Golan ; but for this there is not a
shadow of evidence; and Nam besides is much too
far to the eastward.
The city of Golan is several times referred to by
Josephus (IWAdVn, B. J. i. 4, $ 4, and 8); he,
however, more frequently speaks of the province
which took its name from it, Gaulanitis (VavKar'i-
ris). When the kingdom of Israel was overthrown
by the Assyrians, and the dominion of the Jews in
Bsshan ceased, it appears that the aboriginal tribes,
bates kept in (.abjection, but never annihilated,
rose again to some power, and rent the country
into provinces. Two of these provinces at least
rare of ancient origin [Tbachonitis and Had-
KAit], and had been distinct principalities previous
lo the time when Og or his predecessors united
them under one sceptre. Before the Babylonish
captivity Baahan appears in Jewish history as c
Kingdom ; but subsequent to that period it is spo-
ken of as divided into four provinces — Gaulauitis,
Tsaehonitis, Auranitis, and Batanea (Joseph. Ant.
hr. 6, J 3, and 7, § 4, i. 6, § 4, xvi. 9, $ 1; B. J.
I 20. f 4, iii. 3, § 1, iv. 1, § 1). It seems that
when the city of Golan rose to powe.- it became the
head of s large province, the extent of wh.'ih is
GOLAN 98£
pretty accurately given by Josephus, espraauy when
his statements are compared with the modern di-
visions of Bsshan. It lay east of Galilee, and north
of Gadaritis (Gadara, Joseph. B. J> iii. 3, § 1).
Gamala, an important town on the eastern bank
of the Sea of Galilee, now called El-Hum (see
Handbook for Syr. and PaL), and the province
attached to it, were included in Gaulanitis (B. J.
iv. 1, § 1). But the boundary of the provinces of
Gadara and Gamala must evidently hare been the
river Hieromax, which may therefore be regarded
as the south border of Gaulanitis. Toe Jordan
from the Sea of Galilee to its fountains at Dan and
Csesarea-Philippi, formed the western boundary
(B. J. iii. 3, $ 5). It is Important to observe that
the boundaries of the modern province of Jauldn
..tjy^. is the Arabic form of the Hebrew
] VIS, from which is derived the Greek Tav\ay7-
tm) correspond so far with those, of Gaulanitis;
we may, therefore, safely assume that their north-
ern and eastern boundaries are also identical. Jau-
lan is bounded on the north by J tour (the ancient
Ituraa), and on the east by Haurftn [Haukak].
The principal cities of Gaulanitis were Golan, Hip-
pos, Gamala, Julias or Bethsaida (Mark viii. 22),
Seleucia, and Sogane (Joseph. B. J. iii. 3, $ 1, and
S, iv. 1, § 1). The site of Bethsaida is at a small
tell on the left bank of the Jordan [Bkthsaida] ;
the ruins of KuTat el-Hum mark the place of Ga-
mala; but nothing definite is known of the others.
The greater part of Gaulanitis is a flat and fertile
table-land, well-watered, and clothed with luxuriant
grass. It is probably to this region the name
Mitkor (It&'Q) is given in 1 K. xx. 23, 26 —
'• the plain " in which the Syrians were overthrown
by the Israelites, near Aphek, which perhaps stood
upon the site of the modern Fik (Stanley, App.
§ 6; Handbook for S. and P. p. 425). The
western side of Gaulanitis, along the Sea of Gali-
lee, is steep, rugged, and bare. It is upwards of
2,500 feet in height, and when seen from the city
of Tiberias resembles a mountain range, though in
reality it is only the supporting wall of the plateau.
It was this remarkable feature which led the ancient
geographers to suppose that the mountain range of
Gilead was joined to Lebanon (Reland, p. 342).
Further north, along the bank of the upper Jordan,
the plateau breaks down in a series of terraces,
which, though somewhat rocky, are covered with
rich soil, and clothed in spring with the most lux-
uriant herbage, spangled with multitudes of bright
and beautiful flowers. A range of low, round-
topped, picturesque hills, extends southwards for
nearly 20 miles from the base of Hernion along
the western edge of the plateau. These are in
places covered with noble forests of prickly oak and
terebinth. Gaulanitis was once densely populated,
but it is now almost completely deserted. The
writer has a list of the towns and villages which it
once contained; and in it are the names of 127
places, all of which, with the exception of about
eleven, are now uninhabited. Only a few patches
of its soil are cultivated ; and the very best of its
pasture is tost — the tender grass of early spring
1 The flocks of the Turkmans and el-Fudkl Arabs —
I the only tnoes that remain permanently in this
region — are not able to oonsume it; and the
I 'Anaxeh, those " children of the East " who spread
' over the land like locusts, and " wnose camels sit
' without number " (Judg. vii. 12), onlv arrive about
Digitized by
Google
#W GOLD
lb* beginning of May. At Hut season the whole
gnantry is oovaed with them — their black tenti
pitched in circle* Dear the fountain*; their cattle
thickly dotting the vast plain ; and their fierce cav-
alier* roaming far and wide, " their hand against
•vary man, and every man'* hand againit them."
For fuller account* of the acenery, antiquities,
and history of Gaulanltu, *ee Porter's Handbook
for By. and PaL pp. 296, 424, 461, 531; Five
Tears m Damascus, ii. 250; Journal of Sac. Lit.
ri. 282; Burckhardt'* Trav. m Syr. p. 277.
J. L. P.
GOLD, the mo*t valuable of metal*, from it*
color, lustre, weight, ductility, and other useful
properties (Plin. //. N. xxxiii. 19). Hence it i*
■land a* an emblem of purity (Job zxiii. 10) and
nobility (Lam. iv. 1). There are six Hebrew word*
used to denote it, and four of them occur in Job
xxviii. 15, 16, 17. These are:
L -^Tt* " ie 00mmon name, connected with
3HtJ (to be yellow), a* geld, from gel, yellow.
Various epithets are applied to it: as, "fine" (2
<-"hr. iii. 5), " refined " (1 Chr. xxviii. 18), " pure "
(Ez.xxv.ll). In opposition to these," beaten "gold
(t>YTt"» 't) i* probably maud gold ; LXX. i\trris;
used of Solomon's shields (1 K. x. 16).
2. "TO^ (mi/diXum) treasured, I e. fine gold
(1 K. vi. 20, vii. 49, Ac.). Many names of precious
substance* in Hebrew come from roots signifying
concealment, as )'"OT*"5 (Gen. xliii. 23, A. V.
"treasure").
3. T"J, pure or native gold (Job xxviii. 17 ; Cant.
». 16; probably from ***, *° separate). Rosen-
muller (Alitrthumsk. iv. p. 49) make* it come from
a Syriae root meaning solid or massy ; but "1171©
(8 Chr. ix. 17) corresponds to TB-ltS (1 K. x. 18).
The LXX. render it by fJBos riant, xp^"» y
frupov (I*, xiii. 12 ; Tbeodot. &r«p8or ; comp.
Thuc. ii. 13; Plin. xxxiii. 19, obrussa). In Pa.
exix. 127, the LXX. render it rowifav (A. V.
"fine gold"); but Schleusner happily conjectures
ri ri(ior, the Hebrew word being adopted to avoid
the repetition of xp&eros (The*, s. v. ToVaf; Hesych.
». r. vdfior).
4. K5"l, g°hi earth, or a mass of raw ore (Job
xxii. 24, irupov, A. V. "gold as dust").
The poetical name* for gold are:
1. OTIS (also implying something concealed);
LXX. xp&otov; and in Is. xiii. 12, kt$ot woAv-
TfKiis. In Job xxxvii. 22, it is rendered in A. V.
" (air weather;" LXX. vi<pn xpvo-auyoirra.
IComp. Zech. iv. 12.)
2. Y*On, = dug out (Prov. via. 10), a gen-
sral name, which has become special, Ps. lxviii.
13, where it cannot mean gems, as some suppose
(Bochart, Hieroz. torn. ii. p. 9). Hichaelis coll-
ects the word ch&ruiz with the Greek xpwrot-
Gold was known from the very earliest time*
(Gen. ii. 11 ). Pliny attributes the discovery of
h (at Mount Pangsus), and the art of working it,
to Cadmus (H. N. vii. 57); and his statement is
adopted by Clemens Alexandrinus (Strom, i. 363,
sd. Pott.). It was at first chiefly used for oma-
, etc (Gen. xxiv. 22) ; and although Abraham
GOLGOTHA
is said to have been " very rich in cattle, la *Jv*
and in gold " (Gen. xiii. 2), yet no mention of it.
as used in purchases, is made till after his retus
from Egypt. Coined money was not known to the
ancients (e. g. Horn. //. vii. 473) till a compara-
tively late period ; and on the Egyptian tomb* gold
1* represented as being weighed in rings for com-
mercial purpose*. (Comp. Gen. xliii. 21.) No coins
are found in the ruins of Egypt or Assyria (Layard's
If in. ii. 418). '• Even so late as tie tin;* of David
gold was not used as a standard jf value, but was
considered merely as a very precious article of com-
merce, and was miyhed like other tu tides " (Jahn.
Arch. BibL § 115, 1 Chr. xxi. 25).
Gold was extremely abundant in ancient tunas
(1 Chr. xxii. 14; 2 Chr. i. 15, ix. 9; Nab. ii. 9;
Dan. iii. 1); but this did not depreciate its value,
because of the enormous quantities consumed by
the wealthy in furniture, etc. (1 K. vi. 22, x. pas-
sim; Cant. iii. 9, 10; Esth. i. 6; Jer. x. 9; comp.
Horn. Od. t\i. 55; Herod, ix. 82). Probably too
the art of gilding was known extensively, being
applied even to the battlements of a city (Herod,
i. 98, and other authorities quoted by Layard, ii.
264).
The chief countries mentioned as producing gold
are Arabia, Sheba, and Ophir (1 K. ix. 28, x. 1;
Job xxviii. 16 : in Job xxii. 24, the word Ophir is
used for gold). Gold la not found in Arabia now
(Niebubr's Travels, p. 141), but It used to be
(Artemidor. ap. Strab. xvi. 8, 18, where he speaks
of an Arabian river ^f,yua xpvoov narcupipttr).
Diodorus also says that it was found there native
{tnrvoov) in good-sized nuggets (Bvkipta). Some
suppose that Ophir was an Arabian port to which
gold was brought (comp. 2 Chr. ii. 7, ix. 10).
Other gold-bearing countries were Uphaz (Jer. x.
9; Dan. x. 5) and Parvaim (2 Chr. iii. 6).
Metallurgic processes are mentioned in Pa. lxvi
10, Prov. xvii. 3, xxrii. 21; and in Is. xlvi. 6, the
trade of goldsmith (cf. Judg. xvii. 4, 1*12) is
alluded to in connection with the overhying of
idols with gold-leaf (Rosenmiiller's Minerals of
Script, pp. 46-61). [Handicraft.] F. W. F.
• GOLDSMITH. [Handicraft.]
GOL'GOTHA (ro\yo»a [astuO]: Golgotha),
the Hebrew name of the spot at which our Lord
was crucified (Matt, xxvii. 33; Mark xv. 22; John
xix. 17). By these three Evangelists it is inter-
preted to mean the " place of a skull." St. Luke,
in accordance with his practice in other ease* (com-
pare Gabbatha, Gethsemane, etc.), omits the He-
brew term and gives only its Greek equivalent,
Kpayiov. The word Calvary, which in Luke xxiii.
33 is retained in the A. V. from the Vulgate, as
the rendering of Kpayiov, obscures the statement
of St. Luke, whose words are really as follows.
" the place which is called ' a skull ' " — not, as in
the other Gospels, Kpayiov, "of a skull;" thus
employing the Greek term exactly as they do the
Hebrew one. [Calvary, Amer. ed.]. This He-
brew, or rather Chaldee, term, was doubtless
HP j>|^, Gulgoba, in pure Hebrew nbib*.
applied to the skull on account of its round globu-
lar form, that being the idea at the root of the
word.
Two explanations of the name are given : (1) that
it was a spot where executions ordinarily took place
and therefore abounded in skulls ; but wcordinj U
the Jewish law these muit have ben buried, ai*
Digitized by
Google
GOLIATH
m no more likely to confer a name on
the spot than any other part of ths skeleton. In
kail cue too the Greek should be -6*01 xparlcty,
"of skulls," instead of xpcwlov, "of a skull,"
■till leas "a skull " as in the Hebrew, and in the
Greek of St. Luke. Or (2) it may come from the
look or form of the spot itself, bald, round, and
tkull-like, and therefore a mound or hillock, in
accordance with the common phrase — for which
there is no direct authority — " Mount Calvary."
Whichever of these is the correct explanation —
and there is apparently no means of deciding with
certainty — Golgotha seems to have been a known
spot. This is to be gathered from the way in which
it is mentioned in the Gospels, each except St.
Matthew « having the definite article — " the place
Golgotha " — " the place which is called a skull "
— " the place (A. V. omits the article) called of.
or after, a skulL" It was "outside the gate,"
f{» Ttji wuAiji (Heb. xiii. 12) but close to the city,
eyy** T7j» to\«» (John xix. 20); apparently near
a thoroughfare on which there were passers-by.
This road or path led out of the "country"*
(iypis)- It was probably the ordinary spot for
executions. Why should it have been otherwise ?
To those at least who carried the sentence into
effect, Christ was but an ordinary criminal; and
there is not a word to indicate that the soldiers in
" leading Him sway " went to any other than the
usual place for what must have been a common
operation. However, in the place (iv ry r6wif)
itself — at the very spot — was a garden, or orchard
(wipror).
These are all the indications of the nature and
situation of Golgotha which present themselves in
the N. T. Its locality in regard to Jerusalem is
fully examined in the description of the city.
[Jbbudalem.]
A tradition at one time prevailed that Adam was
buried on Golgotha, that from bis skull it derived
its name, and that at the Crucifixion the drops of
Christ's blood fell on the skull and raised Adam to
the, whereby the ancient prophecy quoted by St.
Paul is Eph. v. 14 received its fulfillment— "Awake,
thou Adam that sleepest," — so the old versions
appear to have run — " and arise from the dead,
for Christ shall touch thee " (rs-n^auo-ti for ht-
ytasVtt). See Jerome, Comm. on Matt, xxvii. 33,
and the quotation in Reland, Pal. p. 860; also
Ssswulf, in Early Travel*, p. 39. The skull com-
monly introduced in early pictures of the Crucifixion
refers to this.
A connection has been supposed to exist between
Goath and Golgotha, but at the best this is mere
tonjeeture, and there is not in the original the
same similarity between the two names — H53
sad HTlbaba— whioh exists In their English or
Latin garb, and which probably occasioned the
suggestion. G.
GOM'ATH (TPb| [sjkdMfor, briUianl, Dtetr. ;
ant see below]: Te\Mt QoUalh), a famous giant
if Oath, who " morning and evening for forty days"
laBed the armies of Israeli Sam. xvil.). He was
possibly descended from the old Rephaim, of whom
» scattered remnant took refuge with the Philis-
tines after their dispersion by the Ammonites (Deut.
L 90, 21; 2 Sam. xxl. 22). Some trace of this
Wu dltl o u may be preserved in the giant's name, if
toe has the artel* In Coosx B.
GOLIATH 981
it be connected with T$£% an exile. Shnoms.
however, derives it from an Arabic word meaning
"stout" (Gesen. Tket. s. v.). His height was
" six cubits and a span," which, taking the cubit
at 21 inches, would make him 10, feet high. But
the LXX. and Josephus read "four cubits and a
span" (1 Sam. xvii. 4; Joseph. Ant vi. 9, § 1).
This will make him about the same size as the
royal champion slain by Antimenidas, brother of
Alcaeus (i,wo\tlwam plav /tiyov ravim awe
wl/twar, ap. Strab. xiii. p. 617, with Miiller's
emendation). Even on this computation Goliath
would be, as Josephus calls him, art\p vo/^trvcOcV
rarot — a truly enormous man.
The circumstances of the combat are in aD
respects Homeric; free from any of the puerile
legends which oriental imagination subsequently
introduced into it — as for instance that the stones
used by David called out to him from the brook,
" By our means you shall slay the giant," eto.
(Hottinger, Bin. Orient, i. 3, p. Ill ft; D'Her
helot, s. v. Gialut). The fancies of the Rabbis are
yet more extraordinary. After the victory David
cut off Goliath's head (1 Sam. xvii. 51; comp
Herod, iv. 6; Xenoph. Anab. v. 4, § 17; Niebuhr
mentions a similar custom among the Arabs, Deter.
Winer, t. v.), which he brought to Jerusalem
(probably after his accession to the throne, Ewald,
Gtech. iii. 94), while he hung the armor in his
tent
The scene of this famous combat was the Valley
of the Terebinth, between Shochoh and Azekah,
probably among the western passes of Benjamin,
although a confused modern tradition has given the
name of 'Am Jdlid (spring of Goliath) to the
spring of Harod, or " trembling " (Stanley, p. 342;
Judg. Vii. 1). [EUAH, VALLRY OF.]
In 2 Sam. xxl. 19, we find that another Goliath
of Gath, of whom it is also said that " the staff of
his spear was like a weaver's beam," was slain by
Elhanan, also a Bethlehemite. St. Jerome ( Quant.
Btbr. ad loc.) makes the unlikely conjecture that
Elhanan was another name of David. The A. V .
here interpolates the words ■' the brother of," from
1 Chr. xx. 5, where this giant is called " LahmL*
This will be found fully examined under Ki-
HAKAH.
In the title of the Psalm added to the Psalter in
the LXX. we find r$ Aai/18 wse> rbr FaAUlS; sad
although the allusions are vague, it is perhaps pos-
sible that this Psalm may have bean written after
the victory. This Psalm is given at length under
David, p. 654 0. It is strange that we find no
more definite allusions to this combat In Hebrew
poetry; but it is the opinion of some that the song
now attributed to Hannah (1 Sam. ii. 1-10) was
originally written really in commemoration of
David's triumph on this occasion (Thenius, die
Bicker Sam. p. 8; comp. Bertholdt, fXnL lii.
915; Ewald, PoeU Bicker dee A. B. 1. HI).
By the Mohammedans Saul and Goliath are
called Taluth and Galuth (Jalut in Koran), perhaps
for the sake of the komoieteleuton, of whioh they
are so fond (Hottinger, ffisfc Orient 1. 3, p. 28).
Abulfeda mentions a Canaanite king of the name
Jalut (Bin. Anieiilam. p. 178, in Winer s. v.) ; and,
according to Ahmed al-Fassl, Gialout was a dynastla
name of the old glant-chleft (D'Herbelot, a. v.
Fc'aithin). [Giahts.] P. W. F.
6 But ths Vulgate has * *•«*•
Digitized by
Google
988
GOMEB
GCMER Opi [compktmtu] : Tafiip; [In
Beak., ra/1/0:] Comer). L The eldest son of
Japheth, and the father of Ashkenas, Riphath, and
Togarmah (Gen. z. 9, 3; [1 Chr. i. 5, 6]). His
name is subsequently noticed but once (Ex. xxxviii.
6) as an ally or subject of the Scythian king Gog.
He is generally recognized as the progenitor of the
early Cimmerians, of the later Cimbri and the other
branches of the Celtic family, and of the modern
Gael and Cymry, the latter presenting with very
slight deviation the original name. The Cimme-
rians, when first known to us, occupied the Tauric
Chersonese, where they left traces of their presence
m the ancient names, Cimmerian Bosphorus, Cim-
merian Isthmus, Mount Cimmerium, the district
Cimmeria, and particularly the Cimmerian walls
(Her. iv. 12, 46, 100 ; .«sch. Prom. Vinci. 729), and
in the modem name Crimea. They forsook this
abode under the pressure of the Scythian tribes,
and during the early part of the 7th century B. c.
they poured over the western part of Asia Minor,
committing immense devastation, and defying for
more than half a century the power of the Lydian
kings. They were finally expelled by Alyattes, with
the exception of a few, who settled at Sinope and
Antandrus. It was about the same period that
Ezekiel noticed them, as acting in conjunction with
Armenia (Togarmah) and Magog (Scythia). The
connection between Gomer and Armenia is sup-
ported by the tradition, preserved by Moses of
Chorene (i. 11), that Gamir was the ancestor of
the Haichian kings of the latter country. After
the expulsion of the Cimmerians from Asia Minor
their name disappears in its original form; but
there can be little reasonable doubt that both the
name and the people are to be recognized in the
Cimbri, whose abodes were fixed during the Roman
Empire in the north and west of Europe, partic-
nlarly in the Cimbric Chersonese (Denmark), on
the coast between the Elbe and Mine, and in Bel-
gium, whence they had crossed to Britain, and
occupied at one period the whole of the British isles,
but were ultimately driven back to the western and
northern districts, which their descendants still
occupy in two great divisions, the Gael in Ireland
and Scotland, the Cymry in Wales. The latter
name preserves a greater similarity to the original
Gomer than either of the classical forms, the con-
sonants being identical. The link to connect Cymry
with Cimbri is furnished by the forms Cambria
and CVunoer-land. The whole Celtic race may
therefore be regarded as descended from Gomer,
tnd thus the opinion of Josephus (Ant. i. 8, § 1),
that the Galatians were sprung from him, may be
reconciled with the view propounded. Various
other conjectures bare been hazarded on the sub-
ject: Bochart (Phaleg, iii. 81) identifies the name
on etymological grounds with Phrygia ; Wahl
(Aden, i. 274) proposes Cappadocia; and Kalisch
'Comm. on Gen.) seeks to Identify it with the
Ohomari, a nation in Bactriana, noticed by Ptolemy
(Ti. 11, $ 8).
2. [roV«p.] The daughter of Diblaim, and
concubine of Hosea (i. 3). The name is significant
of a maiden, ripe for marriage, and connects well
GOMORRAH
with tlv. name Diblaim, which U tlso
from the subject at fruit W. L. 11
GOMORTtAH (rnt», Gh'morak, prob-
ably tubmerrion, from "W'J, an unused root; in
Arabic «+£, ghamara, is to "overwhelm with
water": Tiiui^ba- Gomorrka), one of the fin
citirs of the plain," or "vale of Siddim," that
under their respective kings joined battle there
with Chedorlaomer (Gen. xiv. 2-8) and his allies,
by whom they were discomfited till Abram came tc
the rescue. Four out of the five were afterwards
destroyed by the Lord with fire from heaven (Gen.
xix. 23-29). One of them only, Zoar or Beb,
which was its original name, was spared at the
request of Lot, in order that be might take refuge
there. Of these Gomorrah seems to have been
only second to Sodom in importance, as well as in
the wickedness that led to their overthrow. What
that atrocity was may be gathered from Grn. xix.
4-8. Their miserable fate is held up as a warning
to the children of Israel (Deut xxix. 23j; as a
precedent for the destruction of Babylon (Is. xiii.
19, and Jer. 1. 40), of Edom (Jer. xlix. 18), of
Moab (Zeph. ii. 9), and even of Israel (Am. iv.
11). By St. Peter in the N. T., and by St. Jude
(2 Pet ii. 8; Jude, w. 4-7), it is made "an en-
sample unto those that after should live ungodly,"
or "deny Christ-" Similarly their wickedness
rings as a proverb throughout the prophecies (e. g.
Deut. xxxii. 32; Is. i. 9, 10; Jer. xxiii. 14). Je-
rusalem herself is there unequivocally called Sodom,
and her people Gomorrah, for their enormities; just
in the same way that the corruptions of the Church
of Rome have caused her to be called Babylon. On
the other hand, according to the N. T., there is a
sin which exceeds even that of Sodom and Gomor-
rah, that, namely of which Tyre and Sidon, Ca-
pernaum, Cborazin, and Bethsaida were guilty, when
they "repented not," in spite of "the mighty
works " which they had witnessed (Matt. x. 16);
and St. Mark has ranged under the same category
all those who would not receive the preaching of
the Apostles (vi. 11).
To turn to their geographical position, one pas-
sage of Scripture seems expressly to assert that the
vale of Siddim had become the " salt," or dead,
"sea" (Gen. xiv. 3), called elsewhere too the "sea
of the plain" (Josh. xii. 3); the expression, how-
ever, occurs antecedently to their overthrow." Jo-
sephus (Ant. i. 9) says that the lake Asphaltites or
Dead Sea, was formed out of what used to be the
valley where Sodom stood; but elsewhere he de-
clares that the territory of Sodom was not sub-
merged in the lake (B. J. iv. 8, § 4), but still
existed parched and burnt up, as is the appearance
of that region still ; and certainly nothing in Scrip-
ture would lead to the idea tbat they were destroyed
by submersion — though they may have been sub-
merged afterwards when destroyed — for their de-
struction is expressly attributed to the brimstone
and fire rained upon them from heaven (Gen. xix.
24; see also Deut xxix. 23, and Zeph. ii. 9; also
St. Peter and St. Jude before cited). And St
Jerome in the Onomatticon says of Sodom, " civitat
u •This view, we think, 4s Inesneot Wshaveno
Mason to regard the record (Gen. xtv. 8), at least In
Bbs Jbrm in which we have it, as older than the date
■f the destruction of the cities. The next remark
lias in regard to Josephus must be an Jnadrartsnee.
Josephus doss not affirm that Sodom was In the vols
of Siddim. He »rs that it lay near It , and his «w»
testimonies, quoted in the article above, are enttosl*
consistent t ■ W".
Digitized by
Google
GOMORRHA
diviio igne consumpta juxta man mor-
taum," and so of the rest (ibid. a. v.). The whole
subject is ably handled by Cellarius (ap. Ugol.
Thetaur. vii. pp. docxxxix.-lxxviii.V though it is
not always necessary to agree with his conclusions.
Among modern travellers, Dr. Robinson shows that
the Jordaii ooidd not hare ever flowed into the gulf
of 'AkahJi i on the contrary that the rivers of the
d<"sert themselves flow northwards into the Dead
Sea. [Arabah.] And this, added to the con-
figuration and deep depression of the valley, serves
in his opinion to prove that there must have been
always a lake there, into which the Jordan flowed ;
though he admits it to have been of far less extent
than it now is, and even the whole southern part
of it to have been added subsequently to the over-
throw of the four cities, which stood, according to
him, at the original south end of it, Zoar probably
being situated in the mouth of Wady Kerak, as it
opens upon the Isthmus of the peninsula. In the
same plain, he remarks, were slime pits, or wells of
bitumen (Gen. xiv. 10 ; " salt-pits " also, Zeph. ii.
9); while the enlargement of the lake he considers
to have been caused by some convulsion or catas-
trophe of nature connected with the miraculous
destruction of the cities — volcanic agency, that of
earthquakes and the like (BM. Rte. ii. 187-192,
3d ed.). He might have adduced the great earth-
quake at Lisbon as a case in point. The great
difference of level between the bottoms of the
northern and southern ends of the lake, the former
1,300, the latter only 13 feet below the surface, sin-
gularly confirms the above view (Stanley, S. <f P.
p. 287, 2d ed.). Pilgrims of Palestine formerly
saw, or fancied that they saw, ruins of towns at the
bottom of the sea, not far from the shore (see
Maundrell, Early Tnivelt, p. 454). M. de Saulcy
was the first to point out ruins along the shores
(the Raljom-tLiltzorrhel ; and more particularly
apropos to our present subject, Gvumran on the
N. W.). Both perhaps are right. Gomorrah (as
'its very name implies) may hare been mere or less
submerged with the other three, subsequently to
their destruction by fire; while the ruins of Zoar,
inasmuch as it did not share their fate, would be
found, if found at all, upon the shore. (See gen-
erally Mr. Isaac's Dead Sea.) [Sodom, Amer. ed.]
E.S. Ff.
GOMORTiHA, the manner in which the
name Gomorrah is written in the A. V. of the
Apocryphal books and the New Testament, follow-
ing the Greek form of toe word, r6/iopl>a (2 Esdr.
tL8; Matt. x. IS; Mark vi. 11; Rom. ix. 29 J Jude
-; 2 Pet, ii. 6).
• GOODMAN OF THE HOTJSK (oUo-
*«o"T«Vi|i), employed in the A. V. of the master
af the house (Matt. ix. 11), and simply equivalent
to that expression, without any reference to moral
character. This was a common usage when the A.
V. was made. The Greek term being the same,
there was no good reason for saying " goodman of
the house " in that verse, and " house holder " at
the beginning of the parable (ver. 1). See Trench,
Authorized Version, p. 96 (1859). H.
GOPHBR WOOD. Only once In Gen. vi.
14. The Hebrew ~IS a ^"2, trees of Gopher, does
sot occur In the cognate dialects. The A. V. has
aside no attempt at translation: the LXX ((i\a
rwrpdrfmru) and Vulgate (ligna lascigvia, iicitsd
tjy metathesis of "1 and ^ ("IE3 = *\~%, the for
GORTYNA
mer having refereuce to square blocks, cut by the
axe, the latter to planks smoothed by the plane,
have not found much favor with modem commen-
tators.
The conjectures of cedar (Aben Ezra, Onk
Jonath. and Kabbins generally), avod mott proper
to float (Kiiuchi), the Greek KtSptXirn (Jim
Tremell.; Buit.), pine (Avenar. ; Munst.), tur-
pentine (Castalio), are little better than gratuitous.
The rendering cedar has been defended by Pclletier,
who refers to the great abundanse of this tree in
Asia, and the durability of its timber.
The Mohammedan equivalent is tig, by whiih
Herbelot understands the Indian plane-tree. Two
principal conjectures, however, have been proposed :
(1.) By Is. Yossius (Diu. de LXX. Jnterp. c. 12)
that "155= ^?3| re * , ' n ; whence 3 "'SJ, meaning
any trees of the resinous kind, such as pine, fir,
etc (2.) By Fuller (MitcelL &ic. iv. 5), Bochart
(Phaleg, i. 4), Celsius (Bierobot. pt. i. p. 328),
Hasse (Kntdeckungen, pt. ii. p. 78), that Gopher is
cypress, in favor of which opinion (adopted by
Gesen. Lex. ) they adduce the similarity in sound
of gopher and cypress (,icvrap = yo$tp); the suit-
ability of the cypress for ship- building; and the
fact that this tree abounded in Babylonia, and more
particularly in Adiabene, where it supplied Alex-
ander with timber for a whole fleet (Arrian. vii. p.
161, ed. Steph.).
A tradition is mentioned in Eutychius (AnnnU,
p. 34) to the effect that the Ark was made of the
wood Sad/, by which is probably meant not the
ebony, but the Juniperw Sabina, a species of cy-
press (Bochart and Gels.; Kosenm. Schol ad Gen.
vi. 14, and AUerthumdc. vol. iv. pt. 1). T. E. B.
GOR'GIAS (Ityyfcn; [Alex. 1 Mace. Hi. 38,
2 Mace. xii. 35, 37, Vopytiaii 1 Mace. iv. 5, Kop-
•yias] ), a general in the service of Antiochus Epi-
phanes (1 Mace. iii. 38, &r))p Swarbs t&v <pt\ur
tov jSa<n\e«r; cf. 2 Mace. viii. U), who was ap-
pointed by his regent Lysias to a command in the
expedition against Judaai B. c. 166, in which he
was defeated by Judas Maccabeus with great loss
(1 Mace. iv. 1 ff.). At a later time (b. c. 164) he
held a garrison in Jamnia, and defeated the forces
of Joseph and Azarias, who attacked him contrary
to the orders of Judas (1 Mace. v. 56 ff. ; Joseph.
Ant. xii. 8, § 6; 2 Mace. xii. 32). The account
of Gorgias in 2 Mace, is very obscure. He is
represented there as acting in a military capacity
(2 Mace. x. 14, orponryor rif tiitvv (?),
hardly of Coele-Syria, as Grimm (£. c.) takes it),
apparently in concert with the Idunueans, and
afterwards he is described, according to the present
text as, "governor of IdumsBa'" (2 Mace. xii. 32),
though it is possible (Giotius, Grimm, I. c.) that
the reading is an error for " governor of Jamnia "
(Joseph. Ant. xii. 8, § 6, 6 rrit 'la/m'tat arparri-
yis). The hostility of the Jews towards him is
described in strong terms (2 Mace. xii. 35. rbr
Katriparor, A. V. " that cursed man " ) : aid while
his success is only noticed in passing, hit defeat
and flight are given in detail, though confusedly
(2 Mace. xii. 34-38; cf. Joseph. L c).
The name itself was borne by one of Alexander's
generals, and occurs at later times among the east-
em Greeks. B. F. W.
GORTYTfA (rdpnwoi [rrfpriws in 1 Maee.]
h, .'laancal writers, rdprvra or roprfo: [Gortysa]),
a ™ty of Crete, and m ancient times its most im
Digitized by
Google
940 GOSHEN
Mttant city, uext to Cnossus. The only direct
Biblical interest of Gortyna is in the fact that it
appears from 1 Mace. xv. 23 to have contained
Jewish residents. [Crkte.] The circumstance
alluded to in this passage took place in the reign
of Ptolemy Physcon; and it is possible that the
Jews had increased in Crete during the reign of
his predecessor Ptolemy Pbilometor, who received
many of them into Egypt, and who also rebuilt
some parts of Gortyna (Strab. x. p. 478). This
city was nearly half-way between the eastern and
western extremities of the island ; and it is worth
while to notice that it was near Fair Havens; so
that St Paul may possibly have preached the gos-
pel there, when on his voyage to Rome (Acts xxrii.
8, 9). Gortyna seems to have been the capital of
the island under the Romans. For the remains on
the old site and in the neighborhood, see the Mu-
seum of Classical Antiquities, ii. 377-286.
J. 8. H.
GCSHEN fl#a: IW M ; [Gen. xlvi. 29,
'HodWiro'Att; forver. 28 see below:] Gessm), a
word of uncertain etymology, the name of a part
of Egypt where the Israelites dwelt for the whole
period of their sojourn in that country. It is
usually called the "land of Goshen," ^0*2 Y~Tt$,
but also Goshen simply. It appears* to have borne
another name, "the land of Rameses," Vffl
DDipyn (Gen. xlvii. 11), unless this be the name
of a district of Goshen. Hie first mention of Go-
shen is in Joseph's message to his father: "Thou
shalt dwell in the land of Goshen, and thou ahalt
be near unto me" (Gen. xlv. 10). This shows that
the territory was near the usual royal residence or
the residence of Joseph's Pharaoh. The dynasty
to which we assign this king, the fifteenth [Egypt ;
Joseph], appears to have resided part of the year
at Memphis, and part of the year, at harvest-time,
at Avaris on the Bubastite or Pelusiac branch of the
Nile: this, Manetho tells us, was the custom of the
first king (Joseph, c. Apion. i. 14). In the account
of the arrival of Jacob it is said of the patriarch :
" He sent Judah before him unto Joseph, to direct
his face unto Goshen ; and they came into the land
of Goshen. And Joseph made ready bis chariot,
and went up to meet Israel his father, to Goshen "
(Gen. xlvi. 28, 29). This land was therefore be-
tween Joseph's residence at the time and the frontier
of Palestine, and apparently the extreme province
towards that frontier. The advice that Joseph
gave his brethren as to their conduct to Pharaoh
further characterizes the territory : " When Pharaoh
shall call you, and shall say, What [is] your occu-
pation ? Then ye shall say, Thy servants have been
herdsmen of cattle (HajTO s D?3S) from our youth
even until now, both we [andj also our fathers:
that ye may dwell in the land of Goshen; for every
shepherd (frfS HS'l) [is] an abomination unto
the Egyptians" (xlvi. 33, 34). It is remarkable
that in Coptic OJ'JOC signifies both " a shepherd "
and "disgrace" and the like (Rosellini, Monumenti
Stolid, i. 177). This passage shows that Goshen
»aa scarcely regarded as a part of Egypt Proper,
and was not peopled by Egyptians — characteristics
hat would positively indicate a frontier province.
Rut it is not to be inferred that Goshen had no
Egyptian inhabitants at this period : at the time
af tie ten plagues such are distinctly mentioned.
GOSHEN
That there was, moreover, a foreign popolatios. be-
sides the Israelites, seems evident from the aooouni
of the calamity of Ephraim's house [Bkriab]
and the mention of the 2"H 2~V2 who went out at
the Exodus (Ex. xii. 38), notices referring to the
earlier and the later period of the sojourn. The
name Goshen itself appears to be Hebrew, or Semitic
— although we do not venture with Jerome to de-
rive it from DtPS — for it also occurs as the naoa
of a district and of a town in the south of Pales-
tine (infra, 2), where we could scarcely expect an
appellation of Egyptian origin unless given after
the Exodus, which in this case does not seem likely.
It is also noticeable that some of the names of
places in Goshen or its neighborhood, as certainly
Migdol and Baal-zephon, are Semitic [Baai^ze-
fhox], the only positive exceptions being the cities
Pithom and Rameses, built during the oppression.
The next mention of Goshen confirms the previous
inference that its position was between Canaan and
the Delta (Gen. xlvii 1). The nature of the
country is indicated more clearly than in the pas-
sage last quoted in the answer of Pharaoh to the
request of Joseph's brethren, and in the account of
their settling: "And Pharaoh spake unto Joseph,
^ying, Thy father and thy brethren are come unto
thee: the land of Egypt [is] before thee; in the
best of the land make thy father and brethren to
dwell: in the land of Goshen let them dwell: and
if thou knowest [any] men of activity among them,
then make them rulers over my cattle. . . . And
Joseph placed his fath n- and his brethren, and gave
them a possession in the land of Egypt, in the best
of the land, in the land of Rameses, as Pharaoh
had commanded" (Gen. xlvii. 5, 6, 11). Goshen
was thus a pastoral country where some of Pha-
raoh's cattle were kept The expression " in the
best of the land," \n»n 2^D? (J„ rfj &\.
rtirrn yrj, m opHmo beo), must, we' think, be rel-
ative, the best of the land for a pastoral people
(although we do not accept Michaelis' reading
s > o ,
" pastures " by comparison with VJaJ&jdC, Suppl.
p. 1072; see Gesen. Thes. s. v. 212*13), for in the
matter of fertility the richest parts of Egypt are
those nearest to the Nile, a position which, as will
be seen, we cannot assign to Goshen. The suf-
ficiency of this tract for the Israelites, their pros-
perity there, and their virtual separation, as is
evident from the account of the plagues, from the
great body of the Egyptians, must also be borne in
mind. The clearest indications of the exact position
of Goshen are those afforded by the narrative of
the Exodus. The Israelites set out from the town
of Rameses in the land of Goshen, made two days'
journey to " the edge of the wilderness," and in one
day more reached the Red Sea, At the starting-
point two routes lay before them, " the way of the
land of the Philistines . . . that [was] near," and
" the way of the wilderness of the Red Sea " (Ex.
xiii. 17, 18). From these indications we infer that
the land of Goshen must have in part been near
the eastern side of the ancient Delta, Rameses ly
ing within the valley now called the WdrlU- Tumcg-
lit, about thirty miles in a direct course from the
ancient western shore of the Arabian Gulf [Ex
odds, the].
The results of the foregoing examination of
Biblical evidence are that the lard of Goshen la?
Digitized by
Google
GOSHEN
Minna the extern part of the indent Ddu jnd
the western border of Palestine, that it was scueely
a part of Egypt Proper, was inhabited by o.her
foreigners besides the Israelites, and was in its
geographical names rather Semitic than Egyptian ;
that it was a pasture-land, especially suited to a
shepherd-people, and sufficient for the Israelites,
who there prospered, and were separate from the
■lain body of the Egyptians ; and lastly, that one
of its towns lay near the western extremity of the
Wddi-l-Tumet/tdL These indications, except only
tbit of sufficiency, to be afterwards considered, seem
to us decisively to indicate the Wadi-t- Tumeyldt,
the valley along which anciently llowed the canal
of the Red Sea. Other identifications seem to ut
to be utterly untenable. If with Lepsius we place
Goshen below Heliopolis, near Bubastis and Bil-
beys, the distance from the Bed Sea of three days'
journey of the Israelites, and the separate character
of the country, are violently set aside. If we con-
sider it the same as the Bucolia, we have either the
same difficulty as to the distance, or we must imagine
a route almost wholly through the wilderness, in-
stead of only for the last third or leas of its distance.
Having thus concluded that the land of Goshen
appears to have corresponded to the Wddi~t~ Tumey-
ldt, we have to consider whether the extent of this
tract would be sufficient for the sustenance of the
Israelites. The superficial extent of the Wddi-t-
Tumeyldt, if we include the whole cultivable part
of the natural valley, which may somewhat exceed
that of the tract bearing this appellation, is prob-
ably under 60 square geographical miles. If we
suppose the entire Israelite population at the time
of the Exodus to have been 1,800,000, and the
whole population, including Egyptians and foreign-
ers other than the Israelites, about 3,000,000, this
would give no less than between 30,000 and 40,000
Inhabitants to the square mile, which would be
half as dense as the ordinary population of an
eastern city. It must be remembered, however,
that we need not suppose the Israelites to hare
been limited to the valley for pasture, but like the
Arabs to have led their flocks into fertile tracts of
the deserts around, and that we have taken for our
estimate an extreme sum, that of the people at the
Exodus. For the greater part of the sojourn their
numbers must have been far lower, and before the
Exodus they seem to have been partly spread about
the territory of the oppressor, although collected at
Rameaes at the time of their departure. One very
large place, like the Shepherd-stronghold of Avaria,
which Manetho relates to have had at the first a
garrison of 340,000 men, would also greatly dimin-
ish the disproportion of population to superficies.
The very small superficial extent of Egypt in rela-
tion to the population necessary to the construction
of the vast monuments, and the maintenance of the
great armies of the Pharaohs, requires a different
proportion to that of other countries — a condition
fully explained by the extraordinary fertility of the
soil. Even now, when the population is almost at
the lowest point it has reached in history, when vil-
lages have replaced towns, and hamlets villages, it is
still denser than that of our rich and thickly-pop-
' ulated Yorkshire. We do not think, therefore, that
the small supuficies presents any serious difficulty.
Thus far we have reasoned alone on the evidence
«t the Hebrew text. The LXX. version, however,
presents some curious evidence whicn must not be
by unnoticed. The teatinwi.y of this ver-
ia any Egyptian matter is not tn be di«nv
GOSPELS 941
girded, although in this particular erne too muck
stress should not be laid on it, since the tradition
of Goshen and its inhabitants must hav 9 become
very faint among the Egyptians at the t : me when
the Pentateuch was translated, and we have no
warrant for attributing to the translator or trans-
lators any more than a general and popular knowl-
edge of Egyptian matters. In Gen. xlv. 10, for
ft&a the LXX. has iW/t 'Apa$las- The ex-
planatory word may be understood either as mean-
ing that Goshen lay in the region of Lower Egypt
to the east of the Delta, or else as indicating that
the Arabian Nome was partly or wholly the same.
In the latter case it must be remembered that the
Homes very anciently were far more extensive than
under the Ptolemies. On either supposition the
passage is favorable to our identification. In Gen.
xlvi. 28, instead of flp ^V?^> ^ LXZ ' hm
ko6' 'Hp&tt* ltiXm, ip yfi 'Pafutray (or sir 7i)»
'PtuinroSj), seemingly identifying Barneses with
Heroiipolis. It is scarcely possible to fix the site
of the latter town, but there is no doubt that it
lay in the valley not far from the ancient 'head of
the Arabian Gulf. Its position is too near the gulf
for the Rameses of Scripture, and it was probably
chosen merely because at the time when the trans-
lation was made it was the chief place of the terri-
tory where the Israelites had been. It must be
noted, however, that in Ex. i. 11, the LXX., fol-
lowed by the Coptic, reads, instead of " Pitbom
and Raamsea," rr)i> r* n«0<£, mil 'Pap<o-aHi, «al
'fly, (J iirrir 'HA.ioi5iroA.ir- Eusebius identifies
Barneses with Avaris, the Shepherd-stronghold on
the Pelusiac branch of the Nile (ap. Cramer,
Anted. Paris, ii. p. 174). The evidence of the
LXX. version therefore lends a general support to
the theory we have advocated. [See Exodus,
the.] R. S. F.
2. (]B?2: rWo>: [Gosen; Josh. x. 41, in
Vulg. ed.°1590,] Geuen, [ed. 1593,] Gown) the
"land" or the "country (both Y^fy of Goshen,"
Is twice named as a district in Southern Palestine
(Josh. x. 41, xi. 16). From the first of these it
would seem to have lain between Gaza and Gibeon,
and therefore to be some part of the maritime plain
of Judah; but in the latter passage, that plain —
the Shtftlah, is expressly specified in addition to
Goshen (here with the article). In this place too
the situation of Goshen — if the order of the state-
ment be any indication — would seem to be between
the "south" and the Shtftlah (A. V. "valley").
If Goshen was any portion of this rich plain, is it
not possible that its fertility may have suggested
the name to the Israelites ? but this is not more
than mere conjecture. On the other hand the
name may be far older, and may retain a trace of
early intercourse between Egypt and the south of
the promised land. For such intercourse oomp. 1
Chr. vii. 31.
3. [roo-o/i: Goten.] A town of the same nam*
is .nee mentioned in company with Debir, Socoh,
airi others, as in the mountains of Judah (Josh.
xv. 61). There is nothing to connect this place
with the district last spoken of. It has not yet
been identified. G.
GOSPELS. The name Gospel (from god and
ipeU, Ang. Sax. good mtumje or news, which is a
translation of the Greek thayyi\iov) is applied to
the our implied histories of the life and teaching
Digitized by
Google
942 GOSPELS
tt Christ contained in the New Testament, of which
separate accounts will m given in their place.
[Matthew; Hauk; Luke; John.] It may be
fairly said tout the genuineness of these four nar-
ratives rests upon better evidence than that of any
other ancient writings. They were all composed
during the latter half of the first century: those
of St. Matthew and St. Mark some years before
the destruction of Jerusalem; that of St. Luke
probably about A. D. 64; and that of St John
towards the close of the century. Before the end
of the second century, there is abundant evidence
that the four Gospels, ss one collection, were gen-
erally used and accepted. Irenssus, who suffered
martyrdom about a. d. 302, the disciple of Poly-
carp and Papias, who, from having been in Asia,
in Gaul, and in Rome, had ample means of know-
ing the belief of various churches, says that the
authority of the four Gospels was so far confirmed
that even the heretics of his time could not reject
them, but were obliged to attempt to prove their
tenets out of one or other of them ( Contr. Bar. iii.
11, § 7).. Tertullian, in a work written about A. d.
208, mentions the four Gospels, two of them as the
work of Apostles, and two as that of the disciples
of Apostles (npostoKci); and rests their authority
on their apostolic origin (Adv. Marcian. lib. It. c.
t). Origen, who was born about A. D. 185, and
died A. D. 253, describes the Gospels in a charac-
o • Thcophilus does not use the term " Evangelists,"
but speaks of " the Prophets " or the Old Testament
end « the Gospels " as alike divinely Inspired (Ad
Autol. lib. 111. c. 12, p. 218, ed. Otto), and expressly
names John as amoog those K moved by the Spirit,"
quoting John 1. 1 (ibid. II. 22, p. 120). After citing a
passage from the Book of Proverbs on the duty of
chastity, he says, " But the Evangelic voice teaches
purity yet more imperatively," quoting Matt. v. 28, 32
(ibid. 111. 18). Further on, he introduces a quotation
from Matthew with the expression, « The Gospel says "
(Md. iii. 14).
Among the writers who bear testimony to the gen-
eral reception of the Gospels by Christians before the
close of the second century, Clement might well have
been mentioned, who succeeded Pantamus as president
of the celebrated Catechetical School at Alexandria
about A. n. 190, and was one of the most learned men
3f his age. His citations from all the Gospels as
tuthoiitative are not only most abundant, but he ex-
pressly speaks of " the four Gospels which have ban
handed down to us," in contrast with an obscure
apocryphal book, " The Gospel according to the Egyp-
tians," used by certain heretics (Strom, iii. 18, Opp.
p. 658, ed. Potter). A.
b • The Muratorlan fragment expressly designates
he Gospels of Luke and John as the « third " and
fourth " in order ; and the imperfect sentence with
which it begins applies to Mark. A note of tune in
the document itself appears to indicate that it was
Msmpoeed not far from A. D. 170, perhaps earlier ; but
he question of the date is not wholly free from diffi-
culty. Recent critical editions and discussions of this
mteresting relic of Christian antiquity may be found
In Uredner's Gesrh. des Neutest. Xorum, herausz. von
Talkmar (Bsrl. I860), pp. 141-170, 841-864 ; Hllgen-
frtd's Der Eaxon h. die Kritik da N. T. (Halle, 18GS),
T>. 89-48 ; and Weetcott's Hist, of the Canon of the
X. T., 2d ed. (Load. 1866), pp. 184-198, 466-480.
The statements that follow In the text in regard to
jarly citations from the Gospels require some modifica-
tion. The earliest formal quotation from any of the
Bospeis appears to be found in the epistle ascribed to
■srnabas (see Barkabas), where the saying " Many are
sailed, but Cow chosen " is introduced by wc y^ypcurrau,
"as It is written " (Barnab. c. 4 ; Matt. xxU. 14). With
UO8PEL8
leristie strain of metaphor as " the [four] i
of the Church's faith, of which the whole world,
reconciled to God in Christ, is composed" (In
Johan. [torn. i. § 6] ). Elsewhere, in commenting
on the opening words of St. Luke, he draws a line
between the inspired Gospels and such productions
as ■' the Gospel according to the Egyptians," " the
Gospel of the Twelve," and the like (1/omil. in
Luc., Opp. iii. 932 f.). Although Theophilus, who
became sixth (seventh?) bishop of Antioch about
a. D. 168, speaks only of "the Evangelists," with-
out adding their names (Ad Autol. iii. pp. 124,125),
we might fairly conclude with Gieseler that lie
refers to the collection of four, already known in
his time." But from Jerome we know that The-
ophilus arranged the records of the four Evangelists
into one work (Eput. ad AU/at. iv. p. 197). Tatian,
who died about A. D. 170 (?), compiled a DiaUt-
tartm, or Harmony of the Gospels. The Muratorian
fragment (Muratori, Antiq. It. iii. p. 854; KouUh,
Rtl. Sacr. vol. iv. [vol. i. ed. alt] ), which, even if
it be not by Caius and of the second century, is at
least a very old monument of the Roman Church,
describes the Gospels of Luke and John ; but time
and carelessness seem to have destroyed the sen-
tences relating to Matthew and Mark. 11 Another
source of evidence is open to us, in the citations
from the Gospels found in the earliest writers. Bar-
nabas, Clemens Romanus, and Polycarp, quote pes-
this exception, there is no express reference to any
written Gospel In the remains of the so-called Apostol-
ical Fathers. Clement of Rome (Epist. oc. 18, 46) and
Polycarp (^nit. ce. 2, 7), using the expression, " The
Lord said," or Its equivalent, quota sayings of Christ
in a form agreeing in essential meaning, but not ver-
bally, with passages in Matthew and Luke; except
that in Polycarp two short sentences, n Judge not,
that ye be not judged," and " The spirit indeed is
willing, but the flesh is weak," are given precisely ss
we have them In Matthew. The epistles attributed
to Ignatius have a considerable number of expressions
which appear to imply an acquaintance with words of
Christ preserved by Matthew and John ; but they eon
tain no formal quotation of the Gospels ; and the un
certainty respecting both the authorship and the text
of these epistles is such ss to make it unsafe to rest
any argument on them. In regard to the Apostolical
Fathers in general, it is obvious that the words of
Jesus and the facts in his history which they have
recorded may have been derived by them from oral
tradition. Their writings serve to confirm the truth
of the Gospels, but cannot be appealed to as affording
direct proof of their genuineness.
When we come to Justin Martyr, however, we stand
on firmer ground. He, indeed, does not name the
Evangelists ; and It cannot be said that " many of his
quotations are found verbatim in the Gospel of John."
His quotations, however, from the " Memoirs of the
Apostles," an " Memoirs composed by the Apostles,
which are called Gospels " (Apol. i. c. 66), or as he de-
scribes them in one place more particularly, " Memoirs
composed by Apostles of Christ and their companions ''
(Dial. c. Tryph. e. 103), are such ss to leave no reason-
able doubt of his use of the first three Gospels ; and
his use of the fourth Gospel, though contested by most
of the critics of the Tiiblngen school is now conceded
even by Hilgenfeld (Zritschr. f. win Theal. 1865, p
386). The subject of Justin Martyr's quotations is die
cussed In a masterly manner by Mr. Norton in his
Genuineness of the Gospels, 1. 200-289, and with fuller
detail by Semisch, Die apostcJ. Dtnkwurdigkrilen aV;
Martfrcrs Justinus (Hamb. 1848}, and Westcott (Histor,
of the Canon of the <Y. T., 2d ed., pp. 88-146). If
must not be forgotten that the " Memoirs of the
Apostlss " used by Justin Martyr were sacrvl books
Digitized by
Google
GOSPELS
ages tna them, but not with verbal exactness.
law testimony of Justin Martyr (born about A. IX
M, martyred A. D. 165) u much fuller; many of
Us quotations an found verbatim in the Gospels of
St. Matthew, St. Luke, and St. John, and possibly
of St Mark also, whose words it is more difficult to
separate. Hie quotations from St Matthew are
the most numerous. In historical references, the
mode of quotation is more free, and the narrative
occasionally unites those of Matthew and Luke: in
a very few cases he alludes to matters not mentioned
in the canonical Gospels. Besides these, St Mat-
thew appears to be quoted by the author of the
Epistle to Diognetue, by Hegesippus, Irenteus, Ta-
tian, Athenagoras, and TheophUus. Euaebius re-
cords that Pantamus found in India ( ? the south
of Arabia ?) Christians who used the Gospel of St
Matthew. All this shows that long before the end
of the second century the Gospel of St Matthew
was in general use. From the fact that St Mark's
Gospel has few places peculiar to it, it is more
difficult to identify citations not e xp ressly assigned
to him; but Justin Martyr and Athenagoras appear
to quote his Gospel, and Iremeus does so by name.
8t Luke is quoted by Justin, Irenseus, Tatian,
Athenagoras, and TheophUus ; and St John by all
of these, with the addition of Ignatius, the Epistle
to Diognetus, and Polycrates. From these we may
conclude that before the end of the second century
the Gospel collection was well known and in general
use. There is yet another line of evidence. The
heretical sects, as well as the Fathers of the Church,
knew the Gospels; and as there was the greatest
hostility between them, if the Gospels bad become
known in the Church after the dissension arose,
the heretics would never have accepted them as
genuine from such a quarter. But the Gnostics
and Marcionites arose early in the second century ;
and therefore it is probable that the Gospels were
then accepted, and thus they are traced back almost
to the times of the Apostles (Oishausen). Upon a
review of all the witnesses, from the Apostolic
Fathers down to the Canon of the Ijiodincan Council
GOSPELS
941
read in the churches on the Lord's day, in connection
with the Prophets of the Old Testament (Justin, Apol.
L e. 67). The supposition that in the Interval of 26
or 80 yean between the time of Justin and Irenasus
these books disappeared, and a wholly different set was
silently substituted In their place throughout the
Christian world. Is utterly incredible. The " Memoirs "
therefore of which Justin speaks must have been our
present Gospels.
The importance of the subject will Justify the inser-
tion of the following remarks of Mr. Norton on the
peouliar nature of the evidence for the genuineness of
She Gospels. He observes :
" The mode of reasoning by which we may establish
.he genuineness of the Gospels has been regarded ss
nuch more analogous than It is to that by which we
prove historically the genuineness of other ancient
books; that Is to say, through the mention of their
atlas and authors, and quotations from and notices of
them, In individual, unconnected writers. This mode
af reasoning Is, in Its nature, satisfactory ; and would
be so in its application to the Gospels, if the question
if their genuineness did not involve the most moment
jne of all questions in the history of our race,—
whether Christianity be a special manifestation of God's
love toward man, or only the most remarkable devel-
opment of thoss tendencies to fanaticism which exist
la human nature. Beesonlng in the manner supposed,
we and their giiulnsneas unequivocally asserted by
Dsaswe; as may satisfy ourselves the. ther *"*■
■moved as genuine by Justin Martyr; we £-4 me
in 884, and that of the third Council of Carthsgs
in 897, in both of which the four Gospels are num-
bered in the Canon of Scripture, there can hardly
be room for any candid person to doubt that from
the first the four Gospels were recognized as genuine
and as inspired ; that a sharp line of distinction was
drawn between them and the so-called apocryphal
Gospels, of which the number was very great; that,
from the citations of passages, the Gospels bearing
these four names were the same as those which we
possess in our Bibles under the same names; that
unbelievers, like Celsus, did not deny the genuine-
ness of the Gospels, even when rejecting their con -
tents; and, lastly, that heretics thought it necessary
to plead some kind of sanction out of the Gospels
for their doctrines: nor eouM they venture on the
easier path of an entire rejection, because the
Gospels were everywhere known to be genuine. As
a matter of literary history, nothing can be better
established than the genuineness of the Gospels;
and if in these latest times they have been assailed,
it is plain that tbeologiad doubts have been con-
cerned in the attack. The authority of the books has
been denied from a wish to set aside their contents.
Out of a mass of authorities the following may be
selected: Norton, Onthe Genuineness of* (Ae Gotpelt,
2 vols. London, 1847, 2d ed. [3 vols. Cambridge
and Boston, 1846-48] ; Kirchhofer, Queilensamm-
lung air Getchichte da N.-T. Canont, Zurich,
1844; De Wette, Lehrbuch der hut.-krU. Einla-
luntj, etc., 6th ed., Berlin, 1852 [translated by F.
Krothingham, Boston, 1858 ; 6th ed. of the original,
by Messuer and Lunemann, Berl. I860]; Hug's
EinUitung, etc., Fosdick's [American] translation
with Stuart's Notes [Audover, 1836] ; Oishausen,
Bibtuchtr Commentary Introduction, and his
Echthcit der tier canon. Evangelien, 1823; Jer.
Jones, Method of itttling tie Canonical Authority
of the N. T., Oxford, 1798, 2 vols.; F. C. Baur,
Krit. Unteiiuchungen Bber die kanon. Evangelien,
Tubingen, 1847; Reuss, Getchichte der heiligen
Schriften JV. T. [4th ed., Braunschweig, 1864] ;
Dean Alford's Greek Testament, Prolegomena, vol
Gospels of Matthew and Mark mentioned in the be-
ginning of the second century by Papias ; and to the
genuineness of St. Luke's Gospel we have his own
attestation in the Acta of the Apostles. Confining
ourselves to this narrow mode of proof, we arrive at
what in a common case would be a satisfactory con-
clusion. But when we endeavor to strengthen this
evidence by appealing to the writings ascribed to
Apostolical Fathers, we In fact weaken its force. At
the very extremity of the chain of evidence, where it
ought to be strongest, we are attac hin g defective links
which will bear no weight.
But the direct historical evidence for the genuine
ness of the Gospels ... Is of a very different kino,
from what we have Just been considering. It consists
in the Indisputable fact, that throughout a community
of millions of individuals, scattered over Europe, Asia,
and Africa, the Gospels were regarded with the highest
reverence, as the works of those to whom they an
ascribed, at so early a period that there could be no
difficulty in determining whether they were genuine
or not, and when every intelligent Christian must have
been deeply Interested to ascertain the truth. And
this tact does not merely Involve the testimony of the
great bedy of Christians to the genuineness of the
Gospels ; t 1p Itself a phenomenon admitting of no
explanation, ave»ot that the four Gospels had all been
handed down as genuine from the Apo st o l i c saw, and
had every where sooom panted our religion as It sp r ead
through the world." ( Oen m n n—i M «/ the OosptU
vol. I Additional •otss, p. ocMx. f.) A
Digitized by
Google
Mi
GOSPELS
I.; Bar. B. F. Westcott's ffiatory o/ JV. T. Canon,
London, 1869 [2d ed. 1866] ; Gieseler, Butoritck-
hititchir Vertuch Qbcr die Knttthung, §c., der
tchrxfUichen EmngtUen, Leipzig, 1818. [For
jtber works on the subject, nee the addition to thin
article,]
On comparing these four books one with another,
a peculiar difficulty claims attention, which has had
much to do with the controversy as to their genuine-
ness. In the fourth Gospel the narrative coincides
with that of the other three in a few passages only.
Putting aside the account of the Passion, there are
only three facta which John relates in common with
the other Evangelists. Two of these are, the feed-
ing of the five thousand, and the storm on the Sea
of Galilee (ch. vi. ), which appear to be introduced
in connection with the discourse that arose out of
the miracle, related by John alone. The third is
the anointing of His feet by Mary ; and it is worthy
of notice that the narrative of John recalls some-
thing of each of the other three: the actions of the
woman an drawn from Luke, the ointment and its
value are described in Mark, and the admonition
to Judas appears in Matthew; and John combines
in his narrative all these particulars. Whilst the
three present the life of Jesus in Galilee, John fol-
lows him into Judea; nor should we know, but for
him, that our Lord had journeyed to Jerusalem at
the prescribed feasts. Only one discourse of our
Lord that was delivered in Galilee, that in the 6th
chapter, is recorded by John. The disciple whom
Jesus loved had it put into his mind to wiite a
Gospel which should more expressly than the others
set forth Jesus as the Incarnate Word of God: if
be also had in new the beginnings of the errors of
Cerintbus and others before him at the time, as
Irenseus and Jerome assert, the polemical purpose
is quite subordinate to the dogmatic. He does not
war against a temporary error, but preaches for all
time that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, in
order that believing we may have life through His
name. Now many of the facts omitted by St. John
and recorded by the rest are such as would have
contributed most directly to this great design; why
then are they omitted? The received explanation
is the only satisfactory one, namely, that John,
writing last, at the close of the first century, had
seen the other Gospels, and purposely abstained
from writing anew what they had sufficiently re-
corded . [John.]
In the other three Gospels there is a great amount
of agreement. If we suppose the history that tbey
contain to be divided into sections, in 42 of these
all the three narratives coincide, 12 more are given
by Matthew and Mark only, S by Mark and Luke
only, and 14 by Matthew and Luke. To these
must be added 5 peculiar to Matthew, 2 to Mark,
ind 9 to Luke ; and the enumeration is complete.
But this applies only to general coincidence as to
the (acts narrated: the amount of verbal coinci-
dence, that is, the passages either verbally the same,
or coinciding in the use of many of the same words,
is much smaller. "By Jar the larger portion,"
says Professor Andrews Norton (Gemunenett, i. p.
240, 2d ed. [Addit Notes, p. cvii. f., Amer. ed.]),
" of this verbal agreement is found in the recital
of the words of others, and particularly of the words
sf Jesus. Thus, in Matthew's Gospel the passages
rerbaHy coincident with one or both of tie other
two Gospels amount to less than a sixth part of its
sontanti; and of this about seven eighths occur in
site radial of the words of others, and only about
GOSPELS
one eighth in what, by way of distinction, I may
call mere narrative, in which the Evangelist, speak-
ing in his own person, was unrestrained in the
choice of his expressions. In Mark, the proportion
of coincident passages to the whole contents of the
Gospel is about one sixth, of which not one fifth
occurs in the narrative. Luke has still less agree-
ment of expression with the other Evangelists.
The passages in which it is found amount only to
about a tenth part of his Gospel; and but an in
considerable portion of it appears in the narrative
— less than a twentieth put. These proportions
should be further compared with those which the
narrative part of each Gospel bears to that in which
the words of others are professedly repeated. Mat-
thew's narrative occupies about one fourth of his
Gospel ; Mark's about one half, and Luke's about one
third. It may easily be computed, therefore, that
the proportion of verbal coincidence found in the nar-
rative part of each Gospel, compared with what ex-
ists in the other part, is about in the following
ratios: in Matthew as one to somewhat more than
two, in Mark as one to four, and in Luke as one to
ten."
Without going minutely into the examination
of examples, which would be desirable if space per-
mitted, the leading bets connected with the sub-
ject may be thus summed up: The verbal and
material agreement of the three first Evangelists is
such as does not occur in any other authors who
have written independently of one another. The
verbal agreement is greater where the spoken words
of others are cited than where facta are recorded ;
and greatest in quotations of the words of our Lord.
But in some leading events, as in the call of the
four first disciples, that of Matthew, and the Trans-
figuration, the agreement even in expression is
remarkable: there are also narratives where there
is no verbal harmony in the outset, but only in the
crisis or emphatic part of the story (Matt. viii. 8 =
Mark i. 41 = Luke v. 13, and Matt xiv. 19, 20=
Mark vi. 41-43 = Luke ix. 16, 17). The narratives
of our Lord's early life, as given by St. Matthew
and St. Luke, have little in common; while St.
Mark does not include that part of the history in
his plan. The agreement in the narrative portions
of the Gospels begins with the Baptism of John,
and reaches its highest point in the account of the
Passion of our Lord and the facts that preceded it;
so that a direct ratio might almost be said to exist
betweeu the amount of agreement and the nearness
of the facts related to the Passion. After this
event, in the account of His burial and resurrection,
the coincidences are few. The language of all three
is Greek, with Hebrew idioms: the Hebraisms are
most abundant in St. Mark, and fewest in St. Luke.
In quotations from the Old Testament, the Evange-
lists, or two of them, sometimes exhibit a verbal
agreement, although they diner from the Hebrew
and from the Septuagint version (Matt. iii. 3 =
Mark i. 3 = Luke iii. 4. Matt. iv. 10 = Luke it
8. Matt. xi. 10 = Mark i. 2 = Luke vii. 27, Ac.).
Except as to 24 verses, the Gospel of Mark con-
tains no principal facts which are not found in
Matthew and Luke ; but he often supplies details
omitted by them, and these are often such as would
belong to the graphic account of an eye-witness.
There are no cases in which Matthew and Luke
exactly harmonize, where Mark does not also coin-
cide with them. In several places the words of
Mark have something in common with each of ths
other narratives, so Be to form a connecting link
Digitized by
Google
GOSPELS
them, where their words slightly ilffer.
Hie fftampl«« of verbal agreement betweet Hark
and Luke are not ao long or so numer nu aa thoee
between Matthew and Luke, and Hjtther and
Mark ; but as to the arrangement of events Mark
and Luke frequently coincide, where Matthew differs
from them. These are the leading particulars; but
they are very far from giving a complete notion of
a phenomenon that is well worthy of that attention
and reverent study of the sacred text by which
alone it can be fully and fairly apprehended.
These facts exhibit the three Gospels as three
distinct records of the life and works of the Re-
deemer, but with a greater amount of agreement
than three wholly independent accounts could be
expected to exhibit. The agreement would be no
difficulty, without the differences i it would only
mark the one divine source from which they are
all derived — the Holy Spirit, who spake by the
prophets. The difference of form and style, with-
out the agreement, would offer no difficulty, since
there may be a substantial harmony between ac-
counts that differ greatly in mode of expression,
and the very difference might be a guarantee of
independence. The harmony and the variety, the
agreement and the differences, form together the
problem with which Biblical critics have occupied
themselves for a century and a half.
The attempts at a solution are so many, that
they can be more easily classified than enumerated.
The first and most obvious suggestion would be,
that the narrators made use of each other's work.
Accordingly Grotius, Mill, Wetstein, Griesbach, and
many others, have endeavored to ascertain which
Gospel is to be regarded as the first; which is
copied from the first; and which is the last, and
copied from the other two. It is remarkable that
each of the six possible combinations has found
advocates ; and this of itself proves the uncertainty
of the theory (Bp. Marsh's Miekndit, iii. p. 172;
De Wette, Handtmch, § 22 ff.) When we are told
by men of research that the Gospel of St Mark is
plainly founded upon the other two, as Griesbach,
Busching, and others assure us; and again, that
the Gospel of St. Mark is certainly the primitive
Gospel, on which the other two are founded, as by
Will*, Bruno Bauer, and others, both sides relying
mainly on facts that lie within the compass of the
text, we are not disposed to expect much fruit from
the discussion. But the theory in its crude form
is in itself most improbable; and the wonder w
that ao much time and learning have been devoted
to it. It assumes that an Evangelist has taken up
the work of his predecessor, and without substantial
alteration has made a few changes in form, a few
additions and retrenchment*, and has then allowed
the whole to go forth under his name. Whatever
order of the three la adopted to favor the hypothesis,
the omission by the second or third, of matter in-
serted by the first, often a great difficulty; since it
would indicate a tacit opinion that these passages
are either less useful or of less authority than the
rest. The native of the alterations is not such as
we should expect to find in an age little given to
literary composition, and in writings so simple and
unlearned as these are admitted to be. The re-
placement of a word by a synonym, neither more
nor less apt, the omission of a saying in one place
and insertion of it in another, the occasional trans-
position of events ; these are not in conformity with
the habits of a time in which composition was li"le
" d, and only practiced as a necessity. Beaidw,
«0
GOSPELS 946
such deviations, which in writers wholly IndepansV
ent of each other are only the guarantee of thett
independence, cannot appear in those who copy
from each other, without showing a certain willful-
ness — an intention to contradict and alter — that
seems quite irreconcilable with any view of inspira-
tion. These general objections will be found to
take a still more cogent shape against any particular
form of this hypothesis : whether it is attempted to
show that the Gospel of St. Mark, as the shortest,
is also the earliest and primitive Gospel, or that
this very Gospel bears evident signs of being the
latest, a compilation from the other two; or that
the order in the canon of Scripture is also the
chronological order — and all these views have
found defenders at no distant date — the theory
that each Evangelist only copied from his predeces-
sor offers the same general features, a plausible
argument from a few facts, which is met by in-
superable difficulties as soon sa the remaining facts
are taken in (Gieseler, pp. 35, 36; Bp. Marsh's
MichtuBt, voL iii., part ii. p. 171 ff.).
The supposition of a common original from
which the three Gospels were drawn, each with
more or less modification, would naturally occur
to those who rejected the notion that the Evange-
lists had copied from each other. A passage of
Epiphanius has been often quoted in support of
this (flora. Ii. 6), but the <{ avrijs rris nryrjt
no doubt refers to the inspiring Spirit from whicb
all three drew their authority, and uot to any
earthly copy, written or oral, of His divine mes-
sage. The best notion of that class of specula-
tions which would establish a written document as
the common original of the three Gospels, will be
gained perhaps from Bishop Marsh's (MicJmelU.
voL iii. part ii.) account of Eichhom's hypothesis.
and of bis own additions to it. It appeared to
Kichhom that the portions which are common to
all the three Gospels were contained in a certain
common document, from which they all drew.
Niemeyer had already assumed that copies of such
a document had got into circulation, and had been
altered and annotated by different hands. Now
Eichbom tries to show, from an exact comparison
of passages, that "the sections, whether great or
small, which are common to St. Matthew and St.
Mark, but not to St. Luke, and at the same time
occupy places in the Gospels of St. Matthew and
St. Mark which correspond to each other, were ad-
ditions made in the copies used by St. Matthew
and St Mark, but not in the copy used by St
Luke; and, in like manner, that the sections found
in the corresponding places of the Gospels of St
Mark and St. Luke, but not contained in the Gos-
pel of St Matthew, were additions made in the
copies used by St Mark and St Luke" (p. 192).
Thus Eichhom considers himself entitled to assume
that he can reconstruct the original document, and
also that there must have -been four other docu-
ments to account for the phenomena of the text.
Thus he makes —
1. The original document
2. An altered copy which St Matthew used.
3. An altered copy which St Luke used.
4. A third copy, made from the two precedi-g,
ed by St Mark.
6. A fourth altered copy, used by St Matthew
and St. Luke in common.
As mere is no external evidence worth consider-
ing thv this original or any of its numerous copies
ever existed, the value of this elaborate hypothesis
Digitized by
Google
946
GOSPELS
moil depend upon IU furnishing the only explana-
tion, md that a sufficient one, of the facte of the
text. Bishop -Marsh, however, find* it necessary,
ui order to complete the account of the text, to
raise the number of document* to eight, still with-
out producing an; external evidence for the exist-
ence of any of them ; and this, on one side, de-
prives Eichhorn's theory of the merit of complete-
ness, and, on the other, presents a much broader
surface to the obvious objections. He assumes the
existence of —
1. A Hebrew original.
9. A Greek translation.
3. A transcript of No. 1, with alterations and
additions.
4. Another, with another set of alterations and
additions.
5. Another, combining both the preceding, used
ky St. Mark, who also used No. 2.
S. Another, with the alterations and additions
of No. 3, and with further additions, used by St.
Matthew.
7. Another, with those of No. 4 and further ad-
ditions, used by St. Luke, who also used No. 2.
8. A wholly distinct Hebrew document, in which
our Lord's precepts, parables, and discourses were
recorded, but not in chronological order; used both
by St. Matthew and St. Luke.
To this it is added, that " as the Gospels of St.
Mark and St Luke contain Greek translations of
Hebrew materials, which were incorporated into
St. Matthew's Hebrew Gospel, the person who trans-
lated St. Matthew's Hebrew Gospel into Greek fre-
quently derived assistance from the Gospel of St.
Mark, where he had matter in connection with
St. Matthew: and in those places, but in those
places only, where St. Mark had no matter in con-
nection with St. Matthew, he had frequently re-
course to St. Luke's Gospel" (p. 361). One is
hardly surprised after this to learn that Eichbom
soon after put forth a revised hypothesis (Knieitung
in das N. T. 1804), in which a supposed Greek
translation of a supposed Aramaic original took a
conspicuous part; nor that Hug was able to point
out that even the most liberal assumption of written
documents had not provided for one case, that of
the verbal agreement of St. Mark and St. Luke, to
the exclusion of St. Matthew; and which, though
it is of rare occurrence, would require, on Eich-
horn's theory, an additional Greek version.
It will be allowed that this elaliorate hypothesis,
whether in the form given it by Marsh or by Eich-
hom, possesses almost every fault that can be
charged against an argument of that kind. For
•very new class of facta a new document must be
assumed to have existed ; and Hug's objection does
not really weaken the theory, since the new class
■>{ coincidences he mentions only requires a new
-ersion of the "original Gospel,'' which can be
supplied on demand. * A theory so prolific in as-
sumptions may still stand, if it can be proved that
to other solution is possible; but since this cannot
■» shown, even as against the modified theory of
Gratz (Neutr Vertuch, etc., 1812), then we are
reminded of the schoolman's caution, entia rum
tuM muUipticnru/a prater ntctssitaiem. To assume
or every new class of facts the existence of another
complete edition and recension of the original work
is quite gratuitous; the documents might have been
as easily supposed to be fragmentary memorials,
wrought in by the Evangelists into the web of the
jsiginsl Gospel; or the coincidences might be, as
GOSPELS
Grata supposes, cases when one Gospel but cms)
interpolated by portions of another. Then lbs
" original Gospel " is supposed to have been of
such authority as to be circulated everywhere: yet
so defective, as to require annotation from any
band; so little reverenced, that no hand spared it
If all the Evangelists agreed to draw from such a
work, it must have been widely if not uni'Tsaily
accepted in the Church; and yet there i* m record
of its existence. The force of thir aiemma has
been felt by the supporters of rh„ theory: if the
work was of high authority .t would have been
preserved, or at least mentioned; if of lower au-
thority, it could not have become the basis of three
canonical Gospels : and various attempts have been
made to escape from it. Bertholdt tries to find
traces of its existence in the titles of works other
than our present Gospels, which were current in
the earliest ages; but Gieseler has so diminished
the force of his arguments, that only one of them
need here be mentioned. Bertholdt ingeniously
argues tha: a Gospel used by St PauL and trans-
mitted to the Christians in Pontus, was the basis
of Mansion's Gospel; and assumes that it was also
the "original Gospel:" so that in the Gospel of
Marckui there would be a transcript, though cor-
rupted, of this primitive document But there is
no proof at all that St. Paul used any written
Gospel; and as to that of Mansion, if the work of
Hahn had not settled the question, the researches
of such writers as Volckmar, Zeller, Kitschl, and
Hilgeufeld, are held to have proved that the old
opinion of Tertullian and Epiphanius is also the
true one, and that the so-called Gospel of Marcion
was not an independent work, but an abridged ver-
sion of St. Luke's Gospel, altered by the heretic to
suit his peculiar tenets. (See Bertholdt, ui. 1208-
1223; Gieseler, p. 57; Weisse, Etangetitiifrage,
p. 78.) We must conclude then that the work has
perished without record. Not only has this fists
befallen the Aramaic or Hebrew original, but the
translation and the five or six recensions. But it
may well be asked whether the state of letters in
Palestine at this time was such ss to make this
constant editing, translating, annotating, and en-
riching of a history a natural and probable process.
With the independence of the Jews their litesature
had declined; from the time of Ezra and Nehe-
miah, if a writer here and there arose, his works
became known, if at all, in Greek translations
through the Alexandrine Jews. That the period
of which we are speaking was for the Jews one of
very little literary activity, is generally admitted;
and if this applies to all classes of the people, it
would be true of the humble and uneducated class
from which the first converts came (Acts iv. 13:
James ii. 5). Even the second law (oftrrcp&rfir),
which grew up after the Captivity, and in which
the knowledge of the learned class consisted, wai
handed down by oral tradition, without being re-
duced to writing. The theory of Eichhorn is only
probable amidst a people given to literary habits,
and in a class of that people where education was
good and literary activity likely to prevail: the
conditions here ore the very reverse (see Gieseler't
able argument, p. 59 ff.). These are only a few
of the objections which may be raised, on critical
and historical grounds, against the theory of Eich-
horn and Marsh.
But it must not be forgotten that this qnestios
reaches beyond history and criticism, and has
deep theological interest We are offered hen as
Digitized by
Google
GOSPELS
jrtguxal Gjspel composed by nw unknown per-
m; probably not an apostle. a> Eicbhoru admits,
n his endeavor to account for the loss of the book.
This was translated by one equally unknown ; and
the various persons into whose hands the two docu-
ments came, all equally unknown, exercised freely
the power of altering and extending the materials
thus provided. Out of such unattested materials
the three Evangelists composed their Gospels. So
far as they allowed their materials to bind and
guide them, so far their worth as independent wit-
nesses is lessened. But, according to Eichhorn,
they all felt bound to admit Ike whale of the origi-
nal document, so that it is possible to recover it
from them by a simple process. As to all the pas-
sages, then, in which this document is employed,
It is not the Evangelist, but an anonymous prede-
cessor to whom we are listening — not Matthew the
Apostle, and Mark the companion of apostles, and
Luke the beloved of the Apostle Paul, are affording
us the strength of their testimony, but one witness
whose name no one has thought fit to record. If,
indeed, all three Evangelists confined themselves to
this document, this of itself would be a guarantee
of its fidelity and of the respect in which it was
held; but no one seems to have taken it in hand
that did not think himself entitled to amend it.
Surely serious people would have a right to ask, if
the critical objections were less decisive, with what
view of inspiration such a hypothesis could be rec-
onciled. The internal evidence of the truth of
the Gospel, in the harmonious and self-consistent
representation of the Person of Jesus, and in the
promises and precepts which meet the innermost
needs of a heart stricken with the consciousness of
sin, would still remain to us. But the wholesome
confidence with which we now rely on the Gospels
ss pure, true, and genuine histories of the life of
Jesus, composed by four independent witnesses in-
spired for that work, would be taken away. Even
the testimony of the writers of the second eentury
to the universal acceptance of these books would be
invalidated, from their silence and ignorance about
the strange circumstances which are supposed to
have affected their composition.
Bibliography. — The English student will find
in Bp. Marsh's Translation of Michadit'i Jntrod.
to N. T. iii. 2, 1803, an account of Eichhorn a
earlier theory and of his own. Veysie's Examina-
tion of Mr. Marth't Hypothetic 1808, has sug-
gested many of the objections. In Bp. ThirhvaU's
Tramlatkm of Schleiermncher on St. Luke, 1825,
Introduction, is an account of the whole question-
Other principal works are, an essay of Eichhorn, in
the 6th vol. AUyemtine Bibtiothek der biblitchen
Uteratur, 1794; the Essay of Bp. Marsh, just
i .noted; Eichhorn, Einleitung in dot JV. T. 1804;
Gratis. Never Vertuch the Enilthung der drey
trtten Evany, zu erkldren, 1813 ; BerthoMt, Hit-
tor, krititclie Einleitung in idmmtliche knnon. mi
apok. Sehriften da A. wad If. T., 1819-1819;
sod the work of Gieseler, quoted above. See also
Da Wette, Lehrbuch, and Westoott, Introduction,
already quoted ; also Weisse, Evangelienfrage,
185G. [For a fuller account of the literature of
the subject, see addition to the present article.]
There is another supposition to account for these
(acts, of which perhaps Gieseler has been tne most
■ante expositor. It is probable that none of th*
Gospels was written until many years after the da;-
af Pentecost, on which the Holy Spirit descended
a* the assembled disciples. From that day coc-
G08PBL8
947
menced at Jerusalem the work of preaching tin
Gospel and converting the world. So sedulous
were the Apostles in this work that they divested
themselves of the labor of ministering to the poor
in order that they might give themselves " contin-
ually to prayer and to the ministry of the word "
(Acts vi. ). Prayer and preaching «ere the business
of their lives. Now their preaching must have
been, from the nature of the case, in great part
historical; it must have been based upon an account
of the life and acts of Jesus of Nazareth. They
had been the eye-witnesses of a wondrous life, of
acts and sufferings that had an influence over all
the world : many of their hearers had never heard
of Jesus, many others had received false accounts of
one whom it suited the Jewish rulers to stigmatize
as an impostor. The ministry of our Lord went
on principally in Galilee; the first preaching was
addressed to people in Judaea. There was no writ-
ten record to which the hearers might bo referred
for historical details, and therefore the preachers
must furnish not only inferences from the life of
our Lord, but the facts of the life itself. The
preaching, then, must have been of such a kind as
to be to the hearers what the reading of lessons
from the Gospels is to us. So far as the records of
apostolic preaching in the Acts of the Apostles go,
they oonfirm this view. Peter at Cosarea, and
Paul at Antioch, preach alike the facts of the Re-
deemer's life and death. There is no improbability
in supposing that in the course of twenty or thirty
years' assiduous teaching, without a written Gos-
pel, the matter of the apostolic preaching should
have taken a settled form. Not only might the
Apostles think it well that their own accounts
should agree, as in substance so in form ; but the
teachers whom they sent forth, or left behind in
the churches they visited, would have to be pre-
pared for their mission ; and, so long as there was
no written Gospel to put into their hands, it might
be desirable that the oral instruction should tie as
far as possible one and the same to all. It is by
no means certain that the interval between the
mission of the Comforter and his work of directing
the writing of the first Gospel was so king as is
here supposed: the date of the Hebrew St- Mat-
thew may be earlier. [Matthew.] But the or -
gument remains the same: the preaching of the
Apostles would probably begin to take one settled
form, if at all, during the first years of their min-
istry. If it were allowed us to ask why God in
his providence saw fit to defer the gift of a written
Gospel to his people, the answer would be, that for
the first few years the powerful working of the
Holy Spirit in the living members of the church
supplied the place of those records, which, as soon
as the brightness of his presence began to be at all
withdrawn, became indispensable in order to pre-
vent the corruption of the Gospel history by false
teachers. He was promised as one who should
"teach them all things, and bring nil things to
their remembrance, whatsover " the Lord had ■' said
unto them " (John xiv. 28). And more than onus
his aid is spoken of as needful, even for the proc-
lamation of the facts that relate to Christ (Acts i.
8; 1 P"t. j. 12); and he is described as a witness
with the Apostles, rather than through them, of
the things which they had seen during the course
of a ministry which they had shared (John xv. 28,
37; Acts v. 32. Compare Acts xv. 38). The per-
sonal authority of the Apostles as eye-witnesses of
what *iriy preached is not set aside by this divine
Digitized by
Google
M8
GOSPELS
ud: again and again the; describe themselves a*
" witueaan " to beta (Acta U. 32, iii. 18, z. 39, Ac. ) ,-
will when a vacancy occurs in their number through
die fail of Judas, it is almost assumed as a thing
iif course that his successor shall be chosen from
'whose ■'which had companied with them all the
time that the Lord Jesus went in and out among
them " (Acta i. 21). The teachings of the Hoi;
Spirit consisted, not in whispering to them facta
which the; had not witnessed, but rather in re-
viving the fading remembrance, and throwing out
into their true importance events and savings that
had been esteemed too lightly at the time they
took place. But the Apostles could not have
spoken of the Spirit as they did (Acta v. 32, zv.
28; unless he were known to be working in and
with them and directing them, and manifesting
that this was the case by unmistakable signs.
Here is the answer, both to the question why was
it not the first care of the Apostles to prepare a
written Gospel, and also to the scruples of those
who fear that the supposition of an oral Gospel
would give a precedent for those views of tradition
which have been tbe bane of the Christian church
as they were of the Jewish. The guidance of the
Holy Spirit supplied for a time such aid as made
a written Gospel unnecessary; but the Apostles saw
the dangers and errors which a traditional Gospel
would be exposed to in the course of time; and,
whilst they were still preaching the oral Gospel in
the strength of tbe Holy Gbost, they were admon-
Ulied by the same divine Person to prepare those
written records which were hereafter to be the daily
spiritual food of all the church of Christ. 11 Nor
is there anything unnatural in the supposition that
the Apostles intentionally uttered their witness in
tbe same order, and even, for the most part, in the
same form of words. They would thus approach
most nearly to the condition in which the church
was to be when written books were to be the means
of edification. They quote the scriptures of the
Old Testament frequently in their discourses ; and
as their Jewish education had accustomed them to
the use of the words of the Bible as well as the
matter, they would do no violence to their prejudices
in assimilating the new records to the old, and in
reducing them to a "form of sound words." They
were all Jews of Palestine, of humble origin, all
alike chosen, we may suppose, for the bring zeal
with which they would observe the works of their
Master and afterwards propagate his name; so that
the tendency to variance, arising from peculiarities
of education, taste, and character, would be re-
duced to its lowest in such a body. The language
of their first preaching was the Syro-Chaldaic,
which was a poor and scanty language; and though
Greek was now widely spread, and was the language
even of several places in Palestine (Josephus, Ant.
zvii. 11, § 4; B. J. iii. 9, § 1), though it prevailed
in Antioch, whence the first missions to Greeks and
Hellenists, or Jews who spoke Greek, proceeded
(Acta xi. 2s>, xiii. 1-3), the Greek tongue, as used
by Jews, partook of the poverty of the speech which
i The opening words of St. Luke's Gospel, " Foras-
sjucn as many have taken In nana to set forth In order
federation of those thing* which are most surely
eellwved among us, even as they delivered them unto
as, which from the beginning were eye-witnesses aud
sunlsters of the word," appear to mean that many
persons who heard the preaching of the Apostles wrote
town what they heard, in order to preserve It In a
ssssisiisst tarn. The wwd «nany" cannot refer
GOSPELS
it replaced; as, indeed, it is impossible to borrow
a whole language without borrowing the hubris of
thought upon which It has built itself. Whilst
modern taste aims at a variety of expression, and
abhors a repetition of the same phrases as monoto-
nous, the simplicity of the men, and their lan-
guage, and their education, and the state of liter-
ature, would all lead us to expect that the Apostles
would have no such feeling. As to this, we have
more than mere conjecture to rely on. Occasional
repetitions occur in the Gospels (Luke vtt. 11, 90;
xix. 31, 84), such as a writer in a mere coplouf
and cultivated language would perhaps have sought
to avoid. In the Acta, the conversion of St. Pant
is three time* related (Acts iz., xxii., xzvi.) once
b; the writer and twice by St. Paul himself; and
the two first harmonize exactly, except as to a few
expressions, and as to one more important circum-
stance (iz. 7 = xxii. 9), — which, however, admits
of an explanation, — whilst the third deviates some-
what more in expression, and has one passage pe-
culiar to itself. The virion of Cornelius is also
three times related (Acta x. 3-6, 30-32; xi. 13,
14), where the words of the angel in the two first
are almost precisely alike, and the rest very similar,
whilst tbe other is an abridged account of the same
facta. The vision of Peter is twice related (Acta
z. 10-16; xi. 6-10), and, except in one or two
expressions, the agreement is verbally exact. These
places from the Acta, which, both as to their re-
semblance and their difference, may be compared
to the narratives of the Evangelists, show the same
tendency to a common form of narrative which,
according to the present view, ma; have influenced
the preaching of the Apostles. It is supposed,
then, that the preaching of the Apostles, and the
teaching whereby they prepared others to preach,
a* they did, would tend to assume a common form,
more or less fixed; and that the portions of the
three Gospels which harmonize most exactly owe
their agreement not to the fact that they were
copied from each other, although it is impossible
to say that the later writer made no use of the
earlier one, nor to the existence of an; original
document now lost to us, but to the fact that the
apostolic preaching had already clothed itself in a
settled or usual form of words, to which the writers
inclined to conform without feeling bound to do so;
and the differences which occur, often in the closest
proximity to the harmonies, arise from the feeling
of independence with which each wrote what he
had seen and heard, or, in the case of Mark and
Luke, what apostolic witnesses had told him. Tbe
harmonies, as we have seen, begin with the baptism
of John ; that is, with the consecration of the Lord
to his messianic office; and with this event prob-
ably the ordinary preaching of the Apostles would
begin, for its purport was that Jesus is the Messiah,
and that as Messiah he suffered, died, and rose
again. They are very frequent as we approach ths
period of the Passion, because the sufferings of the
Lord would be much in the mouth of every one
who preached the Gospel, and all would become
familiar with tbe words in which the Apostles d«-
to St Matthew and St. Hark only ; and If the paraai.
implies an Intention to supersede the writings alludeu
to, then these two Evangelists cannot be included
under them. Partial and Incomplete reports of the
preaching of the Apostles, written with a ft ed aim
bnt without authority, an Intended ; and, If wt may
argue from St. Luke's sphere of observation, toey was)
probably composed by Greek converts.
Digitized by
Google
OOSPBLS
isribal it But u regards the Resurrection, which
iUaered from the Passion in that it n a fact which
She euemiea of Christianity felt bound to dispute
(Matt xxviii. 15), it is possible that the divergence
sroee from the intention of each Evangelist to con-
tribute something towards the weight of evidence
lor this central truth. Accordingly, all the four,
even St Mark (xvi. 14), who oftener throws a new
light upon old ground than opens out new, men-
tion distinct acts and appearances of the Lord to
establish that he was risen indeed. The verbal
agreement is greater where thn words of others are
recorded, and greatest of all where they are those
of Jesus, because here the apostolic preaching
would be especially exact; and where the historical
(act is the utterance of oertain words, the duty of
the historian is narrowed to a bare record of them.
(See the works of Gieseler, Norton, Westcott,
Weiase, and others already quoted.)
That this opinion would explain many of the
(acts connected with the text is certain. Whether,
besides conforming to the words and arrangement
of the apostolic preaching, the Evangelists did in
any cases make use of each other's work or not, it
would require a more careful investigation of de-
tails to discuss than space permits. Every reader
would probably find on examination some places
which could beat be explained on this supposition.
Nor does this involve a sacrifice of the independ-
ence of the narrator. If each of the three drew
the substance of his narrative from the one com-
mon strain of preaching that everywhere prevailed,
to have departed entirely in a written account from
the common form of words to which Christian
ears were beginning to be familiar, would not have
been independence but willfulness. To follow here
and there the words and arrangement of another
written Gospel already current would not compro-
mise the writer's independent position. If the
principal part of the narrative was the voice of the
whole church, a few portions might be conformed
to another writer without altering the character of
the testimony. In the separata articles on the Gos-
pels it will be shown that, however close may be
the agreement of the Evangelists, the independent
position of each appears from the contents of his
book, and has been recognised by writers of all
ages. It will appear that St Matthew describes
the kingdom of Messiah, as founded in the Old
Testament and fulfilled in Jesus of Nazareth ; that
St Mark, with so little of narrative peculiar to
himself, brings out by many minute circumstances
a more vivid delineation of our Lord's completely
human life; that St Luke puts forward the work
of Redemption as a universal benefit, and shows
Jeans not only as the Messiah of the chosen people
but as the Saviour of the world; that St John,
writing last of all, passed over most of what his
predecessors had related, in order to set forth more
tolly all that be had heard from the Master who
kned him, of his relation to the Father, and of
the relation of the Holy Spirit to both. The inde-
pendence of the writers is thus established ; and if
Ihey seem to have here and there used each other's
woount, which it is perhaps impossible to prove or
Usprove, such cases will not compromise that claim
which alone gives v»lue to a plurality of witnesses.
How does this last theory bear upon our belief
■ the inspiration of the Gospels ? This momentous
foeation admits of a satisfactory reply. Our blessed
Load, on fire different occasions, promised to the
iagatha the divine guidance, to teach and enlighten
GOSPELS 940
then, in their dangers (Matt x. 19; Luke ill. 11
12; Mark xiii. 11; and John xiv., xv., xvi.). H
bade .hem take no thought about defending them
selves before judges; he promised them the Spirit
of Truth to guide them into all truth, to teacl
them all things, and bring all things to their re-
membrance. That this promise was fully realized
to them the history of the Acts sufficiently shows.
But if the divine assistance was given them in their
discourses and preaching, it would be rendered
equally when they were about to put down in
writing the same gospel which they preached ; and,
as this would be their greatest time of need, the
aid would be granted then most surely. So that,
as to St. Matthew and St. John, we may say that
their Gospels are inspired because the writers of
them were inspired, according to their Master's
promise; for it is impossible to suppose that He
who put words into their mouths when they stood
before a human tribunal, with no greater fear than
that of death before them, would withhold his
light and truth when the want of them would mis-
lead the whole Church of Christ and turn the light
that was in it into darkness. The case of the oth.-r
two Evangelists is somewhat different It has
always been held that they were under the guid-
ance of Apostles in what they wrote — St. Mark
under that of St Peter, and St. Luke under that
of St Paul. We are not expressly told, indeed, that
these Evangelists themselves were persons to whom
Christ's promises of supernatural guidance had been
extended, but it certainly was not confined to the
twelve to whom it was originally made, as the case
of St. Paul himself proves, who was admitted to all
the privileges of an apostle, though, as it were,
" bom out of due time; " and as St Mark and St
Luke were the companions of apostles — shared
their dangers, confronted hostile tribunals, had to
teach and preach — there is reason to think thai
they equally enjoyed what they equally needed. Ir
Acta xv. 28, the Holy Ghost is spoken of as the
common guide and light of all the brethren, not of
apostles only; nay, to speak it reverently, as one
of themselves. So that the Gospels of St. Mark
and St Luke appear to have been admitted into
the canon of Scripture as written by inspired men
in free and close communication with inspired
apostles. But supposing that the portion of the
three first Gospels which is common to all has been
derived from the preaching of the Apostles in gen-
eral, then it is drawn directly from a source which
we know from our Lord himself to have been in-
spired. It comes to us from those Apostles into
whose mouths Christ promised to put the words of
his Holy Spirit. It is not from an anonymous
writing, as Eichhorn thinks — it is not that the
three witnesses are really one, as Story and others
have suggested in the theory of copying — but that
the daily preaching of all apostles and teachers has
found three independent transcribers in the three
Evangelists. Now the Inspiration of an historical
writing will consist in its truth, and in its selection
of events. Everything narrated must be substan-
tially and exactly true, and the conparison of the
Gospels /at with another offers us nothing that
doea no* answer to this test There are differences
of arrangement of events ; here some details of a
narrative or a discourse are supplied which art
wanting were; and if the writer had professed t*
lullow a •»«. t chronological order, or had pretended
iit his reuird was not only true but completa.
then one m .onion of order, or one omission at s
Digitized by
Google
950
GOSPELS
syllable, would convict him of inaccuracy. But if
it ia plain — if it is all but avowed — that minute
chronological data are not part of the writer's pur-
pose — if it ia also plain that nothing but a selection
of the facts is intended, or, indeed, possible (John
Mi. 25) — then the proper test to apply is, whether
each gives us a picture of the life and ministry of
Jesus of Nazareth that is self-consistent and con-
sistent with the others, such as would be suitable
to the use of those who were to believe on His
Name — for this is their evident intention. About
the answer there should be no doubt. We have
seen that each Gospel has its own features, and that
the divine element has controlled the human, but
Dot destroyed it. But the picture which they eon-
spire to draw is one full of harmony. The Saviour
they all describe is the same loving, tender guide
of his disciples, sympathizing with them in the
sorrows and temptations of earthly life, yet ever
ready to enlighten that life by rays of truth out of
the infinite world where the Father sits upon his
throne. It has been said that St. Matthew por-
trays rather the human side, and St. John the
divine ; but this holds good only in a limited sense.
It is in St. John that we read that " Jesus wept; "
and there is nothing, even in the last discourse of
Jesus, as reported by St. John, that opens a deeper
view of his divine nature than the words in St.
Matthew (zi. 25-30) beginning, '< I thank thee, O
Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because thou
hast Lid these things from the wise and prudent
and hast revealed them unto babes." All reveal
the same divine and human Teacher; four copies
of the same portrait, perhaps with a difference of
expression, yet still the same, are drawn here, and
it is a portrait the like of which no one had ever
delineated before, or, indeed, could hare done, ex-
cept from having looked on it with observant eyes,
and from having had the mind opened by the Holy
Spirit to comprehend features of such unspeakable
radiance. Not only does this highest " harmony
of the Gospels " manifest itself to every pious reader
of the Bible, but the lower harmony — the agree-
ment of fact and word in all that relates to the
ministry of the Lord, in all that would contribute
to a true view of his spotless character — exists
also, and cannot be denied. For example, all tell
us alike that Jesus was transfigured ou the mount ;
that the ihdcinah of divine glory sbone upon bis
face ; that Moses the lawgiver and Elijah the prophet
talked with him; and that the voice from heaven
bare witness to him. Is it any imputation upon
the truth of the histories that St. Matthew alone
tells us that the witnesses fell prostrate to the
earth, and that Jesus raised them? or that St.
Luke alone tells us that for a part of the time they
were heavy with sleep ? Again, one Evangelist, in
describing our Lord's temptation, follows the order
of the occurrences, another arranges according to
the degrees of temptation, and the third, passing
over all particulars, merely mentions that our Lord
tent tempted. Is there anything here to shake our
faith in the writers as credible historians V Do we
treat other histories in this exacting spirit ? Is not
the very independence of treatment the pledge to
is that we have really three witnesses to the fact
hat Jesus was tempted like as we are? for if the
Evangelists were copyists, nothing would have been
iiore easy than to remove such an obvious difference
ss this. The histories are true according to any
last that should be applied to a history; and the
I that they selec t — tooagh w» sould not pre-
GOSPKLS
same to say that they were more Important thaa
what are omitted, except from the fact of the omis-
sion — are at least such ss to have given the whok
Christian Church a clear conception of the Re-
deemer's life, so that none has ever complained of
insufficient means of knowing him.
There is a perverted form of the theory we art
considering which pretends that the facts of thi
Redeemer's life remained in the state of an oral
tradition till the latter part of the second century
and that the four Gospels were not written till thai
time. The difference ia not of degree but of kind
between the opinion that tbe Gospels were written
during the lifetime of the Apostles, who were eye-
witnesses, and the notion that for nearly a century
after the oldest of them had passed to his rest thi
events were only preserved in the changeable and
insecure form of an oral account. But for the latter
opinion there is not one spark of historical evidence.
Heretics of the second century who woidd gladly
have rejected and exposed a new gospel that made
against them never hint that the Gospels are spuri-
ous; and orthodox writers ascribe without contra-
diction the authorship of the books to those whose
names they bear. The theory was invented tc
accord with the assumption that miracles are im-
possible, but upon no evidence whatever; and the
argument when exposed runs in this vicious circle:
" There are no miracles, therefore the accounts of
them must have grown up in the course of a century
from popular exaggeration, and as the accounts are
not contemporaneous it is not proved that there are
miracles!" That the Jewish mind in its lowest
decay should have invented tbe character of Jesus
of Nazareth, and the sublime system of morality
contained in his teaching — that four writers should
have fixed the popular impression in four plain,
simple, unadorned narratives, without any outbursts
of national prejudice, or any attempt to give a
political tone to the events they wrote of — would
be in itself a miracle harder to believe than that
Lazarus came out at the Lord's call from his four-
days' tomb.
It will be an appropriate conclusion to this im-
perfect sketch to give a conspectus of the harmony
of tbe Gospels, by which the several theories may
be examined in their bearing on the gospel accounts
in detail. Let it be remembered, however, that a
complete harmony, including the chronological ar-
rangement and the exact succession of all events,
was not intended by the sacred writers to be con-
structed ; indeed tbe data for it are pointedly with-
held. Here most of the places where there is some
special difficulty, and where there has been a ques-
tion whether the events are parallel or distinct, are
marked by figures in different type. The sections
might in many cases have been subdivided but for
the limits of space, but the reader can supply this
defect for himself as cases arise. (The principal
works employed in constructing it are, Griesbach,
Sx/noptis Evangeliorwn, 1776; De Wette and
Liicke, Syn. Erang., [1818,] 1842; RCdiger, Syn.
Evnng., 1829; Clausen, Qtuituot- Evang. Tabula
SynojAlm, 1829; Greswell's Harmony [Harmonia
Evangtiica, ed. fita, Oxon. 1856] and Distertatiom
[2d ed., 4 vols, in 6, Oxford, 1837], a most im-
portant work ; the Rev. I. Williams Ontht Gosjhis .
Theile's Grtek Tettament ; and Teschendorf 6 Syn.
Evang. 1854 [2d ed. 1864] ; besides the well-known
works of Ligbtfoot, Macknight, Newcome, ant
Rcbinson.) [For other works of this class, set
ad lition to the present article.] W. T.
Digitized by
Google
GOSPELS
861
TABLE OF THE HARMONY OF THE FOUR GOSPELS.
■ — In the following Table, whan all the references under a given section are printed in heavy type, a
under "Two Genealogies," It It U oe understood that tome special difficulty beasts the harmoay
Where one or mora reference* under a given section are In light, and one or more In heavy type, it la ta
be nndentood that the former are given aa In their proper place, and that It la mora or leas doubtful
whether the latter are to be considered as parallel narratives or not.
St. Matthew.
St. Mark.
St Lake.
St. John.
The Word"
# t
# #
, .
i. 1-14
Preface, to Theopbiltu ....
.
•
1.1-4
1.5-25
Mar; visits Elizabeth
•
.
1.89-66
Birth of John the Baptist ...
. .
.
1.57-80
1.18-25
.
ii. 1-7
i. J-17
.
111.23-88
The watching Shepherds
.
• ,
u. 8-20
The Circumcision
, .
,
11.21
Presentation in the Temple ....
,
« ,
li. 22-38
The wise men from the East . .
li. 1-12
, ,
Flight to Egypt .... ...
ii 18-23
.
UL 89
Disputing with the Doctors ....
.
•
a. 40-52
Ministry of John the Baptist ....
ill. 1-12
1.1-8
itt. 1-18
i. 15-81
iii. 18-17
LtMl
ill. 21, 22
i 39-34
iv. 1-11
I 12,13
iv. 1-13
Andrew and another aee Jems . . .
.
,
.
1.35-40
Simon, now Cephas
• .
,
.
i. 41, 42
Philip and Nathanael
•
.
1.43-51
.
* •
!i l-ll
Passover (1st) and cleansing the Temple
. .
.
iilS-92
Nicodemus
•
, ,
. .
a. 23-ui. 21
Christ and John baptizing
• •
. .
.
iii. 22-36
The woman of Samaria . .
.
, .
•
iv. 1-42
John the Baptist In prison ....
iv. 12; xir. 3
1. 14; vi. 17
Iii. 19, 30
iii. 24
iv. 12
i. 14, 15
iv. 14, 16
iv. 43-46
The nobleman's son
.
. .
.
iv. 46-64
Capernaum. Four Apostles called . .
It. 18-22
1.16-20
T.U1
Demoniac healed there
.
1. 21-28
iv. 31-37
Simon's wife's mother healed . . .
viii. 14-17
1. 29-34
iv. 38-41
iv. 23-25
i. 35-39
iv. 42-44
Healing a leper . .
viii. 1-4
i. 40-45
v. 12-16
viii. 18-27
iv. 35-41
viu. 22-25
Demoniacs in land of Gadarenes . . .
via. 28-34
v. 1-20
viii. 26-39
Jairus's daughter. Woman healed . .
ix. 18-26
v. 21-43
viU. 40-56
ii. 27-34
. ,
. ,
ix. 1-8
11. 1-12
v. 17-26
Matthew the publican ...
ix. 9-13
1L 13-17
v. 27-32
" Thy disciples fast not " ...
ix. 14-17
ii. 18-22
v. 83-39
Journey to Jerusalem to 2d Passover .
.
.
. ,
v. 1
Plucking ears of corn on Sabbath . .
The withered hand. Miracles . . .
ill. 1-8
U. 23-28
vi. 1-6
xU. 9-21
iii. 1-12
vi 6-U
x. 2-4
iii. 13-19
vi 12-16
The Sermon on the Mount ....
T. 1-vll. 29
, .
vi. 17-49
viii. 6-13
, ,
va. 1-10
iv. lej-M
The widow's son at Nain
. .
, ,
vli 11-17
xl. 2-19
vii. 18-35
Woe to the cities of Galilee ....
xL 20-24
, 9
. .
Call to the meek and suffering . . .
xi. 25-30
, .
. ,
anointing the feet of Jesus ....
, ,
. ,
vli 86-50
Second circuit round Galilee ....
„ #
, B
viii 1-3
xiii. 1-23
tv. 1-20
viii 4-15
" Candle under a Bushel . . .
# ,
Jr. 21-95
viii. 16-18
« the Sewer
iv. 26-29
, .
" the Wheat and Tana ....
xili. 94-M
. .
. ,
•' Grain of Mustard-seed . . .
xUl. 81, 35
Iv. 30-82
xiii 18, 10
'• Leaven
xttl. 33
• •
xiii 20,81
dm aaanhing by parables . .
titt.34,3*
iv. 81,34
Digitized by
Google
952 GOSPELS
TABU Or Tm HARMONY 0* THE VOUK 008PXLS — (amH*m*d).
8t Matthew.
St. Her)
i. St Lake.
St. Mm.
Wheat and tarn explained ....
xiii. 36-43
. ,
. .
The treasure, the pearl, the net .
xiii. 44-62
,
.
His mother and Hie brethren .
xii. 46-60
ill. 81-3
6 viii. 19-91
Reception at Nazareth . . .
xiii. 53-68
vi.1-6
.
Third circuit round Galilee
ix. 36-88; 1
xi.l )
vi.6
.
Sending forth of the Twelve . .
X.
vi.7-18
ix.1-6
Herod's opinion of Jesua . .
sir. 1, 9
vi. 14-16
ix.7-9
Death of John the Baptist
xiv. 8-19
vi. 17-99
.
Approach of Passover (3d)
.
. ,
.
vi 4
Feeding of the five thousand .
xiv. 18-91
tL 80-44
ix. 10-17
Ti 1-16
Walking on the sea . . . .
xiv. 23-33
vi. 45-59
•
vt 16-91
Miracles in Gennesaret ....
xiv. 84-36
vi. 68-66
. .
The bread of life
, .
. ,
, •
V 99-66
The washen hands
xv. 1-20
Til. 1-33
.
The Syrophcenician woman
xr. 21-28
vii.94-8(
»
Miracles of healing ....
xt. 29-81
vii. 81-3-
'
Feeding of the four thousand .
xv. 39-39
viii. 1-9
; ,
The sign from heaven . . .
xvi. 1-4
Till. 10-1
3
The leaven of the Pharisees .
xvi. 6-12
viii. 14-2
1
Blind man healed ....
.
viii. 22-2
8
Peter's profession of faith . .
xvi. 18-19
viii. 27-2
9 Ix. 18-90
/i. 66.71
The Passion foretold . . .
xvi. 30-28
viii. 30-b
c. 1 ix. 91-97
The Transfiguration ....
xvii. 1-9
Ix. 2-10
ix. 38-36
Ehjah
xvii. 10-13
ix. 11-13
.
The lunatic healed ....
xvil. 14-21
ix. 14-29
ix. 37-49
The Passion again foretold . .
xvii. 22,23
ix. 30-32
ix. 43-46
Fish caught for the tribute
xvil. 34-27
.
.
The little child
xviii. 1-6
Ix. 88-87
ix. 46-48
One casting out devils
• ■ •
. .
ix. 88-41
ix.49, 60
Offenses ....
. .
xviii. 6-9
ix. 42-48
zvii.3
The lost sheep . .
. ,
xviii. 10-14
XT. 4-7
Forgiveness of injuries
. ,
xviii. 15-17
. .
Binding and loosing
Forgiveness. Parable
• •
xviii. 18-20
xviii. 21-86
•
" Salted with fire " .
, ,
, ,
tx.49,50
.
Journey to Jerusalem
• . •
, ,
ix.61
Til. 1-10
Fire from heaven . .
, #
, ,
ix. 62-66
Answers to disciples .
. .
Till. 19-99
ix. 67-62
The Seventy disciples
. .
. .
x. 1-16
Discussions at Feast of Tabernael
m
, .
vii. 11-68
Woman taken in adultery . .
. •
viii. 1-11
Dispute with the Pharisees . .
. .
viii. 19-61
The man bom blind . . .
, ,
ix. 1-41
He good Shepherd ....
. ,
x. 1-91
The return of the Seventy . .
, ,
x. 17-24
The good Samaritan . . .
. .
x. 26-37
Mary and Martha ....
•
x. 38-42
The Lord's Prayer ....
vl.9-18
xi. 1-4
*rayer effectual . • • • •
▼it 7-11
xi. 6-13
Through Beelzebub " . . .
The unclean spirit returning .
xii. 22-37
hi. ao-:
10 xi. 14-23
xU. 43-48
xi. 24-28
The sign of Jonah ....
xii. 38-43
xi. 29-39
The light of the body . . .
( V. 16 J Ti.
1 32,23
};
xi. 33-36
The Pharisees
in-ill
xi. 37-54
What to fear
x 36-33
xii. 1-12
" Master, speak to my brother"
xii. 18-16
Jovetousness
vi. 26-33
xii. 16-31
Watchfulness
xii. 32-69
Jalileans that perished . . .
, ,
xill. 1-9
Woman healed on Sabbath .
xiii. 10-17
rhe grain of mustard-seed .
The leaven
xtti. 31, 33
lr. 40-!
19 xiii. 18, 19
xiii. 33
xiii. 20,91
Towards Jerusalem ....
xiii. 22
» Are there few that be taved?"
^ #
xill. 98-80
Warning against Herod
'0 Jerusalem, Jerssak
m" '.
xxttt. 87-89
.
xiii. 31-83
xUl.84,8.
Digitized by
Google
GOSPELS
TABU Or TH1 HABttOCT 01 THB JOUR 008PMLS — (aumrf.)
961
St. Matthew.
St. Hark.
St. Luke.
84. Ma
Dropsy haded on Sabbath-day
, ,
, .
xiv. 1-6
rawing the chief rooos . . . .
. .
.
xiv. 7-14
Panble of the Great Supper . . .
xxii. 1-14
•
xiv. 15-24
Following ChrUt with the Cross . .
x. 87, 38
•
xiv. 25-35
Parables of I/»t Sheep, Piece of Honey, )
Prodigal Son, Unjust Steward, Rich >
.
.
XT. xvL
xviii. 6-18
xvii. ao
•
xvii 1-4
xvii. 5-10
The ten lepers
. .
.
xviL 11-19
How the kingdom cometh
. .
. .
xvii. 90-87
■'arable of the Unjust Judge ....
. .
.
xviii. 1-8
" the Pharisee and Publican . .
. .
xviil. 9-14
xix. 1-19
xix. 13-15
x. 1-12 '
X. 13-16
xviu. 15-17
xix. 18-26
x. 17-27
xviii. 18-87
xix. 97-30
x. 28-31 .
xviii. 28-30
xx.1-16
, .
. •
xx. 17-19
x. 82-84
xviii 81-34
Request of James and John ....
xx. 20-28
x. 85-45
.
xx. 29-34
x. 48-52
xviii. 85-43
Zaochsus
. .
, .
xix. 1-10
Parable of the Ten Talents ....
xxv. 14-30
, .
xix. 11-28
Feast of Dedication
.
, .
. •
x. 29-39
.
.
. .
x. 40-49
Raising of Lazarus
.
.
.
xi. 1-44
Meeting of the Sanhedrim ....
.
.
.
xi. 46-58
Christ in Ephraim
.
. .
.
xL 64-57
xxvi.«-18
xiv. 8-9
Til. 36-60
xU. 1-11
xxi. 1-11
xi. 1-10
xb. 99-44
xii. 19-19
Cleansing of the Temple (3d). . . .
xxL 19-16
xl. 15-18
xix. 45-48
Ji. 13-23
xxL 17-23
(si. 11-14,1
I 19-23 J
.
▼1.14, 16
xi. 24-26
, ,
"By what authority," etc ....
xxi. 23-27
xi. 27-33
xx. 1-8
xxi. 28-32
, ,
„ „
" the Wicked Husbandmen . .
xxi. 33-46
xii. 1-12
xx. 9-19
" the Wedding Garment . . .
xxii. 1-14
. ,
xiv. ie-24
xxii. 16-22
xii. 13-17
xx. 20-96
xxii. 23-33
xii. 18-27
xx. 97-40
xxii. 34-40
xii. 28-34
,
David's Son and David's Lord . . .
xxii. 41-46
xii. 35-37
xx. 41-44
xxiii. 1-39
xii. 38-10
xx. 45-47
.
xU. 41-44
xxi. 1-4
Christ's second coining
xxiv. 1-61
xut 1-37
XXL5-38
Parable of the Ten Virgins ....
xxv. 1-13
.
. »
xxt. 14-30
. ,
xix. 11-38
xxv. 31-46
. .
.
Greeks visit Jesus. Voice from heaven .
xii. 90-88
Reflections of John
.
, .
xii. 36-50
Last Passover (4th). Jews conspire
xxvi. 1-8
xiv. 1,9
xxJi. 1, 9
xxvi. 14-16
xiv. 10, 11
xxii. 3-6
xxvl. 17-29
xiv. 19-95
xxii. 7-23
xHtl-36
Contention of the Apostles ....
. .
. ,
xxii. 94-3C
xxvl. 30-35
xiv. 98-31
xxiL 81-89
riiL 88-88
Last discourse. The departure; the j
The vine and the b-anehes- Abiding j
•
Work of the Comforter in dlsdples
xvii. 1-98
xxvi. 36-46
xiv. 33-49
xxii. 40-46
xviil. 1
xxvl. 47-50 i
xiv. 43-52
xxii. 47-53
xviii. 9-11
Before Annas (Caiaphas). Peters deoia.
(xxi. 57 1
i 58, 69-7J )
I xiv. 53, j
1 54,66-72)
xxii. 54-69
xviii.ia-aj
xxvi. 59-68
xiv. 55-65
Mil. 63-71
( xxvii. 1, )
I 111-14 I
xv. 1-6
xxiii. 1-3
xviii. at
Digitized by
Google
W>4 GOSPELS
TABLE OF THE HARMONY OF THK FODB QvfflPKLB — (xHtmmMy.
Hio Traitor's death .
Before Herod . . .
Accusation and Condemnation
Treatment by the soldiers . .
The Crucifixion
The mother of Jesus . . .
Blockings and railings . . .
The malefactor
The death
Darkness and other portents .
The bystanders
The side pierced
The burial
The guard of the sepulchre
The Insurrection . . .
Disciples going to Emmaus
Appearances in Jerusalem .
At the Sea of Tiberias . .
On the Mount in Galilee .
Unrecorded Works . . .
Ascension
St Matthew.
xxvii. 3-10
xxvii. 16-98
xxvii. 27-31
xxvii. 32-38
xxvii. 39-44
xxvii. 50
xxvii. 45-53
xxvii. 54-56
xxvii. 67-61
xxvii. 69-66
xxviii. 11-15
xxviii. 1-10
xxviii. 16-90
St Mark.
xv. 6-16
xv. 16-90
xv. 21-28
xv. 99-32
xv.87
xv. 83-38
xv. 39-41
xv. 49-47
xvi. 1-11
xvi. 12, 18
xvi. 14-18
xvi. 19, 90
St. Lake.
xxiii. 4-11
xxiii. 13-25
xxiii. 36, 37
xxiii. 26-34
! xxiii. 35-49
! xxiii. 40-43
xxiii. 46
xxiii. 44, 45
xxiii. 47-49
xxiii. 60-66
xxiv. 1-19
xxiv. 13-36
xxiv. 38-48
xxiv. 50-63
(xviii. 29-R
i xix. 1-lt
xix. 2, 3
xix. 17-94
xix. 26-47
xix. 28-30
xix. 31-37
xix. 38-49
xx. 1-18
xx. 19-99
xxL 1-23
( xx. 30. 31;
i xxi.24, 26
* The theory which bears the name of Strauss
wild hardly have originated anywhere but in Ger-
many, nor is it easy for an Anglo-Saxon mind to
conceive of its being seriously propounded and act-
ually believed. It is Ear from being clearly defined
and self-consistent in the author's own statement;
and his Life of Jesut, while a work of great learn-
ing in detail, is singularly deficient in comprehen-
siveness and unity.
The theory, in brief, is this. Jesus was the son
of Joseph and Mary. In his childhood he man-
ifested unusual intelligence and promise, as com-
pared with his external advantages, and was the
object of admiration in the humble family circle in
which his lot was cast. He early became a dis-
ciple of John the Baptist; and, from strong sym-
pathy with his enthusiastic expectation of the
speedy advent of the Messiah (an expectation
vividly entertained by all loyal Jews of that
day), he conceived the idea of assuming that
character himself, and personated it so successfully
as to become bis own dupe, and thus to pass un-
consciously from imposture to self-delusion. He
made proselytes, chose disciples, uttered discourses
which impressed themselves profoundly upon the
popular mind, and draw upon himself the hostility
of the chief men of the nation, especially of the
Pharisees. They procured his execution as a
traitor; but his disciples, believing that the Mes-
siah could not die, maintained that he must have
risen alive from the sepulchre, and, as he had not
been seen among men after his crucifixion, that be
lad ascended to heaven. This simple life-story
eecame the basis of a series of myths — narratives
not intentionally false or consciously invented, but
some of them the growth of popular credulity,
•then, symbolical forms in which his disciples
•ought to embody the doctrines and precepts which
lad bun the staple of his discourses. His mirac-
■looa birth was imagined and believed, because it
W. T.
seemed impossible that tile Messiah should have
been born like other men. Supernatural works
were ascribed to him, because the Hebrew legends
had ascribed such works to the ancient prophets,
and it could not be that he who was greater than
they, and of whom they were thought to have writ-
ten glowing predictions, should not have performed
more numerous and more marvellous miracles than
any of them. His appearances after his resurrec-
tion were inferred, defined as to time and place, and
incorporated into the faith of his disciples, because
it was inconceivable that he should have returned
to life without being seen. These myths had their
origin chiefly outside of the circle of 1 1 le Apostles and
the persons most closely intimate with Jesus, and
were probably due in great part to the constructive
imagination of dwellers in portions of Galilee where
he had tarried but a little while, or of admirers
who had been his companions but for a brief period.
The mythical element, once introduced into his
history, had a rapid growth for some thirty, forty,
or fitly years after his death, and new incidents in
accordance with the Messianic ideal were constant!)
added to the multiform oral Gospel propagated and
transmitted by his disciples. Within that period,
various persons, none of them apostles or intimate
friends of Jesus, compiled such narratives as had
come to their ears; and of these narratives there
have come down to us our four Gospels, together
with other fragmentary stories of equal authority
which bear the popular designation of the Apocrv
phal Gospels.
Such was the complexion of Strauss's mythic*
theory, as developed in bis Life of.ftiu*, a published
in 1835-36, repeatedly republished, and sufficiently
well known in this country by a cheap reprint of •
moderately good English translation. In his mm
work, issued in 1884, The Life of Jam, for Of
<• Dot Ltbn Srju, triiisck btmteUt.
Digitized by
Google
GOSPELS
German People." he departs from his former posi-
ion to far as to charge the propagandist* and his-
torians of Christianity with willful and conscious
ilsifications, and to maintain with the critics of
•Jbe Tubingen school that the four Gospels were
written, in great part, to sanction and promote the
dogmatic beliefs of their respective authors, and
that the; thus represent so many divergent theolog-
ical tendencies. In assuming this ground. Strauss
enlarges the definition of the term myth, which no
longer denotes merely the fabulous outgrowth or em-
bodiment of an idea without fraudulent intent, but
includes such wanton falsehoods as are designed to
express, promulgate, or sanction theological dogmas.
We have said that Strauss admits an historical
oasis for the mythical structure reared by the Evan-
gelists. How is this basis to be determined ? How
are we to distinguish between facts and myths ?
(1.) The usual order of nature cannot in any in-
stance, way, or measure, have been interrupted.
Therefore every supernatural incident must be
accounted as mythical. (2.) Jesus having been
regarded as the Messiah, it was inevitable that rep-
resentations should have been made of him in
accordance with the Messianic notions of his time
and people, and with the predictions deemed Mes-
sianic in the writings of the Hebrew prophets.
Consequently, all such representations, though in-
volving nothing supernatural, such as his descent
from David and bis flight into Egypt, are at least
suspicious, and may be safely set down as myths.
(3. ) His admirers would have been likely to attrib-
ute to him sayings and deeds corresponding with
those recorded of various distinguished persons in
Jewish history. Therefore, every portion of the
narrative which bears any resemblance or analogy
to any incident related in the Old Testament, is
mythical. But (4). on the other hand, Jesus was
a Hebrew, confined within the narrow circle of
Jewish ideas, and not under any training or influ-
ence which could have enlarged that circle. Con-
sequently every alleged utterance of his, and every
idea of his mission and character, that is broader
and higher than the narrowest Judaism, is also
mythical. Thus we have an historical personage,
of whom the critic denies at once everything na-
tional and everything extra-national. By parity of
reasoning, we might, in the biography of Washing-
ton, cast suspicion on everything that he is alleged
to have said or done as a loyal American, because
he was one, and his biographer would of course
ascribe to him the attributes of an American ; and
l everything that he is alleged to have said or
k.'ne from the impulse of a larger humanity, be-
ranse, being an American, it was impossible that
oe should have been anything more — a style of
sriticlsm which, with reference to any but a sacred
personage, the world would regard as simply idiotic.
But this is not all. (5.) Though among secular
historians, even of well-known periods and events,
there are discrepancies in minor details, and these
are held to be confirmations of the main facta, as
evincing the mutual independence of the writers
toiuddered as separate authorities, for some unex-
plained and to us nscrutable reason, this -iw does
sot apply to the Gospels. In then- every discrep-
incy, however minute, casts just suspiciou on an
alleged fact or a recorded discourse or conversation.
rhis suspicion is extended even to the omissi-n or
1 narration of very slight particulars, with-
« Oat Ijbin Jemflk dot DtuUtki Yolk.
GOSPELS 95S
out making any allowance for the different point* of
ew which several independent witnesses must of
necessity occupy, or for the different portions of a
prolonged transaction or discourse which would
reach their eyes or ears, according as they were
nearer or more remote, earlier or later on the
ground, more or less absorbed in what was passing.
All, therefore, in which the Evangelists vary from
one another, is mythical. But while their variance
always indicates a myth (6), their very close agree
ment demands the same construction ; for wherever
the several narrators coincide circumstantially and
verbally, their coincidence indicates some common
legendary source. Thus mutually inconsistent and
contradictory are the several tests empliyed by
Strauss to separate myth from fact. Practically,
were Strauss's Life of Jem* lost to the world, one
might reconstruct it, by classing as a myth, under
one or more of the heads that we have specified,
every fact in the history of Jesus, and every dedd or
utterance of his, which indicates either tho divinity
of his mission, his unparalleled wisdom, or the
transcendent loveliness, parity, and excellence of
bis character.
Yet, while Jesus is represented as in part self-
deluded, and in part an impostor, and his biography
as in all its distinctive features utterly fictitious,
strange to say, Strauss recognizes this biography as
symbolical of the spiritual history of mankind.
What is false of the individual Jesus is true of the
race. Humanity is " God manifest in the flesh,"
the child of the visible mother, Nature, and thr
invisible father, Spirit. It works miracles ; for it
subdues Nature in and around itself by the power
of the Spirit. It it sinless; for pollution cleaves
to the individual, but does not affect the race or
its history. It dies, rises, and ascends to heaven ;
for the suppression of its personal and earthly flfe
— in other words, the annihilation of individual
men by death — is a reunion with the All-Father,
Spirit. Faith in this metaphysical farrago is jus-
tifying and sanctifying Christian faith. Thus a
history, which is the joint product of imposture
and credulity, by a strange chance, (for providence
there is none, ) has become a symbolical representa-
tion of true spiritual philosophy.
We will now offer some of the leading consider-
ations, which are fairly urged against the mythical
theory.
1. This theory assume* that miracles an impos
sible. But why are they impossible, if there be a
God ? The power which established the order of
nature includes the power to suspend or modify it, at
the greater includes the lees. If that order was es-
tablished with a moral and spiritual purpose, for the
benefit of reasoning, accountable, immortal beings,
and if that same purpose may be served by the sus-
pension of proximate causes at any one epoch of
human history, then we may expect to find authentie
vestiges of such an epoch. All that is needed in
order to make miracles credible is the discovery of
an adequate purpose, a justifying end. Such a
purpose, such an end, is the development of the
highest forms of goodness in human conduct and
oharaeter; and whether miracles — real or imagined
— have borne an essential part in such development,
is an historical question which we are competent to
answer. Suppose that we write down the names
of all the men who have left a reputation for pre-
eminent excellence, — Orientals, Greeks, Romans,
ancient, modern, the lights of dark ages, the cho-
sen representatives of every philosophical school, tfce
Digitized by
Google
woe
GOSPELS
finished product of the highest civilization of every
type, refurmen, philanthropists, those who have
adorned the loftiest stations, those who have made
lowly stations illustrious. I.*t na then separate
the names into two column*, writing the < hristians
in one column, all the rest in the other. We shall
find that we have made a horizontal division, —
that the least in the Christian column is greater
than the greatest out of it. From Paul, l'eter,
and John ; from Fenelon, Xavier, Boyle, Doddridge,
Mart™, lleber, Judson, Channing, men whose
genius and culture conspired with their piety to
make theui greatly good, down to the unlettered
Bedford tinker, John Pounds the cobbler, the Dairy-
man's daughter, with just education enough to read
her Bible and to know the will of her Ix>rd, we
find traits of character, which in part are not
shared in any degree, in part are but remotely ap-
proached, by the best men out of the Christian pale.
Now when we look into the forming elements and
processes of these Christian characters, we shall
find that the miracles of the New Testament hold
a foremost place, and we shall find it impossible
even to conceive of their formation under the myth-
ical theory. It is absurd to think of Paul as com-
passing sea and land, laying hare bis l«ck to the
scourge, reaching after the crown of martyrdom,
to defend a mythical resurrection and ascension of
humanity; of Martyn or Judson as forsaking all
the joys of civilized life, and encountering hardships
worse than death, to preach Straussianism ; of the
Gospel according to Strauss as taking the place of
Matthew's or John's Gospel in the hands of the
tinker or the dairy-maid, developing the saintly
spirit, heralding the triumphant deaths, of which
we have such frequent record in the annals of the
poor. These holy men and women have been guided
and sustained in virtue by the authority of a di-
vinely commissioned Lawgiver, whose words they
have received because he had been proclaimed and
attested as the Son of God by power from on high.
They have had a working faith in immortality, —
such a faith as no reasoning, or analogy, or instinct
has ever given, — because they have stood in thought
by the bier at the gates of Nain and by the tomb
of Bethany ; because they have seen the light that
streams from the broken sepulchre of the crucified,
and heard the voice of the resurrection-angel.
Now if the development of the highest style of
human character is a purpose worthy of God, and
if in point of fact a belief in miracles has borne
an essential part in the development of such char-
acters, then are miracles not only possible, but an-
tecedently probable and intrinsically credible. And
this is an argument which cannot be impeached till
Straussianism has furnished at least a few finished
characters, which we can place by the side of those
that have been formed by faith in a miraculously
ampowered and endowed Teacher and Saviour.
Miracle, lying as it does clearly within the scope
f omnipotence, needs only adequate testimony to
-instantiate it Human testimony is indeed ap-
pealed to in proof of the unbroken order of nature ;
out, so far as it goes, it proves the opposite. We
can trace back no line of testimony which does not
reach a miraculous epoch. Nay, if there be any
me element of human nature which is univer-
sal, with exceptions as rare as idiocy or insanity, it
the appetency for miracle. So strong is this,
-at at the present day none are so ready to receive
(he drivellings of hyper-electrified women as utter-
from departed spirits, and to accept the ab-
GOSPKL3
surdities of the newest form of lecromaney, as
those who set aside the miracles of the New Testa-
ment and cast contempt on the risen Saviour
Such being the instinctive craving of human natun
for that which is above nature, it is intrinsicallv
probable that God has met this craving by authentic
voices from the spirit-realm, by authentic glimpses
from behind the veil of sense, by authentic forth-
reachings of the omnipotent arm from beneath the
mantle of proximate causes.
2. Strauss is self-renited on his own ground.
He maintains the uniformity of the law of causation
in all time, equally in the material and the intel-
lectual universe, so that no intellectual phenomenon
can make its appearance, except from causes and
under conditions adapted to bring it into being.
Myths, therefore, cannot originate, except from
causes and under conditions favorable to their birth
and growth. Now, if we examine the undoubted
myths connected with the history and religion of
the ancient nations, we shall find that they had
their origin prior to the era of written literature;
that their evident nucleus is to be sought in his-
torical personages and events of a very early date;
that they grew into fantastic forms and vast pro-
portions by their transmission from tongue to
tongue, whether in story or in song; that their
various versions are the result of oral tradition
through different channels, as in the separate states
of Greece, and among the aboriginal tribes and pre-
historical colonists of Italy ; and that they receive*,
no essential additions or modifications after the
age at which authentic history begins. Thus the
latest of the gods, demigods and wonder-working
heroes of Grecian fable — such of them as ever lived
— lived seven centuries before Herodotus, and not
less than four centuries before Hesiod and Homer;
the various accounts we have of them appear to
have been extant in the earliest period of Greek
literature; and we have no proof of the origin of
any extended fable or of the existence of any per-
sonage who became mythical, after that period.
The case is similar with the distinctively Roman
myths and the mythical portions of Roman history.
They are all very considerably anterior to the earliest
written history and literature of Rome. The
mythical and the historical periods of all nations
are entirely distinct, the one from the other. Now
the Christian era falls far within the historical
period. Single prodigies are indeed related in the
history of that age, as they are from time to time
in modem and even recent history ; but the leading
incidents of individual lives and the successive
stages of public and national affairs in that age are
detailed with the same litcralneas with which the
history of the seventeenth or eighteenth century is
written. Yet, had the conditions for the growth
of myths existed, there were not wanting, then,
personages, whose vast abilities, strange vicissitudes
of fortune, and extended fame would have made
them mythical. It is hardly possible that there
could have been a fuller supply of the material fc~
myths in the life of Hercules, or of Cadmus, or of
Medea, than in that of Julius Ca?sar, or of Marcus
Antonius, or of Cleopatra. Nor can it be main-
tained that in this respect Judiea was at an earlier
and more primitive stage of culture than Rome or
Egypt- Josepbus, the Jewish historian, was born
about the time of the death of Jesus Christ, and
wrote very nearly at the period assigned by Strauss
for the composition of the earliest of our Gospels
In addition to what we believe to have been thi
Digitized by
Google
GOSPELS
aback* of the Old Testament, be res-rda many
■ndoabted myths of the early Hebrew agee; but
hi* history of hie own times, with now end then
a touch of the marvellous, has no more of the
mythical element or tendency than we find in the
narratives of the tame epoch by Roman historians.
tn fine, there was nothing in that age more than
in this, which could gire rise or currency to a
mythical history.
3. Myths are vague, dateless, incoherent, dreamy,
poetical ; while the Gospels are eminently prosaic,
circumstantial, abounding in careful descriptions
of persons, and designations of places and times.
The genealogies given in Matthew and Luke are
represented by Strauss as mythical; but nothing
could be more thoroughly opposed to our idea of a
myth, and to the character of the acknowledged
myths of antiquity, than such catalogues of names.
We believe both these genealogies to be authentic ;
for Matthew alone professes to give the natural and
actual ancestry of Joseph, while Ijike expressly
says that be is giving the legal genealogy of Jesus,
{at he urn legally reckoned being the literal ren-
dering of the words employed by the Evangelist, &j
iropi^iTo,) and H is well known that the legal
genealogy of a Jew might diverge very widely from
the line of his actual parentage. But even were we
to admit the alleged inconsistency of the two, tbey
both bear incontestable marks of having been copied
from existing documents, and not imagined or in-
vented. All through the Gospels we find, in close
connection with the miracles of Christ, details of
common Jewish life, often so minute and trivial,
that they would have been wholly beneath the aim
of ambitious fiction or tumid fancy, and could have
found a place in the narrative only because they
actually occurred. The miracles are not in a setting
of their own kind, as tbey would have been in a
fictitious narrative. They are imbedded in a sin-
gularly natural and lifelike, humble and unpretend-
ing history. The style of the Evangelists is not
that of men who either wondered themselves, or
expected others to wonder, at what they related ;
but it is the unambitious style of men who ex-
lected to be believed, and who were perfectly
amiUar with the marvellous events they described,
lad tbey related these events from rumor, from a
- eated imagination, or with a disnoaition to deceive,
hey must have written in an inflated style, with a
profusion of epithets, with frequent appeals to the
sentiment of the marvellous, not unmixed with the
■how of argument to convince the incredulous.
When we find on the current of the Gospel history
not a ripple of swollen diction, not a quickening of
jbe rhetorical pulse, not a deviation from the quiet,
prosaic, circumstantial flow of narrative, in describ-
ing such events as the walking upon the sea, the
raising of Lazarus, the ascension of Jesus Christ to
feeaven, we can account for this unparalleled literary
,xienomenon only by supposing that the writers
had become so conversant with miracle, either in
heir own experience or through their intimacy with
-~e-witnesses, that events aside from the ordintry
June of nature had ceased to be contemplated with
957
4. Another conclusive argument against the
mythical theory is derived torn the sufferings and
lbe martyrdoms of the primitive Christians. Strauss
admits that the earliest of our Gospels assumed its
present form within thirty or forty years after the
Math of Jesus. At that time there were still livi.ig
past multitudes, a ho mart hare been contemporary
GOSPELS
and coeval with Jesus, and who had the means at
ascertaining the truth with regard to his personal
history. Mere fable, which involved no seiious
consequences to those who received it, might hare
passed unquestioned, and might have been devoured
by weak men and superstitious women with easy
credulity. But men are not wont to stake their
reputation, their property, their lives, on stories
which they have the means of testing, without look-
ing carefully into the evidence of their truth. Now
no fact in history is more certain than that, withhi
forty years from the death of Christ, large numl*is
of persons, many of them natives of Judaea, suffered
the severest persecution, and incurred painful and
ignominious death by fire, by crucifixion, and by
exposure to wild beasts, in consequence of their
professed belief in the divine minion, the miracu-
lous endowments, and the resurrection of Jesus.
Many of these persons were men of intelligence and
cultivation. TTiey must have known bow far the
alleged facts of the life of Jesus were confirmed by
eye-witnesses, and how far and on what grounds
they were called in question. They lived at a time
when they could have tried the witnesses, and they
must have been more cr less than human if they
threw away their lives for mere exaggerations or
fables. The genuineness of several of Paul's epistles
is admitted by Strauss, and neither he nor any one
else doubts the fact of Paul's protracted sacrifices
and sufferings, and his ultimate martyrdom as a
Christian believer. Paul's epistles show him tn
have been a man of eminent power and culture, — in
the opinion of many, the greatest man that God
ever made ; in the judgment of all, far above medioc-
rity. Born a Jew, educated in Jerusalem, familiar
with the alleged scenes and witnesses of the miracles
of Jesus, at fin*t a persecutor of the infant church,
he could have become a believer and a champion
of the Christian faith only on strong evidence, and
with a full knowledge of the grounds for unbelief
and doubt; and we hate his own statement of what
he believed, and especially of his undoubting Ijelief
in the crowning miracle of the resurrection of Jesus
We know of no man whose testimony as to the
state of the argument as it stood in the very life-
time of the coevals of Jesus could be worth so much
as his; and it is inconceivable that he, of all men,
should have suffered or died in attestation of what
he supposed or suspected to be myths. But we
must multiply his testimony by hundreds, nay, by
thousands, in order to represent the full amount
and weight of the testimony of martyrdom. Mow
while we have not the slightest doubt that our
Gospeb were written, three of them at least at an
earlier date than Strauss assigns to the first, and
all of them by the men whose names they bear, we
should deem them, if possible, more surely authen-
ticated as to their contents, did we suppose them
anonymous works of a later date; for in that case
tbey would embody narratives already sealed by the
martyr-blood of a cloud of witnesses, and thus woidd
be not the mere story of their authors, but the
story of the collective church.
5. The character of the primitive Christiana is
an lupregnable argument for the truth of the
Gospel-history, as opposed to the mythical theory.
Therr <s no doubt whatever that from the lifetimf
A Je»us commenced the moral r ege n eration of
humanity. Virtues which had hardly a name lie
fore, sprang into being. Vices which had beer
embalmed in song and cherished in the heart of thi
highest civilization of the Roman empire, war* owi
Digitized by
Google
958
008PEL8
farmed and denounced. A loftier ethical standard
— a standard which has not yet been improved
upon — was bdd forth by the earlieat Christian
writers, and recognized in all the Christian eoin-
munitiei. "Here were among the early Christiana
types of character, which have never been surp as s ed ,
hardly equalled since. Strauss maintains that there
are no uncaused effects, — no eftects which have not
causes fully commensurate with themselves. A
Jewish youth, half-enthusiast, half-impostor, must
have been immeasurably inferior to those great
philosopher* and moralists of classic antiquity, who
hardly made an Impression on the depravity of
their own and succeeding times. Such a youth
must have had very vague notions of morality, and
hare been a very poor example of it He might
have founded a sect of fanatics, but not a body of
linmuarly pure, true and holy men. There is a
paring inadequacy. — nay, an entire and irrecon-
cilable discrepancy between the cause and the effect
We can account for the moral reformation that
followed the ministry of Jesus, only by supposing
him endowed with a higher and caln er wisdom,
with a keener sense of truth and right, with a more
commanding influence over the human heart and
conscience, than has ever belonged to any other
being that the world has seen. Outwardly be was
a humbly born, illiterate Jew, in a degenerate age,
of a corrupt national stock ; and there is no way
of accounting for his superiority over all other
teachers of truth and duty, unless we believe that
he held by the gift of God a preeminence, of which
his alleged sway over nature and victory over death
were but the natural and fitting expression.
8. Strauss bases his theory on the assumption
that our Gospels were not written by the men whose
names they bear, but were the productions of
authors now unknown, at later and uncertain
periods; and he admits that the mythical fabric
which he supposes the Gospels to be could not have
had its origin under the hands, or with the sanction,
of apostles or their companions. Hut the genuine-
ness of no ancient, we might almost say, of no
modem work, rests on stronger evidence than does
the authorship cf our Gospels by the men whose
names they bear. In the earlier ages their com-
position by their now reputed authors was never
denied or called in question, — not even by the
heretics who on dogmatical grounds rejected some
jf them, and would have found it convenient to
'eject all, — not even by Jewish and Gentile op-
losers of Christianity, who argued vehemently and
oitterly against their contents without impugning
tlielr genuineness. Justin Martyr, who wrote about
he middle of the second century, speaks repeatedly
cf Memoirs of the Apostles called Gospels, and in
bis frequent recapitulation of what he professes to
hare drawn from this source there are numerous
coincidences with our Gospels, not only in the facts
narrated, but in words and in passages of consid-
erable length. From his extant works we could
almost reproduce the gospel history. He was a
■nan of singularly inquisitive mind, of philosophical
.raining, of large and varied erudition ; and it is
mpossible that he should not have known whether
hese books were received without question, or
whether they rested under the suspicion of spurious
luthorship. Irenssus, who wrote a little later, gives
a detailed description of our four Gospels, naming
\Mi respective authors, and stating the order in
which and the circumstances under which they were
wmuissd i and be writes, not only in his own
GOSPELS
name, but in that of the whole church, saying tra
these books were not and had not been caked b
question by any. These are but spec im en s of very
numerous authorities that might be cited. Abou.
the same time, Cebus wrote against Christianity
and be drew so largely from our Gospels as the
authorized narratives of the life of Christ, that a
connected history of that life might almost be made
from the extant passages quoted from his writings
by his Christian opponents.
In the middle and the latter half of the second
century, there were large bodies of Christians in
every part of the civilised world, and the copies of
the Gospels must have been numbered by many
thousands. Their universal reception as the works
of the men whose names they now bear can be
accounted for only by tbeir genuineness. Suppose
that they were spurious, vet written and circulated
in the lifetime of the Apostles,— it is impossible that
they should not have openly denied their author-
ship, and that this denial should not have left
traces of itself in the days of Justin Martyr and
Irenapus. Suppose that they were first put in cir-
culation under the names tbey now bear, after the
death of the Apostles, — it is inconceivable that
there should not hare been men shrewd enough to
ask why they had not appeared while their authors
were living, and tbeir late appearance would have
given rise to doubts and questions which would not
have been quieted for several generations. Suppose
that tbey were first issued and circulated anony-
mously, — there must have been a time when the
names of Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John were
first attached to them, and it is impossible that
the attaching of the names of wen-known men as
authors to books which bad been anonymous should
not hare been attended by grave doubt.
The statement of Luke in the Introduction of
his Gospel, and the very nature of the case render
it certain that numerous other accounts, more or
less authentic, of the life of Christ were early
written, and some such accounts, commonly called
the Apocryphal Gospels, are still extant. But we
have ample evidence that no such writings were
ever received as of authority, read in the churches,
or sanctioned by the office-bearers and leading men
in the Christian communities ; and most ot them
disappeared at an early date. Now it is impossible
to account for the discrediting and suppression of
these writings, unless the Church was in the pos-
session of authoritative records. If our Gospels
had no higher authority than belonged to those
narratives, all the accounts of the life of Jesus
would have been received and transmitted with
equal credit. But if there were four narratives
written by eye-witnesses and their accredited com-
panions, while all the rest were written by personi,
of inferior means of information and of inferior
authority, then may we account, as we can in no
other way, for the admitted fact that these foui
Gospels crowded all others out of the Church, snH
drove them into discredit, almost into oblivion.
We have then abundant reason to believe, and
no reason to doubt, that our present four Gospel*
were written by the men whose names they bear'
and if this be proved, by the confession of Straus*
himself the mythical theory is untenable.
A. P. P.
• Literature. The preceding article would bs
incomplete without some further notice of the lit
erature of the subject, which it wiU be convenient
to distribute under several beads.
Digitized by
Google
GOSPELS
1. Critical history of the Gospels ; their origin,
mutual relation, and credibility. In addition to
the works referred to above (np. 943, 947), the fol-
lowing may be mentioned: Tholuck, Die Glaub-
mrdigkeit der evang. Geschichte, 2» Ami., Hamb.
1838; Ullmann, Uistorisch uder Mythisch t Hamb.
18-38 ; Funic*), Jetta and hit Biographers, Philad.
1838, an enlargement of his Remarks on the Four
Gospels; Gfrirer, Die hdlige Sage, 2 Abth., and
Das HcUigthum u. d. Wahrkeit, Stuttg. 1838; C.
H. Weisse, Die evang. Gttchichle, kril. u. philm.
bcurbeitet, 3 Bde. Leipz. 1838; Wilke, Der Ur-
rvangelist, Oder exeg. krit. Untertuchung ub. d.
Vermandtschaftsverhaltniss der did ertten Kvan-
ijelien, Dread. 1838; Hennell, Inquiry concerning
the Origin of Christianity (1st ed. 1838), 3d ed.
Lond. 1841 ; Bruno Bauer, Kritik tier evung. Gesch.
der Synoptiker, 3 Bde. Berl. 1841-42; and Kritik
der Kvangelien u. Gench. ihres Urtprungt, 4 Bde.
Berl. 1850-52; Ebrard, Wissenechaftliche Kritik
d. evang. Geschichte (let ed. 1841), 2« umgearb.
Aufl. Erlangen, 1850, English translation, con-
densed, Edin. 1863; \V. H. Hill, On the attempted
Application of Pantheistic Principles to the
Theory and Historic Criticism of the Gospels,
Cambr. (Eng.) 1840-44; Isaac Williams, Thoughts
on the Study of the Gospels, Lond. 1842; F. J.
Schwarz, Neue Unterauchungen Uber d. Verwandt-
tchnfts- Verhiltniss der synopt. Kvangelien, Tiib.
1844; (Anon.) Die Evanyelien, ihr Gtist, ihrt
Virfaster and ihr VerhdUnist zu einander, I^eipz.
1845; J. R. Beard, Voices of the Church in reply
to Strauss, Lond. 1846; C. L. W. Grimm, Die
Glaubwiirdigkeit der evang. Geschichte, Jena, 1845,
in opposition to Strauss and Bauer- Thiersch, Ver-
such zur HertttUung d. histor. Standpunkts fir d.
Kritik d. neutest. Schriften, Erlangen, 1845, comp.
Baur, Der Kritiker u. der Fnnatiker, u. s. w.
Stuttg. 1846, and Thiersch, Kimgt Worte Oh. d.
Aechtheit d. neutest. Schriften, 1846; Schwegler,
Das nach'tpottoUsche Zeilnlter, 2 Bde. Tub. 1846;
Bleek, BeitrSge zur Kvangelien- Kritik, Berl. 1846,
valuable; Davidson, Jntrod, to the New Test. vol.
1. Lond. 1848; F.wald, Ursprung tint/ wesen der
Kvangelien, in his Jahrb. d. BibL imssenschaft,
1848-1854, namely, i. 113-154; ii. 180-224; iii.
140-183; t. 178-207; vi. 32-72; comp. also ix.
48-87, x. 83-114, xii. 212-224; also his Die drei
ertten Kvangelien ubersezt u. erkldrl, Giitt. 1850;
Hilgenfetd, Krit. Untertuchungen uber die Kvan-
geUen Justin's, u. s. w. Halle, 1850 ; Dts Murkus-
Evangehum, l^ipi. 1850; arts, in TheoL Jahrb.
1852, pp. 102-132, 259-293; Die Kvangelien nich
ihrer KntMehung u. gesch. Bedeutung, Leipz. 1854 ;
arts, in TheoL Jahrb. 1857, pp. 381-440, 498-
532, and in his ZeUschr.f wis*. Theol. 1859, 1861,
and 1862-67, passim; Baur, Kritische Unter-
tuchungen ub. d. kanon. Kvangelien, Tiib. 1847,
already noticed ; Das Markutevangelium, Tiib.
1851; arts, in TheoL Jahrb. 1853, pp. 54-93;
1854, pp. 196-287, at") Zeitschr. f. wist. TheoL
1859 ; for a summary of results, see his Das Chris-
enthum der ilrei erst n Jahrhmdtrte, 2" Ausg..
Tiib. 1860: Kitschl, Ueber den gegtnaarHgir.
Stand der Kritik der sunopL EvangtUen, in TneoL
Jahrb. 1851, pp. 480-538; C. E. Stowe, The Four
Gospels, and the Hegelian Assaults upon them, In
fee BibL Sacra tat July 1851 and Jan. 1852, re-
sulted in Journ. of Sac. lit. Oct. 1865 and Jan.
1866; Da Costa, The Four tTuttswa (trans, from
Jbe Dutch), Lond. 1851, reprinted New York, 1856;
r. B. Birks, Bora KvangeUca or the Internal
GOSPELS
95P
Evidence of the Gospel History, Lond. 1852; C
R. Kustlin, Der Ursprutg u. d. Kompositim d
synopt. Kvangelien, Stuttg. 1853; James Smith
of Jordaohill, Diss, on the Origin and Coimectioi
of the Gospels, Edin. 1853; F. X. Patritius (Cath.),
Dt Evangeliis, Friburgi, 1853; G. F. Simmons,
The Gospels, tie. in the (Boston) Christian Exam-
iner, May, 1853; J. H. Morison, Genuineness of
the Gospels, ibid. Jan. 1864; C. F. Ranke, Dt
libris histor. tfovi Test., BeroL 1855; Norton,
Internal Evidences of the Genuineness of the Gos-
pels, including "Remarks on Strauss' s Life of
Jesus," Boston, 1855 (posthumous), — an abridged
edition of his admirable work on the external Ev-
idences of the Genuineness of the Gospels (see p.
943), has just been published, Boston, 1867; 0.
II. Weisse, Die EvangeUenfragt in ihttm gegen-
adrtigen Stadium, Leipz. 1856; Rmiss, arts, in
the Strasbourg Revue dt Theol. toa. x. xi. jn.,
and Nourellt Revue de Tlieol. 1858, ii. 15-72,
comp. his Gesch. d. heiligen Schriften N. T.
3' Ausg. 1860, § 179 ff. ; Volkmar, Die Religion
Jesu, etc. Leipz. 1857; J. T. Tobier, Die Kvan-
gehenfrage, Zurich, 1858, comp. HUgenfeld's
ZeUschr.f wist. TheoL 1859 and 1860; Soberer,
Notes sur Us evangiles synojttitjueg, 6 articles in
the Nomellt Rev. de Theol. (Strasbourg), 1859
and 1860, vols, iii., iv., and v. ; I. Nichols, Hours
with the Evangelists, 2 vols. Boston, 1859-64;
Westcott, Introd. to the Study of the Gospels,
Caiubr. 1860, 3d ed. 1867, Amer. reprint, Boston,
1862, 12ino; Furuess, Origin of the Gospels, iu
Chrut. Exam, for Jan. 1861, comp. his Veil partly
lifted (1864), pp. 227-301; Weiss, Zur Kntstth-
ungtgeschichte der synopt. Kvangelien, in the
Theol. Stud. u. Krit. 1861, pp. 29-100, 646-713,
comp. bis arts. Die Redettucke des apostoL Mat-
thSus, in Jahrb. f. Deutsche Theol. 1864, ix. 49-
140, and Die Erzdhlungtstucke d. aposU MaUhius,
ibid. 1865, x. 319-376; C. Wittichen, Bemerkungen
uber die Tentlenz and den Lehryehall der synopt.
Reden Jesu, in the Jahrb. f. Deutsche Theol. 1862,
vii. 314-372, and Ueber den histor. Charakter der
synopt. Evangelien, ibid. 1866, xi. 427-482; Bleek,
KM. in das if. T., Berl. 1862, 2d ed. 1860; Holtx-
ruann, Die synopt. Kvangelien, Hir Ursprung u
gesch. Charakter, Leipz. 1883 ; Eichtbal, Les Evan-
guts, 2 torn. Paris, 1863; G. A. Freytag, Die Sym-
phonic der Evangelien, Neu-Ruppin, 1863 ; Alex
Roberts, Discussions on tlic Gospels, 2d ed., Edin
1864; G. P. Fisher, The Mythical Theory of
Strauss, in the Jfew Englander for April, 1864,
excellent; Origin of the First Three Gospels, ibid.
Oct. 1864; Genuineness of the Fourth Gospel, in
BibL Sacra, April, 1864; all reprinted, with addi-
tions, in his Essays on the Supernatural Origin of
Christianity, New York, 1866; Weizsackrr, Unter-
suchungen Uber die evang. Geschichte, ihrt Quel-
ten, u. den Gang Virtr Kntwickehmg, Gotha, 1864,
comp. Weiss's review in Theol. Stud. u. Kril. 1866,
pp. 129-170; M. Nicolas, Etudes criL sur la Bible
— Nouveau Testament, Paris, 1864 ; the AbM
Meignan, Les Evangiles et la critique au XIX*
siecle, Paris, 1864; N. C. Burt, Hours among the
Gospels, Philad. 1865, 12mo; Tischendorf, Warn
wurden unsere Evangelien verfnsst f Leipz. 1866,
4th ed., greatly enlarged, 1866, Eng. trans, by
W. L. Gage, Boston, 1868 (Amer. Tract. Soe.):
Hilgenndd, Constantin Tischendorf ids Defensor
Jidei, in his Zeitschr. f. wist. TheoL 1805, pp.
329-343; Volkmar, Der Ursprung unserer Evan-
gelien nach den Urkunden, Zurich, 1866 (Tiseb
Digitized by
Google
d60 GOSPELS
tndorf hu replied to Hilgenfeld and Volkmar in
hi* 4th edition); J. H. Scholten, De oudste Ge-
luigcitissen, etc., Leiden, 1866, trans, by Maoehot,
Die HUesitn Ztugnute betrejj'eud die Schriften des
If. T. historisch untersucht, Bremen, 1867, in op-
position to Tiacbeadorf; Hobtede de Groot, Bant-
idet ais enter Zeuye f. Alter u. Autoritat neatest.
Schriften, a. a. w. Leipz. 1868 [1867], against
Scholten; J. I. Mombert, The Origin of the Cos-
oeis, in the BibL Sacra for Jul; and Oct. 1866,
with particular reference to Strauss 'a Nea Life
of Jem* j L. A. Sabatier, Essii sur It* sources
de la vie de Jesus, Paris, 1866: A. Rcville, La
question des evangila devnnt In critique modcrne,
in Rev. da Deux Mondes, 1 mai and 1 juin,
1866; H. U. Mayboom, Geschiedenis en Critiek
der Marcus- Hypothese, Amit 1866 ; Rlosteimann,
Das Marcus-J.'vannetium nach teinem Quellen-
vcrthef. d, emng. Geschichte, Gttt 1867; C. A.
Bow, The Historical Character of the Gospels
tested by an Examination of their Contents, In the
Joum. of Sacred lit. for July and Oct. 1865,
Jan. Apr. and July, 1866, and Jan. 1867, — an
original and valuable series of articles, which ought
to be published separately. HolUinann, Der gegen-
wdrtige Stand der Evangelienfrr'ge, in Bunsen's
Bibelwerk, Bd. riii. (1866), pp. 2-V77, gives a good
survey of the literature. For other reviews of
the literature, see Hilgenfeld's Der Knnon u. die
Kritik da N. T. (Halle, 1863), and Uhlhom's
article, Die Jnrchenhistorischen Arbeiten da Jahr-
tehents von 1851-1860, in the JSeiUchrift f. hist.
TheoL for 1866, see esp. pp. 6-19.
2. Harmonies of the Gospels, anil their Chro-
nology. In addition to the works named above (p.
950), the following deserve mention here: Lach-
minn, De Online Narralumnm in Evnngeliis
Synoptids, in the TheoL Stud. u. Krit. 1835, pp.
570-590, comp. Ins Nov. Test torn. ii. (1850), pp.
xiii.-xxv. ; Gelpke, Ueber die Anordn. d. Erzah-
hmgen in den tynopL Evangelien. Sendsclireiben
an K. Lachmam, Bern, 1839; Lant Carpenter,
Apostolical Harmony of the Gospels, 2d ed., Lond.
1838; J. G. Sommer, Synoptische Tafeln [11] /.
d. Kritik u. Exegese der drei ersten Evangelien,
Bonn, 1842; Wieseler, ChronoL Synapse der vier
Evangelien, Hamb. 1843, Eng. trans. Lond. 1864,
comp. his art. Zeitrechnung, ncvtestamcntliche, in
Herzog's Real-EncykL xxi. 543 ff. ; S. F. Juris,
ChronoL fntrod. to the HitL of the Church, con-
taining an Original Harmony of the Four Gospels,
Lond. 1844, and New York, 1846, comp. J. L.
Kingsley In the New Knylandtr for April, 1847,
and July, 1848; H. B. Hackett, Synoptical Study
of the Gospels, in BibL Sacra for Feb. 1846; J.
C. 6. L. Krafft, ChronoL u. Harm. d. vier Evan-
gelien, Erlang. 1848; Anger, Synopsis Evangg.
Matt. Marci Luox, cum Loris qua supersunt par-
alielis lMterarum et Traditionum trenao antiqui-
orum, Lips. 1852, valuable; James Strong, New
Harmony and Exposition of the Gospels, with
ChronoL and Tapog, Dissertations, finely illus-
trated, New York, 1852, Urge 8vo; Harmony of
the Gos/kU, in the Greek of the Received Text,
by the suae. New York, 1854, 12mo; Stroud,
New Greek Harm, of the Four Gospels, compris-
ing a Synopsis and a Diatessaron, Lond. 1853, 4to ;
■Bmprias, Treasury Harmony and Practical Ex
jom'tim of the Four Evangelists, Lond. 1866, 4to;
Uohtensiein, Lcbenegeschichte d. Herrn Jesu
Ckristiinckronologitcher Uebemicht, Erlang. 1856;
(E. E. Hale) Logical Order of the Umptl X irra-
OOSPELS
<we», in the Christ. Examiner tor Sept 1868, ana
System and Order of Christ s Ministry, ibid. Jan
1864; M. H. Schulie, Evangctitmtnfcl at* ems
ibersichtl. Darste&mg d. synopt. Em. in Ureal
Vcrwandtschaftsverhaltnis zu einander, u. s. w
Leipz. 1861; Cbavannes, Dilermination de quel
ques data de thist, evnugelique, in the Strasbourg
Rev. de TheoL 1863, pp. 209-248; Bunsen's Bibel-
werk, Bd. vui. (1866), pp. 116-322, comp. Bd. ix.
(Ijeben Jesu); Sevin, Die drei ersten Evangelien
synoptisch auammengestelU, Wiesbaden, 1866,
Greek after the Codex Sinaiticus, with the varia-
tion* of the Bee. Text; End, Evangelien- Ueber-
skht: sammtliche vier knnon. Em., auf 7 Blatter*
. . . wortlich nach der offiziellen Uebersctatng d.
Zurcherischen Landeskirche bearbeitet, n. a. w.
Zurich, 1867. A Harmony of the Gospels in Greek
(Tischendorf ' s text), with various readings, notes,
tables, etc., by the Kev. Frederic Gardiner, is now
in press (New York, 1868).
3. Commentaries. Passing by older works, we
may notice Campbell, Four Gospels translated, with
Notes, reprinted Andover, 1837, 9 vols. 8vo, val-
uable for the Preliminary Dissertations; Kuiuoei
(Kiihnc 1), Comm. in Libr. N. T. historicos, 4 vols.
Lips. (Matt., 4th ed. 1837; Mark and Luke, 4th
ed. 1843; John, 3d ed. 1825), often unsound in
philology, but still useful; Paulus, Exeg. Handb.
0b. die drei ersten Err., 3 Theilc, Heidelb. 1830-33 ;
Baumgarten-Crusius, Exeg. Schriften turn N. T.
Bd. i. in 2 Th. (Matt., Mark, Luke), Jena, 1844-46,
posthumous ; his TheoL Auslegung d. Johan.
Schriften (1844—15) is more important; Olshausen,
Biltl. Comm. Bde. i. and it Abth. 1, 2, 4« Aufl.
rev. von Ebrard, Konigsb. 1853-62, Eng. trans,
revised by A. C. Kendrick, Now York, 1856-57 ;
Meyer, Krit. exeg. Komm. ub. das N. T. Abth.
1., ii. Gitt. (Matt, 5th ed. 1864; Mark and Luke
5th ed. 1867; John, 4th ed. 1862); De Wette,
Kungef. exeg. Handb. turn N. T. Bd. i. Th. i.-
iii. Leipz. (Matt., 4th ed. by Messner, 1857; Luke
and Mark, 3d ed. 1846; John, 5th ed. by Bruckner,
1863); Stier, Die Reden da Herrn Jesu, 2* Aufl.,
7 Theile, Barmen, 1851-55, Eng. trans. 8 vols.
Edin. 1855-61 ; John Brown, Discoursa and Say-
ings of our Ijord Jesus Christ, 3 vols. Edin. 1850,
reprinted in 2 vols. New York, 1864; Ewald, A>
drei ersten Em. ubers. u. erklart, G< tt 1850, and
Die Johan. Schriften ubers. u. erklart, Giitt. 1861-
62; Norton, New Translation of the Gospels, with
Notes, 2 vols. Boston, 1855, posthumous; Joel
Jones (Judge), Notes on Scripture, Philad. 1861;
Bleek, Synopt. Erkldrung der drei ersten Evange-
lien, 2 Bde. Leipz. 1862; Bunsen's Bibelwerk, Bd.
iv. Th. i. (1862), ed. by Holtzmaun, translation
with brief notes; and the Greek Testaments of
Bloomfield (9th ed. 1855), Alford (5th ed. 1863),
Webster and Wilkinson (1855), and Wordsworth
(4th ed. 1806). Of Langes great Bibelwerk,
"critical, theological, and bomilctical," the vols,
on Matthew, Mark, and Luke have been translated
and published in this country, with valuable addi-
tions, under the general editorship of Dr. Schaff
(New York, 1865-66); the volume on John is in
press. Naat's Commentary (Matt and Mark, Cin-
cinnati, 1864) is on a similar plan. This volume
his a valuable General Introduction to the Gospel*.
treating of their genuineness, authenticity, harmony
etc., which has also been ijsued separately. Sines
the publication of the Rev. Albert Barnes's Notes
on the Gospels, 2 vols. New York, 1832, 17th ed.
revised, 1847 (when 32,000 copies had alreadj
Digitized by
Google
GOTH0LIA8
been told), numerous popular commentaries bare
appeared in this country, representing more or leas
the theological views of different religious denom-
inations, as by H. J. Ripley (Baptist), 3 rots. Boston,
1837-38; Jos. Longking (Methodist), 4 vols. 16mo,
New York, 1841-44 ; A. A. Livennore (Uni-
tarian), 3 vols. Boston, 184J-42; L. R. Paige
(Univeraalist), 3 vols. Boston, 1844-46; H. W.
Jacobus, 8 vols. New York, 1843-66; C. H. Hall
(Episcopalian). S vols. New York, 1857 ; J. J. Owen,
8 vols. New York, 1867-60 "">. D. Whedon (Meth-
•dist), 8 vols New York, 1860-66; and I. P.
Warren, Nta Test, with Sola, vol. i. Boston, 1867
(Amer. Tr. Soc.). Of works illustrating portions of
the Gospels, Abp. Trench's Ifota on the Parables
(1841, 9th ed. 1864), Notes on the Miracles (1846,.
7th ed. 1860), and Studies in the Gospels (1867),
Df ill of which we have American editions, deserve
particular mention. Wichelhaus has written an
elaborate commentary on the history of the Passion
Week (Aus/uhrL Komm. su d. Geseh. des Leiden*
Jem Christi, Halle, 1866). Of the works named
above, the moat valuable in a critical and philo-
logical point of view are those of Meyer, De Wette,
and Bleek. For treatises on the separate Gospels,
ate their respective names ; see also the article
Jiaus Christ. A.
GOTHOLI'AS. Josias, son of Gotholias (IV
to\lov'- GothoHa), was one of the sons of Elam
who returned from Babylon with Esdras (1 Esdr.
viii. 33). The name is the same as Athaliah,
with the common substitution of the Greek G for
the Hebrew guttural Ain (oomp. Gomorrah, Gaza,
etc.). This passage compared with 3 K. xi. 1, Ac.
shows that Athaliah was both a male and female
OOTHO / NIEL (rofon^A, i. e. Othniel ;
[Sin.' raOarum, gen.:J Gothomet), father of Cha-
bris, who was one of the governors (apxosrs* ) of
the city of Bethulia (Jud. vi. 15).
GOURD. I. VV(7*f7, only in Jon. It. 6-10:
no\oicvr0if- hedera. A difference of opinion has
long existed as to the plant which is intended by
this word. The argument is as old as Jerome,
whose rendering hedera was impugned by Augus-
tine as a heresy I In reality Jerome's rendering
was not intended to be critical, but rather as a kind
of pis aUer necessitated by the want of a proper
Latin word to express the original. Besides he was
unwilling to leave it in merely Latinized Hebrew
(Kfaiyoii), which might have occasioned misappre-
hensions. Augustine, following the LXX. and Syr.
Venrious, was in favor of the rendering gourd,
which was adopted by Luther, the A. V., etc. In
Jerome's description of the plant called in Syr.
ban, and Punic et-lceroa, Celsius recognizes the
jWomu Palma Christi, or Castor-oil plant (Uitro-
tot ii. 373 ff.; Bochart, Hieras. ii. 393, 633).
The Ricimu was seen by Niebuhr (Dtscript. of
Arab. p. 148) at Basra, where it was distinguished
by the name eUeeroa; by Rauwolf (Trav. p. 63)
it was noticed in great abundanoe near Tripoli,
where the Arabs called it eUcerua; while both
Haaatlanist and Robuwn observed very large speci-
mens of it in the neighborhood of Jericho ('< Bi-
ennis in ahitudinem arboris iusignis, ' Hasselq. p.
566; see also Rob. 1. 5S3).
Nletiuhr observes that the Jews and Christians
at Mosul (Nineveh) maintained that tht oee which
I Jonah was not « el-keroa," but " el-kerra,"
U
GOURD
961
a sort of gourd, '."his revival of the August, ma
dering has been defended by J. E. Faber (Notes m
Harmer's Observations, etc. i. 146). And it must
be confessed that the evidently miraculous charac-
ter of the narrative in Jon. deprives the Palma
Christi of any special claim to identification on the
ground of its rapid growth and decay, as described
by Niebuhr. Muoh more important, however, is
it to observe the tree-like character of this plant,
rendering it mora suitable for the purpose which it
is stated to have fulfilled ; also the authority of the
Palestine Jews who were contemporaries of Jerome,
as compared with that of the Mosul Jews conversed
with by Niebuhr. But most decisive of all seems
the derivation of the Hebrew word from the Egyp-
tian kild (Herod, ii. 94; oomp. Bahr, ad loc. ; and
Jablonsky, Opusc. pt 1. p. 110) established by Cel-
sius, with whose arguments Michaelia declares him-
self entirely satisfied (J. D. Mich. SuppL); and
confirmed by the Talmudical DT? ?£tr, kik-oO,
prepared from the seeds of the JUcinus (Buxt- Lex.
Chald. Talmud, col. 3029), and Dioscorides, It.
164, where Kforar (= Palma Christi) is described
under the name of kIki, and the oil made from its
seeds is called kUivov iKaior-
II. n"Wi?B, and Q^iJ?. (1.) In 3 K. b.
39 ; a fruit used as food, disagreeable to the taste,
and supposed to be poisonous. (3.) In 1 K. vi
18, vii. 24, as an architectural ornament, where A.
V. «• knops." In Hebrew the plant is described as
TJJp ]?| : afurtKor ir r<f aypf: ritem silce*-
treat ; whence in A. V. « wild vine " [3 K. iv. 89].
The fruit is called in Hebrew as above; rokvrn
aypla, LXX. = iypla KoKoiciyByt, Suid. : colocfn-
thides agri; « wild gourds," A. V.
The inconsistency of all these renderings is man-
ifest; but the fact is that the Hebrew name of the
plant may denote any shrub which grows in ten-
drils, such as the colocyuth, or the cucumber.
KosenmiiUer and Gesenius pronounce in favor of>
the wild cucumber, Cucumu agrestie or astatmu
(Gels. HienboL i. 393 ff.). This opinion is con-
firmed by the derivation from 9j?9, to burst. The
wild cucumber bursts at the touch of the finger,
and scatters its seeds, which the colocynth does not
(Rosenm. Alterthumsi. It. pt. 1, Ac.).
t. e. a
There can, we think, be no reasonable doubt thai
the kttaydn which afforded shade to the prophet
Jonah before Nineveh is the Ricinus communis, at
castor-oil plant, which, formerly a native of Asia,
is now naturalized in America, Africa, and the south
of Europe. This plant, which varies considerably
in size, being in India a tree, but in England sel
dom attaining a greater height than three or four
feet, receives its generic name from the resemblance
its fruit was anciently supposed to bear to the
ncarus ("tick") of that name. See Dioscorides
(iv. 161, ed. Sprengel) and PBny (if. N. xv. 7).
The leaves are large and palmate, with serrated
lobes, and would form an excellent shelter for the
sun-stricken prophet. The seeds contain the oil at
well known under the name of " castor-oil," which
has for ages been in high repute as a medicine.
With regard to the " wild gourd* " (rVWpS,
pakkuith) of 8 K. iv. 39, which one of "the sons
nf the prophets " gathered ignoraiitly, supposing
them to be good for food, there can. be ne doubt
Digitized by
Google
969
GOURD
Govmuros
Outor-oO plant.
that it U * specie* of the gourd tribe (Cucttr-
tilaeta), which contain tome plants of a very bitter
and dangerous character. The leaves and tendrils
of this family of plants bear some resemblance to
those of the vine. Hence the expression, *' wild
vine;"" and as several kinds of Cucurbitaceat,
such as melons, pumpkins, etc., are favorite articles
of refreshing food amongst the Orientals, we can
easily understand the cause of the mistake.
The plants which have been by different writers
identified with the pnkkudth are the following: the
coktcynth, or coloquintida (Citrullus colocynthit);
the Cucumit prophetnrum, or globe cucumber ;
and the EcbaUum (Afomordica) elaterivm; all of
which have claims to denote the plant in question.
The etymology of the word from 51^5, " to split
or burst open," has been thought to favor the iden-
tification of the plant with the Ecbalivm elattriumfi
or " squirting cucumber," so called from the elas-
ticity with which the fruit, when ripe, opens and
scatters the seeds when touched. This is the
sVypior aixvos of Dioscorides (iv. 152) and Theo-
phrastus (vii. 6, § 4, Ac.), and the Cucumit syl~
vestrii of PUny (H. N. xx. 2). Celsius (Hitrob.
i. 393), RosenmuHer (BM. BoL p. 138), Winer
(BM. Reala. i. 625), and Gesenius { Thu. p. 1122),
are in favor of this explanation, and, it most be
confessed, not without some reason. The old ver-
sions, however, understand the colooynth, the fruit
of which is about the size of an orange. The
drastic medicine in such general use is a prepara-
tion from this plant Michaeli* (SvppL Lex. Heb.
p. 344) and Oedmann ( Verm. Samm. iv. 88) adopt
this explanation; and sinoe, according to Kitto
(PicL BM. L c. ), the dry gourds of the colocynth,
when crushed, hurst with a crashing noise, there is
much reason for being satisfied with an explanation
which has authority, etymology, and general suit-
ableness in its favor. All the above-named plants
are (band in the East. W. H.
• On* went oat Into ti» n*U 4* anther pouarbs
• There is a Letter relating to Jonah's Gocrd in
the BibL Sacra, xii. 396 ff., from the late Rev. H.
Lobdell, M. D., missionary at Mosul in Mesopotamia.
He says that " the Mohammedans, Christians, and
Jews all agree in referring the plant to the ker'a,
a kind of pumpkin peculiar to the East. The
leaves are large, and the rapidity of the growth of
the plant is astonishing. Its fruit is, for the most
part, eaten in a fresh state, and is somewhat like
the squash. It has no more than a generic resem-
blance to the gourd of the United States, though I
suppose that both are species of the atcurbiia. It
is grown in great abundance on the alluvial bank*
of the Tigris, and on the plain between the river
and ruins of Nineveh, which is about a mile wide."
He gives reasons for supposing that the LXX. *o-
KoKvvth) was really meant to designate that plant.
Dr. Pusey (Jonah, p. 259) follows those who adopt
our marginal rendering as correct, namely, palmcrist
or the castor-oil plant as described above. He re-
marks concerning this plant (which must be true,
perhaps, of any plant with which the UUyon was
identical) that while the rapidity of its growth was
supernatural, it was a growth in conformity with
the natural character of the product H.
GOVERNOR. In the A. V. this one Eng-
lish word is the representative of no less than ten
Hebrew and four [five] Greek words. To discrim-
inate between them is the object of the following
article.
1. Fpv>S, alluph, the chief of a tribe or family,
elepk (Jodg. vi. 16; Is. lx. 22; Mic. v. 2),
and equivalent to the " prince of a thousand " of
Ex. xviii. 21, or the " head of a thousand " of Num.
I. 16. It is the term applied to the "duke*" of
Edom (Gen. xxxiv.). The LXX. have retained the
etymological significance of the word in rendering
it by xiAiapxot in Zech. ix. 7 ; xii. 5, 6 (camp.
Brbr 1 , from tPblT). The usage in other pas-
sage* seems to imply a more intimate telatioDahis
than that which would exist between a "
^ft.
» From i«/WAAi..
Digitized by
Google
GOVERNOR
and his fellow-clanamen, and to express the closest
friendship. Alliph is then "a guidi, director,
eouusellor- (Ps. lv. 18; Prov. ii. 17; Jer. iii 4),
the object of anfidence or trust (Hie. v. 3).
8. piTTl, chMh (Judg. v. 9), and 3. pi^nip,
m'Mkek (Judg. v. 14), denote a ruler in hia ca-
pacity of lawgiver and dispenser of justice (Gen.
ilix. 10; Prov. riii. 15; comp. Judg. v. 14, with
U.x.1).
4. J&O, mdi/tel, a ruler considered especially as
having newer over the property and persons of his
subjects; whether his authority were absolute, as in
Josh. xii. 2, of Sihon, and in Ps. cv. SO, of Pharaoh ;
or delegated, as in the case of Abraham's steward
(Gen. xxiv. 3), and Joseph as second to Pharaoh
(Gen. xlv. 8, 36, Ps. cv. 21). The "governors of
the people " in 2 Chr. zxiii. 20 appear to have been
the king's body-guard (ef. 3 K. xi. 19).
5. "T03, n>d, is connected etymologically with
1J3 and TJJ, and denotes a prominent personage,
whatever his capacity. It is applied to a king as
the military and civil chief of his people (2 Sam.
v. 3, vi. 21; 1 Chr. zxix. 23), to the general of an
army (2 Chr. xxxii. 21), and to the head of a tribe
(3 Chr. xiz. 11). The heir-apparent to the crown
was thus designated (2 Chr. xi. 22), as holding a
prominent position among the king's sons. The
term is also used of persons who fulfilled certain
offices in the temple, and is applied equally to the
high-priest (2 Chr. xxxi. 10, 13), as to inferior
priests (2 Chr. xxxv. 8) to whose charge were com-
mitted the treasures and the dedicated things (1
Chr. xxvi. 24), and to Levites appointed for special
service (2 Chr. xxxi. 13). It denotes an officer of
high rank in the palace, the lord high chamberlain
(3 Chr. xxviii. 7), who is also described as "over
the household " (1 K. iv. 6), or >< over the house "
(I K. xviii. «). Such was the office held by Shebna,
the scribe, or secretary of state (Is. xxii. 15), and
in which he was succeeded by Eliakim (2 K. xviii.
18). It is perhaps the equivalent of oUorS/xot,
Item. xvi. 83, and of Itpoarin)*, 1 Esdr. vii. 3
(ef. 1 Esdr. i. 8).
6. M^C73, ndsf. The prevailing idea in this
word is that of cUvutim. It is applied to the
chief of the tribe (Gen. xvii. 30; Num. ii. 3, Ac.),
to the heads of sections of a tribe (Num. iii. 32,
vii. 2), and to a powerful sheykh (Gen. xxiii. 6).
It appears to be synonymous with alluph in 2 Chr.
u a, o^tw; = rra$ '•tivn <<* 3 chr. r. s>.
In genenl it denotes a man of elevated rank. In
.Iter times the title was given to the president of
the great Sanhedrim (Selden, Dt Syntdriit, ii. 6,
ID-
7. nM§, pechAh, is probably a word of Assyrian
origin. It is applied in 1 K. x. 15 to the petty
shkftsins who were tributary to Solomon (2 Chr.
x. 14); to the military commander of the Syrians
1 K. xx. 34), the Assyrians (3 K. xviii. 34), the
Jhaldtesns (Jer. II. 23), and the Medes (Jer. Ii. 88).
Jnder the Persian viceroys, during the Babylonian
>aptivHy, the land of the Hebrews appear', to havj
icon portioned out among "governors" (rnng,
pacMth) inferior in rank to the satraps (Ear. via.,
M), like the other provinces which wer* under the
losninion of the Persian lung (Neh. ii. 7, 9). It
h impossible to determine U- precise limits of their
GOVERNOR
961
authority, or the functions which they had to per-
form. They formed a part of the Babylonian sys-
tem of government, and are expressly distinguished
from the D^?, tgtmm (Jer. Ii. 23, 38), to
whom, as well as to the satraps, they seem to have
been inferior (Dan. iii. 2, 3. 27); as also from the
V]W, t&rim (Esth. iii. 12, ▼iii. 9), who, on the
other hand, had a subordinate jurisdiction. Shesh-
baszar, the " prince " (WB73, Ezr. i. 8) of Judah,
was appointed by Cyrus " governor " of Jerusalem
(Ezr. v. 14), or "governor of the Jews," as he is
elsewhere designated (Ezr. vi. 7), an office to which
Nehemiah afterwards succeeded (Neh. v. 14) under
the title of Tirshatha (Ezr. ii. 63; Keh. riii. 9).
Zerubbabel, the representative of the royal family
of Judah, is also called the " governor " of Judah
(Hag. i. 1), but whether in consequence of his
position in the tribe or from his official rank is not
quite clear. Tatnai, the " governor " beyond the
river, is spoken of by Josephus (Ant. xi. 4, § 4)
under the name of Sisines, as ra-tu>x<" °f Syria
and Phoenicia (ef. 1 Esd. vi. 3); the same term
being employed to denote the Roman proconsul or
propraetor as well as the procurator (Jos. Ant. xx.
8, § 1). It appears from Ezr. vi. 8 that these
governors were intrusted with the collection of the
king's taxes; and from Neh. v. 18, xii. 26, that
they were supported by a contribution levied upon
the people, which was technically termed " the
bread of the governor " (comp. Ezr. iv. 14). They
wens probably assisted in discharging their official
duties by a council (Ezr. iv. 7, vi. 6). In the
Peshito version of Neh. iii. 11. 1'ahath Moab is not
taken as a proper name, but is rendered " chief of
Moab ; " and a similar translation is given in other
passages where the words occur, as in Ezr. ii. 6,
Neh. vii. 11, x. 14. The "governor" beyond the
river bad a judgment-seat at Jerusalem, from which
probably he administered justice when making a
progress through his province (Neh. iii. 7).
8. "ViT^i p&lctd, denotes simply a person ap-
pointed to any office. It is used of the officers pro-
posed to be appointed by Joseph (Gen. xii. 34) ; of
Zehul, Abinielech's lieutenant (Judg. ix. 28); of
an officer of the high-priest (2 Chr. xxiv. 11), in
ferior to the ndgtil (2 Chr. xxxi. 12, 13), or pdUA
nigtd (Jer. xx. 1); and of a priest or Levite of high
rank (Neh. xi. 14, 22). The snme term is applied
to the eunuch who was over the men of war (2 K.
xxv. 19; Jer. Iii. 25), and to an officer appointed
for especial service (Esth. ii. 3). In the passage
of Jer. xx. above quoted it probably denotes the
captain of the temple guard mentioned in Acts iv.
1, v. 34, and by Josepbus (B. J. vi. 5, § 3).
9. tS^tt?, thnlSt, a man of authority. Applied
to Joseph as Pharaoh's prime minister (Gen. xlii.
6); to Arioch, the captain of the guard, to the king
of Babylon (Dan. ii. 15), and to Daniel as third in
rank under Belshazzar (Dan. v. 29).
10. "lip, «tr, a chief, in any capacity. Th«
term is used equally of the general of an army (Gen.
xxi. 22), or the commander of a division (1 K. xvi.
9, xi. 24), as of the governor of Pharaoh's prison
(Gen, xxxix. 21), and the chief of his butters and
bakers (Gen. xL 2), or herdsmen (Gen. xlvii. 6).
The chief officer of a city, in his civic capacity, was
thus designated (1 K. xxii. 26; 3 K. xxiii. 8).
The same dignitary is elsewhere described as u o*w
Digitized by
Google
J
«64
GOVEBNOB
the city " (Nab. a. 9). In Judg. ix. K tar h
synonymous with jxLfcfd in rer. 28, and with both
pdhd and «do*» in 1 Chr. xxlv. 5. "HJJ?
rWTJprT, a*;-«" hamm'dhidth, "the princes of
provincea " (1 K. xx. 14), appear to have held a
wmewhat aimilar position to the "governors"
under the Persian kings.
11. *Eer4pxr)t,2Cor.ii.&2 — an officer of rank
under Aretag, the Arabian king of Damascus. It
is not easy to determine the capacity in which he
acted. The term is applied in 1 Mace. xiv. 47, xv.
1 to Simon the high-priest, who was made general
and tthnnrch of toe Jews, as a nasal of Demetrius.
From this the office would appear to be distinct
from a military command. The jurisdiction of
Archelaus, called by Joeephus (B. J. ii. 6, § 3) an
ethnarchy, extended over Idumsa, Samaria, and
ail Juda», the half of his father's kingdom, which
he held as the emperor's vassal. But, on the other
hand, Strabo (xvii. 13), in enumerating the officers
who formed part of the machinery of the Roman
government in Egypt, mentions ethnarchs appar-
ently as inferior both to the military commanders
and to the nomarchs, or governors of districts.
Again, the prefect of the colony of Jews in Alex-
andria (called by Philo ytrip-jnt, &>• •» Flacc.
§ 10) is designated by this title in the edict of
Claudius given by Joeephus (Ant. xix. 6, § 2).
According to Strabo (Joseph. Ant. xiv. 7, § 2) he
exercised the prerogatives of an ordinary independent
ruler, it has therefore been conjectured that the
ethnarch of Damascus was merely the governor of
the resident Jews, and this conjecture receives some
support from the parallel narrative in Acta ix. 24,
where the Jews alone are said to have taken part
in the conspiracy against the Apostle. But it does
not seem probable that an officer of such limited
jurisdiction would be styled " the ethnarch of
Aretaa the king; " and as the term is clearly capa-
ble of a wide range of meaning, it was most likely
intended to denote one who held the city and dis-
trict of Damascus ss the king's vassal or repre-
sentative.
12. 'Hytu&r, the procurator of Judea under the
Romans (Matt xxvii. 2, etc.). The verb is em-
ployed (Luke ii. 2) to denote the nature of the
jurisdiction of Quirinus over the imperial province
of Syria.
13. OlxopoVof (Gal. iv. 2), a steward; apparently
intrusted with the management of a minor's prop-
arty.
14. 'Apx'-rpiicKirot, John ii. 9, " the governor
of the feast." It has been conjectured, but with-
out much show of probability, that this officer cor
responded to the av/iirofflapxos of the Greeks,
whose duties are described by Plutarch (Sympos.
QucuL 4), and to the arbiter InbentK of the Komans.
IJghtfoot supposes him to have been a kind of
chaplain, viho pronounced the blessings upon the
wine that was drunk during the seven days of the
marriage feast. Again, some have taken him to
be equivalent to the rpart(oroi6s, who is defined
by Pollux ( (Mom. vi. 1) as one who had the charge
of all the servants at a feast, the carvers, cup-
bearers, cooks, etc. But there is nothing in the
narrative of the marriage feast at Cana which would
lead to the supposition that the apxiTofxAtroi held
a • On the contrary, FUrst maintains {Handle • * 1
dsat a mgftod and a river bore this nunc (the latter toe
tud-Oem, ■Mar's JM* vill. 680, 81A). The district i
GOZAN
the rank of a tenant He appears rather to ham
been on intimate terms with the btidegroom, sad
to have presided at the banquet in his stead. The
duties of the master of a feast an given at Ml
length in Ecclua. xxxv. (xxxii.).
In the Apocryphal books, in addition to the cow
mon words, ipx utf t oVmroTTjf, ©TpaTwyov, whir>
arc rendered "governor," we find twiararvi {'
Kadr. i. 8; Jud. ii. 14), which closely correspond
to T^9 : tmvx<" u * ed of Zerubbabel and Tatm
(1 Esdr. vi. 3, 29, vil. 1), and wpoordrwr, applie,
to Sbeshbaxzar (1 Esdr. B. 12), both of which rep
resent niTg : Upoaramt (1 Esdr- Til. 2) am
wpowroVip rov laooO (2 Mace. iti. 4), "the got
ernor of the temple" =T3J (ef. 9 Chr. xxxv. 8)
and carpairns (1 Esdr. Hi. 2, 21), "a satrap," lie .
always used in its strict sense, bat as the equivala j
of crpanryis (Jud. v. 2, vii. 8).
W. A. W.
• IS. 'O tbiintr, the governor (dtrigtnr, Vuk* ),
Jas. iii.4, where the pilot or helmsman is mew it
Both nvfitprlrrns (Acts xxvii. 11 and Rev. xv ii.
17) and the Latin gubernator, whence our "g iv-
ernor " is derived, denote the man at the bear of
the vessel. H-
GO'ZAN (]fa [perh. ouarrm, Gee. ; j*nt,
ford, Furst]: r«{aV; [Vat S K. nil. 6, rt'ap,
and 1 Chr., Xa(ap :] Ovtan, [in Is., Gozam]) a ems
in the A. V. of 1 Chr. v. 26 to be the narot of a
river; but in Kings (2 K. xvii. 6, and xviii. J 1) it
is evidently applied not to a river but a country."
Where Kings and Chronicles differ, the authority
of the latter is weak; and the name Goran will
therefore be taken in the present article for the
name of a tract of country.
Gozan was the tract tn which the Israelites were
carried away captive by Put, Tiglath-Pikser, and
Shalmaneser, or possibly Sargon. It has been
variously placed ; but it is probably identical with
the Gtxttznmlu of Ptolemy (Gtogroph. v. 18), and
may be regarded as represented by the Mygdonia of
other writers (Strab., Polyb., etc.). It was the tract
watered by the liabor ('kflipfau, or Xa&4pas),
the modem Khnbour, the great Mesopotamia
affluent of the Euphrates. Mr. Lnyard describes
this region as one of remarkable fertility (A'tnerra
and Bubybm, pp. 269-313). According to the
LXX. Halah and Habor were both riv.srs of Gozan
(2 K. xvii. 6); hut this is a mistransl ition of the
Hebrew text, and it is corrected in fie following
chapter, where we have the term " riva " used in
the singular of the Habor only. Halah seems to
have been a region adjoining Gozan. [Halah.]
With respect to the term Mygdonia, which became
the recognized name of the region in classic times,
and which Strabo (xvi. 1, § 27) and Plutarch
(LuculL c. 32) absurdly connect with the Mace-
donian Mygdones, it may be observed that it is
merely Gozan, with the participial or adjectival Q
prefixed. The Greek writers always rep res en t the
Semitic z by their own d. Thus tiaza became
Cadytis, Achzib became Ect/ippa, the river Zkb
became the ZKaba, and M'gozan became Myg-Jon.
The conjunction of Gozan with Haran or HiUTan
in Isaiah (xxxvii. 12) is in entire agreement wits
was on the river, and a ftnd there (see above) saay tasj
given name to both. It
Digitized by
Google
URABA
Dm position here assigned to the farmer. Aj Goon
was the district on the Khabour, so Harar m
that upon the BUik, the nat affluent of the
Enphrates. [See Chakkak.] Tint Assyrian kings,
having conquered the one, would naturally go on
to the other. O. R.
GRA'BA VAyoafid ; [so Aid. ; Vet] Alex,
[and 10 other MS8.J 'Ayyafid- Armacha), 1 Eadr.
v. 39. [Haqaba.] Aj U the can with many
names in the A. V. of the Apocryphal books, it is
not obvious whence our translators got the form
they have here employed — without the initial A,
which even the corrupt Vulgate retains.
• GRAFT (Bom. xL IT ft). [See Ouvb.]
GRAPE. [Vim.]
GRASS. 1. Thb U the ordinary rendering of
the Heb. word "lVIJn, which signifies properly an
inclosed spot, from the root "V?!"!, to inclose; but
this root also has the second meaning to flourish,
and hence the noun frequently signifies "fodder,"
"food of cattle." In this sense it occurs in 1 K.
xviii. 5; Job xl. 15; Ps. civ. 14; Is. xr. 6, Ac.
As the herbage rapidly fades under the parching
beat of the son of Palestine, it has afforded to the
sacmd writers an image of the fleeting nature of
human fortunes (Job viii. 12; Ps. xxxvii. S), and
also of the brevity of human life (Is. xl. 6, 7 ; Ps.
xc 5). The LXX. render "W£l by fiorJuni and
via, but most frequently by x«Vrei, a word which
in Greek has passed through the very same modifi-
cations of meaning as its Hebrew representative:
X*'|>Tet = oram«i», "fodder," is properly a court
or inclosed space for cattle to feed in (Horn. Jl. A
Tit), and then any feeding-place whether inclosed
or not (Bur. Iph. T. 134, x< Jot»i t««ro>«).
Gesenius questions whether TSPl, x4p T0 *> •"d
the 8antk.*art< = « green" ray rot be traceable
to the same root.
3. In Jer. L 11, A. V. renders KB?} n^JJ?
at the heifer at grass, and the LXX. 4t jSoftia <V
fiorArg- It should be " as the heifer treading out
earn" (eomp. Hoe. x. 11). NtpJ comes from
tCH, eonterere, triturare, and has been con-
founded with Mttfy oramen, from root MttJj,
so germinate. This is the word rendered grass
in Gen. i. 11, 13, where It is distinguished from
ttXffV, the latter signifying Aero* suitable for
human food, while the former is herbage for cattle.
Gesenius says it is used chiefly concerning grass,
which has no seed (at least none obvious to general
observers), and the smaller weeds which spring up
rpontaceously from the soil. The LXX. render it
by tAoSj, as wsll as by x iprot, Per&rn, and too.
3. In Nun. uiL 4, where mention is made of
the ox licking up the grass of the field, the Heb.
""d •» P?v> WBicn elsewhere is rendered green,
when followed by Hl^f or 3J^5, as in Gen. i.
*>, and Ps. xxxvii. 3. It answers to the German
■us Urine, and comes from the root p~\ to
lourish like grass.
4 3^y is used In Dent, In the Paslms, and
■ the Prophets, and, as distinguished fros. Ktt?"5,
GREECE, GREEKS, ETC. 965
signifies herbs for human food (Gen. L 30; Pa. ah
14), hut also fodder for cattle (Deut xi IS; Jer.
xiv. 8). It is the grass of the field (Gen. U. •
Ex. ix. 83) and of the mountain (Is. xiiL 15
Prov. xxvii. 35).
In the N. T. wherever the word grass occurs it
is the representative of the Greek y«Wot. a
W. D.
* GRASS ON THX HOUSE-TOP. [Ajca-
thoth, Amer. ed.]
GRASSHOPPER. [Locust.]
•GRATE. [Alta*.]
GRAVE. [Burial.]
GREAVES (nn?D). This word occurs in
the A. V. only in 1 Sam. xvii. 6, in the description
of the equipment of Goliath — "he had greaves of
brass upon his legs." Its ordinary meaning is a
piece of defensive armor which reached from the
foot to the knee, and thus protected the shin of the
wearer. This was the case with the xynpfr of the
Greeks, which derived its name from its oovering
the Kr4fi7j, i e. the part of the leg above-named.
But the Miuchali of the above passage can hardly
have been armor of this nature. Whatever the
armor was, it was not worn on the legs, but on the
feet OVri) of Goliath. It appears to be derived
from a root signifying brightness, as of a star (set
Gesenius and Fiirat). The word is not in either
the dual or plural number, but is singular. It
would therefore appear to have been more a kind
of shoe or boot than a "grave; " though in our
ignorance of the details of the arms of the He-
brews and the Philistines we cannot conjecture
more closely as to its nature. At the same time it
must be allowed that all the old versions, including
Josephua, give it the meaning of a piece of armor
for the leg — some even for the thigh. G.
GREECE, GREEKS, GRECIANS. The
histories of Greece and Palestine are as Utile con-
nected as those of any other two nations exercising
the same influence on the destinies of mankind
could well be.
The Homeric Epos in its widest range does not
include the Hebrews, while on the other hand the
Mosaic idea of the Western world seems to have
been sufficiently indefinite. It is possible that
Moses may have derived some geographical outlines
from the Egyptians; but he does not use them in
Gen. x. 3-5, where he mentions the descendants of
Javan as peopling the isles of the Gentiles. This
is merely the vaguest possible indication of a geo-
graphical locality ; and yet it is not improbable that
his Egyptian teachers were almost equally in the
dark as to the position of a country which had not
at that time arrived at a unity sufficiently imposing
to arrest the attention of its neighbors. The
amount and precision of the information possessed
by Moses must be measured by the nature of the
relation which we can conceive as existing in his
time between Greece and Egypt. Now it appears
from Herodo'us that prior to the Trojan war the
current of tradition, sacred and mythological, set
from Egypt towards Greece; and the first quasi-
historical ever* which awakened the curiosity, and
stimulated the Imagination of the Egyptian rriesta,
« • In Matt. xtn. 26 and Mark tv. 38 grfptet b ras>
Oared "blade," and in 1 Cor. HI. 18 ''bay'' lbs
other trsiu^tioa oocun 12 times. H
Digitized by
Google
966 GREECE, GREEKS, ETC
mm the story of Paris and Helen (Hood. IL IS,
H, 89, and 118). At the time of the Exodus,
therefore, it ii not likely that Greece had entered
into any definite relation whatever with Egypt.
Withdrawn from the sea-coast, and only gradually
fighting their way to it during the period of the
Judges, the Hebrews can have had no opportunity
of forming connections with the Greeks. From the
time of Moses to that of Joel, we have no notice
of the Greeks in the Hebrew writings, except that
which was contained in the word Javan (Gen. z.
2) ; and it does not seem probable that during this
period the word had any peculiar significance for a
Jew, except hi so far as it was associated with the
idea of islanders. When, indeed, they came into
contact with the lonians of Asia Minor, and recog-
nized them as the long-lost islanders of the western
migration, it was natural that they should mark
the similarity of sound between ] V = )V and
Iones, and the application of that name to the
Asiatic Greeks would tend to satisfy in some meas-
ure a longing to realize the Mosaic ethnography.
Accordingly the U. T. word which is G'recia, in
A. V. Greece, Greek*, etc., is in Hebrew ^ V, Ja-
van (Joel iii. 6 ; Dan. viii. 21) : the Hebrew, how-
ever, is sometimes retained (Is. km. 19 ; Ez. xxvii.
13). In Gen. x. 3, the LXX. hare vol 'lixm>
sal 'EAurrf, with which RoseomiiUer compares
Herod, i. 56-68, and professes to discover the two
elements of the Greek race. From 'luuay he gets
the Ionian or Pelasgian, from 'EaktcI (for which he
supposes the Heb. original Tttpbj*), the Hellenic
element. This is excessively fanciful, and the de-
gree of accuracy which it implies upon an ethno-
logical question cannot possibly be attributed to
Moses, and is by no means necessarily involved in
the met of his divine inspiration.
The Greeks and Hebrews met for the first time
in the slave-market. The medium of communica-
tion seems to have been the Tynan slave-merchant.
About B. a 800 Joel speaks of the Tynans as sell-
ing the children of Judah to the Grecians (Joel iii.
6) ; and in Ez. xxvii. 13 the Greeks are mentioned
as bartering their brazen vessels for slaves. On the
other hand, Bochart says that the Greek slaves
were highly valued throughout the East (Geogr.
Sac. pt. i. lib. iii. c. 3, p. 176); and it is probable
that the Tyrians took advantage of the calamities
which befell either nation to sell them as slaves to
the other. Abundant opportunities would be af-
forded by the attacks of the Lydian monarchy on
the one people, and the Syrian on the other; and
it is certain that Tyre would let slip no occasion of
replenishing her slave-market.
Prophetical notice of Greece occurs in Dan. viii.
21, etc., where the history of Alexander and his
successors is rapidly sketched. Zechariah (ix. 13)
foretells the triumphs of the Maccabees against the
Gneco-Syrian empire, while Isaiah looks forward
k> the conversion of the Greeks, amongst other
Gentiles, through the instrumentality of Jewish
missionaries (Ixvi. 19). For the connection between
the -Jinn and the quasi-Greek kingdoms which
«pr«..g out of the divided empire of Alexander,
•eferenee should be made to other articles.
The presence of Alexander himself at Jerusalem,
and his respectful demeanor, are described by Jose-
ahus (Ant xl. 8, § 3); and some Jews are even
said to ham Joined him in bis expedition against
Pettis (Hecat. ap. Joseph, c Apion. ii. 4), as the
GREECE GREEKS, ETC.
Samaritans had already dons in the siege of Tyn
(Joseph. Ant. xi. 8, §§ 4-6). In 1 Mace. xii. 5-41
(about B. c. 180), and Joseph. Ant. xii. 4, $ 10
we have an account of an embassy and letter sent
by the Lacedaemonians to the Jews. [Aiutus
Onus.] The most remarkable feature in tbs
transaction is the claim which the Lseedsemonians
prefer to kindred with the Jews, and which Areus
professes to establish by reference to a book. It is
by no means unlikely that two declining nations,
the one crouching beneath a Roman, the other be-
neath a Grteco-Svriau invader, should draw together
in face of the common calamity. This may have
been the case, or we may with Jahn (Heb. Corns*,
ix. 91, note) regard the affair as a piece of pempons
trifling or idle curiosity, at a period when " all na-
tions were curious to ascertain their origin, and
their relationship to other nations."
The notices of the Jewish people which occur u»
Greek writers have been collected by Josephus (e.
Apion. i. 22). The chief are Pythagoras, Herod-
otus, Chcerilus, Aristotle, Theophrastus, and Heo-
atseus. The main drift of the argument of Jose-
phus is to show that the Greek authors derived
their materials from Jewish sources, or with mors
or less distinctness referred to Jewish history. For
Pythagoras, he cites Hermippus's life; for Aristotle,
Clearchus; but it should be remembered that the
Neo-Platonism of these authorities makes them
comparatively worthless; that Hermippus in par-
ticular belongs to that Alexandrian school which
made it its business to fine the Hebrew traditions
with the philosophy of Greece, and propitiated the
genius of Orientalism by denying the merit of orig-
inality to the great and independent thinkers of
the West. This style of thought wss further de-
veloped by Iamblichus ; and a very good specimen
of it may be seen in Le Clerc's notes on Grotius,
ae Verit, It has been ably and vehemently assaiM
by Kitter, Hist. PhiL b. i. c. 3.
Herodotus mentions the Syrians of Palestine as
confessing that they derived the rite of circumcision
from the Egyptians (ii. 104). Bahr, however, does
not think it likely that Herodotus visited the inte-
rior of Palestine, though he was acquainted with
the sea-coast. (On the other hand see Dablmann,
pp. 65, 56, Engl, transl.) It la almost impossible
so suppose that Herodotus could have visited Jeru-
salem without giving us some more detailed acoourt
of it than the merely incidental notices in ii. 169
and iii. 6, not to mention that the site of KcUtvru
is still a disputed question.
The victory of Pharoah-Necho over Josiah at
Megiddo is recorded by Herodotus (oomp. Herod
ii. 159 with 2 K. xxiii. 29 ff., 2 Chr. xxxr. 20 ff).
It is singular that Josephus should have omitted
these references, and cited Herodotus only ss men-
tioning the rite of circumcision.
The work of Theophrastus cited is not extant)
he enumerates amongst other oaths that of Corbam.
Chcerilus is supposed by Josephus to describe
the Jews in a by no means nattering portrait of a
people who accompanied Xerxes in his expedition
against Greece. The chief points of identification
are, their speaking the Phoenician language, and
dwelling in the Solymeun mountains, near a broad
take, which according to Josephus wss the Dead
Sea.
The HecatSEUs of Josephus is Hecatseus of Ab-
dera, a contemporary of Alexander the Great, ant
Ptolemy son of Lagus. The authenticity of tin)
History of the Jews attributed to him by Joes
Digitized by
Google
GREECE GREEKS, ETO
ikm has been called in question by Origan and
Jtban.
After (he complete subjugation of the Greeks by
the Romans, and the absorption into the Roman
empire of the kingdoms which were formed out of
the dominions of Alexander, the political connection
between ihe Greek* and Jews as two independent
nations no longer existed.
The name of the country, Greece, occurs once in
N. T., Acts xx. 2, "EAAo» = Greece, i. e. Greece
Proper, as opposed to Macedonia. 11 In the A. V.
of 0. T. the word Greek is not found ; either Ja-
ran is retained, or, as in Joel iii. 6, the word is
rendered by Grecian. In Maccabees Greets and
Gredaru seem to be used indifferently (comp. 1
Mace i. 10, ri. 3 ; also 2 Mace. iv. 10, Gretkuh).
Id N. T., on the other hand, a distinction is ob-
served, 't.KXi)r being rendered Greek, and 'EAAt/k-
unrfis Grecian. The difference of the English
terminations, however, is not sufficient to convey
the difference of meanings. *EAAi)r in N. T. is
either a Greek by race, as in Acts xvi. 1-3, xviii.
17, Rom. i. 14; or more frequently a Gentile, as
opposed to a Jew (Kom. ii. 9, 10, etc.); so fern.
*EA\nris, Mark vii. 26, Acts xvii. 12. 'EKKvyur-
rfis (properly •' one who speaks Greek ") is a foreign
Jew; opposed, therefore, not to 'Iovotuos, but to
'EjSpcuof, a home-Jew, one who dwelt in Palestine.
So Schleuaner, etc. : according to Salmasius, how-
ever, the Hellenists were Greek proselytes, who had
GROVE 967
I become Christians; so Wolf, Parkhnrst, etc., argn-
I ing from Acta xi. 20, where 'EMnvurral an eon-
| treated with 'IouSoibi in 19. The question resolve*
itself partly into a textual one, Griesbach having
adopted the reading "EaAjjvcw, and so also Lach-
mann.' T. E. B.
• GREEK LANGUAGE. [Huxuunar;
LANGUAGE OP THB NlW TESTAMENT.]
• GREETING. [Saldtatiom.]
GREYHOUND, the translation in the text
of the A. V. (Prov. xxx. 31) of the Hebrew
words D^Sn^ "T'JTI (*»■*■ mothnat/bn), i. e.
« one girt about the loins." See margin, where it
is conjectured that the " horse ° is the animal de-
noted by this expression. The Alexandrine version
of the LXX. has the following curious interpreta-
tion, a\4itrap iimpararir in 0n\«taif tftyvxos,
i. e. " a cock as it proudlystruU amongst the hens."
Somewhat similar is the Vulgate, " gallus succinc-
tus lumbos." Various are the opinions as to what
animal " comely in going " is here intended. Some
think "a leopard," others " an eagle," or "a man
girt with armor," or "a zebra," etc. Gesenius
( The*, p. 435), Schultens ( Comment, ad Prov. 1. c),
Bochart (Hieroz. ii. 684), Kosenmttller (Schol. ad
Prov. I c, and Not. ad Boch. 1. c), Fuller (ifit-
celL Sac. v. 12), are in favor of a " war-horse girt
with tappings " being the thing signified. But,
Sacred symbolic Tree of the Assyrians. From Lord Aberdeen's Black Stone.
(Ferguson's Ninneh and Penepolti, p. 298.)
later, Maura- (Comment. Gram, in Vet. Tt$t. 1. c.)
decides unhesitatingly in favor of a " wrestler,"
when girt about the loins for a contest. He refers
to Buxtorf (Lex. Chald. Talm. p. 692) to show that
tarttr is used in the Talmud to express " a wrestler,"
and thus concludes : " Sed ne opus quidem est hoc
loco qoanquam minime oonteranendo, quum aca'ne-
Ssm use in neminem magis cadat quam in lucta-
tomm, ita ut haw significatio carta sit per se."
There is certainly great probability that Maurer is
jorrect. The grace and activity of the practiced
athlete agrees well with the notion conveyed by the
expression, " comely in going ; " and the suitable-
ness of the Hebrew words, zarztr mothnayim, is
ibvious to every reader. W. H.
« •'BAAat standi then tor the stricter 'Agarfc (ne
tr'e xvui. 13. and xlx. 21). WeUteln has shown (Nov.
Pat. B. 690) that Lake was Justified in that use of the
Mm. H. _- _..__. .
» •Also, Tlechsndorf, Ds Wstte, Meyer, and others, ' _ls lime to preach to the Greek-speaking Jews; see
■dOBt'SAAarac, pertlv on external, and pertlv on In- e. g lets U. 9, and lx. 20. ■
• GRINDERS, Eccl. xil. 3. [Almond.]
GRINDING. [Mill.]
GROVE. A word used in the A. V., with twu
exceptions, to translate the mysterious Hebrew term
Asherah (rntT**). This term is examined under
its own head (p. '173), where It is observed that
almost all modem interpreters agree that an idol
or image of some kind must be intended, and not
a grove, as our translators render, following the
version of the LXX. (Axo-oi) and of the Vulgate
(luau). This is evident from many passages, and
especially from 3 K. xxiii. 6, where we find that
Josiah >' brought out the Asherah " (translated by
our version "the grove") "from the house of the
ternal (rends. It Is a question of mixed evidence
without Uns reading It Is impossible to as* how the
sphere uf the preachers in ver. 19 differs from that of
those In ver. 20. It would have been nothing new at
Digitized by
Google
j
xs
GROVE
Lort" (oomp. abo Jadg. iii. 7; 1 K. xW. 33, xvlii.
19). In many passages the " groves " are grouped
with molten and graven images in a manner that
■earea no doubt that some idol was intended (2
Chr. xxxiii. 19, xxxiv. 8, 4; Is. xvii. 8). There
hag been much dispute as to what the Asherah was;
but in addition to the views set forth under Ash-
krah, we must not omit to notice a probable con-
nection between this symbol or image — whatever
it was — and the sacred symbolic tree, the repre-
sentation of which occurs so frequently on Assyrian
sculptures, and is shown in the preceding woodcut.
The connection is ingeniously maintained by Mr.
Fergussou in his Nineveh and Pertepoli* restored
(pp. 299-304), to which the reader is referred.
3. The two exceptions noticed above are Gen. xxi.
88 and 1 Sam. xxii. 6 (margin), where " grove " is
employed to render the word vH?S, Ethel, which
in the text of the latter passage, and In 1 Sam.
xxxi. 13, is translated " tree " Professor Stanlev
(8. 4 P. § 77; also p. 91, note) would have Eah»l
to be a tamarisk ; but this is controverted by Bonar
{Land of Pi-om. ), on the ground of the thin and
shadeless nature of that tree. It is now, however,
generally recognized (amongst others, see Gesen.
The*, p. 50 A: Stanley, 8. d- P. App. § 76, 3,
p. 142 note, 220 note, and passim), that the word
Elan, ?T?£t, which is uniformly rendered by the
A. V. "plain," signifies a grove or plantation.
Such were the Elon of Hamre (Gen. xiii. 18, xiv.
13, xviii. 1); of Moreh (Gen. xii. 6; Deut. xi. 30);
of Zaanaim (Judg. iv. 11), or Zaanannim (Josh. xix.
33); of the pillar (Judg. ix. 6); of Meonenim
(Judg. ix. 37); and of Tabor (1 Sam. x. 3). In
all these cases the LXX. have Spit or BdXcwos;
the Vulgate — which the A. V. probably followed
— valli* or commltU, in the bat three, however,
outre**.
In the religions of the ancient heathen world
groves play a prominent part In old times altars
only were erected to the gods. It was thought
wrong to shut up the gods within walls, and hence,
As Pliny expressly tells us, trees were the first tem-
ples (H. N. xii. 2; Tae. Germ. 9; Lucian, de Sac-
rlfic. 10; aee Carpzov, App. Crit. p. 332), and from
the earliest times groves are mentioned in connec-
tion with religious worship (Gen. xii. 6, 7, xiii. 18;
Deut. xi. 30; A. V. " plain; " see above). Their
high antiquity, refreshing shade, solemn silence,
and awe-inspiring solitude, as well as the striking
illustration they afford of natural life, marked them
out as the fit localities, or even the actual objects of
worship (" Lucos et in iis silentia ipsa adoramus,"
Plin. xii. 1; "Secretum luci . . . et admiratio
umbra fidem tibi numinis fecit," Sen. Ep. xii.;
11 Quo posses viao dicere Numen habet," Or. Fast.
lii. 895; "Sacrft nemus aceubet umbra," Virg.
tieorg. ill. 334; Or. Met. viii. 743; Ex. vi. 13; Is.
viL 5; Hos. ir. 13). This last passage hints at
•nother and darker reason why groves were oppor-
tune for the degraded services of idolatry; their
shadow hid the atrocities and obscenities of hea-
then worship. The groves were generally found
connected with temples, and often had the right of
Hording an asylum (Tec Germ. 9, 40; Herod, ii.
•38; Virg. jSn. i. 441, ii. 512; SU. Ital. i. 81).
jome haw supposed that even the Jewish Temple
lad a r4fuyn planted with palm and cedar (Pa. xcii.
J, 13) and olive (Ps. lii. 8) as the mosque which
•Uals on it* site now has. This is more than
OBOVB
doubtful; but we know that a c el e b r a te d jak i
by the sanctuary at Shechem (Josh. xxiv. 96 ; Jadg
ix. 6; Stanley, 8. tf P. p. 142). We find repeats*,
mention of groves consecrated with deep supersti-
tion to particular gods (Uv. vii. 95, xxiv. 8, xxxr
51; Tac. Am. ii. 12, 51, etc., iv. 73, etc.). Fot
this reason they were stringently forbidden to the
Jews (Ex. xxxiv. 18; Jer. xrii. 9; Ex. xx. 28), and
Maimonides even says that It is forbidden to sit
under the shade of any green tree where an Idol
statue was (Fabric. BibL Antiq. p. 290). Yet wi
find abundant indications that the Hebrews felt
the influence of groves on the mind (" the spirit ii<
the woods," Wordsworth), and therefore selected
them for solemn purposes, such as great national
meetings (Judg. ix. 6, 37) and the burial of tbj
dead (Gen. xxxv. 8; 1 Sam. xxxi. 13). Those
connected with patriarchal history were peculiarly
liable to superstitious reverence (Am. v. 5, viii. 14),
and we find that the groves of Hamre were long a
place of worship (Sozomen, H. E. ii. 4; Euseb.
VtL Constant. 81; Rdand, PahaL p. 714). Then
are in Scripture many memorable trees; e. g. AJlon-
bachuth (Gen. xxxv. 8), the tamarisk (but see
above) in Gibeah (1 Sain. xxii. 6), the terebinth
in Shechem (Josh. xxiv. 98, under which the law
was set up), the palm-tree of Deborah (Judg. iv. 5),
the terebinth of enchantments (Judg. ix. 37), the
terebinth of wanderers (Judg. iv. 11) and others
(1 Sam. xiv. 2, x. 3, sometimes "plain " in A. V.,
Vulg. "convallis").
This observation of particular trees was among
the heathen extended to a regular worship of them
" Tree-worship may be traced frum the interior of
Africa, not only into Egypt and Arabia, but also
onward uninterruptedly into Palestine and Syria,
Assyria, Persia, India, Thibet, Siam, the Philip-
pine Islands, China, Japan, and Siberia; also west-
ward into Asia Minor, Greece, Italy, and other
countries; and in most of the countries here named
it obtains in the present day, combined as it has
been in other parts with various forms of idolatry "
(den. of Earth and Man, p. 139). " The worship
of trees even goes back among the Iraunians to the
rules of Horn, called in the Zend-Avesta the pro-
mulgator of the old law. We know from Herodo-
tus the delight which Xerxes took in the great
plane-tree in Lydia, on which he bestowed golden
ornaments, and appointed for it a sentinel in the
person of one of the ■ immortal ten thousand.'
The early veneration of trees was associated, by the
moist and refreshing canopy of foliage, with that of
sacred fountains. In similar connection with the
early worship of Nature were among the Hellenic
nations the fame of the great palm-tree of Delos,
and of an aged pbtanus in Arcadia. The Bud-
dhists of Ceylon venerate the colossal Indian fig-tret
of Anurah-depura. ... As single trees thus lie-
came objects of veneration from the beauty of their
form, so did also groups of trees, under the nam*
of ■ groves of gods.' Pausanias (i. 21, § 9) is full
of the praise of a grove belonging to the temple at
Apollo at Grynion in JEoKs; and the grove of
Colone is celebrated in the renowned chorus of
Sophocles" (Humboldt, Cosmos, ii. 96, Eng. ed.>
The custom of adorning trees " with jewels anil
mantles " was very ancient and universal (Herod
vii 31; jElian, V. ff. ii. 14; Theocr. Id. xviiL
Ov. Met. viii. 723, 745; Arnob. adv. Genie*, i. 39
and even still exists in the East.
The oractdar trees oi antiquity are well
Digitized by
Google
GUABD
<«. »1 *83; Od. v. 237; Soph. TVoeA. 764; Virg.
Geary. B. 16; Sil. Ital iii. 11). Each god had
some sacred tree (Virg. Ed vii. <1 ff.). The Etru-
rians are laid to have worshipped a palm [a holm-
tree, ilex, Plin. B. N. xvi. 44, aL 87], and the
delta an oak (Max. Tyr. Dissert, viii. 8, in Godwyn's
Ma*, and Aar. ii. 4). On the Druldic veneration
of oak-groves, see Puny, H. N. xvi. 44 [al. 96] ; Tae.
Am. xiv. 30. In the name way, according to the mis-
sionary Oldendorp, the Negroes "have sacred groves,
the abodes of a deity, which no Negro ventures to
enter except the priests " (Prichard, Not Hut. of
Man, pp. 525-689, 3d ed.; Park's Travel*, p. 65).
So too the ancient Egyptians (Kawlhuon's Herod.
ii. 298). Long alter the introduction of Christianity
it was found necessary to forbid all abuse of trees
and groves to the purposes of superstition (Harduin,
Act. Condi. i. 988; see Orelli, ad Toe. Germ. 9).
F. W. F.
GUARD. The Hebrew terms commonly used
had reference to the special duties which the body-
guard of a monarch had to perform.
(1.) Tabbich (n^Q) originally signified a
"oook," and as butchering fell to the lot of the
cook in Eastern countries, it gained the secondary
tense of " executioner," and is applied to the body-
guard of the kings of Egypt (Gen. xxxvii. 36), and
Babylon (2 K. xxv. 8; Jer. xxxix. 9, xl. 1; Dan.
a. 14). [ExEcrrriONKR.]
(2.) RAU (^!) properly means a "runner,"
and Is the ordinary torn employed for the attend-
ants of the Jewish kings, whose office it was to run
before the chariot (2 Sam. xv. 1; 1K.L 5), like
the curtoret of the Roman Emperors (Senec. Ep.
87, 126). That the Jewish ■• runners " superadded
the ordinary duties of a military guard, appears
from several passages (1 Sam. xxii. 17; 2 K. x. 25,
xi. 6 ; 2 Chr. xii. 10). It was their office also to
carry despatches (2 Chr. xxx. 6). They had a
guard-room set apart for their use in the lung's
palace, in which their arms were kept ready for use
(1 K. sir. 28; 2 Chr. xii. 11). [Footman.]
(3.) The terms mithmercth (n*1Q^D) and
vtuhmAr ("llJtpD) express properly the act of
toatckittg, but are occasionally transferred to the
parsons who kept watch (Neh. iv. 9, 22, vii. 3, xii.
9; Job vii 12). The A. V. is probably correct in
substituting muhmarto (VTIlJtpD) *> r "» pres-
ent reading in 2 Sam. xxiii. 23, Benaiah being
appointed "captain of the guard," as Joaephus
(AM. vii. 14, § 4) relates, and not privy councillor:
the same error has crept into the text in 1 Sam.
xxii. 14, where the words " which goeth at thy bid-
ding " may originally have been " captain of the
body-guard." For the duties of the captain of the
guard, see Captain, [and Captain of the
Guard, Amer. ed.] W-. L. B.
GUDGO'DAH (with the art. TTjiT^n:
TtAyii: Gadgad), Deut. x. 7. [Hon Ha'qid-
OAD.]
GUEST. [Hospitaijtt.]
• GUEST-CHAMBER. [House.]
• GUILTY. The phrase guilty of death "
[A. V.) Num. xxxv. 81; Tob. n. 12; Matt. xxr.
M , Mark xiv. 64, contrary to tue present idiom or
war huitTMire, signifies " deserving the penalty of
\" bemg perhaps an imitation of the Latin
GUB, THE GOING UP TO 966
reus mortu. "He is guilty" in Matt. xxHL 1.
(A. V.), is the translation of the same Greek won
(oAffAti) which in ver. 16 is rendered "he is s
debtor." A better translation in both eases would
be, " he is bound," i. ». by his oath. A.
GUI/LOTH (n'lb| [spring, bubbUngi], plu-
ral of i"w 3), a Hebrew term of unfrequent occur-
rence in the Bible, and used only in two passages —
and those identical relations of the same occurrence
— to denote a natural object, namely, the springs
added by the great Caleb to the south land in the
neighborhood of Debir, which formed the dowry of
his daughter Achsah (Josh. xv. 19; Judg. i. 15).
The springs were " upper " and " lower " — possi- '
bly one at the top and the other the bottom of a
ravine or glen; and they may have derived their
unusual name from their appearance being different
to [from] that of the ordinary springs of the coun-
try. The root ( v v3) has the force of rolling or
tumbling over, and perhaps this may imply that
they welled up in that round or mushroom form
which is not uncommon here, though apparently
most rare in Palestine. The rendering of the Vat.
LXX. is singular. In Josh, it has rj)y BorBavls
[so Rom.; Vat. Bo00w«r]< and *V rora<6AdV,
the latter doubtless a mere corruption of the He-
brew. The Alex. MS., as usual, is faithful to the
Hebrew text [reading r«Ao0]. In Judges both
have KvTpaxns. An attempt has been lately made
by Dr. Rosen to identify these springs with the
'Am Ntmkur near Hebron (see Zeittchrift der D.
M. G. 1857),° but the identification can hardly be
received without fuller confirmation (Stanley, 8. <f
P. App. § 64). [Drain.] G.
GUTtfl CMS {torrowful, afflicted, Dietr.]:
IW [Vat -»«], i Tauvi [Vat. -mi] ; Alex. Tuvn:
Gum). L A son of Naphtali (Gen. xlvi. 24; 1
Chr. vii. 13), the founder of the family of the Gu-
nites (Num. xxvi. 48). like several others of the
early Israelite names, Guni is a patronymic —
" Gunite; " as if already a family at the time of
its first mention (comp. Arodi, Hushim, etc.).
2. [row*.] A descendant of Gad; father of
Abdiel, a chief man in his tribe (1 Chr. v. 15).
GU'NITES, THE Oa-tin [the Ganiu]: 6
rauW; [Vat. -»«; Alex. rawc] Gunita), the
" family " which sprang from Guni, son of Naph-
tali (Num. xxvi. 48). There is not in the Hebrew
any difference between the two names, of the indi-
vidual and the family.
GUB, THE GOING UP TO ("WTlbM
= the atctnt or $tetp of Gur, or the Kon't whelp
Ges. Thee. p. 276: iy t£ ivafiaiytiy rat; [Comp.
«V TV iwafi&trtt Toip:] ntctntm Gater), an ascent
or rising ground, at which Ahaiiah received his
death-blow while flying from Jehu after the slaugh-
ter of Joram (2 K. ix. 27). It is described as at
(?) Ibleam, and on the way between Jezreel and
Beth-hag-gan (A. V. "the garden-house"). As
the latter is identified with tolerable probability
with the present Jenbi, we may conclude that the
ascent of Gur was some place more than usually
steep on tie difficult road which leads from the
plain of Esdraelon to Jenln. By Joaephus it is
1 • Dr. Robinson thinks that Mtn Matter saaj
nave some relation to these springs (Aye. Owf- ■
MBl «
Digitized by
Google
970
GUR-BAAL
(Ant. ix. 6, $ 4) merely u "a certain
k" (IV twi rpovfrbrt,). Neither It nor
IMeam have been yet recovered.
For the detail! of the occurrence tee Jehu. For
ether aeoenta am Adummim, Akrabbim, Zir.
G.
GUR-BA'AL (bjg— HQ [oemfe o/ Baat\:
reVoa: Gurbaat), a place or district in which dwelt
Arabian!, as recorded in 3 Chr. zzri. 7. It ap-
pears from the context to hare been in the country
lying between Palestine and the Arabian peninsula;
but this, although probable, and although the LXX.
reading is in favor of the conjecture, cannot be
proved, no site having been assigned to it- The
Arab geographers mention a place called Baal, on
the Syrian road, north of El-Medeeneh (Maritid,
a. v. JkJU ). The Targum, as Winer (*. v.) re-
marks, reads TCD yam 'WXIV - «• Arabs
Bring in Gerar " — suggesting T13 instead of
"TO • but there is no further evidence to strengthen
this supposition. [See also Gerar.] The inge-
nious conjectures of Bochart (Phnleg, ii. 23) re-
specting the Mehunim, who are mentioned together
with the " Arabians that dwelt in Gur-Baal," may
be considered in reference to the Mehunim, although
they are far-fetched. [Mehunim.] E. S. P.
• GUTTER. This word occurs in the difficult
passage 2 Sam. r. 6-8, translated in the A. V. as
follows: " (6.) And the king and his men went to
Jerusalem unto the Jebusitcs, the inhabitants of
the land ; which spake unto David, saying, Except
thou take away the blind and the lame, thou shalt
not come in hither; thinking, David cannot come
in hither. (7.) Nevertheless, David took the strong-
hold of Zion ; the same is the city of David. (8. )
And David said on that day, Whosoever getteth
up to the gutter, and smiteth the Jebusites, and
the lame, and the blind, that are hated of David's
soul, he tknll be chief and captain. Wherefore
they said, The blind and the lame shall not come
into the house."
So long ago as 1546, Sebastian Milnster (Hebrew
Bible, fol. ed., in loc.) said of this passage, "Est
locus ille valde obacurus." The lapse of more than
300 years has not much mended the matter, and
the passage is still " valde abscunu." Our limits
here forbid a full discussion of the points at issue."
But without attempting to examine every gram-
matical difficulty, we may reach a better translation
than the above, by attending to the following
points: — (1.) The two clauses, " except thou take
away the blind and the lame," and " thou shalt
not come in hither," are improperly transposed in
the above version; and this transposition puts the
next following clause out of its proper connection,
« * See, for the later criticism of the passage, Man-
ser, Com. gram. crii. vol. 1. p. 180 ; Thenlus, die Bu-
rner Samuels erHart (Exeget. Handbuch ) 2ta Aufl. 1864 J
Bertheau, die BUcher der Oironik erIUart (in the same
work) 1864 ; BSttcher, in the Zeittehrift der D. Morg.
Besetacliafl, 1857, pp. 640-42, and Neve exegel. krit.
XkrenUu, lte Abth., 1868, p. 161; KeU, die Bother
Bamiuls, 1864. T. J. C.
t> • There is no necessity for a change of pointing
rj l^pn). The Into, farm Is the more emphatic
anjsaasion (Oss. Heb. Oram. « 181, 4). T. J. C.
• • In the A. V. the after-clanse Is supplied In the
" , «•» eaaB to chief mud -captain," Italicised to
GUTTER
and makei it meaningless. (3.) The
dered " except thou take away the blind and the
lame," should be translated, " but the blind and
the lame will turn thee away." * (8.) The apodoan
or after-clause, corresponding to the expression,
" any one that smites " (= if any one smites), is
not expressed in the Hebrew. This is a favorite
Hebrew idiom, where for any reason it is felt to 1st
unnecessary to complete the construction. See,
e. jr., Ex. xxxii. 82, in the A. V. Here, the object
was two -fold: first, to state what David proposed
to his warriors as the means of capturing the strong-
hold ; and secondly, to account for the proverbial
saying that arose from this occurrence. Neither
of these objects required the completion of the sen-
tence, which would readily be understood to be the
offer of a reward for the service. A dash should
therefore be put (as in the A. V. Ex. xxxii. 32)
after the word " soul " (omitting the words in ital-
ics), to indicate that the sentence is incomplete.'
(4.) In ver. 8 there is also, as in rer. 6, an im-
proper transposition of two clauses, "whosoever
getteth up to the gutter," " and smiteth the Jebu-
sites." (5.) In rer. 8, instead of " the Jebusites
(plural with the def. art.), we should translate,
" a Jebusite." (6.) The word translated " gutter,"
"1^32, is here property a toater-eourse. It is de-
rived from a rerb which apparently expresses the
sound of rushing water. It occurs in only on*
other passage, Ps. xlii. 8, and is there applied to a
mountain torrent, or a cataract (A. V. "water-
spouts"). (7.) The words, "the blind and the
lame," may be taken in the same construction ae
"a Jebusite" (even the blind and the lame); or,
as the sentence is manifestly left unfinished, they
may be regarded as a part of the incomplete con-
struction, having no grammatical relation to the
preceding words.
Thus without resorting to the violent method of
conjectural emendation of the text, which Maurer,
Thenius, Biittcher, and others, think necessary, or
to a change of punctuation and an unauthorized
sense of the word "112?, proposed by Ewald and
adopted by Keil, we obtain the following gram-
matically correct rendering :
" (6.) And the king and his men went to Jeru-
salem, to the Jebusite inhabiting the land. And
he spake to David, saying, Thou shalt not come in
hither; but the blind and the lame will turn thee
away, saying, David shall not come in hither.
(7.) And David took the stronghold of Zion; that
is, the city of David. (8.) And David said on that
day, Any one that smites a Jebusite, and gets to
the water-course, and the lame and the blind hated
of David's soul Therefore they say, Blind
and lame shall not come into the house." <*
The Jebusites, confident in the strength of their
show that they am not In the Hebrew text. To the
common reader, with nothing but the translation to
guide him, they seem to be " clutched out of the air,"
as the Germans express it. But a reference to 1 Ohr.
xl. 6 shows that these words, though they have no
right here, are not a pure invention of the translator.
The reader of the Hebrew text, If those words are ne-
cessary to make sense of the passage, was In the same
predicament as the English reader of the A. V. would
be without them. T. J
d • The above translation Is nearly word fbr wont
the same as that of De Wette ; which Is so close to tte
Hebrew that any literal rendering must be almost rer
bally coincident with It T. J.
Digitized by
Google
HAAHASUTARI
which had successfully resisted repeated
attempts to capture it, sneeringly aaid to Da/id,
"the bli-id and the lame will turn thee away;"
deeding only to aay, "David shall not oome in
hither.'"
David took this stronghold (ver. 7); and how
this was effected is intimated in ver. 8. If the
water-course could be reached, by which water was
supplied to the besieged, the reduction of the strong-
bold must soon follow. On the import of the last
clause in ver. 8, compare the suggestion in the ar-
ticle Jerusalem, II., fourth paragraph, foot-note.
A review of the principal interpretations of Jew-
ish and Christian scholars would be interesting and
instructive; but there is not space for it here.
T.J. C.
H.
HAAHASHTARI CnrjStotSJ, with the
article, =the Ahatktarite [perh. courier, mettenger,
Fiirst]: rir 'Aao&ip; [Vat Atrnpar;] £lex. Ao-
tiipa: Ahatthari), a man, or a family, immediately
demanded from Ashur, " father of Tekoa " by his
second wife Naarah (1 Chr. iv. 6). The name does
not appear again, nor is there any trace of a place
»f similar name.
HAB ATAH [3 syl.] (R^D, ™ Neh. TVfiQ
[but MSS. and editions vary in both places; whom
J eJtooah protects]: Aafifla, 'E/tta; Alex. O/Saia,
[EjBsia; in Neh., Vat. E/feia, FA. A/J«id:] BMn,
Babia). Bene-Chabagah were among the sons of
the priests who returned from Babylon with Zerub-
babel, but whose genealogy being imperfect, were
not allowed to serve (Est. ii. 61; Neh. vii. 63).
It is not clear from the passage whether they were
among the" descendants of Barzillai the Gileadite.
In the lists of 1 Esdras the name is given as
Obdia [marg. Hobaiah].
HABArTKUK or HAB'AKKTJK
(p'lpSn [embracing, as a token of love, Ges.,
Fiirst] : Jerome, ProL in Bab., renders it by the
Greek w«»f\irfit; ' Afi$wcoifi: Habacuc). Other
Greek forms of the name are 'AOPaxoi/i, which
Suidaa erroneously renders warhp iyipatvs,
"APaitovn (Georg. Cedrenus), 'AfL$aKoiit, and
'AfiftaKauK (Dorotheus, Doctr. 2). The Latin
forms are Ambacum, Ambncnc, and Abncuc.
1. Of the (acts of the prophet's life we have no
certain information, and with regard to the period
of his prophecy there is great division of opinion.
The Rabbinical tradition that Habakkuk was the
son of the Shunammite woman whom Elisha re-
tored to life is repeated by Abarbanel in his com-
utentary, and has no other foundation than a fanci-
ful etymology of the prophet's name, based on the
expression in 3 K. iv. 16. Equally unfounded is
the tradition that he was the sentinel set by Isaiah
to watch for the destruction of Babylon (comp. Is.
zxi. 16 with Hab. ii. 1). In the title of the history
of Bd and the Dragon, as found in the LXX.
version in Origen's Tetrapla, the author is called
HABAKKUK
971
• • Hscent excavations on the southern slope of
Moant Hon show that this vaunting of the Jsboidtei
•as not without soma foundation. " From the posi-
son and appearance of this escarpment [one discovered
hers] It most ban formed part of the defenses or
ma ei deity, the wall running along the crest; . . .
IH del vhkb lead down On vkll«? of lOnnom could
•' Habakkuk, the son of Joshua, of the tribe of LavL>
Some have supposed this apocryphal writer to be
identical with the prophet (Jerome, Proam. m
Dan. ). The psalm in ch. 3 and its title are tliought
to favor the opinion that Habakkuk was a Levite
(DeliUsch, Bnbakuk, p. iii.). l'seudo-Epiphanius
(vol. ii. p. 240, de lifts Pivphetanun) and Doro-
theus ( Chron. Patch, p. 150) say that he was of
Bn6f°<cv)0 or 'Otfiirovxif (Betbacat, bid. Hispal.
a 47), of the tribe of Simeon. This may have
been the same as Bethzacharias, where Judas Mac-
cabaeua was defeated by Antiocbus Kupator (1 Mace,
vi. 32, 33). The same authors relate that when
Jerusalem was sacked by Nebuchadnezzar, Habak-
kuk fled to Ostracine, and remained there till after
the ChaUUeans bad left the city, when he returned
to his own country and died at his farm two yean
before the return from Babylon, n. c. 538. It was
during his residence in Judaea that he is said to
have carried food to Daniel in the den of lions at
Babylon. This legend is given in the history of
Bel and the Dragon, and is repeated by Eusebius,
Bar-Hebneus, and Kutychius. It is quoted from
Joseph ben Gorion (B. J. xi. 3) by Abarbanel
(Comm. on Bab.), and seriously refuted by him on
chronological grounds. The scene of the event was
shown to mediaeval travellers on the road from
Jerusalem to Bethlehem (Emit) Travel* in Pala-
tine, p. 23). Habakkuk is aaid to have been buried
at Keilah in the tribe of Judah, eight miles E.
of K.leutlicropolU (Eusebius, Onomwiticon). Rab-
binical tradition places his tomb at Chukkok, of the
tribe of Naphtau, now called Jabik. In the days
of Zebenus, bishop of Eleutheropolis, according to
Nicephorus (//. E. xii. 48) and Sozoiuen (//. E.
vii. 28), the remains of the prophets Habakkuk and
Micah were discovered at Keilah.
2. The Kabbinical traditions agree in placing
Habakkuk with Joel and Nahum in the reign of
Manasseh (cf Seder Olam Rabba and Zutn, and
Tteintich 1) ivul). TliU date is adopted by Kimchi
and Abarbanel among the Rabbis, and by YVitsius.
Kolinsky, and Jahn among modern writers. The
general corruption and lawlessness which prevailed
in the reign of Manasseh are supposed to be referred
to in Hab. i. 2—4. Both Kalinsky and Jahn con-
jecture that Habakkuk may have been one of the
prophets mentioned in 2 K. xxi. 10. Syncellus
(Chrtmographia, pp. 214, 230, 240) makes him
contemporary with EzekieL and extends the period
of his prophecy from the time of Manasseh to that
of Daniel and Joshua the son of Josedech. The
Chronicon Paschale places him later, first mention
ing him in the beginning of the reign of Josiah
(Olymp. 32), as contemporary with Zephaniah and
Nahum ; and again in the beginning of the reign
of Cyrus (Olymp. 42), as contemporary with Daniel
and Ezekiel in Persia, with Haggai and Zechariah
in Judaea, and with Baruch in Egypt. Davidson
(Borne'i Intr. ii. 968), following Keil, decides in
favor of the early part of the reign of Josiah.
Calmet, Jaeger, Ewald, De Wette, Rosenmiiller,
KnobeL, Maurer, Hitzig, and Meier agree in assign-
ing the commencement of Habokkuk's prophecy to
be defended by a couple of men against any fores, be-
fore the Invention of fl-v-arms. The escarpment wai
probabr. jarriel down to' the valley In a succession of
tenaeos the la*ae amount of rubbish, however, will
not allow a ay thing to be seen clearly." ftes Ordnam*
Survey nf Jerusalem, p. 6], bond. 1866.} B.
Digitized by
Google
972
HABAKKUK
Ike reign of Jeboiikim, though they are divideJ as
to the exact period to which it is to be referred.
Knobd (Oer Prophttism. A Htbr.) and Meier
(Getck. d. pott, not. Liter. d. Btbr.) an in favor
of the commencement of the Chaldean era, after
the battle ofCarcbemish (b. c. 606), when Judea
was first threatened by the victor*. But the ques-
tion of the date of Habskkuk's prophecy has been
discussed in the most exhaustive manner by
Delitzsch {Dtr Prophet Babahik, EM. § 8), and
though his arguments are rather ingenious than
convincing, they are well deserving of consideration
as based upon internal evidence. The conclusion
at which be arrives is that Habakkuk delivered his
arophecy about the 12th or 13th year of Josiah
n. ft, 630 or 629), for reasons of which the follow-
ing is a summary. In Hub. i. 5 the expression
" in your days " shows that the fulfillment of the
prophecy wonld take place in the lifetime of those
to whom it was addressed. The same phrase in
Jer. xvi. 9 embraces a period of at most twenty
years, while in Ex. xii. 25 it denotes about six
yean, and therefore, reckoning backwards from the
Chaldean invasion, the date above assigned would
Involve no violation of probability, though the
argument does not amount to a proof. From the
sfanilarity of Hab. ii. 20 and Zeph. i. 7, Delitzsch
infers that the latter is an imitation, the former
being the original. He supports this conclusion
by many collateral arguments. Now Zephaniah,
according to the superscription of his prophecy,
lived in the time of Josiah, and from iii. 5 must
have prophesied after the worship of Jehovah was
restored, that is, after the twelfth year of that
king's reign. It is probable that he wrote about
B. c. 624. Between this period therefore and the
12th year of Josiah (B. c. 630) Delitzsch places
Habakkuk. But Jeremiah began to prophesy in
the 13th year of Josiah, and many passages are
borrowed by him from Habakkuk (cf. Hab. ii. 13
with Jer. Ii. 58, Ac.). The latter therefore must
have written about 630 or 629 B. c. This view
receives some confirmation from the position of his
prophecy in the O. T. Canon.
3. Instead of looking npon the prophecy as an
organic whole, Rosenmiillcr divided it into three
parts corresponding to the chapters, and assigned
the first chapter to the reign of Jelioiakim, the
second to that of Jehoiachin, and the third to that
of Zedekiah, when Jerusalem was besieged for the
third time by Nebuchadnezzar. Kalinsky ( Vatic.
Chntmc. tt S"ah.) makes four divisions, and refers
the prophecy not to Nebuchadnezzar, but to Esar
haddon. But in such an arbitrary arrangement
be true character of the composition as s perfectly
developed poem is entirely lost sight of. The
prophet commences by announcing his office and
Important mission (i. 1 ). He bewails the corruption
and social disorganization by which he is sur-
rounded, and cries to Jehovah for help (i. 2-4).
Next follows the reply of the Deity, threatening
swift vengeance (i. 5-11). The prophet, trans
ferring himself to the near future foreshadowed in
the divine threatening*, sees the rapacity and boast-
ful impiety of the Chaldean hosts, but, confident
that God has only employed them as the instni-
SBents of correction, assumes (ii. 1) an attitude of
hopeful expectancy, and waits to see the issue.
Ha receives the divine command to write in an
aaduring form the vision of God's retributive
sattee, as revealed to his prophetic eye (ii. 2, 3).
Hat doom of the Chaldeans is first foretold in gen-
HABAKKTTK
era! terms (ii. 4 6), and the announcement is M
lowed by a series of denunciations pronounced ansa.
them by the nations who had suffered from their
oppression (a. 6-20). The atrophica! arrangement
of these " woes " is a remarkable feature of tin
prophecy. They are distributed in strophes of three
verses each, characterized by a certain regularity
of structure. The first four commence with a
" Woe! " and close with a verse beginning with
^3 (for). The first verse of each of those contains
the character of the sin, the second the development
of the woe, while the third is confirmatory of the
woe denounced. The fifth strophe diners from the
others in form in having a verse introductory tc
the won. The prominent vices of the Chaldeans'
character, as delineated in i. 5-11, are made the
subjects of separate denunciations: their insatiable
ambition (ii. 6-8), their covetousnem (ii. 9-11),
cruelty (ii. 12-14), drunkenness (ii. 15-17), and
idolatry (ii. 18-20). The whole concludes with
the magnificent psalm in chap, iii., " Habakknk's
Pindaric. ode" (Ewald), a composition unrivaled
for boldness of concep t ion, sublimity of thought,
and majesty of diction. This constitutes, in De-
litzsch 's opinion, " the second grand division of the
entire prophecy, as the subjective reflex of the two
subdivisions of the first, and the lyrical recapitula-
tion of the whole." It is the echo of the feelings
aroused in the prophet's mind by the divine answers
to his appeals ; fear in anticipation of the threatened
judgments, and thankfulness and joy at the prom-
ised retribution. But, though intimately connected
with the former part of the prophecy, it is in itself
a perfect whole, as is sufficiently evident from its
lyrical character, and the musical arrangement by
which it was adapted for use in the temple service.
In other parts of the A. V. the name is given as
Habbacic, and Abacic. W. A. W.
* Among the few separate commentaries on Una
prophet we have Dtr Prophet Bao'ituk, ausgtltgt,
by Franz Delitzsch (Leipz. 1843). This author
gives a list in that volume (p. xxir. f.) of other
single works of an earlier date, with critical notices
of their value. C>f these be commends especially
that of G. F. L. Ilwunlein, 0"»m. dt Bab. Vatic
(1840). For a list of the still older writers, set
Keil's Ltlirb. Her hut.-krit. I'inL m dns A. T. p.
302 (2te Aufl.). The commentaries on the Minos
l"rophets. or the Prophets generally, contain of
course Habakkuk: F. liitzig. Die tinUf kL Prvpht
ten. pp. 253-277 (1838, 3' Aufl. 1863): Ewald, Die
Prophtttn rits A. B. i. 373-389 (1840): M surer,
Comm. tirnrn. Mist. Crii. in Pro/>h. Mimores. ii.
528 ff.; L'mbreit, Pmtt. Owra. u». d. Prop*. Bd.
iv. Th. i. (1845); Keil and Delitzsch, BiliL Comm.
uo. d. 12 IL Prv/ih. (1866); Henderson, Minor
Prophets (1845, Atner. ed. I860); G. R. Noyes,
A'oe Trans, of the Beb. ProjilitU. 3d ed. (1866),
vol. i. ; Henry Cowtes, Minor Prophets, vitk A'ofes
Critical, Explanatory, and Practical (New York,
1866).
For the personal history of the p r oph e t , see
especially Debtzsch's Dt //cifrimci ProphtUt YUn
atipit j£tntt (2d ed. 1844\ and I'mbreit's Bnbn-
\latk in Herzog's Rtnl-r.nnjk. v. 430-438. The
latter represents him ss " a great prophet among
toe minor prophets, and one of the greatest among
the great prophets." DeWette says of his style sat
genius: *' While in his sphere of prophetic repre-
sentation be may be compared with the best of th
prophets, a Joel, Amos, Xahum, Isaiah, in the ryrir
Digitized by
Google
HABAZUT1AH
(eh. iii.) he surpasses every thing which
the poetry of the Hebrews hu to ibow in this
spedes of composition. He exhibit* the greatest
strength snd fullness, on imagination capable of the
loftiest flights, without ever sacrificing beaut; and
clearness. His rhythm is at the same time per-
fectly free, and yet measured. His diction is fresh
and pure." (See his EM. in dot A. Tat., p. 838,
SteAusg.) Lowth amrds to him the highest sub-
limity (licet, xxviii. in his Poetry of the He-
breiDt). " The anthem " at the close of the book,
says lease Taylor, " unequaled in majesty and
splendor of language and imagery, gives expression
in terms the most affecting to an intense spiritual
feeling; and, on this ground, it so fully embodies
these religious sentiment* as to satisfy Christian
piety, even of the loftiest order." (See his Spirit
of the Hebrew Pott*, p. 855, Amer. ed.) The
doctrine impersonated in the prophet's experience
is that the soul, though stripped of all outward pos-
sessions and cut off from every human resource, may
still be happy in God alone as the object of its
confidence and the bestower of the ample spiritual
consolations which that trust secures. (Gomp. 8
Cor. iv. 8 ft) H.
HABAZINI'AH (mjBSq [pa*, light of
Jehovah, Ges. : collection byjnh, FUrst] : Xafkurlr;
[Vat. FA. -*-<!»:] Habsama), apparently the head
of one of the families of the Rkcrakites: his
descendant Jaazaniah was the chief man among
them in the time of Jeremiah (Jer. xxxv. 3).
HABTJACTJO ('ApAuoou: Uabneuc), the
form in which the name of the prophet Habakkuk
is given in the Apocrypha (Bel, 33-39).
HABERGEON, a coat of maU covering the
neck and breast. The Hebrew terms are N^n/jl,
TT~jB?, and Xf~$' The first, tachara, occurs
only "in Ex. xxviii! 33, xxxix. 83, and is noticed
incidentally to illustrate the mode of making the
aperture for the head in the sacerdotal mtii. It was
probably similar to the linen corslet (ktn$£prit),
worn by the Egyptians (Her. il. 182, iii. 47), and
the Greeks (/£ ii. 689, 830). The second, thiryih,
occurs only in Job xli. 86, and is regarded as
another form of skin/in C]^pV3), a " breastplate "
(la. lix. 17); this sense has been questioned, as the
context requires offensive rather than defensive
armor; but the objection may be met by the sup-
position of an extended sense being given to the
verb, according to the grammatical usage known
as t—gma. The third, thirybn, occurs ae an
article of defensive armor in 1 Sam. xvii. 5, 8 Chr.
xxvi. 14, and Nek. iv. Id. W. L. B.
- HA/BOB ("VOTI [pert, rich in vegetation,
Dietr.; bat m Flint]: 'Aity, Xafrbp; [Vat 8
K. xviil. 11, Afiutp'] Habor), the "river of
Gossan " (3 K. xvii. 8, and xviii. 11 [also 1 Chr.
v. 26]) has been already distinguished from the
Chebar or Chobar of Esekiel. [Chkbar.] It is
identified beyond ail reasonable doubt with the
famous affluent of the Euphrates, whieh is called
Aborrhas ('Afloat) by Strabo (xvi. 1, $ 87) and
"rocopius (Bell. Pert. ii. 5); Aburaa ( jt/Sovpar)
sv Isidore of Charax (p. 4), Abora ('Kp&pa) by
Zosimus (iii. 18), and Chaboras (XaBipas), by
• For Um "wood" the LXZ. have b rjj outf, 1
WVf fei WW. And a* I
HAOHILAH, TEB HILL 97b
Pliny and Ptolemy (v. 18). The stream in ques-
tion still bears the name of the Khabour. It flows
from several sources in the mountain-chain, which
in about the 37th parallel doses in the valley of the
Tigris upon the south — the Hons Masius of Strabo
and Ptolemy, at present the Kharej Dagh. The
chief source is said to be " a little to the west of
Hardin" (Layard, If in. and Bab. p. 309, note);
but the upper oourse of the river is still very im-
perfectly known. The main stream was seen by
Mr. Layard flowing from the northwest as he stood
on the conical hill of Koukub (about lat. 36° 20',
long. 41°) ; and here it was joined by an important
tributary, the Jenifer, which flowed down to ii
from Nislbis. Both streams were here fordable,
but the river formed by their union had to be
crossed by a raft. It flowed in a tortuous course
through rich meads covered with flowers, having
a general direction about S. S. W. to its junction
with the Euphrates at Karlatia, the ancient Cir-
cesium. The country on both sides of the river
was covered with mounds, the remains of cities
belonging to the Assyrian period.
The Khnbtmr occurs under that name in an
Assyrian inscription of the ninth century before
our era. G. B.
HAOHALI'AH (TT^O [whom Jehovah
afflict*. Gee. 6te Aufl.]: XtA/clo, 'AvoXfo; [V»t-
Xf Actio, AycAui; Alex. AxaAia; FA. AraAja,
Ay<\wO Heehlia, HahtUa), the father of Nebe-
miah (Neh. i. 1; x. 1).
HACHILAH, THE HILL (DJ^ia
PI VpnU [hill of darkness, Ges., or of barren-
nets, Furst] : i fiovrbs tov (and i [but Alex, rov] )
'Ex«Afii [in 1 Sam. xxvi. 1, Vat. XtAuot?, Alex.
Ax«A.«0 coUis, and Gabaa, Uachila), a hill appar-
ently situated in a wood ■ in the wilderness or waste
land (Ijnp) in the neighborhood of Ziph; in the
fastnesses, or passes, of which David and his six
hundred followers were lurking when the Ziphites
informed Saul of his whereabouts (1 Sam. xxiii.
19; comp. 14, 15, 18). The special topographical
note is added, that it was "on the right (xxiii. 19,
A. V. • south ') of the Jeshimon," or, according to
what may be a second account of the same tran-
saction (xxvi. 1-3), "facing the Jeshimon" (7j
\).9, A V. "before"), that is, the waste barren
district. As Saul approached, David drew down
from the hill into the lower ground (xxvi. 8), still
probably remaining concealed by the wood which
then covered the country. Saul advanced to the
hill, and bivouacked there by the aide of the road
(THJi A. V. " way "), which appears to have run
over the hill or close below it. It was during this
nocturnal halt that the romantic adventure of the
spear and cruse of water took place. In xxiii. 14
and xxvi. 13 this hill would seem (though this is
not quite dear) to be dignified by the title of •• the
mountain" O^n : in the latter, the A V. has
' hill" and in both the article is missed); but, ui
lue other hand, the same eminence appears to be
again designated as " the cliff" (xxiii. 85, V Jt%n ■
A. V. "a rock") from* which David descended
* The Heomw exactly answers to our expraesssa
« descended the eluT" : the « into " in the text of She
Digitized by
Google
9,4
HACHMON1
Into the midoar of Maon. Places boring the
oamei of Ziph and Maou are still found in the
nuth of Judah — in all probability the identical
■itea of those ancient towns. They are sufficiently
dose to each other for the district between them to
bear indiscriminately the name of both. But the
wood hag vanished, and no trace of the name Hachi-
lah has yet lieen discovered, nor has the ground been
examined with the view to see if the minute indi-
cations of the story can be recognized. By Euae-
bius and Jerome ( Onomaitiam) Echela is named
as a village then standing; but the situation —
seven miles from Kleutheropolis, i. e. on the N. \V.
of Hebron — would he too far from Ziph and Maon ;
and as Reland has pointed out, they probably con-
founded it with Keilah (oomp. Onom. " CeeUah " ;
and Belaud, p. 74S). G.
HAOH'MONI, SON OF, and THE
HACH'MONITE (1 Chr. zzvii. 33; xl. 11),
both renderings — the former the correct one — of
the same Hebrew words , 3 5 lD5|T'|51=*os> of °
HacmmiU: v lhs 'Kxf&n, "Axa^i [Vat Ax«-
pavu, Ax a h"' ^ m - m * Chr. "'•i ft-xafu&yi ;]
Alex. Kxfwri '• Hnchamoni). Two of the Bene-
Hacmoru [sons of H.] are named in these passages,
Jehiel in the former, and Jasbobkam in the lat-
ter. Hachmon or Hachmoni was no doubt the
founder of a family to which these men belonged :
the actual father of Jashobeam was Zabdiel (1 Chr.
xxvii. 2), and be is also said to have belonged to
the Korhitea (1 Chr. xii. 6), possibly the Levites
descended from Korali. But the name Hachmon
nowhere appears in the genealogies of the Levites.
In 2 Sam. xxiii. 8 the name is altered to the Tach-
eemonite. [Tachmonite.] See rlennicott, Ditt.
pp. 79, 82, who calls attention to the fact that
names given in Chronicles with Ben are in Sam
uel given without the fieri, but with the definite
article. 6.
HA/DAD OnO [tharpntst, Gesen., power-
ful, Ffirst]: 'AUS.'^Mtp,] Xovody: Badad).
This name occurs frequently in the history of the
Syrian and Edomite dynasties. It was originally
the indigenous appellation of the sun among the
Syrians (Macrob. Salurnal i. 23; Flin. xxxvii. 11),
and was thence transferred to the king, as the
highest of earthly authorities, in the forms Hadad,
Ben-hadad (" worshipper of Hadad";, and Hadad-
ezer ("assisted by Hadad," Gesen. The*, p. 218).
The title appears to hare been an official one, like
Pharaoh ; and perhaps it is so used by Nicolaus Da-
mascenus, as quoted by Josephus (Ant. vii. 5, § 2),
in reference to the Syrian king who aided Hadad
eser (2 Sam. viii. 6). Josephus appears to have
used the name in the same sense, where he substi-
tutes it for Benhadad (Ant ix. 8, § 7, compared
with 2 K. xiii. 24). The name appears occasionally
in the altered form Hadar (Gen. xxv. 15, xxxvi. 89,
sompared with 1 Chr. 1. 30, 60).
*• ["HO: Xor8dV, Alex. Xo38a8: Badad.]
The first of the name " was a son of Ishmael (Gen.
xxv. 15 [Hadab, 1]; 1 Chr. i. 30). His descend-
ants probably occupied the western coast of the
Persian Gulf, where the names AUtri (Ptol. vi. 7,
1 15), Attent, and Chateni (Plin. vi. 82) bear af-
Jnlty to the original name.
a. T. is derived from 'he LXX. .it and to* Tnlnte
set. 8ae Jerome's explanation, " ad petram, id ass, ad
i locum," in his Qwssi. Htbr. ad lee.
HADAD-EIMMOH
2- ("Tin [braee, one who throws himself against
the enemy,' Dietr. : *A8d>: Adad].) The second
was a king of Ldom, who gained nn hnportan.
victory over the Midianitea on the field of Moak
(Gen. xxxvi. 35; 1 Chr. i. 48): the position of his
territory is marked by his capital, Avith. [A vrra.]
3 - DTD I'KSii: Adad].) The third was alas
a king of Edom, with Pau for his capital (1 Chr.
i. 50). [Pau.] He was the last of the kings:
the change to the dukedom is pointedly connected
with his death in 1 Chr. i. 51. [Hadab, 2.]
*• ("OH i'AStp: Adad].) The last of the
name was a member of the royal house of Edom
(1 K. xi. 14 ft.), probably the grandson of the one
last noticed. (In ver. 17 it is given in the muti-
lated form of 1TJ?.) In his childhood he escaped
the massacre under Joab, in which his father ap-
pears to have perished, and fled with a band of
followers into Egypt. Some difficulty arises in the
account of his flight, from the words, " they arose
out of Hidian" (ver. 18). Thenius (Comm. in
loc.) surmises that the reading has been corrupted
from YfSQ to 7t"??> mi tmtt the P 1 * 08 intended
is Maon, i. e. the residence for the time being of the
royal family. Other explanations are that Midian
was the territory of some of the Midianitish tribes
in the peninsula of Sinai, or that it is the name
of a town, the MoSfara of Ptol. vi. 7, § 2: some
of the MSS. of the LXX. supply the words tt)j
wi\an before MaSidu. Pharaoh, the predecessor
of Solomon's father-in-law, treated him kindly, and
gave him his sister-in-law in marriage. After Da-
vid's death Hadad resolved to attempt the recovery
of his dominion: Pharaoh, in vain discouraged
him, and upon this he left Egypt and returned to
his own country (see the addition to ver. 22 in the
LXX. ; the omission of the clause in the Hebrew
probably arose from an error of the transcriber).
It does not appear from the text as it now stands,
how Hadad became subsequently to this an " ad-
versary unto Solomon " (ver. 14), still less bow he
gained the sovereignty over Syria (ver. 25). The
LXX., however, refers the whole of ver. 25 to him,
and substitutes for DTN (Syria), *£>*> (Edom).
This reduces the whole to a consistent and intel-
ligible narrative. Hadad, according to this account,
succeeded in his attempt, and carried on a border
warfare on the Israelites from his own territory.
Josephus (Ant. viii. 7, § 6) retains the reading
Syria, and represents Hadad as having failed in
Ins attempt on Idumaea, and then having joined
Kezon, from whom he received a portion of Syria.
If the present text is correct, the concluding words
of ver. 26 must be referred to Kezon, and be con-
sidered as a repetition in an amplified form of the
concluding words of the previous verse.
W.L.B.
H AD ADE'ZER ("ffyTTO : i 'A8s«*C*V>
in both MSS.; [in 1 K.,Rom. •AtaS4(tp; Vs*.
Atpatpa(ap; Alex. ASaSffcs: Adartztr]), 2 Sam.
viii. 3-12; 1 K. xi. 23. [Hadabxzek.]
HA'DAD-RIM'MON (fan "n_7 [aw
infra] : nmrrbs fioavos '• Adadrvmm) is, accord
a «Th» Initial letter Is diflerant from that of the
which follow. The proper distinction would b»
Digitized by
Google
HADAB
ear to the ordinary interpretation of 2ech. xfl. 11,
a plaee In the valley of Megiddo, named after two
Syrian idols, where a national lamentation wu held
far the death of king Joaiah in the la»t of the four
peat battles (aee Stanley, S. a? P. iz.) which hare
made the plain of Esdraelon famous in Hebrew
biatory (ate 3 K. xziii. 29; 3 Chr. xxxv. 33; Jo-
seph. Ant. x. 5, § 1). The LXX. translate the
word "pomegranate;" and the Greek commenta-
tors, using that version, see here no reference to
Joaiah. Jonathan, the Chaldee interpreter, fol-
lowed by Jarchi, understands it to be the name of
the son of king Tabrimon who was opposed to
Ahab at Ramoth-Gilead. But it has been taken
for the place at which Josiah died by most inter-
preters since Jerome, who states (Comm. ta Zach.)
that it was the name of a city which was called in
his time Maximiauopolis, and was not far from
JezreeL. Van de Velde (i. 355) thinks that he has
identified the very site, and that the more ancient
name still lingers on the spot. There is a treatise
by Wichmanshausen, De planclu Badadr. in the
Nae. Tha. ThtoL-phU. i. 101. W. T. B.
HATJABOTID [perh. dumber]: XoSJdV:
Hadar), a son of Ishmael (Gen. xxv. 15); written
in 1 Chr. i. 30 Badad (T1T1 : XorJdV; [Alex.
XoSSoS:] Badad); but Gesenius supposes the for-
mer to be the true reading of the name. It has
not been identified, in a satisfactory way, with the
appellation of any tribe or place in Arabia, or on
the Syrian frontier; but names identical with, or
very closely resembling it, are not uncommon in
those parts, and may contain traces of the Ish-
maelite tribe sprung from Hadar. The mountain
Hadad, belonging to Teyma [Tema] on the bor-
ders of the Syrian desert, north of EL Afedeeneh, is
perhaps the most likely to be correctly identified
with the ancient dwellings of this tribe; it stands
among a group of names of the sons of Ishmael,
containing Dumah (Doomah), Kadar (Keyddr),
and Tema ( Ttgma). E. S. P.
2. ("VJD [pern, ornament, honor], with a dif-
ferent aspirate to [from] the preceding : 'Asa's vlbs
Bafidt, Alex. KpaB • Adar). One of the kings of
Edam, successor of Baal-hanan ben-Achbor (Gen.
xxxri. 39), and, if we may so understand the state-
ment of ver. 31, about contemporary with SauL
The name of his city, and the name and genealogy
of his wife, are given. In the parallel list in 1
Chr. i. [50] he appears as Hadad. We know
from another source (1 K. xi. 14, Ac.) that Hadad
was one of the names of the royal family of Edom.
Indeed, it occurs in this very list (Gen. xxxvi. 35).
But perhaps this fact is in favor of the form Hadar
being correct in the present case: its isolation is
probably a proof that it is a different name from
the others, however similar.
HADAEE'ZEB ("IT5"]1l7 [wYose hefy u
Badad, Gas.]: 'ASm(ipi Alex'. ASeafaa, [and
so gear. Aid. FA.; Comp. genr. 'Alati(tp:\ Adar-
tier), son of Behob (3 Sam. viii. 8i; the king of
the Aramite state of Zobah, who, wade on his way
■o " establish his dominion " at the Euphrates, was
•vertaken by David, defeated with great loss both
af charicU, bones, and men (1 Chr. xviii. 3, 4),
and driven with the remnant of his force to the
aide of the river (xlx. 16). The golden
as captured on this occasion (tabw, A. V.
HADA88AH
9lt
'•shields of gold"), a thousand in number, want
taken by David to Jerusalem (xviii. 7), and ded-
icated to Jehovah. The foreign arms were pre-
served in the Temple, and were long known as king
David's (3 Chr. xxiil. 9; Cant iv. 4). [Amu;
Shelet, p. 163.]
Not daunted by this defeat, Hadarezer seised aa
early opportunity of attempting to revenge himself;
and after the first repulse of the Ammonites and
their Syrian allies by Joab, he sent his army to
the aw stance of bis kindred the people of Mnaohah,
Rehob, and Ishtob (1 Chr. xix. 16; 3 Sam. x. 15,
comp. 8). The army was a large one, as is evident
from the numbers of the slain ; and it was espe-
cially strong in horse-soldiers (1 Chr. xix. 18).
Under the command of Shophach, or Shobach, the
captain of toe host (M^n "Vff) they crossed
the Euphrates, joined the other Syrians, and en-
camped at a place called Helam. The moment
was a critical one, and David himself came from Je-
rusalem to take the command of the Israelite army.
As on the former occasion, the rout was complete:
seven hundred chariots were captured, seven thou-
sand charioteers and forty thousand horse-soldiers
killed, the petty sovereigns who had before been
subject to Hadarezer submitted themselves to Da-
vid, and the great Syrian confederacy was, for the
time, at an end.
But one of Hadarezer's more immediate retain-
ers, Kezon ben-Eliadah, made his escape from the
army, and gathering round him some fugitives like
himself, formed them into one of those marauding
ravaging "bands" (TITS)) which found a con-
genial refuge in the thinly peopled districts between
the Jordan and the Euphrates (2 K. v. 3; 1 Chr.
v. 18-23). Slaking their way to Damascus, they
possessed themselves of the city. Kezon became
king, and at once began to avenge the loss of bis
countrymen by the course of " mischief" to Israel
which he pursued down to the end of Solomon'*
reign, and which is summed up in the emphatic
words " he was an adversary (a ' Satan ' ) to Israel "
... "he abhorred Israel " (1 K. xi. 23-25).
In the narrative of David's Syrian campaign in
3 Sam. viii 3-13 this name is given as Hadad-eser,
and also in 1 K. xi. 83. But in 8 Sam. x., and in
all its other occurrences in the Hebrew text as well
as in the LXX. (both MSS.), and in Josephus, the
form Hadarezer is maintained. G.
HAD'ASHAH (H^jq [ww, Ges.]: 'A*-
atrdv, Alex. AJoffo: Badaua), one of the towns
of Judah, in the Sheftlah or maritime low-country,
named between Zenau and Migdal-gad, in the sec-
ond group (Josh. xv. 37 only). By Eusebius it is
spoken of as lying near " Taphna," i. e. Gophna.
But if by this Eusebius intends the well-known
Gophna, there must be some error, as Gophna was
several miles north of Jerusalem, near the direct
north road to Nablm. No satisfactory reason pre-
sents itself why Hadashah should not be the Adasa
of the Mftccabsean history. Hitherto it has eluded
discovery in modern times. G.
• HADES. [Dead, The; Deep, Tbbi
Hell.]
HADAS'SAH {^10. [myrffc] : t.TT
omit ; EaJia), a name, probably the earlier name,
of Esther (Esth. li 7). Gesenius (Tha. p. 366)
suggest* mat it is identical with 'Aroo-oo, tk*
name of the daughter of Cyrus.
Digitized by
Google
m
HADATTAH
HADATTAH (n^iq [w] : LXX
unit: mora). According to the A. V., one of the
town* of Judah in the extreme south — " Hazor,
Hadattah, end Kerioth, and Hezron," etc. (Josh,
xv. 26); but the Maaoret aecenta of the Hebrew
connect the word with that preceding it, as if it
were Hazor-chadattah, i. e. New Hazor, in distinc-
tion from the place of the same name in ver. 23.
This reading is expressly sanctioned by Eusebius
and Jerome, who speak ( Onom. " Asor ") of " New
Hazor " as lying in their day to the east of and
near Ascalon. (See also Kekuid, p. 708.) But
Asealon, as Kobinaon has pointed out (ii. 34, note),
is in the Skeftiah, and not in the South, and would,
if named in Joshua at all, be included in the second
division of the list, beginning at ver. 33, instead of
where it is, not far from Kedesh. G.
• Mr. Tristram (Land of Jtrcul, p. 810, 2d ed.)
speaks of some ruins in the south of Judah, on a
"brow southeast of Wad; Zuweirak, which the
Arabs said was called Hadddak." He thinks it
possible that the Hadattah of Joshua (it. 25) may
nave been there. H.
HA/DID (TTT1, $karp, possibly from its sit-
uation on some craggy eminence, Ge». Thet. 446 :
'MIS [? by comb, with preceding name, in Ear.,
AoooSi, Vat. \otapa$, Alex. AvtiW AoSattS: in
Neh. vii., AoSaSit, Vat. FA. AotaSia; in Neh. xi.,
LXX. omit:] Hadid), a place named, with Lod
(Lydda) and Ono, only in the later books of the
history (Ezr. ii. 33; Neh. vii. 37, xi. 34), but yet
to as to imply its earlier existence. In the time
of Eusebius (Onom. "Adithaim") a town called
Aditha, or Adatha, existed to the east of Dioapolis
(Lydda). This was probably Hadid. The Adida
of the Haecabean history cannot be the same place,
aa it is distinctly specified as in the maritime or
Philistine plain further south — " Adida in Sephe-
la " (1 Mace. xii. 38) — with which agrees the de-
scription of Josephus (Ant. xiii. 6, J 5). About
three miles east of Laid stands a village called ei-
BadUhth, marked in Van de Velde's map. This
s described by the old Jewish traveller ba-Parchi
it being " on the summit of a round hill," and
dentified by him, no doubt correctly, with Hadid.
See Zunz, in Aaher's Bag. of Tudtia, ii. 439.
G.
HADTiAI [2syL]C7in [retting or keeping
H&toy]: 'EAScf; [Vat Xoojf] Alex. A»8i: Adali),
man of Ephraim; father of Amass, who was one
of the chiefs of the tribe in the reign of Pekah
(2 Chr. xzviii 12).
HADCRAM (CTTHq [possibly Jirt^or-
tkippert- see Fiirst]: 'OSMi; [Alex. IapaS,
KtJoupav; Conip. 'Oto^ifi, '\tuoln^\ Aduram,
[Adoram]), the fifth son of Joktan (Gen. x. 27;
1 Chr. i. 21). His settlements, unlike those of
many of Joktan's sons, have not been identified.
Bochart supposed that the Adramitas represented
his descendants; but afterwards believed, as later
critics have also, that this people was the same as
the Chatramotitaj, or people of Hadramawt (Pha-
Ug ii. c. 17). [Hazakmavith.] Fresnel cites
• • Ds Watte's translation of then Terns (Dm
BMligt Sehrift, 1868), is mors literal, and certainly
more inteUglble : (1) " Utterance of the word of Je-
hovah against the land Hadrach, and upon Damascus
t eumss down (for Jehovah has an eye upon men,
tad all the tribes of Israel) ; (2) and also against
HADRAOH
an Arab author who identifies Hadoram with Jw
Asm (4*k LtUrt, Journ. Anatique, iii* aerie, vl
220); but this is highly improbable; nor is Uu
suggestion of Hadkoora, by Causrin (Kuai, L 30)
more likely: the latter being one of the aborigine,
tribes of Arabia, such aa 'A'd, Thamood, ete>
[Ababia.] E. S. P.
*■ (CPTTq : •Atovpdfi; [Vat lSovpaafi; FA
Itovpa/ii] Alex. Aovpau: Adoram), son of Tou or
Toi king of Hamalh; Lis father's ambassador to
congratulate David on his victory over Hadarezer
king of Zobah (1 Chr. xviii. 10), and the bearer of
valuable presents in the form of articles of antique
manufacture (Joseph.), in gold, silver, and brass.
In the parallel narrative of 2 Sam. viii. the name
is given as Joram; but this being a contraction of
Jehoram, which contains the name of Jehovah, is
peculiarly an Israelite appellation, and we may
therefore conclude that Hadoram is the genuine
form of the name. By Josephus {Ant. vii. 5, § 4)
it is given as 'ASsSpotun .
3- (Q?'lO: t'ASmnpap: [Vat -«,- ;] Alex.
ASeyxyi: Aduram.) The form assumed in Chron-
icles by the name of the intendant of taxes under
David, Solomon, and Rehoboam, who lost his life
in the revolt at Sbecbem after the coronation of the
last-named prince (2 Cbr. x. 18). He was sent by
Rehoboam to appease the tumult, possibly as being
one of the old and moderate party ; but the choice
of the chief officer of the taxes was not a happy
one. His interference was ineffectual, and be him-
self fell a victim : " all Israel stoued him with stones
that he died." In Kings the name is given in the
longer form of Adomram, but in Samuel (2 Sam.
xx. 24) as Auoiiah. By Josephus, in both thf
first and last case, he is called 'AS^poyuor.
HADRACH OSTTin [seem/i-a]: S,3pdx,
[Alex. SfOpur; Aid. with' 13 MSS. 'ASodxO Had-
rack), a country of Syria, mentioned once only, by
the prophet Zechariah, in the following words:
" The burden of the word of Jehovah in the land
of Hadrach, and Damascus [shall be] the rest
thereof: when the eyes of man, as of all the tribes
of Israel, shall be toward Jehovah. And Hamath
also shall border thereby ; Tyrus and Zidon, though
it be very wise " (ix. 1, 2)." The position of the
district, with its borders, is here generally stated,
although it does not appear, as is commonly as-
sumed, that it was on the east of Damascus; but
the name itself seems to have wholly disappeared ;
and the ingenuity of critics bag been exercised on
it without attaining any trustworthy results. It
still remains unknown. It is true that K. Jose of
Damascus identifies it with the site of an important
city east of Damascus; and Joeepb Abassi makes
mention of a place called Hadrok (wstX^)i
but, with Gesenius, we may well distrust then
writers. The vague statement of Cyril Alex, seems
to be founded on no particular facts beyond those
contained in the prophecy of Zechariah. Beside*
these identifications we can point to none that pos-
sesses the smallest claim to acceptance. Those of
Movers (Pkdna.)f Bleek, and others are purely
Hamath which borders thereon, Tyre and Sidon ; tot
It Is very wise" (comp. Bl xxvul, 811.). B.
o * Hovers does not propose any local idenuseatioa
(If that be meant here), but supposes Adark, an Assyr
Ian war-god (Milan, i. 478), to be Intended. lo
Bleak's theory, set above B.
Digitized by
Google
HAOAB
Irjauraatioal, »nd the same \nust be uid of the
theory of Alpheus [Van Alphen], in his monograph
Dt tiara Hadrach et Damateo (Traj. Rh. 1733,
referred to by Winer, s. v.). A solution of the
difficulties surrounding the name may perhaps be
found by supposing that it is derived from H*r ar.
E.S. r.
* Another oonjecture may be mentioned, namely,
that Hadrach is the name of some Syrian king
otherwise unknown. It was not uncommon for
heathen kings to bear the names of their gods.
Gesenius ( Thuaur. i. 449) favors this opinion after
Bleek. (See TheoL Stud. u. Kril. 1852, p. 968.)
Vaihinger argues for it, and attempts to show that
the king in question may hare been the one who
reigned between Benhadad III. and Rezin, about the
time of (Jzziah and Jeroboam II. (See Hera. Heal-
Encyk. v. 445. ) The data are insufficient for so defi-
nite a conclusion. Hengstenberg adopts the Jewish
symbolic explanation, namely, that Hadrach (de-
rived from TTI and T|"l = etrong-tnat) denotes
the Persian kingdom as destined, according to pro.
photic announcement, notwithstanding its power,
to be utterly overthrown. Winer ( BM. Bealw.
i. 454) speaks of this as not improbably correct.
Hengstenberg discusses the question at length un-
der the head of " The Land of Hadrach," in his
Ckritobgg of the 0. 7., iii. 371 ff. (trans. Edinb.
1858). H.
HA'GAB (3^ [foe*]: 'Ayd*: Hayab).
Bane-Hagab [sons of Hagab] wen among the Ne-
thinim who returned from Babylon with Zerubba-
bd (Ezr. ii. 48). In the parallel list in Nehemlah,
this and the name preceding it are omitted. In
the Apocryphal Eadras [r. 30] it is given as
Aqaba.
HAG'ABA (r»Jjq: <AyMi [Alex. Ayyo-
0a:] Bagaba). Bene-Hagaba were among the
Nethinim who came back from captivity with
Zerubbabel (Neh. vii. 48). The name is slightly
different in form from —
HAG'ABAH (H^jq \bcuet\ : 'KyaH ■
Bagaba), under which it is found in the parallel
bat of Ezr. ii. 45. In Esdras it is given as Graba.
HA'GAB ("ljil [fight]: -hyy: -door), an
Egyptian woman, the handmaid, ur slave, of Sarah
(Gen. zvi. 1), whom the latter gave as a concubine
to Abraham, after he had dwelt ten years in the
land of Canaan and bad no children by Sarah (xvi.
3 and 8). That she was a bondwoman is stated
both in the O. T. and in the N. T. (in the latter
as part of her typical character); and the condition
sf a slave was one essential of her position as a
legal concubine. It is recorded that "when she
•aw that she had conceived, her mistress was des-
pised in her eyes " (4), and Sarah, with the anger,
we may suppose, of a free woman, rather than of a
wife, reproached Abraham for the results of her
"wn act: "My wrong be upon tbee: I have given
ay maid into thy bosom ; and when she saw that
she had conoeived, I was despised in her eyes: Je-
hovah judge between me and thee." Abraham's
answer seems to have been forced from him by his
love for the wife of many years, who besides was his
keif-sister; and with the apparent v.ant of purpose
HAOAB
977
a It seems to be unnecessary to rnsnume (as K&llsch
ass, Ornament, on Genesu) that we have here anwuer
•sat as* AhfaJbam's stith. This expUuatlon of the
02
that he before displayed in Egypt, and afterwards
at the court of Abimelech " (in oontrast to his f.rm
courage and constancy when directed by God), ha
said, " Behold, thy maid is in thy hand ; do to bar
as it pleaseth thee." This permission was neces-
sary in an eastern household, but it is worthy of
remark that it is now very rarely given ; nor can
we think, from the unchangeableness of eastern cus-
toms, and the strongly-marked national character
of those peoples, that it was usual anciently to
allow a wife to deal hardly with a slave in Hagar's
position. Yet the truth end individuality of the
vivid narrative is enforced by this apparent depart-
ure from usage: "And when Sarai dealt hardly
with her, she fled from her face,' - turning her steps
towards her native land through the great wilder-
ness traversed by the Egyptian rood. By the foun-
tain in the way to Shur, the angel of the Lord
found her, charged her to return and submit herself
under the hands of her mistress, and delivered the
remarkable prophecy respecting her unborn child,
recorded in ver. 10-12. [Ishmakl.] " And she
called the name of the Lord that spake unto her,
Thou God art a God of vision ; for she said, Have
I then seen [i. e. lived] after vision [of God]?
Wherefore the well was called Beek-lahai-koi "
(13, 14). On her return, Hagar gave birth to
lahmarl, and Abraham was then eighty-six years
old.
Mention is not again made of Hagar in the his-
tory of Abraham until the feast at the weaning of
Isaac, when " Sarah saw the son of Hagar the
Egyptian, which she had borne unto Abraham,
mocking " ; and in exact sequence with the first
flight of Hagar, we now read of her expulsion.
" Wherefore she said unto Abraham, Cast out this
bondwoman and her son ; for the son of this bond-
woman shall not be heir with my son, [even] with
Isaac " (xxi. 9, 10). Abraham, in his grief, and
unwillingness thus to act, was comforted by God,
with the assurance that in Isaac should bis seed be
called, and that a nation should also be raised of
the bondwoman's son. In his trustful obedience,
we read, in the pathetic narrative, " Abraham rose
up early in the morning, and took bread, and a
bottle of water, and gave [it] unto Hagar, putting
[it] on her shoulder, and the child, and sent her
away, and she departed and wandered in the wil-
derness of Beersheba. And the water was spent
in the bottle, and she cast the child under one of
the shrubs. And she went, and sat her down over
against [him] a good way off, as it were a bow-
shot ; for she said, Let me not see the death of the
child. And she sat over against [him], and lifted
up her voice and wept. And God heard the voice
of the lad, and the angel of God called to Hagar
out of heaven, and said unto her, What aileth thee,
Hagar? Fear not, for God hath heard the voice of
the lad where he [is]. Arise, lift up the lad, and
hold him in thine hand, for I will make him a great
nation. And God opened her eyes, and she saw a
well of water, and sue went and filled the bottle [skin]
with water, and gave the lad to drink " (xxi. 14 -
19). The verisimilitude, oriental exactness, and
simple beauty of this story are internal evidences
attesting its truth apart from all other evidence;
and even Winer says (in alluding to the subterfuge
of skepticism that Hagar = flight — would lead to
eve=* is not required, nor does the narrmtiv* appear to
warrant It, unless Abraham regarded Hagar's son as
the heir of the promt** : nunp. (ten. xvti 18*
Digitized by
Google
978
HAGAR
the •asun.pt Ion of its being a myth), " Dm Eraig-
oiM iat io einfach und den orientalischen Sitten so
ingemesaen, das wir bier gewiss eine rein histor-
scne Sage vor una batten " (lUahoorU a. T.
•Hagar").
The name of Hagar occurs elsewhere only when
•he takes a wife to Iihmael (xxi. 21), and in the
genealogy (or. 12). St. Paul refers to her u the
type of the old covenant, likening her to Mount
Sinai, the Mount of the Law (Gal. i?. 22 if.).
In Mohammedan tradition Hagar (*3»vJC,
Elajir, or Hagir) ia repreaented aa the wife of Abra-
ham, as might be expected when we remember that
lahmael ia the head of the Arab nation, and the
reputed ancestor of Mohammed. In the same
manner she ia said to have dwelt and been buried
at Mekkeh, and the well Zemzem in the sacred in-
closure of the temple of Mekkeh is pointed out by
the Muslims aa the well which was miraculously
formed for lahmael in the wilderness. E. S. P.
* The truthfulness to nature which ia so mani-
fest in the incidents related of Hagar and lahmael
(as suggested above), bears strong testimony to the
fidelity of the narrative. See especially Gen. xvi.
6 ; xxi. 10, 11, and 14 If. Dean Stanley very prop-
erly calls attention to this trait of the patriarchal
history as illustrated in this instance, as well as
others. (Jewish Church, i. 40 ft".) See also, on
this characteristic of these early records, Blunts
Veracity of the Books of Muset. Hess brings out
impressively this feature of the Bible in his Ge-
tchichte der Patriarchea (2 Bde. Tubing. 1785). It
appears from Gal. iv. 24, where Paul speaks of the
dissensions in Abraham's family, that the jealousy
between Hagar's son and the beir of promise pro-
ceeded much further than the 0. T. relates. Rii-
etachi has a brief article on " Hagar " in Herzog's
Real-Kncyk. v. 469 f. Mr. Williams (Poly City,
1. 463-468^ inserts an extended account of the sup-
posed discovery by Mr. Rowlands of lieer-lahai-roi,
the well in the desert, at which, after her expulsion
from the house of Abraham, the angel of the I>ord
appeared to Hagar (Gen. xvi. 7 ft*. ). It is said to
be about 5 hours from Kadesh, on the way from
Beer-aheba to Kevpt, and is called Muilahhi (more
correctly .Wuwei/i'A, says Buetschi), the name being
regarded aa the same, except in the first syllable the
change of Beer. " well," for Moi, " water." Near
it ia also found an elaborate excavation in the rocks
which the Arabs call Beit- Ha gar, i. e. "house
of Hagar." Keit and DeliUsch (in Gen. xvL 14)
Incline to adopt this identification. Knobd ( Gen-
ait, p. 147) is less decided. Dr. Robinson's note
(BibL Set., 2d ed. i. 189) throws some discredit on
the accuracy of this report.
Hagar occurs in Gal. ir. 25 (T. a * A V.),
not aa a personal name (>j 'Ayap), but as a word
or local name (to "Ayap) applied to Mount Sinai
in Arabia. The Arabic »3», pronounced very
much like this name, means a "stone," and may
have been in use in the neighborhood of Sinai as
one of ifi iocs) designations. (See Meyer on Gal.
It. 25). There is no testimony that the mount
was so called out of this passage; but as Ewald
remarks respecting this point (Wachtrag in his
BemUJtreiben itei ApotteU, p. 493 ft".), Paul ia so
snoch the loss to be charged with an error here,
Inasmuch ia he himself had travelled in that part
HAGABBNK8
of Arabia, and as an apostle, had remained thus) i
long time." (See Gal. i. 17 f.) Some oonjeccun
that this name was transferred to the mountain from
an Arabian town so called, where, according to one
account, Hagar is said to have been buried. But,
on the other hand, it ia not certain that to "Ayap
really belongs to the Greek text, though the weight
of critical opinion affirms it (see Meyer, ia foe.).
The questions both aa to the origin of the name
and the genuineness of the reading are carefully
examined in Lightfoot's Commentary on Galatiamt
(pp. 178, 189 ff. 2d ed.), though perhaps he un-
derstates the testimony for to "Ayap. H.
HAGABE'NES, HAGARITES (D^JH
D'W-ljn: 'Ayapi)in(, 'Ayapcuoi, [etc.:] Ago.
rem, Ayarei), a people dwelling to the east of Pal
estine, with whom the tribe of Reuben made was
in the time of Saul, and " who fell by their hand,
and they dwelt in their tents throughout all the
east [land] of Gilead " (1 C'hr. v. 10); and again.
in ver. 18-20, the sons of Reuben, and the Gaditea
and half the tribe of Manaaseh " made war with
the Hagarites, with Jetur, and Nephish, and No-
dab, and they were helped against them, and the
Hagarites were delivered into their hand, and aD
that were with them." The spoil here recorded to
have been taken shows the wealth and importance
of these tribes; and the conquest, at least of the
territory occupied by them, was complete, for the
Israelites " dwelt in their steads until the Captivity "
(ver. 22). The same people, as confederate against
Israel, are mentioned in Ps. lxxxiii. : "The tab-
ernacles of Edom and the Ishinaelites ; of Moah
and the Hagarenes; GebaL Amnion, and Amalek;
the Philistines with the inhabitants of Tyre; Aaaut
also is joined with them; they have holpen the
children of Lot " (ver. 6-8).
Who these people were is a question that cannot
readily be decided, though it is generally believed
that they were named after Hagar. Their geo-
graphical position, as inferred from the above pas-
sages, was in the " east country," where dwelt the
descendants of Isbmael; the occurrence of the
names of two of his sous, Jetur and Nephish (1
Chr. v. 19), as before quoted, with that of NodaJh,
whom Gesenius supposes to be another son (though
he is not found in the genealogical lists, and must
remain doubtful [Nodab]), seems to indicate that
these Hagarenes were named after Hagar; but in
the passage in Ps. lxxxiii., the Ishmaelites are ap-
parently distinguished from the Hagarenes (cf. Bar.
iii. 23). May they have been thus called after a
town or district named after Hagar, and not only
because they were her descendants 7 It is neediest
to follow the suggestion of some writers, that Hagar
may have been the mother of other children after
her separation from Abraham (as the Bible and
tradition are silent on the question), and it ia in
itself highly Improbable.
It is also uncertain whether the important town
and district of Herfer (the inhabitants of which
were probably the same as the Agrsei of Steabo, xrl
p. 767, Dionyt. Perieg. 956, Plin. vi. 32, and Ptol
v. 19, 2) represent the ancient name and a dwell'
ing of the Hagarenes; but it is reasonable to agn
pose that they do. Bejer, or Hejera ( ^S3Jt
indeclinable, accorling to Yakoot, Mmhtarak, a. »
but
also, aooordin f to Kdmoot. wiVjC,
Digitized by
Google
HAGEKITE
r write it), b the capital town and alio
subdivision of the province cf no-theaatem
Arabia called ELBahrtyn, or, as some writers »ay,
the name of the province itaelf (Mushtirak and
Mardnd, a. v.), on the borders of the Persian Gulf.
It k a low and fertile country, frequented foi its
abundant water and pasturage bj the wandering
tribes of the neighboring deserts and of the high
bad of Nejd. For the Agrssi, see the Dictitmary
of Geography. There is another Hejer, a place
near El-Medeeueh.
The district of Hajar ( «ifc ), on the borders
of Desert Arabia, north of ELMe&eauh, has been
thought to possess a trace, in its name, of the Ha-
garenee. It is, at least, less likely than Hejer to
do so, both from situation and etymology. The
tract, howe v er, is curious from the caves that it is
reported to contain, in which, say the Arabs, dwelt
the old tribe of Thamood.
Two Hagarites are mentioned in the 0. T. : see
MiMt.YK and Jaziz. E. S. P.
HA'GEBITE, THE 0*3?'?!? : & 'Ayaplr^s;
[Vat. rop«m|i:] Agaretu). Jaziz the Hagerite,
i. t. the descendant of Hagar, had the charge of
David's sheep O'HS, A. V. "flocks; " 1 Chr. xxvii.
31). The word appears in the other forma of Ha-
GAsmm and Hagarkxks.
HAGGAI [3oyL] Pjn rjestwe] : 'Aryowt;
[Sin. Ayytot in Hag., except inscription, and so
Ale*, in the inser. of Ps. cxlv.-cxlviii. :] Aygam),
the tenth in order of the minor prophets, and first
sf those who prophesied after the Captivity. With
regard to hia tribe and parentage both history and
tradition are alike silent. Some, indeed, taking
in its literal sense the expression flirt? TJN/P
(malac y'hdtAk) in i. 13, hare imagined that' he
■as an angel in human shape (Jerome, Comm. in
be.). In the absence of any direct evidence on
the point, it is more than probable that he was one
af the exika who returned with Zerubbabel and
Joshua; and Ewald (Die Proph. d. Alt. B.) is
even tempted to infer from ii. 3 that he may have
been one of the few survivors who had seen the first
temple in its splendor. The rebuilding of the
temple, which was commenced in the reign of Cyrus
(a. c. 935), was suspended during the reigns of
ba successors, Cambyses and Pseudo-Smerdis, in
smswmcDce of the determined hostility of the Sa-
■aaritana. On the accession of Darius Hystaspis
(a. c. 691), the prophets Haggai and Zechariah
urged the renewal of the undertaking, and obtained
the permission and assistance of the king (Ear. v.
1, vi. 14; Joseph. Ant. xi. 4). Animated by the
sjgb courage (mayni ipirilut, Jerome) of these de-
voted men, the people prosecuted the work with
vigor, and the temple was completed and dedicated in
the aviti year of Darius (b. c. 516). According to
u»^<i~. Haggai was born in Babylon, was a young
■an when be came to Jerusalem, and was buried
•ah honor near the sepulchres of the priests (Isidor.
EuesaL o. 49; Poeudo-Dorotheus, in Chrtm. Patch.
•41 d). It has hence been conjectured that he was
# priestly rank. Haggai, Zechariah, and Mabclii,
iccor dlu g to the Jewish writers, were the men who
•are with Daniel when he saw the vision related
a Din. x. 7 ; and were after the Captivltj mem-
lea of the Gnat Synagogue, which consisted of
I (Ow, til. 65). The Seder Ohm Hula
HAGGA. 979
places their death in the 52d year of the Medst
and Persians; while the extravagance of anotha
tradition makes Haggai survive till the entry of
Alexander the Great into Jerusalem, and even till
the time of our Saviour (Carpzov, JtUrod.). In
the Roman Martyrology Hosea and Haggai are
joined in the catalogue of saints (Ada Sanctor.
4 Julii). The question of Haggai's probable con-
nection with the authorship of the book of Ezra
will be found fully discussed in the article under
that head, pp. 805, 806.
The names of Haggai and Zechariah are asso-
ciated in the LXX. in the titles of Ps. 137, 145-
148; in the Vulgate in those of Ps. Ill, 145; and
in the Peahito Syriac in those of Ps. 125, 136, 145,
146, 147, 148. It may be that tradition assigned
to these prophets the arrangement of the above-
mentioned psalms for use in the temple service, just
as Ps. lxiv. is in the Vulgate attributed to Jere-
miah and Ezekiel, and the name of the former is
inscribed at the head of Ps. cxxxvi. in the LXX.
According to Pseudo Epiphanius (rfe Has Proph.),
Haggai was the first who chanted the Hallelujah
in the second temple: "wherefore," he adds, "we
say ' Hallelujah, which is the hymn of Haggai and
Zechariah.' " Haggai is mentioned in the Apoc-
rypha as Aggecs, in 1 Esdr. vi. 1, vii. 3 ; 2 Esdr.
i. 40; and is alluded to in Ecclus. xlix. 11 (cf. Hag.
U. 33) and Heb. xii. 36 (Hag. ii. 6).
The style of his writing is generally tame and
prosaic, though at times it rises to the dignity of
severe invective, when the prophet rebukes his
countrymen fur their selfish indolence and neglect
of God's house. But the brevity of the prophecies
is so great, and the poverty of expression which
characterizes them so striking, as to give rise to a
conjecture, not without reason, that in their present
form they are but the outline or summary of the
original discourses. They were delivered in the
second year of Darius Hystaspis (b. c. 520), at
intervals from the 1st day of the 6th month to the
24th day of the 0th month in the same year.
In his first message to the people the prophet
denounced the listlessneas of the Jews, who dwelt
in their "panelled houses," while the temple of
the Lord was roofless and desolate. The displeas-
ure of God was manifest in the failure of all their
efforts for their own gratification. The heavens
were "stayed from dew," and the earth was
" stayed from her fruit." They had neglected that
which should have been their first care, and reaped
the due wages of their selfishness (i. 4-11). The
words of the prophet sank deep into the hearts of
the people and their leaders. They acknowledged
the voice of God speaking by his servant, and
obeyed the command. Their obedieuce was re-
warded with the assurance of God's presence (i.
13), and twenty- four days after the building was
resumed. A month had scarcely elapsed when the
work seems to have slackened, and the enthusiasm
of the people abated. The prophet, ever ready to
rekindle their zeal, encouraged the flagging spirits
of the chiefs with the renewed assurance of God's
presence, and the fresh promise that, stately and
magnificent as was the temple of their wisest king,
the glory of the latter house should be greater than
the glory of the former (ii. 3-9). Yet the people
were still inactive, and t wo months afterwards we
find him agaiu censuring their sluggishness, whi m
rendered worthless all their ceremonial observances.
But the rebui j was accompanied by a repetition
of the promise (ii. 10-W On the same day, las
Digitized by
Google
980
IXA'JGBRI
fo«r-eiid-tweutietli of the ninth month, the prophet I
lefhrered his lut prophecy, addressed to ZerubbaleL
pnnce of Judah, the representative of the royal
family of David, and aa such the lineal ancestor of
the Meaaiah. This dosing prediction foreshadows
die establishment of the Messianic kingdom upon
-he overthrow of the thrones of the nations (ii.
n- 5 *)- W. A. W.
• For the later exegetical works on the prophets
which include Haggai, see under Habakkuk.
Keil gives a list of the older commentaries or mon-
ographs in his Le/irb. dtr hist. hit. Aini in d.
A. T. p. 308 (2te Aufl.). Oehler treats of the
prophet's personsl history in Herzog's RtaUKncyk.
v. 471 f. Bleek (AM in dot A. Tttt. p. 649)
sgrees with those (Ewsld, Hiivemick, Keil) who
think that Haggai lived long enough to see both
the first and the second temples. On the Mes-
sianic passage of this prophet (ii. 0-9), the reader
may consult, in addition to the commentators,
Hengstenberg, Chriitotogy of the 0. T. lii. 243_
871 (Keith's trans.); Ham, (Jetchkhte de$ Allen
Bundtt, p. 303 ff.; Smith, J. P., Scripture Tee-
ItmMj, to the Mttriah, i. 283 ff. (6th ed. Lond.
1869); and Tholuck, Die Pr,jJ,eten u. Hue Wei*,
ugungen (Star Abdruck), p. 156, a few words only.
a
HAGGERI C-lJr, i. t. Hagri, a llagnrite:
'AW; [Vat, FA. -,,„;] Alex. AtoooI: Agarai).
" Mibiiab son of Haggeri " was one of the mighty
men of David's guard, according to the catalogue
of 1 Chr. xi. 38. The parallel passage — 2 Sam.
ixlil.36 — has "Usui the Gadite"0T3n). This
Kennicott decides to have been the original, from
which Haggeri has been corrupted (UUurt. p.
»H). The Targum has Bar Gedd (rTja 13).
HAG'GI Can [futive]: 'Ayyfr, Alex. Ay
yt.r; [In Num., W, Vat. -y„:] Haggi, Aggi),
second son of Gad (Gen. xlvi. 16; Num. xxvi. 15),
founder of the Haggites Oann). It will be ob-
served that the name, though given as that of an
individual, is really a patronymic, precisely the same
as of the family.
HAGGl'AH (njan [festival of Jehovah] :
'Ayyta; [Vat, Ajia-'] Unggia), a Levite, one of
the descendants of Merari (1 Chr. vi. 30).
HAG'GITES, THE ("anil : f 'Ayyt ;
[Vat. y,i:] Agiia), the family sprung from
Haggi, second son of Gad (Num. xxvi. 15).
HAG'GITH CVan, a dancer: > A yyt6;
Alex. ♦«»>,«, Ayi», [A7«9,] AyysifJ; [Vat. ♦«•*-
W.'?' Ayy««0 Joseph. 'kyylOn: Ilaggith, Ag-
gitti), one of David's wives, of whom nothing is
told us except that she was the mother of Adonijah,
who is commonly designated as " the son of Hag-
rith " (2 Sam. iii. 4; 1 K. 1. 5, 11, ii. 13; 1 Chr.
Hi. 2). He was, like Absalom, renowned for his
handsome presence. In the first and last of the
bove passages Haggith is fourth in order of men-
Jon among the wives, Adonijah being also fourth
unong the sons. His birth happened nt Hebron
(2 Sam. Hi. 2, 5) shortly afto< that of Absalom (1
*.. L 6: where it will be observed that the words
bis mother " are inserted by the translators).
G.
HA'GIA ('Ayut i'Ayii, Bos, Holmes A Par-
amtj : A/gia), 1 Esdr. v. 34. [Hattu.1
HAIB
HAT (*5n [the rfone^,, or ruim): 'Ay
yal: /Sri), The form in which the weH-knowi
place At appears in the A. V. on its first intro-
duction (Gen. xil. 8; xiii. 3). It arisrs from ths
translators having in these places, and these only
recognised the definite article with which Ai is
invariably and emphatically accompanied in the
Hebrew. [More probably it comes from the Vul-
gate.— A.]. In the Samaritan Version of the
above two passages, the name is given in the first
Amah, and in the second Cephrah, as if Cepiii-
rah. g
•HAIL. [Plagues, The T*n; Skow.J
HAIB. The Hebrews were fully alive to the
importance of the hair as an element of personal
beauty, whether as seen in the " curled locks, black
as a raven," of youth (Cant. v. 11), or in the
" crown of glory " that encircled the bead of old
age (Prov. xvi. 31). The customs of ancient na-
tions in regard to the hair varied considerably : the
Egyptians allowed the women to wear it long, but
kept the heads of men closely shaved from early
childhood (Her. ii. 30, iii. 12; Wilkinson's Ancient
Egyptians, ii. 327, 328). The Greeks admired
Grecian manner of wearing the hair. (Hope's Cos-
)
long hair, whether in men or women, as is evi-
denced in the expression Kapnuonowms 'Axaiof,
and In the representations of their divinities, es-
pecially Bacchus and Apollo, whose long locks were
a symbol of perpetual youth. The Assyrians also
wore it long (Her. i. 196), the flowing curls being
gathered together in a heavy cluster on the back,
ss represented in the sculptures of Nineveh. The
Hebrews, on the other hand, while they encouraged
the growth of hair, observed the natural dis-
tinction between the sexes by allowing the women
to wear it long (Luke vii. 38; John xi. 2; 1 Cor.
xi. 8 ff.), while the men restrained theirs by fre-
quent clippings to a moderate length. This differ-
ence between the Hebrews and the surrounding
nations, especially the Egyptians, arose no doubt
partly from natural taste, but partly also from legal
enactments. Clipping the hair in a certain manner
and offering the locks, was in early times connected
with religious worship. Many of the Arabians
practiced a peculiar tonsure in honor of Iheir God
Orotal^ (Her. lii. 8, Kttoorrat wsaiTpexoAo, wr
ftivpovrrts roiti KparAQavt), and hence the He-
brews were forbidden to " round the corners (nt4£,
lit. the extremity) of their heads" (Lev. xix. 27),
meaning the locks along the forehead and temples]
and behind the ears. This tonsure is described in
the LXX. by a peculiar expression aurbn (=ths
classical arKitpiof), probably derived from the He-
brew n , 2 , S (oomp. Bochart, Cbis. 1. «, p. 379X
That the practice of the Arabians was well knows
to the Hebrews, appears from the gpresstoi
, " 1 J?P "&*Si?i rounded at to At fools, by »h'#
Digitized by
Google
HAIR
twy an described (Jer. ix. 96; xxv. 23; xIU. 39 :
ass marginal translation of the A. V.)- Tha pro-
hibition against cutting off the hair on the death
of a relathe (Deut. ziv. 1) waa piibably grounded
on a similar reason. In addition to these regula-
tions, the Hebrews dreaded baldness, as it waa fre-
quently the result of leprosy (Lev. xiii. 40 ft". ), and
hence formed one of the disqualifications for the
priesthood (Lev. zzi. 20, LXX.). [Baldness.]
The rule imposed upon the priests, and probably
followed by the rest of the community, was that
the hair should be petted (D5$, Ex. xliv. 90),
neither being shaved, nor allowed to grow too long
(Lev xxi. 6; Es. £ c). What was the precise
length usually worn, we have no means of ascer-
taining; but from various expressions, such as
WVh jnj, lit. to let bote the head or the hair
(=»ofeere crinti, Virg. JSn. iii. 65, xi. 35; demit-
sos htgentu more cnptUia, Ov. Ep. x. 137) by un-
binding the head-band and letting it go disheveled
(Lev. x. 6, A. V. " uncover your heads "), which
was done in mourning (cf. Ex. xxi v. 17); and
•gain 1IN n?J, to uncover the ear, previous to
making any communication of importance (1 Sam.
a. 2, 18, xxii. 8, A. V., margin), as though the
hair fell over the ear, we may conclude that men
•ore their hair somewhat longer than is usual with
as. The word 3H5, used as = hair (Num. vl. 5;
Ex. xliv. 20), is especially indicative of its free
yrotrtA (cf. Knobd, Comm. in Lev. xxi. 10). I-oiig
bair was admired in the case of young men ; it is
especially noticed in the description of Absalom's
person (2 Sam. xiv. 26), the inconceivable weight
of whose hair, as given in the text (200 shekels),
has led to a variety of explanations (comp. Har-
mer's Obtertationt, iv. 321), the more probable
being that the numeral 3 (80) has been turned into
1 (200): Josephus (Am. vii. 8, J 6) adds, that it
was cut every eighth day. The hair was also worn
long by the body-guard of Solomon, according to the
same authority (Ant. viii. 7, $ 3, itnuiarat *o0c i-
fUrot xairos). The care requisite to keep the hair
in order in such cases must have been very great,
and hence the practice of wearing long hair was
unusual, and only resorted to as an act of religious
observance, in which case it was a " sign of humil-
iation and self-denial, and of a certain religious
slovenliness " (Lightfoot, ExereiL on 1 Cor. xi. 14),
sod was practiced by the Nazarites (Num. vi. 6;
Judg. xiii. 5, xvi. 17; 1 Sam. i. 11), and occa-
sionally by others in token of special mercies (Acts
xviii. 18); it waa not unusual among the Egyptians
when on a Journey (Diod. i. 18). [NAZAMTi:.]
In times of affliction .the hair was altogether cut oft'
(la. iii. 17, 24, xv. 2, xxii. 12; Jer. vii. 29, xlviii.
37; Am. viii. 10; Joseph. B. J. ii. 16, J 1), the
practice of the Hebrews being in this respect the
rererse of that of the Egyptians, who let their hair
from long in time of mourning (Herod, il. 36),
having their heads when the term was ovtr (Gen.
tli. 14r, but resembling that of the Greeks, as fre-
quently noticed by dasaical writers (e. g. Soph. Aj.
H74; Eurip. Electr. 143, 941). Tearing the hair
Bar. ix. 8) and letting it go disheveled, as already
wticed, were similar tokens of grief. rMotRSiwo.]
the practice of the modem Arabs in regaid to the
«agth of their hair varies; generally the u.an allow
t to craw its natural length, the tresses banging
HAIR
981
down to the hreatt and sometime) to the waist, af-
fording substantial protection to the head and rack
against the violence of the sun's rays (Burckhardt's
IfoUt, i. 48; Wellsted's Travels, i. 33, 53, 73).
The modern Egyptians retain the practices of their
ancestors, shaving the heads of the men, but suffer-
ing the women's hair to grow long (line's Mod.
Egypt, i. 52, 71). Wigs were commonly used by
the latter people (Wilkinson, ii. 324), but not by
the Hebrews: Josephus ( Vii. § 11) notices an in-
stance of false hair (repiBrrb k6^v) being used for
the purpose of disguise. Whether the ample ring-
lets of the Assyrian monarchs, as represented in
the sculptures of Nineveh, were real or artificial, is
doubtful (Layard's Nineveh, ii. 828). Among thr
Medes the wig was worn by the upper classes (Xsa
Cyrop. I. 8, J 9).
Igvpwan Wigs. (Wilkinson.)
The usual and favorite color of the hair was black
(Cant. v. 11 ), as is indicated in the comparisons to
a "flock of goats" and the •'tents of Kedar"
(Cant. iv. 1, i. 6): a similar hue is probably in-
tended by the purple of Cant. vii. 6, the term being
broadly used (as the Greek rotxpiptot in a similar
application— ufoar, Anscr. 28). A fictitious hut
was occasionally obtained by sprinkling gold-dust
ou the hair (Joseph. Ant. viii. 7, § 3). It does
not appear that dyes were ordinarily used; the
"Carniel" of Cant vii. 5 has been understood
aa=Vo"1S (A. V. "crimson," margin) with-
out good reason, though the similarity of the words
may have suggested the subsequent reference to
purple. Herod is said to have dyed his gray hair
for the purpose of concealing his age (Ant. xvi. 8,
§ 1), but the practice may have been borrowed from
the Greeks or Romans, among whom it was com-
mon (Aristoph. Ecclet. 736; Martial, Ep. iii. 43;
Propert. ii. 18, 94, 96): from Matt. v. 86, we may
infer that it was not usual among the Hebrews.
The approach of age was marked by a tprMltmg
(FT'Ji Hos. vii. 8 ; comp. a similar use of tpargere,
Propert. iii. 4, 24) of gray hairs, which soon over-
spread the whole head (Gen. xiii. 88, xliv. 99; 1
K. ii. 6, 9; Prov. xvi. 31, xx. 89). The reference
to the almond in Eccl. iii. 5, has been explained
of the white blossoms of that tree, as emblematic
of old age: it may be observed, however, that the
color of the flower la pink rather than white, and
that the verb in that passage, according to high
authorities (Gesen. and Hitdg), does not bear the
sense of blossoming at all. Pure white hair was
deemed characteristic of the Divine Majesty (Dan.
vii. 9; Rev. 1. 14).
Tie chief beauty of the hair consisted in curia,
whether of a natural or artificial character. Tits
Hebrew terms are highly expressive: to omit the
won rrcpV,-- rendered "locks" in Cant. iv. 1,
3, vi. 7, and Is xlvli. 9, but more probably mean
mg a teUy — we have ubpfyPl (Cant, v. 11),
properly pendulous flexible boughs (seeordhig U
Digitized by
Google
083 HAIB
'Ms IXX , ixircu the shoots of the palm-tiee
which supplied an Image of the coma pttutula ,
liS^S (Fx. vili. 3), a similar image borrowed from
the curve of a blossom : pJJ7 (Cant iv. 9), a lock
felling over the shoulders like a chain of ear-pendants
(sa imw nine colli tui, Vulg., which is better than
the A. V., " with one chain of thy neck ") ; C^CTT)
(Cant. vii. 5, A. V. "galleries"), properly the
channels by which water was brought to the flocks,
which supplied an image either of the comajtuens,
or of the regularity hi which the locks were ar-
ranged; n^7 (Cant. vii. 5), again an expression
for coma penduia, borrowed from the threads hang-
ing down from an unfinished woof; and lastly
ntfpB n(pyp (Is. iii. 24, A. V. « well set
hair "), properly plaited work, i. e. gracefully curved
locks. With regard to the mode of dressing the
hair, we have no very precise information ; the
terms used are of a general character, as of Jezebel
(3 K. ix. 30), 2£>\PI, i e. the adorned her head;
of Judith (x. 3), Sitrat t, i. e. arranged (the A. V.
has " braided," and the Vulg. discriminant, here
used in a technical sense in the reference to the
oUscriminalm or hair-pin); of Herod (Joseph. Ant.
xiv. 8, § 4), k<cmt/ium4cVm tiJ trvvBitrti ti)j xiuris,
and of those who adopted feminine fashions (B. J.
Iv. 9, J 10), «<{pa{ irvrSm(6fityoi. The terms
used in the N. T. (v\iy/iaaiy, 1 Tim. ii. 9;
ipTKoierii Tpix&y, I I'et. ill. 3) are also of a gen-
eral character; Schleusner (Lex. s. r.) understands
them of curling rather than plaiting. The arrange-
ment of Samson's hair into seven locks, or mora
troperly braids (fllDbrlD, from *)b|n, to inter-
■orptlan Wlp. (vTUkmson.)
a-tipot, LXX.j Judg. xvi. 13, 19), to-
be (notice of plaiting, which was also
HAKKATAN
familiar to the Egyptians (Wilkintin, II 881) as*
Greeks (Horn. II xir. 176). The locks wen prob-
ably kept in their place by a fillet, as in Eirrut
(Wilkinson, /. a).
Ornaments were worked into the hair, as prac-
ticed by the modern Egyptians, who " add to each
braid three black silk cords with little ornaments
of gold " (Lane, i. 71): the LXX. understands the
term DTO^ (Is. iU. 18, A. V. "cauls"), as
applying to such ornaments (iurKixia); Schrocder
{at Vest. Uul lleb. cap. 2) approves of this, and
conjectures that they were sun-shaped, i. e. circular,
as distinct from the " round tires like the moan,"
i. t. the crescent-shaped ornaments used for neck-
laces. The Arabian women attach small bells to
the tresses of their hair (Niebuhr, Voyage, i. 133).
Other terms, sometimes understood as applying
to the hair, are of doubtful signification, e. a.
D'tp^CJ (Is. iii. 23: new: "crisping-ping"),
more probably purses, as in 2 K. v. 23 ; D^tsTp.
(Is. iii. 20, "head-bands"), bridal girdles, accord!
ing to Schrocder and other authorities; C"]K5
(Is. iii. 20, discriminalia, Vulg. i. e. pins used for
keeping the hair parted ; cf. Jerome in Rvftn. iii.
cap. ult.), more probably turbans. Combs and
hair-pins are mentioned in the Talmud : the Egyp-
tian combs were made of wood and double, one side
having Urge, and the otner small teeth (Wilkinson,
ii. 343); from the ornamental devices worked on
them we may infer that they were worn in the hair.
With regard to other ornaments worn about the
head, see Hkad-drkss. The Hebrews, like other
nations of antiquity, anointed the hair profusely
with ointments, which were generally compounded
of various aromatic ingredients (Ruth iii. 3 : 2 Sam.
xiv. 2; Pt. xxiii. 6, xlv. 7, xcii. 10; Eccl. ix. 8;
la. iii. 2+) ; more especially on occasion of festivities
or hospitality (Matt. ri. 17, xxvi. 7; Luke vii. 46;
cf. Joseph. Ant. xix. 4, § 1, xpuriumt uipoti
tt)k Ktipa\^r, it Awo avvovalat)- It is perhaps
in reference to the glossy appearance so imparted
to it that the hair is described as purple (Cant
vii. 5).
It appears to have been the custom of the Jews
in our Saviour's time to swear by the hair (Matt,
v. 86), much as the Egyptian women still swear by
the side-lock, and the men by their beards (Lane,
L S3, 71, notes).
Hair was employed by the Hebrews as ac image
of what was least valuable in man's person (1 Sam.
xiv. 46; 2 Sam. xiv. 11; 1 K. i. 62; Matt x. 30;
Luke xii. 7, xxi. 18; Acts xxvii. 84); as wel) u
of what was innumerable (Ps. xl. 12, lxix. 4); or
particularly Jine (Judg. xx. 16). In Is. vii. 20, it
represents the various productions of the field, treat
crops, etc. ; like Spos KtKopnpivov (>A» of Callim
Dian. 41, or the humus comavs of Stat Thtb. v.
602. Hair " as the hair of women " (Rev. ix. 8),
meant long and undressed hair, which in later
times was regarded as an image of barbaric rode-
ss (Hengstenberg, Comm. in he.).
W. L. B.
HAKTCATAN Qlffifi [the small or young];
'AmtaTdj'; [Vat Anarar:] Eccetan). Johanaa,
eon of Hakkatan, was the chief of the Bnne-Asgwl
[sons of A.] who returned from Babylon with Eat
(Ezr. viii. 13). The name is probably Ratan, wit)
the definite article prefixed. In the Apoerypba
Etdrat it is At at am.
Digitized by
Google
HAKKOZ
HAK'KOZ (VN^H [the thorn}: i KoS>;
[Camp.] Alex. 'AkkcIs- Accoi), a priest, the chief
rf the seventh course in the service of the sanctuary,
•a appointed by David (1 Chr. xxiv. 10). In Ear.
D. 61 the name occurs again as that of a family of
priests; though here the prefix is taken by our
translators — and no doubt correctly — as the
definite article, and the name appears as Koz.
The same thing also occurs in Neh. iii. 4, 21. In
Eadras Accoz.
HAKUTHA (H^TQ [bent, cwoked, Gee.;
tndltmait, Fiirst] : 'AroueVi, 'Ax"M ! [Vat.
Aftixa, Ax««*oi FA. in Neh., Anions:] Hacu-
l>ha). Bene-Chakupha [sons of C] were among
the families of Nethinim who returned from baby-
Ion with Zerubbabel (Err. ii. 61 ; Neh. vii. 63).
In Esdras (1 Esdr. v. 31) the name is given as
Acipha.
HAXAH (n^CI : 'AKai, Xodxi [Alex. AA-
Aoe, AAm, XaAa:] llala, [Laheln]) is probably a
different place from the Calah of Gen. x. 11. [See
Calah.] It may with some confidence be identi-
fied with the Chalcitis (XoA«?rir) of Ptolemy (v.
18), which he places between Anthemusia (cf. Strab.
xri. 1, § 87) and Gauzanitis." The name is thought
to remain in the modern Gla, a large mound on
the upper Khnbour, above its junction with the
Jerujer (Layard, Nin. and Bab. p. 313, note; 2
K. [xvii. 6,] xviii. 11; 1 Chr. v. 36). G. K.
HAXAK, THE MOUNT (with the article,
p^nn 1Tir\ = tlie $mooth mountain: tfoiroi
XtK%i\ [Vat. in Josh. xL, aAck;] Alex. AAok,
or AAo«: part moiUit), a mountain twice, and
twice only, named as the southern limit of Joshua's
conquests — " the Mount Halak which goeth up to
Seii " (Josh. xL 17, xii. 7), but which has not yet
been identified — has not apparently been sought
for — by travellers. Keil suggests the line of chalk
din's which cross the valley of the Ghor at about 6
miles south of the Dead Sea, and form at once the
southern limit of the Ghor and the northern limit
of the Arabah. [Arabah, p. 135 a.] And this
suggestion would be plausible enough, if there were
any example of the word har, " mountain," being
applied to such a vertical cliff as this, which rather
answers to what we suppose was intended by the
term Sela. The word which is at the root of the
name (supposing it to be Hebrew), and which has
the force of smoothness or baldness, has ramified
into other terms, as Helkah, an even plot of ground,
Ike those of Jacob (Gen. xxxiii. 19) or Naboth (3
K. ix. 36), ar that which gave its name to Helkath
hat-txurim, the " field of the strong" (Stanley,
JVpp. J 20). G.
•HALE (Luke xii. 68; Acts viH. 3) is the
jriglnal form of "haul," sometimes stffi used in
formal discourse In both the above passages it
-neana to drag men by force before magistrates,
rhat is the import also of the Greek terms (Kara-
slip]! * na ' <ripm>). H.
HAI/HUL (VlTlbn 1/uU of hoSoa,,
Punt]: Above!; [Vat. AAova;] Alex. AaovJ.-
ffalhul), a town of Judah in the mountain district,
no of toe group containing Beth-ctr ind 3edor
« • tT.ns says (ffior. La. a. v.) (bat the tunsd
in Is m s lids the plan to be Haitian, a Ave days'
HALL
(Josh. xr. 68). Jerome, in the Oixmuutiam (ana*
Elul), reports the existence of a hamlet (yUkda)
named " Alula," near Hebron. 6 The name still
remains unaltered, attached to a conspicuous hill
a mile to the left of the road from Jerusalem to
Hebron, between 3 and 4 miles from the latter.
Opposite it, on the other side of the road, is Beit-
tur, the modern representative of Beth-zur, and a
little further to the north is Jitter, the ancient
Gedor. [Beth-zur.] The site is marked by the
ruins of walls and foundations, amongst which
stands a dilapidated mosk bearing the name of
Ntby Yunm — the prophet Jonah (Kob. i. 216).
In a Jewish tradition quoted by Hettinger ( Cippi
ffebraici, p. 32) it is said to be the burial-place of
Gad, David's seer. See also the citations of Zuna
in Asher's Bcnj. of Tudcla (ii. 437, note). G.
HAXI ( ,; ?n [necklace] : 'AA4>i Alex. OoA«:
Chati), a town on the boundary of Asher, named
between Helkath and Beten (Josh. xix. 26). Noth-
ing is known of its situation. Schwarz (p. 191)
compares the name with Cbelmon, the equivalent
in the Latin of Cyamoh in the Greek of Jud.
vii. 3. G.
HALICARNAS'STJS CAXiicdpvaeoos) in
Caria, a city of great renown, as being the birth-
place of Herodotus and of the later hintoruui Diony-
sius, and as embellished by the Mausoleum erected
by Artemisia, but of no Biblical interest except as
the residence of a Jewish population in the periods
between the Old and New Testament histories. In
1 Mace. xv. 23, this city is specified as containing
such a population. The decree in Joseph. Ant. xiv.
10, § 23, where the Romans direct that the Jews
of Halicaniassus shall be allowed rat wpootvx&i
wouurStu wpbs rp 0oAdWp Kara to w&rpiov Wot,
is interesting when compared with Acts xvi. 13.
This city was celebrated for its harbor and for the
strength of its fortifications; but it never recovered
the damage which it suffered after Alexander's
siege. A plan of the site is given in Roes, Jteiten
aufdtn Uriech. Inteln. (See vol. iv. p. 30.) The
sculptures of the Mausoleum are the subject of a
paper by Mr. Newton in the Clauicnl Museum,
and many of them are now in the British Museum.
The modern name of the place is Budr&m.
J. S. II
* See particularly on Halicamassus the impor-
tant work of Mr. Newton, History of Ditcoveriu at
Halicarnattut, Cnidut, and Branchida, 2 vols,
text and 1 vol. plates, London, 1862-63. A.
HALLELTJ'JAH. [Alleluia.]
HALL (o6\t): atrium), used of the court of
the high-priest's house (Luke xxii. 66). A&Arj is
in A. V. Matt. xxvi. 69, Mark xiv. 66, John xvili.
16, "palace;" Vulg. atrium ; xpoai\iw, Mark
xiv. 68, "porch;" Vulg. ante atrium. In Matt
xxvii. 27 and Mark xr. 16, a&ki) is syn. with
vpairiptov, which in John xviii. 28 is in A. V.
"judgment-hail." AuAfj is the equivalent fbi
"l?n, an inclosed or fortified space (Ges. p. 612),
in many places in 0. T. where Vulg. and A. V.
have respectively villa or vicutut, "village," o>
atrium, " court," chiefly of the tabernacle or temple.
The hall or court of a house or palace would prob-
ably be an inclosed but uncovered space, imptuviun,
» It Is not unworthy of nottee that, thoncb. so fiu
from Jerusalem, Jerome speaks at* It as " in
tttsti
Digitized by
Google
984 HALLOHESH
an a lower level than the apartments of the lowest
loor which looked into it. The rpoaiXiar waa the
vestibule leading to it, called also, Matt, zzvi 71,
ru\rfa>. ICoukt, Anier. ed.; House.]
H. W. P.
HAXLOTJESH (trrffrn [the ichiqxrer,
enchanter] : *AA*W)i; Alex. A(a>: Aloha), one of
the " chief of the people ' ' who sealed the covenant
with Nehraniah (Neh. z. 84). The name it Locheah,
with the definite article prefixed. That it U the
name of a family, and not of an individual, appears
probable from another passage in which it U given
in the A. T. as
HALOHESH (»mVn [as above]: *AA-
\ariji; [Vat. FA. HA«i«:j Aloha). Shallum, son
of Hal-lochesh, was "ruler of the half part of
Jerusalem " at the time of the repair of the wall
by Nehemiah (Neh. iii. IS). According to the
Hebrew spelling, the name is identical with Hal-
lohkmi. [The A. V. ed. 1611, following the
Genevan version, spells the name falsely Halloesh.
-A.]
HAM (.Oil [ucarthy] : Xd>: Cham). 1. The
name of one of the three sons of Noah, apparently
the second in age. It is probably derived from
□Sin, "to be warm," and signifies "warm" or
" hot." This meaning seems to be confirmed by
that of the Egyptian word Kkm (Egypt), which
we believe to be the Egyptian equivalent of Ham,
and which, as an adjective, signifies " black," prob-
ably implying warmth as well as blackness.
[Egypt.] If the Hebrew and Egyptian words be
the same, Ham must mean the swarthy or sun-
burnt, like A/Woifs which has been derived from
the Coptic name of Ethiopia, eOCMCIJ, but
which we should be inclined to trace to ©OCtJ, "a
boundary," unless the Sshidic eOCBJJJ may be
derived from Keesb (Cush). It is observable that
the names of Noah and his sons appear to have
had prophetic significations. This is stated in the
ease of Noah (Gen. v. 39), and implied in that of
Japheth (ix. 27), and it can scarcely be doubted
that the same must be concluded as to Shetn.
Ham may therefore have been so named as pro-
genitor of the sunburnt Egyptians and Cushites.
Of the history of Ham nothing is related except
his irreverence to his father, and the curse which
that patriarch pronounced — the fulfillment of which
is evident in the history of the Hamites.
The sons of Ham are stated to have been " Cush
and Mizraim and Phut and Canaan" (Gen. x. 6;
oomp. 1 Chr. i. 8). It is remarkable that a dual
form (Mizraim) should occur in the first generation,
Indicating a country, and not a person or a tribe,
and we are therefore inclined to suppose that the
gentile noon in the plural D ,- l ?C, differing alone
m the pointing from D'?''D, originally stood
here, which would be quite' consistent with the
plural forma of the names of the Mizraite tribes
which follow, and analogous to the singular forms
sf the names of the Canaanite tribes, except the
Sidomans, who are mentioned not as a nation, but
tnder the name of their forefather Sidon.
The name of Ham alone, of the three sons of
el, if our identification be correct, is known to
basa given to a country. Egypt Is recognized
HAM
as the " land of Ham" in the Bibb (Pa. h.'<ffl
51, cv. Si), cvi. 23), and this, though it does not
prove the identity of the Egyptian name with thai
of the patriarch, certainly favors it, and establishes
the historical fact that Egypt, settled by the de-
scendants of Ham, was peculiarly his territory.
The name Mizraim we believe to confirm this. The
restriction of Ham to Egypt, unlike the case, if we
may reason inferentialiy, of his brethren, may be
accounted for by the very early civilization of this
part of the Hamite territory, while much of the
rest was comparatively barbarous. Egypt may also
have been the first settlement of the Hamites
whence colonies went forth, as we know to have
been the ease with the Philistines. [Capiitor.]
The settlements of the descendants of Cush have
occasioned the greatest difficulty to critics. The
main question upon which everything turns is
whether there was an eastern and a western Cush,
like the eastern and western Ethiopians of the
Greeks. This has been usually decided on the
Biblical evidence as to the land of Cush and the
Cushites, without reference to that as to the several
names designating in Gen. x. bis progeny, or, ex-
cept in Nimrod's case, the territories held by it, or
both. By a more inductive method we have been
led to the conclusion that settlements of Cush ex-
tended from Babylonia along the shores of the
Indian Ocean to Ethiopia above Egypt, and to the
supposition that there was an eastern as well as a
western Cush : historically the latter inference must
be correct; geographically it may be less certain
of the postdiluvian world. The ancient Egyptians
applied the name Kfesh, or Resit, which is
obviously the same as Cush, to Ethiopia above
Egypt The sons of Cush are stated to hare been
Seba, Havilah, Sabtah, Kaamah, and Sabtechah : it
is added that the sons of Raamah were Sheba and
Dedan, and that " Cush begat Nimrod." Certain
of these names recur in the lists of the descendants
of Joktan and of Abraham by Keturah, a circum-
stance which must be explained, in most cases, as
historical evidence tends to show, by the settlement
of Cushites, Joktanites, and Abrahamites in the
same regions. [Arabia.] Seba is generally identi-
fied with Meroe, and there seems to be little doubt
that at the time of Solomon the chief kingdom of
Ethiopia above Egypt was that of Seba. [Seba.]
The postdiluvian Havilah seems to be restricted to
Arabia. [Havilah.] Sabtah and Sabtechah are
probably Arabian names : this is certainly the case
with Kaamah, Sheba, and Dedan, which are rec-
ognized on the Persian Gulf. [Sabtah; Sab-
techah; Raamah; Sheba; Dedan.] Nimrod
is a descendant of Cush, but it is not certain that
he is a son, and his is the only name which is
positively personal and not territorial in the list of
the descendants of Cush. Tbe account of his first
kingdom in Babylonia, and of the extension of his
rule into Assyria, and the foundation of Nineveh —
for this we take to be the meaning of Gen. x. 11,
12 — indicates a spread of Hamite colonists along
the Euphrates and Tigris northwards. [Cush.]
If, as we suppose, Mizraim in the lists of Gen. x
and 1 Chr. I. stand for Mizrim, we should take the
singular Mazor to be the name of the progeniuw
of the Egyptian tribes. It is remarkable that Maze
appears to be identical in signification with Ham.
so that it may be but another name of the patri
arch. [Egypt.] In this case the mention of Mb
ralm (or Mizrim) would be geographical, and bo
indicative of a Mazor, son of Ham.
Digitized by
Google
HAM
The Mbraites, like the descendants of Ham,
asaem a territory wider than that bearing the name
jf Wtiajm. We may, hcwever, suppose that Mia-
raim included all the first settlements, and tbat in
remote times other tribe* beeidea the Philistine!
migrated, or extended their territories. This we
nay infer to hare been the can wito the Lehabim
(Lubim) or Libyans, for Hanetho speaks of them
u in the remotest period of Egyptian history sub-
ject to the Pharaohs. He tells us that under the
first king of the Third Dynasty, of Memphitee,
Neeherophes, or Necherochis, "the Libyans re-
lolted from the Egyptians, but, on account of a
wonderful increase of the moon, submitted through
rev" « (Cory's Anc Frag. 9d ed. pp. 100, 101).
It is unlikely that at this very early time the
Memphite kingdom ruled far, if at all, beyond the
western boundary of Egypt.
The Ludhn appear to have been beyond Egypt
to the west, so probably the Anaroim, and certainly
the Lehabim. [Ludim ; Anamim ; Lehabim.]
The Naphtubim seem to have been just beyond the
western border. [Naphtuhim.] The Pathrusim
and Caphtorim were in Egypt, and probably the
Casluhim also. [Pathbos; Caphtob; Caslu-
him.] The Philistiin are the only Hizraite tribe
that we know to have passed into Asia: their first
establishment was in Egypt, for they came out of
Oaphtor. [Caphtob.]
Phut has been always placed in Africa. In the
Bible, Phut occurs as an ally or supporter of Egyp-
tian Thebes, mentioned with Cueh and Lubim
(Nah. iii. 9), with Cush and Ludim (the Mizraite
Ludim?), as supplying part of the army of Pha
raoh-Neeho (Jer. xlvi. 9), as involved in the calam-
ities of Egypt together with Cush, Lud, and Chub
[Chob] (Ex. xxx. 5), as furnishing, with Persia,
Lud, and other lands or tribes, mercenaries for the
service of Tyre (xxvii. 10), and with Persia and
Cush as supplying part of the army of Gog (xxxviii.
5). There can therefore be little doubt that Phut
is to be placed in Africa, where we find, in the
Egyptian inscriptions, a gnat nomadic people cor-
responding to it. [Phut.]
Respecting the geographical position of the
Canaanites there is no dispute, although all the
names are not identified. The Hamathitea alone
of those identified were settled in early times wholly
beyond the land of Canaan. Perhaps there was a
primeval extension of the Canaanite tribes after
their first establishment in the land called after
their ancestor, for before the specification of its
limits as those of their settlements it is stated
"afterward were the families of the Canaanites
anad abroad " (Gen. x. 18, 19). One of their
Miost important extensions was to the northeast,
where was a great branch of the Hittite nation in
the valley of the Orontee, constantly mentioned in
the wars of the Pharaohs [Egypt], and in those
9f the kings of Assyria. Two passages which have
occasioned much controversy may be here noticed.
In the account of Abraham's entrance into Pales-
line it is said. " And the Canaanite [was] then in
the land" (xii. 8); and as to a somewhat later
hue, that of the separation of Abraham and Lot,
we read that "the Canaanite and the Perizri'e
dwelled then in the land" (xiil. 7). These pat-
«£ss have been supposed either to be late glosses,
• It has been supposed that some or all of the
•otfaas of emits In Manetho's Hsu woe Inserted by
This cannot, we think, hav» been the eass
HAM 986
or to Indicate that the Pentateuch was written ss ■
late period. A comparison of all the passages re-
ferring to the primitive history of Palestine and
Idunuea shows that there was an earlier population
expelled by the Hamite and Abrahamite settlers.
This population was important in the time of the
war of Chedorlaomer; but at the Exodus, mora
than four hundred years afterwards, there was but
a remnant of it. It is most natural therefore to
infer that the two passages under consideration
mean that the Canaanite settlers were already in
the land, not that they were still there.
, Philologers are not agreed as to a Hamitic class
of languages. Recently Bunaen has applied the
term " Hamitiam." or as be writes it Chamitiiwn,
to the Egyptian language, or rather family. He
places it at the head of the " Semitic stock," to
which be considers it as but partially belonging,
and thus describes it: — " Chamitiam, or ante-his-
torical Semitism: the Chamitic deposit in Egypt;
its daughter, the Demotic Egyptian ; and its end
the Coptic "( Outline*, vol. i. p. 183). Sir H. Raw-
linson has applied the term Cushite to the primitive
language of Babylonia, and the same term has been
used for the ancient language of the souther* coast
of Arabia. This terminology depends, in every in-
stance, upon the race of the nation speaking the
language, and not upon any theory of a Haraitio
clam. There is evidence which, at the first view,
would incline us to consider that the term Semitic,
as applied to the Syro-Arabic class, should be
changed to Hamitic ; but on a more careful exami-
nation it becomes evident that any absolute classi-
fication of languages into groups corresponding to
the three great Noachian families is not tenable.
The Biblical evidence seems, at first sight, in favor
of Hebrew being classed as a Hamitic rather than
a Semitic form of speech. It is called in the Bible
" the language of Canaan," 1?3? HStP (Is. xix.
18), although those speaking it are elsewhere said
to speak fTTKTJ, Judaic* (2 K. xviii. '26. 28;
Is. xxxvi. 11, 13;' Neb. xiii. 24). But the one
term, as Gesenius remarks (Gram. In trod), indi
cates the country where the language was spoken,
the other as evidently indicates a people by whom
it was spoken: thus the question of its being a
Hamitic or Semitic language is not touched ; for
the circumstance that it was the language of Ca-
naan is agreeable with its being either indigenous
(and therefore either Canaanite or Kephaite), or
adopted (and therefore perhaps Semitic). The
names of Canaanite persons and places, aa Gese-
nius has observed (L c), conclusively show that the
Canaanites spoke what we call Hebrew. Elsewhere
we might find evidence of the use of a so-called
Semitic language by nations either partly or wholly
of Hamite origin. This evidence would favor the
theory that Hebrew was Hamitic; but on the other
hand we should be unable to dissociate Semitic
languages from Semitic peoples. The Egyptian
language would also offer great difficulties, unless it
were held to be but partly of Hamitic origin, since
it is mainly of an entirely different class to [from]
the Semitic. It is mainly Nigvitian, but it also
contains Semitic elements. We are of opinion that
the groundwork is Nigritian, and that the Semitic
part is a layer added to a complete N.'gritian Ian-
wits most of -hose notices that occur m the oktw
•/Wades.
Digitized by
Google
988
HAH
nage- Il> two element* in mixed, bat not had.
This opinion than Semitic scholars who have
■tudied the subject •hare with at. Some Iranian
scholars hold that the two element* are mixed, and
that the ancient Egyptian represents the transition
from Turanian to Semitic The only solution of
the difficulty seems to be, that what we call Semitic
is early Noachian.
An inquiry into the history of the Hamite na-
tions presents considerable difficulties, since it can-
not be determined in the cases of the most impor-
tant of those commonly held to be Hamite that
they were purely of that stock. It is certain that
the three most illustrious Hamite nations — the
Cuatites, the Phoenicians, and the Egyptians —
were greatly mixed with foreign peoples. In Baby-
lonia the Hamite element seems to hare been ab-
sorbed by the Sbemite, but not in the earliest times.
There are some common characteristics, however,
which appear to connect the different branches of
the Hamite family, and to distinguish them from
the children of Japbeth and Shem. Their archi-
tecture has a solid grandeur that we look for in
vain elsewhere. Egypt, Babylonia, and Southern
Arabia alike afford proofs of this, and the few re-
maining monuments of the Phoenicians are of the
same class. What is very important as indicating
the purely Hamite character of the monuments to
which we refer is that the earliest in Egypt are the
most characteristic, while the earlier in Babylonia
do not yield in this respect to the later. The na-
tional mind seems in all these cases to have been
[represented in ?] these material forms. The early
history of each of the chief Hamite nations shows
great power of organizing an extensive kingdom, of
acquiring material greatness, and checking the in-
roads of neighboring nomadic peoples. The Philis-
tines afford a remarkable instance of these qualities.
In every case, however, the more energetic sons of
Sbem or Japbeth have at last fallen upon the rich
Hamite territories and despoiled them. Egypt,
favored by a position fenced round with nearly im-
passable barriers — on the north an almost haven-
less coast, on the east and west sterile deserts, held
Its freedom far longer than the rest ; yet even in
the days of Solomon the throne was filled by for-
eigners, who, if Hamites, were Shemite enough in
their belief to revolutionize the religion of the coun-
try. In Babylonia the Hedes had already captured
Nimrod's city more than 2000 years before the
Christian era. The Hamites of Southern Arabia
were so early overthrown by the Joktanites that
the scanty remains of their history are alone known
to us through tradition. Yet the story of the mag-
nificence of the ancient kings of Yemen is so per-
fectly in accordance with all we know of the Ham-
ites that it is almost enough of itself to prove what
other evidence has so well established. The history
|f the Canaanites is similar; and if that of the
r'houidans be an exception, it must be recollected
that they became a merchant class, as Ezekiel's
famous description of Tyre shows (chap, xxvii). In
speaking of Hamite characteristics we do not in-
tend it to be inferred that they were necessarily
altogether of Hamite origin, and not at least partly
arrowed. *• s> **•
1. (OH [multitude, people, Futst], Gen. xiv. 6;
San.. DTT, CTiim) According to the Masoretic
salt, Chedorlaomer and his allies smote t!ie Zuxlm
B a place called Ham. If, at seems likely, the
HAMATH
Zuzux be the aime as the ?«"■—■»■»■— Us*
must be placed in what was afterwards the Austat-
nite territory. Hence it has been conjectured bj
Tuch, that Ham is but another form of the namt
of the chief stronghold of the children of -tfmmoo,
Kabbah, now Am-aaa. The LXX. and Vulg,
however, throw some doubt upon the Masoretic
reading: the former has, as tl» rendering of
DTJJl OnSrtn-nr*! : Kt i «„ Urxypa fa air
Tois\ and the latter, el Zuxim cum eis, which
shows that they read DH^l : but the Mas. ren-
dering seems the more likely, as each clause men-
tions a nation, and its capital or stronghold ; al-
though it must be allowed that if the Zuxim had
gone to the assistance of the Kephaim, a deviation
would have been necessary. The Samaritan Version
hat ntD^ V, LithaJi, perhaps intending the Lasha
of Gen. x. 19, which by some is identified with
CaUirboD on the N. E. quarter of the Dead Sea,
The Targums of Onkekw and Pteudojon. have
KTUpn, Hernia. Sehwarz (21T) suggests Humei-
math (in Van de Velde's map Himeitat), one mile
above Rabba, the ancient Ar-Moab, on the Roman
road. [Zuzmg.]
3. In the account of a migration of the Simeon-
ites to the valley of Gedor, and their destroying the
pastoral inhabitants, the latter, or possibly their
predecessors, are said to have been "of Ham"
(Cn~1Q : U rm> vtaw Xa>: de ttirpe Cham, 1
Chr. iv. 40). This may indicate that a Hamite
tribe was settled here, or, more precisely, that there
was an Egyptian settlement The connection of
Egypt with this part of Palestine will be noticed
under Zekah. Ham may, however, here be in no
way connected with the patriarch or with Egypt.
HA'MAN (len [celebrated (Pen.), or =
Mercury (Sansk.), Fiirst] : Aptly: A man), the chief
minister or vizier of king Ahasuerus (Esth. iii. 1).
After the failure of his attempt to cut off all the
Jews in the Persian empire, be was banged on the
gallows which be had erected for Mordecai. Host
probably he is the tame Aman woo it mentioned
at the oppressor of Achiacharus (Tob. xiv. 10).
The Targum and Josephus (Ant. xi. 6, § 5) inter-
pret the description of him — the Agagite — at
signifying that he was of Amalekitith descent ; but
he is called a Macedonian by the LXX. in Esth.
ix. 21 (cf. iii. 1), and a Persian by Sulpicius Seve-
rus. Prideaux (Connexion, anno 453) computet
the sum which he offered to pay into the royal
treasury at more than .£2,000,000 sterling. Mod-
ern Jews are said to be in the habit of designating
any Christian enemy by his name (hisenruenger
Kni. Juil. i. 721). [See addition under Esther,
Book of.] W. T. B
HATMATH (DOrl [fortriu, citadel] :
'H/Mul, 'Hfult), AlfiiS: Emadi) appears to have
been the principal city of Upper Syria from tb<
time of the Exodus to that of the prophet Amos.
It was situated in the valley of the Orontea, about
half-way between its source near Baalbek, siid tot
bend which it makes at JUr-haditL It thus uatu*
rally commanded the whole of the Orontea valley
from the low screen of hills which forms the water
sbed between the Orontes and the lMtty —tin
"entrance of Hamath," as it is called in Scripture
(Num. xxxiv. 8; Josh. xiii. S, Ac.) — to the defilf
Digitized by
Google
HAMATE HAMAPH 987
rf Daphne below Antioch and this tn»ol appears following reasons: (1.) The northern boundary of
to have formed the kingdom of Hamath, during the Israelites wu certainly nortli of lUblah, for the
ihe time of its independence. east border descends from Hasar-euau to Sbepham,
The Hamathites vure a Hamltic race and are and from Shopham to Riblah. Eiblah is still
included among the descendants of Canaan (Gen. known by its ancient name, and is found south of
I. 18). There is no reason to suppose witn Mr. Hums I<ake about six or eight hours. The "en-
Kenrick {Phanicin, p. 60), that they were ever in trance " must therefore lie north of this town. (2.)
any sense Phoenicians. We must regard them as It must lie east of Mount Hor. Now, if Mount
closely akin to the Ilittites on whom they bordered, Hor be, as it probably is, the range of Lebanon.
and with whom they were generally in alliance.
Nothing appears of the power of Hamath, beyond
the geographical notices which show it to be a well-
known plioe (Num. xiii- 21, xxxiv. 8; Josh. xiii.
5 ; 4c ), until the time of David, when we hear
that Toi, king of Hamath. had " had wars " with
Hadadezer, king of ZoUah, and on the defeat of
the latter by David, sent his son to congratulate
the Jewish monarch (2 Sam. viii. 1*), and (appa-
rently) to put Hamath under his protection. Ha-
math seems clearly to have been included in the
dominions of Solomon (1 K. iv. 21-4); and its king
was no doubt one of those many princes over whom
that monarch ruled, who "brought presents and
served Solomon all the days of his life." The
" store-cities," which Solomon " built in Hamath "
(2 Chr. viii. 4), were perhaps staples for trade, the
importance of the Oruntes valley as a line of traffic
being always great. On the death of Solomon and
the separation of the two kingdoms, Hamath
seems to have regained its independence. In
the Assyrian inscriptions of the time of Ahab
(b. c. 900) it appears as a separate power, in
alliance with the Syrians of Damascus, the
Ilittites, and the Phoenicians. About three-
quarters of a century later Jeroboam the sec-
ond "recovered Hamath " (2 K. xiv. 38); he
seems to have dismantled the place, whence
the prophet Amos, who wrote in his reign
(Am. i. 1 ), couples '• Hamath the great "
with Gath, as an instance of desolation (ib. vi.
2). Soon afterwards the Assyrians took it (2
hi. xriii. 34, xix. 13, Ac), and from this time
it ceased to be a place of much importance.
Antiochus Epiphanes appears to have changed
ita name to Epiphaneia, an appellation under
which it was known to the Greeks and Komana
from his time to that of St. Jerome ( Com-
ment, in Eztk. xlvii. 16), and possibly later.
The natives, however, called it Hamath, even
in St. Jerome's time ; and its present name,
Hamah, is but very slightly altered from the
ancient form.
Burekhardt visited Bamnh in 1812. He
describes it as situated on both sides of the _,
Orontes, partly on the declivity of a hill,
partly in the plain, and as divided into four
quarters — Hiullirr, El Uj'ui; El Alt}) it, and J
El MaKne, the last being the quarter of the ;
Christians. The population, according to |
him, was at that time 30,000. The town J
p os se sse d few antiquities, and was chiefly re-
markable for its huge water-wheels, whereby
the question is readily solved by a reference to the
physical geography of the region. The ranges of
Lebanon and Anti-Lebanon terminate opposite
Hums Lake by bold and decided declivities. There
is then a rolling country for a distance of about
ton miles north of the l«banon chain, after which
rises the lower range of the Nusairlyeh mountain]
A wider space of plain intervenes between Arti
I^banon and the low hills which lie eastward of
Hamath. The city of Hums ties at the intersec-
tion of the arms of the cross thus formed, and
toward each of the cardinal points of the compass
there is an " entering in " between the hills.
Thus northward the pass leads to Hamath ; west-
ward to Kulat tl-l/tun and the Mediterranean:
eastward to the great plain of the Syrian desert:
and southward toward Baal-gad in Ccele-Syria.
This will appear at a glance from the accompany-
ing plan of the country, in which it will be seen
__„ around Hums, showing the " entrance to Hamath.'*
the gardens and the houses in the upper town
were supplied from the Orontea. The neighboring that the plain of Hums opens to the four points of
territory he calls " the granary of Northern Syria" the compass. Especially to one journeying from
( Trateli in Syria, pp. 140-147. See also Pococke, the south or the west would this locality be appro-
Trnvdt m the Eatt, voL i.; Irby and Mangles, priaiely described as an entrance. (3.) It is im-
Tiavtit, p. 144; and Statu/, S. d- P. vp. 406, probable that the lands of Hamath ever extended
(07). G. R. as far south as the height of land between the.
* The •' entrance of Hamath " is not is stated, Le~ntes and the Orontea, or in fact into the south-
It the water-shed between the lAAny am? 'ha era division of Ccele-Syria at all. Hums would
■Ms, which would place it too for south, for the hare teen its natural limit from the sea, to otas
Digitized by
Google
988 HAMATHITE, THB
ioonieyinc, along the coast from Tripoli to I*-
*kla. J.«haiionaiuI the Nuseirtyeh range are seen
x profile, with the gap between them. A similar
new ii presented from the remaining cardinal
P "* 5. k. P.
em A M M I v H
HA'MATHITE, THB (V"«",nn: e'Aast
ii: Amatham, ffamaUtaut), one of 'the fa~m-t
desce n ded from Canaan, named last In the Bat
(Gen. x. 18; IChr. L16). The place of their sst-
tlement wai doubtless Hakath.
Niuairiysli alts
Entrance to °™fli
theW.
HAMATH-ZCBAH (na'iy-njpfj .
Bo«r«-fld; [Alex. A^urf Sa/Sa'.] ^nwrt-i-afciVu
ss:d to have been attacked and conquered by Sol-
omon (3 Chr. viii. 3). It hu been conjectured to
be the same as Hamath, here regarded at included
in Aram-Zobah — a geographical expression which
has usually a narrower meaning. But the name
Hamath-Zubah would seem rather suited to an-
other Haniath which was distinguished from the
" Great Hamatb," by the suffix "Zobah." Com-
pare Ramoth-Gifcad, which is thus distinguished
from Ramab in Benjamin. G. R.
• HAMITAL, 2 K. xxiii. 81, is the reading
of the A. V. ed. 1611 for Hamutal. jL
HAMTHATH (/T$n [warm wring] : -fl^A.
i8<u# — the last two syllables a oomiption of the
jame following; [Alex. Aueto; [AM. 'AWeO
iwiart), one of the fortified cities in the territory
Ulotted to Naphtali (Josh. xix. 85). It U not
visible from this list to determine its position,
out the notices of the Talmudists, collected by
Lightfoot in his Chorographical Century, and
Ckor. Decad, leave no doubt that it was near Ti-
berias, one mile distant — in fact that it had its
name, Cbammath, "hot baths," because it con-
tained those of Tiberias. In accordance with this
are the slight notices of Josephus, who mentions it
under the name of Emmaus as a " village not far
(fftSprj . . . oiiK Ihra-eW) from Tiberias" (Ant.
iviii. 2, § 8), and as where Vespasian had en-
camped " before (wprf) Tiberias " (B. J. iv. 1, § 8).
Remains of the wall of this encampment were rec-
ognized by Irby and Mangles (p. 89 ft). In both
»ses Josephus names the hot springs or baths, add-
ng in the latter, that such is the interpretation of
he name 'hmioovs , and that the waters are me-
'icinal. The Jfammdnt, at present throe ■ in
lumber, still send up their hot and sulphureous
waters, at a spot rather more than a mile south of
the modern town, at the extremity of the ruins of
the ancient city (Rob. ii. 883, 884; Van de Velde.
u. 899).
It is difficult, however, to reconcile with this
position other observations of the Talmudists,
-uoted on the same place, by Lightfoot, to the
inert that Chammath was called also the " wells
of Gadara," from its proximity to that place, and
also that half toe town was on the east side of the
Jordan and bah* on the west, with a bridge between
•*•»» — the fact bring that the ancient Tiberias
Mr. Porter (Hmdb. far Syr. tf Pal. II. 422)
.rfftvur springs: one under the old bath-hons*.
was at least 4 miles, and the Hammam 8,, from
the present embouchure of the Jordan. The same
difficulty besets the secount of Parchi (in Zunx'a
Appendix to Benjamin of Tudeb, ii. 403). He
places the wells entirely on the east of Jordan.
In the list of Levities! cities given out of Naph-
tali (Josb. xxL 32), the name of this place seems
to be given as Hammoth-dok, and in 1 Chr. vi.
76 it is further altered to Hahmoh. O.
HAMMED ATHA (NTI"""? PT : , A^a8d*o,;
[Alex. Aro/Baflaooj, ApaBatot'i] AmadalMu),
lather of the infamous Hunan, and commonly des-
ignated as "the Agagite" (Esth. iii. 1, 10; riiL
5; ix. 24), though also without that title (ix. 10).
By Gesenius (Lex. 1855, p. 639) the name U taken
to be Hedatha, preceded by the definite article.
For other explanations, see Fiirst, Hrtndwb. [Zend,
=given by Baomo, an ted], and Simoois, Ono-
matticon, p. 586. The latter derives it from a Per-
sian word meaning " double." For the termination
compare Abidatha.
HAMME7JECH Cq^PI [the Idngy. „ C
PaaiKiuf. AmeJech), rendered in the A. V. as
a proper name (Jer. xxxvi. 26; xxxviii. 6); but
there is no apparent reason for supposing it to be
anything but the ordinary Hebrew word for " the
king," i. e. in the first case Jeboiakim, and in the
latter Zedekiah. If this is so, it enables us to con-
nect with the royal family of Judah two persons,
Jerachmeel and Malciah, who do not appear in the
A. V. as members thereof. Q.
HAMMER. The Hebrew language has sev-
eral names for this indispensable tooL (1.) PatStk
(B*' ,| "*)B, connected etymologically with rardWw,
U> Krike), which was used by the gold-beater (Is!
xH. 7, A. V. " carpenter") to overlay with silver
and "smooth" the surface of the image; as well
as by the quarry-man (Jer. xxiii. 29). (2.) Male
"MA (n?i?e [»nd n5|9p]), properly a tool for
hollowing, hence a stone-cutter's mallet (1 K. vi.
7), and generally any workman's hammer (Judg.
iv. 21; Is. xliv. 12; Jer. x. 4). (8.) Halmitl
(rfiD?""!). used only in Judg. t. 26, and thee
with the addition of the word •• workmen's " b»
way of explanation. (4.) A kind of hammer
named mappitt ("/BO), Jer. Ii. 20 (A. V. "battle-
axe "), or mephlU (^BO), Ptor. xxv. 18 (A. V
and three others a lew psoas farther sooth (si
Bob. BM. Ret. ffl. 259J.
Digitized by
Google
HAMMOLEKE1H
«eatal "), wh used as a weapon of war. "Ham-
Mr" ii uted flgurativelv for any overwhelming
power, whether worldly iJer. 1. 33), or spiritual
(Jer. xxiii. 19 [comp. Heb. It. 13]). W. L. B.
* From i"t^j7Q cornea Maccabeus or Haocahee
[Maccabees, tbb]. The hammer used by Jael
(Judg. T. 36) wai not of iron, but a wooden mal-
let, such ai the Arabs uae now for driving down
their tent-pins. (See Thomson'! Land and Book,
ii. 149.) In the Hebrew, it it spoken of at " the
hammer," at being the one kept for that purpose.
The nail driven through Sisera's templet wat also
one of the wooden tent-pint. This particularity
points to a scene drawn from actual lift. It is said
in 1 K. vi. 7 that no sound of hammer, or axe, or
any iron tool, was heard in building the Temple,
because it " was built of stone made ready " at the
quarry. The immense cavern under Jerusalem,
where undoubtedly most of the building material
of the ancient city wat obtained, furnishes inci-
dental confirmation of this statement. " The heaps
of chipping! which lie about show that the stone
was dressed on the spot. . . , There are no other
quarries of any great size near the city, and in the
reign of Solomon this quarry, in its whole extent,
was without the limits of the city " (Barclay's City
of the Great King, p. 468, 1st ed. (1866)). See
also the account of this subterranean gallery in the
Ordnance Survey nfJenualem, pp. 63, 64. H.
HAMMOLE'KETH (."13^2 <?. *>ti> the
article = Ike Queen: 4, MaA<xtt : Begina), a
woman introduced in the genealogies of Manssseh
as daughter of Maehir and sister of Uilead (1 Chr.
vii. 17, 18), and as having among her children
Abi-ezkb, from whose family sprang the great
judge Gideon. The Targnm translates the name
by fipblp '!I=-wAo reigned. The Jewish tra-
dition, as preserved by Kimchi in hit commentary
on the passage, it that " she used to reign over a
portion of the land which belonged to Gilead,"
and that for that reason her lineage hat been pre-
HAMULITE8, THB
989
HAMTttON (Pan [hot or tunny]: ['E^e-
poanv;] Alex. Apmri ffamm). 1. A city in
Asber (Josh. xix. 38), apparently not far from Zi-
don-rabbah, or " Great Zidon." Dr. Schultx sug-
gested its identification with the modern village of
Hawaii, near the coast, about 10 miles below Tyre
(Bob. iii. 66), but this it doubtful both in etymology
tod position.
3. [XeuuU; Alex. Xsuusk.] A city allotted
wt of the tribe of Naphtali to the Levitea (1 Chr.
vi. 76), and answering to the somewhat similar
names Hammath and Hammoth-dur in Joshua.
G.
HAM'MOTH-DOR' ("ft^T r!llTJ [warm
sprvu/i, abode]: Nf/uuu?; Alex. EfuiSlttp: Am-
moth Dor), a city of Naphtali, allotted with iU
suburbs to the Gerahonlte Levites, and for a city
of refuge (Josh. zxi. 33). Unlets there were two
placet of the same or very similar name in Naph-
tali, this is identical with Hammath. Why the
auflx Dor is added it is hard to tell, unlets toj ward
awn in tome way to the situation of the pane on
the coast, in which fact only bad it (as fit at we
(now) any resemblance to Don, on the shore of the
sfedUerraneau In 1 Chr. vi. 76 >ht name is oon-
l to Qammos. G.
HAMCNAH (njlDrj [tumult, noijt ef m
multitude]: noAvdVSpior: Amona), the name of
a city mentioned in a highly obscure passage of
Ezekiel (xxxix. 16); apparently that of the place
in or near which the multitude! of Gog should be
buried after their great slaughter by God, and which
is to derive its name — " multitude " — from that
circumstance. G.
HA'MON-GOG', THB VAXLBY OF
(2"IS llQn H , 2 ■= ravine of Gog'e multitude :
Vol to Tokviirtoiov rov Tint niUie muttitudinit
Gog), the name to be bestowed on a ravine or glen,
previously known as " the ravine of the passenger*
on the east of the sea," after the burial there < f
"Gog and all hit multitude" (Ex. xxxix. 11, 15).
HATVIOB (~^Dn, i. e. in Hebrew a large he
us, the figure employed by Jacob for Issachar:
'ZpfUip: Uemor), a Hivite (or according to the
Alex. LXX. a Horite), who at the time of the en-
trance of Jacob on Palestine was prince (Nan) of
the land and city of Shechein, and father of the
impetuous young man of the latter name whose ill
treatment of Dinah brought destruction on himself,
his father, and the whole of their city (Gen. xxxiiL
19; xxxiv. 3,4,6, 8,13, 18, 20, 34, 36). Hamor
would seem to have been a person of great infra
ence, because, though alive at the time, the men of
his tribe are called after him Bene-Bamor, and he
himself, in records narrating events long subsequent
to this, it styled flamor-Abi Shecem (Josh. xxiv.
32; " Judg. ix. 28; Acts vii. 16). In the second
of these passages his name it used as a signal of
revolt, when the remnant of the ancient Hlviles
attempted to rise against Abimelech eon of Gideon.
[Siikchkm.] For the title AH-Shecem, "father
of Hhechem," compare "lather of Bethlehem,"
"father of Tekoah," and others in the early lists
of 1 Chr. ii., iv. In Acts vii. 16 the name is given
in the Greek form of Emmor, and Abraham it
said to have bought hit sepulchre from the " sons
of Emmor."
HAMTJ'EL (byiffln [tee infra], i. e. Uara-
mflel: 'A/uovtja: Amutl), a man of Simeon; sou
of Mlahina, of the family of Shaul (1 Chr. iv. 26),
from whom, if we follow the records of this pas-
sage, it would seem the whole tribe of Simeon
located in Palestine were derived. In many He-
brew MSS. the name is given as ChammueL
* The latter form exchanges the soft guttural fci
the hard. It signifies "heat " and hence "anger
of God " (Geeen.), or " God is a tun " (Fur it).
H.
HATOUL Cy«2Q [pitied, spared] : Sue.
7H1S1 : 'itpoi^A, 'UuuroV; [Alex, in Num.,
ltutovnA; Comp. 'ApotfA, XauoiXt] Bamufi, tiu
younger ton of Pharos, Judith's ton by Tamar
(Gen. xlvi. 12; 1 Chr. U. 6). Hamul was head o(
the family of the Hamulitss (Num. xxvi. 31), but
none of the genealogy of his desoendaatt is pre-
served in the lists of 1 Chronicles, though those of
the descendants of Zerah are fully given.
HATHUUTES, THB %BQQ [set
aoore]: 'Uyiovri, Alex. IiutovnAi; [Comp. 't^unr
a Th a LXX. have here read the word without Ms
lalOal fnttural, and rendtred It wmfi. », 'hmethmkm
« from the AmotUat. '
Digitized by
Google
wo
HAMUTAI,
»If] Bammlitm), the family (nT^tpiJ) of tha
preceding (Num. xxri. 81).
HAMUTAL (bUiCr! = park fan to Ike
Aw; 'AaunfA; [Vat A/a«rr«u, Kmr! Alex. A/u-
toA, -rat;] in Jer. 'A/MtraaA. [Alex, -»u-] : Avn-
lal), daughter of Jeremiah of Libnah ; one of the
wives of king Jonah, and mother of the unfor-
tunate prince* Jehoahaz (9 K. xxiii. 31), and Mat-
taniah or Zedekiah (3 K. uir. 18; Jer. lii. 1).
In the two last passages the name ia given in the
original text aa ^tS'QP, Chamital, a reading
wliich the LXX. follow throughout.
* Curiously enough, in the first passage, but
In neither of the two last, the A. V. ed. 1611 reads
HamitaL A.
HANAM/E&L [property HanameL in 3
ayl ] (b»«parj [pwn- SflSQ "*<»» G«* *°«
oicen, Gesen.]': 'ArcuteAx.: Htmamed), son of
Shallum, and cousin of Jeremiah. When Judas
was occupied by tbe Chaldeans, Jerusalem be-
leaguered, and Jeremiah in prison, the prophet
bought a field of Hanameel in token of his assur-
ance that a time was to come when land should be
Dnoe more a secure possession (Jer. xxxii. 7, 8, 9,
19; and conip 44). The suburban fields belong-
ing to the tribe of Levi could not be sold (Lev.
xxv. 34) ; but possibly Hanameel may have inher-
ited property from his mother. Compare the case
of Barnabas, who also was a Levite; and tbe note
of Grottos on Acts iv. 37. Henderson (on Jer.
xxxii. 7) supposes that a portion of the Levities!
estates might be sold within the tribe.
W. T. B.
HATS AN 0}n fornoiws, merciful]: 'Ardr:
ffanan). JL One of the chief people of the tribe
/ Benjamin (1 Chr. viii. S3).
8. The last of tbe six sons of AeeL a descend-
«t of Saul (1 Chr. viii. 38; ix. 44).
3. [FA. Amv.] " Sou of Maschah," i. e.
possibly a Syrian of Araiu-Maachah, one of the
heroes of David's guard, according to the extended
1st of 1 Chr. xl. 43.
4. [FA. r<urav.] Bene-Chanan [sons of C]
were among the Nethlnira who returned from Bab-
Ion with Zerubbabel (En. li. 46; Neh. vii. 49).
ji the parallel list, 1 Esdr. v. 30, the name is given
as Anas.
5. (LXX. omits [Horn, and Alex. In Neh. x. 10
read Arar, but Vat and FA. 1 omit].) One of the
Levites who assisted Ezra in his public exposition
if the law (Neh. viii. 7). Tbe same person is
irobably mentioned in x. 10 aa sealing the cov-
enant, since several of tbe same names occur in
both passages.
6. [Vat. omits.] One of the "heads " of the
people," that is of the laymen, who also sealed
.be covenant (x. 22).
7. (AiroV; [FA. Aim.]) Another of the chief
laymen on»the same occasion (x. 36).
8. [FA. Auras.] Son of Zaccur, son of Mat-
iniah, whom Nehemiah made one of the store-
keepers of the provisions collected as tithes (Neh.
xiii. 13). He was probably a layman, in which
tsse the four storekeepers represented the four chief
classes of tbe people — priests, scribes, Levites, and
Wymsn.
0. Son of Igdaliahu "the man of God" (Jer.
cnv. 41 TJ» sons of Hsnan had a chamber in
HANANIAH
tbe Temple. The Vat LXX. gives tbe nam* twin
— Iwrar vioO 'Ararfav [FA Arrar vim Art
raMov].
HANANTSfiL [prvpetlg Hanand, in 3 syl..
TUTS TOWBB OF (SjHQ ^P : wipyot
'Awuir^A : turrit Hitnimeel), a tower which formed
part of the wall of Jerusalem (Neh. lii. 1, xil. 39).
From these two passages, particularly from tha
former, it might almost be inferred that Hananeel
was but another name for the Tower of Mesh
(n^pn = (Ae hundred): at any rate they were
close together, snd stood between the sheep-gate
and the fish-gate. This tower is ftirtber mentioned
in Jer. xxxi. 38, where the reference appears to be
to an extensive breach in the wall, reaching from
that spot to the " gate of the corner " (comp. Neh.
lii. 34, 83), and which the prophet is announcing
shall be " rebuilt to Jehovah " and - not be thrown
down any more for ever." The remaining passage
in which it is named (Zech. xiv. 10) also connects
this tower with the " corner gate," which lay on
tbe other side of the sheep-gate. This verse is ren-
dered by Ewald with a different punctuation to
[from] the A. V. — " from the gate of Benjamin,
on to the place of the first (or early) gate, on to
the comer-gate and Tower Hananeel, on to the
king's wine-presses." [Jehusalem.]
HANATSI 0??q [sracimu]: [Bom. Arar,
Aroruu; Alex.] Aran: ITanam). 1. One of the
sons of Heman, David's Seer, who were separated
for song in tbe bouse of tbe Lord, snd head of tha
18th course of the service (1 Chr. xxv. 4, 85).
8. ['Arori; Vac. -r«i, ones -p«; Alex. 1 K.
xvi. 7, Araria-] A Seer who rebuked (B. c. 941)
Asa, king of Judah, for his want of faith in God,
which he had showed by buying off the hostility
of Benhadad I. king of Syria (2 Chr. xvi. 7). For
this he was imprisoned by Asa (10). He (or another
Hanani) was the father of Jehu the Seer, who testi-
fied against Baaaha (1 K. xvi. 1, 7), and Jehoah-
aphat (3 Chr. xix. 2, xx. 34).
3. ['Arori; Vat FA. -rti; Alex. Arario.] One
of tbe priests who in tbe time of Ezra were con-
nected with strange wives (Kzr. x. 20). In Esdraa
the name is Ananias.
4. ['Arori, Araria; FA. in i. 3, Arar.] A
brother of Nehemiah, who returned B. c. 446 from
Jerusalem to Susa (Neh. i. 2): and was afterwards
made governor of Jerusalem under Nehemiah
(vii. 9.)
5. ['AroW; Vat. Alex. FA> omit.] A priest
mentioned in Neh. xU. 36. \V. T. B.
HANANI' AH Cnjn and irVJjq [mAom
Jehovah hat girt*]: 'Araria; ['Ararfaj:] Ann-
mini, [ffonmita,] and llantmint. In New Test
'Arorfar: Amnio*).
1. One of the 14 sons of Hemnn the singer, and
chief of tbe sixteenth out of the 24 courses or ward*
into which the 288 musicians of the Invites were
divided by king David. The sons of I Ionian were
especially employed to blow the horns (1 Chr. xxv.
4, 6, 93).
8. Oneof tbe chief captains of the army of king
Uaxlah (2 Chr. xxvi. II).
3. Father of Zedi kiah, one of the nrinees in tha
reign of .Teboiaklm Ling of Judah (.To. xxxvi. 121
4. Son of Arur, a Benjamite of Gibson and a
false prophet in the reign of Zedekiah king of Jndab
In the 4th year of his reign, b. c. 6ft6, Hananfaw
Digitized by
Google
HANANIAH
Jeremiah the prophet, and publicly
in the temple that within two jean
Jeeoniah and all his fellow-captives, with the needs
of the Lord's house which Nebuchadnezzar had
taken away to Babylon, should be brought back to
Jerusalem (Jer. zxviii.): an indication that treach-
erous negotiations were already secretly opened with
Pharaoh-Hophra (who had just succeeded Psam-
mis on the Egyptian throne "), and that strong
hopes were entertained of the destruction of the
Babylonian power by him. The preceding chapter
(xxvii. 3) shows further that a league was already
in progress between Judah and the neighboring
nations of Edom, Amnion, Moab, Tyre, and Zidon,
for the purpose of organizing resistance to Nebu-
chadnezzar, in combination no doubt with the pro-
jected morenientr of Pharaoh-Hophra. Hananiah
corroborated his prophecy by taking from off the
neck of Jeremiah the yoke which he wore by Di-
Tine command (Jer. xxvii., in token of the subjec-
tion of Judaea and the neighboring countries to the
Babylonian empire), and breaking it, adding, "Thus
■aith Jehovah, Even so will I break the yoke of
Nebuchadnezzar king of Babylon from the neck of
all nations within the space of two full years." But
Jeremiah was bid to go and tell Hananiah that for
the wooden yokes which be had broken he should
make yoke* of iron, so firm was the dominion of
Babylon destined to be for seventy years. The
prophet Jeremiah added this rebuke and prediction
of Hananiah's death, the fulfillment of which closes
the history of this false prophet. " Hear now,
Hananiah; Jehovah hath not sent thee; but thou
makest this people to trust in a lie. Therefore thus
•aith Jehovah, Behold I will cast thee from off the
face of the earth : this year thou shalt die, because
thou hast taught relwllion against Jehovah. So
Hananiah the prophet died the same year, in the
seventh month " (Jer. xxviii.). The above history
of Hananiah is of great interest, sa throwing much
light upon the Jewish politics of that eventful time,
divided as parties were into the partisans of Baby-
lon on one band, and Egypt on the other. It also
exhibits the machinery of false prophecies, by which
the irreligious party sought to promote their own
policy, in a very distinct form. At the same time
too that it explains in general the sort of political
calculation on which such false prophecies were
hazarded, it supplies an important clew in partic-
ular by which to judge of the date of l'haraoh-
Hophra's (or A pries') accession to the Egyptian
throne, and the commencement of his ineffectual
eflbrt to restore the power of Egypt (which had
been prostrate since Necho's overthrow, Jer. xlvi.
2) upon the ruins of the Babylonian empire. The
leaning to Egypt, indicated by Hananiah's prophecy
as having begun in the fourth of Zedekiah, bad in
the sixth of his reign issued in open defection from
Nebuchadnezzar, and in the guilt of perjury, which
cost Zedekiah his crown and his lift, as we learn
from Ez. xvii. 12-80 ; the date being fixed by a
comparison of Ez. viii. 1 with xx. 1. The tem-
porary success of the intrigue which is described
in Jer. xxxvii. was speedily followed by the return
ef the ChaMawis and the destruction of the city,
teeording to the prediction of Jeremiah. This his-
iOrj of Hananiah also illustrates the marner in
which the false prophets hindered the mission, and
abstracted the beneficent effects of the ministry, of
a. MB.
HANANIAH
991
the true prophets, and affords a remarkable examplt
of the way in which they prophesied smooth things,
and said peace when there was no peace (eomp. 1
K. xxil. 11, 24, 25).
0. Grandfather of Irijah, the captain of the ward
at the gate of Benjamin who arrested Jeremiah on
a charge of deserting to the Chakueans (Jer. xxxvii.
13).
6. Head of a Benjamite house (1 Chr. viii. 24).
7. The Hebrew name of Shadrach. [Siiad-
rach.] He was of the house of David, according
to Jewish tradition (Dan. i. 3, 6, 7, 11, 19; ii. 17).
[Akakias.]
8. Son of ZerubbabeL 1 Chr. ill. 19, from whom
Christ derived his descent. He is the «une perron
who is by St Luke called 'Iwayyai, Joanna, and
who, when lihesa is discarded, appears there also
as Zerubbabel's son [Gemkauxjy op Chhist.]
The identity of the two names Hananiah and
Joanna is apparent immediately we compare them
in Hebrew. rTJJJCJ (Hananiah) is compounded
of 7jn and the Divine name, which always takes
the form 7T, or VTj, at the end of compounded
names (as in Jerem-iah, Shephet-iah, Xehem-iah,
Azar-iah, etc. ). It meant grativ$i dtdit Ifominut.
Joanna 0}rT! N ) is compounded of the Divine
name, which at the beginning of compound name*
takes the form V, or liT 1 (as in Jeho-ehua, Jeho-
shaphat, Jo-zadak, etc.), and the same word, ]3n,
and means Oonrintu gratiori dtdit. Examples of a
similar transposition of the elements of a compound
name in speaking of the same individual, are
rTyrOJ, Jecon-iah, and PjtfuT}, Jeho-jachin,
of the same king of Judah: Ahaz-iah and Jeho-
ahaz of the same son of Jehoram ; Eli-am, and
Ammi-el, of the father of Bath-sheba; and El-aaah
for Asah-el, and Ishma-el, for Eli-sbama, in some
MSS. of Ezr. x. IS and 2 K. ixv. 25. This iden-
tification is of great importance, as bringing St
Luke's genealogy into harmony with the Old Testa-
ment Nothing more is known of Hananiah.
0. The two names Hananiah and Jehohanan
stand side by side, Ezr. x. 28, as sons of Bebai, wht
returned with Ezra from Babylon.
10. A priest, one of the " apothecaries " (which
see) or makers of the sacred ointments and incense
(Ex. xxx. 22-38, 1 Chr. ix. 30), who built a portion
of the wall of Jerusalem In the days of Nehemiah
(Neh. ill. 8). He may be the same as is mentioned
in ver. 30 as having repaired another portion. If
so, he was son of Shelemiah ; perhaps the same as
is mentioned xii. 41.
11. Head of the priestly course of Jeremiah U>
the days of Joiaklm the high-priest, Neh. xii. IS.
12. Ruhr of the palace tiTT^rr ljp) at
Jerusalem under Nehemiah. He is described as
" a faithful man, and one who feared (Jod abova
many.'' His office seems to have been one of
authority and trust, and perhaps the same as thai
of Eliaklm, who was H over the house *' in the reign
I of Hexekiah. [Euakim.] The arrangements foi
I guarding the gates of Jerusalem were intrusted te
nim with Hanani, the Tfrshatha's brother. Prideaiu
thinks that the appointment of Hanani and H«n«™i.ti
succeeded Paunmts, 1.
the sasss ef the Jexyptkui reigns ton
an fixed by that of the sooouest of ■ejrM by 0e»
syseSi
Digitized by
Google
992
HANDICRAFT
sadimtes tint at this time Nehemiah returned to
Persia, but without sufficient ground. Nehemiah
«« to hare been continuously at Jenualem for
tonie time after 'be completion of the wall (rii. 6,
88, rill. 9, x. 1). If, too, the term (rn'SH
means, as Uesenlus supposes, and as the use of it
in Neh. ii. 8 makes not improbable, not the palace,
but the fortress of the Temple, called by Josephus
$dpit — there is still less reason to imagine Nehe-
miah's absence. In this case Hananiah would be
a priest, perhaps of the same family as the preced-
ing. The rendering moreover of Neh. vii. 2, 8,
should probably be, " And I enjoined (or gave
orders to) Hananl . . and Hananiah the captains
of tiie fortress .... concerning Jerusalem, and
•aid, l.et not the gates," etc There is no authority
far rendering vj? hy " over " — " He gave such
an one charge over Jerusalem." The passages
quoted by Gesenius are not one of them to toe
point.
13. An Israelite, Neh. x. S3 (Hebr. 94). [Ama-
rus.]
14. Other Hananiahs will be found under Ata-
xias, the Greek form of the name. A. C. H.
HANDICRAFT (t«W ipyaala: an,
ariificium, Acts xvlii. 3, xix. 25; tiev. xviii. 22).
Although the extent cannot be ascertained to which
those arts were carried on whose invention is as-
cribed to Tubsl-Cain, it is probable that this was
proportionate to the nomadic or settled habits of
the antediluvian races. Among nomad races, as
the Bedouin Arabs, or the tribes of Northern and
Central Asia and of America, the wants of life, as
well as the arts which supply them, are few ; and
it is only among the city-dwellers that both of
them are multiplied and make progress. This sub-
ject cannot, of course, be followed out here ; in the
present article brief notices can only be given of
such handicraft trades as are mentioned in Scrip-
ture.
1. The preparation of iron for use either in war,
In agriculture, or for domestic purposes, was doubt-
less one of the earliest applications of labor; and,
together with iron, working in brass, or rather cop-
per alloyed with tin, bronze (Hl^nj, Gesen. p.
876), is mentioned in the same passage as practiced
In antediluvian times (Gen. iv. 22). The use of
this last is usually considered as an art of higher
antiquity even than that of iron (Hesiod. Works
and Days, 160; Wilkinson, Anc Eg. ii. p. 162,
abridg.), and there can be no doubt that metal,
whether iron or bronze, must hare been largely
used, either in material or in tools, for the con-
struction of the Ark (Gen. vi, H, 16). Whether
the weapons for war or chase used by the early
warriors of Syria and Assyria, or the arrow-heads
of the archer Ishmael were of bronze or iron, cannot
be ascertained ; but we know that Iron was used
for warlike purposes by the Assyrians (Layard,
Nin. and Bab. p. 194), and on the other hand that
•tone- tipped arrows, as was the ease also In Mexico,
were used ir the earlier times by the Egyptians as
well as the Persians and Greeks, and that stone or
flint knives continued to be used by them, and by
Jie inhabitants of the desert, and also by the Jews,
for religious purposes after the introduction of iron
tato general on (Wilkinson, Anc. Eg. i. 863, 864,
J. 163; Preaeott, Mttdco, 1. 118; Ex. iv. 26;
ieah. v. 9; Is* Egypt room. Brit. Mus. case 36,
ST). In the construction of the Tabernacle, copper,
HANDICRAFT
but no Iron, appears to have been used, though the
use of iron was at the same period well known tm
the Jews, both from their own use of it and freer"
their Egyptian education, whilst the C'ansanite
inhabitants of Palestine and Syria were in full pos-
session of its use both for warlike and domestic
purposes (Ex. xx. 29, xxv. 3, xxvii. 19; Num
xxxv. 16; Deut. iii. 11, iv. 20, viii. 9; Josh. viiL
31, xvii. 16, 18). After the establishment of the
Jews in Canaan, the occupation of a smith (Wl)
became recognized as a distinct employment (1
Sam. xiii. 19). The designer of a higher order
appears to have been called specially -VJO (Gee.
p. 631; Ex. xxxv. 80, 36; 2 Chr. xxvL 16;
Saalsebtitz, Arch. Hebr. c. 14, § 16). The smith's
work and its results are often mentioned in Scrip-
ture (9 Sam. xii. 31; 1 K. vi. 7; 2 Chr. xxvi. 14;
Is. xliv. 12, liv. 16). Among the captives taken
to Babylon by Nebuchadnezzar were 1000 « crafts-
men" and smiths, who were probably of the
superior kind (2 K. xxiv. 16 ; Jer. xxix. 2).
The worker in gold and silver (*l"jlS : ipyvpo-
KoVor, xairsvrtii : argentaritu, amriftx) must
have found employment both among the Hebrews
and the neighboring nations in very early times,
as appears from the ornaments sent by Abraham
to Kebekah (Gen. xxiv. 22, 63, xxxv. 4, xxxviii. 18;
Deut. rii. 26). But whatever skill the Hebrews
possessed, it is quite clear that they must have
learned much from Egypt and its " iron-furnaces,"
both in metal work and in the arts of setting and
polishing precious stouts ; arts which were turned
to account both in the construction of the Taber-
nacle and the making of the priests' ornaments,
and also in the casting of the golden calf as well
as its destruction by Moses, probably, as suggested
by Goguet, by a method which he had learnt in
Egypt (Gen. xii. 42; Ex. iii. 22, xii. 36, xxxi. 4,
6, xxxii. 2, 4, 20, 24, xxxvli. 17, 24, xxxviii. 4, 8,
94, 95, xxxix. 6, 89; Neh. iii. 8; Is. xliv. 18).
Various processes of the goldsmiths' work (No.
1) are illustrated by Egyptian monuments (Wilkin-
son, Anc. Egypt, ii. 136, 162, 162).
After the conquest frequent notices are found
both of moulded and wrought metal, including
soldering, which last had long been known in
Egypt; but the Phoenicians appear to have pos-
sessed greater skill than the Jews in these arte, at
least in Solomon's time (Judg. viii. 24, 27, xvii.
4; 1 K. vii. 18, 46, 46; Is. xii. 7; Wisd. xr 4;
■typttan Blow-pips, sad small flre-plaea with enaaks
to conflns and reflect the heat. ( Wilkinson.)
Eoclua. xxxviii. 28; Bar. vi. 60, 65, 67 [or EpisV.
of Jer. vi. 50, 55, 67] ; Wilkinson, ii. 162). [Zaws-
phath.] Even in the desert, mention Is mad*
of beating gold into plates, cutting it Into wire, and
Digitized by
Google
HANDICRAFT
atn of Mtting precious stones in gold (Ex. mix.
3, S, Ac.; Beckmann, flit of Inc. U. 414; Gee.
p-13»>.
Among the tools of the imlth tie mentioned —
i (CNT^TO, Xo/Bft, fonxpt, Get. p. 761,
HANDICRAFT 998
It. ri. 6), hammer (ttf N ta9, a^vfi, maOem, Gat
p. 1101), amil (D3?B, Oct. p. 1118), be&owi
(D^9i ♦wnrr^p, «a?fator»iim. Get. p. 896; Ik
k— 7; Jar. ri. 89; Ecclus. xxx-iil. 28: \V kinson,
B.816).
In N. T. Alennder « the eoppenmith " (4 *oA-
■«•*) of Ephenit it mentioned, where also was
■Triad on that trade in "silver shrines" (raol
•>> ypo!), which wit rapntented by Demetrius the
83
silversmith (boymoit&ros) at being in danger from
(the spread of Christianity (Acta zix. 34, 88-; S
Tim. iv. 14). [See also Smith.]
8. The work of the carpenter (tF$f ttJT^I,
Wcrav, artj/fer. Uanarnu) is often mentioned ia
Digitized by
Google
994 HANDICRAFT
(«. g. Gen. vi. 14; Ex. xixvii.; Is. xlir.
In the palace built by David for himself the
men employed were chiefly Phoenician* cent
Mr Hiram (9 Sun. t. 11; 1 Chr. jut. 1), aa mart
18).
HANDICRAFT
the rebuilding under Zerubbabet, no
nude of foreign workmen, though in the 1
ceee the timber is expressly said to have bean
brought by aea to Joppa by Zidoniana (S K. xiL
11; 2Chr.xxiv. IS; Em in. 7).
That the Jewish carpenters must
have been able to carve with
some skill is evident from Is. xli.
7. xli v. 13, in which last passage
some of the implements used in
the trade are met tioned : the)
rule (T$, liirpor,
possibly a chalk pencil.
Tools of an Egyptian Carpenter. (Wilkinson.)
1. 1, 2, 8, 4. Chisels and drills. fig. 9. Horn of oil.
6. Part of drill. 10. Mallet.
6. Nnt of wood belonging to drill. 11. Ibukrt of null
7, 8. Saws. 12.
probably were those, or at least the principal of
those who were employed by Solomon in his works
(1 K. v. 6). But in the repairs of the Temple,
executed under Joaah king of Judah, and also in
noma,
Gee. p.
1837), ireasuring-line (lp, Gee.
p. 1201), compass (n^Vip,
wapayoapis, cirdmu, Gee.
p. 460), plane, or smoothing
instrument (nyil'pa, koAAo,
runa'iKj, Ges. pp. 1228, 1338),
•xe OPS, Ges. p. 302, or
rfc-ifl Gee. p. 1236, iffni,
neurit).
The process of the work, and
the tools used by Egyptian car-
penters, and also coopers and
wheelwrights, are displayed in
Egyptian monuments and relics;
the former, including dovetailing,
veneering, drilling, glueing, var-
nishing, and inlaying, may be
seen in Wilkinson, Anc. L'gypi.
ii. 1 1 1-1 19. Of the latter many
specimens, including saws, hatch-
ets, knives, awls, nails, a hone,
and a drill, also turned objects
in bone, exist in the British
Museum, 1st Egyptian room,
case 42-43, Nos. 6046-6188.
See also Wilkinson, ii. p. 118
fig. 395.
In N. T. the occupation of a
Uaaket which held them, carpenter (rca-ratr) is mentioned
in connection with Joseph the
husband of the Virgin Mary, and ascribed to our
Lord himself by way of reproach (Mark vi. 8;
Matt. xiii. 65; and Just Mali. Died, c Trtph. e.
88).
I 2 8
Veneering and the use of gins. (Wilkinson.)
I, a fine of dark wood applied to one of ordinary quality, ». e, adaa, fixed Into a block of wood of the same color as
a, a ruler ; and/, a square, similar to those used by our ca r pe nt ers, «•, a boa. fig 2 Is grinding something
«, groa-pot on the Are. j, a piece of grot. fig. 8 applying the glue with a brush, f.
5. The masons (O v ?"$, wall-builders, Ges. p.
89) employed by David and Solomon, at least the
Hsf of them, were Phoenicians, as is Implied also
in the word 0^33, men of Gebal, Jeball, sorb-
ins (Ges. p. 258j 1 K. v. 18; Es. xxtH. »i
Burckhsrdt, Syria, p. lit). Among their impW-
Digitized by
Google
HANDICRAFT
HANDICRAFT
996
a mentioned the saw (fPS?, „(„,), the ^>*"nt«> on Egyptian monument* (WiMneoB,
t ..t, p w>, Aim. Ajfjpt ii. 318, 8H), or preaerved in the Brtt-
phimb-tme (T[3S, Ge*. p. 126), the measuring- iah Museum (1st Egyptian room, Nos. 6114, 6038)
, !—•■*—> , ' , _ __, ' Tire large stones used in Solomon's Temple an
»ad ,na , icdAa^ot, critosKs, Ges. p. 1821). said by Joseph™ to haw been fitted together eaaetly
Seme of these, and also the chisel and mallet, are | without either mortar or cramps, but the fbunibv
i to have been listened with lead (Joseph,
rlfl. 8, § 2; it. 11, § 8). For ordinary built-
T»**i
(Ges. p. 1326)
perhaps, bitumen, w was the eue at
Babylon (Gen. tJ. 8). The Bme, ehty, and i
of which mortar is generally composed in the Rest,
. | requires to be rery carefully mixed and united as
n ™ a ' aa to resist wet (Lane, Mod. Egypt, i. 27; Shaw,
Trat. p. 206). The wall "daubed with untenv
Digitized by
Google
»96
HANDICRAFT
Oarpantu*. (Wilkinson.)
■Ufa hoi* in th» MM of a chair, $. 1 I, legs of chair. ««,
•, a aauaro. w, gu planmg or pollening th* kg of a chair,
Masons. (Wilkinson.)
ML Israllini, and Piurt 8 squaring a
An Egyptian loom. (Wllkbson.)
ill shuttle, not thrown, bnt put In with the hand. It had a
hook at each end.
HANDICRAFT
perad mortar " of Eaekial (til
10) ww perhaps a sort of coh-
waB of mud or day without
lime (bpJH, Get. p. 1616)
which would give waj under
heavy rain. The use of white-
wash on tombs is remarked bj
our Lord (Matt, xxiii. 97. Set
also Mishna, Mooter Sheni, t.
1). Houses infected with leprae;
were required by the Law to be
re-plastered (Lev. xiv. 40-i5\.
4. Akin to the craft of the
carpenter is that of ship and
boat-building, which mutt have
been exercised to some extent
for the fishing-vessels on the
lake of Gennesaret (Matt viii.
88, Ix. 1; John xxi. 3, 8).
Solomon built, at Esion-Geber,
ships for his foreign trade, which
were manned by Phoenician
crews, an experiment which Je-
boshaphat endeavored in vain to
renew (1 K. ix. 26, 87, xxii. 48;
8Chr. xx. 86, 87).
6. The perfumes used in the
religious services, and in later
times in the funeral rites of
monarchs, imply knowledge and
practice in the art of the
« apothecaries " (DTJTn,
fivpt^/ol, figmaUarii), who ap-
pear to have farmed a guild or
association (Ex. xxx. 85, 35;
Neh. 111. 8; 8 Chi. xvi. 14;
Eccles. vii. 1, x. 1; Fcchnj
xxxviii. 8).
6. The arts of spinning and
weaving both wool and linen
were carried on in early timet,
as they are still usually among
the Bedouins, by women. The
women spun and wove goat's
hair and flax for the Tabernacle,
at in later times their skill was
employed in like manner for
idolatrous purposes. One of the
excellences attributed to the good
house-wife is her skill and in-
dustry in these arte (Ex. xxxv.
85, 86; Lev. xix. 19; DeuU
xxii. 11; 8 K. xxiii. 7; E*. xvi.
16; Pror. xxxi. 13, 34; Burek-
hardt, Note* on Bed. 1. 65;
camp. Horn, /t i. 123; (U. L
856, ii. 104). Tbe loom, with
its beam ("^D, iitcimor,
Uoiatorium, 1 Sam. xvil. 7 ;
Get. p. 883), pin, (1HJ,
wdWaAot, cbmu, Judg. xvi.
14; Get. p. 643), and shuttle
WJ& Spoptis, Job vii. 6;
Get.' p. 146) wax perhaps, in-
troduced later, but as early ta
David's time (1 Sam. xvil. 7),
and worked by men, as was the
cue in Egypt, contrary to the
practice of other nations. Thlf
trade alto apnears to have bate
Digitized by
Google
HANDKERCHIEF
I hereditarily (1 Chr. It. 91; Henyi. li. 35;
Soph. (Ed. Col 339).
Together with weavir^ we raid also of em-
broidery, in which gold and ailver threads were
interwoven with the body of the •tuff, sometimes
in figure patterns, or with precious stones set in the
needlework (Ex. xxvi. 1, xxviii. 4, xxxix. 6-13).
7. Besides these arts, those of dyeing and of
dressing cloth were practiced in Palestine, and
those also of tanning and dressing leather (Josh,
ii. 15-18; 2 K. i. 8; Matt. Iii. 4; Acts ix. 43;
Mishn. HcgilL iii. 2). Shoe-makers, barbers, and
tailors are mentioned in the Hiahna (Poach, iv.
8): the barber (2^1, xovptis, Gee- p. 883), or
his occupation, by Ezeklel (v. 1; Lev. xiv. 8; Num.
tL 6; Josephus, Ant. xvi. 11, { 6; B. J. 1. 27,
J 5; Mishn. Shabb. L 2), and the tailor (1. 3),
plasterers, glaziers, and glass Teas e ls, painters, and
goldworkers are mentioned in Mishn. (Chtl viii.
9, xxix. 3, 4, xxx. 1).
Tent-makers (iricnrowoiot) an noticed in the Acta
(iriii. 3), and frequent allusion is made to the trade
of the potters.
8. Bakers (D > SK Gee. p. 136) are noticed in
Scripture as carrying on their trade (Jer. xxxvil.
21; llos. tU. 4; Mishn. Chtl xr. 2); and the weU-
known valley Tyropoeon probably derived its name
from the occupation of the cheese-makers, its in-
habitants (Joseph. B. J. t. 4, 1). Butchers, not
Jewish, are spoken of 1 Cor. x. 25.
Trade in all its branches was much developed
after the Captivity ; and for a father to teach bis
■on a trade was reckoned not only honorable but
indispensable (Mishn. Pirkt Ab. ii. 2; Kidduth.
rv. 14). Some trades, however, were regarded as
less honorable (Jahn, BibL Arch. § 84).
Some, if not all trades, had special localities, as
was the case formerly in European, and is now in
Eastern cities (Jer. xxxvii. 21; 1 Cor. x. 25; Jo-
seph. B. J. v. 4, § 1, and 8, § 1; Mishn. Becor.
T. 1; Russell, Aleppo, i. 20 ; Chardin, Voyaytt,
rii. 274, 894; Lane, Mod. Kgyp. ii. 145).
One feature, distinguishing Jewish from other
workmen, deserves peculiar notice, namely, that
they were not slaves, nor were their trades neces-
sarily hereditary, ss was and is so often the case
among other, especially heathen nations (Jahn, BibL
Antiq. c t. § 81-84; Saakchiitx, Htbr. Arch. c.
14; Winer, s. v. Bandieerke). [Musical Ik-
stbdmkxts; Pottekt; Glass; Lbathkr.]
H. W. P.
HANDKERCHIEF, NAPKIN, APRON,
rhe two former of these terms, as used in the A. V.
= (jovtifnav, the latter = a-iputlveW: they are
llssscid together, inasmuch as they refer to objects
if a very similar character. Both words are of
Mia origin: troutiipior — tudarium from tudo,
' to sweat ; " the Lutheran translation preserves
the reference to its etymology in its rendering,
tchwti—tuch; crinudrQior = Mmidnctiun., L e. "a
half girdle." Neither is much used by classical
writers; the twbirium is referred to as used for
siping the face (" candido frontem sudario tergeret,"
3uintU. \u 3), or hands (" sudario manes un-gens,
,uod in eoilo habebat," Petron. infragm. Trugur.
t. 67); and also as worn ova. the face for the pur-
wae of eoncealment (Sueton. tn Neron. o. 48); the
word was introduced by the Romans into Palestine,
stars it was adopted oy the Jews, in the firm
•mrro «><> nrretra, m Buth ul is. "\3
HANKS 997
tudarium is noticed in the N. T. is a wrapper to
fold up money (Luke xix. 20) — as a cloth bound
abou. the bead of a corpse (John xi. 44, xx. 7),
being probably brought from the crown of the head
under the chin — and lastly as an article of dress
that could be easily removed (Acts xix. 12), proba-
ably a handkerchief worn on, the bead like the keffith
of the Bedouins. The temicinctium a noticed by
Martial xiv. Epigr. 153, and by Petron. »n Satyr.
c. 94. The distinction between the ductus snd the
temicinctium consisted in its width (Isidor. Orig.
xix. 38): with regard to the character of the <ri/u-
a-freW, the only inference from the passage in
which it occurs (Acta xix. 12) is that it was easily
removed from the person, and probably was worn
next to the skin. According to Suidas the distinc-
tion between the mdnrium and the temicinctium
was very small, for he explains the latter by the
former, a-i/unMior (pwaikior *, couSApior, the
(paxiiktov being a species of head-dress : Hesycbius
likewise explains o-ipuctrOtov by AoxuUioy. Ac-
cording to the scholiast (in Cod. Step/i.), as quoted
by Schleugner (Lex. s, v. aovtipior), the distinc-
tion between the two terms is that the tudarium
was worn on the head, and the temicinctium used
ss a handkerchief. The difference was probably
not in the shape, but in the use of the article; we
may conceive than to have been bands of linen of
greater or less size, which might be adapted to
many purposes, like the article now called Utngi
among the Arabs, which is applied sometimes as a
girdle, at other times as a turban (Welkted, 7Y-a*-
eU, L 321). W. L. B.
* HAND-MAID. [Comcdbisb; Slav*.]
•HAND-MILL. [Mill.]
•HAND-STAVE. [Staff.]
HA'NES (D3n : Hanet), a place in Egypt
only mentioned in Is. xxx. 4: "For his princes
were at Zoan, and his messengers came to Hanea."
The LXX. has'Ort titrlr in TdV« apxryoi *77«"
Ae« Toyripol, evidently following an entirely diner
ent reading. Hanea has been supposed by Vil-
ringa, Michaelis, Roeenmuller, and Uesenius, to be
the same as Heracleopolis Magna in the Heptane-
mis, Copt, egnec, &nec, gnHC.
This identification depends wholly upon the simi-
larity of the two names : a consideration of the
sense of the passage in which Hanes occurs shows
its great improbability. The prophecy is a reproof
of the Jews for trusting in Egypt: and according
to the Masoretic text, mention is made of an em-
bassy, perhaps from Hoshea, or else from Ahaz, or
possibly Hezekiah, to a Pharaoh. As the king
whose assistance is asked is called Pharaoh, be is
probably not an Ethiopian of the XXVth dynasty,
for the kings of that line are mentioned by name —
So, Ttrhakah — but a sovereign of the XXUId dy-
nasty, which, according to Manetho, was of Tanlta
kings. It is supposed that the last king of the
latter dynasty, Manetho's Zet, is the Sethos of
Herodotus, the king in whose time Sennacherib's
army perished, and who appears to have been men-
tioned under the title of Pharaoh by Rabshakeh
(Is. xxxvi. 6; 2 K. xviii. 21), though it is just
possible that Tlrbakah may have been intended
If the reference be to an embassy to Zet, Zoan was
probably his capital, and in any case then the moat
important city of the eastern part of Lower Egypt.
Hanes was most probably in its neighbor!) Md ; and
Digitized by
Google
998 HANGING
M are disposed to think that the Child. Paraphr.
:■ right in identifying it with DP3^PPI, or
Dn?9rtjp, onee written, if the Kethibh be cor-
rect, in the form CJEnpl, Daphne, a fortified
town on the eastern frontier. [Tahpanheb.]
Gesenius remarks, t\ kind of apology for the
identification of llanea with Heracleopohg Magna,
that the latter wu formerly a royal city. It is true
that in Manetho's list the IXth and Xth dynasties
are said to hare been of Heracleopolite kings; but
it has been lately suggested, on strong grounds, by
Sir Gardner Wilkinson, that this is a mistake in
the case of the IXth dynasty for Hermonthites
{Herod, ed. Rawlinson, vol ii. p. 348). If this
supposition be correct as to the IXth dynasty, it
must also be so as to the Xth; but the circum-
stance whether Heracleopolii wu a royal city or
not, a thousand years before Isaiah's time, is obvi-
ously of no consequence here. B. S. P.
• HANGING. [Pckishhkkt.]
HANGING; HANGINGS. These terms
represent both different words in the original, and
different articles in the furniture of the Temple.
(1.) The "hanging" OHJIJ: Mtnrcurrpov: ten-
torium) was a curtain or '• covering " (as the word
radically means) to close an entrance ; one was placed
before the door of the Tabernacle (Ex. xxvi. 86,
37, xxxix. 38); it was made of variegated stuff
wrought with needlework, and was hung on five
pillars of acacia wood ; another was placed before
the entrance of the court (Ex. xxvii. 16, xxxviii.
18; Num. ir. 26); the term is also applied to the
vail that concealed the Holy of Holies, in the full
expression " vail of the covering " (Ex. xxxv. 12,
xxxix. 84, xl. 21; Num. iv. 5). [Cuktaiks, 2.]
(2.) The " hangings "(D^bp: Urria: lentoria)
were used for covering the walls' of the court of the
Tabernacle, just as tapestry was in modern times
(Ex. xxvii. 9, xxxv. 17, xxxviii. 9 ; Num. iii. 26, iv.
26). The rendering in the LXX. implies that they
were made of the same substance as the sails of a
ship, i. e. (as explained by Kashi) "meshy, not
woven : " this opinion is, however, incorrect, as the
material of which they were constructed was " fine
twined linen." The hangings were carried only
five cubits high, or half the height of the walls of
the court (Ex. xxvii. 18; eomp. xxvi. 16). [Tab-
khnacls.]
In IK. xxffi. 7, the term botttm, CV; »,
strictly " houses," A. V. "hangings," is probably
ntended to describe tents used as portable sanctu-
aries. W. L. B.
HAN1EL (bs^Sn, ». e. Channiel [grace of
Vod]: 'Avelik [Vat. -«»-]: Hanitl), one of the
tons of Ulla, a chief prince, and a choice hero in
.be tribe of Aaher (1 Chr. vii. 89 ). [Hannibu]
HAN'NAH (Han, $rroce,or prayer: 'Ayra:
Anna), one of the wives of Elkanah, and mother
*f Samuel (1 Sam. i. ii.); a prophetess of eonsid-
erable repute, though her claim to that title is baaed
upon one production only, namely, the hymn of
thanksgiving for the birth of her son. This hymn
» in the highest order of prophetic poetry; its re-
semblance to that of the Virgin Mary (eomp. 1
Baa. ii. 1-10 with Luke i. 46-65; see also Ps.
■aA&. j has been noticed by the commentators; and
HAHA
it is specially remarkable as containing the at*
designation of the Messiah under that name. Is
the Targum it has been subjected to a process of
magniloquent dilution, for which it would be diffi-
cult to find a parallel even in the pompous vagaries
of that paraphrase (Eichhorn, JuM. ii. p. 68)
[Samuxu] T. E. B.
HAN'NATHON ("\h , Sn [groctfvl, or pro-
dmuh) dxtpoud\: 'AiuU; Alex. tmSuS: Ilcmo-
thon), one of the cities of Zebulun, a point appa-
rently on the northern boundary (Josh. xix. 14)
It has not yet been identified. G.
HANUIEL (b^an: 'A, 4 <jx: Honrnel),
son of Ephod; as prince {Nan) of Msnsssrh ha)
assisted in the division of the Promised Land
(Num. xxxir. 23). The name is the same as
Haniel.
HATfOGH CT]iri [eeeonEsocH]: 'Erf*:
Henoch). L The third in order of the children
of Midian, and therefore descended from Abrahasn
by Keturah (Gen. xxv. 4). In the parallel list of
1 Chr. i. 33, the name is given in the A. V. as
Hxkoch.
2. Offor]: 'Em»x : Henoch), eldest son of
Reuben (Gen. xlvi. 9; Ex. vi. 14; Num. xxvi. 6;
1 Chr. v. 3), and founder of the family of
HA'NOCHITES, THE CpbnrT: tnum
rod 'E»£x : /""■*&> Henochilarvm), Num. xxvi.
6.
* The Hebrew of Hanoch is the same as that of
Enoch, and belongs to two other persons [Enoch].
There is no good reason for this twofold orthogrsv-
P°7- H.
HA'NUN (lion [gracious] : 'ArrAr, ['A**V,
etc.:] Hanon). 1. Son of Nahaah (2 Sam. x. 1,
2; 1 Chr. xix. 1, 2), king of Ammon about b. c.
1037, who dishonored the ambassadors of David
(2 Sam. x. 4), and involved the Ammonites in a
disastrous war (2 Sam. xii. 81; 1 Chr. xix. 6).
W. T. B.
8. ['Amir: tfamm.] A man who, with the
people of Zanoah, repaired the ravine-gate in the
wall of Jerusalem (Neh. iii. 13).
3. ['Avcui; Vat. FA. Arov/t; Camp. 'Ant*:
ffanun.] A man specified as "the 6th son of
Zalaph," who also assisted in the repair of the
wall, apparently on the east side (Neh. iii. 80).
• HAPHARAaM, so A. V. ed. 1611, sad
other early editions, also the Bishops' Bible; in
many later editions, less correctly,
HAPHRA1M (QM^O. »• «■ Chapharaiin:
'Aylv; [Vat. Ayeiy\] Alex. Aa>u>«ip: Haphara-
im), a city of Issachar, mentioned next to Shunem
(Josh. xix. 19). The name possibly signifies "twe
pita." In the Onomtuticm ("Aphrahn") it is
spoken as still known under the name of Anarea
(Eus. 'Atppalp), and as standing six miles north
of Legio. About that distance northeast otLcjjm,
and two miles west of Solum (the ancient Shunem),
stands the village of eWAfikh (jlLasJI), which
may be the representative of Chapharaim, the gut-
tural Ain having taken the place of the Hebrew
Chelh. Q.
HA'KA (rOn [mountem-jand, Gee.] : Ara)
which appears only in 1 Chr. v. 26, and en
Digitized by
Google
HABADAH
• emitted by the LXX., is either a place ctteriy
mknown, or it mutt be regarded >a identical with
Haran or Chamn (T^n), the Mesopotamia!] city
to which Abraham came from Ur. The names in
Chronicles often vary from those elsewhere used in
Scripture, being later forms ; and Bora would
nearly correspond to Carrlia, which we know from
Strabo and Ptolemy to have been the appellation
by which Haran was known to the Greeks. We
may assume then the author of Chronicles to mean,
that a portion of the Israelites carried off by Pul
and Tiglath-Pileser were settled in Harran on the
Btlik, while the greater number were conveyed to
the Chut/our. (Compare 1 Chr. v. 88 with 2 K.
cvii. 6, xviii. 11, and xix. 12; and see articles on
'hakran and Habor.) O. R.
HAR'ADAH (fTT^On, with the article
[the trembling]: XapaiiS: Arada), a desert sta-
tion of the Israelites, Num. xxxiii. 24, 36; its
position is uncertain. H. H.
HA'KAN. 1. (7"?n [o Urong one, FUrst:
prob. monlanus, momUtiineer, Gesen.]: 'A&(>dv;
Jos. 'Ap&rns'- Aran). The third son of Terah,
and therefore youngest brother of Abram (Gen.
si 26). Three children are ascribed to him —
Lot (37, 31), and two daughters, namely, Milcah,
who married her uncle Nahor (29), and Iscah '29),
of whom we merely possess her name, though iv
some (e. g. Josephus) she is held to be identical
with Sarah. Haran was born in Ur of the Chal-
dees, and he died there while his father was still
living (28). His sepulchre was still shown there
when Josephus wrote his history (Ant. i. 6, § 5).
The ancient Jewish tradition is that Haran was
burnt in the furnace of Nimrod for his wavering
conduct during the fiery trial of Abraham. (See
the Targum Pa. Jonathan; Jerome's Qtiatt. in Ge-
nesim, and the notes thereto in the edit, of Migne.)
This tradition seems to have originated in a trans-
lation of the word Ur, which in Hebrew signifies
"fire." It will be observed that although this
name and that of the country appear the same in
the A V., there is in the original a certain differ-
ence between them; the latter commencing with
the harsh guttural Cheth.
8. (AaV; Alex. Apar- Aran.) A Gershonite
Levite in the time of David, one of the family of
Sbimei (1 Chr. xxffi. 9). G.
HA'KAN O7I7, te.Charan: 'Apa/ii [Vat.]
Alex. Appar: Haran), a son of the great Caleb by
his concubine Ephah (1 Chr. ii. 46). He himself
had a son named Gazxz.
HATtAN (1"jn [scorcW, aria", Gesen.; a
noble, frteman, Flint]: Xap'tif, Strab., Ptol.
Ki^itu: Haran), is the name of the place whither
Abraham migrated with his family from Ur of the
^haldees, and where the descendants of his brother
Jahor established themselves. Haran is therefore
lifted " the city of Nahor " (comp. Gen. xxiv. 10
with xxvii. 43). It U said to be in Mesopotamia
Gen. xxiv. 10), or more definitely, in Padan-Aram
.xxT. 20\ which Is the " cultivated district at the
Out of the hills " (Stanley's 8. <f P., p. 129 note),
name well applying to the beautiful stretch of
lOuntry which li«« below Mount Masius between
the Xkaiour and the Euphrates. [Padak-aram.]
Ben, about midway m this district, is a town stiL
Harran, which really seems never to have
" its appellation, and beyond any reasonable
HASAN
999
doubt Is the Haran or Charran of Seriptars
(Bochart's Phaleg, i. 14; Ewald's OachichU, 1.
384). It is remarkable that the people of Barron
retained to a late time the Chaldean language and
the worship of ChakUean deities (Asseman. BibL
Or. i. 327 ; Chwolsohn's Siabier und der Stabu-
nua, ii. 39). Harran lies upon the Btlilk (ancient
Bilichus), a small affluent ef the Euphrates, which
falls into it nearly in long. 39°. It was famous
among the Romans for being near the scene of the
defeat of Crassus (Plin. B. N. v. 24). About the
time of the Christian era it appears to have been
included in the kingdom of Edessa (Mos. Chor. ii.
32), which was ruled by Agbarus. Afterwards it
passed with that kingdom under the dominion of
the Romans, and appears as a Roman city in the
wars of Caracalla (Mos. Chor. ii. 72) and Julian
(Jo. Malal. p. 329). It is now a small village in
habited by a few families of Arabs.
In the A. V. of the New Test the name follows
the Greek form, and is given as Charran (Acts
vii. 3, 4. G. R.
* A controversy has recently sprung up respecting
the situation of the patriarchal Haran which re-
quires notice here. Within a few years a little
village known as B&ran-tUAvxanad has been dis-
covered, about four hours east of Damascus, on the
borders of the lake into which the Barada (Abana)
flows. Dr. Beke (Originet Biblica, Lond. 1834)
had thrown out the idea that the Scripture Haran
was not, as generally supposed, in Mesopotamia, but
must have been near Damascus. He now main-
tains that this Udrdn, so unexpectedly brought to
light between >' Abana and Pharpnr, rivers of Da-
mascus," must be the identical Haran (or Charran)
of the Bible in Aram-naharaim, ». e. Aram of the
two rivers. In 1861 Dr. Beke made a journey to
Palestine, with special reference to this question.
The argument on which he mainly relies is the
fact that Laban, in his pursuit of Jacob, appears to
have travelled from Haran to Gilead on the east
of the Jordan in 7 days (Gen. xxxi. 23), whereas
the actual distance of Haran from Gilead is about
300 geographical miles, and would make in that
country an ordinary journey of 15 or 20 days. An
Arab tribe on its ordinary migrations moves from
12 to 15 miles a day, and a caravan from 20 to 33
miles a day. On tie other band, it is not a little
remarkable that Dr. Beke himself went over the
ground, step by step, between Haran-tLAuxmM
and Gilead, and found the time to be five days,
hence very nearly the time that Laban was on the
way before he overtook Jacob in Gilead.
It must be owned that this rapidity of Laban's
pursuit of Jacob from Haran is not a slight diffi-
culty. For its removal we can only resort to cer-
tain suppositions in the case, which of course we
are at liberty to make if the Scripture text does not
exclude them, and if they are justified by the known
customs of the country and the age.
First, we may assume that 1-aban, taking with
him only some of his sons or other near kinsmen
("his brothers," see Gen. xxxi. 33), was unin
cumbered with baggage or women and children
and hence moved with all the despatch of which
eastern travelling admits. One party was fleeing
anc* the other pursuing. The chase was a close
one, as all th* language indicates. Jacob com-
plains ths.' Laban bad •' followed hotly " after him.
The swift dromedaries would be brought into
requisition if the ordinary camels were not swift
enough. The speed of these animals is snob, tayi
Digitized by
Google
J
1000
HABAtf
Sir Henry RawBnaon (who hai seen sc much of the
But), that they " consume but 8 days in crowing
the desert from Damascus to Baghdad, a distance
of nearly S00 miles." He thinks it unquestionable
that Laban could hare " traversed the entire dis-
tance from Haran to Gilead in 7 days " (Athenaum,
April 19, 1869). For examples of the capacity of
such camels for making long and rapid journeys,
see the Penny CyclopaxHti, ri. 191.
Secondly, the expression (which is entirely correct
for the Hebrew) that Laban's journey before com-
ing up with Jacob was a " seven days' journey,"
is indefinite, and may include 8 or 9 days si well
as 7. " Seven," as Gesenius states, " is a round
number, and stands in the Hebrew for any number
less than 10." A week's time, in this wider sense,
would bring the distance still more easily within
an expeditious traveller's reach.
But whatever may be thought of the possibility
of Laban's making such a journey in such time,
the difficulty in the case of Jacob would seem to be
still greater; since, accompanied as he was with
Soaks and herds and women and children, he must
have travelled much more slowly. To this it
may be replied that the narrative does not restrict
us to the three days which passed before Laban
became aware of Jacob's departure added to the
seven days which passed before he overtook Jacob
in Gilead. It is very possible that Laban, on hear-
ing so suddenly that Jacob had fled, was not in a
situation to follow at once, but had preparations to
make which would consume three or four days
more ; so as in reality to give Jacob the advantage
of five or six days before be finally started in pur-
suit. It is altogether probable too that the wary
Jacob adopted measures before setting out which
would greatly accelerate his flight. (See Gen. xxxi.
90.) Mr. Porter, who is so familiar with Eastern
life, has drawn out this suggestion in a form that
appears not unreasonable. Jacob could quietly
move his flocks down to the banks of the Euphrates
and send them across the river, without exciting
suspicion ; since then, as now, the Socks of the great
proprietors roamed over a wide -egion (Gen. xxxi.
1-3). In like manner before starting himself he
could have sent his wives and children across the
river, and hurried them forward with all the des-
patch which at this day characterizes an Arab tribe
fleeing before an enemy (vers. 17, 18). All this
might take place before Laban was aware of Jacob's
purpose ; and they were then at least 3 days' dis-
tant from each other (vers. 19-29). The inter-
/ening region between the Euphrates and Gilead,
a distance of 950 miles, is a vast plain, with only
iue ridge of hills ; and thus Jacob " could march
irward straight as an arrow." If, as supposed,
.lis flocks and family were already in advance, he
•ould travel for the first two or three days at a very
rapid pace. " Now, I maintain " (says this writer),
1 that any of the tribes of the desert would at this
noment, under similar circumstances, accomplish
the distance in 10 days, which is the shortest pe-
riod we can, according to the Scripture account,
assign to the journey (vers. 29, S3). We must not
judge of the capabilities of Arab women and chil-
dreu, Socks and herds, according to our Western
ideas and experience." (See Athenaum, May 94,
1889.)
Dr. Beke's other incidental confirmations of his
haory ira ess important. It is urged that unless
Abraham was living near Damascus, he could not
uts bad a servant in his household who was called
HAKJLM
"EHezer of Damascus" (Gen. zr. I), law
answer to this is that the servant himself may pos-
sibly have been born there and have wandered la
the further East before Abraham's migration; ci
more probably, may have sprung from a family that
belonged originally to Damascus. Mr. Porter says
" I knew well in Damascus two men, one called
Ibrahim el-Haleby, > Abraham of Aleppo ' ; and tba
other Elias el-Akkawy, > Elias of Akka,' neither of
whom had ever been in toe town whose name he
bore. Their ancestors had come from those towns .
and that is all such expressions usually signify in
the East " (Athenaum, December 7, 1881.)
The coincidence of the name proves Djthing as
to the identification in question. The nsme (if it
be Arabic) means 'arid,' 'scorched,' and refers n>
doubt to the Syrian Hir&n as being on the in
mediate confines of the desert. The affix itnaai <
" columns," comes from five Ionic pillars, forty feet
high, which appear among the mud-houses of the
village. (See Porter's Handb. of Syr. and Pal.
ii. 497.)
Again, the inference from Acts vii. 2, that Ste-
phen opposes Cbarran to Mesopotamia in such a
way as to imply that Cbarran lay outside the latter,
is unnecessary, to say the least; for he may mean
equally as well that Abraham was called twice in
Mesopotamia, •'. e. not only in the part of that prov-
ince where Cbarran was known to be, but still ear-
lier in the more northern part of it known as " the
land of the Chaldees," the original home and seat
of the Abrahamic race. Not only so, but the latter
must be Stephen's meaning, unless he differed from
the Jews of his time, since both Philo (tie Abr. ii.
pp. 11, 14, ed. Mang.) and Josephus (AnL L 7, § 1)
relate that Abraham was called thus twice in the
land of his nativity and kindred, and in this view
they follow the manifest implication of the O. T.,
as we see from Gen. xv. 7 and Neh. ix. 7 (comp.
Gen. xii. 1-4).
Dr. Beke found " flocks of sheep, and maidens
drawing water," at Hai-an-et-Aunmid, and felt that
he saw the Scripture scene of Jacob's arrival, and
of the presence of Rachel with " her father's sheep
which she kept," reenacted before his eyes. But
that is an occurrence so common in eastern villages
ut the present day, especially along the skirts of the
desert, that it can hardly be said to distinguish one
place from another.
But the reasons for the traditional opinion en-
tirely outweigh those against it. (1.) The city of
Nahor or Haran (Gen. xxiv. 10) is certainly in
Arani-naharaim, i. e. "Syria of the two rivers"
(in the A. V. " Mesopotamia"). This expression
occurs also in Deut. xxiii. 4 and Judg. iii. 8, and
implies a historic notoriety which answers perfectly
to the Tigris and Euphrates, but not to rivers of
such limited local importance as the Abana and
Pharpar, streams of Damascus. (2.) Aram-Dam-
mesek (the •* Syria Damascene " of Pliny) is the
appellation of Southern Syria (see 8 Sam. viii. 6
and Is. vii. 8), and is a different region t >m Aram-
n.haraJTn where Haran was. (3.) Jacob in going
to Haran went to " the land of the people of the
East " (Gen. xxix. 1), which is not appropriate tc
so near a region as that of Damascus, snd one
almost north of Palestine, but is so to that beyond
the Euphrates. In accordance with this, Balaam,
who came from Arara-naharsim, rpeaks of himself
as having been brought "out of the mountains <i
the East" (Deut, xxiii. 5; Num. xxiii. 7). (■»
The river which Jacob crossed in his flight fron
Digitized by
Google
HARARITE, THK
Ufcsa h Urtned "^n, »'• e. " -he river," as Uw
Euphrates is ao often termed by way of eminence
(Gen. izzi. 81 ; Ex. alii. 33 ; Josh. hit. 2, 3, Ac. ).
(5.) The ancient versions (the Targums, the Syriac
and the Arabic Pentateuch) actually insert Eu-
phrates in Gen. mi 31, and thus show how familiar
the authors were with the peculiar Hebrew mode
af designating thai rirer. (6.) The place* associ-
ated with Haran, as Gozan, Kezeph, Eden (2 Kings
six. 12; U. xxxvi. 19), and Canneh (Es. xxvii. 23),
point to the region of the Euphrates as the seat of
this entire group of cities. (7.) Incidental allusions
(as in Gen. xxiv. 4-8; zzviii. 20, 21) show that
Haran was very far distant from Canaan, whereas
Demur in is upon its very border. So, too, Josephus
(Ant. i. 16, § 1) not only place Haran in Mesopo- 1
tamia, but (referring to Abraham's sending Eliezer
to procure a wife for Isaac) sets forth its great dis-
tance from Canaan, as making the journey thither
formidable and tedious in the highest degree. (8.)
The tiling traditions connect Abraham's life in
ilaran with Mesopotamia and not with Damascus.
Ainsworth, who risited H&rin, says that the people
there preserve the memory of the patriarch's history ;
they teO where be encamped, where he crossed the
Euphrates, and how he and his herds found a
resting-place at Beroea, now Aleppo (HetcnrrJitt
is Amyria, etc., p. 152 f.). H
HA'RARITE, THE OT^nn, perhaps =
tie wtcmntainetr, Ges. Tket. p. 392: de Arari, or
Orori, Arrtrila), the designation of three men
connected with David's guard.
1- (* 'Afouxotot: [de Arari.]) " Aoek, a
Hararite " (there is no article here in the Hebrew),
father of Shammah, the third of the three chiefs
sf the heroes (2 Sam. ixiii. 11). In the parallel
passage, 1 Chr. xi., the name of this warrior is
entirely omitted.
*. CApaSlnit; [V"*- Alex. -»«-: de Orori.])
" Shammah the Hararite " is named as one of the
thirty in 2 Sam. xxiii. 33. In 1 Chr. xi. 34
[Afa»>; Vat.1 Apart t, 2. m. Apapu: Ararita]
the name is altered to Shage. Kennicott's con-
chanon, from a minute investigation, is that the
passage should stand in both, " Jonathan son of
Shaimnah the Hararite " — Shammah being iden-
tical with Shimei, David's brother.
3. (3apaovplTr)s, t 'Apapl [Vat. -p«i-, -pti'
ArorUa, Ararita.]) " Sharar (2 Sam. xxiii.
J3) or Sacar (1 Chr. xi. 35) the Hararite " was
the father of Ahiam, another member of the guard.
Kennicott inclines to take Sacar as the oorrect
HARBCTNA Wj'O-jn [prob. Pers. au-
*tser, Ges] :0Ajt6a, Alex, baptfiua; [Comp.Xao-
SaW.°] H«rbona), the third of the seven chamber-
kuna, or eunuchs, who served king Ahasuerus (Esth.
L 10), and who suggested Hainan's being hung on
Us own gallowe (vii. 9). In the latter passage the
same is
HARBCXAH (i"tjP3"lfl • foe above] :
aW fsTaV; [FA- 1 Bowvafe; Corop. Xapfrmnl:]
Bartoma). [Writtec thus in Esth. vii. 9, but the
■use name as the foregoing. — H.]
HARE (»" l 3?7y. "rntbtth : JWwo.i: lepui)
ssjan only in Lev. xi. 6 and Dent. xiv. 7, amongst
Jt» anrmals disallowed as food by the Mosaic lav.
Itm it no Toubt at all that amebetf ienotes a
ham -. ant *n aO probability the species Leptu
HARE 1001
Sinaiiiau, which Ehrenberg and Hemprich (Bymi
Phyt.) mention as occurring in the valleys of
Arabia Petnea and Mount Sinai, and L. Syrtaau,
which the same authors state is found in the Leb-
anon, are those which were best known to the
ancient Hebrews; though there are other kinds of
Leporitla, as the L. AVyyptiw and the L. JCthiopi-
cut, if a distinct species from L. Sinaiiiau, which
are found in the Bible lands. The hare is at this
day called arneb (>_*J)I) by the Arabs in Pales-
tine and Syria (see Russell's Nat. Hut. of Aleppo,
ii 151, 2d ed.). The oWArovf, i. t. « rough foot,"
Hare of Mount Sinai.
is identical with Ao-y<6r, and is the term which
Aristotle generally applies to the hare: indeed, he
only uses the latter word once in his History of
Ammnts (viii. 27, § 4). We are of opinion, as we
have elsewhere stated [Coney], that the rabbit
(L. atmcuhu) was unknown to the ancient He-
brews, at any rate in its wild state; nor does it
appear to be at present known in Syria or Palestine
as a native. It is doubtful whether Aristotle was
acquainted with the rabbit, as he never alludes to
any burrowing \a-yur or Zaafatovs; but, on the
other hand, see the passage in vi. 28, § 3, where
the young of the tairlntovs are said to be " bam
Han ef Mount Lebanon.
blind," which will apply to the rabbit alone. Pliny
(N. H rfii. 55), expressly notices rabbits (ctmieali),
which xscur in such numbers in the Balearic Islands
to destroy the harvests He also nnHnaa the
Digitized by
Google
1002
BASEL
practice of ferreting then animals, and thai driving
them out of their burrows. In confirmation of
Pliny's remarks, we may observe that there is a
•matt bland of the Balearic group called Conejera,
i. e. in Spanish a " rabbit-warren," which at this
day is abundantly stocked with these animals. The
hare was erroneously thought by the ancient Jews
to have chewed the cud, who were no doubt misled,
as in the case of the thdph&n (Byrax), by the habit
these animals have of moving the jaw about.
" Hares are so plentiful in the environs of Aleppo,"
•ays Dr. Russell (p. 158), " that it was no uncom-
mon thing to see the gentlemen who went out a
sporting twice a week return with four or five brace
hung in triumph at the girths of the servants'
hsrsea." The Turks and the natives, he adds, do
not eat the hare; but the Arabs, who have a peculiar
mode of dressing it, are fond of its flesh. Hares
are hunted in Syria with greyhound and falcon.
W. H.
HAR-EL (with the def. art, VfennrV: to
&prf,\: Ariel). In the margin of Ec. xUii. 15 the
word rendered " altar " in the test is given " Harel,
i. «. the mountain of God." The LXX., Vulg.,
and Arab, evidently regarded it as the same with
" Ariel " in the same verse. Our translators fol-
lowed the Targum of Jonathan in translating it
"altar." Junius explains it of the iox&pa or
hearth of the altar of burnt offering, covered by the
network on which the sacrifices were placed over
the burning wood. This explanation Gesenius
adopts, and brings forward ss a parallel the Arab.
8J, irth, " a hearth or fireplace," akin to the
Heb. "WM, <2r, "light, flame." FUret (Bandw.
s. v.) derives it from an unused root WJ'jJ, hard,
" to glow, burn," with the termination -el; but the
rally authority for the root is its presumed existence
in the word Hard. Ewald {Die Prophtten del A.
B. ii. 378) identifies Harel and Ariel, and refers
them both to a root i"HN, drib, akin to "W, dr.
W. A. W.
HA'REPH Win [pheUng off]: 'Aplfi;
[Vat Aptifti] Alex. Apci; [Comp. 'Apr)d)0 Ba-
riph), a name occurring in the genealogies of Judah,
as a son of Caleb, and as "father of Beth-gader "
(1 Chr. ii. 51, only). In the lists of Ezr. ii. and
Neh. vii. the similar name Hariph is found ; but
nothing appears to establish a connection between
the two.
HA'RETH, THE FOREST OF HP!
HTQ : h wo*A«» in both MSS reading "TO
for IT'—Xaplic, [Vat Jtapsuc;] Alex. 'Apid8;
[Comp. Xap^fl:] in taltvm Baret), in which David
took refuge, after, at the instigation of the prophet
Gad, he had quitted the " hold " or fastness of the
save of Adullam — if indeed it was Adullam and
not Mizpeh of Hoab, which is not quite clear (1
Sain. xxii. 5). Nothing appears in the narrative
by which the position of this forest, which has long
duos disappeared, can be ascertained, except the
very general remark that it was in the " bind of
Judah," «'. e. according to Josephus, the inheritance
proper of that tribe, <rj)v K\npovj(.lay rf/t e>uAqt,
a The asms reading Is found In Josephus (.Ant. vi.
Htfa> INS Is om of three Instances In tola chapter
HARIPH
as opposed to the " desert," tt/v ipn/iiar, in vriawft
he had before been lurking (Ant. vi. 12, § 4). W«
might take it to be the "wood" in the "wilder-
ness of Ziph " in which he was subsequently hiddea
(xxiii. 1 5, 19 ), but that the Hebrew term is different
(choreth instead of yaar). In the Onomattieon,
"Arith" is said to have then existed wed of
Jei
HARHA1AH [3 syl.] (TPTntf [Jehoea*
it angry]: 'Apaxlasi [Vat Alex.' FA. omit:]
Araia). Uzziel son of Cliarhaiah, of the goldsmiths,
assisted in the repair of the wall of Jerusalem
under Nehemiah (Neh. iiL 8). [Some MSS. read
n^CnCI=/eAntwA is a protection, Fiirst]
HAR'HAS (Drrin : 'Apds; [Vat Apcuu :]
Armas), an ancestor of Shallnm the husband of
Huldah, the prophetess in the time of Josiah (9
K. xxii. 14). In the parallel passage in Chronicle*
the name is given as HxhRAH.
HAR'HUR ("WTjn [root "HI?, to burn,
Mine : hence distinction, FUret: but Ges., inflam-
mation] : 'Apoip; [in Neh., Vat FA. Apoiiu:] Bar-
hur). Bene-Cnarchur were among the Nethinim
« ho returned from Babylon with Zerubbabel (Ezr.
ii. 51 ; Neb. vii. 53). In the Apocryphal Esdraa
the name has become Assur, Pharacim.
HATtlM (D"!P [flaunted]). L (XopIB;
[Comp.] Alex. Xopr/u: Harim), a priest who had
charge of the third division in the house of God
(1 Chr. xxiv. 8).
2. CHpdp, ['Hpd>; in Neh. x. 6, 'IpeV, Vat
Eipajt;] Alex. 'HpoV [Barm, Harem, Arm.])
Bene-Harim, probably descendants of the above, to
the number of 1017, came up from Babylon with
Zerubbabel (Ezr. ii. 39; Neh. vii. 42). [Carme.]
The name, probably as representing the family, is
mentioned amongst those who sealed the covenant
with Nehemiah (Neh. x. 5); and amongst the
priests who had to put away their foreign wives
were five of the sons of Harim (Ezr. x. 21). In the
parallel to this latter passage in Esdraa the name
is given Annas.
3. ('Apl; [Vat. Alex. FA* omit: Baram.]) It
further occurs in a list of the families of priests
" who went up with Zerubbabel and Jeshua," and
of those who were their descendants in the next
generation — in the days of Joiakim the son of
Jeshua (Neh. xii. 15). In the former list (xii. 3)
the name is changed to Rehum (Q"in to Cm)
by a not unfrequent transposition of letters.
[Rehdm.]
*. ["HodV, exc. Ezr. ii. 38, Rom. 'H\ifi\ Neh.
x. 27, AW. Alex. 'Ptoi/i- Barim, Berem, Barem,
Baran.] Another family of Bene-Harim [sons of
H.], three hundred and twenty in number, came
from the Captivity in the same caravan (Ezr. ii.
32; Neh. vii. 35). rbese were laymen, and seem
to have taken their name from a place, at least the
contiguous names in the list are certainly those of
places. These also appear among those who had
married foreign wives (Ezr. x. 31), as well as thost
who sealed the covenant (Neh. x. 27). [Eases.]
HA'RIPH (*nn [autumnal rain, Ges.; bat
Fiirst, one early-born, strong] :'Apl<p; [Vet Ap « ; t
alone In which the reading of Josephus departs I
tht Hebrew text, and agrees with the LXX
Digitized by
Google
HARLOT
Ufa Apop, [Kt>«p; FA. Aptiai, Ap« ] nmvph),
> bo jdred and twelve of the Mene-Chariph [sons
if C] returned from the Captivity with Zerubbabel
(Neh. rii. 34). The name occurs again among the
"heads of the people" who sealed the covenant
(x. 19 [20 in Ilebr.]). In the lists of Ezra and
Esdras, Hariph appears as Jorah" and Azkph-
iihith respectively. An almost identical name,
Hareph L'HP, ° phdemg °ff~i, appears In the
lists of Jud&h [1 Chr. ii. 61] as the father of Beth-
gader [comp. Hahuphite].
HARLOT H:'V, often with H^M, nj-]5?,
nBH|7). That this condition of persons existed
in the earlU it states of society is clear from Gen.
cxxviii. 15. So Rahab (Josh. ii. 1), who is said
by the Chaldee paraph. (<ul lac.), to have been an
innkeeper,' but if there were such persons, consider-
ing what we know of Canaanitish morals (Lev.
xviii. 27), we may conclude tliat they would, if
women, have been of this class. The law forbids
(xix. 29) the father's compelling his daughter to
sin, but does not mention it as a voluntary mode
of life on her part without his complicity. It could
indeed hardly be so. The isolated act which is the
subject of Deut. xxii. 28, 29, is not to the purpose.
Male relatives c were probably allowed a practically
unlimited discretion in punishing family dishonor
incurred by their women's unchaatity (Gen. xxxviii.
2-1 ). The provision of I*v. xxi. 9, regarding the
priest's daughter, may have arisen from the fact of
his home being less guarded owing to his absence
when ministering, as well as from the scandal to
sanctity so involved. Perhaps such abominations
might, if not thus severely marked, lead the way
to the excesses of Gentile ritualistic fornication, to
vhich indeed, when so near the sanctuary, they
night be viewed as approximating (Michaelis, L iict
f Motet, art. 268). Yet it seems to he assumed
that the harlot class would exist, and the prohibi-
tion of Deut. xxiii 18, forbidding offerings from
the wages of such sin, is perhaps due to the con-
tagion of heathen example, in whose worship prac-
tices abounded which the Israelites were taught to
abhor. The term i"TKHf? (meaning properly "con-
secrated") points to one description of persons,
and i" 1 *"!?? ("strange woman") to another, of
whom this' class mostly consisted. The first term
refers to the impure worship of the Syrian d Aatarte
(Num. xxv. 1; comp. Herod, i. 199; Justin, xviii.
6; Stnbo, viii. p. 378, xii. p. S59; Val. Max. ii. 6,
15; August, rfe Civ. Dei, iv. 4), whose votaries, as
.dciatrj progressed, would be recruited from the
daughters of Israel; hence the common mention
of both the* sins in the Prophets, the one indeed
being a metaphor of the other (Is. I. 21, lvii. 8;
Jar. Ii. 20; comp. Kx. xxxiv. 15, 16; Jer. iii. 1, 2,
*i Ex. xvi. xxiii.; Hoe. i. 2, ii. 4, 6, iv. 11, 13, 14,
15, t. 3). The latter class would grow up with
the growth of great cities and of foreign intercourse,
» • Jonh (rni\ firtt or tarty rain) Is simply _
Baitph, if tht latter means (sss above) the early rain
»hloh begins to mJ. In Palestine about the mlddk. o'
E
• D-vting, Otm. Ac i. 476, H.TP"^.
HAROD, THE WELL OF 1008
and hardly could enter into the view of the Mosaic
institutes. As regards the fashions involved iu the
practice, similar outward marks seem to have at-
tended its earliest forms to those which we trace in
the classical writers, e, g. a distinctive dress and a
seat by the way-side (Gen. xxxviii. 14 ; comp. Ex.
xvi. 16, 25; Bar. vi. 43 [or Epist. of Jer. 43] ;«
l'etron. Arb. Sat. xvi.; Juv. vi. 118 foil.; Dougtad
Analect. finer. Exc. xxiv.). Public singing in the
streets occurs also (Is. xxiii. 16; Kcclus. ix. 4).
Those who thus published their infamy were of the
worst repute, others had houses of resort, and both
classes seem to have been known among the Jews
(Prov. vii. 8-12, xxiii. 28; Kcclus. ix. 7, 8); the
two women, 1 K. iii. 16, lived as Greek hctaarse
sometimes did, in a house together ( Diet. Or. and
Bom. Ant. a. v. Hetara). The baneful fascination
ascribed to them in Prov. vii. 21-23 may be com-
pared with what Chardin says of similar effect*
among the young nobility of Persia ( Voyages em
Pent, i. 163, ed. 1711), as also may Luke xv. 30,
for the sums lavished on them (ii. 162). In earlier
times the price of a kid is mentioned (lien, xxxviii.),
and great wealth doubtless sometimes accrued to
them (!■>.. xvi. 33, 39, xxiii. 26). lint lust, aa dis-
tinct from gain, appears as the inducement in Prov.
vii. 14, 15 (see DougUei Anal. Sacr. ad toe.), when
the victim is further allured by a promised sacri-
ficial banquet (comp. Ter. ton. iii. ii). The "har-
lots " are classed with " publicans," as those who
lay under the ban of society in the N. T. (Matt.
xxi. 32). No doubt they multiplied with the in-
crease of polygamy, and consequently lowered the
estimate of marriage. The corrupt practices im-
ported by Gentile converts into the Church occasion
most of the other passages in which allusions to the
subject there occur, 1 Cor. v. 1, 9, 1 1 ; 2 Cor. xii.
21; 1 Thess. iv. 3; 1 Tim. i. 10. The decree,
Acta xv. 29, has occasioned doubts as to the mean-
ing of woprtta there, chiefly from its context, which
may lie seen discussed at length in Dealing's Obterv.
Siicr. ii. 470, foil.; Schoett^en, Hor. lltbr. i. 468;
Spencer and Hammond, ml lac. The simplest
sense however seems the most probable. The chil-
dren of such persons were held in contempt, and
could not exercise privileges nor inherit (John viii.
41; Deut. xxiii. 2; Judg. xi. 1, 2). On the gen-
end subject Michaelis's Lain of Motet, bk. v. art.
268; Selden, de Ux. Ifeb. i. 16, iii. 12, and de Jw.
Natur. v. 4, together with Schoettgen, and the
authorities there quoted, may be consulted.
The words ^ITJ /TO^n), A. V. "and they
washed his armor " (1 K. xxii. 38) should be "and.
the harlots washed," which is not only the natural
rendering, but in accordance with the LXX. and
Joeuphus. H. H.
HARNETHER {"^TJl [etym. uncer-
tain]: 'Apra^dp; [Vat. corrupt:] ffarnapker),
one of the sons of Zophah, of the tribe of Aaher
(1 Chr. vii. 36).
HA'ROD, THE WELL OF (accur. Me
stoning ; but this Is, by Selden (</« Er. Heb. III. 18),
shown to be unfounded.
d So at Corinth wen 1009 itoeeovAot dedicated to
Aphrodite and the gross sins of ber worship, and sbn
tlarljr at Comcne, in Armenia (Strabo, It. e.).
« A&ro* at yvratxcf «x jrjt terni vast raptorves
tmnfwiicmn (Theophr. Char. xrvtU.). 84 Catullus
e Phuo (Lib. dt tpte. .leg*. 6, 7) contends b-tt (Cann. xxxrll. 16) speaks converse!) of milv*
was punished under the Movie law with mmki.
Digitized by
Google
1004
HABODITE, THE
prmg of Chared [I. e. ©/ fremAKac], T*1£J f^Tg : '
wiyii 'Kfiit, Alex. Tt)r yip lata- font ayi ^oca-
fur Harad), a spring by C?3?) which Gideon mil
hi* great arm; encamped on the morning of the day
which ended in the rout of the Midianitea (Judg.
Tii. 1), and where the trial of the people by their
mode of drinking apparently took place. The word,
•lightly altered, recur* in the proclamation to the
host: " Whosoever is fearful and trembling (T^fl,
chared) let him return " (ver. 3) : but it is impos-
sible to decide whether the name Chared wan, as Prof.
Stanley proposes, bestowed on account of the trem-
bling, or whether the mention of the trembling was
suggested by the previously existing name of the
fountain: either would suit the paronomastic vein
in which these ancient records so delight. The
word chnred (A. V. "was afraid") recurs in the
description of another event which took place in
this neighborhood, possibly at this very spot —
Saul's last encounter with the Philistines — when
he "was afraid, and his heart trembled greatly,"
at the sight of their fierce hosts (1 Sam. xxviii. 6).
The 'AinJaliUl, with which Prof. Stanley would
identify Harod (S. </ P.) is very suitable to the
circumstances, as being at present the largest spring
In the neighborhood, and as forming a pool of con-
siderable size, at which great numbers might drink
(Rob. ii. 323). But if at that time so copious,
would it not have been seized by the Midianitea
before Gideon's arrival ? However, if the 'Am Ja-
liid be not this spring, we are very much in the
dark, since the "hill of Moreh," the only land-
mark afforded us (vil. 1 ), has not been recognized.
The only hill of Moreh of which we have any certain
knowledge was by Shecbem, 25 miles to the south.
If 'Am Jalid be Harod, then Jtbd Duhy must be
Moreh.
It is quite possible that the name Jalud is a
corruption of Harod. In that case it is a good
example of the manner in which local names ac-
quire a new meaning in passing from one language
to another. Harod itself probably underwent a
similar process after the arrival of the Hebrews in
Canaan, and the paronomastic turn given to Gid-
eon's speech, as above, may be an indication of the
change. G.
HA'RODITE, THE (^'"irjrj [patronym.,
see below] : 6 'PovSaios S Alex, o Apovttuos, [o
AfwScuot :] d» HarocH), the designation of two of
the thirty-wren warriors of David's guard, Sham-
mah and Euka (2 Sam. xxiii. 26), doubtless de-
rived from a place named Harod, either that just
spoken of or some other. In the parallel passage
of Chronicles by a change of letter the name ap-
pears as Hakoiutk.
HARO'EH (n^'in, i e. ha-Roeh = Me
seer: 'Apod [Vat. corrupt]), a name occurring in
the genealogical lists of Judah as one of the sons
of "Sbobal, father of Kirjath-jearim " (1 Chr. ii.
59). The Vulg. translates this and the following
words, " qui videbat dimidium requielionum." A
somewhat similar name — Reaiah — is given in
t. 2 as the son of Shobal, but there is nothing to
establish the identity of the two.
HA'BORITE, THE OTHOTI [see Ha-
■odtik]: 6 'Apwpl; [Vat FA. o AJii] Alex.
SaeV Arorilet), the title given to Shamiioth,
■m «f the warriors of David's guard (1 Chr. xi. 27).
HAROBHETH
We have here an example of the min.itt <
anciea which exist between these two parallel Bate
In this case it appears to have arisen from an ex-
change of 1, D, for "1, R, and that at a very early
date, since the LXX. is in agreement with the
present Hebrew text. But there are other diner
ences, for which see Shawm ah.
HARCSHETH (Htthq, Chartsheth
[working m wood, stone, etc., Gee.; or dig of
ern/U, of artificial work, Fiirst]: 'Apuri&t; [Vat.
Koticoi; Alex. KauouB, in ver. 16, Spvfwu']
Barottth), or rather "Harosheth of the Gentiles,"
as it was called (probably for the same reason that
Galilee was afterwards), from the mixed races that
inhabited it, a city in the north of the land of Ca-
naan, supposed to have stood on the west coast of
the lake Mcrom (el-Hileh), from which the Jordan
issues forth in one unbroken stream, and in the
portion of the tribe of Naphtali. It was the res-
idence of Sisera, captain of Jabin, king of Canaan
(Judg. iv. 2), whose capital, Hazor, one of the
fenced cities assigned to the children of Kaphtali
(Josh. xix. 36), lay to the northwest of it; and it
was the point to which the victorious Israelites
under Barak pursued the discomfited host and
chariots of the second potentate of that name
(Judg. iv. 16). Probably from intermarriage with
the conquered Canaanites. the name of Sisera be-
came afterwards a family name (Ezr. ii. 63).
Neither is it irrelevant to allude to this coincidence
in connection with the moral effects of this deci-
sive victory; for Hazor, once " the head of all those
kingdoms " (Josh. xi. 6, 10), had been taken and
burnt by Joshua; its king, Jabin I., put to the
sword ; and the whole confederation of the Canaan-
ites of the north broken and slaughtered in the
celebrated battle of the waters of Merom (Josh. xi.
6-14) — the first time that '* chariots and horses "
appear in array against the invading host, and an
so summarily disposed of, according to Divine
command, under Joshua; but which subsequently
the children of Joseph feared to lace in the valley
of Jczreel (Josh. ivii. 16-18); and which Judah
actually failed before in the Philistine plain (Judg.
i. 19). Herein was the great difficulty of subdu-
ing plains, similar to that of the Jordan, beside
•which Harosheth stood. It was not till the Israel-
ites had asked for and obtained a king, that they
began " to multiply chariots and horses " to them-
selves, contrary to the express words of the law
(Deut. xvii. 16), as it were to fight the enemy with
his own weapons. (The first instance occurs 2
Sam. viii. 4, coinp. 1 Chr. xviii. 4; next in the
histories of Absalom, 2 Sam. xv. 1, and of Adoni-
jah, 1 K. i. 6; while the climax was reached under
Solomon, 1 K. iv. 26.) And then it was that
their decadence set in I They were strong in
faith when they hamstrung the horses s;>d burned
the chariots with fire of the kings of Hazor, of
Madon, of Shimron, and of Achshaph (Josh. xi. 1).
And yet so rapidly did they decline when their
illustrious leader was no more, that the city of
Hazor had risen from its ruins ; and in contrast to
the kings of Mesopotamia and of Moab (Judg. iii.),
who were both of them foreign potentates, another
Jabin, the territory of whose ancestors had been
assigned to the tribe of Naphtali, claimed the dis-
tinction of being the first to revolt against and
shake off the dominion of Israel in his newij
acquired inheritance. But the victory won b»
Digitized by
Google
HABP
[Monk and Bmk was weD worth j of the song of
Mamph which it inspired (Judg. t.), and of the
proverbial celebrity which ever afterwards attached
to it (Pa. Uxxiii. 9, 10). The whole territory waa
gradually won back, to be held permanently, ai it
would Mem (Judg. iv. 24); at all event* we hear
nothing more of Hazor, Haroabeth, or the Canaan-
itee of the north, in the nicceeding ware.
The tile of Haroabeth does not appear to have
been identified by any modern traveller.
E. 8. Ft
• Dr. Thomson (Land and Book, U. 143) sup-
poses Haroabeth to be the high Tell called ffaro-
tkUJi, near the base of Carmel, where the Kishon
flows along toward the sea. " I have no doubt,"
he says, " of this identification." A castle there
would guard the pass along the Kishon into the
plain of Eadreelon, and the ruins still found on this
"enormous double mound" show that a strong for-
tress must nave stood hero in former times. A village
sf the same name occurs higher up on the other
side of the river, and hence somewhat nearer the
scene of the Deborah-Barak battle. This writer says
that HarutAUh is the Arabic form of the Hebrew
Haroabeth, and (according to his view of the di-
rection of the flight) lies directly in the way of the
retreat of Sisera's forces. It is about eight miles
from Megiddo, and in the neighborhood of Accho
CAkkit), and hence exactly in the region where the
Gentile " nations," to which Haroabeth belonged,
still dwelt and were powerful ; for we learn from
Judg. i. 31 that the Hebrews had been unable to
drive them out from that part of the country.
En-dor is mentioned (Ps. Uxxiii. 10) as a place
of slaughter on this occasion. Henoe, Stanley, in
bis graphic sketch (J oath Church, i. 3S9), repre-
sent* the Canaanites as escaping in the opposite
direction, through the eastern branch of the plain,
and thence onward to Uarosbeth, suppueed by him
to be among the northern hills of Ualilee. En-dor
was not far from Tabor (the modem village is dis-
tinctly visible from it* top), and in that passage of
the Psalmist it may be named as a vague designa-
tion of the battle-field, while possbly those who
"perished at En-dor" were some of the fugitives
driven in that direction, about whose destruction
there was something remarkable, as known by «.me
tradition not otherwise preserved. H.
HABP (~>13?, Kinnor), in Greek nan/ifa
or uropo, from the Hebrew word, the sound of
which corresponds with the thing signified, like the
German kmxrrtn, "to produce a shrill tone"
(Liddell at>J Scott), (jesenius inclines to the
opinion that ~ 1*133 is derived from 133, " an
unused onomatopoetic root, which means to give
forth a tremulous and stridulous sound, like that
•f a string when touched." The kinnor waa the
national instrument of the Hebrews, and was well
known throughout Asia. There can be little doubt
that it was the earliest instrument with which man
was acquainted, as the writer of the Pentateuch
assigns its invention, together with that of the
"2*^7*, Dgiib, incorrectly translated " organ " in
that A. V., to the antediluvian period (Gen. iv. 81).
Dr. Kalisch (UuL and CriL Com, m the Old Test.)
sounder* Kinnor to stand for the whole class of
stringed instrument* (Ntginath), sa Ugah, says
ha, " is the type of all wind instruments." 'Vritere
connect the Kirupa with ninois (wailing),
i ft lament), conjecture that this instru-
HABP 1006
meat was only employed by the Greeks on oeee-
sions of sorrow and distress. If this wen the cs*e
with the Greeks it was far different with the He-
brews, amongst whom the tinner served a* an ac-
companiment to songs of cheerfulness and mirth
as well as of praise and thanksgiving to the Su-
preme Being (Gen. xxxi. 37; 1 Sam. xvi. 83; 8
Chr xx. 98; Ps rniii. 8), and was very rarely
Egyptian harp. (Ohampollion.)
used, if ever, in times of private or national aflno-
tion. The Jewish bard finds no employment for
the kinnor during the Babylonian Captivity, bat
describes it as put aside or suspended on the wil-
lows (Ps. exxxvii. 8); and in like manner Job's
harp " is changed into mourning " (xxx. 31), whilst
the hand of grief pressed heavily upon him. The
passage "my bowels shall sound like a harp for
Assyrian harps. (Nineveh marbles.)
Moab" (Is. xvi. 11) has impressed some Biblical
critics with the idea that the kinnor had a lugu-
brious sound ; but this is an error, since "113D3
"ItSrV refers to the vibration of the chords and
not to the sound of the instrument (Gesen. and
Hitzig, in Comment.).
Touching the shape of the kinnor a great differ-
ence of opinion prevails. The author of BhiiU
Baggibborim describes it as resembling the modem
harp; Pfeiffer gives it the form of a guitar; and
St. Jerome declares it to have resembled in shans
Digitized by
Google
1006
HARROW
the Gieek letter delta; and this last view ii up-
ported by Hieronymus, quoted by Joel Brill in the
preface to Mtndtiitohri $ Piahtu. Joaephua re-
cords (Antii/. vii. 12, § 3) that the kiimur had ten
string*, and that it waa played on with the plec-
trum ; other, assign to it twenty-four, and in the
Sialic llii'/t/Murim it is aaid to have had forty-
leven. Juttephus's statement, however, ought not
to lie received m conclusive, an it is in open contra-
diction to what is set forth in the 1st book of
Samuel (ivi. 23, xviii. 10), that David played on
the kitmuf with his hand. As it is reasonable to
suppose that there was a smaller and a larger kin-
nor, inasmuch as it was sometimes played by the
braelitea whilst walking (1 Sam. i. 6), the opinion
>f Mulik — "on jouait peut-6tre del deux manierea,
<uivaot las dimensions da l'inetrument " — ia well
asuinlsa harps, (from tbe tomb at Tnabsa, called
Belionl's.)
aititled to consideration. The Talmud (Mna.
Btracolh) has preserved a curious ' tradition to the
affect that over the bed of David, facing the north,
a kinnor was suspended, and that when at midnight
the north wind touched the chords they vibrated
and produced musical sounds.
The rWBt&rr b» "lUS — "harp on the
Sheminith " (1 Chr. xv. 21) — was so called from
.ts eight strings. Many learned writers, including
the author of Sliilte Haggibbvrim, identify the word
" Sherainith " with the octave; but it would indeed
be rash to conclude that the ancient Hobrews un-
derstood the octave in the sense in which it ia em-
ployed in modern times. [Shkminith.] The
skill of tbe Jews on the kinnor appears to have
reached its highest point of perfection in the age
of David, the effect of whose performances, as well
as of those by the members of the " Schools of
the Prophets," are described as truly marvelous
;comp. 1 Sam. x. 6, xvi. 93, and xix. 20).
D. W. M.
HARROW. The word so rendered 9 Sam.
rii. 81, 1 Chr. xx. 8 (V"!?) U probably a thresh-
ing-machine, the verb rendered "to harrow"
Cn(p)i I«- WW. 94; Job xxxix. 10; Hos. x. 11,
apresses apparently the breaking of the clods, and
la so far analogous to our harrowing, but whether
lone by any such machine as we call " a harrow,"
• very doubtful. In modern Palestine, oxen are
sometimes turned in to trample the clods, and in
sons parti of Asia a bush of thorns ia dragged
aw tils) surfaca, but all these processes, if used,
HART
occur (not after, but) before the seed ia <
to the soil. [See Agkicultubx.] H. H.
HAR-SHA (NPnn [deaf, Ges. 6te AuHj
see FUrst] : 'Apird; ['AJcurdv; in Exr., Vat. Ap*-
ero:] Ham). Bene-Charsha [sons of C] wen
among the families of Nethinim who came back
from Babylon with Zerubbabel (Ezr. ii. 52; Neh.
vii. 54). In the parallel list in Eadras the name ia
Chare a.
HART (bjN: fxapos- cerrus). The hart
ia reckoned among the clean animals (Deut. xii.
15, xiv. 5, xv. 22), and seems, from the passages
quoted as well as from 1 K. iv. 23, to have been
commonly killed for food. Its activity furniahea
an apt comparison in Is. xxxv. 6, though in thii
respect the hind was more commonly selected by
the sacred writers. In Ps. xlii. 1 tbe feminine ter-
mination of the verb renders an emendation neces-
sary: we must therefore substitute the hind; and
again in Lam. i. 8 the true reading ia D;" 1 W,
>< rams " (as given in the I.XX. and Vulg.). The
proper name Ajolon is derived from aayu, and im-
plies that harts were numerous in ti.e neighbor-
hood. W.LB.
The Heb. niaac. noun ayyat ( /*S), which ia al-
ways rendered f\apos by the I.XX., denotes, there
can be no doubt, some species of Cervida (deer
tribe), either the Damn vulgaris, fallow-deer, or
the Cervw Barbanu, the Barbary deer, the south-
ern representative of the European stag (C. ela-
phut), which occurs in Tunis and the coast of
Barbary. We have, however, no evidence to show
that the Barbary deer ever inhabited Palestine,
though there ia no reason why it may not haru
done so in primitive times. Haaselquist (7Vo».
Barbary ojaar.
p. 911) observed the fallow-deer on Mount Tabor.
Sir G. Wilkinson says (Aw. Egypt, p. 997, 8w>
ed.), "The stag with branching horns figured at
Beni Hassan ia also unknown In the valley of tb*
Digitized by
Google
HAKTJM
■Bit bwt it )■ still teen in the vicinity of the Na-
tron Uo, u about Tunis, though not in the des-
ert between the river and the Red Sea." Thia ia
doubtless the Cervai Barbaras.
Host of the deer tribe are careful to conceal their
salves after birth for a time. May there not be
some allusion to this circumstance m Job zxiix. 1,
" Canst thou mark when the hinds do calve? " etc.
Perhaps, as the LXX. uniformly renders at/yal by
(kcupos, we may incline to the belief that the Cer-
wi Barbara* is the deer denoted. The feminine
noun it^'S, ayyilah, occurs frequently in the
O. T. For the Scriptural allusions see under
Hdtd. W. H.
* The word Jot in Arabia is not confined to
any particular species, but is as general as our word
riser. It in (act applies as well to the mountain
(eat JuC^. G. E. P.
HATttJM (nnjl [eUvaUd, lo/tg]: 'I«pfr;
[Tat.] Alex. Iouwif*: Arum). A name occurring
m one of the most ooscure portions of the geneal-
ogies of Judah, in which Coz is said to have begot-
ten "the fiunilles of Aharhel son of Harum" (1
Chr. iv. 8).
HARTTMAPH (TO-Vr} {tliUtoud, Gee.]:
'Eftayid^; [Vat ZpmpaB:] Haromaph), father or
ancestor of Jedaiah, who assisted in the repair of
the wall of Jerusalem (Neb. Hi. 10).
HARTTTHITE, THE CWqTT [p"*ro-
nym., see Haripk] : b Xapm<pty,\ ; '[Vat FA.
-«><ii)A; Aid.] Alex. 'Afoixpl: [ZfanipA flu] ), the
designation of Shephatiahu, one of the Korhites
wbo repaired to David at Ziklag when he was in
distress (1 Chr. zii. S). The MasoreU read the
word Haripbite, and point it accordingly, ^S^TT.
HA'RTJZ (yntl [tealouM, ochre]: 'Apovt:
liana), a man of Jotbah, father of Meshullemeth,
queen of Hanasseh, and mother of Amon king ot
Indab (9 K. xxi. 19).
HARVEST. [Aoricdltorb.]
HASADI'AH (n^-lDH [ahom Jehovah
bees]: 'KtraXla- ffatadia), one of a group of five
persons among the descendants of the royal line of
lodah (1 Chr. Hi. 80), apparently sons of Zerub-
babeL the leader of the return from Babylon. It
!>M been conjectured that this latter half of the
family was born after the restoration, since some
of the names, and amongst them this one — "be-
loved of Jehovah," appear to embody the hopeful
feeling of that time. [Asadiab.]
HASENU'AH (nSV?n, i «. hst-Sennuab
{the hated]; 'Atriyov; [Vat. Aorai] Alex. Aero-
ms: Atana), a Benjamite, of one of the chief
families in the tribe (1 Chr. ix. 7). The name is
-esfly Sennah, with this definite article prefixed.
HASHABI'AH (H^IT q, and with final <;
Vl^ttjq* 'Ac-aBlca, ['AcaBla, A«/8f<u,]
AtrtBia, [etc.:] Rasnbiat, [Hatabia, Hatebiat,]
a this Is ons of the mitanoie in which the word
Mar (bajaad) Is used te the west slda of Jordan. To
HASHABNAH 1007
ffasebia), a name signifying "regarded of Jeho-
vah," uueh in request among the Levites, espe-
cially at the date of the return from Babylon.
1. A Merarite Levite, son of Amaziah, in the
line of Ethan the singer (1 Chr. vi. 45; Heb. 30)
2. Another Merarite Levite (1 Chr. ix. 14).
3. Chashabia'hd: another Levite, the fourth
of the six sons of Jeduthun (the sixth is omitted
here, but i* supplied in ver. 17), who played the
harp in the service of the house of God under
David's order (1 Chr. xxv. 3), and had charge of
the twelfth course (19).
4. Chashabia'hu: one of the Hebronites, »'. *.
descendants of Hebron the son of Kohath, one of
the chief families of the Levites (1 Chr. xxvi. 30)
He and the 1,700 men of his kindred had super ■
intendence for King David over business both
sacred and secular on the west" of Jordan. Pos-
sibly this is the same person as
6. The son of KemueL who was "prince"
("W) of the tribe of Levi in the time of David
(1 Chr. xxvil. 17).
6. Chasiiabia / hu: another Levite, one of the
"chiefs" {*$$) of his tribe, who officiated for
King Joaiah at his great pasaover-feast (2 Chr.
xxxv. 9). In the parallel account of 1 Esdras the
uame appears as Assabias.
7. A Merarite Levite who accompanied Fan
from Babylon (Ear. vni. 19). In 1 Esdras the
name is Asebia.
8. One of the chiefs of the priests (and there
fore of the family of Kohath) who formed part of
the same caravan (Ezr. viii. 24). In 1 Esdras the
name is Assaxias.
9. " Ruler " (~lt£0 of half the circuit or envi-
rons (Tf/JS) of Keilah; he repaired a portion of
the wall of Jerusalem under Nehemiah (Neb., iii.
").
10. One of the Levites who sealed the covenant
of reformation after the return from the Captivity
(Neh. x. 11). Probably this is the person named
as one of the " chiefs " OB? N"}) of the Levites in
the times immediately subsequent to the return
from Babylon (xii. 24; comp. 26).
11. Another Levite, son of Bunni (Neh. xl. 15).
Notwithstanding the remarkable correspondence
between the lists in this chapter and those in 1
Chr. ix. — and in none more than in this versr
compared with 1 Chr. ix. 14 — it does not appear
that they can be identical, inasmuch as this relate*
to the times after the Captivity, while that in Chron-
icles refers to the original establishment of the ark
at Jerusalem by David, and of the tabernacle (comp
19, 21, and the mention of Gibeon, where the
tabernacle was a. this time, in ver. 35). But see
Nehemiah.
12. Another Levite in the same list «f attend-
ants on the Temple; son of Mattaniali (Neh. xi.
22).
13. A priest of the family of Hilldah in the
days of Joialdm son of Jeshua, that is in the gen-
eration after the return from the Captivity (Neh.
xii 91; oomp. 1, 10, 28).
HASHAB'NAH (n^tPq [tea mpra]:
['Zaira&ari; Alex. Zvafrwa, and so Vat FA,
nmon the anomaly, our translators have n
« on toll aUa."
Digitized by
Google
1008 HA8HABKIAH
as. the wrong division of words:] Hasebna), one
of the chief (" heads ") of the " people " (». e. the
hymen) who sealed the covenant at the same time
with Nehemiah (Neh. x 85).
HASHABNI'AH (rPjnBfq [whonJeho-
•oA rtgardt]: 'Aaa&avla; [Vat. ' AtrojSa^o.w;]
Alex. Aafrwia; [KA. A<r£««ui:] Basebonia).
L Father of Uatttuh, who repaired part of the
wall of Jerusalem (Neh. iii. 10).
2. [Bastbnia.] A Levite who was among those
who officiated at the great fast under Eera and
Nehemiah when the covenant was sealed (Neh. ix.
i). This and several other names are omitted in
both MSS. of the LXX.
HASHBAD'ANA (nj'-TSrrn [inteOigmet
m judging, Gesen.] : ' AoafiaSitd; [Vat. FA.1
omit; Alex. A<ra£aapa:] Basbadnna), one of the
men (probably Lerites) who stood on Esra's left
hand while he read the law to the people in Jeru-
salem (Neh. viii. 4).
HA'SHEM (Ctr'n [perh. fat, rich, Ges.]:
'Atrdp; [Vat. FA. corrupt: Assent]). The sons
of Hashem the Gizonite are named amongst the
members of David's guard in the catalogue of 1
Chr. (xi. 34.) In the parallel list of 8 Sam. xxiii.
we find •• of the sons of Jaahen, Jonathan." After
a lengthened examination, Kennicott decides that
the text of both passages originally stood " of the
sons of Hashem, Guni" (Dissertation, pp. 198-
903).
HASHMAN'NIM vC^Ktr'n: wp4v$,u:
tegati). This word occurs only in the Hebrew of
Pa. lxviii. 31 : " Hasbmannim (A. V. " princes " )
shall come out of Egypt, Cush shall make her hands
to hasten to God." In order to render this word
"princes," or the like, modern Hebraists have had
recourse to extremely improbable derivations from
the Arabic. The old derivation from the civil name
of Hennopolis Magna in the Heptanomis, preserved
in the modern Arabic i''i| ■*■', "the two
Ashmoons," seems to us more reasonable. The
ancient Egyptian name is Ha-ahmen or Ha-shmoon,
the abode of eight; the sound of the signs for eight,
lowever, we take alone from the Coptic, and Orugsch
leads them Seaennu (Geog. Intchr. i. pp. 819, 220),
but not, as we think, on conclusive grounds. The
Coptic form is OJHOVJl 6, "the two
Shmoons," like the Arabic. If we suppose that
Haahmannim is a proper name and signifies Her-
mopolites, the mention might be explained by the
•ircumstance that Hennopolis Magna was the great
lity of the Ecyptian Hermes, Thoth, the god of
wisdom; and the meaning might therefore be that
eien the wisest Egyptians should come to the tem-
pi:, ss well as the distant Cushites. R. S. P.
HASHMCNAH (nafcrrn [fruUfuhess] :
itknum; Alex. Aosf^wra: bcsmona), a station
of the Israelites, mentioned Num. xxxiii. 39, as next
before Moseroth, which, from xx. 88 and Deut x.
6, was near Mount Hor ; this tends to indicate the
ocality of Hashmonah. H. H.
HA'SHTJB COTSn, i. e. Chasshub [associate,
friend, or intelligent]: "AaoiQ: And)). • The re-
tnplication of the Sh has been overlooked in the
A. V., and the name is identical with that else-
i correctly given si Hasshdb.
HATAOH
L A son of Pahath-Moab who assisted m tka
repair of the wall of Jerusalem (Neh. iii. 83).
2. Another man who assisted in the same work
but at another part of the wall (Neh. iii. 11).
3. [Vat. FA. Ao-outf.j The name is mentioned
again among the heads of the " people " (that is
the laymen) who sealed the covenant with Nehe-
miah (Neh. x. 88). It may talong to eitho of the
foregoing.
4. [Rom. omits; Vat Alex. FA. Ao-ovjB.] A
Herarite Levite (Neh. xi. 15). In 1 Chr. fat. 14
he appears again as Hasshub.
HASHU'BAH (n^irq [esteemed, or «sr-
ciaUd]: 'Aaovfii; Alex. AirsjBa: Basaba), ths
first of a group of five men, apparently the latUr
hah* of the family of Zerubbabd (1 Chr. iii. 90).
For a suggestion concerning these persona, set
Hasadiah.
HA'SHUM (Ctr'n [rich, distinguished]:
'Aeroiu, 'Aodfi [etc: Basum, Bosom, Basem]).
X. Bene-Chashum, two hundred and twenty-three
in number, came back from Babylon with Zerub-
babel (Ear. ii. 19; Neh. viL 82). Seven men of
them had married foreign wives from whom they
had to separate (Ear. x. 33). The chief man of
the family was among those who sealed the cove-
nant* with Nehemiah (Neh. x. 18). [In 1 Esdr.
ix. 33 the name is Asom.]
2. ('Acrci/*; [Vat. FA.' omit:] Atum.) The
name occurs amongst the priests or Levites who
stood on Ezra's left hand while he read the law tj
the congregation (Neh. viii. 4). In 1 Esdr. ix. 44
the name is given corruptly as Lothascbus.
HASHUTHA G<"{ttT} [uncovered] : 'Atr-
<bi\ [Alex. FA. Affti(pa: Basupha]). one of the
families of Nethinim who returned from captivity
in the first caravan (Neh. vii. 46). The name is
accurately Hasupha, as in Err. ii. 43. [Asifha.]
HAS'RAH (rnpn [perh. splendor, FUrtt]:
'Apis; [Vat XfAAnii] Alex. tZoasyn: Hatra),
the form in which the name Harhas is given in
8 Chr. xxxiv. 88 (comp. 8 K. xxii. 14).
HASSENA'AH (nNJtjri [the thoi-n-hedgt,
FQrst]: 'AoayA; [Vat Amir; FA. Aoanaa]
Atnaa). The Bene-hss-sensah [sons of Hassenaah]
rebuilt the fish-gate in the repair of the wall of
Jerusalem (Neb. iii. 8). The name is doubtless
that of the place mentioned in Err. ii. 35, and Neh.
vii. 38 — Senaah, with the addition of the defi-
nite article. Perhaps it has some connection with
the rock or cliff Skhkh (1 Sam. xiv. 4).
HAS'SHTTB (3-Wn [intelligent, knowing
Ges.] : 'Ae-4jB : Baisub), a Merarite Levite (1
Chr. ix. 14). He appears to be mentioned agaij
in Neh. xi. 15, in what may be a repetition of thj
same genealogy; but here the A. V. have given ths
name as Hashub.
HASUTHA ft*"J"«"*n [imootserea', naked]:
'AoowpA ; [Vat Aoowpt ':] Basupha). Bene.
Chasupba [sons of C] were among the Nethinin
who returned from Babylon with Zerubbabel (Ear.
ii. 43). In Nehemiah the name is inaccurate!)
given in the A. V. [as in the Genevan version^
Hashupha ; in Esdrss it is Asitha.
HAT. [Hkad-drksb, at the end of the art]
HATAOH CnpO [**»»• tunuch, Gesen.1
'KxpaBoMs; Alex, [ver. 5J AxposW; [»•. •
Digitized by
Google
HATHATH
■ilk FA.1, Kx9paBaun\ Comp- 'A0ix'] Athach),
sue of tie eunucha (A. V. "cbamberlaina") in the
sourt of Ahaaoerus, in immediate attendance on
Either (Eath. ir. S, 6, 9, 10). The LXX. alter
ver. li to to» tbrovxor eunvs.
HATHATH (n^q [ftarfiUl: 'kMB: Ha-
that), a man in the genealogy of Judah; one of
the aona of Othniel the Kenaztte, the well-known
judge of Israel (1 Chr. ir. 13).
HATTPHA (N^ttq [*>***, eapHte\ :
'AravAct, 'Ar<4>4; [in Ear., Alex. A note; in
Neh., Vat Alex. FA. Ar«d)a:] Hatipha). Bene-
Chatipha [aona of C] were among the Nethinim
vrho returned from Babylon with Zerubbabel (Ear.
il. 64; Neh. vii. 56). [Atifha.]
HATITA 0*?"*?!! lagging, timing]:
•hrtri; [in Ear., Vat Att/to; in Neh., Vat. FA.
Krttra-] UaHla). Bene-Chatita [aona of C] were
among the " porters " or " children of the porters "
(D N "75lSn, ». e. the gate-keepers), a division of
the Invites who returned from the Captivity with
Zerubbabel (Ezr. ii. 43; Neh. vii. 46). In Eadras
the name is abbreviated to Teta.
HATTILt (Vail [watering, or decaying] :
'ArlA, 'Ett*A; Alex. AttiA, [EtttjA; in Ezr.,
Vat ATf«; in Neh., Vat FA. E-yijA:] HatU).
Bene-Chattll [aona of C.] were among the " chil-
dren of Solomon's slaves " who came back from
captivity with Zerubbabel (Ezr. ii. 67; Neh. vii.
M). [ILvuia.]
HATTUSH (tWtan [prob. assembled, Gee.;
eonUmler, Fiirat] : Xottooj, 'Arroit, [etc. :] Hnt~
tut). 1. A descendant of the kings of Judah,
apparently one of the " aona of Shechaniah " (1
Chr. iii. 33), in the fourth or fifth generation from
Zerubbabel. A person of the same name, expressly
specified aa one of the "aona of David of the aona
of Shechaniah," accompanied Ezra on his journey
from Babylon to Jerusalem (Ezr. viii. 9), whither
Zerubbabel himself had also come only seventy or
eighty years before (Ezr. ii 1, 3). Indeed, in
another statement Hattush ia said to have actually
returned with Zerubbabel (Neh. xii. 2). At any
rate he took part iu the sealing of the covenant
with Nehemiah (Neh. x. 4). To obviate the dis-
crepancy between these last-mentioned statements
sod the interval between Hattush and Zerubbabel
in 1 Chr. iii., Lord A. Hervey proposes to read the
genealogy in that chapter as if he were the nephew
y Zerubbabel, Shemaiah in ver. 23 being taken aa
dentinal with Shiroei in ver. 19. For these pro-
soaals the reader ia referred to Lord Hervey'a
Genealogies, pp. 103, 307, 322. &c [Lzxrus;
rill ECU AMI AH.]
2. CAttou* [Vat FA. AtovS; Alex, avrovs ;
Hornp. 'Arroor-] ) Son of Haahabniab ; one of those
who assisted Nehemiah in the repair of the wall of
.'irusalem (Neh. iii 10).
HAUTtAN ()^yj [see infra]: AJparir.j:
Auran: Arab, mj')*^' > province of Palestine
twior mentioned by Eaekiel in defining the north-
eastern border of the Promised Lai. 1 (xlvii. 18, 18).
Had we no other data for determii_ng iU situation
we should conclude from his words that r. by north
of Damascus. There can he little daub., however,
Oat it Is identical with the well-known Gre> k prov-
HAVILAH
1009
ince of Aurrtnitis, and the modern L'mtran. Itt
name is probably derived from the word ^RTI, llir,
" a hole or cave; " the region still abounds in caves
which the old inhabitants excavated partly to serve
as cisterns for the collection of water, and partly
for granaries in which to secure their grain from
plunderers. Josepbus frequently mentions Aunui-
itis in connection with Tracbonltia, Batansa, and
Gaulanitis, which with it constituted the ancient
kingdom of Bashan (B. J. i. 20, § 4; ii. 17, § 4).
It formed part of that Tpaxfolntot x^f 1 refeired
to by Luke (iii. 1) as subject to Philip the tetrsrch
(comp. Joseph. Ant xvii. 11, § 4). It is bounded
on the west by Gaulanitis, on the north by the
wild and rocky district of Trachonitis, on the east
by the mountainous region of Batanea, and on the
south by the great plain of Moab (Jer. xlviii. 21).
The surface is perfectly flat and the soil is among
the richest in Syria. Not a stone is to be seen save
on the lew low volcanic ttUs that rise up here and
there, like islands in a sea. It contains upwards
of a hundred towns and villages, most of them now
deserted, though not ruined. The buildings in
many of these are remarkable, the walls are of great
thickness, and the roofs and doors are of atone,
evidently of remote antiquity (see l'orter's Fivt
Years in Damascus, vol. ii. [also Jis Giant Cititi
of Bashan ; Wetzstein's Seisebmckt Si. Hauran
u. die Trachonen (Berlin, 1861)]). Some Arab
geographers have described the Jfawnn as much
more extensive than here stated (Bohaed. VU. Sal.
ed. Schult. p. 70; Abulfed. Tali. Syr. a. v.); and
at the present day the name ia applied by those nt
n distance to the whole country east of Jauhn ;
but the inhabitants themselves define it as above.
J. L. P.
• HAVENS, FAIK. [Fair Havens.]
HAVPXAH (nVlrl ldrcU,dislrict,¥ur%t]
Ei>r\d\ EbtViA: Herila). 1. A son of Cush (Ger
x. 7) ; and —
2. A son of Joktan (x. 29). Various theories
hare been advanced respecting these obscure peoples.
It appears to be most probable that both stocks
settled in the same country, and there intermarried ;
thus receiving one name, and forming one race,
with a common descent. It is immaterial to the
argument to decide whether in such instances the
settlements were contemporaneous, or whether new
immigrants took the name of the older settlers. In
the case of Havilah, it seems that the Cushite
people of this name formed the westernmost colony
of Cush along the south of Arabia, aud that the
Joktanitea were an earlier colonization. It is com-
monly thought that the district of Khawlua
^ i»i *»-\ in the Yemen, preserves the tract
of this ancient people; and the similarity of name
(i. being interchangeable with ft, and the ter-
mination being redundant), and the group of Jok-
tanite names in the Yemen, render the identifica-
tion probable. Niebuhr states that there are two
Kuawlans (Descr. 270, 280/, and it has hence been
argued by some that we have thus the Cushite and
the Joktanite Havilah. The second Kk&ddn, how-
ever, is a- town, and not a huge and well-knowia
district like the first, or more northern one; and
the hypothesis baaed on Nielmhr's assertion is un-
necessary, if the theory cf a double settlement bs
Digitized by
Google
1010
HAVILAH
adopted. There U also another town in the Yemen
tailed WiicUm (^ J«ja.).
The district of Khawliin lies between the city of
San'a and the Hyiiz, i. t. in the northwestern
portion of the Yemen. It took it* Dame, according
to the Arab*, from Khhwlan, a descendant of Kahttn
[.Ioktan] (Mnrdtiil, a. v.), or, aa tome car, of
Kahlan, brother of Himyer (Caussin, Emu, i. 1 13,
and tab. ii.J. Thia genealogy mys little more than
that the name «ra» JokUuiite; and the difference
between Kahtan and Kahliin may be neglected,
both being descendant* of the first Joktanite settler,
and the whole of these early traditions pointing to
a Joktanite settlement, without perhaps a distinct
preservation of Joktan's name, and certainly none
of a correct genealogy from him downwards.
Khiiwlan is a fertile territory, embracing a large
part of inyrrhiferous Arabia; mountainous; with
plenty of water ; and smiporting a large population.
It is a tract of Arabia better luiown to both ancients
and moderns than the rest of the Yemen, and the
eastern and central provinces. It adjoins Nejran
(the district and town of that name), mentioned in
the account of the expedition of vKliu« Gallus, and
the scene of great pcisecutions of the Christians by
Dhu-Nuwas, the hut of the Tubboas before the
Abyssinian conquest of Arabia, in the year 023 of
our era (cf. Caussin, Eani, I. 121 ff.). For the
Chaulanita, see the Dictionary of Gtogrnphy.
An argument against the identity of Khawkin
and Havilah has been found in tlie mentions of a
Havilah on the border of the Ishmaelites, " as tbnu
goest to Assyria " (Gen. xxv. 18), and also on that
of the Amalekites (1 Sam. xv. 7). It is not how-
ever necessary that these passages should refer to 1
or 2 : the place named may tie a town or country
called after them ; or it may have some reference
to the Havilah named in the description of the
rivers of the garden of Eden ; and the I. XX. render
it, following apparently the last supposition, EviXaV
in both instances, according to their spelling of the
Havilah of Gen. ii. 11.
Those who separate the Cushite and Joktanite
Havilah either place them in Niebuhr'a two KhKw-
lans (as already stated), or they place 2 on the
north of the peninsula,' following the supposed
argument derived from Gen. xxv. 18, and 1 Sam.
xv. 7, and finding the name in that of the XavAo-
Ttuoi (Kratosth. up. Strabo, xvi. 767), between the
Nabatei and the Agrai, and in that of the town
of Rjbyv on the Persian Gulf (Niebuhr, Deter.
342). A Joktanite settlement so far north is how-
ever very improbable. They discover 1 in the Avalitc
on the African coast (Ptol. iv. 7; Arrian, PtripL
243, ed. Miiller), the modern name of the shore of
the Sinus Avalatis being, says Gesenius, Zeylah =
Zuweylah = Havilah, and Saudiah having three
times in Gen. written Zeylnh for Havilah. But
Gesrnius seems to have overlooked the true orthog-
raphy of the name of the modem country, which
la not &JL>\, but mJo\, with a final letter very
rarely added to the Hebrew. E. 8. P.
HAVIXAH ([EwAdV; Alex. EvsiAar: Be*
itKA] Gen. U. 11). [E»kk, p. 687.]
HATOTH-JAaR (l*^ rVT, i. t. Chav-
safA Jair [tillages of Jair, i. s. of At enHglu-
HAWK
•wl : brai\tis and itifuu 'lata, Oauast [ lay,
etc.:] new, Ifarolh Jaw, rieiuut Jair, [eta.])
certain villages on the east of Jordan, in Gilead «
Baahan. The word Chawah, which occurs in tht
Bible in this connection only, is perhaps best ex-
plained by the similar term in modern Arable,
which denotes a small collection of hots or bonk
in a country place (see the citations in Gesenius,
The*. 461 ; and Stanley, 8. <* P. App. $84).
(1.) The earliest notice of the Havoth-jair is in
Num. xxxii. 41, in the account of the settlement
of the Transjordanic country, where Jair, son of
Manasseh, is stated to have taken some villages
(A. V. " the small towns; " but there is no article
in the Hebrew) of Gilead — which was allotted to
his tribe — and to have named them after himself!,
Hawoth-jair. (2.) In Dent. iii. 14 it is said that
Jair " took all the tract of Argob, unto the bound-
ary of the Geshurite and the M aacathite, and called
them after bis own name, Bashan-havoth-jair."
Here the villages are referred to, but there must be
a hiatus after the word " Maacathite," in which
they were mentioned, or else there is nothing to
justify the plural "them." (3.) In the records
of Manasseh in Josh. xiil. 30 and 1 Chr. ii. S3
(A. V., in both "towns of Jair"), the Hawoth-
jair are reckoned with other districts as making up
sixty " cities " (D % ~I9). In 1 K. iv. 13 they are
named as part of the commissariat district of Bai-
geber, next in order to the " sixty great cities " of
Argob. There is apparently some confusion iu
these different statements as to what the sixty cities
really consisted of, and if the interpretation of
Chawah given above be correct, the application of
the word " city " to such transient erections is
remarkable and puzzling. Perhaps the remoteness
and inaccessibility of the Transjordanic district in
which they lay may explain the one, and our igno-
rance of the real force of the Hebrew word Ir, ren-
dered "city," the other. Or perhaps, though
retaining their ancient name, they had changed
their original condition, and had liecome more im-
portant, as has been the case in our own country
with more than one place still designated as a
"hamlet," though long since a populous town.
(4.) No less doubtful is the number of the Havoth-
jair. In 1 Chr. ii. 22 they are specified as twenty -
three, but in Judg. x. 4, as thirty. In the latter
passage, however, the allusion is to a second Jair,
by whose thirty sons they were governed, and for
whom the original number may have been increased.
The word E^J, "cities," is perhaps employed
here for the sake of the play which it affords with
i*"7*3!< u »si-colta." [Jair; Bashax-havotti-
jaik.] ' <i.
HAWK (V3> "*•■• iVpaf : aedptier), the trans-
lation of the above-named Heb. term, which occurs
in I-ev. xi. 16 and Dent. xiv. 15 aa one of the no-
clean birds, and In Job xxxix. 26, where it is askcV
" Doth the nett fly by thy wisdom and stretch ho
wings towards the south ? " The word is doubtless
generic, as appears from the expression in Deut-
and I.ev. " after his kind," and include! variona
species of the Falconida, with more espcial allusion
perhaps to the small diurnal birds, snch as the
kestrel (Fnlco tinmmcvais), <he holby (Bypo-
triorehit ntbbvfeo), the gregarious lesser kestrel
( Tinmmculut cenelirit), common about the ndoa
in the plain districts of Palestine, all of which ware
Digitized by
Google
HAWK
probably known to the ancient Hebrews. With
respect to the passage in .lob (/. c. J, which appears
to allude to the migratory habits of hawks, it is
curious to observe that of the ten or twelve lesser
raptors of Palestine, nearly all are summer migrants.
The kestrel remains all the year, but T. cenchrii,
Micronisus gabar, Hyp. eleonora, and F. mebinnp~
Urut, are all migrants from the south. Besides
the above-named smaller hawks, the two magnificent
species, F. Saktr and F. lannrim, are summer
ion
AIm Afar.
visitor* to Palestine. "On one occasion," says
Mr. Tristram, to whom we are indebted for much
information on the subject of the birds of Palestine,
"while riding with an Arab guide I observed a
falcon of large size rise close to us. The guide,
when I pointed it out to him, exclaimed, ' Tnir
Siiq'r.' " Tnlr, the Arabic for ' bird,' is universally
throughout N. Africa and the East applied to those
falcons which are capable of being trained for bunt-
ing, »'. 1. * the bird,' par excellence." These two
species of falcons, and perhaps the bobby and
goshawk (Astur pahunbarivt) are employed by the
Arabs in Syria and Palestine for the purpose of
taking partridges, sand-grouse, quails, herons,
gazelles, hares, etc. Dr. Russell ( If at. nisi, of
Aleppo, ii. p. 196, 2d ed.) has given the Arabic
names of several falcons, but it is probable that
some at least of these names apply rather to the
different sexes than to distinct species. See a very
graphic description of the sport of falconry, as pur-
sued by the Arabs of N. Africa, in the lint, i. p.
91 1 ; and comp. Thomson, The Land and the Book,
p. 208 (i. 309-311, Am. ed.).
Whether falconry was pursued by the ancient
Orientals or not, is a question we have been unable
o determine decisively. No representation of such
a sport occurs on the monuments of ancient Egypt
(see Wilkinson, Anc, Eg. 1. p. 991), neither is there
suy definite allusion to falconry in the Bible. With
Mgard, bowiver, to the negative evidence supplied
« * The word Saq'r, , n-tl. Is th« noma of all ths
•■Somt, of the Neons, hawks, and sites.
0. «. P.
HA\
by the monuments of Egyjil, we nr^jt be <
ere we draw a conclusion ; for the camel is not raj,
resented, though we have Biblical evidence to show
that this animal was used by the Egyptians at
early as the time of Abraham ; still, as instances
of various modes of capturing fish, g ime, and wild
animals, are not unfrequent on the monuments, it
seems probable the art was not known to the Egyp-
tians. Nothing definite can be learnt from the
passage in 1 Sum. xxvi. 90, which speaks of "a
partridge hunted on the mountains," as this may
allude to the method of taking these birds by
" throw-sticks," etc. [Paktkidck.] The hind or
hart " panting after the water-brooks " (l'a. xlii- 1)
may appear at first sight to refer to the mode at
present adopted in the East of taking gazilles, deer,
and bustards, with the united aid of falcon and
greyhound: but, as Hengsteuberg (Comment u»
/'*. 1. c. ) has argued, it seems pretty clear that the
exhaustion spoken of is to be understood as arising
not from pursuit, but from some prevailing drought,
as in Ps. lxiii. 1, " My soul thirsteth for tbee m a
dry Innd." (See also Joel i. 90.) The poetical
version of Brady and Tate —
" As pants the hart for cooling streams
When heated In the chase,"
has therefore somewhat prejudged the matter. For
the question as to whether falconry was known U
the ancient Greeks, see Beckmann, history of In-
vention* (i. 198-205, Bohu'e ed.). W. H
HAY {^Vn.ch/Uztr: i r t«7 nUa xA*V>o*.
YoVroj : /"■"' ',l>'i ba), the rendering of the A. V.
in Prov. xxvii 95, and Is. xv. 6, of the above-name.'
Heb. term, which occurs frequently in the O. T.,
and denotes " grass " of any kind, from an onuses'
root, " to be green." [Grass.] In Num. at 6.
this word is properly translated " leeks." [Leek.]
Harmer [Ubierrat. i. 425, ed. 1797), quoting from
a MS. paper of Sir J. Chardin, states that hay is
not made anywhere in the East, and that the
J'emim of the Vulg. (aliit locit) and the " hay "
of the A. V. are therefore errors of translation. It
is quite probable that the modern Orientals do not
make bay in our sense of the term ; hut it is certain
that the ancients did mow their grass, and probably
made use of the dry material. See Ps. xxxvii. 9,
" They shnll soon be cut down pw^p*), and wither
as the green herb j " Ps. lxxii. 6, " Like rain upon
the mown grass " (*J\ See also Am. vii. 1, " The
king's mowings " (Tl7'!?\7 s $?) • »nd Ps. oxxix
7, where of the " grass upon the housetops " (/'.*i
annua?) it is said that "the mower PJPfJ)
filleth not his hand " with it, " nor he that biudell
sheaves his bosom." We do not see, therefore
with the author of Fragment* in Continuation aj
Calntet (No. clxxvili.), any gross impropriety in out
version of Prov. xxvii. 95, or in that of Is. xv. S.
" Certainly," says this writer, " if the lender grau ■
is but just beginning to show itself, the hay, which
is grass cut and dried after it has arrived at uia
turity, ought by no means to be associated with if
still less ought it to be placed before it." But
where is the impropriety ? The tender gran
(NttJ'J) may refer to the springing after-gram.
t> " Ths hay appsarath, and the tender grass
itself, and herbs of the m xratalns an gathsmsl
Digitized by
Google
1012
HAZAEL,
ad the " hay " to the hay-grau. Homier, is to*
two puMgei in question, where alone the A. V.
renden chatar by " hay," the word would eertainlj
he better translated by " gram." We may remark
that there U an express Hebrew term for "dry
gnus " or " hay," namely, ehathath," which, ap-
parently from an unused root signifying "to be
dry,"* is rendered in the only two places where
the word occurs (is. v. 24, xxxiii. 11) "chaff" in
the Authorized Version. We do not, however,
mean to assert that the cluiihath of the Orientals
represent* our modem English hay. Doubtless the
" dry gnus " was not stacked, but only cut in small
quantities, and then consumed. The grass of " the
Utter growth" (Am. rii. 1) (tT^V?), perhaps like
our <ifler-gra*$, denotes the mown grass as it grows
afresh after the harvest; like the Chwdum J'aman
of lliny (//. N. viii. 28). W. II.
H AZ'AEL (Vgjn [El (God) it seeMo, Flirst,
Oca.] : 'Afo^A • lltitnil) was a king of Damascus,
who reigned from about n. c. 886 to II. c. 840.
He appears to have been previously a person iu a
bigh position at the court of Ben-hadad, and was
sent by his master to Klisha, when that prophet
visited Damascus, to inquire if he would recover
from the malady under which he was suffering.
Klisba's answer that lien-hadad might recover, but
irouW die, and his announcement to llazael that
he would one day be king of Syria, which seems
to have been the fulfillment of the commission given
to Elijah (1 K. xix. 15) to appoint llazael king —
led to the murder of Ilen-hadad by his ambitious
servant, who forthwith mounted the throne (2 K.
viii. 7-15). He was soon engaged in hostilities
with Ahaziah king of Judah, and Jehoram king of
Israel, for the possession of the city of Ramoth-
Gilead (ibid. viii. 28). The Assyrian inscriptions
show that about this time a bloody and destructive
war was being waged between the Assyrians on the
one side, and the Syrians, Hittites, Hamathites,
ard Phoenicians on the other. [See Damascus. J
Ren-hatlad had recently suffered several severe defeats
at the hands of the Assyrian king ; and upon the
accession of Hazael the war was speedily renewed.
Hazael took up a position in the fastnesses of the
Anti-Libanus, but was there attacked by the As-
tyrians, who defeated him with great loss, killing
16,000 of his warriors, and capturing more than
1100 chariots. Three years later the Assyrians
once more entered Syria in force; but on this
occasion Hazael submitted and helped to furnish
Ihe invaders with supplies. After this, internal
.roubles appear to have occupied the attention of
the Assyrians, who made no more expeditions into
these parts for about a century. The Syrians
rapidly recovered their losses ; and towards the close
}f the niign of Jehu, Hazael led them against the
Israelites (about u. c. 860), whom he "smote in
nil their mists " (2 K. x. 32), thus accomplishing
the prophecy of Klisha (ibid. viii. 12). His main
attack fell upon the eastern provinces, where he
ravaged « all the land of GUead, the Gadites, and
O '
« tPtPn, allied to the Arabic . A f ,ft ~-
fteMth), which Freytag thus explains, "Herbs,
fail, alceior: tdl. Pabulum riccum, ftenum (ut
_r ^i,) Tirlde at recens."
a « Tha alalia of the desert always lall the dry
HAZARMAVBTH
We Keubenites, and the Manasaites, from Ana*
which is by the river Anion, even Gilead and
Baihan" (ibid. x. 83). After this he seems to
have held the kingdom of Israel in a species of sub-
jection (ibid. xiii. 3-7, and 22); and. towards tbt
dose of his life he even threatened the kingdom of
Judah. Having taken Gath (ibid. xii. 17; corap.
Am. vi. 2), he proceeded to attack Jerusalem, de-
feated the Jews in an engagement (2 Chr. xxiv. 24),
and was about to assault the city, when Joash
induced him to retire by presenting him with " all
the gold that was found in the treasures of the
bouse of the Lord, and in the king'a bouse " (2 K.
xii. 18). Hazael appears to have died about tho
year B. c. 840 (ibid. xiii. 24), having reigned 40
years. He left his crown to his ion Ben-hadod
(ibid.). G. R.
* The true import of HazaeTs answer to the
prophet on being informed of his future destiny
(2 K. viii. 13), does not appear in the A. V. :
" But what, is thy servant a dog, that he should
do this great thing? " This is the language of a
proud and self-approving spirit, spuming an unde-
served imputation : " Thy servant is not a dog
that he should do this great thing." It is ob-
vious, moreover, that in this form the terms of the
question are incongruous. If he bad said, Is thy
servant a dog, that he should do so base a thing,
the question would have been consistent with it-
self, lint the incongruity disappears, and the per-
tinency of the illustration is obvious, when we
render according to the Hebrew: "What is thy
servant, the dog, that he should do this great
thing V" The use of the definite article in the
Hebrew, as well as the congruity of the expression,
requires this rendering. 1 [Doc.] T. J. C
• HAZ'AEL, HOUSE OF (Am. i, 4),
probably some well-known edifice or palace, which
this king had built at Damascus, and which, ac-
cording to the prophet, the fire (God's instrument of
punishment) was destined to bum up. Some under-
stood by " the house " Damascus itself, and others
Hazael'B family or personal descendants. But the
clause which follows — " the palaces of Uen-hadad "
— as Baur (Dtr Prophet Amot, p. 217) points out,
favors the other explanation. H.
HAZA1AH [3 syl.] (fPTq : [Jehovah dc
cidt$ or ririra]: 'Ofto; [Vat. FA.'o(«aO Hazia),
a man of Judah of the family of the Shilouites
A. V. "Shiloni"), or descendants of Siiklah
(Neh. xi. 6).
HA'ZAB-ADTXAR, etc. [Hazer.]
HAZARM ATETH iPI^T. D = Pn Gen-,]
2opju4fl; [Alex. 2 Ao-ap/tAt; in 1 Chr"., Bom. Vat
omit, Alex. Aocutv0:] Atarmoth; the court of
death, Ges.), the third, in order, of the sons of
Joktan (Gen. x. 26). The name is preserved
almost literally, in the Arabic HadramSa
q * * a * e — > •
julceless herbage of tha Sahara, which la ready made
hay while It is Browing, eAejASsA, In contradistinction
from tha fresh gnus of better sol la." — [H. B. Tustbul.
c • Qeaenlus ( Hut. p. 685) : " Quia enlm sum asms
tuus canls, ut tantam rem perficlam ? " Eell (Bitch*
der Xitn>>«): « Was fat demKnecbi. der Hand (d. k
cln so verschtlk-her Kerl . . .) das* or ao gro ss
Ding* thnn solMe?" Thenlua (Bather dtr XVaage)
" Dein Knecht, der Uund ! " T. J. O.
Digitized by
Google
HAZAZON-TAMAB
and I he appellation of a province and an ancient
people of Southern Arabia. This identification of
the settlement of Hazarmaveth U accepted by Bib-
lical scholars as not admitting of dispute. It
rests not only on the occurrence of the name, but
is supported by the proved fact that Joktan settled
in the Yemen, along the south coast of Arabia, by
the physical characteristics of the inhabitants of
this region, and by the identification of the names
of rereral others of the sons of Joktan. The
province of Hadramiiwt is situate east of the
modem Yemen (anciently, as shown in Arabia,
the limits of the latter province embraced almost
the whole of the south of the peninsula), extend-
ing to the districts of Shihr and Mahreh. Its cap-
ital is Shibam, a very ancient city, of which the
native writers give curious accounts, and Its chief
ports are Mirbat, Zafari [Sepiiah], and KUheem,
from whence a great trade was carried on in an-
cient times with India and Africa. Hadramiiwt
itself is generally cultivated, in contrast to the con-
tiguous sandy deserts (called El-AhkAf, where lived
the gigantic race of 'A'd), is partly mountainous,
with watered valleys, and is still celebrated for its
frankincense (El-Idieesee, ed. Joniard, i. p. 64;
Niebuhr, Deter, p. 315), exporting also gum-arabic,
myrrh, dragon's blood, and aloes, the latter, how-
ever, being chiefly from Socotra, which is under
the rule of the sheykh of Kesheem (Niebuhr, /. e.
et teq.). The early kings of Hadramiiwt were
Joktanites distinct from the descendants of Yaa-
rub, the progenitor of the Joktanite Arabs gener-
ally; and it is hence to be Inferred that they were
separately descended from Hazarmaveth. They
maintained their independence against the power-
ful kings of Himyer, until the latter were subdued
at the Abyssinian invasion (Ibn-Khaldoon, op.
Cauasin, Euai, i. 135 ff.). The Greeks and
Romans call this people of Hadramiiwt. variously,
Chatraniotitas, Chatrammita, etc.; and there is
little doubt that they were the same as the Adra-
mitae, etc (the latter not applying to the descend-
anta of Hadoram, as some have suggested); while
the native appellation of an inhabitant, Hadramee,
comes very near Adramitas In sound. The mod-
ern people, although mixed with other races, are
strongly characterized by fierce, fanatical, and rest-
less dispositions. They are enterprising merchants,
well known for their trading and travelling pro-
pensities. E. S. P.
HAZ'AZOK-TA'MAR.aChr.ix. 2. [Ha-
zczok-Tamar.]
HAZEL (fib). The Hebrew term Ms occurs
•nly in Gen- xxx. 37, where It is* coupled with the
-' poplar " and '• chestnut," as one of the trees from
which Jacob cut the rods, which be afterwards
peeled. Authorities are divided between the hazel
and the almond-tree, as representing the liz; in
fcvor of the former we have Kimchi, Rashl, Lu-
ther, sod others; while the Vulgate, Saadias, and
Ueaenius adopt the latter view. The rendering is
the LXX., nip tv, is equally applicable to either.
We think the Utter most probably correct, both
haai l i as the Arabic word Um is undoubtedly the
■almond-tree," and because there is another word
a she Hebrew language tgat (n$«), whien Is
• la t K. xz 4, the Hasorets (Ktri) have substt-
*r+ TST1 (A. T. "seurt") for lbs T»Sn of ttas
HAZEB
1011
applicable to the hazel. The strongest argument
on the other side arises from the circumstance of
another word, thikid (TTJ'l, having reference tc
the almond; it is supposed, however, that the lat-
ter applies to the fruit exclusively, and the word
under discussion to the tree : Rosenmiiller identi-
fies the ihakid with the cultivated, and lux with
the wild almond-tree. For a description of thr
almond-tree, see the article on that subject. The
Hebrew term appears as a proper name in Lnz, the
old appellation of Bethel. W. L. B.
HAZELELPCNI O^S^'H : 'iv.jxtf-
04v; Alex. EtnjXAfXctor: Amkiphum), the sister
of the sons of Etam in the genealogies of Judah
(1 Chr. ir. 8). The name has the definite article
prefixed, and is accurately " the Tzelelponite," or
of a family rather than an individual.
* That the name is genealogical rather than in
dividual appears also from the appended v 7 (see
Ges. Lthrgeb. rltr ffebr. Sprache, p. 514). It is
variously explained : protection of the pretence
(Kurst); or, thade coming upon me (Ges.). Kwald
makes the name still more expressive: (Site thade
thou mho teett me, i. e. God (Lehrbuch, p. 502)
This gives a different force to the ending. H.
HA'ZER (1*?n, I e. Chatzer, from "I'.'P,
to surround or inclose), a word which is of not un-
frequent occurrence in the Bible in the sense of a
" court " or quadrangle to a palace" or other build-
ing, but which topographically seems generally em-
ployed for the " villages " of people in a roving sod
unsettled life, the semi-permanent collections of
dwellings which are described by travellers among
the modern Arabs to consist of rough stone walla
covered with the tent cloths, and thus holding a
middle position between the tent of the wanderer
— so transitory as to furnish an image of the sud-
den termination of life (Is. xxxviil. 19) — and the
settled, permanent, town.
As a proper name it appears in the A. V. —
1. In the plural, Uazekim, and Hazehoth,
for which see below.
2. In the slightly different form of Razor.
3. In composition with other words, giving a
special designation to the particular " village" in-
tended. When thus in onion with another word
the name is Hazar (Chatzar). The following are
the places so named, and it should not be over-
looked that they are all in the wilderness itself, or
else quite on the confines of civilized country: —
X, Ha'zar-ad'dar ("H£ ->V? = ftrowMt
'Apd*, SdpaSa: Alex. ABSapa: IW/i nomine Ad i,;
Addar), a place named as one of the landmarks ;a
the southern boundary of the land promised to
Israel between Kadesh-harnea and Azinon (Nut.
xxxiv. 4). In the specification of the south boun-
dary of the country actually possessed (Josh. xv.
3), the name appears in the shorter form of Addar
(A. V. AnAK), and an additional place is named
on each side of it. The site of Hazar-oddar does
not appear to have been encountered in modem
time*.
The LXX. reading might had to the belief that
Hazar -addar was identical with Arad, a Canaan-
original text. The asm* change should piobably a*
mads In Jer. xii. 7. [Sas Isbsusl. &)
Digitized by
Google
1014 HAZER
to city which lay In this direction, but the pres-
ence of the Ain in the latter name forbids such an
inference.
2. Ha'car-iCxa* Oy?" 1 ?^ [In Etek.
ilvU. 17, jiry TSq]=t»»o« of yri»5»--
Asm rauV, [aSAij rav Klviv, at), r. Alk&p; Vat in
Num., Apo-casisi;] Alex. Airjpcoiy, avAn rav
Aikoj>: Kt<&« A'ntm, Atristm Anon, [/I. Allan]),
the place at which the northern boundary of the
land promised to the children of Israel was to ter-
minate (Num. xxxiv. 9), and the eastern boundary
commence (10). It is again mentioned in Ese-
kiel's prophecy (xlvii. 17. xlviii. 1) of what the ul-
timate extent of the land will be. These bounda-
ries arc traced by Mr. Porter, who would identify
llasar-enan with Kurytlein = " the two cities," a
village more than sixty miles K. N. E. of Damas-
cus, the chief ground for the identification appa-
rently being the presence at K uryetein of " large
fountains," the only ones in that " vast region," a
circumstance with which the name of H&zar euan
well agrees (Porter, Damntcut, i. 858, II. 358).
The great distance from Damascus and the body
of Palestine is the main impediment to the recep-
tion of this identification.
3. Ha'/.ak-oad'ijah (fTJJ ^Vn [village of
fiailrtah or fortune : Rom- itpl, Vat JUpfi/ti]
Alex. A<r<p-ya58>: Aur-Gatlda), one of (he towns
in the southern district of Judah (-losh. x». 37),
named between Moladah and Heshmon. No trace
of the situation of this place appears in the Ono-
matticon, or in any of the modern travellers. In
Van de Velde's map a site named Jurrah in marked
as close to MoUda (el-Sfillt), but it is perhaps too
much to assume that Gaddxh han taken this form
by the change so frequent in the East of D to R.
4. Ha'zab-hat-tt'cox CrO^n ")Vri [the
middle village]: AiAi) toC ZavroV; [Alex, cor-
rupt:] Dimuit Ticlion), a place named in KzekicTs
prophecy of the ultimate boundaries of the land (Kz.
xlvii. 16), and specified as being on the boundary
(vU| 7(*) of Hauran. It is not yet known.
6. Ha'zah-bhu'al (bysiB? -|?n=/«r-rtf-
lage: Xo\curttt\i, 'AfxroiAef, 'Zatpaov&K; Alex.
AvayKrovAo, [XtpvovKa, etc. :] tlmei-eml, Hatar-
tulwl), a town in the southern district of Judah,
lying between Iiazar-gaddah and Deer-sheba (Josh,
xv. 28, xix. 3 1 1 Chr. iv. 28). It is mentioned in
the same connection after the return from the Cap-
tivity (Neb. xi. 27). The site has not yet been
conclusively recovered; but in Van de Velde's map
(1858) a site, Siaeth, is marked at about the right
(put, which may be a corruption of the original
name. This district has been only very slightly
explored; when it is so we may look for most in-
teresting Information.
8. HA'r.in,str*BAa (H^O "V?Tl=korte-vil-
Itge: XafMTovcrir [Vat -oWji Alex. Katptramnii.-
[lluitrnui]), one of the "cities" allotted to
Simeon in the extreme south of the territory of
i-tdjb (Josh. xix. 5). Neither it nor its com-
panion llKTH-MAItCAHOTH, the " DOUM of cbaT-
loU," are named in the list of the towns of Judah
to chap, if., but tney are included In those of
• The translators of the A. T. have curiously re-
sts*! the t *o variations of the nam*. In
HAZEZOX-TAALAR
Simeon in 1 Chr. iv. 31, with the express i
ment that they existed before and up to the time
of David. This appears to invalidate 1 rofessor
Stanley's suggestion (S. if P. p. 160) that they
were the depots for the trade with Egypt in char-
iots and horses, which commenced in the reign of
Solomon. Still, it is difficult to know to what
else to ascribe the names of place* situated, as
these were, in the Bedouin country, where a ctuiriot
must have been unknown, and where even bones
seem carefully excluded from the possessions of the
inhabitants — " camels, sheep, oxen, and asses "
(1 Sam. xxvil. 9). In truth the difficulty arises
only on the assumption that the names are He-
brew, and that they are to be interpreted accord
ingly. It would cease if we could believe them tc
be in the former language of the country, adopted
by the Hebrews, and so altered as to bear a mean-
ing in Hebrew. This is exactly the process which
the Hebrew names have in their turn undergone
from the Arabs, and is in fact one which is weQ
known to have occurred in all languages, though
not yet recognized in the particular case of the
early local names of Palestine.
7. HA'a-AR-strslM (D'D-TD ir.q, tillage of
kontt: 'Hfiia-ovo-taialy, as if S VH' [Vat Htu-
ovs tm Opeuti Alex. Hpio-v Eoo-ipO Hatart*.
si'ro), the form under which the preceding same
appears in the list of the towns of Simeon in 1
Chr. iv. 31. O.
HAZETUM. The A vims, or more accu-
rately the Awim, a tribe commemorated in a frag-
ment of very ancient history, as the early inhabi-
tants of the southwestern portion of Palestine, are
therein said to have lived " in the villages (A. V.
"Hazerim," CIVOJ [A<ni«<4«); Alex. Ainr
pa>0: Ifittrim]), as far as Gain" (Deut ii. 83),
before their expulsion by the Caphtorim. The
word is the plural of Hazkr, noticed above, and
as far as we can now appreciate the significance of
the term, it implies that the Awim were a wan-
dering tribe who had retained in their new locality
the transitory form of encampment of their origina
desert-life. G.
HAZETtOTH (fVnrn [station*, camping
grotmdt]: 'AinuxiM; [in Deut, A&AoV: Bate-
roth ;] Num. xi. 35, xii. 16, ixxiii. 17, Deut LI),
a station of the Israelite* in the desert, mentioned
next to Kibroth-Hattaavah, and perhaps recogniz-
able in the Arabic I— 0-S>., Hudhera (Robinson,
1. 151 ; Stanley, S.V P. pp. 81, 82), which lies about
eighteen hours' distance from Sinai on the ruid to
the Akabah. The word appears to moan the sort
of uninclosed villages in which the bedouins an
found to congregate. [Hazkr.] It. II.
HAZ'EZON-TA'M AR, and HAZ AZON-
TATilAR P^J-I l^".n," but in Chrou.
F\ V^Vn [prob. wet phot of palm*, palm-
marth, Dietr.; rota ofpalmt, palm-forett, FOrst] •
' AffaffoydapApf or 'Aitoctoj' Boju^p; [Alex. Asrn-
ettw 9., Arcurav 0.; Vat in 8 Chr., Ao*wt t>o-
papaO Afatonthnmar), the name under which, si
a very early period of the history of Palestine, and
whan ths Hebrew Is Sanson, they have
th* opposite In Chronicles
Digitized by
Google
HAZIEL
M a document believed by man;- to be the oldest
rf all these earl; records, we first hear of the place
which afterwards became Ks-nm>i. The Amor-
ties were dwelling at Hazaron-Tamar when the four
kings made their incursion, and fought their suc-
seasful battle with the five (Gen. xiv. 7). The
name occurs only once again — in the records of
the reign of Hezekiah (2 Chr. zx. 2) — when he is
warned of the approach of the horde of Ammon-
ites, Hoabites, Mebunim, and men of Mount Seir,
whom he afterwards so completely destroyed, and
who were no doubt pursuing thus far exactly the
same route as the Assyrians had done a thousand
years before them. Here the explanation, " which
is Kn-gedi," is added. The existence of the ear-
lier appellation, after En-gedi bad been so long in
use, is a remarkable instance of the tenacity of
these old oriental names, of which more modern
instances are frequent. See Acciio, Bkthbaida,
He
Hazaam-tamar is interpreted in Hebrew to mean
the '• pruning or felling of the palm " ((iesen.
ThtM. p. 512). Jerome ( Uiuut. in (Jen.) renders
it uros pnlmarum. This interpretation of the name
is borne out by the ancient reputation of the palms
of Kn-gedi (Ecclus. xxiv. 14, ind the citations from
Pliny, given under that name). The Samaritan
Version baa "H3 3lbB = the Valley of Cadi,
possibly a corruption of En-gedi. The Targums
have Kn-gedi.
Perhaps this was the "city of palm trees" (/r
\at-temarim) out of which the Kenites, the tribe
of Moses' father-in-law, went up into the wilder-
ness of Judab, after the conquest of the country
(Judg. i. 16). If this were so, the allusion of
Balaam to the Kenite (Num. xxiv. 21) is nt once
explained. Standing as he was on one of the lofty
points of the highlands opposite Jericho, the west-
em shore of the Dead Sea as far as En-gedi would
be before him, and the cliff, in the clefts of which
the Kenites had Hxerl their secure "nest," would
be a prominent object in the view. This has been
already alluded to by Professor Stanlev {S. # P.,
p. 226, n. 4). ' 0.
HA'ZIEL (b^tn [Eti (God's) bthoVmy]:
'1«<X; [Vat. Eur»*.:j Alex. AfnjA: ffotitl), a
Levite in the time of king David, of the family of
Shiroei or Sliinii, the younger branch of the Ger-
shonites (1 Chr. xxiii. 9).
HA'ZO (ITq [la*, riubilily, Fttrst]: 'AfoJ:
Atan), a son of Nahor, by Milcah his wife (Gen.
nii. 22): perhaps, says Gamins, for DTTn, "a
i." The name is unknown, and the settle-
nts of the descendants of Hazo cannot be ascer-
The only clew is to be found in the iden-
ttficatixi of Chesed, and the other sons of Nahor;
and hence he must, in ail likelihood, be placed in
Vt of the Chaldees, or the adjacent countries.
Bunsen (Bibelicerk, i. pt. 2, p. 49) suggests Cha-
seoe by the Euphrates, in Mesopotamia, or the
Cbazene in Assyria (Suabo, xvi. p. 736).
E. S. P.
HA'ZOBfW^T [mebturt, catU]: 'KaAfX
[Alex, in 1 K. ix. 15, A<r*p:] Ator [Ham-]).
L A fortified city, which on the occupation of the
Auntry was allotted to Naphtali (Josn. xix. 36)
111 position was apparently between Kamah an<*
Kedesh (H/trt. xii. 19). on the high ground over-
eokiog the Uke of Merom (Mpmirat t^i 3«w
HAZOR
io-:. e .
J xurlritot \l/iyris, Joseph. Ant. t. 5, § 1). 1 oere a
no reason for supposing it a different place from
that of which Jabin was king (Josh. xi. 1), both
when Joshua gained his signal victory over the
northern confederation, and when Deborah and
Barak routed his general Sisera (Judg. iv. 2, 17
1 Sam. xii. 9). It was the principal city of the
whole of the North Palestine, "the head of all
those kingdoms " (Josh. xi. 10, and see Onomasti-
con, Ator). like the other strong places of that
part, it stood on an eminence (/JJ, Josh. xi. 13
A. V. " strength "), but the district around must
have been on the whole flat, and suitable fur the
manoeuvres of the "very many" chariots and
horses which formed part of the forces of the king
of tlazor and his confederates (Josh. xi. 4, 0, 9;
Judg. ir. 3). Haztr was the only one of those
northern cities which was burnt by Joshua; doubt-
less it was too strong and important to leave stand-
ing in his rear. Whether it was rebuilt by the
men of Naphtali, or by the second Jabin (Jodg.
iv.), we are not told, but Solomon did not overlook
so important a poet, and the fortification of Hazor,
Megiddo, and Gezer, the points of defense for the)
entrance from Syria and Assyria, the plain of
Esdraelon, and the great maritime lowland respec-
tively, was one of the chief pretexts for his levy of
taxes (1 K. ix. 15). liter still it is mentioned in
the list of the towns and districts whose inhabi-
tants were carried off to Assjria by Tiglatli-l'ileser
(2 K. xv. 29; Joseph. Ant. ix. 11, } 1). We en-
counter it once more in 1 Mocc. xi. 67, where Jon-
athan, after encamping for the night at the " water
of Geneaar," advances to the "plain of Asor"
(Joseph. Ant. xiii. 6, § 7; the Greek text of the
Maccabees has prefixed an n from the preceding
word wttlov: A. V. Nasor) to meet Demetrius,
who was in possession of Kadesh (xi. 63 ; Joseph,
as above). [Nabob.]
Several places bearing names probably derived
from ancient Hazori have been discovered in this
district. A list will be found in Rob. iii. 366, note
(and compare also Van de Velde, Sgr. and Pul. ii.
178; Porter. Dimatcut, i. 304). But none of these
answer to the requirements of this Hazor. The
nearest is the site suggested by Dr. Robinson,
namely, Ttll Khuralbeh, " the ruins," which,
though without any direct evidence of name or
tradition in its favor, is so suitable, in its situa-
tion on a rocky eminence, and in its proximity
both to Kedesh and the like Hileh, that we may
accept it until a better is discovered (Rob. iii. 364,
365).
* The ruins of a large city of very nncient dsti
hare recently been found about two miles southeast
of Ketlet (Kr.Dr.sit, 31, on an isolated hill called
Tell IJarah. The walls of the citadel and a por-
tion of the city walls are distinctly traceable.
( 'aptafai Wilson, of the Palestine Exploring Expe-
dition, inclines to regard this place as the site of
the Bible Hazor (Josh. xix. -16), instead of TcD
Khuraibth. (See. fount, of Sncr. Literature, April,
1866, p. 245.) It is not said that the ancient name,
or any onilar one, still adheres to the locality.
Thomson oroposes JJnttre or ffnxtrg as the site of
this Hazor, northwest of the Hileh (Merom), and
in the centre of the mountainous region which over-
bangs that lake: the ruins are very extensive is
well as ancient, and a living tradition among the
Arabs supports this claim (see ljmd and Butt, 1
439). RJ>inson object* to this identification that »
Digitized by
Google
1018
IIKAD-BANDS
li too remote from the Hiilen, and is within the omits
of Asher, and not in those of Naphtali (Joah. xix.
82,36). Kor Hitter's view that this Hazor in a Ha-
tury on the rocky slope* above Banini (Caesarea
PbUippi), first heard of by Burckhardt in that
quarter, see his Geogr. of Palatine, Gage's trans.,
ii. 221-225. Kobinson states that the few remains
on a knoll there which bears this name are wholly
unimportant, and indicate nothing more than a
ifetra'ah, or goat village {Later Ret. iii. 402). It
is not surprising that a name which signifies
" stronghold," or " fortification," should belong
to various places, both ancient and modern. H.
3. (' Kaopmpvatv, including the following name :
Alex, omits : Amr. ) One of the " cities " of Judah
In the extreme south, named next in order to Ke-
desh (Josh xv. 23). It Is mentioned nowhere else,
nor has it jet been identified (see Rob. ii. 34, note).
The Vatican T.XX. unites Hazor with the name
following it, Ithnan ; which causes Reland to main-
tain that they form but one (Pal. pp. 144, 708);
but the I.XX. text of this list is so corrupt, that it
seems impossible to argue from it. In the Alex.
MS. Hazor is entirely omitted, while Ithnan again
is joined to Ziph.
3. (LXX. omits; [Cod. Sarrav. Aaap rn» kou-
rnv\ Comp. Kloaiap riir Kcurffr:] Ator nova.)
Hazor-Hadattah, = " new Hazor," possibly contra-
distinguished from that just mentioned ; another
of the southern towns of Judah (Josh. xv. 25).
The words are improperly separated in the A. V.
*• ('Katpdw, «Stii 'Kn<bp\ Alex. [Aaipap.,
avrn] Atrupoftafi. ffesron, hoc tit Aior.) " Hez-
ron which is Hazor " (Josh. xv. 25); but whether
It be intended that it is the same Hazor as either
of those named before, or that the name was orig-
inally Hazor, and had been changed to Hezron, we
cannot now decide.
6. ([Vat Alex. FA.» omit; Comp. FA.»]
'Kaip. A$or.) A place in which the Benjamites
resided after their return from the Captivity (Neh.
xi. 33). From the places mentioned with it, as
Anatboth, Nob, Raman, etc., it would seem to have
lain north of Jerusalem, and at no great distance
therefrom. Out it has not yet been discovered.
The above conditions are not against its being the
same place with Baal-Hazok, though there is no
positive evidenoe beyond the name in favor of such
an identification.
The word appears in combination — with Baal
in Baai^Hazoh, with Ain in En-Hazor. 0.
• 9. (i, o4At/: Ator.) In Jer. xlix. 28-33, H»-
tor appears to denote a region of Arabia under the
government of several sheiks (see ver. 38, " king-
lorn of Hazor"), whose desolation is predicted by
Jhe prophet in connection with that of Kebab.
The inhabitants are described (ver. 31) as a nation
dwelling " without gates or bars," i. e. not in cities,
but In unwalled villages, D^'H (comp. Ezek.
txxriii. 11, and sea Hazkr, Hazekim), from
which circumstance some would derive the name
(see Hitiig on Jer. xlix. 28; Winer, Realm., art.
Water, 4; and the Rev. J. L. Porter, art. Bator,
t, in Kitto's Ct/cL of Bibl. Lit, 3d ed.). A.
• HEAD-BANDS (Is. Ul. 80), probably «n
oeorrect translation; see tilKDLB. H.
HEAD-DRESS. The Hebrews do not ap-
pear to have regarded a covering for the head as
an essential article of drens. The earliest notice
we hive of such a thing is in connection with the
HEAD-DRESS
sacerdotal vestments, and in this case it is descrttaf
as an ornamental appendage "for glory and la
beauty " (Ex. xxviii. 40). The absence of any
allusion to a head-dress in passages where we should
expect to meet with it, as in the trial of Jealousy
(Num. v. 18), and the regulations regarding the
leper (I-ev. xiii. 45), in both of which the " uncov-
ering of the head " refers undoubtedly to the hair,
leads to the inference that it was not ordinarily
worn in the Mosaic age; and this is confirmed by
the practice, frequently alluded to, of covering the
head with the mantle. Even in after times it seems
to have been reserved especially for purposes of
ornament : thus tbe tzdniph (F)*2V) is noticed
as being worn by nobles (Job xxix. 14), ladies (Ii
iii. 23), and kings (Is. lxii. 3), while tbe peer
(1N5) was an article of holiday dress (Is. lxi. 3,
A. V - . " beauty; " Ex. xxiv. 17, 23), and was worn
at weddings (Is. lxi. 10) : the use of the ulrpa was
restricted to similar occasions (Jud. xri. 8; Bar. v.
2). The former of these terms undoubtedly de-
scribes a kind of turban : its primary sense (*13^?,
"to roll around") expresses the folds of linen
itxwnrt round the head, and its form probably re-
sembled that of the high-priest's milzntpheth (a
word derived from the same root, and identical in
meaning, for in Zech. iii. 5, ttAnfph = mittnepheU)),
as described by Josephus (Ant. iii. 7, § 3). The
renderings of the term in the A. V., " hood " (Is.
iii. 23), "diadem" (Job xxix. 14; Is. lxii. 8),
" mitre " (Zech. Iii. 5), do not convey the right idea
of its meaning. The other term, peer, primarily
means an ornament, and is so rendered in the A. V.
(Is. lxi. 10; see also ver. 3, "beauty"), and is
specifically applied to the head-dress from its orna-
mental character. It is uncertain what the terns
properly describes: the modern turban consists of
two parts, the kaont, a stiff, round cap occasionally
rising to a considerable height, and the thath, a
long piece of muslin wound about it (Russell. Ale/t-
po, i. 104) : Josephus' account of the high-priest's
Modem Syrian and Egyptian Haad-dntsss.
head-dress Implies a similar construction; far hi
says that it was made of thick bands of linen dosv
bled round many times, and sewn together: to
whole covered by a piece of fine linen to oonosei
the seams. Saalschiits (Archaol. I. 87, Mtal assf
Digitized by
Google
HEAD-DRESS
fall thit the U&niph and the prir represent the
tkiuk k.<d the kaook, the biter rising high above
the other, and so the roost prominent and striking
feature. In faror of this explanation it mar be
remarked that the peer is more particularly con-
nected Nriih the migbaah, the high cap of the or-
dinary priests, in Ex. xxxix. 38, while the Uanlph,
u we hare seen, resembled the high-priest's mitre,
in which the cap was concealed by the linen folds.
The objection, however, to this explanation is that
the etymological force of peer is not brought out :
may not that term hare applied to the jewels and
other ornaments with which the turban is frequently
decorated (Russell, i. 106), some of which are rep-
resented in the accompanying illustration bor-
rowed from lane's Mod. Egypt. Append. A. The
una need tor putting on either the tt&niph or the
sfeypckm Head-dresses. (Lane.)
a* la E?5n, "to bind round" (Ex. xxix. 9;
Ur. rilL 13): hence the words in Ex. xri. 10, " I
girded thee about with fine linen," are to be un-
derstood of the turban ; and by the use of the same
term Jonah (ii. 5) r ep r esen ts the weeds wrapped as
a turban round his head. The turban as now worn
In the East varies rery much in shape; the most
prevalent forms are shown in Russell's Altppo, i.
103.
If the tzantph and the ptir were reserved for
holiday attire, it remains for us to inquire whether
any and what corering was ordinarily worn over
the bead. It appears that frequently the robes
supplied the place of a head-dress, being so ample
that they might be thrown orer the head at pleas-
ure: the ridid and the tidtph at all events were
w used [Dress], and the veil served a similar pur-
pose. [Veil.] The ordinary head-dress of the
Bedouin consists of the ieffiyeM, a square handker-
ebUf, generally of red and yellow cotton, or cotton
and sUk, folded so that three of the comers hang
down over the hack and shoulders, leaving the face
expand, and bound round the head by a cord
(Rarckhardt, NuUi, i. 48). It is not improbable
«b»t a similar corering was used by the Hebrews
so eertaii. occasions: the "keichief" in Ei. xiil.
1 I, has been so understood by some writers (Har-
•ar, Ottertnliant, ii. 393), though the word more
arotuMy refer* to a specif* of veil; and the cifu-
tbvMr (Acts xix. IS* A T. "apron"), as ex-
HEARTH 1017
plained by Suidaa (re rijr K«*oXij» fopnpa), wis
applicable to the purposes of a head-dress. [HiuflD-
kkkchief.] Neither of these cases, howerer, sup-
plies positive evidence on the point, and the general
absence of allusions leads to the Inference that the
head was usually uncovered, as is still the case in
many parts of Arabia (Wells ted, TrareU, i. 7J).
The introduction of the Greek hat (xiraoos) by
Jason, as an article of dress adapted to the gymna-
sium, was regarded as a national dishonor (2 Macs.
iv. 12): in shape and material the pttasui rery
much resembled the common felt hat* of this <
try (Diet, of Ant. art. PUeus).
Bedouin Uead-dreas : the KHByah.
The Assyrian head-dross is described in Ex. xxilL
16 under the terms E^bnntp TPPip, « exceed-
ing in dyed attire;" it is doubtful, howerer,
whether ttbulim describes the colored material of
the head-dress (titira a coloribus quibus tinela
sint) ; another sense has been assigned to it mora
appropriate to the description of a turban (JaidU
obcolvit, Ges. The. p. 542). The term e'richi
[TTPD] expresses the flowing character of the
Eastern head-dress, as it falls down over the back
(Ijtyard, Nimreh, ii. 308)- The word rendered
" hats" in Dan. iii. 91 ftOJ"}?) properly applies
to a cloak. W. L. B.
HEARTH. 1. riH: itrxipa: omia (Ges
89), a pot or brazier for containing fire. 2. "1J2""0
m. and rniflD /..- xaiarpa, Kaiicis' incendium
(Ges. p. 620). 3. "I»S, or ~!V2> (Zech. xii. 6).
SoAor: enmima; in dual, D'|"?" > ? (Lev. xi. 3S)'
Xirroiwoits- chytropodct ; A. V. " ranges for pots"
(Ges. p. 672).
One way of baking, much practiced in the East,
is to place the dough on an iron plate, either laid
on, or supported on legs above the vessel sunk in
the ground, which forms the oven. This plate ot
" hearth " is in Arabic . .k_s»Lis, tnjen ; a word
which has probably passed into Greek in rfiyaror.
The cakes baked " on the hearth " (Gen. xviii. 6
iyxpt^plas, tubcineridot panes) were probably
baked in the existing Bedouin manner, on hot
stones covered with ashes. The " hearth " of king
Jehoiakim's winter palace, Jer. xxxri. 33, was pos-
sibly a pan or brazier of charcoal. (BurckhaVdt
Notes on Bed. 1. 68; P. deUa Valle, Vwggi, i. 437;
Harmer, Obs. i. p. 477. and note ; RauwouT, TrtsveU,
ap. Ray, u. 163; Shaw, Prawls, p. 331; Niebnbr,
Digitized by
Google
1018
HEATH
Utter. <k tArabie, p. 45; Sehleumer, Lex Vet.
TuL rii-ftwor; Ges. ». ». r"J~ p. 997.) [Fir*.]
H. W. P.
HEATH nj'TIB, 'trfffr, and "W"W,
'nr'dr .• ■ »j aypiofivplia), trot iypios '■ myriea).
The prophet Jeremiah compares the man " who
uinketh flesh hia arm, and whose heart departeth
frutu the Lord," to the 'nr'dr in the deeert (xvii.
6). Again, in the judgment of Moab (xlviii. 6),
to her inhabitant* it ia said, " Flee, aave your Uvea,
and lie like the 'Order in the wilderness," where
the margin has "a naked tree." There seems no
l to doubt Celsius' conclusion {Hierob. ii. 195),
that the 'ar'ir is identical with the 'ar'ar (.f j)
uf Arabic writers, which is some species of juniper.
Robinson (Bib. He*. B. 125, 6) state* that when
be was in toe pass of Nemela he observed juniper
trees (Arab, 'ar'ar) on the porphyry rocks aliove.
The berries, he adds, have the appearance and taste
of the common juniper, except that there is more
of the aroma of the pine. " These trees were ten
or fifteen feet in height, and hung upon the rocks
even to the summits of the cliffs and needles."
This appears to be the Junipenu Srttriaa, or savin,
with small scale-like leaves, which are pressed close
to the stem, and which is described as being a
gloomy-looking bush inhabiting the most sterile
soil (see Kngtith CycL N. Hut. iii. 311); a charac-
ter which is obviously well suited to the naked or
dtttitute tree spoken of by the prophet. Rosen-
miiller's explanation of the Hebrew word, which is
also adopted by Maurer, " qui destitutes versatur "
(ScJioL ad Jer. xvii, 6), is very unsatisfactory.
Not to mention the (omental of the comparison, it
is evidently contradicted by the antithesis in ver. 8 :
Cursed is be that trusteth in man ... he shall
be like the juniper that grows on the bare rocks of
the desert: Blessed is the man that trusteth in
the Lord ... be shall be as a tree planted by the
waters. The contrast between the shrub of the
arid desert and the tree growing bj the waters is
very striking ; but Kosenm tiller's interpretation ap-
pears to us to spoil the whole. Even more unsatis-
"actory is Michaelis (Supp. Lex. Ileb. p. 1971),
who thinks "guinea hens" (Numidn mtleayrit)
ire intended ! Gesenius ( Thet. p. 1078, 4) under-
stands these two Heb. terms to denote " pariettnse,
ssdificia eversa" (ruins); but it is more in accord-
ance with the Scriptural passages to suppose that
some tree is intended, which explanation, moreover,
has the sanction of the LXX. and Vulgate, and
<f the modem use of a kindred Arabic word.
W. H.
HEATHEN. The Hebrew words "na, D^3,
j6i, gtyim, together with their Greek equivalents
frtar, t8vr\, have been somewhat arbitrarily ren-
dered ■ ' nations," " gentiles," and " heathen " in
the A. V. It will be interesting to trace the man-
ner in which a term, primarily and essentially gen-
Sal in its signification, acquired that more restricted
sense which was afterwards attached to it. Its
development is parallel with that of the Hebrew
people, and its meaning at any period may be taken
as significant of their relative position with regard
Id the surrounding nations.
■ from the root T?^i " to be naked," In allusion
e aW Ash nature of the reeks on which the Jumpenu
HEATHEN
1. While as yet the Jewish nation had no |
eel existence, gdt/im denoted generally the
of the world, especially including the immediata
descendants of Abraham (Gen. xviii. 18; amp.
GaL iii. 16). The latter, as they grew in numbers
and importance, were distinguished in a moat
marked manner from the nations by whom they
were surrounded, and were provided with a code of
laws and a religious ritual, which made the dis-
tinction still more peculiar. They were essentially
a separate people (Lev. xx. 23); separate in habits,
morals, and religion, and bound to maintain their
separate character by denunciations of the most
terrible judgment* (l«v. xxvi. 14-38; Dent. xxriiL).
On their march through the desert they encountered
tlie most obstinate resistance from Amalek, " chief
of the g&yim " (Num. xxiv. 20), in whose sight the
deliverance from Egypt was achieved (Lev. xxvi
45). During the conquest of Canaan and the sub-
sequent wars of extermination, which the Israelites
for several generations carried on against their
enemies, the seven nations of the Canaanites,
Amoritea, Hittites, Hivites, Jebusites, Perizzites,
and Girgashitea (Ex. xxxiv. 24), together with the
remnants of them who were left to prove Israel
(Josh, xxiii. 13; Judg. iii. 1; Ps. lxxviii. 55), and
teach them war (Judg. iii. 2), received the especial
appellation of goyim. With these the Israelites
were forbidden to associate (Josh, xxiii. 7); inter-
marriages were prohibited (Josh, xxiii. 12; 1 K.
xi. 2); and as a warning against disobedience the
fate of the nations of Canaan was kept constantly
before their eyes (Ler. xviii. 24, 25; Deut. xviii.
12). They are ever associated with the worship
of false gods, and the foul practices of idolaters
(Lev. xviii. xx.), and these constituted their chief
distinctions, as gSy'm, from the worshippers of the
one God, the people of Jehovah (Num. xv. 41;
Deut. xxviii. 10). This distinction was maintained
in its full force during the early times of the mon-
archy (2 Sam. vii. 23; 1 E. xi. 4-8, xiv. 24; Ps.
cvi. 35). It was from among the goyim, the de-
graded tribes who submitted to their arms, that
the Israelites were permitted to purchase their
bond servants (I-ev. xxv. 44, 45), and this special
enactment seems to have Lad the effect of giving
to a national tradition the force and sanction of a
law (comp. Gen. xxd. 16). In later times this
regulation was strictly adhered to. To the words
of Eccl. ii. 7 "I bought men-servants and maid-
servants," the Targum adds, " of the children of
Ham, and the rest of the foreign nations."
And not only were the Israelites forbidden to
intermarry with these goyim, but the latter wen
virtually excluded from the possibility of becoming
naturalized. An Ammonite or Moabite was shut
out from the congregation of Jehovah even to the
tenth generation (Deut. xxiii. 3), while an Kdomite
or Egyptian was admitted in the third (vera. 7, 8).
The necessity of maintaining a separation so broadly
marked is ever more and more manifest as w
follow the Israelites through their history, and ob-
serve their constantly recurring tendency to idolatry
Offense and punishment followed each other with
all the regularity of cause and effect (Judg. ii. 12,
iii. 6-8, (Sic.).
2. But, even in early Jewish times, the term
goyim received by anticipation a significance of
SaMna often grows. Oomp. Ps. ctt. 17, Hv^P
-IJJiyn " the prayer of the dssUtutt " (or 111 eats)
Digitized by
Google
HEATHEN
• range than the national experience (Lew. xxvi.
M, 88; Dent xxx. 1), »ai as the latter was grad-
aafly developed daring the prosperous times of the
monarchy, the goyim were the surrounding nations
generally, with whom the Israelites were brought
into eontaet by the extension of their commerce,
and whose idolatrous practices they readily adopted
(Em. zxiii. SO; Am. T. 26). Later still, it is ap-
plied to the Babylonians who took Jerusalem (Neh.
v. 8; Pa. ixxix. 1, 6, 10), to the destroyers of Moub
(Is. xvi. 8), and to the several nations among
whom the Jews were scattered during the Captivity
(Ps. cvi. 47; Jer. zlvi. 28; Lam. i. 3, Ac.), the
practice of idolatry still being their characteristic
distinction (la xxxvi. 18; Jer. x. 2, 3, xiv. 22).
This signi6cation it retained after the return from
Babylon, though it was used in a more limited
sense as denoting the mixed race of colonists who
settled in Palestine during the Captivity (Neh. v.
17), and who are described as fearing Jehovah,
while serving their own gods (2 K. xvii. 29-33;
Ear. vi. 91).
Tracing the synonymous term (Btui through the
Apocryphal writings, we find that it is applied to
the nations around Palestine (1 Mace. 1. 11), in-
cluding the Syrians and Philistines of the army of
Gorgias (1 Mace. iii. 41, iv. 7, 11, 14), as well as
toe people of Ptolemais, Tyre, and Sidon (1 Mace.
V. 9, 10, 16). They were image-worshippers (1
Mace iii. 48; Wiad. xv. 15), whose customs and
fashions the Jews seem still to have had an uncon-
querable propensity to imitate, but on whom they
were bound by national tradition to take vengeance
(1 Mace. iL 68; 1 Kedr. viii. 85). Following the
customs of the gtyim at this period denoted the
neglect or concealment of circumcision (1 Mace. i.
IS), disregard of sacrifices, profanation of the Sab-
bath, eating of swine's flesh and meat offered to
idols (2 Mace. vi. 6-9, 18, xv. 1, 2), and adoption
of the Greek national games (2 Maeo. iv. 12, 14).
In all points Judaism and heathenism are strongly
contrasted. The " barbarous multitude " in 2
Mace. ii. 21 are opposed to those who played the
man for Judaism, and the distinction now becomes
an ecclesiastical one (oomp. Matt xviii. 17). In
2 Esdr. iii. 33, 34, the "gentes" are denned as
those "qui habitant in seculo" (comp. Matt. vi.
89; Luke xU. 30).
As the Greek influence became more extensively
sett In Asia Minor, and the Greek language was
generally used, Hellenism and heathenism became
eoevertible terms, and a Greek was synonymous
with a foreigner of any nation. This is singularly
evident in the Syriac of 2 Mace. v. 9, 10, 13; cf.
John vii. 35; 1 Cor. x. 32; 9 Mace. xi. 2.
In the N. T. again we find various shades of
meaning attached to {oVm. In its narrowest sense
it Is opposed to " those of the circumcision " (Acts
x. 45: cf. Esth. xiv. 15, where AAAoVpioi — 4ir«p(-
unrror), and is contrasted with Israel, the people
if Jehovah (Luke it 39), thus representing the
Hebrew D'fla at one stage of its history. But, like
ovjfim, it also denotes the people of the earth gen-
wauy (Astn xvii. 96; Gal. iii. 14). In Matt. vi. 7
ssVwe't is applied to an idolater.
But, In addition to its significance as an etnno-
rraphical term, gtyim had a moral sense wmch
must not be overlooked. In Ps. ix. 5, 15, x7 (oomp.
Ex. vii. 91) the word stands in parallelism with
PgTI, rdaU, the wicked, as distinguished by his
HEAVEN 1019
moral obliquity (see Hupfeld on I "a i. 1); and m
ver. 17 the people thus designated are described as
"forgetters of God," that know not Jehovah (Jer.
x. 25). Again in Ps. lix. 5 It is to some extent
commensurate in meaning with "JIM ^JS, b&g'di
aven, " iniquitous transgressors; " and in these pas-
sages, as well ss in Ps. x. 16, it has a deeper sig-
nificance than that of a merely national distinction,
although the latter idea is never entirely lost sight
of.
In later Jewish literature a technical definition
of the word is laid down which is certainly not of
universal application. Elius Levita (quoted by
Eisenmenger, Kntdtclda J udtntltum, i. G65) ex-
plains the sing, gai as denoting one who is not of
Israelitish birth. This can only have reference to
its after signification ; in the U. T. the singular is
never used of an individual, hut is a collective term,
applied equally to the Israelites (Josh. iii. 17) as to
the nations of Canaan (Lev. xx. 23), and denotes
simply a body politic. Another distinction, equally
unsupported, is made between 0^13, g&yim, and
D'BN, ummim, the former being defined as the
nations who had served Israel, while the latter were
those who had not (Jalkul Chadnih, fol. 20, no.
20; Kisemnenger, i. 667). Abarbanel on Joel iii
2 applies the former to both Christians and Turks,
or Ishmaelitea, while in Srpher Juckarin (fol. 148,
col. 2) the Christians alone are distinguished by
this appellation. Eisenmenger gives some curious
examples of the disabilities under which a gdi
labored. One who kept sabbaths was judged de-
serving of death (ii. 206), and the study of the law
was prohibited to him under the same penalty;
but on the latter point the doctors are at issue (ii.
20U). W. A. W.
HEAVEN. There are four Hebrew words
thus rendered in the 0. T., which we may briefly
notice. 1. 5 , i?P (arfpia/uf- Jirmammtum ; Luth.
Vetlt), a solid expanse, from VjlR, " to beat out; "
a word used primarily of the hammering out of
metal (Ex. xxxix. 3, Num. xvi. 38). The fuller
expression is D^Stjfn YTP (Gen. L 14 tV.
That Moses understood it to mean a toSd expanse
is clear from his representing it as the l.arrier be-
tween the upper and lower waters (Gin. 1. 6 f.\
i. r. as separating the reservoir of the celestial ocean
(Ps. civ. 3, xxix. 3) from the waters of the earth,
or those on which the earth was supposed to float
( Ps. exxxvi. 6 ). Through its open lattices (rPSnfcj
Gen. vii. 11; 2 K. viL 2, 19; oomp. icivKumy.
Aristoph. Nub. 373) or doors (D^V?, Pa. lxxvilL
23) the dew and snow and hall are poured upon
the earth (Job xxxviii. 22, 37, where we have the
curious expression " bottles of heaven," « utres
cosli "). This firm vault, which Job describes as
being "strong as a molten looking-glass " (xxxvii.
18), is transparent, like pellucid sapphire, and
splendid as crystal (Dan. iii. 3; Ex. xxir. 10; Es.
.. 22; Kev. iv. 6), over which rests the throne of
God (la lxvi. 1; Ex. i. 26), and which is opened
for the descent of angels, or for prophetic visions
(Gen. xxviii. 17; Ez. i. 1; Acts vii. 56, x. 11). U
h, Jke gems or golden lamps, the stars are fixed to
give light to the earth, and regulate the seasons
1 (Gen. 1. 14-191; and the whole magnificent, in>
Digitized by
Google
1020
HEAVEN
■iiasimble structure (Jer. xxxi. 37) Is supported
by the mountain* u iU pillars, or itrong founda-
tion* (Pi. zviii. 7; 8 Sam. xxii. 8; Job xxvi. 11).
Similarly the Greeks believed in an ovptwbt
roXixaXK»s (Horn. IL v. 604), or o-Miptot (Horn.
(Ml. xt. 328), or iXipuxoTot (Orph. /It/mm. ad
C&tutn), which the philosopher! called <rr*p4'pwtar i
or Kov<rraWoetSts (Emped. ap. Plot, dc PhiL
Plac. U. 11; Artemid. ap. Sen Nat. Qucett. vii.
13; quoted by Gesenius, $. v.) It ia clear that
very many of the above notions were mere meta-
phor* resulting from the simple primitive concep-
tion, and that later writers among the Hebrews
had arrived at more scientific news, although of
course they retained much of the old phraseology,
and are fluctuating and undecided in their terms.
Elsewhere, for instance, the heavens are likened to
a curtain (Pa. civ. 3; Is. xl. 22). In A. V.
"heaven " and "heavens" we used to render not
only TiT?. bn* «•» D?S#. EYT^, and
D^jTTTtp, for which reason we have thrown to-
gether under the former word the chief features
ascribed by the Jewish writers to this portion of
the universe. [Fikmamknt, Amer. ed.J
3. C'Ott? U derived from HE^'. "to be
high." This is the word used in the expression
" the heaven and the earth," or " the upper and
lower regions " (Gen. 1.1), which was a periphra-
sis to supply the want of a single word for the
Cosmos (Deut. xxxii. 1; Is. 1. 2; Ps. cxlviii. 13).
" Heaven of heavens " is their expression of in-
anity (Neh. ix. 6; Ecclus. xvi. 18).
3. 0*O|p. used for heaven in Ps. xviii. 16; Jer.
xxv. 30 ; Is. xxiv. 18. Properly speaking it means
a mountain, as in Ps. cii. 19, Ex. xvii. 23. It
must not, however, be supposed for a moment that
the Hebrews had any notion of a " Mountain of
Meeting," like AlborJth, the northern hill of Baby-
lonish mythology (Is. xiv. 13), or the Greek Olym-
pus, or the Hindoo i/era, the Chinese Kuenlun, or
the Arabian Caf (see Kalisch, Gen. p. 24, and
the authorities there quoted), since such a fancy is
incompatible with the pure monotheism of the Old
Testament.
4. D^ntZj, « expanses," with reference to the
txlenl of heaven, as the last two words were de-
rived from its height; hence this word is often
used together with D^DtP, as in Deut. xxxiii. 30 ;
Job xxxv. 5. In the A. V. it is sometimes ren-
dered <&•«&, for which the fuller term is "^
D"75mj7 (Ps. xviii. 12). The word p{JW
ireans first " to pound," and then " to wear out."
3 j that, according to some, "clouds" (from the
I otion of chult is the original meaning of the word,
deaenius, however, rejects this opinion ( Thet. s. v.).
In the N. T. we frequently have the word oupa
nU which some consider to be a Hebraism, or a
'•rural of excellence (Schleusner, Lex. Nov. Test.,
I. v.). St. Paul's expression iat rpirov oipamv
(8 Cor. xii. 2) has led to much conjecture. Gro-
tius said that the Jews divided the heaven into
three parts, naraelv. (1.) Nubiferuin, tbe air or at-
mosphere, where clouds gather. (2.) Astriferum, the
armament, in which the sun, moon, and stars are
tied. (3.) Empyreum, or Angeliferum, the upper
beaveu, the abode of God and bis angels, i. e. 1.
HttHHH
bs» obw (or vrn) ; % yorm nVw
(or D^OtD); and 8. JVbWI dV» (oi
'• heaven of heavens," D"Bu7 "1307). Tfata ea>
riously explicit statement is entirely unsupported
by Rabbinic authority, but it ia hardly ran- of
Meyer to call it a fiction, for it may be supposed
to rest on some vague Biblical evidence (cf. Dan.
iv. 12, '< the fowls of the heaven; " Gen. xxii. 17,
"tbe stars of tbe heaven; " Ps. ii. 4, "be that
sitteth in the heavens," etc.). Tbe Rabbis spoke
of two heavens (cf. Deut x. 14, " the heaven and
tbe heaven of heavens"), or seven (fa-ra ovpareivt
»B» Tins iotSfLowrt kot' iwurifiaair, Clem.
Alex. Strom. Iv. 7, p. 636). " Reach Lakisch dixit
septem esse ccelos, quorum nomina sunt, 1. velum ;
2. expansum; 3. nubea; 4. habitaculum; 6. hab-
itatioj 6. sedes fixa; 7. Araboth," or sometimes
" the treasury." At the sin of Adam, God as-
cended into the first; at tbe sin of Cain into the
second; during the generation of Enoch into the
third, etc.; afterwards God descended downwards
into the sixth at the time of Abraham, into tbe
fifth during the life of Isaac, and so on down to
the time of Moses, when He redescended into the
first (see many passages quoted by Wetatein, ad 3
Cor. xii. 8). Of all these definitions and deduc-
tions we may remark simply with Origrn, iwra J)
ouparobs *, 8 A«m **puapiep.ivm> hpiBuir alrrwr aX
(ptpiyurat iv rats iKKknvlaa toS %tov o'vk
iurayyiXKovai yoapal (c. Celt. vi. e. 21, p. 889)
[». e. " of seven heavens, or any definite number
of heavens, the Scriptures received in the churches
of God do not inform us "].
If nothing has here been said on the secondary
senses attached to the word " heaven," the omis-
sion is intentions!. The object of this Dictionary
is not practical, but exegetical; not theological, but
critical and explanatory. A treatise on the nature
and conditions of future beatitude would here be
wholly out of place. We may, however, remark
that as heaven was used metaphorically to signify
the abode of Jehovah, it is constantly employed in
the N. T. to signify the abode of the spirits of the
just. (See for example Matt. v. 18, vi. 30; Luke
x. 20, xii. 33; 3 Cor. v. 1 ; CoL i. 6.)
F. W. F.
• HEAVE-OFFERING. [Saciumc*.]
HE'BEK. The Heb. "fl? «nd ~5D an
more forcibly distinguished than the English Eber
and Heber. In its use, however, of this merely
aspirate distinction the A. V. of the O. T. ia con-
sistent: Eber always = 13?, and Heber 130.
In Luke ill. 35, Heber = Eber, 'tZfiipj the distinc-
tion so carefully observed in the O. T. having been
neglected by the translators of the N. T.
The LXX. has a similar distinction, though not
consistently carried out. It expnsses ""Q? by
'Efitp (Gen. I. m,"E0*p (* Chr. 1. 85), 'Efipat-
ous (Num. xxiv. 34); while "I^C it variously
given as Xo£o>, Xa$ip, 'A3d>, or 'Afi4p. In
these words, however, we can dearly perceive two
distinct groups of equivalents, suggested by ths
effort to express two radically different forma. T>»
transition from XoPip through Xafiep to 'Kfitf j
sufficiently obvious.
Tbe Vulg. expresses both indifferently by Heber
except in Judg. iv. 11 ff., where Haber is probabh;
Digitized by
Google
HEBREW LANGUAGE
suggested by the LXX. Xafify: and Num. jadv.
M, Ainm, evidently after the LXX. 'Kfioaiovt.
Excluding Lake iii. 86, where Ueber = Eber, we
have in the 0. T. six of the name.
1. Grandaon of the Patriarch Aaher (Gen. xbi.
17; 1 Chr. Hi. 31; Num. xxvi. 46).
3. Of the tribe of Judah (1 Ch.'. It. 18).
3. I'Ofiffi; Alex. Iv/3n8; Comp. 'Efl«>: //«-
4er.] A Gadite (1 Chr. t. 18).
4. A Benjamite (1 Chr. viii. 17).
0. ['n/34»i Vat n/38ii; Aid. 'A0if. Uebtr.]
Another Benjamite (1 Chr. viii. 29).
6. Heber, the Kenite, the husband of Jael
(Judg. iv. 11-17, t. 34). It is a question how he
could be a Kenite, and yet trace his descent from
Hobab, or Jethro, who was priest of Midian. The
solution ia probably to be sought in the nomadic
habits of the tribe, as shown in the case of Heber
himself, of the family to which he belonged (Judg.
i. 16), and of the Kcnitea generally (in 1 Sam. xr.
4, they appear among the Amalekites). It should
he observed that Jethro is never called a Midian-
ite, but expressly a Kenite (Judg. i. 16); that the
expression "priest of Midian," may merely serve
to indicate the country in which Jethro resided ;
lastly, that there would seem to have been two
successive migrations of the Kenites into Palestine,
one under the sanction of the tribe of Judah at
the time of the original occupation, and attributed
to Jethro'a descendants generally (Judg. i. 16);
the other a special, nomadic expedition of Heber'a
family, which led them to Kedesh in Naphtali, at
that time the debatable ground between the north-
ern tribes, and Jabin, King of Canaan. We are
not to infer that this was the final settlement of
Heber: a tent seems to have been his sole habita-
tion when his wife smote Sisera (Judg. iv. 21 ).
7. CEfitp'- Heber.) The form in which the
name of the patriarch Eber ia given in the ge-
nealogy. Luke iii. 38. T. E. B.
HE'BERITES, THE ("H^OD ■ » Xoj&V
[Vat. -p«t]: Hebtrila). Descendants of Heber,
a branch of the tribe of Aaher (Num. xxvi. 46).
W. A. W.
• HEBREW LANGUAGE. SeeSREMmc
Languages, §§ 6-18.
HE'BBEW, HE'BREWB. This word first
occurs ss applied to Abraham (Gen. xlv. 13): it
was afterwards given as a name to his descendants.
Four derivations have been proposed: —
L Patronymic from Abram.
XL Appellative from ~)3^.
HI. Appellative from ~>2$.
IV. Patronymie from Eber.
1. From Abram, Abrea, and by euphony He-
trrm (August., Ambrose). Displaying, as It does,
the utmost ignorance of the language, this deriva-
tion was never extensively adopted, and was even
retracted by Augustine (Rttract. 16). The eu-
phony alleged by Ambrose is quite impereeptihe,
sod there is no parallel in the Let. meridw =- f%»-
H. TW, from ">3^«= crossed over, ip-
paVsd by the Oanamltes to Abraham upon hb
•worxng the Euphrates (Gen. xiv. 18, when LXX.
ssfWini = tramUor'. This derivation is open to
ha strong objection that Hebrew nouns ending in
at* «stb«T patronymics, or gentilic nouns (Bux-
HEBREW 1021
torf, Leuadea). This is a technical obJeeUot
which, though fetal to the wtpoVnr, or appeWtim
derivation as traced back to the verb, does not
apply to the same as referred to the noun "139.
Thr analogy of Galli, Angli, Hispani derived from
Gallia, Angli*, Hispania (Leusd.), is a complete
blunder in ethnography; and at any rate it would
confirm rather than destroy the derivation from the
noun.
HI. This latter comes next in review, and is es-
sentially the same with n.; since both rest upon
the hypothesis that Abraham and his posterity
were called Hebrews in order to express a distinc-
tion between the races E. and W. of the Euphrates
The question of fact is not essential whether Abra-
ham was the first person to whom the word was
applied, his posterity as such inheriting the name;
or whether his posterity equally with himself were
by the Canaanites regarded as men from " the other
side " of the river. The real question at issue is
whether the Hebrews were so called from » pro-
genitor Eber (which is the fourth and last deriva-
tion), or from a country which had been the
cradle of their race, and from which they had
emigrated westward into Palestine ; in short,
whether the word Hebrew is a patronymic, or a
gentile noun.
IV. The latter opinion in one or other of Its
phases indicated above is that suggested by the
LXX., snd maintained by Jerome, Theodor., Ori-
gen, Chrysost., Arias Montanus, R. Bechal, Paul
Burg., Miinster, Grotius, Scaliger, Selden, Bosenm.,
Gesen., Eichhom; the former is supported by Jo-
seph., Suidaa, Bocbart, Vatablus, Druaius, Voesius,
Buxtorf, Hottinger, Leusden, Whiston, Bauer. As
regards the derivation from "QJ, the noun (or
according to others the prep.), Leusden himself,
the great supporter of the Buxtorfian theory, indi-
cates the obvious analogy of Transmarini, Tran-
sylrani, Tranaalpini, words which from the de-
scription of a fixed and local relation attained in
process of time to the independence and mobility
of a gentile name. So natural indeed is it to
suppose that Eber (tratu, on tie other tide) was
the term used by a Canaanite to denote the coun-
try E. of the Euphrates, and Hebrew the name
which he applied to the inhabitants of that coun-
try, that Leusden is driven to stake the entire
issue as between derivations HI. snd IV. upon a
challenge to produce any passage of the 0. T. in
which ~qy = "injn nay. if we accept kv
senm. SehoL on Num. xxiv. 24, according to which
Eber by parallelism with Asshur = Trans-Euphra.
dan, this challenge is met. But if not, the fa-
cility of the abbreviation is sufficient to create •
presumption in its favor; while the derivation with
which it is associated harmonises more perfectly
than any other with the later usage r.f the won)
Hebrew, and is confirmed by negative argument!
of the strongest kind. In fact it serins almost
impossible for the defenders of the patronymic
Ebtr theory to get over the difficulty arising from
the circumstance that no special prominence ia la
the genealogy assigned to Eber, such as might en-
title him to the position of head or founder of tht
race. From the genealogical scheme in Gen. xi.
10-26, it does not appear that the Jews thought
of Eber ss a source primary, or even secondary, of
the national descent The genealogy neither stars)
from bin nor in its uniform sequence does it rest
Digitized by
Google
1022
HEBREW
upon him with any emphasis. There is nothing to
distinguish Eber shore Arphaxad, Peieg, or Strug.
Like them be is but a link in the chain by which
Sbcm is connected with Abraham. Indeed the
tendency of the Inraelitish retrospect is to stop at
Jacob. It is with Jacob that their history as a
nation begins : beyond Jacob they held, their an-
cestry hi common with the Edomites ; beyond Isaac
they were in danger of being confounded with the
Ishrraelites. The predominant figure of the em-
phatically Hebrew Abraham might tempt them
beyond those points of affinity with other races, so
distasteful, so anti-national; but it is almost incon-
ceivable that they would voluntarily originate, and
perpetuate an appellation of themselves which
landed them on a platform of ancestry where they
met the whole population of Arabia (Gen. x. 26,
80).
Ai might have been expected, an attempt has
been made to show that the position which Eber
occupies in the genealogy is one of no ordinary
kind, and that the Hebrews stood in a relation to
him which was held by none other of his descend-
ants, and might therefore be called par excellence
" the children of Eber."
There is, however, only one passage in which it
is possible to imagine any peculiar resting point as
connected with the name of Eber. In Gen. x. 31
Shem is called " the rather of all the children of
Eber." But the passage is apparently not so much
genealogical as ethnographical ; and in this view it
seems evident that the words are intended to con-
trast Shem with Ham and Japheth, and especially
with the former. Now Babel is plainly fixed as
the extreme E. limit of the posterity of Ham (ver.
10), from whose land Nitnrod went out into As-
syria (ver. 11, margin of A. V.): in the next
place, Egypt (ver. 13) ia mentioned as the W. limit
of the same great race; and these two extremes
having been ascertained, the historian proceeds
(ver. 15-19) to fill up his ethnographic sketch
with the intermediate tribes of the Canaanites.
In short, in ver. 6-30, we have indications of three
geographical points which distinguish the posterity
of Ham, namely, Egypt, Palestine, and Babylon.
At the last-mentioned city, at the river Euphrates,
'heir proper occupancy, unaffected by the excep-
'onal movement of Asshur, terminated, and at the
same point that of the descendants of Shem began.
Accordingly, the sharpest contrast that could be
devised is obtained by generally classing these lat-
ter nations as those beyond the river Euphrates ;
and the words " father of all the children of Eber,"
i. e. father of the nations to the east of the Eu-
phrates, find an intelligible place in the context.
But a more tangible ground for the specialty
Implied in the derivation of Hebrew from Eber is
•ought in the supposititious fact that Eber was the
only descendant of Noah who preserved the one
primeval language; and it is maintained that this
anguage transmitted by Eber to the Hebrews, and
to them alone of all his descendants, constitutes a pe-
suliar and special relation (Theodor., Voss., Leusd. ).
It it obvious to remark that this theory rests
upon three entirely gratuitous assumptions : first,
that the primeval language has been preserved;
next, that Eber alone preserved it; lastly, that
having so preserved it, he communicated it to his
ion Peieg, but not to his son Joktan.
The first assumption is utterly at variance with
the most certain results of ethnology: the two
I are grossly improbable The Hebrew of the
HEBREWS, EPISTLE TO THJt
0. T. was not the language of Abraham when hi
first entered Palestine: whether he inherited his
language from Eber or not, decidedly the language
which he did speak must have been Chaldee (comp
Gen. xxxi. 47), and not Hebrew (Eichhorn). This
supposed primeval language was in fact the Ian
guage of the Canaanites, assumed by Abraham as
more or less akin to that in which he had been
brought up, and could not possibly have beta
transmitted to him by Eber.
The appellative (wtpinis) derivation is strongly
confirmed by the historical use of the word Hebron.
A patronymic would naturally be in use only among
the people themselves, while the appellative which
had been originally applied to them as strangers in
a strange land would probably continue to desig-
nate them in their relations to neighboring tribes,
and would be their current name among foreign
nations. This is precisely the case with the terms
Israelite and Hebrew respectively. The former
was used by the Jews of themselves among them-
selves, the latter was the name by which they were
known to foreigners. It is used either when for-
eigners are introduced as speaking (Gen. xxxix. 14,
17, xli. 12; Ex. i. 16, ii. 6: 1 Sam. iv. 6, 9, xiii.
19, xiv. 11, xxix. 3), or where they are opposed to
foreign nations (Gen. xliii. 82; Ex. 1. 15, ii. 11;
Deut. xv. 12; 1 Sam; xiii. 3, 7). So in Greek
and Roman writers we find the name Hebrews, or,
in later times, Jeun (Pausan. v. 6, $ 2, vi. 34, § 6;
Plut. Syrnpot. iv. 6, 1; Tac. Bust. v. 1; Joseph.
passim). In N. T. we find the same contrast be-
tween Hebrews and foreigners (Acts vi. 1; Phil.
iii. 5) ; the Hebrew language is distinguished from
all others (Luke xxiii. 38; John v. 2, xix. 13;
Acts xxi. 40, xxvi. 14; Rev. ix. 11); while in 2
Cor. xi. 22, the word is used as only second to Is-
raelite in the expression of national peculiarity.
Geseniits has successfully controverted the opin-
ion that the term Israelite was a sacred name, and
Hebrew the common appellation.
Briefly, we suppose that Hebrew was originally a
Cis-Euphratian word applied to Trans-Euphratian
immigrants ; it was accepted by these immigrants
in their external relations; and after the general
substitution of the word Jew, it still found a place
in that marked and special feature of national con-
tradistinction, the language (Joseph. Ant. i. 6,54;
Suidas, s. t>. 'e&muoi; Euseb. de Prop. Evany.
ii. 4 ; Ambrose, Comment, in PhiL iii. 5 ; August.
QuatL in Gen. 34; Consent. Evang. 14; comp.
Retract. 16; Grot. Annot. ad Gen. xiv. 13; Voss.
Etym. s. v. supra; Bochart, Phaleg, ii. 14; Brut.
Due. de Ling. Heb. Conserv. 31; Hottinger, The*.
i. 1, 3; Leusden, Phil. Heb. Diss. 21, 1; Bauer,
Entwurf, etc., § xi. ; Rosenm. SclioL ad Gen. x.
21, xiv. 13, and Num. xxiv. 24; Eichhorn, Einleii.
i. p. 60; Gesen. Lex., and Getch. d. Ileb. Spr. 11,
12). T. E. B.
HB'BREWEBS (n}1?5 : •Efl ? oio; •»«
braa). A Hebrew woman (Jer. xxxiv. 9).
W. A. W.
HEBREWS, EPISTLE TO THE. Ths
principal questions which have been raised, and thi
opinions which are current respecting this epittai
may be considered under the following heads:
I. Its canonical authority.
II. Its 'author.
III. To whom was it addressed?
IV. Where and when was it written?
V. In what language was it written?
Digitized by
Google
HEBREWS, EPISTLE TO THE
1028
VI. Gwflttnn of the Hebrews, and scope of the
VIL Literature connected with it.
L The most important question that can be en-
tertained in connection with this epistle touches
tts canonical ° authority.
The universal Church, by allowing it a place
among the Holy Scriptures, acknowledges that there
is nothing in its contents inconsistent with the rest
of the Bible. But the peculiar position which is
assigned to it among the epistles shows a trace of
doubt* as to its authorship or canonical authority,
two points which were blended together in primi-
tive times. Has it then a just claim to be received
by us as a portion of that Bible which contains the
rule of our faith and the rule of our practice, laid
down by Christ and his Apostles? Was it re-
garded as such by the Primitive Church, to whose
clearly-expressed judgment in this matter all later
generations of Christians agree to defer?
Of course, if we possessed a declaration by an
inspired apostle that this epistle is canonical, all
discussion would be superfluous. But the inter-
pretation (by F. Spanheim and later writers) of
9 Pet. iii. 18 as a distinct reference to St. Paul's
Epistle to the Hebrews seems scarcely tenable.
for, if the " you " whom St. Peter addresses be
aU Christians (see 3 Pet. i. 2), the reference must
not be limited to the Epistle to the Hebrews; or if
it include only (see 2 Pet. iii. 1) the Jews named
in 1 Pet. 1. 1, there may be special reference to the
tiabtians (vi. 7-9) arid Ephesiana (ii. 3-5), but
not to the Hebrews.
Was it then received and transmitted as canon-
ical by the immediate successors of the Apostles?
The most important witness among these, Clement
(a. d. 70 or 95), refers to this epistle in the same
way as, and more frequently than, to any other
canonical book. It seems to have been " wholly
transfused," says Mr. Westcott (On the Cnnon, p.
33), into Clement's mind. Uttle stress can be laid
upon the few possible allusions to it in Barnabas,
Hennas, Polycarp, and Ignatius. But among the
extant authorities of orthodox Christianity during
the first century after the epistle was written, there
is not one dissentient voice, whilst it is received as
a The Rev. J. Jones, In his Method of sailing the
Qmcn'oil Authority of ike N. T., Indicates the way tn
which an Inquiry Into this subject should be con-
tacted ; and Dr. N. Lardner's Credibility of the Oos-
net History Is a storehouse of ancient authorities.
But both these gnat works an nearly superseded lor
ordinary purposes by the Invaluable compendium of
the Bar. B. F. Westcott, On the Canon of the New
Testament, to which the flnt part of this article Is
greatly indebted. [Then Is a 2d edition of this work,
Lend. 1888.)
6 Lardner's remark, that It was not the method ot
Justin to use allusions so often as other authors have
ions, may supply us with something like a middle
point between the eonffiering declarations of two liv-
ing wrlten, both entitled to be beard with attention.
Tb* index of Otto's edition of Justin contains mm
than 50 references by Justin to the epistles of St.
Raul; while Prof. Jowstt (On the ThesiCLomans, etc.,
1st ad. I 846) puts forth in England the statement
hat Justin was unacquainted with St. Paul and his
wttfngB.
• This statement Is modified In the 2d edition of
Prat Jowetfs work (Loud. I860). He then says (I.
444) that " Justin refers to the Twelve In several pas-
■aysw, but nowhere In bis genuine writings mentions
•I real And when speaking of to* books nad in
canonical by Clement writing from Rome; by Jus-
tin Martyr, 6 familiar with the traditions of Italy
and Asia; by his contemporaries, Pinytus (?) the
Cretan bishop, and the predecessors of Clement and
Origen at Alexandria; and by the compilers of the
Peshito version of the New Testament. Among
the writers of this period who make no reference to
it, there is not one whose subject necessarily leads
us to expect him to refer to it. Two heretical
teachers, Basilides at Alexandria and Man-ton at
Rome, are recorded as distinctly rejecting the
epistle.
But at the dose of that period, in the Ncrth
African church, where first the Gospel found utter-
ance in the l«tin tongue, orthodox Christianity
first doubted the canonical authority of the Epistle
to the Hebrews. The Gospel, spreading from Je-
rusalem along the northern and southern shores of
the Mediterranean, does not appear to have borne
fruit in North Africa until after the destruction of
Jerusalem had curtailed intercourse with Palestine
And it came thither not on the lips of an inspired
apostle, but shorn of much of that oral tradition in
which, with many other facts, was embodied the
ground of the eastern belief in the canonical au-
thority and authorship of this anonymous epistle.
To the old Latin version of the Scriptures, which
was completed probably about a. i>. 170, this epis-
tle seems to have been added as a composition of
Barnabas, and as destitute of canonical authority.
The opinion or tradition thus embodied in that age
and country cannot be traced further back. About
that time the Roman Church also began to speak
Latin ; and even its latest Greek writers gave up,
we know not why, the full faith of the Eastern
Church in the canonical authority of this epistle.
During the next two centuries the extant fathers
of the I toman and North African churches regard
the epistle as a book of no canonical authority.
Tertullian, if he quotes it, disclaims its authority
and speaks of it as a good kind of apocryphal book
written by Barnabas. Cyprian leaves it out of the
number of St. Paul's epistles, and, even in his
books of Scripture Testimonies against the Jews,
never makes the slightest reference to it Irenseus,
who came in his youth to Gaul, defending in his
the Chrlstku assemblies, he names only the Gospels
and the Prophets. (A/iol. t. 67.) ... On the
other hand, It Is true that hi numerous quotations
from the Old Testament, Justin appears to follow St.
Paul." The statement that « the Index of Otto's edi-
tion of Justin contains more than 50 r efere n ces by
Justin to the epistles of St Paul '• Is net correct, If
his index to Justin's undisputi 1 ««.rks is Intended, the
number being only 89 (exclusive of 6 to the Epistle to
the Hebrews), and 16 of these being to quotations
from or allusions to the Old Twtament common to
Justin and St. Paul. In most of the remainder, tb%
correspondence it language between Justin and the
epistles of St. Pan. is not close. Still the evident*
that Justin was acquainted with the writing* of the)
great Apostle to the Gentiles appears to be satisfac-
tory. See particularly on this point the articles of
Otto tn IUgen's Zrilsthr. f. d. hist. Theot., 1842, Heft
2, pp. 41-64, and 1848, Heft 1, pp. 84-48. In such
works ss the two Apologies and tbs Dialogue with
Trypbo, quotations from St. Paul were not to be ex-
pected. Tint Justin wss acquainted with the Epistle
to the HsbnwB Is also probable, but that be regarded
it as " canonical n can hardly be proved or disproved-
8ee the careful and Judicious remarks of Mr. West
eott, Canon of the New Tat., 2d ed., f 146 ff.
Digitized by
Google
1.024
HEBREWS, EPISTLE TO THE
great work the Divinity of Christ, never quotes,
scarcely refers to the Epistle to the Hebrews. The
Muratorian Fragment on the Canon leaves it out
uf the list of St. Paul's epistles. So did Caiua
and Hippolytus, who wrote at Borne in Greek ; and
so did Victorinus of Psnnonio. But in the fourth
century its authority began to revive; it was re-
ceived by Hilary of Poitiers, Lucifer and Faustiiius
of Cagliari, Fabius and Victorinus of Rome, Am-
nrose of Milan, and Philaster (?) and Gaudentius
of Brescia. At the end of the fourth century,
Jerome, the most learned and critical of the Latin
Fathers, reviewed the conflicting opinions as to the
authority of this epistle. He considered that the
prevailing, though not universal view of the Latin
churches, was of less weight than the view, not
only of ancient writers, but also of all the Greek
and all the Eastern churches, where the epistle
was received as canonical and read daily ; and he
pronounced a decided opinion in favor of its au-
thority. The great contemporary light of North
Africa, St. Augustine, held a similar opinion. And
after the declaration of these two eminent men, the
Latin churches united with the East in receiving
the epistle. The 3d Council of Carthage, A. D.
897, and a decretal of Pope Innocent, A. D. 416,
gave a final confirmation to their decision.
Such was the course and the end of the only
considerable opposition which has been made to the
canonical authority of the Epistle to the Hebrews.
Its origin has not been ascertained. Some critics
have conjectured that the Montanist or the Nova-
tion controversy instigated, and that the Arian
controversy dissipated, so much opposition as pro-
ceeded from orthodox Christians. The references
iO St. Paul in the Clementine Homilies have led
other critics to the startling theory that orthodox
Christiana at Rome, in the middle of the second
century, commonly regarded and described St.
Paul as an enemy of the Faith ; — a theory which,
If it were established, would be a much stranger
(act than the rejection of the least accredited of
the epistles which bear the Apostle's nsme. But
perhaps it is more probable that that Jealous care,
with which the Church everywhere, in the second
century, had learned to scrutinise all books claim-
ing canonical authority, misled, in this Instance,
the churches of North Africa and Rome. For to
them this epistle was an anonymous writing, un-
like an epistle in its opening, unlike a treatise in
its end, differing in its style from every apostolic
epistle, abounding In arguments and appealing to
sentiments which were always foreign to the Gen-
tile, and growing less familiar to the Jewish mind.
So they went a step beyond the church of Alexan-
dria, which, while doubting the authorship of this
rplstle, always acknowledged its authority. The
iurch of Jerusalem, as the original receiver of
the epistle, was the depository of that oral testi-
mouy on which both its authorship and canonical
authority rested, and was the fountain-head of in-
formation which satisfied the Eastern and Greek
churches. But the church of Jerusalem was early
hidden in exile and obscurity. And Palestine,
after the destruction of Jerusalem, became unknown
jround to that class of ■< dwellers in Libya about
Cyrene, and strangers of Rome," who once main-
tained dose religious intercourse with it All these
« The Vatican Codex (B), i. s. 860, bears traces of
an earlier assignment of the fifth place to the Ip. to
%t Bebrawf \Sm Rau, p. 806 », Amsr. sd.]
considerations may help to account for the tot thai
the Latin churches hesitated to receive an epistle,
the credentials of which, from peculiar circum-
stances, were originally imperfect, and had become
inaccessible to them when their version of Scrip-
ture was in process of formation, until religious
intercourse betweeen East and West again grew
frequent and intimate in the fourth century.
But such doubts were confined to the Latin
churches from the middle of the second to the
close of the fourth century. All the rest of ortho-
dox Christendom from the beginning was agreed
upon the canonical authority of this epistle. No
Greek or Syriac writer ever expressed a doubt. It
was acknowledged in various public documents;
received by the framers of the Apostolical Consti-
tutions (about A. D. 360, Bevmdge); quoted in
the epistle of the Synod of Antioch, a. d. 969;
appealed to by the debaters in the first Council of
Nice ; included in that catalogue of canonical books
which was added (perhaps afterwards) to the canons
of the Council of Laodicea, A. D. 36S; and sanc-
tioned by the Quinisextine Council at Constanti-
nople. A. D. 692.
Cardinal Cajetan, the opponent of Luther, was
the first to disturb the tradition of a thousand
years, and to deny the authority of this epistle.
Erasmus, Calvin, and Bern questioned only its au-
thorship. The bolder spirit of Luther, unable to
perceive its agreement with St. Paul's doctrine,
pronounced it to be the work of some disciple of
the Apostle, who had built not only gold, silver, and
precious stones, but also wood, hay, and stubble
upon his master's foundation. And whereas the
Greek Church in the fourth century gave it some-
times the tenth " place, or at other times, ss it now
does, and ss the Syrian, Roman, and English
jhurchea do, the fourteenth place among the epis-
tles of St. Paul, Luther, when he printed his ver-
sion of the Bible, separated this book from St.
Paul's epistles, and placed it with the epistles of
St. James and St. Jude, next before the Revela-
tion; indicating by this change of order his opin-
ion that the four relegated books are of less im-
portance and less authority • than the rest of the
New Testament, His opinion found some promo-
ters; but it has not been adopted in any confession
of the Lutheran Church.
The canonical authority of the Epistle to the
Hebrews is then secure, so far ss it can be estab-
lished by the tradition of Christian churches. The
doubts which affected it were admitted in remote
places, or in the failure of knowledge, or under the
pressure of times of intellectual excitement; and
they have disappeared before full information and
calm judgment.
II. Who mat the author of the Epistle t — This
question is of less practical importance than the
last; for many books are received as canonical,
whilst little or nothing is known of their writer*.
In this epistle the superscription, the ordinary
source of information, is wanting. Its omission
has been accounted for, since the days of Clement
of Alexandria (apud Euseb. H. E. vi. 14) and
Chrysostom, by supposing that St. Paul withheld
his nsme, lest the sight of it should repel any Jew-
ish Christians who might still regard him rathst
as an enemy of the law (Acts xxi. 21) than as s
benefactor to their nation (Acts xxiv. 17). And
t pp. 847 and 447.
Digitized by
Google
HEBREWS, EPISTLE TO THE
1086
a, or ran other predecessor of Clement,
adds that St. Paul would not writs to the Jews as
an Apostle because he regarded the Lord himself
as their Apostle (see the remarkable expivjssion,
Heb. iil. 1, twice quoted by Justin Martyr, ApoL
i. 18,63).
It was the custom of the earliest fathers to quote
passage! of Scripture without naming the writer
or the book which supplied them. But there is no
reason to doubt that at first, everywhere, except in
North Africa, St. Paul was regarded as the author.
'« Among the Greek fathers," says Olshausen ( 0/kw-
cmta, p. 95), no one is named either in Egypt, or
m Syria, Palestine, Asia, or Greece, who is opposed
so the opinion that this epistle proceeds from St.
Paul." The Alexandrian fathers, whether guided
by tradition or by critical discernment, are the ear-
liest to note the discrepancy of style between this
epistle and the other thirteen. And they received
it in the same sense that the speech in Acts xxii.
1-21 is received as St. Paul's. Clement ascribed
to St. Luke the translation of the epistle into
Greek from a Hebrew original of St. Paul. Ori-
gan, embracing the opinion of those who, he says,
preceded him, believed that the thoughts were St.
Paul's, the language and composition St. Luke's
or Clement's of Rome. Tertullian, knowing noth-
ing of any connection of St. Paul with the epis-
tle, names Barnabas as the reputed author accord-
ing to the North African tradition, which in the
time of Augustine had taken the leas definite shape
of a denial by some that the epistle was St. Paul's,
and in the time of Isidore of Seville appears as a
Latin opinion (founded on the dissonance of style)
that it was written by Barnabas or Clement. At
Rome Clement was silent as to the author of this
as of the other epistles which he quotes; and the
' Blunt, On the Right Use of the Early
fathers, pp. 489-444, gives a complete view of the evi-
Isnee of Clement, Origin, and Buseblus as to the
authorship of the epistle.
* In this seam may be fairly understood the Indi-
rect declaration that this epistle Is St. Paul's, which
the Church of England para Into the mouth of her
ministers in the Offlees for the Visitation of the Sick
and tile Solemnisation of Matrimony.
e Blehop Pearson {Dr. successions priorum Homes
epiteoporum, ch. vtH. f 8) Bars that the way In which
timothy Is mentioned (rlii. 23) seems to him a sum-
dent proof that St. Paul was the author of this epistle.
for another view of this passage see Bleek, i. 27S.
d • it has been asserted by some German critics, as
nehuls sod Ssyffarth, that an unusually large propor-
tion of iwai AryeiuM, or peculiar words, is found in
the Epistle to the Hebrews as compared with other
splat lea of Paul. This Is denied by Prof. Stuart, who
Institutes an elaborate comparison between this epistle
sad the Tint Epistle to the Corinthians in reference to
this point. (See his Comm. on Hebrews, 2d ed., p.
H7 2., 228 If.) As the result of this examination, he
finds) la 1 Cor. 280 words which occur nowhere else
m the writings of Paul ; while In the Bpistle to the
H e br e w s, according to the reckoning of Beyrouth,
(ban are only 118 words of this class. Taking into
a ueuuut the comparative length of the two ephtl**,
the number of peculiar words in the Sptsue to the He-
brews ae compared with that In 1 Oor. Is, according 'o
Prof. Stuart, In the proportion of 1 to 1,. Hence he
arguea, that "If the number of leaf A*y6>n«i in our
spastic prone that It wsa not from the hand of Paul,
It must be mom abundantly evident the t Paul cannot
ham team the author ef the Itnt Spis*ie to the Cor-
Tne sects m she ease, however, an very dlflsnnt
U
writers who follow him, down to the middle of Hie
fourth century, only touch on the point to deny
that the epistle is St. Paul's.
The view of the Alexandrian fathers, a middle
point between the Eastern and Western traditions,
won its way in the Church. It was adopted as the
most probable opinion by Eusebius ; ° and its grad>
ual reception may have led to the silent transfer
which was made about his time, of this epistle
from the tenth place in the Greek Canon to the
fourteenth, at the end of St. Paul's epistles, and
before those of other Apostles. This place it held
everywhere till the time of Luther; as if to indi-
cate the deliberate and final acquiescence of th
universal church in the opinion that it is one of
the works of St. Paul, but not in the same full
sense " as the other ten [nine] epistles, addressed to
particular churches, are his.
In the last three centuries every word and phrase
in the epistle has been scrutinised with the most
exact care for historical and grammatical evidence
as to the authorship. The conclusions of individ-
ual inquirers are very diverse; hut the result has
not been any considerable disturbance of the an
cient tradition. No new kind of difficulty has
been discovered : no hypothesis open to fewer ob-
jections than the tradition has been devised. The
laborious work of the Kev. C. Forster ( The Apos-
tolical Authority of the Kpittle to Me Hebrews),
which is a storehouse of grammatical evidence, ad-
vocates the opinion that St Paul was the author
of the languaire, as well as the thoughts of the
epistle. Professor Stuart, in the Introduction to
his Commenttiry on the Kputte to the Hebrew*.
discusses the internal evidence at great length, and
agrees in opinion with Mr. Forster. d Dr. C.
Wordsworth, On the Canon of the Scriptures,
from what Prof. Stuart supposes. In the first pises,
20 of his auraf Aryrfpmi in 1st Corinthians am found
in the Bpistle to the Hebrews, which, to make the
comparison tolerably lair, should be "—t1 as Pau-
line | S others am found only In quotations ; and 18
mom do not properly belong in the list, while 28 should
be added to it Correcting them errors, we find the
number of peculiar words in 1 Cor. to be shout 217
On the other hand, the number of as-of AcyCftcva in
the Epistle to the Hebrews, not reckoning, of course,
those In quotations from the Old Testament, Instead
of being only 118, as Prof. Stuart assumes, Is about
800. (The precise numbers vary a little sccording to
the text of the Greek Testament adopted as the basis
of comparison.) Leaving out of account quotations
from the Old Testament, the number of lines in the
1st Epistle to the Corinthians, In Knapp's edition ot
the Greek Testament la 922 ; In the Epistle to the
Hebrews, 640. We have then the proportion — 640
922 : : 800 : 432 ; ahowing that if the number of pecu
liar words was as great in 1 Corinthians in proportion
to Its length ss In the Epistle to the Hebrewa, we
should find them 482 instead of about 217. In other
words, the number of airaf Xeyoueva in Hebrews
exceeds that In 1 Corinthians In nearly the propor-
tion of 2 to 1. No Judicious critic would rest an ar
gument In such a case on the mm number of pecu-
liar words; but n* this matter Is to bs discussed at all,
it Is desirable that the tacts should be correctly pre-
sented. Them Is much that Is erroneo us or fUlaemus
In Professor Stuart's other remarks on the internal evi-
dence. Tbe work of Mr. Forster In relation to this
subject (mentioned above), displays tbe same Intellect
ual characteristics as bis treatise on the Hlmyarltts
Inscriptions, his One Primeval Language, and his New
Plea for the Authenticity of the Text of the Three Hew
enty Witnesses (1 John v. 7), recently published a
Digitized by
Google
1086
HEBREWS, EPISTLE TO THE
Last tat, leans to the muds conclusion. Dr. S.
Davidson, in Mi Introduction to the New Tttta-
wumt, gives a very careful and minute summary of
the arguments of all the principal modern critics
who reason upon the internal evidence, and con-
cludes, in substantial agreement with the Alexan-
drian tradition, that St. Paul was the author of the
epistle, and thai, as regards its phraseology and style,
St. Luke cooperated with him in making it what it
now appears. The tendency of opinion in Ger-
many has been to ascribe the epistle to some other
author than St. Paul. Luther's conjecture, that
ApoDos was the author, has been widely adopted
by Le Clerc, Bleek, De Wette, Tholuck, Bunsen,
and others." [Apollos, Amer. ed.] Barnabas
has been named by Wieteler, Thiersch, and others, 11
Luke by Grotius, Silas by others. Nesnder attri-
butes it to some apostolic man of the Pauline
school, whose training and method of stating doc-
trinal truth differed from St. Paul's. The distin-
guished name of H. Ewald has been given recently
to the hypothesis (partly anticipated by Wetstein),
that it was written neither by St. Paul, nor to the
Hebrews, but by some Jewish teacher residing at
Jerusalem to a church in some important Italian
town, which is supposed to have sent a deputation
to Palestine. Most of these guesses are quite des-
titute of historical evidence, and require the sup-
port of imaginary facts to place them on a seeming
equality with the traditionary account. They can-
not be said to rise out of the region of possibility
Into that of probability; but they are such aa any
man of leisure and learning might multiply till
they include every name in the limited list that we
possess of St. Paul's contemporaries.
The tradition of the Alexandrian fathers is not
without some difficulties. It is truly said that the
style of reasoning is different from that which St
Paul uses in his acknowledged epistles. But it
may be replied, — Is the adoption of a different
style of reasoning inconsistent with the versatility
of that mind which could express itself in writings
so diverse as the Pastoral Epistles and the preced-
ing nine? or in speeches so diverse as those which
are severally addressed to pagans at Athens and
Lycaonia, to Jews at Pisidian Antioch, to Christian
eiders at Miletus ? Is not such diversity just what
might be expected from the man who in Syrian
Antioch resisted circumcision and St Peter, but in
Jerusalem kept the Nazarite vow, and made con-
cussions to Hebrew Christians; who professed to
become "all things to all men " (1 Cor. ix. 22);
whose education qualified him to express his
thoughts in the idiom of either Syria or Greece,
and to vindicate to Christianity whatever of eter-
pal truth wsa known in the world, whether it had
become current in Alexandrian philosophy, or in
Rabbinical tradition ?
If it be asked to what extent, and by whom was
St. Paul assisted in the composition of this epistle,
<• Among than must now be placed Dean AUbrd,
who In the fourth vol urns of his Great Tcstamau (pub-
lished sines the above article was in type), discusses
the question with great cars and candor, and concludes
that the epistle was written by Apollos to the Romans,
about a. D. 09, from Bphesus.
6 Among these are some, who, unlike Origan, deny
•net Barnabas is the author of the epistle which bears
bis name. If it be granted that we have no specimen
sf Ids style, the hypothesis which connects him with
she flpistle to the Hebrews becomes less improbable.
■ shew tlie* a* possessed some anal-
the reply must be in the words of Origan, « Whs
wrote p. e. as in Horn. xvi. 99, wrote from the aav
thor's dictation ] this epistle, only God knows.'
The style is not quite like that of Clement of
Some. Both style and sentiment are quite unlike
those of the author of the Epistle of B""«W
Of the three apostolic men named by African
fathers, St Luke is the most likely to have shared in
the composition of this epistle. The similarity ir
phraseology which exists between the acknowledged
writings of St Lukcand this epistle; his constat t
companionship with St Paul, and his habit of lis-
tening to and recording the Apostle's argumeuti
form a strong presumption in his favor.
But if St Luke were joint-author with St PssL
what share in the composition is to be assigned to
him ? This question has been vsked by those who
regard joint-authorship as an impossibility, and
ascribe the epistle to sane other writer than St
Paul. Perhaps it is not easy, certainly it is not
necessary, to find an answer which would satisfy or
silence persons who pursue an historical inquiry
into the region of conjecture. Who shall define
the exact responsibility of Timothy or Silvanus, or
Sosthenee in those seven epistles which St Paul
inscribes with some of their names conjointly with
his own? To what extent does St Mark's lan-
guage clothe the inspired recollections of St. Peter,
which, according to ancient tradition, are recorded
in the second Gospel ? Or, to take the acknowl-
edged writings of St. Luke himself, — what is the
share of the " eye-witnesses and ministers of the
word" (Lukei. 2), or what is the share of St Paul
himself in that Gospel, which some persons, not
without countenance bom tradition, conjecture that
St. Luke wrote under his master's eye, in the prison
at Csasarea; or who shall assign to the follower and
the master their portions respectively in those seven
characteristic speeches at Antioch, Lystra, Athena,
Miletus, Jerusalem, and Csasarea? If St Luke
wrote down St. Paul's Gospel, and condensed his
missionary speeches, may he not have taken after-
wards a more important share in the composition
of this epistle ?
III. To whom tens the Ejxttle tent t — Tnis ques-
tion was agitated as early aa the time of Chrysos-
tom, who replies — to the Jews in Jerusalem and
Palestine. The ancient tradition preserved by
Clement of Alexandria, that it was originally writ-
ten in Hebrew by St Paul, points to the same
quarter. The unfaltering tenacity with which the
Eastern Church from the beginning maintained the
authority of this epistle leads to the inference that
it was sent thither with sufficient credentials in the
first instance. like the First Epistle of St John
it has no inscription embodied in its text, and yet
it differs from a treatise by containing several direst
personal appeals, and from a homily, by closing
with messages and salutations. Its present title,
which, though ancient, cannot be proved tc. has*
Ideations tor writing such an epistle ; such as Ids Le>
vltical descent, his priestly education, his reputaSJoa
at Jerusalem, his acquaintance with Gentile churches,
his company with St Paul, the tradition of Tertolltam,
etc
c Lunemann, followed by Dean Alford, argues that
Origan must have meant hen, aa he con f essedly dees
a lew Unas further on, to indicate an author, not a
scribe, by e ypetyov ; but he acknowledges that C
sen, Btengletn, and DeUssnh, do not allow the I
Digitized by
Google
HEBREWS, EPISTLE TO THE
1027
bj the writer of the epistle, might
km been given to it, in accordance with the use
if the term Hebrewi in the N. T., if it had been
addressed either to Jews who lived at Jerusalem,
and spoke Aramaic (Acts vi. 1), or to the descend-
ants of Abraham generally (3 Cor. xi. 23; PluL
iii.5).
Out the argument of the epistle is wch as could
be used with most effect to a church consisting
exclusive!? of Jews by birth, personally familiar
with," and attached to, the Temple-service. And
such a community (as Bleek, Hebraer, i. 81, argues)
could be fiiund only in Jerusalem and its neighbor-
hood. And if the church at Jerusalem retained its
tbmur distinction of including a great company of
priests (Acts vi. 7) — a class professionally familiar
with the songs of the Temple, accustomed to dis-
cuss the interpretation of Scripture, snd acquainted
with the prevailing Alexandrian philosophy — such
a church would be peculiarly fit to appreciate this
epistle. For it takes from the Book of Psalm* the
remarkable proportion of sixteen out of thirty-two
quotations from the 0. T., which it contains. It
relies so much on deductions from Scripture that
this circumstance has been pointed out as incon-
sistent with the tone of independent apostolic au-
thority, which characterises the undoubted epistles
of St. Paul. And so frequent is the use of Alex-
andrian philosophy and exegesis that it has sug-
gested to seme critics ApoUos as the writer, to
others the Alexandrian church as the primarv re-
cipient of the epistle.' If certain members of the
church at Jerusalem poss ess ed goods (lieb. x. 94),
and the means of ministering to distress (vi. 10),
this fact is not irreconcilable, as has been sup-
posed, with the deep poverty of other inhabitants
of Jerusalem (Kora. xv. 36, dec.); but it agrees
exactly with the condition of that church thirty
years previously (Acts ii. 46, and iv. 34), and with
the historical estimate of the material prosperity
of the Jews at this time (Merivale, Hutm-y of the
Roman* under Me Umpire, vi. 531, eh. lix.). If
St. Paul quotes to Hebrews the LXX. without cor-
recting it where it differs from the Hebrew, this
agrees with his practice in other epistles, and with
(he fact that, as elsewhere so in Jerusalem, Hebrew
ms a dead language, acquired only with much pains
jy the learned. The Scriptures were popularly
known in Aramaic or Greek : quotations were made
bom memory, and verified by memory. Probably
Prof. Jowett is correct in his inference (1st edit. i.
181), that St. Paul did not familiarly know the
Hebrew original, while he possessed a minute knowl-
edge of the LXX.
Ebrard limits the primary circle of readers even
to a section of the church at Jerusalem. Consid-
ering such passsges as v. 13, ri. 10, x. 32, as prob-
ably inapplicable to the whole of that church, he
jDrgeetums that St. Paul wrote to some neophytes
chose conversion, though net mentioned in the
iota, may have been partly lue to the Apostle's
• lor an explanation of the alleged Ignorance of the
author of Hsb. ix. as to the furniture of the Temple,
see Bbrard's Commentary on the passage, or Professor
Stuart's Eramia, xvl. and xvb.
• The Influence of the Alexandrian school did not
begin with Philo, and was not confined to Alexandria.
[aJJBUavau*] The means and the evidence of Its
aregrew may be traced as the writings of the son of
•Jsaeh (Maarles's Marat and Mrtapkyii-al Mlompkp,
f 8, p. 384), the author of the Book of Wisdom
" , SeKSMSM. Ir. 648), Arartobuius. Kssxiel. Pail*.
influence in the time of his last recorded sojourn in
Jerusalem (Acts xxi. 22).
Some critics have maintained that this epistls
was addressed directly to Jewish believers every-
where; others have restricted it to those who dwelt
in Asia and Greece. Almost every city in which
St Paul labored has been selected by some critic
sa the place to which it was originally sent. Not
only Rome and Caaarea, where St. Paul was long
imprisoned, but, amid the profound silence of its
early Fathers, Alexandria also, which he never saw,
have each found their advocates. And one con-
jecture connects this epistle specially with the
Gentile Christians of Ephesus. These guesses sgrer
in being entirely unsupported by historical evidence;
and each of them has some special plausibility com
billed with difficulties peculiar to itself.
IV. Where and wlie* tons it written t — Eastern
traditions of the fourth century, in connection with
the opinion that St. Paul is the writer, name Italy
and Home, or Athens, as the place from whence
the epistle was written. Either place would agree
with, perhaps was suggested by, the mention of
Timothy in the last chapter. An inference in favor
of Koine may be drawn from the Apostle's long
captivity there in company with Timothy and Luke.
Cesarea is open to a similar inference; and it has
been cunjecturally named as the place of the com-
position of the Epp. to the Colossians, Epheniana,
and Philippians: but it is not supported by any
tradition. From the expression "they of (a><f)
Italy," xiii. 34, it baa been inferred that the writer
could not have been in Italy; but Winer (Gram-
matik, § 66, 6), denies that the preposition neces-
sarily has that force.
The epistle was evidently written before the
destruction of Jerusalem in A. o. 70. The whole
argument, and specially the passages riii. 4 and ff.,
ix. 6 and ff. (where the present tenses of the Greek
are unaccountably changed into past in the English
version ), and xiii. 10 and ff. imply that the Temple
was standing, and that its usuai course of Divine
service was carried on without interruption. A
Christian reader, keenly watching in the doomed «
city for the fulfillment of his Ix>rd's prediction
would at once understand the ominous references
to " that which beareth thoms and briers, and is
rejected, and is nigh unto cursing, whose end is to
be burned;" "that which decayeth and waxeth
old, and is ready to vanish away; " and the coming
of the expected " Day," and the removing of those
things that are shaken, vi. 8, viii. 13, x. 35, 37, xii.
27. But these forebodings seem less distinct and
circumstantial than they might hare been if uttered
immediately before the catastrophe. The references
to former teachers xiii. 7, and earlier instruction v.
13, and x. 33, might suit any time after the first
years of the church ; but it would be interesting to
connect the first reference with the martyrdom *
of St. James at the Passover A. D. 63. Modern
criticism has not destroyed, though it hat weakened.
and Theodotus (Bwald, Iv. 287) ; in the phraseology
of St. John (Prof. Jowett, On the T/uuaUmuau, eto
1st edit. 1. 408), and the arguments of St. Paul (ibid
p. 861) ; in the establishment of an Alexandrian syn
agogoe at Jerusalem (Acts vi. 9), and the existence of
schools of scriptural Interpretation there (Bwald, Os
tcAidUf, v. 68, and vi. 281).
c See ■osephus, B. J. vi. 6, 5 8.
d Bat lostphns, Ant. xx 9, * 1 ; laaeb. H. M ■
28 ; ant tfaeogn. Clement. I 70. sp. Oetalsr. 1 MB
Digitized by
Google
1028
HEBREWS, EPISTLE TO THE
Jbt connection of this epistle with St. Paul's
Soman captivity (a. d. 61-63) by substituting the
wading rots Stv/ilou, "the prisoners," for rail
Stffftoit ueu (A. V. "me in my bonds)," x. 84;
by proposing to interpret eWoA<Au/icVor, xiii 23, at
" sent away," rather than "set at liberty; " and
bv urging that the condition of the writer, as por-
trayed in xiii. 18, 19, 33, is not necessarily that
of a prisoner, and that there may possibly be no
allusion to it in xiii. 3. On the whole, the date
which best agrees with the traditionary account of
the authorship and destination of the epistle is
A. d. 63, about the end of St. l'aul's imprisonment
at Rome, or a year after Albinus succeeded Festus
as procurator.
V. In what language teat it written f — Like
St. Matthew's Gospel, the Epistle to the Hebrews
has afforded ground for much unimportant contro-
versy respecting the language in which it was
originally written. The earliest statement is that
of Clement of Alexandria (preserved in Kuseb. H.
£. vi. 14), to the effect that it was written by St
Paul in Hebrew, and translated by St Luke into
Greek; and hence, as Clement observes, arises the
Identity of the style of the epistle and that of the
Acts. This statement is repeated, after a long
interval, by Eusebius, Theodoret, Jerome, and sev-
eral later fathers: but it is not noticed by the
majority. Nothing is said to lead us to regard it
as a tradition, rather than a conjecture suggested
by the style of the epistle. No person is said to
have used or seen a Hebrew original. The Aramaic
eopy, included in the Peshito, has never been re-
garded otherwise than as a translation. Among
the few modern supporters of an Aramaic original
the most distinguished are Joseph Hallet, an Eng-
lish writer in 1727 (whose able essay is most easily
accessible in a Latin translation in Wolfs CW<s
Pkilatogiae, iv. 806-837), and J. D. Michaelis,
Erkldr. det Brit/a an die Htbrier. Meek (i.
6-23), argues in support of a Greek original, on
the grounds of (1) the purity and easy flow of the
Greek; (2) the use of Greek words which could
not be adequately expressed in Hebrew without
long periphrase ; (3) the use of paronomasia —
under which head he disallows the inference against
an Aramaic original which has been drawn from
the double sense given to tuMitcn, ix. 15; and
(4) the use of the Septuagint in quotations and
references which do not correspond with the He-
brew text
VI. Condition of the Hebrew, and teope of the
Spittle. — The numerous Christian churches scat-
lend throughout Judaea (Acts ix. 31; Gal. I. 22)
were continually exposed to persecution from the
Jews (1 These, ii. 14), which would become more
searching and extensive as churches multiplied, and
as the growing turbulence of the nation ripened
into the insurrection of A. d. 66. Personal violence,
spoliation of property, exclusion from the synagogue,
uid domestic strife were the universal forms of per-
secution. But in Jerusalem there was one addi-
tional weapon in the hands of the predominant
oppressors of the Christians. Their magnificent
national Temple, hallowed to every Jew by ancient
historical and by gentler personal recollections, with
Its irresistible attractions, its soothing strains, and
Mysterious ceremonies, might be shut against the
Ses the ingenious, but perhaps overstrained, m-
of Heb. xl. In Thiersch's Vommmtatio
tit tfTittota ad Hcbrtnt-
Hebrew Christian. And even if, audd the lata*
factions and frequent oscillations of authority a
Jerusalem, this affliction were not often laid upoa
him, yet there was a secret burden which evttj
Hebrew Christian bore within him — the knowledge
that the end of all the beauty and awfulness of
Zion was rapidly approaching. Paralyzed, perhaps,
by this consciousness, sod enfeebled by their attach-
ment to a lower form of Christianity, they became
stationary in knowledge, weak in faith, void of
energy, and even in danger of apostasy from Christ
For, at afflictions multiplied round them, and made
them feel more keenly their dependence on God,
and their need of near and frequent and associated
approach to Him, they teemed, in consequence of
their Christianity, to be receding from the God vf
their fathers, and losing that means of communion
with Him which they used to enjoy. Angels, Moses
and the High-priest — their intercessors in heaven
in the grave, and on earth — became of less im-
portance in the creed of the Jewish Christian; tbeii
glory waned as he grew in Christian experience
Already he felt that the Lord's day was superseding
the Sabbath, the New Covenant the Old. What
could take the place of the Temple, and that which
was behind the veil, and the Levities! sacrifices
and the Holy City, when they should cease to exist i
What compensation could Christianity offer him
for the loss which was pressing the Hebrew
Christian more and more.
James, the bishop of Jerusalem, had just left hit
place vacant by a martyr's death. Neither to
Cephas at Babylon, nor to John at Ephesus, the
third pillar of the Apostolic Church, was it given
to understand all the greatness of his want, and to
speak to him the word in season. But there came
to him from Rome the voice of one who had been
the foremost in sounding the depth and breadth of
that love of Christ which was all but incompre-
hensible to the Jew, one who feeling more than any
other Apostle the weight of the care of all the
churches, yet clung to his own people with a love
ever ready to break out in impassioned words, and
unsought and ill-requited deeds of kindness. He
whom Jerusalem had sent away in chains to Rome
again lifted up his voice in the hallowed city among
his countrymen; but with words and arguments
suited to their capacity, with a strange, borrowed
accent, and a tone in which reigned no apostolic
authority, and a face veiled in very love from way-
ward children who might refuse to hear divine and
sating truth, when it fell from the lips of Paul.
He meets the Hebrew Christians on their own
ground. His answer is — " Your new faith gives
you Christ, and, in Christ, all you seek, all your
fathers sought In Christ the Son of God yon
have an all-sufficient Mediator, nearer than angel*
to the Father, eminent above Moses as a benefactor,
more sympathizing and more prevailing than the
high-priest as an intercessor : His sabbath awaits
you in heaven ; to Hit covenant the old was in-
tended to be subservient; His atonement is the
eternal reality* of which sacrifices are bat the
passing shadow; His city heavenly, not made with
hands. Having Him, believe in Him with all your
heart, with a faith in the unseen future, strong at
that of the saints of old, patient under present, and
prepared for coming woe, full of energy, and hop*
and holiness, and love."
Such was the teaching of the Epistle to the Be
o Bern Bishop Batlsr's Analogy, H. 6, | «
Digitized by
Google
HEBREWS, EPISTLE TO THE
1029
jrews. We do not possess the maun of tracing
mt stop by step its effect upon (hem : but we know
that the result at which it aimed was achieved.
The church at Jerusalem did no> apostatize. It
migrated to Pella (Euaebius. H. E. iii. 5); and
there, no longer dwindled under the cold shadow
•A overhanging Judaism, it followed the Hebrew
Christians of the Dispersion in gradually entering
on the possession of the full liberty which the law
of Christ allows to all.
And this great epistle remains to after times, a
keystone binding together that succession of inspired
uec which spans over the ages between Moses and
St. John. It teaches the Christian student the sub-
stantial identity of the revelation of God, whether
given through the Prophets, or through the Son;
ft* it shows that God's purposes are unchangeable,
however diversely in different ages they have been
" reflected in broken and fitful rays, glancing back
from the troubled waters of the human soul." It
is a source of inexhaustible comfort to every Chris-
tian sufferer in inward perplexity, or amid "re-
proaches and afflictions." It is a pattern to every
Christian teacher of the . method in which larger
views abould be imparted, gently, reverently, and
seasonably, to feeble spirits prone to cling to ancient
forms, and to rest in accustomed feelings.
VII. /literature connected with the Epittle. —
In addition to the books already referred to, four
eommeutories may be selected as the best repre-
sentatives of distinct lines of thought; — those of
Chrvsoatom, Calvin, Estius, and Bleek. I jineuiann
(1855 [3d ed. 1867]), and DeUtzsch (1858) have
recently added valuable commentaries to those
already in existence.
The commentaries accessible to the English
reader are those of Professor Stuart (of Andover,
D. S. [3d ed., 1833, abridged by Prof. R. D. C.
Bobbins, Andover, I860]), and of Ebrard, trans-
lated by the Rev. J. Fulton [in vol. vi. of Olshausen'a
BibL Com*., Amer. ed.]. Dr. Owen's Exercita-
Uotu on the Hebrews are not chiefly valuable as an
attempt at exegesis. The Paraphrase and Notes
af Peine [3d ed. Land. 1734] are praised by Dr.
Doddridge. Among the well-known collections of
English notes on the Greek text or English version
•f the N. T., those of Hammond, Fell, Whitby,
Macknigbt, Wordsworth, and Alford may be par-
ticularly mentioned. In Prof. Stanley's Sermon*
and Euaut on the ApoUoUcal Age there is a
thoughtful and eloquent sermon on this epistle;
and it is the subject of three Warburtonian Lec-
ture*, by the Rev. F. D. Maurice [land. 1846].
A tolerably complete list of commentaries on
this epistle may be found in Bleek, vol. ii. pp. 10-
W, and a comprehensive but shorter list at the end
*f Ebmrd's Commentary. W. T. B.
• The opinion that the Epistle to the Hebrews
wee not written by Paul has found favor with many
baa lee those whose names have been mentioned.
Among these are UUmann (Stud. u. Krit. 1828, p.
«88 ft). Scbott (/tagage, 1830, §§ 79-87), Schleier-
nacher (EM. in* \. T. p. 439), Leehler (Da* ApotU
ZeHali p. 159 t), Wieseler (Chron. d. ApotL
ZeUalt p. 604 f.), and in a separate treatise ( Un-
ermchung iber den //ebr*erbrief, Kiel, 1861),
Iwesten (Dogmatik, 4te Aufl., i. 95, and in Piper's
Eoam/tL /Calender tor 1858, p. 43 l.\ Koetlin (in
Bear and ZeUer's TheuL Jahrb. 1854, p. 421 \
Ocdner (Getch. det Keutett. Kanon, edited ,-v
folkmar, p. 161), SchmH (BM. Theol. det N *".
T%\ Rease (Gtsch. det N. T. 4te Ansg.), W«e»
(Stud. u. KriL 185S p. 143) Schneekenbeaftr
(Beitrdge, and in the Stud. u. Krit. 1859, p. S83 1),
Hase (Kirchengesch. 7te Aufl. § 39, p. 688 of toe
Amer. trans.), Lange (Da* ApotL Zettalter, i
185 f.), Ritschl (Stud. u. Krit. 1886, p. 86),
Liinemann (Uandb. p. 1 f., 3te Aufl. 1867, 13th
pt. of Meyer's Komm. ub. d. If. T.), Von Gerlach
(Da* N. T. etc., EiuL p. xxxiv.), Messner (Die
Lehre der Apostel, p. 393 «.), liiehm (Lehrbegr.
det HebrSer-Br., neue Ausg. 1867), Moll (in
Lange's Bibelwerk), Holtzmann (in Bunaen's Bibel-
werk, viii. 512 ff. ), the Roman Catholics Feilmoaer
(EM. in* N. T. p. 359), Lutterbeck (NeutuU
Lehrbegr. ii. 245), Maier (Conun. ub. d. Brief an
die Hebracr, 1861), and among writers in English,
Norton (in the Christian rjeam. 1827 to 1829),
Palfrey (Relation between Judaitm and Christianilg,
pp. 311-331), Tregeues (in Home's /ntroductum,
10th ed., iv. 585), Schaff (Apostolic Church, p. 641
f.), Conybeare and Howeon, Life and Epp. of St
Paul, new ed. chap, xxviii.), Weatoott (Canon of
N. T. 2d ed. p. 314), and others. In justice to thai
opinion, the chief arguments urged in its support
may be more particularly stated. Those furnished
by the epistle itself may be filassi fieri according to
their general nature as formal, doctrinal, personal:
I. To the first clam belong, (1.) The abtence of a
taiuiation, and in general the treatise-tike charac-
ter of the epUUe. The explanation of Pantaenus(?)
is inadequate, for Paul might have sent a salutation
without styling himself "apostle" (cf. Epp. to
Phil. Tbess. Philem.); the supposition of Clement
of Alexandria attributes to the Apostle a procedure
which, even if quite worthy of him, was hardly
practicable, certainly hazardous, and plainly at
variance with the indications that the author was
known to his readers (cf. xiii. 18, 19, 22 f.); the
assumption that Paul in this epistle abandoned hia
ordinary manner of composition for some unknown
reason, admits the facts, but adopts what, in view
of the thirteen extant specimens of his epistolary
ptjle, is the less probable explanation of them. (2.)
The peculinritiei relative to the employment of the
0. T. Paul quotes the O. T. freely, in the epistle
it is quoted with punctilious accuracy; Paul very
often gives evidence of having the Hebrew in mind,
the epistle almost (if not quite) uniformly repro-
duce* the LXX. version, and that, too, in a form of
the text (Cod. Alex.) differing generally from the
LXX. text employed by the Apostle (Cod. Vat),
Paul commonly introduces his quotations as " Scrip-
ture," often gives the name of the human author,
but in the epistle the quotations, with but a single
exception (ii. 6), are attributed more or less directly
to God. (3.) The characteristic* of expression.
(a.) The epistle is destitute of many of Paul's
favorite expressions — expressions which, being of a
general nature and pertinent in any epistle, betray
the Apostle's habits of thought. For instance, the
phrase it Xpumf, which occurs 78 times in the
acknowledged epistles of Paul (being found in all
except the short Epistle to Titus), does not occur
in the Epistle to the Hebrews, although this epistle,
quotations excluded, is rather more than one
seventh aa long aa the aggregate length of the
other thirteen; the phrase i niptos 'Iijo-oC* Xpurrit
(variously modified aa respects arrangement and
pronouns), which occurs in every one of Paul's
epistles, and more than 80 times in all, ia not to
be fornd in the Epistle to the Hebrews; the word
tbayy4\tor. though used 60 times by Paul, and
in ail '-is eputles except that to Titua, is not met
Digitized by
Google
J
1080
HEBREWS, EPISTLE TO THE
tttk In this epistle; /he !um -nxr-tip, applied to
God 86 times by Paul (exclusive of 6 instance* in
which God is called the Father of Christ), and
occurring in every one of his epistles, is so used
but once in the Epistle to the Heorews, and then
d.v my of antithesis (Heb. xii. 9). (b.) It sub-
stitutes certain synonymous words and constructions
in plaoa of those usual with Paul: ex. gr. pie-
tmmSoola for the simple fu<r86i employed by Paul ;
/ih-oxor cfmu, etc., instead of Paul's Koiyuv6r
etc. ; the intransitiTe use of itaBifa in the phrase
kM{u> ir 8<{i? toO Btoi, where Paul uses the verb
transitively ; the expression Summit, ttt to «-ok-
rtKit, tit to tirimcit instead of Paul's wimort.
(e.) It exhibiU noticeable peculiarities of expres-
sion: the phrase tit to tairtieit belongs to this
class also; other specimens are the use of Sow . . .
Kara ro<rovTo or o&Vft), Totrofa* . . . oVo*, or
tce> alone, and of tcapd and 6wtp in expressing
eomparison ; connectives, like Uyrtp (three times),
tStr (six times), which are never used by Paul,
(d.) And in general its language and style diner
from Paul's — its language, in being less He-
braistic, more literary, more idiomatic in construc-
tion; its style, in being less impassioned, more
regular, more rhythmical and euphonious. These
differences have been generally conceded from the
first, and by such judges as Clement of Alexandria
and Origen, to whom Greek was vernacular. They
are not satisfactorily accounted for by supposing a
considerable interval of time to have elapsed be-
tween the composition of the other epistles and
this — for so far as we are acquainted with the
Apostle's history we can find no room for such an
interval, and his style as exhibited in the other
epistles shows no tendency towards the required
transformation ; nor by assuming that Paul dabo
rated his style because writing to Jews — for the
Jews were not accustomed to finished Greek, and
he who ' to the Jews became as a Jew ' did not
trouble himself to polish his style on occasions
when such labor might have been appreciated (cf.
9 Cor. xl. 6); nor by attributing the literary
elegance of the epistle to its amanuensis — for the
rther epistles were dictated to different persons,
ret exhibit evident marks of a common author.
II. The doctrinal indications at variance with the
theory of its Pauline authorship do not amount to
a conflict in any particular with the presentations of
truth made by the Apostle; nor are its divergencies
from the Pauline type of doctrine so marked as
those of James and John. Still, it has peculiarities
which an distinctive: Paul delights to present the
Gospel as justification before God though faith in
the Crucified One; in the Epistle to the Hebrews, on
the other hand, it is represented as consummated
Judaism. In accordance with this fundamental
difference, the epistle defines and illustrates faith
in a generic sense, as trust in God's assurances and
as antithetic to sight; whereas with Paul faith is
specific — a sinner's trust in Christ — and antithetic
(generally) to works: it sets forth the eternal high-
priesthood of the Messiah, while Paul dwells upon
Christ's triumphant resurrection : in it the seed of
Abraham are believing Jews, while Paul everywhere
makes Gentiles joint-heirs with Jews of the grace
jl life: it is conspicuous, too, among the N. T.
writings for its spiritualizing, at times half-mystical,
node of interpreting the 0. T. Further, these
Uflsmnt presentations of the Christian doctrine are
J> general made to rest upon different grounds:
Pad speaks a* the messenger of God, often referring,
indeed, to the 0. T., but still oftener imVHr '
ing plenary authority to declare trata not rttwm~d
to holy men of old ; but the writer to tie UiiSjm*
rests his teaching upon Biblical stateuMZ'* llanos*
exclusively.
III. Among the matters personal which seem tc
conflict with the opinion that the epistle is Paul's,
are enumerated, (1.) The circumstance that it is
addressed to Jewish readers : if Paul wrote it, he
departed, in doing so, from his ordinary province
of labor (cf. Gal. 11. 9; Rom. xr. 99). (9.) The
omission of any justification of his apostolic course
relative to Judaism ; and, assuming the epistle to
have been destined for believers at Jerusalem, hi*
use of language implying affectionate intimacy with
them (xiii. 19, etc.; of. Acts xxi. 17 f.). (8.) Tin
cool, historic style In which reference is made to
the early persecutions and martyrdoms of the church
at Jerusalem (xiii. 7, xii. 4). In these Paul ha&
been a prominent actor; and such passages as 1
Cor. xr. 9; 1 Tim. 1. 19 f. t show how he was ac-
customed to allude to them, even in writing to
third parties. (4.) The intimation (ii. 8) that the
writer, like his readers, received the Gospel indirectly,
through those who had been the personal disciples
of Christ. Paul, on the contrary, uniformly insists
that he did not receive the Gospel through any
human channel, but by direct revelation; and he ac-
cordingly claims coequality with the other Apostles
(Gal. 1. 1, 11, 12, IS, 16; ii. 6; 1 Cor. ix. 1; xL
33; Eph. iii. 9, 3; 3 Cor. xi. 6). The reply, that
the writer here uses the plural communicatively and,
strictly speaking, does not mean to include himself,
is unsatisfactory. For he does not quietly drop a
distinction out of sight; he expressly designates
three separate classes, namely, " the Lord," « them
that heard," and "we," and, in the face of this
explicit distinction, Includes himself in the third
class — this he does, although his argument would
have been strengthened had be been able (like Paul)
to appeal to a direct revelation from heaven.
These internal arguments are not offset by the
evidence from tradition. Respecting that evidence,
statements like Obthausen's give an impression not
altogether correct. For, not to mention that Euse-
bius, although often citing the epistle as Paul's,
elsewhere admits (as Origen had virtually done
before him, Euseb. B. E. vi. 95) that its apostolic
origin was not wholly unquestioned by the oriental
churches (H. E. ill. 3), and in another passage
(H. E. vi. 13) even classes it himself among the
antilegomena, it is noticeable that the Alexandrian
testimony from the very first gives evidence that
the epistle was felt to possess characteristics at
variance with Pauline authorship. The statement
of Clement that the epistle was translated from tha
Hebrew, is now almost unanimously regarded as
incorrect; how then can we be assured of the truth
of the accompanying assertion — or rather, the other
half of the same statement — that it was written
by Paul? Further, in the conflict of testimony
between the East and the West, it is not altogether
clear that the probabilities ftvor the East Half a
century before we find the epistle mentioned in the
East, and hardly thirty years after it was written, it
was known and prized at Rome by a man anciently
believed to have been a fellow-laborer with the
Apostle. It seems hardly possible that, had Pan
been Its author, Clement should have been ignonds%
of the fact; or that, the fact once known, knowl
edge of it should have died out while tha arista
itself sunned. And yet in all psrUof t>* West-
Digitized by
Google
HEBREWS, EPISTLE TO THE
a Gaol, Italy, Africa — the spittle ni regarded
■ nn-Pauline.
■Die theory that Paul was mediately or indirectly
the autbor, hai been adopted by Hug (Einl ii.
422 f.), Ebrard (in Olahauaen'i Com. on If. T., vi.
830, Kendrick'i ed.), Goericke (Uesammtyctch. da
N. T. p. 419 t.\ Davidson {Intivductitm to tlie
If. T. iU. 366 f.), Delittsch (in Kudelbach and
Guericke'i Ztiltchr. for 1849, trans, in the Evangel
Rev. Merceraburg, Oct 1890, p. 184 ff., and in
hia Com. p. 707), Bloomfield {(Jr. Tut., 9th ed.,
ii. 574 r£), Roberta (Duausiotu on the Uotpelt, pt
L chap. ri.). and othera, who think Luke to have
given the epistle ita present form ; by Thiersch (in
the Progr. named above, and in Die Kirche »i»
ApatU ZtiialL p. 197 f.), Conybeare (as above), and
others, who make Barnabas chiefly responsible for
its style; by CHshauaen {Opmc. p. 118 E), who
supposes that sundry presbyters were concerned in
its origin ; and by many who regard the Apostle's
assistant as unknown. Now respecting the theory
of mediate authorship it may be remarked : If Paul
dictated the epistle, and Luke or some other scribe
merely penned it, Paul remains its sole author;
this was hia usual mode of composing; this mode
of composition does not occasion any perceptible
diversity in his style; hence, this form of the
hypothesis is useless as an expla nat ion of the
epistle's peculiarities. Again, if the epistle la
isrunrH to bs the joint production of Paul and some
friend or friends, the assumption is unnatural, with-
out evidence, without unequivocal analogy in the
origin of any other inspired epietle, and insufficient
to remove the difficulties in the case. Once more,
if we suppose the ideas to be in the main Paul's,
bat their present form to be due to some one else,
then Paul not having participated actively in the
work of composing the epistle, cannot according to
the ordinary use of language be called its author.
Whatever be the capacity in which Paul associates
Timothy, Silvanus, and Sosthenea with himself in
the salutation prefixed to soma of his epistles, — and
it is noteworthy that he does not on this account
hesitate to continue in the 1st pen. sing, (tee PhiL
L 8), or to use the 3d pen. of his associate at the
very next mention of him (ii. 19), — the assumption
of some similar associate in composing the Epistle
to the Hebrews, even if it had historic warrant,
would not answer the purpose designed. For the
style of the 1st Epistle to the Corinthians, in which
Sosthenea is conjoined with Paul, bean the Apostle's
uup i e a s as unmistakably as does the style of the
Id Epistle to the Corinthians, where Timothy writes
in the salutation. And in both, the individuality
of the Apostle it at sharply defined as it is in the
Epistle to the Romans. (The philological evidence
•bought by Delitzsch to show Luke's hand in the
taanposition, has been collected snd examined by
Ltfnamann, as above, § 1.)
Toe opinion that Paul was the proper and sole
autbor (besides the modern advocates of it already
aaroed), has been defended by Gelpke ( V indicia,
sic.), a writer in the Spirit of the Pilgrimt for
.828 and 1899 (in reply to Prof. Norton), Gurney
.in the SOL Repot, fat 1832, p. 409 ft"., extracted
torn Bibkcal Nota and Dittertationt, IjonC 1830),
icier (Der Brief an die Heartier, li. p. 431. Lewin
life mid Epp. of SL Paul, ii. 833-899,, snters
. the Journal of Sacred Lit. for 1880, pp 4 J° ft,
1M tt, Hormann {Schriftbtaeii, ii. 2, tie A"%
D> 178, efc p. 106), Bobbins (in the BUU. Sacra for
1M1, > 489 ff. ), cf. Tobler (in HilgenfokTe Ztiltchr.
HEBRON 14)81
for 1864, p. 368 ff.); Wordsworth (On Tt*. B.
(1.) 361 ff.); Stowe {Origin and Hit. oftke Both*
of the Bible, 1867, p. 379 ff.), Pond (in the Cong.
Review for Jan. 1868, p. 39 ff.); — see a review of
the evidence in favor of, and against, the Pauline
authorship, in the Biol Sacra for Oct 1867.
The opinion that the epistle was destined orig-
inally for Alexandrian readers (in opposition to
which see Luuem. Handb. EinL § 3), has been
adopted by Kostlin (as above, p. 388 ff.), Wieseler
(as above, and in the Stud. u. Krit. for 1867, p.
666 tt), Conybeare and Howson (as above), Burner.
(BippoL and hit Age, ii. 140, Germ. ed. i. 366).
Hilgen&ld {Ztiltchr. f. wiu. Theol, 1868, p. 103 ),
Riiachl (as above), and seems to be favored by
Muratori's Fragment (see Westoott, Canon of the
if. T. 2d ed. p. 480, cf. p. 190). Rome as its
destination has been advocated fully by Holtxmaan
in Hilgenfeld's Zeiltchrift for 1867, pp. 1-36.
The date of the epistle is fixed by Ebrard at
A. D. 62; by Lardner, Davidson, SchafT, Lindsay,
and others at 63; by Lauge (in Herzog's RtaU
Encyk. xi. 346) towards 64 ; by Stuart, Tboluck, and
others about 64 ; by Wieseler in the year 64 " be-
tween spring snd July " ; by Riehm, Hilgenfeld (as
above) 64-66; De Wette, Liinemann, and others 65-
67; Ewald '•summer of 66"; Bunssn67; Cony-
beare and Howson, Bleek (EinL ins N. T. p. 683)
68-9; Alford 68-70.
The doctrine of the epistle has been specially
discussed by Neander {Planting, etc. bk. vi. chap,
ii. Robinson's ed. p. 487 f.), Kostlin {Jokan. Lehr-
begr. p. 387 ff.), Reuse (Hutoirt de la Theohgie,
Chretienne, torn, ii.), Meaner (as above), most
fully by Kiehm (ss above) ; its Chriatoiogy by Moll
(in a aeries of programs, 1854 ff.), A. Sarrus (Jetut
Chritt ttaprit tauteur de t£p. aux Bebr., Strub.
1881), snd Beyachlag ( Christologit de* N. T., 1866,
p. 176 ff). The Melchisedec priesthood is treated of
by Auberlen {Stud. u. Krit. for 1857, p. 463 ff).
Its mode of employing the O. T. has been con-
sidered by De Wette ( Theol Zeittehr. by Schleierm.,
De Wette and Liicke, 3te Heft, p. 1 ff), Tbohiek
(Btilayt i. to his Com., also published separately
with the title Dot alte Tat. im If. T., 6te Aufl.
1861), and Fairhairn ( Typology of Script, bk. ii.
Append. B, vi., Amer. ed. vol i. p. 362 ff.). a
To the recent commentators already named may
be added: Turner (revised and corrected edition
N. Y. 1855), Sampson (edited by Dabney from the
author's MS. notes, N. Y. 1856), A. S. Patterson
(Edin. 1856), the Translation with Notes published
by the American Bible Union (N. Y. 1867, 4to), R
E. Pattison (Boat. 1869), Stuart (edited and revised
by Prof. Bobbins, 4th ed. Andover, 1860), Moll (in
Lange's Bibelwerk, 1861), Maier (Rom. Cath.
1861), Reuse (in French, 1862), Brown (edited by
D. Smith, D. D., 2 vols. Edin. snd Lond. 1869),
Lindsay (2 vols. Phil., title-page edition, 1867),
The Epittle to the Hebrew, compared with the
O. T., 5th ed., by Mrs. A. L. Newton, N. Y. 1867 (of
a devotional cast), Longklng (N. Y. 1867), Ripley
(in press, Boston, Jan. 1868). J. H. T.
HEVBRON f7""l~ , ^sT7 [union, alliance]: X»-
Bp&r; [Rom. In 1 Chr". xv. 9, Xf/SsoVO Hebron).
i~ The third son of Kohath, who was the iieeonj
son of Levi; the younger brother of Amram, fothsr
a * 8m also Norton, in ths Christian Examiner
1828, v. 87-70, and s trans, of the Si ed of Tholuck*
Dot A.T.im N. T. by Rev. C- A. Aiken, in Uw AM
Saaa tot Jolj, 1864. A
Digitized by
Google
1082
HEBRON
if Moses and Aaron (Ex. vi. 18; Num. IB. 19; 1
Chr. rt. 3, 18, xxiii. IS). The immediate children
of Hebron ate not mentioned by name (oomp. Ex.
rf. 21, 89), but he wag the founder of a " family "
yMishpachah) of Hebronitea (Num. iii. 27, xxvi.
58; 1 Chr. xxrf. 23, 80, 81) or Bene-Hebron (1
Chr. xt. 9, xxiii. 19), who are often mentioned in
the enumerations of the Levites in the passages
above cited. Jkriah was the head of the family
in the time of David (1 Chr. xxiii. 19, xxvi. ill,
xxiv. 23: in the last of these passages the name of
Hebron does not now exist in the Hebrew, but has
been supplied in the A. V. from the other lists).
In the last year of David's reign we find them
settled at Jacer in Uilead (a place not elsewhere
named as a Levitical city), " mighty men of valor "
( 7?t]J \3?), 2,700 in number, who were superin-
tenden's for the king over the two and a half tribes
in regard to all matters sacred and secular (1 Cbr.
xxvi. 31, 32). At the same time 1700 of the family
under Hashabiah held the same office on the west "
of Jordan (ver. 30).
2. This name appears in the genealogical lists
of the tribe of Judah (1 Chr. ii. 42, 43), where
Mareshah is said to have been the " father of
Hebron," who again bad four sons, one of whom
was Tappuach. The three names just mentioned
are those of places, as are also many others in the
subsequent branches of this genealogy — Ziph,
Maon, Beth-zur, etc. But it is impossible at present
to say whether these names are intended to be
those of the places themselves or of persons who
founded them. G.
HE'BRON (Vn?£! [see Mjpra]: Xtfyx&n
and Xt&puf- [Hebron;! Mace. v. 60, Chebron:]
Arab. JyJU£.' = we /Wend), a city of Judah
(Josh. xv. 64) ; situated among the mountains
(Josh. xx. 7), 20 Roman miles south of Jerusalem,
and the same distance north of Beer-sheba ( Onom.
a. v. 'ApK<&)' Hebron is one of the most ancient
cities in the world still existing; and in this re-
spect it is the rival of Damascus. It was built,
says a sacred writer, " seven years before Zoan in
Egypt" (Num. xiii. 22). But when was Zoan
built? It is well we can prove the high antiquity
f Hebron independently of Egypt's mystic annals.
t was a well-known town when Abraham entered
Canaan 3780 years ago (Gen. xiii. 18). Its original
same was Kirjath-Arba (531M"n;")|7 : LXX.,
KipiaB-apffoKtrKptp, Judg. i. 10), •• the city of
Arba;" so called from Arba, the father of Anak,
«nd progenitor of the giant Anakim (Josh. xxi. 11,
xv. 13, 14). It was sometimes called Harare,
doubtless from Abraham's friend and ally, Hamre
tho Amorite (Gen. xxiii. 19, xxxv. 27); but the
"oak of Hamre," where the Patriarch so often
pitched his tent, appears to have been not in, but
near Hebron. [Mam he.] The chief interest of this
city arises from its having been the scene of some
of the most remarkable events in the lives of the
■ The expiesdon hen Is literally "were snperm-
sndents of Israel beyond ("133712) Jordan lor ths
"»t (rQ-!T») m all the business.'' etc "Be-
mud J ndan " generally means " on -ne east," bnt
an, tndaced probably by the word following, « west-
vard," out tranalaton have rendered It " on this side "
~ . L 1, 6, Josh, ix 1, to.). Hay not the
HEBRON
patriarchs. Sarah died at Hebnn; tad Hiisssm
then bought from Ephron the Hittito the field sod
cave of Machpelah, to serve as a family tomb (Gen.
xxiii. 2-20). The cave is still then; and the mas-
sive walls of the Haram or mosque, within which it
lies, form the most remarkable object in the whole
city. [Machpelah.] ' Abraham it called by
Mohammedans ei-KhuliL, "the Friend," »' «. of
God, and this is the modem name of Hebron.
When the Israelites entered Palestine Hebron was
taken by Joshua from the descendants of Anak,
and given to Caleb (Josh. x. 88, st. 8-15, xv- 13,
14). It was assigned to the Levites, and made 'a
city of refuge" (Josh. xxi. 11-13). Here Dar'd
first established the seat of his government, aul
dwelt during the seven years and a hah* he reigned
over Judah (2 Sam. v. 5). Hebron was rebuilt
after the Captivity ; but it soon fell into the hands
of the Edomites, from whom it was rescued by
Judss Maccabeus (Neh. xi- 25; 1 Mace v. 65;
Joseph. Ant. xii. 8, § 6). A short time before the
capture of Jerusalem Hebron was burned by an
officer of Vespasian (Joseph. B. J. iv. 9, § 9).
About the beginning of the 12th century it was
captured by the Crusaders. It subsequently lay for
a time in ruins (Albert Aq. vii. 15; Ssswulf in
Karly Travels in Pal., p. 45); but in A. D. 1167
it was made the seat of a Ijitin bishopric (Will.
Tyr. xx. 3). In 1187 it reverted to the Muslema,
and has ever since remained in their hands.
Hebron now contains about 5000 inhabitants,
of whom some 50 families are Jews. It it pictur-
esquely situated in a narrow valley, surrounded by
rocky hills. This, in all probability, is that " valley
of Eshcol," whence the Jewish spies got the great
bunch of grapes (Num. xiii. 23). Its sides are still
clothed with luxuriant vineyards, and its grapes are
considered the .finest in Southern Palestine. Groves
of gray olives, and some other fruit-trees, give
variety to the scene. The valley runs from north
to south : and the main quarter of the town, sur-
mounted by the lofty walls of the venerable Haram,
lies partly on the eastern slope (Gen. xxxvii. 14;
comp. xxiii. 19). [Eshooi-] The houses are all
of stone, solidly built, flat-roofed, each having one
or two small cupolas. The town has no walls, bnt
the main streets opening on the principal roads
have gates. In the bottom of the valley south of
the town is a large tank, 130 ft. square, by 50 deep:
the sides are solidly built with hewn stones. At
the northern end of the principal quarter is another,
measuring 85 ft. long, by 55 broad. Both are of
high antiquity; and one of them, probably the
former, is that over which David hanged the mur-
derers of Ish-bosheth (2 Sam. iv. 12). About a mile
from the town, up the valley, is one of the largest
oak-trees in Palestine. It stands quite alone in the
midst of the vineyards. It is 23 ft. in girth, and
its branches cover a space 90 ft in diameter. This,
say some, is the very tree beneath which Abraham
pitched his tent; but, however this may be, it still
bears the name of the patriarch. (Porta s IlmtA-
book, p. 67 ft.; Bob. ii. 73 ff.) J. L. t»
meaning be that Hashablah and his brethren wen
settled on the western side of the Transjordanlc
country?
* • The visit of the Prince of Wales to Hebron wai
made after this article on Hebron was vrltten. Tht
results of the attempt on that occasion to explore thf
celebrated Mosque them, will be stated under Mao*
rojLB (Amer. •".). H.
Digitized by
Google
HEBRON
*. 0^55. »nd fit??. ■ •EA/Jir, Alex. A x -
w : 4e4ran, later editions Abnm). One of the
towns in the territory of Asher (Josh. xix. 28), on
Uu boundary of the tribe. It U named next to
HEBRON
108S
Rehob, and is apparently in the neighhoroood of
Zidou. By Eusebius and Jerome it is merely men-
tioned (Onomntl. Achran), and no one in nioderr
times has discovered its site. It will be observed
that the name in the original is quite different from
that of Hebron, the well-known city of Judith (No
1), although In the A. V. they are the same, our
hasislalm baring repre s en ted toe m'n by H, instead
ji* by G, or by the rowel only, as is their usual
jailiaii But, In addition, it is not certain whether
he asms should not rather be Ebdon or Abdon
1TU7). since that form li found in many MS8.
(Davidson, Htbr. Ttxt; Gat. Tha. p. 980), and
since an Abdon is named amongst the Levities!
cities of Asher in other lists, which otherwise would
be unmentloned here. On the other hand, the old
versions (excepting only the Vat. LXX., which is
obviously corrupt) unanimously retain the R
[Abdon.] O.
■ Kirjath Arba does not annear to have been Ha
Digitized by
Google
1084 HEBRONITES, THE
original name of Hebron; but limply the nima
Immediately prior to the Israelitiah occupancy. For
ire ere told that it was eo called from Arba, the
father of Anak (Josh. xt. 13, 11); and the children
of Anak were the occupant* when Caleb look it, as
we learn from the same passage. But in Abraham's
time there was a different occupant, Hamre the
ally of Abraham (Gen. xiv. 13, 24) j and the place
was then called by his name (Gen. xxiii. 19, hit.
37). This appellation, then, preceded that of Kir-
jath Arba. But as the place was a very ancient
one (Num. ziii. 22), and as Mamre was Abraham's
contemporary, it had soma name older than either
of these two. What was that previous name?
The first mention of the place (Gen. ziii. 18) would
obviously Indicate Hebron as the previous and
original name — subsequently displaced (in part at
least) by Mamre, afterwards by Arba, but restored
to its ancient and time-honored rights when Arba's
descendants, the Anakim, were driven out by the
descendants of Abraham. S. C. B.
HE'BRONITES, THE ("aVQO: i Xf-
fipdv, i XtPpcwl [Vat. -m] : fleftrom,' litbronita).
A family of Kohathite Lerites, descendants of He-
bron the son of Kohath (Num. iii. 27, xxvi. 68;
1 Chr. xxvi. 23). In the reign of David the chief
of the family west of the Jordan was Hashabiah ;
while on the east in the land of Uilead were Jeryah
and his brethren, " men of valor," over the Reuben-
itea, the Gadites, and the half-tribe of Manasseh
(1 Cbr. xxvi. 30, 31, 32). W. A. W.
hedge (rj|, tjj. rrvrf; nj-TDD,
nyiQJJ? : QpaypAs)- The first three words thus
rendered' in the A. V., as well as their Greek equiv-
alent, denote simply that which surrounds or in-
closes, whether it be a stone wall (T73, gtdtr,
Prov. xxiv. 31; Ex. ziii. 10), or a fence of other
materials. "O?' 9 a ^ T i md iT^?, g'tUrih, are
used of the hedge of a vineyard (Num. xxii. 24 ;
Pa. lxxxix. 40; 1 Chr. iv. 23), and the latter is
employed to describe the wide walls of stone, or
fences of thorn, which served as a shelter for sheep
In winter and summer (Num. xxiii. 16). The
stone walls which surround the sheepfolds of modern
Palestine are frequently crowned with sharp thorns
(Thomson, Land and Bonk, i. 299), a custom at
least as ancient as the time of Homer ( Od. xiv. 10),
when a kind of prickly pear (aytptos) was used
for that purpose, as well a* for the fences of corn-
fields at a later period (Arist. Eccl. 855). In order
to protect the vineyards from the rat-ages of wild
beasts (Ps. huoc. 12) it was customary to surround
them with a wall -of loose stones or mud (Matt. xxi.
33 ; Mark xii. 1), which was a favorite haunt of
<erpents (Eccl. x. 8), and a retreat for locusts from
je cold (Nab. til 17). Such walls are described
. y Maundrell as surrounding toe gardens of Damas-
cus. " They are built of great pieces of earth, made
In the fashion of brick and hardened in the sun.
In their dimensions they are each two yards long
and somewhat more than one broad, and half a
yard thick. Two rows of these, placed one upon
mother, make a cheap, expeditious, and, in this
ary country, a durable wall " (Early Trav. in Pal.
p. 487). A waS or fence of this kind is clearly
extinguished in Is. v. 5 from the tangled hedge,
npsttWp, m't6e*K (nS-TDJJ, Mic. vll. 4), whleh
•M planted at an additional safeguard to the vine-
Hisnt
yard (cf. Ecclus. xxviii. 24), and wi
the thjmy shrubs with which Palestine
The prickly pear, a species of cactus, so frequent])
employed for this purpose in the East at present, is
believed to be of comparatively modern introduction
The aptness of the comparison of a tangled hedgt
of thorn to the difficulties which a slothful man
oonjnres up as an excuse (or his inactivity, will ba
at once recognized (Prov. xv. 19; cf. Hos. ii. 6).
The narrow paths between the hedges of the Tine-
yards and gardens, " with a fence on this side and
a fence on that aide " (Num. xxii. 24), are distin-
guished from the "highways," or more frequented
tracks, in Lnke xiv. 23. W. A. W.
HE'GAI [2 syl.] Cqn [Persian name. Gee.]:
rot: £geu$), one of the eunuchs (A. V. " cham-
berlains " of the court of Ahasuerus, who had spe-
cial charge of the women of the harem (Esth. ii
8, 15). According to the Hebrew text he was a
distinct person from the " keeper of the concubines "
— Shaashgaz (14), but the LXX. have the same
name in 14 as in 8, while in 15 they omit it alto-
gether. In verse 8 the name is given under the
different form of —
HE'GE (Kjn : Egau), probably a Persian
name. Aja signifies eunuch in Sanskrit, in accord-
ance with which the LXX. have to? fbvoi%<p,
Hegiaa, 'H-yfu, is mentioned by Ctesiaa as one of
the people about Xerxes, Gesenius, The*. Addenda,
p. 83 4.
HEIFER (nbjy, n"JQ: HfwXu: wtcea).
The Hebrew language has no expression that ex-
actly corresponds to our heifer; for both tglak and
parah are applied to cows that have calved (1 Sam.
vi. 7-12; Job xxi. 10; Is. vii. 21): indeed tglak
means a young animal of any species, the full ex-
pression being tglah bakar, "heifer of kine"
(Deut. xxi. 3; 1 Sam. xvi. 2; Is. vii. 21). The
heifer or young cow was not commonly used for
ploughing, but only for treading out the com (Hos.
x. 11; but see Judg. xiv. 18),» when it ran about
without any headstall (Deut. xxv. 4); hence the
expression an "unbroken heifer" (Hos. iv. 16;
A. V. " backsliding "), to which Israel is compared.
A similar sense has been attached to the e xpressi on
« calf of three years old," 1. e., tmtubdutd, in Is.
xv. 5, Jer. xlviii. 34 ; but it is much more probably
to be taken as a proper name, Eglalh ShtluUynJi,
such names being not uncommon. Tie sense of
" dissolute " is conveyed undoubtedly in Am. iv. 1.
The comparison of Egypt to a " fair heifer " (Jer.
xlvi. 20) may be an allusion to the well-known form
under which Apia was worshipped (to which we
may also refer the words in vex. 15, as understood
in the LXX., " Why is the bullock, fioc X <" <«"
\<ktos, swept away ? "), the " destruction " threat-
ened being the bite of the gad-fly, to which the
word Iceretz would fitly apply. " To plough with
another man's heifer " (Judg. xiv. 18) implies that
an advantage has been gained by unfair means.
The proper names Eglah, En-egkum, and Parah,
are derived from the Hebrew terms at the head of
this article. W. L. B.
HEIR. The Hebrew institutions relative to
inheritance were of a very simple character. Under
the patriarchal system the property was divided
a • Ploughing with henVrs, as Implied In that fas)
saga, is soannmes preeaesd In Palestine st pnaiast
(Bee Bbutr. tf Scripimt, f. 168.) It
Digitized by
Google
HEIR
uaong the sons of the legitimate wives (Gen. zxi.
10, xxlv. 36, zxi. 5), a larger portion being saaigued
to one, generally the eldest, on whom devolved the
duty of maintaining the females of the family.
[Birthrioht.] The sons of concubines were
portioned off with presents (Geo. xxv. 6): oeca-
liooallj they were placed on a par with the legiti-
mate sons (Gen. xlix. 1 ff.), but this may have oeen
restricted to cases where the children had been
adopted by the legitimate wife (Gen. xxx. 3). At
a later period the exclusion of the sons of concu-
bines was ligidly enforced (Judg. xi. 1 ff). Daugh-
ters had no share in the patrimony (Gen. xxxi. 14),
hut received a marriage portion, consisting of a
maid-servant (Gen. xxix. 24, 29), or some other
property. As a matter of special favor they some-
times took part with the sons (Job xlii. 15). The
Mosaic law regulated the succession to real prop-
erty thus : it was to be divided among the sons,
the eldest receiving a double portion (Deut xxi.
17), the others equal shares: if there were no sons,
it went to the daughters (Num. xxvii. 8), on the
Kmdition that they did not marry out of their own
aribe (Num. xxxvi. 6 ff; Tob. vl. IS, vil. 13),
otherwise the patrimony was forfeited (Joseph. Ant.
It. 7, J 5). If there were no daughters, it went to
the brother of the deceased; if no brother, to the
paternal uncle; and, failing these, to the next of
kin (Num. xxvii. 9-11). In the case of a widow
being left without children, the nearest of kin on
her husband's side had the right of marrying her,
and in the event of his refusal the next of kin
(Euth iil. 13, 13): with him rested the obligation
ef redeeming the property of the widow (Ruth iv.
1 ff), if it had been either sold or mortgaged: this
obligation was termed nb^QH ttQtPD ("the
right of inheritance"), and was exercised in other
eases besides that of marriage (Jer. xxxii. 7 ff).
If none stepped forward to marry the widow, the
inheritance remained with her until her death, and
then reverted to the next of kin. The object of
these regulations evidently was to prevent the alien-
ation of the land, and to retain it in the same
family: the Mosaic law enforced, in short, a strict
entaiL Even the assignment of the double por-
tion, which under the patriarchal regime hod been
at the disposal of the father (Gen. xlviii. 22), was
by the Mosaic law limited to the eldest son (Deut.
xxi. IS- 17). The case of Achsah, to whom Caleb
presented a field (Josh. xv. 18, 19; Judg. I. 15), is
ar. exception: but perhaps even in that instance
the land reverted to Caleb's descendants either at
the death of Achsah or in the year of Jubilee. The
bind being thus so strictly tied up, the notion of
heirthip, as we understand it, was hardly known to
the Jews: succession was a matter of right, and
not of favor— a state of things which is embodied
in the Hebrew language itself, for the word EH^
'.A. V. " to inherit") implies poeteuion, and very
■ • It has been suggested that in Oal. iv. 2 Paul
aaay have referred to a peculiar testamentary law
among the OalatJans (see (kins, InttiiHiiona, I. } 65)
eonfcrrtag on the fkther a right to determine the tune
af the son's majority, Instead of Its being fixed by
statute. In that ease we should have an Instance of
It* mdlity with which Paul could avail himself of his
Knowtedgs of minute local regulations In the lands
which he visited. (See Baumg.-Orusius, Comm. liber
1m Bfitf a* die Qalattr, p. 91.) But thai passage In
Mas, what moit closely examined, proves not to be
HELAM 1086
often forcible possession (Deut. ii. 13; Jodg. L ft,
xi. 24), and a similar idea lies at the root U the
words n-TIT^ and 71703, generally translatec
" inheritance." Testamentary dispositions were of
course superfluous: the nearest approach to the
idea is the bit wing, which in early times conveyed
temporal as well as spiritual benefits (Gen. xxvii.
19, 37; Josh. xv. 19). The references to wills in
St. Paul's writings are borrowed from the usages
of Greece and Rome (Heb. ix. 17), whence the
custom was introduced into Judscs: « several wins
are noticed by Josrphus in connection with the
Herods (Ant. xiii. 16, § 1, xvii. 3, § 2; B.J.Mt
J 3).
With regard to ptrtonnl property, it may be pre-
sumed that the owner had some authority over it,
at all events during his lifetime. The admission
of a slave to a portion of the inheritance with the
sons (Prov. xvii. 2) prohahly applies only to the
personalty. A presentation of half the personalty
formed the marriage portion of Tobit's wife (Tob.
viii. 21 ). A distribution of goods during the father's
life-time is implied in Luke xv. 11-13: a distinc-
tion may he noted between oMa, a general term
applicable to personalty, and xAwporouJa, the landed
property, which could only be divided after the
father's death (Luke xii. 13).
There is a striking resemblance between the He-
brew and Athenian customs of heirship, particularly
as regards heiresses (ArbcAnpei), who were, in both
nations, bound to marry their nearest relation : the
property did not vest in the huiband even for his
lifetime, but devolved upon the son of the heiress
as soon as he was of age, who also bore the name,
not of his father, but of his maternal grandfather.
The object in both countries was the same, namely,
to preserve the name and property of every family
(Diet, of Ant. art. 'EwiaAwpoi). W. L. B.
HEX AH (HH^O [re*]: 'AM; Alex.
A Ana: ffalna), one of the two wives of Ashur,
father of Tekoa (1 Chr. ir. 5). Her three children
are enumerated In ver. 7. In the LXX. the pas-
sage is very much confused, the sons being ascribed
to different wives from what they are in the Hebrew
text
HE'LAM (~!pP \ptA. power of the people,
Gee.]: AiAdV Bebim), a place east of the Jor-
dan, but west of the Euphrates (" the river "), at
which the Syrians were collected by Hadarezer, and
at which David met and defeated them (2 Sam. x.
16, 17). In the latter verse the name appears as
Cbelamah (iTCH^n), but the final syllable is
probably only the particle of motion. This longer
form, XaAafiAc, the present text* of the LXX.
inserts in ver. 16 as if the name of the river [but
Alex, and Comp. omit it] ; while in the two other
places it has AfAd/i, corresponding to the Hebrew
text. By Josephus (Ant. vii. 6, § 3) the name Is
decisive as to the existence of such a right among the
Oaiadans (see Iightfbotfs St. Paul's Eputlt lo the Ga-
latians, p. 164, 2d el-). The Apostle, In arguing bis
point (QaL Iv 2), may have framed a can of this na
tnre f:r the sake of Illustration, or have had In mind
a certain discretionary power which the Roman laws
gnnted to the 6 'her. H.
» This Is probably a tote addition, sines In the LXX
text as It stool In Origin's Hjapla, Taaaaes wet
omitted alter werapov (*» Bahnlt, at toe.).
Digitized by
Google
1086 HELBAH
given u Xafapd, and as being that of the king of
the Syrians beyond Euphrates — webs XoAoJwb
ror t<5» Wpay Liuppdr >v 2<5p«f jSwriAca.
In the Vulgate no name is inserted after Jiuvium ;
but hi ver. 16, for " came to Helam," we find ad-
dttctt txercitum wrut, reading uj"0- "their
army." This too is the rendering of the old trans-
lator Aqutta — lv Swipe i airrwv — of whose ver-
sion va. 16 has survived. In 17 the Vulgate
agrees with the A. V.
Many conjecture!) have been made as to the lo-
cality of Helam i but to none of them does any
certainty attach. The most feasible perhaps is that
it is identical with Alamatha, a town named by
ltolemy, and located by him on the west of the
Euphrates near Nicephorium. G.
HEI/BAH (na^H [/afl: Xtflctf; [Alex.
ixttuw (ace.); Conip. 'E\$i:] Helba), a town
of Asher, probably on the plain of Phoenicia, not
fin- from Sidon (Judg. i. 31). J. L. P.
HEI/BON fliabp, [fat, i. e. fruitful] :
Xt\$<&y, [Alex. Xt$paiy]), a place only mentioned
once in Scripture- Ezekiel, in describing the wealth
and commerce of Tyre, says, " Damascus was thy
merchant in the wine of Helbon [xxvii. 18]." The
Vulgate translates these words in rino pinyui ; and
some other ancient versions also make the word
descriptive of the quality of the wine. There can
be no doubt, however, that Helbon is a proper name.
Strabo speaks of the wine of Chalybon (otvov Ik
ivptas to* XaX.v&<iytoy) from Syria as among the
luxuries in which the kings of Persia indulged
(xv. p. 735); and Athenteus assigns it to Damas-
cus (i. 22). Geographers have hitherto represented
Helbon as identical with the city of Aleppo, called
Huleb ( V _*JL&.) by the Arabs; but there are
strong reasons against this. The whole force and
beauty of the description in Ezekiel consists in this,
that in the great market of Tyre every kingdom
and city found ample demand for its own staple
products. Why, therefore, should the Damascenes
supply wine of Aleppo, conveying it a long and
difficult journey overland ? If strange merchants
had engaged in this trade, we should naturally ex-
pect them to be some maritime people who could
carry it cheaply along the coast from the port of
Aleppo.
A few years ago the writer directed attention to
a village and district within a few miles of Damas-
cus, still bearing the ancient name Helbon (the
Arabic i« * f s> corresponds exactly to the He-
brew J1270), and still celebrated as producing
the finest grapes in the country. (See Journal of
Sac Lit. July 1853, p. 280; Five Yean in Da-
matcut, ii. 330 ft*.). There cannot be a doubt that
this village, and not Aleppo, is the Helbon of Eze-
kiel and Strabo. The village is situated in a wild
glen, high up in Antilebanon. The remains of
wme large and beautiful structures are strewn
around it. The bottom and sides of the glen are
somred with terraced vineyards; and the whole
urronnding country is rich in vines and fig-trees
[Hmdb. Jor Syr. and Pal., pp. 495-6).
3. L.P.
* The discovery of this Helbon is one of the re-
«aHa of missionary labor in that Dart of the East
HELEM
Mr. Porter, who writes the article above, was far-
merry connected with the mission at Damascus
Dr. Robinson accepts the propose.) identiflcatk*.
as unquestionably correct. The name alone is
not decisive, for Haleb (Aleppo) may answer to
Helbon ; but Aleppo " produces no wine of any
reputation; nor is Damascus the natural chan-
nel of commerce between Aleppo and Tyre" (Later
Ret. iii. 472). Fairbairn (Etekiei and the Book
of hit Prophecy, p. 301, 3d ed.) follows the old
opinion. Riietschi (Henog's Keal-Encyk. v. 698)
makes Ezekiel's Helbon and this one near Damas-
cus the same, but thinks Ptolemy's Chalybon (see
above) too far north to be identical with them.
H.
HELOHl'AH (X«W«; [Vat •*«..] EeU
dot), 1 Esdr. viii. 1. [Hilkiah.]
HELCHI'AS (Helciat) the same person m
the preceding, 2 Esdr. i. 1. [Hilkish.]
HEI/DAI [2 syl.] OTJTl [worHfc. Iran.
stent]: XoAtfa; [Vat. XoAtcia';] Alex. XoAoat:
ffvlaai). 1. The twelfth captain of the monthly
courses for the temple sen-ice (1 Chr. xxvii. 15).
He is specified as " the Netopbathite," and as a
descendant of Othniel.
2. An Israelite who seems to have returned from
the Captivity; for whom, with others, Zechariah
was commanded to make certain crowns as memo-
rials (Zech. vi. 10). In ver. 14 the name appears
to be changed to Helem. The LXX. translate
wapa t&v ipximtr.
HEXEB (aVl [mtZej: Vat omits; Alex.
AXo*; [Comp. 'EXdjB:] Heled), son of Baanah,
the Netophathite, one of the heroes of king Da-
vid's guard (2 Sam. xxiii. 29). In the parallel lot
the name is given aa —
HEXED ("t^P: X6WS; [FA. XeaoS;] Alex.
Z\aS: IMcil), 1 Chr. xi. 30 [where he is mentioned
as one of -'the valiant men " of David's army].
HEXEK (nVl [part, portion]: Xt\ty,
Alex. X«Af»c; [in Josh., Kt\i(, Alex. teAtx:]
Helec), one of the descendants of Manasseh, the
second son of Gilead (Num. xxvi. 80), and founder
of the family of the Helekitks. The Bene-
Chekk [sons of C] are mentioned in Josh. xvii. 2
as of much importance in their tribe. The name
has not however survived, at least it has not yet
been met with.
HEXEKITES, THE C^PP, 1. e. tke
Chelkite: 6 XtKeyl [Vat -y«,], - Alex. X<A««:
famiUa HeUcitarum), the family descended from
the foregoing (Num. xxvi. 30).
HEXEM (D!?n [hammer or blow]: [Rem.
BwnsAd/i; Vat BaXaaui Alex.] EAa/x: Helem)
A man named among the descendants of Asher, in
a passage evidently much disordered (1 Chr. vil
35). If it be intended that he was the brother of
Shames, then he may be identical with Hotham, ii
ver. 32, the name having been altered in copying
but this is mere conjecture. Burrington (i. 965
quotes two Hebrew MSS., in which the name
written D?P, Cheles.
2. [LXX. rah oxo/iivm/cn.] A man men-
tioned only in Zech. vi. 14. Apparently the saaw
who is jiven as Heldai in var. 10 (Ewald, JVasY
eten. i> 536, note).
Digitized by
Google
HELEPH
ItBXEPH (^lbn [exchange, instead of]:
MnAdp; Alex. Mt\ef — both include the prep-
Mition prefixed: Htlrpli), the place from which the
boundary of the tribe of Naphtali itarted (Josh.
ax. 33), but where rituated, or on which quarter,
cannot be aacerUined from the text. Van de Vdde
{Memoir, p. 320) proposes to identify it with Beil-
Hf, an ancient lite, nearly due east of the Rat
Akgad, and wett of Kades, on the edge of a very
mwAeA ravine, which probably formed part of the
boundary between Naphtali and Aiher (Van de
Velde, Syria, i. 233; and tee his map, 1858). G.
HtfLEZ (\f!?n [parh. knot, thigh, Gesen.] :
ScAA^i — the initial 2 ii probably from the end
of the preceding word, [XfAA^ti 1 Cor. xxvii. 10
Vat. X«<r\i»»;] Alex.EAAt|i,XtAA»|»: Bdet, Htl-
les). 1. One of "the thirty" of David'* guard
(3 Sam. xxiii. 96; 1 Chr. xi. 87: in the latter,
V3?n), an Ephraimite, and captain of the seventh
monthly course (1 Chr. xxvii. 10). In both these
passages of Chronicles he is called " the I'ekraite,"
of which Kennicott decides that "the Paltite" of
Samuel is a corruption (Dissertation, etc., pp. 183-
184). [Palttte.]
8. [X<\A4>: Hettes.] A man of Judah, son
of Azariah (1 Chr. ii. 39); a descendant of Jerah-
meel, of the great family of Hezron.
HEXI ('HAJf, 'HA<(: Beh\ the father of Jo-
seph, the husband of the Virgin Mary (Luke iii.
83); maintained by Lord A. Hervey, tho latest in-
vestigator of the genealogy of Christ, to have been
the real brother of Jacob the father of the Virgin
herself. (Hervey, Genealogies, pp. 1-30, 138.) The
name, as we possess it, is the same as that employed
by the LXX. in the O. T. to render the Hebrew
^bs, Eu the high-priest
3. The third of three names inserted between
AciirroB and Amarias in the genealogy of Ezra,
in 9 Etdr. i. 3 (compare Ear. vii. 8, 3).
HELI'AS, 8 Etdr. vii. 39. [Elijah.]
HELIODO'BTJS CHKiioJpot [sift of <*«
w]), the treasurer (6 «vl tsV woayiteWew) of
Sdencus Philopator, who was commissioned by the
king, at the instigation of Apolkmius [AroL-
loxids] to carry away the private treasures depos-
ited in the Temple at Jerusalem. According to
the narrative in 9 Mace. iii. 9 ffi, he was stayed
from the execution of his design by a " great ap-
parition " (trifirtta), in consequence of which he
fed down "com p assed with great darkness," and
speechless. He was afterwards restored at the in-
tercession of the high-priest Onias, and bore wit-
ness to the king of the inviolable majesty of the
Temple (8 Mace. iii.). The full details of the nar-
rative are not supported by any other evidence.
Josephus, who was unacquainted with 9 Mace.,
akes no notice of it; and the author of the so-
liHed iv. Mace, attributes the attempt to plunder
Jk Temple to Apollonius, and differs in his account
Y the miraculous interposition, though he distinctly
tecognizee it (de Mace 4 oipaviSer f^unroi upon-
pirtiaem tryytkn . . . xarawtawy te ri/uSayiit
i K-roKKiviot . . .). Heliodoru* ifterwards
murdered Sdeucus, and made an unsuccessful
sctempt to seize the Syrian crown b. c. 176 (App.
Vgr. p. 45). Ct Wemsdorf, Dt fide Lib. if ace. ,
{ liv. Raphael's grhtd picture of " Heliodorus "
vDI be known to most by copies and engravings, if
sot by the original. B.F.W. I
HELL 1087
HEL-KAI [9 syL] 0i^?n [whose portion ft
Jehovah] : 'EAjcaf ; [Vat Alex. FA.i omit:] Held),
a priest of the family of Meraioth (or Meremoth,
see ver. 3), who was living in the days of Joialrim
the high-priest, «'. e. in the generation following the
return from Babylon under Jeshua and Zerubbabel
(Neh. xii. 16; comp. 10, 18).
HEL'KATH (r0O [field]: '£{•*•«#*,
[XfXjcdV;] Alex. XfAKoi, [e«A»off:] Baleatk,
and Helcath), the town named as the starting-point
for the boundary of the tribe of Asher (Josh. lix.
95), and allotted with its "suburbs" to the Ger-
shonite Levitea (xxi. 31). The enumeration of the
boundary seems to proceed from south to north;
but nothing absolutely certain can be said thereon,
nor has any traveller recovered the site of Helkath.
Eusebius and Jerome report the name much cor-
rupted ( Onom. Eth»), but evidently knew nothing
of the place. Schwarz (p. 191) suggests the village
Yerka, which lies about 8 miles east of Akka (sea
Van de Velde's map); but this requires further
examination.
In the list of Levities! cities in 1 Chr. vi. Ho-
kok is substituted for Helkath. G.
HEL'KATH HAZ'ZURIM (nrjbtf
^1^? Lfi*U of <*« «*«»y does, KeU; but see
infra]: jualr rar bnfaiAM*— perhaps reading
3^"T^; Aquila, KAijpor r&r artpeuf. Ager
robfutorwn), a smooth piece of ground, apparently
close to the pool of Gibeon, where the combat took
place between the two parties of Joab's men and
Abner's men, which ended in the death of the
whole of the combatants, and brought m a general
battle (3 Sam. ii. 16). [Gibbon; Juab.] Va-
rious interpretations are given of the name. In
addition to those given above, Gesenius ( Thes. p.
485 a) renders it " the field of swords." The
margin of the A. V. has " the field of strong men,"
agreeing with Aquila and the Vulgate; Ewald
( Gesch. in. 147), " das Feld der Tiiekischen." G.
•The field received its name from the bloody
dud fought there, as expressly said (2 Sam. U. 16).
The Scripture words put before us the horrible scene :
" And they caught every one his fellow by the head
and thrust his sword in his fellow's side; so they
fell down together: wherefore that place was called
Helkath-bazzurim." The name may be = " field
of the rocks," «'. e. of the strong men, firm as rocks
(see Wordsworth, tn toe.). H.
HELKI'AS (XtAKfu; [Vat XtMnuas]
Vulg. omits). A fourth variation of the name of
Hilkiah the high-priest, 1 Esdr. i. 8. [HiLKlAH.]
HELL. This it the word generally and unfor-
tunately used by our translators to render the He-
brew Sheol (V)W2$, or bfcl£ : *Aitt|t, »nd one*
tfaVoroi, 8 Sam. xxii. 6: Inferi or Inferno, ot
sometimes Won). We say unfortunately, because
— although, as St Augustine truly asserts, Sheol,
with its equivalents Inferi and Hades, are never
used in a good sense (De Gen. ad Lit. xii. 33), jet
— the English word Hell is mixed up with num-
berless associations entirely foreign to the minds of
the ancient Hebrews. It would perhaps have been
better te retain the Hebrew word Sheol, or das
render it always by "the grave" or "the pit"
Ewald accept* Luther's word HSUe; even Utter-
wet, which is suggested by De Wette, Involves eon>
ceptiont too human for the purpose-
Digitized by
Google
1088 HELL
Pasting evet the derivation! suggested by elder
writers, it ii now generally agreed that the word
jomes from the root 7HJ27, "to make hollow"
(comp. Germ. HOUt, "hell," with HShle, "a hol-
low "), and therefore meant the vast hollow subter-
ranean resting-place which ia the common receptacle
of the dead (Gea. Tha. p. 1348; Bbttcher, de In-
feru, e. it. p. 137 ff. ; Ewald, ad Ps. p. 48). It
ia deep (Job xi. 8) and dark (Job x. 31, 33), in the
centre of the earth (Num. xvi. 80 ; Deut xxxii. 83),
having within it depths on depths (Prov. ix. 18),
and listened with gates (Is. xxxviii. 10) and bars
(Job xvii. 18). Some have fancied (as Jahn, Arch.
BibL $ 303, Eng. ed.) that the Jews, like the
Greeks, believed in infernal rivers: thus Clemens
Alex, defines Gehenna as " a river of fire " (Fragm.
18), and expressly compares it to the fiery rivers of
Tartarus (SUimt. v. 14, 93); and Tertullian says
that it was sup|«sed to resemble Pyriphlegethon
(Apoky. cap. xlvii.). The notion, however, is not
found in Scripture, for Ps. xviil. 6 is a mere met-
aphor. In this cavernous realm are the souls of
dead men, the Kephaim and ill-spirits (Pa lxxxvi.
13, lxxxix. 48; I'rov. xxiii. 14; Ez. xxxi. 17, xxxii.
31). It is all-devouring (Prov. i. 13, xxx. 16), in-
satiable (Is. v. 14), and remorseless (Cant viii. 6).
The shadows, not of men only, but even of trees
and kingdoms, are placed in Sheol (Is. xiv. 9-30;
Ez. xxxi. 14-18, xxxii. paitim).
It is clear that in many passages of the O. T.
Sheol can only mean "the grave," and is so ren-
dered in the A. V. (see, for example, Gen. xxxvii.
85, xlii. 38; 1 Sam. ii. 6; Job xiv. 13). In other
passages, however, it seems to involve a notion of
punishment, and is therefore rendered in the A. V.
by the word " Hell." But in many cases this
translation misleads the reader. It is obvious, for
instance, that Job xi. 8; Ps. exxxix. 8; Am. ix.
3 (where "hell" is used as the antithesis of
"heaven"), merely illustrate the Jewish notions
of the locality of Sheol in the bowels of the earth.
Even Ps. ix. 17, Prov. xv. 34, v. 5, ix. 18, seem to
refer rather to the danger of terrible and precipitate
death than to a place of Infernal anguish. An
attentive examination of all the passages in which
the word occurs will show that the Hebrew notions
respecting Sheol were of a vague description. The
rewards and punishments of the Mosaic law were
semporal, and it was only gradually and slowly that
3od revealed to his chosen people a knowledge of
future rewards and punishments. Generally speak-
ing, the Hebrews regarded the grave as the final
end of all sentient and intelligent existence, " the
land where all things are forgotten " (Ps. lxxxviii.
10-13; Is. xxxviii. 9-30; Ps. vi. 5; Eccl. ix. 10;
Ecclus. xvii. 37, 38). Even the righteous Heselriah
tumbled lest, " when his eyes closed upon the cheru-
bim and the mercy-seat," he should no longer " see
the Lord, even the Lord in the land of the living."
In the N. T. the word Hades (like Sheol) some-
times means merely "the grave" (Rev. xx. 13;
Acts li. 31; 1 Cor. xv. 65), or in general "the
unseen world." It is in this sense that the creeds
say of our I-ord KarriKity iy f 8p or t Is SSov, dt~
cendit ad inferos, or inferno, meaning " the state
it the dead in general, without any restriction of
■appiness or misery " (Beveridge on Art ill.), a
doctrine certainly, though only virtually, expressed
b Scripture (Eph. iv. 9; Acts ii. 35-31). Sim-
ilarly Jaepnus uses Hades as the name of the place
I the soul of Samuel was evoked {AnL H. 14,
HELL
*8). Elsewhere In the N.T.Hades baaed of ■
place of torment (Luke xvi. 83; 8 Pet ii. 4; Matt
xi. 33, Ac.). Consequently it has been the prev-
alent, almost the universal, notion that Hades h
an imtermediaU state between death and resurrec-
tion, divided into two parts, one the abode of the
blessed and the other of the lost This waa the
belief of the Jews after the exile, who gave to the
places the names of Paradise and Gehenna (Joseph.
Ant. xviil. 1, § 8; cf. Otho, Lex. Sabb. s. w.), of
the Fathers generally (Tert de Aniind, c. Iv.; Je-
rome n £ccL iii.; Just Hart Dial c Tryph,
§ 105, Ac.; see Pearson on Creed, Art. v.) aad of
many moderns (Trench on the Parable* p. 467;
Alford on Luke xvi. 33). In holding Jul view,
main reliance is placed on the parable of Dives and
Lazarus; bnt it is impossible to ground the proof
of an important theological doctrine on a passage
which confessedly abounds in Jewish metaphors.
" Theologia parabolica non eat demonstrativa " is a
rule too valuable to be forgotten; and if we an to
turn rhetoric Into logic, and build a dogma on
every metaphor, our belief will be of a vague and
contradictory character. "Abraham's bosom,"
says Dean Trench, " is not heaven, though it will
issue in heaven, so neither is Hades hell, though to
issue in it, when death and Hades shall be cast into
the lake of fire which is the proper hell. It is Use
place of painful restraint (^uAcutrj, 1 Pet iii. 19;
49u<r<roj, Luke viii. 31), where the souk of the
wicked are reserved to the judgment of the great
day." But respecting the condition of the dead
whether before or after the resurrection we know
very little indeed; nor shall we know anything
certain until the awful curtains of mortality are
drawn aside. Dogmatism on this topic appears to
be peculiarly misplaced. [See Paradise.]
The word most frequently used in the N. T. for
the place of future punishment is Gehenna (yi-
evva), or Gehenna qfjire (4) y. rov rupit), and
this word we must notice only so for as our purpose
requires; for further information see Gehenna
and Hinnom. The valley of Hinnom, for which
Gehenna is the Greek representative, once pleasant
with the waters of Siloa ("irrigua et nemorosa,
plenaque deliciis," Hieron. ad Jer. vii. 19, 81;
Matt v. 23), and which afterwards regained its old
appearance (" hodieque hortorum pnebens delicias,"
id.), was with its horrible associations of Moloch-
worship (Jer. vii. 31, xix. 2-6; 3 K. xxiii. 10) so
abhorrent to Jewish feeling that they adopted tha
word as a symbol of disgust and torment The
feeling was kept up by the pollution which the val-
ley underwent at the hands of Josiah, after which
it was made the common sink of all the filth and
corruption in the city, ghastly fires being kept
burning (according to B. Kimehi) to preserve it
from absolute putrefaction (see authorities quoted
in Otho, Lex. Sabb. s. v. Hinnom, etc.). The
fire and the worm were fit emblems of a ngni a h ,
and as such had seized hold of the Jewish imag-
ination (Is. lxvi. 34; Jud. xvi. 17; Eoclus. vii. 17);
hence the application of the word Gehenna and its
accessories in Matt v. 83, 39, 30; Luke xii. 5.
A part of the valley of Hinnom was named
Tophet (2 K. xxiii. 10; for its history and deriva-
tion see Tophet), a word used for what ia defile*
and abominable (Jer. vii. 31, 82, xix. 6-13). It
was applied by the Rabbis to a place of future tor*
ment (Targ. on Is. xxx. 33; Tslm. Srvbtn, I U
1 ; Biitteher, pp. 80, 85), but does not occur in tks
N. T. In the vivid picture of Isaiah (xxx. 3>
Digitized by
Google
HELL
■Web k fan of fine Irony against the enemy, the
name U applied to purpoen of threatening (with a
probable allusion to the recent acts of Hezekiah, aee
Komnmuller, ad toe.). Beaidei the authoritiea
quoted, ate Boohart (Phaleg, p. 528), Ewald (Proph.
li. 55), Selden (de Due Syrie, p. 173 ff.), Wilson
(Land* of the Bible, i. 489), etc.
The subject of the punishment of the wicked,
and of Hell as a place of torment, belongs to a
Theological rather than a Biblical Dictionary.
F. W. F.
* Some of the positions in the previous article
cannot be viewed as well established. That " gen-
erally speaking, the Hebrews regarded the grave
as the final end of all sentient and intelligent
existence " is a statement opposed to the results
of the best scholarship. Against it stand such
considerations as these: a four hundred years'
residence of the Israelites among a people proved
to have held the doctrine of a future life; the He-
brew doctrine of the nature of the soul ; the trans-
lation of Enoch and EUjah ; the prevalent views of
necromancy, or conjuring by the spirits of the dead,
(a practice prohibited by law, and yet resorted to
by a monarch of Israel); the constant insertion
that the dead were gathered to their fathers, though
buried fat away; the explicit and deliberate utter-
ance* of many passages, e. g., the 16th, 17th, 49th,
79d Psalms, Eceles. xU. 13, It, Daniel xii. 8, 3;
and the known fact that the doctrine of immortality
existed among the Jews (excepting the small sect
of Saddocees) at the time of Christ. The utterances
about the silence and inactivity of the grave must
therefore be understood own the present point of
view, and as having reference to the activities of
this life.
The statements of G essoins and very many others
about the gates and bars of Hades simply convert
rhetoric into logic, and might with equal propriety
invest the Kingdom of Heaven with " keys." The
theory so prevalent, that Hades was the common
province of departed spirits, divided, however, into
two compartments. Paradise and Gehenna, seems to
have been founded more upon the classical writers
and the Kabbins — to whom it appeals so largely —
than upon the Bible. It is undoubtedly true, that
under the older economy the whole subject was
much leas distinct than under the new, and the
Hades of the N. T. expresses more than the Sheol
of the 0. T. (See Foirbairn, Hermeneut. Manual,
p. 390 if.) SAW was, no doubt, the unseen world,
the state of the dead generally. So in modem
times we often intentionally limit our views, and
speak of the other world, the invisible world, the
undiscovered country, the grave, the spirit land,
ate. But vagueness of designation is not to be eon-
banded with community of lot or identity of abode
r condition.
Shed, the unknown region into which the dying
disappeared, was naturally and always invested with
gloom to a sinful race. But the vague term was
capable of becoming more or leas definite according
a the writer's thought. Host commonly it was
•imply the grave, as we use the phrase; sometimes
the state of death in general ; sometimes a dismal
place opposed to heaven, e. g., Job xl. 8, Pa.
■xxxix. 8, Am. ix. 3; sometimes s place of extreme
suffering, Ps. ixxxvi 13, ix. 17, rW. xxiii. 14. (See
Bikl Sacra, xiii. 155 ff.) No passes' of the O.
r, we bebeve, implies that the spirits of the good
■ml bad were them brought together. The often
sted pa ssag e (is. xiv. 9) implies the contrary,
HELLENIST 1089
showing us only the heathen kings meeting another
king in mockery.
To translate this Hebrew term, the LXX.
adopted the nearest Greek word, Hades, which by
derivation signifies the invisible world. But the
Greek word could not carry Greek notions into
Hebrew theology.
When Christ and his Apostles came, they nat-
urally laid hold of this Greek word already intro-
duced into religious use. But, of course, they em-
ployed it from their own stand -point. And as it
was the purpose of their mission to make more
distinct the doctrine of retribution, and as under
their teachings death became still more terrible to
the natural man, so throughout the N. T. Hades
seems invariably viewed as the enemy of man, and
from its alliance with sin and its doom, as hostile
to Christ and his church. In many instances it is
with strict propriety translated "hell." Even in
Acts ii. 27, 31, quoted from the 0. T., Hades is
the abode of the wicked dead. In Luke xvi. 38 it
certainly is the place of torment. In Matt. xvi. 18
it is the abode and centre of those powers that were
arrayed against Christ and his church. In Luke
x. 16, Matt. xi. S3, it is the opposite of heaven.
The word occurs, according to the Received Text,
in 1 Cor. xv. 55 ; but the reading is not supported
by the older MSS. The only remaining instances
are the four that occur in Rev. i. 18, vi. 8, xx. 13,
14, where, though in three of these cases personified,
it is still viewed as a terror to man and a foe to
Christ and his kingdom, over which at length he
has gained the victory. While therefore Gehenna
is the term which most distinctly designates the
place of future punishment, Hades also repeatedly
is nearly its equivalent; and, notwithstanding the
greater vagueness of the terms, it remains true, as
Augustin asserts, that neither Hades nor Shtol am
ever used in a good sense, or (we may add) in any
other than a sense that carries the notion of terror.
S. C. B.
* For a full discussion of the terms and passages
of the Old Testament relating to this subject, con-
sult Biittcher, De Inferu Rebiuque pott Mortem
futurit ex Hebraorum el Graxorwn Opimonibm,
Dread. 1848, and for a view of the literature per-
taining to it, see the bibliographical Appendix to
Alger's Critical Hut. of the Doctrine of a Future
Life (4th ed. New York, 1866), Nos. 1734-1888.
See also the art. of Oehler, Utu'crbSdikeit, Lekrt
da A. Test., in Heraog's RealEncyk. xxi. 409
438; and H&vemick's Vorle*mu,en uber die Tht-
ologie dee A. T., pp. 105-111. A.
HELLENIST ('EAAnmrHif : Graau ; of.
'ZWrirur/iis, 3 Msec, ir 13). In one of the
earliest notices of the first Christian Church at
Jerusalem (Acts vi. 1), two distinct parties arc
recognized among its members, "Hebrews" and
" Hellenists " (Grecians), who appear to stand to-
wards one another in some degree in a relation of
jealous rivalry. So again, when St. Paul first visited
Jerusalem after his conversion, he " spake and die
puted with the Hellenists" (Acts ix. 29), as if
expecting to find more sympathy among them than
with the rulers of the Jews. The term Hellenist
occurs once again in the N. T. according to the
common text, in the account of the foundation of
the church at Antioch (Acts xi. 30),» but then
the context, as well as the form of the sentence
i ass the note
Digitized by
Google
1040
HELLENIST
bad vpes'rovt 'E., though the xal u doubtful),
mn to requite the other reading •' Greeks "
("EAAi)i»e«), which is supported by great external
evidence, as the true antithesis to " Jem "
"loutalois, not 'Z0faitu, v. 19).
The name, according to its derivation, whether
the original verb ('EAAi)i'{f«) be taken, according
to the common analogy of similar forms (Mi)8ffa>,
'AttikI(o>, *iAMnr(fa>), in the general sense of
adopting the spirit and character of Greeks, or, in
the more limited sense of using the Greek language
(Xen. Annb. vii. 3, § 23), marks a class distin-
guished by peculiar habits, and not by descent.
Thus the Hellenists as a body included not only
the proselytes of Greek (or foreign) parentage (of
o-f/3<(/i«vi'EAAi)vfi, Actsxrii. !(?); oi Vf&i/uroi
irpoor/Airroi, Acts xiii. 4-'i; of atfiintvoi, Acts
xvii. 17), but also those Jews who, by settling in
foreign countries, had adopted the prevalent form
of the current Greek civilization, and with it the
use of the common Greek dialect, to the exclusion
of the Aramaic, which was the national representa-
tive of the ancient Hebrew. Hellenism was thus
s type of life, and not an indication of origin.
Hellenist* might be Greeks, but when the latter
turn is used ("EAAr/ret, John xii. 20), the point
of race and not of creed is that which is foremost
in the mind of the writer.
The general influence of the Greek conquests in
the East, the rise and spread of the Jewish Dit-
prrtUm, and the essential antagonism of Jew and
Greek, have been noticed in other articles [Alex-
ander the Great; Alexandria; Dispersion;
Antiochub iv. Epiphankb], and it remains only
to characterize briefly the elements which the Hel-
lenists contributed to the language of the N. T.,
and the immediate effects which they produced
upon the Apostolic teaching: —
1. The flexibility of the Greek language gained
for it in ancient time a general currency similar to
tint which French enjoys in modern Europe; but
with this important difference, that Greek was not
only the language of educated men, but also the
language of the masses in the great centres of com-
merce. The colonies of Alexander and his succes-
sors originally established what has been called the
Macedonian dialect throughout the East; but even
in this the prevailing power of Attic literature
made itself distinctly felt. Peculiar words and
forms adopted at Alexandria were undoubtedly of
Macedonian origin, hut the later Attic may be
justly regarded as the real basis of Oriental Greek.
This first type was, however, soon modified, at least
Hi common use, by contact with other languages.
The vocabulary was enriched by the addition of
foreign words, and the syntax was modified by new
constructions. In this way a variety of local dialects
must have arisen, the specific characters of which
were determined in the first instance by the con-
ditions under which they were formed, and which
afterwards passed away with the circumstances
which had produced them. But one of these dialects
has been preserved after the ruin of the people
among whom it arose, by being consecrated to the
noblest service which language has yet fulfilled. In
other cases the dialects perished together with the
communities who used them in the common inter-
course of life, but in that of the Jews the Alexan-
drine version of the O. T., acting in this respect
like the great vernacular versions of England and
Germany, gave a definiteness and fixity to the
popular language which could not have been gained
HELLENIST
without the existence of some recognized i
The style of the LXX. itself is, indeed, differs* b
different parts, but the same general character ma
through the whole, and the variations which it
presents are not greater than those which exist in
the different books of the N. T.
The functions which this Jewish-Greek had to
discharge were of the widest application, and the
language itself combined the most opposite features.
It was essentially a fusion of Eastern and Western
thought. For disregarding peculiarities of inflexion
and novel words, the characteristic of the Hellenistic
dialect is the combination of a Hebrew spirit with
a Greek body, of a Hebrew form with Greek words.
The conception belongs to one race, and the expres-
sion to another. Nor is H too much to say tl at
this combination was one of the most important
preparations for the reception of Christianity, and
one of the most important aids for the adequate
expression of its teaching. On the one hand, by
the spread of the Hellenistic Greek, the deep, the-
ocratic aspect of the world and life, which distin-
guishes Jewish thought, was placed before men at
large; and on the other, the subtle truths, which
philosophy had gained from the analysis of mind
and action, and enshrined in words, were transferred
to the service of revelation. In the fullness of time,
when the great message came, a language was pre-
pared to convey it ; and thus the very dialect of the
N. T. forms a great lesson in the true philosophy
of history and becomes in itself a monument of the
providential government of mankind.
This view of the Hellenistic dialect will at ones
remove one of the commonest misconceptions relat-
ing to it. For it v>ill follow that its deviations
from the ordinary laws of classic Greek are them-
selves bound by some common law, and that irreg-
ularities of construction and altered usages of word*
are to be traced to their first source, and inter-
preted strictly according to the original conception
out of which they sprang. A popular, and even s
corrupt, dialect is not less precise, or, in other
words, U not less human than a polished one,
though its interpretation may often be more diffi-
cult from the want of materials for analysis. But
in the case of the N. T., the books themselves
furnish an ample store for the critic, and the Sep-
tuagint, when compared with the Hebrew text,
provides him with the history of the language which
he has to study.
2. The adoption of a strange language was essen-
tially characteristic of the true nature of Hellenism.
The purely outward elements of the national lifo
were laid aside with a facility of which history offers
few examples, while the inner character of the people
remained unchanged. In every respect the thought,
so to speak, was clothed in a new dress. Hellenism
was, as it were, a fresh incorporation of Judaism
according to altered laws of life and worship. But
as the Hebrew spirit made itself distinctly visible
in the new dialect, so it remained undestroyed by
the new conditions which regulated its action.
While the Hellenistic Jews followed their natural
instinct for trade, which was originally curbed by
the Mosaic Law, and gained a deeper insight into
foreign character, and with this a truer sympathy
or at least a wider tolerance towards foreign opin-
ions, tbey found means at the same time to extent
the knowledge of the principles of their divine faith,
and to gain respect and attention even from thost
who did not openly embrace their religion. Hut
lenism accomplished for the outer world what tht
Digitized by
Google
HELLENIST
Return [Cthub] accomplished for the Palestinian
Jews: it m the necessary step between a religion
of form and a religion of spirit : it wituessed against
Judaism as final and universal, and it witnessed
for it, as the foundation of a spiritual religion which
should be bound by no local restrictions. Under
the influence of this wider instruction a Greek body
grew up around the Synagogue, not admitted into
Ae Jewish Church, and yet holding a recognized
position with regard to it, which was able to appre-
hend the Apostolic teaching, and ready to receive
it. The Hellenists themselves were at once mis-
sionaries to the heathen, and prophets to their own
countrymen. Their lives were an abiding protest
against polytheism and pantheism, and they re-
tained with unshaken teal the sum of their ancient
creed, when the preacher had popularly occupied
the place of the priest, and a service of prayer and
praise and exhortation had succeeded in daily life
to the elaborate ritual of the Temple. Yet this new
development of Judaism was obtained without the
sacrifice of national ties. The connection of the
Hellenists with the Temple was not broken, except
in the case of some of the Egyptian Jews. [The
Disfeusiun.] Unity coexisted with dispersion;
and the organization of a catholic church was
foreshadowed, not only in the widening breadth of
loctrine, but even externally in the scattered com-
oiunities which looked to Jerusalem as their com-
non centre.
In another aspect Hellenism served as the prep-
iratiou for a catholic creed. As it furnished the
language of Christianity, it supplied also that
literary instinct which counteracted the traditional
reserve of the Palestinian Jews. The writings of
the N. T., and all the writings of the Apostolic age,
with the exception of the original Gospel of St.
Matthew, were, as for as we know, Greek; and
Greek seems to have remained the sole vehicle of
Christian literature, and the principal medium of
Christian worship, till the Church of North Africa
rose into importance in the time of Tertullian.
The Canon of the Christian Scriptures, the early
Creeds, and the Liturgies, are the memorials of this
HeBeuistic predominance in the Church, and the
types of its working ; and if in later times the Greek
spirit descended to the investigation of painful subtle-
ties, It may be questioned whether the fullness
of Christian truth could have been developed with-
out the power of Greek thought tempered by He-
brew discipline.
The general relations of Hellenism to Judaism
■re well treated in the histories of Ewald and Jost ;
but the Hellenistic language Is as yet, critically
speaking, almost unexplored. Winer's Grammar
(Oramm. d. N. T. Sprachidiume, 6te Aufl. 1855
[7* Aufl. by Liinetnann, 1867]) has done great
service in establishing the idea of law in N. T.
language, which was obliterated by earlier inter-
preters, but even Winer does not investigate the
origin of the peculiarities of the Hellenistic dialect.
The idioms of the N. T. cannot be discussed apart
from those of the LXX. ; and no explanation can
be considered perfect which does not take into
iccount the origin of the corresponding Ejbrew
idioms. For this work even the materials are as
yet deficient. The text of the LXX. is stC in a
most unsatisfactory condition ; and while Binder's
Concordance leaves nothing to be desired for the
vocabulary of the N. T., Trommius's Concordance
to the LXX., however useful, is quite untrustworthy
for arJxios] purposes. [See Language ot >hk
HEM OF GARMENT 1041
New Testament, Amor, ed.; alio New Testa-
ment, iv.] a f. w.
HELMET. [Arms, p. 161.]
HEXON (i'Vj [strong, poaerful\: XtuAeV.
flelon), lather of Eliab, who was the chief man of
the tribe of Zebulun, when the oensus was taken in
the wilderness of Sinai (Num. i. 9, ii. 7, vii. 24,
29, x. 16).
* HELPS- This is the term used in the
authorized English Version, and in the Rheims
N. T. for a>TiA4«V«<r, 1 Cor. xii. 28. The Vulgate
translates, apittilimonet ; Wycliffe, helpyngit (help-
ings) ; Tyndale, Cranmer, and the Geneva bible,
helpers ; Luther, heifer. The noun occurs only
once in the N. T., but the verb iunri^apfiiyopat,
i. e. to take in turn, to Uiy hold of, to help, also to
take pari in, occurs three times, Luke i. 64 (" hath
holpen his servant Israel "), Acts xx. 35 (" to sup-
port the weak"), 1 Tim. vi. 2 (oi tt)j titpyeotas
lurri \ap$gy 6ptyot, "partakers of the benefit").
With the classics aW(Atn|>t> signifies a taking in
(urn, ttizure ; receipt; perception, but with the
later writers and in the 0. T. Apocrypha (2 Mace,
viii. 19; 3 Mace. r. 50; Ecclus. xi. 12; li. 7; 1
Esdr. viii. 27 al.) also aid, support. This must be
the meaning of the word in 1 Cor. xii., and it is so
understood by nearly all the commentators from
Chrysostom (hmix«r^ax ray lurBiv&v) down to
De Wette, Meyer, Alford, Wordsworth, and Kling
(in Lange's Bibtlicerk). It corresponds with the
meaning of the verb in Luke i. 54 and Acts xx. 35,
and suits the connection. Paul enumerates the
djTiWjifxij among the charismata, and puts them
between the miraculous powers (SvrA/itis and
X«pl<rpaTa lapiray) which were not confined to
any particular office, and the gifts of government
and administration (m&*pvi\cttu) which belonged
especially to the presbyter-bishops, and in the
highest degree to the Apostles as the gubernaiores
ecctesia. 'AvriX^ilxit doubtless comprehends the
various duties of the dencons and deaconesses of
the Apostles' church, especially the care of the poor
and the sick. We may take it, however, in a more
comprehensive sense for Christian charity and phi-
lanthropy. The plural indicates the diversity of
the gift in its practical operation and application;
comp. iiaxoylai, 1 Cor. xii. 5. These help* or
helpings are represented here as a gift of the Spirit
The duty is hased on the possession of the gift, but
the gift is not confined to the deacons or any class
of church officers. It is found also among the laity,
especially the female portion, in all ages and all
branches of Christendom. But from time to time
God raises up heroes of Christian charity and angels
of mercy whom He endows, in an extraordinary
measure, with the charisma of amiXrfyu , tuutoyla,
and a-yda-n for the benefit of suffering humanity.
P. S.
* HELPS, Acta xxvii. 17 (JoAfcioi). See
Ships, Undergirding.
HEM OF GARMENT (D^S: cpfcnrt-
Soy: fimbria). The importance which the later
Jews, especially the Pharisees (Matt, xxiii. 5),
a'.tached to the hem or fringe of their garments
was founded upon the regulation in Num. xr. 88,
39, which attached a symbolical meaning to it.
We must not, however, conclude that the fringe
owed its origin to that passage: it was in the first
instance the ordinary mode of finishing the robe,
thv ends of the threads composing the woof being
Digitized by
Google
1042 HBMAM
hft in order to prevent the cloth Ann unranfing,
Jut m in the Egyptian calcuirU (Her. il. 81;
Wilkinson's Ancient Egyptians, ii. 90), and in the
Assyrian robe* as represented in the bas-reliefs of
Nineveh, the blue ribbon being added to strengthen
the border. The Hebrew word fctrirt is expressive
of this fretted edges the Greek xpaWtSa (the
etymology of which ii uncertain, being variously
traced to Kpoaait, ticpot ltilov, and icoijirli) ap-
puei to the tdye of a river or mountain (Xen. Hut.
Ur. iii. 2, § 16, iv. 6. J 8), and ii explained by
Heaychius as T a iv t«7 e>py rov l/tarlov Ktxkma-
lUra jiififxara col TO tucaoy ovtov. The beged
or outer robe wai a simple quadrangular piece of
cloth, and generally so worn that two of the corners
bung down in front: these comers were ornamented
with a '• ribbon of blue," or rather dark violet, the
ribbon itself being, as we may conclude from the
word used, vVlS, as narrow as a thread or piece
of string. The Jews attached great sanctity to this
fringe (Matt. ix. 20, xiv. 36 ; Luke viii. 44), and
the Pharisees made it more prominent than it was
originally designed to be, enlarging both the fringe
and the ribbon to an undue width (Matt, xxiii. 6).
Directions were given as to the number of threads
of which it ought to be composed, and other par-
ticulars, to each of which a symbolical meaning
was attached (Carpzov, ApparuL p. 198). It was
appended in later times to the talith more especially,
as being the robe usually worn at devotions : whence
the proverbial saying quoted by Lightfoot (KxereU.
on Matt. v. 40), <• He that takes care of his fringes
deserves a good coat." W. L. B.
HEMAM (CD s n [exterminating, or ray-
in;]: Ai/tdV: ffeman). Hori (»". «. Horita) and
Hemam were sons (A. V. "children," but the
word is Bene) of Lotan, the eldest son of Seir (Gen.
xxxvi. 22). In the list in 1 Chr. i. the name ap-
pears as Homam, which is probably the correct
HE'MAN O^n [true, reliable]: [Aiixooiy,
Alriv; Alex.] Atfuw, [HptW- Kmtm, ffeman]).
1. Son of Zerah, 1 Chr. ii. 6; 1 K. iv. 31. See
following article.
2. [AipdV; Tat 1 Chr. xxv. 6, Atuarei, 2 Chr.
xxii. 14, Clratntw; Alex. Ps. Ixxxviii. 1, A<0o« :
Hemam, Heman, A'own.] Son of Joel, snd grand-
son of Samuel the prophet, a Kobathite. He is
soiled " the singer" ("HlBJlpn), rather, the mu-
sician, 1 Chr. vi. 83, and was' the first of the three
chief Levites to whom was committed the vocal and
instrumental music of the temple-service in the
reign of David, as we read 1 Chr. xr. 16-22, Asaph
and Ethan, or rather, according to xxr. 1, 3, Jedu-
Jhun," being bis colleagues. [Jkduthum.] The
jenealogy of Heman is given in 1 Chr. vi. 33-38
;A. V.), but the generations between Assir, the
son of Korah, and Samuel are somewhat confused,
owing to two collateral lines having got mixed. A
rectification of this genealogy will be found at p.
214 of the (ienealoaies of our Lord, where it is
shown that Heman is 14th in descent from Levi.
A further account of Heman is given 1 Chr. xxv.,
where he is called (ver. 5) " the king's soar in the
Batters of God," the word HTP, "seer," which
BKKJjr
in S Chr. xxxt. 15 is applied to JedUnun, sal kt
nix. SO to Asaph, being probably used in the sum
sense ss is H^?> u prophesied," of Asaph and Jedu-
thun in xxv. 1-3. We there learn that Hemaa
had fourteen tons, snd three daughters [Hama-
kiah I.], of which the sons all assisted in the
music under their lather, and each of whem was
head of one of the twenty-four wards of Levites,
who " were instructed in the songs of the Lord,"
or rather, in sacred music. Whether at no this
Heman is the person to whom the 88th Psalm is
ascribed is doubtful. The chief reason for appos-
ing him to be the same is, that as other Psalms ars
ascribed to Asaph and Jeduthun, so it u likely that
this one should be to Heman the singer. But on
the other hand be is there called ' the Ezrahite; "
and the 89th Psalm is ascribed to " Ethan the
Ezrahite." • But since Heman and Ethan are
described in 1 Chr. ii. 6, as " sons of Zerah," it is
in the highest degree probable that Ezrahite means
"of the family of Zerah," and consequently that
Heman of the 88th Psalm is different from Heman
the singer, the Kobathite. In 1 K. iv. 31 again
(Heb. T. 11), we have mention, as of the wisest of
mankind, of Ethan the Ezrahite, Heman, ChalcoL
and Darda, the sons of MahoL, a bat corresponding
with the names of the sons of Zerah, in 1 Chr. ii.
The inference from which is that there was a
Heman, different from Heman the singer, of the
family of Zerah the son of Judah, and that he is
distinguished from Heman the singer, the Invite,
by being called the Ezrahite. As regards the age
when Heman the Ezrahite lived, the only thing
that can be asserted is that he lived before Solomon,
who was said to be " wiser than Heman," and after
Zerah the son of Judah. His being called " son
of Zerah " in 1 Chr. ii. 6 indicates nothing as to
the precise sge when he and his brother lived.
They are probably mentioned in this abridged
genealogy, only as having been illustrious persons
of their family. Nor is anything known of Mahol
their father. It is of course uncertain whether the
tradition which ascribed the 88th Psalm to Heman'a
authorship is trustworthy. Nor is there anything
in the Psalm itself which clearly marks the time
of its composition. The 89th Psslm, ascribed to
Ethan, seems to be subsequent to the overthrow of
the kingdom of Judah, unless possibly the calami-
ties described in the latter part of the Psalm may
be understood of David's night at Absalom's rebel-
lion, in which ease ver. 41 would allude to Shimei
the son of Genu
If Heman the Kobathite, or his father, had mar-
ried an heiress of the house of Zerah, as the sons of
Hakkoz did of the house of Bsreillai, snd was so
reckoned in the genealogy of Zerah, then all the
notices of Heman might point to the same person,
and the musical skill of David's chief musician,
and the wisdom of David's sear, and the genius of
the author of the 88th Psslm, concurring in the
same individual, would make him fit to be joineu
with those other worthies whose wisdom was only
exceeded by that of Solomon. But it is impossible
to assert that this was the case.
tiosenm. Proleg. in Pealm. p. xvii. ; J. Oisbao
sen, on Pealmt, EmleiL p. 92 (Kungef. Ewtf
Hondo.). A. C H.
« JfVH and pniT 1 u probably only clerical
a ster ! Mi l. Bm also 2 Chr. xxlx. 18, 14.
» a*. Anrnsllm » copy raad, with the LXX., Israel.
iu, toe Kmkite, In the tltias to the 88th sad BBtk
Psalms. Bis explanation or the litis of Ps. lxxxviB
Is a carious specimen of spirltuaUsIng tnls u sstallm
Digitized by
Google
HEMATH
HEMATH (npn [fortreu, cUaad\x t J r
tttt; [Vat] Alex. Ejuofl: Amort'. Anotner form
— not warranted by the Hebrew — of the weU-
known name Hamath (Am. ri. 14).
HK'MATH (n»0 i. e. Hammath [heat,
warm spring]: Al/niBi [Vat. Miiniua:] Vulg.
translate! <ie colore), a penon, or a place, named
In the genealogical lists of Judah, as the origin of
the Kenites, and the "rather" of the house of
Kkchab (1 Chr. U. 56).
HEMTXAN (]}Prj [j*os<mioiie,Furst]:
AuoSet: Amdam or damdam, some copies Ham-
dim), the eldest son of Dishon, son of Anah the
Horite (Gen. xxxrl 36). In the parallel list of
1 Chr. (i. 41) the name is changed to Hataran
C|^Qn), which in the A. V. is given as Ambam,
probably following the Vulgate Bamram, in the
earliest HSS. Amaran.
The name Hemdan is by Knobel {Genesis, p.
S56) compared with those of ffumeidy and Ham-
ad*/, two of the fire families of the tribe of Omran
or Amran, who are located to the £. and S. E. of
Akaba. Also with the Bene-Hamyde, who are
found a short distance S. of Kerek (S. E. corner
of the Dead Sea) ; and from thence to el-Btuairih,
probably the ancient Bozrah, on the road to
Petra. (See Burckhardt, Syria, etc, pp. 695,
407.)
HEMXOOK. [Gall.]
HEN (7Q [favor, grace] : Bern). According
to the rendering of the passage (Zech. ri. 14)
adopted in the A. V. Hen (or accurately Chen) is
the name of a son of Zephaniah, and apparently
the same who is called Josiah in tot. 10. But by
the LXX. (xa>»), Ewald (Gm$t), and other in-
terpreters, the words are taken to mean " for the
favor of the son of Zephaniah."
HEN. The hen is nowhere noticed in the Bible
except in the passages (Matt, xxiii. 37 ; Luke xiii.
•4) where our Saviour touohingly compares His
anxiety to save Jerusalem to the tender care of a
ben " gathering her chickens under her wings."
Hie word employed is tpvtt, which is used in the
«ame specific sense in classical Greek (Aristoph.
At. 103, Veep. 811). That a bird, so intimately
connected with the household, and so common in
Palestine, as we know from Rabbinical sources,
should receive such slight notice, is certainly sin-
gular; it is almost equally singular that it is no-
where represented in the paintings of ancient Egypt
(Wilkinson, L 834)." W. L. B.
HEN A (7271 [depression, but land, Fttrst]:
'Anf; [in 2 K. xix., Vat. Am, Alex. Aira; in Is.,
ky confusion with next word, Rom. ' Kvayovyiva,
Vat- Sin. Krayovyaoa:] Ana) seems to have been
one of the chief cities of a monarchical state which
the Assyrian kings had reduced shortly before the
time of Sennacherib (9 K [xriii. 84,] xix. 13; Is.
sxrrii. 13). Its connection with Sepharraim, or
Sippara, would lead us to place it in Babylonia, or
at any rate on the Euphrates. Here, at no great
Vstanoe from Sippara (now Motaib), . an ardent
town called Ana or Anah, which seems to have beeu
HEFHHB
1013
The sommoD barn-door fowl arc met with •.-err-
to S)rieal the present daj. The peasant* rely
them, and the eggs from them, as one of their cnlaf
eas of subnsssoee (Thomson, Land and Boot), U.
in former times a place of considerable importance.
It is mentioned by Abulfeda, by William of Tyre.
and others (see Aaseman. Bibl. Or. vol. iii. pt ii.
p. 560, and p. 717). The conjecture by some (eas
Winer's RtahoSrferbuch, s. v.) that this may be
Hena, is probable, and deserves acceptance. A
further conjecture identifies Ana with a town called
Anoj (n is merely the feminine termination),
which is mentioned in the Assyrian inscriptions as
situated on an island in the Euphrates (Fox Tal-
bot's Assyrian Texts, 21 ; Layard's Nineveh and
Babylon, 355) at some distance below its junction
with the Chabour ; and which appears as Anatho
OAvafleS) in Isidore of Charax (Mane. Parth. p. 4).
The modern Ami* is on the right bank of the
stream, while the name also attaches to some ruins
a little lower down upon the left bank ; but between
them is " a string of islands " (Chesney's Euphrates
Expedition, i. 53), on one or more of which the an-
cient city may hare ben situated. G. R.
HEN'ADAD (T^jO [fator of Hadad,
Fiirst, Gas.] : 'HvatiS, [etc :] Benadad, Ena-
dad), the head of a family of Levites who took a
prominent part in the rebuilding of the Temple
under Joshua (Ear. iii. 9). Bavai and Binnui
(Neh. iii. 18, 24), who assisted in the repair of the
wall of the city, probably belonged to the same
family. The latter also represented his family at
the signing of the covenant (Neh. x. 9).
HE'NOOH (Tl'tin: 'E«» x : Brmochy X.
The form in whioh the well-known name Enoch is
given in the A. V. of 1 Chr. L 8. The Hebrew
word is the same both here and in Genesis, namely,
Chanoc. Perhaps in the present case our transla-
tors followed the Vulgate.
S. So they appear also to hare done in 1 Chr.
i. 33 with a name which in Gen. xxr. 4 is more
accurately given as Hanoch.
HETHEK (~l?0 [a veil]: •O+tp: Bepher)
L A descendant of Manasseh. The youngest of
the sons of Gilead (Num. xxri. 38), and head of
the family of the Hkphekites. Hepher was
father of Zkuophf.had (xxvi. 33, xxrii. 1; [Josh,
xvii. 2, 3]), whose daughters first raised the ques-
tion of the right of a woman having no brother,
to hold the property of her father.
8. (,'H<pd\- Bepher.) The second son of Naa-
rah, one of the two wives of Ashur, the " father of
Tekoa" (1 Chr. iv. 6), in the genealogy of Judah.
3. [Rom. Vat Alex. FA. corrupted by false di-
vision of the words; Comp. 'Aipip; Aid. 'AeWo-]
The Meohemthite, one of the heroes of David's
guard, according to the list of 1 Chr. xi. 86. In
the catalogue of 3 Samuel this name does not
exist (see xxiii. 34); and the conclusion of Kenni-
oott, after a full investigation of the passages, is
that the names in Samuel are the originals, anil
that Hepher is a mere corruption of them.
HETHEB H^n [a «*»]: 'Ofip; [V*
in 1 K. corrupt; Comp. 'Ea)ep'] Qpher), a place
in ancient Canaan, whioh, though not mentioned in
the history of the conquest, occurs in the list of
conquered kings (Josh. xii. 17). It wss on the west
of Jordan (oomp. 7). So was also the " land of
553 The egg* of the hen an no doubt meant in the
8avlour's Illustration (Luke xi. 12), which baptist ales
that they wen very abundant. H
Digitized by
Google
1044 HEPHBKITBS, THE
Hepher " (Yj Yl$> Urra Epher), which is named
with Socoh m one of Solomon'i commissariat dis-
tricts (1 K. It. 10). To judge from this catalogue
it lay towards the south of centra] Palestine, at
any rate below Dor. so that there cannot be any
connection between it and Gath-iiephek, which
was in Zebnlun near Sepphoria.
HETHERITES, THE CHSfTTT [petrc-
nym., see above], i. e. the JltpheriU: 6 'OeVepf
[Vat. -Mt-]: JamiUa Hepherilarum), the fiunily
of Hepher the son of Gilead (Num. xxvi. 33).
HEPH'ZIBAH (Pia-^SpO : «*>,«« iuiy.
wkmttu mea in en). 1. A name signifying My
d light in her, which is to be borne by the restored
Jerusalem (b. lxii. 4). The succeeding sentence
contains a play on the word — " for Jehovah de-
Dghteth (VSI^I, cJtaphet*) in thee."
a. CA^/Jdi [Vat.1 O+tt0ai] Alex. O^ifla;
Joseph. 'A Yi£d° '■ Haphtiba). It was actually the
name of the queen of King Hezekiah, and the
mother of Manasaeh (2 K. xxi. 1). In the par-
allel account (2 Chr. xxxiii. 1 ) her name is omitted.
No due is given us to the character of this queen.
But if she was an adherent of Jehovah — and this
the wife of Hezekiah could not fail to be — it is
not impossible that the words of Is. lxii. 4 may
contain a complimentary allusion to her.
HERALD (NTTI^ [ft ™ "* Pe ™-. c " er >
cnlkr, Dietr.]). The only notice of this officer in
the 0. T. occurs in Dan. in. 4; the term there
need is oonnected etymologically with the Greek
mipiavK and KpdCte, and with our " cry." There
is an evident allusion to the office of the herald in
the expressions rnpoVow, frqpv(, and icfipvyna,
which are frequent in the N- T., and which are but
inadequately rendered by " preach," etc. The
term " herald " might be substituted in 1 Tim. ii
T; 2 Tim. i. 11; 2 Pet. u. 6. W. L. B.
HER'CULES CHixurAi)! [flero's otory]), the
I ame commonly applied by the western nations to
tne tutelary deity of Tyre, whose national title was
i/eftaif cmp bn, i. «. mp -rba, the u»g
cf the city ■ - xo\ioix°', Mekliaum, Phil. Bybl.
ap. Euseb. Prop. Ev. i. 10). The identification
was based upon a similarity of the legends and at-
tributes referred to the two deities, but Herodotus
(ii. 44) recognized their distinctness, and dwells on
the extreme antiquity of the Tynan rite (Herod.
I c; cf. Strabo, xvi. p. 757; Arr. Alex. ii. 16; Jo-
seph. Ant. viii. 5, J 8; c. Apian, i. 18). The wor-
ship of Helkart was spread throughout the Tyrian
colonies, and was especially established st Carthage
(cf- Utmilcar), where it was celebrated even with
juman sacrifices (Plin. B. N. xxxvi. 4 (5); cf.
Jar. six. 5). Mention is made of public embassies
tunt from the colonies to the mother state to honor
ihe national God (Arr. Alex. ii. 84; Q. Curt. iv.
i; I'olyb. xxxl. 20), and this fact places in a clearer
« This Identification U distinctly mads in a Maltese
msenpuoa quoted by Qesenlus (Ersch und Oruber's
Entyldop. s. t. Btl., and Tkemtnu, s. T. 793),
■ bare "IS ^a PffpTQ answers to 'HeaxAti so-
rt r« re.
I Than were eemmon, and an frequently alluded
ta the expresrion "lr^-rPDJP, 2 Sam. xvii. 29
TTTTRn
light the offense of Jason in sending envoy* (fiw
puis) to his festival (2 Haoc iv. 19 ff).
There can be little doubt but that Melksrt fats*
proper name of the Baal — the Prince (?55U)
— mentioned in the later history of the O. T. The
worship of "Baal" was introduced from Tyre (1
K. xvi. 31; cf. 2 K. xi. 18) after the earlier Ca-
naanitish idolatry had been put down (1 Sam. vii.
4; cf. 1 K. xi. 6-8), and Melkart (Hercules) and
Astarte appear in the same close relation (Joseph.
Ant. 1. e.) as Baal and Astarte. The objections
which are urged against the identification appear
to have little weight; but the supposed connections
between Melkart and other gods (Moloch, t-tu •
which have been suggested (l'auly, JUai-h'ncycL
s. v. Melcmih) appear less likely (cf. Gesenius, i
c i Movers, PhOmxitr, i. 176 ff., 385 ff.). [Baal.]
Hie direct derivation of the word Hercules from
Phoenician roots, either as V3TTT, ciradtor, the
traveller, in reference to the course of the sun, with
whom he was identified, or to the journeys of the
hero, or again as 73"1H ('ApxoAtet, Etym. it.),
the strong conquer*, has little probability.
B.F. W.
HERD, HERDSMAN. The herd was
greatly regarded both in the patriarchal and Mo-
saic period. Its multiplying was considered as a
blessing, and its decrease as a curse (Gen. xiii. 2;
Deut vii. 14, xxviii. 4; Ps. cvii. 38, cxliv. 14; Jer.
Ii. 23). The ox was the most precious stock next
to horse and mule, and (since those were rare) the
thing of greatest value which was commonly pos-
sessed (1 K. xviii. 6). Hence we see the force of
Saul's threat (1 Sam. xi. 7). The herd yielded the
most esteemed sacrifice (Num. vii. 8; Ps. box. 31
Is lxvi 3); also flesh-meat and milk, chiefly eon-
verted, probably, into butter and cheese (Deut
mii. 14; 2 Sain. xvii. 29), which such milk yields
more copiously than that of small cattle * (Arist.
Hist. Anim. iii. 20). The full-grown ox is hardly
ever slaughtered in Syria; but, both for sacrificial
and convivial purposes, the young animal was pre-
ferred (Ex. xxix. 1) — perhaps three years might
be the age up to which it was so regarded (Gen. xv.
9) — and is spoken of as a special dainty (Gen.
xviii. 8; Am. vi. 4; Luke xv. 23). The ease of
Gideon's sacrifice was one of exigency (Judg. vi.
25) and exceptional. So that of the people (1 Sam.
xiv. 32) was an act of wanton excess. The agri-
cultural and general usefulness of the ox, in plough-
ing, threshing [Agriculture], and as a beast of
burden (1 Chr. xii. 40; Is. xlvi. \\ made such s
slaughtering seem wasteful; nor, owing to diffi-
culties of grazing, fattening, etc., is beef the prod-
uct of an eastern climate. The animal was broken
to service probably in his third year (Is. xv. 5; Jet.
xlviH. 34; comp. Plin. H. N. viii. 70, ed. Par.).
In the moist season, when grass abounded In the
waste lands, especially In the " south " regies),
of cows' mDk ; JTHpn, Arab. 1 t ~-|
Oen. xvill. 8, Is. tU. 16, 2 Bam. xrli.'ffl, Job xx. 17
Judg. v. 25, Prov. xxx. 88, Is properly rendered « but-
ter " (which Qesenlus, «. r., Is mistaken in declaring
to be "hardly known to the Orientals, except as a
medicine"). The word 71 }\3J, Job x. 10, is to* sbsm
sa the Arab .«JO, applied by the Bedouins to that
goats'-milk cheese. [Bums ; Casxss,]
Digitized by
Google
HHBD
HBHTl
1048
Bgyptlan Sum-yard. (Wilkinson.)
herds grazed there ; e. g. in Camwl on the W. «ide
tf the Dew} Sea (1 Sam. xxr. 2; 2 Clir. xxvi. in).
Dothan also. Mishor, and Sharon (Gen. xxxvii. 17;
soup. Robinson, iii. 122; Stanley, S. if P. pp.
•47, 200, 481, 486; 1 Chr. xxvii. 29; Is. hv. 10)
were favorite pastures. For luch purpoeee Uzziah
built towers in the wilderness (2 Chr. xxvi. 10).
Not only grass,' but foliage, is acceptable to the
ox, and the hills and woods of Bashan and Gilead
afforded both abundantly; on such upland (Ps. 1.
10; lxr- 12) pastures cattle might graze, as also,
of course, by river sides, when driven by the
beat from the regions of the " wilderness." Es-
pecially was the eastern table-land (Ez. xxxix. 18;
Num. xxxii. 4) " a place for cattle," and the pas-
toral tribes of Reuben, Gad, and half Manasteh
who settled there, retained something of the no-
madic character and handed down some image of
the patriarchal life (Stanley, S. 4 P. pp. 824-5).
Herdsmen, etc., in Egypt were a low, perhaps the
lowest, caste; hence as Joseph's kindred, through
his position, were brought into contact with the
highest castes, they are described as '■ an abomina-
tion;" but of the abundance of cattle in Egypt,
and of the care there bestowed on them, there is
no doubt (Gen. xlrii. 6,17; Ex. ix. 4, 20). Brands
were used to distinguish the owner's herds (Wil-
kinson, iii. 8, 186; ir. 126-131). So the plague
of hail was sent to smite especially the cattle (Ps.
Ixxviii. 48), the first-born of which also were smitten
(Ex. til, 29). The Israelites departing stipulated for
(Ex. x. 26) and took •' much cattle " with them (xil.
38). [Wourami or Wahdekuo.] Cattle
A ddbrmad oxherd, so rtpiettutsd to mark oontempt.
armed thus one of the traditions of the Israelitish
amtion in Ha greatest period, and became almost s
•art of that greatness. They an the object of
• la Nan. sxfl. 4, the word fTT, In A. T. <* iraai,"
ajaur Muds* all TSgstattoa. 'drrrp. Ex. z 15, It.
nxra. 27; Oats, dt R. R. o. 80; Tarn, it R. R. L
ICandlfi. TSn.Jobvffl. 12, xl. U, stems uwl
M a akprfaaatkm «qiaUy wld>. [Oasts.]
* labbis oUhr on the qowoVm whttntf the ovmer
at ass aatmal was under (Us saactment Uabtt or not
providential care and legislative ordinance (Ex. xx
10, xxL 28,* xxxir. 19; Lev. xix. 19, xxr. 7; Deut
xi. 15, xxii 1, 4, 10, xxr. 4; Pa. civ. 14; Is. xxx.
23; Jon. It. 11), and even the Levites, though not
holding land, were allowed cattle (Num. xxxv. 2.
3). When pasture failed, a mixture of various
grains (called, Job vi. 5, V??, rendered "fodder"
In the A. V., and, Is. xxx.' 24, "provender;"'
oomp. the Roman farrago and oegmnm. PUn. xvill.
10 and 42) was used, as also ]3C1, "chopped
straw" (Gen. xxiv. 26; Is. xi. 7, Ixv. 25), which
was torn in pieces by the threshing-machine and
used probably for feeding In stalls. These last
formed an important adjunct to cattle-keeping, be-
ing indispensable for shelter at certain seasons (Ex.
ix. 6, 19). The herd, after its harvest-duty was
done, which probably caused it to be in high con-
dition, was specially worth caring for ; at the same
time most open pastures would have failed because
of the heat. It was then probably stalled, and
would continue so until vegetation returned. Hence
the failure of "the herd" from "the stalls" is
mentioned as a feature of scarcity (Hab. 111. 17).
"Calves of the stall" (Mai. iv. 2; Prov. XT. 17)
are the objects of watchful care. The Reubenitee,
etc., bestowed their cattle " In cities " when they
passed the Jordan to share the tolls of conquest
(Deut iii. 19), i. e. probably In some pastures
closely adjoining, like the " suburbs " appointed for
the cattle of the Levites (Num. xxxv. 2, 3; Josh.
xxi. 2). Cattle were ordinarily allowed as a prey
in war to the captor (Deut. xx. 14; Josh. viiL
2), and the can of Amalck ta ex-
ceptional, probably to mark the
extreme curse to which that people
was devoted (Ex. xvii. 14; 1 Sam.
xt. 3). The occupation of herds
man was honorable in early times
(Gen. xlvii. 8; 1 Sam. xi. 6: 1 Chr
xxrli. 29, xxviil. 1). Saul himself
assumed it In the Interval of his
cares as king; also Doeg was cer-
tainly high in his confidence (1 Sam.
xxi. 7). Pharaoh made some cf
Joseph's brethren "rulers over h's
cattle." David's herd-masters wets
nTnxtoaon.) among "ta chief officers of state. In
Solomon's time the relative import-
ance of the pursuit declined as commerce grew, but
It was still extensive (Eccl. 11. 7; 1 K. It. 28). II
must have greatly suffered from the inroads of th»
liable. Sea dt Rt Run. Viuntm Httntcnm, e. H. .
Ufollnf rxte.
e The word stems to bs derived from T2 3, s»mU.
The pas s ag e in Isaiah probably meant that la tat
abundant yield of the crops the cattle should tat of
the bavt, sash as was anally eonramtd by nap
Digitized by
Google
1046 HKRK8
enemies to which the country under the later kings
H Judmli and Israel was exposed. Urtiah, however,
(9 Chr. zzvi. 10), and Hexeklah (xxxii. 88, 90),
resuming command of the open country, revived It.
Joaiah also aeemt to have been rich in herdi (zzzv.
7-6). The prophet Amoa at fint followed this
occupation (Am. i. 1, vii. 14). A sad wai need
(Judg. iil. 31; 1 Sam. xiH. 81, I^^P, 7*?7?)>
being, as mostly, a staff armed with a spike. "For
the word Herd aa applied to swine, aee Swinb;
and on the general subject, Ugolini, xxix., de R. R.
veU. Hebr. c. li., which will be found nearly ex-
haustive of It. H. H.
HEUES (Is. xJx. 18; A. V. "destruction " or
• the aun " )• See Ib-ha-hkres.
HETtB8H (ffn£.= <irr#c«r: 'AfWiti [Vat
Po/mui)\;] Alex. ApYi; carpentarhu), a Levite;
one of the ataff attached to the tabernacle (1 Chr.
fat. 16).
HER-MAS f Emmu, from 'E^wjt, the '• Greek
god of gain," or Mercury), the name of a person
to whom St Paul sends greeting in his Epistle to
the Romans (xvi. 14), and consequently then resi-
dent in Rome, and a Christian: and yet the origin
of the name, like that of the other four mentioned
In the same verse, is Greek. However, in those
days, even a Jew, like St. 1*ru1 himself, might ac-
quire Roman citizenship. Irenaeus, Tertullian, and
Origen, agree in attributing to him the work called
the Shepherd: which, from the name of Clement
occurring in it, is supposed to have been written in
the pontificate of Clement I.; while others affirm
it to have been the work of a namesake in the fol-
lowing age, and brother to Pius I. ; others again
have argued against its genuineness. (Cave, Hut.
Lit. s. v.; Bull, Dejcnt. Fid. JVtc. i. 2, 8-«; Din-
dorf, Prajf'. ad Herma PatL) From internal
evidence, its author, whoever be was, appears to
have been a married man and father of a family :
a deep mystic, but without ecclesiastical rank.
Further, the work in question is supposed to have
been originally written in Greek — in which lan-
guage it is frequently cited by the Greek Fathers —
though it now only exist* entire in a Latin version." 1
It was never received into the canon ; but yet was
generally cited with respect only second to that
which was paid to the authoritative books of the
N. T., and was held to be in some sense inspired
(Caillau's /We*, torn. i. p. 17). It may be atyled
the Pilgrim'* Proyrtts of ante-Nicene timea ; and
is divided into three parts: the first containing
four visions, the second twelve moral and spiritual
precepts, and the third ten similitudes, each in-
tended to shadow forth some verity (Caillau, ibid.).
Every man, according to this writer, is attended by
a goud and bad angel, who are continually attempt-
ing to affect his course through life; a doctrine
which forcibly recalls the fable of Prodicus respect-
rig the choice of Hercules (Xenoph. Mem. ii. 1).
The Hennas of the Epistle to the Romans is
celebrated as a saint in the Roman calendar on
May 9 (IkiUer'a Lives of <Ae Saints, May 9).
E.S. Ft
a • Nearly the whola of the Greek text of the Sirp-
terat has now been recovered from a manuscript found
at Mount Athos by Oonstanane Btmonldee, and a con-
sstsrable purtjpo or the work Is preserved In the Codex
BUmtiem published by Tuchendorf Id 1882. The
I ant was first published by Aager and Dtndorf
HBRMOH
HEJt/MES ('Zofiijt), the name of a man acta*
tioned in the same epistle with the preceding (Bern,
xvi. 14). " According to the Greeks," says Calmer'
(Diet. a. v.), " be was one of the Seventy disciples
and afterwards Bishop of Dalmatia." His festival
occurs in their calendar upon April 8 (Neale, East-
ern Church, ii. 774). E. S. Ff.
* HErVMES, Acts xiv. 19. [Mkbcvbt.]
HERMOCENES ('Ej>*ury«Vi»i) [for* of
Hermei], a person mentioned by St. Paul in the
latest of all his epistles (9 Tim. 1. 15; see Abend's
Proleg. e. vii. § 80), when "all in Asia" (i. t.
those whom be had left there) " had tamed away
from him," and among their number " Phygelhu
and Hermogenes." It does not appear whether
they had merely forsaken his cause, now that he
was in bonds, through fear, like those of whom St.
Cyprian treats in his celebrated work De LaptU ;
or whether, like Hymenseus and Philetua (total eh.
Ii. 18), they had embraced false doctrine. It is
just possible that there may be a contrast intended
between these two seta of deserters. According to
the legendary history, bearing the name of Abdiaa
(Fshricii Cod. Apocryph. N. T. p. 517), Hermog-
enes had been a magician, and was, with Philetua,
converted by St. James the Great, who destroyed
the charm of his spells. Neither the Heraiogenes,
who suffered in the reign of Domitian (Hofmann,
Lex. Univ. s. v.; Alfbrd on 9 Tim. i. 15), nor the
Hermogenes against whom Tertullian wrote — still
less toe martyrs of the Greek calendar (Neale,
Eattern Church, ii. p. 770, January 24, and p.
781, September 1) — are to be confounded with the
person now under notice, of whom nothing more
is known. E. S. Ft
HER'MON (?<BTJ [prominent, lofty]:
'Atp/i&y. [Herman]), a mountain on the north-
eastern border of Palestine (Deut. iii. 8; Josh. xii.
1), over against Lebanon (Josh. xi. 17), adjoining
the plateau of Bashan (1 Chr. v. 93). Its situa-
tion being thus clearly denned in Scripture, there
can be no doubt as to its identity. It stands at
the southern end, and is the culminating point of
the Anti-Libanus range ; it towers high above the
ancient border-city of Dan and the fountains of the
Jordan, and is the niust conspicuous and beautiful
mountain in Palestine or Syria. The name Her-
man was doubtless suggested by Its appearance—
" a lofty prominent peak," visible from afar
(7"VD"in has the same meaning as the Arabic
r--. *>■ )j just as Lebanon was suggested by the
white character of its limestone strata. Other
names were also given to Hermon, each in lice
manner descriptive of some striking feature. The)
Sidonians called it Straw CjV-llf, from rHXT,
'to glitter"), and the Amorites Sentr P^tp,
fjromljl^ "to clatter"), both signifying "I*
plate," and suggested by its rounded glittering top.
when the sun's rays were reflected by the snow that
covers it (Deut iii. 9; Cant iv. 8; Ex. xxvii. B).
at Uipsle In I860, better by Ttochendocf in Dresser's
Puirn Apouolici, lips. 1867 (2d ad. with the readme*
of the Cod. Sin. 1868) ; but the best edition Is that of
HUgenMd, Faac. III. of his Novym Taumentum asm
C at u m t m netfUmt, lips. 1886. A.
Digitized by
Google
HERMON
ft was alio named Sim, "the derated" (]V*»)
I— lllg over all its compeers (Deut iv. 48). 8r
•sir, at the present da;, it in callec Jebel uh~Shaih
( avA.1I Ju^a-), "the chief mountain" — a
name it well deserves ; and Jebel tih-Thdj
( xj M J^^)> "enowy mountain," which
erarj man who am it will say is peculiarly appro-
priate. When the whole country is parched with
the summer-sun, white line* of enow streak the
head of Harmon. This mountain was the great
landmark of the Israelite!. It was associated with
their northern border almost as intimately as the
sen was with the western (see Q? in Ex. xxvii.
19, A. V. " west; " Josh. viii. 9). They conquered
all the land east of the Jordan, "from the river
Anion unto Mount Hennon " (Deut iii. 8, iv. 48;
Josh. li. 17). Baal-gad, the border-city before
Dan became historic, is described as " under Mount
Hermon" (Josh. xiii. 5, li. 17); and when the
half-tribe of Manasaeh conquered their whole al-
lotted territory, they are said to have " increased
from Bsahan unto Baal-hermon and Senir, and
unto Mount Hermon " (1 Chr. r. 33). In one
passage Hermon would almost seem to be used to
signify "north," as the word "sea" (E*) is for
"west"— "the north and the south Thou hast
trea t e d them ; Tabor and Hennon shall rejoice in
thy name" (Pa. Ixxxix. 12). The reason of this
ia obvious. From whatever part of Palestine the
Israelite turned his eyes northward, Hermon was
there, terminating the view. From the plain along
the coast, from the mountains of Samaria, from
the Jordan valley, from the heights of Moab and
Gilead, from the plateau of Bashan, that pale-blue,
snow-capped cone forms the one feature on the
northern horizon. The " dew of Hennon " is once
referred to in a passage which has long been con-
sidered a geographical puzzle — " As the dew of
Hermon, the dew that descended on the mountains
ef Zkm" (Ps. cxzziii. 3). Son (jVS) is prob-
ably used here for Sim (^H'ttJ), one of the old
names of Hennon (Deut. ir. 48). " The snow on
the summit of this mountain condenses the vapors
that float during the summer in the higher regions
of the atmosphere, causing light clouds to hover
around it, and abundant dew to descend on it,
while the whole country elsewhere is parched, and
the whole heaven elsewhere cloudless.
Hennon has three summits, situated like the
angles of a triangle, and about a quarter of a mile
from each other. They do not diner much in de-
ration. This may account for the expression in
Ps. xlJi. 7 (6), " I will remember thee from the land
af the Jordan and the Bermau (D''fU3"iri) -
asrbaps aha for the three appellations in 1 Chr. v.
fcd. On one of the summits are curious and inter-
acting ruins. Round a rock which forms the crest
of the peak are the foundations of a ruoe circular
waD, composed of massive stones; and w.Jiin the
sirde ia a large heap of hewn stones, surrounding
«• It I* acateat tab eqotvalanes that the consonants
set dtflarent (see above) and that the msantngs an dli
•■ant (Jolty : umny, bright). BisMss, ft make the tfcnr
■T n s sia i u Ml upon Itself randan what Mlows Irrsi
HERMOU 1047
the remains of a small and very ancient tempi*.
This is evidently one of those " high places," whlefc
the old inhabitants of Palestine, and the Jews fre-
quently In imitation of them, set up " upon every
high mountain and upon every hill " (Deut. xii. 3;
3 K. xrii. 10, U). In two passages of Scripturs
this mountain is called BaaUiermm (vJ9
PEHO, Judg. iii 8; 1 Chr. v. 33;; and the
only reason that can be assigned for it is that Baal
was there worshipped. Jerome says of it, " did-
turque m vera'ce ejtu inrigne templum, quod ab
ethnids cultui habetur a regione Paneadis et Li-
bani " — reference must here be made to the build-
ing whose ruins are still seen ( (hum. s. v. Hermm\
It is remarkable that Hermon was anciently en-
compassed by a circle of temples, all facing the
tummil. Can it be that this mountain was the
great sanctuary of Baal, and that it was to the
old Syrians what Jerusalem was to the Jews, and
what Mekkah is to the Muslems? (See Handb.
for Syr. and PaL 464, 467 ; Roland, Pal p. 338
IT.)
The height of Hermon has never been measured,
though it has been often estimated. It ia unques-
tionably the second mountain in Syria, ranking
next to the summit of Lebanon near the Cedars,
and only a few hundred feet lower than it. It
may solely be estimated at 10,000 feet. It rises
up an obtuse truncated cone, from 3000 to 3000
feet above the ridges that radiate from it — thus
having a more commanding aspect than any other
mountain in Syria. The cone is entirely naked.
A coating of disintegrated limestone covers the
surface, rendering it smooth and bleak. The snow
never disappears from its summit. In spring and
early summer the top is entirely covered. As sum-
mer advances the snow gradually mdts from the
tops of the ridges, but remains in long glittering
streaks in the ravines that radiate from the centre,
looking in the distance like the white locks that
scantily cover the bead of old age. (See Five
Yeare in Damatcm, vol. i.)
A tradition, originating apparently about the
time of Jerome (Rdand, p. 326), gave the name
Hermon to the range of Jebtl td-Duhy near Tabor,
the better to explain Ps. lxxxix. 12. The name
still continues in the monasteries of Palestine, and
has thus crept into books of travel. [Gilboa,
note.] J. L. P.
* But few of the travellers in Syria have gone lo
the top of Hennon, and the view from it has not
been often described. We are indebted to Mr.
Tristram for the following sketch (Land of Israel,
p. 614, Sded.): —
" We were at last on Hermon, whose snowy head
had been a sort of pole-star for the last atx months.
We had looked at bim from Sidon, from Tyre,
from Carmd, from Uerizim, from the hills about
Jerusalem, from the Dead Sea, from Gilead, and
from Nebo; and now we were looking down on
them all, as they stood out from the embossed map
that lay spread at our feet. The only drawback mi
a light fleecy ekmd which stretched from Camel's
top all along tb» Lebanon, UD it rested upon Jtbti
Awm, dose to Baal-bee. But it lifted sufficiently
event ; for w» can refer the Massing and On spiritual
life spoken of only to Son, the sar-vd awant. Bat
I, m Daw or. H.
Digitized by
Google
1048
HERMON
to ghc us a peep of the Mediterranean in three
aztces, and amongst them of Tyre. There was a
baas, too, over the Gkor so that we could only
see as far as Jtbel Ajlin and Uilead ; but Lakes
Huleh and (Jennesaret, sunk in the depths beneath
us, and reflecting the sunlignt, were magnificent.
We could scarcely realize that at one glance we
were taking in the whole of the land through which,
for more than six months, we had been incessantly
wandering. Not less striking were the views to
the north and east, with the head waters of the
Awaj (Pharpar) rising beneath us, and the Bnrarla
(Abana), in the far distance, both rivers marking
the courses of their fertilizing streams by the deep
green lines of verdure, till the eye rested on the
brightness of Damascus, and then turned up the
«1de opening of Cade-Syria, until shut in by Leb-
anon.
11 A ruined temple of Baal, constructed of squared
stones arranged nearly in a circle, crowns the high-
est of the three peaks of Hermon, all very dose
together. We spent a great part of the day on
the summit, but were before long painfully affected
ny the rarity of the atmosphere. The sun had
sunk behind I-ebanon before we descended to our
tents, but long after we had lost him he continued
to paint and gild Hermon with a beautiful ming-
ling of Alpine and desert hues."
Mr. Porter, author of Five Yean in Damascus,
ascended Hermon in 1852. For an extended ac-
count of the incidents and results of the exploration,
see BibL Sacra, xi. 41-66. See the notices, also,
In Mr. Porter's Hand/wok, ii. 463 ff. Thomson
(Land and Book, ii. 438) speaks of his surprise at
finding that from the shores of the Dead Sea he
bad a distinct view of " Mount Hermon towering
to the sky far, far up the 67<or to the north," It
was a new evidence, he adds, that Moses also could
have sera Hermon (Deut. xxxir. 1 ff.) from the
mountains of Moab [Nebo, Amer. ed.].
Sirion or Shirion, the Sidonian name of Hermon,
signifies a " breast-plate," or •' coat of mail; " and
if (as assumed above), It be derived from H~^
••to glitter," " it refers, naturally, not to any sup-
posed resemblance of figure or shape, but to the
shining appearance of that piece of armor. Her-
mon answers remarkably to that description. An
seen at a distance through the transparent atmos-
phere, with the snow on its summit and stretching
in long lines down its declivities, It glows and
sparkles under the rays of the sun as if robed in a
vesture of silver.
It is altogether probable that the Saviour's trans-
figuration took place on some one of the heights
rf Hermon. The Evangelists relate the occurrence
■n connection with the Saviour's visit to Ceesarea
Philippi, which was in that neighborhood. Hence
also the healing of the lunatic boy (Luke ix- 87 )
took place at the foot of Hermon. Dean Alford
assumes (Greek Tett. 1. 168) that Jesus had been
Journeying southward from Csesarea Philippi dur-
ing the six or eight days which immediately
preceded the transfiguration, and hence infers that
the high mountain which he ascended must be
sought near Capernaum. Bat that it not the more
obvious view. Neither of the Evangelists says that
« • to Oesnius in Hoffmann's ed. 1847 i but aeeord-
asr to D tot rlc h and Hirst, from n" , P', to wsm to-
(attar, /fast**, ss ir making; a shield. B
HEROD
Jesus was journeying southward during then day*
but, on the contrary, having stilted just before that
Jesus came into >' the parts " (Matt. xvi. 13) at
■' the villages " (Mark viii. 27 ) of Casarea Philippi,
they leave us to understand that he preached dui
ing the time mentioned, in that region, and thet
came to the mountain there on which he was trans
figured. [Tabor.] H.
• HERMON, DEW OF. The dew on this
mountain is proverbially excelleut and abundant
(see Ps. exxxiii. 3). " More copious dew," says Tris-
tram (Land of /trail, p. 008 f. 2d ed. ), " we never
experienced than that on Hermon. Everything
was drenched with it, and the tents were small pro-
tection. The under sides of our macintosh sheets
were in water, our guns were rusted, dew-drops
were hanging everywhere The hot air in
the daytime comes streaming up too Ghor from the
Huleh, while Hermon arrests all the moisture, and
deposits it congealed at nights." As Mr. Porter
states, « one of its hills is appropriately called Tell
Abu b'uly, i. e. ' Father of the Dew,' for the clouds
seem to cling with peculiar fondness round its
wooded top and the little Wely of Sheikh Abu
Ntily, which crowns it" (Handbook, ii. 463).
Van de Velde (Syr. and PaL i. 126) testifies to
this peculiarity of Hermon.
It has perplexed commentators not a little to ex-
plain how the Psalmist (exxxiii. 3) could speak of
the dew of Hermon in the north of Palestine as
falling on Zion in Jerusalem. The A. V. does not
show the difficulty; for the words "and the dew "
being interpolated between the clauses, the dew of
Hermon appears there as locally different from that
which descended on Mount Zion. But the He-
brew sentence will not bear that construction (see
Hupfeld, Die Psalmen, iv. 320). Nor, where the
places are so far apart from each other, can we think
of the dew as carried in the atmosphere from one
place to the other. Hupfeld (ir. 322) suggests that
perhaps " as the dew of Hermon " may be a for-
mula of blessing (comp. the curse on tiilloa, 2 Sam.
i. 21), and as applied here may represent Zion as
realizing the idea of that blessing, both spiritual
and natural, in the highest degree. BlUeher
(AehrenUse turn A. T., p. 68) assumes an appel-
lative sense of }"WS"in, t- e. dew (not of any par-
ticular mountain of that name), but of lofty heiglU
generally, which would include Zion. Hengstr^i-
berg's explanation is not essentially different from
this (Die Ptaimtn, Ir. 83), except that with him
the generalized idea would be = Hermon-dew, in-
stead of = Dew of Hermons. H
HER'MONITES, THE (B»3 , W3"jrj: 'Ep.
/umtlu: I/ermoniim) [in the A. V.]. Properly
the " Hermons," with reference to the three [or
two?] summits of Mount Hermon (Pa. xlii. 6 [7] J
[Hkrmos, p. 1047.] W. A. W.
•HER'MONS (according to the Hebrew)
Ps. xlii. 7 (6). Only one mountain is known ir
the Bible as Hermon; the plural name refers, nt
doubt, to the different summits for which this was
noted. [Hermon.] See also Bob. Phut, (leogr.
p. 847. H.
HER'OD ('Hprffcn, «• «• Hero'des). Tits
Herodus Family The history of the Hero-
dian family presents me side of the last develop-
ment of the Jewish nation. The evils which had
existed in the hierarchy which grew up after tki
Return, found aa unexpected embodiment If the
Digitized by
Google
HJSKOD
granny of ■ foreisn usurper. Keligion wu adopted
ss a policy; and the Uellenixing designs of Anti-
oefaus Epiphanes were carried out, at least in their
spirit, by men who professed to observe the \jm.
Side by side with the spiritual " kingdom of God,"
proclaimed by John the Baptist, and founded by
the Lord, a kingdom of the world was established,
which in its external splendor recalled the tradi-
tional magnificence of Solomon. The simultaneous
realization of the two principles, national and spir-
itual, which had long variously influenced the Jews,
in the establishment of a dynasty and a church, is
a fact pregnant with instruction. In the fullness
of time a descendant of Esau established a false
counterpart of the promised glories of Messiah.
Various accounts are given of the ancestry of the
Herods; but neglecting the exaggerated statements
of friends and enemies, 11 it seems certain that they
were of Idumaean descent (Jos. Ant. xiv. 1, 3), a
&ct which is indicated by the forms of some of the
names which were retained in the family (Ewald,
Gachichte, iv. 477, note). Hut though aliens by
race, the Herods were Jews in faith. The Idu-
nueans had been conquered and brought over to
Judaism by John Hyrcanus (b. c. 130, Jos. Ant.
xiii. 9, § 1 ) ; and from the time of their conversion
they remained constant to their new religion, look-
ing upon Jerusalem as their mother city and claim-
ing fur themselves the name of Jews (Joseph. Aut.
n. 7. $ 7; B. J. i. 10, § 4, ir. 4, § 4).
The general policy of the whole Herodian family,
though modified by the personal characteristics of
the successive rulers, was the same. It centred in
the endeavor to found a great and independent
kingdom, in which the power of Judaism should
subserve to the consolidation of a state. The pro-
tection of Rome was in the first instance a neces-
sity, but the designs of Herod I. and Agrippa I.
point to an independent eastern empire as their
md, and not to a mere subject monarchy. Such a
consummation of the Jewish hopes seems to have
found some measure of acceptance at first [Hk-
kodiabs] ; and by a natural reaction the temporal
dominion of the Herods opened the way to the
destruction of the Jewish nationality. The religion
which was degraded into the instrument of unscru-
pulous ambition lost its power to quicken a united
people. The high-priests were appointed and de-
posed by Herod I. and his successors with such a
reckless disregard for the character of their office
(Jost, Geteh. d. Judentliunu, i. 839, 335, 421),
that the office itself was deprived of its sacred dig-
nity (comp. Acts xxiil. 9 9".; Jost, 430, Ac.). The
nation was divided, and amidst the conflict of sects
s universal faith arose, which more than fulfilled
the nobler hopes that found no satisfaction in the
Weacherous grandeur of a conn.
The family relations of the Herods are singularly
implicated from the frequent recurrence of the
-erne names, and the several accounts of Josephus
art not consistent in every detail. The following
table, however, Stems to offer a satisfactory sum-
« The Jewish parasens of Herod (Nleolaus Dama*-
<enaa. np. Jos. AM. xiv. 1, 8) sought to raise htm to
tbJNUa'nJty of a descent from one of the noble fami-
nes which returned from' Babylon ; and. on the other
hand, early Christian writers mpmseoted his origin as
. tterly mean anil servile. Aftioanos has preserved a
Tadtdon (Sooth, ReU. Sacr. li. p. 235), on the authority
af n the natoml kinsmen of the Savlonr," which make*
tattaeaar, 'he father of Herod, the son of one Herod.
HEROD 1040
mary of his statements. The members rf the
Herodian family who are mentioned in the X. T
are distinguished by capitals.
Josephus is the one great authority for the his-
tory of tbo Herodian family. The scanty notices
which occur in Hebrew and classic writers throw
very little additional light upon the events which
he narrates. Of modem writers Ewald hss treated
the whole subject with the widest and clearest view.
Jost in his several works has added to the records
of Josephus gleanings from later Jewish writers.
Where the original sources are so accessible, mono-
graphs are of little use. The following are quoted
by Winer: Noldii JJitt. Jdumaa . . . Kroneq,
lfiOO; E. Spanhemii SUmma . . . Ilervdis M.,
which <ae reprinted in Harercamp's Jotrphug (ii.
331 ft*.; 409 ft".).
1. Hkkok the Cheat ('HpaWnt) was the sec-
ond son of Antipater, who was appointed procurator
of Judaaa by Julius Caaar, B. c. 47, and Cypros,
an Arabian of noble descent (Joseph. Ant xiv. 7,
§ 3). At the time of his father's elevation, though
only fifteen * years old, he received the government
of Galilee (Joseph. Ant. xiv. 9, § 2), mi shortly
afterwards that of Ode-Syria. When Antony
came to Syria, b. c. 41, he appointed Herod and
his elder brother Phasael tetrarchs of Judtea (Jo-
seph. Ant. xiv. 13, § 1). Herod was farced to
abandon Judtea next year by an invasion of the
Parthians, who supported the claims of Antigonus.
the representative of the Asmonsan dynasty, and
fled to Home (n. c. 40). At Home he was well
received by Antony and Octavian, and was ap-
pointed by the senate king of Judasa to the exclu-
sion of the Hasmonwan line (Joseph. Ant. xiv. 14,
§ 4; App. Bill. C. 89). In the course of a few
years, by the help of the Romans, he took Jerusalem
(B. c. 37), and completely established his authority
throughout his dominions. An expedition which
he was forced to make against Arabia saved him
from taking an active part in the civil war, though
be was devoted to tbo cause of Antony. After the
battle of Actium he visited Octavian at Rhodes,
and his noble bearing won for him the favor of the
conqueror, who confirmed him in the possession of
the kingdom, B. c. 31, and in the next yea. in-
creased it by the addition of several important
cities (Joseph. Ant. xv. 10, § 1 ff.), and afterwards
guve him the province of Trachonitis and the dis-
trict of Paneas (Joseph. Ant 1. c). The remainder
of the reign of Herod was undisturbed by external
troubles, but his domestic life was embittered by
an almost uninterrupted series of injuries and cruel
acts of vengeance. Hyrcanus, the grandfather of
his wife Mariamne, was put to death shortly before
his visit to Augustus. Mariamne herself, to whom
he was passionately devoted, was next sacrificed to
his jealousy. One execution followed another, till
at last, in b. c. 6, he was persuaded to put to death
the two sons of Mariamne, Alexander and Aristo-
bulus, in whom the chief hope of the people lay.
Two years afterwards he condemned to doth An-
a slave attached to the servles of a temple of Apollo at
Aaoalon, who was taken prisoner by Idonuean robbers,
and kept by them, as his father could not pay his ran-
som. The locality (cf. Polio, Leg. ad Caium, § 80)
no Ian than the offloe, was calculated to fix a heavy
reproach upon the name (cf. Ronth, ad lor.). This
story Is repeated with great Inaonuracy by Iplphtnlw
(Hrr. xx.).
6*Dlndorf>ed. of Josephus (f.c.)reads twenty -flv*. A.
Digitized by
Google
1060
HBROD
^f!
he!
£
i
i
!
ei-ei£H
fjH
1
"J
H
il-
7*
■s=l 8
J'
-IL
.■Sii-sl-igS-
t
-€315*
^1
II' 1
I
-I
I
-it
-fiSk-
<l
-fisif
i-4
*i
I ^!
I
3 *
4
e
Hi
-fi
-15*35-
l-l,
I JP = ■
i
I
«
i
t
A
Mi
mi
*4
«3
f
Digitized by
Google
HEROD
r, his eldest son, who hid bean their meet |
setjve accuser, and the order for his execution was
imong the hut acta of Herod's life, for he died
bimaelf five days after the death of hi* eon, B. o.
4, in the same Tear which marks the true date of
the Nativity. [Jesus Christ.]
These terrible sets of bloodshed which Herod
perpetrated in his own family were accompanied by
others among his subjects equally terrible, from the
numbers who fell victims to them. The infirmities
of his later years exasperated him to yet greater
cruelty; and, according to the well-known story,
be ordered the nobles whom he had called to him
in his last momenta to be executed immediately
after his decease, that so- at least his death might
be attended by universal mourning (Joseph. Ant.
xrii. 6, {5). It was at the time of this fetal ill-
ness that he must have caused the slaughter of the
infants at Bethlehem (Matt. ii. 16-18), and from
the comparative insignificance of the murder of a
few young children in an unimportant village when
contrasted with the deeds which he carried out or
designed, it is not surprising that Josephus has
passed it over in silence. The number of children
in Bethlehem and "all the borders thereof" («V
tSc u> tom iplois) may be estimated at about ten
nr twelve; » and the language of the Evangelist
leaves in complete uncertainty the method in which
the deed was effected (i«wrt/Aa» 4>tiW). The
aoene of open and undisguised violence which has
been consecrated by Christian art is wholly at va-
riance with what mar be supposed to have been the
historic reality. At a later time the murder of the
children seems to have been connected with the
death of Antipater. Thus, according to the anec-
dote preserved by Macrobius (c A. o. 410), " Au-
gustas, cum audisset inter pueros quos in Syria
Herodes, Rex Judworum, intra bimatum (Matt. ii.
10; ib. Vulg. a bimntu tt infra) juasit interne!,
filium quoque ejus occisum, ait: Melius est Herodis
porcum esse quam filium " (Macrob. Sat ii. 4)
But Josephus has preserved two very remarkable
references to a massacre which Herod caused to be
made shortly before his death, which may throw
an additional light upon the history. In this it is
said that Herod did not spare " those who seemed
most dear to him " (Ant. xvi. 11, § 7), but "slew
all those of his own family who sided with the
Pharisees (i taptaaios) " in refusing to take the
oath of allegiance to the Roman emperor, while
•Jiey looked forward to a change in the royal One
(Joseph. Art. xrii. 2, § 6; of. Lsrdner, Credibility,
4c, i. 278 ft*., 333 f., 349 f.). How fer this event
.nay have been directly connected with the murder
t Bethlehem it is impossible to say, from the ob-
nrrity of the details, but its occasion and charao-
* throw a great light upon St Matthew's nar-
rative.
In dealing with the religious feelings or preju-
dices of the Jews, Herod showed as great contempt
lor pubHc opinion as in the execution of his per-
sonal vengeance. He signalized his elevation to
the throne by offerings to the Capitoline Jupiter
(Jost, UttcA. d. Jvderthumt, i. 318), and sur-
rounded his parson oy foreign mercenaries, some of
whom had been formerly in the service of Cleopatra
;jos. AM. xt. 7, i 3; xrii. 1, § 1; 8, § 3). His
tains and those of his successors bore only Greek
HEROD
1051
■ The lanfuafenf St. Matthew often an instrrlve
watrast to that of Justin H. (Dial. t. JVypA. 78):
I'Hpitat . . itrrn iftit rovt vaitat v»t
legends; and he introduced heathen games within
the walls of Jerusalem (Jos. Art. xv. 8, § 1). He
displayed ostentatiously his fevor towards foreigners
(Joe. Art. xvi. 5, § 3), and oppressed the old Jew-
ish aristocracy (Jos. Art. xv. 1, § 1). The later
Jewish traditions describe him as successively the
servant of the Hasmonawns and the Romans, and
relate that one Rabbin only survived the persecu-
tion which he directed against them, purchanri,
his life by the loss of sight (Jost, i. 319, At.).
While Herod alienated in this manner the affect
tions of the Jews by his cruelty and disregard for
the Law, he adorned Jerusalem with many splendid
monuments of his taste and ™»gnifin«n««_ The
Temple, which he rebuilt with scrupulous care, so
that it might seem to be a restoration of the old
one rather than a new building (Jos. Art. xv. § 11),
was the greatest of these works. The restoration
was begun B. c. 90, and the Temple itself was com-
pleted in a year and a half (Jos. Art. xv. 11, § 6).
The surrounding buildings occupied eight years
more (Jos. AnL xv. 11, § 5). But fresh addition*
were constantly made in succeeding years, so that
at the time of the Lord's visit to Jerusalem at the
beginning of His ministry, it was said that the
Temple was " built (o)Ko8opf/9») in forty and six
years " (John ii. 30), a phrase which expresses the
whole period from the oommenojment of Herod's
work to the completion of the latest addition then
made, for the final completion of the whole build-
ing is placed by Josephus (Ant. xx. 8, 5 7, Iftt] Si
roV« /to) to Upb-v irrr4\t<rTa) in the time of
Herod Agrippa II. (c. A. D. 60).
Yet even this splendid work was not likely to
mislead the Jews as to the real spirit of the king.
While he rebuilt the Temple at Jerusalem, he re-
built also the Temple at Samaria (Jos. Art. xv. 8,
§ 5), and made provision in his new city Coaarea
for the celebration oi heathen worship (Jos. jIhi
xv. 9, § 6); and it has been supposed (Jost, Geteh.
d. Jvdenth. i. 333) that the rebuilding of the Temple
furnished him with the opportunity of destroying
the authentic collection of genealogies which was
of the highest importance to the priestly families
Herod, as appears from his public designs, affected
the dignity of a second Solomon, but be joined the
license of that monarch to his magnificence; and
it was said that the monument which he raised over
the royal tombs was due to the fear which seised
him after a sacrilegious attempt to rob them of
secret treasures (Jos. Art. xvi. 7, § 1).
It is, perhaps, difficult to see in the ehamcta
of Herod any of the true element* of greatness
Some have even supposed that the title — the great
— is a mistranslation for the elder (N3"l, Jost, I.
319, note ; 6 piym, Ewald, GescA. It. 473, 4e.)|
and yet on the other hand he seems to bars pox
aessed the good qualities of our own Henry Vin
with his rices. He maintained peace at bomb
during a long reign by the rigor and timely gen-
erosity of his administration. Abroad he conciliated
the good-will of the Romans under oirenmstanoes of
unusual difficulty. His ostentatious display and
even his arbitrary tyranny was calculated to inspire
Orientals with awe. Bold and yet prudent, oppress-
ive and yet profuse, he had many of the character
l«tka which make a popular hero; and the title
t. BjftArift MAnrarr ii<a»(K#>imu. Cf. Ollf. «. OI*
. p. 47, ad. Sp.no. 6 U 'Ho*** ii*CA» rim re h
Bv?A«4fi koI tch« opteu ovrirl vmM* . •
Digitized by
Google
1052 HEROD
thick may have been fint given in admiration of
•uccessful despotism now serves to bring out in
dearer contrast the terrible price at which the sao-
eesa was purchased.
Copper Coin of Rand the Gnat.
Qtt HPOJAOY. Bunch of gmpes. Rev. E6NAPXO.
Macedonian helmet : In the field cadoceus.
II. IIkhod Axtii-as ('Krclwrms, 'Arrfmn)
urn the son of Herod the Great by Malthace, a
Samaritan (Jos. Ant. zvii. 1, § 3). His father had
originally destined him as hia successor in the king-
dom (cf. Matt. ii. 22; Arohklaub), but by the
last change of hia will appointed him " tetrarch of
Galilee and l'erasa'' (Joa. Ant. xvii. 8, § 1, 'Ho. d
TfTpipxts, Matt, xiv. 1 ; Luke iii. 19, ix. 7 ; Acta
xiii. 1; cf. Luke iii. 1, Tt*papx»orras tt)» roAi-
Kaias 'Hp.l, which brought him a yearly revenue
of 300 talents (Joa. Ant. zvii. 13, § 4; cf. Luke viii.
3, Xou{a iwirpirov "Up.)- He first married
i daughter of Aretas, " king of Arabia l'etreea,"
but after some unie (Jos. Ant. zviii. 5, $ 1) he
made overtures of marriage to Herodias, the wife
of hia half-brother Herod-Philip, which she received
favorably. Aretas, indignant at the insult offered
to his daughter, found a pretext for invading the
territory of Herod, and defeated him with great
loss (Joa. I c). This defeat, according to the famous
passage in Joaephua (Ant. xviii. 5, § 2), was attrib-
uted by many to the murder of John the Baptist,
which had been committed by Antipaa shortly
before, under the influence of Herodias (Matt. xiv.
4 ff.; Mark vi. 17 ff.; Luke iii 19). At a later
time the ambition of Herodiaa proved the cause
of her husband's ruin. She urged him to go to
Rome to gain the title of king (cf. Mark vi. 14, i
fia<ri\tbs 'Up. by courtesy), which had been
granted to hia nephew Agrippa; but he waa opposed
at the court of Caligula by the emissaries of Agrippa
[Hkkod Aubippa], and oondemned to perpetual
banishment at Lugdunum, A. D. 39 (Jos. Ant. xviii.
7, § 2), whence he appears to have retired after-
wards to Spain (B. J. ii. 9, § 6 ; but see note on
p. 796). Herodiaa voluntarily shared hia punish
meut, and be died in exile. [Hkkodiab.]
Pilate look occasion from our Lord's residence
hi Galilee to send Him for examination (Luke xxiii.
8 ff.)to Herod Antipaa, who came up to Jerusalem
to celebrate the Passover (cf. Jos. Ant. xviii. 6, § 3),
and thus heal the feud which had existed between
the tetrarch and himself (Luke xxiii. 12; cf. Luke
xiii. 1, w«sl Tatr TaAiAaW, Sir to al]ua niAaror
"u{fr m*t& rt> eWiic canmv)." The share
»hich Antipas thus took in the Passion is specially
noticed in the Acta (iv. 27) in connection with Pa.
ii. 1, 2. Hia character, aa it appears in the Gospels,
HEROD
answers to the general tenor of his fife. Hewaaoa-
scrupulous (Luke iii. 19, xtpl w&rrmr iv irolnvn
vornpuv), tyrannical (Luke xiii. 31), and weak
(Matt. xiv. 9). Yet hia cruelty waa marked by
cunning (Luke xiii. 32, r§ aAtircai rairp), and
followed by remorse (Man vi. 14). In contrast
with Pilate he presents the type of an Eastern
despot, capricious, sensual, and superstitious. This
last element of superstition is both natural and
dearly marked. For a time "be heard John
gladly " (Mark vi. 20), and waa anxious to are
Jesus (Luke ix. 9, xxiii. 8), in the expectation, aa it
is said, of witnessing some miracle wrought by Him
(Luke xiii. 31, xxiii. 8).
The city of Tibkmab, which Antipaa founded
and named in honor of the emperor, waa the moat
conspicuous monument o' hia long reign; but, like
toe rest of the Herodian family, he showed his
passion for building cities in several places, restor-
ing Seppboria, near Tabor, which had been de-
stroyed in the wars after the death of Herod the
Great (Joa. Ant. xvii. ]2, § 9; xviii. 2, § 1) and
Betbaramphtha (Beth-haram) in Penea, which be
named Julias, "from the wife of the emperor"
(Jos. Ant. xviii. 2, 1 ; Hieron. Euaeb. Chron. a. d.
29, lAvias).
III. AitCHKLAUS C&pxfaaos [ruler of At
ptapW\) was, like Herod Antipas, the sou of Herod
the Great and Malthace. He was brought up with
hia brother at Home (Joseph. Ant. xvii. 1, § 3),
and in consequence of the accusations of his eldest
brother Antipater, the son of Doris, he waa ex-
cluded by his father's will from any share in hia
dominions. Afterwards, however, by a second
change, the "kingdom" waa left to him, which
had been designed for his brother Antipaa (Joseph.
Ant. xvii. 8, $ 1), and it was this unexpected
arrangement which led to the retreat of Joseph to
Galilee (Matt. ii. 22). Archelaus did not enter on
his power without strong opposition and bloodshed
(Joseph. Ant. xvii. 9); but Augustus confirmed the
will of Herod in its essential provisions, and gave
Archelaus the government of " Idumaea, Judsea,
and Samaria, with the cities of Caesarea, Sebaste,
Joppa, and Jerusalem " (Joseph. AnU xvii. 13, § 6),
which produced a revenue of 400 (Joseph. B. J. ii.
6, § 3) or 600 talents (Ant. xvii. 13, 5). For the
time he received the title of Ethnarch, with the
promise of that of king, if he proved worthy of it
(Joseph. I. c). His conduct justified the fears
which hia character inspired. After violating the
Mosaic law by the marriage with Glaphyra, his
brother's widow (Joseph. Ant. xvii. 13, $ 1), he
roused his subjects by his tyranny and cruelty to
appeal to Rome for redress.' Augustus at once
summoned him to his presence, and after his cause
waa heard he was banished to Vienne in Gaul
(a. d. 7), where probably be died (Joseph. L c. ;
cf. Strab. xvi. p. 765; Dio Case. Iv. 27); though
in the time of Jerome, hia tomb waa shown near
Bethlehem (OnomaiHcon).
IV. Hkbod Philip I. (vfAnra-os, Mark vi. 17)
waa the son of Herod the Great, and Mariamne ths
e * Pilate's sending Jesus to Herod seems to have
bean an expedient merely to dispose of the ewe, if pos-
sibly he might do no, Id that way. Herod, conciliated
by an apparent act of courtesy, may then have made
advances on his part to the procurator, which led to
tbe reiteration of a better understanding between
Asm. That It was their common enmity to Christ
afcfch made Herod and Pilate friends on Una oooaelon
(as Is often asld) does not agree with the manttan
anxiety of Pilate to release Jesus. V
» • Of this character of Archelaus Matthew's state
■sent (U. 22) furnishes a significant Intimation. On
returning from Egypt Joseph evidently meant to ga
directly to Bethlehem ; out hearing that Arehelaue had
succeeded Herod rather than some other one of bji
son*, ho avoided that place and proceeded to flamss
Digitized by
Google
HEROD
jasigattr at a high-priest Simon (Joseph. Ant xviii.
I, 4), and most be carefully distinguished from the
satrarrh Philip. [Herod Philip II.] He married
Kxodias, the sister of Agrippa I., by whom be had
a daughter Salome. Herodias, however, left him,
and made an infamous marriage with his half-
brother Herod Antipas (Matt lit. 8; Mark ri. 17;
Luke iii. lit). He is called only Herod by Josephua,
but the repetition of the name Philip is fully justi-
fied by the frequent recurrence of names in the
Herodian family (e. g. Antipater). The two Philips
were confounded by Jerome (ad Matt L «.)•, and
the confusion wss the more essy, because the son
of Mariamne wss excluded from all share in his
Esther's possessions (ttjj Jio^mjt ^AsnfwK) in
consequence of his mother's treachery (Joseph. B.
J. i. 30, § 7), and lived afterwards in a private
station.
Y. Herod Philip II. (♦(Aimroj) was the son
af Herod the Great and Cleopatra ('Ifpoc-oAuuiVir )•
like his half-brothers « Antipas and Archelaus, he
was brought up at Koine (Joseph. Ant xvii. 1, § 3),
sad on the death of his father advocated the claims
of Archelaus before Augustas (Joseph. B. J. ii. 6,
1 1). He received as his own government « Batanoa,
Trachonitia, Auranitis (Ganlonitis), and some parts
about Jamnia " (Joseph. B. J. ii. 6, § 3), with
the title of tetrarch (Luke iii. 1, 4>i/Jinrot> . . .
Trrpapxovyrot riji 'Irovpoiai Kal Tpax"viriSoi
X*Vav)- His rule wis distinguished by justice and
moderation (Joseph. Ant. zviii. 4, § 6), and he ap-
pears to have devoted himself entirely to the duties
of his office without sharing in the intrigues which
disgraced his family (Joseph. Ant xviii. 6, 6). He
built a new city on the site of Panes*, near the
sources of the Jordan, which he called Caesarea
(Koio-optfa *, ♦iaIts-ou, Matt. xvi. 13; Mark viii.
27), and raised firthsaida (in lower Gaulonitis) to
the rank of a city under the title of Julias (Joseph.
Aid. ii. 9, § 1; xviii. 9, § 1), and died there A. D.
34 (xviii. 5, § 6). He married Salome, the daugh-
ter of Philip (1.) and Herodias (Ant. xviii. 6, § 4),
but as he left no children at his death his dominions
were added to the Roman province of Syria (xviii.
6, § 8).
VI. Herod Agrippa I. ('Hpattni, Acts ;
Aypimt. Joseph.) was the son of Aristobulus
and Berenice, and grandson of Herod the Great.
He was brought up at Rome with Claudius and
Drusue, and after a life of various vicissitudes
(Joseph. Ant xviii. 7), was thrown into prison by
Tiberius for an unguarded speech, where he re-
saained till the accession of Cains (Caligula) A. D.
J7. The new emperor gave him the governments
formerly held by the tetrarchs Philip and Lrsanias.
and bestowed on him the ensigns of royalty and
other marks of favor (Acts xti. 1, 'Ho. 6 jSaa-iAcvi )•
The jealousy of Herod Antipas and his wife Herodias
was excited by these distinctions, and tney sailed
to Rome in the hope of supplanting Agrippa in the
emperor's favor. Agrippa was aware of their de-
sign, and anticipated it by a counter-charge against
Antipas of treasonous correspondence with the
Parthian*. Antipas failed to answer the accusation,
HEROD
1058
* Jos. Jut. xvtt. 8, J 1 Jessphns sails PtriUp
** X tKiom Aa s s Ae i irk*** i hot risewbsr* be stasis
» JmHO—tk. 4. Judtntkmm, I. 420) quotas a Iq^nJ
<ka* Agrippa bant Into tsars on reading In ■ public
Santas Dsat xvil. lit; whereupon Cos people cried
sot,"»actifl*i— «i, sylapa.thonartoor brother"
and was banished to Gaul (A. D. 89), and his
dominions were added to those already held by
Agrippa (Joseph. Ant. xviii. 7, $ 9). Afterwards
Agrippa rendered important ser vices to Claudius
(Joseph. B. J. ii. 11, §§ 9, 3), and received from
him in return (a. d. 41) the government of Judaea
and Samaria; so that his entire dominions equaled
in extent the kingdom of Herod the Great. Unlike
his predecessors, Agrippa wss a strict observer of
the Ijrw (Joseph. Ant. xix. 7, § 8), and ho sought
with success the favor of the Jews.* It is probable
that it was with this view • he put to death James
the son of Zebedee, and further imprisoned Peter
(Acta xii. 1 IT.) But his sudden de-ith, w'lich U
lowed immediately afterwards, interrupted} his am-
bitious projects.
In the fourth year of Us reign over the wh '*
of Judasa (A. D. 44) Agrippa attended some garnx
at Caesarea, held in honor of the emperor. When
he appeared in the theatre (Joseph. Ant xix. 8, § 9,
Sivr4ptf tow ffotpiaV tyWpa; Acts xii. 91, Taxrf
rifiipf) in "o robe of silver stuff (/{ ipyipm
wrwoirinirnv sraow, Joseph. ; «Vrf qra /Sae-i Aunjv,
Acts xii. 91) which shone in the morning light,
his flatterers saluted him sa a god ; and suddenly
he was seized with terrible pains, and being carried
from the theatre to the palace died after five dayi
agony (la)' fiftipai wsVre vs? rqt yturrpks AAyifr-
part Supyair$tlt rhv f&o» Kariorpwtytr, Joseph.
Ant. xix. 8; yiviiuvos aKttKtiiti&perroi lltyvfer,
Acts xii. 93; cf. 9 Mace. ix. 6-0).
By a singular and instructive confusion Euse-
blus (H. K. ii. 10; cf. Heinichen, Axe. 9, ad loc.)
converts the owL which, according to Josephua, ap-
peared to Herod as a messenger of evil {byyKoi
kokwv) into " the angel " of the Acts, who was thi
unseen minister of the Divine Will (Acts xii. 98,
triratty airrbv aVwAot Kvplovi cf. 9 K. xix. 86,
LXX.).
Various conjectures hare been made as to the
occasion of the festival at which the event took
place. Josephua ('. c. ) says that it was in " behalf
of the emperor's safety,'' sod it has been supposed
that it might be in connection with his return from
Britain; but this is at least very uncertain (cf.
Wieseler, Chron. d. Apott. ZaL p. 131 ff). Jose-
phus mentions also the concourse " of the chief men
throughout the province " who were present on the
occasion ; and though he does not notice the em-
bassy of the Tyrkuis and Agrippa's speech, yet his
narrative is perfectly consistent with both facts.
VII. Hekoii Aokippa II. CAwfrra, N. T.
Joseph.) wss the son of Herod Agrippa 1. and Cy-
pres, a grand-niece of Herod the Great At the
time of the death of his father, a. d. 44, he was at
Rome, and his youth (he was 17 years old) pre
vented Claudius from carrying oat hb first inter*
tion of appointing him his father's successor (Jo-
seph. Ant. xix. 9, H 1, 9). Not long afterwards
however, the emperor gave him (e. A. i>. 50) the
kingdom of Chalcis, which had belonged to bit
uncle (who died A. D. 48; Joseph. Ant XX. 4, § 9;
B. J. it. 12, § 1); and then transferred him (A. i>.
59) to the tetrarchies formerly held by Philip and
In virtue, that Is, of hl» halMssssnt from the Us»
c Jest (p. 421, Kc.\ who objects that these sals an
Inconsistent with the known hunuralt/ of Agrippa,
entirely neglects the rsasso suasjulil ay M. Lake
(Aca x||. 8)
Digitized by
Google
1054
UEBODIAITS
Lysenias (Joseph. Ant. xz. 6, § 1; B. J. U. 19, §
8), with the title of king (Acta xxv. 18, 'Ayptmt
i /Soo-iAnSi, zzvi. z, 7, Ac.).
Nero afterwards increased the dominions of
Agrippa by the addition of several cities {Ant. xx.
6, J 4) ; and he displayed the lavish magnificence
irhiih marked his family by costly buildings at
Jerusalem and Berytua, in both cases doing violence
to the feelings of the Jews (Ant. xx. 7, § 11 ; 8,
§ i ). The relation in which he stood to his sister
Berenice (Acts xzv. 13) was the cause of grave sus-
picion (Joseph. Ant. xz. 6, § 3), which was noticed
by Juvenal (Sal. vi. 155 ff.). In the last Roman
war Agrippa took part with the Romans, and after
the fall of Jerusalem retired with Berenice to Rome,
where he died in the third year of Trajan (a. d.
100), being the last prince of the house of Herod
(Phot. Cod. 88).
Copper Coin of Herod Agrippa U. with Titus
Obv. : AYTOKPTITOC KAICAPCBBA. Head lau-
reate to the right. Rev. : ETO KS BX AITinnA
(year 26). Victory advancing to the right : in the
field a star.
i
The appearance of St. Paul before Agrippa (a.
d. 60) offers several characteristic traits. Agrippa
seems to have been Intimate with Festus (Joseph.
Ant. xx. 7, § 11); and it was natural that the Ro-
man governor should avail himself of his judgment
on a question of what seemed to be Jewish law
(Acts xzv. 18 ff., 26; cf. Joseph. Ant. xx. 8, § 7).
The "pomp" (weAAl) Aarraa-U) with which the
king came into the audience chamber (Acts xxv.
33) was accordant with his general bearing; and
the cold irony with which he met the impassioned
words of the Apostle (Acta xxvi. 27, 28) suits the
temper of one who was contented to take part in
the destruction of his nation. B. F. W.
Yin. Berenice. [Berenice.]
DC. Dbusilla. [Drusilla.]
HEHO'DIANS ('HpuSuwol: [fienooW)).
In the account which is given by St- Matthew
(xxii. 15 ff.) and St. Mark (lii. 13 ff.) or the last
efforts made by different sections of the Jews
to obtain from our Lord himself the materials for
his accusation, a party under the name of Htro-
tUaru is represented as acting in concert with the
Pharisees « (Matt xxii. 16; Mark xii. 13). St
n Orlgen (dim. in Matt. torn. xvtl. § 26) regards
this combination of the Huodlans and Pharisees as a
eombioatiou of antagonistic parties, the one favorable
to the Iloman government (ei/coc yap ori iv ry Aa<j> tot*
m niv otSaffKoire* r<Actv rop $6pw Kaurapi ckoAovvto
'Hpuo'tarOi vn-6 nwt» fii) *«AdVr*»l» TOVTO ytrffftfat . . . )i
and the other opposed to It ; bat this view, which Is
only conjectural (?i«6f ), does not offer a complete solu-
tion of the various relations of the Herodians to the
other parties of the times. Jerome, following Origan,
limits Che meaning of the term yet more : " Cum He-
rodlaoij, Id eat, niilldbus Hcrodla, aeu quos illudentas
Pharissei, quia Homanls trlbuta solvebant, Herodianoa
srnebanlet non divlnocnltui deditoa " (Uiaron. Ctmm.
<* Mm. zxil. 141.
HERODIANS
Mark mentions the combination of the two i
for a similar object at an earlier period (Mark ill.
6), and in another place (viii. 15; cf. Luke zil. 1)
he preserves a saying of our Lord, in which "the
leaven of Herod " is placed in close connection with
"the leaven of the Pharisees"). In the Gospel of
St. Luke, on the other hand, the Herodians are not
brought forward at all by name.
These very scanty notices of the Evangelists aa to
the position of the Herodians are not compensated
by other testimonies; yet it is not difficult to fix
their characteristics by a reference to the condition
of Jewish feeling in the Apostolic age. There
were probably many who saw in the power of the
Herodian family the pledge of the preservation of
their national existence in the face of Roman am-
bition. In proportion as they regarded the inde-
pendent nationality of the Jewish people as the first
condition of the fulfillment of its future destiny,
they would be willing to acquiesce in the dominion
of men who were themselves of foreign descent
[Herod], and not rigid in the observance of the
Mosaic ritual. Two distinct classes might thus
unite in supporting what was a domestic tyranny
as contrasted with absolute dependence on Rome —
those who saw in the Herods a protection against
direct heathen rule, which was the one object of
their fear (cf. Juchat. f. 19, ap. IJghtfoot, Harm.
Ev. p. 470, ed. Leusd. " Herodes etiam senem Hil-
lel magoo in honors habuit; namque hi homines
regem ilium esse non asgre ferebant"), and those
who were inclined to look with satisfaction upon
such a compromise between the ancient faith and
heathen civilization, as Herod the Great and his
successors had endeavored to realize, as the true
and highest consummation of Jewish hopes. 6 On
the one side the Herodians — partisans of Herod in
the widest sense of the term — were thus brought
into union with the Pharisees, on the other, with
the Sadduceea. Yet there is no reason to suppose
that they endeavored to form any very systematic
harmony of the conflicting doctrines of the two
sects, but rather the conflicting doctrines themselves
were thrown into the background by what appeared
to be a paramount political necessity. Such coali-
tions have been frequent in every age; and the
rarity of the allusions to the Herodians, as a marked
body, seems to show that this, like similar coalitions,
had no enduring influence as the foundation of
party. The feelings which led to the coalition re-
mained, but they were incapable of animating the
common action of a united body for any length of
time. B. ¥. W.
* On the occasion mentioned in Matt. xxii. 16
and Mark xii. 13, the Herodians appear aa supporters
of the claim of the Roman emperors to receive
tribute-money from the Jews. This fact agrees
6 In tbli way the Herodians were said to regard
Herod (Antlpas) as "the Messiah": 'Hpaiuuvt car'
itctivovt rovt xpoVovf Iftfar oi ror 'Hfituiifv Xptarbv rival
Myorm,iKi<rnftTcu (Vict. Ant. ap. Cram. Oat. in
Mare. p. 400). Phllastrius (Oar. xsvitl.) applies tu
same belter to Herod Agrippa ; Spiphanlus (iter, six.)
to Herod the Great. Jerome In one place (ad Matt.
xxll. 16) calls the Idea " a ridiculous notion of soon
1-atfn writers, which rests on no authority (yooa* n«»-
quam legimue);" and again (Dial. e. Lucifer, xiill.j
mentions It in a general summary of heretical notions
without hesitation. The belief was, In Out, one a>
general sentiment, sad not of disttnei aad pr nmmtat
Digitized by
Google
HBRODIAS
test with tba view that they were essentially a pn-
ttioal end not a religious party, and hence in this
I— p en t itood at the very opposite pole from Um
Pharisees, for the latter denied the Roman right of
government and resisted all foreign innovation* It
■a remarkable that we find two aueh hostile parties
acting together in any instance. And especially in
regard to that earlier combination (Mark iii. 6), it
does not appear from the narrative how a coalition
of the Pharisees with the Ilerodians was to enable
tbem to accomplish the death of Jesus. We can
only conjecture how this may have been. The in-
fluence of Christ among the people in Galilee at that
period was very great, sod therefore any open act
of violence on the part of his enemies was out of
the question. Means more covert must be employed.
The Herodians, as the partisans of Herod, had in-
fluence with that ruler; and the Pharisees, in-
triguing with them and fixing upon some political
accusation, may have hoped to secure Herod's inter-
position in arresting and putting to death the object
of their malice. It is not without significance that
the overture for iht* alliance came from the Phari-
sees and not bom the Herodians (/irra tAv 'rlpw-
oWtw avii&obMor inlaw, Mark iii. 6). H.
HEROT>IA8 ('HpoiSfai, a female patronymic
■Tom 'HpdiSns ; on patronymics and gentilic names
In mi, see Matthis, Greek Gr. § 101 and 103), the
name of a woman of notoriety in the X. T., daugh-
ter of Aristubulus, one of tie sons of Mariamne
and Herod the Great, and consequently sister of
Agrippal.
She first married Herod, surnamed Philip, an-
other of the sons of Mariamne and the first Herod
(Joseph. Ant xviii. 5, § 4; comp. B. J. i. 29, § 4),
and therefore her full uncle; then she eloped from
him, during his lifetime (Ant. ibid), to marry
Herod Antipss, her step-uncle, who had been long
married to, and was still living with, the daughter
of JSneas or Aretaa — his assumed name — king
of Arabia (ibid. xvii. 9, § 4). Thus she left her
husband, who was still alive, to oonnect herself with
a man whose wife was still alive. Her paramour
was indeed less of a blood relation than her original
husband; but being likewise the half-brother of
that husband, he was already connected with her
by affinity — so close that there wsa only one case
contemplated in the I.aw of Moses where it could
be set aside, namely, when the married brother had
died childless (Lev. xviii. 16, and xx. 31, and for
the exception Deut. xxv. 5 ff.j. Now Herodiaa had
already had one child — Salome — by Philip (Ant.
viii. 5, § 4), and, as he was still alive, might have
nad more. Well, therefore, may she be charged by
Joaephus with the Intention of confounding her
country's institutions (ibid, xviii. 5, § 4); and well
may St John the Baptist hare remonstrated against
the enormity of such a connection with the tebrarch,
whose conscience would certainly seem to have been
•. less hardened one (Matt. xir. 9 says he " was
HERODIAA 1055
sorry." Mark vi 90 that he " feared " St. Johtu
and " heard him gladly ").
The consequences both of the crime, and of the
reproof which it incurred, are well known. Aretaa
made war upon Herod for the injury done to his
daughter, and routed him with the loss of his whole
army (Ant. xviii. 6, § 1). The head of St. John
the Baptist was granted to the request of Herodiaa
(Matt. xir. 8-11 ; Mark vi. 34-38). According to
Joaephus the execution took placn in a fortress
called Machaerus, on the frontier betwetn the do-
minions of Aretaa and Herod, according to Pliny
(v. 15), looking down upon the Dead Sea from the
south (ooiup. Robinson, 1. 570, note). And it was
to the iniquity of this act, rather than to the im-
morality of that illicit connection that, the historian
says, some of the Jews attributed the defeat of
Herod. In the closing scene of her oareer, indeed,
Herodiaa exhibited considerable niignanimity; as
she preferred going with Antipas to Lugdunum,"
and there sharing his exile and reverses, till leath
ended them, to the remaining with her brother
Agrippa I., and partaking of his elevation (Ant
xviii. 7, $ 3).
There are few episodes in the whole range of the
N. T. more suggestive to the commentator than
this one scene in the life of Herodiaa.
1. It exhibits oue of the most remaikable of the
undesigned coincidences between the N. T. and
Josephua ; that there are some discrepancies in the
two accounts, only enhances their value. More
than this, it has led the historian into a brief di-
gression upon the life, death, and character of the
Baptist, which speaks volumes in favor of the
genuineness of that still more celebrated passage,
in which he speaks of "Jesus," that "wise man,
if man he may be called " (Ant. xviii. 8, $ 3; comp.
xx. 9, § 1, unhesitatingly quoted as genuine by
Euseb. H. E. 1. 11).»
3. It has been warmly debated whether it was
the adultery, or the incestuous connection, that
drew down the reproof of the Baptist. It has
been already shown that, either way, the offenie
merited condemnation upon more grounds than
one.
3. The birthday feast is another undesigned
coincidence between Scripture and profane history.
The Jews abhorred keeping birthdays as a pagan
custom (Maud on Matt. xir. 6). On the other
hand, it was usual with the Egyptians (Gen. xl.
30; comp. Joseph. Ant. xii. 4, § 7), with the Per-
sians (Herod. 1. 133), with the Greeks, even in the
case of the dead, whence the Christian custom jf
keeping anniversaries of the martyrs (Btihr, id
Herod. Iv. 26), and with the Romans (Pen. Bat
il. 1-3). Now the Herods may be said to have
gone beyond Rome in the obsenance of Ul that
was Roman. Herod the Great kept the day of hii
secession; Antipas— as we read here— and Agrippa
I., as Joaephus tells us (Ant. xlx. 7, { 1), thefr
■ This town Is probably Lugdunum Gonvenarum,
a town of Gaol, situated on the right bank of the
Oaroana, at the foot of tba Pyrenees, now j>. Bertram
4* Otrmrninga (Murray, Hamtb. of France, p. 814)
Sassbtus, H. E. i. 11, says r.mne, eonftjaudhig Ap-
apas with Arebalaus; Burton on Matt. xJv. 8, AUbid,
sod moderns In general, Lyon*. In Joaephus (B. J.
II. 9, S 6V, Antipas b said so have died in Spain — ep-
sanwtlr. than the context, the land of his sx^s. A
I act the frontWri therefore, like the aewvsw raid
• * Thomck has mads admirable nss of tl
mant from this sourcs In his Gtoubwilrdigkeil det
Kvang. OeichUKtc, pp. 854-867. It Is shown that the
personal names, the places, dates, and customs, Jewish
and Roman, mentioned or Implied in the account of
Herodtv and of the beheading of John, are rally coo-
finned by contemporary writers. On the questfoa
whether Joaephus and ths evangelists dtssgns In re-
gard to the plaes whan John was hnpriansed. aw
H
Digitized by
Google
1056
HEBODIOK
birthday, with such magnificence, that the " birth-
days of Herod " (HerodU die*) had pasted into a
proverb when I'eraiua wrote (Sat. v. 180).
4. And jet dancing, on these festive occasions,
was common to both Jew and Gentile; and was
practiced in the same way — youths and virgins,
singly, or separated into two bands, but never in-
termingled, danced to do honor to their deity, their
hero, or to the day of their solemnity. Miriam
(Ex. zv. 30), the daughter of Jephthah (Judges xi.
34). and David (3 Sam. vi. 14). are familiar instances
In Holy Writ; the '• Carmen Suculare " of Horace,
to quote no more, points to the same custom
amongst Greeks and Romans. It is plainly owing
to the elevation of woman in the social scale, that
dancing in pairs (still unknown to the East) has
some into fashion.
5. The rash oath of Herod, like that of Jeph-
thah in the O. T., has afforded ample discussion to
casuists. It is now ruled that all such oaths, where
there is no reservation, expressed or implied, in
favor of the laws of God or man, are illicit and
without force. And so Solomon had long since
decided (1 K. ii. 30-34; see Sanderson, Dt Juram.
Obtig. Prated. HI. 16). K. S. Ff.
HEROTHON ('HpvoW: Htrodirm), a rela-
tive of St. Paul (to* avyyt<n\ pov- cognatm), to
whom he sends his salutation amongst the Chris-
tians of the Honian Church (Rom. xvi. 11). Noth-
ing appears to be certainly known of him. By
Hippolytus, however, he is said to have been bishop
of Tarsus; and by Pseudo-Dorotbeus, of l'atrw
(Winer, tub toe.).
HERON (i"i*JJfl). The Hebrew tm&pliah ap-
pears as the name of an unclean bird in Lev. xi. 19,
Deut xiv. 18. From the addition of the words
" after her kind," we may infer that it was a gen-
eric name for a well-known class of birds, and hence
it is the more remarkable that the name does not
occur elsewhere in the Bible. It is quite uncer-
tain what bird is intended ; the only point on which
any two commentators seem to agree is, that it is
not the heron, for many suppose the preceding
word, translated in the A. V. " stork," to apply in
reality to the heron. The LXX. translates it jra-
piSpiot, which may be regarded as applicable to all
birds frequenting swampy ground (tVyoprfopaif ),
but more particularly to the plover. This explana-
tion loses what little weight it might otherwise
iave bad, from the probability that it originated in
a false rending, namely, agaphah, which the trans-
lators connected with ngnph, " a bank." The Tal-
mudista evidently were at a loss, for they describe
It indefinitely as a "high-flying bird of prey"
(Chulin, 63 a). The only ground on which an
[pinion can be formed, is the etymology of the
word; it is connected by Gesenius (That. p. 127)
with the root anaph, " to snort in anger," and is
therefore applicable to some irritable bird, perhaps
the goose. The parrot, swallow, and a kind of
eagle have been suggested without any real reason.
W. L. B.
HE'SED (1^0 [ttnoViest, fator]: •£«•«;
Alex. Erf : BeiJieted), the son of Hesed, or Ben-
Chesed, was commissary for Solomon in the district
of •' the Arubboth, Socoh, and all the land of
Hepher" (1 K. iv. 10).
HESH'BON (V"ffltrn [prudence, mufer-
Manding] : 'Eo-fjEhiv; [Rom. Tat. in Josh. xxi. 39,
!#0*V:] Besebmi, the capital city of Sihon king
HE8HMON
of the Amorites (Num. xxi. 36). It stood on Ma
western border of the high plain (Mithor, Josh,
xiii. 17), and on the boundary-line between the
tribes of Reuben and Gad. Toe ruins of HetbAn,
20 mUes east of the Jordan, on the parallel of the
northern end of the Dead Sea, mark the site, as
they bear the name, of the ancient Hesblion. The
city is chiefly celebrated from its connection with
Sihon, who was the first to give battle to the invad-
ing Israelites. He marched against them to Jahaa,
which must have been situated a short distance
south of Heshbon, and was there completely over,
thrown (Deut. ii. 33 ff.). Heshbon was rebuilt by
the tribe of Reuben (Num. xxxii. 37), but was as-
signed to the Levites in connection with the tril«
of Gad (Josh. xxi. 39). After the Captivity it ftD
into the hands of the Moabites, to whom it had
originally belonged (Num. xxi. 36), and hence it
is mentioned in the prophetic denunciations against
Moab (Is. xv. 4; Jer. xlviii. 3, 84, 46). In the
fourth century it waa still a place of some note
( Onom. s. v. Jk'$ebnn), but it has now been for many
centuries wholly desolate.
The ruins of Heshbon stand on a low hill rising
out of the great undulating plateau. They are
more than a mile in circuit: but not a building
remains entire. Towards the western port is a sin-
gular structure, whose crumbling ruins exhibit the
workmanship of successive ages— the massive stones
of the Jewish period, the sculptured cornice of the
Roman era, and the light Saracenic arch, all grouped
together. There are many cisterns among the
ruins; and towards the south, a few yards from the
base of the hill, Is a large ancient reservoir, which
calls to mind the passage in Cant vii. 4, " Thine
eyes ore like the fish-pools of Heshbon by the gate
of Bath-rabbim." (See Burckhardt, Tmt. in Syr.,
p. 365; Irby and Mangles, p. 472.) [Bath-rab-
bim.] J. L. P.
* For a description of the ruins of Hetbin, see
Tristram's Lund of luraeL, p. 544, 3d ed. Among
other monuments of the old city, he speaks of " the
foundations of a forum, or public building of the
Roman period, arranged exactly like the forum at
Pompeii. . . . .Some portions of the wails are
standing — a few tiers of wom stones; and the
space is thickly strewn with piles of Doric shafts,
capitals of columns, broken entablatures, and large
stones with the broad bevelled edge. In one edifice,
of which a large portion remains, near the foot of
the hill, Jewish stones, Roman arches, Doric pillars,
and Saracenic arches, are all strangely mingled. . . .
The old wells were so numerous that we had to ride
with great care to avoid them." Instead of " fish-
pools " said (A. V.) to have been at Heshbon (Cant
vii. 4), we should read " pools " or " tanks "
(myi?) : and, as we see above, the remains of
water-works of this description are still abundant
there. Of all the marks of antiquity the Arabs
consider none more decisive than the ruins of
cisterns or reservoirs (Wetzstein's Reiirbericht
Hber Hauran, etc., p. 86). H.
HESHTtfON {yiCXpr [Urning, fnatful.
nest]: LXX. omits, both MSS.; [Comp. Ait
'Ao-uusV:] Hauemon), a place named, with other*.
as lying between Moladah and Beer-sheba (Josh, xt
27), and therefore in the extreme south of Judat
Nothing further is known of it; but may it not
be another form of the name Aemox, given U
Num. xxxiv. 4 as one of the landmarks of tht
southern boundary of Jndah? O.
Digitized by
Google
HBSBOIT
HEfcVBOH (f"fifn [encloted, u by » wall] :
'AsveV; Alex. Kapmp: Besron). Hkzron, the
•on of Reuben (Num. xxvi. 6, [21] ). Our trans-
laton followed the Vulg. in adopting this form of
the name. [In many modern editions of the A.
Y. however, it is spelt Hezron. A.] W. A. W.
flESTtONITES, THR (WVO^: i
Kapari; [Vat] Alex, o Aopenft: Besronita).
Descendants of Hesron, or Hezron, the son of Reu-
ben (Mum. xxtL 6). [In many modern editions
of the A. V. the word is spelt Hezronites. — A.]
W. A. W.
HBTH QUI, i. «. Cheth [(error, giant]:
X«V: Beth), the fore&ther of the nation of the
HrrrrrKs. In the genealogical table* of Gen. x.
and 1 Chr. i., Heth is stated as a son of Canaan,
younger than Zidon the firstborn, but preceding
the Jebusite, the Amorite, and the other Canaanite
families. Heth and Zidon alone are named as
persons; all the rest figure as tribes (Gen. x. 15;
1 Chr. i. 13; LXX. T ix Xtrraier: [Vulg. Beth-
nsmt ;] and so Josephus, Ant. L 6, § 3).
The Hittites were therefore a Hamite race,
neither of the " country " nor the " kindred " of
Abraham and Isaac (Gen. xxir. 3, 4; xxviii. 1, 9).
In the earliest historical mention of the nation —
the beautiful narrative of Abraham's purchase of
the care of Machpelah — they are styled, not Hit-
tites, but Bene-Cheth (A. V. '< sons, and children
of Heth," Gen. xxiii. 3, 5, 7, 10, 16, 18, 20; xxv.
10; xlix. 33). Ouce we bear of "daughters of
Heth " (xxviL 48), the "daughters of the land; "
at that early period still called, after their less im-
mediate progenitor, " daughters of Canaan" (xxviii.
1, 8, compared with rxrii. 46, and xxri. 34, 35).
In the Egyptian monuments the name Chat is
said to stand for Palestine (Bunsen, AVgyptm,
footed by Ewald, Gttch. i. 317, note). G.
HBTHTiON (T^OP "HTJ. «*• «»? of
Hetklon [«. e. of the lurking-plice or strong-
hold] : [LXX. translate the name: Bethnlon] ), the
same of a place on the northern border of the
» promised land." It is mentioned only twice in
Scripture (Ex. xlrii. 15, xlviii. 1). In all prob-
ability the •» way of Hetblon " is the pass at the
northern end of Lebanon, from the sea-coast of the
Mediterranean to the great plain of Hamath, and
■a thus identical with " the entrance of Hamath "
m Num. xxxir. 8, Ac (See Five Yean in Da-
mascus, ii. 356.) J. L. P.
HE2TBKI 0i?Tn, i. e. Hizki, a short form of
Hitlriah, strength of Jehovah = Hezekiah : 'Afaxf ;
[Vat. A(a*tc] Btxtoi), a man in the genealogies
«f Benjamin, one of the Bene-Elpaal [sons of E.],
a descendant of Shaaraim (1 Chr. Till. 17).
HEZEKI'AH ^1*77\n. generally inyflTn,
Bmtiya'hu, and also with initial ■• — in^rT; :
LXX. and Joseph. 'Eft *(ot : Sxechias ; — strength
tf Jehovah, eomp. Germ. Qotthard, Gee.), twelfth
king of Judah, son of the apostate Ahaz and AM
(or AWjah), ascended the throne at the age of 35
a. o. 736. Since, however, Ahaz died at the age
of 86, some prefer to make HeseUah only 30 years
aid at his secession (reading 3 for H3). as jther-
wise he oust have been born when Ahaz was a boy
of 11 years old. This, indeed, is not Lapuesible
Kp.ad VOnkm, 133, quoted by Boohart,
•7
HEZEKIAH 1067
Geoor. Boor. p. 920; see Keil on 3 K. xrlH. 1;
KnobeL Jts. 32, Ac.); but, if any change be de-
sirable, it is better to suppose that Ahaz was 36
and not 20 years old at his accession (LXX. Syr
Arab. 2 Chr. xxviii. 1), reading PD for 3 In 9
K. xvi. 3.
Hezekiah was one of the three most perfect longs
of Judah (2 K. xviii. 5; Ecclus. xlix. 4). His
first set was to purge, and repair, aud reopen with
splendid sacrifices and perfect ceremonial, the Tem-
ple which bad been despoiled and neglected during
the careless and idolatrous reign of his father.
This consecration was accompanied by a revival of
the theocratic spirit, so strict as not even to spars
" the high places," which, although tolerated by
many well-intentioned kings, had naturally been
profaned by the worship of images and Asherahs
(2 K. xviii. 4). On the extreme importance and
probable consequences of this measure, see High
Places. A still more decisive act was the de-
struction of a brazen serpent, said to have been
the one used by Moses in the miraculous healing
of the Israelites (Num. xxi. 9), which had been
removed to Jerusalem, and had become, " down to
those days," an object of adoration, partly in con
sequence of its venerable character as a relic, and
partly perhaps from some dim tendencies to the
ophiolatry common in ancient times (Ewald, (reset,
iii. 622). To break up a figure so curious and so
highly honored showed a strong mind, as well as a
clear-sighted zeal, and Hezekiah briefly justified his
procedure by calling the image ]JJ)tp r 1?, ■' a bra-
zen thing," possibly with a contemptuous play oa
the word B?ri3, " a serpent." How necessary this
was in such times may be inferred from the fast
that "the brazen serpent" is, or was, reverenced
in the Church of St- Ambrose at Milan (Prideaux,
Connect, i. 19, Oxf. ed.).« When the kingdom of
Israel had fallen, Hezekiah extended his pious en-
deavors to Ephraim and Manasaeh, and by inviting
the scattered inhabitants to a peculiar Passover
kindled their indignation also against the idolatrous
practices which still continued among them. This
Passover was, from the necessities of the case, eel*
ebrated at an unusual, though not illegal (Num.
ix. 10, 11) time, and by an excess of Levitical seal,
it was continued for the unprecedented period of
fourteen days. For these latter facta the Chronicler
(2 Chr. xxix., xxx., xxxi.) is our sole authority, and
he characteristically narrates them at great length.
It would appear at first sight that this Passover
was celebrated immediately after the purification of
the Temple (see Prideaux, L c), but careful con-
sideration makes it almost certain that it could not
have taken place before the sixth year of Hesekiah's
reign, when the fall of Samaria had stricken re-
morseful terror into the heart of Israel (3 Chr.
xxxi. I, xxx. 6, 9, and Keil on 2 K. xviii. 3).
By a rare and happy providence the most pious
of kings was confirmed in his faithfulness, and
seconded in his endeavors by the powerful assist-
ance of the noblest and most eloquent of prophets.
Hie influence of Isaiah was, however, not gained
without a struggle with the " scornful" remnant
of the former royal counsellors (Is. xxviii. 14), who
in aU probability recommended to the king such
a "TJn serpent de bronze qui sslon uns i
popubire emit eelul que leva Motse, et qui doit ttftm
i la fin ski awash '* bin. d»PIUuu, » 117 1
Digitized by
Google
1068 HEZEKIAH
alkanoss and eoKpromise* as would be in uninn
rather with the dictates of political expediency, than
with that Kile unhesitating tnut is the arm of
Jehovah which the prophets inculcated. The lead-
ing man of this »binet was Shebns, who, from the
omission of his father's name, and the expression in
Is. xxii. 16 (see Blunt, Unitt. Coincidence/), was
probably a foreigner, perhaps a Syrian (Hitxig).
At the instance of Isaiah, he seems to hare been
subsequently degraded from the high post of pre-
fect of the palace (which office was given to Klia-
Um, Is. xxii. 21), to the inferior, though still
. honorable, station of state-secretary PD3, a K -
xvlli. 18); the further punishment of exile with
which Isaiah had threatened him (xxii. 18) being
possibly forgiven on bis amendment, of which we
have some traces in Is. xxxvii. 9 ff. (Ewald, 6'etcA.
iii. 617).
At the head of a repentant and united people,
Hezekiah ventured to assume the aggressive against
the Philistines, and in a series of victories not only
rewon the cities which his father had lost (2 Chr.
ixviii. 18), but even dispossessed them of their own
cities except Gaza (2 K. xviii S) and Gath (Joseph.
Ant. ix. 13, § 3). It was perhaps to the purposes
of this war that he applied the money which would
otherwise have been used to pay the tribute exacted
by Shalmanezer, according to the agreement of
Ahaz with his predecessor, Tiglath Pileaer. When,
after the capture of Samaria, the king of Assyria
applied for this impost, Hezekiah refused it, and in
open rebellion omitted to send even the usual pres-
ents (2 K. xviii. 7), a line of conduct to which he
was doubtless encouraged by the splendid exhorta-
tion of his prophetic guide.
Instant war was averted by the heroic and long-
sontinued resistance of the Tyrians under their king
Elukeus (Joseph. Ant. ix. 14), against a siege,
which was abandoned only in the fifth year (Grote,
Greece, iii. 859, 4th ed.), when it was found to be
impracticable. This must have been a critical and
intensely anxious period for Jerusalem, and Heze-
kiah used every available means to strengthen his
position, and render his capital impregnable (2 K.
xx. 20; 2 Chr. xxxii. 8-6, 30; Is. xxii. 8-11, xxxiii.
18; and to these events Ewald also refers Ps. xlviii.
18). But while all Judsea trembled with anticipa-
tion of Assyrian invasion, and while Shebna and
others were relying "in the shadow of Egypt,"
Isaiah's brave heart did not fail, and he even de-
nounced the wrath of God against the proud and
sinful merchant-city (Is. xxiii.), which now seemed
to be the main bulwark of Judast against immediate
attack.
It was probably during the siege of Samaria that
Shalmanezer died, and was succeeded by Sargon,
who, jealous of Egyptian influence in Judsea, sent an
army under a Tartan or general (Is. xx. 1), which
penetrated Egypt (Nah. iii. 8-10) and destroyed
No-Amon; although it is clear from Hezekiah's
rebellion (2 K. xviii. 7) that it can have produced
but little permanent impression. Sargon, in the
tenth year of his reign (which is the fourteenth
year of the reign .of Hezekiah), made an expedition
to Palestine; but his annals make no mention of
any conquests from Hezekiah on this occasion, and
he seems to have occupied himself in the siege of
Ashdod (Is. xx. 1), and in 'the inspection of mines
(Bosenmuller, BM. Geoyr. ix.). This must there-
fan be tlie expedition alluded to in 2 K. xviii. 18;
la. xxx/i. 1; an exaeditian .which is merely alluded
HEZEKIAH
to, as it led to no result. But if I to SefipUm nar-
rative is to be reconciled with the records of Assyr
ian history it seems necessary to make a transposi-
tion in the text of Isaiah (and therefore of the book
of Kings). That some such expedient moat ha
resorted to, if the Assyrian history is trustworthy,
is maintained by Dr. Hincks in a paper On tas
rectification of Chronology, which the ntrlg-tSt-
covered Apit-ttekt render necessary. " The text,"
he says, " as it originally stood, was probably to
this effect: 2 K. xviii. 13. Now in the fourteenth
year of king Hezekiah the long of Auf-ia on«
up [alluding to the attack mentioned in Sargon'f
Annalt] ; xx. 1-19. In those days was king Heze-
kiah sick unto death, etc., xviii. 13. And Sen-
nacherib, king of Assyria, came up against all the
fenced cities of Judah, and took them, etc, xr.h
18, xix. 37 " (Dr. Hincks, in Journ. of Soar. Lit
Oct 18S8). Perhaps some later transcriber, unaware
of the earlier and unimportant invasion, confused
the allusion to Sargon in 2 K. xviii. 13 with the
detailed story of Sennacherib's attack (2 K. xviii.
14 to xix. 37), and, considering that the account
of Hezekiah's illness broke the continuity of the
narrative, removed it to the end.
According to this scheme, Hezekiah's dangerous
illness (3 K. xx.; Is. xxxviii.; 2 Chr. xxxii. 94)
nearly synchronized with Sargon'a futile invasion,
in the fourteenth year of Hezekiah's reign, eleven
years before Sennacherib't invasion. That it must
have preceded the attack of Sennacherib is nearly
obvious from the promise in 2 K. xx. 6, as well sa
from modern discoveries (Layard, iVm. and Bab. i.
146) ; and such is the view adopted by the Rabbi
(Seder Olam, cap. xxiii. ), Ussher, and by most com-
mentators, except Vitringa and Gesenius (Keil, ad
be. ; Prideaux, i. 22). There seems to be nc
ground whatever for the vague conjecture so con-
fidently advanced (Winer, s. v. Bitkiat; Jahn,
Hear. Common, § xli.) that the king's illness was
the same plague which had destroyed the Assyrian
army. The word 7TTO? is not elsewhere applied
to the plague, but to carbuncles and inflammatory
ulcers (Ex. ix. 9; Job ii. 7, Ac.). Hezekiah, whose
kingdom was in a dangerous crisis, who had at that
time no heir (for Manasseh was not born till long
afterwards, 2 K. xxi. 1), and who regarded death
as the end of existence (Is. xxxviii.), "turned hie
face to tlie wall and wept sore " at the threatened
approach of dissolution. God had compassion on
his anguish, and heard his prayer. Isaiah had
hardly left the palace when he was ordered to
promise the king immediate recovery, and a fresh
lease of life, ratifying the promise by a sign, and
curing the boil by a plaster of figs, which were often
used medicinally in similar cases (Ges. The*, i,
311; Celsius, Hierobot. ii. 877; Bartholinns, D*
M orbit BibUcis, x.47). What was the exact nature
of the disease we cannot say; according to Meade
it was fever terminating in abscess. For some
account of the retrogression of the shadow on the
sundial of Ahaz, see Dial. On. this remarkable
passage we must be content to refer the reader to
Carpzov, App. CriU p. 361 ff. ; Winer, a. v. BiMat
and Uhren; Rawlinson, Berod, ii. 333 ff.; the
elaborate notes of Keil on 2 K. xx. ; RosenmuHtr
and Gesenius on Is. xxxviii., and especially Ewald
Getch, iii. 638.
Various ambassadors came with letters end gift*
to congratulate Hezekiah on his recovery (2 Chr
xxxii. 93), and among them an nrbassy from Hero
Digitized by
Google
HEZEKIAH
taca-Bakdan (or Berodach, 2 K. xx. 12; i BdA-
tSat, Joseph. I. e.), the viceroy of Babylrn, the
Mardokempados of Ptolemy's cukhi. The osten-
rible object of this mission ni to compliment Heze-
kiah on his convalescence (2 K. xx. 12; Is. xxxix.
1), and " to inquire of the wonder that was done
m the land " (2 Chr. xxxii. 31 ), a rumor of which
could not fail to interest a people devoted to astrol-
ogy. But its real purpose was to discover how far
an alliance between the two powers was possible or
desirable, for Mardokempados, no less than Heze-
kiah, was in apprehension of the Assyrians. In
fact Sargon expelled him from the throne of Baby-
lon in the following year (the 16th of Hezekiah),
although after a time he seems to have returned
and reestablished himself for six months, at the end
of which he was murdered by Belibos (Or. Hincks,
f. e. ; Kosenrauller, HibL (Jtogr. ch. viii. ; Layard,
A hi. and Bab. i. 141). Community of interest
made Hezekiah receive the overtures of Babylon
with unconcealed gratification; and, perhaps, to
enhance the opinion of his own importance as an
ally, he displayed to the messengers the princely
treasures which he and his predecessors had ac-
cumulated. The mention of such rich stores is an
additional argument for supposing these events to
bane happened before Sennacherib's invasion (see 2
K. arm. 14-16), although they are related after
them in the Scripture historians. If ostentation
were his motive it received a terrible rebuke, and
be was informed by Isaiah that from the then tot-
tering and subordinate province of Babylon, and
not from the mighty Assyria, would come the ruin
and captivity of Judoh (Is. xxxix. 8). This prophecy
and the one of Micah (Mic. iv. 10) an the earliest
definition of the locality of that hostile power, where
the (foods of exile so long threatened (l-ev. xxvi.
33; Deut. iv. 27, xxx. 3) were beginning to gather.
It is an impressive and fearful circumstance that
the moment of exultation was chosen as the oppor-
tunity for warning, and that the prophecies of the
Assyrian deliverance are set side by side with those
of the Babylonish Captivity (Davidson On Proptitey,
p. 256). The weak friend was to accomplish that
which was impossible to the powerful foe. But,
although pride was the sin thus vehemently checked
by the prophet, Uiiah was certainly not blind to
the polUienl motives (Joseph. Ant. x. 2, f 2), which
made Hezekiah so complaisant to the Babylonian
ambassadors. Into those motives he had inquired
in vain, for the king met that portion of his ques-
tion ("What said these men?") by emphatic
silence. Hezekiau'a mrek answer to the stern de-
nunciation of future woe has been most unjustly
censured as "a false resignation which combines
selfishness with silliness" (Newman, fftbr. .Won.
f> 174). On the contrary it merely implies a con-
viftfon that God's decree could not be otherwise
(ton just and right, and a natural thankfulness for
a temporary suspension of its inevitable ful-
HEZKKIAH
1068
was succeeded (B. c. 709) by his son
Bsnnaeharib, whose two invasions occupy the greater
•art of the Scripture records concerning the i-eigr
af Hezekiah. The first of these took place vu the
durd year of Sennacherib (a. c. 700), and occupies
snly three verses (2 K. xviii. 13-16), though the
■onto of the advancing Assyrians may be traced in
is- x 5, xL The rumor of the invasion reu^ubled
fl sis isli's exertions, and he prepared for a siege
Vy providing offensive and defensive armor, "topping
an tbt wells, and diverting the watercourses, con-
ducting the water of Uihon into the city by a sub-
terranean canal (Ecclus. xlviii. 17. For a similar
precaution taken by the Mohammedans, see WBL
Tyr. viii. 7, Keil). But the main hope of the
political faction was the alliance with Egypt, and
they seem to have sought it by presents and private
entreaties (Is. xxx. 6), especially with a view to
obtaining chariots and cavalry (Is. xxxi. 1-3), which
was the weakest arm of the Jewish service, as we
see from the derision which it excited (2 K. xviii.
23). Such overtures kindled Isaiah's indignation,
and Sbebna may have lost his high office by recom-
mending them. The prophet clearly saw that Kgypt
was too weak and faithlro to be serviceable, and
the applications to Pharaoh (who is compared by
Rabshakeh to one of the weak reeds of his own
river), implied a want of trust in the help of God.
But Isaiah did not disapprove of the spontaneously
proffered assistance of the tall and warlike Ethio-
pians (Is. xviii. 2, 7, ace. to Ewald's trans.); be-
cause he may have regarded it as a providential
lid.
The account given of this first invasion in the
Annatt of Stimachtrib is that he attacked Heze-
kiah, because the Ekronites had sent their king
Padiya (or " Haddiya" ace. to Col. Kawlinson) aa
a prisoner to Jerusalem (cf. 2 K. xviii. 8) ; that he
took forty-six cities (" all the fenced cities " in 2
K. xviii. 13 is apparently a general expression, ef.
xix. 8) and 200,000 prisoners: that he besieged
Jerusalem with mounds (cf. 2 K. xix. 32); and
although Hezekiah promised to pay 800 talents of
silver (of which perhaps 300 only were ever paid)
and 80 of gold (2 K. xviii. 14; but see Layard,
if in. and Bob. p. 145), yet not content with this
he mulcted him of a part of his dominions, and
gave them to the kings of Kkron, Ashdod, and Gaza
(Kawlinson, fferod. i. 475 if ). So important was
this expedition that Demetrius, the Jewish his-
torian, even attributes to Sennacherib the Great
Captivity (Clem. Alex. Strom, p. 146, ed. Sylb.).
In almost every particular this account agrees with
the notice in Scripture, and we may see a reason
for so great a sacrifice on the part of Hezekiah in
the glimpse which Isaiah gives us of his capital city
driven by desperation into licentious and impious
mirth (xxii. 12-14). This campaign must at least
have bad the one good result of proving the worth-
lessnesi of the Egyptian alliance; for at a plant
called Altagu (the Kltekou of Josh. xv. 69?) Sen-
nacherib inflicted an overwhelming defeat on the
combined forces of Egypt and Ethiopia, which bad
come to the assistance of Ekron. But Isaiah re-
garded the purchased treaty ss a cowardly defection,
and the sight of bis fellow-citizens gazing peacefully
from the house-tops on the bright array of the car-
borne and quivered Assyrians, filled him with in-
dignation and despair (Is. xxii. 1-7, if the latest
explanations of this chapter be correct).
Hezekiah's bribe (or fine) brought a temporary
release, for the Assyrians marched into Egypt,
where, if Herodotus (ii. 141) and Josepbus (/Int.
x. 1-3) are to be trusted, they advanced without
resistance to Pelusium, owing to the hatred of the
warrior-caste against Sethos the king-print or
Pthah* who had, in his priestly predilections, inter-
fered with their prerogatives. In spite of this
advantage, Sennacherib was forcud to iut the
siege of Pelusium, by the advance j.' Tirhakah or
Tarakos, the ally of Sethos and Hezekiah, who
afterwards united the crowns of Egypt and Ethiopia.
This magnificent Ethiopian hero, who had exto tuW
Digitized by
Google
1060 KKZBKTAB
ah eouquesU to the pillars of Hercules (Strab. xv.
479), ni indeed a formidable antagonist. Hi*
feeds are recorded in a temple at Medineet Haboo,
hat the Jealousy of the Memphites (Wilkinson, Anc.
Egypt- i. 141) concealed his assistance, and attrib-
uted the deliverance of Sethos to the miraculous
interposition of an arm; of mice (Herod, ii. 141).
This story ma; have had its source, however, not
in jealousy, but in the use of a mouse as the em-
blem of destruction (HorapolL HieivyL i. 50; Kaw-
linson, Herod, ad ktc.), and of some sort of disease
or plague (? 1 Sam. vi. 18; Jahn, Arch. BiU. §
185). The legend doubtless gained ground from
the extraordinary circumstances which afterwards
ruined the army of Sennacherib. We say afitr-
ward$, because, however much the details of the
two occurrences may have been confused, we can-
not agree with the majority of writers (Prideaux,
Bochart, Michaelis, Jahn, Keil, Newman, etc) in
identifying the flight of Sennacherib from Pelushim
with the event described in 2 K. xix. We prefer
to follow Josephus in making them allude to dis-
tinct events.
Returning from his futile expedition {iwpaicros
iwex&PI*** Joseph. Ant. x. 1, § 4), Sennacherib
" dealt treacherously " with Hezekiah (Is. xxxiii. 1)
by attacking the stronghold of bullish. This was
the commencement of that second invasion, respect-
ing which we have such full details in 2 K. xviii.
17 tl; 2 Chr. xxxii. 9 ft*.; Is. xxxvi. That there
were two invasions (contrary to the opinion of
Layard, Bosanquet, Vance Smith, etc.) is clearly
proved by the details of the first given in the
Assyrian annals (see Rawlinson, Hervd. i. p. 477).
Although the annals of Sennacherib on the great
cylinder in the Brit. Museum reach to the end of
his eighth year, and this second invasion belongs
to his fifth year (b. c. 698, the twenty-eighth year
of Hezekiah), yet no allusion to it has been found.
So shameful a disaster was naturally concealed by
national vanity. From Lachish he sent against
Jerusalem an army under two officers and his cup-
bearer the orator Rabshakeh, with a blasphemous
and insulting summons to surrender, deriding Heze-
Uah's hopes of Egyptian succor, and apparently
endeavoring to inspire the people with distrust of
his religious innovations (2 K. xviii. 22, 25, 30).
The reiteration and peculiarity of the latter argu-
ment, together with Kabshakeh s fluent mastery of
Hebrew (which he used to tempt the people from
their allegiance by a glowing promise, v. 81, 32),
give countenance to the supposition that he was an
apostate Jew. Hezekiah's ministers were thrown
into anguish and dismay ; but the undaunted Isaiah
hurled back threatening for threatening with un-
rivaled eloquence and force. He even prophesied
that the fires of Tophet were already burning in
expectancy of the Assyrian corpses which were
destined to feed their flame. Meanwhile Sen-
nacherib, having taken 1 -acltish (an event possibly
depicted on a series of alalia at Mosul, layard, N.
and B. 148-152), was besieging Libnah, when,
a 'Stanley's note mar be cited here: "By what
■special means this great destruction was effected, with
fcow Urge or small a remnant Sennacherib returned,
• not told. It might be a pestilential blast (Is. xxxvU.
,' Joseph. Ant. x. 1, § 5), according to the analogy
jy which a pestilence is usually described in Scripture
endsr the Image of a destroying angel (PS. lxxvllt 48 ;
I San. xxrr. 16) ; and the numbers sre not greater
Sawn an naxrdsd as perishing within very short
s — 160,000 Carthsgliiians In Sicily, GOO/NO k*
HEZEKIAH
alarmed by a " nrmer " of Tirhakah's advaaas (at
avenge the defeat at AUagft?), he was forced fa
relinquish once more his immediate designs, am.
content himself with a defiant letter to Hezekiah.
Whether on this occasion lie encountered and de-
feated the Ethiopians (as Prideaux precariously
infers from Is. xx. Corned, i. p. 26), or not, we
cannot tell. The next event of the campaign, about
which we are Informed, is that the Jewish king
with simple piety prayed to God with Sennacherib's
letter outspread before him (cf. 1 Mace iii. 48),
and received a prophecy of immediate deliverance.
Accordingly " that night the Angel of the Lord
went out and smote in the camp of the Assyrian)
185,000 men."
There is no doubt that some secondary cause was
employed in the accomplishment of this event.
We are certainly " not to suppose," as Dr. Johnson
observed, '• that the angel went about with a sword
in his hand stabbing them one by one, but that
some powerful natural agent was employed." The
Babylonish Talmud and some of the Targums at-
tribute it to storms of lightning (Vitringa, Vogel,
etc.); Prideaux, Heine (rfe caned Strag. Astyr.),
and Faber to the Simoon ; R, Jose, Ussber, Preias (els
cotud dad. Atsyr.), etc., etc., to a nocturnal attack
by Tlrhakah ; Paulus to a poisoning of the waters;
and finally Josephus, followed by an immense ma-
jority of ancient and modern commentators, includ-
ing even Keil, to the Pestilence. This would be a
cause not only adequate (Justin, xix. 11; Diodor.
xix. p. 434 : see the other instances quoted by Bo-
senmuller, Winer, Keil, Jahn, etc.), but most prob-
able in itself from the crowded and terrified state
of the camp. There is therefore no necessity to
adopt the ingenious conjectures by which Doder-
lein, Koppe, and Waaler endeavor to get rid of the
large number 185,000.'
After this reresse Sennacherib fled precipitately
to Nineveh, where he revenged himself on as many
Jews aa were in his power (Too. i. 18), and after
many years (not fifty-five days, as Tobit says, i.
21), was murdered by two of his sons as he drank
himself drunk in the house of Nisroch (Assarac?)
his god. He certainly lived till B. c. 680, for hie
22d year is mentioned on a clay tablet (Rawlinson,
i c.)\ he must therefore hare survived Hezekiah
by some seventeen years. It is probable that sev-
eral of the Psalms (c. g. xlvi.-xlvuX, lxxrL) allude
to his discomfiture.
Hezekiah only lived to enjoy for about one year
more his well-earned peace and glory. He slept
with his fathers after a reign of twenty-nine yean,
in the 50th year of his sge (b. c. 697), and was
buried with great honor and universal mourning
"in the chiefest of the sepulchres (or 'the road
leading np to the sepulchres,' ir iyafidatt rtueanr,
LXX., because, as Thenius conjectures, the. actual
sepulchres were full) of the sons of David " (2 Chr.
xxxii. 33). He had found time for many works of
peace in the noble and almost blameless course of
his troubled life, and to bis pious labors we are in-
seven months at Cairo (Oesenius, ad lot.). It might
be accompanied by a storm. So Vitringa understood
it, and this would best suit the words In Is. xxx. 29'
(History of (at Jewish Omrtk. II. 680). A mutuaW
account of this wonder was current among the Xgyp
Hans. Tbey ascribed it, "as a matter of course, t>
their own divinities, but unquestionably had m vis*
the same occurrence (see Bawllnsen, llmd. U. 111).
a.
Digitized by
Google
HKZKKIAH
CsbUd far at lout one portion of die pre»en* canon
;P|ot. xxv. 1; Ecchu. xlviii. 17 If). He can have
10 finer panegyric than the words of the sou of
Sirach, "even the kiuin of Judah failed, for the;
brook the law of the Most High j all except Da-
lid, and KzeJdas, and Jwlat ftuLd."
Besides the many authors and oommentatort who
hare written on this period of Jewish history (on
which much light has been recently thrown by
Mr. Layard, Sir G. Wilkinson, Sir. H. Bawlinson,
Dr. Hincks, and other scholars who have studied
the Nineveh remains), see for continuous lives of
Hesekiah, Josephus (Ant. ix. 13-x. 2 J, Prideaux
(Connect, i. 16-30), Jahn (Hebi: Comm. § xli.),
Winer (a. v. Hitkuu), and Ewald (Cue*, lit 614-
644, 2d ed.). F. W. F.
* Dean Stanley devotes a long lecture (Hilton/
of the, Jewish Church, ii. 505-540) to the character
of Hezekiah, and the events with which he was
eoanected. "The reign of Hesekiah is the cul-
minating point of interest in the history of the
longs of Judah." Yet the interest of his personal
history is mainly that which arises from the con-
templation of his example as one of faith and piety,
and of the wonderful deliverances vouchsafed to the
nation for his sake, though both these and his ear-
nest efforts for the reformation of the people served
only to delay, but not to avert the hastening ruin
of the commonwealth. The sketch drawn by Mr.
Stanley of Hezekiah's repairing to the temple with
the defiant letter of Sennacherib, to spread it before
Jehovah and to implore his help, brings out the
monarch's character at that most critical juncture
In its best light. The Assyrian conqueror had sent
bom Lachish, demanding the submission of Heze-
kiah and the surrender of Jerusalem into the hands
of his general. On hearing this summons, Eli-
sMm, Shebna, and Joan, Hezekiah's three highest
officers, " tore their garments in horror, and ap-
peared in that state before the king. He, too, gave
way to the same uncontrolled burst of grief. He
and they both dressed themselves in sackcloth, and
the king took refuge in the Temple. The minis-
ters went to seek comfort from Isaiah. The in-
sulting embassy returned to Sennacherib. The
army was moved from lachish and lay in front of
the fortress of Ubnah. A letter couched in terms
like those already used by his envoys, was sent
direct from the king of Assyria to the king of Ju-
dah. What would be their fate if they were taken,
they might know from the fate of Lachish, which
are still see on the sculptured monuments, where
die inhabitants ire lying before the king, stripped
in order to be flayed alive- Hesekiah took the
aster, sad penetrating, as it would seem, into the
Must Holy Place, laid it before the Divine Presence
enthroned above the cherubs, and called upon him
whose name it insulted, to look down and see with
his own eyes the outrage that was offered to him.
From that dark recess no direct answer was vouch-
safed. The answer came through the mouth of
Isaiah. From the first moment that Sennacherib's
army had appeared, he had held the same language
*f unbroken hope and confidence, clothed in ever*
variety of imagery. ... It was a day of awful
suspense. In proportion to the strength of Isaiah's
sonfldence and of Hezekiah's devotion, would have '
teen the ruin of the Jewish church and faith, ii '
soar had been disappointed of their hope. It was
t day of suspense also for the two great armies
which were drawing near to their encounter on the
i H Palestine. Like Anianns in the siege
HKZEKLAH
1061
of Orleans, Hezaldah must have knked aonthwasw
and westward with ever keener and keener eager-
ness. For already there was a rumor that Tirha-
kah,the king of Egypt, was on his way to the rescue
Already Sennacherib had heard the rumor, and it
was this which precipitated his endeavor to in-
timidate Jerusalem into submission. The evening
closed in on what seemed to be the devoted city.
The morning dawned, and with the morning came
the tidings from the camp at Ubnah, that they
were delivered. 'It came to pass that night (8
&.. xix. 35) that the Angel of Jehovah went forth,
and smote in the camp of the Assyrians a hundred
and fourscore and five thousand.' . . . The As-
syrian king at once returned, and, according to the
Jewish tradition, wreaked his vengeance on the
Israelite exiles whom he found in Mesopotamia.
He was the last of the great Assyrian conquerors.
No Assyrian host again ever crossed the Jordan.
Within a few years from that time . . . the As-
syrian power suddenly vanished from the earth."
It was in all probability at the time of Sen-
nacherib's first invasion of Palestine that Hezekiah
purchased his exemption from subjection to the
Assyrian yoke by the payment of a fine. If the
Assyrian inscriptions are rightly interpreted, they
furnish an important confirmation of the Biblical
account of this expedition, and of its results as re-
gards Hezekiah and the Jews. The boastful record
on one of the cylinders is said to read as follows:
•"And because Hezekiah, king of Judah,' says
Sennacherib, ' would not submit to my yoke, I came
up against him, and by force of arms and by the
might of my power, I took furty-tix of hit strong
fenced cities ; and of the smaller towns which wars
scattered about, I took and plundered a countless
number. And from these places I captured and car-
ried off as spoil two hundred thousand one hundred
and fifty people, old and young, male and female,
together with horses and mares, asses and camels,
oxen and sheep, a countless multitude. And Heze-
kiah himself I shut up in Jerusalem, his capital city,
like a bird in a cage, building towers round the city
to hem him in, and raising banks of earth against
the gates, so as to prevent escape. . . . Then upon
this Hezekiah there fell the fear of the power of
my arms, and he sent out to me the chiefs and the
elders of Jerusalem with 30 talents of gold and 800
talents of silver, and divers treasures, a rich and
immense booty. (See 3 K. xviii. 13-16.) . . .
All these things were brought to me at Nineveh,
the seat of my government, Hezekiah having sent
them by way of tribute, and as a token of his sub-
mission to my power.' " (See liawlinson's Bamp-
ton Lecture* for 1859, p. 316 f., Amer. ed.) Dean
Milman also calls attention to this coincidence
(History of the Jews, i. 427, Amer. ed.).
The chronological order of some of the events
in Hezekiah's life is not easily adjusted. The
events are related in different books (Kings, Chron
icies, Micah, Isaiah ), and not with many notations
of time. M. von Niebuhr treats of some of the
questions relating to the synchronism of Hezekiah's
history with that of the Babylonians and Egyp-
tians (Gcschichte Assur's u. Babets, pp. 71, 76,
88, 100 fc, 179). For valuable articles on Hese-
kiah, see Winer's Bibt. Realm, i. 496-499; Her-
d's Beal-Encyk. vi. 151-157; and ZeUer's BibL
nrterb. 1. 612-615, Ste Aufl. For information
on related subjects, the reader is referred in this
Dictionary to Dial; Isaiah; Saigon; Sis
AACHKKin: Lachish; and Micah. H.
Digitized by
Google
1062 HEZION
B "Efwte.] Son of Nesriah, one of Che de-
nendantsof the royal familyof Judah (1 Chr. iii. S3).
3. [Ktec'uu; ed. 1500, -chiat.] The tune
same, though rendered In the A. V. Hizkiah, is
found In Zeph. 1. 1.
4. Atkr-of-Hkzkki.ui. [Atkk.] F. W. F.
HE'ZION ()V»n [right, virion]: 'A&r;
fVat Af«u-;] Alex.Af«m\: ffcnut), a king of
Aram (Syria) father of 1'abrimoD, and grandfather
of Benhadad I. He and his father are mentioned
only in 1 K. xv. 18, and their names are omitted
by Josephus. Ill the absence of all information,
the natural suggestion is that he is identical with
Kkzon, the contemporary of Solomon, in 1 K. xi.
33 ; the two names being very similar in Hebrew,
and still more so in other versions (compare Arab,
and Feahito on the latter passage) ; and indeed this
conclusion has lwen adopted by some translators
and commentators (Junius, Kiider, Dathe, Ewald).
Against it are (" ), that the number of generations
of the Syrian kings would then be one less than
those of the contemporary kings of Judah. But
then the reign of Abyam was only three years, and
in fact Jeroboam outlived both Kehoboam and his
ton. \6.) I'he statement of Nicolaua of Damascus
(Joseph. Ant. vii. 5, § 2), that from the time of
David for ten generations the kings of Syria were
one dynasty, each king taking the name of Hadad,
"as did the Ptolemies in Egypt." But this would
exclude, not only Hezion and Tabrimon, but Rezon,
unless we may interpret the last sentence to mean
that the official title of Hadad was held in addition
to the ordinary name of the king. [Rezon ; Tab-
KIMON.] O.
HE'ZIR ("I"*? [«•*•]: Xin>; [Vat X»-
Curi] Alex. U(eie; [Comp. Xy(elp'- Hear]). 1.
A priest in the time of David, leader of the 17th
monthly course in the service (1 Chr. xxiv. 16).
2. ["rifle; Vat. Alex. FA. Hfeu>: Boar.]
One of the heads of the people (laymen) who sealed
the solemn covenant with Nehemiah (Neh. x. 20)
HEZ'RAI [2 syl.] (""^'P [=)*-)?n, Hes-
ron, which see], according to' the Ktri of the Ma-
aorets, but the original reading of the text, Ctlib,
has TISn=Hezro: 'Aaapat; [Alex. Atrapaf]
/farm), a native of Carmel, perhaps of the south-
ern one, and in that case possibly once a slave or
adherent of Nabal; one of the 30 heroes of David's
guard (2 Sam. xxiii. 35). In the parallel list the
Dame appears as —
HEZ'RO ('"nsn [seew»/ro]: 'H<r*p4i Alex.
As-ouku; [Aid. 'Aapat: Comp. 'EeyifO Baro), in
1 Chr. xi. 37. Kennioott, however (Diaertation,
pp. 207, 208), decides, on the almost unanimous
authority of the ancient versions, that Hetzral is
the original form A the name.
HEZ'RON (P^H [blooming, Fiirrt; but
called, as a garden, Gee.]: 'Atrpavt [Alex, in
Num., A<rp<*/iO Baron). L A son of Reuben
(Gen. xlvi. 9; Ex. vi. 14), who founded the family
of the Hearonites (Num. xxvi. 6).
2. A son of Pharez, and one of the direct an-
sartors of David (Gen. xlvi. 19; Ruth It. 18); in
-JLX. "jMoin (once var. lect Grab. 'AsyaV), and
Israel, which is followed in Matt. 1. 3. [Vat in
(Nth, Zrpur; in 1 Chr. il. 9, 18, SI, SS, Eat par;
L u, hr. 1, Amrov : Vulg. Baron, in Ruth Etron.]
T. KB.
HIEL
HEZ'RONITEtf, THE ("a^rTTJ: J At
pmvl [Vat -ytt] : Hetromta). A branch of nV
tribe of Judah, descendants of Hezron, the son «s
Pharez (Num. xxvi. 91). [In the A. V. ed. 1611
the word is spelt Hetronitos. — A.] W. A. W.
HIIXDAI [2 syL] OIH [mightg «*•>/]
Alex. AWai; [Comp. 'HSai; Aid. Ovpli] Vat
omits: Eeddai), one of the thirty-seven heroes of
David's guard (2 Sam. xxiii. 30), described ss "of
the torrents of Gaash." In the parallel list of :
Chr. (xi. 32) the name is given as Huhai. Ken-
nioott (DiuerU p. 194) decides in favor of " Hurai "
on grounds for which the reader most be refenad
to his work.
HEDDE'KEL (VfT^n [iharp, urifl, Dsstr.
in Ges. 6te Aufl.]: liypif, [in Dan. (Theodot),]
Tiypa 'EStWA [Alex, Ek»««\] : Tygrit, Ti-
gru), one of the riven of Eden, the river which
"goeth eastward to Assyria" (Gen. ii. 14), am]
which Daniel calls "the Great river" (Dan. x. 4),
seems to have been rightly identified by the LXX.
with the Tigris. It is difficult to account for the
initial n, unless It be for Tl, "lively," which ■
used of running water in Gen. xxvi. 19. Dtkrl
( vfTj) is clearly an equivalent of Digla or Diglatk,
a name borne by the Tigris in all ages. The form
Diglath occurs in the Tsrgums of Onkelos and Jon-
athan, in Josephus (Ant. I. 1), in the Armenian
Eusebius (Chron. Can. pars 1. o. 2), in Zonana
(Ann. i. 2), and in the Armenian version of the
Scriptures. It is hardened to DigUt (Diglito) by
Pliny (B. N. vi. 27). The name now in use among
the inhabitants of Mesopotamia is Dijleh.
It has generally been supposed that Digla is a
mere Semitic corruption of Tigra, and that this
latter is the true name of the stream. Strabo (xi.
14, § 8), Pliny (foe. eft.) and other writers tell as
that the river received its designation from Ha
rapidity, the word Tigris ( 7Yoro) meaning in the
Medo-Persic language "an arrow." This seems
probable enough ; but it must be observed that the
two forms are found side by side in the Babylonian
transcript of the Behistun inscription, and that the
ordinary name of the stream in the inscriptions of
Assyria is Tiggar. Moreover, If we allow the
Dtkel of Biddekei, to mean the Tigris, it would
seem probable that this was the more ancient of
the two appellations. Perhaps, therefore, it is bast
to suppose that there was in early Babylonian a
root dtk, equivalent in meaning, and no doubt con-
nected in origin, with the Aryan tig or tif, and
that from these two roots were formed independ-
ently the two names, Dtkel, Dikta, or Digla, am.
Tiggar, Tigra, or Tigris. The stream was known
by either name indifferently; but on the whole the
Aryan appellation predominated in ancient times,
and was that most commonly used even by Semltie
races. The Arabians, however, when they conqaered
Mesopotamia, revived the true Semitic title, and
this (Dijlek) continues to be the name by which
the river is known to the natives down to the pres-
ent day. The course of the river is described under
Tiaras. G. R.
HTEL (bt^n, perhaps for bfcNT [0*
sjms, Ges.]: 'Ax^Ai [Vat Ay«mA; Corap
Xi4a0 Biei), a native of Bethel, who rebuilt Jar
icho in the reign of Ahab (1 K. xvi. 34); and b
whom was fulfilled the curse pronounced by <
Digitized by
Google
HIERAPOLIS
(tab. ri 96). 8tr»bo speaks of this cursing of a
ImIhijiiiI city as an ancient custom, and instances
the corse* imprecated by Agamemnon and Croesus
(Grot. AimoL ad Joth. vi. 96); Manus compares
Ihe cursing of Carthags by the Romans (PoL Syn.).
The term Bethelite 0*?$? n N 2) here onlj is ren-
dered family of anting (Pet. Hart.), and also
■owe or place of curling (Arab., Syr., and Child.
versions), qu. H^N /"VS ; but there seems no rea-
son for questioning the accuracy of the LXX. i
BadrnKlrtit, which is approved by most commen-
tators, and sanctioned by Gee. (Lex. s. v.). The
rebuilding of Jericho was an intrusion upon the
kingdom of Jehoshaphat, unless with Pet Hart
we suppose that Jericho had already been detached
from it by the kings of Israel T. E. B.
HIERAP'OLIS ClcpoWis [ucrtd city]).
This place is mentioned only once in Scripture, and
that incidentally, namely, in CoL ir. 13, where its
church is associated with those of Coloss.k and
Laodicea. Such association is just what we
should expect; for the three towns were all in the
basin of the Meander, and within a few miles of
one another. It is probable that Hierapolis was
one of the " inlustres Asias urbes " (Tac. Ann. xiv.
27) which, with Laodicea, were simultaneously des-
olated by an earthquake about the time when Chris-
tianity was established in this district. There is
little doubt that the church of Hierapolis was
sounded at the same time with that of Coloaue,
and that its characteristics In the apostolic period
won the same. Its modern name is Pambouk-
Kalttn. The most remarkable feature of the
neighborhood consists of the hot calcareous springs,
which have deposited the vast and singular incrus-
tations noticed by travellers. See, for instance,
Chandler, Trav. in Ana Minor (1817), i. 264-272;
Hamilton, Acs. in Ann Minor (1842), i. 507-522.
The situation of Hierapolis is extremely beautiful ;
and its ruins are considerable, the theatre and gym-
nasium being the most conspicuous. J. S. H.
• Arundel passed within sight of Hierapolis,
which he describes as high up on the mountain
side, on a terrace extending several miles (Ditcov-
erie* in Ana Minor, it 200 ). Kiohtar ( WaUfahr-
fea, p. 533 <T.) states that Hierapolis and Laodicea
(mentioned together, CoL iv. 13) lie within view
of each other on opposite sides of the Lycus. For
notices by still other travellers, see Pooocke's De-
^rip&m of the fail, etc., ii. pt il. 75; Fellows's
Atia Minor, p. 283 ff. : and Schubert's Unite in
dot Morgenlawl, p. 283. The various observations
am brought concisely together in Lewin's sketch
(life and EputUt of St. Paul, 1. 904 f.). Ep-
aphra* may have founded the church at Hierapolis;
at all event*, that city was one of the places
be manifested that seal for the truth ac-
ta him by the Apostle (CoL iv. 13)
"To celebrated Stoic philosopher, Epictetus, was a
native of Hierapolis, and nearly contemporary with
Paul and Epaphras. H.
HIER'EEL ('l«er»>: Jetleeh), 1 Esdr. ix.
M. [Jbhiei.]
HIERTBMOTH Cl*a*iM: Erimoth). L
Esdr. ix- 27. [Jkbehotii.]
S. [Jermoth.] 1 Esdr. ix. SO. [Ramoth.]
HIBRIEXT78 (1t(p^Kot, I. e. Iezrhdos;
rVat. U(optmXas; Aid. 'IcoiqAov :] Jttrehu), 1
lair. is. 97- This tnswers to Jxmitr, in the Hat
HIGH PLACES
1088
of Err. x.; but whence our translators ob tain ed
their form of the name does not appear.
* Our translators evidently derived this form of
the name from the Aldine edition of the LXX.
which they have so often followed in the Apoc-
rypha- A.
HIER"MAS Cltpuas; [Vat Up/un] Semiat),
1 Esdr. ix. 26. [Bamiah.]
HIERON'YMTJS ('Uprfrouof [socre*
named] : ffieronymut), a Syrian general in the
time of Antiochus V. Eupator (2 Mace. xii. S).
The name was msde distinguished among the
Asiatic Greeks by Hieronymus of Cardia, the his-
torian of Alexander's successors. B. F. W.
• HIERTJ'SALEM is used in the A. V. ed.
1611, and other early editions, for Jkbubalem.
HIGGAION [8 syl.] OVjil ■ <}H)> » *<*■
which occurs three times in the book of Psalms
(Ix. 17 [16], xix. 16 [14], xcii. 4 [3]). Mendelssohn
translates it meditation, thought, idea. Knapp
(fits Ptalmen) identifies it, in Ps. ix. 17, with the
Arabic *2H and bUil, " to mock," and bene*
his rendering " What a shout of laughter! " (be
cause the wicked are entrapped in their own snares) ;
but in Ps. xcii. 4, he translates it by "Lieder"
(songs). B- David Kimchi likewise assigns two
separate meanings to the word ; on Ps. ix. 17 he
says, "This aid is for us (a subject of) meditation
and thankfulness," whilst in his commentary on
the passage Ps. xcii. 4, be gives to the same word
the signification of melody, " this is the melody of
the hymn when it is recited (played) on the harp."
'< We will meditate on this forever " (Raehi, Oman.
on Pt. ix. 17). In Ps. ix. 17, Aben Ezra's Com-
ment, on " Higgaion Selah " is, " this will I record
in truth : " on Ps. xcii. 4 he says, " Higgaion
means the melody of the hymn, or it is the name
of a musical instrument" According to Furst,
7V2H is derived from nan. "to whisper:" (a)
it refers to the vibration of the harp, or to the
opening of an interlude, an opinion supported by
the LXX., Symmachus, and Aquilas: (A) it refers
to tilenl mediation : this is agreeable to the use of
the word in the Talmud and in the Rabbinical
writings; henoe }"Mn for logic (Concord. Heir,
atgue Chald.).
It should seem, then, that Higgaion has two
meanings, one of a general character implying
thought, reflection, from 71SH (eomp. TWfl
•>ab, Ps. ix. 17, and OVn bs *& ZBY3Tf\,
Lam. ill 62), and another in Ps. ix. 17 and Ps
xcii. 4, of a technical nature, bearing on the im
port of musical sounds or signs well known in the
age of David, but the precise meaning of which
cannot at this distance of time be determined.
D. W. M.
HIGH PLACES (rflD^ : in the historical
books, to tyy\i, t« ftyni; in the Prophets, faftol;
in the Pentateuch, ottJaoi, Lev. xxvi. 80, Ac.;
and once tttaKa, Ex. xvi. 16: excelta, /ana).
From 'he earliest times it was the custom among
ail nat">ns to erect altars and places of worship on
lofty and conspicuous spots. We find that the
Trojan* sacrificed to Zeus on Mount Ida (JL X.
171), and we are repeatedly told hat such was tht
custom of the Persians, Greeks Germans, ate ,
Digitized by
Google
1064
HIGH PLACES
tame they fended that the hill-tope were nearer
hearen, and therefore the meet favorable places for
prayer and Incense (Herod, i. 131; Xen. Cyrop.
viii. 7; Mem. iii. 8, § 10; Strab. XT. p. 733; Lac.
ie Sacrif. L 4; Creuzer, Symb. 1. 159; Winer, I. v.
BerggSUer). To this general custom we find con-
stant allusion in the Bible (Is. Ixt. 7; Jer. iii. 8;
Ec. ri. 13, xviii. 6; Hos. iv. 18), and it ii espe-
cially attributed to the Moabites (Is. it. 3, zri.
13; Jer. xlviii. 85). Kren Abraham built an altar
to the Lord on a mountain near Bethel (Gen. iii. 7,
8; cf. xxii. 3-4, zxzi. 54) which shows that the
practice was then as innocent as it was natural; and
although it afterwards became mingled with idol-
atrous observances (Num. xxiii. 3), it was in itself
far less likely to be abused than the consecration
of grores (Hos. ir. 13). The external religion of
the patriarchs was in some outward observances
different from that subsequently established by the
Mosaic law, and therefore they should not be con-
demned for actions which afterwards became sinful
only because they were forbidden (Heidegger, HUL
Patr. U. iii. f 53). [Bah AR.]
It is, however, quite obvious that if every grove
and eminence had been suffered to become a place
for legitimate worship, especially in a country where
they had already been defiled with the sins of
polytheism, the utmost danger would have resulted
to the pure worship of the one true God (Haver-
nick, EM. i. p. 592). It would infallibly have led
to the adoption of nature-goddesses, and " gods of
the hills " (1 K. xx. 23). It was therefore implic-
itly forbidden by the law of Moses (Deut. xii. 11-
14), which also gave the strictest injunction to
destroy these monuments of Canaanitish idolatry
(Lev. xxvi. 30; Num. xxxiii. 52; Deut. xxxiii. 39,
nbi LXX. TjxtxnA.01), without stating any general
reason for this command, beyond the fact that they
had been connected with such associations. It
seems, however, to be assumed that every Israelite
would perfectly understand why groves and high
places were prohibited, acd therefore they are only
condemned by virtue of the injunction to use but
me altar for the purposes of sacrifice (Lev. xvii. 8,
4; Deut xii. patsim, xvi. 21; John iv. 20).
The command was a projective one, and was
Dot to come into force until such time as the tribes
•ere settled in the promised land, and " had rest
tern all their enemies round about" Thus we
find that both Gideon and Manoah built altars on
high places by Divine command (Judg. vi. 35, 36,
xiii. 16-23), and it is quite clear from the tone of
the book of Judges that the law on the subject
was either totally forgotten or practically obsolete.
Hot could the unsettled state of the country have
teen pleaded as an excuse, since it seems to have
iieen most fully understood, even during the life of
lushua, that burnt-offerings could be legally offered
mi one altar only (Josh. xxii. 29). It is more sur-
pnsing to find this law absolutely ignored at a
much later period, when there was no intelligible
reason for its violation — as by Samuel at Mizpeh
;i Sam. vii. 10) and at Bethlehem (xvi. 6); by
Saul at Gilgal (xiii. 9) and at Ajalon (? xiv. 85);
by David (1 Chr. xxi. 26); by Ehjah on Mount
Uarmel (1 K. xviii. 80); and by other prophet*
(1 Sam. x. 6). To suppose that in all these eases
'ha rule was superseded by a Divine intimation
appears to us an unwarrantable expedient, the
man so as the actors in the transactions do not
appear 10 oe aware of anything extraordinary in
icb conduct The Rabbis have invented elaborate
HIGH PliAUSS
methods to account for the anomaly: thus the)
say that high places were allowed until the build
ing of the Tabernacle; that they were then illega.
until the arrival at Gilgal, and then during the
period while the Tabernacle was at SbJloh; that
they were once more permitted whilst it was si
Nob and Gideon (cf. 2 Chr. i. 3), until the build-
ing of the Temple at Jerusalem rendered them
finally unlawful (R. Sol. Jarchi, Aherbanel, etc..
quoted in Carpzov, App. CriL p. 333 ft; Roland,
Ant. Hebr. i. 8 ff. ). Others content themselves
with saying that until Solomon's time all Palestine
was considered holy ground, or that there existed
a recognized exemption in favor of high places for
private and spontaneous, though not for the stated
and public sacrifices.
Such explanations are sufficiently unsatisfactory;
but it is at any rate certain that, whether from the
obvious temptations to the disobedience, or from
the example of other nations, or from ignorance of
any definite law against it, the worship in high
places was organized and all but universal through-
out Jodssa, not only during (1 K. iii. 3-4), but
even after the time of Solomon. The convenience
of them was obvious, because, as focal centres of
religious worship, they obviated the unpleasant and
dangerous necessity of visiting Jerusalem for the
celebration of the yearly feasts (2 K. xxiii. 8).
The tendency was ingrained in the national mind ;
and although it was severely reprehended by the
later historians, we have no proof that it was known
to be sinful during the earlier periods of the mon-
archy, except of course where it was directly con-
nected with idolatrous abominations (1 K. xi. 7;
2 K. xxiii. 13). In fact the high places seem to
have supplied the ueed of synagogues (Ps. lxxiv. 8),
and to have obviated the extreme self-denial in-
volved in having but one legalized locality for the
highest forms of worship. Thus we find that
Rehoboam established a definite worship at the
high places, with its own peculiar and separated
priesthood (8 Chr. xi. 15; 2 K. xxiii. 9), the mem-
bers of which were still considered to be priests of
Jehovah (although in 2 K. xxiii. 5 they am called
by the opprobrious term D , "1?p9). It was there-
fore no wonder that Jeroboam found it so easy to
seduce the people into his symbolic worship at the
high places of Dan and Bethel, at each of which he
built a chapel for his golden calves. Such chapels
were of course frequently added to the mere altars
on the hills, as appears from the expressions in 1 K.
xi. 7; 2 K. xvii. 9, Ac. Indeed, the word DIQS
became so common that it was used for any idol-
atrous shrine even in a valley (Jer. vii. 31), or in
the streets of cities (2 K. xvii. 9; El. xvi. 31).
These chapels were probably Dot structures of stone,
but mere tabernacles hung with colored tapestrr
(Es. xvi. 16; 4n&4\urpa, Aqu. Tbeod.; Jer. ad
loc. ; fllaXov bamiv, LXX.), like the owwrr/ Up&
of the Carthaginians (Diod. Sic. xx. 65; Creusar,
Symbol v. 176, quoted by Ges. The*, i. 188), aad
like those mentioned in 3 K. xxiii. 7 ; Am. v. 36.
Many of the pious kings of Judah were either
too weak or too ill informed to repress the worship
of Jehovah at these local sanctuaries, while they of
course endeavored to prevent it from being contam-
inated with polytheism. It is therefore appended
as a matter of blame or a (perhaps venial) drawback
to the character of some of the most pious princes
that they tolerated this disobedience to the provi*
Digitized by
Google
HIGH-PRIEST
I ef Dmtmwxnj and Leviticus. On the other
ad it b mentioned u an aggravation of the sin-
■s of other kings that they built or railed high
piaeei (2 Chr. zzi. 11, xxviii. 29), which are gen-
erally add to have been dedicated to idolatrous
purpo s e s. It is almost inconceivable that to direct
a violation of the theocratic principle as the per-
mitted existence of false worship should hare been
tolerated by kings of even ordinary piety, much
leas by the highest sacerdotal authorities (2 K. xii.
8). When therefore we find the recurring phrase,
"only the high places were not taken away; aa yet
the people did sacrifice and burn incense on the
high places " (2 K. xiv. 4, xv. 4, 86; 2 Chr. zv.
17, Ac), we are forced to limit it (aa above) to
places dedicated to Jehovah only. The subject,
however, is made more difficult by a double discrep-
ancy, far the assertion, that Aaa •' took away the
Ugh places" (2 Chr. idv. 3), is opposite to what is
•fated in the first book of Kings (xv. 14), and a
similar discrepancy is found in the can of Jehosh-
aphat (2 Chr. xvti. fl, xx. 33). Moreover in both
instances the chronicler is apparently at issue with
Umadf (xiv. 3, xv. 17, xvil. 8, xx. 83). It is in-
credible that this should have been the result of
carelessness or oversight, and we must therefore
•oppose, either that the earlier notices expressed
the will and endeavor of these monarohs to remove
the high places, and that the later ones recorded
their failure in the attempt (EwaM, GescA. ill. 468;
Kail, Apokg. Vtrwch, p. 290; Winer, >. cv. Atta,
Jotaptuit) ; or that the statements refer respectively
to Banioth, dedicated to Jehovah and to idols
(IGcbaelia, Schwa, Bertheau on 2 Chr. xvil. «, Ac.).
" Those devoted to false gods were removed, those
nusdevoted to the true God were Buffered to remain.
The kings opposed impiety, but winked at error"
(Bishop Hall).
At last Hesekiah set himself in good earnest to
the suppression of this prevalent corruption (2 K.
niii. 4, 82), both in Judah and Israel (2 Chr.
xxxL 1), although, so rapid was the growth of the
•vfl, that even his sweeping reformation required to
be finally consummated by Josiah (2 K. xxiii-),
sad that too in Jerusalem and its immediate neigh-
borhood (2 Chr. xxxir. 8). The measure must
have caused a very violent shock to the religious
prejudices of a large number of people, and we
have a curious and almost unnoticed trace of this
resentment in the fact that Rabshakeh appeals to
the discontented faction, and represents Hezekiah
aa a dangerous innovator who had provoked God's
anger by his arbitrary Impiety (2 K. xviii. 22 ; 2
Chr. xxxii. 12). After the time of Josiah we find
us farther mention of these Jehovistic high places.
F. W. F.
HIGH-PRIEST Onbn, with the definite
article, I. e. the Priut; and In the books subse-
t to the Pentateuch with the frequent addition
\n and tTHhrr). Lev. xxi. 10 seems to ex-
tdbit the epithet VfJ (as hUrKowot and tutWor
« the N. T.) In a transition state, not yet wholly
technical; and the same may be said of Num.
exxv. 26, where the explanation at the end a* the
tana, "which was anointed with the holy ill,"
■asm to show that the epithet VTJ was not yet
sake estabUsbed as distinctive of the chief priest
(at ver. 28). In all other passages of the Penta-
totta it la simply "the priest," Ex. xxlx. 80, 44;
HIGH-PRIEST
10W
**
Lev. xvi. 82: or yet more frequently " Aaron," at
" Aaron the priest," aa Num. iii. 6, iv. 33 ; Lev. i
7, Ac. So too « Eieazar the priest," Num. xxvH.
22, xxxi. 26, 29, 31, Ac. In the LXX. i ipxf
ptvt, or Itptvt, where the Heb. has only JHS.
Vulg. tactrdo* magnut, or primut pontifa, prim
cept ucerdotum.
In treating of the office of high-priest among
the Israelites it will be convenient to consider it —
I. Legally. II. Theologically. III. Historically.
I. The legal view of the high-priest's office com-
prises all that the law of Moses ordained respecting
it. The first distinct separation of Aaron to the
office of the priesthood, which previously belonged
to the firstborn, was that recorded Ex. xxviii. A
partial anticipation of this call occurred at the
gathering of the manna (ch. xvi.), when Hoses bid
Aaron take a pot of manna, and lay it np before
the Lord: which implied that the ark of the Testi-
mony would thereafter be under Aaron's charge,
though it was not at that time in existence. The
taking up of Nadab and Abihu with their father
Aaron to the Mount, where they beheld the glory
of the God of Israel, seems alio to have been
intended as a preparatory intimation of Aaron's
hereditary priesthood. See also xxvii. 21. Bat
it was not till the completion of the directions for
making the tabernacle and its furniture that the
distinct order was given to Moses, "Take thon
unto tbee Aaron thy brother, and his sons with
him, from among the children of Israel, that ha
may minister unto me in the priest's office, even
Aaron, Nadab and Abihu, Eieazar and Ithamar,
Aaron's sons " (Ex. xxviii. 1). And after the order
for the priestly garments to be made " for Aaron
and his sons," it is added, " and the priest's office
shall be theirs for a perpetual statute; and thon
shalt consecrate Aaron and his sons," and " I wil
sanctify both Aaron and his sons to minister to me
in the priest's office," xxix. 9, 44.
We find from the very first the following charac-
teristic attributes of Aaron and tbe high-priests hie
successors, as distinguished from the other priests.
(1.) Aaron alone was anointed. "He poured
of the anointing oil upon Aaron's head, and anointed
him to sanctify him " (Lev. viii. 12); whence one
of the distinctive epithets of the high-priest was
fTttfyn ^nbn, «the anointed priest" (Ler.
iv. 3, 6, 16, xxi. 10; see Num. xxxv. 26). Thai
appears also from Ex. xxix. 29, 30, where it la
ordered that the one of the sons of Aaron who suc-
ceeds him in the priest's office shall wear the holy
garments that were Aaron's for seven days, to be
anointed therein, and to be consecrated in then.
Hence Eusebius {Hut. A'cclet. i. 6 ; Dan. Evang.
viii.) understands the Anointed (A. V. " Messiah,"
or, aa the LXX. read, xpitrpa) in Dan. Ix. 26, the
anointing of the Jewish high-priests: "It means
nothing else than the succession of hlgh-priesta,
whom the Scripture commonly calls Ypurrott,
anointed;" and so too Tertullian and Theodore*
(Rosenm. ad L e.). The anointing of the sons of
Aaron, t. «., the common priests, seems to have
been confined to sprinkling their garments with the
anointing oil (Ex. xxix. 21, xxviii. 41, Ao.), though
according to KaHsch on Ex. xxhc 8, and Ughtfoot,
following the Rabbinical interpretation, toe differ-
ence consists In the abundant pouring of oil (PJr^)
on the head of the high-priest; from whence it was
drawn with the finger into two streams, in tat
Digitized by
Google
1086 H1GH-PBIEST
shape of ■ Greek x> while the priest* wen merely
marked with the finger dipped in oil on the fore-
head (Tittup). But this is probably a late inven-
tion of the Rabbins. The anointing of the high-
priest is alluded to in Ps. cxxxiii. 2: " It is like
the precious ointment upon the head, that ran down
upon the beard, even Aaron's beard, that went
down to the skirts of his garments." The com
position of this anointing oD, consisting of myrrh,
cinnamon, calamus, cassia, and olive oil, is pre-
scribed Ex. xxx. 22-25, and its use for any other
purpose but that of anointing the priests, the
tabernacle, and the vessels, was strictly prohibited
on pain of being " cut off from his people." The
manufacture of it was intrusted to certain priests,
colled apothecaries (Neh. iil. 8). But this oil is
■aid to have been wanting under the second Temple
(Prideani, 1. 151; Seiden, cap. lx.).
High-priest.
(9.) The high-priest had a peculiar dress, which,
as we have seen, passed to his successor at his
death. This dress consisted of eight parts, as the
Rabbins constantly note, the brea*t/>lnte, the tphod
with its curious girdle, the »•(>*« of the epbod, the
mitre, the broidered cnnt or diaper tunic, and the
girdle, the materials being gold, blue, red, crimson,
ind line (white) linen (Ex. xxviii.). To the above
ire added, in ver. 42, the breeches or drawers (Lev.
rvi. 4) of linen; and to make up the number 8,
<oroe reckon the high-priest's mitre, or the plate
»V*?) separately from the bonnet; while others
rjckon the curious girdle of the ephod separately
from the ephod.'
Of these 8 articles of attire, 4, namely, the crat
or tunic, the girdle, the breeches, and the bonnet or
* In Lev. vUl. 7-12 then to a complete account of
the potting on of these garments 'by Aaron, and the
vbole ceremony of his consecration and that of his
•ens. It there appears distinctly that, besides the
girdle common to all the priests, the high-priest also
vote the curious girdle of the ephod.
* Jetsfhna, however, whom BShr follows,. calls the
HIGH-PRIEST
turban, n^JJD, instead of the mitre, H^SQ
belonged to tie common priests.
It is well known how, in the Assyrian sculptures
the king is in like manner distinguished by ths
shape of his head-dress; and how in Persia none
but the king wore the cidaris or erect tiara.'
Taking the articles of the high -priest's dress in the
order in which they are enumerated above, we have
(a) the breastplate, or, as it is further named (Ex.
xxviii. 15, 29, 30), the breastplate of judgment,
tafrpO ^n, \oy*7or riir Kpitrtmr ("ir ttjj
Kpletm) in the LXX-, and only in ver. 4, wtpia-
■rii8iov. It was, like the inner curtains of the
tabernacle, the vail, and the ephod, of " conning
work," atT n n jpyQ, « opus plumarium," and
" arte plumaria," Vulg. [See Embroiderer.]
The breastplate was originally 2 spans long, and i
span broad, but when doubled it was square, the
shape in which it was wom. It was fastened at the
top by rings and chains of wreathen gold to the
two onyx stones on the shoulders, and beneath with
two other rings and a lace of blue to two corre-
sponding rings in the ephod, to keep it fixed in it*
place, above the curious girdle. But the most
remarkable and most important parts of this breast-
plate, were the 12 precious stones, set in 4 rows, 3
in a row, thus corresponding to the 12 tribes, and
divided in the same manner as their camps were;
each stone having the name of one of the children
of Israel engraved upon it. Whether the order
followed the ages of the sons of Israel, or, as seems
most probable, the order of the encampment, may
be doubted; but unless any appropriate distinct
symbolism of the different tribes be found in the
names of the precious stones, the question can
scarcely be decided. According to the LXX. and
Josephus, and in accordance with the language of
Scripture, it was these stones which constituted the
L'rim and Thummim, nor does the notion advo-
cated by Gesenius after Spencer and others, that
these names designated two little images placed
between the Wds of the bresstplate, Kem to rest
on any sufficient ground, in spite of the Egyptian
analogy'' brought to bear upon it Josepbus's
opinion, on the other hand, improved upon by the
Rabbins, as to the manner in which the stones gave
out the oracular answer, by preternatural illumina-
tion, appears equally destitute of probability. It
seems to be far simplest and most in agreement
with the different accounts of inquiries made by
Urim and Thummim (1 Sam. xir. 3, 18, 19, xxiii.
2, 4, 9, 11, 12, xxviii. 8; Judg. xx. 28; 2 Sam.
v. 23, Ac. ) to suppose that the answer was given
simply by the Word of the I»rd to the high-priest
(comp. John xi. SI), when he had inquired of the
Lord clothed with the ephod and breastplate. Such
a view agrees with the true notion of the breast-
plate, of which it was not the leading characteristic
to be oracular (as the term \o-yeloy supposes, and
as is by many thought to be intimated by the de-
scriptive addition " of judgment," i. e., as they
bonnets of the priests by the name of Df}}??* ass
Lelow.
Btfhr compares also' the apkes of the Assess)
Malls.
<* For an account of the image of Thmd worn ■}
the Egyptian Judge and priest, see K&lisch'i note •»
xxviii. ; Hengstenberg's Egypt and Us Boots s>
Wilkinson's Egyptians, U. 27. fcn.
Digitized by
Google
HIGH-PBIE3T
•adentand it, " deciaion "), hut only an incidem-J
privilege connected with its fundamental meaning.
What that meaning was re learn from Ex. xxviii. 30,
where we read " Aaron shall bear the judgment of the
ahildren of Israel upon his heart before the Lord
continually." Now tS^ICD is the judicial sen-
tence by which any one is either justified or con-
demned. In prophetic vision, as in actual oriental
life, the sentence of justification was often expressed
by the uature of the robe worn. " He hath clothed
me with the garments of salvation, He hath covered
me with the rolie of righteousness, as a bridegroom
deckuth himself with ornaments, and as a bride
adometh herself with her jewels " (Is. lxi. 10), is a
good illustration of this; cf. lxii. 3. In like man-
ner, in Rev. iii. 5, vii. 9, xix. 14, Ac., the white
linen robe expresses the righteousness or justifica-
tion of saints. Something of the same notion
may be seen in Esth. vi. 8, 9, and on the contrary
ver. 13.
The addition of precious stones and costly orna-
ments expresses glory beyond simple justification.
Thus in Is. lxii. 3, •• Thou shalt be a crown of glory
in the hand of the l.ord, and a royal diadem in the
hand of thy God." Kxactly Mie same symbolism
of glory is assigned to the precious stones in the
description of the New Jerusalem (Kev. xxi. 11,
19-21), a passage which ties together with singular
force the arrangement of the tribes in their camps,
and that of the precious stones in the breastplate.
But, moreover, the high-priest being a representa-
tive personage, the fortunes of the whole people
would most properly be indicated in his person. A
striking instance of this, in connection too with
symbolical dress, is to be found in Zech. iii. " Now
Joshua (the high-priest, ver. 1) was clothed with
glthy garments and stood before the angel. And
he answered and spake unto those that stood before
him, saying, Take away the filthy garments from
him. And unto him he said, Behold, I hare caused
thine iniquity to pass from thee, and I will clothe
thee with change of raiment. And I said, Let
them set a fair mitre (T , 3S) upon his head. So
they set a fair mitre upon his head, and clothed
him with garments." Here the priest's garments,
D^J?, and the mitre, expressly typify the restored
righteousness of the nation. Hence it seems to be
sufficiently obvious that the breastplate of righteous-
ness or judgment, resplendent with the same pre-
sious stones which symbolize the glory of the New
Jerusalem, and on which were engraved the names
of the 12 tribes, worn by the high-priest, who was
then said to bear the judgment of the children of
Iwad upon his heart, was intended to express by
symbols the acceptance of Israel grounded upon the
sacrificial functions of the high-priest. The sense
of the symbol is thus nearly identical with such
passages as Num. xxiii. 81, and the meaning of the
Crim and Thumraim is explained by such expia-
tions as 'JT7W Hy* 1 ? n'TN TO-lp, "Arise,
•bine; for thy light is come" (Is. Ix. 1). Thura-
ssim expresse s alike complete prosperity and com-
slete innocence, and so falls in exactly with the
loohte notion of light (Is. Ix. 1, and lxii. 1, 3).
He privilege of receiving an answer from God
jsan the same relation to the general state of Israel
fnaboUzad by the priest s dress, that the promise
• Is. Bv. 13, ' AB thy children shall be taught :f
Ss>> Lord " don to the preceding description, •' I
HIGH-PRIEST 1067
win lay thy stones with fair cobra, and Ly thy
foundations with sapphires, and I will make thy
windows of agates, and thy gates of carbuncles, and
all thy borders of pleasant stones," ver. 11, 13,
comp. also ver. 14 and 17 (Hen.). It is obvious to
add how entirely this view accords with the bless-
ing of I>evi in Dent, xxxiii. 8, where Levi is called
God's holy one, and God's Thuminim and Urim
are said to be given to him, because he came out
of the trial so clear in his integrity. (See also Bar.
v. 2.)
(ft.) The Ephod ("tt N). This consisted of two
parts, of which one covered the back, and the other
the front, i e., the breast and upper part of thj
body, like the Ms of the Greeks (see Did. »f
Antiquitiet, art. Tunica, p. 1172). These were
clasped together on the shoulder with two large
onyx stones, each having engraved on it 6 of the
names of the tribes of Israel. It was further united
by a " curious girdle " of gold, blue, purple, scarlet,
and fine twined linen round the waist Upon it
was placed the breastplate of judgment, which in
iact was a part of the ephod, and included in the
term in such passages as 1 Sam. ii. 28, xiv. 8,
xxiii. 9, and was fastened to it just above the curi-
ous girdle of the ephod. Linen ephods were also
worn by other priests (1 Sam. xxii. 18), by Samuel,
who was only a Levite (1 Sam. ii. 18), and by
David when bringing up the ark (2 Sam. vi. 14).
The expression for wearing an ephod is "girdtd
with a linen ephod." The ephod was alio fre-
quently used in the idolatrous worship of the
Israelites. See Judg. viii. 27, xvii. 5, 4c. [Ephodj
Girdle.]
(c.) The Robe of the ephod (^^P). This was
of inferior material to the ephod itwlf, being all of
blue (Ex. xxviii. 31), which implied its being only
of "woven work" (CnV* HOTD, xxxix. 22). It
was worn immediately under the ephod, and was
longer than it, though not so long as the broidered
coat or tunic (V? t T'T '""E^" 1 ?). according to
some statements (Bahr, Winer, Kalisch, etc.). The
Greek rendering, however, of V^VQ, woSrjpnf, and
Josepbus's description of it (B. J. v. 5, § 7) seem
to outweigh the reasons given by Biihr for thinking
the robe only came down to the knees, and to make
it improbable that the tunic should have been seen
below the robe. It seems likely therefore that the
sleeves of the tunic, of white diaper linen, were the
only parts of it which were visible, in the case of
the high-priest, when he wore the blue robe over it.
Kor the blue robe had no sleeves, but only slits in
the sides for the arms to come thruugh. It had ■
hole for the head to pass through, with a border
round it of woven work, to prevent its being rent.
The skirt of this robe had a remarkable trimming
of pomegranates in blue, red, and crimson, with a
bell of gold between each pomegranate alternately.
The bells were to give a sound when the high-priest
went in and came out of the Holy Place. Josephus
in the Aniiquititt gives no explanation of the use
of the bells, but merely speaks of the studied beauty
of their appearance. In his Jewish War, however,
he tells us that the bells signified thunder, and the
1 pomegranates lightning. For I'hilo's very curious
I observations see Lightfoot's Works, ix. p. 25.
] Neither does the son of Sirach very distinct)}
' explain '. (Ecclus. xlv.), who in his description of
Digitized by
Google
i
1068 HIGH-PRIEST
the hlgh-pri«t'a attire seems chiefly impressed with
Ml beaut; and magnificence, and says of this trim-
ming, •< He compassed him with pomegranates and
with many golden bells round about, that as he
went there might be a sound, and a noise made
that might be beard in the temple, for a memorial
to the children of his people " l'erhaps, howerer,
he means to intimate that the use of the belk was
to give notice to the people outside, when the high-
priest went in and came out of the sanctuary, as
Whiston, Yatablus, and many others hare sup-
posed.
(d.) The fourth article peculiar to the high-priest
is the mitre or upper turban, with its gold plate,
engraved with Houxkss to thk Lord, fattened
to it by a ribbon of blue. Josephus applies the
term ngJj^D (fuurratfi^H.s) to the turbans of
the common priests as well, lint says that in addi-
tion to this, and sewn on to the top of it, the high-
meat bad another turban of blue: that beside this
he had outside the turlian a triple crown of gold,
consisting, that is, of 3 rims one above the other,
and terminating at top in a kind of conical calyx,
like the inverted calyx of the herb hyoscyamua.
Josephus doubtless gives a true account of the high-
priest's turban as worn in bis day. It may be
fairly conjectured that the crown was appended
when the Aamoneans united the temporal monarchy
with the priesthood, and that this was continued,
though in a modified shape," after the sovereignty
was taken from them. Josephus also describes the
weVoAov, the lamina or gold plate, which he says
covered the forehead of the high-priest. In Ant.
vii. 8, § 8, he says that the identical gold plate
made in the days of Moses existed in his time; and
Whiston adds in a note that it was still preserved
in the time of Origen, and that the inscription on
it was engraved in Samaritan characters (Ant. iii.
8, § 6). It is certain that K. Fiiezer, who flourished
in Hadrian's reign, saw it at Home. It was doubt-
less placed, with other spoils of the Temple, in
the Temple of Peace, which was burnt down in the
reign of Commodus. These spoils, however, are
expressly mentioned aa part of Alaric's plunder
when be took Rome. They were carried by Gen-
seric into Africa, and brought by Belisarius to By-
santium, where they adorned his triumph. On the
warning of a Jew the emperor ordered them back
to Jerusalem, but what became of them is not
known (Keland, dt SpaUU TtmpU).
(«.) The broidered coat, Vl? I? '" l ?' n T» »"•
a tunic or long shirt of linen with a tessellated or
diaper pattern, like the setting of a stone. The
girdle, t333N, also of linen, was wound round the
body several times from the breast downwards, and
(he ends hung down to the ankles. The breeches
or drawers, D^D3?Q, of linen, covered the loins
and thighs; and the bonnet or ny^JD was a
turban of linen, partially covering the bead, but not
in the form of a cone like that of the high-priest
•ben the mitre was added to it. These four last
were common to all priests. Josephus speaks of
the robes (iygifiara) of the chief priests, and the
tunics and girdles of the priests, as forming part
if the spoil of the Temple, (B. J. vi. 8, § 8). Aaron,
• Josephus [A. I. xx. 10) say« that Pauper would
•OS allnw Ryreanus to wear the diadem, when ha
:«Mtand him te the high priesthood
HIGH FREEST
and at his death Eleazar (Num. xx. 96, 88), am
their successors in the high-priesthood, wen sol
emnly inaugurated into their office by being cM
in these eight articles of dress on seven m luteal »
days. From the time of the second Temple, when
the sacred oil (said to have been hid by Josiah, and
lost) was wanting, this putting on of the garment*
was deemed the official investiture of the office.
Hence the robes, which had used to be kept in one
of the chambers of the Temple, and were by Hyr-
canus deposited in the Baris, which he built on
purpose, were kept by Herod in the same tower,
which he called Antonio, so that they might be at
his absolute disposal. The Romans did the same
till the government of Vitellius in the reign of
Tiberius, when the custody of the robes was restored
to the Jews (Ant. xv. 11, § 4; xviii. 4, $ 8).
(3.) Aaron had peculiar functions. To him alone
it appertained, and be alone was permitted, to enter
the lloly of Holies, which he did once a year, en
the great day of atonement, when he sprinkled the
blood of the sin-offering on the mercy-seat, and
burnt incense within the vail (Lev. xvi.). He it
said by the Talmudists, with whom agree Lightfoot,
Selden, (irotius, Winer, Bahr, and many others,
not to hare worn hu full puiitifical robes on this
occasion, but to have been clad entirely in white
linen (Lev. xvi. 4, 32). It is singular, however,
that on the other hand Josephus says that the
great fast day was the chief, if not the only day in
the year, when the high-priest wore all his robes
(B. J. v. 5, § 7), and in spite of the alleged im-
propriety of his wearing his splendid apparel on a
day of humiliation, it seems far more probable that
on the one occasion when he performed functions
peculiar to the high-priest, he should have worn
his full dress. Josephus too could not hare been
mistaken as to the fact, which he repeats (ami. Ap.
lib. ii. J 7 ), where he says the high-priests alone
might enter into the Holy of Holies, " propria
stolA circumomicti." For although Selden, 11 who
strenuously support* the Rabbinical statement that
the high-priest only wore the 4 linen garments
when he entered the Holy of Holies, endeavors to
make Josephus say the same thing, it is impossible
to twist his words into this meaning. It is true
on the other hand, that Lev. xvi. distinctly pre-
scribes that Aaron should wear the 4 priestly gar-
ments of linen when he entered into the Holy of
Holies, and put them off immediately he came out,
and leave them in the Temple; no one being pres-
ent in the Temple while Aaron made the atonement
(vex. 17). Fjther therefore in the time of Josephus
this law was not kept in practice, or else we must
reconcile the apparent contradiction by supposing
that in consequence of the great jealousy with
which the high-priest's robes were kept by the civil
power at this time, the custom had arisen for him
to wear them, not even always on the 3 great festi-
vals Ldnt xviii. 4, § 3), but only on the great day
of expiation. Gad in this gorgeous attire he would
enter the Temple in presence of all the people, and
after having performed in secret, as the law requires,
the rites of ipiation in the linen dress, he would
resume bis pontifical robes and so appear again in
public Thus hia wearing the robes would cutty
come to bt identified chiefly with the day of atone-
ment i and this I* perhaps the most probable n>
» Balden himself remarks (eap. vfl. t» Jm.) the
Josspbua and others always describe the t»«Mtaa
robes ey the bum of rfv rraMk iwfmxuait.
Digitized by
Google
mGH-PBirar
In other respects the high-priest per-
I the functions of a priest but only on uew
ssoons and other great feasts, and on such sulei in
] elisions at the dedication of the Temple under
Solomon, under ZeronbabeL etc. [Atoxkmkjit,
OAT OF.]
(4.) The high-priera bad a peculiar place in the
bur of the manslayer, and his talcing sanctuary in
the cities of refuge. The manslayer might not
jetm the city of refuge during the lifetime of the
existing high-priest who was anointed with the
holy oil (Num. xxxv. 25, 28). It was also forbid-
den to the high-priest to follow a funeral, or rend
Us clothes for the dead, according to the precedent
in Lev. x. 6.
The other respects in which the high-priest ex-
ercised superior functions to the other priests arose
rather from his position and opportunities, than
were distinctly attached to his office, and they con-
sequently varied with the personal character and
abilities of the high-priest. Such were reforms in
religion, restorations of the Temple and its service,
the preservation of the Temple from intrusion or
profanation, taking the lead in ecclesiastical or civil
amirs, judging the people, presiding in the San-
hedrim (which, however, he is said by Lightfoot
rarely to have done), and other similar transactions,
in which we find the high-priest sometimes prom-
inent, sometimes not even mentioned. (See the
historical part of this article.) Even that portion
of power which most naturally and usually fell to
his share, the rule of the Temple, and the govern-
ment of the priests and Levites who ministered
there, did not invariably fall to the share of the
Ugb-priest. For the title <• Ruler of the House
of God," DTrbsn-iTS T33, which usually
A~int** the high-priest, is sometimes given to those
who were not high-priests, as «. g. to I'&ihur the
son of Immer in Jer. xx. 1 : comp. 1 Chr. xii. 27.
The Rabbins speak very frequently of one second
In dignity to the high-priest, whom they call the
lagan, and who often acted in the high-priest's
room." lie is the same who in the 0. T. is called
" the second priest " (2 K. xxiii. 4, xxv. 18). They
say that Hoses was tngnn to Aaron. Thus too it
is explained of Annas and Caiaphas (Luke iii. 2),
that Annas was lagan. Ananias is also thought
by some to hare been tngnn, acting for the high-
priest (Acts xxiii. 2). In like manner they say
Zadok and Abiathar were high-priest and mgnn in
the time of David. The mgnn is also very fre-
quently called memtuuuh, or prefect of the Temple,
and upon him, chiefly lay the care and charge of
the Temple services (lightfoot, jxtirim). If the
high-priest was incapacitated from officiating by
any accidental unclean ness, the mgnn or vice- high-
priest took bis place. Thus, t. g., the Jerusalem
Talmud tells a story of Simon son of Kamitb, that
'• on the eve of the day of expiation, he went out
o speak with the king, and some spittle fell upon
is garments and defiled him : therefore Judah his
rother went in on the day of expiation, and served
in his stead : and so their mother Kamith saw two
tf her sons high-priests in one day. She had seven
•one, and they all served in the high-priesthood "
(Lightibot, lx. 36). It does not appear by whose
Juthority the high-priests were appointed to their
HIGH-PEIB8T
1069
« There tea co nu wvsnr as I
> whether tfa* deputy
lightfoot
office before there were kings of Israel. But a* ws
find it invariably done by the civil power in later
times, it is probable that, in the times preceding
the monarchy, it was by the elders, or Sanhedrim.
The installation and anointing of the high-priest ot
clothing him with the eight garments, which was
the formal investiture, is ascribed by Maimonides
to the Sanhedrim at all times (Lightfoot, ix 22V
It should be added, that the usual age for enter-
ing upon the functions of the priesthood, according
to 2 Chr. xxxi. 17, is considered to have been 20
years, though a priest or high -priest was not actually
incapacitated if he had attained to puberty, as ap-
pears by the example of Aristobulus, who was high -
priest at 17. Ouiag, the sou of Simon the Just,
could not be high-priest, because be was but a child
at his father's death. Again, according to Lev.
xxi., no one that had a blemish could officiate at
the altar. Hoses enumerates 11 blemishes, which
the Talmud expands into 142. Josephus relates
how Antigonus mutilated Hyrcanus's ears, to inca-
pacitate him for being restored to the high-priest-
hood. Illegitimate birth was also a bar to the
high-priesthood, and the subtlety of Jewish dis-
tinctions extended this illegitimacy to being born
of a mother who had been taken captive by heathen
conquerors (Joseph, c. Apicm. i. § 7). Thus FJeuar
said to John Hyrcanus (though, Josephus says,
falsely) that if he was a just man, he ought to
resign the pontificate, because his mother had been
a captive, and he was therefore In cap a ci tated. Lev.
xxi. 13, 14, was taken as the ground of this and
similar disqualifications. For a full account of this
branch of the subject the reader is referred to
Selden's learned treatises De SucceuionUmt, etc.,
and De Succtu. in Pontif. JCiranr. ; and to Pri-
deanx, ii. 806. It was the universal opinion of the
Jews that the deposition of a high-priest, which
became so common, was unlawful. Josephus (AM.
xv. 8) says that Antiochus Kpiphanes was the first
who did so, when be deposed Jesus or Jason; Aris
tobulus, who deposed his brother Hyrcanus, the
second ; and Herod, who took away the high-priest-
hood from Ansnelus to give it to Aristobulus, the
third. See the story of Jonathan son of Ananus,
Ant, xix. 6, § 4.
II. Theologically. The theological view of the
high-priesthood does not fall within the scope of
this Dictionary. It must suffice therefore to ind?
cats that such a view would embrace the considers
tion of the office, dress, functions, and ministrations
of the high-priest, considered as typical of the
priesthood of our Lord Jesus Christ, and as setting
forth under shadows the truths which are openly
taught under the Gospel. This has been done to
a great extent in the Epistle to the Hebrews, and
is occasionally done in other parts of Scripture, as.
e. g., Kev. i. 13, where the wo&fjpqi, and the girdle
about the paps, are distinctly the robe, and the
curious girdle of the epbod, characteristic of the
high-priest. It would also embrace all the moral
and spiritual teaching supposed to be intended by
such symbols. Philo (de vita Motii), Origen
(HomiL in Levii.), Eusebius (DetnoniL Etang.
lib. iii.); Epiphanius (cent. Mtkhked. It. 4c),
Gregory Nasianwn (OraL i., and Elbe Cretans.
Comment p. 196), Augustine ( ituaat. in Ewod.)
may be cited among many others of the ancients
who have more or leas thus treated the subject. Of
modems BeJir (SymbuHI: del Momuchen Cultui).
Fairbairi 'Typology of Script.), Kaliach (Chat-
aaex.'. on iawi) have entered full* into tins MeV
Digitized by
Google
1070
HIGH-PRIEST
set, bath fti.ii the Jewish and Christian point of
rtew. [See end of the article ]
Hi. T* paaa to the historical view of the subject.
The history of the high-priests embraces a penud
«f about 1370 years, according to the opinion of
the present writer, and a snceesaion of about 80
high-priests, beginning *ith Aaron, and ending
with Phannian. "The number of all the high-
priests (says .liwphus, Ant. xx. 10) from Aaron
. . . until I'haiias . . . was 83," where he gives
a comprehensive account of them. They naturally
arrange themselves into three groups: (a) those
before David; (A) those from David to the Cap-
tivity; (c) those from the return from the Baby-
lonish Captivity till the cessation of the office at
the destruction of Jerusalem. The two former
have come down to us in the canonical books of
Scripture, and so have a few of the earliest and
the latest of the latter; but for by far the larger
portion of the Litter group we have only the au-
thority of Josephns, the Talmud, and some other
profane writers.
(o.) The high-priejts of the first group who are
distinctly made known to us as such, are: (1) Aaron ;
(S) Eleazar; (-'!) I'hinehas; (4) Eli; (5) Abitub
(1 Chr. ix. 11: Neh. zi. 11: 1 Sam. xiv. 3); (6)
Ahiah; (7) Aliimelech. I'hinehas the son of Eli,
and father of Ahitub, died before his father, and so
was not high-priest. Of the above the three first
succeeded in regular order, Nadab and Abihu,
Aaron's eldest sons, having died in the wilderness
(Lev. i.). But Kb", the 4th, was of the line of
Ithamar. What was the exact interval between
the death of I'hinehas and the accession of Eli,
what led to the transference of the chief priesthood
from the line of Eleazar to that of Ithamar, and
whether any, or which, of the descendants of Elea-
nor between I'hinehas and Zadok (seven in number,
namely, Abishua, Uukki, Uzzi, Zerahiah, Meraioth,
Amariah, Ahitub), were high-priests, we have no
means of determining from Scripture. Judg. xx.
88, leaves Phinehas, the son of Eleazar, priest at
Shiloh, and 1 Sam. i. 3, 9, finds Eli high-priest
there, with two grown-up sons priests under him.
The only clew is to be found in the genealogies, by
which it appears that Phinehas was 6th in succes-
sion from Levi, while Eli, supposing him to be the
same generation as Samuel's grandfather, would be
10th. If, however, Phinehas lived, as is probable,
to a great old age, and Eli, as his age admits, be
placed about half a generation backward, a very
small interval will remain. Josephus asserts (Ant,
riii. 1, § 3) that the father of Bukki — whom he
alls Joseph, and {Ant. v. 11, § SJ Abiezer, i. e.,
Abishua — was the last high-priest of Phhiehas's
line, before Zadok. This is probably a true tradi-
tion, though Joeephus, with characteristic levity,
Iocs not adhere to it in the above passage of his
6th book, where he makes Bukki and Uzzi to have
seen both high-priests, and Eli to have succeeded
Czri ; or in bk. xx. 10, where he reckons the high-
priests before Zadok and Solomon to have been 13
(a reckonhur which includes apparently all Elea-
sar's descendants down to Ahitub), and adds Eli
•nd his son Phinehas, and Abiathar, whom he calls
Eli's grandson. If Abishua died, leaving a son or
grandson under age, Eli, as head of the line of Ith-
amar, might have become high- priest as a matter of
xrarse, or be might have been appointed by the
alders. His having judged Israel 40 years (1 Sam
T. 18) marks him ss a man of ability. If Ahiah
and AhlmeWih an not variations of the name of
HIGH-PRIEST
the same person, they most have been
since both were sons of Ahitub. The high-priests
then before David's reign may be set down as eight
in number, of whom wren are said in Scripture to
have been high-priests, and one by Josephns alone.
The bearing of this on the chronology of the times
from the Exodus to David, tallying as it does with
the number of the ancestors of David, is too im-
portant to be passed over in silence. It must also
be noted that the tabernacle of God, during the
high-priesthood of Aaron's successors of Shis first
group, was pitched at Shiloh in the tribe of Eph-
raim, a fact which marks the strong influence which
the temporal power already had in ecclesiastical
affairs, since Epbraim was Joshua's tribe, as Jndah
was David's (Josh. xxiv. 30, 33; Judg. xx. 87, 38,
xxi. 21; 1 Sam. i. 8, ft, 94, iv. 8, 4, xiv. 3, 4c;
Ps. lxxviii. 60). This strong influence and inter-
ference of the secular power is manifest throughout
the subsequent history. This first period was also
marked by the calamity which befell the high-priests
as the guardians of the ark, in its capture by the
Philistines. This probably suspended all inquiries
by TJrim and Thnmmim, which were made before
the ark (1 Chr. xiii. 3; comp Judg. xx. 97; 1
Sam. vii. 2. xiv. 18), and must have greatly dimin-
ished the influence of the high-priests, on whom
the largest share of the humiliation e xm e ssed in
the name Ichabod would naturally fell. The rise
of Samuel as a prophet at this very time, and his
paramount influence and importance in tne state,
to the entire eclipsing of Ahiah the priest, coin-
cides remarkably with the absence of the ark, and
the means of inquiring by Urim and Thummim.
(6.) Passing to the second group, we begin with
the unexplained circumstance of there being two
prier 4 * in the reign of David, apparently of nearly
equa* authority, namely, Zadok and Abiathar (1
Chr. xv. 11; S Sam. viii. 17). Indeed, it is only
from the deposition of Abiathar, snd the placing of
Zadok in his room, by Solomon (1 K. ii. 38), that
we learn certainly that Abiathar was the high-
priest, and Zadok the second. Zadok was sou of
Ahitub, of the line of Eleazar (1 Chr. vi. 8), and
the first mention of him is in 1 Chr. xii. 98, as
" a young man, mighty in valor," who joined Da-
rid in Hebron after Saul's death, with 29 captains
of his father's house. It is therefore not unlikely
that after the death of Ahimelech and the secession
of Abiathar to David, Saul may have made Zadok
priest, as far as it was possible for him to do so
in the absence of the ark and the high-priest's robes,
and that David may have avoided the difficulty of
deciding between the claims of his faithful friend
Abiathar, and his new and important ally Zadok
(who perhaps was the means of attaching to Da-
vid's cause the 4600 Levitts and the 3700 priests
who came under Jehoiada their captain, w. 26, 97),
by appointing them to a joint priesthood : the first
place, with the Ephod, and Urim and Thummim,
remaining with Abiathar, who was in actual pos-
session of them. Certain it is that from this time
Zadok and Abiathar are constantly named together,
and singularly Zadok always first, both in the book
of Samuel and that of Kings. We can, however
trace very clearly up to a certain point the division
of the priestly offices and dignities between them
coinciding, as it did, with the divided state of the
Levitical worship in David's time. For we lean
from 1 Chr. xri. 1-7, 37, compared with 89, 44
and yet more distinctly from 9 Chr. i. 8, 4, ft, tha.
the tabernacle and the brazen altar made by Mesas
Digitized by
Google
HIGH-PRIE8T
I BeesM in the wilderness were at thU U&ie at
while the ark was at Jerusalem, in the
asperate tent made for it by David. [Gibkosj, p.
•M.1 No* Zadok the priest and his brethren the
priests were left >' before the tabernacle at Gibeon "
to ofler burnt-offerings unto the Lord morning and
evening, and to do according to all that is written
in the law of the Lord (1 Chr. xvi. 39, 40). It U
therefore obvious to conclude that Abiathar had
special charge of the ark and the services connected
with it, which agrees exactly with the possession
of the ephod by Abiathar, and his previous position
with David before he became long of Israel, as well
sa with what we are told 1 Chr. xxvii. 34, that
Jehoiada and Abiathar were the king's counsellors
next to AhitbnpheL Residence at Jerusalem with
the ark, and the privilege of inquiring of the Lord
before the ark, both well suit his office of counsel-
lor. Abiathar, however, forfeited his place by
taking part with Adonijah against Solomon, and
Zadok was made high-priest in his place. The
pontificate was thus again consolidated and trans-
ferred permanently from the line of Ithamar to
that of Kleazar. This is the only instance recorded
of the deposition of a high-priest (which became
common in later times, especially under Herod and
the Romans) during this second period. It was
the fulfillment of the prophetic denunciations of
the sin of Eli's sons (1 Sam. ii., iii.).
The first considerable difficulty that meets us in
the historical survey of the high-priests of the
second group is to ascertain who was high-priest
at the dedication of Solomon's Temple — Josephus
(Ant. x. 8, § 0) asserts that Zadok was, and the
Seder Ohm makes him the high-priest in the
reign of Solomon. But first it is very improbable
that Zadok, who must have been very old at Sol-
omon's accession (being David's contemporary),
should have lived to the 11th year of his reign;
and next, 1 K. ir. 2 distinctly asserts that Azariah
the son of Zadok was priest under Solomon, and
1 Chr. vi. 10 tells us of Azariah," "he it Is that
executed the priest's office in the Temple that Sol-
omon built in Jerusalem," obviously meaning at its
first completion. We can hardly therefore be wrong
in saying that Azariah the son of Ahimaaz was the
first high-priest of Solomon's Temple. The non-
mention of him in the account of the dedication
of the Temple, even when one would most have
expected it (as 1 K. via. J, 6, 10, 11, 69; 9 Chr. v.
7, 11, 4c.), and the prominence given to Solomon
— the civil power — are certainly remarkable.
Compare aK> 9 Chr. viil. 14, 15. The probable
nferenee is that Azariah had no great personal
qualities or energy. In constructing the list of the
succession of priests of this group, our method
mitt be to compare the genealogical list in 1 Chr.
vi. 8-15 (A. V.) with the notices of high-priests
hi the sacred history, and with the list given by
Josephus, who, it must be remembered, had aeons
to the lists pie se i ied in the archives at Jerusalem :
testing the whole by the application of the ordinary
rules of genealogical succession. Now as regards
the genealogy, it is seen at once that there is some-
thing defective; for whereas from David to Jeooniah
there are SO kings, from Zadok to Jehozada*. there
an bat 18 priests. Moreover the passage in ques-
HIGH-PRIB8T 1071
tion is not a list of high-priests, but the pedigree
of Jehozadak. Then again, while the pedigree fat
in six first generations from Zadok, inclusive, ex-
actly suits the history — for it makes Amariah the
sixth priest, while the history (3 Chr. xix. 11) tells
us he lived in Jehoshaphat's reign, who was the
sixth king from David, inclusive; and while tha
same pedigree in its five last generations also suits
the history — inasmuch as it places Hilkiah the son
of Shallum fourth from the end, and the history
tells us he lived in the reign of Josiah, the fourth
king from the end — yet is there a great gap in the
middle. For between Amariah, the high-priest In
Jehoshaphat's reign, and Shallum the father of
Hilkiah, the high-priest in Josiah's reign — an in
terval of about 240 years — there are but two
names, Ahitub and Zadok, and those liable to the
utmost suspicion from their reproducing the same
sequence which occurs in the earlier part of the
same genealogy — Amariah, Ahitub, and Zadok.
Besides which they are not mentioned by Josephus.
This part, therefore, of the pedigree is useless for
our purpose. But the historical books supply us
with four or five names for this interval, namely,
Jehoiada in the reigns of Athaliah and Joash, and
probably still earlier; Zechariah his son; Azariah
in the reign of Uzziah; Uryah in the reign of
Ahaz ; and Azariah in the reign of Hezekiah. If,
however, in the genealogy of 1 Chr. vi. Azariah and
Hilkiah hare been accidentally transposed, as is not
unlikely, then the Azariah who was high-priest in
Hezeki&h'a reign will be the Azariah of 1 Chr. vi. 18,
14. Putting the additional historical names at
four, and deducting the two suspicious names from
the genealogy, we have 15 high-priests indicated in
Scripture as contemporary with the 20 kings, with
room, however, for one or two more in the history.
Turning to Josephus, we find his list of 17 high-
priesta (whom he reckons as 18 (Ant. xx. 10), as do
also the Rabbins) in places exceedingly corrupt, a
corruption sometimes caused by the end of one
name sticking on to the beginning of the following
(as in Axioramus), sometimes apparently by sub-
stituting the name of the contemporary king or
prophet for that of the high-priest, as Joel and
jotham. Perhaps, however, Sudeas, who corre-
sponds to Zedekiah in the reign of Amaziah in the
Seder Olam, and Odeua, who corresponds to Hosh-
aiah in the reign of Manasseh, according to the
same Jewish chronicle, may really represent high-
priests whose names have not been preserved in
Scripture. This would bring up the number to
17, or, if we retain Azariah as the father of Seraiah,
to 18, which agrees with the 20 kings.
Reviewing the high-priests of this second group,
the following are some of the most remarkable in-
cidents: — (1) The transfer of the seat of worship
from Shiloh in the tribe of Ephraim to Jerusalem
in the tribe of Judah, effected by David, 6 and con
solidated by the building of the magnificent Temple
of Solomon. (2.) The organization of the temple
service under the high-priests, and the division of
the priests and Levites into courses, who resided at
the Temple during their term of service — all which
necessarily put great power into the hands of aa
able high-priest. (3.) The revolt of the ten tribes
am 1 Our. vl. 9 that Asarlah was
i to Zadok, bring she son of ahhnaas The
. 10 si wis to belong to him, sad not to
■*> SB of Jonaato,
t * Its transfer by David was not Immediate, for the
ark after Its capture bj the Philistines at the now JS
EU'i death, was kept at ssveral other places befbrs Its
oUtanete removal to Jerusalem. [Ssoloh; Tsaaaair
OU. HuMry.) ■
Digitized by
Google
1072
HIGH -PRIEST
hu the dynasty of David and from the wonhip at
Jerusalem, and the setting up of a schismatical
priesthood at Dan and Beer-eheba (1 K. xii. 81;
I Chr. xiii. 9, 4a). (4.) The overthrow of the
asm-potion of Athaliah, the daughter of Ahab, by
Jehoiada the high-priest, whose near relationship
to king Joash, added to his zeal against the idol-
atries of the house of Ahab, stimulated him to
head the revolution with the force of priests and
Levites at his oommand. (5.) The boldness and
success with which the high-priest Azariah with-
stood the encroachments of the king Uzziah upon
the jffice and functions of the priesthood. (6.)
The repair of the temple by Jehoiada, in the reign
of J Jash, the restoration of the temple services by
Azariah in the reign of Hezekiah, and the discovery
of the book of the law, and the religious reforma-
tion by Hilkiah in the reign of Josiah. [Hib-
kiaii.] (7.) In all these great religious move-
ments, however, excepting the one headed by
Jehoiada, it is remarkable how the civil power
look the lead. It was David who arranged all the
temple service, Solomon who directed the building
and dedication of the temple, the high-priest being
not so much as named; Jehoshaphat who sent the
siesta about to teach the people, and assigned to
Jbe high-priest Amariah his share in the work;
Hezekiah who beaded the reformation, and urged
on Azariah and the priests and Levites; Josiah
who encouraged the priests in the service of the
house of the I»rd. On the other hand we read of
no opposition to the idolatries of Manasseh by the
high-priest, and we know how shamefully subser-
vient Urijah the high-priest was to king Ahaz,
actually building an altar according to the pattern
of one at Damascus, to displace the brazen altar,
and joining the king in his profane worship before
it (9 K. xvi. 10-16). The preponderance of the
civil over the ecclesiastical power, as an historical
bet, in the kingdom of Judah, although kept within
bounds by the hereditary succession of the high-
priests, seems to be proved from these circum-
stances.
The priests of this series ended with Seraiah,
who was taken prisoner by Nehuzar-adan, and slain
'it Riblah by Nebuchadnezzar, together with Zeph-
aniah the second priest or tngan, after the burn-
ing of the temple and the plunder of all the sacred
vessels (2 K. xzv. 18). His son Jehozadak or Jose-
deeh was at the same time carried away captive
(1 Chr. vi. 15).
The time occupied by these (say) eighteen high-
priests who ministered at Jerusalem, was about 454
years, which gives an average of something more
than twenty-five years to each high-priest. It is
remarkable that not a single instance is recorded
after the time of David of an inquiry by Urim and
Thununim as a means of inquiring of the Lord.
The ministry of the prophets seems to have super-
seded that of the high-priests (see e. g. 2 Chr. xv.,
trill., xx. 14, 15; 2 K. xix. 1, 2, xxii. 12-14; Jer.
od. 1, 2). Some think that Urim and Thummim
ceased with the theocracy ; others with the division
of Israel into two kingdoms. Nehemiah seems to
oave expected the restoration of it (Neh. vii. 65),
and so perhaps did Judas Maccabaras, 1 Mace. iv.
46; comp. xiv. 41, while Josephus affirms that it
bad been exercised for the last time 200 years be-
ta* he wrote, namely, by John Hyrcanus (Whia-
ton, tfott on Ant. iii. 8, and Prid. Connect. L 150,
til). It seems therefore scarcely true to reckon
Ciisa sod Thummim as one of the marks of God's
HIGH-PRIEST
presence with Solomon's Temple, which waas
to the second Temple (Prid. L 138, 144 ff.). Taut
early cessation of answers by Urim and Thmnmim
though the high-priest's office and the wearing of
the breastplate continued in force during so many
centuries, seems to confirm the notion that suck
answers were not the fundamental, but only the
accessory uses of the breastplate of judgment.
(c) An interval of about fifty-two years elapsed
between the high-priests df the second and third
group, during which there was neither temple, nor
altar, nor ark, nor priest. Jehozadak, or Josedech,
as it is written in Haggai (i. 1, 14, Ac. ), who should
have succeeded Seraiah, lived and died a captive at
Babylon. The pontifical office revived in his son
Jeshua, of whom such frequent mention is made in
Ezra and Nehemiah, Haggai, and Zechariah, 1
Eadr. and Ecclus. ; and he therefore stands at the
head of this third and last series, honorably dis-
tinguished for his zealous cooperation with Zerub-
babel in rebuilding the Teni|.le, and restoring tie
dilapidated commonwealth of Israel. His success-
ors, as far as the O. T. guides us, were Joiakim,
Eliaahib, Joiada, Johanan (or Jonathan), and Jad-
dua. Of these we find Eliaahib hindering rather
than seconding the zeal of the devout Tirahatha
Nehemiah for the observance of God's law in Israel
(Neh. xiii. 4, 7); and Johanan, Josephus tells us,
murdered his own brother Jesus or Joshua in the
Temple, which led to its further profanation by Ba-
goses, the general of Artaxerxes Mnemon's army
{Ant. xi. 7). Jaddua was high-priest in the time
of Alexander the Great. Concerning him Josephus
relates the story that he went out to meet Alexan-
der at Sapha (probably the ancient Mizpeh) at the
head of a procession of priests; and that when
Alexander saw the multitude clothed in white, and
the priests in their linen garments, and the high-
priest in blue and gold, with the mitre on his head,
and the gold plate, on which was the name of God,
he stopped forward alone and adored the Name,
and hastened to embrace the high-priest {Ant xL
8, § 6). Josephus adds among other things that
the king entered Jerusalem with the high-priest,
and went up to the Temple to worship and offer
sacrifice; that he was shown the prophecies of
Daniel concerning himself, and at the high-priest's
intercession granted the Jews liberty to live accord-
ing to their own laws, and freedom from tribute on
the Sabbatical years. The story, however, has not
obtained credit. It was the brother ofthis Jaddua,
Manasseh, who, according to the same authority,
was at the request of Sanballat made the first high-
priest of the Samaritan temple by Alexander tin
Great.
Jaddua was succeeded by Onias I., his son, and
he again by Simon the Just, the last of the men
of the great synagogue, as the Jews speak, and to
whom is usually ascribed the completion of the
Canon of the O. T. (Prideaux, Conn. i. 546). Of
him Jesus, the son of Sirach, speaks in terms of
most glowing eulogy in Ecclus. i., and ascribing to
him the repair and fortification of the Temple, with
other works. The passage (1-21) contains an in-
teresting account of the ministrations of the high-
priest. Upon Simon's death, his son Onias being
under age, Eleazar, Simon's brother, succeeded him.
The high-priesthood of Eleazar is memorable at
being that under which the LXX. version of the
Scriptures was made at Alexandria for Ptolenij
Philadelphia, according to tne account of Josep h us
taken from Aristeas (Ant. xii. 2). This tranalatios
Digitized by
Google
HIUH- PRIEST
it the Hebrew Scriptures into Greek, valuable a*
it n with reference to the wider interests of re-
ligion, and jaarked as waa the Providence which
gave it to the world at this time aa a preparation
for the approaching advent of Christ, yet tiewed in
ita relation to Judaism and the high-priesthood,
waa a sign, and perhaps a helping cause of their
decay. It marked a growing tendency to Hellenize,
utterly inconsistent with the spirit of the Mosaic
economy. Accordingly in the high-priesthood of
Eleazar's rival nephews, Jesus and Onias, we find
their very names changed into the Greek ones of
Jason and Menelaus, and with the introduction of
this new feature of rival high-priests we find one
of them, Menelaus, strengthening himself and seek-
ing support from the Syro-Greek kings against the
Jewish party, by offering to forsake their national
laws and customs, and to adopt those of the Greeks.
Toe building of a gymnasium at Jerusalem for the
nse of these apostate Jews, and their endeavor to
conceal their circumcision when stripped for the
game* (1 Mace. i. 14, 15; 2 Mace. iv. 12-16 ; Jos.
AhL sii. 6, § 1), show the length to which this
spirit was carried. The acceptance of the spurious
priesthood of the temple of Onion from Ptolemy
Philometor by Onias (the son of Onias the high-
priest), who would have been the legitimate high-
priest on the death of Menelaus, his uncle, is another
striking indication of the same degeneracy. By
this flight of Onias into Egypt the succession of
high-priests in the family of Jozadak ceased: for
although the Syro-Greek kings had introduced
much uncertainty into the succession, by deposing
at their will obnoxious persona, and appointing
whom they pleased, yet the dignity had never gone
out of the one family. Akimus, whose Hebrew
name waa Jskim (1 Chr. xxiv. 12), or perhaps
Jachin (1 Chr. fat. 10, xxiv. 17), or, according to
Ruffinus (ap. Seklen), Joachim, and who was made
high-priest by Antiochus Eupator on Menelaus
being put to death by him, was the first who was
if a different family. One, says Josephus, that
" waa indeed of the stock of Aaron, but not of this
family " of Jozadak.
What, however, for a time saved the Jewish in-
stitutions, infused a new life and consistency into
the priesthood and the national religion, and ena-
bled them to fulfill their destined course till the
advent of Christ, was the cruel and impolitic perse-
cution of Antiochus Epiphanes. This thoroughly
aroused the piety and national spirit of the Jews,
and drew together In defense of their temple and
country all who feared God and were attached to
their national institutions. The result was that
after the high-priesthood had been brought to the
lowest degradation by the apostasy and crimes of
the last Onias or Menelaus, and after a vacancy of
jeven years had followed the brief pontificate of
Akimus, his no less infamous successor, a new and
glorious succession of high-priests arose in the
Asmonean family, who united the dignity of civil
rulers, and for a time of independent sovereigns,
to that of the high-priesthood. Josephus, who is
followed by Lightfbot, Selden, and others, calls
Judas Maccabeus " high-priest of the nation of
Judah " (Ant. xii. 10, § 6), but, according to the
or better authority of 1 Mace. x. 20, it was not
till after the death of Judas Maccabceu* that Alci-
HIGH-PRIE8T
10T3
* Jasaphns tells us of one Asanas and ha five sons
• bo all Wad the oflkw of high-priest In turn. One
f Haws, ananas she younger. ws> ^epossd fly king
no-
mas himself died, and that Alexander, king of
Syria, made Jonathan, the brother of Judas, high-
priest. Josephus himself too calls Jonathan " the
first of the sons of Asainonama, who was high-
priest " ( Vita, {1). It is possible, however, that
Judas may have been elected by the people to the
office of high-priest, though never confirmed in it
by the Syrian kings. The Asmonean family were
priests of the course of Joiarib, the first of the
twenty-four courses (1 Chr. xxiv. 7), and whose
return from captivity is recorded 1 Chr. ix. 10
Neh. xi. 10. They were probably of the house of
hleazar, though this cannot be affirmed with cer-
tainty ; and Josephus tells us that he himself was
related to them, one of his ancestors having mar-
ried a daughter of Jonathan, the first high-priest
of the house. This Asmonean dynasty lasted from
B. c. 153 till the family was damaged by intestine
divisions, and then destroyed by Herod the Great.
Aristobuiua, the last high-priest of his line, brother
of Mariamne, was murdered by order of Herod, his
brother-in-law, B. c. 35. The independence of
Judasa, under the priest-kings of this raie, had
lasted till Pompey took Jerusalem, and sent king
Aristobuiua II. (who had also taken the high-
priesthood from his brother Hyrcanus) a prisoner
to Rome. Pompey restored Hyrcanus to the high-
priesthood, but forbad him to wear the diadem.
Everything Jewish was now, however, hastening
to decay. Herod made men of low birth high-
priests, deposed them at bis will, and named others
in their room. In this he waa followed by Arche-
laus, and by the Romans when they took the gov-
ernment of Judna into their own hands; so that
there w*re no fewer than twenty-eight high-priests
from the icign of Herod to the destruction of the
Temple by Titus, a period of 107 years." The N.
T. introduces us to some of these later, and oft-
changing high-priests, namely, Annas and Caiaphas
— the former, high-priest at the commencement
of John Baptist's ministry, with Caiaphas ss sec-
ond priest; and the latter high-priest himsuf at
our Lord's crucifixion — and Ananias, thought to
be the same as Ananus who was murdered by the
Zealots just before the siege of Jerusalem, before
whom St. Paul was tried, as we read Acta xxiii.,
and of whom he said " God shall smite thee, thou
whited wall." Theophtlus, the son of Ananus, was
the high-priest from whom Saul received letters to
the synagogue at Damascus (Acts ix. 1, 14, Kui-
nod). Both he and Ananias seem certainly to
have presided in the Sanhedrim, and that officially,
nor is IJghtfoot's explanation (viii. 450, and 484>
of the mention of the high-priest, though Gama-
liel and his son Simeon were respectively presidents
of the Sanhedrim, at all probable or satisfactory
(see Acts v. 17, dsc. )■ The last high-priest waa
appointed by lot by the Zealots from the course of
priests called by Josephus Enlachim (probably a
corrupt reading for Jachim). He Is thus described
by the Jewish historian. " His name was I'han-
nias : he was the son of Samuel of the village of
Aphtha, a man not only not of the muaitt of the
chief priests, but who, such a mere rustle was lie,
scarcely knew what the high-priesthood meant.
Yet did they drag him reluctant from the country,
and setting him forth in a borrowed character aa
on the stage, they put the sacred vestments on him.
Agrlppa for the part he took In causing " James ttu
brother of Jesus who was called Christ " to he swat
(4hi xx. 8, i I).
Digitized by
Google
1074
HIGH-PBIEBT
H1LKV
and instructed him how to act on the occasion.
This •hocking impiety, which to them wan a sub-
ject of merriment and (port, drew teara from the
other priests, who beheld from a diatanoe their law
turned into ridicule, and groaned over the subver-
sion of the sacred honors" (B. J. iv. 3, { 8).
Tbua ignominiously ended the aeries of high-prieata
which had stretched in a acaroely broken line,
through nearly fourteen, or, according to the com-
mon chronology, aixteen centuries. The Egyptian,
Assyrian, Babylonian, Persian, Grecian, and Roman
empires, which the Jewish high-prieata had seen in
turn overshadowing the world, had each, except
the last, one by one withered away and died — and
now the last successor of Aaron waa stripped of his
sacerdotal robes, and the temple which he served
laid level with the ground to rise no more. But
this did not happen till the true High-priest and
King of Israel, the Minister of the sanctuary and
of the true Tabernacle which the Lord pitched, and
not man, had offered His one sacrifice, once for all,
uid bad token Hia place at the right hand of the
Majesty in the heavens, bearing on Hia breast the
judgment of His redeemed people, and continuing
a Priest forever, in the Sanctuary which shall
□ever be taken down 1
The subjoined table shows the succession of high-
priests, as far as it can be ascertained, and of the
contemporary civil rulers.
civil s p t s s
Aaron.
Joshua
Othnlel
Ablshua AbMiua.
Bl HI.
Samuel Ahltub.
Saul Ahtjeh.
David Zedok and Abiatnar.
Solomon Aaarlah.
Abtjaa Johanan.
Asa Aaarlah.
Jshoshaphat .... Amarlah.
Jehoram Jehoftada.
*x«»ui» ...... u
Jahoaah ...... Do. and Hscherlah
Amaslsh f
Jxslah Asariah.
Jotham !
Ahai Urljah.
Heuklah Aaarlah.
Uuunb Bhalluin.
Anion *«
Josiah HHklah.
Jefaouklm Asarlah ?
Bedekiah Seraiah.
JEvil-Herodach .... Jehasaaak.
Zerubbabel (Cyrus and Jeshua.
Darius).
Mordecal? (Xerxes) . . Joiaklm.
Bars and Nehemlah (Ar- EllashJb.
taxarxsa).
Darius Nonius .... Joiade.
Artaxerxoa Mnemon . . Johanan
Alexander th« Qreat . . Jaddua.
Onlaa I. (Ptolemy Srtar, Oniaa L
Antfgonus).
Ptolemy Soter . . . Simon the Just.
Ptolemy Philadelphas
** ....
Ptolemy Xnansstss . . Onlss II.
PMamy Pbilopator . . Simon II.
Ptotmy Kpiphaoss sud Onlss III.
Antloehus.
Aatloebus NpiphwMt . . (Joshua, or) Jason.
» Onlss, or Menelsus.
Demetrius
jaulniuS| or Absransi
Jonathan, brother of
Judas Maooab— a ;U
Simon (Aamonaan) . .
John Hjrcanus (Asm.) .
King Arlstobnlns (Asm.)
King Alexander Jannasua
(Asmonean).
Queen Alexandra (Asm.)
King Aristobulus n. (As-
monean).
Pompey the Oreat and
Hyrcanus, or rather,
towards the end of his
pontificate, Antlpater.
Pacorua the Parthian . .
Herod, K. of Judas . .
Herod the Great
Archelaus, K. of Judaea
Bunon (aamonaan).
John Hyrcanus (Do.).
Aristobulus (Do.).
AletaniVir Jannaras (Do )
Hyrcsnus LT. (Do.),
Arlstobnlns JX. (Do.).
Hyrcanua IT. (Do.).
Antigonus (Do.).
Ananelus.
Aristobulus (last of As-
monaaos) murdered by
Herod.
Ananelus restored.
Jesus, son of Phabee.
Bunon, son of Boetnus,
fltther-ln-law to Hand.
Matthias, son of Thao-
phllus.
Joasarua, aou of Bfmon
[ratbar, Boethus, Jo*
aaph. Ant. xvUL X, 1 1J.
Oynntua, governor of
Syria, second time.
Valerius Oratus, procura-
tor of Juda*
TltelUus, governor of
Syria
Herod Agrlppa ....
Jesus, son of Sis.
Joaxams (aseond time),
a nanus
Ishmael, son of Phmbl
Klaaaar, son of Ananna.
Simon, son of Kandth.
Oaiaphas, called also Jo-
seph.
Jonathan, eon of Ananna
Theophllua, brothar of
Jonathan.
Simon Cantheras.
Matthias, brother of Jon-
athan, son of Ananna.
KUonasus, son of Oan-
Herod, king of Chalda . Joseph, son of Camel.
u Ananias, son of Mebidasus
« ..... Jonathan.
u Ishmael, son of Phabt
u Joseph, son of Simon
u Ananna, son of Ananna,
or Ananfas.
|«i Jesus, son of Danuuens.J
Appointed by the people Jems, son of GasaaHal.
Do. (Whiston on B. J. Iv. Matthias, Met of Thec-
S, } 6). phllus.
Chosen by lot . . . Phannlas, ton of Samuel
The hitter part of the above list is taken parity
from Lightfoot, vol. ix. p. 26 ff. —also in part from
Josephua directly, and In part from Whiston's note
on AnL xx. 8, § 5. A. C. H.
* The subject of the preceding article and thai
of Priests are so related to each other, that writers
have usually discussed them under the same head.
For a list of some of the writers who have Uusttil
of the topics more or leas in connection with snel
other, see under Priests. II
• HIGHWAY. [Hkooeb; Wat.]
HIllBN flY'n [pert, /ortress. FUrst].
Digitized by
Google
HILKIAH
UKri; Alex. NnAw : " Helm), the name of a city
if Jndah allotted with iU " suburbs " to the priests
3 Chr. ri. 58); and which in the corresponding
ists of Joshua is called Houir. G.
hilki'ah flnjnbn and njnbn. /*«■
Lord [Jehovah] it my portion: XiXkIcu; tin 2 K.
xriii. 18, Alex. XaAjruu; 96, 37, Vat Alex. -««-:]
Bdrim). X. Hilkia'hu, father of Kliakiin (2 K.
xviii. [18, 28,] 37; Is. xxii. 20, xxxvi. [3,] 22).
[EUAKIM.]
8. [Vat. genr. XcAnuu: in Ear. vil. 1, Vat.
EAjmuw, Alex. XcAmias; in Neb. xi. 11, Rom.
'E&xfa, Vat FA. EAkcio-] High-priest in the
reign of Jonah (3 K. xxii. 4 ff. ; 2 Chr. xxxiv. 9 ff. ;
1 Eadr. 1. 8). According to the genealogy in 1
Chr. ri. 18 (A. V.) be was son of Shallum, and
from Ezr. vii. 1, apparently the ancestor of Ezra
the scribe. His high-priesthood was rendered par-
ticuhuiy illustrious by the great reformation effected
under it by king Josiah, by the solemn Passover
kept at Jerusalem in the 18th year of that king's
reign, and abore all by the discovery which he
made of the book of the law of Moses in the Temple.
With regard to the Utter, Kennicott (Heb. Text,
H. 999) is of opinion that it was the original
autograph copy of the Pentateuch written by
Moses which Hilkiah found. He argues from the
peculiar (arm of expression in 2 Chr. xxxiv. 14,
nrro T? T}^ rtf™ "W " *"•»>«* of
the law of Jehovah by the hand of Moses; " whereas
in the fourteen other places in the O. T. where the
law of Moses or the book of Moses are mentioned,
it is either "the book of Moses," or "the law of
M os e s," or " the hook of the law of Moses." But
the argument is far from conclusive, because the
phrase in question may quite as properly signify
" the book of the law of the Lord given through
Moses." Compare the expression lr x"f ' fC'Tou
(tJsl iii. 19), and fTTHD T? (Ex. ix. 86, xxxr.
99; Neh. x. 29; 2Chr.'xxxv. 6; Jer. 1. 1). Though,
however, the copy cannot be proved to have been
Moses' autograph from the words in question, it
seems probable that it was, from the place where it
was found, namely, in the Temple; and, from its
not having been discovered before, but being only
brought to light on the occasion of the repairs
which were necessary, and from the discoverer being
the high-priest himself, it seems natural to oonclude
that the particular part of the Temple where it was
found was one not usually frequented, or ever by
any but the high-priest Such a place exactly was
the one where we know the original copy of the
law was deposited by command of Moaes, namely,
by the side of the ark of the covenant within the
vail, as we learn from Deut xxxi. 9, 26. A difficult
and interesting question arises. What was the book
bond by Hilkiah? Was it the whole Pentateuch,
is Le Clerc, Keil, Ewald, etc., suppose, or the three
xriddla hooka, as Bertheau, or the book of Deuter-
onomy alone, as De Wetta, Geaenius, RosenmuUer,
ate. ? Our means of answering this question seem
«> be limited, (1) to an examination of the terms
a which the depositing the book of the 'aw hr the
ark was original!/ enjoined ; (2; to an examination
if the eontenU of the book discovered by Hilkiah,
a far as they transpire; (3) to an; indications
' In OuLXX. this name appears lover. 69, bavin,
witn Jatttr.
HILKIAH
1076
which may be gathered from the oontercporarv
writings of Jeremiah, or from any other portions
of Scripture. As regards the first a comparison
of Deut i. 6 with xxxi. 9 ; the consideration how
exactly suited Deuteronomy is for the purpose of a
public recital, as commanded Deut xxxi. 10--13,
whereas the recital of the whole Pentateuch is
scarcely conceivable ; and perhaps even the smaller
bulk of a copy of Deuteronomy compared with that
of the whole law, considered with reference to its
place by the ark, point strongly to the conclusion
that " the book of the law " ordered to be put " m
the aide of the ark of the covenant " was the book
of Deuteronomy alone, whether or no exactly in its
present form is a further question. As regards the
second, the 28th and 2ath chapters of Deut. seem
to be those especially referred to in 2 K. xxii. 13,
16, 17, and 2 K. xxiii. 2, 3 seem to point directly
to Deut xxix. 1, in the mention of the covenant,
and ver. 3 of the former to Deut xxx. 2, in the
expression tcith all their heart and all their tout.
The words in 2 Chr. xxxr. 3, •• The Levites that
taught all Israel," seam also to refer to Deut xxxiii.
10. AU the actions of Josiah which followed the
reading of the book found, the destruction of all
idolatrous symbols, the putting away of wizards and
workers with familiar spirits, and the keeping of the
Passover, were such as would follow from hearing
the 16th, 18th, and other chapters of Deuteronomy,
while there is not one that points tc any precept
contained in the other books, and not in Deuter-
onomy. If there is any exception to this statement
it is to be found in the description of the Passover
in ch. xxxv. The phrases " on the fourteenth day
of the first month," in ver. 1 : " Sanctify your-
selves, and prepare your brethren, that they may
do according to the word of the Lord by the hand
of Moses," ver. 6; "The priests sprinkled the
blood,'' ver. 11; and perhaps the allusion in ver.
12, may be thought to point to Lev. xxiii. 6, or
Num. ix. 3; to Lev. xxii. and Num. viii. 20-23;
to Lev. 1. 6; iii. 2, Ac; and to Lev. iii. 3-5, Ac
respectively. But the allusions are not marked, and
it must be remembered that the Levities! institu-
tions existed in practice, and that the other books
of Moses were certainly extant, though they were
not kept by the side of the ark. As regards the
third, it is well known bow full the writings of
Jeremiah are of direct references and of points of
resemblance to the book of Deuteronomy. Now
this is at once accounted for on the supposition of
the law thus (bund by Hilkiah being that book,
which would thus naturally be an object of special
curiosity and study to the prophet, and as naturally
influence his own writings. Moreover, in an un-
dated prophecy of Jeremiah's (ch. xi.*), whioh
seems to have been occasioned by the finding of tins
oovenant — for he introduces the mention of " the
words of this oovenant " quite abruptly — he quotes
word for word from Deut xxvii. 96, answering
Amen himself, as the people are there directed to
do, with reference to the curse for disobedience (see
ver. I, 6); a very strong confirmation of the pre
ceding arguments which tend to prove that Deuter
onomy was the book found by Hilkiah. But again :
in Josh. viii. we have the account of the first execu-
tion by Joshua and the Israelites of that which
Moses had commanded relative to writing the law
» Hledg, ou Jer. xi., also supposes the «|
In this chapter to have bean accastoned by the
of ths book of the law.
Digitized by
Google
1076
hilkiah
opon stones to be tat upon Mount Ebal; ind it b
added in ver. 84, " and aflenrardi he read ill the
worda of the law, the blessing* and cursings, accord-
ing to ail that is written in the book of the law."
In vei 32 he had said " he wrote there upon tie
■tone* a cop; of the law of Moses." Now not only
is it impossible to imagine that the whole Penta-
teuch was transcribed on these stones, but all the
references which transpire are to the book of Deu-
teronomy. The altar of whole stones untouched by
iron tool, the peace-offerings, the blessings and the
cursings, as well as the act itself of writing the law
on stones and setting them on Mount Ebal, and
placing half the tribes on Mount Ebal, and the
other half on Mount Gerizim, all belong to Deuter-
onomy. And therefore when it is added in ver.
35, " There was not a word of all that Moses com-
manded which Joshua read not before all the con-
gregation of Israel," we seem constrained to accept
the words with the limitation to the book of Deu-
teronomy, as that which alone was ordered by Moses
to be thus publicly read. And this increases the
probability that here too the expression is limited
to the same book.
The only discordant evidence is that of the book
of Nehemiah. In the 8th chapter of that look,
and ix. 3, we hare the public reading by Kara of
" the book of the law of Moses " to the whole con-
gregation at the feast of Tabernacles, in evident
obedience to Deut. xxxi. 10-13. But it is quite
certain, from Neh. viii. 14-17, that on the second
day they read out of Leviticus, because the directions
about dwelling in booths are found there only, In
eh. xxiit. Moreover in the prayer of the Levitea
which follows Neh. ix. 6, and which is apparently
based upon the previous reading of the law, reference
is freely made to all the books of Moses, and indeed
to the later books also. It is, however, perhaps not
an improbable inference that, Kara having lately
completed his edition of the Holy Scriptures, more
was read on this occasion than was strictly enjoined
by Deut. xxxi., and that therefore this transaction
does not really weaken the foregoing evidence.
But no little surprise has been expressed by
critics at the previous non-acquaintance with this
book on the part of Hilkiah, Josiah, and the people
generally, which their manner of receiving it plainly
evidences ; and some have argued from hence that
" the law of Moses " is not of older date than the
reign of Josiah; in fact that Josiah and Hilkiah
invented it, and pretended to hare found a copy in
the Temple in order to give sanction to the refor-
mation which they had in hand. The following
remarks are intended to point out the true inferences
*o be drawn from the narrative of this remarkable
discovery in the books of Kings and Chronicles.
The direction in Deut. xxxi. 10-13 for the public
reading of the law at the feast of Tabernacles on
each seventh year, or year of release, to the whole
cur.£regatk>u, as the means of perpetuating the
knowledge of the law, sufficiently shows that at that
time a multiplication of copies and a multitude of
readers was not contemplated. The same thing
teems to be implied also in the direction given in
Deut. xvi* 18, 19, concerning the copy of the law
to oe made, for the special use of the kit if, distinct
torn that ir. the keeping of the priests and Invites.
\>A this paucity of copies and of readers is just
what one would have expected in an age when the
art of reading and writing was confined to the pro-
•xesiousl scribes, and the very few others who, like
Bw- bad learnt the art in Egypt (Acts vii. 82).
WTT.TTTAH
The troublous times of the Judges were obv i o u s!)
more likely to obliterate than to promote the study
of letters. And whatever occasional revival of sacred
learning may have taken place under such kings at
David, Solomon, Jehoahaphat, Uzziah, Jotham, and
Hezekiah, yet on the other hand such reigns or
that of Athaliah, the last years of Joash, that of
Ahaz, and above all the long reign of Manasseh,
with their idolatries and national calamities, must
have been most unfavorable to the study of " tat
sacred letters." On the whole, in the days of Josiah
irreligion and ignorance had overflowed all the
dykes erected to stay their progress. In spite of
such occasional acts as the public reading of the
law to the people, enjoined by Jehoahaphat (2 Chr.
xvii. 9), and nuch insulated evidences of the king's
reading the law, as commanded by Moses, as the
action recorded of Amaziah affords (2 K. xiv. 6) —
where by the way the reference is still to the book
of Deuteronomy — and the yet more marked ac-
quaintance with the law attributed to Hezekiah
(2 K. xviii. 6, 6) [Gemeaixxjy], everything in
Josiah's reign indicates a very low state of knowl-
edge. There were indeed still professional scribes
among the Levitea (2 Cbr. xxxiv. 13), and Shaphan
was the king's scribe. But judging from the nar-
rative, 2 K. xxii. 8, 10; 2 Chr. xxxiv., it seems
probable that neither Hilkiah nor Josiah could
read. The same may perhaps be said of Jeremiah,
who was always attended by Baruch the scribe, who
wrote down the words of Jeremiah from his mouth
(Jer. xxxvi. 2, 4, 6, 8, 18, 28, 32. xiv., *«.). How
then can we wonder that under such circumstances
the knowledge of the law bad fallen into desuetude ?
or fail to see in toe incident of the startling dis-
covery of the copy of it by Hilkiah one of those
many instances of simple truthfulness which im-
press on the Scripture narrative such an unmis-
takable stamp of authenticity, when it is read in
the same guileness spirit in which it is written ?
In fact, the ignorance of the law of Moses which
this history reveals is in most striking harmony
with the prevalent idolatry disclosed by the previous
history of Judaea, especially since its connection
with the house of Ahab, as well as with the low
state of education which is apparent from so many
incidental notices.
The story of Hilkiah's discovery throws no light
whatever upon the mode in which other portions
of the Scriptures were preserved, and therefore this
is not the place to consider it But Thenius truly
observes that the expression in 2 K.. xxii. 8 clearly
implies that the existence of the law of Moses was
a thing well known to the Jews. It is interesting
to notice the concurrence of the king with the high-
priest in the restoration of the Temple, as well as
the analogy of the circumstances with what took
place in the reign of Joash, when Jehoiada waa
high-priest, as related 2 Chr. xxiv. (Berthetu, ad
he; Prideaux, Connect. I. 43, 815, Lewis, Orig.
Btb. bk. viii ch. 8, Ac.) [Chklcias.]
A C. H.
3. Hilki'ah (LXX. [Roni.Vatj omit; [Ale*.
XcAxmu; Comp. Aid. XcWar or -a.:] Htlctat),
Merarite Levite, son of Amzi, one of the ancestor)
of Ethan (1 Chr. ri. 45; Heb. 30).
4. [Vat. omits; Alex. XcAkcuu-] Hilkia'hc
another Merarite Levite, second son of Hoaah,
among the doorkeepers of the tabernacle in the timt
of king David (1 Chr. xxvi. 11).
5. [In Neh. viii. 4, X«Aitio, Vat EAiMia, Ales
XcAJccia; in xii. 7, Rom. Vat Alex. FA.' omit
Digitized by
Google
WTT.T.TB1
■ h. fS. f., on. Bom. 'EAxfa-j Htuu'AR; one
H those who stood on the right baud of Eom who.
be reed the law to the peonle. Doubtless a Levite,
and probablj a priest (Neh. nil. 4). He ma; be
identical with the Hilkiah who came up in the
expedition with Jeshua and Zerubbabel (xii. 7), and
whose descendant Hashabiah is commemorated as
living in the days of Joiakim (xii. 21).
6. Hiucia'hu; a priest, of Anathoth, father of
the prophet Jkremiah (Jer. i. 1).
7. HilkYah, lather of Gemariah, who was one
of Zedekiah's envoy* to Babylon (Jer. xxix. 8 J.
HILXEL (bVn [rick in praue, FUrrt]:
'EXA«>: Alex. StAAttui Joseph. *EAAijAo»: Met),
a native of Piratbon in Mount Ephraim, father of
Abdoh, one of the judges of Israel (Judg. xii. 13,
15).
HILLS. The structure and characteristics of
the hills of Palestine will be most conveniently
noticed in the general description of the features
of the country. [Palestine-] But it may not
be unprofitable to call attention here to the various
Hebrew terms for which the word " hill " has been
employed in the Auth. Version.
1. Gibtak, nP53, from a root akin to 3gj,
which seems to have the force of curvature or
humpishness. A word involving this idea is pecul-
iarly applicable to the rounded hills of Palestine,
and from it are derived, as has been pointed out
under Gibkah, the names of several places situated
on hills. Our translators have been consistent in
rendering gibeik by " hill ; " in four passages only
qualifying it as " little hill," doubtless for the more
complete antithesis to "mountain" (Ps. lxv. IS,
Uni. 3, exiv. 4, 6).
8. Bat they have also employed the same Eng-
lish word for the very different term kar, "Til,
which has a much more extended sense than gibtak,
meaning a whole district rather than an individual
eminence, and to which our word "mountain"
answers with tolerable accuracy. This exchange is
always undesirable, but it sometimes occurs so as
to confuse the meaning of a passage where it is
desirable that the topography should be unmistak-
able. For instance, in Ex. xxiv. 4, the " hill " is
the same which is elsewhere in the same chapter
(18, 13, 18, Ac) and book, consistently and accu-
rately rendered " mount " and " mountain." In
Num. xir. 44, 45, the " hill " U the '• mountain "
of ver. 40, as also in Dent. i. 41, 43, compared with
34, 44. In Josh. xv. 9, the allusion is to the Mount
of Olives, correctly called " mountain " in the pre-
siding verse; and so also In 9 Sam. xvi. 18. The
Jountry of the " hills," in Dent. 1. 7; Josh. lx. 1,
x. 40, xt 16, is the elevated district of Judah, Ben-
jamin, and Ephraim, wbich is correctly called " the
sjountain " in the earliest descriptions of Palestine
(Num. xiii. 21), and in many subsequent passages.
The " boly hill " (Ps. Bi. 4), the " hill of Jehovah "
(xxiv. 3), the " hill of God " (Ixri'L 15), are noth-
ing; else than "Mount Zion." In 9 K. 1. 9 and
•v. 97, the use of the word "hill" obscures the
Busion to Carmel, which it other passages of the
Us of the prophet (e. g. 1 K. xvin. 19; 9 K. iv.
ft) has the term " mount " correctly attached to
t Other places in the historical books in which
dkt same substitution weakens the force of the r.ar-
■mtiTB, are as follows: Gen. vii. 19; Deut vill. 7:
baa- xfil. 6, xviii. 13, 14; Judg. xvL 8; 1 faun.
HINNOM, VALLEY OF 1077
Ixxiil. 14; xxv. 90; xxvL 13; 9 Sam. rill. 31, 1 K
' xx. 23, 28, xxii. 17, in.
I 3. On one occasion the word Afa'nlth, " 37?-
I is rendered " hill," namely, 1 Sam. ix. 11, where it
would be better to employ " ascent " or some sim-
ilar term.
4. In the N. T. the word " hill " is employed to
render the Greek word $ouyis ; but on one occa-
sion it is used for tpot, elsewhere " mountain," so
as to obscure the connection between the two parts
of the same narrative. The "hill' from which
Jesus was coming down in Luke ix. 87, is the same
as " the mountain " into which Ha had gone fut
His transfiguration the day before (oonip. ver. 28).
In Matt v. 14, and Luke Iv. 29, Spot is also ren-
dered •< hill," but not with the inconvenience just
noticed. In Luke i. 39 [and 65] the " hill country "
(») ApeiWj) is the same " mountain of Judah "
[sing. = collective] to which frequent reference is
made in the O. T. G.
HIN. [Measures.]
HIND (n^JS : feasor: etrvm), the (email
of the common *tag or cervus etaphiu. It is fre-
quently noticed in the poetical parts of Scripture
ss emblematic of activity (Gen. xlix. 21; 2 Sam
xxii. 34; Ps. xviii. 33; Hab. lii. 19), gentleness
(Prov. v. 19), feminine modesty (Cant ii. 7, iii. 6),
earnest longing (Ps. xlii. 1), and maternal affection
(Jer. xiv. 5). Its shyness and remoteness from the
haunts of men are also noticed (Job xxxix. 1), and
its timidity, causing it to cast its young at the
sound of thunder (Ps. xxix. 9). The conclusion
which some have drawn from the passage last
quoted that the hind produces her young with great
difficulty, is not in reality deducible from the words,
and is expressly contradicted by Job xxxix. 3. The
LXX. reads nVfl in Gen. xlix. 21, rendering It
o-rAfyot krtipiyoy, "a luxuriant terebinth:"
Lowth has proposed a similar change in Ps. xxix.,
but in neither ease can the emendation be accepted:
Naphtali verified the comparison of himself to a
" graceful or tall hind " by the events recorded in
Judg. iv. 6-9, v. 18. The inscription of Ps. xxii.,
'• the hind of the morning," probably refers to a
tune of that name. [Aukleth-Shahar.]
W. L. B.
BINGE. 1. "V?, oTf>o>ry{, canto, with the
notion of turning (Ges. p. 1165). 8. JIB, Moaiua,
cnrdo, with the notion of insertion (Ges. p. 1096)
Both ancient Egyptian and modem Oriental doors
were and are hung by means of pivots turning In
sockets both on the upper and lower sides. Is
Syria, and especially the Hauran, there are many
ancient doors consisting of stone slabs with pivots
carved out of the same piece, Insfted in socket*
above and below, and fixed during the building ol
the house. Ine allusion in Prov. xxvi. 14 Is thus
clearly explained. The hinges mentioned in 1 K.
vii. 50 were probably of the Egyptian kind, attached
ti tha upper and lower side* of the door (Backing-
ham, Arab Tribe; p. 177; Porter, Dtmneau, ii.
22, 192 Maundrell, Early Travels, pp. 447, 448
(Bonn); Shaw, Travel; p. 210) Lord Lindsay,
Letter; p. 202; Wilkinson, Ano. Eg. abridgm. I.
15). H. W. P.
HINNOM, VALLEY [more strictly R».
vii:] OF, otherwise called " the valley of Mm
son " or « children [sons] of Hinnom " (Dbt"]" , l
Digitized by
Google
1078 HIKHOM, VALLEY OF
» rny^g, or "mj?"^, variously ren-
dered by LXX. (pdpxyE 'Ewo/t [Vat. Oro/t, Josh,
cv. 8], or vlov 'Ervo> [2 K. xxiii. 10, Jer. vii. 89,
SO, xxxii. 36], or Taltyra, Josh, xviii. 16 [also
vaWn 2orndfi (Alex, yarn mm Ew»u), and r«u
Oyyop (Alex, for Vatiyya)]; ir y* Bsrsyrop
[Alex, ty yn Btfyyo/i], 2 Chr. xxvlii. 8, xxxiii.
6 ; to iroKvdySpioy via* riy ritamy aiirmy, Jer.
xix. 8, [iroAvdVtpior iifoB 'EmS/i (Vat. Alex. FA.
Eyyop), yet.] 6), a a deep and narrow ravine, with
•teep, mcky (idea to the S. and W. of Jerusalem,
separating Mount Zion to the N. from the " Hill
of Kvil Counsel," and the sloping rocky plateau of
the « plain of Rephaim" to the S., taking its
name, according to Professor Stanley, from " some
ancient hero, the son of Hinnotn " having encamped
In It (Stanley, S. 4 P. p. 172). The earliest
mention of the Valley of Hlnnom in the sacred
writings is Josh. xv. 8, xviii. 16, where the bound-
ary line between the tribes of Judah and Benjamin
is described with minute topographical accuracy,
as passing along tbe lied of the ravine. On the
southern brow, overlooking the valley at its eastern
extremity, Solomon erected high places for Molech
(1 K. xi. 7), whose horrid rites were revived from
time to time in the same vicinity by tbe later
idolatrous kings. Aha: and Mannsseh made their
children "pass through tbe lire" in this valley
(8 K. xvi. 3; 2 Chr. xxviii. 3, xxxiii. 6), and the
fiendish custom of infant sacrifice to the fire-gods
seems to have been kept up in Tophet, at its S. E.
extremity for a considerable period (Jer. vii. 31 ;
2 K. xxiii. 10). [Tophet.] To put an end to
these abominations the place was polluted by
■Tosiah, who rendered it ceremonially unclean by
spreading over it human bones, and other corrup-
tions (2 K. xxiii. 10, 13, 14; 2 Chr. xxxiv. 4, 5),
from which time it appears to have become the
common cesspool of the city, into which its sewage
was conducted, to be carried off by the waters of
the Kidron, as well as a laystall, where all its solid
filth was collected. Most commentators follow
Buxtorf, IJghtfoot, and others, in asserting that
perpetual fires were here kept up for the consump-
tion of bodies of criminals, carcases of animals, and
whatever else was combustible ; but the Rabbinical
authorities usually brought forward in support of
this idea appear insufficient, and Robinson declares
(i. 274) that " there is no evidence of any other
fires than those of Molech having been kept up in
this valley," referring to Rosenniiiller, Biblitch.
Gtogr. II. i. 158, 164. For the more ordinary
view, see Hengsteiiburg, ChriitoL ii. 454, iv. 41 ;
Keil on Kin^t ii. 147, Clark's edit.; and cf. Is.
xxx. 33, Ixvi. 24.
From its ceremonial defilement, and from the
detested and abominable fire of Molech, if not from
the supposed everburning funeral piles, the later
Jews applied the name of this valley Gt JKnnom,
GtJitnna, to denote the place of eternal torment,
tnd some of the Habbins here fixed the " door of
hell;" a sense in which it is used by our lard.
[Gkhenxa.] It is called, Jer. ii. 23, >• tbe val-
ley," kot' tfoxhn, »»<1 perhaps "the valley of
lead bodies,'' xxxi. 40, and " the valley of vision,"
Is. nil. 1, 6 (Stanley, Syr. and PaL pp. 172, 482).
HIKHOM. VALLEY OF
The name by which it is now known Is (b igno-
rance of tbe meaning of the initial syllable) Wia\
Jehamam, or Widy tr Habit (Williams, flWj
City, I. 56, wppl.), though in Mohammedan tra-
ditions the name Gehenna is applied to the Valley
of Kedron (Ibn Batutah, 12, 4; Stanley, ut np.).
The valley commences in a broad sloping basic
to the W. of the city, S. of the Jaffa road (extend-
ing nearly to the brow of the great Wady, on the
W.), in the centre of which, 700 yards from the
Jaffa gate, is the large reservoir, supposed to be
the "upper pool," or " Gihon " [Gihom] (Is. vii.
3, xxxvi. 2; 2 Chr. xxxii. 30), now known as Bir-
ket-ei- Manilla. After running about three quar-
ters of a mile E. by S. the valley takes a sudden
bend to the S. opposite tbe Jaffa gate, but in less
than another three quarters of a mile it encounters
a rocky hill-side which forces it again in an eastern
direction, sweeping round the precipitous S. W.
corner of Mount Zion almost at a right angle. In
this part of its course the valley is from 50 to 100
yards broad, the bottom everywhere covered with
small stones, and cultivated. At 290 yards from
the Jaflk gate it is crossed by an aqueduct on nine
very low arches, conveying water from the " pools
of Solomon " to the Temple Mount, a short dis-
tance below which is the " lower pool " (Is. xxii.
S), Birket-es-Sultan. From this point the ravine
narrows and deepens, and descends with great ra-
pidity between broken cliffs, rising in successive
terraces, honeycombed with innumerable sepulchral
recesses, forming the northern lace of the " Hill of
Evil Counsel," to the S., and the steep, shelving,
but not precipitous southern slopes of Mount Zion,
which rise to about the height of 150 feet, to the
N. The bed of the valley is planted with olivet
and other fruit trees, and when practicable is cul-
tivated. About 400 yards from the S. W. angle
of Mount Zion the valley contracts still more, be-
comes quite narrow and stony, and descends with
much greater rapidity towards the " valley of Je-
hoshaphat," or "of tbe brook Kidron," before
joining which it opens out again, forming an ob-
long plot, the site of Tophet, devoted to gardens
irrigated by the waters of Siloam. Towards the
eastern extremity of the valley is the traditional
site of "Aceldama," authenticated by a bed of
white clay still worked by potters (Williams, Holy
City, ii. 496),* opposite to which, where the cliff is
thirty or forty feet high, tbe tree on which Judas
hanged himself was placed during the Frankisb
kingdom (Barclay, City of Great King, p. 208).
Not far from AcekLima is a conspicuously situated
tomb with a Doric pediment, sometimes known as
the " whited sepulchre," near which a large sepul-
chral recess with a Doric portal bewn in the native
rock is known as tbe "Latilmlum apostolorum,"
where the Twelve are said to have concealed them-
selves during the time between the Crucifixion and
the Resurrection. The tombs continue quite down
to tbe corner of the mountain, where it bends off
to the S. along the valley of Jehoahaphat. None
of the sepulchral recesses in the vicinity of Jeru-
salem are so well preserved; most of them are very
old [see infra] — small gloomy caves, with narrow
rock-hewn doorways.
Robinson places "the valley gate," [which had
of the variations of the Vatican MS. are
act noticed hers, being mere corruptions. . A.
» * The clay used in tbe pottery at Jerusalem near
Its choree of St. Anns Is said to be obtained from K-
Jib (Gibson). Sea Ordnance Stareey of Jtrutaltm, J
59 (1866). Compare the note under Aoxuuu, •
19, and the text to which thr note relates. The tat
tunony at present indicates dtbrent opinions. B
Digitized by
Google
HINNOM, VALLEY OF
ts nam* from tliis ravine], Neh. ii. 13 15; t Chr
ixvi. 9, at the N. W. corner of Mount / : m in the
ipper put of this valley (Kobinaon, i. 230, 339.
274, 330, 393; William*, lluly City, i. »uppl. 66,
it 495; Barclay, City of Great Auty, 305, 208).
[But tee Jkrusalkm.] E. V.
* The group of tombs in th Valley of Hinnom
and on the southern hill-side above the ravine are
somewhat fully described hi the Ordnnnee Surrey
of Jenwilem, pp. 67, 68 (1805). They are re-
garded " as having been made or modified at a later
period than those on the north aide of the city."
Many of them have an inscription or scattered let-
ters, but nothing that can be well deciphered,
(loser inspection shows some of these to be much
more elaborate than has been generally supposed.
" Close to the building of Aceldama the rock is
perforated by seven ' loculi,' through one of which
a chamber containing several more ' loculi ' is
reached; and one of these again, on the right-hand
aide, gives access to a second chamber with •lo-
culi;* from that there is an opening to a third,
and thence down a flight of steps to a fourth and
last one, all the chambers having ' loculi ; ' most
of them are filled with rubbish, and many have the
appearance of leading to other chambers." Sketches
were taken of some of the appurtenances of these
tombs, which accompany the text of the work re-
ferred to. Tobler states the results of a special
examination of these rock-sepulchre* in Hinnom
(DriUt Wimdtruny, p. 348 ft".).
A very noticeable feature of this ravine is the
precipitous wall of rocks which overhangs the gorge
in its deepest part, on the left, as one goes west-
ward and nearly opposite to Aceldama on the height
above. The rocky ledges here ore almost perpen-
dicular, and ore found to be at different points
forty, thirty-six, thirty-three, thirty, and twenty
feet high. A few trees still grow along the margin
of the overhanging brow, and trees here must an-
ciently have been still more numerous when the
land was better cultivated. Aside from this pecu-
liarity of the valley, regarded as one of its aspects,
it has some additional interest from its having been
connected by some with the death of Judas. It
has been thought that he may have hung himself
on the limb of a tree near the edge of one of these
precipices, and that the rope or limb breaking, he
fell to the bottom and was dashed to pieces. This
latter result would have been the more certain, in
the event of his having so fallen, on account of the
thorp edges projecting from the aides of the cliff,
ss well as the rocky ground below. Dr. Kobinaon
(ffarmmy if the Greek Gotpelt, § 161) supposes
that some such relation as this maj have existed
b e tw ee n the traitor's "bursting asunder" and the
suicide, though he does not assign the occurrence
to any particular place. Tholuck ( MS. Hula) is
ii e of those who think of Hinnom as the scene of
tea event. See on this point the Lift of our Lord,
by Andrews, p. 610 ff. (1867). We cannot indeed
re!" very much on such minute specifications, be-
nnse so little bang related, so little is really known
eapecting the manner of Judas's death. [Judas.]
It may not be useless to correct more distinctly
HIHAH
tors
« * That depends on th* explanation. Dr. xant
rcnarks on the passage: t« &kr a cedar; namely, as
a jadar Is brat, which la not mstlv done. Tt > allusion
a> to the strength and atUmcaa of the tall, the small-
est and w akeat of all the members of the animal'
assjr " IB*ok of lob, will) a Recited Venitm, p. 166)
a somewhat prevalent idea that the Valej of Hin-
nom lies wholly on the south of Jerusalem. This
name belongs also to the valley on the west of the
city, though the latter is often called from the res-
ervoirs there the Valley of Gihon. They are both
parts of one and the same valley, which sweeps
around the city on two side*. As a topographical
description, the reader will find Robinson's concise
account of this locality (Phy. Geogr., pp. 97-100)
very distinct and accurate. H.
HIPPOPOTAMUS. There is hardly a
doubt that the Hebrew behemoth (HlOn?) de-
scribes the hippopotamus: the word itself bean
the strongest resemblance to the Coptic name pe-
hemoul, "the water-ox," and at the same time
e xp re sses in its Hebrew form, a* the plural of
njpn3. the idea of a very large beast. Though
now no longer found in the lower Nile, it was for-
merly common there (Wilkinson, i. 839). The
association of it with the crocodile in the passage
in which it is described (Job. xL 16 ff), and most
of the particulars in that passage are more appro-
priate to the hippopotamus than to any other ani-
mal. Behemoth " eateth grass as an ox " (Job xl.
15) — a circumstance which is noticed as peculiar
in an animal of aquatic habits ; this is strictly trut
of the hippopotamus, which leaves the water by
night, and feeds on vegetable* and green crops.
Its strength is enormous, vv. 16, 18, and the notice
of the power of the muscles of the belly, '• his
force is in the navel of his belly," appears to be
strictly correct. The tail, however, is short, and
it must be conceded that tie first part of ver. 17,
" he ruoveth his tail like a eedar," seems not alto-
gether applicable." His mode of attack is with
his mouth, which is armed with a formidable array
of teeth, projecting incisors, and enormous curved
canines: thus " his creator offers him a sword,"
for so tbe words in ver. 1U may be rendered. But
the use of his sword is mainly for pacific purposes,
" the beasts of the field playing " about him as he
feeds ; the hippopotamus being a remarkably inof-
fensive animal. His retreat is among the lotuses
(ttettim; A. V. "shady trees") which abounded
about the Nile, and amid the reeds of the river.
Thoroughly at home in the water, " if the river ris-
eth, he doth not take to flight ; and he cares not
if a Jordan (here an appellative for a " atream " )
press on his mouth." Ordinary means of capture
were ineffectual against the great strength of this
animal. " Will any take him before his eyas?"
(«'. e. openly, and without cunning), " will any bore
his nose with a gin ? " as was usual with largi
fish. The method of killing it in Egypt was with
a spear, the animal being in the tint instanc*
secured by a lasso, and repeatedly struck until it
became exhausted (Wilkinson, I. 340); the very
same method is pursued by the natives of South
Africa at the present day (Livingstone, p. 73; in-
stances of its great strength on noticed by thi
same writer, pp. 831, 833, 48T). W h. B.
HITIAH (fHTl [«o6t% noble birth} i
Se* «'*> Hlrstl's Hiob erUurt, p. 240. There are sev-
eral expressions in this celebrated description of thv
water-ox of the Nils which the present philology rep-
resents somewhat differently from tbs A. V. See Uu
versions of Xmld, D» Wette, Umbreit, Sonant, Ho;st>
tad others. B
Digitized by
Google
1080
HIRAM
tloit Hiram), an Adullainlte, the friend (?-?)
if Judah (Geo. m*E 1, IS; end we 80). For
'friend" the LXX. and Vulg. have "shepherd,"
probably reading Vtyi.
HITRAM or HtTCtAM (PTTt, or CTTI
[noble born = "IP Gee.] : [Rom. Xipip, exc 3
8am. t. 11, 1 Thr. xiv. 1, Xtipip; Vat. Alex.
Xtipau: Hiram] on the different forms of the name
see Huram). 1. The King of Tyre who sent
workmen and materials to Jerusalem, first (2 Sam.
v. 11, 1 Chr. xiv. 1) to build a palace for David
whom he ever loved (1 K. v. 1), and again (1 K.
r. 10, vii. 13, 3 Chr. ii. 14, 16) to build the Tem-
ple for Solomon, with whom be had a treaty of
peace and commerce (1 K. v. 11, IS). The con-
tempt with which be received Solomon's present
of Cabul (1 K. ix. 13) does not appear to have
caused any breach between the two kings. He ad-
mittod Solomon's ships, Issuing from Joppa, to a
share in the profitable trade of the Mediterranean
(1 K. x. 22) ; and Jewish sailors, under the guid-
ance of Tynans, were taught to bring the gold of
India (1 K. ix. 26) to Solomon's two harbors on
the Red Sea (see Ewald, Gttc/i. In: lii. 346-
347).
Eupolemon (np. Euseb. Prop. Emng. ix. 30)
states that David, after a war with Hiram, reduced
him to the condition of a tributary prince. Dius,
the Phoenician historian, and Menander of Ephesus
(ap. Joseph, c. Ap. i. 17, 18) assign to Hiram a
prosperous reign of 34 years; and relate that his
Esther was Abibsl, his son and successor Raleazar ;
that he rebuilt various idol-temples, and dedicated
some splendid offerings ; that he was successful in
war; that he enlarged and fortified his city; that
he and Solomon had a contest with riddles or dark
sayings (compare Samson and his friends, Judg.
xiv. 12), in which Solomon, after winning a large
stun of money from the king of Tyre, was even-
tually outwitted by Abdemon, one of his suhjecta.
The intercourse of these great and kindred-minded
Idngs was much celebrated by local historians.
Josephus (Ant. viii. 2, § 8) states that the corre-
spondence between them with respect to the build-
ing of the Temple was pre s erve d among the Tyrian
archives in his days. With the letters in 1 K. v.
and 2 Chr. ii. may be compared not only his copies
of the letters, but also the still less authentic let-
ters between Solomon and Hiram, and between
Solomon and Vaphres (Aprlea?), which are pre-
served by Eupolemon (ap. Euseb. Prop. F.vang.
Iv. 30), and mentioned by Alexander Polyhistor
(ap. Clem. Alex. Strom, i. 31, p. 838). Some
Phoenician historians (ap. Tatlan. cont. Grox. § 37)
rebkte that Hiram, besides supplying timber for the
Temple, gave his daughter in marriage to Solomon.
Jewish writers in less ancient times cannot over-
ook Hiram's undrcumefoirn In his services towards
•he building of the Temple. Their legends relate
(ap. Eisentn. KnUJud. 1. 868) that because he was
a nod-fearing man and built the Temple he was
received alive into Paradise; but that, after he had
been there a thousand years, he sinned by pride,
and was thrust down into bell.
S. [Xepd>; Vat. Alex. Xtipau: Hiram.] Hiram
was the name of a man of mixed race (1 K. vil.
18, 40, [43] ), the principal architect and engineer
•sot by king Hiram to Solomon ; also called Hu-
■I m the Chronicles. On the title of 2N =
HTTTITKS, THH
Master, or father, given to him in 2 Chi fi. II
iv. 16, see Huram, No. 8. W. T. B.
* At the distance of 1} hours on the MD-sidi
east of Tyre, is a remarkable tomb known as Kabt
ffairin, 1. e. Tomb of Hiram. "It stands al
alone, apart alike from human habitation and an-
cient ruin — a solitary, venerable relio of remote
antiquity. In fact it is one of the most singula*
monuments in the land. It is an immense sarcoph-
agus of limestone hewn out of a single block —
12 feet long, 8 wide, and 6 high ; covered by a ml
slightly pyramidal, and 5 feet in thickness; — the
whole resting on a massive pedestal, about 10 feet
high, composed of three layers of burgs hewn
stones, the upper layer projecting a few inches. The
monument is perfect, though weather-beaten. The
only entrance to it is an aperture broken through
the eastern end. A tradition, now received by aD
classes and sects in the surrounding country, makes
this the tomb of Hiram, Solomon's friend and
ally; and the tradition may have come down un-
broken from the days of Tyre's grandeur. We
have at least no Just ground for rejecting it."
(Porter, Handbook, ii. 896.)
The people there also connect Hiram's name
with a copious fountain over which a massive stons
structure has been raised, which the traveller passes
on the south shortly before coming to the site of
Tyre (see Tristram's Land of ItraO, p. 66, 3d ed.).
Such traditions, whether they cleave rightfully or
not to these particular places, have. their interest.
They come down to us through Phoenician chan-
nels, and indirectly authenticate the history of
Hiram as recorded by the Hebrew writers. H.
HIRCA'NTJS ("rywoWt [Hyreomian, from
"Tpxarla, a province on the Caspian Sea] : Hirca-
nue), '-a son of Tobias," who had a large treasure
placed for security in the treasury of the Temple at
the time of the visit of Heliodorus (c 187 B. c. ;
3 Mace. iil. 11). Josephus also mentions " chil-
dren of Tobias " (Ant. xii. 6, § 1, rcuits TvjSfov),
who, however, belonged to the faction of Menelaus,
and notices especially a son of one of them (Joseph)
who was named Hyrcanus (Ant. xii. 4, § 2 If.).
But there is no sufficient reason for identifying the
Hyrcanus of 2 Mace, with this grandson of Tobias
either by supposing that the ellipse (tov TwjSiov)
Is to be so filled up (Grotius, Calmet), or that th«
sons of Joseph were popularly named after their
grandfather (Ewald, Uuch. It. 309), which could,
scarcely have been the case in consequence of the
great eminence of their father.
The name appears to be simply a local appella-
tive, and became illustrious afterwards in the Mac-
cabean dynasty, though the circumstances which
led to its adoption are unknown (yet comp. Joseph.
Ant. xiil. 8, § 4). [Maccabkeb.] B. F. W.
• HIS is used throughout the A. V. Instead of
iff, which does not occur in the original edition of
1611, though It has been introduced In one place
In later editions. [It.] This use sometimes occa-
sions ambiguity, as in Matt. vi. 33, " Seek ye first
the kingdom of God, and his righteousness," when
Eastwood and Wright (Bible Word-Book, p. 863-
erroneoitaly refer the " his " to " kingdom " '- stead
of to " God," the Greek being tV Sucuoe-orn*
airoC, not afrrijt- " His righterusness " hen
means " the righteousness which He requires."
HTTTITES, THE, the nation
from Cheth (A V. •< Heth "), the second son of
Digitized by
Google
HITTITES, THE
trin i (1 ) With five eaoeptions, uotfoad be-
•*, the word is , .?7 ! ^ = «e CWf/fte [4 X«r-
rsuor, o> Xrrrcuoi- Hethamu, Hethcd, in En-, ix.
1, 4 E8f, Vat E0«, Alex. E89i], in the singular
lumber! according to the common Hebrew idiom.
It is occasionally rendered in the A. V. in the sin-
gular number, " the Hittite " (Ex. zxiii. 28, xxxiii.
2, xxziv. 11; Josh. ix. 1, xi. 8), but elsewhere
plural (Geo. xv. 20; Ex. iii. 8, 17, xiii. 5, xxiii.
29; Num. xiii 99; Deut vii. 1, xx. 17; Josh. iii.
10, rii. 8, xxir. 11; Judg. ill. 5; 1 K. ix. 20; 2
Chr. viii. 7; Ear. ix. 1; Neh. ix. 8; 1 Esdr. viii.
68, XfrroMu). (2-) The plural form of the word
U D"Finn = Me CkitHm, or HUtUtt [Xsrrfr
(Vat -T«r, Alex. XerrMi/i), X*ttiu> (Vat. -«».),
«2 Xerroibt: BtUhim, Htthm\ (Josh. i. 4; Judg.
i. 96; 1 K. x. 29; 2 K. vii. 6; 2 Chr. i. 17}.
(3.) "A Hittite [woman] " is j"PWn [XfTToia:
Cetian] (Ex. in. 3, 45). In 1 K. xi 1, the same
word is rendered >• Hittites."
L Our first introduction to the Hittites is in the
time of Abraham, when he bought from the Bene-
Cbeth, " Children of Heth " — such was then their
title — the field and the cave of HachpeUh, be-
longing to Ephron the Hittite. The; were then
settled at the town which was afterwards, under its
new owe of Hebron, to become one of the most
famous cities of Palestine, then bearing the name
of Kirjath-orba, and perhaps also of Mamre (Gen.
xxiii. 19, xxt. 9). The propensities of the tribe
appear at that time to hare been rather commer-
cial' than military. The "money current with
the merchant," and the process of weighing it,
■ere familiar to them ; the peaceful assembly <> m
the gate of the city " was their manner of receiv-
ing the stranger who was desirous of having a
" possession " "secured" to him among them.
lie dignity and courtesy of their demeanor also
tome out strongly in this narrative. As Ewald
well says, Abraham chose his allies in warfare from
the Amorites, but he goes to the Hittites for his
grave. But the tribe was evidently as yet but
small, not important enough to be noticed beside
u the Canaanite and the Perizzite " who shared the
balk of the land between them (Gen. xii. 6, xiii.
7). In the southern part of the country they re-
mained for a considerable period after this, possibly
extending aa tar as Gerar and Beer-sheba, a good
deal below Hebron (xxvi. 17, xxviii. 10). From
their families Esau married his two first wives;
and her fear lest Jacob should take the same course
la the motive given by Rebekah for sending Jacob
away to Haran. It was the same feeling that
had urged Abram to send to Mesopotamia for a
wife for Isaac. The descendant of Sham could not
wed with Hamites — " with the daughters of the
Canaanites among whom I dwell . . . wherein I
tm a stranger," hut " go to my country and thy
lindred " is his father's command, "to the house
af thy mother's lather, and take thee a wife from
thence " (Gen. xxviii. 2, xxiv. 4).
2. Throughout the book of Exodus the name of
the Hittites occurs only in the usual formuet for
lbs occupants of the Promised I .and. Changes
pern* m the mode of stating this formula [Canaan,
t> 304 a], but the Hittites are never omit* sd '?ee
niTTITEW, THE
10«
m « Ganaanfte •* has In many places the fierce of
'■tarshant" or" trafficker." Bos among other* the
■ In vsL If. SUA
Ex. xxiii. 28). In the report of the spies, however,
we have again a real historical notice of them:
■• the Hittite, the Jebusite, and the Amorite dwell
in the mountain" (Num. xiii. 99). Whatever
temporary circumstances may hare attracted them
so far to the south as Beer-sheba, a people having
the quiet commercial tastes of Ephron the Hittite
and his companions can have had no call for the
roving, skirmishing life of the country bordering
on the desert: and thus, during the sojourn of
Israel in Egypt, they had withdrawn themselves
from those districts, retiring before Amalek (Num.
xiii. 29) to the more secure mountain country in
the centre of the land. Perhaps the words of
Eaekiel (xri. 3, 45) may imply that they helped to
found the city of Jehus.
From this time, however, their quiet habits
vanish, and they take their part against the invader,
in equal alliance with the other Canaanite tribes
(Josh ix. 1, xi. 3, Ac.).
3. Henceforward the notices of the Hittites are
very few and faint. We meet with two individuals,
both attached to the person of David. (1. ) " Ahim-
elech the Hittite," who was with him in the hill
of Hachilah, and with Abisbai accompanied him by
night to the tent of Saul (1 Sam. xxvi. 6). He is
nowhere else mentioned, anil was possibly killed in
one of David's expeditic"-*, before the fist in 9 Sam.
xxiii. was drawn up (2.) "Uriah the Hittite,"
one of " the thirty " of David's body-guard (2 Sam.
xxiii. 39; 1 Chr. xi. 41), the deep tragedy of whose
wrongs forms the one blot in the life of his master.
In both these persons, though warriors by profes-
sion, we can perhaps detect traces of those qualities
which we have noticed as characteristic of the tribe.
In the case of the first, it was Abishai, the practi-
cal, unscrupulous "son of Zeruiab," who pressed
David to allow him to kill the sleeping king:
Abimelech is clear from that stain. In the oass
of Uriah, the absence from suspicion and the gen-
erous self-denial which he displayed are too well
known to need more than a reference (2 Sam. xi.
11, 12).
4. The Egyptian annals tell us of a very power-
ful confederacy of Hittites in the valley of the
Orontea, with whom Setber I., or Sethos, waged
war about b. c. 1340, and whose capital, Ketesh,
situate near Emesa, he conquered. [Egypt, p.
511.]
5. In the Assyrian inscriptions, as lately deci-
phered, there are frequent references to a nation
of JChatti, who '• formed a great confederacy ruled
by a number of petty chiefs," whose territory also
lay in the valley of the Orontea, and who were
sometimes assisted by the people of the see on se t,
probably the Phoenicians (Rawlinson's Htrodotvt,
i. 463). « Twelve kings of the Southern KhaW
are mentioned in several places." If the identifi-
cation of these people with the Hittites should
prove to be correct, it agrees with the name Chut,
as noticed under Heth, and affords a clew to the
meaning of some passages which are otherwise
puzzling. These are (n) Josh. i. 4, where the ex-
pression " all the land of the Hittites " appears to
nnan all the land of Canaan, or at least tie northern
part thereof. (4) Judg. i. 26. Here nearly the
same expression recurs. [Lr/z.] (c) 1 K. x. 29;
2 Ch i. 17: " All the kings of the Hittites and
kings c f Aram " (probably identical with the " kings
on thu ride Euphrates," 1 K. ir. 24) are mentioned
as purchasing chariots and horses from Egypt, for
the possession of which they were so notorious. Cast
Digitized by
Google
10S2
HTVTTE8, TBQB
(d) It would seem to have become at a Liar date
slmost proverbial in allusion to an alarm of an
attack by chariot* (3 K. viL 6).
6. Nothing is laid of toe religion or worship of
the Hittite*. Even in the enumeration of Solomon's
idolatrous worship of the gorii of hii wives — among
whom were Hittite women (1 K. xi. 1) — no Hittite
deity U alluded to. (See 1 K. xl. 5, 7; 8 K. xxiii.
13.)
7. The name* of the individual Hittite* men-
tioned in the Bible are u follow. They are all
susceptible of interpretation aa Hebrew words, which
would lead to the belief either that the Hittite*
•poke a dialect of the Aramaic or Hebrew language,
oi that the words were Hebraized in their trans-
ference to the Bible records.
Adah (woman), (Jen. xxxvi. 3.
Aiiimklkch, 1 Sam. xxvi. 6.
Bashemath, aecur. Bas'math (woman); pos-
sibly a second name of Adah, Gen. xxvi. 34.
Bkrri (father of Judith, below), Gen. xxvi. 34.
Elom (father of Baamath), Gen. xxvi. 34.
Ephkon, Gen. xxiii. 10, 13, 14, Ac.
Judith (woman), Gen. xxvi. 84.
Uriah, 2 Sam. xi. 3, 4c., xxiii. 39, Ac.
Zoiiak (father of Ephron), Gen. xxiii. 8.
In addition to the above, Sibbechai, who in the
Hebrew text is always denominated a Hushathite,
is by Joaephus (AnL vii. 12, § 3) styled a Hittite.
G.
HTVITES. THE (^TTH (jperh. the villager.
Gee.], L e. the Chwritt : 6 Evcuot ; [in Josh. ix. 7,
Xotycuos, and so Alex, in Gen. xxxiv. 2:] Hmziu).
The name is, in the original, uniformly found in
the singular number. It never lias, like that of the
Hittitea, a plural, nor does it appear in any ether
form. Perhaps we may assume from this that it
originated in some peculiarity of locality or circum-
stance, as in the case of the Amorites — " moun-
taineers ; " and not in a progenitor, aa did that of
the Ammonites, who are also styled llene-Ammon
— children of Amnion — or the Hittite*, Bene-
Cheth — children of Heth. The name is explained
by Ewald (Oesch. i. 318) as Binneuliinder, that is,
«Hidlanders;" by Gesenius ( The: 451) as /mourn,
" villagers." In the following passages the name
la given in the A. V. in the singular — the
Hivitb: — Gen. x. 17* Ex. xxiii. 28, xxxiii. 2,
xxxiv. 11; Josh. ix. 1, xi. 3; 1 Chr. i. IS; also
Sen. xxxiv. 2, xxxvL 2. In all the rest it is
Jural.
1. In the genealogical tables of Genesis, "the
Hivite " is named as one of the descendants — the
sixth in order — of Canaan, the son of Ham (Gen.
c. 17 ; 1 Chr. I. 15). In the first enumeration of
the nations who, at the time of the call of Abraham,
occupied the promised land (Gen. xv. 19-21), the
Hirites are omitted from the Hebrew text (though
n the Samaritan and 1.XX. their name is inserted).
this has led to the conjecture, amongst others, that
they are identical with the Kadmonitkb, whose
name is found there and there only (Keland, Pal.
140; Bochart, PhnL Iv. 36; Can. i. 19). But are
not the Kadmonite* rather, as their name implies,
the representatives of the Bene-kedem, or " children
►f the East " ? The name constantly occurs in the
tsnmda by which the country is designated m the
*rher bocks (Ex. Hi. 8, 17, xiil. S, xxiii. 23, 28,
cxxUL 9, xxxiv. 11; Dent vii. 1, xx. 17; Josh. iii.
10, ix. 1, xii. 8, xxiv. 11), and also in the later
ones (1 K. Ix 80; 2 Chr. viii. 7; but comp. Ear.
HIVTTB8, TUB
ix. 1, and Neh. Ix. 8). It is, however, alwent It
the report of the spies (Num. xili. 89), a aocumeut
which fixes the localities occupied by the Canaanitr
nations at that time. Perhaps this is owing to
the then insignificance of the Hivite*, or perhaps
to the fact that they were indifferent to the special
locality of their settlements.
2. We first encounter the actual people of the
Hivites at the time of Jacob's return to Canaan.
Shechem was then (according to the current He-
brew text) in their possession, Hamor the Hivite
being the ••prinos (WtpJ) of the land" (Gen.
xxxiv. 2). They were at this time, to judge of
them by their rulers, a warm and impetuous
people, credulous, and easily deceived by the crafty
and cruel sons of Jacob. The narrative further
exhibits them as peaceful and commercial, given to
••trade" (10, 21), sod to the acquiring of - po*
sessions " of cattle and other " wealth " (10, 33, SB,
29). Like the Hittite* they held their assemblies
or conference* in the gate of their city (30). We
may also age a testimony to their peaceful habit*
in the absence of any attempt at revenge on Jacob
for the massacre of the Sbeehemite*. Perhaps a
similar indication is furnished by the name of the
god of the Sbeehemite* some generations after this
— Baal Jberith — Baal of the league, or the alliance
(Judg. viii. 33, ix. 4, 46); by the way in which
the Sbeehemite* were beaten by Abimdeeh (40);
and by the unmilitary character, both of the weapon
which caused Abimelech's death and of the person
who discharged it (ix. 68).
The Alex. MS., and several other MSS. of the
LXX, in the above narrative (Gen. xxxiv. 3) sub-
stitute "Horite" for "Hivite." The change is
remarkable from the usually close adherence of the
Alex. Codex to the Hebrew text, but It is not cor-
roborated by any other of the ancient versions, nor
is it recommended by other consideration*. Ne
instances occur of Horite* in this part of Palestine,
while we know, from a later narrative, that then
was an important colony of Hivites on the highland
of Benjamin at Gibson, etc., no very g«eet distance
from Shechem. On the other hand, in Gen. xxxvi.
2, where Abolibamah, one of Esau's wives, is said to
have been the daughter of [Anah] the daughter of
Zibeon the Hivite, all considerations are in favor of
reading " Horite " for " Hivite." In this oass w*
fortunately possess a detailed genealogy of the fam-
ily, by comparison of which little doubt is left of
the propriety of the change (oomp. verses 80, 84,
36, 30, with 3), although no ancient version ha*
suggested it here.
3. We next meet with the Hivites during the
conquest of Canaan (Josh. ix. 7, xi. 19). Their
character is now in some respects materially altered.
They are still evidently averse to fighting, but they
have acquired — possibly by long experience in
traffic — an amount of craft which they did not
before possess, and which enable* them to turn the
table* on the Israelite* in a highly successful man-
ner (Josh. ix. 3-37). The colony of Hivite*,' who
made Joshua and the heads of the tribes then
dupes on this occasion, had four cities — Gibson,
Chephirab, Beeroth,and Kirjath-jearim — situated
if our present knowledge is accurate, at eonsiderabH
distances asunder. It is not certain whether tbt
three last were destroyed by Joshua or not (xi. 19)
Thot again the LXX. (both 1188.) have BorikH
for Hlvitas ; but we cannot secapt the ebanfs wtthoai
further consideration.
Digitized by
Google
HIZKIAH
3Bmod certainly was (pared. In ver. 11 'he Gfb-
nrites apeak of the " elder* " of their city, a word
which does not necessarily point to any special
5Dnn of government, as U assumed by Winer
(Baiter), who noes the ambiguous expression that
they " lived under a republican constitution " (in
rtpubUcamtektr Verfaumg)\ See also Ewald
(Gttek. i. 318, 319).
4. The main body of the Hivites, however, were
at this time living on the northern confines of
western Palestine — " under Hennon, in the land
of Mixpeh " (Josh. xi. 3) — "in Mount Lebanon,
from Mount Baal-Hemion to the entering in of
Haniath " (Judg. iii. 3). Somewhere in this neigh-
borhood they were settled when Joab and the cap-
tains of the host, in their tour of numbering, came
to "all the cities of the Ilivites" near Tyre (3
Sam. xxiv. 7). In the Jerusalem Targum on Gen.
x. 17, they are called Tripolitans (^ftePTQ),
a name wnich points to the same general northern
locality.
6. In speaking of the Avim, or Awites, a sug-
gestion has been made by the writer that they may
have been identical with the Hivites. This is ap-
parently corroborated by the fact that, according to
the notice in Dent, ii., the Avites seem to have been
dispersed before the Hivites appear on the scene of
the sacred history. G.
HIZKI'AH (n»i?tn [Krenotf ofjeiotnh]:
'Effa-fat: Extant), an ancestor of Zep h a ni a h the
prophet (Zeph. i. 1).
HIZKI'JAH (rrjrjTn r»»»bove]: '%(, K la:
Hataa), according to the punctuation of the A.
V. a man who sealed the covenant of reformation
with Ezra and Nehemiah (Neh. x. 17). But there
is no doubt that the name should be taken with
that preceding it, as " Ater-Iiiziujah," a name
E'ren in the lists of those who returned from Baby-
a with Zerubbabel. It appears also extremely
likely that the two names following these in x. 17,
18 (Azzur, Hodijah) are only corrupt repetitions
of them.
This and the preceding name are identical, and
are the same with that given in the A. V. as
HXZEKIAH.
H03AB (Spn [tee, Ukmd]: t 'OJ3d79,
Alex. Q0afi; in Judg. 'Iv$d0: Hobab). This
name is foiiud in two places only (Num. x. 99;
Judg. It. 11), and it seems doubtful whether it
denotes the father-in-law of Moses, or his son.
(L) In favor of the latter are (a.) the express state-
Bent that Hobab was " the son of Kaguel" (Num.
x. 39); Kaguel or Reuet — the Hebrew word in
both eases is the same — being identified with
Jethro, not only in Ex. ii. IS (oomp. iii. 1, Ac.),
last alio by Josephus, who constantly gives him
that name. (A.) The fact tfc.it Jethro had some
time previously left the IsraeL~.e camp to return to
his own country (Ex. xviii. 37). The words "the
father-in-law of Moses " in Num. x. 39, though in
moat of the ancient versions connected with Hobab,
will in the original rend either way, so that no
argument can be founded on then.. (3.) In favor
sf Hobab's identity with Jethro are (n.) the words
sf Judg. iv. 11; but it should be remembered that
ibis is (ostensibly) of later date than the other, and
altogether a more casual statement, (*.) Josephus
sa speaking of Kaguel remarks once (Ant. ii. 12, § 1 )
hat he " had Iuthor, ■'. e. Jethro) for a surname "
HOBAH 1038
(rotrro yhp fo MK\r)/ia Tel *P<rytn/u\}. From
the absence of the article here, it is inferred by
Whiston and others that Josephus intends that he
had more than one surname, but this seems hardly
safe.
The Mohammedan traditions are certainly in favor
of the identity of Hobab with Jethro. He is known
in the Koran and elsewhere, and in the East at the
present day, by the name of Skodb ( yjlA ),
doubtless a corruption of Hobab. According to
those traditions he was the prophet of God to the
idolaters of Mtdytn (Midian), who not believing
his message were destroyed (Lane's .Koran, 179-
181); be was blind (ib. 180 note); the rod of Moses
was his gift, it had once been the rod of Adam,
and was of the myrtle of Paradise, etc. (Ib. 190:
Weil's BibL LegttxU, 107-109). The name of
Siw'eib still remains attached to one of the wadies
on the east side of the Jordan, opposite Jericho,
through which, according to the tradition of the
locality (Seetxen, Rtutn, 1854, ii. 319, 376), the
children of Israel descended to the Jordan. [Bkth-
Nimkaii.] According to this tradition, therefore,
he asoompanied the people as far as the Promised
Ijuid, though whatever weight that may possess is,
when the statement of Ex. xviii. 37 is taken into
account, against his identity with Jethro. Other
places bearing his name and those of his two
daughters are shown at Sinai and on the Gulf of
Akaba (Stanley, S. <f P. p. 33).
But whether Hobab was the father-in-law of
Moses or not, the notice of him in Num. x. 29-32,
though brief, is full of point and interest. While
Jethro is preserved to us as the wise and practiced
administrator, Hobab appears as the experienced
Bedouin sheikh, to whom Moses looked for the
material safety of his cumbrous caravan in the new
and difficult ground before them. The tracks and
passes of that "waste howling wilderness" were
all familiar to him, and his practiced sight would
be to them " instead of eyes " in discerning the
distant clumps of verdure which betokened the wells
or springs for the daily encampment, and in giving
timely warning of the approach of Amalekites or
other spoilers of the desert. [Jbthko.] G.
H03AH [or HO'BA, A. V. ed. 1611]
(nyin [conctaUd, Gee.; hirking-kole, Ffirst]:
XojEU: Huba), the place to which Abraham pursued
the kings who had pillaged Sodom (Gen. xiv. IB).
It was situated "to the north of Damascus"
(pt£719T? 7r$I3te'l3). Josephus mentions a tra-
dition concerning Abraham which he takes from
Nicolaus of Damascus: — "Abraham reigind at
Damascus, being a foreigner . . . and his name it
still famous in the country; sad 'Jkft is thowr •
village called from him Tkt Batotation of Abra-
ham" (Ant. i. 7, 5 3). It is reurkabla that in
the village of Bmrzth, three miles north of Damas-
cus, there is a votly held in high veneration by the
Mohammedans, and called after the name of the
patriiirch, Matjnd Ibrahim, "the prayer-pbee of
Abranam." The tradition attached to It is that
here Abraham offered thanks to God after the total
discomfiture of the eastern kings. Behind the at If
is a cleft in the rock, in which another tradition
represent* the patriarch as taking refuge on oni
occasion from the giant Nurrod. It is rrmarkabls
that the word f/ub-ik signifies "a hiding-place."
The Jews of Damascus affirm that the village of
Digitized by
Google
1084
HOD
Mar, not far from Barzeh, U the Hobah of Scrip-
ture. They h»ve a synagogue then dedicated to
□yah, to which they make frequent pilgrimages
(see p. 720 6, note; alio llamlb. for Syr. and Pal
pp. 491, 493). " J. L. P.
HOD (Tin [splendor, onwmenf] : 'ad; [Vat.]
Alex. QS: Hod), one of the una of Zophah, among
the descendants of Aaher (1 Chr. vii. 37).
HODATAH [3 iyL] (C»«a», Vf^fuf,
altered in the Ktri to WTJpHn, i. e. Hoda-
via'hu [spUmlor of Jehovah] : 'OSoKla ; Alex.
ll&ovta- Oduia), ton of Ivlwenai, one of the laat
inemben of the royal line of Judah ; mentioned 1
Chr. iii. 34.
HODAVI'AH(rPp'in[»iaU)w]: 'Oiovia:
Oduia). 1. A man of Manasneh, one of the heads
of the half-tribe on the east of Jordan (1 Chr. v.
84).
2. [Vat. Otvia: Oduin.] A man of Benjamin,
•on of Haa-aenuah (1 Chr. ix. 7).
3. [Vat. 2ooovu>: Odaria.] A Ijerite, who
seems to have given his name to an important
family in the tribe — the Dene Hoduviah (Kit. ii.
40). In Kehemiah the name appears at Hoiif.vah.
Lord A. Hervey has called attention to the fact
that this name if closely connected with Judah
(Uenealogies, p. 119). This being the ease, we
probably find thia Uodaviah mentioned again in
Hi. 9.
HODE8H (BH'n [new moon, or time of the
new moon] : 'ASd i [Comp. XiSes :] Bodes), a
woman named in the genealogies of Benjamin (1
Chr. viii. 9) as the wife of a certain Shaharaim,
and mother of seven children. Shaharaim had two
wives besides Hodeah, or possibly Hodeah was a
second name of one of those women (ver. 8). The
LXX. by reading Baara, BaaSi, and Hodeah, 'Ata,
seem to wish to establish such a connection.
HODEVAH (nrpn, Arm iTTin [perh.
hrightnest, ornament of Jehovah] : OiiSavla: [Vat.
SovtoutaO Alex Ovtovit: Oduin), Bene-Hodevah
[sons of H.], a Levite family, returned from Cap-
tivity with Zernbbabel (Neh. vii. 43). In the
parallel lists it is given as Hodaviah (No. 3) and
OUDlAg.
HODI'AH (nj'l'in [splendor of Jehovah]:
q 'IoWa; Alex. IouSwa; [Comp. 'atta:] Odaia),
one of the two wives of Ezra, a man of Judah, and
mother to the founders of Keilah and Eahtemoa
(1 Chr. iv. 19). She is doubtless the same person
as Jchudjjah (in verse 18, that is " the Jewess "),
in bet, except the article, which is disregarded in
'he A . V., the two names are identical [comp.
Uodaviah, No. 3]. Uodiah is exactly the same
uame as IIoduah, under which form it is given
more than once in the A. V.
HODI'JAH (n»Yffl [as above] : 'OSovta:
OiHa, Odaia). This is in the original precisely the
■ame uime as the preceding, though spelt differently
in the A. V. It occurs —
L A Levite in the time of Ezra and Nehemiah
;N«h. vili. 7; and probably also ix. 6j x. 10). The
i lu etch M3. the sama equivalent as the above baa
mm fivsn tot lotus
HOLON
name with others is omitted in the two first «t
these passages in the LXX.
3. ['ntoi/j.; Alex, ntom: Odaia.] Anothei
Levite at the same time (Neh. x. 13).
3. ['aSouia; Vat. Alex. FA Otovia: Odma.,
A layman ; one of the " heads " of the people at
the same time (Neh. x. 18).
HOGXAH (nH|u7 [partridge]: 'EyU
Alex. ArvAa, AryXoyu: Btgla), the third of the
Ave daughters of Zelopbehad, in whose lavor the
law of inheritance was altered to that a daughter
could inherit her lather's estate when he left no
sons (Num. xxvi. 33, xxvii. 1, xxxvL 11, Josh,
xvii. 3).
Tie name also occurs in Bkth-hoglah, which
',
HOUAM (Dmn [whom Jehovah tneUet,
ties.]: "EKifi; Alex. AiAa/u;" Oham), king of
Hebrou at the time of the conquest of Canaan
(Josh. x. 3) : one of the five kings who were pursued
by Joshua down the pass of Beth-boron, and who
were at last captured in the care at Hakkedah and
there put to death. As king of Hebron he is
frequently referred to in Josh, x., but his name
occurs in the above passage only.
HOLM-TREE (nmi: Hex) occurs only in
the apocryphal story of Susanna (ver. 68). The
passage contains a characteristic play on the names
of the two trees mentioned by the elders in their
evidence. That on the mastich (o-Yiror . . .
HyyKos onion at) has been noticed under that
head [Mastich-thee, note]. That on the holm-
tree (ratroy) is •' the angel of God waiteth with the
sword to cut thee in two " (Ira tpltrcu e-<). For the
historical significance of these puns see Sdsahna.
The xpiKoj of Theophrastus {Hist. Plant iii. 7, $
3, and 16, § 1, and elsewhere) and Dioscorides (i.
144) denotes, there can be no doubt, the Quereus
coccifern, the Q. pseudo-eoeciftra, which is perhaps
not specifically distinct from the first-mentioned
oak. The Hex of the Roman writers was applied
both to the holm-oak ( Quereus ilex) and to the
Q. coedftra or kermea oak. See Pliny (H. S.
xvi 6). •
For the oaks of Palestine, see a paper by Dr.
Hooker in the Transactions of the Lhmwan Society,
vol. xxiii. pt ii. pp. 381-387. [Oak.J W. H.
HOLOFER'NES, or, more correctly, Oiav
kkkses ('OXo0<f>vqr: [Hotof ernes] ),» was, accord-
ing to the book of Judith, a general of Nebuchad-
nezzar, king of the Assyrians (Judg. ii. 4), who was
slain by the Jewish heroine Judith during the siege
of Bethulia. [Judith.] The name occurs twice in
Cappadocian history, as borne by the brother of
Ariarathes I. (c. b. c. 350), and afterwards by a
pretender to the Cappadocian throne, who was at
first supported and afterwards imprisoned by Deme-
trius Soter (c. b. c. 168). The termination (Tia-
taphemts, etc) points to a Persian origin, but the
meaning of the word is uncertain. B. F. W.
HOXON 0'bh [oeooV, halting-place, Sim.l .
XoAoo ital Xaryd, Alex. XiXowr; y TtWi, Aiex.
OAor: Ohm, HoLm). X. A town in the mountains
of Judah ; one of the first group, of which LVbii
was apparently the most considerable. It is auaei
between Goshkk and Gii/OH (Josh. XT. 61), sai
» • In the A. 7. ad. 1611 the name Is fmerall
printed « Olofernes," thougt « Hotofcrnes " also nc
Digitized by
Google
HOMAM
ma allotted with ita « suburbs " to the priests
(xxt 15). In the list of print's cities of 1 Uhr.
ii. the name appears as Htlen. In the Onomas-
ncon (« Hekw " and " Okm " ) it is mentioned, but
not so as to Imply ita then existence. Nor has the
name been since recognized by travellers.
2. Qr7fl [as above] : XeAoV: Ham), a city
of Moab (Jer. xlviii. 31, only). It was one of the
towns of the MUkor, the level downs (A. V. " plain
country") east of Jordan, and is named with
Jahaxab, Dibon, and other known places ; but no
identification of it has yet taken place, nor does It
appear in the parallel lists of Num. rail, and
Joan. xiii. 0.
HO'MAM (Dp'irt [txttrminati/m, Oca.] :
hljiAt- ffoman), the form under which in 1 Chr.
i. 39 an Edomite name appears, which in Oen.
xxxvi. is given Hkmam. Homam is assumed by
Geaenius to be the original form ( Tku. p. 885 a).
By Knobel (Gaunt, p. 254), the name is compared
with that of Homaima ( * I * I "** )i * town now
ruined, though once important, half-way between
Petra and Attath, on the ancient road at the back
ef the mountain. See Laborde, Journey, p. 907,
Amiimi ; also the Arabic authorities mentioned by
Koobel. O.
HOMER. [Measures.]
•HONEST. [Hojiksty.]
• HONESTY, for „,p,trnt (A. V.), 1 Tun.
ii. 2, is more restricted in its idea than the Greek
wool <rtiwiri)t- The latter designates generally
dignity of character, including of course probity,
but also other qualities allied to self-control and
decorum. The same word is rendered " gravity,"
1 Tim. iii. 4, and Tit ii. 7. It may be added that
u honest " (which in the N. T. usually repr es en ts
■oAo'i, once aturit) is often to be taken as equiv-
alent to " good " or " reputable." like the Latin
konettm, It describes what is honorable, becoming,
or morally beautiful in character and conduct.
" Honestly " is used in the A. V. In a similar man-
ner as the rendering of twnrnpoVcn and caAwt
(Rom. xiii 13; 1 Thess. iv. 13; Heb. xiii. 18).
H.
HONEY. We have already noticed [Food]
the extensive use of honey as an article of ordinary
(tod among the Hebrews: we shall therefore in the
present article restrict ourselves to a description of
the different articles which passed under the Hebrew
name of ttbath (B??^). In the first place it ap-
plies to the product of the bee, to which we ex-
clusively apply the name of honey. All travellers
agree in describing Palestine as a land "flowing
with honey " (Ex. iii. &), bees being abundant even
in the remote parts of the wilderness, where they
deposit their honey in the crevices of the rocks or
SB hollow trees. In some parts of northern Arabia
the hiUs are so well stocked with bees, that no
sooner are hives placed than tbey are occupied
(WeusterTs TrnnU, U. 139). The Hebrews bad
special expressions to describe the exjdlur. of the
wear/ from the comb, such as adnaeta (n^>\
dropping" (Cant It. U; Pro*, v. 3, xxrr. >3„
■»>* (*P**), "overflowing" (Pa. xix. i0; Prov.
CfL MX sod fa'nr py?) or en'drwA (miJC (1
"lam. atv. 97; Cent. v. 1) — sxpreaatoue whxn
HOOK 1086
answer to the ntel acetum of Pliny (xi 15): the
second of these terms approaches nearest to the
sense of " honey comb," inasmuch as it is connected
with ttopJirlh in Ps. xix. 10, " the droppings of the
comb." (2. ) In the second place, the term <Tbail
applies to a decoction of the juice of the grape,
which is still called ditn, and which forms an article
of commerce in the East; it was this, and not
ordinary bee-honey, which Jacob sent to Joseph
(Gtn. xliii. 11), and which the Tynans purchased
from Palestine (Ex. xxvii. 17). The mode of pre-
paring it is described by Pliny (xiv. 11): the must
was either boiled down to a half (in which case it
was called defrutum), or to a third (when It was
called riraam. or sapa, the trtpaus obot, and
fifnuui of the Greeks): it was mixed either with
wine or milk (Virg. Oeorg. 1. 396; Ov. Fast. It.
780) : it is still a favorite article of nutriment
among the Syrians, and has the appearance of
coarse honey (Kusaell, Aleppo, i. 82). (3.) A third
kind has been described by some writers as " vege-
table " honey, by which is meant the exudations
of certain trees and shrubs, such as the 7omar£e
manmfera, found in the peninsula of Sinai, or the
stunted oaks of Luristan and Mesopotamia. The
honey which Jonathan ate in the wood (1 Sam.
xiv. 35), and the " wild honey " which supported
St John (Matt ill. 4), have been referred to ths
species. We do not agree to this view : the boner
in the wood was in such abundance that Jonathan
took it up on the end of a stick; but the vegetable
honey is found only In small globules, which must
be carefully collected and strained before being used
(WeHsted, ii. 50). The use of the term yi'or In
that passage Is decisive against this kind of honey.
The fi{\i iypim of Matthew need not mean any-
thing else than the honey of the wild bees, which
we have already stated to be common in Palestine,
and which Joaephus (B. J. Iv. 8, { 3) specifies
among the natural productions of the plain of
Jericho : the expression is certainly applied by
Diodorus Siculus (xix. 94) to honey exuded from
trees; hut it may alto be applied like the Latin
met m'htttrt (Phn. xl. 16) to a particular kind of
bee-honey. (4.) A fourth kind is described by
Joaephus (I. ft), as being manufactured from the
Juice of the date.
The prohibition against the use of honey in meat
offerings (Lev. ii. 11) appears to have been grounded
on the fermentation produced by it, honey soon
turning sour, and even forming vinegar (Plin. xxi.
48). This fitet is embodied in the Tahnndical
word hidbith — " to ferment," derived from (tbath.
Other explanations have been offered, as that bars
were unclean (Philo dt Sncrif. e. 6, App. ii. 365',
or that the honey was the artificial taos (iat>.
SymM. U. 838). W. L. B.
•HONEY-COMB. [Hmtet.]
•HOOD. Is. Iii. 33. [HuD-SKOs.]
HOOK, HOOKS. Various kinds of hooks
an noticed In the Bible, of which the following an
the most important
1. Fiahing-hooks (nj*?, TD, Am. hr. 3 >
njjn, Job xH. 3; Is. xix. 8; Hab. 1. 15). The
two first of these Hebrew terms mean primarily
If-irra, and secondarily jUking-kodtt, from ths
similarity in *hape, or perhaps from thorns having
been originally used for the purpose; m both cases
the LXX. and Vulg. are mistaken In their render-
tags, giving ta-Xoif and eontit for the first. \4tw
Digitized by
Google
1086 HOPHNI
rat mi ottu for the second; the third term refers
to the contraction of the mouth by the hook.
9 nin (A. V. "thorn"), properly a ring
tylA&tor, ctixulu$) placed through the mouth of
a large fish and attached by a cord (ptiJH) to a
•take for the purpose of keeping it alive in the
water (Job xli. 8); the word meaning the cord ia
rendered "book" in the A. V. and = trxotvos .
8. nrt and n'Tt, generally rendered "hook"
in the A. V. after tin LXX. Ayiturrpar, but prop-
erly a ring (eirculm), auch as in our country ia
placed through tbe nose of a bull, and aunilarly
used in the east fur leading about lions (Ei. xix. 4,
where the A. V. has " with chains "), camels, and
other animals. A similar method was adopted for
leading prisoners, as in the case of Hanasseh who
was led with rings (2 Chr. xxxiii. 11; A. V. "in
the thorns"). An illustration of this practice is
found io a bas-relief discovered at Kborsabad (Lay-
ard, ii. 376). The expression is used several times
In this sense (8 K. lix. 38; Is. xxxvii. 39; Ex.
axis. 4, xxxviil. 4). The term ttJfTIO Is used in
a similar sense in -lob xl. 94 ( A. V. " bore his nose
with a gin," margin).
c
■look. (Layard's Ninrerk.)
4. D*]}, a term exclusively used in reference to
the Tabernacle, rendered '■ hooks" in the A. V.
The IJCX. varies in its rendering, sometimes giv-
ing KtipaKii, »'. «• the capital of the pillars, some-
times Kfixot and iyxiKn ; the expenditure of gold,
as given in Ex. xxxviii. 88, has led to this doubt ;
they were, however, most probably hiiokt (Ex. xxvi.
18, 87, xxvii. 10 If., xxxviii. 10 ff.): tbe word seems
.o have given name to the letter 1 in tbe Hebrew
ilphabet, possibly from a similarity of the form in
which the latter appears in tbe Greek Digamma,
n that of a hook.
o. i i 3&TQ> ■ vine-dresser's pruning-hook (Is.
3. 4, xriii. 5; Mic. iv. 3: Joel iii. 10).
6. abTO and HjHyp (xptdypa), a flesh-book
for getting up the joints of meat out of tbe boiling
pot (Ex. xxvii. 3; 1 Sam. ii. 13-14).
7. DlglQtj? (Ex. xl. 43), a term of very doubt-
ful meaning, probably meaning " hooks " (as in tbe
A. V.), used for the purpose of hanging up ani-
mals to flay them (/laxiUi bifurci, Oes. Thet. p.
U70): other meanings given are — ledges (labia,
Vulg.), or eaves, na though the word were DV12t{7 ;
oens for keeping the animals previous to their being
-laughtered ; hearth -stones, ss in the margin of the
*.. V. ; and lastly, gutters to receive and carry off
the blood from the slaughtered animals.
w. l. a
HOPHNI C35I7, » fffl>tfr [n pmgiUn,
Vxrer, Gee. ; esse Hirmg, paatrfut, Fiirst] ■• 'Otpvt
HOB, MOUNT
[Vat -mi; Alex, in 1 Sam. ii. 84, K+m, Iv. «
U, 17, 0^«,: Ophm}) andl'aiKWiiJi (DiT^S,
iirtit [Vat. ♦«!>•«««]), tbe two sons of EH, 'whs
fulfilled their hereditary sacerdotal duties at Shiloh.
Their brutal rapacity and lust, which seemed to
acquire fresh violence with their father's increasing
years (1 Sam. ii. 28, 19-17), filled the people with
disgust and Indignation, and provoked the eurse
which was denounced against their father's house
first by an unknown prophet (w. 87-86), and then
by Samuel (1 Sam. iii. 11-14). They were both
cut off in one day in the flower of their age, and
tbe ark which they had accompanied to battle
against the Philistines was lost on the same occa-
sion (1 Sam. iv. 10, 11). The predicted ruin and
ejectment of Eli's house were fulfilled in the reign
of Solomon. [Eli; Zadok.] The unbridled
licentiousness of these young priests gives us a ter-
rible glimpse into the fallen condition of tbe chosen
people (Ewald, 6'escA. Ii. 538-638)." Tbe Scrip-
ture calls them "sons of Belial " (1 Sam. ii. 19);
and to this our great poet alludes in the words —
— — « To him no temple stood
Or altar smoked ; yet who ran oft than he
In temples and at altars, want Uu print
Tunu atheiit, as did Eli's sons, wbo Oiled '
With lust and violence tbe house of God ? "
Air. Last, I. 401. F. W. I.
HOR. MOUNT OiTTJ -ift, = Hor tht
mountain, remarkable as the only case in which
the name comes first). 1. fty to tpos' Moot
Hvr), the mountain in which Aaron died (Num.
xx. 85, 87). Tbe word Hor is regarded by the
lexicographers as an archaic form of Ifar, the usual
Hebrew terra for " mountain " (Gesenius, TVies.
p. 391 ; Fiirst, Handwb. ad voc., etc.), so that the
meaning of the name is simply " the mountain of
mountains," as the LXX. have it in another case
(see below, No. 2) re Upas to Spec: Vulg. mvns
altitmmuitf and Jerome (Ep. ad Fabiotam) "nun
in monte simpliciter sed In montis monte."
The few facts given us in tbe Bible regarding
Mount Hor are soon told. It was " on tbe boundary
line " (Num. xx. 83) or " at the edge " (xxxiii. 37)
of the bind of Edom. It was the next halting-
place of tbe people after Kadesh (xx. 23, xxxiii.
37), and they quitted it for Zalmonah (xxxiii. 41)
in the road to tbe Ked Sea (xxi. 4). It was during
the encampment at Kadesh that Aaron was gath-
ered to his fathers. At the command of Jehovah,
be, bis brother, and his son ascended the moun-
tain, in the presence of tbe people, " in tbe eyes
of all tbe congregation." The garments, and with
the garments the office, of high-priest were taken
from Aaron and put upon Eleazar, and Aaron died
there in tbe top of the mountain. In the circum-
stances of tbe ascent of the height to die, and in
the marked exclusion from tbe lYomised Land, the
end of tbe one brother resembled the end of the
other; hut in tbe presence of tbe two suivivori,
and of the gazing crowd below, there is a striking
difference between this event and the solitary death
of Moses.
Mount Hor " is one of the very few spots eon. -
netted with tbe wanderings of tbe Israelites which
admit of no reasonable doubt " (Stanley, Syr. mas'
Pal p. 86). It is almost unnecessary to state thai
a * Dseu Stanley finds a lesson also for other and. to us. See his remarks, History </ He Jheuk Olsa n as
•ssr times In that "gnat and Instructive wicked- j i. 418. V
•ass " whisk the naaws «f Phinehes and Uoptral retail I
Digitized by
Google
HOB, MOUNT
• » attssusyi on the extern aide of the great valley !
ef the Arabnh, the highest and most eonapicuona
af the whole range of the sandstone mountains of I
Kdom, haring clone beneath it on ita easten, aide —
though strange to say the two are not visible to
each other — the mysterious city of I'etra. The
tradition has existed from the earliest date, .lone- '
phua doe* not mention the name of Hor (Ant. iv.
4, { 7), but he describes the death of Aaron as '
taking place " on a- very high mountain which aur- '
rounded the metropolis of the Arabs," which Utter
"was formerly called Arke, but now Petra." In
the Ommitticun of Etiaebius and Jerome it is Or
mau — "a mountain in which Aaron died, close
to the city of I'etra." When it was visited by the
Crusaders (see the quotations in Rob 521), the
sanctuary was already on its top, and there is little
doubt that it was then what it is now — the Jebel
NM-Hat-m, « the mountain of the Prophet
Aaron."
HOB, MOUNT
1087
Of the geological formation of Mount Hor wa
have no very trustworthy accounts. The general
structure of the range of Edom, of which it forma
the most prominent feature, la new red sandstone,
displaying itself to an enormous thickness. Above
that is the .lura limestone, and higher still the
cretaceous beds, which latter in Mount Seir are
reported to be 3,600 feet iu thickness (Wilson,
Lnndi, 1. l'J4). Through these deposited strata
longitudinal dykes of red granite and porphyry
have forced their way, running nearly north and
south, and so completely silicifying the neighboring
sandstone as often to give it the look of a primitive
rock. To these combinations are due the extraor-
dinary colors for which Petra is so famous. Mount
Hor itself is said to be entirely sandstone, in very
horizontal strata (Wilson, i. 390). Its height,
according to the latest measurements, is 4,800 fort
(Eng.) above the Mediterranean, that is tc sty
•bout 1,700 feet above Ox town of Petra, 4.0C0
View of tbe summit of Mount Hot. (From Leborde.)
above the level of the Arabah, and more than 6,000
above tbe Dead Sea (Roth, in Petermann'a Mit-
CietZ. 1868, i. 8). The mountain is marked, far
and near, by ita double top, which rises like a huge
esMttflated building from a lower base and is sur-
mounted by tbe circular dome of the tomb of
Aaron, a distinct white spot on the dark red sur-
face of tbe mountain (Stanley, 86; Laborde, 143;
Stephens, /ncitlcntt). This lower base is the " plain
«f Akoc," beyond which Burckhardt was, after all
his tails, prevented from ascending. " Out of this
plain, culminating in its two summits, springs the
red aandatone nuns, from its base upwards rocky
and naked, not a bush or a tree to relieve the rug-
ged and broken comers of the sandstone blocks
which compose it. On ascending this mass a little
plain is found to lie between the two peaks, marked
by a white cypres s, vid not unlike the celebrated
slain of tbe cypress under the summit of Jebel
Jfaan, traditionally believed to be tbe scene of
EB4ab's vision. The southernmost of the two, or.
•ppruschmg, takes a conical form. Tbe northrm-
ssnat is truncated, and crowned by the chapel of
Aaron's tomb." The chapel or moak is a small
i Taw baudiug, measuring inside about 28 feet by
<• I Wilson, 94)6), with its door in the 8. W. angle.
It is built of rude stones, hi part broken columns,
all of sandstone, but fragments of granite and
marble lie about. Steps lead to the flat roof of
the chapel, from which rises a white dome as usual
over a saint's tomb. The interior of the chape)
consists of two chambers, one below tbe other.
The upper one has four large pillars and a stone
chest, or tombstone, like one of the ordinary slabs
in churchyards, but larger and higher, and rather
bigger at the top than the bottom. At its head It
a high round stone, on which sacrifices are mads,
and which retained, when Stephens saw it, tin
marks of tbe smoke and blood of recent offerings.
"On the slab are Arabic inscriptions, and it is
covered with shawls chiefly red. One of tbe pil-
lars Is hung with votive offerings of beads, etc,
and two ostrich eggs are suspended over the chest.
Steps in the N. W. angle lead down to the lower
chamcer, which is partly in tbe rock, but plastered.
It is perfectly dark. At the end, apparently under
the atone cheat above, is a recess guarded by a gra-
ting. Within this is a rude protuberance, whether
of stone or plaster was not ascertainable, resting on
wood, and covered by a ragged paD. This lower
recess is no doubt the tomb, and possibly ancent-
What it above it »ly the artificial
Digitized by
Google
1
1088
hob, mount
ssrtataty modem." « In one of the with of the
upper chamber is a " round polished black stone,"
one of those mysterious stones of which the pro-
totype is the Ksaba at Mecca, and which, like that,
would appear to be the object of great devotion
(Martineau, 41H, 430).
The impression received on the spot is that
Aaron's death took place in the small basin be-
tween the two peaks, and that the people were
stationed either on the plain at the base of the
peaks, or at that part of the iViuiy Abu-Kutheybth
bum which the top is commanded. Josephus says
that the ground was sloping downwards (mrraVrct
Ijr to XKflor\ Ant. iv. 4, J 7). But this may be
the mere general expression of a man who had
never been on the spot The greater part of the
above Information has been kindly communicated
to the writer by Professor Stanley.
The chief Interest of Mount Hor will always con-
sist in the prospect from its summit — the last view
of Aaron — " that view which was to him what
Piagah was to his brother." ft is described at
length by lrby (134), Wilson (1. 293-9), Martineau
(430), and is well summed up by Stanley in the
following words : " We saw all the main points on
which his eye must have rested. He looked over
the valley of the Arabah countersected by Its hun-
dred watercourses, and beyond, over the white
mountains of the wilderness they had so long trav-
ersed; and at the northern edge of it there must
have been visible the heights through which the
Israelites had vainly attempted to force their way
into 'he Promised Land. This was the western
view. Close around him on the east were the
rugged mountains of Ednm. and far along the
horizon the wide downs of Mount Selr, through
which the passage had been denied by the wild
tribes of Esau who hunted over their long slopes."
On the north lay the mysterious Dead Sea gleam-
ing from the depths of its profound basin (Stephens,
fnddenlt). " A dreary moment, and a dreary
scene — such it must hare seemed to the aged
priest . . . The peculiarity of the view is the com-
bination of wide extension with the scarcity of
marked features. Petra is shut out by intervening
rocks. But the survey of the Desert on one side,
and the mountains of Edom on the other, is com-
plete; and of these last the great feature is the
mass of red bald-headed sandstone rocks, intersected
not by valleys but by deep seams " (S. <f P. p. 87).
Though Petra itself is entirely shut out, one out-
lying building — if it may be called a building —
is visible, that which goes by the name of the Deir,
or Convent. Professor Stanley has thrown out a
suggestion on the connection between the two which
is well worth further investigation.
Owing to the natural difficulties of the locality
and the caprices of the Arabs, Mount Hor and
Petra are more difficult of access than any other
places which Europeans usually attempt to visit
The records of these attempts — not ail of them
successes — will be found in the works of Burck-
hardt, lrby and Mangles, Stephens, Wilson, Robin-
son, Martineau, and Stanley. They are sufficient
to Invest the place with a secondary Interest, hardly
nfcrior to that which attaches to it as the halting-
place of the children of Israel, and the burial-place
of Aaron.
« If Barckharlfs Informants wen comet (Syria,
f. 481) then la a considerable difference between what
Ike tomb was even when he sacrificed his kid on the
HOBAM
8. (to toot to toot: mom aH u m imm t .) A moon
tain, entirely distinct from the preceding, named
in Num. xxxiv. 7, 8, only, as one of the marks of
the northern boundary of the land which the chil
dren of Israel were about to conquer. The identi-
fication of this mountain has always been one of
the puzzles of Sacred Geography. The Mediter-
ranean was the western boundary. The northern
boundary started from the sea; the first point in it
was Mount Hor, and the second the entrance of
Hamath. Since Sidon was subsequently allotted
to the most northern tribe — Asher — and was, as
far as we know, the most northern town so allotted,
it would seem probable that the northern boundary
would commence at about that point; that is,
opposite to where the great range of Lebanon breaks
down to the sea. The next landmark, the entrance
to Hamath, seems to have been determined by Mr.
Porter as the pass at KvUU tUfium, close to Him*,
the ancient Hamath — at the other end of the
range of Lebanon. [Hamath, Amer. ed ] Surely
Mount Hor " then can be nothing else than the
great chain of Lebanon itself. Looking at the mas-
sive character and enormous height of the range, it
is very difficult to suppose that any individual peak
or mountain is intended and not the whole mass,
which takes nearly a straight course between the
two points just named, and includes below it the
great plain of the Bukn'a and the whole of Pales-
tine properly so called.
The Targum Pseudojon. renders Mount Hor by
Umnnnt, probably intending Amana. The latter
is also the reading of the Talmud (6'ittin 8, quoted
by FUrst, $ub voce), in which it is connected with
the Amana named in Cant. iv. 8. But the situation
of this Amana is nowhere indicated by them. It
cannot have any connection with the Amana or
Abana river which flowed through Damascus, as
that is quite away from the position required in
the passage. By the Jewish geographers Schwarz
(34, 26) and Parchl (Benj. of Tudda, 413, Ac.),
for various traditional and linguistic reasons, a
mountain is fixed upon very far to the north, be-
tween Tripoli and Hamath, in fact, though they do
not say so, very near the Mons Amanus of the
classical geographers. But this is some 300 miles
north of Sidon, and 150 above Hamath, and is
surely an unwarranted extension of the limits of
the Holy Land. The great range of Lebanon is so
clearly the natural northern boundary of the coon-
try, that there seems no reason to doubt that the
whole range is intended by the term Hor. O.
* Dr. Robinson (Phys. O'togr. p. 346) would limit
this Hor either to " the northern end of Lebanon
Proper or a Hor connected with it" Porter also
(Giant Citia of Balkan, etc., p. 318) fixes on the
northern peak of Lebanon as the point of departure
in tracing the northern boundary, which peak he
represents as sufficiently conspicuous to be thus
singled out The entire Lebanon range, stretching
so far from north to south, would certainly be very
indefinite if assigned as the starting-point for run-
ning the line in that direction. In other respects
this description of the Land of Promise (Num.
xxxiv. 8-13) may be said to be re m arkably special
In the designation of places. E.
HOTftAM CCQ'n [elevated; or**]: '«jul>
plain below, and whan lrby
six yean after.
Digitized by
Google
HORBB
(▼•*.] Am. Aikapi [AM. 'Opih- Boram), king
of Okzxr at the time of the conquest of tb* south-
western pert of Palestine (Josh. — 33). He came
to the assistance of Lechish, bat was slaughtered
by Joshua with all his people. Whether the Uezer
which he governed was that commonly mentioned,
or another place further south, is not determinable.
* HCREB [331, dry: X«frl,$; Alex, in
Deut L 19. 3«x»* ! Boreb], Ex. iii. 1, xvil. 6,
xxxiii. 6; Deut i. 3, 6, 19, iv. 10, 15, t. 2, ix 8,
xviii. 16, xxix. 1; 1 K. viii. 9, xix. 8; 2 Chr. v. 10;
Ps. evi. 19; Mai. iv. 4; Ecclus. xlviii. 7. [Sinai.]
HOBBM (Q!?p [eoiuecraled,Gt*.:fortreu,
Rhnt]: MtyaXaapi/i [Vat. -«ip], Alex. 1*0780-
\nfctpafi, both by inclusion of the preceding name:
Herein), one of the fortified places in the territory
tf Naphtali ; named with Iron and Migdal-el (Josh.
six. 38). Van de Velde (i. 178-9; Memoir, 322)
suggests Hvrah as the site of Horem. It is an
ancient site in the centre of the country, half-way
between the Rat en-Ntkh&ra and the Lake Merom.
on a Tell at the southern end of the Wady el-'Ain,
one of the natural features of the country. It is
ihn in favor of this identification that Borah is
•rfar Turin, probably the representative of the
andent I box, named with Horem. G.
HOB HAOIiyOAD ("Tfjan "lh [moun-
tain of the dtft, Furst] : Spot rdtytS: Mont Gad-
gad — both reading 1H for vl), the name of a
desert station where the Israelites encamped (Num.
xxxiii. 32), probably the same as Gudgodah (Deut.
x. 7). In both passages H stands in sequence with
three others, Hoserah or Moseroth, (Beeroth) Bene-
Jaakan, and Jotbath or Jotbathah ; but the order
is not strictly preserved. Hengstenberg ( Gentdne-
ne—oftkt, Pentateuch, ii. 856) has sought to ac-
count for this by supposing that they were in Deut.
x. 7 going the opposite way to that in Num. xxxiii.
33. For the consideration of this see Wilderness
' * ' \
of Wajtdekhco. Gtdged (Arab. J^Ju^j
means a hard and level tract. We have also Gud-
» • f
ynoT (Arab. tXsfcJu*> ), which hat among other
nings that of a well abounding in water. The
plural of either of these might closely approximate
in sound to Gudagid. It is observable that on the
west side of the Arabah Robinson (vol. i., map) has
a Wady Gh&ddghidh, which may bear the same
meaning ; but as that meaning might be perhaps
applied to a great number of localities, it would be
dangerous to infer identity. The junction of this
wady with the Arabah would not, however, be un-
writable for a station between Mount Hor, near
which Mceerah lay (eomp. Num. xx. 28, Deut x.
•), and Eeion-Geber. Robinson also mentions a
shrub growing in the Arabah itself, which he calls
Ldft, GUdkih (il. 121 eomp. 119), which may
aba possibly suggest a derivation for the name.
H. H.
HCKI. 1. 0"lh, but in Chron. v "> , \n
\mhabitant of cava, troglodyte, Ges., Furst]:
XaMtol, Alex. Xoppti, in Chron. Xoibl [Vat -«,] :
fieri), a Horite, as bis name *<ewke u s; son of
totan the son of Seir, and brother L Hemam or
1 (Gen. rxxvi. 29; 1 Chr. L 89). No
HOBHAH 1060
of the name appears to have been met wttfc m
modem times.
3. (Xofyl; Alex. Xopati: Borraonm.) In
Gen. xxxvi. 30, the name has in the original the
definite article prefixed — """jnn = the Horite;
and is in fact precisely the same word with that
which in the preceding verse, and also in 31, is
rendered in the A. V. '• the Horites."
3. (Win : "Xovol in both MSS. [rather, Rom.,
Alex.; Vat 2ot»«:] Buri.) A man of Simeon;
father of Shaphat, who represented that tribe
among the spies sent up into Canaan by Moses
(Num. xdii. 5).
HOOEUTES and HOTUMS H'r.Gen. xW.
6, and D^'Th, Deut IL 12: Xo#woi: Corrai
[Hm-roA, Horrhcd , also HO'RITE in the sing.,
Gen. xxxvi. 20, Xoihaiof. Borrow]), the aborig-
inal inhabitants of Mount Seir (Gen. xiv. 6), and
probably allied to the Emims and Kepliainis. The
name Horite 0"yi, a troglodyte, from "Y1T1, "a
hole" or "cave") appears to have l*tm derived
from their habits as ••cave-dwellers." Their ex-
cavated dwellings are still found in hundreds in the
sandstone clifis and mountains of Kdoni, and espe
dally in Petra. [Edom and Edomitks.] It may,
perhaps, be to the Horites Job refers in xxx. 6, 7.
They are only three times mentioned in Scripture:
first, when they were smitten by the kings of the
East (Gen. xiv. 6); then when their genealogy is
given in Gen. xxxvi. 20-30 and 1 Chr. i. 38-42;
and lastly when they were exterminated by the
Edomites (Deut. ii. 12, 22). It appears probabk
that they were not Canaanites, but an earlier race,
who inhabited Mount Seir before the posterity of
Canaan took possession of Palestine (Ewald, Get-
chichte, vol. i. 304, 305). J. L. P.
HOIVMAH (n^nr^t [devotemmt to detrac-
tion, anathema : Rom. Vat Alex, commonly 'tpui
or 'Eppi, but Num. xxi. 3 and Judg. i. 17, 'AviB-
Mia, 1 Sam. xxx. 30, 'UptuotS (Vat -pet-); Rom.
Vat. Num. xiv. 45, 'Zpidm, Josh. xii. 14, 'Ep/idS:
Alex. Josh. xv. 30, Ep/ioA '■ norma, Herma, Harma,
Aroma (al. Baramii}] ; its earlier name Zepbath,
ri5V, is found Judg. i. 17) was the chief town
of a " king" of a Canaanitiah tribe on the south
of Palestine, reduced by Joshua (Josh. xii. 14), and 1
became a city of the territory of Judah (Josh. xv.
80 ; 1 Sam. xxx. 30), but apparently belonged to
Simeon, whose territory is reckoned as parcel of the
former (Josh. xix. 4; eomp. Judg. 1. 17; 1 Chr. iv.
30). The seeming inconsistency between Num. xxi.
3 and Judg. 1. 17 may be relieved by supposing
that the vow made at the former period was ful-
filled at the latter, and the name (the root of which.
Q^n, constantly occurs in the sense of to devoti
to destruction, or utterly to destroy) given by antici-
pation. Robinson (ii. 181) identifies the pass Ee-
Sa/a, sLLaJf, with Zephath, in respect both
of the name, which is sufficiently similar, and of
the situation, which is a probable one, namely, the
rp in the mountain barrier, which, running about
W. and N. E., completes the plateau of Southern
Palestine, ind rises above the less elevated step —
• iV.' tt^s x, reprweu'uig. H. somp Hon, Bust*
Digitized by
Google
1090
HOBK
the level of the desert et- TO — taterposed between
It and the Ghor [Wilderness op Waxdek-
tro.] H. H.
HORN. I. Literal. (Josh, vi. 4, 6; oomp.
Ex. xix. 13; 1 Sam. xvi. 1, 13; 1 K. i. 39; Job
zHL 14). — Two purpose* are mentioned in the
Scriptures to which the horn seems to hare been
applied. Trumpet* were probably at first merely
horns perforated at the tip, such as are still used
upon mountain-farms for calling borne the laborers
at meal-time. If the A. V. of Josh, vi, 4, 6 ("rains'
horns," 72l*n JTjJ) were correct, this would
settle the question: 'but the fact seems to be that
v2V has nothing to do with ram, and that 7T?lj?i
horn, serves to indicate an instrument which orig-
inally was made of horn, though afterwards, no
doubt, constructed of different materials (comp.
Varr. L. L. v. 24, 33, " cornua quod ea que nunc
sunt ex sere tunc fiebant bubulo e cornu ").
[Cornet.] The horns which were thus made into
trumpets were probably those of oxen rather than
of rams: the latter would scarcely produce a note
sufficiently imposing to suggest its association with
the fall of Jericho.
The word horn is also applied to a flask, or rena l
made of horn, containing oil (1 Sara. xvi. 1, 13;
1 K. I. 89), or used as a kind of toilet-bottle, filled
with the preparation of antimony with which women
tinged their eye-lashes (Keren-happuch=p«in<-
horn, name of one of Job's daughters, Job xlii. 14).
So in English, drinking-horn (commonly called a
horn). In the same way the Greek xipas some-
times signifies bugle, trumpet (Xen. An. li. 2, § 4),
and sometimes drinking- bom (vii. 2, § 23). In
Ulce manner the Latin cornu means trumpet, and
also oil-cruet (Hot. Sat ii. 9, 61), and funnel
(Virg. Ueorg. iii. 609).
II. Mbtaphokicai. — 1. From similarity of
farm. — To this use belongs the application of the
word horn to a trumpet of metal, as already men-
tioned. Horns of ivory, that is, elephants' teeth,
are mentioned in Ez. xxvii. 15; either metaphori-
cally from similarity of form; or, as seems more
probable, from a vulgar error. The harm of the
altar (Ex. xxvii. 2) are not supposed to have been
made of horn, but to ha™ been metallic projec-
tions from the four comers (yavlai KtparoeiSets,
Joseph. B. J. w. &, § 6). [Altai*, p. 74 6.] The
peak or tummit of a hill was called a bom (Is. v.
1, where hill = horn in lleb. ; comp. tcsput, Xen.
An. v. 6, § 7, and cornu, Stat. Theb. v. 632; Arab.
Kvr&n HatOn [Horns of fhttin], Robinson, Bibl.
A.-, ii. 370; Germ. Schreckhorn, Wetterhorn,
Aurhom; Celt cairn). In Hab. iii. 4 ("he had
horns coming out of bis hand ") the context im-
plies rays of light."
Toe denominative 7?" = to emU rays, is used
of Moses' face (Ex. xxxiv. 29, 30, 35); so all the
versions except Aquila and the Vulgate, which
have the translations Ktoardons j|r, cornuta eraL
This curious idea has not only been perpetuated by
paintings, coins, and statues (Zornius, Biblioth.
AnHq. i. 121), but has at least passed muster with
a • Bo Dr. Novas translates, Rayn stream forth from
Ms hand, and remarks, "May not this denote that
iy.h.1^. w,r, j„ his hands? See Job xxxri. 82,
Hi e—mk his hands uritk lightning. Also xxxvii. I,
U. Ii-' A.
HOBK
Grotius (AmuL ad loo.), who est* Abtn-sW
identification of Hoses with the homed Hnavk of
Egypt, and suggests that the phenomenon was in-
tended to remind the Israelites of the golden calf!
Spencer (Leg. Hebr. iii. Diss. i. 4) tries a recon-
ciliation of renderings upon the ground that cormsa
= radii fact's; but Spanheim (Diss. vii. 1), not
content with stigmatizing the efforts of art in this
direction as " prcpostera induatria," distinctly at-
tributes to Jerome a belief in the veritable homs of
Moses. Bishop Taylor, in all good faith, though
of course rhetorically, compares the " sun's golden
homs " to those of the Hebrew Lawgiver.
2. From similarity vf position and use. — Twi
principal applications of this metaphor will be found
— strength and honor. Of strength the horn of
the unicorn [Unioofk] was the most frequent
representative * (Deut. xxxiii. 17, Ac.), but not
always; oomp. 1 K. xxii. 11, where probably homs
Hair of South AMeam ornamented with 1
(Livingstone, Travis, pp. 460, 461.)
of iron, worn defiantly and symbolically on the
head, are intended. Expressive of the same idem,
or perhaps merely a decoration, Is the oriental mil-
itary ornament mentioned by Taylor (CabneCs
Frag, cxiv.), and the conical cap observed by Dr.
Uvingstona among the natives of S. Africa, and
not improbably suggested by the horn of the rhi-
noceros, so abundant in that country (we Living-
Heads of modern
stone's Travels, pp. 365, 450, 657; oomp. Taylor,
L c). Among the Druses upon Mount Lebanon
the married women wear silver homs on their
heads. The spiral coils of gold wire projecting on
either side from the female head-dress of some of
the Dutch provinces are evidently an ornament
borrowed from the same original ides.
In the sense of honor, the word horn stands for
» • In this seme David speaks of God (Pa, srvHl. 3
as " the horn of bis salvation," i. s. his mighty, east
tual deliverer (comp. Am. vf . 18). Hence w» see the fas
port of this same figure and language (Woe* aur n f i m
iiatr) as applied by~Zaaharlas to the Savfear (Loks
Digitized by
Google
HORNET
(my born. Job zvi. 16; all the home
tf Israel, Lain. ii. 3), and sc for the suprerci au-
thority (oomp. the storj of Cpp-is, Ovid, Mil. xv.
MS; and the born of the Indian Sachem men-
tioned in Clarkson'a Life of Penn). It also stands
fur concrete, whence it comes to mean king, king-
dom (Dan. viii. 3, 4c.; Zech. i. 18; cotnp. Tal-
linn's dream in Accius, ap. Cic. Oiv. i. 23); hence
an coins Alexander and the Setaicidas wear horns
(aee drawings on p. 61), and the former is called in
Arab, two homed (Kor. xviii. 88 ft*.), not without
reference to Dan. viii.
Out of either or both of these two last meta-
pliora spnuig the idea of representing gods with
herns. Spanheim has discovered such figures on
the Roman denarius, and on numerous Egyptian
coins of the reigns of Trajan, Hadrian, and the
Antooines (Diet. v. p. 853). The Bacchus ravpo-
miov%, or cornutus, is mentioned by Euripides
(Bacch. 100), and among other pagan absurdities
Amobius enumerates " Dii cornuti " (c. Gent. vi.).
In like manner river-gods are represented with horns
( u tauriformis Aufldus," Hor. Od. ir. 14, 25; nv
fifu»p<por tpyia Kr|<p«roS, Eur. Ion. 1261). For
various opinions on the ground-thought of this
metaphor, see JV"«fc« and Queries, 1. 419, 456.
Manx legends speak of a tarroo-ushtej, i. e. wnter-
WI (aee Cn^een's Mnnx Did.). (See Boehert,
ffitrot. ii. 288; and, for an admirable compen-
dium, with references, Zornius, Bibliotheca Antijua-
ria, ii. 106 If.). T. E. B.
HORNET GiyiS : o-ipnicU: craoro). That
the Hebrew word txir'ih describes tbe hornet, may
be taken for granted on the almost unanimous au-
thority of the ancient versions. Not only were
bees exceedingly numerous in Palestine, but from
the name Zoreah (Josh. xv. 33) we may infer that
hornets in particular infested some part* of tho
country : the frequent notices of the animal in the
Talmudical writers (Lewysohn, Zooi § 405) lead to
the same conclusion. In Scripture the hornet is
referred to oidy as tho means which Jehovah em-
ployed for the extirpation of the Canaanites (Ex.
xxiii. 28; Deut. vii. 90; Josh. xxlv. 12; Wied.
xtt. 8). Some commentators regard the word as
need in its literal sense, and adduce authenticated
instances, where armies have been seriously mo-
lested by hornets i <£lian, xi. 28, xvii. 35; Ammian.
Marcellin. xxiv. 8|. But the following arguments
stem to decide in favor of a metaphorical sense:
v l) that the word "hornet" in Ex. xxiii. 28 is
•arallel to "fear" in ver. 27; (2) that similar ex-
el eeaiics are undoubtedly used metaphorically, e. g.
" io ebase as the bees do " (Dent. i. 44; Ps. cxviii.
I-I-; (3) that a similar transfer from the literal to
tin metaphorical sense may be instanced in the
Haesieal asstrus, originally a "gad-fly," afterwards
1st ror and madness ; and lastly (4), that no his-
torical notice of such Intervention as hornets occur
to tbe Bible. We may therefore regard it as ex-
pressing under a rivid image the consternation with
which Jehovah would inspire the enemies of the
Israelites, as declared in Deut. ii. 25, Josh. ii. 11.
W. L. B.
HORONA1M (D^jVn = boo caverns: [in
Is.,] 'Aptmttn, Alex. ASavtrip; [in Jer.,] 'Qpar
mifL, ^Otmratu., eta. :] Oronaim), a town of Moab
aaned with Zoar and Luhith (Is. xv. b. Jer.
drHL 3, 5, 34), hut to the position of wt sh no
turn h aflbrned ettber by tbe notices uf thr Bible
HORSE 1091
or by mention in other works. It seems to haw*
been on an eminence, and approached (like Beth-
boron) by a road which is styled the "way"
OTTHFi Is. xv. 6), or the "descent" (TTIO, Jer.
xlviii. 5). From the occurrence of a similar ex-
pression in reference to Luhith, we might imagine
that these two places were sanctuaries, on the high
places to which the eastern worship of those days
was so addicted. If we accept the name as He-
brew, we may believe the dual form of it to arise,
either from the presence of two caverns in the
neighborhood, or from there having been two towns,
possibly an upper and a lower, as in the case of
the two Beth-borons, connected by tbe ascending
road.
From Horonaim possibly came Sanballat the
Horonite. O.
HOR'ONITE, THE PahhTt [patr. from
]'l~lh]= 6 'Kpttrl; [Vat. FA. -r«, exe. xUi. 28,
where Rom. i Oupcwlrns, Vat. Alex. FA. omit:]
fforonites), the designation of Sanballat, who was
one of the principal opponents of Nehemiah's
works of restoration (Neh. ii. 10, 19; xiii. 28).
It is derived by Gesenius (Thes. 459) from Horo-
naim the Hoabite town, but by Fiirst (Bandtcb.)
from Horon, i. e. [Upper-] Beth-boron. Which
of these is the more accurate is quite uncertain.
The former certainly accords well with the Am-
monite and Arabian who were Sanballat's com-
rades; the Utter is perhaps more etymologically
correct. G.
HORSE. The most striking feature in the
Biblical notices of the horse is the exclusive appli-
cation of it to warlike operations; in no instance is
that useful animal employed for the purposes of
ordinary locomotion or agriculture, if we except Is.
xxviii. 28, where we learn that horses ( A. V. " horse-
men") were employed in threshing, not however
in that case put in the gears, but simply driven
about wildly over the strewed grain. This remark
will be found to be borne out by the historical pas-
sages hereafter quoted; but it is equally striking
in the poetical parts of Scripture. The animated
description of the horse in Job xxxix. 19-25, ap-
plies solely to the war-hone ; the mane streaming
in the breeze (A. V. "thunder ") which " clothes
his neck; " his lofty bounds " as a grasshopper; "
his hoofs " digging in the valley " with excite-
ment; his terrible snorting — are brought before
us, and his ardor for the strife —
He swalloweth the ground with fierceness and maja ;
Neither believsth he that It la the sound of the tram
pet.
He sslth among the trumpets Ha, ha !
And he smelleth the battle afar off, the thunder of the
captains, and the shouting.
So again the bride advances with her charms to an
immediate conquest " as a company of horses in
Phamoh's chariots" (Cant. i. 9); and when the
prophet Zechariah wishes to convey the Idea rf
perfect peace, he represents the hone, no mote
mixing in tbe fray as before (ix. 10), but bearing
on his bell (which was intended to strike terror
into too foe) the peaceable inscription "Holiness
unto the Ix>rd " (xiv. 20). Lastly, the character-
istic of the horse is not so much his speed or Us
utility, but bis strength (Ps. xxxiii. 17, cxhrli 10),
as shown in the special application of the tans
Digitized by
Google
1092
HOESK
asMr O^Sc*), i e. strong, as an equivalent for a
hone (Jcr. viii. 16, xlvii. 3, 1. 11).
The tenm under which the hone it described in
the Hebrew language are usually tit and p&r&th
(D-TD, BnQ). The origin of these terms is not
satisfactorily made out; Pott (Etym. Fortch. i.
60) connects them respectively with Sum and
Pares, or Persia, as the countries whence the hone
was derived ; and it is worthy of remark that tut
was also employed in Egypt for a mare, showing
that it was a foreign term there, if not also in Pal-
estine. There is a marked distinction between the
tut and the parnih; the former were horses for
driving in the war chariot, of a heavy build, the
latter were for riding, and particularly for cavalry.
This distinction is not observed in the A. V. from
the circumstance that pdr&th also signifies horse-
man ; the correct sense is essential in the following
passages — 1 K. iv. 26, "forty thousand chariot
horses and twelve thousand cmwfry-horses ; " Er_
xxvii. 11, "driving-horses and riding-bones;"
Joel ii. 4, "as riding-hones, so shall they run;"
and Is. xxi. 7, "a train of horses in couples." In
addition to these terms we have reettk (tPJJP, of
undoubted Hebrew origin) to describe a swift horse,
used for the royal post (Esth. viii. 10, 14) and sim-
ilar purposes (1 K. iv. 28; A. V. "dromedary"
as also in Esth.), or for a rapid journey (Mic. i.
18); rarnmdc (T]l$n), used ouce for a m-irt (Esth.
viii. 10); and tit&h (n^-lD) in Cant. 1. 9, where
it is regarded in the A. V. is a collective term,
"company of horses; " it rather means, according
to the received punctuation, " my mare," but still
better, by a slight alteration in the punctuation,
" mares."
The Hebrews in the patriarchal age, as a pastoral
race, did not stand in need of the services of the
horse, and for a long period after their settlement
in Canaan they dispensed with it, partly in conse-
quence of the hilly nature of the country, which
only admitted of the use of chariots in certain lo-
calities (Judg. i. 19), and partly in consequence of
the prohibition in Deut. xvii. 16, which would be
held to apply at all periods. Accordingly they
hamstrung the bones of the Canaanites (Josh. ii.
6, 9). David first established a force of cavalry
and chariots after the defeat of Hadadezer (2 Sam.
<-lii. 4), when he reserved a hundred chariots, and,
as we may infer, all the horses: for the rendering
" houghed all the chariot-Aor»f»," is manifestly in-
correct. Shortly after this Absalom was possessed
of some (2 Sam. xv. 1 ). But the great supply of
horses was subsequently effected by Solomon through
his connection with Egypt; he is reported to have
had " 40,000 stalls of horses for his chariots, and
12,000 cavalry hones " (1 K. Iv. 26), and it is
worthy of notice that these forces are mentioned
parenthetically to account for the great security of
Ufa and property noticed in the preceding verse.
There is probably an error in the former of these
numbers: for the number of chariots is given in
1 K. x. 26; 2 Chr. 1. 14, sa 1,400, and consequently
If we allow three horses for each chariot, two in
ase and one as a reserve, as wss usual in some
sountries (Xen. Cyrop. vi. 1, § 27), the number
required would be 4,200, or, in round numbers,
1,000, which is probably the correct reading. Solo-
mon alao established a very active trade in horses,
•hash were brought by dealers out of Egypt and
HOBSB
resold at a profit to the Hlttites, win lived I
Palestine and the Euphrates. The passage in whisk
this commerce is described (1 K. x. 28, 29), ii un-
fortunately obscure; the tenor of ver. 28 seems tc
be that there was a regularly established traffic,
the Egyptians bringing the hones to a mart In ths
south of Palestine and handing them over to ths
Hebrew dealers at a fixed tariff. The price of a
bone was fixed at 160 shekels of silver, and that
of a chariot at 600; in the latter we moat include
the horses (for an Egyptian war-chariot was of no
great value) and conceive, as before, that three
horses accompanied each chariot, leaving the value
of the chariot itself at 150 shekels. In addition to
this source of supply, Solomon received horses by
way of tribute (1 K. x. 25). rhe force was main-
tained by the succeeding kings, and frequent notices
occur both of riding hones and chariots (2 K. ix.
21, 33, xi. 16), and particularly of war-chariots (1
K. xxii. 4; 2 K. iii. 7 ; Is. ii. 7). The force seems
to have failed in the time of Hezekiah (2 K. xvui.
23) in Judah, as it had previously in Israel under
Jehoahaz (2 K. xiii. 7). The number of horses
belonging to the Jews on their return from Baby-
lon is stated at 736 (Neh. vii. 68).
In the countries adjacent to Palestine, the um
of the hone was much more frequent. It waa in-
troduced into Egypt probably by the Hyksos, as it
is not represented on the monuments before the
18th dynasty (Wilkinson, i. 386, abridgm.). At
the period of the Exodus hones were abundant
there (Gen. xlvii. 17, L 9; Ex. Ix. 8, xiv. 9, 23;
Deut xvii. 16), and subsequently, as we have
already seen, they were able to supply the nations
of Western Asia. The Jewieh kings sought the
assistance of the Egyptians sgainst the Assyrians
in this respect (Is. xxxi. 1, xxxvi. 8; Ex. xvii. 15).
The Canaanites were possessed of them (Dent xx.
1; Josh. xi. 4; Judg. iv. 3, v. 22, 28), and like-
wise the Syrians (2 Sam. viii. 4; 1 K. xx. 1; 2 K.
vi. 14, vii. 7, 10) — notices which are confirmed by
the pictorial representations on Egyptian monu-
ments (Wilkinson, i. 893, 397, 401), and by the
Assyrian inscriptions relating to Syrian expeditions.
But the cavalry of the Assyrians themselves and
other eastern nations waa regarded as most formid-
able ; the hones themselves were highly bred, as the
Assyrian sculptures still testify, and fully merited
the praise bestowed on them by Habakkuk (i. 8),
" swifter than leopards, snd more fierce than the
evening wolves;" their riders "clothed in blue,
captains and mien, all of them desirable young
men " (Ex. xxiii. 6), armed with " the bright sword
and glittering spear " (Nah. iii. 3), made a deep
impression on the Jews, who, plainly clad, went on
foot ; as also did their regular array as they pro-
ceeded in couples, contrasting with the disorderly
troops of asses and camels which followed with the
baggage (Is. xxi. 7, receb In this passage signifying
rather a train than a single chariot). The number
employed by the eastern potentates was very great,
Holofemes possessing not less than 12,000 (Jud. ii.
15). At a later period we have frequent notices
of the cavalry of the Greco-Syrian monarrhs (1
Mace. i. 17, iii. 39, Ac.).
With regard to the trappings and management
of the horse, we have little information ; the bridle
(rtten) was placed over the horse's nose (Id. xxx.
28), and a bit or curb (mttheg) Is alao noticed (I
K. xlx. 28; Pa. xxxii. 9: Prov. xrvL 8; Is. xxxvU
29; in the A. V. It is Incorrectly given " bridle,
with the exception of Pa. xxxii.). The I
Digitized by
Google
HORSE-GATE
he Assyrian bones m proftjely decorate*, the
kit* being gilt (1 Esdr. Ui. 6), and the bridle*
•domed with tassels: on tbe neck was a collar
terminating in a bell, u described by Zechariah
(xiv. 20). Saddles were not used until a late period;
•nly one U represented oil the Assyrian sculptures
(Layard, ii. 357). The horses were not shod, and
therefore hoofs a* hard "as Bint " (Is- v. 28) were
regarded u a great merit The chariot-horses were
covered with embroidered trappings — the "pre-
tious clothes " manufactured at Dedan (Ei. xxvii.
10): these were fastened by straps and buckles, and
to this perhaps reference is made in Prov. xxx. 31,
in the tetm zarrir, "one girded about the loins "
(A. V. "greyhound"). Thus adorned, Mordecai
rode in state through the streets of Shushan (Esth.
vi. 9). White horses were more particularly ap-
propriate to such occasions, as being significant of
victory (Ker. vi. 2, xix. 11, 14). Horses and
chariots were used also in idolatrous processions,
u noticed in regard to the ran (2 K. xxiii. 11).
w. l. b.
Trappings of Assyrian bona. (Uvard )
• HOB8B-GATB. [Jkkosauui.]
HORSELEECH (n^lbj, 'tlikth: aj,v
ia: tanguUugn) occurs once only, namely, Prov.
txx- IS, "The horseleech hath two daughters, cry-
ing. Give, give." There is little if any doubt that
"iliblh denotes some species of leech, or rather is
the generic term for any bloodsucking annelid, such
at liintdo (the medicinal leech), Hamopi* (the
boraeleech), Limnatu, Trochelia, and Aulastoma,
It ad these genera are found in the marshes and
pools of the Bible-lands. Sehultens ( Comment in
Prov. I c.) and Bochart (Hieroe. Ui. 785) have
endeavored to show that 'aMb&li is to be understood
i signify * fete," or "impending misfortune of
any kind" (fattun u*iatu/ue impendent); they
rsfcr the Hebrew term to the Arabic 'alik, ret
fpmta, nffixa homini. The "two daughters"
MB explained by Bochart to signify Hades (V*4f?)
end the grave, which are never satisfied. This ex-
planation is certainly very ingenious, but where is
be neceisity to appeal to it, when the important
•Id versions are opposed to any such interpretation?
Ibe bloodsucking leeches, such as Hv-utlo and
B mmo piM, wen without a doubt knowr to the
ancient Hebrews, and as the leech hss U*n for
ages the emblem of rapacity and crueltj *'..•« is
i so doubt that this annelid is denoted by
HOSANHA 1098
j dliUth. The Arabs to this day deLominate the
^LimnnUt Nilotiea, 'alak. As to the e x pre ss ion
, " two daughters," which has been by some writen
absurdly explained to allude to "the double tongue"
of a leech — this animal having no tongue at all —
there can be no doubt that it is figurative, and is
intended, in the language of oriental hyperbole, to
denote its bloodthirsty propensity, evidenced by the
tenacity with which a leech keeps its bold on the
skin (if Hirudo), or mucous membrane (if HmmopU).
Comp. Horace, Ep. ad Pit. 476; Cicero, Ep. ad
AUicum, i. 18 ; Plautus, Epid. act iv. sc. 4. The
etymology of the Hebrew word, from an unused
root which signifies " to adhere," is eminently suited
tea "leech." Getenius ( Tha. p. 1038) reminds
us that the Arabic 'alik ii explained in Camus by
ghut, "a female monster like a vampire, which
sucked human blood." The passage in question,
however, has simply reference to a " leech." The
valuable use of the leech (Hirudo) in medicine,
though undoubtedly known to Pliny and the later
Roman writers, was in all probability unknown to
the ancient Orientals ; still they were doubtless
acquainted with the fact that leeches of the above
named genus would attach themselves to the skin
of persons going barefoot in ponds ; and they also
probably were cognizant of the propensity horse-
leeches (Hamopitj have of entering the mouth and
nostrils of cattle, as they drink from the waters
frequented by these pests, which are common enough
in Palestine and Syria. W. H.
HCSAH (rtOh [pines of refuge, pro
lection] : [Rom. 'Iturf>, Vat. -trsiip;] Alex. Zowral
[Aid. Saxra; Comp. 'CUrit] Hota), a city of Asher
(Josh. xix. 29), the next landmark on the boundary
to Tyre, G.
HO'SAH (nph [as above] : •Oo-«C ; [Vet
Oo-d-o, loero-ai] Alex. Own* and Oo-a: Hota), a
man who was chosen by David to be one of the
first doorkeepers (A. V. " porters ") to the ark after
its arrival in Jerusalem (1 Chr. xvi. 38). He was
a Herarite Levite (xxvi. 10), with "sons and
brethren" thirteen, of whom four were certainly
sons (10, 11); and his charge was especially the
"gate Shallecbeth," and the causeway, or raised
road which ascended (18, nVl5n rT9plJ5).
HOSA1TNA l&o-arrd; Heb. KJ SEftn.
" Save, we pray; " a&aov Hi, «« Theophylact cor-
rectly interprets it), the cry of the multitudes as
they thronged in our Lord's triumphal procession
into Jerusalem (Matt. xxi. 9, 15: Mar. ii. 9, 10;
John xii. 13). The Psalm from which it was taken,
the 118th, was one with which they were familiar
from being accustomed to recite the 25th and 20th
verses at tbe Feast of Tabernacles. On that occa-
sion the Great IlaUel, consisting of Psalms cxiii.-
cxviii., was chanted by one of the priests, and at
certain intervals the multitudes Joined in the
responses, waving their branches of willow and
palm, and shouting as tbey waved them, Hallelujah,
or Hosanna, or " Lord, I beseech thee, send now
prosperity " (Ps. cxviii. 25). This was done at the
recitation of the first and last verses of Ps. cxviii. ;
be* according to the school of Hillet, at tbe words
"Save now, we beseech thee" (ver. 25). The
school of Shammai, on the contrary, say it was at
the wa-ls ' Send now prosperity" cf the same
verse. RabUn Gamaliel and R. Joshua wen ob-
served by H. Akiba to wave thej branches osdy ss)
Digitized by
Google
1094. HOSEA
the word* " Bare now, we beseech thee " (Mishua,
Smceali, Hi. 9). On each of the seven days during
Which the feist lasted the people thronged in the
court of the Temple, and went in procession about
the altar, setting their boughs bending towards it ;
the trumpets sounding as they shouted Hosanna.
But on the seventh day they marched seven times
round the altar, shouting meanwhile the great
Hosanna to the sound of the trumpets of the Levites
(Lightfoot, Temple Service, xvi. 2). The very
children who could wave the palm branches were
expected to take part in the solemnity (Mishna,
Succnh, iii. 15; Matt, xxi- 16). From the custom
of waving the boughs of myrtle and willow during
the service the name Hosanna was ultimately trans-
ferred to the boughs themselves, so that according
to FJias Levita ( ThiM, s. v.), " the bundles of the
willows of the brook which they carry at the Feast
of Tabernacles are called Hosannas." The term is
frequently applied by Jewish writers to denote the
Feast of Tabernacles, the seventh day of the feast
being distinguished *s the great Hosanna (Buxtorf,
Lex. Talm. s. v. 3H27 , ) > It was not uncommon
for the Jews in later times to employ the observances
of this feast, which was preeminently a feast of
gladness, to express their feelings on other occasions
of rejoicing (1 Mace. xiii. 51; 2 Mace. x. 6, 7), and
it is not, therefore, matter of surpriw that they
should have done so under the cirjumstances
recorded in the Gospels. W. A. W.
HOSE'A (?B?Vi [At/p,aVfirerrmee,Gee.;or,
God u help, Furat] : '(Un>4, LXX.; 'nans', N. T.
fto Tisch. ed. 7, but 'CUrni, Eli., Lachm.j : Otee),
son of Been, and first of the Minor Prophets as
they appear in the A. V. The name is precisely
the same as Hoshka, which is more nearly equiv-
alent to the Hebrew.
Time. — This question must be settled, as fer as
it can be settled, partly by reference to the title,
partly by an inquiry into the contents of the book,
(a.) As regards the title, an attempt has been made
to put it out of court by representing it as a later
addition (Calmet, Roaenmuller, Jahn). But it can
easily be shown that this is unnecessary ; and Eich-
born, suspicious as he ordinarily is of titles, lets
that of Hoses pass without question. It has. been
most unreasonably inferred from this title that it
intends to describe the prophetic life of Hosea as
extending over the entire reigns of the monarchs
whom it mentions as his contemporaries. Starting
with this hypothesis, it is easy to show that these
reigns, including as they do upwards of a century,
are an impossible period for the duration of a
prophet's ministry. But the title does not neces-
«rily imply any such absurdity; and interpreted
D the light of the prophecy itself it admits of an
bvious and satisfactory limitation. For the btgm-
ning of Hosea's ministry the title gives as the reign
of Uzziah, king of Judah, but limits this vague
definition by reference to Jeroboam II., king of
Israel. The title therefore gives us Uzziah, and
nore definitely gives us Uzziah as contemporary
with Jeroboam ; it therefore yields a date not later
than B. c. 783. The question then arises bow
aiurh further back It Is possible to place the first
public appearance of Hosea. To this question the
iHle gives no answer; for it seems evident that the
wly reason for mentioning Jeroboam at all may
■an been to indicate a certain portion of the reign
at Parian (*.) Accordingly it is necessary to refer
HOSKA
to the contents of the prophecy; and in Joing thb
Eichhorn has dearly shown that we cannot allow
Hosea much ground in the reign of Jeroboam
(823-783). The book contains descriptions whiek
are utterly inapplicable to the condition of the king-
dom of Israel during this reign (8 K. xiv. 25 ff.)
The pictures of social and political life which Hosea
draws so forcibly are rather applicable to the inter-
regnum which followed the death of Jeroboam
(782-772), and to the reign of the succeeding kings.
The calling in of Egypt and Assyria to the aid of
rival factions (x. 3, xiii. 10) has nr thing to do with
the strong and able government of Jtroboam. Nor
Is it conceivable that a prophet who had lived long
under Jeroboam should have omitted the mention
of that monarch's conquests in his enumeration of
Jehovah's kindnesses to Israel (ii. 8). It seems
then almost certain that very few at least of his
prophecies were written until after the death of
Jeroboam (788).
So much for the beginning ; as regards the end
of his career the title leaves us in still greater doubt.
It merely assures us that he did not prophesy be-
yond the reign of Hezekiah. But here again the
contents of the book help us to reduce the vague-
ness of this indication. In the sixth year of Heze-
kiah the prophecy of Hosea was fulfilled, and it is
very improbable that he should have permitted this
triumphant proof of his Divine mission to pass
unnoticed. He could not therefore have lived long
into the reign of Hezekiah; and as It does not
seem necessary to allow more than a year of each
reign to justify his being represented as a contem-
porary on the one hand of Jeroboam, on the other
of Hezekiah, we may suppose that the life, or rather
the prophetic career of Hoses, extended from 784
to 725, a period of fifty-nine years.
The Hebrew reckoning of ninety years (Corn, a
Lap.) was probably limited by the fulfillment of the
prophecy in the sixth of Hezekiah, and by the date
of the accession of Uzzish, as apparently indicated
by the title: 809-720, or 719 = 90 years.
Place. — There seems to be a general impression
among commentators that the prophecies contained
in this collection were delivered in the kingdom of
Israel, for whose warning they were principally
intended. Eichhorn does not attempt to decide
this question (iv. 284). He thinks it possible that
they may have been primarily communicated to
Judah. as an indirect appeal to the conscience of
that kingdom; but he evidently leans toward the
opposite supposition that having been first pub-
lished in Israel they were collected, and a copy sent
into Judah. The title Is at least an evidence that
at a very early period these prophecies were sup-
posed to concern both Israel and Judah, aid, nukes
we allow them to have been transmitted from the
one to the other, it is difficult to account for their
presence in our canon. As a proof of their northern
origin Eichhorn professes to discover a Samaritan-
ism in the use of "]H as msec. suff. of the second
person.
Tribe and Parentage. — Tribe quite unknown
The Peeudo-Epiphsnius, it is uncertain upon what
ground, assigns Hosea to the tribe of Issachar.
His father, Beeri, has by some writers been con-
founded with Beerah, of the tribe of Keuben (*.
Chr. t. 6): 'his is an anachronism. The Jewish
fauoy Uiat an prophets whose birth-place is not
specified are to be referred to Jerusalem (R. David
Vatab.) is probably nothing more than ■ fits**
Digitized by
Google
HUSK*.
(On. a Lap.). Of hit father Beari w» know
aa s nhitrly nothing. Allegorical interpretations of
Ika name, marvelous for their frivolous ingenuity,
have been adduced to prove that hi ni a prophet
(Jerome «d ZeoA. init; Baail ad It. i.); but they
are aa little trustworthy aa the Jewish dogma,
which derides that, when the father of a prophet ia
mentioned by name, the indiridual so specified waa
himaelf a prophet.
Order m the Prophetic mi«i. — Moat aneient
and medueval interpretatore make Horn the first
of the prophet*: their great argument being an old
rendering of i. 2, according to which •» the begin-
ning of tho word by Hoaea" implies that the
stream of prophetic inspiration began with him,
aa dutitK-t bom the other prophets. Modem oom-
meutators have rejected this interpretation, and
snbatitated the obvious meaning that the particular
prophecy which follows was the first communicated
by God to Hoses. The consensus for some time
asms to hare been for the third place. Wall (O*.
Not O. T.) gives Jonah, Joel, Hoaea ; Home's
Table gives Jonah, Amos, Hoaea; Gesenius writes
Joel, Amos, Hoaea. The order adopted in the
Hebrew and the Versions is of little consequence.
In short, there ia great difficulty in arranging
these prophets: as for as titles go, Amos is Hosea's
only rival; but 2 K. ziv. 25 goes for to show that
they must both yield to Jonah. It is perhaps more
important to know that Hoaea must have been
more or less contemporary with Isaiah, Amos,
Jonah, Joel, and Nahum.
Dmtwn of the Book. — It is easy to recognize
two great divisions, which accordingly have been
generally adopted: (1.) chap. i. toiii.; (3.) iv. to
and.
The subdivision of these several parts is a work
of greater difficulty: that of Eichhoru will be found
to be baaed upon a highly subtle, though by no
means precarious criticism.
(1.) According to him the first division should
be subdivided into three separate poems, each
originating in a distinct aim, and each after its
own fashion attempting to express the idolatry of
Israel by imagery borrowed from the matrimoniid
relation. The first, and therefore the least elaborate
of these ia contained in chap, iii., the second in i.
t-U, the third in 1. 2-6, and ii. 1-23. These three
an p r ogre s si vely elaborate developments of the same
reiterated idea. Chap. L 2-9 ia common to the
second and third poems, but not repeated with each
severally (iv. 278 ff.). (2.) Attempt* have been
made by Welk, Etchhorn, etc., to subdivide the
seeond part of the book. These divisions are made
either according to reigns of contemporary kings,
or according to the subject-matter of the poem.
The former course has been adopted by Wells, who
fat* Jfee, the latter by Eichbom, who gets nxleen
poems out of this part of the book.
These prophecies — so scattered, so unconnected
that Bishop Lowth ha* compared them with the
leaves of the Sibyl— were probably collected by
n o— himself towards the end of his career.
Haeen't marriage with Comer. — This passage
(i. 2 foil) i* the texatn qmettio of the book. Of
tonne it has it* literal and its allegorical interpre-
ters. For the literal view we have the majority of
the fathers, and of the ancient and medieval oom-
(aantatora. There is some little doubt about Jerc me,
wk* speaks of a figurative ami typical interpreta-
•<*■; but he evidently means the word typical in
nee a* applied to a factual reality flg-
HOSEA 1096
natively representative of something else (Cons, a
Lap.) At the period of the Reformation th*
allegorical interpreters could only boast the Chaldea
Paraphrase, some few Rabbins, and the Hermeneuti*
school of Origen. Soon afterwards the theory ob-
tained a rigorous supporter in Junius, snd more
recently has been adopted by the bulk of modem
commentators. Both views are embarrassed by
serious inconveniences, though it would seem that
those which beset the literal theory are the more
formidable. One question which sprang out of the
literal view was whether the connection between
Hoaea and Gomer wa* marriage, or fornication.
Another question which followed immediately upen
the preceding was " an Deua posait ditpensare ut
fomicatio sit licit*." This latter question was
much discussed by the schoolmen, and by the
Tbomists it was avowed in the affirmative. But,
notwithstanding the difficulties besetting the literal
interpretation, Bishops Horsley and Lowth have
declared in its favor. Eichhora sees all the weight
on the side of the literal interpretation, and shows
that marrying a harlot ia not necessarily implied by
WVBt fl^, which may very well imply a wife
who after marriage becomes an adulteress, though
chaste before. In favor of the literal theory, he
also observes the unfitness of a wife unchaste before
marriage to be a type of Israel.
Referencet in N. T. — Matt ix. 13, zii. 7, Hoe.
vi. 6; Luke zxiiL 30, Rev. vi. 16, Ho*, z. 8; Matt,
ii. 15, Ho*, ii. 1; Rom. ix. 25, 26, 1 Pet ii. 10,
Hos. i. 10, ii. 23; 1 Cor. zv. 4, Hos. vi. 2 [?];
Ileb. ziii. 15, Hos. ziv. 2.
Style. — " Commaticus," Jerome. " Osea quanta
profundius loquitur, tanto operosius penetretur,"
AugtuL Obscure brevity seems to be the charac-
teristic quality of Hosea; and all commentators
agree that " of all the prophets be is, in point of
language, the most obscure and hard to be under-
stood " (Henderson, Minor Prophets, p. 2). Eich-
hora is of opinion that he has never been adequately
translated, and in fact could not be translated into
any European language. He compares him to a
bee flying from flower to flower, to a painter revel-
ing in strong and glaring colors, to a tree that
wants pruning. Horsley detects another important
specialty in pointing out the excessively local and
individual tone of these prophecies, which above all
others he declares to be intensely Jewish.
Hosea's obscurity has been variously accounted
for. Lowth attributes it to the fact that the extant
poems are but a sparse collection of compositions
scattered over a great number of years (PraL xxi.)
Horsley (Pref.) makes this obscurity individual
and peculiar; and certainly the heart of the prophet
seems to have been so full and fiery that it might
well burst through all restraints of diction (Eich-
horu). T. E. R
* That Hosea exercised the prophetic office ia
Israel, and in all probability was born there and
not in Judah, ia the general view of scholars at
present The almost exclusive reference of his mes-
sages to that kingdom is a sufficient ground for
this opinion : for the prophets very seldom after th*
I separation of the ten tribes left their own part of
j -m country for another, as appears the more
wongly from the ezceptional character which the
mission, for example, of Elijah and Amos lo both
kingdoms is represented a* having in their respec-
tive histories, but though we are to rely on thai
as the main argument, we may concede somatl tag
Digitized by
Google
1096 HOBEA
t* other considerations. Horn shows, imnenlsMy,
s special familiarity with Idealities in the territory
of Ephraim, as GUead, Mizpah, Tabor, Gibeah,
Gilgal, Beth-Aven, Samaria, and others (aee iv. 15,
T. 18, ft 8, x. 5, 7, xii. 11, Ac.). Hi* diction alao
partake* of the roughness, and here and there of
the Aramaean coloring, of the north-Palestine
writer*. For a list of words or forms of words
more or less peculiar to Hosea see Keil's Einltitrmg
in dot A. T. p. 276. Haveroick has shown that
the grounds for ascribing to him a south-Palestine
extraction are wholly untenable (Bandb. der EM.
in dm A. Test. ii. 277 ft".). It may excite surprise,
it is true, that Hosea mentions in the title of his
book {the genuineness of which there is no reason
for doubting) four kings of Judah, and only one
of Israel. It is a possible explanation of this that
the prophet after the termination of his more public
ministry may hare withdrawn from Ephraim to
Judah, and there collected and published his
writings (see Bleak, Ami in dot A. Tett. p. 623).
Dr. Posey finds a deeper reason for this preeminence
given to the Jndasen dynasty. " The kingdom of
Judah was the kingdom of the theocracy, the line
of David to which the promises of God were made.
As FJishs .... turned away from Jehoram (2
K. Hi. 13, 14) saying • Get thee to the prophets
of thy father and to the prophets of thy mother,'
and owned Jehoshaphat king of Judah only, so in
the title of his prophecy Hosea at once expresses
that the kingdom of Judah was legitimate " (/fossa,
p. 7). The book at all events was soon known
among the people of Judah ; for the kingdom of
Israel did not continue long after the time of Hosea,
and Jeremiah certainly had a knowledge of Hosea,
as is evident from various expressions and illus-
trations common to him and that prophet (On
this latter point see especially Kueper, Jeremiat
tibr. Sacr. Interpret atque Kndex, pp. 67-71).
No portion of this difficult writer has occasioned
so much discussion as that relating to Hosea's
marriage with Gomer, " a wife of whoredoms " and
the names of the children Jezreel and Lo-ruhamah,
the fruit of that marriage (i. 2 IF.). From the
earliest period some have maintained the literal
and others the figurative interpretation of this nar-
rative. For a history of the different opinions, the
student may consult Harck's Diatribe de Vxorr
fvrnioalionum qua eaponitur fere integrum cap.
i. Hottce (Leyden, 1696), and reprinted in his
Oman, in XII. Prcphetai Minora (Tubing. 1734).
It is difficult to see how the transaction can be
defended on grounds of morality, if it be understood
as an outward one. It has been said that when
' Scripture relates that a thing was done, and that
with the names of persons," we must conclude that
it is "to be taken as literally true." The principle
thus stated is not a correct one: for in the parable
acts are related and names often applied to the
actors, and yet the literal sense is not the true one.
The question in reality is not whether we are to
accept the prophet's meaning in this instance, but
what the meaning is which the prophet intended
to convey, and which he would have us accept as
the intended meaning. Further, aside from this
question of the morality or immorality of the pro-
ceeding, it is impossible to see in it any adaptation
to the prophet's object above that of the parabolic
representation of a case assumed for the purpose
tl Uhatration. The circumstances, if they occurred
■ a literal sense, must extend over a series of years;
assy could hare been known to the people only by
HOSEA.
the prophet'* own rehearsal of them, ltd lwaa
could have had the force only of hi* own personal
testimony and explanation of their Import. Heng-
stenberg (Chrittologu, i. 177, Edinburgh, 1864
has stated very forcibly the manifold difficulties
exegetical and moral, which lie against our suppos-
ing that Hosea was instructed to form a marriage
so disreputable and repulsive, and at variance with
explicit promulgations of the Mosaic code (e. g
Lev. xxi. 7). At the same time this writer, whin,
he denies that the marriage, the wife's adultery
and the birth of the " children of whoredoms '" (U.
4) took place outwardly and literally, maintains
that they took place inwardly and actually as a sort
of vision ; thus serving to impress the facts more
strongly on the mind and enabling him to describe
tbem with greater effect. He is very earnest to
make something of the difference between this view
and that of a symbolic Or parabolic use of marriage
as a type both in the aacredness of its relations anJ
the criminality of its violations of the covenant
between Jehovah and his people; but the line of
distinction is not a very palpable one. Tr legard
the acts as mentally performed in a sense different
from that of their being objects of thought simply,
would be going altogether too far. The idea of the
ingenious writer may be that the virion, which is
tuhjectivt as distinguished from an outward occur-
rence, is at the same time objective to the prophet
as that which he inwardly beholds. Prof. Cowle)
offers two or three suggestions to relieve this diffi-
cult question of some of its embarrassment (ac-
cording to the literal theory) in his Minor Pnpkett.
pp. 8, 4, 418-416.
Dr. Pusey assigns 70 years to the period of
Hosea's ministry. He draws a fearful picture of the
corruption of the times in which the prophet lived,
derived partly from Hosea's own declarations, and
partly from those of his contemporary, Amos. " The
course of iniquity had been run. The stream had
become darker.and darker in its downward flow. . . .
Every commandment of God was broken, and that,
hahitualry. All was falsehood, adultery, blood-
shedding; deceit to God produced faithlessness to
man ; excess and luxury were supplied by secret or
open robbery, oppression, false dealing, perversion
of justice, grinding of the poor. Blood was shed
like water, until one stream met another, and over-
spread the land with one defiling deluge. Adultery
was consecrated as an act of religion. Those wbc
were first in rank were first in excess. People and
king vied in debauchery, and the sottish king joined
and encouraged the free-thinkers and blasphemers
of his court. The idolatrous priest loved and shared
in the sins of the people; nay, they seem to bar*
set themselves to intercept those on either side of
Jordan, who would go to worship at Jerusalem,
laying wait to murder them. Corruption had
spread throughout the whole land ; even the place*
once sacred through God's revelations or other
mercies to their forefathers, Bethel, Gilgal, Gilead,
Mizpah, Shecbeni, were especial scenes of corruption
or of sin. Every holy memory was effaced by
present corruption. Could things be worse? Tien
was one aggravation more Remonstrance was use-
less; the knowledge of God was willfully rejected
the people hated rebuke; the more they were called,
the more they refused ; they forbade their propheti
to prophesy; and their false prophets hated God
greatly. All attempts to heal all this disease only
showed its incurableness " (/fated, p. 8).
The same writer traces the obararity vrUeb man/
Digitized by
Google
H08HA
lawefcmnd in Horn, to tin « solemn pathos " for
•fetch he U distinguished. The expression of St
Jerome hat often been repeated; "Hosea is concise,
and speak/ah, as it wen, in detached sayings."
The words of upbraiding, of judgment, of woe,
burst out, aa it were, one by one. (lowly, heavily,
Dondenaed, abrupt, from the propbet'a heavy and
shrinking soul, aa God oommanded and constrained
him, and put His words, like fire, in the prophet's
mouth. An image of Him who said, ' Jerusalem,
Jerusalem, thou that killest the prophets and
atonest them which are sent unto thee, how often
would I have gathered thy children together, even
■a a hen gathers her chickens under her wings, and
ye would not,' he delivers his message, as though
each sentence burst with a groan from his soul,
and he had anew to take breath, before he uttered
each renewed woe. Each verse forma a whole for
itself, like one heavy toll in a funeral kneU. The
prophet has not been careful about order and sym-
metry, so that each sentence went home to the souL
And yet toe unity of the prophecy is so evident
in the main, that we cannot doubt that it ia not
broken, even when the connection ia not apparent
on the surface. The great difficulty consequently
in Hosea ia to ascertain that connection in places
where it evidently exists, yet where the Prophet
baa not explained it. The easiest and simplest
sentences are sometimes, in this respect, the most
difficult"
Literature. — Some of the helps have been inci-
dentally noticed in the addition which precedes. See
ander Amos and Habakkuk for the more im-
portant general works which include Hosea. Of
aha separate works on this prophet the following
aaay be mentioned : Pocock, the celebrated orien-
talist and traveller, Comment, on Hotea, 1686 ;
Hanger, Comment, in Hoteam, 1782, perhaps un-
eqnaled for the tact and discrimination with
which ha unfolds the spirit and religious teachings
of the prophet; Kulnoel, Hotea Orncula Htbr. et
Lot. Amotatitmt itbutratit, 1792; Bishop Horsley,
fiasco, translated from the Hebrew, with Notet
aaminaator* and critical, Sd ed., Lond. 1804; J. C.
Stack. Hottat Prophtta : Jntroauctumem prtmmt,
swift, eommt nlahu tut, 1838, who regards the
fyinbobo acta in ohaps. i. and ill. as real events or
beta; Simeon, Dtr Prophet Hotea trklart u.
mbtnettt, with a copious history of the interpreta-
tion, 1861 ; Drake, Nottt on Hotea, Cambr. (Eng.),
IBM; and August Wuneehe, Dtr Prophet Hotea
tberttUt u. erhart, 1868 (erste Halfte, aa for aa
chap. vii. 8, pp. i.-xrrii. and 1-388), in which he
baa made special use of the Targums, and of the
Jewish interpreters Rashi, Aben Em, and David
Kfasehl Dr. Posey's Commentary on this prophet
(in pt L of his Minor Prophets) deserves to be
characterized as learned, devout, and practical. It
sontaina passages of great beauty and suggestive-
asaa. In his pages Hosea still lives, sad his teach-
ings are for our times as well as for his own. Ail
that ia Jewish ia not found in Judaism, nor all
that ia heathenish found in heathendom.
Ulbkert (Sfmboluche Handkmg Hotea't in the
TkeoL Stud. u. XriL, 1836, pp. 647-866) main-
kins the parabolic view of the Qomer-marriage
nestion. Umbreit's article Hotta (Heraog's Real-
Kmegk. rl. 867-176) is to some extent exegetical as
faB aa biographical. Stanley's interesting sketch
ntraya Hosea ss " the Jeremiah of Israel " and
' tfct only Individual character that stands oat
" the darkness of . . -early the whole of
HOSHBA.
1097
the last century of the northern kingdom" {Jtwith
Church, U. 409 f.).
The Christology of Hosea is not without diffi-
culties. One psssage only, namely, that foretelling
the conversion of the heathen (ii. S3 and oomp. 1
10) ia cited in the N. T. as explicitly MesaUnk
(Rom. ix. 85; 1 Pet il. 10). But it is a foist
principle of interpretation that only those portions
of the O. T. refer to Christ which are expressly
recognized as having that character in the New
Testament The N. T. writers represent the Re-
deemer aa the great subject of the ancient economy;
and if only those types and predictions relate to
him which are cited and applied in that manner,
it is difficult to see how the Hebrew Scriptures can
justly have ascribed to them such a character of
predominant reference to the Christian economy.
In regard to such Gospel prophecies in Hosea, the
reader may consult (in addition to the Com-
mentaries) Hengatenberg's Chrittobgy of the ft
T. i. 168-886 (Edinb. ed.) : Hoftnann's rPefo.
ariotmo u. JCrfaUung, i. 208 t; Tholuck's Dit
Prepheten u. ihrt rVeutni/ungen, pp. 193, 197,
206; and Stahelin's Die Meuianuchen Wciua-
gungen da A. T. p. 36 ft".
All these writers do not recognize the same pas-
sages as significant, nor the same as significant in
the same degree. H.
• HOSKN (plural of hate) Dan. ffl. 81 (A. V.),
is the translation of a Cbaldee word which signifies
(antes [Drkhs, p. 624 a]. Hotea formerly denoted
any covering for the legs, short trowsers or trunk-
hose as well as stockings. See examples of this
usage in Eastwood and Wright's Bible rVord-Book,
p. 367. H.
HOSHA1AH [3 syi.] (H^Vl [total
Jehovah saved] : Otaiat). 1. {'Cloaia.) A man who
assisted in the dedication of the wall of Jerusalem
after it had been rebuilt by Nehemiah (Nch. zii.
32). He led the princes ("Hip) of Judah in the
procession, but whether himself one of them wa aaa
not told.
8. (Mooo-a/at; [Alex. Maa-aiat; FA. 1 Anmnta,
Mao-««.] The father of a certain Jeaaniah, oc
Azariah, who was a man of note after the destruc-
tion of Jerusalem by Nebuchadnezzar (Jar. alii. 1^
xBii.2).
HOSH'AMA (?^'in {whom Jehovah
heart]: 'Oo-o/uu?; (Tat -/usA:] Alex. Iannuui;
[Comp. 'fkroiul:] Soma), one of the sons of Je-
eoniah, or Jehoiachin, the last king of Judah bat
one (1 Chr. ill. 18). It ia worthy of notice that,
in the narrative of the capture of Jeconiah by
Nebuchadnezzar, though the mother and the wives
of the king are mentioned, nothing ia said about
his sons (3 K. xxlv. 12, 16). In agreement with
this is the denunciation of him as a childless man
in Jer. xxii. 80. There ia good reason for suspect-
ing some confusion in the present state of the
genealogy of the royal family in 1 Chr. ill. ; and
these facts would seem to confirm it
HOSHE'A (7gftn [help, or God it kelp:
see Fiirst] : 'n«V: Out), the nineteenth, last, ani
best king of Israel. He succeeded Pekah, whom
he slew m a successful ocmsoimoy, thereby fulfilling
a propb»ry of Isaiih (Is. vii. 10). Although
Jarphus rails Hoabea a friend of Pekah «(Am
to*i hrifiooKtixramn atrrf. Ant. ix. 18, ( 1),
we have t» gr-"oA fc» sailing, this- "•.*
Digitized by
Google
1098 HOSHEA
nailer*' (Prideaox, L 16). It took place b. c.
T«7, "in the 30th yesr of Jotham " (2 K. xv. 80),
C «, « hi the 80th jeer after Jotham became sole
king," for he only reigned 16 jean (2 K. zt. 33).
But there must hare been an interregnum of at
least eight jean before Hoshea came to the throne,
which was not till B. c. 739, in the 12th rear of
Ahas (3 K. xrii. 1 : we cannot, with Clericus [Le
Clere], read 1th for 12th in this verse, because of
2 K. xviii. 9). This is the simplest way of recon-
ciling the apparent discrepancy between the pas-
sages, and has been adopted by Ussher, Des Vig-
noles, Tiele, etc. (Winer, i. ». Houat). The other
methods suggested by Hitzlg, Lightfoot, etc., are
mostly untenable (Keil on 2 K. zr. 30).
It is expressly stated (2 K. xrii. 2) that Hoshea
was not so sinful as his predecessors. According
to the Rabbis this superiority consisted in his re-
moving from the frontier cities the guards placed
there by his predecessors to prevent their subjects
(torn worshipping at Jerusalem (Swfer Ohm Rabba,
cap. 22, quoted by Prideaux, i. 16), and in his not
hindering the Israelites from accepting the invita-
tion of Hezekiah (2 Cbr. xxx. 10), nor checking
their zeal against idolatry (to. xxxi. 1). This en-
comium, however, is founded on the untenable sup-
position that Hezekiah's passover preceded the foil
of Samaria [Hezekiah], and we must be content
with the general feet that Hoshea showed a more
theocratic spirit than the former kings of Israel.
The compulsory cessation of the calf-worship may
have removed his greatest temptation, for Tiglath-
Pileser had carried off the golden calf from Dan
some years before (Std. 01. Rob. 22), and that at
Bethel was taken away by Shalmaneser in his first
invasion (2 K. xrii. 3; Hos. z. 14; Prideaux, L c).
But, whatever may have been his excellences, he
still "did evil in the sight of the Lord," and it
wss too late to avert retribution by any improve-
ments.
In the third year of his reign (b. c. 726) Shal-
maneser, impelled probably by mere thirst of eon-
quest, came against him, cruelly stormed the strong
caves of Beth-arbel (Hos. x. 14), and made Israel
tributary (2 K. xvii. 3) for three years. At the
end of this period, encouraged perhaps by the revolt
of Hezekiah, Hoshea entered into a secret alliance
with So, king of Egypt (who was either the ititx ot
of Manetho, and son of iafiaK&s, Herod, ii. 137 ;
Keil, Vitringa, Gesenius, etc; Jahn, Hebr. Com.
§ xl ; or else Sabaco himself, Wilkinson, Anc. Eg.
L 139; Ewald, Gach. Hi. 610), to throw off the
Assyrian yoke. The alliance did him no good ; it
was revealed to the court of Nineveh by the Assyr-
ian party in Ephraim, and Hoshea was immediately
seized aa a rebellious vassal, shut up In prison, and
apparently treated with the utmost indignity (Mic.
f. 1). If this happened be/ore the siege (3 K.
«Hfu 4), we must account for it either by supposing
that Hoshea, hoping to dissemble and gain time,
had gone to Shalmaneser to account for his con-
Inet, or that he had been defeated and taken pris-
mer in some unrecorded battle. Thst he disap-
peared very suddenly, like " foam upon the water,"
we may infer from Hos. xiii. 11, x. 7. The siege
of Samaria lasted three years; for chat " glorious
snd beautiful " city was strongly situated like " a
srown of pride" among her hiUs (Is. xxviii. 1-5).
During the course of the siege Shalmaneser must
have died, for it is certain that Samaria was taken
3f his successor Ssrgon, who thus laconically de-
ssrftes toe «v«nt In his annals; " Samaria I looked
HOSPITALITY
at, I captured; 27,280 men (famines?) who dwsH
in it I carried away. I constructed fifty chariot*
In their country ... I appointed a governor ovsr
them, snd continued upon them the tribute of th
former people" (Botta, 14S, 11, quoted by Dr
Hincks, Journ. of Sacr. LU. Oct. 1898; Layard,
ffin. and Bab. i. 148). This was probably b. c
721 or 730. For the future history of the unhappy
Ephraimitea, the places to which they were trans-
planted by the policy of their conqueror and his
officer, " the great and noble Aanapper " (Ezr. Iv.
10), and the nations by whh-h they were superseded,
see Samaria. Of the subsequent fortunes of
Hoshea we know nothing. He came to the throne
too late, and governed a kingdom torn to pieces by
foreign invasion and Intestine broils. Sovereign
after sovereign had fallen by the dagger of the
assassin; and we see from the dark and terrible
delineations of the contemporary prophets [Hosba,
Micah, Isaiah], that murder and idolatry, drunk-
enness and hut, had eaten like " an incurable
wound " (Hie. i. 9) into the inmost heart of the
national morality. Ephraim was dogged to Its ruin
by the apostate policy of the renegade who had
asserted its independence (3 K. xvii.; Joseph. Am.
ix. 14; Prideaux, 1. 16 it; Rett, On Sing*, Ii. 60 ft,
Engl, ed.; Jahn, Hebr. Com. § xl.; Ewald, Getck.
Hi. 607-618; Roseomuller, Bibl Geogr. chap, fax,
Engl, transl.; .RawUnson, Herod. 1. 149).
F. W. F.
HOSHE'A (ytt>Vt = Aefc [see above]). Taw
name is precisely the same as that of the prophet
known to us ss Hosea. ]_ The son of Nun, i. e.
Joshua (Dent, xxxii. 44; and also in Num. xiii. 8,
though there the A. V. has Oshba). It was prob-
ably his original name, to which the Divine nam
of J ah was afterwards added — Jehoahua, Joshua —
••Jehovah's help." The LXX. in this passage
miss the distinction, and have 'Iqiroot: Vulg.
Jotut.
2. Oifcrtj: Out.) Son of Azazdah (1 Chr. xxviL
20) ; like his great natneeake, a man of Ephraim,
ruler (nagid) of his tribe in the time of king
David.
3. COotis"; (Tat FA. Ocryfiai] Osee.) One
of the headsof the"people" — i. e. the hymen —
who sealed the covenant with Neliemiah (Neh. x.
83).
HOSPITALITY. The rites of hospitality sn
to be distinguished from the customs prevailing in
the entertainment of guests [Food; Meals], and
from the laws and practices relating to charity,
almsgiving, etc.; and they are thus separately
treated, as far ss possible, in this article.
Hospitality was regarded by most nations of the
ancient worlil aa one of the chief virtues, and
especially by peoples of the Semitic stock; but that
it was not characteristic of the latter alone is amply
shown by the usages of the Greeks, and even the
Romans. Race undoubtedly Influences its exercise,
and It must also be ascribed in no small degree to
the social state of a nation. Thus the desert tribes
have always placed the virtue higher in their esteem
than the townsfolk of the same descent as thomv
serres; and in our own day, though an Arab towns-
man is hospitable, he entertains different notions oa
the subject from the Arab of the desert (the Bad-
awee). The former has fewer opportunities of
showing his hospitality; and when he does so, bs
does it not as much with the feeling of duchargins
an obligatory act aa a social and dvUitsd duty
Digitized by
Google
HOSPITALITY
With the advance of civilization the cans of hos-
pitality beoome less and less urgent. The dweUer
fat the wilderness, however, find* th? entertainment
of wayfarers to be a part of his daily life, and that
to refuse it is to deny a common humanity. Viewed
In this light, the notions of the Greeks and the
Romans must be appreciated as the recognition of
the virtue where its necessity was not of the urgent
character that it possesses in the more primitive
lands of the East. The ancient Egyptians resembled
the Greeks ; but, with a greater exclusiveness, they
limited their entertainments to their own country-
men, being constrained by the national and priestly
abhorrence and dread of foreigners. This exclusion
throws some obscurity on their practices in the dis-
charge of hospitality; but otherwise their customs
in the enttrtaiument of guests resembled those well
known to jVnsical scholars — customs probably de-
rived in a great measure from Egypt.
While hospitality is acknowledged to hare been
a wide-spread virtue In ancient times, we must con-
cede that it nourished chiefly among the race of
Sbem. The O. T. abounds with illustrations of the
divine command to use hospitality, and of the
strong national belief in its importance; so too
the writings of the N. T. ; and though the Eastern
Jews of modern times dare not entertain a stranger
hat he be an enemy, and the long oppression they
have endured has begotten that greed of gain that
has made their name a proverb, the ancient hospi-
tality still lives In their hearts. The desert, how-
ever, is yet frse; it is ss of old a howling wilder-
ness; and hospitality is as necessary and as freely
given ss in patriarchal times. Among the Arabs
vie find the best illustrations of the old Bible nar-
ratives, and among them see traits that might
beseem their ancestor Abraham.
The laws respecting strangers (Lev. rix. 33, 34)
and the poor (I>ev. xxr. 14 ff.; Deut. zv. 7 J, and
concerning redemption (Lev. xxv. 33 ff.), etc., are
framed in accordance with the spirit of hospitality;
and the strength of the national feeling regarding
it is shown in the incidental mentions of its prac-
tice. In the Law, compassion to strangers is con-
stantly enforced by the words, " for ye were stran-
gers in the land of Egypt " (as Lev. xix. 34). And
before the Law, Abraham's entertainment of the
angels (Gen. xviii. 1 ff.), and Lot's (xix. 1), are in
exact agreement with its precepts and with modern
usage. So Moses was received by Jethro, the priest
of Midian, who reproached his daughters, though
he believed him to be an Egyptian, saying, " And
where is he? why is it [that] ye have left the
man? call him, that he may eat bread" (Ex. ii.
90). The story of Joseph's hospitality to his
brethren, although he knew them to be such, ap-
pears to be narrated as an ordinary occurrence: and
in like manner Pharaoh received Jacob with a lib-
erality not merely dictated by his relationship to
the savior of Egypt. Like Abraham, "Manoah
pud onto the angel of the Lord, I pray thee let us
vietain thee nntO we shall have made ready a kid
for thee" (Judg. xiii. 15); and like Lot, the old
man of Gibeah sheltered the Levite when he saw
him, "a wayfaring man in the street of the city:
and the old man said, Whither goest thou? and
» We as* am why the tnBaspUaatr of the 8s-
soon fierce Indignation In the two
James and John (Luke Ix. 62 E). Jesus
a at the eioas of the day Into one of the 3a-
I to procure a night's lo-lglng for Mm :
HOSPITALITY 1099
whence contest thou? . . Peace be with thee,
howsoever [let] all thy want* [lie] upon me; only
lodge not in the street. So he brought him into
his house, and gave provender unto the asses; and
they washed their feet, and did eat and drink"
(Judg. xix. 17, 20, 21).
In the N. T. hospitality is yet more markedly
enjoined ; and in the mom civilized state of society
which then prevailed, its exercise became more a
social virtue than a necessity of patriarchal life."
The good Samaritan stands for all ages as an ex-
ample of Christian hospitality, embodying the coin-
maud to love one's neighbor as himself; and our
Lord's charge to the disciples strengthened thai
command : " He that recelveth you receiveth mu,
and he that receiveth me receiveth him that sent
me. . . . And whosoever shall give to drink unto
one of these little ones a cup of cold water [only],
in the name of a disciple, verily I say unto you, he
shall in nowise lose his reward " (Matt. x. 42).
The neglect of Christ is symbolized by inhospitality
to our neighbors, in the words, " I was a stranger
and ye took me not in " (Matt. xxv. 43). The
Apostles urged the church to " follow after hospi
tality," using the forcible words tV ^iAo£<Wo>
tidxorrts (Horn. xii. 13; cf. 1 Tim. r. 10); to
remember Abraham's example, " Be not forgetful tc
entertain strangers, for thereby some have enter-
tained angels unawares" (Heb. xiii. 2); to "use
hospitality one to another without grudging " (1
Pet. iv. 9); while a bishop must be a "lover of
hospitality" (Tit. i. 8, cf. 1 Tim. iii. 2). The
practice of the early Christians was in accord with
these precepts. They had all things in common,
and their hospitality was a characteristic of their
belief.
If such has been the usage of Biblical times, it
is in the next place important to remark how hos-
pitality was shown. In the patriarchal ages we
may take Abraham's example as the most fitting,
as we have of it the fullest account; and by the
light of Arab custom we may see, without obscu-
rity, his hasting to the tent door to meet his guests,
with the words, " My lord, if now I have found
favor in thy sight, pass not away, I pray thee, from
thy servant: let a little water, I pray you, be fetched,
and wash your feet, and rest yourselves under the
tree, and I will fetch a morsel of bread, and com-
fort ye your hearts." " And," to continue the
narrative in the vigorous language of the A. V.,
" Abraham hastened into the tent unto Sarah, and
said, Make ready quickly three measures of fine
meal, knead [it], and make cakes upon the hearth.
And Abraham ran unto the herd, and fetched a
calf tender and good, and gave [it] unto a young
man, and he hasted to dress it. And he took but-
ter and milk, and the calf which he had dressed,
and set [it] before them; and he stood by them
under the tree, and they did eat." A traveller in
the eastern desert may see, through the vista of
ages, this far-off example in its living traces. Mr.
Lane's remarks on this narrative and the general
subject of this article are too apposite to be omitted :
he says, " Hospitality is a virtue for which the na-
tives of the East in general are highly and de-
servedly admired; and the people of Egypt an
but the people refused to noelve him, because he was
Journeying to Jerusalem. This act was not an In-
.Ivtlif- merely, or an inhumanity : It wu an outrage
agalnr* c.ae of the most sacred of the racogni-wd lafl
of orwntal society. B
Digitized by
Google
1100
HOSPITALITY
m0 entitled to commendation on thii amount. A
word which signifies literally ' a penon on a Jour-
ney' (musafir) ia the term moat commonly em-
ployed In this country in the sense of a visitor or
guest There are very few persona here who would
think of sitting down to a meal, if there was •
stranger in the house, without inviting him to par-
take of it, unless the latter were a menial, in which
ease he would be invited to est with the servants.
It would be considered a shameful violation of good
manners if a Muslim abstained from ordering the
table to be prepared at. the usual time because a
visitor happened to lie present. Persons of the
middle classes in this country [Egypt], if living in
a retired situation, sometimes take their supper
before the door of their house, and invite every
passenger of respectable appearance to eat with
them." This is very commonly done among the
lower orders. In cities and large towns claima on
hospitality are unfrequent, as there are many we-
kdleht or khans, where strangers may obtain lodg-
ing; and food is very easily procured: but in the
villages travellers are often lodged and entertained
by the Sheykh or some other inhabitant; and if
the guest be a person of the middle or higher
classes, or even not very poor, he gives a present to
the host's servants, or to the host himself. In the
desert, however, a present is seldom received from
a gueat. By a Snnneh law a traveller may claim
entertainment, of any person able to afford it to
him, for three days. The account of Abraham's
entertaining the three angels, related in the Bible,
presents a perfect picture of the manner in which a
modern Bedawee sheykh receives travellers arriving
at his encampment He immediately orders his
wife or women to make bread, slaughters a sheep
or some other animal, and dresses it in haste, and
bringing milk and any other provisions that he may
have ready at hand, with the bread and the meat
which he has dressed, sets them before his guests.
If these be persons of high rank, he stands by
them while they eat, aa Abraham did in the cose
above alluded to. Most Bedawees will suffer al-
most any injury to themselves or their families
rather than allow their guests to be ill-treated while
under their protection. There ore Arabs who even
regard the chastity of their wives as not too pre-
cious to be sacrificed for the gratification of their
guests (see Burckhardt's Ni.tes on the Bedouins,
etc., 8vo ed. i. 179, 180); and at an encampment
of the Bishdreen, I ascertained that there are many
persona in this great tribe (which inhabits a large
portion of the desert between the Nile and the Red
Sea) who offer their unmarried daughters (cf. Gen.
dx. 8; Judg. xix. 24) to their guests, merely from
motives of hospitality, and not for hire" (Mad.
Egypt, ch. xiii.). Mr. 1-sne adds that there used
to be a very numerous class of persons, called Tu-
fjeylees, who lived by spunging, presuming on the
well-known hospitality of their countrymen, and
going from house to house where entertainments
■ere being given. The Arabs along the Syrian
■ n It If sold to have been a custom of some of the
Banntkeu (the family so renowned for their gene-
rosity) to keep open bouse during the hours of meals,
and to allow no one who applied at such times for ad-
mission to be repulsed" (Lane's Thousand and One
JfeAM. eh. v. note 97)
e The time of entertainment, according to the pre-
sent of Mohammed, la three days, and he permitted a
gasst *o take this right by force ; although one day
MM eas night ia the period of the host's being « kind "
HOSPITALITY
frontier usually pitch the sbeykh's tent towards tfci
west, that is, towards the inhabited country, to ia
vite passengers and lodge them on their way (Burck-
hardt's Notes on (he Bedouins, eta, 8vo ed. L 88),
it is held to be disgraceful to encamp in a place out
of the way of travellers ; and it is a custom of the
Bedawees to light fires in their encampments to
attract travellers, and to keep dogs who, besides
watching against robbers, may in the night-time
guide wayfarers to their tents. Hence a hospitable
man is proverbially called " one whose dogs bark
loudly." * Approaching an encampment, the trav-
eller often sees several horsemen coming towards
him, and striving who shall be first to claim him
as a gueat. The favorite national game of thi
Arabs before El-IslAm illustrates their hospitality.
It was called " Meysir," and was played with arrows,
some notched and others without marks. A young
camel was bought and killed, and divided into %i
portions; those who drew marked arrows had shares
in proportion to the number of notches; (hose who
drew blanks paid the cost of the camel among them.
Neither party, however, ate of the flesh of the
camel, which was always given to the poor, and
" this they did out of pride and ostentation," says
Sale, "it being reckoned a shame for a man to
stand out, and not venture his money on such an
occasion." Sale, however, is hardly philosophical
in this remark, which concerns only the abuse of a
practice originally arising from a national virtue:
but Mohammed forbade the game, with all other
games of chance, on the plea that it gave rise to
quarrels, etc. (Sale's Preliminary Discount, p. 96,
ed. 1836, and Xur-an, ch. ii. and v.).
The oriental respect for the covenant of bread
and salt, or salt alone, certainly sprang from the
high regard in which hospitality was held. Even,
accidentally to taste another's salt imposes this
obligation ; and to so great an extent ia the feeling
carried that a thief has been known to jive up his
booty in obedience to it. Thus El -Leys Es-Safftr,
when a robber, left his booty in the passage of the
royal treasury of Syiaton ; accidentally he stumbled
over, and, in the dork, tasted a lump of rock-salt:
his respect for his covenant gained his pardon, and
he became the founder of a royal dynasty (Lane's
Thousand and One Nights, ch. it. note 21). The
Arab peculiarity was carried into Spain by the so-
called Moors.
For the customs of the Greeks and Romans in
the entertainment of guests, and the exercise of
hospitality generally, the reader is referred to the
Dictionary of Antiquities, art. JTospitium. They
are incidentally Uluetrated by passages in the N. T.,
but it is difficult to distinguish between those sc
derived, and the native oriental customs which,
as we hare said, are very similar. To one of the
customs of classical antiquity a reference is sup-
posed to exist in Rev. ii. 17: "To him that over-
cometh will I give to eat of the hidden manna, and
will give him a white stone, and in the stone •
to him (Misklcai ei-Musibeek, H. 829, cited in lame's
Thousand and Out frights, Intr. note 18). Bnrek
hardt (Holes on the Bedouins, ate., L 178. 179, cite ■
In the same note) says that a stranger without friend.
In a camp allghta at the flnrt tent, where the woman.
In the absence of the owner, provide tur his refresh
mens. After the lapse of three daya and four hosns
he must. If ha would avoid censure, either assist b
household duties, or claim hospitality at arssstst
tent
Digitized by
Google
HOST
■Mr name ■lillm, which no man knoweth, eating
he that reeeiveth fit]." E. S. P.
* HOST (Lake x. 35 ). [Hospitality ; Imh.]
* HOSTAGE- The pnctioe of giving and
receiving persons, to be retained u security for the
observance of publio treaties or engagements, is
indicated in S Kings xiv. 14, and 2 Chr. xxv. 34.
It is said there that J jash after his victory over Ara-
tsiah took with him hostages (JTQnS.nn *3?)
apon his return to his own kingdom. D. 8. T.
HOTHAM (prjhn [signetring]: XcOdV;
Alex. [Aid.] Xm$ifi- Hutham), a man of Ashor;
sou of Heber, of the family of Beriah (1 Chr. viL
32).
HOTHAN (CHIP, i. e. Hotham: XtOifi;
[Vat.] Alex. X»0aj>; [FA. Kutar:] Botkam), a
man of Aroer, father of Shams and Jehiel, two of
the heroes of David's guard (1 Chr. li. 44). The
substitution of Hotban for Hotham is an error
which has been retained from the edition of 1611
[following the Bishops' Bible] till now. (Comp.
the rendering of the LXX. both of this and the
preceding name.)
HOTHIB ("lVTin [yU6ie»f]! '!%!;
Vat. OSrifu, H9«i;j Alex. IvtBtpt, [U«tp>:]
OUrir), the 13th son of Human "the king's
aser" (1 Chr. xxv. 4), and therefore a Kohathite
LevHe. He had the charge of the twenty-first
course of the musicians in the service of the tab-
ernacle (xxv. 28).
* Some think that this name and the names of
four of Henian's other sons (Giddalti, Komamti-
jaer, MaUothi, Hothir, Mahazloth) formed a verse
of some ancient prophetic uyiug. They follow
other in the list, 1 Chr. xxv. 4 (except the
of Joshbekashah), so ss to make this
couplet: —
1 have mmptiiUit and exalted help ;
1 have declared In abundance visions.
Flint says (fleer, u. Chald. WSrlerb. 1. 944),
that the rhythm of the words favors this view.
Ewald refers to this case as a remarkable illustra-
tion of the use of significant or symbolic personal
names among the Hebrews (Lehrbueh da- Htbr.
Sprite/*, p.SOa.S" Anag.). [Naurs, Aroer. ed.]
It should be said that according to this theory eier
belongs to both the preceding verbs, and makes of
them two compound names, instead of one, as in
the A. V. H.
• HOUGH (Josh. xi. a, 9; 2 Sam. Till. 4) is
an obsolete word from the Anglo-Saxon hoh, and
means to hamstring, i. e. to cut the back sinews,
and thus disable animals. H.
HOUB (nW, Nnjttf, Chald.). This word
is tret found in Dan. Ui. 8, lv. 19, 38, v. 6; and
t occurs several times in the Apocrypha (Jud. xiv.
i, 2 Eedr. ix. 44). It seems to be a vague expres-
sion for a short period, and the frequent pL-ase
" in the seme hour " means " immediately "
tenee we find JTJftB3, substituted in the Targum
fcr VfyS, " in a moment " (Num. xvi. 21, to
Has is frequently used in the same way by the
K. T writer. (Matt. vui. 13; Luke xn. 39, to.).
HOUB 1101
It occurs in the LXX as a rendering for vartoaa
words meaning time, just as it does in Greek wri-
ters king before it acquired the specific meaning of
our word "hour." Saah is still used in Arabic
both for an hour and a moment.
The ancient Hebrews were probably unacquainted
with the division of the natural day into 24 parts.
The general distinctions of '■ morning, evening, and
noonday " (Ps. lv. 17), were sufficient for them at
first, as they were for the early Greeks (Horn. 11
ui. Ill) ; afterwards the Creeks adopted five
marked periods of the day (Jul. Pollux, Onom. L
68; Dio Chrysost. Oral. ii. tie (Jim:), and the
Hebrews parcelled out the period between sunrise
and sunset into a series of minute divisions distin-
guished by the sun's course [Day], as is still done
by the Arabs, who have stated forms of prayers for
each period (Lane's Mod. Eg. i. ch. 8).
The early Jews appear to have divided the day
into four parte (Nek. ix- 8), and the night into
throe watches (Judg. vii. 19) [Day; Watcheb],
aud even in the N. T. we find a trace of this di-
vision in Matt. xx. 1-4. Them is however no
proof of the assertion, sometimes made, that tea
in the Gospels may occasionally n-ean a space of
three hours.
The Greeks adopted the division of the day into
13 hours from the Babylonians (Herod, il. 109;
comp. Rawlinson, Herod, ii. p. 834). At what
period tho Jews became first acquainted with this
way of reckoning time is unknown, but it is gen-
erally supposed that they too learnt it from the
Babylonians during the Captivity (Waehner, Am.
Htbr. § v. i. 8, 9). They nuiy have had some such
division at a much earlier period, as has been in-
ferred from the fact that Abas erected a sun-dial
in Jerusalem, the use of which had probably bean
learnt from Babylon. There is however the great-
est uncertainty as to the meaning of the word
nibSD (A. V. "degrees," Is. xxxviiL 8).
[Dial] It is strange that t'ue Jews were not
acquainted with this method of reckoning even
earlier, for, although a purely conventional one, It
is naturally suggested by the months in a year.
Sir G. Wilkinson thinks that it arose from a less
obvious cause (Rawlinson, Herod, ii. 334). In
whatever way originated, it was known to the
Egyptians at a very early period. They had IS
hours of the day and of the night (called Nau =
hour), each of which had its own genius, drawn
with a star on its head. The word is said by Lep-
sius to be found as tar back as the 6th dynasty
(Rawlinson, llerod. ii. 135).
There are two kinds of hours, namely, (1.) tht
astronomical or equinoctial hour, i. e. the 34th part
of a civil day, which although " known to astrono-
mers, was not used in the affairs of common lift
till towards the end of the 4th sentury nf the Chris-
tian era" (Diet, of Ant. s. v. Hora): and (8.) the
natural hour (which the Rabbis called DV3QT
KiupiKal or temporalis), i. t. the 12th part of thf
natural day, or of the time between sunrise and
sunset. These are the hours meant in the N. T.,
Joeephus, and the Kabbis (John xi. 9, to.; Jos.
Ant. xiv. 4, § 8), and it must be remembered that
they perpetually vary in length, so ss to be very
different at different times of the year. Besides
this, an hour of the lay would always mean a dif-
ferent length of time from an hour of the night,
except at the equinok From the oonseqnent «J>
Digitized by
Google
1102
HOUR
oartainty of the term there mow the proverbial
sxpreasion " not all hours are equal " (R. Joshua
ap. Carpzor, App. Crit. p. 345 J. At the equinoxes
the third hour would correspond to 9 o'clock ; the
sixth would ahoayt be at noon. To find the exact
time meant at other seasons of the year we must
know when the sun rises in Palestine, and reduce
the hours to our reckoning accordingly. [Day.]
(Winer, s. v. Tag, Uhren; Jahn, Arch. BibL
§ 101.) What horo logic contrivances tne Jews
possessed in the time of our Lord is uncertain; but
we may safely suppose that they had gnomons,
dials, and clepsydra, all of which had long been
known to the Persians and other nations with whom
tbey had come in contact. Of course the two first
were inaccurate and uncertain indications, but the
water-clock by ingenious modifications, according
to the season of the year, became a very tolerable
assistance in narking time. Mention is also made
of a curious invention called H3?tP HYiy, by
which a figure was constructed so as to drop a stone
into a brazen basin every hour, the sound of which
was heard for a great distance and announced the
tune (Otho, Lex. Sab. a. r. Bora).
For the purposes of prayer the old division of
the day into 4 portions was continued in the Tem-
ple service, as we see from Acts ii. 15, iii. 1, x. 9.
The Jews supposed that the 3d hour had been con-
secrated by Abraham, the 6th by Isaac, and the
Bth by Jacob (Kimchi; Schoettgen, Bar. Htbr.
on Acts iii. 1). It is probable that the canonical
hours observed by the Komanists (of which there
are 8 in the 24) are derived from these Temple
boors (Godwyn, Motet <md Aar. iii. 9).
The Rabbis pretend that the hours were divided
into 1080 Q^pbn (minutes), and 56,848 B^Wl
(seconds), which numbers were chosen because they
are so easily divisible (Gem. Ilier. Beracoth, 2, 4,
a Reland AiU. Btbr. iv. 1, § 19). F. W. F.
* Besides the various points mentioned above
as forming the beginning of the day, from which
the hours were reckoned, l'liny testifies (B. N. ii.
79) that among the Romans the official, religious,
and civil day was reckoned from midnight to mid-
night. His words are: "Ipsuni diem alii aliter
observavere . . . vulgus oinne a luce ad tenebras :
sacerdotes Ronianl, et qui diem difiiniere civilian,
Item iEgyptli, et Hipparchus, a media node in
medium." To the same purpose also Aulus Gel-
Bus (Nod. Alt. iii. 9): ••Populum autem Roma-
ram ito, nti Varro dixit, dies singulos adnumerare
a media nocte ad medium proximam multis argu-
ments ostenditur." He then gives Varro's proofs.
If the passages in St. John's Gospel relating to
the hour of the day be all examined, it will appear
probable that he adopted this official Roman reck-
oning, — of course, numbering the hours from
midday as well as from midnight, so ss not to
exceed the number twelve. In 1. 40 the visit of the
iisdplas to Jesus will thus have occurred about 10
i. it. instead of at 4 P. H. as often supposed, and
this seems more agreeable to the statement " they
ibode with him that day." In iv. 6 the same
node of reckoning brings Jesus, " wearied with
sis journey," to the well of Samaria at six in the
evening, a time when the woman would naturally
jome to draw water, instead of at noon. So in iv.
H this computation makes "the seventh hour"
when th j fever left the nobleman's son, seven instead
at on* r. M., which agrees better with the circum-
HOTJBB
stanees and the probable distance between Cans
and Capernaum.
The only remaining passage is xix. 14, the re-
lation of which to Hark xv. 25 has been so much
questioned. Here, too, this method of reckoning
removes the seeming discrepancy, while the whole
coarse of the narrative in all the Evangelists shows
that the time indicated by St. Johu as that when
Pilate sat upon his judgment-seat, ootud not hare
been later than between six and seven in the morn-
ing — "about the sixth hour." After this, the
events which followed — the further ineffectual ex-
position and final yielding of Pilate to the will of
the Jews, the leading of Jesus out to Golgotha
after taking off his mock royal array, etc., the prep-
aration for the crucifixion, and the crucifixion it-
self, must have consumed the two hours or more
until our nine o'clock, called by St. Hark, accord-
ing to Jewish usage, " the third hour." For a list
of the older writers who adopt this view, see Wot-
fius, Curat Phil, on John xix. 14. Olahausen (who
seems to prefer for himself a conjectural emenda-
tion of the text) yet well observes, " With this
hypothesis admirably accords the fact that John
wrote for the people of Asia Minor " — a remark
which applies to all the passages above cited ban
his Gospel. F. O.
HOUSE (iTJ : oT«ot: domm; Chald. rtS,
(o pan the night, Ges. Tha. 191 4), a dwelling
in general, whether literally, as house, tent, palace,
citadel, tomb; derivatively, as tabernacle, temple,
heaven; or metaphorically, as family. Although
in oriental language, every tent (see Ges. p. 32)
may be regarded as a house (Harmer, 06s. I. 194),
yet the distinction between the permanent dwelling-
house and the tent must have taken rise from the
moment of the division of mankind into dwellers
in tents and builders of cities, i. e. of permanent
habitations (Gen. iv. 17, 20; Is. xxxviii. 12). The
Hebrews did not become dwellers in cities tul tha
sojourn in Egypt and after the conquest of Canaan
(Gen. xlviL 3; Ex. xu. 7; Heb. vi. 9), while the
Canaanites as well as the Assyrians were from an
earlier period builders and inhabitants of cities,
and it was into the houses and cities built by the
former that the Hebrews entered to take possession
after the conquest (Gen. x. 11, 19, xix. 1, xxiii. 10,
xxxiv. 20; Nnm. xi. 27; Deut. vi. 10, 11). The
private dwellings of the Assyrians and Babylonians
have altogether perished, but the solid material of
the houses of Syria, east of the Jordan, may par-
haps have preserved entire specimens of the ancient
dwellings, even of the original inhabitants of thai
region (Porter, Dnmatcut, ii. 195, 196; C. C. Ota-
ham in Camb. Essays, 1859, p. 160, Ac; camp,
Buckingham, Arab. Tribe, p. 171, 172).
In inferring the plan and arrangement of ancient
Jewish or Oriental houses, as alluded to in Scrip-
ture, from existing dwellings in Syria, Egypt, and
the East in general, allowance must be made for
the difference in climate between' Egypt, Persia,
and Palestine, a cause from which would ptuum l
differences in certain cases of material and uunstr ee-
tion, as well as of domestic arrangement.
1. The bouses of the rural poor in Egypt, as
well as in most parts of Syria, Arabia, and Persia,
are for the most part mere huts of mud, or sun-
burnt bricks. In some parts of Palestine and
Arabia stone is used, and in certain districts eaves
in the rock are used as dwellings (Amos v. 11
BartleU, Watts, p. 117; Cavh). The '
Digitized by
Google
HOUSE
an saosJly of one story only, namely, the ground
loot, aud sometimes contain only one apartment.
Sometimes a small oourt for the cattle U attached ;
and iii some case* the cattle are boused in the same
building, or the people lire on a raised platform,
and the cattle round them on the ground (1 Sam.
xxviii. 24; Irby and Mangles, p. 70; JoUitte, Let-
ters, i. 43; Buckingham, Arab Tribe*, p. 170;
Burckhardt, Travel*, ii. 119). In Lower Egypt
the oxen occupy the width of the chamber farthest
from the entrance; it is built of brick or mud,
about four feet high, and the top in often used as
a sleeping place in winter. The windows are small
apertures high up in the walls, sometimes grated
with wood (Burckhardt, TrcastU, i. 241, ii. 101,
119, 301, 329; Uue, Mod Kg. i. 44). The roofs
are commonly but not always flat, and are usually
formed of a plaster of mud and straw laid upon
boughs or rafters; and upon the flat roofs, tents or
" booths " of boughs or rushes are often raised to
be used aa sleeping-places in summer (Irby and
A Neetonan house, with stages upon the roof for
(Ward. IKiuwi, 1. 177.)
Mangles, 71; Niebuhr, Dacr. pp. 49, 63; I-ayard,
.Via. tad Bab. p. 112; Nineveh, i. 176 ; Burckhardt,
Syria, p. 280; Travel*, i. 190; Van Egmont, ii. 32:
Malan, Magdala and Bethany, p. 15). To this de-
scription the houses of ancient Egypt aud also of
Assyria, as represented in the monuments, in great
measure correspond (Layard, Monument* of Nine-
sei, pL ii. pi. 49, 60; bas-relief in Brit Hus.
Assyrian room, No. 49; flrst Egypt, room, ease
17; Wilkinson, Ane. Kg.
L 13: Martineau. KatL
lift, 1. 19, 97). In the
towns the bouses of the
Inferior kind do not differ
much from the abore
description, but they an
sometimes of more than
•ne story, and the roof-tern
races are more carefully
eonatrneted. In Palestine
they are often of stone
(JoOifle, i. 28).
J. The difference be-
tween the poorest houses
> of the class next
HOtrsis nog
houses of the flrst rank. The prevailing plan of
eastern houses of this class presents, as was the
case in ancient Egypt, a frout of wall, whose blank
and mean appearance is usually relieied only by
the door and a few latticed and projecting windows
( View in Syria, ii. 25). Within this is t court
or courts with apartments opening into them.
Some of the finest houses in the East are to be
found at Damascus, where in some of them are
seven such oourts. Whon that are only two, tbt
innermost is the hareem, in which the women Mid
children live, and which is jealously secluded Iron:
the entrance of any man but the muter of the
house (Burckhardt, Travels i. 188; Van Egtnont
ii. 246, 253; Shaw, p. 207; Porter, Damatau, 1
34, 37, 60; Chardin. Voyage*, vi. 6; Lane, Mud.
Kg. i. 179, 207). Over the door is a projecting
window with a lattice more or leas elaborately
wrought, which, except in times of public oelebra
Assyrian bouse, Kt
younjik.
share them is greater than between these and the
Entrance to house lu Cairo.
Enptiatu.)
(Uum, Modtrm
tions, is usually closed (2 K. ix. 30; Shaw, Trav-
eU, p. 207; Lane, Mod. Kg. i. 27). The doorway
or door liears an inscription from the Kuran, as
the ancient Egyptian houses had inscriptions over
their doors, and as the Israelites were directed to
write sentences from the Iaw over their gates.
[Gate.] The entrance is usually guarded within
from sight by a wall or some arrangement of the
passages. In the passage is a stone seat for tlie
porter and other servants (l-ane. Mod. Kg. i. 32;
Shaw, Travel*, p. 207 : Chardin, Vvyage*,\y.\\i,
Beyond this passage is an open court like the
Roman impluvium, often paved with marble. Into
this the principal apartments look, and are either
open to it in front, or are entered froir tt by doors.
An awning is sometimes drawn over the oourt, and
the floor strewed with carpets on festive occasions
(Shaw, p. 208). On the ground floor there is
generally an apartment for male visitors, called
mandarah, having a portion of the floor sunk be-
low the rest, called durkd'ah. This is often paved
with marble or colored tiles, and has In the centre
a fountain. The rest of the floor Is a raised phi-
form called leeadn, with a mattress and cushion*
at the back on each of the three aides. This seal
or sofa is called drewdn. fererr person on entrust
Digitized by
Google
1104 HOUSE
lata off hit •boa on the durka'ak before (tapping
an Um Itewan (Ex. iii. 6; Jo«h. v. 15; Lake vii.
M). The ceiling! over the Uewan end dvtkd'aJi
an often richly paneled and ornamented (Jer. xxii.
14). [Ckilisg.] The •tain to the upper apart-
ment* are in Syria usually in a eoruer of the court
(Hobinson, iii. 309). When there U no upper
story the lower rooms an usually loftier. In Per-
sia they an open from top to bottom, and only
divided from the court by a low partition (Wilkin-
son, Am. Eg. 1. 10; Chardin, It. 119; Burckhardt,
TrmtU, i. 18, 19; Vie** « Syria, I 66).
r eoait of house io Cairo, with Mak'ad.
(lane, Mortem Sgypiiant.)
Around port, if not the whole, of the court u a
verandah, often nine or ten feet deep, over which,
when there ia more than one floor, runt a second
gallery of like depth with a balustrade (Shaw, p.
808). Hearing in mind that the reception room is
HOCU
raised above the level of the court (Chardta, n
118; \laet in Syria, 1. 66), we may, in erplalnlng
the circumstances of the miracle of the paralytic
(Hark ii. 8; Luke 1. 18), suppose, (1.) that our
l/>rd was standing under the verandah, and the
people in front in the court. The bearers of the
sick man ascended the stairs to the roof of th*
house, and taking off a portion of the boarded cor
ering of the verandah, or removing the awning
over the im/Uueimn, to p.ioov, in the former cae»
let down the bed tkrouyk the verandah roof, or ir
the latter, ikncn by any of the roof, 8ii t£> Ktoi
lutv, and deposited it before the Saviour (Shaw,
p. 212)." (2.) Another explanation presents itself
in considering the room where the company wen
assembled as the vr<p<for, and the roof opened for
the bed to be the true roof of the house (Trench,
iiv-ade; p. 1»9; Ijuie, Mat Eg, i. 39). (8.)
And one still more simple is found in regarding
the house as one of the rude dwellings now to be
seen near the Sea of Galilee, a mere room " 10 or
12 feet high and as many or more square," with
no opening except the door. The roof, used as a
sleeping-place, is reached by a ladder from the out-
side, and Uie bearers of the paralytic, unable tc
approach the door, would thus have ascended the
roof, and having uncovered it U(opufairej), let
him down into the room where our Lord was
(Malan, I. c.).»
The stain to the upper apartments or to Uk
Court ot
at AnOocb.
« * «•• a full statement of this latter view in Nor-
ton's Ufflmmw of lot GosptU, 2d ed., 1. p. exii. IT.
(AddlL Notes), or In his Trtuu. tf tht Qotptl), with
Notes, B. 218 I., 249 t. A.
• Another view ma; be stated. Those who brought
the paralytic, finding it Impossible to reach the Saviour
In the room where he was teaching (aee especially
Mark II. 2), may have hastened at once to the court of
an adjacent house. Taking advantage there of the
stairs leading up thence to the roof of that next house,
tavr eould have cro ss ed to the roof (separated from
Ka-ah of house Io Cairo.
roof are often shaded by vines or creeping plants
and the courts, especially the inner ones, planted
with trees. The court has ~Aen a well or 'uik in
lit (IV exxviii. 3; 2 Sam. xvii. 18; liusseil, Altfj».
the other. If at all, by only a low parapet) which was
over the room into which they 1st down the bad be-
fore Jesus, through the tiles, broken up lor that pro-
pose. Stairs on the outside of houses are almost un-
known In Palestine at present, and wonld only exprs*
the Inmates to violence and pillage. The healing of
the paralytic took place at Capernaum (Mark tt. 1'
where the houses might he expected to be that eon.
ttguous to each other. Thomson informs us (Lamt
ami Book, Ii. 6 II.) how the ordinary Arab house* an
constructed in the last. at.
Digitized by
Google
HOTJBK
i. 84, 89; WHklnsoE, I. 8, 8; Lane, Mod. Eg. 1.
89; Haw fa S^to, i. 56).
Besides the mawiiraA, there u sometime* a seo-
ond room, either on the ground or the upper floor,
celled hd'ah, fitted with tkaediu, and at the cor-
ner* of these rooms portions taken off and inclosed
form retiring rooms (Lane, i. 39; Russell, L 31,
13).
When there is no second floor, but more than
sue court, the women's apartments, hareem, harem,
or karam { , t v ~- and »«^> $tchuUa\ or pro-
Ubiitd, with which ma; be compared the Hebrew
Armrm 11D1N (Stanley, 8. 4 P. App. § 82), are
nui&Uy in the second court; otherwise they form a
separate building within the general inclosure, or
are above on the first floor (line, Mod. Ey. i. 179,
837; VUw$ in Syria, i. 56). The entrance to the
harem is crossed by no one but the master of the
house and the domestics belonging to the female
establishment. Though this remark would not
apply in the same degree to Jewish habits, the pri-
vacy of the women's apartments may possibly be
indicated by the " inner chamber " (^TTJ : ra/u-
tior- cubiadum) resorted to as a hiding-place (1
K. xx. 30, xxii. 35; see Jodg. xr. 1). Solomon,
in his marriage with a foreigner, introduced also
r of house (harem) in
foreign usage in this respect, which was carried
further in subsequent times (1 K. vil. 8 ; 2 K. xxiv.
IS). [Women.] The harem of the Persian
monarch (D^ttb JT3 : iywautir' domiufem-
avtma) is noticed in tile book of Esther (U. 3).
When there is an upper story, the kd'ak forms
the most important apartment, and thus probably
answers to the iwtpfoy, which was often the
u guest-chamber " (Luke xxii. 12 [Iw&ywov] ; Acta
i. 13, ix. 37, xx. 8; Burekhardt, Trim. i. 154).'
The windows of the upper rooms often project one
•r two feet, and form a kiosk or latticed chamber,
the ceilings of which are elaborately ornamented
(Lane, L 97; Russell, i. 103; Burekhardt, Trav.
i. 190). [Window.] Such may hare been the
u chamber on the wall " (n*bp_ : irr, a f y : eowao-
• • " At Ramlfk," says Dr. Robinsoi 'BM. Rts. il.
SB, M ed.), »• wer» " eondusted to an ipper room,'
a large airy hall, forming a sort of third story, npon
be flat roof of the house. n The prophet's chamber
Shunam, 8 K 't. 10 ("co th. well," A. V., bi-
^toaa Mj » wall-chamber, i. t. one rarrounded with & | ropta (1 K. xvll. 19}.
•f H, daly nmtbad), was ue doubt the modern 'afltycA
70
HOUSK 1106
shVm; G«s. p. 1030) made, or rather set apart mr
EUsha, by the Shunammite woman (3 K. ir. 10,
11). So also the "summer parlor" of Egkm
(Judg. iil. 20, 23, but see Wilkinson, 1. 11), the
"loft" of the widow of Zarephath (1 K. xrii. 19).
The "lattice" (nj3^ : SumwroV: canceM)
through which Ahaziah fell, perhaps belonged to
an upper chamber of this kind (3 K. i. 8), as also
the "third loft" (rflartyov) from which Euty
cbus fell (Acts xx. A; comp. Jer. xxli. 13). There
are usually no special bedrooms in eastern houses,
and thus the room in which Ish-bosheth was mur
dered was probably an ordinary room with a
deewdn, on which he was sleeping during the heal
of the day (2 Sam. ir. 5, 6; Lane, i. 41).
Sometimes the dttvxm is raised sufficiently to
allow of cellars underneath for stores of all kinds
(Tuucia, Matt. xxiv. 26 ; Russell, 1. 33).
The outer doors
are closed with a
wooden lock, but in
some cases the
apartment'' are di-
vided from each
other by curtains
only (I-uie, i. 42;
Chardin, iv. 123 ;
Kussell, i. 21).
Tli ere are no
chimneys, but fire
is made when re-
quired with char-
coal in a chafing-
dish; or a fire of
wood might be Ida-
died in the open
court of the house
(Luke xxii. 55 ; Rat-
sell, i. 31; Lane, L
41; Chardin, iv.
120). [Coal,
Amer. ed.]
Besides the man-
darah, some houses
in Cairo have an
apartment called
mik'ad, open in
front to the court,
with two or more
arches, and a rail-
IIoom fea a street at Oaten.
(Tram Roberts.)
lag; and a pillar to support the wall above (Lane,
i. 38). It was in a chamber of this kind, probably
one of the largest size to be found in a palace, that
our Lord was being arraigned before the high-priest,
at the time when the denial of Him by St Peta
took place. He " turned and looked " on Peter as
he stood by the fire in the court (Luke xxii. 56,
61; John xviii. 25), whilst He himself was in th»
" hall of Judgment," the mnk'nd. Such was the
" porch of judgment " built by Solomon (1 K. vil.
7 ), which finds a parallel in the golden alcove of
Mohammed Uzbek (Ibn Batuta, 7Vat>. 76, ed.
Lee).
(the Hebrew word i* the same). " It is the most de-
sirable part of the establishment, is best fitted up, and
Is still given to guests who an to be treated with
honor " (Thomson, Lnml and Book, I. 285). This Is
the name also of Elijah's room (" loft," A. T.) at 8»
a
Digitized by
Google
1106 HOUSE
Before quitting the interior of the house we may
s b s um that, on the deacon, the corner is the place
of honor, which is never quitted by the master of
the house in receiving strangers (UusseU, i. 37;
Malan, Tyre and Sidua, p. 38)." The roofs of
eastern houses are, as has been said, mostly flat,
though there are sometimes domes over some of the
rooms. The flat portions are plastered with a oom-
poiition of mortar, tar, ashes, and aaud, which in
time becomes very hard, but when not laid on at
the proper season is apt to crack in winter, and the
rain is thus admitted. In order to prevent this,
every roof is provided with a roller, which is set
at work after rain. In many cases the terrace
roof is little better than earth rolled hard. On ill-
compacted roofs grass is often found springing into
a short-lived existence (l'ruv. xix. 18, xxvii. 15;
Pa. exxix. 6, 7; Is. xxxvii. 27; Shaw, p. 310;
Lane, i. 27; Kobinson, iii. 39, 44, 60).
In no point do oriental domestic habits differ
more from European than in the use of the roof.
Its flat surface is made useful for various house-
hold purposes, ss drying corn, hanging up linen,
and preparing figs and raisins (Shaw, p. 311;
Burckhardt, Tt-av. i. 191). The roofs are used as
places of recreation in the evening, and often as
sleeping-places at night (2 Sam. xi. 2, xvi. 22; Dan.
iv. 29; 1 Sam. ix. 25, 26;* Job xxvii. 18; Prov.
xxi. 9; Shaw, p. 211; Kussell, i. 35; Chardin, iv.
116; Leyard, JVinereA, i. 177). They were also
used as places for devotion, and even idolatrous
worship (Jer. xxxii. 29, xix. 13; 2 K. xxiii. 13;
Zeph. i. 5; Acts x. 9). At the time of the Feast
of Tabernacles booths were erected by the Jens on
the tops of their houses, as in the present day huts
of boughs are sometimes erected on the housetops
as sleeping-places, or places of retirement from the
heat in summer time (Neh. i iii. 16 ; Burckhardt,
Syria, p. 880). As among the Jews the seclusion
<f women was not carried to the extent of Mohara-
nedan usage, it is probable that the housetop was
made, as it is among Christian inhabitants, more a
place of public meeting both for men and women,
than is the ease among Mohammedans, who care-
fully seclude their roofs from inspection by parti-
tions (Burckhardt, Trav. i. 191; oomp. Wilkinson,
i. 33). The Christians at Aleppo, in Russell's time,
lived contiguous, and made their housetops a means
of mutual communication to avoid passing through
the streets in time of plague (Kussell, i. 35). In
the same manner the housetop might be made a
means of escape by the stairs [i. e. from the roof
into the court] by which it was reached without
entering any of the apartments of the house (Matt,
xxiv. 17, x. 27; Luke xii. 3).
Both Jews and heathens were in the habit of
wailing publicly on the housetops (Is. xv. 3, xxii.
1 ; Jer. xlviii. 38). I'rotectiou of the roof by par-
apets was enjoined by the Ijhv (Deut xxii. 8). The
parapets thus constructed, of which the types may
be seen in ancient Egyptian houses, were sometimes
if open ivork, and it is to a fall through, or over
one of these that the injury by which Ahaziah suf-
fered is sometimes ascribed (Shaw, p. 211). To
pass over roofs tor plundering purposes, as well as
a • Heoae In Am. iii. 12 " the comer of a bed "
the "divan " being meant then) Is represented as the
p lae s oooupied by the pruud nobles of Samaria, from
whlnh only a miserable remnant of them would bs
sWe to escape in the day or calamity. H.
• •The A. V. (1 Sam Ix. 25) states mwoly that
HOUSE OF GOD
for safety, would be no difficult matter (Joel H »).
In ancient Egyptian and also in Assyrian houses a
sort of raised story was sometimes built above the
roof, and in the former an open chamber, roofed m
covered with awning, was sometimes erected on tha
housetop (Wilkinson, i. 9; Layard, Afon. of Ni»
ii. pi. 49, 60).
There are usually no. fire-p.aces except in the
kitchen, the furniture of which consists of a sort
of raised platform of brick with receptacles in
it for fire, answering to the "boiling places"
(/Tlbtp59 : fuytiptTa: cunms) of Esckiel (xlvL
23; Lane, i. 41; Ges. p. 249).
Special apartments were devoted in larger houses
to winter and summer uses (Jer. xxxvi. 83; Am.
iii 15; Chardin, iv. 119).
TTie ivory house of Ahab was probably a palace
largely ornamented with inlaid ivory. [Palace.]
The circumstance of Samson's pulling down the
bouse by means of the pillars, may be explained
by the fact of the company being assembled on
tiers of balconies above each other, supported by
central pillars on the basement; when these were
pulled down the whole of the upper floors would
fall also (Judg. xvi. 26; Shaw, p. 311).
Houses for jewels and armor were built and fur-
nished under the kings (2 K. XX. 18). Tha draught-
house (rtWnrin : Kanfiv- labimi) was doubt-
less a public latrine, such as exists in modern
eastern cities (2 K. x. 27; Kussell, i. 84).
Leprosy in the house was probably a nitrons
efflorescence on the walls, which was injurious to
the salubrity of the house, and whose removal was
therefore strictly enjoined by the Law (Lev. xiv.
34, 55; Kitto, Phy. Geogr. of Pal p. 113;
Winer, s. v. Hauser).
The word fT2 is prefixed to words i^-ffHptmg
a local name, as Bethany, Beth-boron, etc. In
modern names it is represented by Beit, as Beit-
lahm. ' H. W. P.
• HOUSEHOLD, CdESAR'S. [Cjui'i
Household.]
• HOUSEHOLDER. [Goodmax.]
• HOUSE OF GOD. This expression oc-
curs in Judg. xx. 18 (A. V.), where no doubt iTSl
7{J, instead of being translated, should be retained
so a proper name, i. e. Bethel; so also, ver. 86 and
xxL 8. Bethel on the confines of Judah and Benja-
min is the place there meant. Tha Ark of the
Covenant having been brought to Bethel from Shl-
loh just at that time, for the purpose (it may be)
of more convenient access, the other tribes went up
thither to " ask counsel " of Jehovah in regard to
the war on which they were about to enter against
the Benjamites. The Ark of the Govt nant is found
again not long after this in its proper sanctuary at
ShUoh (1 Sam. i. 3). That in Judg. xx. 18 Beth*;
denotes the place where the Ark then was, and not
the Ark itself as called "the house of God," it
evident from Judg. xx. 27, where the narrative dis-
tinguishes the two from each other, and recognises
gunnel and Saul had a conversation or private Intsr*
view « on tha roof." Bot it appears from the Hebrew
(ver. 26) that Saul, at least, slept than during the M.
lowing night; tor early the next rooming Sanaa
called to him on the roof to arias and nsasss Ms
Journey M-
Digitized by
Google
HTJKKOK
As ure ss um of the Ark at Betoe) aa the result of
i special emergency. H.
HtTK'KOK Ci"r ["K»n, roolKxwiiwlum,
Dietr. ; oSfca, Flint] : 'Iojca-a; Ajex. Ik»k: ff«c-
uca), a place on the boundary of Naphtali (Joah.
xix. 34), named next to Aznolh-Tabor. It ia men-
tioned by Euaebius and Jerome ( Onomast. "Icoc "),
but in such a maimer as to show that they knew
nothing of it but from the Text. By hap-Parchi
in 1320, and in our own timea by Wolcott and
by Robinson, Hukkok has been recovered in YAkuk,
a Tillage in the mountains of Napbtali, west of the
upper end of the Sea of Galilee, about 7 miles
8. 8. Vf. of Safed, and at the head of Wady-eL
AmAd. An ancient Jewish tradition locates here
the tomb of Habakkuk (Zunz, in B. Tudela, ii.
491; Sebwerx, p. 189; Kobinaon, iii. 81, 82).
G.
BVKOK Ipf^n [perh. ettaMuked, or tn-
</raved~\: 4 'A*dx; [Vat. Ikojc;] Alex. Uunut;
[Comp. Aid. 'IksikO Hwac), a name which in 1
Chr. vi. 75 is substituted for Hsxkath in the par-
allel list of the Gershouito cities in Asher, in Joah.
xxi.
HTJL (VlP [circle, region, FUrst] : 'OuAi [hi
1 Chr., Rom. Vat omit, Alex. OvS- Hid]), the
second son of Aram, and grandson of Shem (Gen.
X. 23). The geographical position of the people
whom be represents is not well decided. Josephus
{Ant, i. 6, § 4) and Jerome fix it in Armenia;
Schnlthess (Parad. p. 262) on etymological grounds
(aa though the name = /VT, until) proposes the
southern part of Mesopotamia; ran Boblen (/«-
tnd. to Gen. ii. 249) placet it in the neighborhood
ef Chakuea. The strongext evidence is in favor
of the district about the roots of 1-ebsaoii, where
the names Ard-et-llilth, a district to the north of
Lake Herom ; OtKaBa, a town noticed by Josephus
(AtU. xt. 10, § 3), between Galilee and Trachonitis;
Golan, and its modern form DjimlAn, bear some
affinity to the original name of Uul, or, aa it should
rather be written, CAW. W. L. B.
HTJI/DAH (rPJ^Jl [wenieZ, Furst]: 'OA-
Sar- [ffolda,] OUn), a prophetess, whose husband
Shauum wss keeper of the wardrobe in the time
of king Josiah, and who dwelt in the suburb (Ros-
snmuDer, ad Zeph. i. 10) of Jerusalem. While
Jeremiah waa still at Anathoth, a young man un-
known to nunc, Huldah waa the moat distinguished
person far prophetic gifts in Jerusalem ; and it was
to her that Josiah had recourse when Hilkiah found
• book of the I*w, to procure an authoritative
opinion on it (2 K. xxii. 14; 2 Chr. xxxiv. 22).
W. T. b.
HTJMTAH (HEOn [phcecfli»mh,Gm.i
fartrem, FUrst]: Ei/ut; Alex. Xa/tpora: Atk-
asatin), a city of Judah, one of those in the moun-
tain-district, the next to Hebron (Josh. xt. 64).
It waa not known to Euaebius and Jerome (see
OmmnsHam, " Ammatha "), nor baa it since been
There is some resemblance between the
and that of Kimath (Ki/utt), one of the
places added in the Vat. LXX. to the list in the
Hebrew text of 1 Sam. xxx. 27-31. G.
HUNTING. The objects for which hunting
j practiced, indicate the various conditions oi so-
4sty and the piogi ess of civ'lizatiov Hunting,
■ • natter of necessity, wheti-a for the extormi-
HTJNTINO HOT
nation of dangerous beasts, or for procuring suste-
nance, betokens a rude and semi-civilized state;
ss an amusement, it betokens an advanced state-
In the former, personal prowess and physical
strength are the qualities which elevate a mac
above his fellows and fit him for dominion, ana
hence one of the greatest heroes of antiquity is de-
scribed as a " mighty hunter before the Lord "
(Gen. x. 9), while IshmaeL the progenitor of a wild
race, was famed aa an archer (Gen. xxi. 20), and
Esau, holding a similar position, was "a cunning
hunter, a man of the field " (Gen. xxv. 27 ). 1 be
latter state may be exemplified, not indeed from
Scripture itself, but from contemporary records.
Among the accomplishments of Herod, bis skill in
the chase is particularly noticed ; be kept a leguUl
stud and a huntsman (Joseph. Ant. xvi. 10, j 8),
followed up the sport in a wild country (Ant. »v.
7, § 7) which abounded with stags, wild asses, aal
bears, and is said to have killed as many as forty
head in a day (B. J. i. 21, § 13). The wealthy in
Egypt and Assyria followed the sports of the field
with great rest; they had their preserves for the
express purpose of preserving and hunting game
(Wilkinson's Anc JCgypL i. 215; Xen. C'yrqp. i.
4, §§ 5, 14), and drew from hunting scenes subjects
for decorating the walls of their buildings, and even
the robes they wore on state occasions.
The Hebrews, as a pastoral and agricultural
people, were not given to the sports of the field ;
the density of the population, the earnestness of
their character, and the tendency of their ritual
regulations, particularly those affecting food, all
combined to discourage the practice of bunting;
and perhaps the examples of Ishmael and Esau were
recorded with the same object. There was no lack
of game in Palestine; on their entrance into the
land, the wild beasts were so numerous as to be
dangerous (Ex. xxiii, 29); the utter destruction of
them was guarded against by the provisions of the
Mosaic law (Ex. xxiii. 11 ; Lev. xxv. 7). Some of
the fiercer animals survived to a late period, as
lions (Judg. xiv. 5; 1 Sam. xvii. 34; 2 Sam. xxiii.
20; 1 K. xiii. 24, xx. 36), and bears (1 Sam. xvil.
34; 2 K. ii. 24); jackals (Judg. xt. 4) and foxes
(Cant. ii. 15) were also numerous; hart, roebuck,
and fallow deer (Ueut xii. 15; 1 K. iv. 23) formed
a regular source of sustenance, and were possibly
preserved in inclosures. The manner of fatehing
these animals was either by digging a pitfall
(rintn), which was the usual manner with the
larger animals, as the lion (2 Sam. xxiii. 20; Ea.
xix. 4, 8); or secondly by a trap (fl?), which waa
set under ground (Job xvill. 10), in the ran of
the animal (Pror. xxii. 6), and caught it by the
leg (Job xviii. 9); or lastly by the use of the net,
of which there were various kinds, as for the
gazelle (?) (Is. U. 20, A. V. "wild bull"), and
other animals of that class. [Nkt.] The method
in which the net was applied ia familiar to us from
the descriptions In Virgil (y£«, iv. 121, 151 ft".,
x. 707 ff.); it was placed across a ravine or narrow
valley, frequented by the animals for the sake of
water, and the game was driven in by the hunters
and then dispatched either with bow and am w, or
spears (comp. Wilkinson, I. 214). The game se-
lected was generally such as wss adapted for food
(Pror. xiL 27), and care wss taken to pour out tbi
blood of these as well ss of tame animals (law. xvil.
18).
Digitized by
Google
1108
HUPHAM
Bh-ds fanned an article of food among the He-
bnn (Lev. xvii. 18), and much skill ni exercised
in catching than. Tht fallowing ware the moat
ipproved method*. (1.) Tlie trap (ITS), which
oousisted of two parts, a net, attained over a frame,
and a stick to rapport it, but so placed that it
ihould give way at the alightest touch; the atick
cr springe was termed 07{71Q (Am. iii. 5, "gin;"
Pa. lzix. 22, "trap"); thia wa> the moat usual
method (Job xviii. 9; EccL U. 12; Prov. vii 23).
(2.) The snare (S N SS, from QD^, to braid; Job
iriii. 9, A. V. -'robber"), consisting of a eord
( /jn, Job xviii. 10; comp. Pa. xviii. 6, cxvi. 3,
exl. 5), so set as to catch the bird by the leg. (3.)
The net, which probably resembled those used in
Egypt, consisting of two sides or frames, over which
network was strained, and so arranged that they
could be closed by means of a eord : the Hebrew
names are various. [Net.] (4.) The decoy, to
which reference is made in Jer. ▼. 26, 27 — a cage
of a peculiar construction (31/3) — was filled
with birds, which acted as decoys; the door of the
cage was kept open by a piece of stick acting as a
springe (TTTttpB), and closed suddenly with a
clop (whence perhaps the term e'lib) on the en-
trance of a bird. The partridge appears to have
been used ss a decoy (Eeclus. xi. 30).
W. L. B.
HUTHAM (DWTI [protector, Kiirst; coatt-
itthabUant, Ges.]: LXX. omit in both MSS.;
[Comp. 'Ctyd/tO Hvphcm), a sou of Benjamin,
founder of the family (Mithpachnh) of the Hu-
FHAMiTEa (Num. xxvL 39). In the lists of Gen.
xhi. and 1 Chr. vii. the name is given as Hutpim,
which see.
HUTHAMITES, THB pEJJVTn: om.
in LXX.; [Comp. 6 'Cxpa/d:] f/upJtamila). Ue-
seendaiits of Hupham of the tribe of Benjamin
(Num. xxvi. 89). W. A. W.
HUPTAH (n§PI [covering, veiling]: 6
'Oripi; [Vat Oxyoe)4>a; Comp.] Alex. 'Otfxpi:
Hopi>ha), a priest in the time of David, to whom
•as committed the charge of the 13th of the 24
mines in the service of the bouse of God (1 Chr.
1DV. 13).
HTJPTIM (O^B ■* [protection, screen, Furst,
Ges.]: Gen. xlvi. 21; 1 Chr. vii. 19; in Geo.,
omitted in LXX. [Rom. Vat.], but Cod. Alex, has
(tytfur; in 1 Chr. vii. 12, 'Air«)fr, [Vat. Awf)«y,]
and in Cod. Alex. A£«iu; [ver. 15, Vat. Kfuptir,
Alex. hty*tr\\ the former is the correct form, If,
ss we read in Num. xxvi. 89, the name was Hu-
pham: Ophim, [fiapkam, ffapphim]), head of a
Benjamite family. According to the text of the
I.XX. in Gen., a son of Bela [Bela; Becker];
but 1 Chr. vii. 12 tells us that he was son of Ir, or
W (ver. 7), who was one of the five sons of Bela.
According to Num. xxvi., the Huphamites were
sue of the original families of the tribe of Benja-
min. The sister of Huppim married into the tribe
< Mauasseb (1 Chr. vii. 15). A. C. H.
HUB C"*in [hole, hence a pruon\: Bur). L
("tV< Joseph. *fl«of.) A man who is mentioned
with Moses and Aaron on the occasion of the battle
rith Amalek at Rephidim (Ex. xvii. 10), when with
HUB
Aaron he stayed up the lianas if ICoaae (It). Hi
is mentioned again in xxiv. 14, ai being, with Asian,
left in charge of the people by Hoses during ha
ascent of Sinai. It would appear from this that hi
must have been a person connected with the family
of Hoses and of some weight in the camp. Tht
latter would follow from the former. The Jewish
tradition, as preserved by Josephus (Ant iii. 2, § 4)
is that be was the husband of Miriam, and (iii. 3,
§ 1) that he was Identical with —
2. ('Op.) The grandfather of Beetled, tbt
chief artificer of the tabernacle— "son oi Cri, son
of Hur — of the tribe of J udah" (Ex. xxxL 2, xuv.
80, xxxviii. 22), the full genealogy being given on
each occasion (see also 2 Chr. i. 5). In tbs lists
of the descendants of Judah in 1 Chr. the pedigree
is more fully preserved. Hur there appears as out
of the great family of Pharez. He was the son ol
Caleb ben-Hezron, by a second wife, Ephrath (1L
19, 20; comp. 5, also hr. 1), the first fruit of the
marriage (ii. 50, iv. 4), and the father, besides Uri
(ver. 20), of three sons, who founded the town* of
Kirjath-jearim, Beth-lehem, and Beth-gader (51).
Hur's connection with Betb-lehem would seem to
have been of a closer nature than with the others
of these places, for be himself is emphatically called
'< Abi-Bethlehem " — the " father of Bethlehem "
(iv. 4). Certainly Beth-lehem enjoyed, down to a
very late period, a traditional reputation for the
art* which distinguished his illustrious grandson.
Jesse, the father of David, is said to have been a
weaver of the vails of the sanctuary (Targ. Jonathan,
2 Sam. xxi. 19), and the dyers were still lingering
there when Benjamin of Tudela visited lWJilAii
in the 18th century.
In the Targum on 1 Chr. ii. 19 and iv. 4,
Ephrath is taken as identical with Miriam: but
thia would be to contradict the more trustworthy
tradition given above from Josephus.
In his comments on 1 Chr. iv. 1 ( Quasi. Bebr.
in Parakp.), Jerome overlooks the fact that the
five persons there named as " sons " of Judah are
really members of successive generations; and be
attempts, as his manner is, to show that eaeb of
them is identical with one of the immediate sons
of the patriarch. Hur he makes to be another
name for Onan.
3. (Otp; Joseph. Offset.) The fourth of the
five "king*" 03^9: LXX. and Joseph. AM.
It. 7, i 1, jBao-iXf i>) of Hldian, who were shin with
Balaam after the " matter of Peor " (Num. xxxL 8).
In a later mention of them (Josh. xiil. SI) they
are called "princes" O^B??! of Hidian *n«
"dukes" (*3*D3. not the word commonly ren-
dered "duke," but probably with the force of
dependence, see Keil ad loc. : LXX. trapa) of Sihov
king of the Amorites, who wss killed at the sany
time with them. No further light can be obtained
as to Hur.
*• «•*>; [Vat. Alex. FA. omit]) Father of
Rephalah, who was ruler of half of the environs
Cn^9, A. V. " part ") of Jerusalem, and assisted
Nehemiah in the repair of the wall (Neh. Iii. 9).
fi. The " son of Hur " — Ben-Chur — was com-
missariat ixffioer for Solomon in Mount Enhralg
(1 K. iv. 8). The LXX. (both HSS. [rather, Bom
and Alex.]) give the word Ben both in ttsurigina,
and its translated form (B««V — Alex. Bar — «Ai
'Of [Vat Boiwo for B. v(. "Of, '
Digitized by
Google
HTJRA1
tt»4f\), a not infrequent custom with them.
Josephna (A:U. viii. 2, § 3) hi* 06ms as the name
of the officer himself. The Vulg. (Benhur) follows
the Hebrew, and is in turn followed in the margin
of the A. V. It is remarkable that the same form
Is observed in giving the names of no lest than fire
oat of the twelve officers in this lbt 6.
HUTtAI [2 iyL] Onn [fret, noble, Fttrst:
or = """Tin, fineiMoertcer, Ges.] : Oupl ; [V**- FA.
Oubw:] Bitrai), one of David's guard — Hural of
the torrents of Gaash — according to the list of 1
Chr. ri. 32. In the parallel catalogue of 2 Sam.
Dili the R is changed to D, as is frequently the
ease, anil the name stands as Hiddai. Kennlcott
has examined the discrepancy, and, influenced by
toe readings of some of the MSS. of the LXX.,
decides in favor of Hurai as the genuine name
(Diftrt. p. 194).
HTJ'RAM (DTPin [nobk-born] : Obpip i
[Vat flip;] Alex. Imp: ffurtm). L A Benjamite;
son of Beta, the first-born of the patriarch (1 Chr.
viiL 5).
3. The form in which the name of the king of
Tyre in alliance with David and Solomon — and
elsewhere given as Hiram — appears in Chronicles,
(a.) At the time of David's establishment at Jeru-
salem (1 Chr. xiv. 1). In the A. V. the name is
Hiram, in accordance with the Cetib at original
Hebrew text (Q"1 , n) ; but In the marginal cor-
rection of the Hasorets (ATeri) it Is altered to
Huram (Qlin), the form which is maintained
in all its other occurrences in these books. The
LXX. XtifKbi [r'A. Xuxut], Vulg. Hiram, and
Targuui, all agree with the Cetib. (6.) At the
secession of Solomon (2 Chr. ii. 3, 11, 12, viii. 2,
18, ix. 10, 21: in each of these cases also the
LXX. have Xipd>, [Vat. and] Alex. Xeipap, Vulg.
tftrnm).
3. The same change occurs in Chronicles in the
name of Hiram the artificer, which is given as
Huram in the following places: 2 Chr. ii. 13, ir.
11, 16. In the first and last of these a singular
title is given him — the word Ab, '* father" —
- Huram my father," « and " Huram his father."
No doubt this denotes the respect and esteem in
which he was held, according to the similar custom
of the people of the East at the present day.* There
also the LXX. [Rom. Xipdji, Vat. and Alex.
Xtifafi] and Vulgate follow the form Hiram.
HU'RI Or*" 1 [finen-teenrer] : [obpl. Vat
Oapet-] Buri),\ Gadite; father of AbibaiL a chief
an in that tribe (1 Chr. v. 14).
HUSBAND. [Mabiuage.]
HV8HAH (ntpn [We]: 'CUriv; [Camp.
Obai; Aid. 'OtrdO Hurt), a name which occurs
in the genealogies of the tribe of Judah (1 Chr. ir.
) — " Exer, father of Hushah." It may weD be
oe" name of a place, like Etem, Uedor, Betb-lehem,
■od others, in the preceding and succeeding verses;
HUSHXM
1100
bat we have no means of ascertaining the fact,
since It occurs nowhere else. For a patronymic
possibly derived from this name see Hcbhathitb.
HCSHAI [2 syl.] CWTt [ouict, rapid]:
Xoval [Vat -o-ei, and so often Alex.], LXX. ana
Joseph.: Chtaai), an Archite, i. e. possibly ai
Inhabitant of a place called Erec (2 Sam. xv. 32 ffi,
xvi. 16 &*.). He is called the "friend" of David
(2 Sam. xv. 37; in 1 Chr. xxvii. 33, the word is
rendered " companion; " comp. Joseph. Ant. vii. 9,
§ 2: the LXX. has a strange confusion of Archite
and ipxiertupot = chief friend). To him David
confided the delicate and dangerous part of a pre
tended adherence to the cause of Absalom. His
advice was preferred to that of AbithopheL ninl
speedily brought to pass the ruin which it medi-
tated.
We are doubtless correct in assuming that the
Hushai, whose son Baana was one of Solomon's
commissariat officers (1 K. iv. 16), was the famous
counsellor of bis father. Hushai himself was prob-
ably no longer living; at any rate his office was
filled by another (comp. ver. 6). [Akchitk.]
T. e. a
HU'SHAM (Dirri, in Chron. Dtjfrn [Aoss-
ing, stcift\: 'Acja,[in 1 Chr.,] 'A<ro>, [«nd so
Alex, in Gen. :] ffutnm), one of the kings of Edom,
before the Institution of monarchy in Israel (Gen.
xxxvi. 34, 36; 1 Chr. i. 49, 46). He is described
as " Husbam of the land ui the Temanite; " and
be succeeded Jobab, who is taken by the LXX. in
their addition to the Book of Job as Identical with
that patriarch.
HU'SHATHTTE, THE (V^rT?, and
twice in Chron. \"$nn [pair, from ntfiT!,
see above] : i 'AffrorvW, ObtraBl, TLaocaii, [etc. ;]
de fltunti, ffmnthUet), the designation of two of
the heroes of David's guard. L Smbechai (2
Sam. xxi. 18; 1 Chr. xi. 29, xx. 4, xxvii 11). In
the last of these passages he is said to have be-
longed to the Zarhites, that is (probably) the
descendants of Zerah of the tribe of Judah. So
far this is in accordance with a connection between
this and Hosiiah, a name, apparently of a place,
in the genealogies of Judah. Josephus, however
(Ant. vii. 12, § 2), mentions Sibbechai as a HhV
tlte.
2. ['Aissfrnrr; Vat •««-; Atax. Aow9tiTUt:
d» Htunti.] Mebuhxai (2 Sam. xxiii. 27). Then
seems no doubt that this name is a mere corrnptioo
of Sibbechai.
HU'SHIM (B*Brn [the ka*tbtg, Furst;
hatUe (pL) Ges.] : 'Avi/i 4 - Brum). L In Gen. xhi.
23, " the children [sons] 0.5?) of Dan " are snid
to have been Hushtm. The name is plural, as if
of a tribe rattier than an individual, which perhaps
is sufficient to account for the use of the plural • in
" children." In the list of Num. xxvi. the name
is changed to Shuham,
Huahiim figures prominently in the Jewish tradt-
(<rvyyn^t, ver. 81/ and "avtber" (82). Somewhat
analogous, too, is the dm of terms of ralaaonshlp —
" brother," " cousin " — m legal and oodal doeo-
menta of our own and other ooontrlas.
e Sen. xxxvi. 25, adduced by Knobel ad toe as t
I (Oen. xlv. 8), " Ood hath made m» ' punlfe ase to this, Is hardly so, since a daughter of
» fatter mnto Pharaoh." Compare also 1 Maee j/ Anah Is given a* w»U as his son, and the wot* Aw
« The A. T. of 2 Chr. it. 18 renders the words " of
<tur*m my xither's," meaning tbe lata king ; bot this
■ »i j, and the Hebrew will weU bear th*
feodsnog green aoovo.
» Analogous to this, though not exactly similar, It
Digitized by
Google
1110 HUSKS
Mem of the recognition of Joseph, and of Jacob's
eorial at Hebron. See the quotations from the
Midnub in Weil's Bib. Legend*, p. 88 note, and
the Targum Pseudojon. on Geo. L 18. In the
latter he is the executioner of Esau.
8. OWn (i. e. Chusshim: 'Atr&p.; Alex. Ao-o0:
ffruhn), a member of the genealogy of Benjamin
(1 Chr. vii. 12); and here again apparently (as the
text now stands) the plural nature of the name is
recognized, and Hushim is stated to be "the sons
(Ben,.) of Aher." (See Bertheau in Exeg. Handb.
ad toe.)
HUZZAB
i»med St John's Bread, from a tradition that Uh
Baptist lived upon its fruit in the wilderness.
w. l. a
* The carob-tree is very common also in tbt
Greek islands, and its fruit is still in great request
there as a nutritious article for fattening hum.
It may be seen exposed for sale in the markets at
Smyrna and Athens. The writer has seen it as
far north as Trieste, on the Gulf of Venice. The
pod, though considerably larger, resembles very
much that of our common locust-tree. It contains
a sweetish pulp when tender, but soon becomes dry
and hard, with small seeds, which rattle in the pod
3. (D^ttfan, and D^tC'lT: 'CUrly; [Vat Imrtr, WDen shaken It emits a slight odor when first
IUrv„i] *Alex. riffi/a : Uutim, but in ver. H gathered, not a little oflensive to those unaccus
Mthiaim, by inclusion of the Hebrew particle.) , ton r !? 1 to "\ , , ., ..,..,
Hie name occurs again in the genealogy of Be.ua- T^ occasional use of this product for food (see
<niu, but there as that of one of the two wives of ! above) is not at variance with the parable.
Shaharaini (1 Chr. viii. 8), and the mother of two
9f his sons (11 ). In this case the plural significance
nf the name is not alluded to.
HI 'SKS. The word irspdVia, which our trans-
Ctmtania sititpta.
jrtors have rendered by the general term " husks "
(Luke xv. 18), describes really the fruit of a partic-
ular kind of tree, namely, the carob or teratoma
liliqun of botanists. This tree is very commonly
met with in Syria and Egypt; it produces pods,
shaped like a born (whence the Greek name), vary-
ing in length from II to 10 incites, and about a
hnger's breadth, or rather more. These pods, con-
taining a thick pithy substance, very sweet to the
taste, were eaten: and adorned food not only for
taltlj (Mishu. Shabb. 24, § 2), and particularly
pigs (Colum. It. R. vii. 9), but also for the poorer
glasses of the population (Hot. Ep. 11. 1, 123 ; Juv.
si. 68). The same uses of it prevail in the present
lay ; at the tree readily sheds its fruit, it forms a
i mode of feeding pigs. The tree is also
It n
not said there that the prodigal resorted to foul
eaten only by swine; but that in bis wretchedness,
baring no friend to give him anything better, he
was glad to share (/trctVpc t yn^iou) " the husks "
which the swine were eating, which he was sent
into the fields to watch. Yet the expression
here (gal ovSfU i&i&ov airrqi) some under-
stand differently, namely, that no one gave
the prodigal even so much as any of the
husks, and if be obtained them, it was with-
out pemiUsiou and by stealth. This is
Meyer's view (I.ukiit, p. 450, 4te Aufl.), and
it appears to be that of Luther. The Greek
does not require this interpretation ; for the
clause cited above (added in the Hebniati:
way by rai = oti) may assign a reason why
(there being no other alternative) the prodigal
must eat the husks to save himself from
starvation. The ellipsis of t! after SiSv/u is
very common (Matt. xix. 21, xxv. 8; Mark
vi. 37 ; Luke vi. 30, Ac). In the other cast
we supply KtpiruL as the object. H.
HUZ (YW [perh., fruitful in tret*,
Dietr.], i. 1. Us, in which form the name is
uniformly given elsewhere in the A. V.: OSf,
Alex. n{: Hut), the eldest son of Nahor and
Milcah (Gen. xxii. 21). [Buz; Uz.]
HUZ'ZAB (3?n [Assyrian, FUrst: see
infra]: f) foroVrao-it : mifcj captirut), ac-
cording to the general opinion of the Jews
(BuxtorTs Lexicon ad voc DU > ), was the
queen of Nineveh at the time when Kahuni
delivered his prophecy. 'litis view appears
to 1« followed in our version (Nah. ii. 7/,
and it has been recently defended by Ewald
Most modern expositors, however, incline to
the U lief that lluzznb here is not a proper name at
all, but the Hophal of the verb 2V3 («ee Buxtort,
as above; Gesenius, Lex. p. 903 ), and this is allowed
as possible by the alternative rendering in U e mar-
gin of our English Bible — " that which was es-
tablished." Still there are difficulties in the war of
such an understanding of the passage, and it is not
improbable that after all Huzzab may really be a
proper name. That a Ninevite queen otherwise
unknown should suddenly be mentioned, is indeed
exceedingly unlikely; for we cannot grant to Ewaln
that " the Ninevite queens were well nigh as power-
ful as the kings." But there is no reason why the
word should not be a gxgraphic term — an equiv-
alent or repre s en tat i ve jf Assyria, which the prophet
Digitized by
Google
BYMSK
iaaatads to threaten with captivity. Bmxab may
■Man " the Zne country," or the fertile tract out
af the Tigris, watered by the upper and lower Zab
riven (Zab Ala and £ao sis/ni). the A-diub-tat
of the geographer!. This province — the moat val-
uable part of Assyria — might well stand for Assyria
Itself, with which it ia identified by Pliny (H. N. v.
IS) and Ammianui (xxiii. 6). The name Zab, at
applied to the rivers, is certainly very ancient, being
found in the great inscription of Tiglath-Pileser I.,
which belongs to the middle of the twelfth century
a.0. G. K.
HYJENA. Authorities are at variance as to
whether the term Udbi'a (5*0^) in Jer. xiL 9
■team a "hyasna," as the LXX. has it, or a
« speckled bird," as in the A. V. The etymolog-
ical force of the word ia equally adapted to either,
the hysena being ttreaied. The only other instance
In which it occurs is as a proper name, Zeboim
(1 Sam. xiii. 18, " the valley of hyaanas," Aquila;
Neh. xi. 84). The Talmudical writers describe the
hysena by no lees than four names, of which MM' a
b one (Lewysohn, ZnBL $ 119). The opinions of
Bochart (Hitrvz. ii. 163) and Gesenius (Tht$. p.
1149) are in favor of the same view; nor could any
room for doubt remain, were it not for the word ail
(&*$; A.V. "bird") connected with it, which
in all other passages refers to a bird. The hysena
was common in ancient as in modern Egypt, and
ia constantly depicted on monuments (Wilkinson,
L 313, 325): it must therefore have been well
known to the Jews, if indeed not equally common
In Palestine." The sense of the passage in Jeremiah
Implies a fierce strong beast, not far below the lion
in the parallel 'passage (v. 8); the hyena fully
answers to this description. Though cowardly In
bit nature, he is very savage when once he attacks,
sod the strength of his Jaws is such that be can
crunch the thigh-bone of an ox (Livingstone's
TractU, p. 600). [Zeboim.] W. L. B.
HYMEN^TUa
1111
* The etymological affinity of the Arable
C? 6
ought to deeid? that the animal intended ia the
hysena. This animal is common in Palestine and
Syria. G. E. P.
HYDASTES (TBAnrwi : [Jadamm] ), a river
noticed in Jud. i. 6, in connection with the
Euphrates and Tigris. It is uncertain what river
is referred to: the well-known Hydaspes of India
(the Jihm of the Pimji) ia too remote to accord
with the other localities noticed in the context
We may perhaps identify it with the Choaspes of
8oaiana. W. L. B.
HYMBN-flniS [A. V. Hymene'us] (Tjt/.
mi«f), the name < t a person occurring twice in the
eorrespondence between St. Paul and Timothy; the
first time classed with Alexander, and with him
"delivered to Satan, that they might learn not to
Blasphem e'' (1 Tim. i. 30); snd the second time
dasaied with l'hiletus, and with him charged with
baring "erred concerning the truth, saying that
the resurrection Is past already." and: thereby
•• overthrown the faith of some ' (3 Tim. 11. 17,
tt). These latter expressions, coupled with "the
shipwreck of hitb " attributed to Hymensras in
* Prat Stanley records (X *■ P. p. 16x, nou) that
teoalv wild animal he saw hi Palatum wn '
the context of the former passage (ver. 19), surety
warrant our understanding both passages of the
same person, notwithstanding the interval between
the dates of the two letters. When the first was
written he had already made one proselyte; before
the second was penned he had seduced another;
and if so, the only points further to be considered
are, the error attributed to him, and the sentence
Imposed upon him.
I. The error attributed to him was one that had
been in part appropriated from others, and has
frequently been revived since with additions. What
initiation was to the Pythagoreans, wisdom to the
Stoics, science to the followers of Plato, contempla-
tion to the Peripatetics, that " knowledge " (■year
(rit) was to the Gnostics. As there were likewise
in the Greek schools those who looked forward to a
complete restoration of all things (amtari/maa,
v. Heyne ad Virg. Ed. iv. 6, corop. j£n. vi. 745))
so there was " a regeneration " (Tit. iii. 6; Matt,
xix. 38), " a new creation " (3 Cor. v. 17, see Alford
ad foe. ; Kev. xxi. 1 ), ''a kingdom of heaven and
of Messiah or Christ" (Matt, xiii.; Bev. vii.) — and
herein popular belief among the Jews coincided —
unequivocally propounded in the N. T. ; but Aers
with this remarkable difference, namely, that in a
great measure, it was present ss well as future —
the same thing in germ that was to be had in per-
fection eventually. " The kingdom of God It within
you," said our Lord (Luke ivli. 31 ). •' He that Is
spiritual judgeth all things,'' said St Paul (1 Cor.
ii. 15). " He that is bom of God cannot sin," said
St John (1 Ep. iii. 9). There are likewise two
deaths and two resurrections spoken of in the N.
T.; the first of each sort, that of the soul to and
from sin (John iii. 3-8), " the hour which now ia "
(ibid. v. 24, 36, on which tee Aug. Dt Civ. Dei,
xx. 6); the second, that of the body to and from
corruption (1 Cor. xv. 36-44; also John v. 38, 39),
which last is prospective. Now u the doctrine of
the resurrection of the body was found to involve
immense difficulties even in those early days (Act*
xvii. 83; 1 Cor. xv. 35; how keenly they were
pressed may be seen in St. Aug. Dt Civ. Dei, xxii.
12 ff. ) ; while, on the other hand, there was so great
a predisposition in the then current philosophy
(not even extinct now) to magnify the excellence
of the soul above that of its earthly tateraacle, it
was at once the easier and more attractive course
to insist upon and argue from the force of those
passages of Holy Scripture which enlarge upon the
glories of the spiritual life that now is, under Christ,
and to past over or explain away ailegorically all
that refers to a future state in connection with the
resurrection of the body. In this manner we may
derive the first errors of the Gnostics, if whim
Hymenaeus was one of the earliest. They were on
the spread when St John wrote; and his grand-
disciple, St Irenteus, compiled a voluminous work
against them (Ado. Ifarr.). A good account of their
full jevebpment is given by Gieseler, K. H., per. L
dlv. I. § 44 ff.
II. At regards the sentence passed upon 1dm —
it has been asserted by some writers of eminenet
(see Corn, it Lapide ad 1 Cor. v. 5), that the
"delivering to Satan" is a mere synonym for
ecclesiastical excommunication. Such can hardly
be the case. The Apostles possessed many extra-
ordinary prerogatives, which none have since arro-
gated. Even the title which they bore hat been
set apart to them ever since. The shaking off the
dost of ttri leet against a dty that would not
Digitized by
Google
1112
HYMBNjBUB
iteeive them (St. Matt x. 14), even though tin
same injunction m alterwarda given to the Serentj
(St. Luke x. 11), end which St Paul found it
necessary to act upon twice in (he course of his
ministry (Acts xiii. 51, and xviii. 6), has never
been a practice since with Christian ministers.
" Anathema," says Bingham, " is a word that
occurs frequently in the ancient canons " (Anliq.
xvi. 2, 16), but the form " Anathema Haranatha"
is one that none have ever ventured upon since St.
Paul (1 Cor. xvi. 22). As the Apostles healed all
manner of bodily infirmities, so they seem to have
possessed and exercised the same power in inflicting
them — a power far too perilous to be continued
when the manifold exigencies of the Apostolical age
had passed away. Ananias and Sapphira both fell
down dead at the rebuke of St. l'eter (Acta v. 5
and 10); two words from the same lips, " Tabitha,
arise," sufficed to raise Dorcas from the dead (ibid.
ix. 40). St Paul's first act in entering upon his
ministry was to strike Elymaa the sorcerer with
blindness, his own sight having been restored to
him through the medium of a disciple (ibid. ix. IT,
and xiii. 11); while soon afterwards we read of his
healing the cripple of Lystra (ibid. xiv. 8). Even
apart from actual intervention hy the Apostles,
bodily visitations are spoken of in the case of those
who approached the Lord's Supper unworthily,
when as yet no discipline had been established:
u For this cause many are weak and sickly among
you, and a good number (iiecwol, in the former
ease it is woAAof) sleep " (1 Cor. xi. 30).
On the other hand Satan was held to be the
instrument or executioner of all these visitations.
Such is the character assigned to him In the book
of Job (L 6-12, ii. 1-7). Similar agencies are
described 1 K. xxli. 19-22, and 1 Chr. xxt. 1. In
Ps. lxxviti. 49, such are the causes to which the
plagues of Kgypt sre assigned. Even our Lord
submitted to be assailed by him more than once
(Matt lv. 1-10: Luke iv. 13 says, " departed from
Him for a senson"); and "a messenger of Satan
was sent to buffet " the very Apostle whose act of
delivering another to the same power is now under
discussion. At the same time large powers over
the world of spirits were authoritatively conveyed
by our Lord to his immediate followers (to the
Twelve, Luke ix. 1 ; to the Seventy, as the results
showed, ibid. x. 17-20).
It only remains to notice live particulars con-
nected with its exercise, which the Apostle supplies
himself. (1.) That it was no mere prayer, but a
solemn authoritative sentence, pronounced in the
name and power of Jesus Christ (1 Cor. v. 8-6).
(2.) That It was never exercised upon any without
the Church : " them that are without God judgeth "
(ftW.v. 18), he says in express terms. (3.) That it
was " for the destruction of the flesh," i. e. some
bodily visitation. (4. ) That It was for the improve-
ment of the offender; that "his spirit might be
saved in the day of the Ivord Jesus " (ibid. v. 8);
and that " he might learn not to blaspheme " while
upon earth (1 Tim. 1. SO). (5.) That the Apostle
eould in a given case empower others to pass such
sentence in his absence (1 Cor. v. 8, 4).
Thus, while tbe "delivering to Satan" may
assemble ecclesiastical excommunication In some
respects, it has its own characteristics likewise,
which show plainly that one is not to be confounded
* placed on the same level with the other. Nor
•gain does St Paul himself deliver to Satan all
Hue* la whose company he bids his converts " not
HYmr
eren to eat" (1 Cor. v. 11). See an abb «nee
of the whole subject by Bingham, Antiq. vL 2, U
K. 8. Ft
HYMN. This word is not used in the EngBsk
version of the O. T., and only twice in the N. T.
(Eph. v. 19; Col. ill. 16); though in the original
of the latter the derivative verb ■ occurs in three
places (Matt xxvi. 30; eomp. Mark xiv. 26; Acts
xvi. 25; Heb. ii. 19). The LXX., however, employ
it freely in translating the Heb. names for almost
every kind of poetical composition (Schleusn. Lex.
Sfiyot). In bet the word does not seem to have
had for the LXX. any very special meaning; and
they called the Heb. book of TehilUm the book ol
psalms, not of hymns. Accordingly the word psalm
had for the later Jews a definite meaning, while
the word hymn was more or less vague in Its appli-
cation, and capable of being used as occasion should
arise. If a new poetical form or idea should bt
produced, the name of hymn, not being emt st-
ressed by a previous determination, was ready to
associate itself with the fresh thought of another
literature. And this seems to have been actually
the case.
Among Christians the Hymn has always been
something different from the Psalm; a different
conception in thought, a different type in composi-
tion. There is some dispute about the hymn sung
by our Lord and his Apostles on the occasion of
the Last Supper; but even supposing it to have
been the Hauel, at Paschal Hymn, consisting of
Pas. cxiii.-cxvili., it is obvious that the word hymn
is in this case applied not to an individual psalm,
but to a number of psalms chanted successively,
and altogether forming a kind of devotional exercise
which is not unaptly called a hymn. The prayer
in Acta iv. 34-80 is not a hymn, unless we auow
non-metrical as well as metrical hymns. It may
have been a hymn as it was originally altered; but
we can only judge by the Greek translation, and
this is without metre, and therefore not properly a
hymn. In the jail at Philippi, Paul and Silas
•' sang hymns " (A. V. " praises " ) unto God, and
so loud wss their song that their fellow-prisoners
heard them. This must have been what we mean
by singing, and not merely recitation. It was in
fact a veritable singing of hymns. And it la
remarkable that the noun hymn la only used in
reference to the services of the Greeks, and in the
same passages is clearly distinguished from the
psalm (Eph. v. 19, Col. iii. 16), "psalms, and
hymns, and spiritual songs."
It is probable that no Greek version of the
Psalms, even supposing It to be accommodated to
the Greek metres, would take root in the affections
of the Gentile converts. It was not only a question
of metre, it was a question of tune ; and Greek
tunes required Greek hymns. So it was in Syria.
Richer In tunes than Greece, for Greece had but
eight, while Syria had 275 (Benedict Pre/, vol. T.
Op. tph. Syr.), the Syrian hymnographers revelled
in the varied luxury of their native music; and the
result was that splendid development of the Hymn,
as moulded by the genius of Bardesanes, Harmonius,
and Epbrem ' Syrus. In Greece the eight tunes
which seem to have satisfied the exigencies of
church-music were probably accommodated to fixed
metres, each metre being wedded to a particular
a • Hymn occurs also In Matt xxvt. 8), art Mail
xiv. 98, when "when they had rani aa hym
(A. V.) stands tor v^trtwrn ■
Digitized by
Google
ETHH
•i aa am dement to which we eta ooserve ■
/In tht Directions about tunes and measure*
at the and of air English metrical version of the
Psalms. Thii is alio the cue in Urn German
hymnology, where certain ancient tunes are recog-
nized aa models for the metres of later compositions,
and their names are always prefixed to the hymns
in oommon use-
It is worth while inquiring what profane models
the Greek hymnographers chose to work after. In
the old religion of Greece the word hymn had
already acquired a sacred and liturgical meaning,
which could not fall to suggest Its application to
the productions of the Christian muse. So much
lor the name. The special forvu of the Greek
hymn were various. The Homeric and Orphic
hymns were written in the epic style, and in hex-
ameter Terse. Their metre was not adapted for
J "8*"g ; and therefore, though they may hare been
recited, it is not likely that they were sung at the
celebration of the mysteries. We tum to the Pin-
daric hymns, and here we find a sufficient variety
of metre, and a definite relation to music These
hymns were sung to the accompaniment of the
lyre; and it is very likely that they engaged the
attention of the early hymn-writers. The dithyramb,
with its development into the dramatic chorus, was
sufficiently connected with musical traditions to
make its form a fitting vehicle for Christian poetry ;
and there certainly is a dithyrambio savor about
the earliest known Christian hymn, as it appears
in Clem. Alex. pp. 312, 313, ed. Potter.
The first impulse of Christian devotion was to
ran into the moulds ordinarily used by the wor-
shippers of the old religion. This was more than
an impulse, it was a necessity, and a twofold neces-
uty. The new spirit was strong; but it had two
imitations : the difficulty of conceiving a new
nnsioo-poetical literature; and the quality so pecu-
liar to devotional music, of lingering in the heart
after the head has been convinced and the belief
changed. The old tunes would be a real necessity
to the new life; and the exiln from his ancient
(kith would delight to hear on the foreign soil of a
new religion the familiar melodies of home. Dean
Trench has indeed labored to show that the reverse
was the case, and that the early Christian shrank
with horror from the sweet, but polluted, enchant-
ments of his unbelieving state. We can only as-
sent to this in so far as we allow it to be the second
in the history of hymns. When old trsdi-
died away, and the Christian acquired not
only a new belief, but a new social humanity, it
was possible, and it was desirable too, to break for-
ever the attenuated thread that bound him to the
ancient world. And so it was broken; and the
trochaic and iambic metres, unassociated as they
•ere with heathen worship, though largely associa-
ted with the heathen drama, obtained an ascendant
m the Christian church. In 1 Cor. xiv. 36 allu-
sion is made to improvueil hymns, whloh being
the outburst of a passionatd emotion would proba-
bly lasume the dithyrambic form. But attempts
•ate been made to detect fragments of ancient
hymns conformed to more obvious metres in Epo.
t. 14; Jam. i. 17; Rev. 1. 8 ft"., xv. 3. These pig-
headed fragments, however, may with much greater
Ikefibcod be referred to the swing of a prose oom-
aoauiin unconsciously culminating into metre. It
was iu the Latin church that the trochaic and lam-
tie metrrs became most deeply rooted, and acquire/
depth of tone and grace of unisk
HYBSOP
1118
As an exponent of Christian feeling they soon su-
perseded the accentual hexameters; they were ustt
mnemonically against the heathen and the heretics
by Commodianus and Augustine. The introduc-
tion of hymns into the Latin church is commonly
referred to Ambrose. But it is impossible to con-
ceive that the West should have been so for behind
the East; similar necessities must have produced
similar results; and it is more likely that the tra-
dition is due to the very marked prominence of
Ambrose as the greatest of all the Latin hymnog-
raphers.
The trochaic and iambic metres, thus impressed
into the service of the church, have continued te
hold their ground, and are in fact the 7'a, S. M,
C. M., and L. M. of our modern hymns ; many of
which are translations, or at any rate imitations,
of Latin originals. These metres were peculiarly
adapted to the grave and sombre spirit of Latin
Christianity. Less ecstatic than the varied chorus
of the Greek church, they did not soar upon the
pinion of a lofty praise, so much as they drooped
and sank into the depths of a great sorrow. They
were subjective rather than objective; they appealed
to the heart more than to the understanding; and
if they contained less theology, they were fuller of
a rich and Christian humanity. (Daniel's The-
saurus ffymnologicus, Halis et Lipase, 1841-1856;
LateimscAe Bymnen, etc., by F. G. Mone; Going*
Christlicher Vorzeit, by C. ForUage, Berlin, 1844;
Sacred Latin Poetry, by K. C. Trench; Ephem
Syrus, by Dr. Burgess; Hahu's Bardesanesf
[Unison's Church of the Firtt Three Centuries,
p. 343 £, 2d ed.]) T. E. B.
HYSSOP (2TTM, btib: (Womw). Perhaps
no plant mentioned in the Scriptures has given rite
to greater differences of opinion than this. The
question of the identification of the ez&b of the
Hebrews with any plant known to modern botan-
ists was thought by Casaubon " adeo difficult ad
explicandum, ut videatur Esias expectant! us, qui
certi aliquid nos doceat." Had the botanical
works of Solomon survived they might have thrown
some light upon it. The chief difficulty arises from
the fact that in the LXX. the Greek taverns it
the uniform rendering of the Hebrew ado, and that
this rendering is endorsed by the Apostle in the
Epistle to the Hebrews (ix. 19, 31), when speaking
of the ceremonial observances of the Levitical law.
Whether, therefore, the LXX. made use of the
Greek taamros as the word most nearly resembling
the Hebrew in sound, as Stanley suggests {S.rfP.
21, note), or as the true representative of the plant
indicated by (he latter, is a point which, in all
probability, will never be decided. Botanists differ
widely even with regard to the identification of tht
Sovanror of Diosoorides. The name has been given
to the Satureia Ormca and the 8. JuStma, to
neither of which it is appropriate, and the iyssoj,
of Italy and South France is not met with in
Greece, Syria, or Egypt. Daubeny (Led. on Rom.
Husbandry, p. 813), following Sibthorpe, identifies
the mountain-hyssop with the Thymbra spieata,
but this conjecture is disapproved of by Kuhn
(Comm. in Dions, iii. 37), who in the same passage
gives it as his opinion that the Hebrews used tht
Origanum jEgyptiacum in Egypt, the 0. Syria-
aim in Palestine, and that the hyssop of Dioaeo
rides was the 0. Smyrnaunt. The Greek botanist
describes two kinds of bvssnp, op«u>r) and cirrsvrt;
and gives i«ra\«u at the Egyptian equivalent
Digitized by
Google
nn
HYSSOP
The ?ehxrad!*ts make the nine distinction be-
tween the wild bywop and the garden-plant uaed
for food.
The ix&b was uaed to sprinkle the doorpost* of
the Israelites in Egypt with the blood of the paa-
ehal lamb (Ex. xii. 22); it waa employed in the
purification of lepers and leprous houses (Lev. sir.
4, 51), and in the sacrifice of the red heifer (Num.
xix. 6). In consequence of its detergent qualities,
or from it* being associated with the purificatory
services, the Psalmist makes use of the expression,
" purge me with izub " (Pi. li. 7). It is described
k> 1 K. iv. 33 as growing on or near walls. In
John xix. 29 the phrase uaaiira vtpiBirrts corre-
sponds tc wepifflf KoAdVfi >n Matt, xxvii. 48 and
Mark xv. 86. If therefore KaXijuf be the equiva-
lent of !iaa<i-rtf, the latter must be a plant capa-
ble of producing a stick three or four feet in length.
Five kinds of hyssop are mentioned in the Tal-
mud. One is called 31*H simply, without any
epithet: the others are distinguished as Greek,
Soman, wild hyssop, and hyssop of Cochali (Mishna,
Neyaim, xiv. 6). Of these the four last-mentioned
were profane, that is, not to be employed in puri-
fications (Muibna, Partih, xi. 7). Maimonides (de
Vacca Ha/a, iii. 2) says that the hyssop mentioned
In the law is that which was used as a condiment-
According to Porphyry (As Abttin. iv. 7), the
Egyptian priests on certain occasions ate their
bread mixed with hyssop; and the viator, or wild
marjoram, with which it haa been identified, is often
an ingredient in a mixture called duklaih, which ia
to this day uaed aa food by the poorer classes in
Egypt (Lane, Mod. Kg. i. 200). It is nut improb-
able, therefore, that this may have been the hyssop
of Maimonides, who wrote in Egypt; more espe-
cially aa K. D. Kimchi (Lex. a. v.), who reckons
seven different kinds, gives as the equivalent the
Arabic . XA <a, ta'atar, origanum, or marjoram,
and the German Dotten or Wohlgemuth (Koeenm.
Handb.). With thia agrees the Tauchum Hieroa.
MS. quoted by Gesenius. So in the Judfeo-Span-
iah version, Ex. xii. 22 ia tranalated " y tomart'dei
manojo de oriynno." But Dioseorides makes a
distinction between origanum and hyssop when be
describes the leaf of a species of the former as
resembling the latter (cf. Plin. xx. 67), though it
ia evident that he, as well aa the TalraudUU, re-
garded them as belonging to the same family. In
the Syriac of 1 K. iv. 33 hyssop ia rendered by
^SCX^, 14/9, " houaeleek," although in other
passages It ia represented by j»SO|, tufo, which
'in Arabic translation follows in Pa. li. 7 and Heb.
bt. 19, while in the Pentateuch it has taatar for the
lame. Patrick (on 1 K. iv. 33) was of opinion
that ezob ia the same with the Ethiopic runs, which
represents the hyasop of Pa. II. 7, aa well aa jjevoVr-
itor, or mint, in Matt, xxiii. 23.
Buchart decides in favor of marjoram or some
plant like it (Uierot. i. b. 2, e. 60), and to thia
eonciuaion, it muat be admitted, all ancient tradi-
tion points. The monk* on Jebel Musa give the
name of hyasop to a fragrant plant called ja'deh,
ahich grows in great quantities on that mountain
,Botinaon, BibL Ret. i. 187). Celaiua (HierobU.
i. 423,, after enumerating eighteen different plants,
thyme, southernwood, rosemary, French lavender,
•ran rie. and the maidenhair fern among others,
•hash bant been severally identified with the hya-
HYB80P
sop of Scripture, concludes that we haw* aa aaW-
native but to aeeept the Hyooput officinal*, "aia
velimus spottolum corrigere qui t» ~> ft" (row
ray reddit Heb. ix. 19." He avoids the difficult)
in John xix. 29 by supposing that a sponge fined
with vinegar was wrapped round a bunch of hyssop
and that the two were then fastened to the end of
a stick. Dr. Kitto conceived that he had found
the peculiarities of the Hebrew hub in the Phyto-
lacca decandra, a native of America. IVemeUius
and Ben Zeb render it by " moss." It baa been
reserved for the ingenuity of a German to trace a
connection between jEeop, the Greek fabulist, and
the tzdb of 1 K. iv. 33 (Hitzig, Die Spriche Salo-
me's, KinL § 2).
An elaborate and interesting paper by the lata
Dr. J. Forbes Boyle, On the Hyuop of Scripture,
in the Journ. of Ike Soy. At. Soc viii. 193-911,
goes far to throw light upon thia difficult question.
Dr. R., after a careful investigation of the subject,
arrived at the eonciuaion that the hyasop ia na
other than the caper-plant, or capparit tptnom off
Linnaeus. The Arabic name of thia plant, amf,
by which it ia sometimes, though not commonly,
described, bears considerable resemblance to the
Hebrew. It is found in Lower Egypt (ForskaL
Flo,: Kg.-Arab.; Plin. xiii. 44). BurckhanU
( Trot, ia Syr., p. 636) mentions the aatf aa a
tree of frequent occurrence in the valleys of the
peninsula of Sinai, " the bright green creeper which
climbs out of the fissures of the rocks " (Stanley,
S. a* P. p. 21, Ac.), and produces a fruit of the
size of a walnut, called by the Arabs Felfel Jibbel,
or mountain-pepper (Shaw, Spec. Phytogr. Afr.
p. 39). Dr. K. thought thia to be undoubtedly a
species of enpparis, and probably the caper-plant.
The capparit tpinota waa found by M. Bore' (Set
(tun Voy. Baton, en Kg., etc.) in the desert of Sinai,
at Gaza, and at Jerusalem. Lynch saw it in a
ravine near the convent of Mar Saha (Exped., p.
388). It is thus met with in all the localities
where the izAb ia mentioned in the Bible. With
regard to ita habitat, it grows in dry and rooky
places, and on walla: " quippe quum capparis quo-
que aeratur ttccit maxima " (Plin. xix. 48). De
Candolle describes it as found " in muris et rupee-
tribus." The caper-plant was believed to be pos-
sessed of detergent qualities. According to Pliny
(xx. 69) the root waa applied to the cure of a dis-
ease similar to the leprosy. Lamarck (Knc. Kotan.
art. Caprier) says, " les eapriers . . . Boot regordes
oomme . . . antiscorbutiques." Finally, the >-aper-
plant is capable of producing a stick three or fom
feet in length. Pliny (xiii. 44) describes it in
Egypt aa " firmioris ligni frutex," and to thia prop-
erty Dr. Royle attaches great importance, identify-
ing as be does the iacArtf of John xix. 29 with
the KaXiiuf of Matthew and Mark. He thus con-
cludes: "A combination of circumstances, and
some of them apparently too improbable to be uni-
ted in one plant, I cannot believe to be accidental,
and have therefore considered myself entitled to
infer, what I hope I have succeeded In proving to
the satisfaction of others, that the caper-plant is
the hyasop of Scripture." Whether his conclusion
is sound or not, bis investigations are well worthy
of attention; but it must be acknowledged that,
setting aside the passage in John xix., which may
possibly admit of another solution, there seems na
reason for supposing that the properties of the at*
of the Hebrews may not be found in some one of
Digitized by
Google
HYSSOP
lb* photo with which the tradition of centuries
ha* identified it. That it may have beer possessed
of *ome detergent qualities which led to ita signifi-
eant employment in the purificatory aerrice is pos-
sible; but it does not appear from the narrative in
Leviticus that ita use was such as to call into action
any medicinal properties by which it might have
been characterized. In the present state of the
evidence, therefore, there does not seem sufficient
reason for departing from the old interpretation,
which identified the Greek tacawot with the He-
• aTTfcl W. A. W.
* I. I design to give reasons, conclusive in my
mind, against the suppoition that the Capparis
•BMoas is the hyssop. (1.) It is a thorny plant
highly unsuitable to the use intended ; i. e. the be-
ing formed into a sort of wisp or brush, or bunch,
Mutable for sprinkling. Ita branches are straggling
and quite incapable of assuming the required form,
and ita harsh thorn* would make it impossible to
hold it in the hand. Can it be supposed that it
waa stripped of these to prepare it for use? (9.)
It has no affinity with the Li«\, which is one of
the Labiate, and which
treat ita etymological
Ueotity with 21W is
entitled to be considered
the plant referred to in
the Scriptures.
II. I desire to present
the evidence which satis-
fies my mind that the
Origanum mat-u is the
plant intended.
(1.) The definition of
Lias in Arabic is '-a
plant growing on a slen-
der square stem " (a
characteristic of the An-
«a*»)"with a leaf like
the sl cuda r i SLjLaQ.'*
This deSnition makes it
certain that the Arabic
Zupta is very near the
Or i i /m m m maru, for the
latter ia one of the nume-
rous species included by
the Arabs under the in-
definite term iSjUfl :
in fret, it is the most
ootnmon of them all.
(9.) It grows on the
«"&of all the terrace*
throughout Palestine
and Syria,
(3.) It ia free from
thorns, and it* strode!
stem, free from spread-
•Og branches, and ending
ia a duster of head*,
having a highly aromatio
odor, exactly fits it to
be mad* into a
•am mar*. (0. aV
Post/xu)
.i .
IBJlI 1116
for purposes of sprinkling. No plant growing la
the East is so well fitted for the purpose. That*
considerations have long persuaded me that this is
the plant intended."
Ita leaves are commonly eaten in Syria with bread,
and a* a seasoning, as we use summer savory, which
it resembles in taste. Its effect* on sheep and
goats are very salutary. G. E. P.
IB'HAB On?* [u*om Goddmctet] : 'EjSsda,
'EjBa*V, Bod>; [Vat. Baas in 1 Chr.;] Alex, I*-
fiap, ltjSoop: Syr. Jueooor: Jtbahar, Jebaar),
one of the sons of David, mentioned in the lists
next after Solomon and before Elishua (2 Sam. v
15; 1 Chr. iii. 6, xiv. 5). Ibhar was born in Je-
rusalem, and from the second of these passages it
appears that be was the son of a wife and not of a
concubine. He never comes forward in the history
in person, nor are there any traditions concerning
him. For the genealogy of David's family see
David.
IBTiEAM (DyV?'! [amoucror or detounr
of the people] : [in Josh., Kom. Vat. Alex, omit,
Comp. 'lolAadV: >« Judg>,] 'U&\aafx, Alex. Ba-
Aaau; [iu 2 K., Vat. E«vSa<uui, Kom. Alex. 'U0-
Xoa> :] JtUaam), a city of Manasaeh, with villages
or towns (Hebrew "daughters") dependent on It
(Judg. i. 27). Though belonging to Manasaeh, it
appears not to have lain within the limit* allotted
to that tribe, but to hare been situated in the ter-
ritory of either Issachar or Asher (Josh. xvii. 11).
It is not said which of the two, though there is no
doubt from other indications that it was the former.
The ascent of Guk, the spot at which Ahaziah rt
ceived his death wound from the soldiers of Jehu
was "at (?) Ibleam" (2 K. ix. 97), somewhere
near the present Jenin, probably to the north of it,
about where the village Jelama mow stands.
In the list of cities given out of Manasaeh to
the Kohathite Levites (1 Chr. ri. 70), Bileam U
mentioned, answering to Gathrimmon in tho hat
of Josh. xid. Bileam is probably a mere alteration
of Ibleam (comp. the form given in the Alex. LXX.
above), though this is not oertain. G.
IBNETAH [8syL] (fT??? [JeJu,vnhbuiih]t
lenrarf; [Vat. Boraou; Comp. Aid.] Alex. '1*3-
nod: Jubaaia), mm of Jeroham, a Berjamita, who
was a chief man in the tribe apparently at the
time of the first settlement in Jerusalem (1 Chr.
ix.8).
EBNI'JAH ("??3* [as above]: Itptmt ,
[Vat. Boraia;] Alex. l<J9araai: Jebtmia), a Ben.
Jamite (1 Chr. ix. 8).
IBTU (""py [fftbrt*]: 'Afrd; Alex. q»..
[Comp. 'AjBaf>/:] Htbri), a Merarite Levite of the
family of Jaaziah (1 Chr. xxiv. 97), in the time of
king David, concerned in the service of the houa*
of Jehovah.
The word is precisely the asm* a* that fhe w h ar*
rendered in the A. V. "Hebrew," which are.
' *fh* fast that many stalk* g»w up ha on*
r ok spsda* te the purpose In.
The hand oould lastly gather In a
grasp the requisite bundle or bunch all rsady fcr ass
8 B r
Digitized by
Google
1116
IBZAN
IB'ZAN (TJ2N [swi/1, JUtl, Dletr.; *&«•
Sd, Itauttful, KUnt]: 'KBautairi [Vat. A/J»r
nun] Alex. Ee-fflaw; Joaeph. 'Aij>aV>)i: .dieson),
4 native of Bethlehem, who Judged Israel for (even
yean after Jephthah (Judg. xii. 8, 10). He had
30 sons and 30 daughter*, and took home 30 wives
for hit Mm, and sent out his daughter! to as man;
husbaoda abroad. He was buried at Bethlehem.
From the non-addition of " Ephratah," or " Judah,"
after Bethlehem, and from Ibzan having been suc-
ceeded by a Zebulonite, it seems pretty certain that
the Bethlehem here meant is that in the tribe of
Zebuluu (Josh. xix. 15: see Joaeph. Ant. v. 7, §
73). There is not a shadow of probability In the
notion which has been broached as to the identity of
Ibzun with Boat CIV'S). The history of his large
family is singularly at variance with the impression
of Boer given us in the book of Kuth.
A. C. H.
ICH'ABOD (TQyV, from "M, " where? -
equivalent to the negative, and TQ^ "glory,"
ICOKnrM
Get. Tke$. p. 70, inglorious: fin 1 8u It. •
Oiai0afx<&b*, [*>**■ Ouux«4«*> Coup B;rar
$4f in 1 Sam. ziv. 3, 'U X a0ifi\, which seems
to derive from '"'"W, "woe," oimi, 1 Sam. It. 8
Ges. p. 89: lehaboct,, the son of Phinehaa, and
grandson of Ell. In giving birth to him his
mother died of grief at the news of the sudden
deaths of her husband and father-in-law. Hit
brother's name was Ahiah or Aitimelech (1 Sam.
iv. 21. xiv. 8). H. W. V.
IOCXIITM ('uUm), the modern Komth, is
situated in the western part of an extensive plan.,
on the central table-land of Asia Minor, and not
far to the north of the chain of Taurus. This
level district was anciently called Lycaokia. Xen-
ophon (Annb. i. 2, 19) reckons Iconium aa the
most easterly town of Phryuia; but all other
writers speak of it as being in Lycaonia, of which
it was practically the capital. It was on the great
line of communication between Ephesus and the
western coast of the peninsula on one side, and
Tarsus, Antioch, and the Euphrates on the other.
We see this indicated by the narrative of Xblvi hor
leotrium (KonttA). (tetborde, r «*af <" Unmtt.)
(i. •■■ ) and the letters of Cicero {ad Fain. iii. 8, v.
ill, xv. 4). When the Roman provincial system
was matured, some of the most important roads in-
tersected one another at this point, ss may be seen
from the map in (pake's Ana Minor. These cir-
cumstances should be borne in mind, when we trace
St. Paul's journeys through the district. Iconium
was a well-chosen place for missionary operations.
Ite Apostle's first visit was on his first circuit, in
jompany with Barnabas; and on this occasion he
approached it from Antioch in Pisidia, which lay
to the west. From that city he had been driven
)<y the persecution of the Jews (Acts xiii. 60, 51).
There were Jews in Iconium also; and St. Paul's
first efforts here, according to his custom, were
3iade in the synagogue (xiv. 1). The results were
considerable both among the Hebrew and Gentile
population of the place (ibid.). We should notice
that the working of miracles In Iconium is emphat-
ically mentioned (xiv. 3). The intrigues of the
Jews again drove him away ; he was in danger of
being stoned, and be withdrew to Lybtra and
Dbbbx in tje eastern and wilder part of Lycaonia
,fjr. H) Thither also the enmity of the Jews of
Antioch and Iconium pursued him ; and at Lystrt
he was actually stoned and left for dead (xiv. 19 V
After an interval, however, he returned over the
! old ground, revisiting Iconium and encouraging the
church which he had founded there (xiv. 21, 22).
These sufferings and difficulties are alluded to in
2 Tim. iii. 11 ; and this brings us to the consider-
ation of his next visit to this neighborhood, which
was the occasion of his first practically associating
himself with Timothy. Paul left the Syrian An-
tioch, in company with Silas (Acts xv. 40), on his
second missionary circuit ; and travelling througl
Ciucia (it. 41), and up through the pastes of
Taurus Into Lycaonia, approached Iconium from
the east, by Derbe and Lyttra (xvi. 1, 2). Though
apparently a native of Lyttra, Timothy waa evi-
dently well known to the Christiana of Ieonhun
(xvi. 9); and it is not improbable that hit circum-
cision (xvi. 3) and ordination (1 Tim. . 18, It. 14
vi. 12: 2 Tim. L 6) took place there. On leaving
Iconium St Paul and hit party tratelled to tbs
N. W. : and the place is not mentioned again it
the sacred narrative; though there it little doubt
that it was visited by the Apostle again in the earl}
Digitized by
Google
ICONITJM
■art of hit third elreuit (Acta xviii. 8S). From Hi
poritiao It could not fail to be an important centre
of Christian inflosLce in the early agea o( the
afaurch. The carious apocryphal legend of St
Thecla, of which Iconium is the scene, must not
be entirely passed by. The " Acta Pauli et Thecla '
are given in full by Grab* (Spirit, vol. i.), and by
Jones (On the Canon, vol ii. pp. 353-411). It is
natural here to notice one geographical mistake in
that document, namely, that Lystra is placed on
the west instead of the east. In the declining
period of the Koman empire, Iconium was made a
ootonia. In the middle ages it became a place of
gnat consequence, as the capital of the Sejjukian
sultans. Hence the remains of Saracenic archi-
tecture, which are conspicuous here, and which are
described by many traveller*. Koniek Is still a
town of considerable size. J. 3. H.
* The origin of the name it obscure. Some find
it allied to their or tbtiviov (=";>lace of images")
while others derive it from a Semitic root (see
Paoly's Rtid-EncykL iv. 51). It was situated on
one of the largest plains in Asia Minor, and, like
Damascus, formed an oasis in the desert. " The
rifts that flowed from mountain ranges on the west
at the city irrigated, for a little distance, the low
grounds which stretched away towards the east,
and gardens and orchards were seen in luxuriance,
but soon the water, the source of vegetation, was
exhausted, and then commenced the dry barren
plain of Lycaouia." (See Lewin's Life and KpMtt
of SL Paul, i. 158.) The eyes of Paul and Bar-
nabas must have rested for hours on the city both
before reaching it from Antioch and after leaving
it for Lystra. •' We travelled," says Ainsworth,
" three hours along the plain of Koniyeh, always
to sight of the city, before we reached it " ( Travels
in Atia Minor, ii. 65). Leake says, "We saw
the city with its mosques and ancient walls still at
•be distance of 12 or U miles from us " ( TraveU
h Ami Minor, p. 45).
Lake's statement that Paul found there " a great
multitude both of Jews and Greeks" (Actaxir. 1),
accords with the extent and variety of the ruins
■till found on the spot. It accords also with the
geographical position of the place so well situated
for trade and intercourse with other regions. The
Greeks and Jews were the commercial factors of
that period, as they are so largely at the present
lima; and hence the narrative mentions them as
very numerous precisely here. The bulk of the
population belonged to a different stock. The pos-
session of a common language gave the missionaries
access at ones to the Greek-speaking foreigners.
The Apostle's narrow escape from being stoned
at Iconium (Acta xlr. 6) recalls to as a passage in
sne of the epistles. Paul was actually stoned at
Lystra (Acta xiv. 19). soon after his departure from
Iconium, and referring to that instance when he
wrote to the Corinthians, he says (H Cor. xl. 36) :
"Once was I stoned." Hence, says Paley {Bora
Paulina), - bad this meditated assault at Iconium
been completed, had the history related that a rtone
sua thrown, as it relates that preparations were
■ads both by Jews and Gentik* to atone Paul and
pi companions, or even bad the account of this
■ si— i linn stopped, without going on to lnforui us
that Paul and his companions were ' aware ot the
■agar and fled,' • contradiction between the his-
tory and the epiatks would bare ensued Truth is
saeaasarQy consistent; but It Is scarcely possible
Jest independent accounts, not having truth to
IDDO
iin
guide them, should thus advance to the very brink
of contradiction without falling into it" H.
IiyALAH (ilbMT. [memorial stone of £1
(God), Fiirst]: Iscix*' [Vat -tit-]; Alex. loS-
t|\<j: Jtdala and Jtrah), one of the cities of the
tribe of Zebulun, named between Shimron and
Bethlehem (Josh. xix. 15). Schwara (p. 179),
without quoting his authority, but probably from
one of the Talmudical books, gives the name as
"Yidalah or Chirli," and would identify it with
the village "Kellah al-Chire, 6 miles S. W. ol
Semunii." Semuaiyeh is known and marked en
many of the maps, rather less than 8 miles S. ft
Bat-Uihm; but the other place mentioned l.y
Schwara has evaded observation. It is not nanxi
in the Onomasu'con. G.
ITTBASH (Ety'T; [stout, eorpvltni]: »i,fl-
84s; [Vat lafias ; Cotnp. 'itStddri] Alex, Ijafinf.
Jtdebot), one of the three sons of Abi-Etam —
"the father of Etam " — among the familial of
Judah (1 Chr. It. 3). The Tzdelponite is named
as his sister. This list is probably a topographical
one, a majority of the names being those of places.
IDDO L (ATS: XaSoi; [Vat corrupt;]
Alex, 2a8m: Addo.) The father of Abinadab,
one of Solomon's monthly purveyors (1 K. iv. 14).
8. 0VTO : 'AMI; [Vat A3«; Comp. Aid. "A3-
8t};] Adda.) A descendant of Gershom, son of
Levi (1 Chr. vi. SI). In the reversed genealogy
(ver. 41) the name is altered to Udaiah, and we
there discover that be was one of the forefathers
of Asaph the seer.
3. (TT [favorite]: laJoti [Vnt looooi;]
Alex, jaSbai: Jadao.) Son of Zechariah, ruler
(n>d) ol the tribe of Manasseh east of Jordan in
the time of David (1 Chr. xxvii. 21).
4,. (^yj, i- t. Ye'doi [corn on a festival.
Font] ; but in the correction of the Keri TTO\
Ye'do: 'tor/*, 'A88w [Vat A8a>]: Addo.) A seer
(H^l) whose "visions" (fYVTCp against Jero
beam incidentally contained some of the acta of
Solomon (2 Chr. ix. 29). He also appears to hare
written a chronicle or story (Midrath, Ges. p. 357)
relating to the Ufa and reign of Abijah (2 Chr. xtti.
82), and also a book " concerning genealogies," in
which the acta of Rehoboam were recorded (xtt.
15). These books are lost, but they may have
formed part of the foundation of the — '■»>"<[ book*
of Chronicles (Bertheau, On Chroa. Introd. f 8).
The mention of his having prophesied against Jero-
boam probably led to his identification In the an
dent Jewish ti.iditions (Jerome, Qua*. Htb. in
2 Chr. xil. 15, Jaddo; Joaeph. Ant. viii 3, } 5.
'loSaV) with the "Man of God" out of Judah,
who denounced the altar of that king (1 K. xiil. 1).
He is also identified with Uded (see Jerome on 2
Chr. xt. 1).
S. (tfFT? ; in Zech. [I. 7,] VTS : ( A8Mt [in
Exr., Vat A8o>; In Neh., Vat. Alex. FA. omit,
and to Rom. in xii. 4:] .iddo.) The grandfather of
the pophet Zechariah (Zech. I. 1, 7), although in
other ptaoni Zechariah U called » the son of Iddo"
(Ear. T. 1. vi. 14). Iddo returned from Babyfoa
with ZeruWjabel and Jeshua (Net. xii. 4), and In
the next generation — the " days of JoiaHm " son
of Jeshua (vr. 10, 19) — hit bouse was represent*'
Digitized by
Google
Ills
IDOL
•y Zeehariah (ver. 14). In 1 Esdr. tL 1 Un name
k Auih>.
6. (S'fM : [LXX. omit, exc Comp. once 'A8-
6W:] Kddo.) The chief of thoae who assembled
at Casiphia, at the time of the second caravan from
Babylon, in the reign of Artaxerxea Longimanus
b. o. 468. He was one of the Nethinim, of whom
220 responded to the appeal of Ezra to assist in
the return to Judeea (Ear. viii. 17 ; comp. SO). In
the Apocr. Eedras the name is Saddeub and Dai>-
dkcs. ti.
IDOL, IMAGB. As no less than twenty-one
different Hebrew words have been rendered in the
A. V. either by idol or image, and that by no
noons uniformly, it will be of some advantage to
attempt to discriminate between them, and assign,
as nearly as the two languages will allow, the Eng-
lish equivalents fur each. But, before proceeding
to the discussion of those words which in them-
selves indicate the objects of false worship, it will
be necessary to notice a class of abstract terms,
which, with a deep moral significance, express the
degradation associated with it, and stand out as a
protest of the language against the enormities of
Idolatry. Such are —
!• 71^i & nn , rendered elsewhere " nought,"
"vanity," " iniquity," •■wickedness," "sorrow,"
etc., snd oi*e only •> Idol " (Is. Ixvl. 8). The pri-
mary idea of the root seems to lie emptiness, nothing-
ness, as of breath or vapor; and, by a natural tran-
sition, in a moral sense, wickedness in its active
form of mischief, and then, ss the result, sorrow
and trouble. Hence dren denotes a rain, false,
wicked thing, and expresses at once the essential
nature of idols, and the consequences of their wor-
ship. The character of the word may be learnt
from Its associates. It stands in parallelism with
DfJ!^, tpkn (b ill. 39), which, after undergoing
various modifications, comes at length to signify
•■ nothing; " with V^U, hebtl, " breath " or " va-
por," itself applied as a term of contempt to the
object* of Idolatrous reverence (Deut. xxxii. 21 ; 1
K. xvL 13; 11. xxxi. 6; Jer. viil. 19, x. 8); with
Ml^, ikAv, "nothingness," "vanity;" and with
"lj7$, ehtter, "falsehood" (Zech. x. S): aU indi-
cating the utter worthlessness of the idols to whom
homage was paid, and the false and delusive nature
of their worship. It is employed In an abstract
sense to denote idolatry in general in 1 Sam. xv.
83. There i« much significance in the change of
name from lieth-el to Heth-aren, the great centre
af idolatry in Israel (Hos. ir. 16).
2. V7N, Ml, is thought by some to bare a
sense akin to that of "Ip.P, didetr, " falsehood,"
with which it stands hi parallelism in Job xiii. 4,
and would therefore much resemble dvtn, as ap-
plied to an idol. Delitzsch (on Hab. ii. 18) derives
it from the negative particle vft nX, "die Nich-
tigen." But according to FUrst (Ilandw. s. v.) it
is a diminutive of /fcj, "god," the additional syl-
lable indicating the greatest contempt In this
esse the signification above mentioned is a sub-
sidiary one. The same authority asserts that the !
sard denotes a small image of the god, which was .
Mosulted as an oracle among the Egyptians and '
Phavoidana (Is. xix. *t Jer. (ir. 14). It is ear-
XDOXi
talnly used of the Idols of Noph or Mesopkai (U
xxx. 18). In strong contrast with Jehovah it st>
pears in Ps. xcvi. 6, xcvii. 7: the contrast probaMi
being heightened by the reaemblanee between 16-
Km and UAhkn. A somewhat similar play upon
words is observable in Hab. ii. 18, D N V>V<>;
D^dVs, iOOm Uttmtm ("dumb idols," A. V.).
8. np^, tmdh, "horror" or "terror," and
hence an object of horror or terror (Jer. L 88), in
reference either to the hideousneas of the idols or
to the gross character of their worship. In this
respect it is closely connected with —
4. n^?9Q, mpkUfeUi, a " fright," " horror '
applied to the idol of Maachah, probably of wood,
which Asa cut down and burned (I K. XT. 18; 2
Chr. xv. 16), and which was unquestionably the
I'hallns, the symbol of the productive power of
nature (Hovers, Phaa. i. 671; Selden, dt Ob 8gr.
ii. 6), and the nature-goddess Ashera. Allusion is
supposed to be made to this in Jer. x. 6, snd Epitt.
of Jer. 70 [in the Apocrypha]. In S Chr. xt. 16
the Vulg. render " simulacrum Priapi " (cf. Hor.,
>• furum aviumque maxima furmido"). TbeLXX
had a different reading, which it is not easy to
determine. They translate in 1 K. xt. 18 the same
word both by airotot (with which corresponds the
Syr. )»Ui, 'Ui. "a festival," reading perhaps
nn?S, 'dtserert, as in 2 K. x. 20; Jer. ix. 3) and
fcoraSov-tif, while in Chronicles it is cfSatAor.
Possibly in 1 K. xt. 18 they may have read
nn^vp, M'tmiuthih, for njp?b?a, «•«*-
latotdA, as the Vulg. t/wcum, of which " simulacrum
turpissimum " is a correction. With this must be
noticed, though not actually rendered, " image " or
"idol."
6. npa, MsnefA, "shame," or "shameful
thing" (A. V. Jer. xl 13; Hos. ix. 10), applied to
Baal or Baal-Peor, as characterizing the obscenity
of his worship. With Ml is found in close con-
nection —
8. D^S^J, ffiUultm, also a term of contempt,
but of uncertain origin (Es. xxx. 13). The Kab-
binical authorities, referring to such passages aa
Es. iv. 12, Zeph. i. 17, have favored the interpre-
tation given in the margin of the A. V. to Deut.
xxix. 17, "dungy gods" (Vulg. "sorites," "sordea
idolorum," 1 K. xt. 12). Jahn connects it with
V?|, gdlal, " to roll," snd applies it to the stocks
of trees cf which idols were made, and in mockery
called gilliUm, " rolling things " (n cofoewafo, be
says, though it is difficult to see the point cf Ma
remark). Uesenius, repudiating the derivation from
the Arab. Js», /aOa, "to be great, illustrioui,'
gives his preference to the rendering " stones, sbnt-
gods," thus deriving it from /J, gnl, « a heap of
stones; " and in this he is followed by FUrst, wht
translates gitMl by the Germ. " Steinbaufe." Taw
expression is applied, principally in Eeekid, to kin
gods and their symbols (Deut. xxix. 17; Ex. Till
10, Ac.). It stands side by side with other earn
temptuous terms in Es. xvi. 36, xx. 8; as sb
example YT$. sweiets, " filth,"
(E«. rill. 10), and —
Digitized by
Google
IDOL
T. tbt cognate ip?>&, sAtes&n ' filth," " im-
fmttj," especially applied, like ihekelt, to that
■Mob. produced ceremonial uncleanness (Ex. xxxvil.
H; Nah. iii. 6), auch aa food offered in sacrifice to
Uob (Zech. ix. 7; corap. Acta xv. 20, 39). Aa
referring to the idola themselves, it primarily denotes
the obscene rites with which their worship was
associated, and hence, by metonymy, is applied both
to the objects of worship and also to their worship-
pen, who partook of the impurity, and thus " be-
came loathsome like their love," the foul Baal-Peor
'Hos. ix. 10).
We now come to the consideration of those
words which more directly apply to the images or
idols, as the outward symbols of the deity who was
worshipped through them. These may be classified
according aa they indicate that the images were
made in imitation of external objects, and to repre-
sent some idea, or attribute; or aa they denote the
workmanship by which they were fashioned. To
the first class belong —
a. ^99' * eme '' or ^9?> **""'> with wUcn
Geeenius compares sa cognate 'B^pi mUkU, and
B/ffi, tttlem, the LaL rimilu and Greek tfta\6t,
signifies a "likeness," "semblance." The Targ.
la Dens. It. 16 gives MHTO, liird, " figure," ss
the equivalent; while in Es. viil. 8, 5, it is rendered
by D 1 "??, nrtiax, « image." In the latter paasages
the Syriae has )k V> »t S , hoimtt, «a statue"
(the «rv)An of the LXX.), whioh more properly
corresponds to mattttibih (see No. 16 below) ; and
in Dent. iflOl^, gtntt, "kind" {=yi mt ).
The passage in 2 Chr.xxxiil. 7 is rendered "images
at* tour faces," the latter words r ep res en ting the
one under consideration. In 2 Chr. xxxiii. IS it
appears as " carved images," following the LXX. to
yXwrrir- On the whole the Greek dxiy of Deut.
lir. 18, 2 Chr. xxxiii. 7, and the " simulacrum " of
the Vulgate (2 Chr. xxxiii. 15) most nearly resem-
ble the Hebrew ttmeL
9. a 1 ??, ttelem (Ch. id. and ObtS, tttlnm) is
ey all lexicographers, ancient and modern, con-
wHh b?, tail, "a shadow." It la the
' of God in which man was created (Gen.
L 17: et Wisd. ii. 23), distinguished from fflDI,
dtmUk, or " likeness,'' as the " image " from the
"Men' which it represents (Schmidt, de Jmng,
Dei m Horn. p. 84), though it would be rash to
insist upon this distinction. In the N. T. tlit&r
appears to represent the latter (Col. ill. 10; cf.
LXX. of Gen. v. 1 ), as tfiolu/ui the former of the
two words (Rom. i. 23, riii. 29; PhiL 11. 7), but
In Heb. x. 1 thtiw is opposed to <r«(o aa the sub-
stance to the unsubstantial form, of which it is the
perfect representative. The LXX. render demith
by tfiotmrts, i/utlttuct, tlntliv, Suoiot, and tielem
most frequently by •'aroiv, though ifiolm/M, Mw\oy,
jod reVo* also occur. But whatever abstract term
■nay best define the meaning of ttelem, it is un-
questionably uaed to denote the visible forms of
(eternal objects, and is applied to figures of geld
IDOL
111*
and aJhar (1 8am. vi. 6; Num. xxxiii. 69; Dm
iii 1), such sa the golden image of Nebuchadnn
car, as well as to those painted upon walls (Ex.
xxiii. 14). " Image " perhaps most nearly repre-
senta it in all paasages. Applied to the human
countenance (Dan. iii. 19) It signifies the " tipi cs-
sion," and corresponds to the lS4a of Matt, xxriil.
3, though demilk agrees rather with the Platunis
usage of the latter word.
10. njTOJjl, temtnih, rendered "image" in
Job iv. 16; elsewhere " similitude" (Deut. iv. 12),
"likeness" (Deut v. 8): "form," or "snaps"
would be better. In Deut. Iv. 16 it is in paralKiiiaa
with rMan, iabMth, literally "build;" heoM
"plan," or' "model" (2 K. xvi. 10; cf. Ex. xx.
4; Num. xii. 8).
11. 22y, 'oVeno, 12. 33"?, -efceft (Jer. xxii.
28), or 13. 3^J, 'Atteb (Is. xlviii. 6), " a figure,"
all derived from a root 3Sy, 'ttroo, " to work,"
or " taehion " (akin to 33£T, chittab, and the
like), are terms applied to idols aa expressing that
their origin was due to the labor of man. The
verb in its derived smses indicates the sorrow and
trouble consequent upon severe labor, but the latter
seems to be the radical idea. If the notion of
sorrow were most prominent the words as applied
to idols might be compared with dren above. Is.
lviil. 3 is rendered in the Prshito Syriae " idola"
(A. V. "labors"), but the reading was evidently
different In Ps. cxxxlx. 24, 3£fc TT??» *ree*-
dtttb, is " idolatry."
14. T2, tstr, once only applied to an idol (la.
xlv. 16; LXX. yijeot, as if D^H, iyjfim). The
word usually denotes " a pang," but in this instance
is probably connected with the roots "VIS, tsar,
ond "^J' V*Aiir, and »'gnifi» "» shape," or
" mould," and hence an " idol."
16. n3SQ, mMubcVi, anything set up, a
" statue " (= 3T2?, n'tso, Jer. xliii. 13), applied
to a memorial stone like those erected by Jacob on
four several occasions (Gen. xxviiL 18, xxxi. 46,
xxxv. 14, 15) to rommemorate a crisis in his life,
or to mark the grave of Riichd. Such were the
stones set up by Joshua (Josh. iv. 9) after the pas-
sage of the Jordan, and at Shechem (xxiv. 36), and
by Samuel when victorious over the Philistines (1
Sam. vii. 12). When solemnly dedicated they wen
anointed with oil, and libations wen poured upon
them. The word la applied to denote the obelisks
which stood at the entrance to the temple of til
Sun at Heh'opolis (Jer. xliii. 13), two of which wen
a hundred cubits high and eight broad, eaoh of a
single stone (Her. 11. 111). It is also used of the
statues of Baal (2 K. ill. 2), whether of stone (2 K.
x. 27) or wood (id. 26), which stood In the inner-
most recess of the temple at Samaria. Movers
(Pkam. 1. 674) conjectures that the latter wen
statues or columns distinct from that of Baal, which
was of stone and conical (678), like the " meta "
of Paphos (Tae. H. Ii. 8), and probably I
■ act many paasages In the Syr. at OhranSeles the whole taMor In awnraey <
at** * Is hopeaslMa to neonellr with the laestvsd the O. T
i and the translation of thas. books Is — I
thai of thsi
Digitized by
Google
1120
IDOL
belonging to other deities who wen hb) riftlpai
* rip&miuH. The Phoenicians eonwcrmtod and
anointed stones like that at Bethel, which were
(ailed, aa aome think, from this circumstance
Batylw. Many auch are said to hare been seen on
the Lebanon, near Heliopolis, dedicated to various
gods, and many prodigies are related of them
(Damascius in 1'hotius, quoted by Bochart, Canaan,
11 2). The same authority describes them as
aerolites, of a whitish and sometimes purple color,
spherical in shape, and about a span In diameter.
The Palladium of Troy, the black stone in the
Kaaba at Mecca, said to have been brought from
heaven by the angel Gabriel, and the stone at
Epbesus "which fell down from Jupiter" (Acts
six. 35), are examples of the belief, anciently so
sommon, that the gods sent down their images
Tpon earth. In the older worship of Greece stones,
according to I'ausaniaa (vil. 22, § 4), occupied the
place of images. Those at Phane, about thirty in
number, and quadrangular in shape, near the statue
of Hermes, received divine honors from the Pha-
rlans, and each had the name of some god con-
ferred upon it. The stone in the temple of Jupiter
Ammon (umbitini maxinu similU), enriched with
emeralds and gems (Curt iv. 7, { 81); that at
Delphi, which Saturn was said to have swallowed
(Paua. Phoe. 24, § 6) j the black stone of pyramidal
shape in the temple of Juggernaut, and the holy
stone at Pessinus in (jalatia, sacred to Cybefe, show
bow widely spread and almost universal were these
ancient objects of worohip. Closely connected with
these "statues" of Baal, whether in the form of
obelisks or otherwise, were —
18. O^pll, cliammintm, rendered hi the mar-
gin of most passages " sun-images." The word has
given rise to much discussion. In the Vulgate it
u translated thrice rimubicrii, thrice delubra, and
mix farm. The LXX. give r«p«Vn twice, sfSoMa
twice, tfi\ira vsiswrofnra, fUtKbyiuera, and t4
WtjAo. With one exception (2 Chr. xxxiv. 4,
which is evidently corrupt) the Syriac has vaguely
either " fears," i. e. objects of fear, or - idols." The
Targum in all passages translates it by HJpjip'>pEJ,
eVJaam'snyjfd, "houses for star-worship" (Flint
c>
compares the Arab. t\tt l h-\ Chunnnt, the planet
Mercury or Venus), a rendering which Rosenmliller
supports. Gesenius preferred to consider these
chanlm'tayyA as " veils" or "shrines surrounded
or shrouded with hangings" (Ka. xvi. 16; Targ.
on Is. ill. 19), and scouted the interpretation of
Buxtorf— "status: solares " — as a mere guess,
though he somewhat paradoxically assented to
RosenmuUer's opinion that they were "shrines
dedicated to the worship of the stars." Kimchi,
mder the root ?&n, mentions a conjecture that
they were trees like the Afhtrim, but («. e. C*. H)
suewhere expresses his own belief that the Nun is
epenthetic, and that they were so called " because
the snii-wDrshippei* made them." Aben Ezra (on
Ijty. xxvi. 30) says they were " houses made for
worshipping the sun," whicb Bochart approves
(Canaan, ii. 17), and Jarchl, that they were a kind
ji idol placed on the roofs of houses. Vosslus (rfe
IdoL ii. 3A8), as Scallger before him, connects the
won) with .A menus, or Oroanus, the sacreH fire,
Mas symbol of the Persian sun-god, and renders it
IDOL
pgraa (cf. SeUea, ii. 8). Adehmg (MUknd. 1
159, quoted by Gesen. on la. xvii. 8) suggested the
same, and compared it with the Sanskrit fossa
But to such interpretations the passage in 2 Chr.
xxxiv. 4, is inimical (Vitringa on h. xvii. 8).
Gesenius' own opinion appears to have fluctuated
considerably. In his notes on Isaiah (/. e.) he prefers
the general rendering " columns " to the more
definite one of " sun-columns," and is inclined to
look to a Persian origin for the derivation of the
word. But in his Thesaurus he mentions the
occurrence of Chamman as a synonym of Baal in
the Phoenician and Palmyrene inscriptions in the
sense of " Dominus Solaris," and its after applica-
tion to the statues or columns erected for his
worship. Spencer (rfe Ltyg. Htbr. ii. 26), and
after him Miebaelis (SuppL ad Lex. ffcbr. s. v.),
maintained that it signified statues or lofty columns,
like the pyramids or obelisks of Egypt. Movers
(Pham. i. 441 ) concludes with good resets that
the sun-god Baal and the idol "Chanarxn" are
not essentially different. In his discussion cf Cham-
minim, he says, " These images of the fire-god wen
placed on foreign or non-Israelitish altars, in con-
Junction with the symbols of the nature-goddess
Asherah, as o-epuSayui (2 Chr. xiv. 3, 5, xxxiv. 4,
7 ; Is. xvii. 9, xxvii. 9), as was otherwise usual with
Baal and Asherah." They are mentioned with the
Aaherim, and the latter are coupled with the statues
of Baal (1 K. xiv. 28; 2 K. xxlii. 14). The eham-
mdnlm and statues are used promiscuously (cf. 2 K.
xxlii. 14, and 2 Cbr. xxxiv. 4; 2 Chr. xiv. 3 and 6),
but are never spoken of together. Such an this
steps by which he arrives at his conclusion. He ii
supported by the Palmyrene inscription at Oxford,
alluded to above, which has been thus rendered:
" This column (K3Dn, Chamm&ntm), and this
altar, the sons of Malchu, etc. have erected and
dedicated to the Sun." The Veneto-Greek Version
leaves the word untranslated in the strange form
amLSarrfi. From the expressions in Es. vi. 4, 6,
and Lev. xxvi. 30, it may be inferred that these
columns, which perhaps represented a rising flame
of fire and stood upon the altar of Baal (2 Chr.
xxxiv. 4), were of wood or stone.
17. JTStPB, mmcM, occurs in Lev. xxvi. 1;
Num. xxxiil. 52; Ex. vlii. 12: "device" most
nearly suits all paasages (cf. Ps. lxxitt. 7; Prov.
xviil. 11, xxv. 11). This word has been the fruit-
ful cause of ss much dispute ss the preceding.
The general opinion appears to be that & )JJIiJ,
then puudlh, signifies a stone with figures graven
upon it Ben Zeb explains it as " a stone with
figures or hieroglyphics carved upon it," and so
Michaelis; and it is maintained by Movers (Plum.
1. 106) that the bcetyka, or columns with painted
figures, the " lapides effigiati " of Minucius Felix
(c. 3), are these "stones of device," and that the
characters engraven on them are the i«pa <rroix««a,
or characters sacred to the several deities. The
invention of these characters, which is ascribed to
Taaut, he conjectures originated with the Seres.
Gesenius explains it aa a stone with the image of
an idol, Baal or Astarte, and refers to his Mom.
Phan. 21-24 for others of similar character
Raahi (on Lev. xxxi. 1) derives it from the root
"T3&7, to cover, "because they cover the floor wit*
a pavement of stones." The Targum and Syr.
Lev. xxvi. 1, give "•tone of devotun," usl las
Digitized by
Google
nxtti
Id Nam. xrriii. 58, baa " home of (hair
devotion," where the Svr. only render! " their ob-
jects of deration." 'For the former toe LXX.
have Xitas tricowis, and for the latter rat oTtorios
■aVSr, connecting the word with the root n^tj?,
•'to look," a circumstance which haa induced Seal-
sehuto (Hot. Rtcht, pp. 382-385) to conjecture that
etc* mructth waa originally a smooth derated atone
employed for the purpose of obtaining from it a
freer prospect, and of offering prayer in prostration
epon it to the deities of heaven. Hence, generally,
he concludes it signifies a stone of prayer or devo-
tion, and the "chambers of imagery" of Ea. rill.
7, are "chambers of devotion." The renderings
af the last-mentioned passage in the LXX. and
Ttrgum, are curious aa pointing to a various read-
ing VlS^Rp, or mora probably *QJtjflJ.
18. ETB"^. teripMn. [Tkraphim]
The terms which follow have regard to the mate-
rial and workmanship of the idol rather than to its
character aa an object of worship.
19. I *23, pad, and SO. D^DS, patOm,
anally translated in the A. V. "graven or carved
.mages." In two passages the latter ia ambigu-
ously rendered " quarries " (Judg. iii. 19, 26) fol-
lowing the Targum, but there seems no reason for
departing from the ordinary signification. In the
majority of instances the LXX. have yXtnrrir,
once yXiuiia. The verb Is employed to denote
the finishing which the stone r ec eiv ed at the hands
of the masons, after it had been rough-hewn from
the quarries (Ex. xxxiv. 4; 1 K. v. 18). It is
probably a later usage which has applied prtel" to
a figure cast in metal, aa in Is. xl- 19, xliv. 10.
These " sculptured " Ima g es were apparently of wood,
iron, or stone, covered with gold or silver (Deut
«&. 36; Is. xxx. 33; Hab. U. 19), the more costly
being of solid metal (Is. xl. 19). They could be
burnt (Dent. til. 6; la. xlv. SO; 2 Chr. xxxit. 4),
cot down (Deut xii. 3) and pounded (2 Chr. xxxiv.
7), or broken in pieces (Is. xxi. 9). In making
en, the skill of the wise iron-smith (Deut. xxvii.
16; Is. xl. 20) or carpenter, and of the goldsmith,
waa employed (Judg. xvii. 3, 4; Is. ill. 7), the
fanner supplying the rough mass of iron beaten
Into shape on his anvil (Is. illt. 19), while the lat-
ter overlaid U with plates of gold and silver, prob-
ably from Tarshbh (Jer. x. 9), and decorated It
with silver chains. The image thus formed re-
ceived the further adornment of embroidered robes
(Be. xti. 18), to which possibly allusion may be
evade in Is. Hi. 19. Brass and day were among
the materials employed for the same purpose (Dan.
6. 83, v. 23).» A description of the three great
laaagea of Babylon on the top of the temple of
Betas wfll be found in DM. Sic. ii. 9 (eomp. Lay.
ard, Jfm. 11. 433). The several stages of the pro-
sea by which the metal or wood became the " gra-
ven image " are so vividly described in Is. xliv. 10-
20, that H is only necessary to refer to that passage,
and we are at once introduced to the mysteries of
idol manufacture, which, aa at Epbesus, " brought
no small gain unto the craftsmen."
UL 1T9a, eesec, or TfpjS (esse, and 22.
IDOL
1121
pvsabt/sCUl f,
ta a kat>
by the
I denoow by anticipation
stacs after It had base
71
il^QS, m ns s fcd A, are evidently synonymous (Is.
xli. 29, xlviil. S; Jer. x. 14) in Uter Hebrew, and
denote a " molten " image. Maalcih is frequently
used in distinction from pad or paUtm (Deut.
xxvii. IS; Judg. xvii. 3, Ac.). The golden calf
which Aaron made was fashioned with " the gra-
**" (^CJ. chtrtt), but it ia not quite clear for
what purpose the graver was used (Ex. xxxii. 4).
The cherti (cf. Or. prapaVrw) appears to have ben
a sharp-pointed instrument, used like the ttyUu tat
a writing implement (Ia. viil. 1). Whether then
Aaron, by the help of the chtrtt, gave to the
molten mass the shape of a calf, or whether he
made use of the graver for the purpose of carving
hieroglyphics upon it, hat been thought doubtful
The Syr. hat J.&3Q^, tiptt (reVot), "the
mould," for okeret But the expression "^JJl
vfUffttt&r, deoidet that it was by the chtrtt, in
whatever manner employed, that the shape of a
calf was given to the metal.
In N. T. thtir is the " image " or head of the
emperor on the ooinage (Matt xxii. 20).
Among the earliest objects of worship, regarded
as symbols of deity, were, as has been said above,
the meteoric stones which the ancients believed to
have been the images of the gods sent down from
heaven. From these they transferred their regard
to rough unhewn blocks, to stone columns or pil-
lars of wood, in which the divinity worshipped was
supposed to dwell, and which were consecrated, like
the sacred atone at Delphi, by being anointed with
oil, and crowned with wool on solemn days (Pans.
Phoe. 24, § 6). Tavernier (quoted by Kosenmuller,
Alt. f tf. Morgtidntul, i. § 89) mentions a black
stone in the pagoda of Benares which was daily
anointed with perfumed oil, and such are the
" Lingama " in daily use in the Siva worship of
Bengal (cf. Arnobius, 1. 39; Mln. Fd. c. 3). Such
customs are remarkable illustrations of the solemn
consecration by Jacob of the stone at Bethel, as-
showing the religious reverence with which these
memorials were regarded. And not only were sin
gle stones thus honored, but heaps of stone were,
in later times at least, considered aa sacred to
Hermes (Horn. Od. xvi. 471; cf. Vulg. Prev. xxvi.
8, "sicut qui mittit lapidem in acervum. Mer-
curii"), and to these each passing raastilW con-
tributed his offering (Creuzer, Symb. i. 24). The
heap of stones which Laban erected to commemo-
rate the solemn compact between himself and Jacob,
and on which he invoked the gods of his fathers,
ia an instance of the Intermediate stage in which
such heaps were associated with religious obser-
vances before they became objects of worship. Ja-
cob, for his part, dedicated a single stone as his
memorial, and called Jehovah to witness, thus hold-
ing himself aloof from the rites employed by Laban,
which may have partaken of his ancestral idolatry.
[J roab-Saradvtha.]
Of the forms assumed by the idolatrous images
we have not many traces in the Bible. Dagon,
the fish-god of the Philistines, was a human figure
terminating in a fish [Daoox]; and that the
Syrian deities were represented in later times in a-
symbolical human shape we know for certainty
• Images of
■Bra* (Wilkinson, . Jm. Jsfr.
UL M{ eootn. Wis* iv
Digitized by
Google
1122
IDOLATRY
The Hebrews imitated their neighbors in this re-
spect ai in others (Is. xliv. 13; Wisd. xiii. 13),
and from various illusions we may infer that idols
m human forms were not uncommon among them,
though they were more anciently symbolized by
«"l""tl« (Wisd. xiii. 14), ss by the calves of Aaron
and Jeroboam, and the brazen serpent which was
afterwards applied to idolatrous uses (2 K. xviil.
4; Bom. i. 23). When the image came from
the hands of the maker it was decorated richly with
silver and gold, and sometimes crowned (Epist.
■Jer. 9 [or Bar. vi. 9]); clad in robes of blue and
purple (Jer. x. 9), Hke the draped images of Pallas
and Hera (Miiller, Handb. d. Arch. d. Kunsl, § 69),
and fastened in the niche appropriated to it by
means of chains and nails (Wisd. xiii. IS), in order
that the influence of the deity which it represented
might he secured to the spot. So the Epheslans,
when besieged by Croesus, connected the wall of
their city by means of a rope to the temple of
Aphrodite, with the view of ensuring the aid of
the goddess (Her. i. 26); and for a similar object
the Tynans chained the stone image of Apollo to
the altar of Hercules (Curt. iv. 8, § 15). Some
images were painted red (Wisd. xiii. 14), like those
of Dionysus and the Bacchantes of Hermes, and
the god Pan (Paus. U. 2. § 6; MUUer, flandb. d.
Arch. d. Kuntt, § 69). This color was formerly
considered sacred. Pliny relates, on the authority
of Verrius, that it was customary on festival days
to color with red-lead the face of the image of
Jupiter, and the bodies of those who celebrated a
triumph (xxxiii. 36). The figures of Priapus, the
god of gardens, were decorated in the same man-
ner ("ruber ciistos" Tibull. i. 1, 18). Among
the objects of worship enumerated by Amobius (i.
89) are bones of elephants, pictures, and garlands
suspended on trees, the " rami coronati " of Apu-
lsius {dt Mag. c. 56).
When the process of adorning the image was
completed, it was placed in a temple or shrine ap-
pointed for it (oWla, Epist Jer. 12, 19 [or Bar. vi.
12, 19] ; ofcnun, Wisd. xiii. IS; tttvXuov, 1 Cor.
viii. 10; see Stanley's note on the latter passage).
In Wisd. xiii. 15, oftrnpo is thought to be used
contemptuously, as in Tibull. i. 10, 19, 20 — " cum
paupere cultu Statist in txigna iigneus ode deus"
(Fritasche and Grimm, flandb.), but the passage
quoted is by no means a good illustration. From
these temples the idols were sometimes carried in
procession (Epist. Jer. 4, 26 [or Bar. vi. 4, 26])
on festival days. Their priests were maintained
from the idol treasury, and feasted upon the meats
which were appointed for the idols' use (Bel and
the Dragon, 3, 13). These sacrificial feasts formed
an important part of the idolatrous ritual [Idol-
atry], and were a great stumbling-block to the
early Christian converts. They were to the hea-
then, as Prof. Stanley has well observed, what the
observance of circumcision and the Mosaic ritual
were to the Jewish converts, and it was for this
reason that St Paul especially directed his atten-
tion to the subject, and laid down the rules of con-
duct contained in his first letter to the Corinthians
(tUL-«.). W. A. W.
IDOLATRY (D*?"^, friphtm, « tere-
phlm," once only, 1 Sam. xr. 23: tlSaXoXarptla),
strictly speaking, denotes the worship of deity in a
visible form, whether the images to which homage
Si paid are symbolical representations of the true
Gad. or of the false divinities which has* been
IDOLATRY
made the objects of worship In his isesA Witt
its origin and pi ogr es s the present article is oat
concerned. The former is lost amidst the dark
mists of antiquity, and the latter is rather the sub-
ject of speculation than of history. Bat under
what aspect it is presented to us in the Scriptures,
how it affected the Mosaic legislation, and what
Influence it had on the history of the Israelites,
are questions which may be more property dis-
cussed, with some hope of arriving at a satisfactory
conclusion. Whether, therefore, the deification of
the powers :f rsture, and the representation of
them under tangible forms, preceded the worship
of departed heroes, who were regarded as the em-
bodiment of some virtue which distinguished their
lives, is not in this respect of much importance.
Some Jewish writers, indeed, grounding their the-
ory on a forced interpretation of Gen. iv. 26, assign
to Enos, the son of Seth, the unenviable notoriety
of having been the first to pay divine honors to the
host of heaven, and to lead others into the like
error (Maimon. de Idol i. 1). R. Solomon Jarehi,
on the other hand, while admitting the same verss
to contain the first account of the origin of idola-
try, understands it as implying the deification of
men and plants. Arabic tradition, according to
Sir W. Jones, connects the people of Yemen with
the same apostasy. The third in descent from
Joktan, and therefore a contemporary of Nahor,
took the surname of Abdu Skanu, or " servant of
the sun," whom he and his family worshipped,
while other tribes honored the planets and fixed
stars (Hales, Chrtmoi. ii. 59, 4to ed.). Nimrod,
again, to whom is ascribed the introduction of
Zabianism, was after his death transferred to th*
constellation Orion, and on the slender foundation
of the expression " Ur of the Chaldees " (Gen. xL
31) is built the fabulous history of Abraham and
Nimrod, narrated in the legends of the Jews and
Mussulmans (Jellinek, Bet ha-MidraA, i. 23;
Weil, BibL Leg. pp. 47-74; Hyde, Set. Pen. c.
I. But, descending from the regions of fiction to
sober historic narrative, the first undoubted illusion
to idolatry or idolatrous customs in the Bible is in
the account of Rachel's stealing her father's tera-
phim (Gen. xxxi. 19), a relic of the worship of
other gods, whom the ancestors of the Israelites
served '< on the other side of the river, in old time "
(Josh. xxiv. 2). By these household deities Latum
was guided, and these he consulted as oracles (obs.
TJtpn? Gen. xxx. 27, A. Y. " learned by expe-
rience"), though without entirely losing sight of
the God of Abraham and the God of Nahor, to
whom he appealed when occasion offered (Gen. xxxi.
53), while he was ready, in the presence of Jacob,
to acknowledge the benefits conferred upon him by
Jehovah (Gen. xxx. 27). Such, indeed, was tha
character of most of the idolatrous worship of tha
Israelites. Like the Cuthean colonists in Samaria,
who " feared Jehovah and served their own gods "
(2 K. xvii. 83), they blended in a strange manner
a theoretical belief in the true God with the externa,
reverence which, in different stages cf their history
they were led to pay to the idols of the nations by
whom they were surrounded. For this species or
false worship they seem, at all times, to have had
an incredible propension. On their journey from
Shecbem to Bethel, the family of Jacob put away
from among them " the gods of the Joreigntr .- '
not tha teraphim of Leban, but the gods of the
Digitized by
Google
IDOLATRY
taasarias) thmngh whose land they pined, and
b amnlras and charms which wen worn u the
ippmdages of their worship (Gen. xxxv. 8, 4). And
this marked feature of the Hebrew character is
traceable throughout the entire history of the people.
Daring; their long residence in Egypt, the country
af symhousm, they defiled themselves with the idols
of the land, and it was long before the taint was
removed (Joan. xxiv. 14; Ex. xx. 7). Tothesegods
Moses, as the herald of Jehorah, flung down the
gauntlet of defiance (Kurtx, Gach. d. AIL B. ii.
it\ and the plagues of Egypt sniote their symbols
(Nam. zxxiii. 4). Vet, with the memory of their
deHveraiiee fresh in their minds, their leader absent,
the laraelities clamored for some risible shape in
which they might worship the God who had brought
them np oat of Egypt (Ex. xxxii.). Aaron lent
himself to the popular cry, and chose as the symbol
of deity one with which they had long been familiar
— the calf — embodiment of Apis, and emblem of
the productive power of nature. But, with a weak-
ness of character to which his greater brother was
a stranger, he compromised with his better im-
pulses by proclaiming a solemn least to Jehovah
(Ex. xxxii. 5). How much of the true Uod was
recognised by the people in this brutish symbol it
is impossible to conceive; the festival was charac-
terised by all the shameless licentiousness with
which idolatrous worship was associated (ver. 95),
and which seems to have constituted its chief at-
traction. But on this occasion, as on all others,
the tranagreaaion was visited by swift vengeance,
and three thousand of the offenders were slain.
For a while the erection of the tabernacle, and the
ilslili ill merit of the worship which accompanied it,
satisfied that craving for an outward sign which
the Israelites constantly exhibited; and for the
remainder of their march through the desert, with
the dwelling-place of Jehovah in their midst, they
did not again degenerate into open apostasy. But
bt waa only so long as their contact with the nations
was of a hostile character that this seeming ortho-
doxy was maintained. The charms of the daughters
sf Moab, as Balaam's bad genius foresaw, were
patent for evil: the Israelites were " yoked to Baal-
Pear " in the trammels of his fair worshippers, and
the character of their devotions is not obscurely
hinted at (Num. xxv.). The great and terrible
retribution which followed left so deep an impress
■pan the hearts of the people that, after the con-
stant of the promised land, they looked with an
eye of terror upon any indications of defection from
the worship of Jehovah, and denounced as Idolatrous
a memorial so slight as the altar of the Keubenites
at the passage of Jordan (Josh. xxil. 16).
During the lives of Joshua and the elders who
oaxlrred him, they kept brae to their allegiance; but
the generation following, who knew not Jehovah,
•or the works he had done for Israel, swerved from
was plain path of their fathers, and were caught in
tee toils of the foreigner (Judg. U.). From this
tkse forth their history becomes little more than a
e hiuBlde of the inevitable sequence of offense and
"They provoked Jehovah to anger
and the anger of Jehovah was hot against
he delivered them into the hands of
issuers that spoiled them " (Jjdg. U. 13, 14). The
ss natn es of the book of Judges, contemporaneous
r ■imaaiin tefl of the fierce struggle maintained
isshet their hated foes, and how women forgo*
BHsr tenderness and forsook their retirement to
fay the son* of victory over the oppressor. By
IDOLATRY 1128
turns each conquering nation strove to rrtattHsh
the worship of its national god. During the rule
of Midian, Joatb the father of Gideon had an altar
to Baal, and an Aaherah (Judg. vi. 2fi), though he
proved but a lukewarm worshipper (ver. 31). Even
Gideon himself gave occasion to idolatrous worship
yet the ephod which he made from the spoils of the
Midianites was perhaps but a votive offering to the
true God (Judg. viii. 27). It is not improbable
that the gold ornaments of which it was composed
were in some way connected with idolatry (cf. Is.
iii. 18-34), and that from their having been worn
as amulets, some superstitious virtue was conceived
to cling to them even in their new form. But
though in Gideon's lifetime no overt act of idolatry
was practised, he was no sooner dead than the
Israelites again returned to the sen-ice of the
Baalim, and, as if in solemn mockery of the cove-
nant made with Jehovah, chose from among thee.
Baal Berith, >>Baal of the Covenant" (cf. Zrit
Spicier), as the object of their special adoration
(Judg. viii. 33). Of this god we know only that
his temple, probably of wood (Judg. ix. 49), was a
stronghold in time of need, and that his treasury
was filled with the silver of the worshippers (ix. 4).
Nor were the calamities of foreign oppression con-
fined to the land of Canaan. The tribes on lbs
east of Jordan went astray after the idols of the
land, and were delivered into the hands of the chil-
dren of Amnion (Judg. x. 8). But they put away
from among them " the gods of the foreigner," and
with the baseborn Jephthah for their leader gained
a signal victory over their oppressors. The exploits
of Samson against the Philistines, though achieved
within a narrower space and with less important
results than those of his predecessors, fill a brilliant
page iu his country's history. But the tale of bis
marvelous deeds is prefaced by that ever-recurring
phrase, so mournfully familiar, " the children of
Israel did evil again in the eyes of Jehovah, and
Jehovah gave them into the hand of the Philis-
tines." Thus far idolatry is a national sin. The
episode of Micah, in Judg. xvii. xviii., sheds a lurid
light on the secret practices of individuals, who
without formally renouncing Jehovah, though ceas-
ing to recognize him as the theocratic King (xvii.
6), linked with his worship the symbols of ancient
idolatry. The house of Uod, or sanctuary, which
Micah made in imitation of that at Sbiloh, waa
decorated with an ephod and teraphim dedicated to
God, and with a graven and molten image conse-
crated to some inferior deities (Selden, dt Dit Syrig,
Synt 1. 2). It is a significant fact, showing how
deeply rooted in the people was the tendency to
idolatry, that a Levite, who, of all others, should
have been most sedulous to maintain Jehovah's
worship in Its purity, was found to assume the
office of priest to the images of Micah ; and that
this Levite, priest afterwards to the idols of Dan,
was no other than Jonathan, the son of Gershom,
the son of Moses. Tradition says that these idols
were destroyed when the Philistines defeated the
army of Israel and took from them th* ark of the
covenant of Jehovah (1 Sam. iv.). The Danites
are supposed to have carried tbem into the field, as
the other tribes bore the ark, and the Philistines
the Images of their gods, when they went forth to
battie (2 Sam. v. 21; Lewis, Ong. lltbr. v. 9).
But toe Seder Olam Rabba (c. 24) interprets " tat
captivity of the land" (Judg. tviii. 30), of the
eaptlvit- of Manaasehr and Benjamin of Tuusls
mistook the remains it later Untile worship §m
Digitized by
Google
1124 IDOLATRY
traces of the altar or statue which Hkah had dedi-
sated, and which wai worshipped by the tribe of
Dan (Selden, dt Dtt.Stp: Synt i. c 9; Stanley,
8. $ P. p. 398). In later time* the practice of secret
idolatry was carried to greater lengths. Images
were set up on the corn-floors, in the wine-rats,
and behind the doors of private houses (Is. Mi. 8;
Hos. ix. 1, 2); and to check this tendency the
statute in Deut. xxvii. 15 was originally promul-
gated.
Under Samuel's administration a fast was held,
and purificatory rites performed, to mark the publie
renunciation of idolatry (1 Sam. Tii. 8-6). Bat in
the reign of Solomon all this was forgotten. Each
of his many foreign wires brought with her the
gods of her own nation ; and the gods of Amnion,
Hoob, and Zidon, were openly worshipped. Three
of the summits of Olivet were crowned with the
high-places of Ashtoreth, Chemosh, and Moloch
(1 K. xt 7; 8 K. xxiii. 13), and the fourth, in
memory of his great apostasy, was branded with
the opprobrious title of the " Mount of Corruption."
Rehoboam, the son of an Ammonite mother, per-
petuated the worst features of Solomon's idolatry
(1 K. sir. 23-24); and in bis reign was made the
great schism in the national religion : when Jero-
boam, fresh from his recollections of the Apis
worship of Egypt, erected golden calves at Bethel
and at Dan, and by this crafty state-policy severed
for ever the kingdoms of Judah and Israel (1 K.
xii. 38-33). To their use were temples consecrated,
and the service in their honor was studiously copied
from the Mosaic ritual. High-priest himself, Jero-
boam ordained priests from the lowest ranks (8 Chr.
xi. 15); incense and sacrifices were offered, and a
solemn festival appointed, closely resembling the
feast of tabernacles (1 K. xii. 32, 88; ef. Am. iv.
4, 5). [Jerouuam.] The worship of the calves,
"the sin of Israel " (Hos. x. 8), which was appar-
ently associated with the goat-worship of Mendes
(9 Chr. xi. 15; Herod, ii. 48) or of the ancient
Zabii (l>ewis, Orig. Hebr. v. 3), and the Asherim
(1 K. xiv. 15; A. V. "groves"), ultimately spread
to the kingdom of Judah, and centred in Beer-sheba
(Am. v. 5, vii. 9). At what precise period it was
introduced into the Litter kingdom is not certain.
The Chronicles tell us how Abjjah taunted Jero-
boam with his apostasy, while the less partial nar-
rative in 1 Kings represents his own conduct as far
from exemplary (1 K. xv. 3). Asa's sweeping
reform spared not even the idol of his grandmother
Maachah, and, with the exception of the high-
places, he removed all relics of idolatrous worship
(1 K. xv. 18-14), with its accompanying impurities.
-If* reformation was completed by Jehoshaphat
(3 Chr. xvii. 6).
The successors of Jeroboam followed in his steps,
till Ahab, who married a Zidonian princess, at her
instigation (1 K. xxi. 25) built a temple and altar
to Bud, and revived all the abominations of the
Amorites (1 K. xxi. 2G). For this he attained the
bad preeminence of having done " more to provoke
Jehovah, the God of Israel, to anger than all the
kings of Israel that were before him " (1 K. xvi.
18). Compared with the worship of Baal, the
a The Syr. supports the rendering of "Tj?37 to v.
U.wo!oh the A. V. has adopted — " to enquire by " :
tat Ketl translates the clause, " It will be tor me to
T, n i. «. what shall be done with the altar, in
r la support his theory that this titer erected by
IDOLAXBT
worship of the calves was a venial c Sense, nresMht)
because it was morally leas detestable sad also isss
anti-national (1 K. xii. 88; 3 K. x. 28-31). [Eli-
jah, voL i. p. 708 *.] Henceforth Baat-wonbja
became so completely identified with the northern
kingdom that it is described as walking in the way
or statutes of the kings of Israel (2 hV. xvi. 3, xvii. 8),
as distinguished from the sin of Jeroboam, which
ceased not till the Captivity (2 K. xvii. 93), and lb*
corruption of the ancient inhabitants of the land.
The idolatrous priests became a numerous and im-
portant caste (1 K. xvili. 19). living tinder the pat-
ronage of royalty, and fed at the royal table. n»
extirpation of Baal's priests by Elijah, and of his fol-
lowers by Jehu (3 K. x.), in which the royal family
of Judah shared (8 Chr. xxii. 7), was a death-blow
to this form of idolatry in Israel, though other
systems still remained (3 K. xiii. 6). But while
Israel thus sinned and was punished, Judah was
more morally guilty (Ex. xvi. 61). The alliance
of Jehoshaphat with the family of Ahab transferred
to the southern kingdom, during the reigns of his
son and grandson, all the appurtenances of Bsal-
worship (8 K. viii. 18, 27). In less than ten yean
after the death of that king, in whose praise it is
recorded that he "sought not the Baalim," nor
walked "after the deed of Israel" (2 Chr. xvii. 8,
4), a temple had been built for the idol, statues sod
altars erected, and priests appointed to minister in
his service (9 K. xi. 18). Jehoiada's vigorous
measures checked the evil for a time, but his reform
was incomplete, and the high-places still remained,
as in the days of Asa, a nucleus for any fresh sys-
tem of idolatry (3 K. xii. 3). Much of this might
be due to the influence of the king's mother, Zibiah
of Beer-sheba, a place intimately connected with the
idolatrous defection of Judah (Am. viii. 14). After
the death of Jehoiada, the princes prevailed upon
Joash to restore at least some portion of his father's
idolatry (3 Chr. xxiv. 18). The conquest of the
Edomites by Amaziah introduced the worship of
their gods, which had disappeared since the days
of Solomon (8 Chr. xxv. 14, 20). After this period
even the kings who did not lend themselves to the
encouragement of false worship had to contend with
the corruption which still lingered in the hearts of
the people (8 K. xv. 35; 3 Chr. xxvii. 8). Hitherto
the temple had been kept pure. The statues of
Baal and the other gods were worshipped in then
own shrines, but Abas, who "sacrificed unto the
gods of Damascus, which smote him" (3 Chr.
xxviii. 23), and built altars to them at every comer
of Jerusalem, and high-places In every city of Judah,
replaced the brazen altar of burnt-offering by on*
made after the model of " At altar" of Damascus,
and desecrated it to bis own uses (9 K. xvi. 10-
1B).«
The conquest of the ton tribes by Shalmaneser
was for them the last scene of the drama of abom-
inations which had been enacted uninterruptedly
for upwards of 850 yean. In the northern king-
dom no reformer arose to vary the long line of
royal apostates; whatever was effected in the way
of reformation, was done by the hands of the people
(8 Chr. xxxl. 1). But even in their captivity they
Anas was not directly intended to prossns the tampls
by Idolatrous worship. But ft Is olaar that iirswisMin
of an Idolatrous nature had been I nt roduced Into lbs
temple, and was afterwards r emoved by B se akssh 9
Chr. xxix. 6; ef. Bar. vl. 21, tx. 11). It Is i ~
that thai nugnt have reference to the 1
Digitized by
Google
IDOLATRY
I to perpetuate the corruption. Toe
whoa the Assyrian oonqueron placed in t^eir
stead iu the cities of Samaria, brought with them
their own gods, and were taught at Bethel by a
priest of the captive nation " the manner of the
God of the land," the tenons thus learnt resulting
in a strange admixture of the calf-worship of Jero-
boam with the homage paid to their national deities
(2 K. xvii. 24-41' Their descendants were in
consequence regarded with suspicion by the elders
who returned from the Captivity with Ears, and
their offers of assistance rejected (Est. iv. 3).
The first set of Hezekiah on ascending the
throne was the restoration and purification of the
Temple, which bad been dismantled and dosed dur-
ing the latter part of his father's life (2 Chr. xxviii.
34; xxix. 3). The multitudes who flocked to Je-
rusalem to celebrate the paasover, so long in abey-
ance, removed the idolatrous altars of burnt-oflering
and incense erected by Ahax (2 Chr. xxx. 14).
Toe iconoclastic spirit was not confined to Judah
snd Benjamin, but spread throughout Ephraim and
Man—ah (9 Chr. xxxi. 1), and to aU external ap-
pearance idolatry was extirpated. But the reform
extended little below the surface (Is. xxix. 18).
Among the leaders of the people there were many
in high position who conformed to the necessities
of the time (Is. xxviii. 14), and under Manssaeh'a
patronage the false worship, which had been merely
driven into obscurity, broke out with tenfold vir-
Idolatry of every form, and with all the
i of enchantments, divination, and witch-
craft, was again rife; no place was too sacred, no
assocwtions too hallowed, to be spared the contam-
ination. If the conduct of Abas in erecting an
altar in the temple court is open to a charitable con-
struction, Manasseh's was of no doubtful character.
The two courts of the temple were profaned by
altars dedicated to the host of heaven, and the
image of the Asherah polluted the holy place (2
K. ni. 7; 3 Chr. xxxiii. 7, 15; cf. Jer. xxxii. 34).
Even in his late repentance he did not entirely de-
stroy all traces of bis former wrong. The people,
easily swayed, still burned incense on the high
phew; but Jehovah was the ostensible object of
their worship. The king's son sacrificed to his
father's idols, but was not associated with him in
hie repentance, and in his short reign of two years,
restored all the altars of the Baalim, and the im-
ages of the Asherah. With the death of Josiah
ended the last effort to revive among the people a
purer ritual, if not a purer faith. The lamp of
David, which had long abed but a struggling ray,
bekered for a while and than went out in the dark-
ness of Babylonian captivity.
Bat foreign exile was powerless to eradicate the
i inbred tendency to idolatry. One of the first
with which Ezra had to contend, and
which brought him well nigh to despair, was the
nrnte with which his countrymen took them foreign
wives of the people of the land, and followed tbem
m all their abominations (Ear. ixA The priests
and rulers, to whom he looked for assistance in his
treat enterprise, wen among the first io fall away
(Ear. ix. 2, x. 18; Neh. vi. 17, 18. xiii. 23). Even
during Uie Captivity the devotees of false wortoip
nfied their craft as prophets and diviners (Jer. xxix.
8; Ex. xiii.), and the Jews who fled to Egypt car-
ded with them recollections of the material pros-
serily which attended their idolatrous sacrifices in
Iwdab, and to the neglect of which the' Attributed
Sab- exiled condition (Jer. xli*. 17, 18). The eon-
112.
IDOLATRY
quests of Alexander in Asia caused Giuak I
to be extensively felt, and Greek idolatry to be first
tolerated, and then practiced, by the Jews (1 Maes.
i. 43-60, 64). The attempt of Antiochus to es-
tablish this form of worship was vigorously resisted
by Mattathiaa (1 Mace. ii. 23-26), who was joined
in his rebellion by the Assidseans (ver. 42), and
destroyed the altars at which the king commanded
them to sacrifice (1 Maec. ii. 25, 46). The erection
of synagogues baa been assigned as a reason for the
comparative purity of the Jewish worship after the
Captivity (Prideaux, Connect, i. 374), while an-
other cause has been discovered in the hatred for
images acquired by the Jews in their intercourse
with the Persians.
It has been a question much debated wbethei
the Israelites were ever so far given up to idolatry
as to lose all knowledge of the true God. It would
be hard to assert this of any nation, and still more
difficult to prove. That there always remained
among them a faithful few, who in the face of
every danger adhered to the worship of Jehovah,
may readily be believed, for even at a time when
Baal worship was most prevalent there were found
seven thousand in Israel who had not bowed before
his image (1 K. xxix. 18). But there is still room
for grave suspicion that among the masses of the
people, though the idea of a supreme Being — of
whom the images they worshipped were but the
distorted representatives — was not entirely lost, It
waa so obscured as to be but dimly apprehended.
And not only were the ignorant multitude thus led
astray, but the priests, scribes, and prophets be-
came leaders of the apostasy (Jer. ii. 8). Warbur-
ton, indeed, maintained that tbey never formally
renounced Jehovah, and that their defection con-
sisted "in joining foreign worship and idolatrous
ceremonies to the ritual of the true God " (Die.
Leg. bk. v. § 3). But one passage iu their history,
though confessedly obscure, seems to point to a
time when, under the rule of the judges, " Israel
for many days had no true God, and no teaching
priest, and no law " (2 Chr. xv. 3). The correl-
ative argument of Cudworth, who o ntends from
the teaching of the Hebrew doctors and rabbis "that
the pagan nations, anciently, at least the intelligent
amongst them, acknowledged one supreme God of
the whole world ; and that all other gods were but
creatures and inferior ministers," is oontroverted
by Hoaheim (Inttll. Syst. i. 4, § 30, and notes).
There can be no doubt that much of the idolatry
of the Hebrews consisted in worshipping the true
God under an image, such as the calves at Bethel
and Dan (Joseph. Ant. viii. 8, § 5 : So^u£\«ir in-
yv/ious t«7 0«<j>), and in associating his worship with
idolatrous rites (Jer. xli. 6), and places consecrated
to idols (2 K. xviii. 22). From the peculiarity of
their position they were never distinguished as the
inventors of a new pantheon, nor did they adopt
any one system of idolatry so exclusively as ever to
become identified with it." But they no sooner
came in contact with other nations than they readily
adapted themselves to their practices, the old spirit
of antagonism died rapidly away, and intermarriage
waa one step to idolatry.
II. The old religion of the Semitic rases con-
sisted, in the -pinion of Movers (Phi*. L c. 6), in
the deification of the powers and laws of nature;
these powers being considered either as distinct and
a A the afoebttss wan toe worship of
(Nan. xxi. »).
Digitized by
Google
1126
IDOLATRY
nt, or ai manifestations of one iupreme
and all-ruliug being. In moat instanoea the two
Idea* were co-existent. The deity, following human
analogy, waa conceived aa male and female: the
one representing the active, the other the puasive
principle of nature; the former the aource of spir-
itual, the latter of physical life. The transference
of the attributes of the one to the other resulted
either in their mystical conjunction in the her-
maphrodite, aa the Persian Mithra and Phoenician
Baal, or the two combined to form a thud, which
symbolized the essential unity of both'" With
these two supreme beings all other deities are iden-
tical; so that in different nations the same nature-
worship appears under different forms, representing
the varioiu aspects under which the idea of the
power of nature is presented. The sun and moon
were early selected as outward symbols of this all-
pervading power, and the worship of the heavenly
bodies was not only the most ancient hut the most
prevalent system of idolatry. Taking its rise, accord-
ing to a probable hypothesis, in the plains of Chal-
dasa, it spread through Egypt, Greece, Scythia, and
even Mexico and Ceylon. It was regarded as an of-
fense amenable to the civil authorities in the days of
Job (xxxi. 26-28), and one of the statutes of the
Mosaic law was directed against its observance
(Deut. iv. 19; xvii. 3); the former referring to the
star-worship of Arabia, the latter to the concrete
form in which it appeared among the Syrians and
Phoenicians. It is probable that the Israelites learnt
their first lessons in sun-worship from the Egyp-
tians, in whose religious system that luminary, as
Osiris, held a prominent place. The city of On
(Beth-ehemesh or Heliopolis) took its name from
his temple (Jer. xliii. 18), and the wife of Joseph
was the daughter of his priest (Gen. xli. 45). The
Phoenicians worshipped him under the title of
" Lord of heaven," D'OE? v53, BaaEth&mayim
(Bff\s-cEui)v, ace. to Sanchoniatho in Philo Byb-
Uus), and Adon, the Greek Adonis, and the Tham-
muz of Ezekiel (viii. 11). [Thammuz.] As
Molech or Milcom, the sun was worshipped by the
tmmonitee, and as Chemosh by the Moabites.
rhe Hadad of the Syrians is the same deity, whose
uame is traceable in Benhadad, Hadadezer, and
Hadad or Adad, the Edomite. The Assyrian Bel
or Belua, is another form of Baal. According to
Philo (de VU. Cont. § 3) the Easenes were wont
to pray to the sun at morning and evening (Joseph.
B. J. ii. 8, $ 6). By the later kings of Judah,
sacred horses and chariots were dedicated to the
sun-god, as by the Persians (2 K. xxiii. 11 ; Bo-
chart, ffitroz. pt. 1, bk. ii. c. xi.; Selden, de DS$
Syr. ii. 8); to march in procession and greet his
rising (R. Sol. Jarchi on 2 K. xxiii. 11). The
MassageUe offered hones in sacrifice to him (Strabo,
xi. p. 613), on the principle enunciated by Macro-
bius (SaL vii. 7), "like rejoiceth in like" ("simili-
bus similia gaudent; " cf. Her. i. 216), and the
custom was common to many nations.
Tho moon, worshipped by the Phoenician* under
the name of Aatarte (Luoian, de Dea Syra, c. 4),
« This will axplain the occurrence of the name of
Deal with the masculine and feminine articles In the
UCX. ; cf. Has. xi. 2; Jer. xlx. 6 ; Bom. xi. 4. Pbl-
Khcini, quoted by Mseroblus (SK. ill. 8), says that
«eo and women sacriflad to Venus or the Moon, with
m» gsrawnts of the sexes interchanged, because she
•as regarded both as msaeuUns and feminine (see Bel-
Ian, aV tU Hot. 1. 2). Henee liana and L umt ,
IDOLATKY
or Baaltia, the passive power of nature, aa Baal waa
the active (Movers, i. 149), and known to the He-
brews aa Ashtaroth or Aahtoreth, the tutelary god-
dess of the Zidonians, appears early among tho
objects of Israelitiah idolatry. But this Syro-Phoe-
nician worship of the sun and moon was of a grosses'
character than the pure star-worship of the Magi
which Movers distinguishes as Upper Asiatic «
Assyro-Persian, and was equally removed from the
Chaldean astrology and Zabianism of later times.
The former of these systems tolerated no images or
altars, and the contemplation of the heavenly bodies)
from elevated spots constituted the greater part of
its ritual.
But, though we have no positive historical ac-
count of star-worship before the Assyrian period,
we may infer that it was early practiced in a con-
crete form among the Israelites from the allusions
in Amos v. 26, and Acts vii. 42, 48. Even in the
desert they are said to have been given up to wor-
ship the host of heaven, while Chiun and Remphan,
or Rephau, have on various grounds been identified
with the planet Saturn. It was to counteract
idolatry of this nature that the stringent law of
Deut. xvii. 8 was enacted, and with the view of
withdrawing the Israelites from undue contempla-
tion of the material universe, Jehovah, the God of
Israel, is constantly placed before them as Jehovah
Zebaoth, Jehovah of Hosts, the king of heaven
(Dan. iv. 85, 87), to whom the heaven and heaven
of heavens belong (Deut x. 14). However this
may be, Movers (PkSn. i. 65, 66) contends that
the later star-worship, introduced by Ahaz and fol-
lowed by Hanasseh, was purer and more spiritual
in its nature than the Israelite-Phoenician worship
of the heavenly bodies under symbolical forms as
Baal and Asberah : and that it was not idolatry in
the same sense that the latter was, but of a simply
contemplative character. He is supported, to some
extent, by the fact that we find no mention of any
images of the sun or moon or the host of heaven,
but merely of vessels devoted to their service (2 K.
xxiii. 4). But there is no reason to believe that
the divine honors paid to the " Queen of Heaven "
(or as others render, " the frame " or " structure of
the heavens ")* were equally dissociated from image
worship. Mr. Layard (jvm. ii. 451) discovered a
bas-relief at Nimroud, which represented four idols
carried in procession by Assyrian warriors. One
of these figures he identifies with Hera the Assyr-
ian Astarte, represented with a star on her head
(Am. v. 26), and with the "queen of heaven,"
who appears on the rock-tablets of Pterium " stand-
ing erect on a lion, and crowned with a tower, or
mural coronet," aa in the Syrian temple of Hle-
rapolia (At p. 456; Lucian, de Dea Sgra, 81, 82).
But, in his remarks upon a figure which rceemblss
the Rhea of Diodorus, Mr. Layard adds, " the rep-
resentation in a human form of the c elest i al bodies,
themselves originally but a type, was a corruption
which appears to have crept at a later period into
the mythology of Assyria; for, in the more ancient
bas-reliefs, figures with caps surmounted by start
do not occur, and the sun, moon, and planet* stand
alone" (Id. pp. 457, 468).
o Jer. vii. 18 j xliv. 19. In the former jasssg* son*
M88. have DSH^Q for /"D^B, a reeding; sws
parted by the LXX., r$ trrpanf , as well as by ska
Syr. ■ -S"°1. pUeMn, its equivalent- But at a*
latter they both agree in the rendering « quean."
Digitized by
Google
IDOLATRY
Iks allusions in Job xxxvill. 81, 38, an jao ob-
■eore to allow any inference to be drawn M to the
mysterious influence* which were hetd bj the old
astrologers to be exercised by the atari over human
destiny, nor is there sufficient evidence to connect
them with anything more recondite than the astro-
nomical knowledge of the period. The same may
be said of the poetical figure in Deborah's chant
of triumph, " the stars from their highways warred
with Sisera " (Judg. v. 20). In the later times of
the monarchy, Masouoth, the planets, or the sodi-
ical signs, received, next to the sun and moon,
their share of popular adoration (2 K. xxiii. 5);
and the history of idolatry among the Hebrews
shoes at all times an intimate connection between
the deification of the heavenly bodies, and the
superstition which watched the clouds for signs,
and used divination and enchantments. It was
but a step from such culture of the sidereal powers
to the worship of Gad and Heni, Babylonian divin-
ities, symbols of Venus or the moon, as the goddess
of luck or fortune. Under the latter aspect, the
moon was reverenced by the Egyptians (Macrob.
8aL t 19); and the name Baal Gad is possibly an
example of the manner in which the worship of
the planet Jupiter as the bringer of luck was
grafted on the old faith of the Phoenicians. The
false gods of the colonists of Samaria were probably
connected with eastern astrology: Adrainmelecb,
Movers regards as the sun-fire — the Solar Mars,
and Anammelech the Solar Saturn (PhSn. i. 410,
411). The Vulgate rendering of Prov. xxvi. 8,
" aicat qui mittit lapidem in acervum Mercmii,"
fallows the Hidnuh on the passage quoted by Jar-
ehi, and requires merely a passing notice (see
Selden, dt DU Syria, ii. 15; Maim, de Idol iii.
S; Buxtorf, Lex. Talm. s. v. cVipiD).
Beast-worship, as exemplified in the calves of
Jeroboam and the dark hints which seem to point
to the goat of Mendes, has already been alluded
to. There is no actual proof that the Israelites
ever Joined in the service of Dagon," the fish-god
of the Philistines, though Ahaziah sent stealthily
to Baal-zebub, the fly-god of Ekron (3 K. 1.), and
in later times the brazen serpent became the object
of idolatrous homage (2 K. xriii. 4). But whether
the latter was regarded with superstitious reverence
as a memorial of their early history, or whether
Incense was offered to it as a symbol of some power
of nature, cannot now be exactly determined. The
threatening in Lev. xxvi. 30, " I will put your car-
casses upon the carcasses of your idols," may fairly
be considered as directed against the tendency to
pgard animals, as in Egypt, as the symbols of
leity. Tradition says that Nergal, the god of the
:«n of Cuth, the idol of fire, according to Leusden
(/"A*T Hebr. Wat. Diss. 43), was worshipped under
Use form of a cock ; Ashima as a he-goat, the em-
aiem of generative power ; Nibbax as a dog ; Adram-
meleeh as a mule or peacock; and Anammelech as
a horse or p h ea s a nt
■ Soma have exrlauwd the allusion In Zeph. 1. 9,
as referring to a practice connected with tbe worship
at* Dagon ; ramp. 1 Sam. v. 5. Ths Syrians, -f> the
•wthorlT of Xeoophon (Anab. 1. 4. j 9), paid Urine
Masts m flsh.
ft JanoM (Oaemosf. a. v. Drye) men Jons an oak
asar Hebron which existed in hi* infcacv «nd was the
waeatkwal trer beneath which AbraUm dwelt. It
was regarded with great reverence, and wis made an
'■tyest of worship by the heathen. Modem Palestine
IDOLATRY 1121
Of pure hero-worship among the Semitic rasas
we find no trace. Moses indeed seems to have en-
tertained some dim apprehension that his country-
men might, after his death, pay him more boson
than were due to man; and the anticipation of
this led him to review his own conduct in terms of
strong reprobation (Dent, iv. 21, 22). The ex-
pression in Ps. cvi. 28, " the sacrifices of the dead,''
is in all probability metaphorical, and Wisd. xhr.
15 refers to a later practice due to Greek influence.
The rabbinical commentators discover in Gen.
xlriii. 16, an allusion to the worshipping of angels
(CoL ii. 18), while they defend their ancestors from
the charge of regarding them in any other light
than mediators, or intercessors with God (Lewis,
Orig. Hebr. r. 3). It ii needless to add that their
inference and apology are equally groundless. With
like probability has been advanced the theory of
the demon-worship of the Hebrews, the only foun-
dation for it being two highly poetical passages
(Deut. xxxtt. 17; Ps. cvi. 37). It u possible that
the Persian dualism is hinted at in Is. xlv. 7.
But if the forms of the false gods were manifold,
the places devoted to their worship were almost
equally numerous. The singular reverence with
which trees have in all ages been honored is not
without example in the history of the Hebrews.
The terebinth at Mamre, beneath which Abraham
built an altar (Gen. xii. 7, xiii. 18), and tbe me-
morial grove planted by him at Beer-sheba (Gen.
xxi. 33), were intimately connected with patriarchal
worship, though in after-ages his descendants were
forbidden to do that which he did with impunity,
in order to avoid the contamination of idolatry.*
Aa a symptom of their rapidly degenerating spirit,
the oak of Sheehem, which stood in tbe sanctuary
of Jehovah (Josh. xxiv. 26), and beneath which
Joshua set up the stone of witness perhaps appears
in Judges (ix. 37), as " the oak (not ' plain,' as in
A. V.) of soothsayers " or " augurs." e Moun-
tains and high places were chosen spots for offering
sacrifice and incense to idols (1 K. xi. 7, xiv. 23);
and the retirement of gardens and tbe thick shade
of woods offered great attractions to their worship-
pers (2 K. xvi. 4; Is. i. 29; Hos. iv. 13). It was
the ridge of Carmel which Elijah selected as the
scene of his contest with the priests of Baal, fight-
ing with them the battle of Jehovah, as it were, on
their own ground. [Carmel.] Carmel was re-
garded by the Roman historians as a sacred moun-
tain of the Jews (Tac. H. ii. 78; Suet. Vetp. 7)
The host of heaven was worshipped on the house-
top (2 K. xxiii. 12; Jer. xix. 13, xxxii. 29; Zeph.
i. 6). In describing the aun-woi'ship of the Naba
taa, Strabo (xvi. p. 784) mentions two character
istics which strikingly illustrate the worship of
Baal. They built their altars on the roofs of
houses, and offered on them incense and libations
daily. On the wall of bis city, in the sight of the
besieging armies of Israel and Edom, the king of
Moab offered bis eldest son aa a burnt-offering.
abounds with sacred trees. They are found " all over
toe land covered with bits of rags from the garments
of passing villagers, hung up as acknowledgments or
as deprecatory signals and charms : and we find beau-
tiful clumps of oak-trees sacred to a kind or beings
called Jacob's daughters " (Thomson, Land and Book
II. 151). [See Oaovs.]
- Unless, Indeed, this be a reiki of ths andso
OanaamBeh worship ; an older name associated wits
Idolatry, which the conquering Hebrews ware com
msadsd and endeavored to obliterate (Dent. xfl. 8>
Digitized by
Google
1128
IDOLATRY
Ik* Pendant, who worshipped the inn under the
same of Milan (Strabo, it. p. 73S), sacrificed on
an derated spot, but built no altera or Images.
The prieste of the false worship are sometimes
designated Chemarim, a word of Syriac origin, to
which different meanings ban been assigned. It
U applied to the non-Levitical priests who burnt
incense on the high-places (3 K. xxiii. 5) as well
as to the priests of the calves (Hos. x. 5); and the
corresponding word is used in the Peshito (Judg.
xviii. 30) of Jonathan and his descendants, priests
to the tribe of Dan, and in Targ. Onkelos (Gen.
xhii. 22) of the priests of Egypt. The Rabbis,
followed by Gesenius, bare derived it from a root
signifying " to be black," and without any authority
assert that the name was given to idolatrous priests
from the black vestments which they wore. But
white was the distinctive color in the priestly gar-
ments of all nations from India to Gaul, and black
was only worn when they sacrificed to the subter-
ranean gods (Bahr, Hyrnb. ii. 87, Ac.). That a
special dress was adopted by the Baal-worshippers,
as well as by the false prophets (Zech. xiii. 4), is
evident from 2 K. x. 22 (where the rendering
should be "tAe apparel"): the vestments were
kept in an apartment of the idol temple, under
the charge probably of one of the inferior priests.
Micah'a Levite was provided with appropriate robes
(Judg. zvii. 10). The "foreign apparel," men-
tioned in Zepb. i. 8, refers doubtless to a similar
dress, adopted by the Israelites in defiance of the
sumptuary law in Mum. xv. 87-40.
In addition to the priests there were other per-
sons intimately connected with idolatrous rites, and
the impurities from which they were inseparable.
Both men and women consecrated themselves to
the service of it'ols: the former as D*C7|7, kedi-
ihtm, for which (here is reason to believe the A. V.
(Deut. xxiii. 17, Ac.) has not given too harsh an
equivalent; the latter as TVittlp.. ktdeshdth. who
wore shrines for Astarte (2 K. xxiii. 7), and re
Bembled the iraipcu of Corinth, of whom Strabo
(viii. p. 378) says there were more than a thousand
attached to the temple of Aphrodite. Egyptian
prostitutes consecrated themselves to Isis (Jut. vi.
489, ix. 22-24). The same class of women existed
among the Phosniciann. Armenians, Lydians, and
Babylonians (Her. i. 93. 199; Strabo, xi. p. 632
Epiet. of Jerem. vur. 43). They are distinguished
from the public prostitutes (Hos. iv. 14) and asso-
ciated with the performances of sacred rites, just
as in Strabo (xii. p. 559) we find the two classes
coexisting at Comana, the Corinth of Pontus,
orach frequented by pilgrims to the shrine of Aph-
rodite " The wealth thus obtained flowed into the
treasury of the idol temple, and against such a
practice the injunction in Deut xxiii. 18 is directed.
Dr. Maitlund, anxious to defend the moral charac-
ter of Jewish women, has with much ingenuity
attempted to show that a meaning foreign to their
true sense has been attached to the words above
mentioned; and that, though closely associated
with idolatrous services, they do not indicate such
Vul corruption (Essay on False Worship). But
, as Movers, with great appearance of probability,
has conjectured (Ph6n. i. 679), the class of persons
IDOLATRY
alluded to was composed of foreigners, the Jwsl al
women in this respect need no such advocacy
That such customs existed among foreign nations
there is abundant evidence to prom (Lueian, dt
8yra Dta, e. 5); and from the juxtaposition of
prostitution and the idolatrous rites against whisk
the laws in Lev. xix. are aimed, it is probable that
next to its immorality, one main reason why it was
visited with such stringency was its concretion
with idolatry (comp. 1 Cor. vi. 9).
But besides these accessories there were the or-
dinary rites of worship which idolatrous systems
had in common with the religion of the Hebrews
Offering burnt sacrifices to the idol gods (2 K. v.
17), burning incense in their honor (1 K. xi. 8),
and bowing down in worship before their images
(1 K. xix. 18) were the chief parts of their ritual;
and from their very analogy with the ceremonies
of true worship were more seductive than the
grosser forms. Nothing can be stronger or more
positive than the lauguage in which these cere-
monies were denounced by Hebrew law. Erery
detail of idol- worship was made the subject of a
separate enactment, and many of the laws, which in
themselves seem trivial and almost absurd, receive
from this point of view their true significance. We
are told by Maimonides (Mor. Nth. c. 12) that the
prohibitions against sowing a field with mingled
seed, and wearing garments of mixed material, were
directed against the practices of idolaters, who
attributed a kind of magical influence to the mix-
ture (Lev. xix. 19; Spencer, dt Leg. Hebr. ii. 18).
Such too were the precepts which forbade that the
garments of the sexes should be interchanged (Deut
xxii. 5; Maimon. dt ldoL xii. 9). According to
Macrobius (Sat. iii. 8) other Asiatics when they
sacrificed to their Venus changed the dress of the
sexes. The priests of Cybele appeared in women's
clothes, and used to mutilate themselves (Creuier,
Symb. ii. 34, 42): the same custom was observed
" by the Ithvphalli in the rites of Bacchus, and by
the Athenians in their Ascophoria " (Young, /dot
Cur. in JUL. 1. 105; cf. l.ucian, dt Dta Syra, c.
15). To preserve the Israelites from contamination,
they were prohibited for three years after their eon-
quest of Canaan from eating of the fruit-trees of
the land, whose cultivation bad been attended with
magical rites (Lev. xix. 23). They were forbidden
to " round the comer of the head," and to " mar
the corner of the beard" (Lev. xix. 27), as the
Arabians did in honor of their gods (Her. iii. 8, iv.
176). Hence, the phrase P«5 TlSf?, I""***
phSdh, (literally) " shorn of the comer," Is especially
applied to idolaters (Jer. ix. 26, xxv. 28). Spencer
(dt Leg. Hebr. ii. 9, % 2) explains the law forbid-
ding the offering of honey (Lev. ii. 11) as intended
to oppose an idolatrous practice. Strabo describes
the Magi as offering in all their sacrifices libations
of oil mingled with honey and milk (xv. p. 733).
Offerings in which honey was an ingredient were
made to the inferior deities and the dead (Horn.
Od. x. 519; Porph. dt Antr. Nymph, c. 17). So
also the practice of eating the flesh of sacrifices
" over the blood " (Lev. xix. 26; Ea. xxxiii. 25, 26)
was, according to Maimonides, common among tb*
Zabii. Spencer gives a double reason for the pro
i Illustration, though not an example, of this
I m the modern history of Europe. At a pe-
tal of great profligacy and corruption of morals,
Isasniiiissiis— was carried to such an excess in Stres-
bunr that the public prostitute* received the appalls
tioo of the noaOows of the cathedral (MHIar, T W. •
Hist, a 441).
Digitized by
Google
IDOLATBT
that it ni a rite of divination, and
Urination of the worst kind, a specie) of necro-
mancy by which they attempted to raise the spirit*
jf the dead (comp. Hor. Sat. i. 8). There are
supposed to be allusions to the practice of necro-
mancy in Is. lxv. 4, or at any rate to superstitious
rites in connection with the dead. The grafting
of one tree upon another was forbidden, because
among idolaters the process was accompanied by
gross obscenity (Maim. Mor. Neb. c 12). Cutting
the flesh for the dead (Lev. xix. 28; 1 K. xriii. 28),
and making a baldness between the eyes (Deut
xiv. lj were associated with idolatrous rites: the
latter being a custom among the Syrians (Sir G.
Wilkinson in Rawlinson's Herod, ii. p. 158, note).
The thrice repeated and much-vexed passage, " Thou
ahalt not seethe a kid in his mother's milk " (Ex.
xxiii. 19, xxxir. 36; Deut. xiv. 21), interpreted by
some as a precept of humanity, is explained by
Ondworth in a very different manner. He quotes
bom a Karaite commentary which he had seen in
MS. : " It was a custom of the ancient heathens,
when they had gathered in all their fruit, to take
a kid and boil it in the dam's milk, and then in a
miffi-r^ way go about and besprinkle with it all
the trees and fields and gardens and orchards;
HiinMng by this means they should make them
fructify, and bring forth again more abundantly toe
following year" (On Ike Lorttt Supper, c 3)."
The law which regulated clean and unclean meats
(Lev. xx. 33-26) may be considered both as a san-
itary regulation, and also as having a tendency to
separate the Israelites from the surrounding idol-
atrous nations! It was with the same object, in the
opinion of Michaelis, that while in the wilderness
they were prohibited from killing any animal for
food without first offering it to Jehovah (Loot of
Motet, trans. Smith, art 203). The mouse, one
of the unclean animals of Leviticus (xi. 29), was
sacrificed by the ancient Magi (Is. lxvi. 17 ; Movers,
PUn. i. 319). It may have been some such reason
a* that assigned by Lewis (Orig. Hebr. v. 1), that
the dog was the symbol of an Egyptian deity, which
gave rise to the prohibition in Deut. xxiii. 18.
Movers says the dog was offered in sacrifice to
Moloch (i. 404), as swine to the moon and Dionysus
by the Egyptians, who afterwards ate of the flesh
(Her. iii. 47; Is. lxv. 4). Eating of the things
offered was a necessary appendage to the sacrifice
(eomp. Ex. xviii. 12, xxxii. 6, xxxiv. 15 ; Num. xxv.
% a\e.). Among the Persians the victim was eaten
by the worshippers, and the soul alone left for the
jod (Strabo, xv. 733). "Hence it is that the
. iobtiry of the Jews in worshipping other gods is
so often described syneodochically under the notion
•/ tasting. Is. lvii. 7, ' Upon a high and lofty
mountain thou hast $et thy bed, and thither wentest
than up to offer sacrifice;' for in those ancient
times they were not wont to sit at feasts, but lie
down on beds or couches. Ex. xxiii. 41 : Amos ii.
8, ' They hud themselves down upon clothes laid
to pledge by every altar,' »'. e. laid themselves dowii
•o eat of the sacrifice that was offered on the altar:
jsnp. E*. xviii. 11 " (Cudworth, ut nprn, o. 1 ;
at 1 Cor. riii. 10). The Israelites were forbidden
-•to print any mark upon them " (Lev. xix. 88),
I it was a custom of idolaters to brand upon
r flesh some symbol of the deity they worshipped.
IDOLATRY
1189
a Br. Thomson mentions a fcvorita dish among the
lass* salts* 'tea iimna, to which ha oonoame allusion
aaatlUsi md Book, L WW
as the ivy-leaf of Bacchus (8 Maoc. ii. 39). Accord-
ing to Ludan (de Dta Byra, 59), all the Assyrians
wore marks of this kind on their necks and wrists
(comp. Is. xliv. 6; Gal. vi. 17; Rev. xiv. 1,11).
Many other practices of false worship are alluded
to, and made the subjects of rigorous prohibition
but none are more frequently or more severely de-
nounced than those which peculiarly distinguished
the worship of Molech. It has been attempted to
deny that the worship of this idol was polluted by
the foul stain of human sacrifice, but the allusions
are too plain and too pointed to admit of reasonable
doubt (Deut. xii. 31; 3 K. iii. 37; Jer. vii. 31; Pa.
cvi. 37; Es. xxiii. 39). Nor was this practice con-
fined to the rites of Molech ; it extended to those
of Baal (Jer. xix. 5), and the king of Moab (2 K.
iii. 37) offered his son as a bunitroffering to his
god Chemosh. The Phoenicians, we are told by
Porphyry (de Abttin. ii. c. 66), on occasions of great
national calamity sacrificed to Kronos one of their
dearest friends. Some allusion to this custom may
be seen in Micah vi. 7. Kissing the images of the
gods (1 K. xix. 18; ipos. xiii. 2), hanging votive
offerings in their temples (1 Sam. xxxi. 10), and
carrying them to battle (3 Sam. v. 21), as the Jews
of Maccabeus' army did with the things conse-
crated to the idols of the Jamnites (2 Maoc xii.
40), are usages connected with idolatry which are
casually mentioned, though not made the objects
of express legislation. But soothsaying, interpre-
tation of dreams, necromancy, witchcraft, magic,
and other forms of divination, are alike forbidden
(Deut xviii. 9; 3 K. i. 3; Is. lxv. 4; Ex. xxi. 31).
The history of other nations — and indeed the too
common practice of the lower class of the popula-
tion of Syria at the present day — shows us that
such a statute as that against bestiality (Lev. xviii.
23) was not unnecessary (cf. Her. ii. 46; Rom. i.
26). Purificatory rites in connection with idol-
worship, and eating of forbidden food, were visited
with severe retribution (Is. lxvi. 17). It is evident,
from the context of Es. viH. 17, that the votaries
of the sun, who worshipped with their faces to the
east (v. 16), and "put the branch to their nose,"
did so in observance of some idolatrous rite. Movers
(PkSn. i. 66), unhesitatingly affirms that the
allusion is to the branch Barsom, the holy branch
of the Magi (Strabo, xv. p. 733), while Havemiek
(Comm. ru Ettch. p. 117), with equal confidence,
denies that the passage supports such an inference,
and renders, Laving in view the lament of the
women for Thammuz, " sie entsenden den Trauer-
gesang su ihren Zorn." The waving of a myrtle
branch, says Maimonides (de IdoL vi. 2), accom-
panied the repetition of a magical formula in incan
tations. An illustration of the usage of boughs in
worship will be found in the Greek iKtrnpla (jEsoh.
Ewn. 43; Suppl. 193; Schol. on Aristoph. PluU
383; Porphyr. de Ant. Nymph, c. 33). For detailed
accounts of idolatrous ceremonies, reference mutt
be made to the articles upon the several idols-
Ill. It remains now briefly to consider the light
in which idolatry was regarded in the Mosiae code,
and the penalties with which it was visited. If one
main object of the Hebrew polity was to teach the
unity of God, the extermination of idolatry was but
a subordinate end. Jehovah, the God of the Israel-
itea, was the civil head of the State. He was the
theocratic king of the people, who had delivered
them from bondage, and to whom they had taken a
wiUlng oath of allegiance. They had entered into a
■Oahun league and covenant with illnoss their ciws«
Digitized by
Google
1180
IDOLATRY
Hog (coop. 1 Sam. Till. 7), by whom obedience
wm requited with temporal blearing*, and rebellion
with temporal punishment. This original contract
of the Hebrew government, aa it baa been termed,
la contained in Ex. xix. 3-8, xx. 2-5; Dent. xxix.
10-xxx. ; the bleasinga promised to obedience are
enumerated in Deut. xxriii. 1-14, and the wither-
ing curaea on disobedience in verses 16-68. That
this covenant was faithfully observed it needa but
alight acquaintance with Hebrew history to perceive.
Often broken and often renewed on the part of the
people (Judg. x. 10; 2 Chr. xr. 12, 13; Neh. ix.
38), it was kept with unwavering constancy on the
part of Jehovah. To their kings he stood in the
relation, so to speak, of a feudal superior ; they were
his representatives upon earth, and with them, as
with the people before, his covenant was made
(1 K. ill. 14, xi. 11). Idolatry, therefore, to an
Israelite, was a state offenee (1 Sam. xv. 23),° a
political crime of the gravest character, high treason
against the majesty of his king. It was a trans-
gression of the covenant (Deut. xvii. 2), " the evil "
preeminently in the eyes of Jehovah (1 K. xxi. 25,
opp. to ~ITT*rr, "tin right," 2 Chr. xxvii. 2).
But it was much more than all this. While the
Idolatry of foreign nations is stigmatized merely as
vi abomination in the sight of God, which called
for his vengeance, the sin of the Israelites is re-
garded as of more glaring enormity, and greater
moral guilt In the figurative language of the
prophets, the relation between Jehovah and bis
people is represented as a marriage bond (Is. liv. 5;
Jer. iii. 14), and the worship of false gods with all
its accompaniments (Lev. xx. 56) becomes then the
greatest of social wrongs (Hos. ii. ; Jer. iii. etc.).
This is beautifully brought out in Hos. ii. 16, where
the heathen name Baali, my master, which the
apostate Israel has been accustomed to apply to her
foreign poss e ssor, is contrasted with Ishl, my man,
my husband, the native word which she is to use
when restored to her rightful husband, Jehovah.
Much of the significance of this figure was unques-
tionably due to the impurities of idolaters, with
whom such corruption was of no merely spiritual
character (Ex. xxxiv. 16; Num. xxv. 1, 2, Ac.),
but manifested itself in the grossest and most
revolting forms (Rom. i. 26-32).
Regarded in a moral aspect, false gods an called
"stumbling blocks" (Ex. xiv. 3), "lies" (Am. ii.
4; Rom. i. 25), >' horrors " or " frights " (1 K. xr.
13; Jer. 1. 38), "abominations" (Deut. xxix. 17,
axil. 16; 1 K." xi. 6; 2 K. xxiii. 13), "guilt"
abstract for concrete, Am. viii. 14, rTQtTN,
aihmih, comp. S Chr. xxix. 18, perhaps with a
play on AMma, S K. xvii. 80), and with a pro-
found sense of the degradation consequent upon
their worship, they are characterized by the prophets,
whose mission it was to warn the people against
them (Jer. xlir. 4), aa "shame" (Jer. xi. 13; Hos.
ix. 10). As considered with reference to Jehovah,
they are " other gods " (Josh. xxir. 2, 16), " strange
gods " (Deut. xxxii. 16), " new gods " (Judg. v. 8),
'devils, — not God" (Deut. sxxii. 17; 1 Cor. x.
a The point or this ran* <ts lost In the A. T. : It
should be " tor the sin of witchcraft (Is) ssbellion ; and
Idolatry (lit vanity) and tnapbim (are) stabbomnafs."
lbs Israelites, contrary to command, had spared of
at* spoil of the Idolatrous AmaleMtee •> oner to Je-
ws*, and thus assedatsd bat worship vdth that of
IDOLATRY
SO, 91) ; and, as denoting their foreign Orlgbs
"gods of the foreigner" (Josh. xxiv. 14, 16). •
Their powerlessness is indicated by describing tartar,
as "gods that cannot save" (b. xhr. SO), "thai
made not the heavens" (Jer. x. 11), " nothing "
(Is. xli. 24; 1 Cor. viii. 4), " wind and emptiness "
(la. xli. 29), "vanities of the heathen " (Jer. xhr
22; Acta xiv. 15); and yet, while their deity it
denied, their personal existenoe seems to have been
acknowledged (Kurtz, Getch. d.A.ft.il 86, Ac.),
though not in the same manner in which the pre-
tentions of local deities were reciprocally recognised
by the heathen (1 K. xx. 23, 28; 2 K. xvii. 96).
Other terms of contempt are employed with refer-
ence to idols, D , Vbfc«, m&m (Lev. xix. 4), and
D,1 ? , ^3i S»*i*» (Deut xxix. 17), to which dif-
ferent meanings have been assigned, and many
which indicate ceremonial uncleanneas. [Tool, p.
1118 o.]
Idolatry, therefore, being from one point of view
a political offense, could be punished without in-
fringement of civil rights. No penalties were at-
tached to mere opinions. For aught we know,
theological speculation may have been as rife among
the Hebrews s* in modem times, though such was
not the tendency of the Semitio mind. It was not,
however, such speculations, heterodox though they
might be, but overt acts of idolatry, which were
made the subjects of legislation (Michaelis, Lam
of Motu, arts. 246, 246). The first and second
commandments are directed against idolatry of
every form. Individuals and communities were
equally amenable to the rigorous code. The indi-
vidual offender was devoted to destruction (Ex. xxiL
20); his nearest relatives were not only bound to
denounce him and deliver him up to punishment
(Deut xiii. 2-10), but their hands were to strike
the first blow when, on the evidence of two wit-
nesses at least, he was stoned (Deut xvii. 2-6).
To attempt to seduce others to false worship was a
crime of equal enormity (Dent xiii. 6-10). An
idolatrous nation shared a similar, fate. No foots
are more strongly insisted on in the O. T. than that
the extermination of the Canaanites was the pun-
ishment of their idolatry (Ex. xxxiv. 15, 16; Dent
vii., xii. 29-31, xx. 17), and that the calamities of
the Israelites were due to the same cause (Jer. ii
17). A city guilty of idolatry was looked upon as
s cancer of the state; it was considered to be in
rebellion, and treated according to the laws of war.
Its inhabitants and all their cattle were put to
death. No spoil was taken, but everything it con-
tained was burnt with itself; nor was it allowed to be
rebuilt (Deut xiii. 13-18; Josh. vi. 26). Saul lost
his kingdom, Achan his life, and Hiel his family,
for transgressing this law (1 Sam. xv.; Josh, vii.;
1 K. xvi. 84). The eUver and gold with which
the idols were covered were accursed (Deut vii. 26,
26). And not only were the Israelites forbidden
to serve the gods of Canaan (Ex. xxiii. 24), but
even to mention their names, that is, to call upon
them in prayer or any form of worship (Ex. xxiii
» In the A. V. ths terms "IT, **>, "stranfs," sal
"93 «* '")??> nMr w •**•» "*« i * n i" •*• ■*•
uniformly distinguished, and the point of a passage tt
frequently lost by the interchange of one with tin
other, or by rendering both by ths same word. So P
baud. 9 should be, "There shall not be in thee
strongs god, nor ahstt thou worship tflnign end.'-
Digitized by
Google
IDOLATBl
U, Josh nfiL 7). Oil takng possession of the
and the)' were to obliterate all traces of the exist-
ing idolatry; statues, altars, pillars, idoi-temples,
rrery person and everything connected with it,
were to be swept away (Ex. xxiii. 21, 32, xxxiv.
13; Deut vii. 5, 25, xii. 1-3, xx. 17), and the
name and worship of the idols blotted out. Such
were the precautions taken by the framer of the
Mosaic code to preserve the worship of Jehovah,
the trjc God, in its purity. Of the manner in
which his descendant* have " put a fence " about
" the law " with reference to idolatry, many in-
stances will be found in Mairaonides (de /dol.).
They were prohibited from using vessels, scarlet
garment*, bracelets, or rings, marked with the sign
of the sun, moon, or dragon (vii. 10); trees planted
or stones erected for idol-worship were forbidden
(riii. 5, 10); and, to guard against the possibility
of contamination, if the image of an idol were
found among other images intended for ornament,
they were all to be cast into the Dead Sea (vii.
11).
IV. Much indirect evidence on this subject might
be supplied by an investigation of proper names.
Mr. Layard has remarked, " According to a custom
existing from time immemorial in the East, the
name of the Supreme Deity was introduced into
the names of men. This custom prevailed from
the banks of the Tigris to the Phoenician colonies
beyond the Pillars of Hercules; and we recognize
in the Sardanapalus of the Assyrians, and the Han-
nibal of the Carthaginians, the identity of the relig-
ions system of the two nations, as widely distinct
in the time of their existence as in their geograph-
ical position " (JV«». ii. 480). The hint which ha
has given can be but briefly followed out here.
Traces of the sun-worship of the ancient Canaanites
remain in the nomenclature of their country. Beth-
abemesh, " house of the sun," En-ehemesh, >' spring
of the sun," and (r-shemesh, "city of the sun,"
whether they be the original Canaanitish names,
sr their Hebrew renderings, attest the reverence
paid to the source of light and heat, the symbol
of the fertilizing power of nature. Samson, the
Hebrew national hero, took his name from the
name luminary, and was born in a mountain-village
above the modern 'Ain Shenu (En-shemesh : Thom-
son, fsmd and Book, ii. 361). The name of Baal,
the sun-god, is one of the most common occurrence
in compound words, and is often associated with
places consecrated to his worship, and of which
perhaps he was the tutelary deity. Bamoth-baal,
"the high-places of Baal;" Baal-hermon, Beth-
Baal-meon, Baal-gad, Baal-hamon, in which com-
pound the names of the sun-god of Phoenicia and
ligypt are associated, Baal-Taniar, and many others,
are instances of this." Nor was the practice con-
fa ed to the names of places : proper names are
found with the same element- Ksh baa), Ish-baal,
etc., are examples The Amorites, <rhom Joshua
did not drive out, dwelt on Mount Hem, in Aija-
lon, "the mountain of the sun" [Timnath-
hibes]. Here and there we find traces of the
attempt made by the Hebrews, on their conquest
jf the country, to extirpate idolatry. Thus Baalah
» Khjath-baal, "the town of Baal," became Kir-
IDOLATBY
1181
a Rut temples in Syria, dedicated to tr.i several
■vtsdtiM, did transfer their names to he places when
4*y stood, is evident from the testmony of Ludao
SB Assyrian himnlt His derlvado. of Bim froc
sat temple of the Aiayrian Hem shows that urn was
Joth-jearhn, "the town of forests " (Josh. w. 80).
The Moon, Astarte or Ashtaroth, gave her nam* It
a city of Bashan (Josh. xiii. 13, 31), and it is net
improbable that the name Jericho may hare been
derived from being associated with the worship of
this goddess. [Jkricho.] Nebo, whether it be
the name under which the Chaldteans worshipped
the Moon or the planet Mercury, enters into many
compounds: Nebu-zaradan, Samgar-nebo, and the
like. Bel is found in BeUhazzar, Belteshazzar, and
others. Were Baladan of Semitic origin, it would
probably be derived from Baol-Adon, or Adonis,
the Phoenician deity to whose worship Jer. xxii. 18
seems to refer ; but it has more properly been traced
to an Indo-Uermanic root Hadad, Hadadezer,
Benhadad, are derived from the tutelar deity of
the Syrians, and in tfergalsharezer we recognize
the god of the Cushites. Chemosh, the fire-god
of Moab, appears in Carchemish, and Peor in Beth-
peor. Malcom, a name which occurs but once, and
then of a Moabite by birth, may have been con-
nected with Molech and Milcom, the abomination
of the Ammonites. A glimpse of star-worship
may lie seen in the name of the city Chesil, the
Semitic Orion, and the month Chisleu, without
recognizing in Rahab " the glittering fragments of
the sea-snake trailing across the northern sky." It
would perhaps be going too far to trace in En-gedl,
*' spring of the kid," any connection with the goat-'
worship of Mendes, or any relics of the wars of the
giants in Rapha and Rephaim. Kiirst, indeed, rec-
ognizes in Gedi, Venus or Astarte, the goddess of
fortune, and identical with Gad (ffnrulio. s. v.).
But there ire fragment* of ancient idolatry in other
names in which it is not so palpable. Ish-bosheth
is identical with Esh-boal, and Jerulbesheth with
Jerubbaal, and Mephibosheth and Meribbaal an
but two names for one person (cf. Jer. xi. 13). The
worship of the Syrian Kimmon appears in the
names Hadad-rimmon, and Tabrimroon ; and if, as
some suppose, it be derived from TUB"}, Rimmtn,
" a pomegranate-tree," we may connect it with the
towns of the same name in Judah and Benjamin,
with En-Rimmon and the prevailing tree-worship.
It is impossible to pursue this investigation to any
length : the hint* which have been thrown out may
prove suggestive. W. A. W.
IDU'BL CUovijAoj: Ecetlon), 1 Esdr. riii.
48. [Ariel, 1.]
IDTJME'A [or IDUM^'A] (DY1$} lea
frequently □"*!??• red]: 7) 'ISovpafa: Idumaa,
Etlom), b. xxxiv*. 5, 6 ; Ez. xxxv. 15, xxxxvi. 5 ; 1
Mace. It. 15, 29, 61, v. 3, vi. 31; 2 Maco. xii. 39
Mark ill. 8. [Edom.]
IDTJME'ANS [or IDUM^'ANS] (o.
'IBovpowi: Jdumai), 2 Mace. x. 15, 16. [Edom-
ites.]
I'OAL (7W"' [whom God redeem or neenget]).
1- ClAooA; Alex. 1-yoX: Jgnl.) Son of Joseph,
of the tribe of Issachar, chosen by Moses to repre-
sent that tribe among the spies who went up from
Kadesh to search the Promised Land (Num. xiii.
n
familiar with the circumstance (it Dea Syr. e. 1).
Baliampsa ( = Beth-shemesh), a town of Arabia, de-
rived Its name from the sun-worship (Voastns, ik
7W. Gnt. 11. e. 8), like Kir Hens ««r. xlvwJ U
of Moab.
Digitized by
Google
1182
IGDALIAH
*. [rda\: IgaaL] One of the beroei cf LV
tld'a guard, son of Nathan of Zobah (2 Sam. xxiii.
W, r«foX). In the parallel list of 1 Chr. the name
M given u "Joel the brother of Nathan" (xL 38,
leW^A)- Kennicott, after a minute examination of
the paaaage both in the original and in the ancient
version*, decides in favor of the latter aa most like
the genuine text (Dissertation, pp. 212-214).
This name is really identical with Igeal.
IODALI'AH ( ! TPV>'3£, i. e.IgdahVhu [Je-
hovah u great, Fiirat ; whom Jehovah makes great,
Gee.]: TotoXin; [FA. omita:] Jegedeliat), a
prophet or holy man — " the mail of God " — named
once only (Jer. xxxv. 4), as the father of Hasan,
in the chamber of whose sons, the Bene-Hanan, in
the house of Jehovah, Jeremiah had that remark-
able interview with the Rechabites which is recorded
in that chapter.
IGTBAL (btCP [see Ioal] : 'l«<j\: Jegaat),
• son of Shemaiah ; a descendant of the royal bouse
of Judab (1 Chr. iii. 22). According to the pres-
ent state of the text of this difficult genealogy, he
is fourth in descent from Zerubbabel ; but, accord
ing to Lord A. Hervey's plausible alteration, he is
the son of Sbimed, brother to Zerubbabel, and
therefore but one generation distant from the latter
(Genealogy of our Lord, pp. 107-109). The
name is identical with Ioal [2 Sam. xxiii. 36] ;
and, as in that case, the LXX. give it aa JoeL
ITM (O y *V [ruins, «fcme-*e<nM]). X. (r«rf:
Jieabarim). The partial or contracted form of the
name Ije-Abarim, one of the later stations of the
Israelites on their journey to Palestine (Num.
xxxiii. 45). In the Samaritan version Iim is ren-
dered by Cephrani, " villages ; " and in the Targum
Pseudojon. by Gizzeh, n<2, possibly pointing to
sheep-shearing in the locality. But in no way do
we gain any clew to the situation of the place.
3. (Bokc6k; Alex. Avet/i'- Iim), a town in the
extreme south of Judah, named in the same group
with Beer-sheba, Hormah, etc. (Josh. xv. 29). The
Peshito Syriac version has Elin, , '^ •>■ No
trace of the name has yet been discovered in this
lirection. G.
WE-AB'ARIM (D^Sn V.?i wiUx the
teflmte article, lye ha-Abarim — the heaps, at
lane, of the farther regions : Jerome ad Fabiolam,
acereos taptdum tranteuntiwn : 'Axa\yai [Vat.
XaA-yAci, Alex. Ax<A-yai], and Tat' Jeabarim,
Mid jieabarim), one of the later halting places of
the children of Israel as they were approaching
Palestine (Num. xxi. 11 ; xxxiii. 44). It was next
beyond Obolh, and the station beyond it again was
the Wady Zared — the torrent of the willows —
rbably one of the streams which run into the
E. angle of the Dead Sea. Between Ije-abarim
and Dibon-gad, which succeeds it in Num. xxxiii.,
the Zared and the Arnon have to be inserted from
•he parallel accounts of xxi. and Deut. ii., Dibon-
gad and Almon-Diblathaim, which lay above the
Arnon, having in their turn escaped from the two
last-named narratives. Ije-abarim was on the
boundary — the S. F. boundary — of the territory
if Hoab; not on the pasture-downs of the Miabor,
the modern Belka, but in the midbar, the waste
fncultivated "wilderness" on its skirts (xxi. 11).
Kent; they were expnssly forbidden to molest
1XLYRIOTJM
(Deut. ii. 9-19), but we may perhaps be i
to conclude from the terms of ver. 18, " now rlsa
up " 0<&p), that they had remained on his frontlet
in Ije-Abarim for some length of time. No iden-
tification of its situation has been attempted, nor
has the name been found lingering in the locality,
which, however, has yet to be explored. If there
is any connection between the Ije-Abarim and the
Har-Abarim, the mountain-range opposite Jericho,
then Abarim is doubtless a general appellation for
the whole of the highland east of the Dead Sea.
[Abarim.]
The rendering given by the LXX. is remarkable.
Taf is no doubt a version of lye — the Am being
converted into G: but whence does the 'AxdA
come ? Can it be the vestige of a nachal — '< tor-
rent" or "wady" — once attached to the name?
The Targum Pseudojon. has Meshre Megiztha —
the plain of shearing — which is equally ptuxling.
In Num. xxxiii. 45 it is given in the shorter
form of Im. G.
I'JON CP*?» •"•*»•• 'Ai* «nd 'Altfr; f> 1
K., Alex. NoTk; in 2 Chr., Vat. !«:] Ahum,
[Aiori]), a town in the north of Palestine, belong-
ing to the tribe of Naphtali. It was taken and
plundered by the captains of Benhadad, along with
Dan and other store-cities of Naphtali (1 K. xt.
20; 2 Chr. xvi. 4). It was plundered a second
time by Tiglath-pileser (2 K. xv. 29). We find
no further mention of it in history. At the ban
of the mountains of Naphtali, a few miles N. W.
of the site of Dan, is a fertile and beautiful little
plain called Merj 'Ayun (ij*** — yC; the
Arabic word . .»wtC, though different in meaning,
is radically identical with the Heb. P*?)> •">*
near its northern end is a large mound called Tett
Dibbin. The writer visited it some years ago, and
found there the traces of a strong and ancient city.
This, in all probability, is the site of the long-lost
yon (Robinson's BibL Ret., iii. 875). J. L. P.
IK'KESH (V y)T) [perrerse, perverted]:
"Io-ko, *EKK(t, 'Enririjs ; Alex. Ek«u, [Exurni ;
Tat FA. in 1 Chr., Ea-npO Acces), the father
of Ira the Tekoite, one of the heroes of David's
guard (2 Sam. xxiii. 26; 1 Chr. xi. 28, xxvii. 9).
ITiAI [2 syl.] Ctyv [most high, exalted]:
'HAi; [Vat. FA. HA«:] lUd), an Ahohite, one of
the heroes of David's guard (1 Chr. xi. 29). In
the list of 2 Sam. xxiii. the name is given Zal-
MOlf. Kennicott (Diuertation, pp. 187-9) exam-
ines the variations at length, and decides in favor
of Dai as the original name.
ILLYBIOTJM ClAAuputoV), "» extensive dis-
trict lying along the eastern coast of the Adriatic
from the boundary of Italy on the north to Epiras
on the south, and contiguous to Hcesia and Mace-
donia on the east : it was divided by the river Drib
into two portions. Illyris Barbara, the northern,
and Illyris Gneca, the southern. Within these
limits was included Dalmatia, which appnrs to
have been used indifferently with Illyricum for a
portion, and ultimately for the whole of the dis-
trict. St. Paul records that he preached the Gos-
pel " round about unto Illyricum " (Rom. xt. 19) :
he probably uses the term in its most extonatta
sense, and the part visited (if indeed he
Digitized by
Google
IMAGE
r it all) would hare been about Dyr-
W. LB.
* In Rom. xt. 19 Paul apeak* of hi* having
attached the gospel "from Jerusalem and round
about unto Ulyricum." We hare no account in
the Acta of the Apoatlea of any journey to that
province. It is a question of interest whether we
can insert this journey in the history so as to bring
the Act* and the Epistles into accordance with
each other on this point. Ulyricum lay on the
Adriatic, west of Macedonia. Paul now m in
u«/»Hnnin only three times during his ministry.
He could not haw gone to Ulyricum when he was
there first; for the course of his journey at that
time is minutely traced in the Act* from his land-
ing at Neepolis to hi* tearing Corinth on his return
by sea to Palestine. In going south on that occa-
sion he mured along the eastern side of the penin-
sula, and was kept at a distance from Ulyrioum
(Ada xrL 13 ft*.). Nor, again, could it hare been
when be passed through Macedonia on his return
thither from Greece at the time of hi* last journey
to Jerusalem (Acta xx. 1 ft*.); for the excursion to
Ulyricum must have preceded this return. He
had then written the Epistle to the Romans, in
which he speaks of having already been to Ulyr-
icum; and that epistle he wrote at Corinth just
before hi* departure thence for Macedonia (see
Bom. xri. 1. S3, and ooiup. 1 Cor. i. 11). Hi*
only other visit to Macedonia was the intermediate
one when he came to that region from Ttoas on
the way to southern Greece (Acts xx. 1, 3). No
mention is made of Ulyricum at that time, but in
describing the circuit of the Apostle's labors here,
Lake employe the comprehensive expression, ■' those
parts " (ra p«pq Intra). We may assume, there-
sore, that one of the " part*," or regions, was Ulyr-
icum, which was adjacent to Macedonia; and so
much the more, because the chronology of this por-
tion of Paul's life sllows us to assign the ample
time of three or four months to just these labors
in Northern Greece before he proceeded to Achaia
or Corinth. Thus the epistle and the history, so
incomplete and obscure apart from each other, form
a perfect whole when brought together, and that
by a combination of circumstances, of which the
two writers could have had no thought when they
penned their different accounts. Lardner pro-
nounces this geographical and historical coinci-
dence sufficiently important to authenticate the
entire narrative of Paul's travels as related in the
Acts of the Apostles. H.
IMAGB. [Idol.]
• IMAGERY, CHAMBERS OF, or
chambers of images (Exek. riii. IS). The Hebrew
a, inrpjpp Tin? •#«, and of this . ut««i
translation would be: " Each one in the chamber
or apartment of his imagery." Many of the com-
mediators transfer the suffix pronoun to the first
noun, and render: '• Each one in hit apartment of
images" (see Kosenmuller, Maurer, and others).
But the pronoun may perhaps be added to the last
aoun to show that different persons had iifferent
objects of worship. The whole passage (rr. 7-13
inclusive) represents a scene of idolatrous worship
which was disclosed to the prophet aa through a
secret door of entrance (w. 7, 8). On the walla
of the apartment were portrayed " every form o*
. Milium thing and abominable beasts, and all the
slab of the bouse of Israel " (rar. 10); and *«venty
IMMANTJKL 1181
men of the elders of the house of Israel (aeeordlng
to the number of the Sanhedrim), with their presi
dent (Jsataniah) stood before these pictures, each
with his censer in his hand, and offered incense
(ver. 11). That this idol worship was introduced
from Egypt is plain from the kind of objects por-
trayed, as indicated in ver. 10 ; whilst in subsequent
verses idolatrous practices which had crept in from
Phoenicia (ver. 14) and Persia (ver. 16), are brought
to view. A similar chamber of imagery Is referred
to in Ex. xxiii. 14 : " Where she saw men portrayed
upon the wall, the images of the Chaldeans por-
trayed with vermilion," etc. Representations found
among the ruins of Nineveh, as well as in Egypt,
furnish good illustrations of the practices her*
referred to. K. D. C. R.
IM'LA (N^T) [JUUd,fuUj or/taJHfar]:
'Ufi$\i; [Vat n'tifiAaas, Icju/JAoa;] Alex. Ifit-
Xa: Jemla), father or progenitor of Micaiah, the
prophet of Jehovah, who was consulted by Abab
and Jehoshaphat before their fatal expedition to
Ramoth-gUead (3 Chr. xviii. 7, 8). The form —
IMXAH (n^?. 'IqijUUts; [Vat Isauot,
Is/ua;] Alex. U/ina: Jemla) is employed in the
parallel narrative (1 K. xxii. 8, 9).
IMMANUEL (bfiPOp? [with ui God], or
in two words in many MSS. and editions *0*S9
7$ : 'EfiparotWjA: Emmanuel), the symbolical
name given by the prophet Isaiah to the child who
was announced to Ahaz and the people of Judah,
as the sign which God would give of their deliver-
ance from their enemies (Is. vii. 14). It is applied
by the Apostle Matthew to the Messiah, born of
the Virgin (Matt. i. 33). By the LXX. in on*
passage (Is. vii. 14), and in both passages by the
Vulg., Syr., and Targ., it is rendered aa a proper
name; but in Is. viii. 8 the LXX. translate it lit-
erally fuf Ti/Amr 6 Btii. The verses in question
have been the battle-field of critica for centuries,
and in their discussions there has been no lack of
the odium thtotoyiam. As early aa the times of
Justin Martyr the Christian interpretation was
attacked by the Jews, and the position which they
occupied has of late years been assumed by many
continental theologians. Before proceeding to ■
discussion, or rather to a classification of the nn-
merous theories of which this subject has been the
fruitful source, the circumstance* under which the
prophecy was delivered claim especial consideration.
In the early part of the reign of Abas the king-
dom of Judah was threatened with annihilation by
the combined armies of Syria and Israel. A hun-
dred and twenty thousand of the choice warrior*
of Judah, all " sons of might," bad fallen in one
day's battle. The Edomites and Philistines had
thrown off the yoke (3 Chr. xxviii.). Jerusalem
was menaced with a siege; the hearts of the king
and of the people " shook, as the trees of a forest
shake before the wind " (Is. vii. 3). The king had
gone to " the conduit of the upper pool," probably
to take measures for preventing the supply of water
from being cut offer falling into the enemy's hand,
when the prophet met him with the mes sa ge of
vnsolation. Not only were the designs of the hos-
tfls armies to fail, but within sixty-five years tht
kingdom of Israel would be overthrown. In con-
firmation of his words, the prophet bids i
a abja of Jehovah, which the king, with j
Digitized by
Google
L134
IMMANUEL
humility, refuted to do. After administering a
severe rebuke to Ahaz for his obstinacy, Isaiah an-
nounees the sign which Jehovah himself would
give unasked: "behold! the virgin (i"t^75\!>
h&'alm&h) • is with child and beareth a son, and
she shall call his name ImmnnueL"
The interpreters of this passage are naturally
divided into three classes, each of which admits of
subdivisions, as the differences in detail are numer-
ous The first class consists of those who refer the
fulfillment of the prophecy to an historical cent,
which followed immediately upon its delivery. The
majority of Christian writers, till within the last
fifty years, form a second class, and apply the
prophecy exclusively to the Messiah, while a thud
ilass, almost equally numerous, agree in considering
both these explanations true, and hold that the
prophecy had an immediate and literal fulfillment,
but was completely accomplished in the miraculous
conception and birth of Christ Among the first
an numbered the Jewish writers of all ages, with-
out exception. Jerome refutes, on chronological
grounds, a theory which was current in his day
amongst the Jews, that the prophecy had reference
to Hezekiab, the son of Ahaz, who from a compar-
ison of 2 K. xvi. 2 with xviii. 2, must have been
nine years old at the time it was delivered. The
force of his argument is somewhat weakened by
the evident obscurity of the numbers in the pas-
sages in question, from which we must infer that
Ahaz was eleven years old at the time of Hezekiah's
birth. By the Jews in the middle ages this ex-
planation was abandoned as untenable, and in con-
sequence some, at Jarchi and Aben Ezra, refer the
prophecy to a son of Isaiah himself, and others to
a son of Ahaz by another wife, as Kimchi and
Abarbanel. In this case, the 'alm&h is explained
as the wife or betrothed wife of the prophet, or as
a later wife of Ahaz, Kelle (Gesen. Comm. uber
den Jeiaia) degrades her to the third rank of ladies
in the harem (oomp. Cant vi. 8). Hitzig (der
Proph. Jeiaia) rejects Gesenius' application of
'alm&h to a second wife of the prophet, and inter-
prets It of the prophetess mentioned in viii. 3.
Hendewerk (da Proph. Jetaia Weittag.) follows
Sesenius. In either case, the prophet is made to
fulfill his own prophecy. Isenbiehl, a pupil of
Michaelis, defended the historical sense with con-
4derable learning, and suffered unworthy persecu-
tion for expressing his opinions. The 'atmAh in
his view was some Hebrew girl who was present at
the colloquy between Isaiah and Ahaz, and to
whom the prophet pointed as he spoke. This opin-
ion was held by Bauer, Cube, and Rosenmuller
(lit ed.). Michaelis, Kichhorn, Paulus, and Am-
nion, give her a merely ideal existence; while
Umbreit allows her to be among the bystanders,
but explains the pregnancy and birth as imaginary
inly. Interpreters of the second class, who refer
he prophecy solely to the Messiah, of course un-
erttand by the 'alm&h the Virgin Mary. Among
these, Vitringa (Obt. Bacr. v. o. 1) vigorously op-
poses those, who, like Grotius, PeUicanus, and
Ttrinus, conceded to the Jews that the reference to
Christ Jesus was not direct and immediate, but by
EMMANUEL
way of typical allusion. For, he m ai n tai ns , a
young married woman of the time of Abas aat
Isaiah could not be a type of the Virgin, net
could her issue by her husband be a figure of the
child to be bom of the Virgin by the operation of
the Holy Ghost. Against this hypothesis of a
solely Messianic reference, it is objected that the
birth of the Messiah could not be a sign of deliv-
erance to the people of Judah in the time of Ahaz.
In reply to this, Theodoret advances the opinion
that the birth of the Messiah involved the conser-
vation of the family of Jesse, and therefbie by im-
plication of the Jewish state. Cocceius argues on
the same side, that the sign of the Messiah's birth
would intimate that in the interval the kingdom
and state of the Jews could not be alienated from
God, and betides it confirms ver. 8, indicating that
before the birth of Christ Judaea should not be
subject to Syria, as it was when Archektus was
removed and it was reduced to the form of • Bo-
man province. Of all these explanations Vitringa
disapproves, and states his own conclusion, which
is also that of Calvin and Piscator, to be the fol-
lowing: In w. 14-18, the prophet gives a sign
to the pious in Israel of their deliverance from the
impending danger, and in ver. 17, *c., announces
the evils which the Assyrians, not the Syrians,
should inflict upon Ahaz and such of his people as
resembled him. As surely as Messiah would be
bom of the Virgin, so surely would God deliver the
Jews from the threatened evil. The principle of
interpretation here made use of is founded by Cal-
vin on the custom of the prophets, who confirmed
special promises by the assurance that God would
send a redeemer. But this explanation involves
another difficulty, besides that which arises from
the distance of the event predicted. Before the
child shall arrive at years of discretion the prophet
announces the desolation of the land whose kings
threatened Ahaz. By this Vitringa understands
that no more time would elapse before the former
event was accomplished than would intervene be-
tween the birth and youth of Immanuel, an argu-
ment too far-fetched to have much weight Heng-
stenberg (Chrutology, ii. 44-66, Eng. trans.) sup-
ports to the full the Messianic interpretation, and
closely connects vii. 14 with ix. 6. He admits
frankly that the older explanation of w. 15, IS,
has exposed itself to the charge of being arbitrary,
and confidently propounds his own method of re-
moving the stumbling-block. " In ver. 14 the
prophet had seen the birth of the Messiah as pres-
ent Holding fast this idea and expanding it, the
prophet makes him who has been bom accompany
the people through all tie stages of its existence.
We have here an ideal anticipation of the real im-
carnation. .... What the prophet means, and
intends to say here is, that, in the tpace of about a
twelvemonth, the overthrow of the hottile Unodomi
would already have taken place. At the repre-
sentative of the contemporaries, he brings forward
the wonderful child who, as it were, formed th»
soul of the popular life In the subsequent
prophecy, the same wonderful child, grown up into
a warlike hero, brings the deliverance from Atshur,
and the world'a power represented by It" TTitJ
. 'Ahn&J, denote, a girl of "«"<*»■«• ■£• b «' lM to B.bsk»h (Ctan. xxlv. 18, 48), as apparent?
not mamed, and therefore a m/*m by implication, epp ^^ * ^ ^^ ^ ^ #TMm(- ^
not «nm«, ana mrouor, . , ™* .» -v — ■ I „„ Ternb ta tsniis j and m admtton to *« svMene.
K P never sven ussd, as JTW1?, ielMUak, which «„ cognate languages, Arabic
■■„_., , i uTi»« Xf ■ K*iiU nr h»- fMtimnnv of Jerome (on Is.
sen directly expresses virginity, of a bride or bs- testimony of Je rome (on Is
• * -ft (Joel i 8). 'JJm«*and6«ia«a»areliom|aimod«iotedavli|dn.
and Syrlsc, we have tot
Til. 14) that In
Digitized by
Google
IMMBB
thin admits the doable sense in
the case of Asshur, but deniea iU application to
ImmanueL It would be hard to lay whether text
or commentary be the more obaeure.
In new of the difficulties which attend these
explanations of the prophecy, the third dan of
interpreter! above alluded to have recourse to a
theory which combines the two preceding, namely,
the hypothesis of the double sense. They suppose
that the immediate reference of the prophet was to
some contemporary occurrence, but that bis words
received their true and full accomplishment in the
birth of the Messiah. Jerome ( Comm. in Etaiam,
vii. 14) mentions an interpretation of some Juda-
ism that Immanuel was the son of Isaiah, born
of the prophetess, as a type of the Saviour, and
that his name indicates the calling of the nations
after the Word became flesh and dwelt among us.
Something of the same kind is proposed by Dathe ;
in his opinion •' the miracle, while it immediately
respected the times of the prophet, was a type of
the birth of Christ of the Virgin Mary." Dr. Pye
Smith conjectured that it had an immediate refer-
ence to Hecekiah, "the virgin" being the queen
of Ahaz; but, like <ome other prophetic testimo-
nies, had another ana a designed reference to some
remoter circumstance, which when it occurred
would be the real fulfillment, answering every fea-
ture and filling up the entire extent of the original
delineation (Scrip. TttL to llie Meuinh, i. 857, 3d
ad. ). A serious objection to the application of the
prophecy to Hetekiah has already been mentioned.
Keppieott separates ver. IS from the three preced-
ing, applying the latter to Christ, the former to
the eon of Isaiah (Sermon on Is. vii. 18-16).
Such in brief are some of the principal opinions
which have been beU on this Important question.
From the manner in which the quotation occurs
in Matt. L 23, there can be no doubt that the
Evangelist did not use it by way of accommodation,
but as having in view its actual accomplishment
Whatever may have bean his opinion as to any
contemporary or immediate reference it might con-
tain, this was completely obscured by the full
conviction that burst upon him when he realized
its completion in the Messiah. What may have
been the light in which the promise wss regarded
by the prophet's contemporaries we are not in a
position to judge; the hypothesis of the double
sense satisfies most of the requirements of the prob-
lem, and as it does leas violence to the text than
the others which have been proposed, and is at the
same time supported by the analogy of the Apos-
tle's quotations from the 0. T. (Matt. li. 16, 18,
43; iv. 15), we accept it as approximating most
nearly to the true solution. ' W. A. W.
Df/MER ("!$» [pert. tnOcatite, Dietr.Ges.;
prominent, high, Flint] : 'Zpp4ip\ [in 1 Chr. ix. 12,
Vat. timp; Neh. xi. 13, Vat Alex. FA. omit:]
Earner), apparently the founder of an important
family of priests, although the name does not occur
In any genealogy which allows us to discover his
descent from Aaron (1 Chr. ix. 12; Neh. xi. 18).
This family had charge of, and gave its name to,
the sixteenth course of the service (1 Chr. xxiv. 14).
From them came Pashur, chief governor of the
Temple in Jeremiah's time, and his persecutor (Jer.
tx. 1). They returned from Babylon with Zerub-
KM an! Jeshua (Est. ii. 37; Neh. vii. 40). Zadok
•am-Iomer repaired his own house (Neh. ill. 29)
■at) tov other priests of the family put away their
INCENSE 1186
foreign wives (Est. x. 20). But it Is —-*•"■
that* the name is omitted from the list of those who
sealed the covenant with Nehemiah, and also of
those who came up with Zerubbabel and Jeshua,
and who are stated to have had descendants sur-
viving in the next generation — the days of Joiakim
(see Neh. xii. 1, 10, 12-21). [Emmer.] Different
from the foregoing must be —
3. (.'Epphp, 'Upitpi [In En-., Vat. E/tqp; in
Neh., Alex. Upprtp-] £mer, [Emmer}), apparently
the name of a place in Babylonia from which cer-
tain persons returned to Jerusalem with the first
caravan, who could not satisfactorily prove their
genealogy (Ezr. ii. 59 ; Neh. vii. 61). In 1 Eadras
the name is given as 'Aa\ip,
IM'NA (739'. [hoiSng back] s 'lpa,i :
Jemna), a descendant of Asher, son of Helem, and
one of the " chief princes " of the tribe (1 Chr. vii
35; eomp. 40).
lira AH (m& [faici, success]: 1tp»i\
[Vat. Irira:] Jemna). 1. The first-born of Ashes
(1 Chr. vii. 30). In the Pentateuch the name
(identical with the present) is given in the A V
as Jimxah.
2. [Vat. Aipuv-] Eon ben-Imnah, the Levite,
assisted in the reforms of Hesekiah (2 Chr. xxxt
14).
• IMPLEAD (A. V. AcU xix. 88) is a tech-
nical term (like Luke's tyKaXiWaiaav), signifying
" to accuse," or " prosecute " by a due course of law.
The proper word occurs in the proper place. It is
the city-councilor who speaks in that passage (see
tn he.), pointing out to the Ephesians the lawful
remedy for their grievances as opposed to one un-
lawful. H.
• IMPORTABLE occurs in the Prayer of
Manatees :==inuwrt<ioi£t in the Vulg. i. e. insup-
portable, unendurable, said of the divine threaten-
ing. The word is now obsolete in that sense.
a
• IMPOTENT (from impotent) signifies
" strengthless," "sick," " infirm." It is the ren-
dering of boQtr&r in John v. 8, and in AcU iv. 9;
but of aSeVorot in AcU xiv. 8. H.
• IMPRISONMENT. [Puktshmests.]
IM'RAH (rrnip^ [oosfinacy, Ges.]: 'I^aV;
[Vat. corrupt;] Alex. Uppa- Jamra), a descendant
of Asher, of the family of Zopiiah (1 Chr. vii. 88),
and named as one of the chiefs of the tribe.
IMTRI CHpH [efoowenf]). 1. VApfipdtp,
[Vat] Alex, omit: Omrai, but it seems to have
changed places with the preceding name.) A man
of Judah of the great family of Pharea (1 Chr.
lx.4).
3. Ckpapl; [Vet FA. Auop.i; Alex. Mtewi:]
Asset), father or progenitor of Zaccub, who as-
sisted Nehemiah in the rebuilding of the wall of
Jerusalem (Neh. ill. 2).
• INCANTATIONS. [Maoic.]
INCENSE, rn'lBjp {Icttdrih), Dent xxxUL
10; n^Sttf} (Irttreth), Ex. xxr. 6, xxx. 1, Ac.;
nj'o'p llebtnih), Is. xliii. 23, lx. 6, Ac The
incense 'employed in the service of the taberoaek
was distinguished as D'tttjn fTTbf? (baVett
tumammlm), Ex. xxv. 6, from being
Digitized by
Google
1186
INCENSE
of the perfumes atacte, onyeha, galbanmn, and jmre
frankincense. All Incense which wu not made
jf then ingredients wu oiled TTIt TTIIQp
(teflMA sdnU), Ex. xxx. 9, and wu forbidden to
be offered. According to Raahi on Ex. xxx. 34, the
above-mentioned perfumes wen mixed in equal pro-
portions, seventy manehs being taken of each. The;
were compounded by the skill of the apothecary, to
whose use, according to rabbinical tradition, wu
devoted a portion of the temple, called, from the
name of the family whose especial duty it wu to
prepare the incense, " the house of Abtines." So
In the large temples of India " is retained a man
whose chief business it is to distil sweet waters
from flowers, and to extract oil from wood, flowers,
and other substances" (Roberts, Orient libit, p.
88) l"he priest or Levite to whose care the incense
wu intrusted, wu one of the fifteen CaiDD
(memdnnint), or prefects of the temple. Constant
watch wu kept in the house of Abtines that the
incense might always be in readiness (Buxtorf,
Lex. Talm. a. v. 03*153**).
In addition to the four ingredients already men-
tioned Jarchi enumerates seven others, thus making
eleven, which the Jewish doctors affirm were com-
municated to Moses on Monnt Sinai. Josephua
(B. J. v. 6, § 6) mentions thirteen. The propor-
tions of the additional spices are given by Mai-
monides (Cell hnmmikldsh, ii. 2, § 8) u follows.
Of myrrh, cassia, spikenard, and saffron, sixteen
manehs each. Of costus twelve manehs, cinnamon
nine manehs, sweet bark three manehs. The weight
of the whole confection wu 368 manehs. To these
wu added the fourth part of a cab of salt of Sodom,
with amber of Jordan, and an herb called " the
smoke-raiser" (fWV rT?SO, madttk AtliAn),
known only to the cunning in such matters, to
whom the secret descended by tradition. In the
ordinary daily service one nianeh wu used, half in
the morning and half in the evening. Allowing
then one nianeh of incense for each day of the solar
year, the three manehs which remained were again
pounded, and used by the high-priest on the day
of atonement (Lev. xvi. 18). A store of it wu
constantly kept in the temple (Jos. B. J. vi. 8,
$3).
The Incense possessed the threefold characteristic
of being salted (not tempered u in A. V.), pure
and holy. Salt ma the symbol of incorrupt™
and nothing, says Maimonides, wu offered without
it, except the wine of the drink-offerings, the blood,
and the wood (cf. Lev. ii. 13). The expression
T3? "1$ (bad bebad), Ex. xxx. 34, is interpreted
by the Chaldee " weight by weight," that is, an
equal weight of each (cf. Jarchi, in toe.); and this
rendering is adopted by our version. Others how
ever, and among them Aben Ezra and Maimonides,
consider it u signifying that each of the spices wu
separately prepared, and that all were afterwards
mixed. The incense thus compounded wu specially
set apart for the service of the sanctuary: its dese-
cration wu punished with death (Ex. xxx. ST, 38);
u in some part of India, according to Miohaelis
^Motaaek. Recht, art. 249), it wu considered high
treason for any person to make use of the best sort
sf Calambak, which wu for the service of the king
tins.
Aaruu, u high-priest, wu originally appointed
« <dar incense, but in the daily service of the
LNOKN8B
second temple the office devolved upon the mkrta
priests, from among whom one wu chosen by Jot
(Miahna, Yoma, ii. 4; Luke i. 9), each morning
and evening (Abarbanel on Lev. x. 1). A peculiar
blessing wu supposed to be a ttached to this service,
and in order that all might share in it, the lot wu
cast among those who were " new to the incense,"
if any remained (Miahna, Yoma, L c. ; Bartenora oa
Tamid, v. 2). Uxriah wu punished for his pre-
sumption in attempting to infringe the prerogatives
of the descendants of Aaron, who were consecrated
to burn incense (2 Chr. xxvi. 16-21: Jos. Ant. ix.
10, 4). The officiating priest appointed another,
whose office it wu to take the fire from the brazen
altar. According to Maimonides ( Tmid. Uwmt. ii.
8, iii. 5) this fire wu taken from the second pile,
which wu over against the S. E. corner of the altar
of burnt-offering, and wu of fig-tree wood. A silver
shovel (njJirTD, machtah) wu first filled with the
live coals, and afterwards emptied into a golden
one, smaller than the former, so that some of the
coals were spilled (Miahna, Tamid, v. 5, Yoma, iv.
4; cf. Rev. viii. 6). Another priest cleared the golden
altar from the cinders which had been left at the
previous offering of incense (Miahna, Tamid, iii. 6,
9, vi. 1).
The times of offering incense were specified in
the instructions first given to Moses (Ex. xxx. 7, 8).
The morning incense wu offered when the lamps
were trimmed in the holy place, and before the
sacrifice, when the watchman set for the purpose
announced the break of day (Miahna, Yoma, iii.
1,5). When the lamps were lighted " between the
evenings," after the evening sacrifice and before
the drink-offerings were offered, incense wu again
burnt on the golden altar, which " belonged to the
oracle" (1 K. vi. 88), and stood before the veil
which separated the holy place from the Holy of
Holies, the throne of God (Rev. viii. 4; Philo, d*
Anim. talm. § 8).
When the priest entered the holy place with the
incense, all the people were removed from the
temple, and from between the porch and the altar
(Maimon. Tmid. Umm. iii. 3; cf. Luke 1. 10).
The incense wu then brought from the house of
Abtines in a large vessel of gold called *1? («»>*)>
in which wu a phial (T T 2, batte, properly " a
taker") containing the incense (Miahna, Tamid,
v. 4). The assistant priests who attended to the
lamps, the clearing of the golden altar from the
cinders, and the fetching fire from the altar of
burnt-offering, performed their offices singly, bowed
towards the ark of the covenant, and left the holy
place before the priest, whose lot it wu to offer
incense, entered. Profound silence wu observed
among the congregation who were praying without
(cf. Rev. viii. 1), and at a signal from the prefect
the priest cast the incense on the fire (Miahna,
Tamid, vi. 3), and bowing reverently towards the
Holy of Holies retired slowly backwards, not pro-
longing his prayer that he might not alarm ths
congregation, or cause them to fear that be had
been struck dead for offering unworthily (Lev. xvi.
18; Luke i. 21: Miahna, Yoma, v. 1). When hs
came out he pronounced the blessing In Num. v
24-26, the "magrephah " sounded, and the Levitat
burst forth into song, accompanied by the full swel
of the temple music, the sound of which, say ths
Rabbins, could be heard u far u Jericho (Miahna.
Tamid, iii. 8). It is possible that this may hi
Digitized by
Google
IN0EN8B
I to in Bar. viiL 6. The print then emptied
the center in a clean place, and hung it on one of
Ike horni of the altar of burnt -offering.
On the day of atonement the service wu dif-
ferent. The high-priest, after sacrificing the bullock
■a a sin-offering for himself and his family, took
ineenaa in hu left hand and a golden shovel filled
with live coala from the west side of the brazen
altar (Jarchi oa La. zri. IS) in his right, and
went into the Holy of Holies. He then placed the
shovel upon the ark between the two bars. In the
second temple, where there was no ark, a stone was
substituted. Then sprinkling the incense upon the
noals, he stayed till the house was filled with smoke,
ind walking slowly backwards came without the
Tail, where be prayed for a short time (Maimonides,
low kakJappur, quoted by A ins worth on Lev.
avi ; Outran) de SacrifidU, 1. 8, § 11).
The offering of incense has formed a part of the
religious ceremonies of most ancient nations. The
Egyptians burnt resin in honor of the sun at its
rising, myrrh when in its meridian, and a mixture
called Kuphi at its setting (Wilkinson, Aac. Kg.
i. 816). Plutarch (de /«. et 0$. c. 52, 80) describes
Knphi as a mixture of sixteen ingredients. " In
the temple of Sirs incense is offered to the Lingam
six times in twenty-four hours " (Koliertt, Orient.
libit, p. 468). It wss an element in the idolatrous
worship of the Israelites (Jer. xi. 12, 17, xlviii. 35;
i Chr. xxxiT. 25).
With regard to the symbolical meaning of in-
cense, opinions have been many and widely differ-
ing. While Maimonides regarded it merely as a
perfume designed to counteract the effluvia arising
from the beasts which were slaughtered for the
daily sacrifice, other interpreters hare allowed their
imaginations to run riot, and vied with the wildest
speculations of the Hidraahim. Philo ( Quit rer.
cm. har. tit, § 41, p. 601) conceives the stacte and
onycha to be symbolical of water and earth ; gal-
banum and frankincense of air and fire. Josephus,
sallowing the traditions of his time, believed that
the ingredients of the incense were chosen from the
products of the sea, the inhabited and the unin-
habited parts of the earth, to indicate that all
things are ofGod and for God (B. J. v. 6, §5). As
the temple or tabernacle was the palace of Jehovah,
the theocratic king of Israel, and the ark of the
covenant his throne, so the incense, in the opinion
of some, corresponded to the perfumes in which the
hxxnrious monarch* of the East delighted. It may
mean all this, but it must mean much more.
Grotius, on Ex. xxx. 1, says the mystical significa-
tion is '■ sorsum habenda cords." Cornelius a
Lapide, on Ex. xxx. 34, considers it as an apt
emblem of propitiation, and finds a symbolical
~»"l"g in the several ingredients. Fairbaim
( TypJugy of Scripture, ii. 320), with many others,
be ks upon prayer as the reality of which incense
is the symbol, founding his conclusion upon Ps.
eiH. 2; Rev. v. 8, viii. 3, 4. Biihr (Symb. d. Mot.
Cub. voL i., vL § 4) opposes this view of the sub-
ject, on the ground that the chief thing in offering
incense, is not the producing of the smoke, which
presses like prayer towards heaven, but the spread-
ing of the fragrance. His own exposition may be
pimm«d op sa follows. Prayer, amins all oriental
nntr~*. signifies calling upon the ■mrne of God.
The oldest prayers consisted in the mere enumera-
tion of the several titles of God. The Scripture
,ilaees incense in close relationship to prayer, so
that offering incense is synonymous with worship. I
72
INDIA
1187
Hence incense itself is a symbol of the name of
God. The ingredients of the inoe&je correspond
severally to the perfections of God, though It Is
impossible to decide to which of the four names of
God each belongs. Perhaps stacte corresponds to
nVP (Jehoeah), onycha to t^rT 1 ^ (EldMm),
galbanum to 'n (chat), and frankincense to B7VTJ3
(k&ddth). Such is Bahr's exposition of the sym-
bolism of incense, rather ingenious than logical.
Looking upon incense in connection with the other
ceremonial observances of the Mosaic ritual, it
would rather seem to be symbolical, not of prayer
itself, but of that which makes prayer acceptable,
the intercession of Christ. In Her. viii. 3, 4, the
incense is spoken of as something distinct from,
though offered with, the prayers of all the saints
(cf. Luke 1. 10) ; and in Rev. v. 8 it is the golden
vials, and not the odors or Incense, which are said
to be the prayers of saints. Ps. cxli. 2, at first
sight, appears to militate against this conclusion ;
but if it be argued from this passage that incense
is an emblem of prayer, it must also be allowed
that the evening sacrifice has the same symbolical
meaning. W. A. W.
INTHA OTCh, i.c OxUu: «. 'Mm*: /*&•)
The name of India does not occur in the Bible be-
fore the book of Esther, where it is noticed as the
limit of the territories of Ahssuenis in the east, ss
Ethiopia was in the west (i. 1 ; viii. 9) ; the names
are similarly connected by Herodotus (vii. 9). The
Hebrew form " Huddu" is an abbreviation of
Honadu, which is identical with the indigenous
names of the river Indus, " Hindu," or " Sindhu,"
sad again with the ancient name of the country si
it appears in the Vendidad, >< Hapta Hendu." The
native form " Sindus " is noticed by Pliny (vi. 28)
The India of the book of Esther is not the penin-
sula of Hindostan, but the country surrounding the
Indus — the Punjab, and perhaps Scinde — the
India which Herodotus describes (iii. 98) as form-
ing part of the Persian empire under Darius, and
the India which at a later period was conquered by
Alexander the Great. The name occurs in the
inscriptions of Pereepolis and Nakhsh-i-Rustam,
but noc in those of Behistun (Rawlinson, Herod, ii.
485). In 1 Mace. viii. 8, India is reckoned among
the countries which Eumenes, king of Pergamua,
received out of the former possessions of Antiochus
the Great. It is clear that India proper cannot be
understood, inasmuch as this never belonged either
to Antiochus or Eumenes. At the same time none
of the explanations offered by commentators are
satisfactory: the Eneti of Paphlagonia have been
suggested, but these people bad disappeared long
before (Strab. xii. 534): the India of Xencphon
( Cyrop. i. 6, § 3, iii. 2, § 26), which may have been
above the Carian stream named Indus (Plin. v. 29,
probably the Calbis), is more likely ; but the emen-
dation " Mysia and Ionia " for Media and India,
offers the best solution of the difficulty. [Ionia.]
A more authentic notice of the country occurs in
1 Mace. vi. 37, where Indians are noticed 'as the
drivers of the war-elephants introduced into the
army of the Syrian king. (See also 1 Esdr. iii. 2;
Esth. xiii. 1; xvi. 1.)
But though the name of India occurs so seldom,
the people and productions of that country most
have been tolerably well known to the Jews. There
is undoubted evidence that an active trade was
carried on between India and Western Asia: the
Digitized by
Google
1188
INFIDEL
Tyrian* established their depot* on the shores of
the Parian Gulf, and procured "horni of Ivory and
ebon;,' u broidered work and rich apparel " (Ee.
xxvii. IS, 24), by a route which croaaed the Arabian
deaert by land, and then followed the eoaat* of the
Indian ocean by aea. The trade opened by Solomon
with Opbir through the Red Sea chiefly coniiited
of Indian articles, and aome of the name* even of
the article*, ult/ummim, "sandal wood," kuphim,
" ape*," thucciim, " peacocks," are of Indian origin
(Humboldt, Kmmot, ii. 133); to which we may
add the Hebrew name of the "topaz," jnilaJi,
derived from the Sanscrit pita. There is a strong
probability that productions of yet greater utility
were furnished by India through Syria to the shores
of Europe, and that the Greeks derived both the
term tcajtriripoi (eomp. the Sanscrit hat&ra), and
the article it represents, " tin," from the coasts of
India. The connection thus established with India
led to the opinion that the Indians were included
under the ethnological title of Cush (Gen. x. 6),
and hence the Syrian, Chaldaan, and Arabic ver-
sions frequently render that term by In'lia or In-
diana, as in 2 Chr. xxi. 16; Is. xi. 11, xviii. 1;
Jer. xiii. 23; Zeph. iii. 10. For the connection
which some have sought to estsMish between India
and Paradise, see Ki>km. [See on this word
Roediger'* AoiiU. ad (iet. The*, p. 83. — II.]
W. I- B.
* INFIDEL, known to our Bible phraseology
only in 2 Cor. vi. IS, and 1 Tim. v. 8. Instead of
this positive term the privative " unbeliever "
(aVioros) i* more correct, a distinction elsewhere
observed in the rendering. Tie A. V. misses also
the alliteration in the former of the above passages.
H.
INHERITANCE. [Hnt]
INK, INKHOEN. [Wbituio.]
INN 0"i"!?. «dA>» : KaT<U.v/ut, rartoK(7oy)-
The Hebrew word thus rendered literally signifies
•a lodging-place for the night."" Inns, in our
■esse of the term, were, as they still are, unknown
in the East, where hospitality is religiously practiced.
The khans, or caravanserais, are the representatives
of European inns, and these were established but
gradually. It is doubtful whether there is any
allusion to them in the Old Testament. The
halting-place of a caravan was selected originally
on account of its proximity to water or pasture, by
which the travellers pitched their tents and passed
the night. Such was undoubtedly the " inn " at
which occurred the incident in the life of Hoses,
narrated in Ex. iv. 84. It was probably one of the
halting- places of the Ishmaelitish merchant* who
traded to Egypt with their camel-loads of spices.
Mraes was on his Journey from the land of Midian,
and the merchants in Gen. xxxvli. are called indis-
irinuiiately Ishmaelites and Hidianite*. At one
of these stations, too, the first which they reached
after leaving the city, and no doubt within a short
distance from it, Joseph's brethren discovered that
their money had been replaced in their wallets
(Geo. xlii. 27).
Increased commercial intercourse, and in later
ran
time* religious enthusiasm fix pilgrimages' pit
rise to the establishment of more permanent aecoan-
modation for traveller*. On the more frequented
route*, remote from town* (Jer. ix. 2), caravanserais
were in course of time erected, often at the expenat
of the wealthy. The following description of one
of those on the road from Baghdad to Babylon will
suffice for all: "It is a large and substantial
square building, In the distance resembling a for-
tress, being surrounded with a lofty wall, and
flanked by round tower* to defend the inmate* ia
case of attack. Passing through a strong gateway,
the guest enters a large court, the sides of which
are divided into numerous arched comportment*,
open in front, for the accommodation of separate
parties and for the reception of goods. In the
centre is a spacious raised platform, used for sleep-
ing upon at night, or for the devotions of the faith-
ful during the day. Between the outer wall sod
the compartments are wide vaulted arcades, ex-
tending round the entire building, where the beast*
of burden are placed. Upon the roof of the arcades
is an excellent terrace, and over the gateway an
elevated tower containing two rooms— one of which
is open at the sides, permitting the occupants to
enjoy every breath of air that passes across the
heated plain. The terrace is tolerably clean ; but
the court and stabling below are ankle-deep in
chopped straw and filth " ((.oftus, Chaldaa, p. 18).
The great khans established by the Persian kings
and great men, at intervals of about six miles on
the roads from Baghdad to the sacred places, sre
provided with stables for the horses of the pilgrims.
" Within these stables, on both sines, are other
cells for travellers '' (Uyard, JV&s, and Bab. p. 478,
note). The " stall " or " manger," mentioned in
Luke ii. 7, was probably in a stable of this kind.
Such khans are sometimes situated near running
streams, or have a supply of water of some kind,
but the traveller must carry all hi* provisions with
him (Ouaeley, Trm. m Pertia, i. 961, arte). At
Damascus the khans are, many of them, substantial
buildings ; the small rooms which surround the
court, as well as those above them which are entered
from * gallery, are used by the merchant* of the
city for depositing their goods (Porter's Damatcut,
i. 38). The tcekdUht of modern Egypt are of a
similar description (Lane, Mod. Eg. U. 10).
••The house of paths" (Prov. viil. 2, «V «*««•
ttioar. Vert. Ken.), where Wisdom took her stand,
is understood by some to refer appropriately to a
khan built where many ways met and frequented
by many travellers. A similar meaning has been
attached to DHDS fVTlJ, gb-tlk Cimhtm, " the
hostel of Cbimham" (Jer. xli. 17), beside Bethle-
hem, built by the liberality of the son of Barzillai
for toe benefit of those who were going down to
Egypt (Stanley, S. f P., p. 163; App. § 90). The
Targum says, "which David gave to Cbimham,
son of BarzilLii the Gileadite " (comp. 2 Sam. xix.
37, 38). With regard to this passage, the ancient
versions are strangely at variance. The LXX. had
evidently another reading with 2 and 2 trar-yoeed,
which they left untranslated -fa$i)paya^da, Alex.
a la the language of tha A. T. « to lodes " bss the
tans of lemainlnf tor the night. Tha word \^7 Is
anfaed la 1 K. xtx. 9 « lodge ; " In Gen. xU. 2
amy all night ; " comp. also Jer. xiv. 8, 4o.
* Iks srwttoo H hospitals In the middle sow was
due to the same cause. Paula, the friend of Jerome,
built asversl on the road to Bethlehem ; and the Scotch
and Irish residents In France emctsd hospitals tat Ins
uss of pilgrims of their own nation, on their way Is
Rome (Beckmann, Hint, of hn II. 467). Bane* as*
pilot, kotttl, and fuullv haul.
Digitized by
Google
INN
H>y<Xig'^i' The Vulgate, IT intended to he
iasral, mint have retd ip3^l E.*" 1 ?.! ptregt-in-
sruVss M CAnnaasr. The Arabic, following the Alex-
andrian HS., lead it tr yjj Bnpa>6xapda/t, " in
the land of Berothchamaam." The Syriao bai
l*»J^S, btdri, "in the threshing-floor.," m if
rVQ"133, btgorndth. Joaephus had a reading
different from all, iYVT723» btyidriilh, " in the
Sold* of " Chimham ; for he says the fugitives went
» to a certain place called Mandra " (MdVBpa
ktyiiurov, AnL x. 9. § 5), and in this he was
toUowed by Aquila and the Hexaplar Syriac.
The TartoKttor (Luke x. 34) probably differed
■nun the «ot«Uu/io (Luke ii. 7) in having a " host "
INSTANT
1188
or "innkeeper" (way&Mtut, Luke x. 36), wW
supplied some few of the necessary provisions, and
attended to the wants of travellers left to his charge.
The word has been adopted in the later Hebrew,
and appears in the Miihna (Ytbauutk, xri. 7)
under the form p"T31S, pindak and the best la
^p"T31S, p&nd&IA. The Jews were forbidden to
put up their beasts at establishments of this kind
kept by idolaters (Aboda Zara, ii. 1). It appears
that houses of entertainment were sometimes, as
in Egypt (Her. ii. 35), kept by women, whose
character was such that their evidence was regarded
with suspicion. In the Hishna ( YtbamoOi, xvi. 7 )
a tale is told of a company of Levites who were
travelling to Zoar, the Ctty of Palms, when one of
ih-m fell ill on the road and was left by bis com
rades at an inn, under the charge of the hostess
(n , p"T31S,piBifcii(A = iroi*>«sin-pio). On their
return to inquire for their friend, the hostess told
them he was dead and buried, but they refused to
believe her till she produced his staff, wallet, and
roll of the law. In Josh. ii. 1, TTiM, zm&h, the
term applied to Rahab, is rendered in the Targum
at* Jonathan HiTpT31S, pindekUki, "a woman
who keeps an inn." So in Judg. xl. 1, of the ,
mother of Jephthah ; of Delilah (Judg. xvi. 1) and !
the two women who appealed to Solomon (1 K. iii. j
16). The words, in the opinion of Kimchi on Josh. >
R. 1, appear to have been synonymous.
In some parts of modern Syria a nearer approach j
Ms bean made to the European system. The people
at a-8ak, according to Burekhardt, support four j
swerns (Maiztlar Mtdhnft)ti the public expense. ',
U these the traveller is furnished with everything
it may require, so long as he chooses to remain,
.eorided his stay is not unreasonably protracted,
flie expenses are paid by a tax on the heads of
families, and a kind of landlord superintends the
MtabUshment (Trav, in Syria, p. 36).
W. A. W.
• The statement ascribed above to Burekhardt
•* not strictly correct. In modern Syria, in all
tillages not provided with a khan, there is a house,
vstully the dwelling of the tktikh, which is called
•be mamil, whieh is the place of entertainment
of all strangers who are not visiting at the houses
tf fcfcuds. On* of the villagers is offlciall,- desig-
MOd ae the kkom/H or caterer, and his business is
It <u sat strangers to the menxoui, to supply than
sdth ^ormout and fodder if required, to keep off
the intrusive visits of children and Idlers, and ta
provide a place of safety for the anlm aU at night
It is not customary for the village to furnish these
supplies gratis, but the traveller pays for them at
usual rates, the caterer being the referee in case of
a dispute between the buyer and seller. The caterer
receives a compensation for his services proportioned
to the generosity of the traveller. G. E. P.
INSTANT, INSTANTLY. A word em-
ployed by our translators in the N. T. with the
force of urgency or earnestness, to render five dis-
tinct Greek words. We still say " at the instance
of," but as that sense is no longer attached to
" instant " — though it is still to the verb " insist,''
and to other compounds of the same root, such as
" persist," " constant " — it has been thought ad-
visable to notice its occurrences. They afford an
interesting example, if an additional one be needed,
of the close connection which there is between the
Authorised Version and the Vulgate; the Vulgate
having, as will be seen, suggested the word in three
out of its five occurrences.
1. ffwau8al«f — " they besought Him insUitly"
(Luke vii. 4). This word is elsewhere oomiMal;
rendered " earnestly," which is very suitable ben.
3. Mxtirro, from Mxtifuu, to lie upon: —
" they were instai t with loud voices " (Vulg. lev
itnbani), Luke xxiii. 23. This might be rendered
"they were pressing" (as in ver. 1).
3. tv im-mtf, " instantly serving God " (Acts
xxvi. 7). The metaphor at the root of this word
is that of stretching — on the stretch. Elsewhere
in the A. V. it is represented by " fervently."
4. wpoaKOfrrtpovvrti, "continuing instant*
(Rom. xii. 19), Vulg. mUa«Us. Here the adjeotiv
Digitized by
Google
1140 INWARD
w hardly nstesssry, the word being elsewhere Ten-
dered by " continuing " — or to pre se rve the rhythm
of eo familiar a. sentence — " continuing stedfut "
(m Acts U. 42).
6. 'ZwUrrrfli, from i<purrdrai, to stand by or
opon — "be instant in season, out of aeuon " (S
Tim. iv. 2), Vulg. intta. Four verses further on
it it rendered, " U at hand." The sense ii " stand
ready," " be alert " for whatever may happen. Of
the fire words tab ii the only one which contains
the tame metaphor as " instant."
In Luke ii. 38, '■ that instant " is literally " that
same hour," — ainf if Spa. Q.
* INWARD is used in the expression " my
inward friends," for "familiar," "confidential"
(A V.) Job fix. 19 Of© "HQ, fit. men of my
intimacy). The patriarch complains that those
with whom be had been most familiar, to whom
he had made known his most secret thoughts, had
turned against him and abhorred him. Ii.
• INTEREST. [Loak; tiara v.]
•INTERPRETER. [Pkoi-hkt; Maojc.]
KXNIA ([Semitic f^. Javan, which see:]
"luWa)- The substitution of this word for q 'lr-
Sucfi in 1 Mace. viii. 8 (A. V. '• India") is a con-
jecture of Grctius, without any authority of MSS.
It must be acknowledged, however, that the change
removes a great difficulty, especially if, as the same
commentator suggests, Mvo-fa [Mysia] be substi-
tuted for Mrjt da or Mrj5/a in the same context"
The passage refers to the cession of territory which
the Romans forced Antiochus the Great to make;
and it is evident that India and Media are nothing
to the purpose, whereas Ionia and Mysia were
among the districts cii Taurum, which were given
up to Eumenes.
As to the term Ionia, the name was given in
early times to that part of the western coast of
Asia Minor which lay between jfiolis on the north
and Doris on the south. These were properly eth-
nological terms, and had reference to the tribes of
Greek settlers along this shore. Ionia, with its
islands, was celebrated for its twelve, afterwards
thirteen cities; five of which, Ephesus, Smyrna,
Miletus, Chios, and Samoa, are conspicuous in the
N. T. In Roman times Ionia ceased to have any
political significance, being absorbed in the province
of Asia. The term, however, was still occasionally
used, as in Joseph. Ant. xvi. 2, § 3, from which
passage we learn that the Jews were numerous in
this district. This whole chapter iu Josephus is
very interesting, as a geographical illustration of
that part of the coast [Javak.] J. S. H.
IPHEDEOAH [4 syL] (H^ [wkom Jt-
VouA frt*i\: 'UQa&las; [Vat life/urn;] Alex,
cetafia: Jephdaia), a descendant of Benjamin,
lieof the Bene-Shashak (1 Chr.vui.8fi); specially
named as a chief of the tribe, and as residing in
Jerusalem (eomp. ver. 28).
IR ("V? [e% lorn]: 'fjp, as If 1W? Alex.
Opo; [Vat om.; Comp. 'l e :\ Hir), 1 Cbr. vii.
M. [lax]
ITtA (MTfy [viyUani, Dietr.; or uatcher]:
« • ror a copious note on this textual question, see
rrmanbe's Hmdb. xu dm Apohyphm, III. 124. On-
es) the Uxt be coirupt, It is Impossible to acquit the
sitter %& Maocabeei of gross Inaccuracy. Druslus and
IRAM
In). L dps?,, [Vat] Alex. Bum.) "l*t
Jairite," named in the catalogue of David i great
officers (2 Sam. xx. 26) as "priest to David '
0U '■: A. V. " a chief ruler"). The Peshito ver-
•ion for "Jairite" has "from Jathir," i. e. prob-
ably Jattib, where David had found friends during
his troubles with Saul [Jairite.] If this can
be maintained, and it certainly has an air of prob-
ability, then this Ira is identical with —
2. ('loot, "tyd; [Vat Eipar, lea;] Alex. Eipai,
[lpas]) " Ira the Ithrite " 0"V??n ; A V. omits
the article), that is, the Jattirite, one of the henoa
of David's guard (2 Sam. xxiii. 38; 1 Cbr. xi. 40).
[Ithrite; Jattih; Jethek.]
3. Clpat, 'Ofi; [Vat Eipes*, flpsu;] Alsx.
tyai; [in 1 Cbr. xxvii., 'OoWai, Alex. Eua,
Comp. 'Ipa'] Biro.) Another member of David's
guard, a Tekoite, son of Ikkeah (2 Sam. xxiii. 26:
1 Chr. xl. 28). Ira waa leader of the sixth monthly
course of 34,000, as appointed by David (1 Chr
xxvii. 9).
I'RAD (Tyy [fleet, rapid, Dietr.]: made
in both MSS.; Joseph. lap/Sqr: Syr.Idar: Irad)
son of Enoch; grandson of Cain, and father of
Mehujael (Gen. iv. 18).
I/RAM (CP^ [watchful, Dietr.]: ZooWr
[Alex. Zapcui, Hoop; Vat in Chr., Zmputut]
Hiram; "belonging to a city," Ges.), a leader
(tylVg: LXX. iryt/ui,: "phylarch," A. V
"duke") of the Edomites (Gen. xxxvi. 43; 1 Chr.
i. 64), «. e. the chief of a family or tribe. He oc-
curs in the list of "the names of the dukes [that
came] of Esau, according to their families, after
their places, by their names " (Gen. xxxvi. 40-43) ,
but none of these names is found in the genealogy
of Esau's immediate descendants; the Utter being
separated from them by the enumeration of the
sons of Stir and the kings of Edom, both in Gen.
and Chr. They were certainly descendants of
Esau, but In what generation is not known; ev-
idently not in a remote one. The sacred records
are generally confined to the history of the chosen
race, and the reason of the exclusion of the Edomite
genealogy beyond the second generation is thus
explicable. In remarking on this gap in the ge-
nealogy, we must add that there appears to be no
safe ground for supposing a chronological sequence
of sons and grandsons of Esau, sons of Seir, kings
of Edom, and lastly descendants of Esau again,
ruling over the Edomites. These were probably
in part, or wholly, contemporaneous; and *P vr 5i
we think, should be regarded as signifying a chief
of a tribe, etc. (as rendered above), rather than a
king. The Jewish assertion that these terms sig-
nified the same rank, except that the former was
uncrowned and the latter crowned, may be safely
neglected.
The names of which "ram is one are " according
to their families, after their places (or 'towns.'
DTIQpQ), by their names " (ver. 40); and again
(vet. 43), "These [be] the dukes of Edom, ac-
cording to their habitations in the land of the*
possession." These words imply that tribes and
others had suggested the change of names baton Or»
ttus. It hss bean thought possible also that the asm
may have crept Into the Greek In the proof* of trans
lation from the Anunaea. It .
Digitized by
Google
IR-HA-HBRES
•tees* wen called after tbeb leaden sjd founders,
and tend to confirm the preceding remarks on the
descendants of Esau being chiefs of tribes, and
probably more or less contemporaneous with each
other, and with the kings and Horites named to-
gether with them in the same records. It has been
suggested that the names we are considering are
those of the tribes and places founded by Esau's
Immediate descendants, mentioned earlier in the
record ; but no proof has been adduced in support
of this theory.
The time of the final destruction of the Horites
Is nncertain. By analogy with the conquest of
Canaan (cf. Dent. ii. 12, 22) we may perhaps infer
that it was not immediate on Esau's settlement.
No identification of Iram has been found.
E.S.P.
IR-HA-HF/RES, in A. V. Thb Cm or
DrarRDcnoH (D"inn TV, »ar. D'TTin T? :
[tre'Aif 4<r«W«; FA. 1 w. eurtSriXiov; Comp. r.
■X«0«Y] '■ Cieitn* Soli*), the name or an appellation
•fa city in Egypt, mentioned only in Is. xix. 18.
The reading D"1H la that of most MSS. the Syr.
Aq- and Theod., the other reading, 3~Di is sup-
ported by the LXX., but only In form, by Symm.
who has to'Ais t)\Iov, and the Vulg- Gesenius
(Tha. pp. 391 a, 622) prefers the latter reading.
There are various explanations : we shall first take
those that treat it as a proper name, then those
that suppose it to he an appellation used by the
prophet to denote the future of the city.
1. D^nn "FT}, dig of th* nm, a translation
of the Egyptian sacred name of Heliopolis, gener-
ally called in the Bible On, the Hebrew form of
its civil name An [On], and once BtUnhtmuh,
"the house of the sun" (Jer. xliii. 13), a more
literal translation than this supposed one of the
sacred name [Beth-shemksh].
9- D "5^L' "TO. or D^nrt TV, Ike city
fferet, a transcription in the second word of the
Egyptian sacred name of Heliopolis, Ha-ra, " the
abode (lit. ' house ') of the sun." This explana-
tion would necessitate the omission of the article.
The LXX. favor it
*■ D"3iTn TV, a city dtttroytd, lit "a city
•f destruction ; " in A. V. "the city of destruc-
tion," meaning that one of the fire cities men-
tioned should be destroyed, according to Isaiah's
Idiom.
*• D7!7"? ™^?i " cbs pruervtd, meaning
that one of the fire cities mentioned should be pre-
serred. Gesenius, who proposes this construction,
if the second word be not part of the name of the
■bee, compares the Arabic yj»yS>-, " he guarded,
kept, preserred," etc. It may be remarked that
the word Hkuks or Hues in ancient Egyptian,
probably signifies " a guardian." This rendering
of Gesenius is, however, merely conjectural, and
seems to bare been favored by him on account of
its directly contradicting the rendering last no-
ticed.
The first of these explanations L> highly rmj»vb-
abfe, for we find elsewhere both the sacred and the
■M names of Heliopolis, so that a third name,
• variety of the Hebrew rendering of the
IR-HA-HBRES 1141
sacred name, is very unlikely. The name BeaV
$htmeth is, moreover, a more literal tianslation hi
its first word of the Egyptian name than this sup-
posed one. It may be remarked, however, as to
the second word, that one of the towns in Palestine
called Beth-«hemesh, a town of the Invites on the
borders of Judah and Dan, was not far nam a
Mount Heres, D^rT""!!! (Judg. i. 36), so that the
two names as applied to the sun as an object of
worship might probably be interchangeable. The
second explanation, which we believe has not been
hitherto put forth, is liable to the same objection
as the preceding one, besides that it necessitates the
exclusion of the article. The fourth explanation
would not have been noticed had it not been sup-
ported by the name of Gesenius. The common
reading and old rendering remains, which certainly
present no critical difficulties. A very careful ex-
amination of the xixth chap, of Isaiah, and of the
xviiith and xxth, which are connected with it, has
inclined us to prefer it Egypt and Ethiopia were
then either under a joint rule or under an Ethiopian
sovereign. We can, therefore, understand the con-
nection of the three subjects comprised in the three
chapters. Chap, xviii. is a prophecy against the
Ethiopians, six. is the Burden of Egypt, and xx.,
delivered in the year of the capture of Ashdod by
Tartan, the general of Sargon, predicts the leading
captive of the Egyptians and Ethiopians, probably
the garrison of that great stronghold, as a warning
to the Israelites who trusted in them for aid. Chap,
xviii. ends with an indication of the time to which
it refers, speaking of the Ethiopians — as we un-
derstand the passage — as sending " a present "
" to the place of the name of the Lord of hosts,
the mount Zion " (rer. 7). If this is to be taken
in a proper and not a tropical sense, it would refer
to the conversion of Ethiopians by the preaching
of the Law while the Temple yet stood. That such
had been the case before the gospel was preached
is evident from the instance of the eunuch of
Queen Candace, whom Philip met on his return
homeward from worshipping at Jerusalem, and con-
verted to Christianity (Acta viii. 28-39). Tin
Burden of Egypt seems to point to the times of
the Persian and Greek dominions over that country.
The civil war agrees with the troubles of toe Do-
decarehy, then we read of a time of bitter oppres-
sion by " a cruel lord and [or ' even '] a fierce
king," probably pointing to the Persian conquests
and rule, and specially to Cambyses, or Cambyses
and Ochus, and then of the drying of the sea (the
Red Sea, comp. xl. 18) and the river and canals,
of the destruction of the water-plants, and of the
misery of the fishers and workers in linen. Tht
princes and counsellors are to lose their wisdom and
the people to be filled with fear, all which calamities
seem to have begun In the desolation of the Persian
rule. It is not easy to understand what follows as
to the dread of the land of Judah which the Egyp-
tians should feel, immediately preceding the men-
tion of the subject of the article : " In that day
shall five cities In the land of F<rypt speak the lan-
guage of Canaan, and swear to the Lord of hosts;
one shall be called Ir-na-beres. In that day shal
there be an altar to the Ixird in the midst of the
land of Egypt, and a pillar at the border thereof
to the Lord. And it shall be for a sign and for ■
witness onto the Lord of hosts in the land of
Egypt; for they shall cry unto the Lord beoanss
of the op pr essors, and he shall send them • sartor
Digitized by
Google
1142
IBI
■nd a gnat one, and be (ball deliver them " (zix.
18-80). The partial or entire conversion of Egypt
U propheaied in the next two verses (91, 23). The
time of the Greek dominion, following the Persian
rule, may be here pointed to. There waa then a
great influx of Jewish settlers, and as we know of
a Jewish town, Onion, and a great Jewish popula-
tion at Alexandria, we may suppose that there were
other large settlements. These would " speak the
language of Canaan," at first literally, afterwards
in their retaining the religion and customs of their
fathers. The altar would well correspond to the
temple built by Onias; the pillar, to the synagogue
of Alexandria, the latter on the northern and west-
ern borders of Egypt. In this case Alexander
would be the deliverer. We do not know, how-
ever, that at this period there was any recognition of
the true God on the part of the Egyptians. If the
prophecy is to be understood in a proper sense, we
can however see no other time to which it applies,
and must suppose that Ir-ha-heres was one of the
cities partly or wholly inhabited by the Jews in
Egypt: of these Onion was the most important,
and to it the rendering, >' One shall be called a city
of destruction," would apply, since it was destroyed
by Titus, while Alexandria, and perhaps the other
cities, yet stand. If the prophecy is to be taken
tropically, the best reading and rendering can only
be determined by verbal criticism. It S. P.
I'M (Oipta; Alex. Owpii [Vat Ovpua: AM.
(with preceding word) Mapiiutiovpl ■] Jorui), 1
Esdr. viii. 62. This name answers to Uriah in
Ezra (viii. 33). But whence did our translators
get their form?
I'M or IK 0T¥ <* T? [adorer of Jehovah,
Dietr-i Jehovah it watcher, Flint]: Otipl [Vat.
■mi] and "flo ; [Alex. ver. 12, Clpa, Vat. omits :]
Urai and Fir), a Benjamite, son of Bela, accord-
ing to 1 Chr. vii. 7, 12. The name does not oc-
cur in any of the other genealogies of the tribe.
[Hcfham.] A. C. H.
IRI'JAH (rVJrrr [whom Jehovah tee*, at
fehovah tett]: Sapovia; [Alex. FA. lapovtas'-]
T eriat), ton of Shelemiah, " a captain of the ward "
(f1T|TS ?^5\ "ho met Jeremiah in the gate of
Jerusalem called the " gate of Benjamin," accused
«im of being about to desert to the Chaldeans, and
ed him back to the princes (Jer. xxxvii. 13, 14).
IR-NA'HASH (tfTTf^V = lerpent-citg :
wtAis Nm»; [Comp. 'Homo's:] Urbt Kaai), a
name which, like many other names of places, oc-
curs In the genealogical lists of Judah (1 Chr. iv.
12). Tehinnah Abi Ir-nahaab — '• father of Ir-
nahash " — was one of the sons of Eshton, all of
them being descendants of Chelub (ver. 11). But
it seems impossible to connect this special genealogy
with the general genealogies of Judah, and it has
the air of being a fragment of the records of some
other family, related, of course, or it would not be
here, but not the same. May not " Shuah, the
broth-- of Chelub " (ver. 11), be Shuah the Ca-
naanite, by whose daughter Judah had his three
eldest sons (Gen. xxxviii. 2, Ac.), and these verses
be a fragment of Canaanite record preserved
among.* those of the great Israelite family, who
then became so closely related to the Canaanites ?
IVua, the two Sliuahs are written differently in
Sebmw — 9107 and nnW, Int. ooniidaring
ntoK
the early late of th* one passage and the miv/
and incomplete state of the other, this Is ferhapt
not irreconcilable.
No trace of the name of Ir-nahaab. attached to
any site has been discovered. Jerome's interpre-
tation (Qu. Hebr. ad Inc.) — whether his own a
a tradition he does not say — is, that Ir-nahash is
Bethlehem, Nahash being another name for Jesse.
[Nahash.]
ITtON (iVp^ [fearful, perh. Godfearing]
KspW; Alex, lapimr; [Comp. 'Upiri Aid. 'Earn:]
Jeron), one of the cities of Naphtali, named be-
tween En-hazor and Higdal-el (Josh. xix. 88):
hitherto unknown, though possibly 1'nrtin. G.
IRON (V?3, oonel: Ch. N^Tl?, pnrt'M :
trl&npos), mentioned with brass as the' earliest of
known metals (Gen. iv. 22). As it is rarely found
in its native state, but generally in combination
with oxygen, the knowledge of the art of forging
iron, which is attributed to Tubal Cain, argues an
acquaintance with the difficulties which attend the
smelting of this metal. Iron melts at a temperv-
ture of about 3000° Fahrenheit, and to produce
this heat large furnaces supplied by a strong blast
of air are necessary. But, however difficult it may
be to imagine a knowledge of such appliances at
so early a period, it is perfectly certain that the use
of iron is of extreme antiquity, and that therefore
some means of overcoming the obstacles in ques-
tion must have been discovered. What the process
may have been is left entirely to conjecture; a
method is employed by the natives of India, ex-
tremely simple and of great antiquity, which though
rude is very effective, and suggests the possibility
of similar knowledge In an early stage of civilisa-
tion (Ure, Diet. Art* and Science*, ait. Steel).
The smelting furnaces of Jfthalia, described by
Diodorus (v. 13), correspond roughly with the mod-
em bkwmeries, remains of which still exist in this
country (Napier, MetnUwyy of the Bale, p. 140).
Malleable iron was in common use, but it is doubt-
ful whether the ancients were acquainted with cast-
iron. The allusions in the Bible supply the fol-
lowing facts.
The natural wealth of the soil of Canaan is indi-
cated by describing It as " a land whose stones are
iron " (Deut viii. 9). By this Winer (Realm, art.
Eiten) understands the basalt which predominates
in the Hauran, is the material of which Og's bed-
stead (Deut iii. 11) was made, and contains a large
percentage of iron. It is more probable that the
expression is a poetical figure, l'liny (xxxri. 11),
who is quoted as an authority, says indeed that
basalt is " ferrei colons atque duritise," but doei
not hint that iron waa ever extracted from it The
book of Job contains passages which indicate thul
iron was a metal well known. Of the manner of
procuring it, we team that "iron is taken from
dust" (xxvili. 2). It does not follow from Jc'_
xix. 24, that it was used for a writing implement,
though such may have been the case, any more
than that adamant was employed for the same pur-
pose (Jer. xvii. 1), or that shoes were shod with
iron and brass (Deut xxxiii. 25). Indeed, iron so
frequently occurs in poetic figures, that it is diffi-
cult to discriminate between its literal and meta-
phorical sense. In such passages as the following
in which a " yoke of iron " (Deut xxvili. 48) da
notes hard service; a " rorf of iron " (Pi H. ft),
stern government; a "pUlar of Iron" (Jer i IS
Digitized by
Google
IRON
j support; and " thretkmg inttnrntntt of
1 (Am. i. 3), the meant of crcd oppression ;
the W«in«— and heaviness (Ecclus xxii. 15) of
iron are ao clearly the prominent ideal, that though
it ma; hare been used for the instruments in ques-
tion, inch usage is not of necessity indicated.
The "furnact of iron " (Dent. iv. 20; 1 K. viil.
51) is a figure which vividly expresses bard bond-
age as represented by the severe labor which at-
tended the operation of smelting. Iron was used
for chisels (Deut. xxvii. 6), or something of the
kind ; for axes (Deut. xix. 6 ; 2 K. vi. 5, 6 ; Is. x.
34; Horn. IL ir. 485); for harrows and saws (2
Sam. xii. 31; 1 Chr. xx. 3); for nails (1 Chr.
xxii. 8), and the fastenings of the Temple ; for
weapons of war (1 Sam. xvil. 7; Job xx. 24), and
for war-chariots (Josh. xvii. 18, 18; Judg. i. 19,
ir. 8, 18). The latter were plated or studded with
it. Its usage in defensive armor is implied in 2
Sam. xxiii. 7 (ef. Kev. ix. 9), and as a safeguard
in peace it appears in fetters (Ps. cv. 18), prison-
gates (Acts xii. 10), and bare of gates or doun
(Ps. crii. 16; Is. xiv. 2), as well as for surgical
purposes (1 Tim. It. 2). Sheet-iron was need for
cooking utensils (Ex. ir. 8; cf. Lev. vii. 9),« and
bars of hammered iron are mentioned in Job xL
18, though here the LXX. perversely render aitv-
pot %vr6t, " cast- iron." That it was plentiful in
the time of David appears from 1 Chr. xxii. 3. It
waa used by Solomon, according to Josepbus, to
damp the large rocks with which he built up the
Temple mount (Ant. xv. 11, § 3); and by Heze-
klah's workmen to hew out the conduits of Gibon
(Ecclus. xlviii. 17). Images were fastened in their
niches in later times by iron brackets or clamps
(Wisd. xiii. 15). Agricultural implements were
early made of the same material. In the treaty
made by l'orsena was inserted a condition like that
imposed on the Hebrews by the Philistines, that
no iron should be used except for agricultural pur-
poses (Plin. xxxiv. 89).
The market of Tyre was supplied with bright or
polished iron by the merchants of Dan and Javan
(Ex. xxvii. 19). Some, at the LXX. and Vulg.,
render this "wrought iron:" so De Wette "ge-
eehmiedetea Eisen." » The Targum has "bars of
iron," which would correspond with the ttrictura
of Pliny (xxxiv. 41). But Kimchi (Lex. a. v.)
expounds HltT^, 'Athtth, as " pure and polished "
(= Span, nciro, steel), in which he is supported by
R. Sol. Parchon, and by Ben Zeb, who gives
u gianzend " as the equivalent (comp. the Ho-
meric affair altifpot, IL vii. 473). If the Javan
sBoded to were Greece, and not, at Bochart (I'hn-
leg, ii. 21) seems to think, some place in Arabia,
there might be reference to the iron mines of Mace-
donia, spoken of in the decree of iEmilius Paulus
(ljv. xlv. 29); but Bochart urges, as a very strong
argument in support of his theory, that, at the time
if Exekiel's prophecy, the Tyrians did not depend
upon Greece for a supply of cassia and cinnamon,
which are associated with iron In the merchandise
«f Dan and Javan, but that rather the contrary
waa the ease. Plinj N xxriv. 41) awards the palm
to the iron of Series, that of Parthia being next
The Chalybcs of the Pontua wer*
IBOK 1141
celebrated at workers in iron In very ancient 1mm
(JSsch. Prom. 733). They were ldentifiea by
Stmbo with the ChakUei of his day (xii. 549), and
the mines which they worked were in the moun-
tains skirting the sea-coast. The produce of their
labor is supposed to be alluded to in Jer. xv. 12, at
being of superior quality. Iron mines are still
in existence on the same coast, and the ore is .*>nnd
" in small nodular misses in a dark yellow da)
which overlies a limestone rock " (Smith's Oeoy
Diet. art. Chalybet).
It was for a long time supposed that the Egyp-
tians were ignorant of the use of iron, and that
the allusions in the Pentateuch were anachronisms,
as no traces of it have been found in their insnu-
menta; but in the sepu'ehres at Thebes brtchere
are represented as sharpening their knivet on a
round bar of metal attached to their aprons, which
from its blue color is presumed to be steel. The
steel weapons on the tomb of liameses III. are also
painted blue ; those of bronze being red (Wilkin-
son, Anc. Eg. iii. 247). One iron mine only hat
been discovered in Egypt, which was worked by
the ancients. It is at Hammami, between the N'Jw
and the Red Sea; the iron found by Mr. Burt >u
was in the form of specular and red ore (Id iii.
246). That no articles of iron should have been
found is easily accounted for by the fact that it it
easily destroyed by exposure to the air and moist-
ure. According to Pliny (xxxiv. 43) it was pre-
served by a coating of white lead, gypsum, and
liquid pitch. Bitumen was probably employed for
the same purpose (xxxv. 52). The Egyptians ob-
tained their iron almost exclusively from Assyria
Proper in the form of bricks or pigs (I-ayard, ffin.
ii. 415). Specimens of Assyrian iron-work over-
laid with bronze were discovered by Mr. Layard,
and are now in the British Museum (ffin. and
Bab. p. 191). Iron weapons of various kinds were
found at Nimroud, but fell to pieces on exposure
to the air. Some portions of shields and arrow-
heads (Id. 194, 596) were rescued, and are now in
England. A pick of the same metal (Id. 194) was
also found, as well as part of a saw (195), and the
head of an axe (357), and remains of scale-armor
and helmets inlaid with copper (ffin. i. 340). It
was used by the Etruscans for offensive weapons,
as bronze for defensive armor. The Assyrians bad
daggers and arrow-heads of copper mixed with iron,
and hardened with an alloy of tin (Layard, Ami.
ii. 418). So in the days of Homer war-chibs were
shod with iron (IL vii. 141); arrows were tipped
with it (//. ir. 128); it was used for the axles of
chariots (IL v. 723), for fetters ( Od. 1. 204), for
axes and bills (II. if. 485; Od. xxL 3, 81).
Adrastus (IL vi. 48) and Ulysses (Od. xxi. 10)
reckoned it among their treasures, the iron weap-
ons being kept in a chest in the treasury with th»
gold and brass ( Od. xxi. 61). In Od. 1. 184, Mentet
tells Telemachus that he is travelling from Taphos
to Tamese to procure brass in exchange for irot
which Eustathius says was not obtained from ths
mines of the island, bit was the produce of pirat-
ical excursions (Millln, Mineral Horn. p. 116, 2d
ed.). Pliny (xxxiv. 4>) mentions iron as used
symboBcaDy for a statue of Hercules at Thebes
(cf. Dan. ii. 33, v. 4), and goblets of iron i
• The paaatge of Xcckfei b lUnttralad by ths screens ) nWr* «*_■. m . 1 1, <>■•_<- «>— . -
»»taa wMehtoe.rchw, stand in th. representations \™VV <**"< Havernlek, made, Ittrst, ess-*x»
a) a aba* oo tin Nlmnrod sculptures. jtteAafl.). Seeadatooa at the end of the irnr*
> •*»*■ k ths
Digitized by
Google
1144 IBOK
fee offering! In the temple of Man the Avenger, at
Rune, Alyattes the Lydian dedicated to the Ora-
cle at Delphi a small goblet of iron, the workman-
ship of Glaucus of Chios, to whom the dieeovery of
the art of soldering this metal is attributed (Her.
i. 96). The goblet is described by Pausanias (x.
x6). From the fact that such offerings were made
to the temples, and that Achilles gave as a prize
of contest a rudely-shaped mass of the same metal
(/£ xxiii. 838), it has been argued that in early
times iron was bo little known as to be greatly
esteemed for its rarity. That this was not the
case in the time of Lycurgus is evident, and Ho-
mer attaches to it no epithet which would denote
its preciousiiess (Millin, p. 106). There is reason
to suppose that the discovery of brass preceded
that of iron (I.ucr. r. 1299), though little weight
can be attached to the line of Hesiod often quoted
as decisive on this point (Op. ct Dies, 150). The
Dactyli Idasi of Crete were supposed by the an-
cients to 'lave the merit of being the first to dis-
cover the properties of iron (Flin. vii. 57; Diori.
Sic. v. 64), as the Cyclops were said to have
invented the iron-smith's forge (Plin. vii. 57).
According to the Arundelian marbles, iron was
known B. c 1370, while Larcher ( ChronoL it Bend.
L570) assigns a still earlier date, B. c. 1537.
nigh has been said to prove that the allusions
to iron in the Pentateuch and other parts of the
0. T. are not anachronisms.
There is considerable doubt whether the ancients
were acquainted with cast-iron. The rendering
given by the LXX. of Job xl 18, as quoted above,
seems to imply that some method nearly like that
of casting was known, and is supported by a pas-
sage in Diodorus (v. 13). The inhabitants of
ASthalia traded with pig-iron in masses like large
sponges to Diccarchia and other marts, where it
was bought by the smiths and fashioned into vari-
ous moulded forms (wAaVpara murroSairtii).
In Ecclus. xxxviil. 28, we have a picture of the
interior of an iron-smith's (Is. xliv. 12) workshop:
the smith, parched with the smoke and heat of the
furnace, sitting beside his anvil and contemplating
the unwrought iron, his ears deafened with the
din of the heavy hammer, his eyes fixed on his
model, and never sleeping till he has accomplished
his task. [Steel.] W. A. W.
* Iron of a superior quality is mined and worked
at the present day near the village of Dumn in
Mount Lebanon. It is especially valuable for shoe-
ing beasts of burden, and is greatly sought for
through Northern Syria. It is probable that the
merchants of Dan, who had possessions in the ex-
treme north of Palestine in the neighborhood of
Caaarea Philippi, derived from this source the
" bright iron," which is probably to be translated
» wrought iron," Ear. xxrii. 19.
This view oommends itself the more if we suppose
Java to be in Arabia, as the mention of the two
places together makes it probable that they had at
east a common entrepot for their wares. This
TOuld be possible at the junction of the roads of
Oaksyria from the north, with those from Gilead
on the east in the possessions of Dan, and would
explain the circumstance that to Tyre Dan was a
source of supply of iron frcm Mount Lebanon, and
xf cassia and calamus from Arabia.
Still further, the geographical position of this
entrepot corresponds with the language of the con-
tat. In ver. 18 the prophet speaks of Damascus;
• *sr. 19. of Dan with its trade with Javans In
ISAAC
ver. 90, of the caravans from Dedan, which wottl
oome in toward Tyie to the southward of Dan
finally, ver. 21, nf those from Arabia, which wool*
oome from a still more southerly direction.
G. E.P
IRTEEL ( 1 ?£9T [whom God heals, or (km
repair*, builds]: Kafdr; [Aid.] Alex. 'Itse)ai)X
Jarephel), one of the cities of Benjamin (Josh,
xviii. 27), occurring in the list between Rekem and
Taralah. No trace has yet been discovered of its
situation. It will be observed that the Ir in this
name is radically different from that in the names
Ir-nahash, Ir-ahemesh, etc. Taken as a Hebrew
name it is Irpe-EI = '• restored by God." G.
IE-SHB'MESH (tt?31£ "V? = city oj At
tun: x6\nt Ittfifudis; Alex. wo\itiafuf- ller-
semet, id est, Cititns Bolts), a city of the D.initea
(Josh. xix. 41), probably identical with Beth-
shkmksh, and, if not identical, at least connected
with Mount Herbs (Judg. L 85), the " mount
.. the sun." Beth-sheroesb is probably the later
form of tbe name. In other cases Beth appears to
have been substituted for other older terms [sea
Baal-meok, etc.J. such as Ir or Ar, which is un-
questionably a very ancient word. G.
ratT ( ! n , y [toateh, FUrst]: *R>, Alex. Hpo;
[Comp. 'IpoiS:] /fir), the eldest son of the great
Caleb son of Jephunneh (1 Chr. iv. 15). It is by
some supposed that this name should be Ir, the
vowel at the end being merely the conjunction
" and," properly belonging to the following name.
* It is true, 1 more frequently connects ths
nouns in such an enumeration ; but that reason for
changing Ira to Ir is not decisive. The copula may
also be omitted between them (see 1 Chr. iv. 90,
24, Ac.). H.
I'SAAC (PCTf!, «r \K^P), laughter [mocker,
laughter, FUrst J: laaiic- [Isaac]), the son whom
Sarah, in accordance with the Divine promise, bore
to Abraham in the hundredth year of his age, at
Gerar. In his infancy be became the object of
tUimael's jealousy ; and in his youth (when twenty-
five years old, according to Joseph. Ant. i. 13, § 2)
the victim, in intention, of Abraham's great sacri-
ficial act of faith. When forty years old he married
Rebekah his cousin, by whom, when he was sixty,
he had two sons, Esau and Jacob. In his seventy-
fifth year he and his brother Ishmael buried then-
father Abraham In the cave of Macbpelah. From
his abode by the well Labai-roi, in the South
Country — a barren tract, comprising a few pas-
tures and wells, between the hills of Judea and the
Arabian desert, touching at its western end Phil-
istia, and on the north Hebron — Isaac was driven
by a famine to Gerar. Here Jehovah appeared to
him and bade him dwell there and not go over into
Egypt, and renewed to him the promises made to
Abraham. Here he subjected himself, like Abraham
in the same place and under like circumstances
(Gen. xx. 2), to a rebuke from Abimelech the
Philistine king for an equivocation. Here he ae-
quiied great wealth by his flocks; but was repeat-
edly dispossessed by the Philistines of tbe weds
which he sunk at convenient stations. At Beer
sheba Jehovah appeared to him by night ant
blessed him, and be built an altar there : there, toe
like Abraham, he received a visit from the PhiHe
tine king Abimelech, with whom he made a <v?
enant of peace. After the deceit by which Jasv*
Digitized by
Google
ISAAC
Us hiker"! blessing baas mm hit mo to
[ a wife in Padanaram, and all that we know
of kirn during too hat forty-three yean of oil life
ta that he aaw that m, with a large at>d prosper-
•m family, retirn to him at Hebron (xxxt. 37)
lesbre he died then at Jw age of 180 years.
He waa buried bj hie two aona in the care of
ISAAC
1144
In the N. T. reference it made to the offering
of laaae (Heb. xi. 17; and James ii. 91) and to his
blearing his aona (Heb. xi. 20). As the child of
the promise, and at the progenitor of the children
of the promise, he ia contrasted with Iahmael (Horn.
ix. 7, 10; Gal It. 28; Heb. xi. 18). In our lord's
remarkable argument with the Sadducees, his his-
tory is carried beyond the point at which it is left
in the O. T., into and beyond the grave. Isaac,
of whom it was said (Gen. xxxt. 29) that he was
gathered to his people, is represented as still living
to God (Luke xx. 38, Ac.); and by the same Divine
authority be is proclaimed as an acknowledged heir
of future glory (Matt viii. 11, Ac).
H. Such are the bets which the Bible supplies
of the longest-Jived of the three Patriarchs, the
least migratory, the least prolific, and the least
favored with extraordinary divine revelations. A
few events iu this quiet life have occasioned dia-
(<i.) The signification of Isaac's name is thrice
alluded to (Gen. xvii. 17, xviii. 13, xxi. 6). Josephus
(Ant. i. 12, § 2) refers to the second of those pas-
sages for the origin of the name; Jerome ( Quant.
Btb. in Gen.) vehemently confines it to the first;
Ewald (Getch. i. 425), without assigning reasons,
gives it as his opinion that all three passages have
bean added by different writers to the original
(4.) It has been asked what are the pa Mentions
sustained by Isaac from Iahmael to which St. Paul
refers (GaL iv. 39)? If, as is generally supposed,
he refers to Gen. xxi. 9, then the word prT'P
ratfjMTa, may be translated mocking, as in the
A. v., or vaulting, ss in xxxix. 14, and in that
see too trial of Isaac waa by means of " crutl
moekings" (ifiwatyumr), in the language of the
Epistle to the Hebrews (xi. 86). Or the word may
Delude the signification paying idolatrom worship,
is in Ex. xxxiL 8, or fighting, ss in 3 Sam. 1L 14.
These three significations are given by Jarchi, who
rentes a Jewish tradition (quoted more briefly by
Wetstein on Gal iv. 99) of Isaac suffering personal
violence from Iahmael, a tradition which, as Mr.
EOieott thinks, waa adopted by St Paul. [Haoar,
Amer. ed.] The English reader who is content
with our own version, or the scholar who may
prefer either of the other renderings of Jarchi, will
be at no loss to connect Gal. iv. 39 with Gen. xxi. 9.
But Origen (in Gen. Horn. vii. § 3), and Augustine
(Sermo iii.), and apparently Professor Jowett (on
GaL iv. 39), not observing that the gloss of the
LXX. and the Latin versions " playing with he,
«m /mac" forms no part of the simple statement
is Genesis, and that the words ~P*'?, woifiwro,
are not to be confined to the meaning " playing,
•asm to doubt (as Mr. EUieoU does on othet
pounds), whether the passage in Genesis bean th«
j o wtiucti on apparently put upon it by St Paul.
Ob the other hand, Rosenmuller (SchoL it Gen
<xL 9) even goes so far as to characterise islam —
' — as t very excellent interpretation
of POrTp- (See Drusiue on Gen xxi 9 in CHI
Sacr., and Estius on Gal It. 99.)
(c) The offering up of laaae by Abraham haw
been viewed in various lights. It U the subject of
five dissertations by Frisehmuth in the The*. TheoL
PhiioL p. 197 (attached to Grit Sacri). By Bishop
Wsrburton (Dit. Leg. b. vi. § 5) the whole tran-
saction waa regarded as " merely an information by
action (compare Jer. xxvil 9; Es. xii. 3; Hoe. i. 2),
instead of words, of the great sacrifice of Christ for
the redemption of mankind, given at the earnest
request of Abraham, who longed impatiently to ses
Christ's day." This view is adopted by Dean
Graves (On the Penbiteuck, vL iii. f 4), and has
become popular But it is pronounced to be un-
satisfactory by Davison {Primitive Sacrifice, pt
iv. j 3), who, pleading for the progressive com-
munication of the knowledge of the Christian atone-
ment, protests against the assumption of a con-
temporary disclosure of the import of the sacrifice
to Abraham, and points out that no expiation or
atonement was joined with this emblematic oblation,
which consequently symbolized only the act, not
the power or virtue of the Christian sacrifice. Mr.
Maurice (Patriarch* and Lawgiver*, iv.) draws
attention to the offering of Isaac as the last and
culminating point (compare Ewald, Ouch. i. 430-4)
in the divine education of Abraham, that which
taught him the meaning and ground of self-sacri-
fice. The same line of thought is followed up in a
very instructive and striking sermon on the sacrifice
of Abraham in Doctrine uf Sacrifice, iii. 33-48.
Some German writers have spoken of the whole
transaction as a dream (Eichhorn), or a myth (De
Wette), and treat other events in Isaac's life as
slips of the pen of a Jewish transcriber. Even the
merit of novelty cannot be claimed for such views,
which appear to have been in some measure fore-
stalled in the time of Augustine (Sermo ii. de Ten-
tatione Abraha). They are, of course, irreconcilable
with the declaration of St James, that it was a
work by which Abraham was justified. Eusebius
(Prop. Kvang. iv. 16, and 1. 10) has preserved a
singular and inaccurate version of the offering of
Isaac in an extract from the ancient Phoenician
historian Sanchoniathon ; but it is absurd to sup-
pose that the widely-spread (see Ewald, Atttrthumer
p. 79, and Thomson's Bamptan Lecture*, 1863, p
38) heathen practice of sacrificing human beings
received any encouragement from a sacrifice which
Abraham was forbidden to accomplish (see Water-
land, Work*, iv. 303). Some writers have found
for this transaction a kind of parallel — it amounts
to no more — in the classical legends of Iphigenis
and Phrixus. The story of Iphigenia, which in-
spired the devout Athenian dramatist with sublime
notions of the import of sacrifice and suffering
(iEseh. Agam. 147 ff.), supplied the Roman infidel
only with a keen taunt against religion (Lucret i.
102), just as the great trial which perfected the
faith of Abraham and moulded the character of
laaae, draws from the Komanixed Jew of the first
century a rhetorical exhibition of his own unae-
quaintance with the meaning of sacrifice (see Joseph,
i Ant 1. 18, 1 3).
I (<t) No passage of his life has produced mora
.reproach to Isaac's character than that which is
irecoHdd in Gen. xxvi. 6-11. Abraham's conduct
while in Egypt (xii.) and in Gtrar (xx.), where ht
conoea. 1 the closer connection between himself and
his wife, was imitated br laaae in Gerar. On tb*
Digitized by
Google
1146
ISAAC
xot hand, thla has been regarded by avowed ad-
reraariet of Christianity u involvil g the guilt of
" lying and endeavoring to betray the wife'a ehaa-
Uty," and wren by Christiana, undoubtedly zealous
for truth and right, as the conduct of " a very poor
paltry earthworm, displaying cowardice, selfishness,
nadineas to put hie wife in a terrible hazard for
hie own sake." But, on the other band, with
more reverence, more kindness, and quite aa much
probability, Waterland, who is no indiscriminate
apologist for the errors of good men, after a minute
examination of the circumstances, concludes that
the patriarch did " right to evade the difficulty so
long as it could lawfully be evaded, and to await
and tee whether Divine Providence might not, some
way or other, interpose before the last extremity.
The event answered. God did interpose." (Scrip-
ture, Vindicated, in Work*, iv. 188, 190.)
(e.) Isaac's tacit acquiescence in the conduct of
bis sons has been brought into discussion. Perhaps
Fab-bairn ( Typology, i. 334) seems scarcely justified
by facts in his conclusion that the later days of
Isaac did not fulfill the promise of his earlier; that,
instead of reaching to high attainments In faith, he
fell into general feebleness and decay, moral and
bodily, and made account only of the natural ele-
ment in judging of his sons. The inexact transla
Uon (to modem ears) of "PV, prey taken tn hunt-
ing, by " venison " (Gen. xxv. 28), may have con-
tributed to form, in the minds of English readers,
a low opinion of Isaac. Nor can that opinion be
supported by a reference to xxvii. 4; for Isaac's
desire at such a time for savory meat may have
iprung either from a dangerous sickness under
which he was laboring (Blunt, Undetigntd Coin-
tidencet, pt. i. eh. vi.), or from the same kind of
impulse preceding inspiration aa prompted Elisha
(2 K. Hi. 16) to demand the soothing influence of
music before he spoke the word of the Lord. For
sadness and grief are enumerated in the Gemara
among the impedimenta to the exercise of the gift
of prophecy (Smith's Select Ditcowte; vi. 245 1.
The reader who bears in mind the peculiarities of
Isaac's character, will scarcely infer from those
passages any fresh secession of mental or moral
feebleness.
HI. Isaac, the gentle and dutiful ton, the faith-
ful and constant husband, became the father of a
house in which order did not reign. If then were
iny very prominent points in his character they
were not brought out by the circumstances in which
he was placed. He appears lees as a man of action
than aa a man of suffering, from which he is gen-
erally delivered without any direct effort of hit own.
Thus he suffers as the object of Ishmael'a mocking,
of tho intended sacrifice on Moriah, of the rapacity
,! the Philistines, and of Jacob's stratagem. But
sh> thought of his sufferings is effaced by the ever-
present tokens of God's favor; and he suffers with
the calmness and dignity of a conscious heir of
heavenly promise*, without uttering any complaint,
and generally without committing any action by
which he would forfeit respect. Free from violent
passions, he was a man of constant, deep, and tender
aflectjics. Thus he mourned for his mother till
her place was filled by his wife. Hit tons were
4Srtured at home till a late period of their lives ;
and neither his grief for Esau's marriage, nor the
anxiety in which he was involved in consequence
3f Jacob's deceit, estranged either of them from his
aflfcotiontie care. His life of solitary hUmelesaneta
ISAAC
mutt have been sustained by strong haMUil flat}
such at allowed itatlf at the time of Kebekah's bar
rennets (xxv. 21/, in hit special intercourse wi»l
God at Gerar and Beer-theoa (xxvi. 2, 23), in the
solemnity with which he Iteetows his blessing and
refuses to change it. His life, judged by a worldly
standard, might seem inactive, ignoble, and unfruit-
ful ; but the " guileless years, prayers, gracious acts
and daily thank-offerings of pastoral life " are not
to be so esteemed, although tbej make no show in
history. Isaac's character may not have exercised
any commanding influence upon either his own or
succeeding generations ; but it was sufficiently
marked and consistent to win respect and envy from
his contemporaries. By his posterity his name is
always joined in equal honor with those of Abraham
and Jacob; and so it was even used as part of the
formula which Egyptian magicians in the time of
Origen (Contra Celsum, i. 22) employed at effica-
cious to bind the demons whom they adjured (camp.
Gen. xxxl. 42, 63).
If Abraham's enterprising, unsettled life fore-
shadowed the early history of his descendants; if
Jacob was a type of the careful, commercial, un-
warlika character of their later days, Isaac may
represent the middle period, in which they lived
apart from nations, and enjoyed possession of the
fertile land of promise.
IV. The typical view of Isaac it barely referred
to in the N. T. ; but it is drawn out with minute
particularity by Philo and those inter p re te rs of
Scripture who were influenced by Alexandrian phi-
losophy. Thus in Philo, Isaac = laughter = the
most exquisite enjoyment = the toother and cbeerer
of peace-loving souls. Is foreshadowed in the facts
that hit father had attained 100 years (the perfect
number) when he was born, and that he is spe-
cially designated as given to his parents by God.
His birth from the mistress of Abraham's house-
hold symbolizes happiness proceeding from pre-
dominant wisdom. His attachment to one wife
(Rebekah = perseverance) is contrasted with Abra-
ham's multiplied connections and with Jacob's toil-
won wives, as showing the superiority of Isaac's
heaven-born, self-sufficing wisdom, to the accumu-
lated knowledge of Abraham and the painful expe-
rience of Jacob. In the intended sacrifice of Isaac
Philo sees only a sign that laughter = rejoicing is
the prerogative of God, and ia a fit offering to Him,
and that He gives back to obedient man at much
happiness as is good for him. Clement of Rome
(eh. 31), with characteristic soberness, merely re-
fers to Isaac as an example of faith in God. In
Tertullian he is a pattern of monogamy and a type
of Christ bearing the cross. But Clement of Alex-
andria finds an allegorical meaning in the incident'
which connect Abiniekch with Isaac and Rebskao
(Gen. xxvi. 8) as well as in the offering of Isaac.
In this latter view he is followed by Origen, and
by Augustine, and by Christian expositors gener-
ally. The most minute particulars of that tran-
saction are Invested with a spiritual meaning by
tush writers ss Rabanut Haurus, in Gen. § iii.
Abraham is made a type of the First Person in the
bleated Trinity, Isaac of the Second ; the two ser
rants dismissed are the Jewish sects who did not
attain to a perception of Christ in his humiliation ;
the ttt bearing the wood it the Jewish nation, to
whom were committed the oracles of God which
they railed to understand ; the three days are tb>
Patriarchal, Mosaic, and Christian dispensat : ooa
the ram b Christ on the cross; the thicket the*
Digitized by
Google
ISAAC
■ha placed him there. Modern English wiKen
told firmly too typical significance .f the transac-
tion, without extending it into nieh detail (aee
Pearson cm Me Crttd, i." 348, 351, ed. 1843; Fair-
bairn's Typology, I 333). A recent writer (A.
Juke*, Type$ of Geneeu), who has shown much
ingenuity in attaching a spiritual meaning to the
sharacten and incidents in the book of Genesis,
regards Isaac as representing the spirit of sonship,
in a series in which Adam represents human na-
ture, Cain the carnal mind, Abel the spiritual,
Noah regeneration, Abraham the spirit of frith,
Jacob the spirit of service, Joseph suffering or
glory. With this series may be compared the
new of Ewald (Gach. i. 387-400), in which the
whole patriarchal family is a preflgurative group,
comprising twelve members with beven distinct
modes of relation : (1.) Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob
an three fathers, respectively personifying active
power, quiet enjoyment, success after struggles, dis-
tinguished from the rest as Agamemnon, Achilles,
and Ulysses among the heroes of the Iliad, or as
the Trojan Anchises, jEneas, and Ascanius, and
mutually related as Komulus, Remus, and Nuina;
(8.) Sarah, with hajrar, as mother and mistress
of the household; (3.) Isaac as child; (4.) Isaac
with Bebekah as the type of wedlock (oomp. Ai-
Urikimcr, p. 333): (5.) Leah and Kachel the
plurality of ooequal wives; (6.) Deborah as nurse
(compare Anna and Caieta, j£n. iv. 664, and vii.
1); (7.) KKezer as steward, whose office is com-
pared to that of the messenger of the Olympic
deities.
V. Jewish legends represent Isaac as an angel
made before the world, and descending to earth in
human form (Origen, m Jormn. ii. § 35); as one
of the three men in whom human sinfulness has
no place, as one of the six over whom the angel
of death has no power (Eisenmenger, J-M. Jud. i.
843, 864). He is said to have been instructed in
divine knowledge by Sheni (Jarchi, on 6'en. sxr.).
The ordinance of evening prayer is ascribed to him
(Gen. xxiv. 63), as that of morning prayer to
Abraham (xix. 37), and night prayer to Jacob
(xxviii. 11) (Eiaeumenger, Ent. Jud. i. 483).
The Arabian traditions included in the Koran
represent Isaac as a model of religion, a righteous
person inspired with grace to do good works, ob-
serve prayer, and give alms (ch. 31 ), endowed with
the divine gifts of prophecy, children, and wealth
(eh. 19). The promise of Isaac and the offering
of Isaac are also mentioned (cb. 11, 38). Faith
b a future resurrection is ascribed to Abraham;
but it Is connected, not as in Heb. si. 19 with the
«*M"g of Isaac, but with a fictitious miracle (ch.
1). W. T. B.
* A few additional words should be said on some
uf the points introduced or suggested in the fore-
going article-
It is well to notice In regard to the origin of
Isaac's name, that while tt was given by divine
command (Gen. xvii. 19), the reason for giving it
b not explicitly stated. The historian employs the
•ord on which the name is founded just before
•er. 17), in speaking of Abraham's joy on being
enured that the child of promise was about to be
m after so long a delay; and again, shorty after
that (xviil. 13), In speaking of Sarah's incredulity
si to the possibility of her becoming a mother at!
ID advanced an age. We may infer, therefore,
that the name was designed to embody and com
i huidenU in the family-history. It
ISAAC nil
represents, indeed, very different states of mind
but no violence is done thereby to the ilebre*
word, which readily admits of the twofold oombl
nation. No doubt Sarah refers once more to ttu
signification of the name, on the occasion of for-
mally giving it to the child at the time of circum-
cision (Gen. xxi. 3 ff.); but in that instance her
object was simply to recognize in the better sense
of the name a symbol and pledge of joy both to
herself and to the multitude of others who should
be blessed hi the promised seed. Such reasons for
the name are certainly not inconsistent with each
other, and, still less, are they so inconsistent as to
discredit the narrative as one made up from con-
tradictory sources. For some good remarks on the
significance of " birth-names," the reader may con-
sult Wilkinson's Pa-tonal Noma of the JiibU, pp
356-313 (Loud. 1865).
It will be noticed above that some of the opin-
ions respecting the typical character of Abraham '■
offering up of Isaac extend the analogy to numer-
ous and very minute correspondences. It is of
some importance here to distinguish between such
opinions of interpreters and the explicit teaching
of Scripture on this subject; so as not to make the
sacred writers auswerable for views or principles of
exegesis in the allegorizing of the 0. T. history,
which in the hands of some expositors have led to
very fanciful conclusions. It seems unreasonable
to deny altogether a symbolic significance to this
sacrificial act and its concomitants, both on account
of its suitableness in itself considered to shadow
forth Christian ideas and relations, and abo on
account of some hints given by Paul which point
in that direction. The most extended reference to
Isaac in the N. T. is tha'. in Gal. iv. 31-31. Yet
the intimations there in regard to his typical char-
acter, leavo it questionable whether the Apostle
meant to recognize the general facts of his history
as in a strict sense prophetic of the N. T. dispen-
sation, or simply to use the frets for the purpose
of illustration. The points of comparison which
the Apostle draws out in that passage are the fol-
lowing: As Ishmael was born in accordance with
the laws of nature, so the Jews are a mere natural
seed; but Christians who obtain justification in
conformity with the promise made to Abraham,
are the true promised seed, even as Isaac was.
Further, as in the history of Abraham's family,
Ishmael persecuted Isaac, the child of promise, so
It should not be accounted strange that under the
Gospel, the natural seed, that is, the Jews, should
persecute the spiritual seed, that is, Christians.
And finally, as Isaac was acknowledged as the true
heir, but Ishmael was sei aside, so must it be as
to the difference which exists between Jews and
believers. The former, or, in other words, those
who depend on their own merit for obtaining the
favor of God, will be rejected, while those who seek
it by frith shall obtain the heavenly inheritance.
It may be remarked that this parallelism (whether
illustrative only or typical) enables the Apostle
skilfully to recapitulate the prominent doctrines of
the whole epistle, and thus to leave them so asso-
ciated in the minds of the Galatians with a frmil-
•v and striking portion of sacred history, that thi
teachings of the epistle could never be easily forgot-
ten.
No mention is made in Genesis of Ishmael's per-
secuting Isaac; but Ishmael's mocking at the feast
of.weaning (Gen. xxi. 8, 9) reveals the spirit out
of which an active hostility would be expected t*
Digitized by
Google
1148
ISAAC
rm tn dne time. In all probabUKy P»al refers
such effects of that spirit well blown to the
Jawi of hii time, from traditionary sources. For
other examples of tradition! that recognized as
true, ne under Amathar (Amor. ed.'. Beer
{Ltttn AbraJutm't, pp. 49, 170) ibowi that the
iewi (bund in Ishmsei's " mocking" a significant
intimation of the alienatioo and strife which marked
the subsequent ralationa of the two brother! to each
ether.
Of the precise age of [aaac at the time of the
great trial of Abraham'! faith, we obtain no knowl-
edge from the Bible. That lie waa no longer a
child, but waa at leaat approaching hia manhood,
U evident from the fact that the wood was laid on
him, u the father and the eon went up the moun-
tain. He ii called at that time a lad in the A. V.
(Gen. xxii. 5), but the earoe Hebrew term (">73)
Is applied also to the servants who
Abraham on this journey. When Josephus
of bim as then twenty-five years old {Ant. t. 13,
5 3), it is • conjecture only, without any proof
from Scripture or elsewhere to warrant so precise a
statement. The full consent of Isaac to the wishes
and design of Abraham must lie taken for granted,
as otherwise a resistance could have been made by
the stronger to the weaker, rendering it difficult to
bind the victim to the altar. It is evident from
Heb. xi. 19, that the pious Hebrews regarded this
trial of Abraham's character as illustrating not so
much a blind submission to the will of God, what-
ever this might seem to require, as an unwavering
faith in the power and willingness of God to bring
back the son to life if the father's hand must slay
him. The question of the place of sacrifice ia dis-
cussed under Moriah (Amer. ed.). The view
maintained there, that it was some mount near
Jerusalem, in all probability the temple-mount itself
(9 Chr. iii. 1), is also that of Baumgarten (PenUi-
leucA.i. 237); Knobel (Die Gtnrut erito-f.p. 174);
Ewald (6VjcA. 1. 476, comp. iii. 813 I, 8» Aufl.)j
Hengstenberg (Authentic Jt$ Pent. ii. 195 ff.);
Winer (Renlw. ii. 108); Delitxsch (Centmt, p. 406
ff., and Edinb. transl. p. 249); Kurtz (GeichichU
dtt A. Huadet, i. 313 f.), and others.
It has been made an objection to the accuracy
»f the Biblical history of the patriarchs that so
many similar events and so many identical names
•f persons and places occur in the account of the
different men. But it is not to be forgotten that
the dissimilarity in what is related of them is incom-
1 aiably greater than the agreement. Their personal
iharact/rlatics are unlike, bearing unmistakable
xarks of originality and individuality. Isaac
.lever goes beyond the boundary of Palestine,
though Abraham and Jacob roamed from one
extreme part of the East to another. The do-
mestic meats also of their respective families were
as diverse as the vicissitudes of human condition
sould well permit, Abimelech's lawless seizure of,
(he wires of the two strangers (Gen. xx. 2 ff., and
tx7i. 6 ff.) proves only that the same passions be-
long to men in successive generations, and prompt
lo the same acts in the presence of the same temp-
tations. That, leading as they all did a nomadic
Jfe, they should occasionally visit the same places,
was natural and inevitable. Abraham and Isaac
appear at different times at Gerar and Beer-sbebe,
hut the fertility of these places, or the opportunity
'at obtaining water, accounts for that coincidence.
the recurrence of the seme personal names, e. g.,
ISAAC
AUmeIeehandr1il<^rathemtereot.rseol Akm
ham and Isaac with the Philistines, has its perfect
analogy in the present customs of the East. It ii
generally allowed that Abimkij'.ch (which an)
like Pharaoh in Egypt, and Cesar among the its
mam, waa a royal title, and not the name of a
single individual. But Phichol also, says Thom-
son (Land amd Book, ii. 362), " may have bean a
name of office, ai ssaritror matsMr now is in this
country. If one of these officers is spoken of, his
name is rarely mentioned. I, indeed, never knew
any but the official title of these Turkish officers."
It is alleged as a difficulty that Beer-aheba ia repre-
sented as receiving its name from Abraham, and
then again from lease, in ratification, in both in-
stances, of a similar covenant between them and
the native chiefs or theila of the region. But we
have here an example merely of the reaffirmation
of a name (as in other instances, e. g. Bethel)
under new circumstances such as made the name
doubly significant, or revived it after having fallen
partially into disuse. Beer-aheba, being wed known
when Genesis waa written, the name occurs pro-
leptically in xxi. 14. But it was first so called
when Abraham established there a treaty of peace
with Abimelech respecting the well in dispute be-
tween them (Gen. xxi. 31). A similar difficulty
arose between Isaac and the Abimelech who suc-
ceeded the other; and that being settled by a Bks
treaty sealed with sacrifice! and oaths, Isaac re-
imposed the appropriate name in token of the same
happy issue of the strife. It was this restoration
of the name, It would seem, that made it perma-
nent through all time (Gen. xxvi. 33).
For an outline of the events in Isaac's life, and
a discussion of some of the historical and exeget
ical questions which the narrative presents, tha
reader may see Kurtz's Gachichtt dtt A. B tm d tt,
i. 218-239. This writer regards >• the ground-type
of Isaac'! character as a certain elasticity of en-
durance which doss not resist evil, does not con-
tend against it, but overcomes it by patience and
concession (ate Gen. xxvi. 17-22); and, in this
respect, Isaac is truly great and worthy of admira-
tion. That this greatness of men is usually un-
recognized and abused, detracts nothing from its
worth; and that in Isaac also it was mixed and
marred by a degree of weakness and want of self
command " shows that human virtue has its una-
voidable limitations. Hess has sketched the patri-
arch's life with mingled praise and censure in hie
Getchiehte dtr Pittrinishen, ii. 3-64. Vsihinger
has a brief article on Isaac in Herzog'a RtaUEn-
cyk. vii. 81-83; and also Wunderlich, in Zeller'a
BibL Wtrltrb. i. 730 ff. The portraiture of Isaac's
life, as this latter writer remarks, does not indeed
impress us as that of an extraordinary personality;
but, on the other hand, we are to remember that
the design of Scripture here is, not to present men
to us, even the elect ones, as tbey should be, but as
they are. A spirit of humility and honesty must
stamp itself on biography so written. It is not to
be forgotten that what we know of the fauna *C
good men in the Bible, rests, in great part, on con-
fessions which they themselves have made, and not
on the accusation of others. Bishop Hall's reflec-
tions on " Isaac's offering " ( Contempl a tion, r».
bk. ii.) are cha ra cteristic and interesting. H.
• ISAAC, twice ued (Am. vii. 0, 16, when
the form Is pntfP) aa a poetie synonym for Is
rati, i < the ten tribes. Hence " the higb-nlaca
Digitized by
Google
ISAIAH
of lane " (ver. 0) an the sanctuaries of idol wor-
■bjp to which the Israelites resorted in their apostasy
"mm Jehovah. The LXX. go fuither, and find a
■icaam in the me and the import of the rsme
(Pmpol rev yihamt, " alum of laughter," but the
laughter to become a mockery in the day of God's
natation). ThU hidden meaning U far-fetched.
Pussy (jfstos, p. 911) regards it with favor. H.
ISAI'AH [8 syt] (VT»yi»*, i. e. Yeshayahu
[Jdunah't hdp or talvadon], always in Heb. Text;
but in Rabbinical superscription* of the Heb. Bible
rPSW: 'Hmftu: Ivdnt). The Hebrew name,
our shortened form of which occurs of other per-
sona [see Jksaiah, Jkshaiah], signifies Saltation
of John (a shortened form of Jrhovnh). Reference
is plainly made by the prophet- himself (Is. viii. 18), to
the significance of his own name as well aa of those
of bis two sons. His father Amoz 0P&$, 'A^uSr)
moat not be confounded, as was done by Clemens
Akoandrinus itnd some other of the Fathers
through their ignorance of Hebrew, with the
prophet Amos (DIQ^, in LXX. also 'A/u»j), who
flourished in the reign of Jeroboam II. Nothing
whatever is known of Amoz. He is said by some
of the Rabbins to have been also a prophet, and
brother of king Amazinh — the latter apparently
a mere guess founded on the affinity of the two
names. Kimchi (A. D. 1230) says in his commen-
tary on Is. i. 1, " We know not his race, nor of
what tribe he was."
I. The first verse of the book runs thus: " The
radon of Isaiah the son of Amoz, which he saw
concerning Judah and Jerusalem in the days of
Uxziah, Jotham, Ahaz, aud Hezekiah, kings of
Judah." A few remarks on this verse will open
toe way to the solution of several inquiries relative
to the prophet and his writings.
1. This verse is not the preface to the first chapter
only, nor to any small portion of the book, as is
dear from the enumeration of the four kings. It
plainly prefaces at least the first part of the hook
(eha. L-xxxix.), which leaves oft* in Hexekiah's
reign; and as there appears no reason for limiting
ita referen ce even to the first part, the obvious con-
struction would take it as applying to the whole
bonk (eomp. Hos. i. 1 ; Mic. i. 1). The word vision
Heb. is a collective noun, aa in 8 Chr. xxzU.33; the
1 Trjl ia never found in the phn-aL As this is the
natural and obvious bearing of the verse,
3. We are authorized to infer, that no part of
the vision, the fruit* of which are recorded in this
book, belongs to the reign of Minasseh. Hypoth-
eses, therefore, which lengthen Isaiah's prophetic
ministration into the reign of Manaaaeh, appeur to
task historical foundation. A rabbinical tradition,
it Is true, apparently confirmed by the Surpiatyf
car of Heb. xi. 37, which can be referred to no
other known fact, reports the prophet to have been
■awn asunder " in the trunk of a tree by order of
afanasseh; but the hostility of the party opposed
to the service of Jehovah, which gained the ascend-
ancy at the s e cession of that prince, had been suf-
ficiently excited by the prophet during toe reign of
hi* p redece ssor to prompt them to the murder,
without our lengthening the period of his prophe-
• the tssdluonal spot of the martyrdom Is a very
•M aamuMUT-tm wtakw sands ami the Pool of
ISAIAH 1146
sying beyond the limit* which this vast sashjui
For indeed —
3. Isaiah must have been an okl nun at the clost
of Hezekiah's reign. The ordinary chronology giver
758 b. c. for the date of Jotham's accession, and
698 for that of Hezekiah's death. This gives us a
period of GO yean. Aud since his miristry com-
menced before Uxiah'a death (how lung we know
not), supposing him to have been an more than 2(
years old when he began to prophesy, he would
have been 80 or 90 at Manasseh'a accession.
*. The circle of hearers upon whom his ministry
was immediately designed to operate is determined
to be " Judah and Jerusalem." True, we have u>
the book prophecies relating to the kingdom ol
Israel — a* alio to Moeb, Babylon, and other hut-
then states; but neither in the one case nor the
other was the prophesying designed for the beutflt
of these foreign states, or meant to be communi-
cated to them, but only for Judah, now becoming
the sole home of Hebrew blessings and hopes
Every other interest in the prophet's inspired view
moves round Judah, and is connected with her.
5. It is the most natural and obvious supposi-
tion that the " visions " are in the main placed in
the collection according to their chronological
order; and this supposition it would be arbitrary
to set aside without more solid reasons than the
mere impulses of subjective fancy. We grant that
this presumption might be overruled, if good causa
were shown ; but till it is shown, we have no war-
rant for rejecting the principle that the present
arrangement is in the main founded upon chrono-
logical propriety, only departed from in ca s e s when
(as is very natural to suppose) similarity of char-
acter occasioned the grouping together of visions
which were not uttered at the same time.
6. If then we compare the content* of the book
with the description here given of it, we recognize
prophesyings which are certainly to be assigned to
the reigns of Uzziah, Ahaz, and Hezekiah ; but we
cannot so certainly find any belonging to the reign
of Jotham. The form of the expression m vL 1,
'• the year that king Uzziah died," fixes the time
of that vision to the close of Usziah's reign, and
not to the commencement of Jotham's. What
precedes eh. vi. may be referred to some preceding
part of Uzriah's reign: except perhaps the first
chapter; this may be regarded as a general sum-
mary of sdviae founded upon the whole of what
follows, — a kind of general preface ; corresponding
at the commencement of the book to the panenesis
of the nine chapters at it* close. Ob. vii. brings
us at once from " the year that king Uzziah died "
to "the days of Ahaz." We have then nothing
left for Jotham's reign, unless we suppose that
some of the group of "burdens" in xiii.-xxiiL
belong to it, or some of the perhaps nuseettaneo.il
utterances in xxviii.-xxxv. It may be that proph-
esyings then spoken were not recorded, because,
applying to a state of things similar to what ob-
tained m the latter part of Uzziah, they were them-
selves of a similar strain with eha. ii.-v.
. 7. We naturally ask, Who was the compiler of
the book? The obvious answer is, that it was
Isaiah himself aided by a scribe; eomp. the very
interesting glimpse afforded us br Jer. xxxvi. 1-5,
of the relation between the utterance of prophecies
and Mwir writing. Isaiah we know was otherwiat
of J«
on to. slopes ef Ophel, kslew th* 8 ■ <•**
Digitized by
Google
1150
Isaiah
r; for In 2 Chr. xxvi. 22 we read: "Now
IM rat of the acts of f Jzziah first mnd last did
Isaiah the son of Amoz the prophet write " ; and
though that historical work has perished, the feet
remains to show that Isaiah's mind was not alien
from the cares of written composition (comp. also
3 Chr. xxxii. 32: and observe the first person used
in riii. 1-6). The organic structure of the whole
book also, which we hope to make apparent, favors
the same belief. On the whole, that Isaiah was
himself the compiler, claims to be accepted as the
true view. The principal objection deserving of
notice is that founded upon xxxvii. 38. It has
been alleged (Hitzig, in be.) that Sennacherib's
murder took place b. c. 696, two years after Man-
aaseh's accession; others, however, question this
(comp. HKvernick's kmttitung): at all events the
passage is quite rernncilahle with the belief of Isaiah's
being the compiler, if we suppose him to have lived
two or three years after Manasseh's accession, even
without our having recourse to the expedient of
attributing the verse in question and the one before
it to a later hand. The name given in xxxvi. 11,
111, to the Hebrew spoken in Jerusalem, " the Jews'
language," rVTVP, is no evidence of a later age ;
it is perfectly conceivable that while the written
language remained the same in both kingdoms, as
is evidenced by the prophetical books, the a/wiben
dialect (comp. Judg. xii. 6) of the kingdom of
Judah may hare diverged so far from that of the
(now perished) kingdom of Israel as to have re-
ceived a distinct designation ; and it* name would
naturally, like that of the kingdom itself, be drawn
from the tribe which formed the chief constituent
of the population. As we are seeking for objective
evidence, we may neglect those wild hypotheses
which some have indulged in, respecting an original
work and its subsequent modifications; for since
they originate in the denial of divine inspiration
conjoined with reliance on a merely subjective ap-
preciation of the several writings, such hypotheses
nfust be assigned to the region of fancy rather
than of historic investigation.
8. In this introductory verse we have yet to
notice the description which it gives of Isaiah's
prophesyings : they are " the virion which he saw."
When we hear of viriont we are apt to think of a
mental condition in which the mind is withdrawn
altogether from the perception of objects actually
present, and contemplates, instead of these, another
set of objects which appear at the moment sensibly
present — a sort of dream without sleep. Such a
vision was that of St. Peter at Joppa. Such again
we recognize in Is. vi. — the only instance of this
kind of pure vision in the book ; in Jeremiah, Eze-
kiel, and Zechariah, they abound. But Isaiah's
mental state in his prophesying appears ordinarily
to have been different from this. Outward objects
really present were not withdrawn from his percep
tkm, but appear to have btoided to his view, at
times, with the spiritual whicn was really present,
though not recognizable -except to the eye of faith
(e. g., the presence of Jebuvah); at times, with the
'uture, whether sensible or spiritual, which seemed
o the prophet as if actually present. In this view,
lis prophesyings are not to be regarded as utter-
ances, In the delivery of which the Holy Ghost em-
ployed the intellectual and physical organs of the
prophet as mere instruments wielded by itself, but
•a vuurn i. «., the description by the prophet him-
self under divine direction (2 Tim. lit. 16) of that
IBAIAR
which at the time he seemed to himself to m*. II
this view be just, it follows that in the deterlptioa
which the prophet gives of that which appeared t»
be before him, we cannot be at once sure, whether
he is describing what was actually objectively pres-
ent, or whether the objects delineated as present
belonged to the future. For example; at first sight
the description given of the condition of Judah in
i. 6-9, portraying an invasion, might be understood
of what was actually present, and so might lead us
either to supplement the history of 2 K. with a
hypothetical invasion, or put forward the time of
the prophesying to Ahaz or Hezekiab. But recol-
lecting that it is rwwn, we see that it may be taken
as simply predictive and threatening, and therefore
as still spoken in Uzziah's reign. Similarly iii. 8,
*. 13, x. 28-32, are all predictive. So in the sec-
ond part is lxiv. 11. Further, it would be only in
accordance with this method of prophetic sight if
we found the prophet describing some future time
as if present, and from that standing-point an-
nouncing some more distant future, sometimes as
future, and sometimes, again, as present. And in
fact it is thus that Isaiah represents the coming
fortunes of God's people in the second part of bis
prophecy. Comp. xlii. 13-17, xlix. 18, xlv. 1-4,
liii. 3-10, 11, 12, lxiii. 1-6, as illustrations of the
manner in which the relations of past, present, and
future time are in vision blended together.
It has been remarked alwve as characteristic of
Isaiah's ordinary prophetic vision, that the actually
present is not lost to view. In fact this was essen-
tial to his proper function. His first and immediate
concern was with his contemporaries, as the re-
prover of sin. and to build up the piety of believers.
Even when his vision the most contemplates the
future, he yet does not lose his reference to the
present, but (a* we shall see even in the second
part) he makes his prophesyings tell by exhortation
and reproof upon the state of things actually around
him. From all this it results, that we often find
it difficult to discriminate his predictions from his
rebukes of present disorders. His contemporary**,
however, would be under no such difficulty. The
idolatrous and ungodly Hebrew would promptly
recognize his own description ; the pious would be
confirmed and cheered.
II. In order to realize the relation of Isaiah's
prophetic ministry to his own contemporaries, wa
need to take account both of the foreign relations
of Judah at the time, and internally of its social
and religious aspects. Our materials are scanty,
and are to be collected partly out of 2 K. and 2
Chr., and partly out of the remaining writings of
contemporary prophets, Joel (probably), Obadiah,
and Micah, in Judah ; and Hosea, Amos, and Jonah,
in Israel. Of these the most assistance is obtained
from Micah.
1. Under TJzziah the political position of Judah
had greatly recovered from the blows suffered under
Amaziah ; the fortifications of Jerusalem itself were
restored; castles were built in the country; new
arrangements in the army and equipments of de-
fensive artillery were established ; and considerable
successes in war gained against the Philistines, the
Arabians, and the Ammonites. [UxziAH.] Thh
prosperity continued during the reign of Jotham
except that, towards the close of this latter reign,
troubles threatened from the alliance of Israel ana
Syria. [Jotham.] The consequence of this pros-
perity was an influx of wealth, and this with thi
in c reased means of military strength withdrew man •
Digitized by
; Google
ISAIAH
) from Jehovah, and led tbem U trust b
Mriuy rceouioss. Moreover great disorders existed
In the internal administration, all of which, whether
moral or religions, were, by the very nature of the
commonwealth, aa theocratic, alike amenable to
prophetic rebuke. It waa the Terr business of Isaiah
and other prophets to rain their roices aa public
reformers, as well as to fulfill the work which be-
longs to religious teachers in edifying God's true
servants and calling the irreligious to repentance.
Accordingly our prophet steps forward into public
view with the divine message, dressed after the
manner of prophets in general — girded in coarse
jnd black, or at least dark colored, hair-cloth (comp.
Is. ix. 2. 1. 3: 2 K. i. 8 ; Zech. xlii. 4) — emblem-
atically indicating by this attire of mourning that
Jehovah spoke to his people in grief and resent-
ment. [Sackcloth.] From his house, which
appears to have been in Jerusalem (comp. vii. 3,
xxxvii. 6), he goes forth to places of general con-
course, chiefly no doubt, ss Christ and his Apostles
afterwards did, to the colonnades and courts of the
Temple, and proclaims in the audience of the people
" the word of Jehovah."
SL And what is the tenor of his message in the
time of Czziah and Jothatn ? This we read in chs.
i.~v. Chap. i. is very general in its contents. In
perusing it we may fancy that we hear the very
voice of the Seer as he stands (perhaps) in the
Court of the Israelites denouncing to nobles and
people, then assembling for divine worship, the
whole estimate of their character formed by Jehovah,
and his approaching chastisements. " They are a
sinful nation ; they have provoked the Holy One
of Israel to anger. Flourishing as their worldly
sondition now appears, the man whose eyes are
opened sees another scene before him (1-9) — the
bind laid waste, and Zion left as a cottage In a vine-
yard — (a picture realized in the Syro-Ephraimitish
war, and more especially in the Assyrian invasion
— the great event round which the whole of the
first part of the book revolves). Men of Sodom
and Gomorrah. that they are, let them hearken!
they may go on if they will with their ritual worship,
* trampling ' Jehovah's courts ; nevertheless, He
loathes them: the stain of innocent blood is on
ts*ir hands: the weak are oppressed ; there is bribery
ana corruption in the administration of justice.
Let them reform; if they win not, Jehovah will
burn out their sins in the smelting fire of his judg-
ment Zion shall be purified, and thns saved,
whilst the sinners and recreants from Jehovah in
her shall perish in their much-loved idolatries."
This discourse suitably heads the book ; it sounds
the key-note of the whole ; fires of judgment destroy-
ing, but purifying a remnant — such wss the burden
iD along of Isaiah's propheaymgs.
Of the other public utterances belonging to this
period, chs. ii.-iv. are by almost all critics consid-
ered to be one prophesying — the leading thought
of which is that the present prosperity of Judah
should be destroyed for her sins, to make room/or
Ike real glory of piety and virtue ; while ch. v.
forms a distinct discourse, whose main purport is
that Israel, God's vineyard, shall be brought to
deso latio n. The idolatry denounced in these chap-
ters is to be taken aa that of private Individuals,
for both Urrinh and Jotham served Jehovah. They
u* prefaced by the vision of the exaltation of the
avxmtain on which Jehovah dwells above all other
ntaina, to become the source of light and moral
" i to all mankind (II. SM).
THATAfl
1151
Here wi are met by the fact that Una same
vision is found in very nearly the same words fas
Mieah iv. 1-3. The two prophets were content
porary, and one may very well have heard the other,
and adopted his words. Compare a nearly sim-
ilar phenomenon in 1 Pet r. 5-9, compared with
Jam. iv. 6-10; for Peter and James had no doubt
often beard each other's public teaching at Jerusa-
lem. Which was the prior speaker of the words
we cannot in either case determine. In many cases
■enters of Scripture adopt the words of former
inspired writer! ; why not speakers also ? In this
instance, Isaiah or Micah may without improb-
ability be imagined as standing by whilst the ethat
announced Jehovah's word, and himself, still under
divine inspiration, afterwards repeating the same
word. As among the prophets in the Christian
Church some were directed to remain in silence,
and "judge" whilst others spoke; so we may be-
lieve that occasions frequently occurred in which
the prophesying of one sable-dressed prophet was
listened to, and ratified by other prophets, one or
more, standing by, who might add their testimony:
'• This is the word of Jehovah " (comp. 1 K. xxii.
11, 12).
After thus refreshing pious souls with delineating
future (Messianic) glories, Isaish is recalled by the
sad present Far distant is God's people as yet
from the high calling of being the teacher of the
world. " All is now wrong. Heathenism is flood-
ing the land with charmers and diviners, with silver
and gold, with horses and chariots, and with idolt t
Jehovah, forgive them not ! — Jehovah's day of
judgment is coming, when all human glory shall
disappear before hit glory, and in consternation
Hebrew idolaters shall burl their Images into any
corner. Ix>, Jehovah-Zebaoth will take away every
stay of order and well-being In the state, leaving
only the refuse of society to rule (if indeed they
will) the desolated city. Look at them only! The}
are as shameless aa Sodom! O my people, thy
leaders lead thee astray, thy princes oppress : what
mean ye that ye grind the faces of my poor ? saith
Jehovah. Look again at their ladies, with their
jewels and their head-gear, and their fine dresses
and their trinkets ! Jehovah will take all of it away,
leaving to them only shame and sackcloth. Yes,
Zion shall lose both sons and daughters (so man;
are they who offend !), and bereaved of all shall si.
on the bare ground. Yet out of these judgments
shall issue purity and peace. He, the Branch of
Jehovah's appointing (iv. 2), shall appear in glory
and the redeemed springing out of the earth shall
shine with accordant splendor In what is left a!
Israel. All in Zion shall then be holy, and the
pillar of fire by night and the overshadowing
cloud by day, shall as of yore cheer and protect —
what is precious must needs be protected ! Sweet
shall be the security and refreshment of thnsi
days."
Again the prophet is seen in the public con-
course. At first he invites attention by reciting t
parable (of the vineyard) in calm and composed
accents (ch. v.). But as he interprets the parable
his note changes, and a sixfold " woe " la poured
forth with terrible invective. It is levelled sgainst
the covetous amassers of land, breaking down those
landmarks which fenced the small hereditary free-
holders whose perpetuity formed an essential ele-
ment In the original constitution of the Hebrew
ootnmorwealth (comp. 1 K. xxi. 3); against luxu-
rious revsUtrs; against bold sinner/ who defied
Digitized by
Google
1162
ISAIAH
God's work* of judgment, with which the prophet!
threatened them (oomp. the similar usocUtion of
revelling with burdened unbelief in Israel, Am. v.
18, vi. 3-6); against those who confounded moral
distinctions ; against self-couceited skeptics ; and
■gainst profligate perverters of judicial justice. In
fury of wrath Jehovah stretches forth his hand.
Here there is an awful vagueness in the images of
terror which the prophet accumulates, till at length
out of the cloud and mist of wrath we hear Jehovah
hiss for the stem and irresistible warriors (the
Assyrians), who from the end of the earth should
crowd forward to spoil, — after which all distinct-
ness of description again lades away in vague
images of sorrow and despair.
What effect (we may ask) would such denuncia-
tions produce upon the mass of Hebrew bearers ?
It was not from Isaiah only that the same persons
heard them. ( >p]iression, denounced by him (iii. 14,
15, v. 7-10), was denounced also by Micah (ii. 1, 2) ;
maladministration of justice (Is. i. 83, v. 33) is
noted also by Micah (iii. 1-3, 9-11, vii. 3); the
combination of idolatry, diviners, and horses found
in Is. ii. 6-8, 16, is paralleled in Hie. v. 10-15.
This concurrence of prophetical testimony would
not be without weight with those who had still
some faith in Jehovah. But the worldly-minded,
however silent when flagrant immorality was cen-
sured, might find what they would count plausible
ground for demurring, when - the prophet put the
multiplication of gold, silver, horses, and chariots,
in the same category with idols, or when with un-
sparing satire he particularized articles of female
adornment as objects of Jehovah's wrath. But
God's law through Hoses had given similar injunc-
tions (Deut. xvii. 16, 17); and indeed in general
there is not a single page of the prophetic books
in which the Pentateuch is not again and again
referred to. The Hebrew commonwealth was not
designed to be a commercial state, but a system
of small hereditary land-owners under a theocracy.
Material progress and ever heightening embellish-
ment, whether in the court or in society In general,
with the men or with the women, removed it further
and further from its original constitution, and from
Jehovah its God. Something resembling Spartan
Cness belonged essentially to the idea of the
jew state.
8. In the year of Usxiah's death an ecstatic
vision fell upon Isaiah, which, in compiling his
prophecies long after, he was careful to record, both
for other reasons, and also because he had then
become aware of the failure of his ministry in ref-
srence to the bulk of his contemporaries, and of the
desolation, yet not without hope, which awaited his
people. We see in the case of St. Peter at Joppa
(Acts z. 9-16) that such a state of ecetntir, though
unquestionably of divine origin, yet in its form
adapts itself to the previous condition, whether cor-
poreal or psychological, of the patient. Isaiah at
this period (as v.e must infer from the placing of
the narrative) had been already for some time en-
gaged in his ministry; and we may venture to
surmise he lamented his little success. Seeing what
he saw around him, and foreseeing what be foresaw,
eouM he do otherwise than feel deeply how little
he was able to effect for the welfare of his beloved
oountry ? In this vision he saw Jehovah, In the
Second Person of the Godhead (John xii. 41 ; comp.
Hal. 111. 1), enthroned aloft in bis own earthly
■aJbsrnaele, attended by seraphim, whose praise Ailed
Out tanstuary at It were with the smoke of incense.
ISAIAH
As John at Patmos, so Isaiah was overwhelmed
with awe: he felt his owu sinfulness and that of at
with whom he was connected, and cried " woe "'
upon himself as if brought before Jehovah to receive
the reward of his deeds. But, as at Patmos, tbv
Son of Mac laid his hand upon John saying, " Few
not! " so, in obedience evidently to the will of
Jehovah, a seraph with a hot stone taken from th>
altar touched his lips, the principal organ of good
and evil in man, and thereby removing his sinful-
ness, qualified him to join the seraphim in what-
ever service he might be called to- And now the
condescending invitation of the Great King i«
heard: "Whom shall I send? Who will go tor
us?" "Here am I! send me." Had he not
borne Jehovah's commission before? No doubt he
had ; yet now, with the intenser sense of the reality
of divine things which that hour brought him, be
felt as if he had not What heaven-taught minister
does not understand this? And what was to be
the nature of his work ? " Make the understand-
ing of Ihil people (not " my people ") torpid; dull
their ears; close up their eyes; the more they hear
thy word, the more hardened they shall become;
they must not, they shall not, receive the message
so as to repent." A heart-crushing commission for
one who loved his people as Isaiah did ! The moan
of grief at length finds utterance: "Lord, how
long?" "Till the land be desolate — saving a
small remnant, utterly desolate — a remnant of a
holy seed, which will be a stock to sprout forth, but
again and again to be cut back and burnt, and yet
still to survive."
This vision in the main was another mode of
representing what, both in previous and in subse-
quent prophesying*, is so oontinually denounced —
tie almost utter destruction of the Hebrew people,
with yet a purified remnant. But while this pre-
diction was its principal purport, we are sure that
the inspired editor of his prophesying! so many
years after, beheld in it also the sketch of the fruits
of his ministry, which at the time when the revela-
tion was made to him must have had no small
effect upon his own private feelings. He goes afresh
about his work, despairingly as to the main result
for the present, yet with seraph-like zeal, ardent
and heaven-purged, and not without hope too, for
the time to come. The " holy seed " was to be
the " stock." It was to be his business to form
that holy seed.
It is a touching trait, illustrating the prophet's
own feelings, that when he next appears before us,
some years later, he has a son named Shearjashub,
" Kemnant-shall-return." The name was evidently
given with significance; aud the fact discovers alike
the sorrow which ate his heart, and the hope in
which be found solace.
4. Some years elapse between chs. vi. and vii .
and the political scenery has greatly altered. The
Assyrian power of Nineveh now threatens the He-
brew nation ; Tiglath-pileser has already spoiled
Pekah of some of the fairest parts of his dominions
— of the country east of Jordan and the vale of tne
Sea of Galilee, removing the inhabitants probably
to people the wide and as yet uninhabited space
Inclosed by the walls of Nineveh (b. a 746). After
the Assyrian army was withdrawn, the Syrian king
dom of Damascus rises into notice; its monarch,
Resin, combines with the now weakened king of
Israel, and probably with other small states around,
to consolidate (it has been conjectured) a powo
which shall confront Asshur. Aha* keens alool
Digitized by
Google
ISAIAH
ad become* the object of attack to the allies; he
has been ahead; twice defeated (3 Chr. xxviii. 5,
8); and now the allies an threatening him with a
combined invasion (741). The newt that " Aram
ia encamped in Ephraim " (I*. vii. 2) fiUa both king
and people with consternation, and the king U gone
forth ftom the city to take measures, at it would
seem, to prevent the upper reservoir of water from
(ailing into the hands of the enemy. Under Je-
hovah's direction Isaiah goes forth to meet the
king, surrounded no doubt by a considerable coin-
riy of his officers and of spectators.' The prophet
directed to take with him the child whose name,
Shearjaahub, was ao full of mystical promise, to
add greater emphasis to his message. " Fear not,"
he tells the king, " Damascus is the head of Syria,
and of Syria only ; and Kezin head of Damascus,
and not of Jerusalem ; and within 66 years Ephraim
shall be broken, to be no more a kingdom : so far
•ball Ephraim be ftom annprring Judith ' Samaria
again is head only of Ephraim, ami Remaliah's son
only of Samaria. If ye will be established, believe
this!"
"Dost thou hesitate? Ask what sign thou wilt
to assure thee that thus it shall be." The young
king is already resolved not to let himself into the
line of policy which Isaiah is urging upon him; he
is bent upon an alliance with Assyria. To ask a
sign might prove embarrassing; for, if it should be
given ? Ahas therefore, with a half-mocking
show of reverence, declines to "tempt Jehovah."
" house of David, are ye not satisfied with trying
the patience of an honest and wisely advising
prophet, that you will put this contempt also upon
the God who speaks through me? Jehovah him-
self, irrespective of your deserving*, gives you a
guarantee that the commonwealth of Israel is not
yet to perish. Behold, the Virgin is with child,
and is bearing a son, and thou, mother (comp.
Gen. xvi. 11 ), shalt call his name ImmanueL I seem
to see that Child already born ! Behold Him there !
Cream and honey, abundance of the best food, shall
he eat, when, ten or twenty years hence, be comes
to the age of discretion ; the devastating inroad of
Syria and Israel shall be past then ; for before that,
the land of the two kings thou holdest so formidable
shall be desolate. But ' — here the threat which
mingles with the promise in Bhtarjaihub appears
— " upon thy people and upon thy family, not only
in thy lifetime, but afterwards, Jehovah will bring
an enemy more terrible than Jacob has ever known,
Asshur — Aaahur, whom thou wouldest fain hire
to help (v. SO), but who shall prove a raaor that
will shave but too clean ; he shall ao desolate the
hud that its inhabitant* shall be sparse and few."
ISAIAH
1161
■« Tht reader will observe the particular specification
of the place. Indicating the authenticity of the nar-
rative. (Comp. Blast's Undaigtud Cbineidtiua, pt.
U. no. LJ
» That the birth of the MaMUb Is here pointed to
cannot be doubted ; Indeed even Kwald sees this. But
the esaet interpretation of w. 15, 14, Is hard to de-
termine. That given above Is in the main Hengsten-
btrg's (C*ri*fo/ogjr, vol. II.). The great lifflcultr which
atlach«e to It Is that the prophet represents Christ at
already appearing, reckon!** from hit birth at the
then present tune, forward /a the desolation of 8,rla
sad Tares! within a lew years. This difficulty Is, how-
ever, alleviated by the consideration that the prophet
•Mas the future u exhibited to hur In « vision," aod
la such prophetic vision the distances between events
as paint of time are often uaparasived by the mar, who
78
Again Isaiah predicts the Assyrian Invasion ; •otnp.
ch. xxxvi. 6
8. As tho Assyrian empire began more and more
to threaten the Hebrew commonwealth with utter
overthrow, it is now that the prediction of the
Messiah, the Restorer of Israel, becomes more
positive and clear. Micah (v. 2) points to Bethle-
hem aa the birthplace, and (r. 3) speaks of "her
that travaileth " aa an object to prophetic vision
seeming almost present. Would not Micah and
Isaiah confer with each other in these dark days
of prevailing unbelief, upon the cheering hope which
the Spirit of Christ that wss in them suggested to
their minds? (comp. Mai. iii. 16).
The king was bent upon an alliance with Assyria.
This Isaiah stedfastly opposes (comp. x. 20). In a
theocracy the messenger of Jehovah would frequently
appear as a political adviser. " Neither fear Aram
and Israel, for they will soon perish ; nor trust in
Asshur, for she will be thy direst oppressor." Such
is Isaiah's strain. And by divine direction ho em-
ploys various expedients to make his testimony the
more impressive. He procured a large tablet (viii.
1 ), and with witnesses (for the purpose of attesting
the fact, and displaying its especial significance) be
wrote thereon in large characters suited for a publie
notice the words' Hastenbootv Spkedsfoil;
which tablet was no doubt to be hung up for publie
view, in the entrance (we may suppose) to the
Temple (comp. "priest," ver. 2). And further:
his wife — who, by the way, appears to have been
herself possessed of prophetic gifts, for " prophetess "
always has this meaning and nowhere indicates a
prophet's wife merely— just at this time apparently
gave birth to a son. Jehovah bids the prophet give
him the name Battenbooty SpeedtpoU, adding, what
Isaiah was to avow on all occasions, that before the
child should be able to talk, the wealth of Damascus
and the booty of Samaria should be carried away
before the king of Assyria.
The people of Judah was split into political fac-
tions. The court was for Assyria, and indeed!
formed an alliance with Tiglath-pileaer; but a pop-
ular party was for the Syro-Ephraimitic connection
formed to resist Assyria — partly actuated by their
fears of a confederacy from which they had already
severely suffered, and partly perhaps influenced by
sympathies of kindred race, drawing them to Israel,
and even to Aram, in opposition to the more foreign
Assyria. " Fear none but Jehovah only ! fear Him,
trust Him; He will be your safety." Such is the
purport of the discourse viii. 6-ix. 7; in which,
however, he augurs coming distress through tht
rejection of his counsels, but refreshes himself with
the thought of the birth of the Great Deliverer.''
perhaps might sometimes In his own private Interpre-
tation of the vision (comp. 1 Pet. 1. 10) have miscon-
ceived the relations of time In regard to events. The
very clearness with which the future event waa ex*
hlblted to him might deceive him In Judging of Its
nearness. In tho N. T. we have a somewhat similar
phenomenon in the estimate formed by the Apostles
and others of the relation of time between Christ's
coming to judge Jerusalem and Ma second coming at
the end of the world.
c A. V. MaheMhalal-haah-bas ; by Luther rendered
Raubebald, EHtbtult.
«* With reference to Tlglath-pueser's having recently
removed the population of Galilee, the prophet specifies
that " as the former time brought humiliation In the
direction of Zebulun and Kaphtali," located on the
western shore of the Sea of Oattlea, » to .the latter Haw
Digitized by
Google
1164 ISAIAH
The Inspired advice was not accepted. Unbelief
not disoerning the power and faithfulness of Jehovah
would argue that isolation was ruin, and accord-
ingly involved Judah in alliances which soon brought
her to almost utter destruction.
8. A prophecy was delivered at this time against
the kingdom of Israel (ix. 8-x. 4), consisting of
four strophes, each ending with the terrible refrain :
"for all this, his anger is not turned away, but
his hand is stretched out still." It announces that
all expedients for recovering the power which Israel
had lately lost were nugatory; they had forsaken
Jehovah, and therefore God-forsaken (x. 4) they
should perish. As Isaiah's message was only to
Judah, we may infer that the object of this utter-
ance was to check the disposition shown by many
in Judah to connect Judah with the policy of the
sister kingdom.
7. The utterance recorded in x. 6-xii. 6, one of
the most highly wrought passages in the whole
book, was probably one single outpouring of inspi-
ration. It stands wholly disconnected with the pre-
ceding in the circumstances which it presupposes ;
and to what period to assign it, is not easy to
determine." To allay the dread of Assyria which
now prevailed, Isaiah was in God's mercy to hi*
people inspired to declare, that though heavy judg-
ments would consume the bulk of the nation, yet
Sbearjashub ! the remnant should return (x. 20-22 ;
comp. vii. 3), and that the Assyrian should be
overthrown in the very hour of apparently certain
success by agency whose precise nature is left in
awful mystery (x. 33, 34). From the destruction
of Judah's enemies thus representatively foreshad-
owed, he then takes wing to predict the happy and
peaceful reign of the " Twig which was to come
forth from the stump of Jesse," when the united
commonwealth of Judah and Ephraim should be
restored in glory, and Jah Jehovah should be
should bring these regions honor." A mysterious
oracle then ! But made clear to us by the event (Matt.
tv. 16).
a Since the gnat object of this discourse Is to allay
Judah's fear of the Assyrian (x. 24), it can hardly be-
long to the very early part of the reign (742 to 727) of
Ahai ; for then the more Immediate fear was the Syro-
£phmlmlte alliance. According to the principle of
chronological arrangement which we suppose to have
been fallowed by Isaiah in his compilation, it would
be before the death of Ahsa (comp. xfv. 28). Ahu
had " hind " the help of Tiglath-pileser by a large
present (2 K. xvi.), and the Assyrian had come and
fulfilled (788) the prediction of Isaiah (rill. 4) by cap-
turing and spoiling Damascus. But already, in the
time of Ahu, Assyria began to occasion uneasiness to
Judah (2 Chr. xxvlli. 20). Shalmaneser succeeded
Tiglath-pileser not later than 728, and might not care
much fbr his predecessor's engagements — if, indeed,
Tiglath-pileser himself felt bound by them. At any
rate, so encroaching a power, bent on conquest, must
needs be formidable to the feeble kingdom of Judah,
Syria being now conquered and Israel powerless.
Cilttcs, who do not take sufficient account of the man-
ner In which future events are represented in the pre-
dictions of inspiration as already taking place, have
been led to unsettle the chronology by observing that
Samaria Is described by the boasting Assyrian as being
already ss Damascus, and that the Invading army is
already aear Jerusalem. But the conquest of Samaria
was already announced at the beginning of the reign
of Ahai (Till. 4) as equally certain with that of Damas-
ews ; and the Imagery of x. 28-82 Is probably that In
wMoh the Imagination of one familiar with the passes
ft the s oauUj would obvioasly portray an invader's
ISAIAH
celebrated as the proved strength of his psatiai
Here again is set forth a great delivjrance, possibly
the foreshadowing of xxxvii.
8. The next eleven chapters, xiii.-xxiii., contain
chiefly a collection of utterances, each of which is
styled a " burden." 6 As they are detached pieces;
it is possible they have been grouped together with-
out strict observance of their chronological order.
(a.) The first (xiii. 1-xiv. 27) is against Babylon;
placed first, either because it was first in point of
utterance, or because Babylon in prophetic vision,
particularly when Isaiah compiled his book, headed
in importance all the earthly powers opposed to
God's people, and therefore was to be firs' struck
down by the shaft of prophecy. As yet, not Baby-
ten but Nineveh was the imperial city; but Isaiah
possessed not a mere foreboding drawn from politi
cal sagacity, but an assured knowledge, that Baby-
lon would be the seat of dominion and a leading
antagonist to the theocratic people. Not only did
be tell Hezekiah a few years later, when Nineveh
was still the seat of empire, that bis sons should be
carried captive " to Babylon," but in this " burden"
he also foretells both the towering ambition and
glory of that city, and its final overthrow.' The
ode of triumph (xiv. 3-23) in this burden is among
the most poetical passages in all literature. It is
remarkable that the overthrow of Babylon is in w.
24, 25, associated with the blow inflicted upon the
Ninevite empire in the destruction of Sennacherib's
army (for here again this great miracle of divine
judgment looms out into the prophet's view), which
very disaster, however, probably helped on the rise
of Babylon at the cost of ita northern rival The
explanation seems to be that Babylon was regarded
as merely another phase of Asshur's sovereignty
(comp. 2 K. xxiii. 29), so that the overthrow of
Sennacherib's army was a harbinger of that more
complete destruction of the power of Asshur which
approach. The destruction of Sennacherib's army Is
the centre object of the first part of the book ; and the
action of predictive prophecy, and of miracle In rela-
tion to It, cannot be gainsaid without setting aside the
authenticity of the narrative altogether.
b This remarkable word, NB?T3, " lifting up," is
variously understood, some taking it to refer to evils
to be borne by the parties threatened, others as a lift-
ing up of the voice In a solemn utterance. A hundred
years later the term had been so misused by false
prophets, that Jeremiah (udtl. 88-40) seems to forbid
its use. See 1 Chr. xv. 22, where in text and margin
of A. T. It Is rendered "song," "carriage," and
" lifting up."
c Compare our remarks In p. 1100. Even If this
were conceded to be the production of a later prophet
than Isaiah (which there Is no just cause whatever fbr
believing), the problem which It presents fcc skepticism
would remain as hard as ever ; for whenoc shonll Its
author learn that the ultimate condition cf Bai ylon
would be such as is here delineated ? (xlil. 19-22). In
no time of Hebrew literature was there reason to aa>
Uclpate this of Babylon in particular more than of
other cities. In vain does skepticism quote xvll. 1 ;
nothing Is said there of the ultimate condition of
Damascus ; and It Is obvious enough that any such
blow as that («. g.) inflicted by Tiglath-pileser would
make Damascus fbr a while appear to be " no city "
compared with what it had been, anl would convert
many of Its streets Into desolation. How different the
language used of Babylon! And how wonderfully
verified by time ! We have the parallel language seat
verification In reference In Idonuea (xxxtv.i.
Digitized by
Google
ISAIAH
\kk harden announces. This prophecy is a note
tf preparation for the second part of the book: for
the picture which it draws of Babylon, as having
Jacob in captivity, and being compelled to relin-
quish her prey (xiv. 1-3), is in orief the same as is
more fully delineated in xlvii. : while the conclud-
ing verses about Sennacherib's army (2-1-27) stand
in somewhat the same relation to the rest of the
"burden," as the full history in xxxvi., xxxvii
stands to xl.-xlviii.
(6.) The short and pregnant " burden " against
PMliitia (xiv. 29-32) in the year that Ahaz died,
was occasioned by the revolt of the Philistines from
Judah and their successful inroad, recorded 2 Chr.
txviii. 18. " If Judah's rule was a serpent, that
of Assyria would prove a basilisk — a flying dragon ;
let their gates howl at the smoke which announced
the invading array ! Meanwhile Zion would repose
safe under the protection of her king : " — language
plainly predictive, as the compiler in giving the
date evidently felt; comp. xxxvii.
(c. ) The " burden of Moab " (xv., xvi. ) is remark-
able for the elegiac strain in which the prophet
bewails the disasters of Moab, and for the dramatic
character of xvi. 1-6, in which 3-5 is the petition
of the Moabites to Judah, and ver. 6 Judah's
answer." For Moab's relation to Israel see Moab.
(at) Chapters xvii., xviii. This prophecy is
headed " the burden of Damascus; " and yet after
ver. 3 the attention is withdrawn from Damascus
and turned to Israel, and then to Ethiopia. Israel
appears as closely associated with Damascus, and
indeed dependent upon her, and as having adopted
her religious rites, " strange slips," ver. 10 (comp.
2 K. xvi. 10, of Ahax), which shall not profit her.
This brings us to the time of the 8yro-Ephraimitic
alliance; at all events Ephraim has not yet ceased
to exist. Chap. xvii. 12-14, as well as xviii. 1-7,
point again to the event of xxxvii. But why this
here? The solution seems to be that, though
Assyria would be the ruin both of Aram and of
Israel, and though it would even threaten Judah
("us," ver. 14), it should not then conquer Judah
(comp. turn of xiv. 31, 32). And with this hut
thought ch. xviii. is inseparably connected ; for it
is a call of congratulation to Ethiopia (" woe " in
ver. 1 of A. V. should be " bo ! " as Iv. 1 ; also in
rer. 2 omit « saying "), whose deputies, predictively
Imagined as having come to Palestine to learn the
progress of the Assyrian invasion (comp. xxxvii. 9),
are tent back by the prophet charged with the glad
sews of Asshur's overthrow described in w. 4-6.
[n ver. 7 we have the conversion of Ethiopia ; for
u the people tall, and shorn " is itself " the present "
lo be brought unto Jehovah. (Comp. Acts viii.
98 -VI. and the present condition of Ethiopia.)
These repeated predictions of Zion's deliverance
from Asshur, in conjunction with Asshur's triumph
Wftr Zion's enemies, entered deeply into the essence
if the prophet's public ministry ; the great aim of
•i ich was to fix the dependence of his countrymen
BLifcely upon Jehovah.
« A good deal of (his burden Is an enlargement of
■ma xxl. 27-30, from the imitation of which the
storing of Its style In part arises. It In turn reap-
twn hi an enlarged edition In Jer. xlvHL Th» two
occluding verses (Is. xvi. 13, 14), which furnish no
-aal ground for doubting whether Isaiah wror* the
■brie of It, recount that of old time the purport of
Ms denunciation has been decreed 'namely, In Num.
Dd. and xjdv. 17), but that within three j*ar.< It
ISAIAH 1150
(e.) In the " burden of Egypt " v,xh theproph*
seems to be pursuing the same object Both Israel
(2 K. xvii. 4) and Judah (is. xxxi.) were naturally
disposed to look towards Egypt for succor against
Assyria. Probably it was to counteract this ten-
dency that the prophet is here directed to prophesy
the utter helplessness of Egypt under God's judg-
ments: she should be given over to Asshur (the
"cruel lord" and "fierce king" of ver. 4, not
Psammetichus), and should also suffer the most
dreadful calamities through civil dissensions and
through drought, — unless this drought is a 'Igure
founded upon the peculiar usefulness of the Nile,
and the veneration with which it was regarded
(1-15). But the result should be that numerous
cities of Egypt should own Jehovah for their God,
and be joined in brotherhood with his worshippers
in Israel and in Asshur; — a reference to Messianic
times.*
(f.) In the midst of these " burdens " stands a
passage which presents Isaiah in a new aspect, an
aspect in which he appears in this instance only.
It was not uncommon both in the O. T. and in thf
New (comp. Acts xxi. 11) for a prophet to add fa
his spoken word an action symbolizing its import
Sargon, known here only, was king of Assyria,
probably between Shalmaneser and Sennacherib.
His armies were now in the south of Palestine be-
sieging Ashdod. It has been plausibly conjectured
that Tirhakah, king of Meroe, and Sethos, the king
of Egypt, were now in alliance. The more em-
phatically to enforce the warning already conveyed
in the " burden of Hgypt " — not to look thither-
ward for help — Isaiah was commanded to appear
in the streets and temple of Jerusalem stripped of
his sackcloth mantle, and wearing his vest only,
with his feet also bare. " Thus shall Egyptians
and Ethiopians walk, captive* before the king of
Assyria." For three years was he directed (from
time to time, we may suppose) thus to show him-
self in public view, — to make the lesson the more
impressive by constant repetition.
\g.) In " the burden of the desert of the sea,"
a poetical designation of Babylonia (xxi. 1-10),
the images in which the fall of Babylon is indicated
are sketched with jEschylean rapidity, and certainly
not less than ./Eschylean awfulness and grandeur.
As before (xiii. 17), the Medes are the captors. It
is to comfort Judah sighing under the " treacherous
spoiling " (v. 2) and continual " threshing " (v. 10)
of Asshur — Ninevito and Babylonian — that the
Spirit of God moves the prophet to thi* utterance.'
(h.) "The burden of Dumah," — in which the
watchman can see nothing but night, let them ask
him as often as they will — and " of Arabia " (xxi.
11-17), relate apparently to some Assyrian inva-
sion.
(»'.) In "the burden of the mlley of rutVm"
(xxii. 1-14), it is doubtless Jerusalem thai, is thus
designated, and not without sadness, as having been
so long the home of prophetic vision to so little
result. The scene presented is that of Jerusalem
should tefftii to be fulfilled. It was not completely
fulfilled even in Jeremiah's time.
6 Comp. the close of the " burden of Tyre." The
" city of destruction " (xlx 18) Is supposed by many
to be Beth-themesh of Jer. xllil. 13, specified becauM
hitherto m especial seat of Idolatry. Onias's misun
of this prediction Is well known. [See Is-ba-rius.
<Inti i and 4 the poet dramatically repnasnti
the feelings of the Babylonians.
Digitized by
Google
1156 ISAIAH
faring an invasion; in the hostile army are named
EUm and Kir, nations which no doubt contributed
troops both to the Ninevite and to the Babylonian
armies. The Utter is probably here contemplated.
The bomiletic purpose of this prediction in reference
to Isaiah's contemporaries, was to inculcate a pious
and humble dependence upon Jehovah in place of
any mere fleshly confidence.
(i.) The passage xxii. 15-25 is singular in Isaiah
as a prophesying against an individual. Comp. the
word of Amos (vii.) against Amaziah, and of Jere-
miah (xx.) against Paehur. Shebna was probably
as ungodly as they. One of the king's highest
functionaries, he seems to hare been leader of a
party opposed to Jehovah (v. 25, " the burden that
is upon it "). Himself a stranger in Jerusalem —
perhaps an alien, as EwaM conjectures from the
un-Hebrew form of his name — he may have been
introduced by Hezekiah's predecessor Ahax; he
made great parade of bis rank (ver. 18; comp. 2
Sam. xv. 1), and presumed upon bis elevation so
far as to hew out a tomb high up in the cliffs
(probably on the western or southwestern side of
Jerusalem, where so many were excavated), as an
ostentatious display of hia greatness (comp. 2 Chr.
xxxii. 33, maryin). We may believe him to have
been engaged with this business outside the walls
when Isaiah came to him with his message. Shebna
fancies his power securely rooted ; but Jehovah will
roll him up as a ball and toss him away into a far
distant land, — ditgrace that he it to his matter 1
his stately robes of office, with his broad magnificent
girdle, shall invest another, Eliakim. Ch. xxxvi.
3, seems to indicate a decline of his power, as it
also shows Eliakim's promotion to Shebna's former
poet. Perhaps he was disgraced and exiled by
Hezekiah, after the event of xxxrii., when the sin-
ners in Zk>n were overawed and great ascendency
for a while secured to the party which was true to
Jehovah. If his fall was the consequence of the
Assyrian overthrow, we can better understand both
the denunciation against the individual and the
position it occupies in the record.
(t) The last " burden " is against Tyre (xxiii.).
The only cause specified by Isaiah for the judgment
upon Tyre is her pride (ver. 9; comp. Ez. xxviii.
2, 8); and we can understand how the Tyrians,
proud of their material progress and its outward
displays, may have looked with contempt upon the
plainer habits of the theocratic people. But this
was not the only ground. The contagion of her
idolatry reached Jerusalem (1 K. xi. 5, 33; 2 K.
xt. 18, xxiii. 13). Otherwise also she was an in-
jurious neighbor (Ps. lxxxiii. 7; Joel, iii. 6; Am.
i. 9). It therefore behoved Jehovah, both as aven-
« That It is not Sennacherib's Invasion, we infer
from the unrelieved description of godleasness and
recklessness (rv. 11, 12), and the threatened punish-
ment unto death (ver. 14). whereas Heaeklah's piety
was conspicuous, and saved the city. (Comp. 2 Chr.
xxxvi. 12, 16.) Moreover, the famine in 2 K. xxv. 3
throws light on Is. xxii. 2. That w. 9-11 agree
with 2 Chr. xxxii. 8-6 proves nothing: the same
BMasuree would be taken in any invasion (comp. Is.
rti. 8). The former part of ver. 2 and rv. 12, 18,
isserlbe the slate of things preceding the imagined
» «* Behold the land of the Chaldasaas ; this people,"
i. *. the Chaldseans, " was not : Asshur founded it for
•fee Inhabitants of the wilderness," assigning a loca-
lism to ttw Chaldstans, heretofore nomadic, Job 1. 17 ;
• muj," the Ihaldaauu, " set up their watch-towers ;
ISAIAH
ging his own worship, and as the guardian ajal
avenger of his peculiar people, to punish Tyra
Shalmaneser appears to have been foiled in hi*
five years' siege; Nebuchadnezzar was more suc-
cessful, capturing at least the mainland part of the
city; and to this latter circumstance ver. 13 refers-*
In rv. 15-17 it seems to be intimated that when
the pressure of Asshur should be removed (by the
Medo- Persian conquest), Tyre should revive. Her
utter destruction is not predicted by Isaiah as it
afterwards was by EzekieL Ver. 18 probably
points to Messianic times: comp. Mark vii. 28;
Acts xxi. 3; Euseb. H. £. x. 4.
9. The next four chapters, xxiv.-xxvii., form zot
prophecy essentially connected with the preceding
ten " burdens " (xiii.-xxiii. ), of which it is in effect
a general summary; it presents previous denunci-
ations in one general denunciation which include*
the theocratic people itself, and therewith also the
promise of blessings, especially Messianic blessings,
for the remnant. It no longer particularizes (Mono,
xxv. 10, represents all enemies of God's people, as
Edom does in Ixiii. 1), but speaks of judgments
upon lands, cities, and oppressors in general terms,
the reference of which is to be gathered from what
goes before.
The elegy of xxiv. is interrupted at ver. 13 by a
glimpse at the happy remnant (ver. 15, fire* prob-
ably means entt), but is resumed at ver. 16, till at
ver. 21 the dark night passes away altogether to
usher in an inexpressibly glorious day. 1 *
In xxv., after commemorating the destruction of
all oppressors (" city " ver. 2, contemplates Baby-
lon as type of all), the prophet gives us in w. 6-9
a most glowing description of Messianic blessings,
which connects itself with the N. T. by numberless
links, indicating the oneness of the prophetic Spirit
("the Spirit of Christ," 1 Pet. 1- 11), with tint
which dwells in the later revelation.'
In xxvi., w. 12-18 describe the new, happy state
of God's people as God's work wholly (comp. 13,
"by thee only"); all their efforts were fruitiest
till God graciously interposed. The new condition
of Israel is figuratively a resurrection (comp. Eze-
kiel's vision of dry bones, Ez. xxxvil.), s fruit of
omnipotent agency; as indeed the glorified state
of the Church hereafter will be literally a resur-
rection.
In xxvii. 1, " Leviathan the fleeing serpent, and
Leviathan the twisting serpent, and the dragon in
the sea," are perhaps Nineveh and Babylon — two
phases cf the same Asshur— and Egypt (comp.
ver. 13); all, however, symbolizing adverse powers
of evil. The reader will observe that in this period
of his ministry, Isaiah already contemplates the
they demolished her (Tyre's) palaces : Ee nude bar
a ruin." In the face of all external evidence, we can-
not accept Kwald's Ingenious conjecture rf 0^33Q9
for D^lttJS.
e Thus' comp. xxiv. 18-15, xxvli. 9, with xvfl 6-8 ;
also xxt. 2 with xiil. 19 ;-also xxv. 8-12 with xvHL
7, xxiii. 18; and xxv. 6 with xrili. 4-8.
* In ver. 21, "Jehovah shall visit the host ot the
height " —stare, symbolic of rulers, as Mark xili. 25-
The "ancients " of ver. 28 represent the Churcn, Uks
the elders In Hev. It. 4.
« In ver. 7 " the face," ». e. « the surface of th
covering," Is the veil limit as lying upon the earth
"of the covering." In ver. 11 we have the ft iltllasa)
endeavors of Moab to escape out of the flood of Qoa
wrath.
Digitized by
Google
ISAIAH
defirerance of hia people w a restoration
lam captivity, especially from Assyria, tt. 12, 13
(oomp. xi. 11, 16), u he don in the second pert;
— Babylon being a second phase of Aashur.
10. Chs. xxviii.-xxxv. The former put of this
section seems to be of a fragmentary character,
being, as Hengstenberg with much probability con-
jectures, the substance of discourses not fully com-
municated, and spoken at different times. The
fetter part hangs more closely together, and may
with considerable certainty be assigned to the time
1 Sennacherib's invasion. At such a season the
spirit of prophecy would be especially awake.
Ch. rxviii. 1-6 is clearly predictive; it therefore
preceded Shalmaneser's invasion, when Samaria,
"the crown of pride" surmounting its beautiful
bill, was destroyed. But the men of Judah also, ver.
7 (ootnp. ver. H), are threatened. And here we
have a picture given us of the way in which Jeho-
vah's word was received by Isaiah's contemporaries.
Priest and prophet were drunk with a spirit of
infatuation, — " they erred in vision, they stumbled
in judgment," and therefore only scoffed at his
ISAIAH
1157
In the lips of these false prophets, prophesying,
in proportion to its falsehood, would be exaggerated
in the wUdness and inooherency of the style. Hence
the swifting prophets and priests made it a matter
of reproach against Isaiah that his style was so
plain and simple — as if he were dealing with little
children, ver. 9. And in mockery they accumulate
monosyllables as Imitating his style (tsav la tsav,
taav la-tsav, kav la-kav, kav la-kav, xeeir sham,
eeair sham, ver. 10). " Twist my words " (is
Isaiah's reply) " into a mocking jabber if ye will ;
God shall in turn speak to you by the jabber of
foreign invaders I " (oomp. Deut. xxviii. 49). They
trusted that they had made a " vision " — a com-
pact with death and hell (w 18, 18, "agree-
ment," Hebr. maim), and that through the meas-
ures which they, seer and priest together, had
adopted, no invasion should hurt them. But the
atone which Jehovah lays in Zion (God's own
prophets) alone secures those who trust in it; ye
shall perish (16-33). Ver. 16 is applied in the
H. T. to Christ; he is now the prophet who saves
those who believe in him. This glimpse into He-
brew life explains to us in part the cause of the
aulure of the prophetic ministry. The travesty of
•• the word of Jehovah " preoccupied men's minds,
ar at least confused them ; while further the con-
flicting voices of different prophets, the false and
the true, would furnish them, as in all ages it does
so the worldly and the skeptical, a ground for entire
disbelief.
" Cannot ye wise men apply to the conduct of
your lfiairs in relation to God that shrewdness and
afiadotn, which the farmer displays in dealing with
Ids various businesses, ar.d which God has given
ink* to him and to you? " (93-39).
whs
r
1 to* «rophet. r - Than Is no ma-
ss understand these •J connected with Idolatry,
wars always (It would seam) A numerous party
the hair-wove menue of the prophet
a hairy garment to deceive ") ; and these
men perhaps even swarmed In the streets
[Biiu, p. 708, note *.\ The priests,
the other hand, were the arlstoerwy of Judma,
a, under the king, to a great extent ruled its policy.
fee feeesalanon of strategus and oia-.-r at Athens,
priest and prophet played Into each tiler's hands
Whatever public polio/ the
Ch. xxix. Jerusalem was to be visited with
extreme danger and terror, and then sudden de-
liverance, w. 1-8- (Sennacherib's invasion again I
But the threatening and promise seemed very enke
matical; prophets, and rulers, and scholars, oouk
make nothing of the riddle (9-13). Alas' the
people themselves will only hearken to the prcpheto
and priests speaking out of their own heart; even
their so-called piety to Jehovah is regulated, not
by his true organs, but by pretended ones, ver. 13
(oomp. the condition of the Jews in relation to their
rabbins and to Christ, Matt. xv. 8, 9); but all
their vaunted policy shall be confounded ; the wild
wood shall become a fruitful field, and the fruitful
field a wild wood ; — the humble pupils of Jehovah
and these self-wise leaders shall interchange their
places of dishonor and prosperity, w. 13-24.
One instance of the false leading of these proph-
ets and priests (xxx. 1) in opposition to the true
prophets (w. 10, 11) was the policy of courting
the help of Egypt against Assyria. Against this,
Isaiah is commanded to protest, which he does both
in xxx. 1-17, and in xxx. 1-3, pointing out at the
same time the fruitlessness of all measures of hu-
man policy and the necessity of trusting in Jehovah
alone for deliverance. In xxx. 18-33, and ml
4-9, them is added to each address the prediction
of the Assyrian's overthrow and its consequences,
xxx. 19-24, in terms which, when read hi the light
of the event, seem very clear, but which no doubt
appeared to the worldly and skeptical at the time
mere frenzy.
As the time approaches, the spirit of prophecy
becomes more and more glowing; that marvelous
deliverance from Asshur, wherein God's " Name "
(xxx. 27) so gloriously came near, opens even
clearer glimpses into the time when God should
indeed come and reign, in the Anointed One, and
when virtue and righteousness should everywhere
prevail (xxxii. 1-8, 16-30) ; then the mighty Jeho-
vah should be a king dwelling amongst his people
(xxxiii. 17, 22); ha should himself be a sea of
glory and defense encircling them, in which all
hostile galleys should perish. At that glorious
display of Jehovah's nearness (namely, that afforded
in the Assyrian's overthrow), they who had re-
jected Jehovah in his servants and prophets, the
sinners in Zion, should be filled with dismay, dread-
ing lest his terrible judgment should alight upon
themselves also (xxxiii. 14). With these glorious
predictions are blended also descriptions of the
grief and despair which should precede that hour,
xxxii. 9-14 (?)» and xxxiii. 7-9, and the earnest
prayer then to be offered by the pious (xxxiii. 3).
In eh. xxxiv. the prediction must certainly be
taken with a particular reference to Idunuea (this is
shown by the challenge in ver. 16, to compare the
fulfillment with the prophecy); we are however led,
both by the placing of the prophecy and by lxiii. 9,
to take it in a general sense as well as typical."
advised, they would be seconded therein by prophets,
n in the name of Jehovah." Isaiah's contemporary
shows ns In what an unprincipled manner the proph-
ets abused their function for their own advantage (Mia.
IH. 6-7, 11): "The prophets propbeskd mlesly, ant
the prleeta bars mis by their means" (Jar. v. 81).
Henee prophets and priests am so often named to-
gether (oomp. xxix. 9, 10).
ft In ver. 10, read " some days over a year shall
ye be troubled."
e The reference to " the book of Jehovah," ver. M
as containing this prediction, deserves ncslee. Ja OH
Digitized by
Google
1168 ISAIAH
As xxxlv. has a general sense, to xxxv. indicates
h general terras the deliverance of Israel as if out
af captivity, rejoicing in their secure and happy
march through the wilderness. It may be doubted
whether the description is meant to apply to any
deliverance out of temporal captivity, closely as the
Imagery approaches that of the second part. It
rather seems to picture the march of the spiritual
Israel to her eternal Zion (Heb. xli. 23).
11. xxivii.-xixix. — At length the season so
often, though no doubt obscurely foretold, arrived.
The Assyrian was near with forces apparently irre-
sistible. In the universal consternation which en-
sued, all the hope of the state centred upon Isaiah ;
the highest functionaries of the state, — Shebnc
too, — wait upon him in the name of their sove-
reign, confessing that they were now in the very
extremity of danger (xxxvil. 3), and entreating his
prayers; — a signal token this, of the approved
fidelity of the prophet in the ministry which he
had so long exercised. The short answer which
Jehovah gave through him was, that the Assyrian
king should hear intelligence which would send
him back to his own land, there to perish. The
■vent shows that the intelligence pointed to was
that of the destruction of his army. Accordingly
Hezekiah communicated to Sennacherib, now at
Libnah, his refusal to submit, expressing his assur-
ance of being protected by Jehovah (conip. ver. 10).
This drew from the Assyrian king a letter of defi-
ance against Jehovah himself, as being no more
able to defend Jerusalem, than other tutelary gods
had been to defend the countries which he had
conquered. On Hezekiah spreading this letter
before Jehovah in the Temple for him to read and
answer (ver. 17), Isaiah was commissioned to send
a fuller reply to the pious king (91-38), the mani-
fest object of which was the more completely to
signalize, especially to God's own people them-
selves, tie meaning of the coming event." How
the deliverance was to be effected, Isaiah was not
commissioned to tell; but the very next night (3
K. xix. 35) brought the appalling fulfillment. A
divine interposition so marvelous, so evidently
miraculous, was iu its magnificence worthy of
being the kernel of Isaiah's whole book ; it is in-
deed that without which the whole book rails to
pieces, but with which it forms a well-organized
whole (oorup. I's. lxxvi., xlri., xlviii.).
provost's spoken word was " the word of Jehovah,"
■o his written word is hen called " the book of Jeho-
vah." It shows Isaiah's estimate of his prophetical
writings. So xxx. 8 points to an enduring record in
whlea he was to deposit his testimony concerning
•gypt. an xxx. 9, lor "That this is," etc., read
" Because this Is," etc.)
a How like Isaiah's style the whole passage is!
xxxvli. 28 refers to the numerous predictions of Ar-
thur's conquests and overthrow found In preceding
parts of the book (eomp. xllv. 8; xlvi. 9-11, fce ).
Uomp. ver. 27 with xli. X " Sign" In ver. 80, as in
vli. 14-16 ; — There must be a remnant; therefore ye
shall now be delivered. For further explanation,
■wald ream to the law In Lev. xxv. 6, 11 : " Your
sondWon this year will be like that of a Sabbath year ;
ftwxt year (the land being even then not quite cleared
if Invaders) like that of the jubilee year : as at the
mbDer the Hebrew commonwealth starts afresh, re-
stored to its proper condition, so now reformation,
the fruit of affliction, shall Introduce better days "
tfsr«).
• for Heaekiah's sickness veu 16 years beta* his
Unity whereas the des tr uction' of Sennacherib's amy
\
i
ISAIAH
Chs. xxxviii., xxxix. cbronosogieallj precede tfel
two previous ones ; • but there seems to be a two-
fold purpose in this arrangement: one ethical, se
illustrate God's discipline exercised over his most
favored servants, and the other literary, to intro-
duce by the prediction of the Babylonian Captivity
the second part of the book. As the two preceding
chapters look hack upon the prediction of the first
part, and therefore stand even before xxxviii., so
xxxix. looks forward to the subsequent propbesy-
ings, and is therefore placed immediately before
them."
12. The last 97 chapters form a prophecy, whose
coherence of structure and unity of authorship are
generally admitted even by those who deny that it
was written by Isaiah. The point of time and
situation from which the prophet here speaks, is
for the most part that of the Captivity in Babylon
(conip., e. g., Ixir. 10, 11). But this is adopted on
a principle already noted as characterizing " vision,"
namely, that the prophet sees the future as if
present. That the present with the prophet in this
section was imagined and not real, is indicated by
the specification of sins which are rebuked; as
neglect of sacrifices (xliii. 22-24), unacceptable
sacrifices (Ixvi. 3), various idolatries (Ml. 8-10)
ixv. 3, 4); sins belonging to a period before the
exile, and not to the exile itsehV But that tola
imagined time and place should be maintained
through so long a composition, is unquestionably a
remarkable phenomenon. It is, however, explained
by the tact, that the prophet in theee later prophesy-
ings is a writer rather than a public speaker, writing
for the edification of God's people in those future
days of the approach of which Isaiah was aware.
For the punishment of exile had been of old de-
nounced in case of disobedience even by Hoses
himself (Lev. xxvi. 81-35), and thus contemplated
by Solomon (1 K. viii. 46-60); moreover, Isaiah
had himself often realized and predicted it, with
reference repeatedly to Babylon in particular (xxxix.
6, 7, xxvii. 12, 13, xxi. 2, 10, xiv. 3, 3, xi. 11, 13,
vi. 11, 13); which was also done by Mieah (It. 10,
vii. 12, 13). Apart therefore from the immediate
suggestion of an inspiring afflatus, it was a thought
already fixed in Isaiah's mind by a chain of fore-
going revelations, that the Hebrews would be de-
ported to Babylon, and that too within a genera-
tion or two. We dwtll upon this, because it ■
(so chronologers determine) occurred 12 or 18 jeers
before the same date.
« Since xxxviii. 9-20 Is not In 2 K., and on tfas
other hand in 2 K. are found many touebee not found
In Is. (<. g 2 K. xvlii. 14-16 ; xx. 4, 6, 9, Ac.), critics
an generally agreed that neither account was drawn
from the other, but both of them from the record
mentioned In 2 Car. xxxil. 82 as " the vision of Isaiah
the prophet, the son of Amos, (found) in (not, ss In
A. V., ' and in ') the book of the kings of Jndah and
Israel " ; which record Isaiah adopted with modmea-
tions into the compilation of his prophedee.
<* As it is for the benefit of God's own people that
Isaiah writes, and not to affect heathen nations tr
wham he had no commission, the arguing against
idolatry, of which we have so much in this part, is to
be ascribed to Idolatrous tendencies among the Hs»
brews themselves, which ceased at the Captivity ; tec
the deportation probably (Hengst.) affected chiefly the
best disposed of the nation, especially the priests, cf
whom them appears to have been a dlspropartlcon**
number both among those who wen exiled and shot)
who returned.
Digitized by
Google
ISAIAH
» acknowledged, and we have already made the
mark, tint » vision " even in its most heightened
form still adapted itself more or leu to the previous
nenlil condition of the seer. We can under-
stand, therefore, how Isaiah might be led to write
profiteerings, such as should serve as his minis-
terial bequest to hia people when the hour of their
captivity ahould have Mien upon them.
This same fact, namely, that the prophet ia here,
in the undisturbed retirement of his chamber, giv-
ing as a written prophecy, and not recording, as in
the early part of the book, spoken discourses, goes
fw to explain the greater profusion of words, and
the dearer, more flowing, and more complete ex-
position of thoughts, which generally characterize
this second part; whereas the first part frequently
exhibits great abruptness, and a close compression
ind terseness of diction, at times almost enigmati-
cal — as an indignant man might speak among
puassyers from whom little was to be hoped. This
difference of style, so far as it exists (for it has been
greatly exaggerated), may be further ascribed to the
difference of purpose; for here Isaiah generally ap-
pears as the tender and compassionate comforter
of the pious and afflicn-d ; whereas before he appears
rather as accuser and denouncer. There exists after
tQ sufficient similarity of diction to indicate Isaiah's
hand (see Keil'a Einleitmg, § 72, note 7).
This second part falls into three sections, each,
■a it happens, consisting of nine chapters; the two
fast end with the refrain, " There is no peace,
aaith Jehovah (or "my God *'), to the wicked; "
sod the third with the same thought amplified.
(I.) The first section (xI.-xlviiL) has for its main
topic the comforting assurance of the deliverance
from Babylon by Korean (Cyrus) who is even named
twice (ili. 9, 3, 35, xliv. 28, xlv. 1-4, 13, xlvi. 11,
ifriii. 14, 15)." This section abounds with artcu-
nents against idolatry, founded mainly (not wholly,
see the noble passage xliv. 9-20) upon the gift of
prediction possessed by Jehovah's prophets, eape-
oaBj as shown by their predicting Cyrus, and even
laming him (xli. 96, xliv. 8, 24-26, xlv. 4, 19, 21,
thi. 8-11, xhriiL 3-8, 15). Idols and heathen
(moan are taunted with not being able to predict
(it 1-7, 21-24. xliii. 8-13, xlv. 20-21, xlvii. lu-
ll). This power of foretelling the future, as shown
m this instance, is insisted upon as the test of
tjvinitj.' It is of importance to observe, in refer-
ence to the prophet's standing-point in this second
part, that in speaking both of the Captivity in
Bab-Ion and of the deliverance out of it, there is
(excepting Cyrus's name) no specification of partic-
sisr circumstances, such as we might expect to find
{ the writer had written at the end of the exile;
ISAIAH 115fi
the delineation is of a general kind, bur ro we d fre-
quently from the history of Moses and Joshua. Let
it be observed, in particular, that the language
respecting the mlderneu (a. g. xli. 17-20), thn
which the redeemed were to pass, is
ideal and symbolical.
It is characteristic of sacred prophecy In general,
that the " vision " of a great deliverance leads the
seer to glance at the great deliverance to samp
through Jesus Christ. This association of ideas is
found in several passages in the firs' purl of Isaiah,
in which the destruction of the Assyrian arm)
suggests the thought of Christ (e. g. x. 24- xi. 16,
xxxi. 8-xxxii. 2). This principle of associatirn
prevails in the second part taken as a whole , but
in the first section, taken apart, it appeals as yet
imperfectly. However, xlii. 1-7 is a clear predictioc
of the Messiah, and that too as viewed in part in
contrast with Cyrus; for the "servant" of Jehovah
is meek and gentle (ver. 2, 3), and will establish
the true religion in the earth (ver. 4). Neverthe-
less, since the prophet regards the two deliverances
as referable to the same type of thought (conip. bri.
1-3), so the announcement of one (xl. 3-6") is held
by all the four Evangelists, and by John Baptist
himself, as predictive of the announcement of the
other.'
(2.) The second section (xlix.-lvii.) is distin-
guished from the first by several features. The
person of Cyrus as well as his name, and the speci-
fication of Babylon (named in the first section four
times) and of its gods, and of the Chaldeans (named
before five times), disappear altogether. Return
from exile is indeed repeatedly spoken of and at
length (xlix. 9-26, 11. 9-lii. 12, lv. 12, 13, Ivii. 14);
but in such general terms as admit of being applied
to the spiritual and Messianic, as well as to the
literal restoration. And that the Messianic restora-
tion (whether a spiritual restoration or not) is prin-
cipally intended, is clear from the connection of the
restoration promised in xlix. 9-25 with the Messiah
portrayed in xlix. 1-8 ;<< from the description of
the suffering Christ (in 1. 5, 6) in the midst of the
promise of deliverance (1. 1-11); from the same
description in lii. 13-liii. 12, between the passages
li. 1-lii. 12, and liv. 1-17 ; and from the exhibition
of Christ m lv. 4 (connected in ver. 3 with the
Messianic promise given to David), forming the
foundation on which is raised the promise of lv.
3-13. Comp. also the interpretation of liv. 13 given
by Christ himself in John vi. 45, and that of bri.
1-3 in Luke iv. 18. In fact the place of Cyrus in
the first section is in this second section held by
his greater Antitype.*
(3.) In the third section (Mii.-Ixvi.) as Cyras
■ The point has bean argued tor, and the evidence
Nans aUkAelory (Hivaraiek, Hengst,), that Korean,
s word nuanJag Stat, was commonly In the Bast, and
aBtanuadr In Persia, a title of princes, and that it
ae saramed by Cyrus, whose original name was
txrasafces, on bis ascending the throne. It stands,
esvcver, m history as his own proper name. This
eafsnrw of partkruarixliig In prophecy Is paralleled by
*» awraVallun of Jostah's name (1 K. xlii. 2) some
■Oram before his time. I
' II is diracolt to acquit the passages above cited I
« aapodeat and Indeed suicidal mendacity, If they i
*aa set written before Cyras appeared on the political I
usta.
e Inr the dtscaanoo and refutation of all expositions
sejea voaterstand by " the servant of Jehovah " here
» at tea ■wood section, the Jewish people, or tb»
pious among them, or the prophetical order, or some
other objeet than the Messiah, eomp. Hengstenberg'e
ChriUoiosy, VOL 1L
4 In this passage Christ Is called " Israel," as the
concentration and consummation of the covenant*
people — as he In whom its idea Is to be rcauVd.
< That Jesus of Nasareth Is the object which la
" vision " the prophet saw in 1. 6, and In lii. 18, hIL
12 (connecting HI. 13 with lilt. 12 aa one passage), wlil
hardly be questioned smongst ourselves, except by
those whose minds an prepossessed by the notion that
predictive revelation Is Inconceivable. Meanwhile all
will acknowledge the truth of Ewald's remark : '< ns
the Servant of Jahve, who so vividly havers before hie
view, the prophet discerns a new clear light shed
aoroad over all possible situations of that tone; ks
him he Unas the balm of consolation, the cheer •&
Digitized by
Google
1160
ISAIAH
•owners appears, so neither does « Jehovah's ser-
vant " occur to frequently to view as in the second.
Ills only delineation of the latter is in hi. 1-3
and in lxiil. 1-6, 0. He no longer appears as suf-
fering, but only as earing and avenging Zion."
rhe section is mainly occupied with various practi-
cal exhortations founded upon the views of the
future already set forth. In the second the parte-
neais is almost all consoling, taking in lv. 1-7 the
form of advice; only in lii. and towards the close
in lvi. 9-lvii. 14 is the language accusing and
minatory. In this third section, on the other hand,
the prophesying is very much in this last-named
strain (cf. lviii. 1-7, lix. 1-8, lxr. 1-16, livi. 1-6,
16-17, 24) ; taking the form of national eelf-bewail-
ment in lix. 0-15 and lxiii. 15-lxiv. 12. Still,
interspersed in this admonition, accusation, and
threatening, there are gleams, and even bright
tracts, of more cheering matter; besides the cou-
ditional promises as arguments for well-doing in
lviii. 8 14 and lxvi. 1, 2, we have the long passage
of general and unconditional promise in lix. 20-
lxiii. 6, and the shorter ones lxv. 17-26, lxvi. 7-14,
18-23 ; and in some of these passages the future of
Zion is depicted with brighter coloring than almost
anywhere before in the whole book. But on the
whole the predominant feature of this section is
exhortation with the view, as it should seem, of
qualifying men to receive the promised blessings.
There was to be "no peace for the wicked," but
only for those who turned from ungodliness in
Jacob; and therefore the prophet in such various
forms of exhortations urges the topic of repentance,
— promising, advising, leading to confession (lxiv.
6-12; comp. Hos. xiv. 2, 3), warning, threatening.
In reference to the sins especially selected for rebuke,
we find specified idolatry lxr. 3, 4, 11, lxvi. 17 (as
in the seoond section lvii. 3-10), bloodahedding,
and injustice (lix. 1-16), selfishness (lxv. 6), and
merely outward and ceremonial religiousness (lxvi.
1-3). If it were not for the place given to idolatry,
we might suppose with Dr. Henderson that the
spirit of God is already by prophetic anticipation
rebuking the Judaism of the time of Jesus Christ,
— so accurately in many places are its features de-
neated as denounced in the N. T. But the speci-
Ication of idolatry leads us to seek for the imme-
diate objects of this paramnesia in the prophet's own
time, when indeed the Pharisaism displayed in the
N. T. already existed, being in fact in all ages the
natural product of an unconverted, unspiritual heart
totnhining with the observance of a positive religion,
wd in aU ages (comp. e. o. Pa. L) antagonistic to
true piety.
While we can clearly discern certain dominant
thoughts and aims in each of these three sections,
we must not, however, expect to find them pursued
with the regularity which we look for in a modem
sermon ; such treatment is wholly alien from the
spirit of prophecy, which always more or leas is in
the strict sense of the word desultory. Accordingly
we find in these, aa in the earlier portions of the
book, the transitions sudden, and the exhortation
every now and then varied by dramatic interlocu-
tvsrlasttag hope, the weascn wherewith to oombat and
ass me down those who understand not the time, the
•Mam of Impressive exhortation. And If In this long
stage (xl.-lxvl.) a multitude of very dlvenv weighty
•boughts emerge into view, yet this Is the dominant
Ihcrnght which binds every thing together " {Propknen,
ISAIAH
Hon, by description, by odes of thaakaghtae;, b)
prayers.
HI. Numberless attacks have been made by
German critics upon the integrity of the wools
book, different critics pronouncing different portions
of the first part spurious, and many concurring to
reject the second part altogether. A few observe
turns, particularly on this latter point, appear them
fore to be necessary.
1. The first writer who ever breathed a suspicion
that Isaiah was not the author of the last twenty
seven chapters wss Koppe, in remarks upon ch. L,
in his German translation of Lowth's Imah, pub-
lished in the years 1779-1781. This was [ resently
after followed up by Di;derlein, especially in his
Latin translation and commentary in 1789; by
Eichhorn, who in a later period most fully developed
his views on this point in his BtbrcH$chen Pro-
phtttn, 1816-1819; and the most fully and effect-
ively by Justi. The majority of the German critics
hare given in their adhesion to these views: aa
Paulus (1798), Bertholdt (1812), De Wette (1817),
Geaenius (1820, 1821), Hitidg (1833), Knobd
(1838), Unibreit and Ewald (1841). Defenders of
the integrity of the book have not, howerer, been
wanting — particularly Jahn in his £tnleitn»g
(1802); Moller in his De AvthenM Oracukrm
Jama (Copenhagen, 1825); Kkinert in his Eck-
theit da Jatiiai (1829) ; Hengstenberg in his
Chrittokgy, vol. ii. ; Haver-nick, EMtUmg, B. Hi
(1849); Stier in his Jaaiat nuM Pttwh-Jnaiai
(1850); and KeU, Einteihmg (1853), in which hat
the reader will find a most satisfactory compendium
of the controversy and of the grounds for the gen-
erally received view.
2. The catalogue of authors who gainsay Isaiah's
authorship of this second part is, in point of num-
bers, of critical ability, and of profound Hebrew
scholarship, sufficiently imposing. Nevertheless
when we come to inquire into their grounds cf ob-
jection, we aoon cease to attach much value to this
formidable array of authorities. The circumstance
mainly urged by them is the unquestionable fact
that the author has to a considerable view taken
his standing-point at the close of the Babylonish
Captivity aa if that were his present, and from
thence looks forward into the subsequent future.
Now is it possible (they ask) that in such a manner
and to such a degree a Seer should step out of his
own time, and plant his foot so firmly in a later
time? We must grant (they urge) that he might
gase upon a future not very distant, aa if present,
and represent it accordingly ; but in the case before
us infallible Insight and prescience must be predi-
cated of him ; for this idea of an Isaiah who knows
even Cyrua'a name was not realized for two cen-
turies later, and a chance hit is here out of the
question. "This, however, k inconceivable. A
prophet's prescience must be limited to the notion
of foreboding (Ahmmg), and to the deductions from
patent facts taken in combination with real or sup-
posed truths. Prophets were bounded like other
men by the horizon of their own age; they bor-
rowed the object of their soothsaying lrom their
« Restoration from captivity is spoken cf in lvU.
12, lxL 4-7, lxli. 4, 5, 10 ; but for tin most part it
snob general terms as might easily be understood at
referring to spiritual restoration only ; but vinos the
literal restoration pre-nqulred repentance, this exbov
tation may be taken v th a rrfxnmoe to Vmt restore
Bon aa well.
Digitized by
Google
ISAIAH
t; and exerted by the relation* of their pro-
mt the; spoke to their contemporaries of what
(fleeted other people's minds or theii own, occupy-
ing themselves only with that future whose rewards
or punishments were likely to reach cheir contem-
poraries. For exegesis the position is impregnable,
that the prophetic writings are to be interpreted
ai each case out of the relations belonging to the
time of the prophet; and from this follows as a
corollary the critical Canon : that that time, those
time-relations, out of which a prophetic writer is
explained, are hit time, hit time-relations; — to that
time he must be referred as the date of his own
existence " (Hitarig, p. 463-468).
3. This is the main argument. Other grounds
which are alleged are confessedly " secondary and
external," and are really of no great weight. The
most important of these is founded upon the difler-
ence in the complexion of style which has already
been noticed; this point will come into view again
presently. A number of particulars of diction said
to be non-Isaianio have been accumulated ; but the
reasoning founded upon them has been satisfactorily
met by opposing evidence of a similar kind (see
KeQ, Einkitsmg, § 72) It is not, however, on
such considerations that the chief stress is laid by
the impugners of the Isaianic authorship of this
portion of Scripture: the great ground of objection
is, as already stated, the incompatibility of those
phenomena of prediction which are noted in the
writings in question, with the subjective theories
of inspiration (or rather non-inspiration) which the
reader has just had submitted to him. The incom-
patibility is confessed. But where is the solution
of the difficulty to be sought ? Are those theories
so certainly true that all evidence must give way
to them? This is not the place for combating
them: but, for our own part, we are so firmly con-
vinced that the theory is utterly discredited by the
facts exhibited to us in the Bible throughout, that
we are content to lack in this case the countenance
of its upholders. Their judgment in the critical
question before us is determined, not by their
scholarship, but avowedly by the prepossessions of
their unbelief.
4. for our present purpose it must suffice briefly
to indicate the following reasons as establishing the
• * In the critical discussions respecting the proph-
ecies ascribed to Isaiah, the language which has some-
times bean used has kid to a mlsapprehention of the
real question at heme. Such terms as "spurious,"
" Pseudo-Isaiah," have been very naturally understood
as implying that the portions so designated are re-
garded ss unworthy of a place among the writings of
the Hebrew Prophets, or even as the work of trend.
But this has not been generally, if ever, intended by
those who hare used such expressions. The question
Is essentially one of authorship and date ; it does not
necessarily affect the value, the inspiration, or the
eanonicity of the portions of Scripture under consider-
ation. Take, for example, the last 27 chapters of
Isaiah. Whoever was the author of that wonderful com-
position, it shines by its own light ; and Its splendor
'M not lessened by the supposition that the name of
•be writer, like that of the Book of J.J, must remain
unknown. If he were not the lsala_ who wrote the
earner prophecies which have been collected in th*
same volume, we have two great prophets instead a
sas. His lofty strains of exhortation, warning, ana
sonsolation do not loss their power when we consider
hem specially adapted to the condition of his imme-
kli eontempoFsries, rather than designed tor the
•SmoaOni of the people 150 years or more after the
ISAIAH 1161
integrity of the whole book, and ss vindicating tin
authenticity of the second part : —
(a.) Externally. — The wum'nosi testimony of
Jewish and Christian tradition — Ecclus. xlviii. 94,
25, which manifestly (in the words wopsKclAca't
robs reWlouVrai «V Stir and frriSt i{« — Tf
vroVrpvdw xplr */ Tapaytrtotitu airri) refers tc
this second part. The use apparently made of the
second part by Jeremiah (x. 1-16, v. 25, xxv. 31,
1., li.), Esekiel (xxiii. 40, 41), and Zephaniah (ii. 16,
ill. 10). The decree of Cyrus in Ezr. i. 3-4, which
plainly is founded upon Is. xliv. 28, xlv. 1, 13, ac-
crediting Josephus's statement (Ant, xi. 1, § 9) that
the Jews showed Cyrus Isaiah's predictions of him.
The inspired testimony of the N . T., which often
(Matt. iii. 3 and the parallel passages; Luke it.
17; Acts viii. 28; Rom. x. 16, 20) quotes with
specification of Isaiah's name prophecies found ii
the second part.
(6.) Internally. — The unity of design and cot •
atruction which, as we have seen, connects these
last twenty-seven chapters with the preceding parts
of the book. — The oneness of diction which per-
vades the whole book. — The peculiar elevation and
grandeur of stylo, which, as is universally acknowl-
edged, distinguishes the whole contents of the
second part as much as of the first, and which
assigns their composition to the golden age of He-
brew literature. — The absence of any other name
than Isaiah's claiming the authorship. At the time
to which the composition is assigned, a Zechariah
or a Malachi could gain a separate name and book;
how was it that an author of such transcendent
gifts, as " the Great Unnamed " who wrote xL-lxvi.,
could gain none ? — The claims which the writer
makes to the foreknowledge of the deliverance by
Cyrus, which claims, on the opposing view, must
be regarded as a fraudulent personation of an earlier
writer. — Lastly, the predictions which it contains
of the character, sufferings, death, and glorifica-
tion of Jesus Christ; a believer in Christ cannot
foil to regard those predictions as affixing to this
second part the broad seal of Divine Inspiration;
whereby the chief ground of objection against its
having been written by Isaiah is at onoe anni-
hilated."
IV. It remains to make a few observations on
death of the author. Those who feel compelled from
Internal evidence to ascribe the latter part of Isaiah
to a writer who flourished in the time of the Captivity,
do not on that account value the work the less, but
regard this view of It as Investing It with new Interest
Thus Dr. Noyes calls the author " the greatest of all
the Jewish prophets " (New Trans, of the Brbmt
Prophet*, 4th ed., 1. p. xjl.) ; Dean Stanley speaks of
these chapters as " the most deeply Inspired, the most
truly Evangelical, of any portion of the Prophetical
writings, whatever be their date, and whoever theft
author" (Hist, of tht Jewish Church, II. 687); and
Dean Hllman remarks : « It Is well known that the
later chapters of Isaiah are attributed, by the common
consent of most of the profoundly learned writers
of Qermany ... to a different writer, whom they
call the great nameless Prophet, or the second Isaiah,
who wrote during the exile. I most acknowledge
that these chapters, In my judgment, read with In-
finitely greater force, sublimity, and reality under
this view. If they lose, and I hardly feel that they
rt> 'oss, In what Is oommonly called prophetic, they
rue far mere In historical, Interest. ... As to what
are usually called the Messianic predictions • . . the)
tave the same force and. meaning, whether uttered bg
one or two prophats,.at one or *<wo-d
Digitized by
Google
1162
ISAIAH
[seiah's style; though in tenth the abundance of the
material! which oner themselves makes it a difficult
matter to give anything like a just and definite
view of the subject, without trespassing unduly
upon the limits necessarily prescribed to us. On
this point we cannot do better than introduce some
of the remarks with which Ewald prefaces his
translation of such parts of the book as he is dis-
posed to acknowledge as Isaiah's (Pmpktttn, 1.
168-179): —
" In Isaiah we see prophetic authorship reaching
Its culminating point Everything conspired to
raise him to an elevation to which no prophet
either before or after conk) as writer attain. Among
'he other prophets, each of the more important
ones is distinguished by some one particular excel-
lence, and some one peculiar talent: in Isaiah, all
kinds of talent and all beauties of prophetic dis-
course meet together so as mutually to temper and
qualify each other; it is not so much any single
feature that distinguishes him as the symmetry and
perfection of the whole.
" We cannot fail to assume, as the first condition
of Isaiah's peculiar historical greatness, a native
power and a vivacity of spirit, which even among
prophets is seldom to be met with. It is but rarely
that we see combined in one and the same spirit
the three several characteristics of — first, the most
profound prophetic excitement and the purest senti-
ment ; next, the most indefatigable and successful
practical activity amidst all perplexities and changes
of outward life; and, thirdly, that facility and beauty
in representing thought which is the prerogative
of the genuine poet : but this threefold combination
we find realized in Isaiah as in no other prophet ;
and from the traces which we can perceive of the
unceasing joint-working of these three powers we
must draw our conclusions as to the original great-
ness of his genius. — Both as prophet and as author
Isaiah stands upon that calm, sunny height, which
in each several branch of ancient literature one
eminently favored spirit at the right time takes
possession of; which seems as it were to have been
waiting for Mm ; and which, when he has come
and mounted the ascent, seems to keep and guard
him to the last as its own right man. In the senti-
ments which he expresses, in the topics of his dis-
courses, and in the manner of expression, Isaiah
uniformly reveals himself as the Kingly Prophet.
•• In reference to the last named point, it cannot
be said that his manner of representing thought is
ISAIAH
elaborate and artificial: it rather shows a lofty sts»
plidty and an unconcern about external attractive-
ness, abandoning itself freely to the leading and
requirement of each several thought ; but neverths
less it always rolls along in a full stream whick
overpowers all resistance, and never fails at tht
right place to accomplish at every turn its object
without toil or effort
" The progress and development of the discourse
is always majestic, achieving much with few words,
which though short are yet dear and transparent;
an overflowing, swelling fullness of thought, which
might readily lose itself in the vast and indefinite,
but which always at the right time with tight rein
collects and tempers its exuberance; to the bottom
exhausting the thought and completing the utter-
ance, and yet never too diffuse. This severe self-
control is the most admirably seen in those shorter
utterances, which, by briefly sketched images and
thoughts, give us the vague apprehension of some-
thing infinite, whilst nevertheless they stand before
us complete in themselves and clearly delineated ;
t. g., tUJ. 6-ix. 6, xb. 29-82, xviil. 1-7, xxi. 11, 12;
while in the long piece, xxviii.-xxxii., if the com-
position here and there for a moment languishes,
it is only to lift itself up again afresh with all the
greater might In this rich and thickly crowded
fullness of thought and word, it is but seldom that
the simile which is employed appears apart, to set
forth and complete itself (xxxi. 4, 6); in general,
it crowds into the delineation of the object which it
is meant to illustrate and is swallowed up in it, —
aye, and frequently simile after simile; and yet the
many threads of the discourse which for a moment
appeared ravelled together soon disentangle them-
selves into perfect clearness ; — a characteristic
which belongs to this prophet alone, a freedom of
language which with no one else so easily succeeds.
" The versification in like manner is always full,
and yet strongly marked : while however this
prophet is little concerned about anxiously weigh-
ing out to each verse its proper number of words;
not unfrequently he repeats the same word in two
members (xxxi. 8, xxxii. 17, xi. 6, xtr. 13), as if,
with so much power and beauty in the matter
within, he did not so much require a painstaking
finish in the outside. The structure of the strophe
is always easy and beautifully rounded.
" Still the main point lies here, — that we can-
not in the case of Isaiah, as In that of other proph-
ets, specify any particular peculiarity, or any favorite
(Hill, of the Japs, I. 482, note, new Amor, ed.). David-
son, In his Introduction to tht Old Tatament (III. 69),
after a full discussion of the authorship, concludes as
follows : " Among all the prophetic writings, the first
place In many respects Is due to those of the younger
laden. . . . None has announced In such strains as
his the downfall of all earthly powers ; or [so] unfolded
to the view of the afflicted the transcendent glory of
Jshovab/i salvation which should arise npon the rem-
nant of Israel, forsaken and persecuted. None has
penetrated so far Into the essence of the new dispensa-
tion. . . . There Is majesty In his sentiments, beauty
and force in his language, propriety and elegance in
pis Imagery." Delttasch, one of the most orthodox
uid conservative of the modem German theologians.
In his elaborate article on Isaiah In Falrbalrn's Im-
perial Bible Dictionary, maintains that all the proph-
esies In (he book which bears the name of Isaiah are
sstsr tt> ascribed to him ; bnt also remarks that, on
jtss i .nhrary supposition, '■ the prophetic discourses
*. xL-Jjrri. would not niinsssvlly Sum anything of
their predictive character and of their Incomparable
value. Their anonymous author might pass hence-
forward, also, as the greatest evangelist of the Old
Testament. We have no doctrinal reasons which would
forbid us to distinguish In the book of Isaiah proph-
ecies of Isaiah himself, and prophecies of anonymous
prophets annexed to these." (Fab-bairn, I. 806, 806.)
He had before spoken of the composite character of
the historical books of the Old Testament, and of the
book of Proverbs, " where, under the name of Solomon,
the gnomie pearls of different times and of several
authors are arranged beside one another, just as In
the Psalter the poets of many centuriee an collected
under the banner of David, the father of lyric poetry."
So Prof. Stuart observes, " It Is of little or no theolog-
ical or doctrinal Importance which way thlr question
U decided" (Oil. Him. of the Out Tat Coma*, •
106). On this subject see also the excellent remarks of
Stanley, In his Note "On the Authorship of the Books
of the Old Testament," appsndrd n nl i of hs)
Hilton/ of the Jewiih Chm-h. A.
Digitized by
Google
IBAIAH
jolor at attaching to his genera, style. Ut it not
'he especially lyrical prophe., or the especially ele-
aiacal prophet, or the especially oratorical and
kortatory prophet, at toe should describe a Joel, a
Hvien, a Micah, with whom there it a greater
prevalence of tome particular color ; but, just at
the subject requires, he hat readily at command
(very several land of style and every several change
of delineation ; and it u precisely this that, in point
if language, establishes hit greatness, as well as in
general forms one of his most towering points of
excellence. His only fundamental peculiarity is
the lofty, majestic calmness of his style, proceeding
gut of the perfect command which he feels he pos-
sesses over his subject-matter. This calmness,
however, no way demands that the strain shall
not, when occasion requires, be more vehemently
excited and assail the hearer with mightier blows;
but even the extremest excitement, which does here
and there intervene, is in the main bridled still by
the same spirit of calmness, and, not overstepping
the limits which that spirit assigns, it soon with
lofty self-control returns back to its wonted tone
of equability (ii. 10— iii. 1, xxviii. 11-2-1, xxix. 9-
14). Neither does this calmness in discourse re-
quire that the subject shall always be treated only
in a plain, level way, without any variation of form ;
rather, Isaiah shows himself master in just that
variety of manner which suits the relation in which
his hearers stand to the matter now in hand. If
he wishes to bring home to their minds a distant
truth which they like not to hear, and to judge
them by a sentence pronounced by their own
mouth, he retreats back into a popular statement
H a case drawn from ordinary life (w. 1-4, xxviii.
33-29). If he will draw the attention of the over-
wise to some new truth, or to some future prospect,
he surprises them by a brief oracle clothed in an
enigmatical dress, leaving it to their penetration to
discover its solution (vii. 11-16, xxix. 1-8). When
the unhappy temper of people's minds which noth-
ing can amend leads to loud lamentation, his speech
becomes for a while the strain of elegy and lament
(L 21-23, xxii. 4, S). Do the frivolous leaders of
the people mock? — he outdoes them at their own
weapons, and crushes them under the fearful ear-
nest of divine mockery (xxviii. 10-13). Even a
single ironical word in passing will drop from the
bfty prophet (xvii. 3, glory). Thus his discourse
varies into every complexion: ii is tender find stern,
didactic and threatening, mourning and again ex-
ulting in divine joy, mocking and earnest ; but ever
at the right time it returns back to its original
elevation and repose, and never loses the clear
ground-color of its divine seriousness."
In this delineation of Isaiah's style, Kwald con-
templates exclusively the Isaiah of i.-xxxix., in
which part of the book itself, however, there are
several paisages of which he will not allow Isaiah
to be the author. These are the following: xii.,
xiii. 2-xiv. 23, xxl. 1-10, xxiv.-xxvii., xxxiv., xxxv.
In reference to all these passages, with the excep-
tion of the first, the ground of objection is obvious
upon a moment's observation of the contents* on
rationalistic views of prophecy, none of them can
-M ascribed to Isaiah. For the proof of th'ir gen-
"dneness it is sufficient to refer to Drechsler's
Prophet Jesaja, at to Keil's Einleitung. We
rannot, however, help noticing the estimate wnich
she honesty of Ewald's sesthetical Judgment torms
tf the style of nearly all these passages. He pro-
sai ne as the mngnilkvnt denunciation of Babylon,
IBAIAH U68
xiii. 2-xiv. 23, to be referable to tho same antha
as the prediction of Babylon's overthrow in xxl. 1-
10, and both as alike remarkable for " the poetic*
facility of the words, images, and sentiments,'
particularizing xiv. 6-20 especially as " an ode of
high poetical finish," which in the last strophe
(w. 20-23) rises to " prophetical sublimity." In
xxiv.-xxvii. he finds parts, particularly the " beau-
tiful utterances" in xxv. 6-8, xxvii. 9, 12, 13,
which he considers as plainly borrowed from oracles
which are now lost; while lastly, in xxxiv., xxxv.
(which in his 20th lecture on Hebrew poetry Bishop
Lowth selects for particular comment on account
of its peculiar poetical merit), he traces much that
'* reechoes words of the genuine Isaiah."
If we refer to that part of Ewald's Propheten
which treats of xl.-lxvi., which be ascribes to " the
Great Unnamed," the terms in which he speaks of
its style of composition do not fall far short of (host
which he has employed respecting the former part
>' Creative as this prophet is in his views and
thoughts, he is not less peculiar and new in his
language, which at times is highly inspired, and
carries away the reader with a wonderful power. —
Although, after the general manner of tho later
prophets, the discourse is apt to be too diffuse in
delineation ; yet, on the other side, it often moves
confusedly and heavily, owing to the over-gushing
fullness of fresh thoughts continually streaming in.
But whenever it rises to a higher strain, as e. 17.,
xL, xiii. 1-4, it then attains to such a pure lumin-
ous sublimity, and carries the hearer away with
such a wonderful charm of diction, that one might
be ready to fancy he was listening to another
prophet altogether, if other grounds did not convince
us that it is one and the same prophet speaking,
only in different moods of feeling. In no prophet
does the mood in the composition of particular pas-
sages to much vary, at throughout the three several
sections into which this part of the book it divided,
while under vehement excitement the prophet pur-
sues the most diverse objects. It is his business at
different times, to comfort, to exhort, to shame, to
chasten ; to show, as out of heaven, the heavenly
image of the Servant of the Lord, and, in contrast,
to scourge the folly and base groveling of image-
worship ; to teach what conduct the times require,
and to rebuke those who linger behind the occa-
sion, and then also to draw them along by his own
example — his prayers, confessions, and thanks-
givings, thus smoothing for them the approach to
the exalted object of the New Time. Thus the
complexion of the style, although hardly anywhere
passing into the representation of visions properly so
called, varies in a constant interchange; and rightly
to recognize these changes is the great problem for
the interpretation" (Propheten, vol. 11. 407-409).
For obvious reasons we have preferred citing the
sesthetical judgments of so accomplished a critic
as Ewald, to attempting any original criticism of
our own ; and this all the more willingly, because
the inference to be drawn from the above cited par-
sages (the reader will please especially to mark thi
sentences which we have put into italics) is clear,,
that in point of style, after taking account of the
considerations already stated by m, we can find no
difficulty in recognizing in the second part the
presence of the same plastic genius as we discover
in the first. And, altogether, the -esthetic criti-
cism of all the different parts of the book brings
us to the conclusion substantiated by the evidence
previously accumulated; namely, that the whole
Digitized by
Google
1164 ISAIAH
*t the book originated in one mind, and that mind
one of the most sublime and variously gifted in-
struments which the Spirit of God has eve* em-
ployed to pour forth ita Toioe upon the world.
V. The following are the most important works
on Isaiah: Vitringa's Commentariut in Librurn
Prophetiarwm /taia, 2 role. fol. 1714, a vast mine
of materials ; Rosenmiiller's Scholia, 1818-1830
[3d ed., 1829-34], or his somewhat briefer Scholia
in Compendium redacta, 1831, which, though ra-
tionalistic, is [are] sober, and valuable in particular
for the full use which he makes of Jerome and the
Jewish expositors ; Gesenius's PhUotogisch-icriti-
trber und hietoriicher Commentar, 1821 [and
Utberutzang, 3* Aufl., 1829]; Hitxig's Prophet
Jesaja iibertttzl und tiutgtlegt, 1833, and Knobel,
1843 [3d ed. 1861], in the Kwzyefaittes Exeget-
iecha Ilandbuch turn Alt. Ttitam., which are ail
three decidedly skeptical, but for lexical and his-
torical materials are of very great value; Ewald's
Prophelen del Alien Bvndts [1840-41, 2* Ansg.
1867-68], which, though likewise skeptical, is ab-
solutely indispensable for a just appreciation of the
poetry; the second volume of Hengstenberg's Chritt-
ology, translated in Clark's Foreign Theological
library, 1856; Drechsler's Prophet Jetaja liber-
letst und ertlart, now in course of publication
[completed after the author's death by F. Delitzsch
«nd A. Hahn, 8 Theile, 1845-57], and Rod. Stier's
Jetaiat nichi Pieudo-Jetaiat, 1850-51, which is a
sommentary on the last 27 chapters. The two
chief English works are Bishop Lowtb's Itniah, a
new translation, with Nottt, Critical, Philological,
and Explanatory, 1778 [13th ed., 1842], (whose
incessant correction of the Hebrew text is con-
stantly to be mistrusted), and Dr. Ebenezer Hen-
derson's Trantlation and Commentary, 2d ed.,
1857. E. H. S.
* The strong internal evidence of the common
origin of the various writings attributed to Isaiah
is of a cumulative character, and (especially as re-
quiring often for its just presentation the aid of
exegesis) can only be adequately exhibited at con-
siderable length. A few of the more prominent
point* of the argument, in addition to those above
given, may be here alluded to.
It is a consideration of no little weight, that
many of the representations which are most strik-
ingly characteristic of the second part are but fur-
ther development* of thoughts that are more or
less clearly suggested in the first. Thus the Cap-
tivity and the restoration, so largely and variously
Iwelt upon in the disputed portions, are distinctly
predicted in ch. vi. 11-13, a* well a* intimated in
ither passages of whiah Isaiah is unhesitatingly
tdmitted to be the author. Even the view pre-
sented of the Servant of Jehovah, which is perhaps
the most distinctive feature of the second part, and
vhich, combining as it does elements at first sight
wholly irreconcilable with one another," has always
bean the stumbling-block of expositor*, is, when
a • For an exposition of the phrase Servant of Je-
loooA, which meets perhaps better than any other the
Jemands of the various connections in which this
phrase occurs, the reader is referred to the commen-
tary of Dr. J A. Alexander on ch. xlil. D. 8. T.
b • Chap. xlil. and xiv. 1-28 are among the sections
most confidently referred to the ktar period of the
Vaptivtty. Bat if anything In the results of criticism
sen be regarded u established, it is that Is. xiv. 9-19
v the rir]giiial # from which an derived some of the moat
maailllill tillages and expressions in Ke. xxxi. 14-18
ISAIAH
rightly regarded, but a further nrdhldtug of 1*
conception which Geeenius, Ewald, and Knobel find
in ch. xi. of the organic relation subsisting between
the (ideal) Messiah and his people — the same con-
ception, substantially, which Ewald, Hitxig, and
Knobel find in viii. 8 and ix. 6, and which Ewald
recognizes even in vii. 14.
In xliv. 28-xlv. 13 we find the thought expanded
and applied to Cyrus which occurs in another form
with a different application in x. 6-7. Compare
here also xlvi. 11, liv. 16. The elements of the
representation of tie new heaven and the new earth
in lxv. 17-25 are found in xi. 6-9 and elsewhere.
The magnificent representations, cb. Ix. and else-
where, of the glory of Jehovah being made the
light and the defense of his people, have their germ
in iv. 5.
In like manner the predictions in xliii. 6, xlix,
22, and lxvi. 20 are foreshadowed in xiv. 1,2.' 'Com-
pare also xiv. 9-11 with xix. 25, and xxix. 2-1; x]i»
9-20 with ii. 8; lxiii. 17 with vi 10.
One of the most prominent characteristic* of
style, binding together the various portion* of the
book, is the frequent occurrence of the expression,
The Holy One of lernel. This designation of Je-
hovah is found out of Isaiah but six times ; 2 K. xix.
22; Ps. lxxi. 22, lxxviii. 41, Ixxxix. 18; Jer. 1. 29,
li. 5. In the first of these pasaages it is put into
the mouth of Itaiah himtelf. In the passages of
Jeremiah, the whole intermediate context exhibit*
an expansion of the thoughts of Isaiah, sometimes
presented even in his own language, yet in such a
manner as to suggest that Jeremiah was not (a*
Hengstenberg affirms) imitating, but only writing
with the impression lull upon his mind of the ut-
terances of his great predecessor. It deserves to
be noticed that by such critics as Ewald, J. Okt-
hausen, and Hitzig, the Psalms where the expres-
sion occurs are all assigned to a period later than
the time of Isaiah. According to this view the
expression must in all probability have originated
with Irciah.
Another remarkable peculiarity observable in the
different portions of Isaiah is tie frequent use of
the formula to be named in the sense of to be.
Such coincidences as these cannot hare been acci-
dental. Geaenius, with whom De Wette substan-
tially agrees, attempting to account for them, con-
jectures that there may have been an imitation of
the earlier writer by the later, or, as he supposes
with more probability, an attempt by a later hand
bo bring tie various portions of the book into
mutual conformity. But the former supposition,
if consistently carried out and applied to all cases
of marked resemblance occurring in these writings,
must lead to results which no one capable of recog-
nizing the impress of independent thought can pos-
sibly admit The latter supposition is simply ab-
surd. No proper parallel to such a procedure can
be found in the history of ancient literature. Ge-
aenius refers indeed to the traces of a conforming
and xxxil. 18-82. That there Is a connection between
these passages can hardly be denied. Nor Is there any
room to question that the great conception embodied
In Isaiah xiv. Is an original conception. We need not
affirm that in the later prophet there Is any conscious
imitation. But In the many and varied repetitions of
Bnklel we hear beyond all reasonable doubt toe rarer
Derations of that majestic strain in which Isaiah has
described the descent of the king of Babylon to ttss
region of the dead. D. 8 T.
Digitized by
Google
ISAIAH
mm! la Uw punctuation of Sin and "153 in the
Pentateuch. Bat it U not Decenary to point out
saw wide ii the dif&TOiee between toe correction
af what ni anppoeed to be an error in a single
letter, and the radical changes which upon the sap-
porition in question must bate been made by the
u conforming hand " in such passages at liv. 6, hdi.
1,4.
To say nothing of the difficulty there is in im-
agining an adequate motive for such a procedure,
the procedure itself implies a habit of critical ob-
servation which was wholly foreign to the spirit of
the times. And those who can suppose a Jewish
rtdacteur, living two or three centuries before
Christ, to nave thus placed himself by anticipation
at the stand-point of modern criticism, ought to
And no difficulty in conceiving that a prophet writ-
ing in the time of Hesekiah should take his position
amidst the scenes of the Captivity, and should an-
nounce the name of the deliverer."
While there are co n fessedly marked peculiarities,
both of thought and diction, exhibited in the later
portions of the prophecies attributed to Isaiah, and
to some extent in the other portions also of which
the genuineness has been called in question, the
uncertain nature of the argument they furnish is
sufficiently shown by a comparison of the widely
different conclusions which different critics of the
same school have formed in view of them. A very
striking comparison of this kind is presented by
AU^mW in bis Commentary, voL i. pp. xxvii.,
xxviii-
The array of linguistic evidence in proof of a
diversity of authorship, which has gradually grown
within the last century into the formidable propor-
tions in which it meets us in the pages of Knobel
and others, rests very largely upon an assumption
which none of these critics have the hardihood dis-
tinctly to vindicate, namely, that within the nar-
row compass of the Hebrew literature that has
come down to us from any given period, we have
the means for arriving at an accurate estimate of
all the resources which the language at that time
pnsafied When we have eliminated from the list
of words and phrases relied upon to prove a later
date than the time of Isaiah, everything the value
of which to the argument must stand or fall with
this assumption, there remain! absolutely nothing
which may not be reasonably referred to the reign
ISAIAH
1161
of Hesekiah. Indeed, considering all tie ifaenny
stances of the times, it might justly have been ex-
pected that the traces of foreign influence upon
the language would be for more conspicuous in a
writing of this date than they actually are *n the
controverted portions.
It is to be remembered that the ministry of the
prophet most have extended through a period, at
the fewest calculation, of nearly fifty years;' a
period signalized, especially during the reigns of
Ahaa and Hesekiah, by constant and growing in-
tercourse with foreign nations, thus involving
continually new influences for the corruption of
public morals and new dangers to the state, and
making it incumbent upon him who had been di-
vinely constituted at once the political adviser of
the nation and its religious guide, to be habitually
and intimately conversant among the people, so as to
descry upon the instant every additional step taken
in their downward lOurse and the first approach it
of each new peril from abroad, and to be able to
meet each successive phase of their necessities with
forms of instruction, admonition, and warning, not
only in their general purport, but in their very style
and diction, accommodated to conditions hitherto
unknown, and that were still perpetually «*»ngl»»g
Now when we take all this into the account, and
then imagine to ourselves the prophet, toward the
dose of this long period, entering upon what was
in some respects a novel kind of labor, and writing
oat, with a special view e to the benefit of a remote
posterity, the suggestions of that mysterious The-
apneutlia to which his lips had been for so many
years the channel of communication with his con-
temporaries, far from finding any difficulty in the
diversities of style perceptible in the different por-
tions of his prophecy, we shall only see fresh occa-
sion to admire that native strength and grandeur
of intellect, which have still left upon productions
so widely remote from each other in the time and
circumstances of their composition, so plain an im-
press of one and the same overmastering individual-
ity. Probably there is not one of all the languages
of the globe, whether living or dead, possessing any
considerable literature, which does not exhibit in-
stances of greater change in the style of an author,
writing at different periods of his life, than appears
upon a comparison of the later prophecies of Isaiah
with the earlier. D. S. T.
• • As a farther exhibition of the eorrsspondanees
la thought, Illustration, and expression which occur
la the different portions of the book, the reader is re-
ferred to the following passages, which an but a part
af what might be adduced : 1. 8, v. 18, xxlx. 21. xxx.
20, Uv. 18; L 11 ft, xxlx. 18, MU. S S. ; 1. 22, 26,
xlvUl. 10; vi. 18. lxv. 8, 9; Ix. 18, xlvU. 14; Ix. 20,
xU. 2, xiix. 26; x. 20, xlvtU. 1, 2; xxtv. 28, xxx. 26,
Ix. 19, 20; xxlx. 5, xU. 18 ; xxlx. 18, xxxv. 6, xlii. 7,
18, 19; xxx. 22, lxhr. « (see Gas. I«r. under TVfV,
«rst under 1?) ; xxx. 27, 80, hd». 1, 2, lxrL 6, 14,
16, If; xxxtLU, xxxv. 1, lv. 18. D. B. T.
b • iialah certainly began his public work as early,
at hast, as the last rear of Uznah, and oonttnued it
at least all the Uth of Hesekiah. Tills gives him a
anmmum period of 47 years. In all probability his
xdnbfery lasted arveial years longer. D. 8. T.
• • That the prophet throughout his later writings
Bad sssra or leas l e fe ia ma eootiuaally to the drejm-
se aao esofassowa Urns, Is abundantly manifest, and de-
e*-vsf to be particularly noticed here. Those who deny
eat aaaubiaaaai of these productions, while they admit
(see Bertholdt, Eint. pp. 1884, 1886) that Isaiah aai
other prophets often transfer themselves in spirit taw
future times, lay great stress upon the alleged feet that
the writer here deals rxdusivly with a period whleh
In the age of Iasiah was yet future. But in addition
to the considerations in relation to this point pre-
sented la the preceding article, p. 1168 », the passage
lvB. 11 may be adduced as plainly implying that at
the time the prophet wrote, Jehovah had as yet tc
borne to punlah his rebellious people, and that his for
bearanoe had only been abused. The last clause of
the first vans Is also most naturally explained as con
touting an intimation of oomiog Judgment. 8U11 fur
ther, the only explanation of ver. 9 which satisfies al*
the demands of the passage maXM it to refer to the
attempts of tti people, In the age preceding the Oaa>
Uvlty, to strengthen themselves t y foreign alliances
and than attempts are spoken of as being made by
the contemporaries of the prophet. It Is also strcngi]
Implied <n .n. 6, 7, and attll mora strongly m lxvt I
6, 20 (last clause), that the Temple was yet srsnatag
D.S.T.
Digitized by
Google
1166 ISAIAH
• Additional Literature. — Caheu's Bible (He-
hnr), torn. ix. Paris, 1838, containing a French
translation and note*, also a translation of the
Preface of Abarbanel to his commentary on Isaiah,
and of his commentary on ch. zxzir., with a full
critical notice by Hunk of the Arabic version by
daadias Gaon, and of a Persian MS. version in the
Royal Ubr. at Paris; Hendewerk, Da Proph.
Jtmja Weissagmgen, ckron. geordnet, ubert. u.
erkidrt, 9 Bde." KXnigsb. 1838-43; J. Ueinemann,
Der Proph. Jesaia*, BerL 1840. original text,
comm. of Rash!, Chaldee paraphrase, German
translation (in the Hebrew character), notes, and
Mason; F. Beck, Die cyrojemjanuchen Weissa-
ouugrn (Is. xL-lxvi.) krit. u. extgcL bearbeUet,
Leipi. 1844; Umbreit, PraH. Comm. Ob. d. Proph.
d. Alien Bunda, lid. I, Jtsaja, 9« AufL Hamb.
1846; K. Meier, Per Proph. Juaja erldart,
V Halfle, Pforzh. 1860; Bunsen's Bibelwerk, TheU
ii. 1* Htilfte, Leipz. 1860, translation, with popular
notes; G. K. Mayer (Rom. Cath.), Die Mettian-
itchen Propheaetn d. Jetaia*, Wien, 1860, new
Utle-ed. 1863; J. Steeg, Elate xl.-lxvi., in the
NotatUe Rev. de TMoL (Strasb.) 1862, x. 121-
180, translation, with brief introduction and notes ;
F. Delitxsch, Bibl. Comm. 0b. d. Proph. Jetaia,
Leipi. 1866 (TheU iii. Bd. i. of Keil and Delitzsch's
BibL Comm. 0b. d. A. T.), Eng. trans, in 2 vols.
Edinb. 1867 (Clark's Foreign Theol. Ubr.); S. D.
Lnzzatto, the eminent Italian Hebraist, // profeta
Itaia tradotta ... em commenti ebraici, 9 torn.
Padova, 1865-67. In this country we have Albert
Barnes, The Book of Isaiah with a New Tram,
and Note*, 3 vols. Boston, 1840, 8vo, abridged ed.
New York, 1848, in 2 vols. 12mo; J. A. Alexan-
der, The Earlier Prophecies of Isaiah, New York.
1846; Later Prophecies, ibid. 1847; both re-
printed in Glasgow under the editorship of Dr.
Eadie, 1848; new edition with the title, The
Prophecies of leaiah translated and explained, 2
vols. New York, 1866, 8vo; abridged ed., ibid. 1861,
2 vols. 12mo. This may be regarded as the most
valuable commentary on the book in English. See
also Dr. Noyes's New Translation of Vie Hebrew
Prophets, with Notes, vol. 1., 3d ed., Boston, 1867.
Dr. Cowles promises a volume on Isaiah in contin-
uation of his labors on the Hebrew Prophets. A
translation of eh. xiii., xlv., with explanatory notes,
by Prof. B. B. Edwards, may be found in the Bibl.
Bacra for 1849, vi. 766-786. Geeenius's Com-
mentary on Is. xv., xvi. is translated in the BibL
Repot, for Jan. 1836, and on Is. xvii. 12-14, xviil.
1-7, ibid. July, 1836.
For summaries of the results of recent investi-
gation respecting the book, one may consult par-
cicularly Bleak's EM. in das A. T. (1860), pp.
448-466; Keil's EM. in das A. T., pp. 206-248,
*nd Davidson's Introd. to Ike 0. T. (1868), iii.
1-86. Umbrdt's sit. Jesaja in Hersog's ReaU
Encykl. vi. 607-691 is valuable as a critique and a
biography. The elaborate art. on Isaiah in Kitto's
CycL of Bibl Lit. is by Hengstenberg, and that
in Fab-bairn's Imperial Bible Diet i. 801-814, by
Delitxsch. See also on the critical questions oon-
jected with the book, besides the various Introduo-
'ions and Commentaries, A. F. Kleinert, Ueber d.
Echtheit sammtl. in d. Buck Jetaia enthaltenen
Weinagungen, Theil i. Berl. 1829, called by Heng-
•tenberg " the standard work on the subject " ; C.
P. Cnspari, Beitrige mr EM. in das Buch Jesaia,
BarL 1348, apologetic; Ruetschi, Plan «. Gang
ton la. 40-66, in the TheoL Bind. u. Krit. 1864,
ISOABIOT
pp. 261-296; Entfelder, ChronoL de* prepk
tfEsale, in the Strasb. Rev. de TheoL 1M3, ap,
16-42; and F. Hosse, Die Wdssagvngtn dm
Proph. Jesaia, BerL 1865 (a pamphlet), defixulinf
the unity of authorship.
On the » Servant of God " in Is. xl.-lxvi., us
sides the works already referred to, and general
treatises like Hengstenberg's Christologie, Stahelin's
Die messianischen Weitmgtmyen des A. T. (1847),
and Havernick's Yorltsungen ub. d. Theol. d. A.
T. (2* Aufl. 1863), one may consult Umbreit, Der
Knecht Gottes, Beitrag tur Christologie des A. T-,
Hamb. 1840; Bleak, Erklarung von Jtsaja 52,
13—53, 12, in the TheoL Stud. u. KriL 1861, pp.
177-218 ; P. Kleinert, Ueber das Subject der
Weismgung Jet. 59, 13— 53, 12, ibid. 1862, pp.
699-752, and V. F. Oehler, Der Knecht Jehovah's
im DtuUrqjesajak, 9 Thle. Stuttg. 1865; comp.
G. F. Oehler, art Mttsias in Hersog's Real-
EncykL ix. 420 f. The Introduction to voL i. of
Dr. Noyes's New Trans, of the Hebrew Prophets,
3d ed. (1867), contains a discussion of the tub*
ject of Jewish prophecy in general and of the
Messianio prophecies in particular. Hengsten-
oerg's remarks on the genuineness of Is. il-Uvi.
and his interpretation of Is. Iii. 19-liii. are trans-
lated from the first edition of his Christology of
the O. T. in the BibL Repot, for Oct. 1831 and
April 1832.
. Stanley's description of Isaiah (Jewish Church,
ii. 494-504) presents him to us as one of the
grandest figures on the page of history. A few
sentences may be quoted, showing the universality
of Isaiah's ideas and sympathies and the reach
of his prophetic vision. "First of the prophets,
he and those who followed him seised with unre-
served confidence the mighty thought, that not in
the chosen people, so much as in the nations outside
of it, was to be found the ultimata well-being of
man, the surest favor of God. Truly mlfc.it the
Apostle say that Isaiah was "very bold," — "bold
beyond" (eWroA/if, Rom. x. 30) all that had
gone before him — in enlarging loe boundaries of
the church ; bold with that boldness, and large with
that largeness of view which, so far from weaken-
ing the hold on things divine, strengthens it to a
degree unknown in less comprehensive minis. For
to him also, with a distinctness which makes all
other anticipations look pale in comparison, a dis-
tinctness which grew with his advancing years, was
revealed the coming of a Son of David, who should
restore the royal house of Judah and gather the
nations under its sceptre. . . . Lineament after
lineament of that Divine Ruler was gradually drawn
by Isaiah or his scholars, until at last a Figure
stands forth, to marvelously combined of power
and gentleness and suffering as to present in the
united proportions of his descriptions the moral fea-
tures of an historical Person, such as has been, by
universal confession, known once, and once only,
in the subsequent annals of the world."
H. and A.
IS'C AH (HSD* [on* who look* about, or seers] :
'Ua-xi- Jetchn), daughter of Haran the brothel
of Abram, and sister of Milcah and of Lot (Geo.
zi 99). In the Jewish traditions as preserved by
Josephus (Ant. i. 6, $ 5), Jerome ( Quasi, in Gtu*
esim), and the Targum Pseudo-Jonathan — not W
mention later writers — she is identified wH)
Saral.
ISOABIOT. [Judas Iscakiot.)
Digitized by
Google
THDABTi
TJTDAEL QhrtatK: Gaddalul), 1 Esdr. t. S3.
[GlDDBX, 8.]
ISH3AH (nS?^ Ipraumg]: 6 'U<r0i;
[Vat Mopes';] Ales. I«ra£a: Sesfa), » man in
the line of Judah, commemorated u toe " father
sf Eahtemoa " (1 Chr. iv. 17); but from whom he
use immediately descended is, in the very ooonued
■Ute of this put of the genealogy, not to be ascer-
tained. The mort feasible conjecture U that he
was one of the sons of Mered by hie Egyptian wife
BmilAR. (See Bertheau, Chromic, ad be.)
ISH'BAK (p$ty\ [teeming behind, Gee.].
'I«r3<£«, 2o/9d«; [Alex, in Chr., U<t0ok-] Jabue),
a ion of Abraham and Keturah (Gen. xxr. S; 1
Chr. 1. 82), and the progenitor of a tribe of north-
ern Arabia. The settlements of thii people are
very obscure, and we can only suggest as poaaible
that they may be recovered in the name of the
valley called Sabak, or, it it add, Slbak ((jL*,),
in the Dahna (»Lu»jJI and UtfjJl),
(Marmd, s. v.). The Heb. root P3Q7 eorre-
aponda to the Arabic n * ■■■ in etymology and
signification: therefore identifications with names
derived from the root iaL« m an improbable.
There are many places of the latter derivation, as
Shebek (dlL&), Shibak ( JL.&), and Esh-
Shdbak (jGjiLJI): the last having been sup-
posed (as by Bunsen, Bibdaerk, 1. pt. ii. 53) to
pre s erve a trace of Iehbak. It is a fortress in
Arabia Petraea; and is near the well-known fortress
of the Crusader's times called El-Karak.
The Dahna, in which is situate Sabak, is a fer-
tile and extensive tract, belonging to the Benee-
Temeem, in Nejd, or the highland, of Arabia, on
the northeast of it, and the borders of the great
desert, reaching from the rugged tract ("ham")
of Yensoo'ah to the sands of Yebrean. It contains
much pasturage, with comparatively few wells, and
is greatly frequented by the Arabs when the veg-
etation is plentiful (Mvthtarak and Maraud, s. v.).
There is, however, another Dahna, nearer to the
Euphrates (>&.), and some confusion may exist re-
garding the true position of Sabak; but either
Dahna is suitable for the settlements of Ishbak.
The first-mentioned Dahna, lies in a favorable por-
tion of the widely-stretching country known to
have been peopled by the Katurahitee. They
Intended from the borders of Palestine even to the
'ersian Gulf, and traces of their settlements must
be looked for all along the edge of the AraMvi
peninsula, where the desert merges into the culti-
vable land, or (itself a rocky undulating plateau)
rises to the wild, mountainous oountry of Nejd.
Iihbak seems from his name to have preceded o*
guoe before his brethren: the place suggested fo»
his dwelling is far away towards the Persian Gulf,
and penetrates also into the peninsula. On these,
M wifl w mere etymological grounds, the identtfi-
tatton is aumaectly probable, and every way better
than Oat which •onnetts the patriarch with Eth-
lleAait. its. E. 8. P.
I8H-BOSHBTH
1187
.' 18HT3I-BBrNOB(aS012tf^,A:«rt,^^:
[dxmltmg in ret] : 'lnr$l; tAfex.' I«<r/3i «■ N*/Jsl
Jubt-benoi), son of Kapha, one of the rase of
Philistine giants, who attacked David in battle,
but was slain by Abiihal (8 Sam. xxi. 18, 17).
H. W. P.
ISH-BO'SHBTH (H^a B^H [see infra);
'UfkHrOti [in 3 Sam. Ii., Alex. It0oo-0ai or E«0.,
Comp. 'Io-0Ar«8; In 3 Sam. iii., iv., Vat. Mf/utr-
$oa9ei, Alex. MsAia)<0oa-0ai:] Jtbottk), the young-
est of Saul's four sons, and his legitimate successor.
His name appears (1 Chr. viii. 33, ix. 39) to hvrt
been originally Esk-haal, ?55"BJy, the wua
of Baal Whether this indicates that Baal was
used as equivalent to Jthovah, or that the reverence
for Baal still lingered in Israelitiah families, is un-
oertain; but it can hardly be doubted that tho
name (Ish-bosheth, " the man of $ham»") by whioh
be is commonly known, must have been substituted
for the original word, with a view of removing the
scandalous sound of Baal from the name of an
Israelitiah Idng, and superseding it by the con-
temptuous word (Boaheth — " shame ") which was
sometimes used as its equivalent in later times
(Jer. iiL 34, xi. 13; Hoe. ix. 10). A similar pro-
cess appears in the alteration of Jerubbaal (Judg.
viii. 36) into Jerubbesheth (2 Sam. xi. 21); Meri-
baal (3 Sam. Iv. 4) into Mephi-bosheth (1 Chr.
viii. 34, ix. 40). The three last cases all occur in
Saul's family. He was 36 years of age at the time
of the battle of Gllboa, in which his father and
three oldest brothers perished; and therefore, ac-
cording to the law of Oriental, though not of
European succession, ascended the throne, as the
oldest of the royal family, rather than Mephi-
bosheth, son of his elder brother Jonathan, who
was a child of five years old. He was immediately
taken under the care of Abner, his powerful kins-
man, who brought him to the ancient sanctuary
of Mahanaim on the east of the Jordan, beyond
the reach of the victorious Philistines ;2 Sam. ii.
8). There was a momentary doubt even in those
remote tribes whether they should not close with
the offer of David to be their king (2 Sam. U. 7,
iii. 17). But this was overruled in favor of Ish-
boaheth by Abner (2 Sam. iii. 17), who then for
five years slowly but effectually restored the domin-
ion of the house of Saul over the Transjordank
territory, the plain of Esdraelon, the central moun-
tains of Ephraim, the frontier tribe of Benjamin,
and eventually " over all Israel " (except the tribe
of Judah, 3 Sam. ii. 9). Ish-bosheth was then
" 40 years old when he began to reign over Israel,
and reigned two years" (3 Sam. ii. 10). This
form of expression is used only for the secession
of a fully recognised sovereign (comp. in the cm*
of David, 3 Sam. ii. 4, and v. 4).
During these two years be reigned at Mahanaim,
though only in name. The wan and negotiations
with David were entirely carried on by Abner (3
Sam. ii. 13, iii. 8, 13). At length Ish-bosheth
accused Abner (whether rightly or wrongly does
not appear) of an attempt on his father's concu-
bine, Rixpah ; which, according to oriental usage,
amounted to treason (3 Sam. iii. 7 ; comp. 1 K.
ii. 13; 3 Sam. xvi. 81, xx. 3). Abner resented
this suspicion in a burst of passion, which vented
itself in a solemn vow to transfer the kingdom frasc
the bouse of Saul to the bouse of David. Mi-
Digitized by
Google
1168 ism
bo s h o tn wi too mneh cowed to answer; and whan,
•bortly aAerwaroV, through Abner's negotiation,
D»Tid demanded the restoration of hie former wife,
kQehal, he at ones tore his sister from her reluctant
husband, and committed her to Abner's charge
(2 Sam. in. 14, 15).
The death of Abner deprived the house of Saul
of their last remaining support. When Ish-boaheth
heard of it, "his hands were feeble and all the
Israelites were troubled " (S Sam. iv. 1).
In this extremity of weakness he fell a victim,
probably, to a revenge for a crime of his rather.
The guard of Ish-bosheth, as of Saul, was taken
from their own royal tribe of Benjamin (1 Chr. xu.
29). But amongst the sods of Benjamin were
reckoned the descendant* of the old Canaanitish
inhabitants of Beeroth, one of the cities in league
with Gibson (2 Sam. iv. 2, 3). Two of those Bee-
rothites, Baana and Recbab, in remembrance, it
baa been conjectured, of Saul's slaughter of their
kinsman the Gibeonites, determined to take advan-
tage of the helplessness of the royal bouse to de-
stroy the only re p resentative that was left, except-
ing the child Hephi-boabeth (2 Sam. iv. 4). They
were " chiefs of the marauding troops " which used
from time to time to attack the territory of Judah
(eoap. 9 Sam. iv. 2, Hi. 22, where toe same word
TIT? is used; Vulg. prindpet latnmum). [Ben-
jamin, vol. i. p. 278 a; Gittaim, vol. U. p. 930.]
They knew the habits of the king and court, and
acted accordingly. In the stillness of an eastern
noon they entered the palace, as if to carry off the
wheat which was piled up near the entrance. The
female slave, who, as usual in eastern houses, kept
the door, and was herself sifting the wheat, had,
in the heat of the day, fallen asleep at her task
(2 Sam. iv. 5, 6, in LXX. and Vulg.). They stole
in, and passed into the royal bedchamber, where
Ish-bosheth was asleep on his couch. They stabbed
him in the stomach, cut off his bead, made their
escape, all that afternoon, all that night, down the
valley of the Jordan (Arabah, A. v. "plain;" 2
Sam. iv. 7), and presented the head to David as a
welcome present. They met with a stem recep-
tion. David rebuked them for the cold-blooded
murder of an innocent man, and ordered them to
be executed; their hands and feet were cut off, and
their bodies suspended over [prob. by or near] the
tank at Hebron. The head of Ish-bosheth « jras
earefolly buried in the sepulchre of his great kins-
man Abner, at the same place (2 Sam. iv. 9-12).6
A. P. S.
rSHl C?t£^ [taring, salutary]: Jed). L
v'lo-fuiTtX; Alex. I«m.) A man of the deaeend-
mts of judah, son of Appaim (1 Chr. ii. 31); one
of the great house of Heeron, and therefore a near
xmnection of the family of Jesse (oomp. 9-13).
The only son here attributed to Ishi is Sheshan.
2. (3«t; [Vat ttti;] Alex. Ei; [Comp. 'i, ff (.])
In a subsequent genealogy of Judah we find another
Ishi, with a son Zoheth (1 Chr. iv. 20). There does
not appear to be any connection between the two.
3. (*W; [Vat Ua9fr\\ Alex. I«r«i.) Fora-
men of the Bene-Ishi [sons of I.], of the tribe of
Simeon, are named in 1 Chr. iv. 49 as having
" In Dryoan's Maalom tmd Ahithaflui, «Jboifah
!ahboabsth" is mtmlotuly taken to npnawt BJehard
OromwsU.
» • Ths Jaws at Hebron data that they know tha
exact place ot this sepulchre. They an accustomed
TSTTMAUT,
headed an expedition of 600 of their
who took Mount Seir from the Amalekitea, anal
made it their own abode.
4. Urf; [Vat a««;] Alex. Ura.) On* of
the heads of the tribe of Msniisnh on the east of
Jordan (1 Chr. v. 24).
I/8HT ( % B^H : 6 lu^p iio«: Vh- mm). This
word has no connection whatever with the forego*
ing. It occurs in Hoe. ii. 16, and signifies " my
man," " my husband." It is the Israelite term,
in opposition to Baali [Amer. ed.] the Canaanita
term, with the same meaning, though with a sig-
nificance of its own. See pp. 207-8, 210 a, when
the difference between the two appellations is no-
tioad more at length.
ISHI'AH (-".JOT, i. e. laahiyah [whom J*
kowth Undt. perh. with the idea of children as a
trust]: 'Iso-fo; [Vat corrupt: Jeda]), the fifth
of the five sons of Israhiah; one of the heads of
the tribe of Isaachar in the time of David (1 Chr
vii. 3).
The name ia identical with that elsewhere given
a> ISHUAH, IslHIAH, JESIAH.
ISHI' J AH (nj»^ [as above]: Wn; [Vat
FA. Uoatia;] Alex. Uanux'- Jo***), a lay Israelite
of the Bene-Harim [sons of H.], who had married a
foreign wife, and was compelled to relinquish bat
(Kzr. x. 31). In Esdras the name is Abbas.
This name appears in the A. V. under the vari-
ous forms of Ishiah, Ibshiah, Jkbiab.
ISH'MA (Ngtp [watte, dettrt. Get.]: •i„r-
pAr\ [Vat Ptry/u-.;] Alex. I«rua: Jetema), a
name in the genealogy of Judah (1 Chr. iv. 3).
The passage is very obscure, and in the caw of
many of the names it is difficult to know whether
they are of persons or places. Ishma and his com-
panions appear to be closely connected with Beth-
lehem (see ver. 4).
ISH'MAEL (bWJJtp?, itAom God Aeon:
1o?iav/A: Umaet), the eon of Abraham by Hagar,
his concubine, the Egyptian ; born when Abraham
was fourscore and six years old (Gen. xvi. 15, 16).
Ishmael was the first-bom of his father; in ch. xr.
we read that he was then childless, and there is no
apparent interval for the birth of any other child;
nor does the teaching of the narrative, besides the
precise enumeration of the sons of Abraham as the
father of the faithful, admit of the supposition.
The saying of Sarah, also, when she gave him
Hagar, supports the inference that until then he
was without children. When he " added and took
awifo"(A.V. "Then again Abraham took a wife,"
xxv. 1), Keturah, is uncertain, but it ia not likely
to have been until after the birth of Isaac, and
perhaps the death of Sarah. The conception of
Ishmael occasioned the flight of Hagar [Hagak] ;
and it was during her wandering in the wilderness
that the angel of the Lord appeared to her, com-
manding her to return to her mistress, and giving
her the promise, " I will multiply thy seed exceed-
ingly, that it shall not be numbered for multitude; "
and, " Behold, thou [art] with child, and shaft bear
a eon, and shaft call his name Ishmael, because the
to ofler prayers there on every new moosHtay (naps,
Jenaattm u. dot ktiltgt Load, 1. 491). Ths o-atcas
shows a trace of Un old superstition in regard to ta*
of such days (Is. 1. 13, 14 ; Ool. U. ta, ae.l
B
Digitized by
Google
1SHMAEL
Last] bath baud thy affliction. And he wffl be a
vfld mm; hla hand [will be] against every man,
and every man'i hand agalmt him; and be (hall
dwell in the presence of all hie brethren" (xvi.
10-18).
Iihmael was born in Abraham's home, when he
dwelt in the plain of Hamre; and on the institu-
tion of the covenant of circumcision, was circum-
cised he being then thirteen years old (xrii. 85).
With the institution of the corenant, God renewed
his promise respecting fahmajJ. In answer to
Abraham's entreaty, when he cried, " O that Ish-
mael might lire before thee ! " God assured him of
the birth of Isaac, and said, " As for IshwaeL I
hare beard thee: behold, I hare blessed him, and
will make him fruitful, and will multiply him ex-
ceedingly; twelve princes » shall he beget, and I will
make him a great nation " (xrii. 18, 30). Before
this time, Abraham seems to have regarded his
first-born child as the heir of the promise, bis
belief in which was counted unto him for right-
eousness (xv. 6); and although that faith shone
yet more brightly after his passing weakness when
Isaac was first promised, his love for Ishmael is
recorded in the narrative of Sarah's expulsion of
the latter: " And the thing was very grievous in
Abraham's sight because of bis son " (xxi. 11).
Ishmael does not again appear in the narrative
until the weaning of Isaac. The latter was born
when Abraham was a hundred years old (xxi. 6),
and as the weaning, according to eastern usage,
probably took place when the child was between
two and three years old, Ishmael himself must bare
bean then between fifteen and sixteen years old.
The age of the latter at the period of his circum-
cision, and at that of his expulsion (which we hare
now reached), has given occasion for some literary
speculation. A careful consideration of the pas-
sages referring to it fails, however, to show any
discrepancy between them. In Gen. xrii. 35, it U
stated that he was thirteen years old when he was
circumcised; and in xxi. 14 (probably two or three
years later), "Abraham . . . took bread, and a
bottle of water, and gave [it] onto Hagar, putting
[it] on her shoulder, sad the child, and sent her
away." • Here it la at least unnecessary to assume
that the child was put on her shoulder, the con-
struction of the Hebrew (mistranslated by the
ISHMAEL
1169
In this ease, is
Hues" and the
of a bribe, or even of a family
■ The Heb. l a u d m ed
Wt&J, which rigninsa both
" leader." or " oapsaln
[nasal | It boa seams to mean the leader of a tribe,
and Ishmael 's twain sons an enumerated In Gen.
sxr. 18 "according to their nations," mom correctly
«aee ? !js,» rflBH.
• • The ambiguity Ilea In the A. V., nttwr than
the original. According to the Hebnw construction
(tfeoogh a little peculiar), the expression " putting on
Bar shoulder" should be taken as parenthetic, and
that of « the child " be made lbs object of the mat
St the verbs which premie. H.
• •Ttai, allnafcn to « the shrubs" of the desert
Hags owl a piotansque trait of the narrative. The
word so rendered (11^07) Is stOI used In Arabic, un-
ahaagvl. It Is used, however, with some latitude,
betas; a general darignatlon tor tb» shrnbh" or bushy
These shrubby plants, wnloh an uf virions
an sailed generally ^_&, as we speak of
c
The nod, however, most In nee, and mon
74
LXX., with whom seems to rest the origin of ths
question) not requiring it; and the sense of the
passage renders it highly improbable: Hagar cer-
tainly carried the bottle on her shoulder, and per-
haps the bread: she could hardly have also thus
carried a child. Again, these passages are quite
reconcilable with rer. 80 of the last qui ted chapter,
where Ishmael k termed ~l?3n, A. V. "tad'
(oomp., for use of this word, Gro. xxxiv. 10
xxxvii. 8, xli. 18).
At the " great (east " made in celebration of the
weaning. " Sarah saw the son of Hagar the Egyp-
tian, which she had borne unto Abraham, mocking,"
and urged Abraham to cast out him and his mother.
The patriarch, comforted by God's renewed promise
that of Ishmael be would make a nation, sent them
both away, and they departed and wandered in the
wilderness of Beer-eheba. Here the water being
spent in the bottle, Hagar east her eon under one
of the desert shrubs," and went away a little dis-
tance, " for she said, Let me not see the death of
the child," and wept. " And God heard the rolce
of the hid, and the angel of the Lord called to
Hagar out of heaven," renewed the promise al-
ready thrice given, "I will make him a great
nation," and " opened her eyes and she saw a wall
of water." Thus miraculously saved from perish-
ing by thirst, " God was with the lad ; and he grew,
and dwelt in the wilderness; and became an archer."
It is doubtful whether the wanderers halted by the
well, or at once continued their way to the " wilder-
ness of Paran," where, we are told in the next
verse to that just quoted, he dwelt, and where " his
mother took him a wife out of the land of Egypt "
(Gen. xxi. 9-31). This wife of Ishmael is not
elsewhere mentioned; she was, we must infer, an
Egyptian; and this second infusion of Hmmitio
blood into the progenitors of the Arab nation,
Iahmael's sons, is a tact that has been generally
overlooked. No record is made of any other win
of Ishmael, and railing such record, the Egyptian
was the mother of his twelve sons, and daughter.
This daughter, however, is called the "sister of
Nebajoth " (Gen. xxriii. 9), and this limitation of
the parentage of the brother and sister certainly
seems to point to a different mother for Iahmael's
other sons.*
than any other spectaeaUy designated, Is the Spartivm
j tm it um. This Is a tall shrub, growing to the height
of eight or tan feat, of a close ramtflratton, but mak-
ing a light shade, owing to the email aba and laova-
olate shape of ite leaves. Its flowers an yellow, and
Its aeede edible. It grows In stony places, usually
whan then Is little moisture, and Is widely diffused,
V7e should expeet to find it, of eoune. In a n wilder-
ness" like that of Beerebebe. But whether we un-
derstand by Trip this particular plant, whom light
and lnsufBeiant shade would prove the only mitigation
of the heat of the sun, or, In general, a buab or shrub,
the allusion to it in Gen. xxi. IS Is locally exact, and
explains why the mother sought such a shelter fur tht
child. It might also be understood of Genista n»M-
•ptrma, the Rrtm of the Arabs, which furnished a
shade to toe prophet KHJata (1 K. xU. 4, 6), and is
spoken of in Pe. cxx. 4, and Job xxx. 4. This spades
Is said to abound in the desert of Slnal, and is kin-
dred to the ^4, being, in snt, anmnnrt wHh It
u. Job xxx. 4. O. B. P.
4 According to Babblnical tnvntior, Ishmael pat
away his wile and look a second ; and the Arabs,
Digitized by
Google
1170 BHMAEL
Of III* later life of Ishmael we know little. He
was preseut with Isaac at the burial of Abraham ;
and E*au contracted an alliance with him when he
" took unto the wives which he had Hahalath [or
Babhkmath or Basmath, Gen. xxxvi. 8] the
laughter of bhmael Abraham'! sou, the sister of
Nebajoth, to be hit wife; " and this did Esau be-
cause the daughten of Canaan pleased not Iiaac
and Rebekah, and Jacob in obedience to their wishes
had gone to Laban to obtain of hi* daughten a
wife (zzviii. 6-9). The death of bhmael Is re-
corded in a pravioui chapter, after the enumeration
of nil tons, at having taken place at the age of a
hundred and thirty-seven yean; and, it is added,
" he died in the presence of all his brethren " ■
(xxv. 17, 18). The alliance with Esau occurred
before this event (although it is mentioned in a
previous passage J, for he "went . . . unto Ish-
mael ; " but it cannot have been long before, if the
chronological data be correctly preserved.*
It remains for us to consider, (1 ), the place of
IshmaeTa dwelling ; snd, (2), the names of his
children, with their settlements, and the nation
sprung from them.
1. From the narrative of his expulsion, we learn
that Ishmael first went into the wilderness of Beer-
theba, and thence, but at what interval of time is
uncertain, removed to that of Paran. His con-
tinuance in these or the neighboring places seems
to be proved by- his having been present at the
burial of Abraham ; for it mutt be remembered that
in the East, sepulture follows death after a few
houn' space; and by Esau's marrying his daughter
at a time when he (Esau) dwelt at Beer-sheba: the
tenor of the narrative of both these events favoring
the inference that Ishmael did not settle far from
the neighborhood of Abraham and Isaac. There
are, however, other passages which must be taken
into account. It is prophesied of him, that " he
shall dwell in the pretence of all his brethren,"
tod thus too he " died in the presence of all his
brethren" (xxv. 18 ).» The meaning of these
sassagei is confessedly obscure; but it seems only
to signify that he dwelt near them. He was the
first Abrahamk settler in the east country. In
eh. xxv. 6 it is said, " But unto the sons of the
concubines, which Abraham had, Abraham gave
gifts, and tent them away from Isaac his ton,
while he yet lived, eastward, unto the east
country." The "east country" perhaps was re-
stricted in early times to the wildernesses of Beer-
sheba and Paran, and it afterwards seems to have
'ncluded those districts (though neither supposition
necessarily follows from the above passage); or,
shraael removed to that east country, northwsrds,
rithout being distant from his father and his
rethren ; each case being agreeable with Gen.
cxv. 6. The appellation of the " east country "
became afterwards applied to the whole desert «-
probably borrowing from the above, sssert that ha
twice married ; the first wife being an Amaleklte, by
whom he had no issue ; and the second, a Joktanlts,
af the tribe of Jurhum (Mir-it n-Zrman, MB., quot-
jig a tradition of Mohammad Ibn-Is-nik).
a * Tta» meaning la different In the Hebrew. The
verb there Is bDJ, and means not "died" but
« tattled " er "dwelt" ( _ JJtT, Geo. xvi. 13). Ths
statement Is iially made not of Ishmael, but of his
aWsodaats. Iihmsel's death Is meattaosd In vsr. 17,
MtBotmra 18. H.
UBHMAKL
tending from the frontier of Psiastint cast to He
Euphrates, and south probably to the borders of
Egypt and the Arabian peninsula. This qntstioa
Is discussed in art. Bese-Kjedkm; and it is inter-
woven, though obscurely, with the next subject,
that of the names and settlements of the sons of
IahmaeL See also Keturah, etc. ; for ths
" brethren " of TthmaW, in whose presence be dwelt
and died, included the sons of Keturah.*
2. The sons of Ishmael were, Nebajoth (expressly
stated to be his first-born), Kedar, Adbeel, Hibaam,
Mishma, Dumah, Matta, Hadar, Tenia, Jetnr,
Nephish, Kedemah (Gen. xxv. 13-15); and he bad
a daughter named Mahalath (xxviii. 9), ilscwlms
written Basbemath (or Basnnth, Gen. xxxvi 3),
the sister of Nebajoth, before mentioned. The sons
are enumerated with the particular statement that
" these are their names, by their towns, and by their
castles; twelve princes according to their nations "
or " peoples " (xxv. 16). In seeking to identify Isb-
mael's sons, this passage requires close attention:
it bears the Interpretation of their being father* of
tribes, having towns snd castles called after them;
and identifications of the latter become therefore
more than usually satisfactory. " They dwelt from
Ilavilah unto Shur, that is before Egypt, as thou
goest unto Assyria " (xxv. 18), and it is certain,
in accordance with this statement of their limits
[tee Havilah, Shuk], that they stretched in very
early times across the desert to the Persian Gulf,
peopled the north and west of the Arabian penin-
sula, and eventually formed the chief element of the
Arab nation. Their language, which is generally
acknowledged to have been the Arabic commonly
so called, has been adopted with insignificant ex-
ceptions throughout Arabia. It has been said that
the Bible requires the whole of that nation to be
sprung from Ishmael, and the feet of a large ad-
mixture of Joktanite and even Cuahite peoples hi
the south and southeast has been regarded at a
suggestion of skepticism. Yet not only does the
Bible contain no warrant for the assumption that
all Arab* are Ishmaelites; but the characteristics
of the Ishmaelites, strongly marked in all the more
northern tribes of Arabia, and exactly fulfilling the
prophecy " he will be a wild man ; his hand [will
be] against every man, and every man's hand against
him," become weaker in the south, and can scarcely
be predicated of all the peoples of Joktanite and
other descent The true Ishmaelites, however, and
even tribes of very mixed race, are thoroughly
u wild men," living by warlike forays and plunder;
dreaded by their neighbon; dwelling In tents, with
hardly any household chattels, but rich in flocks
and herds, migratory, snd recognizing no law but
the authority of the chiefs of their tribes. Even
the religion of Mohammad it held in light esteem
by many of the more remote tribes, among whom
the ancient usage* of their people obtain in almost
» Abraham at ths birth of Ishmael was 88 yean ol*
and at Itaac't about 100. Isaac Ink Bebskah to we*
when ht was 40 yean old, when Ishmael would ht
about 54. aaau was bore when his father was 90;
and Ksau was mora than 40 when be marrlsd Ish-
mael'K laughter. Therefore Ishmael was than at least
114 (54+20 + 40- 114), leaving 28 yean bason hts
dsath tor Esau's coming to nun.
c • Ishmael is not named In the N. T., but la diraeu>
referred to la ths allegory, 0*1 lv. S ft. Baa adaataa
Digitized by
Google
IBHMABL
Jaw. oW shnplicity, besides idolatrous practices
altogether repugnant to Mihammadanism m they
are to the faith of the patrurchs; practices which
may be ueribed to the influence of the Canaanites,
of Moab, Amman, and Edom, with whom, by inter-
marriages, commerce, and war, the tribes of Tihmafi
most have had long and intimate relations.
Tlie term Ishmakute ObNJJJpBT) occurs on
three occasions, Gen. xxxvii. 85, 27, 28, xxxix. 1;
Judg. nii. 24; Pa. Ixxxiii. 6. From the context
of the first two instances, it seems to hare been a
general name for the Abrahamic peoples of the east
country, the Bene-Kedem ; but the second admits
also of a closer meaning. In the third instance the
name is applied in its strict sense to the Ishmaelites.
It is also applied to Jether, the father of Amaso, by
David's sister Abigail (1 Chr. ii. 17). [Ithba;
Jethek.]
The notions of the Arabs respecting Ishmael
((/*(*' im' ) ore partly derived from the Bible,
- •
partly from the Jewish Rabbins, and partly from
native traditions. The origin of many of these
traditions is obscure, but a great number may be
ascribed to the bet of Mohammad's having for
political reasons claimed Ishmael for his ancestor,
and striven to make out an impossible pedigree;
while both be and his followers have, as a conse-
quence of accepting this assumed descent, sought
to exalt that ancestor. Another reason may be
safely found in Ishmael's acknowledged headship
of the naturalized Arabs, and this cause existed
from the very period of his settlement. [Arabia.]
Yet the rivalry of the Joktanite kingdom of south-
ern Arabia, and its intercourse with classical and
medians! Europe, the wandering and unsettled
habits of the Ishmaelites, their having no literature,
and, as for as we know, only a meagre oral tradition,
all contributed, till the importance it acquired with
the promulgation of El-Isliun, to render our knowl -
edge of the Ishmaelitic portion of the people of
Arabia, before Mohammad, lamentably detective.
That they maintained, and still maintain, a patri-
archal and primitive form of life is known to us.
Their religion, at least in the period immediately
preceding Mohammad, was in central Arabia chiefly
the gr o ss e st fetishism, probably learnt from aborig-
inal inhabitants of the land ; southwards it diverged
to the cosmic worship of the Joktanite Himyerites
(though these were for from being exempt from
fetishism), and northwards (so at least in ancient
times) to an approach to that true faith which
Ishmael carried with him, and his descendants thus
gradually lost. This last point is curiously illus-
trated by the numbers who, in Arabia, became
either Jews (Caraites) or Christians (though of a
vary corrupt form of Christianity), and by the move-
Rant to search of the faith of the patriarchs which
lad been put forward, not long before the birth of
Mohammad, by men not satisfied with Judaism or
■he corrupt form of Christianity, with which alone
'hay were acquaint*!. This movement first aroused
Mohammad, and was afterwards the main cause of
Ma success.
The Arabs believe that Ishmael was the first
born of Abraham, and the .majority of their doctors
(but the point is hi dispute) assert that this son,
sod not Isaac, was offered by Abraham In sacrifice.'
Dm scene of this sacrifice Is Mount 'Ararat, near
ISHMAEL
1171
Mekkeh, the last holy place visited by pilgrims, it
being necessary to the completion of pilgrimage to
be present at a sermon delivered there on the 9th
of the Mohammedan month Zu-1-Hejjeh, in com
memoration of the offering, and to sacrifice a victiu
on the following evening after sunset, in the valley
of Mine. The sacrifice last mentioned is observed
throughout the Muslim world, and the day on which
it is made is called " The Great Festival " (Mr.
Lane's Mod. Kgypt. ch. in.). Ishmael, say the
Arabs, dwelt with his mother at Mekkeh, and both
are buried in the place called the " Hejr," on the
northwest (termed by the Arabs the north) aide
of the Kaabeh, and inclosed by a curved wall called
the "Hateem." Ishmael was visited at Mekkeh
by Abraham, and they together rebuilt the temple,
which had been destroyed by a flood. At Mekkeh,
Ishmael married a daughter of Mudad or El-Mudnd,
chief of the Joktanite tribe Jurhum [Almodad;
Arabia], and had thirteen children (Afir-dt-a-
Zemdn, Ms.), thus agreeing with the Biblical num-
ber, including the daughter.
Mohammad's descent from Ishmael Is totally
lost, for an unknown number of generations to
'Adnan, of the twenty-first generation before the
prophet : from him downwards the latter' s descent
is, if we may believe the genealogists, fairly proved.
But we hare evidence far more trustworthy than
that of the genealogists; for while most of the
natives of Arabia are unable to trace up then- pedi-
gree; it is scarcely possible to find one who is
ignorant of his race, seeing that his very life often
depends upon it. The law of blood-revenge neces-
sitates his knowing the names of his ancestors for
four generations, but no more; and this law extend-
ing from time immemorial has made any confusion
of race almost impossible. This law, it should be
remembered, is not a law of Mohammad, but an
old pagan law that he endeavored to suppress, but
could not. In casting doubt on the prophet's pedi-
gree, we must add that this cannot affect the proofs
of the chief element of the Arab nation being lah-
maelite (and so too the tribe of Kureysh of whom
was Mohammad). Although partly mixed with
Joktanites, they are more mixed with Keturahitee,
etc ; the characteristics of the Joktanites, as before
remarked, are widely different from those of the
Ishmaelites; and whatever theories may be adduced
to the contrary, we believe that the Arabs, front
physical characteristics, language, the concurrence
of native traditions (before Mohammedanism made
them untrustworthy), and. the testimony of the
Bible, are mainly and essentially Ishmaelite. [la
mael, 1.] E. 8. P.
3. One of the sons of Axel, a descendant of Saul
through Merib-baal, or Mephi-bosbeth (1 Chr. viiL
38, ix. 44). See the genealogy, under Saul.
3. [Vat omits: Ismahel] A man of Judah,
whose son or descendant Zebadiah was rular
(T\3^ of the bouse of Judah in the time of Je-
hosh'aphat (2 Chr. xix. 11).
4. [Vat. M. Iot»i)\: fMmahtl.] Another man
of Judah, son of Jehohanan; one of the " captains
(*njj7) of hundreds" who assisted Jeboiada in
restoring Joash to the throne (2 Chr. xxiii. 1).
6. [Vat. 3aumi\; FA. Jopotr/A.] A {.riest,
of the Bene-Pacnur [sons of P.], who was forced
« With this and some other exceptions, ths Haa
Urns hare adopted the chief Acts of the history ef Isa
mael recanted In the Bible.
Digitized by
Google
1172 ISHMAEL
kj Ebb to relinquish his foreign wits (Est. x. 22).
8. [VaU in 2 K. xxv. 25, Mayan A: /swaAel]
He ion of Nethaniah ; a perfect marvel of craft
and villainy, whose treachery forms one of the chief
episodes of the history of the period immediately
succeeding the first fall of Jerusalem. His exploits
are related in Jer. xL 7-xli- 15, with a abort sum-
mary in 2 K. xxv. 33-25, sad they read almost
like a page from the annals of the late Indian
mutiny.
His full description is " Ishmael, the son of
Nethaniah, the son of Elishama, of the seed royal "°
of Judah (Jer. xli. 1 ; 2 K. xxv. 25). Whether by
Ibis is intended that be was actually a son of Zede-
kiah, or one of the later kings, or, more generally,
that be had royal blood in bis veins — perhaps a
descendant of Elishama, the son of David (2 giun.
v. 16) — we cannot tell. During the siege of the
city he had, like many others of his countrymen
(Jer. xl. 11 ), fled across the Jordan, where he found
a refuge at the court of Uaalis, the then king of the
Bene- Amnion (Jos. Ant. x. 9, § 2). Ammonite
women were sometimes found in the harems of the
kings of Jerusalem (1 K.. xi. 1 ), and Ishmael may
have been thus related to the Ammonite court on
his mother's side. At any rate he was instigated
by Baalis to the designs which he accomplished but
too successfully (Jer. xl. 14: AnLx. 9, §3). Several
bodies of Jews appear to have been lying under
arms in the plains on the S. E. of the Jordan, 6
during the but days of Jerusalem, watching the
progress of affairs in Western Palestine, commanded
by "princes"* 0?jp), the chief of whom were
Ishmael, and two brothers, Johanan and Jonathan,
sons of Kareah. Immediately after the departure
of the Chaldsean army these men moved across the
Jordan to pay their respects to Gkdauah, whom
the king of Babylon had left as superintendent
("PpB) of the province. Gedaliah had taken up
his residence at Mizpah, a few miles north of
Jerusalem, on the main road, where Jeremiah the
prophet resided with him (xl. 6). The bouse would
appear to have been isolated from the rest of the
town. We can discern a high inclosed court-yard
and a deep well within its precincts. The well was
tertainly (Jar. ill. 9; comp. 1 K. xv. 22), and the
« nDl^Dn V~1t.. Jerome (Qn. iter, on 2
Ctanm. xxvlil. 7) Interprets this expression as meaning
" of the seed of Molech." He gives the same meaning
to the words " the King's son " applied to Haueiah
in the above passage. The question It an interesting
ens, and has been recently revived by OeJger ( UncAri/l,
*tc. p. 307), who extends it to other passages and per-
sons. [Mouch.] Jerome (es above) further tiys —
fetsapa on the strength of a tradition — that Ishmael
vas the son of an Egyptian slave, Qera : as a reason
why the " seed royal " should bear the meaning he
gives it. This the writer has not hitherto succeeded
In elucidating.
* So perhaps, taking It with the express statement
jf xl. 11, we may Interpret the word* " the forces
vhksh were in the field " (Jer. xl. 7, 18), where the
term rendered "the Held" (mty§) la one nsed to
asnote the pasture grounds of Moab — the modern
JMto — oftener than any other district. Bee Oen.
txxvl. 86 ; Num. xxl. 20 ; Ruth 1. 1, and puarim ;
I Ohr. viU. 8 ; and Stanley's 8. f P. App. f 16. The
essaMsat saw of the word in the eeml-MoabUo book
M Ruth is alone enough to fix its meaning.
BHMAEX
whole residence was probably, a rette oi the isUssaj)
works of Aaa king of Judah.
Ishmael made no secret of his intention to kfl
the superintendent, and usurp his position. Of
this Gedaliah was warned in express terms by Jo-
hanan and his companions; and Johanan, in a
secret interview, for e se ei ng how irreparable a mis-
fortune Gedaliah's death would be at this juncture
(xl. IB), offered to remove the danger by killing
Ishmael. His, however, Gedaliah, a man evi-
dently of a high and unsuspecting nature, would
not bear of (xl. 16, and see the amplification in
Joseph. AnL x. 9, § 3). They all accordingly took
leave. Thirty days after (Ant. x. 9, § 4), in the
seventh month (xli. 1), on the third day of the
month — so says the tradition — Isbmael again
appeared at Mizpah, this time accompanied by ten
men, who were, according to the Hebrew text,
"princes of the king" CH^O ^"1), though
this is omitted by the LXX. and by Josephus.
Gedaliah entertained them at a feast (xli. 1). Ac-
cording to the statement of Josephus this was a
very lavish entertainment, and Gedaliah became
much intoxicated. It must have been a private
one, for before its close Isbmael and hie followers
had murdered Gedaliah and all his attendants with
such secrecy that no alarm was given outside the
room. The same night he killed all Gedaliah's
establishment, including tome Chaldsaan soldiers
who were then. Jeremiah appears fortunately to
have been absent, and, incredible as it seems, so
well had Ishmael taken his precautions that for two
days the massacre remained perfectly unknown to
the people of the town. On the second day Ishmael
perceived from his elevated position a large party
coming southward along the main road from She-
cbem and Samaria. He went out to meet them.
They proved to be eighty devotees, who with rent
clothes, and with shaven beards, mutilated bodies,
and other marks of heathen devotion, and weeping *
as they went, were bringing incense and offerings to
the ruins of the Temple. At his invitation they
turned aside to the residence of the superintendent.
And here Ishmael put into practice the same strat-
agem, which on a larger scale was employed by
Meheniet All in the massacre of the Manielnk.es
at Cairo in 1806. As the unsuspecting pilgrim*
passed into the court-yard ■ he dosed the entrances
c It Is a pity that some different word Is not ass-
ployed to render this Hebrew term from that used In
all. 1 to translate one totally dliUnoL
d This Is the LXX. version of the matter — avrai
tnoniorra nl icAatev. The statement of the Hebrew
Text and A. T. that Ishmael wept is unintelligible.
• The Hebrew has TJjn — " the city " (Ju V. vet.
7). This has been read by Jcaephns "TSn— n court-
yard." The alteration carries Its genuineness In Ms
face. The same change has been made by the ase-
sorsts i.K*i) In 2 K. xx. 4.
• It I* safer to follow the text, with Hung, ussotsst,
Ds Watts, and others. It Is to be noted that m the
Hebrew IfHnbH precedes "T'TH, I «. they cam*
"Into the midst of the city," so that they wen com-
plstsly In Ishmael'a power before the massacre took
place. It was natural to mention that ctr- nratanca
but there Is no obvious reason for speaking thus pre-
cisely of « lat mute of the court-yard." Ibat spates
eatlon also seams to require the article before Ha
genitive. The " pit " (or » cistern," the wort k •"rCaV
Digitized by
Google
ISHMABLITE
cm, and there he sod his band butchered
the whole number: ten only escaped by the offer
of henry raaom for their lives. The seventy
corpses were then thrown into the well, which, n
at Cawnpore, wu within the precinct* of the
house, and which ni completely filled with the
bodies. It waa the same thing that had been done
by Jehu — a man hi some respects a prototype of
t«hm»«l — with the bodies of the forty-two relatives
■jf Ahaziah (S K. x. 14). This done he descended
to the town, surprised and carried off the daughters
of king Zedekiab, who had been sent there by
Nebuchadnezzar for safety, with their eunuchs and
their ChakUcan guard (xli. 10, 16), and all the
l«ople of the town, and made off with his prisoners
to the country of the Ammonites. Which road he
took is not quite clear; the Hebrew text and LXX.
say by Gibeon, that is north ; but Jonphus, by
Hebron, round the southern end of the Dead Sea.
The news of the massacre had by this time got
abroad, and Ishmael was quickly pursued by Jo-
banan and his companions. Whether north or
south, they soon tracked him and his unwieldy booty,
and found them reposing by some copious waters
(D' , 5T? D1Q)- He waa attacked, two of bis bra-
roes slain, the whole of the prey recovered, and
lahmael himself, with the remaining eight of his
people, escaped to the Ammonites, and thencefor-
ward passes into the obscurity from which it would
hare been well if he had never emerged.
Johanan's foreboding was fulfilled. The result
of this tragedy was an immediate panic. The small
remnants of the Jewish commonwealth — the cap-
tains of the forces, the king's daughters, the two
prophets Jeremiah and Baruch, and all the men,
women, and children — at once took flight into
Egypt (Jer. xli. 17; xliii. 5-7); and all hopes of
a settlement were for the time at an end. The re-
membrance of the calamity was perpetuated by a
fast — the rast of the seventh month (Zech. rii. 5;
viiL 19), which is to this day strictly kept by the
Jews on the third of Tishri. (See Bdand, Antia
iv. 10; Kimchi on Zech. vii. 6.) The part taken
by Baalis in this transaction apparently brought
upon hi* nation the denunciations both of Jeremiah
(xlix. 1-6), and the more distant Ezekiel (xxr. 1-7),
but we hare no record how these predictions were
accomplished. G.
ISHItfAEIilT/E. [bHMAH, p. 1171.]
ISHMA1AH [3 syl.J (iBTTn^ i. t.
Ishmaya'hu [Jehovah heart] : Tiyinfiir : Jumaint),
son of ObadUh: the ruler of the tribe of Zebulun
in the time of king David (1 Chr. xxvii. 19).
ISrTMEELITE ajtd ISH'MEKLITES
pbrtytptp^ and D-Sqnptp, respectively : [1<r-
asmAirnr (Vat. -A«->, lo-uoqArrai: ImahtOha,
ItmniHta]), the form — in agreement with the
vowels of the Hebrew — in which the descendants
af Ishmael are given in a few places in the A. V. ;
fie former in 1 Chr. ii. 17; the latter in Gen.
ixxvii. 3d, 37, 38, xxxix. 1.
ISHIfERAl [8 syL] PlO?^ [«*om Jeho-
•natee/i*]: 'loapapl; [ Vat Jo^.i ;] Alex. I«r-
yiapi: Jetamart), a Bexriamito; one of the family
ISLE
1178
dto which tba banes wrn thrown may navs been In
a eoarHrard or rianrher* In eutam towns tbera are
aaMrtetta te public on as wall as private. H.
of ElpaaL and named as a chief man hi the trior
'IChr. r". 18).
ISH'OD Cnntr^H, «. e lab- hod [numoj r*
wmJ: o "IitjvJ; [Vat ltvitu;] Alex. 2ou8: ft-
rum decorum), one of the tribe of Manasseh on
the east of Jordan, son of Hammoleketh, i. e. the
Queen, and, from his near connection with Gikad
evidently an important person (1 Chr. rii. 18).
ISHTAN OetJ^ [perh. bold, Get.; one
ttrong, Flint] : 'U<r<pJj>; [Vat Io-^o*;] Alex. Be-
ttor: Jetpham), a Benjamite, one of the fiunily of
Shashak; named as a chief man in his tribe (1
Chr. rffi. 32).
I8HTOB (a'TO-B^H [see infra]: 'Urd»i
[Vat. Liarw$;} Joseph, "lent fas- /stoi), »OT»r-
ently one of the small kingdoms or states which
formed part of the general country of Aram, named
with Zobah, Rehob, and Maacah (3 Sam. x. 6, 8).
In the parallel account of 1 Chr. six. Ishtob is omit-
ted. By Josephus (Ant. vii. 6, § 1 ) the name is given
as that of a king. But though in the ancient ver-
sions the name is given as one word, it is probable
that the real signification is " the men of Ton," a
district mentioned also in connection with Ammon
in the records of Jephtbah, aM again perhaps,
under the shape of Tomb or Tubixm, in the hi>
tory of the Maccabees. G.
ISHTJAH (njtfh [even, level, Ges.; reKmo
peaceful, Dietr.] : 'Uaaovi, Alex, lerratu'- Jaw),
the second son of Asher (Gen. xlvi. 17). In the
genealogies of Asher in 1 Chr. rii. 30 the name,
though identical in the original, is in the A. V.
given as Isuah. In the lists of Num. xxvi.,
however, Ishuah is entirely omitted.
* The word is properly Ishvah, and was probably
intended by the translators of the A. V. to be s*
read, u being used in the edition of 1611 for v.
A.
ISHTJAI [3 syl.] (?$*, i. e, Ishvi [sea
above]: 'loovi; Alex. Uoovi- Jeisui), the third
son of Asher (1 Chr. vii. 30), founder of a family
bearing his name (Num. xxvi. 44; A. V. "Je
suites ")■ His descendants, however, are not me) -
tioued in the genealogy in Chronicles. His nams
is elsewhere given in the A. V. as lam, Jesui, and
(another person) Ishui.
ISHTJI OTt'j •■ •• W"i [peaceful, quiet,
Dietr.]: letrtrioi; [Vat U<r<riov\;] Alex. Io*ov<i;
Joseph. 'If (roil- Jemd), the second son of Saul
by his wife Ahinoam (1 Sam. xir. 49, comp. 60) :
his place in the family was between Jonathan and
Melchishua. In the list of Saul's genealogy in 1
Chr. riii. and ix., however, the name of Ishui is
entirely omitted ; and in the sad narrative of the
battle of Gilboa his place is occupied by Ahinadab
(1 Sam. xxxi. 2). We can only conclude (hat hi
died young.
The same name is elsewhere given in the A. V
as Ibui, and Ishuai. [In aD these names u may
have oeen intended by the translators of the A. V.
to be read as v. See Ishvah. — A.] G.
ISLE ON : rnvot)- The radical sense of the
Hebrew word seems to be " habitable places," as
o p posed to water, an' in this sense it occurs in Is.
xlil. 15. Hence it means secondarily any maritiri*
district, whether belonging to a continent or to aa
• thus it is used of the shore of the He*
Digitized by
Google
1174
ISMACHIAH
i (Is. xx. 6, xxiil. 2, 6), and of the coast*
of Ehshah (Ex. xxvii. 7), ». e. of Greece and Asia
Minor. In this sense it Is more particularly re-
ttrieted to the shores of the Mediterranean, some-
limes in the fuller expression " islands of the sea"
(Is. xL 11), or " isles of the Gentiles " (Gen. x. 5;
comp. Zeph. ii. 11), and sometimes simply as
"isles" (Ps. Ixxii. 10; Ex. xxvi. 15, 18, xxvii. 3,
85, xxxix. 6; Dan. xi. 18): an exception to this,
however, ocean in Ee. xxvii. 15, where the shores
of the Persian gulf are intended. Occasionally the
word is specifically used of sn island, as of Caphtor
or Crete (Jer. xlvii 4), and Chittim or Cyprus (Ex.
xxvii. 6; Jer. ii. 10), or of islands as opposed to
the mainland (Esth. x. 1). But more generally it
Is applied to any region separated from Palestine
by water, as fully described in Jer. xxv. 22, " the
isles which are beyond the sea," which were hence
regarded as the most remote regions of the earth
(Is. xxiv. 15, xlii. 10, lix. 18: compare the ex-
pression in Is. Ixvi. 19, "the isles alar off"), and
also as large and numerous (Is. xi. 15; Ps. xcvii.
1): the word is more particularly used by the
prophets. (See J. D. Michaelis, SpiciUgwm, i.
181-149.) W. L. B.
ISMACHIAH Pin;5t>p^, i «. Ismae-
jVhu [ahom Jehovah tuppoiit] : i 2«uutx' a [Vat.
"Xs«-] : Jtmnckim), a Lerite who was one of the
sverseere (D , ^pS) of offerings, during the revival
under king Hexekiah (2 Chr. xxxi. 13).
ISTMAEL. 1. Qlc/Ae^X: Jtmail), Jud. 11.
83. Another form for the nam* Ishmael, son of
Abraham.
8. ('loyiaqAos : Bitmaenu), 1 Esdr. Ix. S3.
[Ishmael, 5-]
ISMAI'AH [3 syl.] (ITyptr [Jehovah
heart]: Sonatas: Samaiat), a Gibeonite, one of
the chiefs of those warriors who relinquished the
cause of Saul, the head of their tribe, and joined
themselves to David, when he was at Ziklag (1
Chr. xii. 4). He is described as " a hero ( OMor)
among the thirty and over the thirty " — t. e. Da-
vid's body-guard: but his name does not appear in
the lists of the guard in S Sam. xxiii. and 1 Chr.
xi. Possibly he was killed in some encounter be-
fore David reached the throne.
1ST AH (n^tp^., ». t. Ishpah [perh. bald,
Get.]: '\tcr<pi; Alex. Eir(f>ax : Jetpha), a Benja-
mite, of the family of Beriah; one of the heads
of his tribe (1 Chr. viii. 16).
IS'RAEL (^tp"; [see infra]: 'IcpatiK).
1. The name given (Gen. xxxii. 28) to Jacob after
his wrestling with the Angel (Hot. xii. 4) at Peniel.
In the time of Jerome ( Quant. Htbr. in 6'en. Opp.
iii. 357) the signification of the name was com-
monly believed to be " the man (or the mind) see
log God." But he prefers another interpretation,
ViJ paraphrases the verse after this manner: " Thy
jame shall not be called Jacob, Supplantcr, but
Israel, Prince with God. For as I am a Prince, so
thou who hast been able to wrestle with Me shalt
te called a Prince. But if with Me who am God
,or an Angel) thou hast been able to contend, bow
■men more [shalt thou be able to contend] with
men, •'. e. with Esau, whom thou oughtest not to
tread ? " The A. V., apparently following Jerome,
Intadates fV^tp, " as a prince thou hast power; "
Mat IfrsMiiiiWlfi and Gesenlns give it the simpler
ISRAEL, KINGDOM OF
meaning, " thou hast contended." Geteniui Intel
prats Israel ■' soldier of God."
2. It became the national name of the twelvt
tribes collectively. They are to called in Ex. iii
16 and afterwards.
3. It is used in a narrower sense, excludii^t
Judah, in 1 Sam. xi. 8. It is so used in the famous
cry of the rebels against David (2 Sam. xx. 1), and
against his grandson (1 K. xii. 16). Thenceforth
it was assumed and accepted aa the name of the
Northern Kingdom, in which the tribes of Judah,
Benjamin, Levi, Dan, and Simeon had no share.
4. After the Babylonian Captivity, the returned
exiles, although they were mainly of the kingdom
of Judah, resumed the name Israel as the designs
tion of their nation; but as individuals they ar>
almost always described as Jews in the Apocrypha
and N. T. Instances occur in the Books of Chron
ides of the application of the name Israel to Judah
(e. g. 3 Chr. xi. 3, xii. 6); and in Esther of the
name Jews to the whole people. The name Israel
la also used to denote laymen, aa distinguished from
priests, levites, and other ministers (Ear. vi. 16,
ix. 1, x. 26; Neh. xi. 3, it.). W. T. B.
ISRAEL, KINGDOM OF. 1. The prophet
Ah\)ah of Shiloh, who was commissioned in the
latter days of Solomon to announce the division of
the kingdom, left one tribe (Judah) to the bouse
of David, and assigned ten to Jeroboam (1 K. xi.
35, 81). These were probably Joseph (= Ephraim
and Manasteh), Issachar, Zebulun, Asber, Naphtali,
Benjamin, Dan, Simeon, Gad, and Keuben; Levi
being intentionally omitted. Eventually, the greater
part of Benjamin, and probably the whole of Simeon
and Dan, were included as if by common consent
in the kingdom of Judah. With respect to the
conquests of David, Moab appean to have been
attached to the kingdom of Israel (2 K. iii. 4); so
much of Syria aa remained subject to Solomon (see
1 K. xi. 24) would probably be claimed by his suc-
cessor in the northern kingdom; and Ammon.
though connected with Rehoboam as his mother's
native land (2 Chr. xii. 13), and though afterwards
tributary to Judah (3 Chr. xxvii. 5), was at car
time allied (3 Chr. xx. 1), we know not how
closely, or how early, with Moab. The sea-cout
between Accho and Japho remained in the posset
tkw of Israel.
3. The population of the kingdom is not ex-
pressly stated, and in drawing any inference from
the numbers of fighting-men, we must bear in mind
that the numbers in the Hebrew text of the O. T.
are strongly suspected to have been subjected to
extensive, perhaps systematic, corruption. Forty
years before the disruption, the census taken b>
direction of David gave 800,000 according to 2 Sam
xxiv. 9, or 1,100,000 « according to 1 Chr. xxi. 5,
as the number of fighting-men in Israel. Jeroboam,
B. c. 957, brought into the field an army of 800,-
000 men (8 Chr. xiii 3). The small number of the
srmy of Jehoahaz (2 K. xiii. 7) is to be attributed
to his compact with Haxael; for in the next reig;
Israel could spare a mercenary host ten times as
numerous for the wars of Amaziah (3 Chr. xxv. 6V
Ewald is scarcely correct in his remark that we
know not what time of life is reckoned as the mili-
tary age (Getck. I$r. 01. 186); for it is denned b
a Bp. Patrick pro pos e s to reconcile mess two nsas
ban, by adding to the Ibrmer 388 /W) oa tiiost tt •
David's standing legions.
Digitized by
Google
18HAKL, KINGDOM OF
ffam. L 8, and again 9 Chr. xxr. S, as " twenty
f»m old sod above." If in B. c. 957 there were
ickuuy under arms 800,000 men of that age in
brael, the whole population mar perhaps have
amounted to at least three millions and a half."
Later observers have echoed the disappointment
with which Jerome from his cell at Bethlehem con-
templated the small extent of this celebrated country
(Ep. 129, ad Dordan. § 4). The area of Palestine,
as it is laid down in Kiepert's BibeUAUat (ed.
Iionnet, 1859), is calculated at 13,620 English
■quare miles. Deducting from this 810 miles for
the strip of coast S. of Japho, belonging to the
Philistines, we get 12,810 miles as the area of the
hud occupied by the 13 tribes at the death of
Solomon : the area of the two kingdoms being —
Israel, 9,375, Judah, 3,435. Hence it appears that
the whole area of Palestine was nearly equal to that
of the kingdom of Hollaud (13,610 square miles) ; or
rather more than that of the six northern counties
of England (13,136 square miles). The kingdom
of Judah was rather less than Northumberland,
Durham, and Westmoreland (3,683 square miles,
with 753,852 population in 1851); the kingdom
of Israel was very nearly as large as Yorkshire,
Lancashire, and Cumberland (9,453 square miles,
with 4,023,713 population iu 1851).
3. Shechbm waa the first capital of the new
kingdom (1 K. xii. 25), venerable for its traditions,
and beautiful in its situation. Subsequently Tirzah,
whose loveliness had fixed the wandering gaze of
Solomon (Cant. vi. 4), became the royal residence,
if not the capital, of Jeroboam (1 K. xiv. 17) and
of bis successors (xv. 33, xvi. 8, 17, 33). Samaria,
uniting in itself the qualities of beauty and fertility,
and a commanding position, waa chosen by Omri
(1 K. xvi. 34), and remained the capital of the
kingdom until it had given the last proof of its
strength by sustaining for three years the onset of
the boats of Assyria. Jezreel was probably only a
royal residence of some of the Israelitish kings. It
may have been in awe of the ancient holiness of
Shiloh, that Jeroboam forbore to pollute the secluded
site of the Tabernacle with the golden calves. lie
chose for the religious capitals of his kingdom Dan,
the old home of northern schism, and Bethel,' 1 a
Benjamite city not far from Shiloh, and marked out
by history and situation as the rival of Jerusalem.
4. The disaffection of Ephraim and the northern
tribes, having grown in secret under the prosperous
but burdensome reign of Solomon, broke out at the
critical moment of that great monarch's death. It
waa just then that Ephraim, the centre of the
movement, found in Jeroboam an instrument pre-
pared to give expression to the rivalry of centuries,
with sufficient ability and application to raise him
to high station, with the stain of treason on his
name, and with the bitter recollections of an exile
In his mind. Judah and Joseph were rivals from the
time that '.bey occupied the two prominent places,
and received the amplest promises in the blessing
of the dying patriarch (Gen. xlix. 8, 33). When
the twelve tribes issued from Egypt, only Judah
and Joseph could muster each above 70,000 war-
ion. In the desert and in the conquest, Caleb and
a R Mr. Hickman noticed that tn 1821 and in 1 jU
fee Busbar of males under 30 years of age, sal 'he
■amber of mates of 20 years of age and upwards, were
asarlv equal ; and this p ro p uiUuu has been since re-
canted as invariable : or, it has been assumed, that
fee mates of the age of 30 and upwards are equal la
ISRAEL, KINGDOM OF 1176
Joshua, the representatives of the two tribes, stanc
out side by side eminent among the leaden of the
people. The blessing of Moses (Deut. xxziiL 18)
snd the divine selection of Joshua inaugurated tot
greater prominence of Joseph for the next tiros
centuries. Othniel, the successor of Joshua, was
from Judah; the last, Samuel, was born among the
Ephraimites. Within that period Ephraim sup-
plied at Shiloh (Judg. xxi. 19) a resting-place for
the ark, the centre of divine worship; and a ren-
dezvous, or capital at Shechem (Josh. xxiv. 1;
Judg. ix. 2) for the whole people. Ephraim arro-
gantly claimed (Judg. viii. 1, xii. 1) the exclusive
right of Uking the lead against invaders. Koyal
authority was offered to one dweller in Ephraim
(viii. 21), and actually exercised for three years by
another (ix. 23). After a silent, perhaps sullen,
acquiescence in the transfer of Samuel's authority
with additional dignity to a Benjamite, they resisted
for seven years (2 Sam. ii. 9-11) its passing into
the hands of the popular Jewish leader, and yielded
reluctantly to the conviction that the sceptre which
seemed almost within their grasp was reserved at
last for Judah. Even in David's reign their jealousy
did not always slumber (2 Sam. xix. 43) ; and
though Solomon's alliance and intercourse with
Tyre must have tended to increase the loyalty of
the northern tribes, they took the first opportunity
to emancipate themselves from the rule of his son.
Doubtless the length of Solomon's reign, and the
clouds that gathered round the close of it (1 K.
xi. 14-25), and possibly his increasing despotism
(Ewald, Getch. lir. ill. 395), tended to diminish
the general popularity of the house of David ; and
the idolatry of the king Uienated the affection of
religious Israelites. But none of these was the
immediate cause of the disruption. No aspiration
after greater liberty, political privileges, or aggran
dizement at the expense of other powers, no spirit
of commercial enterprise, no breaking forth of pent-
up energy seems to have instigated the movement.
Ephraim proudly longed for independence, without
considering whether or at what cost he could main-
tain it. Shechem was built as a capital, and Tirzah
as a residence, for an Ephraimite king, by the
people who murmured under the burden lmpreed
upon them by the royal state of Solomon. Ephraim
felt no patriotic pride in a national splendor of
which Judah was the centre. The dwelling-place
of God when fixed in Jerusalem ceased to be so
honorable to him as of old. It was ancient jealousy
rather than recent provocation, the opportune death
of Solomon rather than unwillingness to incur
taxation, the opportune return of a persecuted
Ephraimite rather than any commanding genius
for rule which Jeroboam possessed, thut finally
broke up the brotherhood of the children of Jacob.
It was an outburst of human feeling so socn as
that divine influence which restrained the spirit of
disunion was withdrawn in consequence of the
idolatry of Solomon, so soon as that stern prophetic
voice which had called Saul to the throne under ■
protest, and David to the throne in repentance, wai
heard in anger summoning Jeroboam to divide thr
kingdom.
number to a fcrarth part of the wbola porulenon."—
drums of Ortat Attain, 1861, Popubuiex lUfcs, It
Ago, etc, p. vL
6 0; these siven plaera ses Stanley's &$ J>,eh*«l
ir. t. and xi.
Digitized by
Google
1176 ISRAEL, KINGDOM OF
t. Disruption where there can be no expansion,
or dismemberment without growth, Is fatal to a
state If England and America have prospered
since 1783 it is because each found space for in-
crease, and had vital energy to fill it. If the sep-
aration of east and west was but a step in the
decline of the Homan empire, it was so because
each portion was hemmed in by obstacles which it
wanted rigor to surmount. The sources' of life and
strength begin to dry up ; the state shrinks within
itself, withers, and falls before some blast which
once it might have braved.
The kingdom of Israel developed do new power.
It was but a portion of David's kingdom deprived
of many elements of strength. Its frontier was as
open and as widely extended as before ; but it wanted
a capital for the seat of organized power. Its ter-
ritory was as fertile and as tempting to the spoiler,
but its people were less united and patriotic. A
corrupt religion poisoned the source of national life.
When less reverence attended on a new and un-
eonsecrated king, and less respect was tell for an
aristocracy reduced by the retirement of the Levites,
the army which David found hard to control rose
Dp unchecked in the exercise of its willful strength ;
and thus eight houses, each ushered in by a revolu-
tion, occupied the throne in quick succession. Tyre
ceased to be an ally when the alliance was no longer
profitable to the merchant-city. Moab and Amnion
yielded tribute only while under compulsion. A
powerful neighbor, Damascus, sat armed at the
gate of Israel ; and, beyond Damascus, might be
discerned the rising strength of the first great
monarchy of the world.
These causes tended to increase the misfortunes,
and to accelerate the early end of the kingdom of
Israel. It lasted 254 years, from b. c. 975 to B. c.
791, about two thirds of the duration of its more
compact neighbor Judah.
But it may be doubted whether the division into
two kingdoms greatly shortened the independent
existence of the Hebrew race, or interfered with the
purposes which, it is thought, may be traced in
the establishment of David's monarchy. If among
those purposes were the preservation of the true
religion in the world, and the preparation of an
agency adapted for the diffusion of Christianity in
due season, then it must be observed — first, that
as a bulwark providentially raised against the cor-
rupting influence of idolatrous Tyre and Damascus,
Israel kept back that contagion from Judah, and
partly exhausted it before its arrival in the south ;
next, that t'.e purity of divine worship was not
Impaired by the excision of those tribes which were
remote from the influence of the Temple, and by
Ihe concentration of priests and religious Israelites
within the southern kingdom ; and lastly, that to the
worshippers at Jerusalem the early decline and fall
of Israel was a solemn and impressive spectacle of
judgment — the working out of the great problem
of God's toleration of idolatry. This prepared the
heart of Judah for the revivals upder Hezekiah and
Josi&h, softened them into repentance during the
Vaptivity, and strengthened them for their absolute
renunciation of idolatry, when after seventy years
they returned to Palestine, to teach the world that
there is a spiritual bond more efficacious than the
occupancy of a certain soil for keeping up national
existence, and to become the channel through which
3od's greatest gift was conveyed to mankind.
rCApnvrrr.]
' 8. The detailed history of the kingdom of Israel
ISRAEL, KINGDOM OF
will be found under the names of its nineteet
kings. [See also Etoraim.] A summary vie*
may be taken in four periods: —
(a.) b. a 975-888. Jeroboam had not suffi
cient force of character in himself to make a last-
ing impression on his people. A king, but not s
founder of a dynasty, he aimed at nothing beyond
securing his present elevation. Without any am-
bition to share in the commerce of Tyre, or tc
compete with the growing power of Damascus, or
even to complete the humiliation of the helpless
monarch whom he had deprived of half a kingdom,
Jeroboam acted entirely on a defensive policy. He
attempted to give his subjects a centre which they
wanted for their political allegiance, in Shecrem or
in Tirzah. He sought to change merely so much
of their ritual as was inconsistent with his authority
over them. But as soon as the golden calves wen
set np, the priests and Levites and many religions
Israelites (2 Chr. xi. 16) left their country, and
the disastrous emigration was not effectually checked
even by the attempt of Baasha to build a fortress
(2 Chr. xvi. 6) at Kamah. A new priesthood was
introduced (1 K. xii. 81) absolutely dependent on
the king (Am. Til. 13), not forming as under the
Mosaic law a landed aristocracy, not respected by
the people, and unable either to withstand the op-
pression or to strengthen the weakness of a king.
A priesthood created, and a ritual devised for secu-
lar purposes, had no hold whatever on the conscience
of the people. To meet their spiritual cravings a
succession of prophets was raised up, great in their
poverty, their purity, their austerity, their self-
dependence, their moral influence, but imperfectly
organized ; — a rod to correct and check the civil
government, not, as they might have been under
happier circumstances, a staff to support it. The
army soon learned its power to dictate to the iso-
lated monarch and disunited people. Baasha in
the midst of the army at Gihbethon slew the son
and successor of Jeroboam; Zimri, a captain of
chariots, slew the son and successor of Baasha;
Omri, the captain of the host, was chosen to pun-
ish Zimri ; and after a civil war of four years he
prevailed over Tibni, the choice of half the people.
(4.) B. c. 929-884. For forty-five years Israel
was governed by the house of Omri. That saga-
cious king pitched on the strong hill of Samaria as
the site of his capital. Damascus, which in the
days of Baasha had proved itself more than a match
for Israel, now again assumed a threatening atti-
tude. Edom and Moab showed a tendency to in-
dependence, or even aggression. Hence the prince?
of Omri's house cultivated an alliance with the
contemporary kings of Judah, which was cemented
by the marriage of Jehoram and Athaliah, and
marked by the community of names among the
royal children. Ahab's Tyrian alliance strength-
ened him with the counsels of the masculine mind
of Jezebel, but brought him no further support.
The entire rejection of the God of Abraham, under
the disguise of abandoning Jeroboam's unlawful
symbolism, and adopting Baal as the god of a lux-
urious court and subservient populace, led to a reac-
tion in the nation, to the moral triumph of tha
prophets in the person of Elijah, and to the extinc-
tion of the house of Ahab in obedience to the bid-
ding of Eliaha.
(c) b. o. 884-772. Unparalleled triumphs, bat
deeper humiliation, awaited the kingdom of Israel
under the dynasty of Jehu. The worship nf Bat,
was abolished by one blow; but, so long as bns
Digitized by
Google
ISRAEL, KINGDOM OF
luted, the people never ran superior to
the debasing form of religion established by Jero-
boam. Hazael, the successor of the two Becha-
dads, the ablest king of Damascus, reduced Jeho-
abai to the condition of a racial, anJ triumphed
for a time over both the disunited Hebrew king-
doms. Almost the first sign of the restoration of
their strength was a war between them ; and Jeho-
ash, the grandson of Jehu, entered Jerusalem as
the conqueror of Amaaah. Jeboash also turned
the tide of war against the Syrians; and Jeroboam
IX., the most powerful of all the kings of Israel,
aaptured Damascus, and recovered the whole an-
eient frontier from Hamath to the Dead Sea. In
the midst of his long and seemingly glorious reign
the prophets Hosea and Amos uttered their warn-
ings more clearly than any of their predecessors.
The short-lived greatness expired with the last king
of Jehu's line.
(d) B. c. 778-721. Military violence, it would
seem, broke off the hereditary succession after the
obscure and probably convulsed reign of Zacbariah.
An unsuccessful usurper, Shallum, is followed by
the cruel Menahem, who, being unable to make
head against the first attack of Assyria under Pol,
became the agent of that monarch for the oppres-
sive taxation of his subjects. Yet his power at
eume was sufficient to insure for his son snd sue-
I8RAEL, KINGDOM OF 1177
oejsoi Pekahiah a ten years' reign, cut short by s
bold usurper, Pekah. Abandoning the northern
and transjordanic regions to the encroaching power
of Assyria under Uglath-pileser, he was very near
subjugating Judah, with the help of Damascus,
now the coequal ally of Israel. But Assyiia inter-
posing summarily put an end to the independence
of Damascus, and perhaps was the indirect cause
of the assassination of the baffled Pekah. The
irresolute Hoshea, the next and last usurper, be-
came tributary to his invader, Shalmaneser, betrayed
the Assyrian to the rival monarchy of Egypt, and
was punished by the loss of bis liberty, and by the
capture, after a three years' siege, of his strong
capital, Samaria. Some gleanings of the ten tribes
yet remained in the land after so many years of
religious decline, moral debasement, national degra-
dation, anarchy, bloodshed, and deportation. Even
these were gathered up by the conqueror and car-
ried to Assyria, never again, as a distinct people,
to occupy their portion of that goodly and pleasant
land which their forefathers won under Joshua from
the heathen.
7. The following table shows at one view the
chronology of the kings of Israel and Judah.
Columns 1, 2, 3, 7, 8, 9, 10 are taken from the
Bible. Columns 4, 5, 6 are the computations of
eminent modern chronologists : column 4 being the
Tsar of
ammdliig
Kins of
Judah.
Dura-
tion
of
Belgn.
KIHOS
0»
Commencement
of Belgn.
KIMS*
or
Dura-
tion
Tear of
preceding
Queen Moths!
Israel.
A.V.
Clinton
Winer.
Judah.
of
Belgn.
17
King of
Israel.
in Judah.
22
Jeroboam. .
STB
976
975
Bshoboam
Naamah.
968
969
967
Ab(jah. . .
8
18th '.
MlchnUh Pi
Maachah (f )
966
968
966
Asa ...
41
20th .
2nd
2
Nadab . . .
964
965
964
art
at
Baaiha . .
968
954
968
JSth
2
Blah . . .
910
980
980
nth .
JBmr! . . .
929
980
928
12
Omrl . . .
929
980
928
Bth .
22
Ahab . . .
918
919
918
914
916
914
Jshoshaphat.
25
4th .
Asnbah
mh .
2
Ahsxiah . .
898
896
897
18th .
12
Jehoram . .
896
896
896
892
891
889
Jehoram . .
8
6th .
885
884
886
Abufah . .
1
12th .
AthaUah,
28
Jehu . . .
884
888
884
Athauah . .
6
878
877
878
Jshoash . .
40
7th .
Bbiah.
*M .
17
Jehoahas . .
866
865
866
nth .
16
Jshoash . .
841
889
840
889
887
888
STnTufoh •
39
2d. .
JehosddM
■6th .
41
Jeroboam n.
826
828
825
810
808
809
Undahor Am-
62
27th .
Jeehollah
11
Intel isttuunt.
riah
Kth .
Zaehariah
771
771
772
Shallum . .
772
770
771
Bth
10
Henahem. .
772
770
771
90th .
2
Pekahiah . .
761
769
760
SM .
20
Pekah . . .
769
767
768
768
766
768
Jotham . .
16
2d.
jeiBshs>
742
741
741
Aha* . . .
16
17th
•
2d Interreg-
<
num.
•
Hoshea . .
780
780
729
726
798
726
Heseklah . .
29
8rd .
AM.
Me
Samaria taken
721
721
721
698
697
696
Manasseh . •
65
Hephslbah
648
642
641
Amon . . •
2
Msshnue-
meth.
641
640
689
Josiab . . .
fa
JedMah.
610
609
609
Jehoaosa
HamutaL
610
609
609
Jsholaehha .
11
Zsbudeh
609
698
698
Jebolacblr, or
Conktb
Hehnshta.
609
69f
696
ZedeUah .
n
Hasmtal.
686
6sr
686
Jerusalem ds
stroved
1
Digitized by
Google
1178 ISRAEL, KINGDOM OF
! adopted in the margin, of the English Ver-
sion, which is founded on the calculation! of Arch-
bishop Ussher: column 5 being the computation
rf Clinton {Fatti BeUenid, iii. App. § 5); and
column 8 being the computation of Winer (Seat-
utirterbuch).
The numerous date* giren in the Bible as the
(rants of the duration of the king's reigns act aa a
continued check on each other. The apparent dis-
crepancies between them hare been unduly exag-
gerated by some writers. To meet such difficulties
rarioua hypotheses have been put forward; — that
an interregnum occurred; that two kings (father
and son) reigned conjointly; that certain reigns
were dated not from their real commencement, but
from some arbitrary period in that Jewish year in
which they commenced ; that the Hebrew copyists
have transcribed the numbers incorrectly, either by
accident or design; that the original writers have
made mistakes in their reckoning. All these are
mere suppositions, and even the most probable of
them must not be insisted on as if it were a histor-
ical fact. But in truth most of the discrepancies
may be accounted for by the simple fact that the
Hebrew annalists reckon in round numbers, never
specifying the months in addition to the years of
the duration of a king's reign. Consequently some
af these writers seem to set down a fragment of a
year as an entire year, and others omit such frag-
ments altogether. Hence in computing the date
of the commencement of each reign, without attrib-
ating any error to the writer or transcribers, it is
necessary to allow for a possible mistake amounting
to something less than two years in our interpreta-
tion of the indefinite phraseology of the Hebrew
writers. But there are a few statements in the
Hebrew text which cannot thus be reconciled.
(a.) There are in the Second Book of Kings
three statements as to the beginning of the reign
of Jehoram king of Israel, which in the view of
some writers involve a great error, and not a mere
numerical one. His accession is dated (1) in the
second year of Jehoram king of Judah (2 K. i.
17); (3) in the fifth year before Jehoram king of
Judah (2 K. viii. 16); (3) in the eighteenth year
Of Jehoshaphat (2 K. iii. 1). But these state-
nents may be reconciled by the fact that Jehoram
long of Judah had two accessions which are re-
corded in Scripture, and by the probable supposi-
tion of Archbishop Ussher that he had a third
and earlier accession which is not recorded. These
three accessions are, (1) when Jehoshaphat left his
kingdom to go to the battle of Ramoth-Gilead, hi
bis 17th year; (2) when Jehoshaphat (2 K. viii.
16) either retired from the administration of affairs,
or made his son joint king, in his 23d year; (3)
when Jehoshaphat died, in his 25th year. So that,
If the supposition of Ussher be allowed, tie acces-
sion of Jehoram king of Israel in Jehoshaphat's
18th year synchronized with (1) the second year
of the first accession, and (2) the fifth year before
ihe second accession of Jehoram king of Judah.
(4.) The date of the beginning of Uzziah's reign
(2 K. xt. 1) in the 27th year of Jeroboam n. can-
not be reconciled with the statement that Uriah's
father, Amariah, whose whole reign was 2P years
3nly, came to the throne in the second year of
Joash (3 K. xiv. 1 ), and so reigned 14 years con-
temporaneously with Joash and 27 with Jeroboam.
Dasher and others suggest a reconciliation of these
statements by the supposition that Jeroboam's
asjgn bad tiro oemiueiicenients, the first not men-
I8KAELITISH
tioneu m Scripture, on his association wMk lafa
father Joash, B. a 837. But KeU, sites Capefas
and Grotius, supposes that T2 Is an error of tb*
Hebrew copyists for 1T2, and that instead of 27a
of Jeroboam we ought to read 15th.
(c) The statements that Jeroboam H. reigned
41 years (2 K. xiv. 33) after the 15th year of
Am a ri a h , who reigned 29 years, and that Jero-
boam's son Zachariah came to the throne in the
38th year of Uzxiah (2 K. xt. 8), cannot be recon-
ciled without supposing that there was an inter-
regnum of 11 years between Jeroboam and his son
Zachariah. And almost all chronologists accept
this as a fact, although it is not mentioned in the
Bible. Some chronologists, who regard an inter-
regnum as intrinsically improbable after the pros
perous reign of Jeroboam, prefer the supposition
that the number 41 in 2 K. xiv. 23 ought to ha
changed to 51, and that the number 27 in xt. 1
should be changed to 14, and that a few other cor-
responding alterations should be made.
(iL) In order to bring down the dato of Pekah's
murder to the date of Hoshea's accession, soma
chronologists propose to read 29 years for 30, in
2 K. xv. 27. Others prefer to let the dates stand
as at present in the text, and suppose that an in-
terregnum, not expressly mentioned in the Bible,
occurred between those two usurpers. The words
of Isaiah (ix. 20, 21) seem to indicate a time of
anarchy in Israel.
The Chronology of the Kings has been minutely
investigated by Abp. Ussher, Ckronologia Sacra,
Par* PotUrior, De Annie Begum, Works, xii.
95-144; by Light&ot, Order of Ike Text* of tie
0. T., Works, i. 77-130; by Hales, New Analnme
of Chronology, ii. 378-447; by Clinton, L c ; and
by H. Browne, Ordo Sadonm. [See alio D.
Wolff, Venueh, die Widertpriche us den Jakr-
reihen der KSnige Judo's a. /er. «. andtre Dtf-
ferenien in d. WW. ChronoL auaugleicien, in the
TheoL Stud. u. KriL 1858, pp. 635-688, sod the
references under Chbokology, Amer. ed. — A.]
W. T. B.
ISRAELITE OVntpV 'l^Afrwt;
[Vat. I<rpai)A«irnr ; Aid. 'IcpanAfrnr ;] Alex.
Io?utnA.cmij: de Jetralli). In 3 Sam. xvii. 35,
Ithra, the father of Anuua, is called " an Israelite,"
or more correctly " the Israelite," while in 1 Chr.
ii. 17 he appears as " Jether the Ishmaelite." The
latter is undoubtedly the true reading, for unless
Ithra had been a foreigner there would hare been
no need to express his nationality. The LXX. and
Vulg. appear to hare read ^MyiT, « Jezreante."
"V. A. W.
• "Israelite" also occurs in the A. V. as the
rendering of Vhntp* {TV, "man of Israel,"
Num. xxr. 14; and of 'lo-oanAfTwi or 'IffaanVcrnp
(Tisch. Treg. ), John 1. 47, Rom. xL 1. « Israelites ■
is the translation of V'^"; H , used collectively, in
Ex. ix. 7; Lev. xxiiL 43; Josh. Iii. 17, xiii. 8
Judg. xx. 31; 1 Sam. ii. 14, xiii. SO, xir. 31, xxr
1, xxix. 1; 3 Sam. It. 1; 3 K. fit. 34, fit, 18; ]
Cbron. ix. 3; — of 'le-pafi\, Bar. ill. 4; 1 Msec, i
43, 53, 68, iii. 46, ri. 18; — of viol lo-awfr, Jaft
ri. 14; 1 Msec. rii. 33; — and of lo-ponAirw m
-Kterat, Rom. ix. 4; 3 Cor. xl. 82. A.
•I8EABUTI8H (n^^fST. : 'u$mm*.
Digitized by
Google
ISSAOHAB
ro Vat, -JUr-; Alex, once Ie£Mr*Ams: uroeBti?
Tim datignttinn of a certain woman (Ley. xxir. It
11) wfaoaa aon in atoned for blasphemy. A.
WSACHAH (-13K7»% [aee infra], I. ».
lasacar — such U the invariable spelling of the
name in the Hebrew, the Samaritan Codex and
Venion, the Targums of Onkdos and Pseudo-
jonathan, bnt the MasoreU hare pointed it so aa
to npenede the second S, "l^ttTJJP, lass [s] car:
lacixap ; Bee. Text of N. T. '\aaaxif, but Cod.
C, 'ImxAp [Cod. A, and Sin. Iavraxao]; Joseph.
loeix*?"- /ssncAnr). the ninth son of Jacob and
the fifth of Leah; the firstboru to l.eah after the
interval which occurred in the births of her children
i lieu. xxx. 17; comp. xxix. 35). As is the ease
with each of the sons the name is recorded as be-
stowed on account of a circumstance connected with
the birth. But, as may be also noticed in more
loan one of the others, two explanations seem to
be combined in the narrative, which even then is
sot in exact accordance with the requirements of
toe name. " God hath given me my hire (12B7,
•Job-) . . . and she called his name Issachar," is
the record ; bat in verse 18 that " hire " is for the
axrrender of her maid to her husband — while in
ver. 14-17 it is for the discover}' and bestowal of
the mandrakes. Besides, as indicated above, the
name in its original form — Isaacar — rebels against
Uus interpretation, an interpretation which, to be
consistent, requires the form subsequently imposed
en the word Ia-eachar." The allusion is not again
brought forward as it is with Dan, Asher, etc., in
the blessings of Jacob and Moses. In the former
only it is perhaps allowable to discern a faint echo
of the sound of " Issachar " in the word thicmo —
"shoulder" (Geu. xlix. 15).
Of Issachar the individual we know nothing. In
talent he is not mentioned after his birth, and
the few verses in Chronicles devoted to the tribe
eootain merely a brief list of its chief men and
heroes in the reign of David (1 Chr. vii. 1-5).
At the descent into Egypt four sons are ascribed
to him, who founded the four chief families of the
tribe (Gen. xlvi. 13; Num. xxvi. 23, 25: 1 Chr.
vii. 1). Iataehar's place during the journey to
Canaan was on the east of the Tabernacle with his
brothers Judah and Zebulun (Num. ii. 5), the
rroup moving foremost in the march (x. 15), and
baring a oommon standard, which, according to the
Rabbinical tradition, was of the three colors of
sardine, topaz, and carbuncle, Inscribed with the
names of the three tribes, and bearing the figure
fl a Eon's whelp (see Targum Pseudojon. on Num.
H. 3), At this time the captain of the tribe was
Nethaoeel ben-Zuar (Num. i. 8, ii. 6, vii. 18, x. 15).
He was succeeded by lgal ben-Joseph, who went as
representative of bis tribe among the spies (xiii. 7),
and he again by Paltiel ben-Azsan, who assisted
Joshua in apportioning the land of Canaan (xzxiv.
•8). Issachar was one of the six tribes who »-ere
lo stand on Mount Cerixim during the ceremony
of Hissing and cursing (Deut xxvii. 12). He was
sun in company with Judah, Zebulun being opposite
~ The number of the fighting mer of
ISSACHAR
117?
* The wonts ooear again almost Identically In 2 Ch"
*» I. sat Jer. xxxJ. 16 : "13^ BJ^ _ « there It a
1 A. T. « shall be rewarded."
i ef the story of the matdraktt, with
Issachar when taken in the census at Sinai was
54,400. During the journey they seem to hare
steadily increased, and after the mortality at Peat
they amounted to 64,300, being inferior to none
but Judah and Dai. — to the latter by 100 «ouh
only. The numbers given in 1 Chr. vii. 2, 4, 5
probably the census of Joab, amount in all U
145,600.
The Promised Land once reached, the connection
between Issachar and Judah seems to hare closed,
to be renewed only on two brief occasions, which
will be noticed in their turn. The intimate rela-
tion with Zebulun was however maintained. The
two brother-tribes had their portions close together,
and more than once they are mentioned in com-
pany. The allotment of Issachar lay above that of
Manasseh. The specification of its boundaries and
contents is contained in Josh. xix. 17-23. But to
the towns there named must be added Daberath,
given in the catalogue of Leritical cities {xxi. 28 •
Jannutb here is probably the Remetb of xix. 21),
and five others — Beth-shean, Ibleam, En-dor, Taa
nach, and Megiddo. These hut, though the prop
erty of Manasseh, remained within the limits of
Issachar (Josh. xvii. 11; Judg. i. 97), and they
assist us materially in determining his boundary.
In the words of Josephus (Ant. v. 1, § 22), "II
■extended in length from Carmel to the Jordan, in
breadth to Mount Tabor." In fact it exactly con-
sisted of the plain of Esdraelon or JezreeL The
south boundary we can trace by En-gannim, the
modern Jentn, on the heights which form the
southern inclosure to the Plain ; and then, further
westward, by Taanach and Megiddo, the authentic
fragments of which still stand on the same heights
as they trend away to the hump of Carmel. On
the north the territory also ceased with the plain,
which it there bounded by Tabor, the outpost of the
hilts of Zebulun. East of Tabor the hill-country
continued so as to screen the tribe from the Sea of
Galilee, but a continuous tract of level on the S. E.
fed to Beth-shean and the upper part of the Jordan
valley. West of Tabor, again, a little to the south,
is Chesullotb, the modern Jkttil, close to the tra-
ditional " Mount of Precipitation ; " and over this
the boundary probably ran in a slanting course till
It joined Mount Carmel, where the Kishon (Juab,
xix. 20) worked itt way below the eastern bluff of
that mountain — and thus completed the triangle
at itt western apex. Nazareth lies among the hills,
a few [about twoj miles north of the so-called
Mount of Precipitation, and therefore escaped being
in Issachar. Almost exactly in the centre of this
plain stood Jexreel, on a low swell, attended on the
one hand by the eminence of Mount Gilboa, on
the other by that now called ed-Duhy, or " little
Hermon," the latter having Shunem, Nain, and
En-dor on its slopes, names which recall tome of tot
most interesting and important events in the his-
tory of Israel.
This territory was, as it still is, among the richest
land in Palestine. Westward was the famous plain
which derived its name, the " seed-plot of God " —
such is the signification of Jezreel — from its fer-
tility, and the very weeds of which at this day
curious details, will be (bund in the H ifswisf— i
ltathar, labiidus, Cod. Ptrrnlrpigr. I. 620-628. TbeJ
■are ulumatelv deposited " In the house of the UveV
whatever that ex pm«l oo Day mean.
Digitized by
Google
1180
ISSAOHAB
testify to 1U enormous powers of production (Stan-
ley B. 4 P. f. 848). [Esdraeloh: Jkzhbxu]
Ota the north is Tabor, which even under the burn-
ing tun of that climate a laid to retain the gladei
and dells of an English wood (ibid. p. 850). On the
seat, behind Jezreel, is the opening which conducts
to the plain of the Jordan — to that Beth-shean
which was proverbially anions; the Rabbis the gate
of Paradise for its fhiitfulness. It is this aspect of
the territory of Issarhar which appears to be alluded
to in the Blessing of Jacob. The image of the
"strong-boned he-ass" (D7)| "fan) — the large
animal used for burdens and 5eki work, not the
lighter and swifter she-ass for riding — >' couching
down between the two hedge-rows," ■ chewing the
cud of stolid ease and quiet — is very applicable,
not only to the tendencies and habits, but to the
very size and air of a rural agrarian people, while
the sequel of the verse is no less suggestive of the
certain result of such tendencies when unrelieved
by any higher aspirations: " ile saw that rest
was good and the land pleasant, and he bowed bis
back to bear, and became a slave 6 to tribute" —
the tribute imposed ou him by the various maraud-
ing tribes who were attracted to his territory by
the richness of the crops. The Blessing of Moses
completes the picture. He is not only '< in tents "
— in nomad or semi-nomad life — but " rejoicing "
in them, and it is perhaps not straining a point to
observe that he has by this time begun to lose his
Individuality. He and Zebulun are mentioned
together as having part possession in the holy
mountain of Tabor, which was on the frontier line
of each (Deut. zxxiii. 18, 19). We pass from this
to the time of Deborah : the chief struggle in the
great victory over Sisera took place on the territory
of lasaebar, " by Taanach at the waters of Hegiddo ' '
(Judg. v. 19); but the allusion to the tribe in the
song of triumph is of the most cursory nature, not
consistent with its having taken any prominent
part in the action.
One among the Judges of Israel was from Issa-
char — Tola (Judg. x. 1) — but beyond the length
of his sway we have only the fact recorded that he
resided out of the limits of his own tribe — at
Shamir in Mount Ephraim. By Josephus he is
omitted entirely (see Ant. v. 7, $ 6). The census
of the tribe taken in the reign of David has already
oeen alluded to. It is contained in 1 Chr. vii. 1-6,
uid an expression occurs in it which testifies to the
nomadic tendencies above noticed. Out of the
whole number of the tribe no less than 36,000 were
narauding mercenary troops — " bands " (DMVU)
— a term applied to no other tribe in this enumer-
ation, though elsewhere to Gad, and uniformly to
the irregular bodies of the Bedouin nations round
Israel.? This was probably at the close of David's
■wign. Thirty years before, when two hundred of
.be head men of the tribe had gone to Hebron to
<• The word hen rendered "hedge-rows" Is one
which only occurs In Judg. v. 18. The sense than Is
evidently shnllar to that In this passage. But as to
what that sense Is all tha authorities diner. Bee
Gesenlus, Ben Zev, otc. The rendering given seams
to bo nearer the real fore* than any.
b l^fS Off/' By the LXX. rendered aVijp
tmpyis. Comp. their similar rendering of TT^yS
L4. T. « servants," and " husbandry ") in Sen. xxvl.
CJSACHAB
assist In making David king over tin entire nana
different qualifications are noted in them — they
" had understanding of the times to know what
Israel ought to do . . . and aU their brethren wan
at their commandment." To what this " under
standing of the times " was we have no clew. By
the later Jewish interpreters it is explained as elril
in ascertaining the periods of the sun and moon,
the intercalation of months, and dates of solemn
feasts, and the interpretation of the signs of the
heavens (Targum, ad toe. ; Jerome, Quail. Htbr.).
Josephus (Ant. vii. 2, § 2) gives It as " knowing
the things that were to happen ; " and he adds that
the armed men who came with these leaders were
20,000. One of the wise men of Issachar, accord-
ing to an old Jewish tradition preserved by Jerome
( Quatt. Bebr. on 2 Chr. xvii. 18), was Amasiah
son of Zichri, who with 200,000 men offered him-
self to Jehovah in the service of Jeboshaphat (2 Chr
xvii. 16): but this is very questionable, as th
movement appears to have been confined to Judah
and Benjamin. The ruler of the tribe at this time
was Omri, of the great family of Michael (1 Chr
xxvii. 18; comp. vii. 3). May he not have been
the forefather of the king of Israel of the tame
name — the founder of the " bouse of Omri " and
of the " bouse of Ahab," the builder of Samaria,
possibly on the same hill of Shamir on which the
Issacharite judge. Tola, had formerly held his court?
But whether this was so or not, at any rate oni
dynasty of the Israelite kings was Issacharite
Baasha, the son of Ahijah, of the house of Issa-
char, a member of the army with which Nadab and
all Israel were besieging Gibbethon, apparently not
of any standing in the tribe (comp. 1 K. xvi. 2),
slew the king, and himself mounted the throne
(1 K. xv. 27, Ac.). He was evidently a fierce and
warlike man (xv. 29 ; 2 Chr. xvi. 1 ), and an idolater
like Jeroboam. The Issacharite dynasty lasted
during the 24 years of his reign and the 2 of bis
son Elah. At the end of that time it was wrested
from him by the same means that his father had
acquired it, and Zimri, the new king, commenced
his reign by a massacre of the whole kindred and
connections of Baasha — he left him " not even to
much as a dog" (xvi. 11).
One more notice of Issachar remains to be added
to the meagre information already collected. It it
fortunately a favorable one. There may be no trntn
in the tradition just quoted that the tribe was In
any way connected with the reforms of Jehosha-
phat, but we are fortunately certain that, distant
as Jezreel was from Jerusalem, they took part in
the passover with which Hezekiah sanctified the
opening of his reign. On that memorable occasion
a multitude of the people from the northern tribes,
and amongst them from Issachar. although so long
estranged from the worship of Jehovah as to have
forgotten how to make the necessary purifications,
yet by the enlightened wisdom of Hezekiah wen
e The word " bands," which Is commonly employed
la the A. V. to render GetfOcfltn, *s above, la unfor-
tunately used in 1 Chr. ill. 28 for a very dimrenl
term, by which tha orderly assembly of the nghtbaa
men of the tribal Is denoted when they visited Hebrew
to make Devil king. This term Is ""tWO — " beads.'
We may almost suspect a mere misprint, « psdally at
the Vulgate has prineipa. [The i
shows *hat It la not a misprint.]
Digitized by
Google
ISSHIAH
aluwed to keep the feast, and they did keep it
seven days with great gladness — with such tu-
multuous joy at had not been known since the time
of Solomon, when the whole land wai one. Nor
did they separate till the occasion had been sig-
nalised by an immense destruction of idolatrous
altars and symbols, " in Judah and Benjamin, in
Ephraim and Hanaaseh," up to the very confines
of Issachar's own land — and then " all the children
of Israel returned every man to his possession into
their own cities" (2 Chr. xzxi. 1). It is a satis-
factory farewell to take of the tribe. Within five
years from this date Shalmaneser king of Assyria
bad invaded the north of Palestine, and after three
years' siege had taken Samaria, and with the rest
of Israel had carried Issachar away to his distant
dominions. There we must be content to leave
them until, with the rest of their brethren of all
the tribes of the children of Israel (Dan only ex-
cepted), the twelve thousand of the tribe of Issa-
char shall be sealed in their foreheads (Rev. vii.
n
8. ("Ija7*^: 'Uffdxap- [/ssocAor.]) A
Karaite Levite, one of the doorkeepers (A. V.
"porters") of the house of Jehovah, seventh son
of Obed-edom (1 Chr. xxvi. 5). O.
ISSHI'AH (py&\ {whom Jehovah leads]).
L (Tat. omits; Alex. Ucias- Jetiat.) A de-
scendant of Hoses by his younger ton Eliezer; the
bead of the numerous family of Rehabiah, in the
time of David (1 Chr. xzir. 31 ; oomp. xxiii. 17,
xxvi. 85). His name is elsewhere given as Jesha-
IAH. [ISHIAII.]
3 Vlcla; Alex. Airio: Jetia.) A Levite of the
house of Kohath and family of Uziiel; named in
the list of the tribe in the time of David (1 Chr.
xxiv. 35).
•ISSUE OF BLOOD. [Blood, Issue
or.]
ISSUE, RUNNING. The texts Lev. xr. 9,
S, xxii. 4, Num. v. 3 (and 9 Sam. iii. 39, where the
malady " is invoked as a curse), are probably to be
interpreted of gonorrhoea. In Lev. xv. 8 a distinc-
tion ia introduced, which merely means that the
cessation of the actual flux does not constitute cer-
emonial cleanness, but that the patient must bide
the legal time, 7 days (ver. 13), and perform the
prescribed purifications and sacrifice (ver. 14). See,
h owever, Sureuhusius's preface to the treatise Zabitn
of the Mishna, where another interpretation is given.
As regards the specific varieties of this malady, it
is generally asserted that its most severe form (gm.
timlttUa) ia modern, having first appeared in the
I5th century. Chardin ( Voyaget en Pent, ii. 200)
states that be observed that this disorder was prev-
alent in Persia, but that its effects were far less
severe than in western climates. If this be true,
it would go tome way to explain the alleged absence
of the gm. viruL from ancient nosology, which
(bond Hs field of observation in the East, Greece,
ate. ; and to confirm the supposition that the milder
farm only was the subject of Mosaic legishu,on.
But, beyond this, it is probable that diseases may
sppear, run their course, and disappear, and, for
•ant of an accurate observation of their symptoms,
■are no treat behind them. The "bed," "teat,"
ITALIAN BAND
1181
i the t u iiisfl i i m are, T"iy30 2T, or 2t alone,
» *QfirT^|l TTfJT^ TJ ; and than af^aeUfX.
tic. (Lev. xv. 5, 6, 4c), are not to be s uppo sed
regarded by that law at contagious, but the de
filament extended to them merely to give greata
prominence to the ceremonial strictness with which
the case was ruled. In the woman's "issue'"
(ver. 19) the ordinary menstruation seems alom
intended, supposed prolonged (rer. 85) to a morbid
exteut. The Scriptural handling of the subjec
not dealing, as in the case of leprosy, in symptoms,
it seems gratuitous to detail them here: those who
desire such knowledge will find them in any com-
pendium of therapeutics. The references are Jo-
seph. B. J. v. 6, } 6, vi. 9, § 3; Mishna, Ctlim, I
3, 8; Maimon. (id Zabim, ii. 2: whence we leant
that persons thus affected might not ascend the
Temple-mount, nor share in any religious celebrv
tion, nor even enter Jerusalem. See also MlchadU,
Lam of Motet, iv. 28a. H. H
ISTALCU1UJ8. In 1 Esdr. viii. 40, the
"son of Istakurus" (t rov 'lo*ra\Koipov [Vat
IotwmAxov] ) •» substituted for " and Zabbnd " of
the corresponding list in Ezra (viii. 14). The Ktri
hat Ziccur instead of Zabbud, and of this there b
perhaps some trace in Istalcurus.
ISTTAH (TTW), i. e, Ishvah [peaceful,
quiet]: Soviet; [Vat. Icovai] Alex. Icrova: J*-
sua), second son of Atber (1 Chr. vii. 30). like-
where in the A. V. his name, though the same ia
Hebrew, appears as Ishuah.
IS'UI CUf^, i «. Ithvi [at above]: Tat
[Horn, (not in Tat.)] and Alex. "l«ot!\: Jetmi\
third son of Asher (Gen. xM. 17); founder of t
family called after him, though in the A. T. ap-
pearing as the .Iksuttes (Num. xxvi. 44). Els*
where the name also appears as Ishcai.
• IT is used for itt in Lev. xxv. 6 in the A. T
ed. 1811 (" That which groweth of it owne acconl,'
etc.), as in the Genevan version, though itt hus
been substituted here in later editions. This use
of it was not uncommon in the English of the six-
teenth century, and occurs 15 times in Shakespeare
in the folio edition of 1623 (see the example* in
Eastwood and Wright's Bible Word-Book, p. 378
f.). It* it not found in the original edition of the
A. V., hit being everywhere used in its place, with
the single exception noted above. [His.] It was
just beginning to come into use in the time of
Shakespeare, in whose plays it occurs 10 times
(commonly spelt it's). For fuller details, see East-
wood and Wright as above. A.
• ITALIAN BAND or COHORT (<nr.$re
'IraAurf)), Acts x. i. This topic has been alluded
to under Army and Italy, but demands a fuller
notice. It is no longer questioned that the Roman
cohorts were distinguished from each other as wall
as the legions, not by numbers only but by names.
Five legions are known to have been called Italian,
and at least one cohort (see Viimd's Schulpm
gramme, p. 7, 1850). No ancient writer, it is true,
speaks of any cohort as bearing this name, stationed
at Csemrea. It certainly was not a cohort detached
from the Itnlica Leyio or Prima luiHrxi mentioned
by Tacitus {Hitt. i. 59, 64; ii. 100, Ac.); for that
legion was raised by Nero (Dio Cass. I. 8, 24), and
hence did not exist at the time of Peter's visit to
the centurion, about A. ». 40-43. Yet Luke's as-
pva\t U rev i i tfp T s i , the l
ysvefoofe, est.
Digitized by
Google
1182
TTAJUY
Jersey here, though not confirmed by an; direct
evidence, is not left wholly unsupported. It ao hap-
pens that one of Gruter's inscriptions speaks of a
' Conors militant Italicorum voluntaris, qns est in
Syria" (see Akerman, Numismatic Illwlr. of
the Narrative Portiunt of the ff. T. p. 84). There
was a class of soldiers in the Roman army who en-
listed of their own accord, and were known as
" vDluntarii " in distinction from conscripts (see
Pauly's HeaUKncyk. ri. 3744).
It is supposed, therefore, with good reason, that
there was such a cohort at Casarea, at the time to
which Luke's narrative refers, and that it was called
Italian because it consisted of native Italians;
whereas the other cohorts in Palestine were levied,
for the most part, from the country itself (see Jo-
seph. Ant, xiv. 16, § 10; B. J. i. 17, § 1). Ewald
conjectures that this Italian cohort and the Augus-
tan cohort (Acts xxrii. 1) may hare been the same;
but the fact that Luke employs different names is
against that supposition, and so much the more be-
cause different cohorts are known to have been in
Judsea at this time (Joseph. Ant. xix. 9, § 2; zx.
8, § 7). It is worthy of remark, as Tholuck ob-
serves (Glaubw. derJCvang. Getdtichte, p. 174), that
Luke places this Italian cohort at Oesarea. That
city was the residence of the Roman procurator;
and it was important that he should have there a
body of troop* on whose fidelity he could rely.
We may add that, if the soldiers who composed
this legion were Italians, no doubt Cornelius him-
self who commanded them was an Italian.
Writers on this topic refer, as the principal au-
thority, to Schwartz, Distertatio de cohort* JtaSca
et Augusta, Altorf, 1790. For notes or remarks
more or less extended, see also Wolf's Curat Pliilo-
togica, ii. 1148 f; Kuinoel, Acta ApotL p. 360;
Wieseler, Chronohgie da Apott. Zeitaltert, p. 146 ;
Biscoe, History of the Act* Confirmed, pp. 217-
224 (Oxford, 1840); and Conybeare and Howaon's
Life and Lettere of St. Paul, i. 143 (Amer. ed.).
H.
IT/ALT ('ItoA(o: [rialia]). This word is
used in the N. T. in the usual sense of the period,
i. e. in its true geographical sense, as denoting the
whole natural peninsula between the Alps and the
Straits of Messina. For the progress of the history
of the word, first as applied to the extreme south
of the peninsula, then as extended northwards to
the right bank of the Po, see the Diet, of Gcogr.
vol. ii. pp. 75, 76. From the time of the close of
the Republic it was employed as we employ it now.
In the N. T. it occurs three, or indeed, more cor-
rectly speaking, four times. In Acts x. 1, the
talian cohort at Cseaarea (^ orupa ti goAov/icVn
ItoXik^, A. V. " Italian band "), consisting, as it
taubtless did, of men recruited in Italy, illustrates
vhe militia y relations of the imperial peninsula with
the provinces. [Army.] In Acts xviii. 2, where
.re are told of the expulsion of Aquila and Priscilla
with their compatriots "from Italy," we are re-
minded of the large Jewish population which many
uthorities show that it contained. Acts xxrii. 1,
vhere the beginning of St Paul's voyage "to
_taly" is mentioned, and the whole subsequent
■arrative, illustrate the trade which subsisted be-
tween the peninsula and other parts of the Medi-
terranean. And the words in Heb. xiii. 24, " They
of Italy (of ire rift 'IraA-fat) salute you," what-
Ter they may prove for or against this being the
region In which the letter was written (and the
has been strongly argued both ways), are
ITHNAN
interesting as a specimen of the pr o g res s of CUo
tianity in the west J. 8. H.
ITHAI [2 syl.] (VVM [with Jehovah] : ASsi
[Vat Aip«; FA. Atfa ; Alex.] Hfov; [Aid. 'H0af
Comp. 'Wat:] £thai), a Benjamite, son of Rib*
of Gibeah, one of the heroes of David's guard (1
Chr. xi. 31). In the parallel list of 2 Sam. xxiii
the name is given a* Ittai. But Kennicott de-
cides that the form Ithai is the original (Vumrta-
Hon, ad loc).
ITH'AMAK ("^{TK [land of palms]: 'i»-
cuuip: Ithamar), the youngest son of Aaron (Ex.
vL 23). After the deaths of Nadab and Abihn
(Lev. x. 1), Eleozar and Ithamar, having been ad-
monished to show no mark of sorrow for their
brothers' loss, were appointed to succeed to their
places in the priestly office, as they had left no
children (Ex. xxviii. 1, 40, 43; Num. iii. 8, 4; 1
Chr. xxir. 2). In the distribution of services be-
longing to the Tabernacle and its transport on tht
march of the Israelites, the Gersbonites had chargt
of the curtains and hangings, and the Meraritea of
the pillars, cords, and boards, and both of these
departments were placed under the superintendence
of Ithamar (Ex. xxxriii. 21; Num. ir. 21-33).
These services were continued under the Temple
system, so far as was consistent with its stationary
character, but instead of being appropriated to
families, they were divided by lot, the first lot be-
ing taken by the family of Eleazar, whose descend-
ants were more numerous than those of Ithamar
(1 Chr. xxir. 4, 6). The high-priesthood paased
into the family of Ithamar in the person of Eli,
but for what reason we are not informed. It re-
verted into its original line in the person of Zadok,
in consequence of Abiathar's participation in the
rebellion of Adonyah. Thus was fulfilled the proph-
ecy delivered to Samuel against Eli (1 Sam. ii.
81-36; 1 K. ii. 26, 27, 35; Joseph. Ant rffi. 1,
5 8)-
A descendant of Ithamar, by name Daniel, is
mentioned as returning from captivity in the timj
of Artaxerxes (Ear. riii. 2). H. W. P.
ITHIEL (bNVTS {God it with me]: '£•.
tjA; [Vat Alex. A<«in\; FA. SefcnA.] Etktel)
1. A Benjamite, son of Jesaiah (Neh. xi. 7).
3. (LXX. omit; Vulg. translates, cum quo est
Deut.) One of two persons — Ithiel and Ueal —
to whom Agur ben-Jakeh delivered his discount
(Pror. xxx. 1). [Ucal.]
ITHTUAH (npJT [orphanage] : 'Uttyai,
[Vat- E0o/ia; FA. E0cua:] Alex. Irf.^a: Jethma),
a Moabite, one of the heroes of David's guard, ac-
cording to the enlarged list of Chronicles (1 Chr.
xi. 46).
ITH'NAN (73 IT [bettotoed, given]; in boU,
MSS. of the LXX. the name is corrupted by being
attached to that next it: ' Aaopturair, Alex.
16na£up: Jtthnam), one of the towns in the ex-
treme south of Judah (Josh. xv. 23), named with
Kedeah and Telem (comp. 1 Sam. xr. 4), and
therefore probably on the borders of the desert, if
not actually in the desert itself. No trace of Us
existence has yet been discovered, nor does it ay-
pear to hare been known to Jerome. The village
/oVi which recalls the name, is between Hebros
and Beit-Jibrin, and therefore such too far north
u.
Digitized by
Google
ITHUA
ITHfBA Q*yy [abundimct, entiMKe]
tttif, [Tal. Ala.] lofty; Joseph. Ant. vii. 10,
I 1, 'IfOgtfxrat : Jf'ra), an Israelite (9 Sam. xvii.
15) or Ishmaelite (1 Chr. ii. 17, "Jetber the Ish-
medite"); the father of Amass by Abigail, Da-
vid's sister. He ni thus brother-in-law to David
and ancle to Josh, Abishai, and Asahel, the three
"ions of Zeruiah." There is no absolute means
of settling which of these — Israelite or Ishmaelite
— is correct; but there can be little doubt that the
latter is so ; the fact of the admixture of Ishmaelite
blood in David's family being a fit subject for no-
tice in the genealogies, whereas Ithra's being an
'waelite would call for no remark. [Jktheh.]
6.
• Keil and Delitzsch also (Boots of Samuel, p.
433, Eng. transl.) read " Ishmaelite" for " Israel-
ite," 2 Sam. xvii. 25. Wordsworth (Book* of
Samuel, p. Ill) suggest* that if "Israelite" be
correct, Ithra may be so called because he belonged
to one of the other tribes, and not to that of Judah
into which he married. [Abigail.] As to the
question (not an easy one to answer) of his precise
relationship to David in consequence of the mar-
riage, see Nahash. IL
mrHAH fl-J.-p [as above]). 1. CModV,
IseWp; [Alex. UBpar; Vat. in 1 Chr., Tffpap:]
Jethram, Jethrnn), a son of Diahon, a Horite (Gen.
xxxvi. 26; 1 Chr. i. 41); and probably a phylarch
(••duke," A. V.) of a tribe of the Horim, as was
his fether (Gen. xxxvi. 30); for the latter was ev-
idently a son of Seir (w. 91 and 80), and not a
son of Anah (rer. 25).
2. ('Mpd: [Vat. 0epa: Alex. Uttp; Comp.
Aid. 'UBpir:] Jtthrmt), a descendant of Asher, in
the genealogy contained in 1 Chr. vii. 30-40.
E.8. P.
ITH'BEAM (D?'?'"!'; [residue of the peo-
ple]: 'U9tpuin, 'U8pa4fi; [Vat. in 1 Chr., l$a-
aast;] Alex. Eiffepoop, uepap. ; Joseph. Tf0-
paiprif- Jethraam), a son of David, horn to him
in Hebron, and distinctly specified as the sixth, and
as the child of " Eglah, David's wife " (2 Sam. iii.
t ; 1 Chr. iii. 3). In the ancient Jewish traditions
Eglah is said to hare been Michal, and to have
died in giving birth to Ithream.
ITHfUTE, THE (TVO [patronym. trom
">!£]• 'ESipaMt, 'Etevtuot, 'UBpi; [Vat.
Meiptuot, BMenuot, HStiosi (FA I0»p«);]
Alex, o EBpatot, Teflprrrit, UBtpi, IBrjpei : Jeth-
rite*, Jethratu), the native of a place, or descend-
snt of a man called Iether (according to the He-
brew mode of forming derivatives) : the designation
of two of the members of David's guard, urn and
f'rtreb (2 Sam. xxiii. 88; 1 Chr. xi. 40). The
Ithrite (A. V. "Ithrite*" [AUaKlpi, Vat Alex.
-\eiH- Jcthrei]) is mentioned in 1 Chr. ii. 53 as
among the '• families of Kirjath-jearim ; " but this
does not give us much clew to the derivation of the
term, exofpt that it fixes it as belonging to Judah.
The two Ithrite heroes of David i £uard may have
some from jATTtit, in the mountains of Judah,
sue of the places which were the " haunt" of Da-
rid and his men in their freebooting wanderings,
end where he had '•friends" (1 Sam. xxx. 27;
soup. 31). Ira has been supposed to be identical
erith "ha the Jairite," David's priest (2 Sam. xx.
•»)— the Sjriae version reading " from Jatir" in
ITTAI 1188
that place. But tr thing more than eonjeornre cag
be arrived at on the point.
•ITS. [Hui; It.]
ittah-ka'zin n^ijnny: *vi *»*»
Karao-cV>; Alex. .... Kao-ip: lllacaun), one
of the landmarks of the boundary of Zebuhin (Josh,
xix. 13), named next to Gath-hepher. Like that
place (A. V. " Gittah-hepher " ) the name is prob-
ably Eth-karin, with the Hebrew particle of mo-
tion (oA) added — i. e. " to Eth-kadn." Taken a*
Hebrew the name bears the interpretation time, or
people, of a judge (Gee. Thee. p. 1083 6). It ha*
not been identified. Q.
IT/TAI [9 syL] fJ-jH [m time, opportune!*
pretent]). 1. ('EBt, sod so Josephus; [Vat 2«r-
Bti\] Alex. EWii : Kihni.) "Ittai thb Grr-
titk," i. «. the native of Gath, a Philistine in the
army of Sing David. He appears only during toe
revolution of Absalom. We first discern him on
the morning of David's flight, while the king ws*
standing under the olive-tree below the city, watch-
ing the army and the people defile past him. [Set
David, vol. i. p. 663 a.] Last in the procession
came the 600 heroes who had formed David's band
during his wanderings in Judah, and had been
with him at Gath (2 Sam. xv. 18; comp. 1 Sam.
xxiii. 13, xxvii. 2, xxx. 9, 10; and see Joseph. Ant
vii. 9, $ 2). Amongst these, apparently command-
ing them, was Ittai the Gittite (ver. 19). He caught
the eye of the king, who at once addressed him and
besought him as "a stranger and an exile," and as
one who had but very recently joined his service,
not to attach himself to a doulitful cause, but to
return "with bis brethren" and abide with the
king" (19, 20). But Ittai is firm; he is the king'*
slave ("V3.V, A. V. " sen-ant "), and wherever hi*
master goes he will go. Accordingly he is allowed
by David to proceed, and he passes over the Kedron
with the king (xv. 22, LXX.), with all his men,
and "all the little ones that were with him."
These "little ones" (^n*^, "« u the chil-
dren") must have been the families of the band,
their "households" (1 Sam. xxvii. 3). They ac-
companied them during their wanderings in Judah,
often in great risk (1 Sam. xxx. 6), and they wen
not likely to leave them behind in this froth com-
mencement of their wandering life.
When the army was numbered and organised by
David at Mahanaim, Ittai again appears, now in
command of a third part of the force, and (for the
time at least) enjoying equal rank with Joab and
Abishai (2 Sam. xviii. 2, 5, 12). But here, on the
eve of the great battle, we take leave of this vs-iast
and faithful stranger; his conduct in the fight and
hi* subsequent fate are alike unknown to us. Nn
is he mentioned in the lists of David's cantata* aiid
of the heroes of his body-guard (see 2 Sam. xxiii.;
1 Chr. xi.), lists which are possibly jf a date pre-
vious to Ittai's arrival in Jerusalem.
An interesting tradition is related by Jerome
(Quasi Hear, on 1 Chr. xx. 2). "David took
the crown off the head of the image of Hilcom
(A. V. ' their king ')• Bat by the law it was for-
bidden to any Israelite to touch either gold or
silver of an idol. Wherefore they say that Ittai
a The meaning of this Is doubtful. " The king "
sy be Absalom, or It may be Ittai's rbrawr man
sty the LXX the words an omHtsd
Digitized by
Google
1184
l'SVHMA.
the Gittite, who had oome to David bom the Phil-
istines, m the nun who snatched the crown from
the head of Milcom ; for it was lawful for a Hebrew
to take it from the hand of a man, though not
from the head of the idol." The main difficult;
to the reception of this legend lies in the net that
if Ittai was engaged in the Ammonite war, which
happened several Years before Absalom's revolt, the
expression of David (2 Sam. iv. 20), " thou earnest
but yesterday," loses its force. However, these
words may be merely a strong metaphor.
From the expression "thy brethren" (xv. 20)
we may Inter that there were other Philistines be-
sides Ittai in the six hundred ; but this is uncertain.
Ittai was not exclusively a Philistine name, nor
does " Gittite " — as in the case of Obed-edom, who
was a I-evite — necessarily imply Philistine parent-
age. Still David's words, "stranger and exile,"
seem to show that he was not an Israelite.
2. CaMrtfot; [Vat E<r9o«; Conip. Aid. '£«»(:]
Mm".) Sun of Kibai, from Gibeah of Benjamin;
one of the thirty heroes of David's guard (2 Sam.
xxiii. 29). In the parallel list of 1 Chr. xi. the
name is given as Ithai. G.
ITTJILSi'A ClToupofa [from "WD% encfos-
iire, nomadic camp, Ges.]), a small province on
the northwestern border of Palestine, lying along
the base of Mount Hennon. In Luke Hi. 1 it is
stated that Philip was " tetrarch of Itunea and the
region of Trachonitis; " and this is the only men-
tion in Scripture of the district under Its Greek
name. But the country became historic long be-
fore the rule of the Herodian family or the advent
of the Greeks. Jetur ("WO?) was a son of Ish-
msel, and he gave his name, like the rest of his
brethren, to the little province he colonized (Gen.
xxv. 15, 16). In after years, when the Israelites
had settled in Canaan, a war broke out between
the half-tribe of Hanasseh and the Hagarites (or
Ishmaelites), Jetur, Nephish, and Nodab. The
latter were conquered, and the children of Manas-
seh " dwelt in the land, and they increased from
Bashan unto Baal-Hermon." They already pos-
sessed the whole of Bashan, including Gaulanitis
and Trachonitis; and now they conquered and col-
onised the little province of Jetur, which lay between
Bashan and Mount Hennon (1 Chr. v. 19-23).
Subsequent history shows that the Ishmaelites were
neither annihilated nor entirely dispossessed, for in
the second century B. c, Aristohulus, king of the
Jews, reconquered the province, then called by its
Greek name Itunea, and gave the inhabitant* their
choice of Judaism or banishment (Joseph. Ant. xiii.
11, $ 3). While some submitted, many retired to
their own rocky fastnesses, and to the defiles of
Hennon adjoining. Strabo says that in his day
the mountainous regions in the kingdom of Chalcis
Hen inhabited partly by Humans, whom he de-
scribe* a* Kcutovpyat rirrts (xvi. pp. 818, 520).
Other early writers represent them as skillful arch-
ers and daring plunderer (Cic Phil. ii. 44; Vlrg.
Georo.u. 448; Lucan. Phnr. vil. 230). Itursea.
with the adjoining provinces, fell into the hands of
a chief called Zeuodorus; but, about B. c. 20, they
were taken from him by the Roman emperor, and
r'ven to Herod the Great (Joseph. Ani. xr. 10,
1), who bequeathed them to his son Philip (Ant.
wii. 8, (j 1; Lake Hi. 1; comp. Joseph. B. J. ii.
M«>-
Th* paasagss above referred to point dearly to
FrUIUBA
the position of Itursea, and show, notwithstanding
the arguments of Reland and others (Relatd. p.
106; Lightfoot, Bar. Bet. a. v. tturan), tint Ii
was distinct from Auranitis. Pliny rightly places it
north of Bashan and near Damascus (v. 23); • and
J. de Vitry describes it as adjoining Trachonitis,
and lying along the base of Libanus between Tibe-
rias and Damascus (Gala Dei, p. 1074; comp. pp.
771, 1003). At the place indicated U situated the
modern province of JetUr (<.Juus»j, whioh is
just the Arabic form of the Hebrew Jetur ("MS?).
It is bounded on the east by Trachonitis, on the
south by Gaulanitis, on the west by Hennon, and
on the north by the plain of Damascus. It is table-
land with an undulating surface, and has little con-
ical and cup-shaped hills at intervals. The southern
section of it has a rich soil, well watered by nu-
merous springs and streams from Hennon. The
greater part of the northern section is entirely dif-
ferent. The surface of the ground is covered with
jagged rocks; in some places heaped up in huge
piles, in others sunk into deep pits; at one plsnr
smooth and naked, at another seamed with yawi -
ing chasms in whose rugged edges rank grass and
weeds spring up. The rock is all basalt, and toe
formation similar to that of the Lejah. [Aroob.]
The molten lava seems to have issued from the
earth through innumerable pores, to have spread
over the plain, and then to have been rent and
shattered while cooling (Porter's Handbook, p. 465).
Jedtr contains thirty-eight towns and villages, ten
of which are now entirely desolate, and all the rest
contain only a few families of poor peasants, living
in wretched hovel* amid beans of ruins (Porter's
Damaicut, ii. 272 ff.). J. L. P.
* Yet there is some dissent from this view of
the identity of Jetur (Gen. xxv. 35) and Jedir,
and hence of the situation of Ituraa s* being on
the northeastern slope of JtUl Btiteh, one of the
spurs of Hennon. The German traveller in the
Hawran, Dr. Wetzstein, though he regards Jetur
and Ituraea as unquestionably the same, maintain*
that Jetur and Jedir, or Gtdir, are not identical,
partly on account of the difference in the name*
(generally considered unimportant), and partly be-
cause the Humans, as described by ancient writers,
must have been a more hardy and powerful race
than the inhabitants of a few villages in a compar-
atively low region like Gedir, and poorly protected
against invasion and subjugation He place* Itu-
raea further south, on the summits and on the east
em declivity of the central mountains of the Bmt-
ran, now inhabited by a portion of the Druses, one
of the most warlike tribes of the East. He holds
that the Biblical Jetur, though now lost, was among
these mountains, and belonged to an Ishmaelitic
tribe, a* stated in Gen. xxv. 12 fF. He argues,
also, that a little district like Gedir, so near to
Damascus, would be under the jurisdiction of that
city, and not form part of an independent tetrarehy.
The farms and villages there at present are owned
by patrician families of Damascus. See thist au-
thor's Reutbericht Qber ffaurin wnd die Traeho-
nen, pp. 88-92. The derivation of Gtd&r from
Jetur, says the writer on "Itursea," in ZeUar-
BibL WUrterb., a. v. (2» Aufl.), has not yet base
shown. If the ancient name still remains, it e*t>
a • puny assigns Itarasa to O a ls uji ta to H. *
v. 19, but doss not refer to It tn v. 28. B.
Digitized by
Google
IVAH
total; Inn the finding of Itunaa in GeMr, as
does >1» ita being assigned by some of the ancient
writers to Ode-Syria. Tet Ccele-Syria, it should
be said, is a vague designation, and was bometimes
used so as to embrace nearly all inner Syria from
Damascus to Arabia (see Winer's Bibl. Realm, i.
388, 3o Ami.)- Dr. Bobinson (Phyt. Geoor. p.
319) follows the common representation. See, to
the same effect, Raumer's Faustina, p. S27, V*
Ami. For a paper on " Bashan, Itunea, and Ke-
rath," by Mr. Porter, author of the above article,
see BM. Sacra, xiU. 789-808. H.
ITAH, or ATA (rTI?, or HJ? [destrae-
■on, ntau, Gee.]: 'Afli, [in Is. (with Hena),
'Anyauydm, Vat. (with Hena) Avayovyava;
Camp. 'AovaV; in 9 K. zriii., Vat, omits, Alex.
Am; in xix., Tat, Ovftov. Alex. AvraO Am),
which is mentioned in Scripture twice (2 K. xviii.
34, xix. 13; cotnp. Is. xxxvii. 13. in connection
with Hena and Sepharvaim, and once (S K. xvii.
24) in connection with Babylon and Cutbah, must
be sought in Babylonia, and is probably identical
with the modem Bit, which is the "Ij of Herodotus
(L 179). This town lay on the Euphrates, between
Sippara (Sepharvaim) and Annh (Hena), with
which it seems to have been politically united
shortly before thj time of Sennacherib (2 K. xix.
IS). It is probably the Aheva (H^ilH) of Ezra
(viii. IS). The name is thought to have been
originally derived from that of a Babylonian god,
/■», who repre s en ts the sky or JJther, and to
whom the town is supposed to have been dedicated
(Sir H. Rawlinson, in Bawlinson's Herodntw, 1.
408, note). In this case Imnh (i"TW) would seem
to be the most proper pointing. The pointing
At a, at rather Avva (rVf$\ shows a corruption of
articulation, which might readily pan on to Ahava
1YOBY
1186
In the Talmud the name appears as
Ma* (M , n , ) ; and hence would be formed the
Greek "i», and the modern Bit, where the I is
merely the feminine ending. Isidore of Cbarax
seems to intend the same place by his 'At f-roAir
(Mam. Parik. p. 6). Some have thought that it
occurs as It in the Egyptian Inscriptions of the
4me of Tbothmes HI., about B. c. 1450 (Birch, in
QnVi JEgypHaca, p. 80).
This place has always been famous for its bitu-
men springs. It is bitumen which is brought to
Tluthmes III. as tribute from /«i From /«, so-
cording to Herodotus, was obtained the bitumen
used as cement in the walls of Babylon (L 1. c).
Isidore eaDs AeipolU "the place where are the
bitumen springs" (Ma iurAaArlriSn wiryaO.
These springs still exist at Hit, and sufficiently
mark the identity of that place with the Herodo-
tean Is, and therefore probably with the Ivah of
Scripture. They have been noticed by most of our
Mesopocamian travellers (see, among others, Rich's
Pint Memoir on Babylon, p. 64, and Chesney's
Emmrata Exptd&on, L 63). Q. R.
IVORY 0#, ikln, in all passages, except 1 K.
(. B, and 9 Chr. Ix. 81, where D^rTJEJ, then-
Sabbtm, is so rendered). The word thin' literally
signifies the "tooth" of any animal, and hence
more especially denoUs the substance of the pu-
Jeetang tusks of elephants. By some of the an-
tfcwt nations these tusks were Imagined to u»
7«
Irani (Ex. xxvii 15,- PUu. viU. 4, xviiL 1), though
Diodorus Siculus (i. 55) correctly calls them teeth
As they were first acquainted with elephants through
their ivory, which was an important article of com-
merce, the shape of the tusks, in all probability, led
them into this error. It is remarkable that no
word in Biblical Hebrew denotes an elephant, unless
the latter portion of the compound thenhabUm be
supposed to have this meaning. Geseniua derives
it from the Sanscrit ibhat, " an elephant; " Eeil
(on 111 22) from the Coptic cboy; while Sir
Henry Bawlinson mentions a word habba, which he
met with in the Assyrian inscriptions, and which
he understands to mean " the large animal," the
term being applied both to the elephant and the
camel (Journ. of At. Soc. xii. 403). It is sug-
gested in Geseniua' Thetaurm («. ».) that the
original reading may have been D s 3?n ]B7,
" ivory, ebony " (cf. Ez. xxvii. 15). Hitzig (liniah,
p. 643), without any authority, renders the word
"nubiachen Zahn." The Targum Jonathan on 1
K. x. 22 has Vs? ]tt>, "elephant's tusk," while
the Peshito gives simply "elephants." In the
Targum of the Pseudo Jonathan, Gen. 1. 1 is
translated, " and Joseph placed his father upon a
bier of ?^S12tP " (ihinddphln), which is conjec-
tured to be a raluable species of wood, but for
which Buxtorf, with great probability, suggests as
another reading VST fVi, - Ivory."
The Assyrians appear to have carried on a great
traffic in ivory. Their early conquests in India
had made them familiar with it, and (according to
one rendering of the passage) their artists supplied
the luxurious Tynans with carvings in ivory from
the isles of Chittim (Ez. xxvii. 6). On the obelisk
in the British Museum the captives or tribute
bearers are represented as carrying tusks. Among
the merchandise of Babylon, enumerated in Rev
xviii. 12. are included " all manner vessels of ivory.'
The skilled workmen of Hiram, king of Tyre, fash-
ioned the great ivory throne of Solomon, and over-
laid it with pure gold (1 K. x. 18; 2 Chr. ix. 17).
The ivory thus employed was supplied by the car-
avans of Dedan (Is\ xxi. 13 ; Ez. xxvii. 15), or was
brought with apes and peacocks by the navy of
Tharahish (1 K. x. 22). The Egyptians, at a very
early period, made use of this material in decora-
tion. The cover of a small ivory box in the Egyp-
tian collection at the Louvre is " inscribed with the
pnenomen Nefer-ka-re, or Neper-cheres, adopted by
a dynasty found in the upper line of the tablet of
Abydos, and attributed by M. Bunsen to the fifth.
... In the time of Thothmes III. ivory was im-
ported in considerable quantities into Egypt, either
' in boats laden with ivory and ebony ' from Ethi-
opia, or else in tusks and cups from the Ruten-nu.
. . . The celebrated car at Florence has its linch-
pins tipped with ivory " (Birch, in Tram. 0/ Roy.
Soc. of Lit iil. 2d series). The specimens of
Egyptian Ivory work, which are found in the prin-
cipal museums of Europe, are, most of them, in
the opinion of Mr. Birch, of a date anterior to the
Persian invasion, and soaie even as old as the 18th
dynasty.
The ivorv used by the Egyptians was principally
brought from Ethiopia (Herod, iil. 114), though
their elephants were originally from Asia. The
I Ethiopians, iccording to Diodorus Siculus (1. 55),
'brought te Seaostris "ebony and gold, and the
Digitized by
Google
1186 ivy
•oath of elephants." Among the tribute paid by
thai to the Persian kings wen " twenty Urge tasks
of Ivory " (Herod, ui. 97). In the Periplni of the
Bed Sea (e. 4), attributed to Aran, Coloe ( Calai)
la aaid to be " the chief mart for ivory." It woe
thence carried down to Adouli (ZuUa, or Thvlla),
a port on the Red Sea, about three days' Journey
from Coloe, together with the hides of hippopotami,
tortoise-shell, apes, and slaves (Plin. vi. 34). The
dephanta and rhinoceroses, from which it was ob-
tained, were killed further up the country, and tew
were taken near the sea, or in the neighborhood of
Adouli. At Ptolemaia Theron was found a little
Ivory like that of Adouli (PeripL e. 8). Ptolemy
PMJadelphua nude thia port the depot of the ele-
phant trade (Plin. vi. 84). According to Pliny
(viii. 10), ivory was so plentiful on the borders of
Ethiopia that the natives made door-posts of it, and
even fences and stalls for their cattle. The author
of the Periphu (c. IS) mentions Rhapta as another
atation of the ivory trade, but the ivory brought
down to thia port is aaid to have been of an inferior
quality, and " for the moat part found in the woods,
damaged by rain, or collected from animals drowned
by the overflow of the rivers at the equinoxes"
(Smith, Diet. tieogr. art Rhapta). The Egyptian
merchants traded for ivory and onyx atones to
Barygaza, the port to which waa carried down the
commerce of Western India from Otene (PeripL
e.49).
In the early ages of Greece ivory waa frequently
employed for purposes of ornament. The trappings
of horses were studded with it (Horn. IL v. 584);
it waa used for the handles of keys (Od. xxi. 7),
and for the bosses of shields (Hes. Se. Bere. 141,
143). The " Ivory house " of Ahab (1 K. xxii. 89)
was probably a palace, the walla of which were
panelled with ivory, like the palace of Mendaua
described by Homer (Otlyt. iv. 73; cf. Eur. /ph.
AuL 583, tKupavroiiroi Sopot- Comp. also Am.
Iii. 15, and Pa. xlv. 8, unless the " ivory palaces"
in the latter passage were perfume boxes made of
that material, as has been conjectured). Beds inlaid
or veneered with ivory were in use among the He-
brews (Am. vi. 4; cf. Horn. Od. xxiii. 800), aa also
among the Egyptians (Wilkinson, Aac. Egypt, iii.
189). The practice of inlaying and veneering wood
with ivory and tortoise-shell is described by Pliny
(xvi. 84). The peat ivory throne of Solomon, the
work of the Tyrian craftsmen, has been already
mentioned (cf. Rev. xx. 11); but it ia difficult to
determine whether the " tower of ivory " of Cant
vii. 4 ia merely a figure of speech, or whether it
bad its original among the things that were. By the
.uxurious Phoenicians ivory was employed to orna-
ment the boxwood rowing benches (or " hatches "
according to some) of their galleys (Ex. xxvii. 6).
Many specimens of Assyrian carving in ivory have
been found in the excavations at Nimroud, and
among the rest some tablets " richly inlaid with
oiue and opaque glass, lapis lazuli, etc" (Bonomi,
Nineveh and its Palaces, p. 334; cf. Cant v. 14).
Part of an ivory staff, apparently a sceptre, and
several entire elephants' tusks were discovered by
Mr. Layard in the last stage of decay, and it was
with extreme difficulty that these interesting relies
void be restored (JVm. ami Bah. p. 195).
W. A. W.
IVY (nov6f. Aerfera), the common Bedera
Ma*, ef which the ancient Greeks and Romans
tarn or three Unas, winch appear to be
IZRAHITK, THE
only varieties. Mention of thia plant la made ants
in S Mace. ri. 7, where it ia said that the Jews
were compelled, when the least of Bacchus was
kept, to go in procession carrying ivy to thia deity,
to whom it ia well known thia plant waa sacred.
Ivy, however, though not mentioned by name, has
a peculiar interest to the Christian, as forming the
" corruptible crown " (1 Cor. ix. 35) for which the
competitors at the great Isthmian games contended,
and which St Paul so beautifully contrasts with
the " incorruptible crown " which shall hereafter
encircle the brows of those who run worthily the
race of this mortal lift. In the Isthmian contests
the victor's garland waa either try or /Me.
W. H.
* The ivy (such aa ia described above) grows
wild also in Palestine. Q. E. P.
IZ'EHAR Plovalae: Jaaar]. The form In
which the name Ixhar ia given in the A. V. of
Num. iii. 19 only. In ver. 87 the family of the
same person ia given aa Ixeharitea. The Hebrew
word is the same as Ishar.
IZ'EHARITES, THE C"3»T?!n: * 'Ir-
troop; Alex, o Sotu: Jetaarita). A family of
Kohathite LeriteaTdeacended from Ixhar the sob
of Kohath (Num. Ui. 87); called also in the A. V.
" Izharitee." W. A. W.
IZ'HAR (spelt Izehar in Num. 10. 19, of
A. V.; in Heb. always "in?^ [oil; and perh. one
anointed with oil]: 'lovdap *ad [1 Chr. vi. 88,
xxiii. 13, 18,] Imlae [but bere Vat Alex, read
Ie-e-aoe; Vat in Ex. iii. 19, Iovero*]: Itaar),
son of Kohath, grandson of Levi, uncle of Aaron
and Moses, and lather of Korah (Ex. vi. 18, 81;
Num. Ui. 19, xvi. 1; 1 Chr. vi. 8, 18). But in
1 Chr. vi. 83 Ammmadab ia substituted for Mar,
aa the son of Kohath and father of Korah, in the
line of SamueL This, however, must be an acci-
dental error of the scribe, as in ver. 88, where the
same genealogy ia repeated, Ixhar appears again i>
his right place. The Cod. Alex, in ver. 83 read)
lthnr [leraaap] in place of Ammmadab, and th)
Aldine and Complut read Ammmadab between
Ixhar and Kore, making another generation. But
these are probably only corrections of the text
(See Burrington's Genealogies of tht 0. T.) Ishat
was the bead of the family of the Izharttes or
Izehabites (Num. iii. 87; 1 Chr. xxvi. 83, 89),
one of the four families of the Kohathltea.
A. C. H.
IzTHARTTES, THE (^V^O : * Ivaapt,
•io-o-odV, * 'Itronopl; [Vat in i Chr. xxlv. 89,
xxvi. 89, le-<rap«;j Alex, o levoaot, lovopt, o
litaap ii ltaari, Itaarita). The same aa the pre-
ceding. In the reign cf David, Shebmith was the
chief of the family (1 Chr. xxlv. 23), and with his
brethren had charge of the treasure dedicated few
the Temple (1 Chr. xxvi. 88, 89). W. A. W.
IZRAHI'AH (nNTTT [Jehoeak amtet as
sprout forth or appear] :' 'legato, 'E£>ata; [Vat
Za/fia;] Alex. ItCpta: ftrahia), a man of Issachsr,
one of the Bene-Uzzi [sons of U.], and father of
four, or five — which, ia not clear — of the priori
pal men In the tribe (1 Chr. riL 8).
IzTRAHITE, THE (rTTT»TT, I , -tot
Israeli " [mdigemm, move, Gee., Flu-st] : 4 'IsepaW
[Vat Eo-pof ;] Alex. U(peuK: Jeuerites), the dot
ignatton of Shamhith, the captain of the flftt
Digitized by
Google
JZKKBL
u appointed by Dmvid (1 Chr.
mil 8). In it* present form toe Hebrew will Lot
bee the interpretation put on it it the A. V. Its
real force is probably Zerahite, that U, from the
great Judaic family of Zerah — the Zarhites.
* IZ'BEEL U used for Jezrkkl In <T .ah. zix.
18 in the A. V. ed. 1611. It is the common form
in the Genevan version. A.
IZTU ( s "]?»n, i. e. "the Iterite [Jehovah
creates, FUrst]':" 'Woyrf; [Vat l«ro>«;] Alex.
lee-Spi: ftari), a Levite, leader of the fourth course
or ward in the service of the house of God (1 Chr.
in. 11). In ver. 3 he is called Zbri.
J.
J A AKAN (li^S. [°*m Kigadout, huttigent,
FUrst]: 'IokI/i; [Vat.] Alex. Icuc'ip: Jaean), the
forefather of the Bene-Jaekan, round whose wells
the children of Israel encamped after they left
Mosera, and from which they went on to Hor-
Hagidgad (Deut x. 6). Jaakan was son of Eater,
the son of Seir the Horite (1 Chr. i. 43). The
name is here given in the A. V. as Jakam, though
without any reason for the change. In Gen. xxxvi.
87 it is in the abbreviated form of Akam. The
site of the wells has not been identified. Some
suggestions will be seen under Brme-Jaakan.
G.
JAAK03AH (n^PS?: 'l. Ka jS<i; Alex.
locals: Jacaba), one of the princes (D^rPttTjl)
st* the families of Simeon (1 Chr. ir. 36). Except-
ing the termination, the name is identical with that
of Jacob.
* FUrst makes this name = " to Jacob," i. e.
reckoned to him. It is the unaccented paragogic
r1 T , appended to a class of proper names In the
biter Hebrew. (Hear, trad Chald. Hamho. s. v.)
H.
JA'ALA (Mb^> [mU she-goat]: 'I,MJa:
[Alex. FA lean*:] Jahala). Bene-Jaala [sons
af J.] were among the descendants of " Solomon's
slaves" who returned from Babylon with Zerub-
babel (Neb. viL 56). The name also oocnrs as —
JA'ALAH (F^-VI [as above]: 'IniAii; Alex.
ItAo: Jala), Ear. ii. 86; and in Etdras as Jeeu.
JA'ALAM (Db9>: whom God hides, Ges.:
'IryAo>: Ikebm, Ihetom), a son of Esau by his wife
Ahoubaxah (Gen. xxxvi. 5, 14, 18; cf. 1 Chr.
1 *»), and a phylarch (A. V. "duke") or bead of
• tribe of Edom. E.8.P.
JA'A'SAI [3 syL] C3?£: [whom Jehovah
mswers]: 'larlr; [Vat. Iowir;] Alex, lorm :
Jamni), a chief man In the tribe of Gad (1 Chr.
r. 13). The LXX. have connected the following
tame, Shaphat, to Jaanai, and rendered it as I. o
fpOflfUlTtit-
JA'ARE-OB/EGIM (D^-jh ^71 D
<*}fimjt 'ApusyryO* ; [Vat Alex. '-y«,» :]' SaZtu
poU/mitaruu), according to the present text of 3
Bam. xri. 19, a Betbkbemite, and the father of
Bhanan who slew Goliath (the words " the brother
4." are added in the A. A'.). In the pni.iuVl pu-
JAAZAMIAH 1187
nge, 1 Chr. 1 1, S, besides other differences Jab? ■
found instead of Jaare, and Oregim is emitted.
Oregim is not elsewhere found as a proper name
nor is it a common word ; and occurring as it does
without doubt at the end of the verse (A. V.
" weavers "), in a sentence exactly parallel to that
in 1 Sam. xvii. 7, it is not probable that it should
also occur in the middle of the same. The con-
clusion of Kennicott (Dissertation, 80) appears a
just one — that in the latter place it has been
interpolated from the former, and that Jair or Jaor
is the correct reading instead of Jaare. [Elii awan,
vol i. p. 697 a.]
Still the agreement of the ancient versions with
the present Hebrew text affords a certain corrobora-
tion to that text, and should not be overlooked.
[Jair.]
The Peshito, followed by the Arabic, substitutes
for Jaare-Oregini the name " Malaph the weaver,"
to the meaning of which we have no clew. The
Targum, on the other hand, doubtless anxious to
avoid any apparent contradiction of the narrative
in 1 Sam. xvii., substitutes David for Elhanan,
Jesse for Jaare, and is led by the word Oregim to
relate or possibly to invent a statement as to Jesse's
calling — " And David son of Jesse, weaver of the
veils of the house of the sanctuary, who was of
Bethlehem, slew Goliath the Gittite." By Jerome
Jaare is translated by sallus, and Oregim by potu-
mitai-ius (comp. Queat. Htbr. on both passages).
In Josephus's account (Ant. vii. 12, § 2) the Israelite
champion is said to have been " Nephan the kins
man of David " CN tipivoi i avyytv^it atVrov) ; the
word kinsman perhaps referring to the Jewish tra-
dition of the identity of Jair and Jesse, or simply
arising from the mention of Bethlehem.
In the received Hebrew text Jaare is written
with a small or suspended R, showing that in the
opinion of the Masorets that letter is uncertain.
JA'ASATJ OipSi but the Ken has *WV\
i. e. Jaasai [Jehovah makes, or it maker] : and so
the Vulg. Jaei), one of the Bene-Bani who had
married a foreign wife, and had to put her away
(Ear. x. 37). In the parallel list of 1 Esdras the
name is not recognizable. The LXX. had a different
text — *al Ixolixm = WSJJ.
JAA'SIEL (bS't&S! [ mkom Cat* created]:
'Iao-i^X; [Vat A<r<np;]' Alex. Ao-tnA: Josiet),
son of the great Abner, ruler (T 1 ?}) or « prince "
(")!») of Ms tribe of Benjamin, in the time of
David (1 Chr. xxvii. 31).
JAAZAKI'AH PTT??K and 7T?n£
[tchom Jehovah heart]), i.' Ta'azan-ta'ITO
('U(ovlasi [Vat O(ovtat>] Jexonins), one of the
" captains of the forces " who accompanied Johanan
ben-Kareah to pay bis respects to Gedaliah at Miz-
pah after the fall of Jerusalem (2 K. xxv. 23), and
who appears afterwards to have assisted in recover-
ing Ishmael's prey from his clutches (comp. Jer.
xli. 11). After that, he probably went to Egypt
with the rest (Jer. xliii. 4, 5). He is described as
the "son of the (not 'a') Maachathlte." In the
narrative of Jeremiah the name h slightly changed
to Jezaxiah.
S. Ya'azam-ta'hc flfxoyiar; Aim. U(ovua:
Jetonias), son of Shapban : leader of the band of
seventy of the eiders of Israel, who were seer, bj
Kxekiri worahipu.ug before the idols on Mi* wail of
Digitized by
Google
1188 JAAZER
Jet tosnt of the house of Jehovah (Ex. fiii. 11).
tt It possible tint he la identical with —
3. YA'AZAS-r Alt' ('Itxovlaf- Jaoniat), ton of
Axur; one of the " princes " (^0?) of the people
against whom Ezekiel m directed to prophesy
(Is. xi. 1).
4. Ya'azah-tah' flsvevias: Jezoma$), a Re-
shabite, son of Jeremiah. He appears to have been
the sheikh of the tribe at the time of Jeremiah's
interview with them (Jer. xxxt. 3). [Jkhos-
ADAl).]
JA'AZEB and JA'ZER [ktlptr, Get; or
plnct hedgtd about, Fiirst: see infra], (The form
of this name is much varied both in the A. V. and
the Hebrew, though the one does not follow the
sther. In Num. zxxii. it is twice given Jazer and
once Jaacer, the Hebrew being in all three cases
"M?! [?]< *> «■ Ya'ezzer. Elsewhere in Numbers
and in Josh. xiii. it is Jaater; but in Josh, xxi., in
8 Sam. xxiv., Isaiah and Jeremiah, Jazer: the He-
brew in all these it I???, Ya'ezer. In Chronicles
it is also Jaasr; but here the Hebrew is in the
extended form of "WV j Ya'ezeir, a form which
the Samar. Codex also presents in Num. xxxii.
The LXX. have 'IafV. but once P &*"• *&*• °]
'EkU(tp, Alex. EAtafrp — including the affixed
Heb. particle, [and in 1 Chr. vi. 81, Vat. ra(tp;
xxvi. 31, Vat. Via&ip, Alex. TaCrip:} Vulg. Jater,
Jattr, [Jeter]). A town on the east of Jordan,
in or near to Gilead (Num. xxxii. 1, 3; 1 Chr.
xxvi. 81). We first hear of it in possession of the
Amorites, and as taken by Israel after Heshbon,
and on their way from thence to Bashan (Num.
xxL 32).° It was rebuilt subsequently by the chil-
dren of Gad (xxxii. 35), and wjs a prominent place
in their territory (Josh. xiii. 25; 2 Sam. xxiv. 6).
it was allotted to the Merarite Levites (Josh. xxi.
39; 1 Chr. n. 81), but in the time of David it
would appear to have been occupied by Hebronites,
i. e. descendants of Kohatb (1 Chr. xxvi. 31). It
.Kerns to have given its name to a district of de-
pendent or " daughter " towns (Num. xxi. 32, A. V.
"villages;" 1 Mace. v. 8), the "land of Jazer"
(Num. xxxii. 1). In the " burdens " proclaimed
over Moab by Isaiah and Jeremiah, Jazer is men-
tioned so as to imply that there were vineyards
then, and that the cultivation of the vine bad ex-
tended thither from Sibmah (Is. xvi. 8, 9; Jer.
xlviii. 32). In the latter passage, as the text at
present stands, mention is made of the " Sea of
Jazer" (~>T?* DJ). This may have been some
pool or lake of water, or possibly is an ancient cor-
ruption of the text, the LXX. having a different
reading — x4\a 'I. (See Gesenius, Juaia, i.
650.)
Jazer was known to Euaebius and Jerome, and
its position is laid down with minuteness in the
Onomatticon as 10 (or 8, ». me. "k{ap) Roman
miles west of Philadelphia (AmmAn), and 15 from
Heshbon, and as the source of a river which falls
jito the Jordan. Two sites bearing the names of
ChOrbet Szdr and et-Sztr, on the road westward
»f Amman, were pointed out to Seetzen in 1806
'RtUen, 1854, i. 397, 398). The latter of these was
passed also by Burckbardt (Syr. 364) at 2 T hours
• in Mum. xx). 21, when the present Hebrew text
MS Xf (A V. " strong "), tan LXX. have read laftc.
JABBOK
below FuaeU going south. The ruins ap pear -ti
have been on the left (east) of the road, and below
them and the road is the source of the Wafv Stk
(_A<o), or ifojtb to-Sthr (Seetzen), answering
though certainly but imperfectly, to the woropoi
fieyicrot of Euaebius. Seetzen conjectures that
the sea of Jazer may have been at the source ol
this brook, considerable marshes or pools sometimes
existing at these spots. (Comp. his early sugges-
tion of the source of the Wad) Serba, p. 393.)
Sttr, or 8eir, is shown on the map of Van de Velda
is 9 Roman miles W. of Anunin, and about 19
from Heshbon. And here, until further investiga-
tion, we must be content to place Jazer. G.
JAAZTAH OfiTTSn, i. t. Yaariyalm [wkom
Jekovah coiuoiVi]: 'Oflai [Vat Offia:] Oriau),
apparently a third son, or a descendant, of Merar!
the Levits, and the founder of an independent
house in that' family (1 Chr. xxiv. 26, 27); neither
be nor his descendants are mentioned elsewhere
(comp. the lists in xxiii. 21-23; Ex. vi. 19, 4c).
The word Beno 03?), which follows Jaaalah,
should probably be translated " his son," i. e. the
son of Merari.
JAA'ZTEX (bKTO? [icAom God consoles]:
'0(tfi\ [Vat FA. -Ctt-]; Alex. IqovA: Janel),
one of the Levites of the second order who were
appointed by David to perform the musical service
before the ark (1 Chr. xv. 18). If Aziel in ver.
20 is a contracted form of the same name — and
there is no reason to doubt it (comp. Jesharehh
and Aaharelah, 1 Chr. xxv. 2, 14) — his business
was to " sound the psaltery on Alamoth."
• In the A. V. ed. 1611 the name is written
Jaziel, as in the Bishops' Bible and the Vul-
gate. A.
JA'BAL (bX [<• Krwsi]: 'ImftK; [Alex.
I»jBs\Q Jabtl), tin son of Lantech and Adah
(Gen. iv. 20) and brother of Jubal. Though de-
scended from a dweller in a city (ver. 17), be is
described as the father of such as dwell in tents
and have cattle. Bochart (/Herns. 1. ii. c 44, near
the end) points out the difference between his mode
of life and Abel's. Jabal's was a migratory life,
and bis possessions probably included other animals
besides sheep. The shepherds who were before him
may have found the land on which they dwelt suf-
ficiently productive for the constant sustenance of
their flocks in the neighborhood of their fixed
abodes. W. T. B.
JAB'BOK (p3£ \ftrtammg forth, fitting,
Sim. Ges.]: ['Ia/Stf*; in Gen. xxxU. 22, Rom.]
'la/My: Jnboe, [Jtboc]), a stream which inter-
sects the mountain- range of Gilead (comp. Josh,
xii. 2, sod 5), and falls into the Jordan about mid-
way between the sea of Galilee and the Dead Sea.
There is some difficulty in interpreting two or three
passages of Scripture in which the Jabbok is spoken
of as " the border of the children of Amnion."
The following facts may perhaps throw some light
upon them : — The Ammonites st one time pos-
sessed the whole country between the rivers AmoB
and Jabbok, from the Jordan on the west to the
wilderness on the east They were driven out of it
bySihon king of the Amorites; and he was in tarn
expelled by the Israelites. Yet long subsequent b
these events, the country was popularly called "the
Digitized by
Google
JABESH
jmi of the Ammonites," and mi even claimed bj
tan (Jsdg. xi. 13-82). For thii reason the Jab-
bak is eta! called « the border of the children of
tan " in Deut. iii. 16, and Joah. xii. 8. Again,
■•en the Amnnmito were driven out by Sihon
ban their ancient territory, they took possession
of the eastern plain, and of a considerable lection
rf the eastern defile* of UUead, around the sources
sal upper brancbea of the Jabbok. Rabbath-Am-
■00, their capital city (8 Sera, xl.), stood within
the mountains of Gilead, and on the banks of a
tnbatsrj to the Jabbok. This explains the atate-
nt in Num. xxi. 34 — " Israel possessed his
tSiDoo •) land from Anton unto Jabbok, unto the
Aildren of Ammon ({"US? s jJS"T5), for the
border of the children of Amnion was strong " —
the border among the defiles of the upper Jabbok
ni strong. This also illustrates Deut. ii. 37,
» Only unto the land of the children of Amnion
thou earnest not, unto every place of the torrent
Jabbok (pa; brD "T-bS), and unto the cities
in the mountains, and every place which the Lord
oar God forbad."
It ni on the south bank of the Jabbok the in-
terview took place between Jacob and Esau (Gen.
nxii. zz) ; and this rinr afterwards became, to-
vards its western part, the boundary between the
kingdoms of Sihon and Og (Josh. xii. 2, 5). Euse-
bhu rightly places it between Gerasa and Phila-
Uphia (0aoM. a. v.); and at the present day it
■paratee the province of Btlka from Jebel Ajlun.
Ita modem name is Wady Zarlca. It rises in the
plateau east of Gilead, and receives many tributaries
6m both north and south in the eastern declivities
of the mountain-range — one of these cornea from
Gems, another from Rabbath-Ammon ; but all of
them are mere winter streams. The Zurka cuts
through Gilead in a deep, narrow defile. Through-
out the lower part of its course it is fringed with
thickets of cane and oleander, and the banks above
ire clothed with oak-forests. Towsrds its mouth
the stream is perennial, and in winter often ini-
pustlje. J. L. 1>.
* For other notices of the Jabbok, its history
ud scenery, the reader may see Robinson's Phy.
<^ocr. pp. 57, 156 C; Tristram's Land of /trad,
pp. 479, 663 (3d ed.); Stanley's S. <f P. p. 390
(liner, ed.); Porter's Handbook of Syria, p. 310 f.;
•ad Lyoch's Expedition to the Dead Sea, p. 353.
The lord of Jabbok which Jacob crossed with his
uuailj on his return from Mesopotamia (Gen. xxxii.
13 C) is pointed out at Knlnat Serka, on the great
bnweeus road through Gilead. A legend which
entndicta the Biblical account assigns the passage
to (he Jordan, north of the Sea of Galilee. See
Biter - ! Ueogr. of Palatine, Gage's transl. ii. 328.
The depression which marks the valley of the Zerkn
(Jabbok) can be seen from the heights near Bethel
(Rob. Met. i. 444, 2d ed.). H.
JA3ESH (tfa; [dry, parched]: 'ufilsi
[Vat. loflm;] Alex. AB*u, laBtui Joseph.
UBwrf- J abet). L Father of Shallow, the
15th king af Israel (3 K. xv. 10, 13, 14 .
*• [Vat laibu; Alex. In 1 Sam., Etajta. In
• U*, Infos-] The abort form of the Lame
'asish-Gilkad (1 Chr. x. 12 only). .The abort
*■» slso occurs in 1 Sam. xi- 1, 8, 5, 9, 10, xxxi.
•3,1s— A.]
JABESH-QILKAX) (iybj ttbj. also
JABBZ
1189
B".?;, 1 Sara. xL J, 9, Ac, dry, from 073*, to bt
oVj [1 Sam. xi. 1, 3 Sam. ad. 18,] 'loflli [Vat,
Alex. -Btts] roXodJi [1 Sam. xi. 9, lafrt (Vat
-Bttt); Alex. Eioj8.ii rcAooJ; 1 Sam. xxxi. 11
8 Sam. ii. 4, 5, laBit (Vat. -|B«r, Alex. EiaBta
ttjs roAoo8(Ti8o» (Vat. -«««-); 1 Chr. x. 11
raAoii:] Jabet Galaad), or Jabesh in" the terri-
tory of Gilead. [Gilead.] In its widtat sense
Gilead included the half tribe of Manasaeh (1 Chr
xxvii. 31) as well as the tribes of Gad and Reuben
(Num. xxxii. 1-42) east of the Jordan— and of
the cities of Gilead, Jabesh was the chief. It is first
mentioned in connection with the cruel vengeance
taken upon its inhabitants for not coming up to
Mizpeh on the occasion of the fierce war between
the children of Israel and the tribe of Benjamin.
Every male of the city was put to the sword, and
all virgins — to the number of 400 — seized to be
given in marriage to the 600 men of Benjamin that
remained (Judg. xxi. 8-14). Nevertheless the city
survived the loss of ita males; and being attacked
subsequently by Nahash the Ammonite, gave Saul
an opportunity of displaying his prowess in its
defense, and silencing all objections made by the
children of Belial to his sovereignty (1 Sam. xi.
1-15). Neither were his exertions in behalf of this
city unrequited; for when he and his three sons
were slain by the Philistines in Mount GUboa (1
Sam. xxxi. 8), the men of Jabesh-Gilead came by
night and took down their corpses from the walls
of Beth-«han where they had been exposed as
trophies; then burnt the bodies, and buried the
bones under a tree near the city — observing a strict
funeral fast for seven days (total 13). David doss
not forget to bless them for this act of piety towards
his old master, and his more than brother (2 Sam.
ii. 5); though he afterwards had their remains
translated to the ancestral sepulchre in the tribe
of Benjamin (2 Sam. xxi. 14). As to the site of
the city, it is not defined in the O. T., but Euse-
bius (Onomait. s. v.) places it beyond Jordan, 6
miles from Pella on the mountain-road to Gerasa;
where its name is probably preserved in the Wady
Yabet, which, flowing from the east, enters the
Jordan below Beth-shan or Soythopolis. Accord-
ing to Dr. Robinson (BibL Set. iii. 319), the ruin
ed-Deir, on the S. side of the Wady, still marks
ita site. E. S. Ft.
JA"BEZ (V?7? [«*• emuet torn*, Get.:
possibly a high place, FUrst]: 'ldBts; [Vat. r«-
ueo-op;] Alex. ro0nt : Jabu), apparently % place
at which the families of the scribes (O^sjb)
resided, who belonged to the families of the Kenites
(1 Chr. ii. 65). It occurs among the descendants
of Sauna, who was of Judah, and closely connected
with Bethlehem (ver. 51), possibly the father of
Boaz; and also — though how is not clear — with
Joab. The Targum states some curious particulars,
which, however, do not much elucidate the diffi-
culty, and which are probably a mixture of trust-
worthy tradition and of mere invention based on
philol>rical grounds. Recbab is there identified
with Rechabiah the son of Elieser, Moses' younger
son (1 Chr. xxvi. 26), and Jabes with Othniel the
Keneraite, who bore the name of Jabes " because
be founded by his counsel (rT^ k )7) a school
(rre s 3~in'> if disciples called Tinthitot, Shim-
eetnUes, ana Sucathites." See deo the quotations
Digitized by
Google
1190
JABIN
hn Talnud ronnraA, in Buxton" a Lex. col. 966,
where ■ similar derivation is given.
8. ['I-yp^ti Alex. I<ryjSi», raflnr.] The name
ooeun again in the genealogies of Judah (1 Chr.
hr. 9, 10) in a passage of remarkable detail inserted
m a genealogy again connected with Bethlehem
(ver. 4). Here a different force is attached to the
name, it is made to refer to the sorrow (3?£,
otteo) with which his mother bore him, and also to
his prayer that evil may not grieve 03?^) him.
Jabez was " more honorable than his brethren,"
though who they were is not ascertainable. It is
very doubtful whether any connection exists be-
tween this genealogy and that in ii. 50-66. Several
names appear in both — Hur, Ephratab, Bethlehem,
Xareathites (in A. V. iv. 2 inaccurately " Zorath-
ites"), Joab, Caleb; and there is much similarity
between others, as Kechab and Kechah, Eshton and
Eahtauliiea ; but any positive connection seems un-
demonstrahle. The Targum repeats its identifica-
tion of Jabez and Othniel.
These passages in the Targnms are worthy of
remark, not only because they exemplify the same
habit of playing on words and seeking for deriva-
tions which is found in the above and many other
passages of the Bible, both early and late, but also
because, as Jten as not, the pons do not now exist
in the Kabbinical Hebrew in which these para-
phrases are written, although they appear if that
Kabbinical Hebrew is translated back into Biblical
Hebrew. There are several cases of this in the
Targum above quoted, namely, on 1 Chr. ii. 66 (see
Tirathim, Socathim, etc.), and others in the Tar-
gum on Kuth, in the additions to the genealogy at
the end of that book. One example will show what
Is intended. "Obed (T2TO) was he who wired
the Lord of the world with a perfect heart."
" Served " In Biblical Hebrew is "T32\ from the
same root as Obed, but in the dialect of the Tar-
gum it is nbet, so that the allusion (like that
in Coleridge's famous pun) exists, at it stands,
neither for the eye nor the ear. G.
JA'BIN (yT [intelligent, Fiirst; one tckom
God obtervn. Get.] : 'Io/Siti [Vat, Alex. Ia0tu-
J atria]). L King of Hazor, a royal city in the
north of Palestine, near the waters of Merom, who
organized a confederacy of the northern princes
against the Israelites (Josh. xi. 1-3). He assembled
an army, which the Scripture narrative merely com-
pares to the sands for multitude (ver. 4), but which
Josephus reckons at 800,000 foot, 10,000 horse, and
80,000 chariot*. Joshua, encouraged by God, sur-
prised this vast army of allied forces " by the waters
of Merom " (ver. 7 ; near Kedeah, according to
Josephus), utterly routed them, cut the hoof-sinews
jf their horses, and burnt their chariots with fire
at a place which from that circumstance may hare
derived its name of Miskephoth-Mauj (Hervey,
On the Gentalogia, p. 328). [Mibrkphoth-
Maim.] It is probable that in consequence of this
battle the confederate kings, and Jabin among
'.ten, were reduced to vassalage, for we find im-
■nediately afterwards that Jabin is safe in bis capital.
Bat during the ensuing wars (which occupied some
■ la Joan. xv. 46, after the words " tram Karon,"
fee UUL said Team!, Jabneb, Instead of " even onto
JABNKBL
time, Tosh. xi. 18), Joshua "tamed back,"
perhaps on some fresh rebellion of Jabin, I
on him a signal and summary vengeance, makmf
Haaor an exception to the general rule of not bunt-
ing the conquered cities of Canaan (xi. 1-14
Joseph. Ant. v. 1, § 18; Ewald, Geteh. ii. 328).
3. [In Judg., •la&r (Vat -0,ir); Alex, lauta,
IajBtir; in Ps., 'IajSefy] A king of Hazor, whoat
general Sisera was defeated by Barak, whose army
is described in much the same terms sa that of Mi
predecessor (Judg. iv. 3, 13), and who suffered pre-
cisely the same fate. We have already pointed out
the minute similarity of the two narratives (Josh,
xi.; Judg. iv., v.), and an attentive comparison of
them with Josephus (who curiously omits the name
of Jabin altogether in his mention of Joshua's
victory, although his account la full of details)
would easily supply further points of resemblance,
[Barak ; Deborah.] It is indeed by no means
impossible that in the coarse of ISO years Hazor
should have risen from its ashes, and even reas-
aumed its preeminence under so v erei gn s who still
bore the old dynastic name. But entirely inde-
pendent considerations show that the period be-
tween Joshua and Barak could not have been 160
years, and indeed tend to prove that those two
chiefs were contemporaries (Hervey, GeneaL p.
228); and we are therefore led to regard the two
accounts of the destruction of Hazur aud Jabin as
really applying to the same monarch, and the same
event. What is to prevent us from supposing that
Jabin and his confederate kings were defeated both
by Joshua and by Barak, and that distinct accounts
of both victories were preserved ? The most casual
reader of the narrative cannot but be struck by the
remarkable resemblance between the two stories.
There is no ground whatever to throw doubts on
the kittorical veracity of the earlier narrative, aa is
done by Haste (p. 129), Maurer (ad foe.), Stuck*
(on Judge*, p. 90), and De Wette (A'ini p. 231),
according to Keil, on Ja&k. xi. 10-16; and by
Kosenmuller (SckoL Jot. xi. 11); but when the
chronological arguments are taken into considera-
tion, we do not (in spite of the difficulties which
still remain) consider Hkvemick successful iu re-
moving the improbabilities which beset the com-
mon supposition that this Jabin lived long after
the one which Joshua defeated. At any rate we
cannot agree with Winer in denouncing any attempt
to identify them with each other as the ne piu
ultra of uncritical audacity. F. W. F.
JAB/NE&L (VyjJJ [God Demob or erases
to build]). The name of two towns in Palestine.
1. (In O. T. A«M; [Vat Aeuiw;] Alex. IojS-
mh; in Apocr. 'hurefa: JtbnteL, Jamnia.) Out
of the points on the northern boundary of Judah,
not quite at the sea, though near it" (Josh. xv.
11). There is no sign, however, of its ever having
been occupied by Judah. Josephus (Ant. v. 1, J
22) attributes it to the Danites. There was a con-
stant struggle going on between that tribe and the
Philistines for the possession of all the places in
the lowland plain [Dak], and it is not surprising
that the next time we meet with Jabned it should
be in the hands of the latter (2 Chr. xxvL 6). On.
xiah dispossessed them of it, and demolished its
Hera it is in the shorter form at
lbs sss; n Bfosafehr
word TV$\
ns?:**
Digitized by
Google
JABNfiEL
Id iti Greek garb, Iammia, it 1* fre-
r mentioned in the Maccabees (1 Mace iv.
16, v. 68, x. 69, xr. 40), In whose time it m
■gain a strong plaoe. According to Josephus (Ant.
lii. 8, § 6) Gorgiae mi governor of it; but the
text of the Maecabsee (9 Mace. xii. 33) hat Idu-
uuea. At this time there waa a harbor on the
coast, to which, and the veateia lying there, Judas
set fire, and the conflagration waa seen at Jerusa-
lem, a Hittanra of about 36 miles (3 Mace. xii. 9).
The harbor is also mentioned by Pliny, who in eon-
■equeuce speaks of the town as double — dua Jam-
net (see the quotations in Reland, p. 823). like
Aacalou and Gaza, the harbor bore the title of
Majuiuae, perhaps a Coptic word, meaning the
■* place on the sea " (Keland, p. 690, Ac. ; Iiauuier,
p. 174, note, 184, note; Kenrick, Phoenicia, pp. 27,
29). At the tune of the Call of Jerusalem. Jabneh
was one of the most populous places of Judoa, and
contained a Jewish school of great fame," whose
learned doctors are often mentioned in the Talmud.
The great Sanhedrim was also held here. In this
holy eity, according to an early Jewish tradition,
was buried the great Gamaliel. His tomb was
riaited by l'archi in the 14th century (Zunz, in
Aehers Sea/, of Tudtta, ii. 439, 440; also 98).
In the time of Eusebiue, however, it had dwindled
to a small place, wo\lx")t merely requiring casual
mention ( Oaumatticon). In the 6th century, under
Justinian, it became the seat of a Christian bishop
(Epiphaniua, adv. flan: lib. ii. 730). Under the
Crusaders it bore the corrupted name of Ibeliu, and
gave a title to a line of Counts, one of whom, Jean
d'lbelin, about 1360, restored to efficiency the fa-
mous code of the " Assises de Jerusalem " (Gibbon.
eh. 68 ad Jin. ; also the citations in Raumer, Pa-
Uafsaa, p. 186).
The modern village of Ytbna, or more accurately
Itma (Ljlo), stands about two miles from the
tea, on a slight eminence just south of the ffnhr
Rubin. It is about 11 miles south of Jnffa, 7
torn Ramleh, and 4 from Akir (Ekrou). It prob-
ably occupies its ancient site, for some remains of
aid buildings are to be seen, possibly relics of the
fortress which the Crusaders built there (Porter,.
Handbook, p. 974). G.
• Raumer (PaUtHna, p. 903, 4te Aufl.) regards
Jabneel and Jabneh as probably the same. Fiiret
(Handw. i. 479) denies that they are the same, re-
garding Jabneh indeed as represented by Ytbna,
bat the site of Jabneel as lost. The traveller go-
ing from Eedrtd (Aahdod) to YAfa (Joppa) passes
near Ytbna, conspicuouji on a hill to the right, at
the foot of which is a well from which the water is
raised by a large wheel. The women of the vil-
lage may be seen here in picturesque groups, with
their water-skins and jars, at almost any hour. A
slab of antique marble forms the front-piece of the
aratering-trough, and other similar fragments lie
scattered here and there. At a little distance fur-
ther south occur a few remains of a Roman aque-
taet The Gamaliel whose tomb is shown at Ytbna
see above) must be understood to be Gamaliel the
longer, a grandson of the great Gamaliel who
•as Paul's teacher. (See Sepp's Jems, smrf cat
» •Onset (ffraoUatU dtr Jmatn, Iv. U) speaks of
Ms Msa of a renowned Jewish school at Jabneh ba-
te* U» frll of Jerusalem aa uitfoanded. AUltteel-b-
1tjr n* sat Its STStfense, was subsequent to to*, event. ,
JAOH1N 1191
h*L Land, li. 601.) The origin, stadm, and fawn
of the Jewish school established at Jamnfat or
Ytbna after the destruction of Jerusalem foam
an important chapter in the history of rabbinical
and Biblical literature. Lightfoot furnishes an out-
line ot the subject ( Opp. ii. pp. 141-144, Amsterd.
1686). The best modern account of this seminary
and its influence on the philosophy and religious
ideas of the Jews is probably that of Dr. H.
Greets in the opening chapter of his Gttcliichte
dor Judtn, vol iv. (Berlin, 1868). The reader may
see also Jest's GachichU der ItratlUen, iii. 185 ff. ;
and Dean Milman's Hitlory of the J tat, vol. ii.
bk. xvii. (Amer. ed.). H.
3. ('Isdvouoi; Alex. Io/gynA; [Comp. 'I«S-
riv)A:] JtbnaiL) One of the landmarks on the
boundary of Napbtali (Joah. xix. 33, only). It is
named next after Adami-Nekeb, and had appar-
ently T»lrlrnm between It and the " outgoings " of
the boundary at the Jordan. But little or no clew
can be got from the passage to its situation.
Doubtless it is the same place which, at 'laftrtla
( Vita, § 37), and 'la/wlS (B. J. ii. 20, § 6), is
mentioned by Josephus among the villages in Upper
Galilee, which, though strong in themselves (»«r-
fxitas oHoat), were fortified by him in anticipation
of the arrival of the Romans. The other villages
named by him in the same connection are Meroth,
Acbabare, cr the rock of the Achabari, and Seph.
Sehware (p. 181) mentions that the later name of
."ibneel was Ktfr Yamnh, 1 ' the village by the tee-
Taking this with the vague indications of Josephus,
we should be disposed to look for its traces at the
N. \V. part of the Sea of Galilee, in the hill coun-
try. G.
JABTSTEH (nj.J [htltlt or causes to build]:
'la$r4ip; [Vat. A/Scrirja;] Alex, lafitit- Jabnia),
2 Chr. xxvi. 6. [Jabxkki.]
JA'CHAN (]|72 {affliction or afflicted];
'lauxdV; [Vat Xi/ta;] Alex. I ax a*: Jachan),
one of seven chief men of the tribe of Gad (1 Chr
v. 13).
JA'CHIN (T"?J [*« AaU utabluh] : in
Kings, 'laxoi/i, Alex, lay our; but in Chr. Ko-
ripBuatt In both MSS. ; Josephus, 'lax'' 1 Jachin,
Jachim), one of the two pillars which were set up
"in the porch" (1 K. vii. 21) or before the temple
(3 Chr. ill. 17) of Solomon. It was the "right-
hand " one of the two ; by which la probably meant
the south (comp. 1 K. vii. 39). However, both the
position and the structure of these famous columns
are full of difficulties, and they will be most suit-
ably examined in describing the Temple. Inter-
preted at a Hebrew word Jachin signifies firmness
[See Boaz 3.]
JACHIN S ?I [Mtbove]! 'Ax«<r, 'la X tlr,
'laxly; [in Num., Vat Alex. Iavfir; in Gen.
and Ex.,] Alex. Iavtu*: Jachin). 1. Fourth eon
of Simeon (Gen. xlvi. 10; Ex. vi. 16); founder of
the family of the Jachinttks (Num. xxvi. 19).
2. [In 1 Chr. Ix. and Nab., 'I«x<r, Vat Alex.
Iax«»; In 1 Chr. xxiv., 'AyIm, Vat Ay«u, Alex.
'ax*"".] Head of the Slat course of priests in
the time of David. Some of the course returned
from Babylon (1 Chr. Ix. 10, xxiv. 17; Neb. xL
s Oh Jm nam* In the Tat LXJC. (given above) ba
a corruption a.' thia? It can hardlv he e on na tal
from Jsmnia or .abnaal
Digitized by
Google
1192 JAOHINITES, THB
10) [Joiaiub.] Jacimus, the origin*! nunc of
Alamos (1 Mboc. vii. 5, Ac. ; Joseph. Ant. xii., ix,
| 7), who mi the first of hia family thai ni high-
priest, may possibly have been in Hebrew Jaehin,
though the k more properly auggeata Jakim.
'Ax*tp, Achim (Matt. 1. 14), seems aiao to be
the tame name. A. C. H.
JA'CHINITES, THE Oyjjn [*« «*°«] :
lapciyi [Vat -mi]; Alex, o lay cm: familia Ja-
eSmitarum), the family founded by Jachin, ion
of Simeon (Num. xivi. 12).
JACINTH (Wkii^oj: ht/ncinl/nu), a precious
atone, forming one of the foundation* of the walls
of the new Jerusalem (Her. xxi. 30). It seems
to be identical with the Hebrew Uthem (DtZ>b,
A. V. " ligure "), which was employed in the forma-
tion of the high-priest's breastplate (Ex. zxviii. 19).
The jacinth or hyacinth is a red variety of tircon,
which is found in square prisms, of a white, gray,
red, reddish-brown, yellow, or pale-green color, Li-
gurite is a crystallized mineral of a yellowish-green
or apple-green hue, found in Liguria, and thence
deriving its name. It was reputed to possess an
attractive power similar to that of amber (Theo-
pbrast- Lapp. 28), and perhaps the Greek \tyipioy,
which the I.XX. gives, was suggested by an appar-
ent reference to this quality (as if from Xtlx*'*,
"to lick"). The expression in Kev. ix. 17, "of
jacinth," applied to the breastplate, is descriptive
simply of a kyaeinthint, i. e. dark-purple color, and
has no reference to the stone. W. L. B.
JA'OOB (2pV* = tupplantcr: 'Ia*w/3: Ja-
cob), the second eon of Isaac and Rebekah. He
was born with Esau, when Isaac was 69 and Abra-
ham 159 years old, probably at the well Lahai-roi.
His history is related in the latter half of the book
of Qeneaia. He grew up a quiet, domestic youth,
the favorite son of hia mother. He bought the
birthright from his brother Esau ; and afterwards,
at his mother's instigation, acquired the blessing
intended for Esau, by practicing a well-known de-
ceit on Isaac. Hitherto the two sons shared the
wanderings of Isaac in the South Country; but
now Jacob, In hia 78th year, was sent from the
family home, to avoid hia brother, and to aeek a
wife among hia kindred in Padan-aram. Aa he
passed through Bethel, God appeared to him.
After the lapse of 81 years he returned from Padan-
aram with two wives, two* concubines, eleven sons,
and a daughter, and large property. He escaped
from the angry pursuit of Laban, from a rencontre
with Esau, and from the vengeance of the Canaan-
tea provoked by the murder of Shechem ; and in
unch of those three emergencies be was aided and
■t rengthened by the interposition of God, and in
linn of the grace won by a night of wrestling with
God his name was changed at Jabbok into Israel
("soldier of God"). Deborah and Rachel died
liefore he reached Hebron ; and it was at Hebron,
in the 133d year of hia age, that he and Esau
buried their father Isaac. Joseph, the favorite son
if Jacob, was sold into Egypt eleven years before
the death of Isaac; and Jacob had probably ex-
ceeded his 130th year when he went thither, being
sneouraged in a divine vision aa he passed for the
last timr through Beer-aheba. He was presented
Vj Pharaoh, and dwelt for seventeen years in Ram-
am and Goshen. After giving his solemn blessing
V» Kphraim and Manasseb, and his own aon» one
JACOB
by one, and charging the ten to complete then
reconciliation with Joseph, he died in his 147U
year. Hia body was embalmed, carried with greni
care and pomp into the land of Canaan, and depos-
ited with his fathers, and hia wife Leah, in the cart
of Hachpelah.
The example of Jacob la quoted by the first and
the lsat of the minor prophets. Hosea, in the lat-
ter days of the kingdom, seeks (xii. 3, 4, 13) to
convert the descendants of Jacob from their state
of alienation from God, by recalling to their mem-
ory the repeated acts of God's favor shown to th&r
ancestor. And Malachi (i. 3) strengthens the de-
sponding hearts of the returned exiles by assuring
them that the love which God bestowed upon Jacob
was not withheld from them. Besides the frequent,
mention of his name in conjunction with tl ore of
the other two Patriarchs, there are distinct refer-
ences to events in the life of Jacob in four books
of the N. T. In Rom. ix. 11-13, St. Paul adduces
the history of Jacob's birth to prove that the favor
of God is independent of the order of natural de-
scent. In Heb. xii. 16, and xi. 21, the transfer, of
the birthright and Jacob's dying benediction are
referred to. His vision at Bethel, and hia posses-
sion of land at Shechem are cited in St. John i.
51, and lv. 5, 12. And St Stephen, in hia speech
(Acts vii. 13-16), mention* the famine which waa
the means of restoring Jacob to hia lost son in
Egypt, and the burial of the patrlarh in Shechem.
Such are the events of Jacob's life recorded in
Scripture. Soma of them require additional no-
tice.
1. For the sale of hia birthright to Jacob, Esau
is branded in the N. T. as a "profane person"
(Heb. xii. 16). The following sacred and impor-
tant privileges have been mentioned as connected
with primogeniture in patriarchal timet, and aa
constituting the object of Jacob's desire, (a.) Su-
perior rank in the family : see Gen. xlix. 3, 4. (b.)
A double portion of the father's property ; so Aben
Ezra: see Deut xxi. 17, and Gen. xlriii. 23. (c.)
The priestly office in the patriarchal church: see
Num. viii. 17-19. In favor of this, see Jerome
ad Kmng. Kp. lxxiii. § 6; Jarchi taj Gen. xxv.;
Estius in Htbr. xii.; Shuckford's Connexion, bk.
vii.; Blunt, Undo. Coindd. pt 1. 1, J§ 8, 3; and
against it, Vitringa, 0ft*. Sac, and j. D. Mirimli^
Mosnisch. Recht, il. § 64, cited by Rosenmuller in
Gen. xxv. (d.) A conditional promise iir adumbra-
tion of the heavenly inheritance: tee fartwright
in the CriL Sacr. on Gen. xxv. (e.) Tie promise
of the Ssed in which all nations should be blessed,
though not included in the birthright, may have
been so regarded by the patriarchs, aa it was by
their descendants, Rom. Ix. 8, and Shuckfbrd, viii.
The whole subject has been treated in separata
essays by Vitringa in his Obt. Sac. pt i. 11, § 3;
also by J. H. Hottinger, and by J. J. Sehruder,
cited by Winer.
3. With regard to Jacob's acquisition of his
father's blessing, oh. xxvil., few persona will accept
the excuse offered by Augustine, Serai, iv. j 38,
33, for the deceit which he practiced — that it was
merely a figurative action, and that hia personatior
of Esau was justified by his previous [urehaseof
Esau's birthright. It la not however necessary
with the view of cherishing a Christian hanr-d of
sin, to heap opprobrious epithets upon a fellibii
man whom the cboioe of God has rendered ven-
erable in the eyet of believers. Waterland (iv SOS
speaks of the conduct of Jacob in language whtas
Digitized by
Google
JACOB
■ actthar wanting in reverence dot likely to en-
jum t ^v the extenuation of guilt. " I do n>t know
whether it be justifiable in every particular: I sus-
pect that it is not. There ware se tml very good
ud laudable eireunutancei in what Jacob and Re-
bekah did ; but I do not take upon me to acquit
them of all blame." And Blunt, (Undes. Coine.)
observes that none " of the patriarchs can be est
op at s model of Chriatian morals. They lived
under a code of lam that were not absolutely good,
perhaps not so good as the Levities!: for as this
was but a preparation for the more perfect law of
Christ, so possibly was the patriarchal but a prep-
aration far the Law of Hoses." The circumstances
which led to this unhappy transaction, and the
retribution which fell upon all parties concerned in
it, have been carefully discussed by Benson, Hulsean
Lectures (1829) on Scripture Difficulties, xvi. and
ivii. See also Woodgate's B'utorical Sermons, ix. ;
and Maurice, Patriarchs and Lawgiver*, v. On the
fulfillment of the prophecies concerning Esau and
Jacob, and on Jacob's dying blessing, see Bp. Newton,
Dissertations on the Prophecies, §§ iii. and iv.
3. Jacob's vision at Bethel is considered by
■Begins in a treatise, De Scald Jacobi, in the
Thesaurus sura* Tlieologico- Philoloaicus, i. 195.
See also Augustine, Serm. czxii. His stratagem
with Laban's cattle is commented on by Jerome,
Quasi, in Gru. Opp. iii. 353, and by Nitschmann,
De eoryh Jacobi in Tkes. nor. ThcoL-Phil i. 901.
4. Jacob's polygamy is an instance of a patri-
archal practice quite repugnant to Christian moral-
ity, but to be accounted for on the ground that the
time had not then come for a full expression of the
will of God on this subject. The mutual rights of
husband and wile were recognized in the history
of the Creation; but instances of polygamy are
frequent among persons mentioned in the sacred
records from Lameeh (Gen. iv. 19) to Herod
(Joseph. Ant. xvii. 1, $ 8). In times when frequent
wars in cr e ased the number of captives and orphans,
sod reduced nearly all service to slavery, there may
have been some reason for extending the recognition
and protection of the law to concubines or half-
wives as Bilhah and Zilpah. And in the case of
Jacob, it is right to bear in mind that it was not
his original intention to marry both the daughters
of Laban. (See on this subject Augustine. Contra
Faustum, xxii. 47-54.)
6. Jacob's wrestling with the angel at Jabbok is
the subject of Augustine's Sermo v. ; compare with
it De Civitate Da, xvi. 39.
In Jacob may be traced a combination of the
quiet patience of his father with the acquisitiveness
which seems to have marked bis mother's family;
and in Ksau, as In IshmaeL the migratory and in-
dependent character of Abraham was developed into
the enterprising habits of a warlike hunter-chief.
Jacob, whose history occupies a larger space, leaves
en the reader's mind a less favorable impression
than either of the other patriarchs with whom he
■ joined in equal honor in the N. T. (Matt. vni.
11). But in considering his character we must
bear fii mind that we know not what limits were
set in those days to the knowledge of God and the
ssMtifying influence of the Holy Spirit. A timid,
JhonghtluT boy would acquire no self-reliance in a
■eluded home. There was little scope for the
surds* of intelligence, wide sympathy, generosity,
Vans was Growing np a stranger to the great
Joys and g-set sorrows of natural fife — deaths, and
S M s VrV . and births: unred to caution and restraint
JACOB 1198
In the presence of a more vigorous brother; sjsMnsj
stimulated by a belief that God designed for hha
some superior blessing, Jacob wis perhaps in a hit
way to become a narrow, selfish, deceitful, disap-
pointed man. But, after dwelling for more than
half a life-time in solitude, he is driven from home
by the provoked hostility of his more powerful
brother. Then in deep and bitter sorrow the out-
cast begins life afresh long after youth has passed,
and finds himself brought first of all unexpectedly
into that close personal communion with God which
elevates the soul, and then into that enlarged inter-
course with men which is capable of drawing out
all the better feelings of human nature. An unseen
world wss opened. God revived and renewed to
bim that slumbering promise over which he bad
brooded for threescore years, since he learned it in
childhood from his mother. Angels conversed with
him. Gradually be felt more and mom the watch-
ful care of an ever present spiritual Father. Face
to face be wrestled with the Representative of the
Almighty. And so, even though the moral conse-
quences of his early transgressions hung about him,
and saddened him with a deep knowledge of all the
evil of treachery and domestic envy, and partial
judgment, and filial disobedience, yet the increasing
revelations of God enlightened the old sge of the
patriarch ; and at last the timid " snpplanter," the
man of subtle devices, waiting for the salvation of
Jehovah, diet the " soldier of God " uttering the
messages of God to his remote posterity.
For reflections on various incidents in Jacob's
life, see Bp. Hall's Contemplations, bk. iii. Many
rabbinical legends concerning him may Be found
in Eisenmenger's Enid. Jnaenthum, and in the
Jerusalem Tarawa. In the Koran he is often
mentioned in conjunction with the other two patri-
archs (eh. a, and elsewhere). W. T. &
* Some of the other writers on the subject of
this article may be mentioned : Hess, Geschichte der
Patriarchal, ii. 67-423, the fullest of his Scriptur*
histories. Kurtz, Geschichte des A. Bundes, i. 239
338, valuable as a historical sketch, and for it*
vindication of the narrative against objections.
Kanke, Untersuchungen iber den Pentateuch, i.
50 ff. Ewald, Geschichte des Volkei Israels, i. 489-
519 (8te Aufl.). Dreehsier, especially on Jacob's
and Esau's character. Die Einheit und EchthtU
der Genesis, pp. 230-287. Winer, Beabo. i. 622 ff.
Auberkn, " Jakob " in Herzog's BtaUEncyk. ri.
373-378. Wundernch, « Jakob " in ZaUer's BibL
Worterb. i. 649-650. Heim, Bibelstunden, 1845.
Kitto, Daily Biblical Illustrations, with additions
by J. L. Porter, i. 294-335 (ed. 1866). Thomson,
Ijmd and Book, ii. 23-29, 354 t, 398 f. Blunt.
Veracity of the Book of Moses, ch. viii. Milmau,
History of the Jews, i. 76-108. Stanley, Lectures
on the History of the Jewish Church, i. 68-89
(Amer. ed.). Quarry, Genesis and its Authorship,
pp. 482-608, 566-575 (Loud. 1866). The portions
of Genesis relating to Jacob are fully and ably
treated here in opposition to critics of the Cossnso
school. See Harah (Amer. ed.) for supposed dif-
ficulties connected with Jacob's flight from Meso-
potamia.
Dean Stanley takes decided ground against those
who entertain a disparaging view of Jacob's char-
acter as compared with that of Esau. We quote
a part of his reply to that adverse opinion : " Tak-
ing the two from first to last, how entirely is the
judgment of Scripture and the judgment of pos-
terity eonfHmed by the mult of the whole. The
Digitized by
Google
1194
JAOTJBTJS
nan impulsive hunter vanishes amy, light u air:
he did eat and drink, and rose up and went hi»
way. Thus Eiau deepiiied hie birthright.' The
substance, the strength of the chosen family, the
true Inheritance of the promise of Abraham, was
Interwoven with the very essence of the character
of the ' plain man, dwelling in tents,' steady, perse-
vering, moving onward with deliberate settled pur
post, through years of suffering and of prosperity,
of exile and return, of bereavement and recovery.
The birthright is always before him. Rachel is
won from Laban by hard services, 'and the seven
years seemed unto him but a few days for the love
he had to her.' Isaac and Rebekah, and Rebekah's
nurse, are remembered with a faithful, filial remem-
brance; Joseph and Benjamin are long and pas-
sionately loved with a more than parental affection,
— bringing down his gray hairs for their sates • in
sorrow to the grave.' This is no character to be
contemned or scoffed at; if it was encompassed
with much infirmity, yet its very complexity de-
mands our reverent attention ; in it are bound up,
as his double name expresses, not one man, but
two ; by toil and struggle, Jacob, the Supplanter,
is gradually transformed into Israel, the Prince of
God ; the harsher and baser features are softened
and purified away ; he looks back over his long ca-
reer with the fullness of experience and humility.
• I am not worthy of the least of all the mercies and
of all the truth which thou hast shown unto thy
servant ' (Gen. xxxii. 10). Alone of the patriarchal
family, his end is recorded as invested with the so-
lemnity of warning and of prophetic song, ' Gather
yourselves together, ye sons of Jacob; and hearken
unto Israel your father.' We need not fear to
acknowledge that the God of Abraham and the
God of Isaac was also the God of Jacob." (Jacob
Church, p. 69 f.) H.
JACU'BUS ('IoVov/Sot; [Vat laarovfioos:]
Accubiu), 1 Ksdr. ix. 48. [Akkub, 4.]
J AT) A (7T [known, skitlfuq : 'l«4W, and at
ver. 38, AoSof, [Vat ISovSa,] Alex. U&tat :
[Jada]), son of Onam, and brother of Shammai,
in the genealogy of the sons of Jerahmeel by his
wife Atarah (1 Chr. ii. 28, 32). This genealogy
is very corrupt in the LXX., especially in the
Vatican Codex. A. C. H.
JA'DAU [8 §yL] (IT, but the Ktri has
**\ ». e. Yaddai [faeoriU, friend, FUrst] : 'laJoi;
[Vat ASia:] Jeddu), one of the Bene-Nebo who
had taken a foreign wife, and was compelled by
Ezra to relinquish her [Ear. x. 43).
JADDU'A C&W1 [hum]: 'laSoi, 'look;
[in Neh. xii. 22, Vat. IoSov, FA.' A8o»0 Jtddoa),
son, and successor in the high-priesthood, of Jon-
athan or Johanan. He is the last of the high-
priests mentioned in the 0. T., and probably alto-
gether the latest name in the canon (Neh. xii. 11,
82), at least if 1 Chr. lit. 22-24 is admitted to be
corrupt (see Cental of our Lord, pp. 101, 107).
His name marks distinctly the time when the latest
tdditions were made to the book of Neheniiah and
the canon of Scripture, and perhapt affords a clew
to the age of Mafatchi the prophet. AH that we
■earn concerning him in Scripture is the fact of his
icing the son of Jonathan, and high-priest We
gather also pretty certainly that he was priest in
lb* reign of the last Persian king Darius, and tbat
a* was still high-priest after the Persian dynasty
JAIL
was overthrown, i. e. in the rehp of A Wander Ua
Great For the expression " Dai us the Persian '•
must have been used after the accession of the
Grecian dynasty,- and had another high-priest suc-
ceeded, his name would most likely have been men-
tioned. Thus far then the book of Neheniiah bean
out the truth of Joeephus's history, which makes
Jaddua high-priest when Alexander invaded Judjea.
But the story of his interview with Alexander
[High-priest, vol. ii. p. 1072 i] does not on that
account deserve credit, nor his account of the build-
ing of the temple on Mount Gerizim during Jad-
dua's pontificate, at the instigation of Sanballat,
both of which, as well as the accompanying circum-
stances, are probably derived from some apocryphal
book of Alexandrian growth, since lost, in which
chronology and history gave way to romance and
Jewish vanity. Josephus seems to place the death
of Jaddua after that of Alexander (A/.xL8,§7).
Eusebins assigns 80 yean to Jaddua's pontificate
(dental, of our Lard, 823 ff.; SeUen, rfe Bucc;
Prideaux, etc.). A. C. H.
JADDU'A QWT [as above] : 'uttoia [Vat.
FA. 1 omit;] Alex. USSovk: Jeddua), one of the
chief of the people, i. e. of the laymen, who sealed
the covenant with Nehemiah (Neh. x. 21).
JADON 0'VT [judge] : sbipmv in both
MSS. [rather, in the Roman ed.; Vat Alex. FA. I
omit] : Jadvn), a man, who in company with the
Gibeonites and the men of Mizpnh assisted to repair
the wall of Jerusalem (Neh. iii. 7). His title, "the
Meronothite " (comp. 1 Chr. xxvii. 80), and the
mention of Gibeonites, would seem to point to a
place Meronoth, and that in the neighborhood of
Gibeon ; but no such place has yet been traced.
Jadon Clativ) is the name attributed by Jose-
phus (Ant. viii. 8, § ft) to the man of God from
Judah, who withstood Jeroboam at the altar at
Bethel — probably intending Iddo the seer. By
Jerome ( Chi. Hear, on 8 Chr. ix. 29) the name is
given as Jaddo.
JA'EL (bjj [climber, FUrst, and hence wild
goat]: Hex. Syr. Anoel: 'Iot/X; Joseph. 'IdAq:
Jahtl), the wife of Ileber the Kenite. Heber was
the chief of a nomadic Arab clan, who had sep-
arated from the rest of his tribe, and had pitched
his tent under the oaks, which had in consequence
received the name of " oaks of the wanderers "
(A. V. plain of Zaanoim, Judg. iv. 11), in the
neighborhood of Kedesh-Naphthali. [Hebkk;
Kehites.] The tribe of Heber had secured the
quiet enjoyment of their pastures by adopting a
neutral position in a troublous period. Their
descent from Jethro secured them the favorable
regard of the Israelites, and they were sum ;iently
important to conclude a formal peace with Jabin
king of Hazor.
In tka headlong rout which followed the defeat
of the Canaanites by Barak, Sisera, abandoning his
chariot the more easily to avoid notice (cemp. Horn.
//. v. 20), fled unattended, and in as opposite
direction from that taken by his srmy, to the tent
of the Kenite chieft&iness. "The tent of Jael"
is expressly mentioned either because the bares
of Heber was in a separate tent (Rosenmiiuer
MorgenL iii. 38), or because the Kenite himself
was absent at the time. In the sacred seclusion
of this almost inviolable sanctuary, Sisera might
well have felt himself absolutely secure from the
incursions of the enemy (Calmet, Fragm- zxr.i
Digitized by
Google
JAKL
mi although he intended to take refuge emoLg the
Kenttea, be would not have ventured so openly 10
rioUte all Idea of oriental propriety Hy entering a
Iranian's apartments (D'Herbelot, BihL Orient.
i>t. " Hiiram"), had be not received Jael's express,
earnest, and respectful entreaty to do so. He ac-
aepted the invitation, and she flung a mantle " over
him as he lay wearily on the floor. When thirst
prevented sleep, and he asked for water, she brought
him butter-milk in her choicest vessel, thus ratify-
ing with the semblance of officious seal the sacred
bond of eastern hospitality. Wine would hare
been leas suitable to quench his thirst, and may
possibly have been eschewed by Heber's clan (Jer.
xxxi'. 2). Butter-milk, according to the quotations
in llarmer, is still a favorite Arab beverage, and
that this is the drink intended we infer from
Judges v. 35, as well as from the direct statement
of Joseplnis (yi\a SiapSopht jin, Ant. v. 6, J 4),
although there is no reason to suppose with Josephus
and the Rabbis (D. Kimchi, Jarchi, etc.), that Jael
purposely used it because of its soporific qualities
(Bochart, Hitn*. i. 473). But anxiety still pre-
vented Sisera from composing himself to rest, until
he had exacted a promise from his protectress that
abe would faithfully preserve the secret of his con
eealment; till at but, with a feeling of perfect
security, the weary and unfortunate general resigned
himself to the deep sleep of misery and fatigue.
Then it was that Jael took in bar left hand one
of the great wooden* pins (A. V. " nail") which
fastened down the cords of the tent, and in her
right hand the mallet (A. V. "a hammer") used
to drive it into the ground, and creeping up to her
sleeping and confiding guest, with one terrible Mow
dashed it through Sisera's temples deep into the
earth. With one spssm of fruitless agony, with
one contortion of sudden pain, "at her feet he
bowed, he foil; when he bowed, there he fell down
dead " (Judg. r. 87). She then waited to meet
the pursuing Barak, and led him into her tent that
she might in his presence claim the glory of the
deed!
Many have supposed that by this act she ful-
filled the saying of Deborah, that God would sell
Sisera into the hand of a woman (Judg. iv. 9;
Joseph, v. 5, J 4); and hence they have supposed
that Jael was actuated by some divine and hidden
influence. But the Bible gives no hint of such an
inspiration, and it is at least equally probable that
Deborah merely intended to intimate the share of
the honor which would be assigned by posterity to
her own exertions. If therefore we eliminate the
still toon monstrous supposition of toe Rabbis that
Sisera was slain by Jael because he attempted to
efler her violence — the murder will appear in all
Its hideous atrocity. A fugitive had asked, and
received d ikheel (or protection) at her hands, — he
was miserable, defeated, weary, — he was the ally
of her husband, — he was her invited and honored
guest, — be was in the sanctuary of the hararn, —
above all, he was confiding, defenseless, and asleep ;
ret she broke her pledged faith, violated ber solemn
hospitality, and murdered a trustful and unpro-
ected siumberer. Surely we require the dearest
fid most positive statement that Jael was insti-
gated to such a murder by divine suggestion.
• "Mantis" Is hue Inaccurate j Use word Is
rryOtyn— with th» definite articM. But as us
■ass ■ net found al«whsre, it is so. possible •- no-
JAH 1105
But It may be asked, "Has not the deed at
Jael been praised by an inspired authority?'
" Blessed above women shall Jael the wife of Hebn
the Kenite Vie, blessed shall she be above women in
the tent" (.' jdg. r. 34). Without stopping to ask
when and where Deborah claims for herself any
infallibility, or whether, in the passionate moment
of patriotic triumph, she was likely to pause in such
wild times to scrutinize toe moral bearings of an
act which had been so splendid a benefit to herself
and her people, we may question whether any moral
commendation is dirtdly intended. What Debo-
rah stated was a fact, namely, that the wives of
the nomad Arabs would undoubtedly regard Jael
aa a public benefactress, and praise her as a popular
heroine.
The suggestion of Uesenius (Tht*. p. 608 A),
MoUmsnu, and others, that the Jael alluded to in
Judg. v. 6 is not the wife of Heber, but some un-
known Isrselitish judge, appears to us extremely
unlikely, especially as the name Jael must almost
certainly be the name of a woman (Prov. v. 19, A.
V. >> roe "). At the same time it must be admitted
that the phrase " in the days of Jael " is one which
we should hardly have expected. F. W. F.
* This view of Gesenius that Jael (Judg v. 6),
is the name of a judge otherwise unknown, is also
that of Flint, Bertbeau, Wordsworth, and others.
The name is masculine, and very properly used of
a man, though such names were often borne by
women. Camel {Riehttr and Ruth, p. 60) denies
that the wife of Heber can be meant in this in-
stance, since Deborah was contemporary with her,
and would hardly designate her own days as those
of Jael. But to suppose with him that Shamgar
mentioned in the other line is called Jael (— "active,"
" chivalrous ") merely aa a complimentary epithet,
seems far-fetched. From the order of the names,
if this Jael was one of the judges, we should be led
to place his time between Shamgar and Barak, and
so have a more distinct enumeration of the long
series of years during which the land was afflicted
before the deliverance achieved by Deborah and her
H.
JA'GTJR CVPJ [lodginfflact] : 'Ao-^5 Alex
larytup: Jagnr), a town of Judah, one of those
furthest to the south, on the frontier of Edora (Josh,
xv. 21). Kabzeel, one of its companions in the
list, recurs subsequently ; but Jagur is not again
met with, nor has the name been encountered in
the imperfect explorations of that dreary regie n.
The Jagur, quoted by Schware (p. 99) from tt«
Talmud as one of the boundaries of the territory a"
Ashkelon, must have been further to the N. W.
G.
JAH (HP: K^ioj: Dommu). The abbrr-
viatod form of "Jehovah," used only in poetry
It occurs frequently in the Hebrew, but with a sin-
gle exception (Ps. lxviii. 4) Is rendered » Lord " in
the A. V. The identity of Jah and Jehovah is
strongly marked in two passsges of Isaiah (xii. 3.
xxvi. 4), the force of which is greatly weakened by
the English rendering "the Lord." The former
of these should be translated " for my strength and
song is Jah Jehovah " (comp. Ex. xv. 3); and
the latter, " trust ye hi Jehovah for ever, for fat
phe what the Semfeah was. Probably sums pan
of UM regular furniture of the tent.
» rJunroAos, LXX. ; but aeeonUnf tr Jo»*«>!ine
Digitized by
Google
1196 JAHATH
Jab Jehovah Is the nek of ages." « Praiae ye
Ike Lord," or Hallelujah, should be in all cases
» praise ye Jab." In Ps. ixxxix. 8 [9] Jah stands
hi parallelism with '• Jehovah the God of hosts "
to a passage which is wrongly translated hi our
version. It should be " Jehovah, God of hosts,
who like thee is strong, Jah ! " W. A. W.
JA'HATH (DTP [oaeneat, union] : 'lie,
Tuft; Vat 1«9. H X o: Jahath]). 1. Bon of
Ubni, the son of Gershom, the son of Levi (1 Chr.
vi. SO, A V.). Ha was ancestor to Asaph (ver.
48).
2. ['U«: AeAstf.] Head of a later house in
the family of Gershom, being the eldest son of
Shimei, the son of Laadan. The house of Jahaih
existed in David's time (1 Chr. xxiii. 10, 11).
AC. H.
3. Ql46; Alex, omits: [Jahath.]) A man in
the genealogy of Judah (1 Chr. iv. 2), son of Reaiah
ben-Shobal. His sons were Ahumai and Lahad,
the families of the Zoratbitee. If Keaiah and
Haroeh are identical, Jahaih was a descendant of
Caleb ben-Hur. [Haroeh.]
4. (['lie; Vat.] Alex. Iva0.) A Levite, son of
Shelomoth, the representative of the Kohathite
family of Izhab in the reign of David (1 Chr.
xxiv. 82).
6. [*I«; Tat it; Comp. 'W9.] A Merarite
Levite. in the reign of Joaiah, one of the overseers
of the repairs to the Temple (2 Chr. xxxiv. 18).
JA'HAZ, also JAHA'ZA, JAHA'ZAH,
and JAH'ZAH. Under these four forms are
given in the A. V. the name of a place which in
the Hebrew appears as V?! and nVrjP, the H
being in some eases — as Num. and Deut — the
particle of motion, but elsewhere an integral addi-
tion to the name. It has been uniformly so taken
by the LXX., who have 'laatrd, and twice 'load
[once, namely, Judg. xL 30, where Alex, reads
IirpoTjA]. Jahaz is found Num. xxi. 33; Dent,
ii. 32; Judg. xi. 80; Is. XT. 4; Jer. xlviii. 34. In
the two latter only is it YT1\ without the final
n. The Samaritan Cod. has nSrT 1 : Vnlg.
Jem.
At Jahaz the decisive battle was fought between
the children of Israel and Sihon king of the Aroo-
rites, which ended in the overthrow of the latter
and in the occupation by Israel of the whole pas-
toral country included between the Anion and the
Jabbok, the BeVta of the modem Arabs (Num.
xxi. 83; Deut. ii. 33; Judg. xi. 80). It was in
the allotment of Reuben (Josh. xiii. 18), though
not mentioned in the catalogue of Num. xxxii. ;
and it was given with its suburbs to the Merarite
Levites (1 Chr. vi. 78: and Josh. xxi. 86, though
here omitted in the ordinary Hebrew text).
Jihazah occurs in the denunciations of Jeremiah
and Isaiah on the inhabitants of the " plain coun-
try," «. e. the Mishor, the modern Btlka (Jer. xlviii.
31, 34; Is. xv. 4); but beyond the fact that at this
wriod it was in the hands of Hoab we know noth-
ng of its history.
from the terms of the narrative in Num. xxi.
and Deut. ii., we should expect that Jahaa was in
Jm extreme south part of the territory of Sihon,
tut yet north of the river Arnon (see Deut. ii. 34,
U: and the words in 31, •' begin to possess "). and
■ exactly this position a site named Jazaxa is
1 by Schwara (337), though by him only.
JAHDA1
But this does not agree with the statements of
Eosebius ( (Mom. 'Uovi), who says it was extathia
in his day between Medeba and Aniloo>, by which
he probably intends Dibon, which would phot
Jahaa considerably too far to the north. Like
many others relating to the places east of the Dead
Sea, this question must await further research
(See Ewald, Gttchichte, ii. 866, 371.) G.
JAHA'ZA (TTSTV, i. «. Yahtnh [trodden
dam, threshing-floor] : B«r<f>; Alex. Iwrow
Jasta), Josh. xUL 18. [Jabaz.]
JAHA'ZAH (rr|rP [as above]: in Jer.
'Pf<pis, in both HSS.; [FA.i Ptupai, Comp. 'Uur-
ai-] Jaser, J ma), Josh. xxi. 36 (though omitted
in the Rec. Hebrew Text, and not recognizable in
the LXX. [perhaps represented by 'Iojjfjp]), Jer.
xlviii. 21. [Jahaz.]
JAHAZI'AH <JV?P** i- t. Taefa'zeyah
[whom Jehovah beholds,' ties.]: 'Io£Ias; [Vat
FA.l Aa(tia:] Jaasia), son of Tikvah, apparently
a priest; commemorated as one of the four who
originally sided with Ezra in the matter of the
foreign wives (Eir. x. 16). In Eadraa the name
becomes Ezechias.
J AH A'ZIEL (btfTO- [**»» God rtrengtk-
««•])• *• Cle(i*>; [Vat FA. I«fox:] JtkaitL)
One of the heroes of Benjamin who deserted the
cause of Saul and joined David when he was at
Ziklag (1 Chr. xii. 4).
a. COW* [Vat fa.* orVmxi] J«**t-) a
priest in the reign of David, whose office it was, in
conjunction with Benaiah, to blow the trumpet at
the ministrations before the ark, when David had
brought it to Jerusalem (1 Cor. xvi. 6). [High-
priest.]
3. ('I«fif/A, 'Iafir/X; [Vat Oftr/A, tarn ;] Alex.
la(,i>\: [Ja/iarief.]) A Kohathite Levite, third
son of Hebron. His house is mentioned in the enu-
meration of the Levites in the time of David (1
Chr. xxiii. 19; xxiv. 33). A. C. H.
4. ('Ofi*\; [Vat OfnnX; Comp. 1«fiv>:]
Jahntiel.) Son of Zechariah, a Levite of the
Bene-Asaph, who was inspired by the Spirit of
Jehovah to animate Jehoshaphat and the army of
Judah in a moment of great danger, namely, when
they were anticipating the Invasion of an enormous
horde of Moabites, Ammonites, Hehunhns, and
other barbarians (2 Chr. xx. 14). Ps. lxxxiii. if
entitled a l'salm of Asaph, and this, coupled with
the mention of Edom, Moab, Ammon, and others,
in hostility to Israel, has led some to connect it
with the above event [Gkbal.] But, however
desirable, this is very uncertain.
5. ('Afif/A; [Vat. Alex, omit:] Euchiel) The
" son of Jahaziel " was the chief of the Bene-SLe-
caniah [sons of S.] who returned from Babylon
with Ezra, according to the present state of the
Hebrew text (Err. nil. 5). But according to the
LXX., and the parallel passage in 1 Esdr. (viii 88),
a name has escaped from the text, and it should
read, "of the Bene-Zathoe (probably Zattu),
Shecaniah son of Jahaziel." In the latter place
the name appears as Jezelus.
JAHDAI [8 syl.] CJTT}, {. e. Yehuai [«*oa
Jehovah leads] : 'AJJaf ; (Vat ltprov;] Alex. la-
ta': Jahoddni), a man who appears to be threat
abruptly into the genealogy of Caleb, as the father
of six sons (1 Chr. it, 47). Various
Digitized by
Google
JAHDIBL
j the name have been made: M that Ga-
lea, the name preceding, should be Jahdai; that
Jahdai was a ooncuoine of Caleb, ate. : but these
we men groundless suppositions (an Burrington,
L 216; Bertbeau, adloc.).
JAHTMEL (bW , 'Tn2 [»*om <lod mulcts
joyful]: 'l(Si«>; [Vat. I.A»m A :] -/saW), one of
the heroes who were headi of the half-tribe of
HanaaMh on the out of Jordan (1 Chr. ▼. 24).
JAHTX) (VffTj [untied; resetter]: USSdt,
at if the name had originally been V TTP ; oomp.
Jaasau, Jadau; [Vat Iovaci; Comp. 'USSA-]
Jeddo\ a Gadite named in the genealogies of hii
tribe (1 Chr. r. 14) at the ion of Buz and father
of JeahiahaL
JAH'LEBL (bN 1 ?^ [hoping in God]:
'Ax»4a; Alex. AAonA., AAaija: JaktUL, [Jalel]),
the third of the three aona of Zebulun (Gen. rivi.
14; Num. xxvi. 36), founder of the family of the
Jahlkklitks. Nothing is heard of him or of
hi* descendant*.
JAHXEBLITES, THE ( ,1 ?tfi , ?nMj' : j
'AAAaAl [Vat -Kti] : JaleUta). A branch of the
tribe of Zebulon, deaeendanta of Jahleel (Num.
wxn. 26). W. A. W.
JAH'MAI [3 tyL] CT?r£ [.atom /eAora/i
ownreb]: 'lopof; [Vat Ei&caw ; Alex. Ufiov-
Jtmai), a man of laauhar, one of the heads of
the houae of Tola (1 Chr. rii. 3).
JAH'ZAH fTC???! [a place ttaaped, Ihrah-
mg-Jlour]: '\aai; [Vat omit*:] Jam), 1 Chr. vi.
78." [Jahaz.]
JAH'ZKKL 0>$rT [God apportion,] :
'A<rr»>; [VaU in Num.', Xm)X:] Ja$UI), the fint
af the four aona of Naphtali (Gen. xlvi. 24), founder
of the family of the Jahzeeutks ( s 7H?n?,n.
Num. xxri. 48). His name is onee again men-
tioned (1 Chr. rii. 13) in the slightly different form
Of J AHZIKL.
JAH'ZEELITBS, THK C^niPI: 6
'ArtnKli [Vat» Ja7|A«i, 3. m. Am>A« :j Jauliim).
A branch of the Naphtalitoa, descended from Jah-
aael (Num. xxri. 48).
JAH'ZBEAH (TTTrp [<ohom God Itadt
tack]: 'ZCtpit [or 'Efijw;' Vet USttaf, Alex.
U(pm:] Jtxrn), a priest, of the house of Immer;
ancestor of Haasiai (read Haasiah), one of the
eouraes which returned (1 Chr. ix. 13). [Jkhoia-
IUB.] In the duplicate passage in Neb., xi. 13 he
is catted *?T1rj, Ahasai, and all the other names
aie much varied. A. C H.
•JAILOR. [Pniaoa; PtntisHHESTs.]
JAH'ZIKL (bM^SrT [God aOaU or appor-
tkmt]: 'Iae-<qA; [Vat uitrtnik:] Jntitl), the form
to whinh the name of the first of Naphtali's sons,
■a whew given Jahzkel, appears in 1 Chr. vii.
IS only.
JA1H CVKJ [msoM Jthorh enfyfent] :
tmlp; [Vat commonly Utia: Alex. lamp, ->;/>,
JAIRTTK, TOT
mi
• Thai vans would wan not to ret* to the anttnal
t of theas vllUgas by Jair, at the A. V n~-+
r to their noutnia. Tha accural* no-
^>:J fair). L A man who on hie father's alii
was descended from Judah, and on hia mother*
from Manasseh. His father was Segub, son of
Hearon the son of Phares, by his third wife, the
daughter of the great Machir, a man so great that
hia name is sometimes used as equivalent to that
of Manasseh (1 Chr. ii. 21, 22). Thus on both
sides he was a member of the most powerful family
of each tribe. By Moses be is called the " son of
Manasseh" (Num. xxxii. 41; Deut iii. 14), and
according to the Chronicles (1 Chr. ii. 23), he was
one of the " sons of Machir the father of Gilead."
This designation from his mother rather than his
father, perhaps arose from hia having settled in the
tribe of Manasseh, east of Jordan. During the
conquest be performed one of the chief feat* re-
corded. He took the whole of the tract of Aboob
(Deut iii. 14 [comp. Josh. xiii. 30]), the naturally
inaccessible Tracbonitia, the modern Ltjah — and
in addition possessed himself of some nomad vil-
lages in Gilead, which he called after his own
name, Havvoth-Jair (Num. xxxii. 41; 1 Chr.
ii. 23).* None of his descendants are mentioned
with certainty ; but it ia perhaps allowable to eon-
aider Ira thk Jaikitk a* one of them. Possibly
another was —
3- i'ldtpi Vat lamp; Alex. lane, Atip.J
" Jaw the Gileaditk," who judged Israel for
two and twenty years (Judg. x. 8-6). He had
thirty sons who rode thirty asset (0*H55), and
possessed thirty " cities " (D^S) in the land of
Gilead, which, like those of their namesake, wen
called Havvoth-Jair. Possibly the original twenty-
three formed part of these. Joaephus (Ant. v. 7,
$ 6) gives the name of Jair as 'iacfpijr ; he declares
him to have been of the tribe of Msnstsnh, and hia
burial place, Camoh, to have been in Gilead.
[Havoth-Jair.]
3- Ptfuot; Vat FA. Iaeuet ; Alex. larpn.)
A Benjamite, son of Kish and father of Murdeeai
(Esth. ii. 5). In the Apocrypha hia name it given
aa Jaibub.
*■ ("^ [«*«"• Go* a*ahent] : a totaUy (lif-
erent name from the preoeding ; 'laipi [Vat Iasip;]
Alex. A8««: Baltm.) The father of Elhanan, on*
of the heroes of David's army, who killed Taehml
the brother of Goliath (1 Chr. xx. 6). In the orig-
inal Hebrew text (CerttA) the name ia Jaor
013P)' In the parallel narrative of Samuel (I
Sam. xxi. 19) Jaare-Oregim is substituted for Jair.
The arguments for each will be found under Euhca-
xam and Jaark-Oreoim.
In the N. Test, at in the Apocrypha, wa en-
counter Jair under the Greek form of jAiBtra.
G.
JA1K1TE, THB O"*?*" [pasronym.]: 4
'Implr [Vat -w]; Alex. « lanptfi Jo&ritm).
Ira the Jairtte was • priest (*jni, A. V. « chief
mler")to David (3 Sam. xx. 36). If "priest"
ia to be taken here in its sacerdotal sense, Ira mutt
have been a descendant of Aaron, In whose lint
however no Jair ia mentioned. But this is not
imperative [tee Priest], and he may therefore
daring to said to be, " And aether at
Havvoth-Jair from them, irlth Ksoath aad bar
tor-towns, sixty duel " (Bsrtbaao, CVw*. p. 161.
Digitized by
Google
1198 JAIRU8
Iran Um great Jslr U MummA, or
r person of the name.
J llltUS [8 syl]. 1. Od,,pe,: [Jainu]), a
ruler of a synagogue, probably in some town near
the western shore of tlie Sea of Galilee. He wu
the father of the maiden whom Jesus restored to
life (Matt. ix. 18; Mark v. 32; Luke viii. 41). The
name is probably the (incized fonu of the Hebrew
Jaik.
* It has been questioned whether the daughter
of Jairus was really dead and raised to life again
by the power of Jesus, or lay only in a state of in-
sensibility. Among others Olshausen (Bibl. Comm.
I. 821 ff.) and Robinson (Lex. of He N. T., p.
862) entertain the Utter view. The doubt has
arisen chiefly from the fact that the Saviour said
of the damsel, « She is not dead, but skepeth "
(see Matt. ix. 24). The usual verb for describing
death as a sleep, it is true, is a different one (iror-
uAm, see John xi. 11 f.); but the one which the
Saviour employed in this instance (xaBtiSti) is
also used of the dead in 1 These, v. 10, where
«• whether we wake or sleep " is equivalent to
- whether we are alive or dead." Hence we may
attach the same figurative sense to the word as
applied in the passage before us. It was a pecu-
liarly expressive way of saying that in its relation
to Christ's power death was merely a slumber: he
had only to speak the word, and the lifeless rose at
once to consciousness and activity. But there are
positive reasons for understanding that Christ per-
formed a miracle on this occasion. The damsel lay
dying when the father went in pursuit of Jesus (Luke
viii. 49) ; shortly after that she was reported as dead
(Mark v. 36); and was bewailed at the house with
the lamentation customary on the decease of a per-
son (Mark v. 88 ft".). The idea that she was asleep
merely was regarded as absurd (Matt. ix. 24), and
Luke states expressly (viii. 68) that "her spirit
tame again " to her on being commanded to arise.
The parents and the crowd " were astonished with
a great astonishment" at what they beheld or
beard related (Mark v. 42). and the Saviour per-
mitted that impression to remain with them.
One other circumstance in this account deserves
notice. Our Lord on arriving at the house of Jai-
rus found the mourners already singing the death-
dirge, and the " minstrels " (,ai>\ifrai, " flute-play-
ers") performing their part in the service (Matt.
Ix. 33). On that custom, see De Wette's Htbr.
Archaokgit, § 363 (4» Aufl.).
Mr. Lane mentions that it is chiefly at the funer-
als of the rich among the modem Egyptians that
musicians an employed ss mourners. (Modem
Egyptian, li. 387, 397.) It is not within the
ability of every family to employ them, as they are
p rof es si onal acton, and their presence involves some
ixpense. The same thing, as a practical result,
was true, no doubt, in ancient times. Hence
•* the minstrels " very properly appear in this par-
ticular history. Jairus, the father of the damsel
whom Christ restored to life, being a ruler of the
synagogue, was a person of some rank among his
nuntrymen. In such a family the most decent
rtyte of performing the last sad offices would be
■bserved. Further, the narrative allows of hardly
«ny interval between the daughter's death and the
<> •■too If the rule was stricter, etroomstaoeas
•ould eontml she practice. The poor mast often wtth-
sjaM the iimui l b s d tribute. The Talmud (CtttavsoM,
(?. t) says, with isjsrsaes to the death of a wUk
JAXXH
commencement of the wailing. 'Ink
the present oriental custom; for when the death of
a person is expected, preparations an often made at
es to have the lament begin almost as soon as ths
last breath is drawn. H.
S. Clattpox; [Vat. i«umi]) Esth. xl 3. [Jaik,
8.] W. T. B.
JA'KAN Onj! [=1P,S. mumfftnt, tag*.
<]•■ 'AmtV; [Vat. n»u»0 Alex. [Isxuror xoi]
OtNnxu: Jacam), son of Exer the Horite (1 Chr. i.
43). The name is identical with that more com-
monly expressed in the A. V. ss Jaakak. And
see Asian.
JA'KEH (nn>, and in some MSS. K£; [sec
infra], which is followed by a MS. of the Targun?
in the Cambridge Univ. Libr., and was evidently
the reading of the Vulgate, when the whole clause
is rendered symbolically — " Verba congregantis
filii noasaius"). The A. V. of Prov. xxx. 1, fol-
lowing the authority of the Targnm and Syriae,
has represented this as the proper name of the
father of Agar, whose sayings are collected in Prov.
xxx., and such is the natural interpretation. But be-
yond this we have no clew to the existence of either
Agur or Jakeh. Of course if Agur be Solomon,
it follows that Jakeh was a name of David of some
mystical significance. But for this then is not •
shadow of support. Jarehi, punning on the twa
names, explains the clause, " the words of Solomon,
who gathered understanding and vomited it," ovi-
dently having before him the reading Np\ which
he derived from Hip, " to vomit" This explana-
tion, it needs scarcely be said, is equally character-
ized by elegance and truth. Others, adopting the
form n]7^, and connecting it with HTt^ (or at
Sunt gins it, ~rtp*), «ttt'a<U, "obedience,"
apply it to Solomon in his late repentance. But
these and the like are the merest conjectures. If
Jakeh be the name of a person, ss there is every
reason to believe, we know nothing more about
him; if not, there is no limit to the symbolical
meanings which may be extracted from the clause
in which it occurs, and which change with the ever-
shifting ground of the critic's point of view. That
the passage was early corrupted is clear from the
rendering of the LXX., who insert eh. xxx. 1-14
in the middle of eh. xxiv. The first clause they
translate root luoiu kiyovs, vli, f o/M»V<» «*■
StfdWmu aOToij prrawici — " My son, fear my
words, and, having received them, repent: " a mean-
ing which at first sight seems hard to extract from
the Hebrew, and which has therefore been aban-
doned as hopelessly corrupt. But a slight alteration
of one or two letters and the vowel-points win, if
it do no more, at least show how the LXX. arrived
at their extraordinary translation. They must
have read Ctt<H.}. ™7P "3? -M.^ "ny*. a
which the letters of the last word an slightly trans-
posed, in order to account for urraosst. In sup-
port of this alteration see Zeeh. xL 6, whan
ilSITr^ is rendered tteTeulAovT*. 6 The largua
" Mam pauperrlmus Inter Israalltss pnebeblt el asa
minus quam duas ttbtss at unam Ismsiitslihesi "
a.
» This conjaotiuw tautdsntaUy throws Ufht oa Ma
IJUL of ProT. xlv. 16, iKftm tit aivsssiae, as)
Digitized by
Google
JAKEH
seal flyrls* point to dilftreui readings abc. though
ant where, Jakeh is concerned.
fStxig (die fyritefo Sofomo's), unable to find
aay other fipU"»* 3 "", h« recourse to an alteration
sf the text as violent as it is unauthorized. He
proposes to read W^S FtnJTJ JS, "the son of
her whose obedience is Massa:*" which, to say the
least of it, is a very remarkable way of indicating
" the queen of Massa." But in order to arrive at
this reading he first adopts the rate word nnjv")
(which only occurs in the const state in two pas-
sages, Gen. xlix. 10, and Prov. xxx. 17), to which
he attaches the unusual form of the pronominal
suffix, and ekes out his explanation by the help of
an elliptical and highly poetical construction, which
is strangely out of place in the bold prose heading
of the chapter. Yet to this theory Bertheau yields
a coy assent (" niebt ohne Zogem," die Bpr. SrtL
EM. p. xviil.); and thus Agur and Lemuel are
brothers, both sons of a queen of Massa, the for-
mer being the reigning monarch (Prov. xxxi. 1).
HO??, maui, "prophecy " or '• burden," is consid-
ered as a proper name and identical with the region
named Masba in Arabia, occupied by the descen-
dants of a son of Ishmael (Gen. xxv. 14; 1 Chr. i.
90), and mentioned in connection with Dumah.
This district, Hitzig conjectures, was the same
which was conquered and occupied by the 600 Sim-
eonites, whose predatory excursion in the reign of
Hezekiah is narrated in 1 Chr. iv. 41-43. They
are there raid to have annihilated the Amalekites
in Mount Seir, and to have seised their country.
That this country wss Massa, of which Lemuel was
king, and that Agur was a descendant of the con-
quering Simeonites, is the opinion of Hitzig, ap-
proved by Bunsen. But the latter, retaining the
received text, and considering Jakeh as a proper
name, takes rWftpn, hammtusA, as if it were
"MBPIpn, aamnvuavii, a gentilie name, " the man
at* Massa," supporting this by a reference to Gen.
xv. 3, where PQWJi Dammetek, is apparently
need in the same manner (BiUlmrk, i., clxxviii.).
There is good reason, however, to suspect that the
word in question in the latter passage is an inter-
polation, or that the verse is in some way corrupt,
as the rendering of the Chaldee and Syriac is not
supported by the ordinary usages of Hebrew, though
it is adopted by the A. V., and by Gesenius, Kno-
JAMBS
1198
In any case the instances an not
W.A. W.
bd, and others,
analogous.
JA'KIM (SPRJ [isftom Godkjttup]: loirfssi
[Vat.] Uutfip: Jadm). 1. Head of the 12th
course of priests in the reign of David (1 Chr
xxlv. 12). The Alex. LXX. gives the name Hia-
kim (EAuumi/i). [Jehourih; Jachih.]
2. [Alex. laa-siu.] A Benjamite, one of to*
Bene-Shimhi [sons of 8.] (1 Chr. viii. 19).
a. an.
JAIiON 0^ [Mp»W. atidbtg]: "ituuC*;
[Vat. Kumrx] Alex. IoAwr: John), one of the
sons of Ksrah, a person named in the geucaliiglee
of Judah (1 Chr. iv. 17).
JAM'BRBS. [See Jamnes and Jambrei.J
JABfBRI- Shortly after the death of Judas
Maccabeus (b. o. 161), " the children of Jambri "
are said to have made a predatory attack on a de-
tachment of the Maccaboan forces and to have suf-
fered reprisals (1 Mace ix. 86-41). The nam*
does not occur elsewhere, and the variety of read-
ings is considerable: 'lapfipi, Cod. B; ■ [Iap/Spiy,]
Ieuttytir, Cod. A; [Sin. A/ifipti, Icyijspi;] alii,
'Auifyoi, 'Afi&pti Syr. Ambrt*. Josephus (AM.
liii. 1, $ 2) reads ol 'Ajiapatov mutts, and it
seems almost certain that the true reading is 'Aupl
(tt), a form which occurs elsewhere (1 K. xvi. 22;
Joseph. AM. viii. 12, $ S, 'Afiaptnf, 1 Chr. xxviL
18, Hob. ''"«?«?, Vulg. Amri; 1 Chr. ix. 4, 'A*v
JSpotu).
It ha* been conjectured (Dnisius, Minhaelis,
Grimm, 1 Mace. ix. 86) that the original text was
"HCM \33, " the sons of the Amorites," and that
the reference is to a family of the Amorites who
had in early times occupied the town Medeba (ver.
36) on the borders of Keuben (Num. xxi. 30, 31).
B.F. W.
JAMES ('IdVwfloi: Jaeo6ut),» the name of
several persons mentioned in the N. T.
L James the Sou of Zebedke. This is the
only one of the Apostles of whose life and death
we can write with certainty. The little that w*
know of him we have on the authority of Scripture.
All else that is reported is idle legend, with the
possible exception of one tale, handed down by
Clement of Alexandria to Euseblus, and by Eus e
bius to us. With this single exception the line of
demarcation is drawn clear and sharp. There is
■niTg"? 1*0*, which they probably read ri^J
QtTMT), ratal quantum.
a * ikere, m family In the English edition of this
work, Cod. B, or the Vatican manuscript 1208, Is con-
bunded with the Soman edition of 1687. The Vat-
lean manuscript (B) doss not oontsin the books of
Maeeabsss A.
6 The name itself will perhaps repay a fcw mo-
msnte' consideration. As borne by the Apostles and
Ibadr eootsmporaries in the N. T., it was of course
Jacob, sod It Is somewhat remarkable that In thsm it
itmnwl two forms, apparently of different cogues :
/ago — in modern Spanish Diego, Portuguese, Timf
— and Xofme or Jnyme, pronounced Haymi, with a
■trong InltM guttural. In France it became Jscqutu ;
but another form was Jam*, which appears In the
metrical lift of 8t Thomas 4 Becket by Gamier (A. i>
1170-74), quoted In Bobertson'a Sedctt, p. 189, nol*
From this last the transition to our James Is ess;.
When it first appeared in English, or through what
channel, the writer has not been able to trace. Pas
sibly it came from Scotland, when the name was a
tavorlte one. It exists in WyclMh's Bible (1881). In
Russia, and in Germany and the countries more im-
mediately related thereto, the name has retained its
■rea pp ears for the first time sues the patriarch himself. |
la the unchangeable Bast St. James Is still St. Jacob , original form, and accordingly there alone there would
— Jf-w Yakoob ; but no sooner had the name left tot seem to be no distinction between Jacob and James ;
Stores of Palestine than it underwent a series of cl which was she case even In medueval Latin, where
dons and Interesting changes probably unparalleled
r* aay otter case. To the Greeks it became 'Utmfiot,
nth the secant on the first syllable; to the Latins
fasti t, doubtless similarly accented, sines In Italian
t Is tncrnmt or Qiiamt [also Jacopo]. In Spain it , its original form
Jacob and Jacobus were always discriminated. Its
modern dress, however, sits very lightly on the name ;
and we sss In " Jacobite" and "Jacobin " bow ready
It is to throw It off, and, like a true Oriental, reveal
Digitized by
Google
1200
JAMBS
bo far of eontranding the St. James of the New
Testament with the hero of Compostella.
Of St. James's early life we know nothing. We
firat hear of him a. d. 27, when he wag called to
be our Lord's disciple; and he disappears from view
A. D. 44, when he suffered martyrdom at the hands
of Herod Agrippa 1 We proceed to thread to-
gether the several pieces of information which the
inspired writers hare given us respecting him dur-
ing these seventeen Tears.
I. Bit History. — In the spring or summer of
the vear 27, Zebedee, a fisherman, but possessed
at least of competence (Mark i. 20), was out on the
Sea of Galilee, with his two sons, James and John,
and eomn boatmen, whom either he had hired for
the occasion, or who more probably were his usual
attendants. He was engaged in his customary oc-
cupation of fishing, and near him was snother boat
belonging to Simon and Andrew, with whom he
and his sons were in partnership. Finding them-
selves unsuccessful, the occupants of both boats
came ashore, and began to wash their nets. At
this time the new Teacher, who had now been min-
istering about six months, and with whom Simon
and Andrew, and in all probability John, were al-
ready well acquainted (John i. 41), appeared upon
the beach. He requested leave of Simon and An-
drew to address the crowds that nocked around him
from their boat, which was lying at a convenient
distance from the shore. The discourse being com-
pleted, and the crowds diaperaing, Jesus desired
Simon to put out into the deeper water, and to try
another cast for fish. Though reluctant, Simon
did as he was desired, through the swe which be
already entertained for One who, he thought, might
possibly be the promised Messiah (John i. 41, 42),
and whom even now he addressed as "Rabbi"
(ewtrrdro, Luke v. 6, the word used by this Evan-
gelist for 'Pa$$i). Astonished at the success of
his draught, he beckoned to his partners hi the
other boat to come and help him and his brother
in landing the fish caught The same amazement
communicated itself to the sons of Zebedee, and
Sashed conviction on the souls of all the four fish-
ermen. They had doubted and mused before; now
they believed. At His call they left all, and became,
once and for ever, His disciples, hereafter to catch
men.
This is the call of St. James to the diacipleship.
It will be seen that we have regarded the events
narrated by St. Matthew and St. Mark (Matt. iv.
18-29; Mark i. 16-20) as identical with those
related by St Luke (Luke v. 1-11), in accordance
with the opinion of Hammond, Lightfoot, Maldo-
jatus, I^trdner, Trench, Wordsworth, etc. ; not as
distinct from them, as supposed by Alford, Gres-
weU,etj.
For u full year we lose sight of St James. He
a then, in the spring of 28, called to the apostle-
abip with his eleven brethren (Matt. z. 2; Mark
Hi 14; Luke vi. 13; Acts i. 13). In the list of
thi Apostles given us by St Mark, and in the hook
jf Acts, his name occurs next to that of Simon
Peter: in the Gospels of St. Matthew and St Luke
H -wines third. It is clear that in these lists the
lames are not placed at random. In all four, the
names of Peter, Andrew, James, and John are
Saoed first; and it is plain that these four Apostles
An srrlcalaauVal tradition, of uncertain date,
the rsstnanee of Zebedee and the birth of St.
at Japtala, sow Y4/a, near Nazareth,
JAMBS
were at the head of the twelve t hr o ug h o u t Thane
we see that Peter, James, and John, alone were
admitted to the miracle of the raising of Jaime's
daughter (Mark v. 37; Luke vUi. 61). The same
three Apostles alone were permitted to be present
at the Transfiguration (Matt xvii. 1; Mark ix. 2
Luke ix. 28). The same three alone were allowed
to witness the Agony (Matt. xxvi. 37; Mark xiv.
33). And it is Peter, James, John, and Andrew
who ask our Lord for an explanation of bis dark
sayings with regard to the end of the world and
his second coming (Mark xiii. 8). It is worthy of
notice that in all these places, with one exception
(Luke ix. 28), the name of James is put before
that of John, and that John is twice described as
" the brother of James " (Mark v. 37; Matt xvii.
1). This would appear to imply that at this time
James, either from age or character, took • higher
position than his brother. On the last occasion on
which St. James is mentioned we find this position
reversed. That the prominence of these three
Apostles was founded on personal character (as out
of every twelve persons there must be two or three
to take the lead), and that it was not an office held
by them " quos Dominus, ordinis servandi canst,
coeteris pneposuU," as King Jamas I. has said
(PrmfnU Man. tn AjxA. pro Jwr. Fid.), can
scarcely be doubted (ef. Eusebius, ii. 14).
It would seem to have been at the time of the
appointment of the twelve Apostles that the name
of Boanerges [Boa merges] was given to the sons
of Zebedee. It might, however, like Simon's name
of Peter, have been conferred before. This name
plainly was not bestowed upon them because they
beard the voice like thunder from the cloud (Jerome),
nor because "dirina eorum predicatio magnum
quendam et illustrem sonitum per terrarum orbem
datura erat" (Vict Antioch.), nor &s uryoAoicr/-
pymi koI 0<oAO7srrdVovt (Theoph.), but it was,
like the name given to Simon, at once descriptive
and prophetic. The " Rockman " had a natural
strength, which was described by his title, and he
was to have a divine strength, predicted by the
same title. In the same way the " Sons of Thunder "
had a burning and impetuous spirit, which twice
exhibits itself in its unchaatened form (I.uke ix. 64;
Mark x. 37), and which, when moulded by the
Spirit of God, taking different shapes, led St James
to be the first apostolic martyr, and St John to
become in an especial manner the Apostle of Love.
The first occasion on which this natural char-
acter manifests itself in St James and his brother
is at the commencement of our Lord's last Journey
to Jerusalem in the year 30. He was passing
through Samaria; and now courting rather than
avoiding publicity, be " sent messengers before his
face " into a certain Tillage, " to ipake ready for
him " (Luke ix. 62), i. e. in all probability to an-
nounce him as the Messiah. The Samaritans, with
their old jealousy strong upon them, refused to
receive him, because be was going to Jerusalem
instead of to Gerizim ; and in exasperation James
and John entreated their Master to follow the
example of EUjah, and call down fire to oclkju
them. The rebuke of their Lord is testified to by
all the New Testament MSS. The words of the
rebuke, " Ye know not what manner of spirit y»
are of," rest on the authority of the Codtm Bmm
that villas* la commonly known to the BMsaeam at
the Latin Ohureh In that dtstsfet ar am C
Mania.]
Digitized by
Google
JAMBS
sad • few MSS. of minor value. TV rat of the
nrw, *> For the Son of Han ii no* oome to deatroy
men'* lives, bnt to ewe them," I* an insertion
without authority of MSS. i*ae Alford, m toc).«
At the end of the aame journey a aimilar spirit
appear* again. A* they went up to Jerusalem our
Lord declared to hi* Apostles the circumstances of
his coming Passion, and at the same time strength-
ened them by the promise that they should sit on
twelve thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.
These words seem to hare made a great impr e ss i on
upon Salome, and she may have thought her two
son* quite as fit as the sons of Jonas to be the chief
ministers of their Lord in the mysterious kingdom
which he was about to assume. She approached
therefore, and besought, perhaps with a special
tetereuee in her mind to Peter and Andrew, that
her two sons might sit on the right hand and on
the left in his kingdom, i. e. according to a Jewish
farm of expression * (Joseph. AM. vi. 11, § 9), that
they might be next to the King in honor. The
two brothers joined with her in the prayer (Mark
x. 35). The Lord passed by their petition with a
mild reproof, showing that the request had not
arisen from an evil heart, but from a spirit which
limed too high. He told them that they should
•lrink His cup and be baptized with His baptism
of suffering, but turned their minds away at once
from the thought of future preeminence: in His
kingdom none of his Apostles were to be lords over
the rest The indignation felt by the ten would
show that they regarded the petition of the two
brothers ss an attempt at infringing on their priv-
ileges as much as on those of Peter and Andrew.
From the time of the Agony in the Garden, A. n.
30, to the time of his martyrdom, A. D. 44, we
know nothing of St James, except that after the
ascension be p e rsev e r e d in prayer with the other
Apostles, and the women, and the Lord's brethren
(Acts i. 13). In the year 44 Herod Agrippe I.,
sou of Aristobulua, was ruler of ail the dominions
which at the death of his grandfather, Herod the
Great, had been divided between Archebuis, An-
lipas, Philip, and Lysaniaa. He had received from
Caligula, Treehonitit in the year 37, Galilee and
Pence in the year 40. On the accession of Clau-
dius, in the year 41, he received from him Idunuea,
Samaria, and Judas. This sovereign was at once
a supple statesman and a stern Jew (Joseph. Ant.
xviii. 6, § 7, xnt 5-8): a king with not a few grand
and kingly qualities, at the same time eaten up
with Jewish pride — the type of a lay Pharisee.
" He was very ambitious to oblige the people with
donations,'' and "he was exactly careful in the
observance of the laws of his country, keeping him-
self entirely pure, and not allowing one day to pass
over his baad^ritbout its appointed sacrifice " {Ant.
six. 7, § 8). Policy and inclination would alike
kud such a monarch " to lay hands " (not " stretch
forth bis hands," A. V. Aets xii. 1) "on certain
of the church ; " and accordingly, when the pass-
over of the year 44 had brought St James and St
Pater to Jerusalem, he seised them both, considering
« • Baa note d under Kujah, vol. I. p. 707 t A.
I The nine form is common throughout the But
*» Uai'l Arab. Nifkts, vol. IB. p. 312, ftc.
c The gnat Armenian convent at Jerusalem on the
■trailed Mount Hob is dedicated to " St Janus the
eon of Zebedee-" The church of the convent or rather
a small chapel on Its northeast side, onronta* the tro-
erttoro- alt* of his martyrdom. This, however, can
7(
JAMBS 1801
doubtless that if he cut off the "Son of Thunder"
and the "Rockman" the new sect would be mom
tractable or more weak under the presidency of
James the Just, for whose character he probably
had a lingering and sincere respect James was
apprehended first — his natural impetuosity of tem-
per would eeetn to have urged him on even beyond
Peter. And "Herod the king," the historian
simply tells us, " lulled James the brother of John
with the sword " (Acts xii. 2). This is all that
we know for certain of hi* death. 11 We may notice
two thing* respecting it — first, that James is now
described as the brother of John, whereas previously
John had been described as the brother of James
showing that the reputation of John had increased,
and that of James diminished, by the time that
St Luke wrote: and secondly, that he perished not
by stoning, but by the sword. The Jewish law
laid down that if seducers to strange worship were
few, they should be stoned; if many, that they
should be beheaded. Either therefore Herod in-
tended that James's death should be the beginning
of a sanguinary persecution, or he merely followed
the Roman custom of putting to death from prefer-
ence (eee Lightfoot, in he.).
The death of so prominent a champion left a
huge gap in the rank* of the infant society, which
was filled partly by St James, the brother of our
Lord, who now steps forth into greater prominence
in Jerusalem, and partly by St Paul, who had now
been seven years a convert, and who shortly after-
wards set out on his first apostolic Journey.
II. Chronological recapitulation. — In the spring
or summer of the year 27 James was called to be
a disciple of Christ. In the spring of 28 he was
appointed one of the Twelve Apostles, and at that
time probably received, with his brother, the title
of Boanerges. In the autumn of the same year be
wa* admitted to the miraculous raising of Jaime's
daughter. In the spring of the year 39 he wit-
nessed the Transfiguration. Very early In the year
30 he urged his Lord to call down fire from heaven
to consume the Samaritan village. About three
months later in the same year, just before the final
arrival in Jerusalem, he and his brother made their
ambitious request through their mother Salome.
On the night before the Crucifixion he was present
at the Agony in the Garden. On the day of the
Ascension lis is mentioned as persevering with the
rest of the Apostles and disciples in prayer. Shortly
before the day of the Passover, in the year 44, he
was put to death. Thus during fourteen out at
the seventeen years that elapsed between his call
and his death we do not even catch a glimpse of
him.
III. Tradition rapectmg km. — Clement of
Alexandria, in the seventh book of the Hypotypotat,
relates, concerning St. James's martyrdom, that
the prosecutor was so moved by witnessing his bold
confession that he declared himself a Christian on
the spot: accused and accuser were therefore hurried
off together, and on the road the latter begged St
James to grant him for g i v ene ss ; after a moment's
hardly bs the actual site (WUUams, Holy O'ty, IL658).
Its most intsresttaf possession Is the chair of the
Aposu>, a venerable ralle, the age of which Is perhaps
traceable as mr back as the 4th eantnry (miHems,
680). Bnt as It would seem that It Is bell, red to have
belonged to " the flnt Bishop of Jerusalem," It ■
doubtful to wnkh of the two Jameses ths trad
would ettfeaii is.
Digitized by
Google
1202
JAMES
u. tbe Apostle kissed him, saying, " Peace
he to then!" and they were beheaded together.
Tin cnditioii hi preserved by Kusebius (H. E. ii. 6).
There ii uo internal evidence against it, and tbe
external evidence it tnfficient to make it credible,
for Clement nourished u early a* a. i>. 196, and
he Rate* expressly that the account was given him
by those who went before him.
For legends respecting bis death and his con-
nection with Spain, see the Roman Breviary (in
Feet. S. Jac Ap.), in which the healing of a
paralytic and tbe conversion of Hermogenes are
attributed to him, and where it is asserted that lie
preached tbe Gospel in Spain, and that his remains
were translated to ComposteUa, See also the fourth
nook of the Apostolical History written by Abdias,
the (pseudo) first biabop of Babylon (Abdias, Buby-
Ionia primi Fpitcopi ah Apostolit constitute de hie-
loria Ccrttiminie Apostolici Libri deem, Paris,
1566) ; Isidore, DetitAel ubitu SS. utriusque Test.
No. LXXIII. (Hsgewxe, 1529); Pope CaUixtus
II.'* Four Sermon* on St James the Apostle (BM.
Pair. Magn. xv. p. 824); Mariana, De adrenlu
.laeubi Apoetcli Afq/oris in Hitpaninm (Col. Agripp.
1609); Baroniua, Martyrvtog'mm Romamm ail Jul.
£6, p. 326 (Antwerp, 1589): Bollandus, Acta Sanc-
torum ad Jul. 25, torn. vi. pp. 1-124 (Antwerp,
1729); Estius, Comm. in Act. Ap. c. xdi.; Armut.
in difficiUora loea 8. Script. (Col. Agripp. 1622);
'nilemont, Memeiree pour servir i tliittnre ec-
elenattiqtus dee six premiere Steele*, torn. i. p. 899
(Brussels, 1706). A* there is no shadow of foun-
dation for any of tbe legends here referred to we
pass them by without further notice. Even Baronius
shows himself ashamed of them ; Estius gives them
up as hopeless; and Tillemont rejects them with
as mueh contempt as his position would allow him
to show. Epiphanius, without giving or probably
having any authority for or against his statement,
reports that St June* died unmarried (S. Epipb.
Adv. Bar. ii. 4, p. 491, Paris, 1622), and that,
like his namesake, he lived tbe life of a Nazarite
{ibid. Ui. 2, 13, p. 1046).
3. James thb Sou op Almi.kub. Matt x. 8;
Mark fix. 18; Luke vi. 16; Acta i. 13.
3. Jambs the Brother of the Lord. Matt
xiii. 65; Mark vi. 3; Gal. i. 19.
4. James the Sou or Mart, Matt xxvii. 66 ;
Luke xxiv. 10. Also catted the Little, Mark
cv. 40.
B. James the Brother op Jude. Jude 1.
0. James the Brother (?) op Jude. Luke
vi. 16; Acts!. 13.
7. James. Acta xii. 17, xv. 13, xsd. 18; 1 Cor.
xv. 7; Gal. ii. 9, 12.
8. James the Servant op God ajjd op the
!,oi:i> Jehus Christ. James i. 1.
We reserve tbe question of tbe authorship of the
epistle for tbe present
St. Paul identifies for us Nos. 3 and 7 (see Gal.
ii. 9 and 12 compared with i. 19).
If we may translate 'looser '\ax40ov, Judas the
brothtr, rather than the son of .lames, we may con-
dude that 5 and 6 tre identical. And that we
may so translate it, is proved, if proof were needed,
by Winer ( Grammir of the /rooms of the N. T.,
translated by Agnew and Ebbeke, New York, I860,
§§ Ixri. and xxi.), by HKnlein (Handb. der EM.
in die tkhriften dee ffeuen Test, Erlangen, 1809),
by Arnaud (Reeherehee critiques $ur tSpitre de
Jude, Strsslmrg, 1851 V
Wa may identify o and 6 with s because we
know that James the Lord's brasher had a Hutu*
wwifi? Jude.
We may identify 4 with 8 because we know
James tbe son of Mary bad a brother named Jons,
and so also had James the Lord's brother.
Thus there remain two only, James tbe son of
Alphasus (2.), and Jamas the brother of the Lord
(3.). Can we, or can we not, identify them? This
requires a longer consideration.
I. By comparing Matt xxvii. 66 and Mark xv.
40, with John xix. 26, we find that tbe Virgin Mary
bad a sister named like herself, Mary, who was the
wife of Clopas, and who bad two sons, James tht
little, and Jose*. It has been suggested that
" Mary the wife of Clopas " in John xix. 26 need
not be tbe same person as " his m itber's sister "
(Kitto, Lange, Davidson), but the Ciieek will not
admit of this construction without the addition or
the omission of a «W. By referring to Matt xiii
65 and Mark vi. 3 we find that a James and a
Joses, with two other brethren called Jude and
Simon, and at least three (ntureu) sisters, were
living with the Virgin Mary at Nazareth. By
referring to Luke vi. 16 and Acta i. 18 we find that
there were two brethren named James and Jude
among the Apostles. It would oertainly be natural
to think that we had here but one family of four
brothers and three or more sisters, tbe children of
dopes and Mary, nephews and nieces of the Virgin
Mary. There are difficulties, however, in tbe way
of this conclusion. For, (1) the four brethren in
Matt xiii. 66 are described as the brothers (AScA-
*o() of Jesus, not as His cousins; (2) they are
found living a* at then- borne with the Virgin
Mary, which seems unnatural if she were their
aunt, their mother being, a* we know, still alive:
(8) the James of Luke vi. 15 is described as the son
not of Clopas, but of Alphasus; (4) the "brethren
of tbe Lord " (who are plainly James, Joses, Jude,
and Simon) appear to be excluded from the Apos-
tolic band by their declared unbelief in his Mes-
siabship (John vii. 8-5) and by being formally dis-
tinguished from tbe disciples by tbe Gospel-writers
(Matt vii. 48; Mark iii. 88; John ii. 12; Acts i.
14); (5) James and Jude are not designated as tbe
Lord's brethren in the lists of the Apostles; (6)
Mary is designated as mother of James and Joses
whereas she would have been called mother of James
and Jude, bad James and Jude been Apostles, and
Joses not an Apostle (Matt, xxvil. 66).
These are the six chief objections which may be
made to the hypothesis of there being but one
family of brethren named James, Joses, Jude, and
Simon. Tbe following answers may be given : —
Objection 1. — " They are called brethren." I,
is a Miund rule of criticism that words are to hr
understood in their most simple and literal accepta-
tion; but there is a limit to this rule. When
greater difficulties are caused by adhering to the
literal meaning of a word, than by interpreting it
more liberally, it is the part of the critic to inter-
pret more liberally, rather than to cling to the
ordinary and literal meaning of a word. Now it is
clearly not necessary to understand McAeW as
"brothers" in tbe nearest sense of brotherhood.
It need not mean more than relative (comp. I .XX.
Gen. xiii. 8, xiv. 14, xx. 12, xxix. 12, xxxi. 98;
Lev. xxv. 48; Dent li. 8; Job xix. 18, xlB. 11.
Xen. Cyrop. i. 5, J 47; Isocr. Paneg. 90; Plat
Phad. 57, Crit. 16; see also Cie. ad AtL 18: Tee
Ann. iii. 38 ; Quint. Curt vi. 10, $ 84 ; etsnp. Suiear
and Scbksusner. in me.). But perhaps the arcs**
Digitized by
Google
JAMBS
JAMB
1908
PM of the case would lead 01 to translate "M^o-nUtd mJ . 1rom ^ Aramale S5Vt »
• brethren? On the contour, nieb a translation'
appears to produce vet; gnve difficulties. For,
first, it introduces two sets of four first-eousius,
bearing the acme names of James, Joses, Jude, and
Siiuon, who appear upon the stage without any-
thing to show which ia the ton of Clopas, and which
his cousin ; and secondly, it dims us to take our
choice between three doubtful and improbable
hypotheses as to the parentage of this second set
of Janus, Joses, Jude, and Simon. There are three
such hypotheses : (a.) The Eastern hypothesis,
that they were the children of Joseph by a former
wife. This notion originated in the apocryphal
(iospel of Peter (Orig. m Matt. xiii. 66. Op. torn,
iii. p. 482, E. ed. Delarue), and was adopted by
St. Epiphanhis, St. Hilary, and St. Ambrose, and
handed on to the later Greek Church (Epiph. Bar.
xxriL 1, Op. torn. i. p. 116; HU. in Matt. I, St.
Ambr. Op. torn. ii. p. 960, Ed. Bened.). (ft.) The
Hehridian hypothesis, put forward at first by
Bonosus, Helvidius, and Joviiiian, and revived by
Strauss and Herder in Germany, and by Davidson
and Alfbrd in England, that James, .loses, Jude,
Simon, and the three sisters, were children of Joseph
and Mary. This notion is opposed, whether rightly
or wrongly, to the general sentiment of the Chris-
tian body in all ages of the Church : like the other
two hypotheses, it creates two sets of cousins with
the same name: it seems to be scarcely compatible
with our lord's recommending His mother to the
care of St. John at HU own death (tee Jerome,
Op. torn. ii. p. 10); for if, as bat been suggested,
though with great improbability, her sons might
st that time have been unbelievers (Worn. Ditp.
Thiol, p. 67, Lugd. Bat ; Keander, Plnnting, etc,
iv. 1), Jaaos would have known that that unbelief
was only to continue for a few days. That the
wparroVomt uidt of Luke ii. 7, and the «n o5
trc« of Matt. i. 95, imply the birth of after chil-
dren, is not now often urged (see Pearson, On the
Creed, L 304, li. 990). (c.) The Levirate hypothesis
may be passed by. It was a mere attempt made
in the eleventh century to reconcile the Greek and
Latin traditions by supposing that Joseph and
Clopas were brothers, and that Joseph raised up
and to his dead brother (Tbeoph. m MatL xiii. 66;
Op. torn. L p. 71, E. ed. Venat. 1764).
Objection 9. — " The four brothers and their
sisters are always found living and moving about
with the Virgin Mary." If they were the children
of Clopat, the Virgin Mary was their aunt. Her
•wn husband would appear without doubt to have
died at some time between A. D. 8 and A. P. 96.
Nor have we any reason for believing Clopas to
have been alive during our Lord's ministry. (We
ceed not pause here to prove that tbe Cleophst of
I -oka xxlv. is an entirely different person and name
from Clopas.) What difficulty is there in sup-
posing that tbe two widowed sisters should have
lived together, tbe more so ss one of them had but
one ton, and be was often taken from her by his
ministerial duties? And would it not be moat
•tural that two families of first cousins thus living
tjgether should be popularly looked upon at one
smily, and spoken of as brothers and sisters instead
jf cousins? It is noticeable that St. Mary it no-
s-hsre celled the mother of the four brothers.
Objection 3. — "James the Apostle is said to be
the eon of Alphajus, not of Clopas." But Alphasus
sod dopes are tbe same name rendered into the
•reek language in two different but ordinary and
Jigsaw. (Sea Mill, Accounts of our iortfl
Brethren vindicated, etc. p. 336, who compares tin
two forms Clovis and Aloysius ; Amaud, Recherche*
etc).
Objection 4. — Dean Alford considers John vii
5, compared with vi. 67-70, to decide that none of
the brothers of the Lord were of the number of tbe
Twelve (ProUg. to Ep. ofjnmet, Gr. Test iv. 88,
and t'omm. in foe). If this verse, as he states,
makes " the crowning difficulty " to the hypothesis
of the identity of James tbe son of Alpliaeus. the
Apostle, with James the brother of the Ix>rd, tbe
difficulties are not too formidable to be overcome.
Many of tbe disciples having left Jesus, St Peter
bursts out in the name of tbe Twelve with a warm
expression of faith and love; and after that — very
likely (see Greswell's Harmony) full six months
afterwards — the Evangelist states that "neither
did his brethren believe on Him." Does it follow
from hence that all his brethren disbelieved? Let
us compare other passages in Scripture. St Mat-
thew and St Mark state that the thieves railed on
our Lord upon the Cross. Are we therefore to dis-
believe St Luke, who says that one of the ihieves
was penitent, and did not rail ? (Luke xxiii. 3!<, 40).
St. Luke and St John say that the soldiers offered
vinegar. Are we to believe that all did so? or, at
St. Matthew and St. Mark tell us, that only one
did it? (Luke xxiii. 36; John xix. 99; Mark xv.
36; Matt xxvii. 48). St. Matthew tells us that
" his disciples " had indignation when Mary poured
tbe ointment on the Lord's head. Are we to sup-
pose this true of all? or of Judas Iscariot, and
perhaps tome others, according to John xil. 4 and
Mark xir. 4? It it not at all necessary to suppose
that St John is here speaking of all the brethren.
If Joses, Simon, and the three sisters disbelieved,
it would be quite sufficient ground for the state-
ment of the Evangelist The tame may be said
of Matt. xii. 47, Mark iii. 39, where it is reported
to Him that his mother and bis brethren, desig-
nated by St. Mark (iii. 91) at of wop' aSrrov, were
standing without Nor does it necessarily follow
that the disbelief of the brethren was of such a
nature that James and Jude, Apostles though they
were, and vouched for half a year before by the
warm-tempered Peter, could have had no share in
it It might have been similar to that feeling of
unfaithful restlessness which perhaps moved St
John Baptist to send his disciples to make their
inquiry of the Lord (see Grotius in foe, and Lard-
ner, vi. p. 497, Ixmd. 1788). With regard to John,
ii. 19, Acts I. 14. we may say that "his brethren "
are no more excluded from the disciples in the first
passage, and from the Apostles in the second, by
being mentioned parallel with them, than "the
other Apostles, and the brethren of the Lord, and
Cephas " (1 Cor. Ix. 6), excludes Peter from the
Apostolic band.
Objection 5. — " If the title of brethren of the
Lord bad belonged to James and Jude, they would
have been designated by it in tbe list of tbe Apostles."
The omission :f a title is so slight a ground for an
Argument that we may pass this by.
Objection « -That Mary tie wife of Clopas
should be designated by the title of Mary the
...other of James and Joses, to the exclusion of
Jude, If James and Jude were Apostles, appears U
Dr. Davidson (.Introd. to N. T.. iii. 996. 1
Digitized by
Google
1204
JAMES
1861) and to Dean Alford (Prol to Ep. of J conn,
G. T., hr. 90) extremely improbable. There li no
improbability in it, if Joaes was, ai would aeem
likely, ao elder brother of Jude, and next in order
to Jamee.
II. We have hitherto argued that the hypothesis
•vhich moat naturally account* for the fact* of Holy
Scripture is that of the identity of James the little,
the Apostle, with James the Lord's brother. We
hare also argued that the six main objections to
this view are not valid, inasmuch as tbey may either
be altogether met, or at beat throw us back on other
hypotheses which create greater difficulties than
that under consideration. We proceed to point
nut some further confirmations of our original
hypothesis.
1. It would be unnatural that St. Luke, in a list
of twelve persons, in which the name of James
twice occurred, with its distinguishing patronymic,
should describe one of the last persons on his list
as brother to " James," without any further desig-
nation to distinguish him, unless be meant the
James whom he had just before named. The James
whom be had jurt before named it the son of
Alphaeus ; the person designated by his relationship
to him is Jude. We have reason therefore for
garding Jude as the brother of the son of Alphjeus ;
on other grounds (Matt. xiii. 55; Mark vi. 3) we
have reason for regarding him as the brother of the
Lord : therefore we have reason for regarding the
son of Alphseus as the brother of the Lord.
2. It would be unnatural that St. Luke, after
having recognized only two Jameses throughout his
Gospel and down to the twelfth chapter of the Acta
of the Apostles, and having in that chapter nar-
rated the death of one of them (James the son of
Zebedee), should go on in the same and following
chapters to speak of "James," meaning thereby
not the other James, with whom alone his readers
are acquainted, but a different James not yet men-
tioned by him. Alford's example of Philip the
Evangelist (.Proleg. to the Ep. of Jamet, p. 89) la
in no manner of way to the point, except as a con-
trast. St. Luke introduces Philip the Evangelist,
Acts vi. 5, and after recounting the death of
Stephen his colleague, continues the history of the
same Philip.
3. James is represented throughout the Acta as
exercising great authority among, or even over,
Apostles (Acta xii. 17, xv. 13, xxi. 18); and in
St. Paul's Epistles he is placed before even Cephas
uid John, and declared to be a pillar of the Church
rith them (Gal. ii. 9-12). It is more likely that
«n Apostle would hold such a position, than one
who had not been a believer till after the Resur-
rection.
4. St. Paul says (Gal. i. 19), "Other of the
Apostles saw I none, save James the Lord's brother"
(irtpov 8c T«r foroirroAuy owe tt&ov tl pv) *Id-
ku&ov rir iXt\(phv roS Kvpfov). This passage,
though seeming to assert distinctly that James the
lx>rd's brother was an Apostle, and therefore iden-
tical with the son of Alphaeus, cannot be taken as
a direct statement to that effect, for it it jiombU
'hat amxTToAw may be used in the looser sense,
though this is not agreeable with the line of defense
which St. Paul is here maintaining, namely, that
We Uaii received his commission from God, and not
toni the Twelve (aee Thomdike, i. p. 6, Oxf. 1844).
And attain, tl ut) "uiy qualify the whole sentence,
md not only the word euroaroAan' (Mayerhoff, Hut.
trif. EinttiU in die Petrin. Bchr. p. 58, Hamb.
JAMBS
1888; Neander, Miohadia, Winer, Altai). M
this la not often, if ever, the ease, when tl pvj W
Iowa irtpoy (Schneekenburger, Admit, ad Epiet
Jae.perptL p. 144, Stuttg. 1882: see abo Winer
Gramm. 6th ed., p. 847, and Meyer, Komm. in loc- ;
and if St. Paul had not intended to include St
James among the Apostles, we should rather have
expected the singular ix-oVroAor than the plural
raw awaaro'Aair (Arnaud, Recherche*, etc.). Tbe
more natural interpretation of the verse would
appear to be that which includes James among tbe
Twelve, identifying him with tbe son of Alpha ub.
But, as we have said, such a conclusion does not
necessarily follow. Compare, however, this verse
with Acta ix. 27, and the probability is increased
by several degrees. St. Luke there asserts that
Uaroabaa brought Paul to the Apvttkt, rpot roue
iwo<rri\<mf. St. Paul, as we have seen, asserts
that during that visit to Jerusalem be saw Peter,
and none other of tbe Apostles, save James the
lxrd's brother. Peter and James, then, were the
two Apostles to whom Barnabas brought Paul. Of
course, it mny be said here also that as-oVroAoi ia
used in its lax sense; but it appears to be a more
natural conclusion that Jamee the Lord's brother
was one of the Twelve Apostles, being identical
with James the sou of Alphaeus, or James the
Utile.
III. We must now torn for a short time from
Scripture to the early testimony of uninspired
writers. Here, as among modern writers, we find
the same three hypotheses which we have already
mentioned : —
For tbe identity of James the Lord's brother
with James the Apostle, the son of Alphena, w*
find Papias of Hierapolis, a contemporary of the
Apostles « (see Routh, RtHq. Sacr. i. 16, 43, 230,
Oxon, 1846), St. Clement of Alexandria (Hj/potf-
poteu, bk. vii. apud Euaeb. H. E. il. 1), St. Chry-
sostom (in Gal. i. 19).
Parallel with this opinion there existed another
in favor of the hypothesis that James was the son
of Joseph by a former marriage, and therefore not
identical with tbe son of Alphams. This is first
found in the apocryphal Gospel of Peter (see Origen,
in Matt. xiii. 55), in the Protevangelium of James,
and tbe Pseudo-Apostolical Constitutions of the
third century (Thilo, Cod. Apocr. L 228; Cant.
ApotL vi. 18). It is adopted by Eusebius ( Cbnun.
in Etai. xvii. 6; H. E. i. 12, ii. 1). Perhaps it la
Origen's opinion (aee Coram, in Jok. il. 12). St.
Epiphanius, St. Hilary, and St. Ambrose, we have
already mentioned as being on the same side. So
are Victorinus (Vict. PhiL in Gal apud Mail
Script, vet. nor. CoU. [torn. IB. pari ii.] Roma:,
1828) and Gregory Nyssen (%>. torn. ii. p. 844,
D, ed.Par. 1618), and it became the recognized
belief of the Greek Church.
Meantime the hypothesis maintaining the iden-
tity of the two waa maintained ; and being warmly
defended by St. Jerome (in Matt xii. 49), and
supported by St. Augustine ( Contra Fatnt. xxii
35, Ac), it became the recognized belief of tb.
Western Church.
The third hypothesis waa unknown until U waa
put forward by Bonosus In Macedonia, and by Het-
vidius and Jovinian hi Italy, as an opinion which
seemed to them conformable with Scripture. Theb
followers were called Antidieomarianitea. The foes
a • Here, too, the older Papbm la inntlinialaw will
bis later nimsssrs Baa noes, vol. 1. p. 8V ft
Digitized by
Google
JAMKS
af stair hating s name given them shorn that their
■ambers muat ban been considerable; they date
bom the latter part of the fourth century.
English theological writers haw been dirided
between the first and second of these news, with,
however, a preference on the whole for the first
hypothesis. See, for example, Lardner, vi. 495,
Lond. 1788; Pearson, Minor Works, i. 350, Ozf.
1844, and On the Creed, i. 308, U. 334, Oxf. 1833;
Thomdike, L 6, Oxf. 1844; Home's Introd. to U.
S. W. 437, Loud. 1834, Ac. On th* same side are
Lightfoot, Witaiua, Lamps, Baumgarten, Sender,
Gabler, Eichhorn, Hug, Bertholdt, Guericke,
Sehneckenburger, Meier, Stelger, Gieseler, Theile,
Lange. Taylor (Opp. torn. v. p. 20, Lond. 1849),
Wilson ( Opp. torn. v«. p. 673, Oxf. 1859), Can (Life
tfSt. Jama) maintain the second hypothesis, with
Vossius, Basnage, Valerius, etc. The third is held
by Dr. Davidson (Mr. A". T. vol iii.) and by Dean
Alford (Greek TetU iv. 87).»
The chief treatises on the subject are Dr. Mill's
Accounts of our Lord's brethren vmiicnttd, Cam-
bridge, 1843; Alford, as above referred to; Lange's
Article in llerzog'a Rent-EncykloptkKe fir prates-
tammsche Tktohgie und Kirche, Stuttgart, 1858;
Neander's Pfieaaung und Leitung; Schnecken-
borger's Annotatio rid KpisL Jac. perpetua, Stutt-
gart, 1833; Amand's Recherche* critiques stir
JjlpUrt de J udt, Strasbourg, 1851; ScharTs Das
Verkdltnist dts Jacobus Bruders des fferrn und
Jacobus Alp/idi, Berlin, 1843; Gabler's De Jacobo,
Epietola eiiletn nscri/ila Auctori, Altorf, 1787.
Had we not identified James the son of AJphsras
with the brother of the I.ord we should have but
little to write of him. When we had said that his
name appears twice in the catalogue of the Twelve
Apostles, our history of him would be complete. In
like manner the early history of the lord's brother
would be confined to the fact that he lived and
moved from place to place with his brothers and
sisters, and with the Virgin Mary ; and, except the
appearance of the risen I-ord to him, we should
have nothing more to recount of him until after
the death of James the son of Zebedee, in the year
44, or at least, till St. Paul's first visit to Jerusalem
liter his conversion, in the year 40. Of James the
ittle, who would probably be distinct from each
it the above (for an argument against the identity
/ the Jameses is the doubt of the identity of
nlpbjeus and Clopas), we should know nothing,
except that he had a mother named Mary, who
was the sister of the Virgin Mary and the wife of
Clopas.
James the Little, the sou or Alphas,
the bbotheb or thk Lord. — Of James' father
yiQbn, rendered by St Matthew and St Mark
Alpham ('A\ipa!os), tad by St. John Clopas
.KA*iraj), we know nothing, except that he mar-
ked Mary, the sister of the Virgin Mary, and had
by ber four sons and three or more daughters.*
He appears to have died before the commencement
H our Lord's ministry, and after his death It would
seem that his wife and ber sister, a widow like her-
self, and in poor circumstances, lived together hi
ene house, generally at Nazareth (Matt. xlii. 56),
but sometimes abo at Capernaum (John ii. 13) and
Jerusalem (Acta i. 14). It is probable that theat
JAMBS 1206
cousins, or, as they wen usually called, brothers aisf
sisters, of the Lord were older than himself; as os
one occasion we find them, with his mother, indig-
nantly declaring that He was beside himself, ana
going out to " lay hold on Him " aud compel Him
to moderate his zeal in preaching, at least suf-
ficiently >' to eat bread " (Mark iii. 80, 81, 31).
This looks Bke the conduct of elders towards one
younger than themselves.
Of James individually we know nothing till the
spring of the year 38, when we find him, together
with his younger brother Jude, called to the A pos-
tdate. It has been noticed that in all the four
lists of the Apostles James holds the same place,
beading perhaps the third class, consisting of him-
self, Jude, Simon, and Iscariot; as Philip heads the
second class, consisting of himself, Bartholomew,
Thomas, and Matthew ; and Simon Peter the first,
consisting of himself, Andrew, James, and John
(Alford, in Matt x. 3). The nut of Jude being
described by reference to James ('loifias 'laxdfiou)
shows the name and reputation which he had,
either at the time of the calling of the Apostles or
at the time when St Luke wrote.
It is not likely (though far from impossible) that
James and Jude took put with their brothers and
sisters, and the Virgin Mary, in trying " to lay
hold on " Jesus in the autumn of the same year
(Mark iii. 21); and it is likely, though not certain,
that it is of the other brothers and sisters, without
these two, that St John says, " Neither did his
brethren believe on Him " (John vii. 5), in the
autumn of a. d. 89.
We hear no more of James till after the Cruci-
fixion and the Resurrection. At some time in the
forty days that intervened between the Resurrection
and the Ascension the I-ord appeared to bim. This
is not related by the Kvangelista, but it is men-
tioned by St Paul (1 Cor. xv. 7); and there never
has been any doubt that it was to this James rather
than to the son of Zebedee that the manifestation
was vouchsafed. We may conjecture that it was
for the purpose of strengthening him for the high
position which be wss soon to assume in Jerusalem,
and of giving him the instructions on " the things
pertaining to the kingdom of God" (Acta i. 3)
which were necessary for his guidance, that the
Lord thus showed himself to James. We cannot
fix the date of this appearance. It was probably
only a few days before the Ascension ; after which
we find James, Jude, and the rest of the Apostles,
together with the Virgin Mary, Simon, and Joses,
in Jerusalem, awaiting in faith and prayer the out-
pouring of the Pentecostal gift
Again we lose sight of James for ten years, and
when be appears once more it is in a for higher
position than any that he has yet held. In to*
year 87 occurred the conversion of Saul. Three
years after his conversion he paid his first visit tr
Jerusalem, but the Christians recollected what they
had suffered at his hands, and feared to have any-
thing to do with him. Barnabas, at this time of fat
higher reputation than himself, took him by tin
■ The anther of the article on the " Brethren «r
' Void " sskss a dmaraot view from the one frven
, vol L p. S»]
<r>.
<r>
r.i__.
the Virata-
■ar/ • Clopai or Alphsras.
Jastx.
Jambs. Jomb.
Jaas.
IbaoB Tamer
Digitized by
Google
1206 JAMBS
Hand, and tabodiiced him to Peter and James
(AcU ix. 37 ; GaL i. 18, 10), and bj their authority
he was admitted into the society of the Christians,
and allowed to associate free!)' with them during
the fifteen days of his stay. Here we find James
on a level with Peter, and with him deciding on
the admission of St. Paul into fellowship with the
Church at Jerusalem; and from henceforth we
always find him equal, or in his own department
superior, to the very chiefest Apostles, Peter, John,
sud Paul. For by this time he had been appointed
(at what exact date we know not) to preside over
the infant Church in its most important centre, in
a position equivalent to that of Bishop. This pre-
eminence is evident throughout the after history
of the Apostles, whether we read it in the Acts, in
the Kpistles, or in ecclesiastical writers. Thus in
the year 44, when Peter is released from prison, he
desires that information of his escape may be given
to "James, snd to the brethren " (Acts xii. 17).
In the year 49 be presides at the Apostolic Council,
and delivers the judgment of the Assembly, with
the expression 5i4 tyti itplmt (AcU xv. 13, 19; see
St. Chrys. m he.). In the same year (or perhaps
In the year 51, on his fourth visit to Jerusalem)
St. Paul recognizes James as one of the pillars of
the Church, together with Cephas and John (Gal-
li. 9), and places his name before them both.
Shortly afterwards it is " certain who came from
James," that is, from the mother church of Jeru-
salem, designated by the name of its Bishop, who
lead Peter into t e r g i ve r sa tion at Antioch. And in
the year 57 Paul pays a formal visit to James in
the presence of all his presbyters, after having been
previously welcomed with joy the day before by the
brethren in an unofficial manner (Acts xxi. 18).
Entirely accordant with these notices of Scripture
is the universal testimony of Christian antiquity to
the high office held by James in the Church of
Jerusalem. That he was formally appointed Bishop
of Jerusalem by the I/nd himself, ss reported by
Epiphanius {Ham. Ixxviii.); Chrysostom (Horn,
r.i. in 1 Cor. mi.); Pro Jus of Constantinople (De
Trad. Dit. Uturg.); and Photius (A>. 157), is not
likery. Eusebius follows this account in a passage
of his history, but says elsewhere that be was ap-
pointed by the Apostles (//. K. ii. 33). Clement
of Alexandria is the first author who speaks of bis
Episcopate (ffgpnttpottit, bk. vi. ap. Kuseb. //. K.
11. 1), and he alludes to it ss a thing of which the
chief Apostles, Peter, James, and John, might well
have been ambitious. The same Clement reports
that the Lord, after his resurrection, delivered the
gift of knowledge to James the Just, to John, and
Peter, wlto delivered it to the rest of the Apostles,
and they to the Seventy. This at least shows the
estimation in which James was held. But the
author to whom we are chiefly indebted for an ac-
count of the life and death of James is Hegesippus
\i. e. Joseph), a Christian of Jewish origin, who
lived in the middle uf the second century. His
narrative gives us such an insight into the position
of »t. James in the Church of Jerusalem that it is
best to let him relate it in his own words: —
Tradition mpecling Jamn, a$ given fry Htgt-
vppm. — " With the Apostles James, the brother
if the Ivord, succeeds to the charge of the Church —
that James, who has been called Just from the time
of the Lord to our own days, for there were many
of the name of James. He was holy from his
inother's womb, he drank not wine or strong drink,
•or did be eat animal food : « razor came not upon
JAMES
his head; he did not anoint himself with eft; kt
did not use the bath. He alone might go into thi
holy place; for he wore no woollen clothes, but linen
And alone he used to go into the Temple, and then
he was commonly found upon Ida knees, praying
for forgiveness for the people, so that his knees
grew dry and thin [generally translated hard] like
a camel's, from his constantly bending them in
prayer, and entreating forgiveness for the people.
On account therefore of his exceeding righteousness
be was called < Just,' and • Oblias,' which means in
Greek < the bulwark of the people,' and ' righteous-
ness,' as the prophets declare of him. Some of the
seven sects then that I have mentioned inquired
of him, • What is the door of Jesus?' And h-
said that this man was the Saviour, wherefore sonw
believed that Jesus Is the Christ Now the fore-
mentioned sects did not believe in the Resurrection,
nor in the coming of one who shall recompense
every man according to his works; but all who
became believers believed through James. When
many therefore of the rulers believed, there was a
disturbance among the Jews, and Scribes, and
Pharisees, saying, ' There is a risk that the whole
people will expect Jesus to be the Christ.' They
came together therefore to James, and said, ' We
pray thee, stop the people, for they hare gone astray
after Jesus as though he were the Christ. We pray
thee to persuade all that come to the Passover con-
cerning Jesus: for we all give need to thee, for we
and all the people testify to thee that thou art just,
and acccptest not the person of man. Persuade
the people therefore not to go astray about Jesus,
for the whole people and all of us give heed to thee.
Stand therefore on the gable of the Temple, that
thou mayest be visible, and that thy words may be
beard by all the people; for all the tribes and even
the Gentiles are come together for the Passover.'
Therefore the forementioned Scribes snd Pharisees
placed James upon the gable of the Temple, and
cried out to him, and said, ' O Just one, to whom
we ought all to give beed, seeing that the people
are going astray after Jesus who was crucified, tell
us what is the door of Jesus ? ' And be answered
with a loud voice, ' Why ask ye me about Jesus
the Son of Han ? He sits in heaven on the right
hand of great power, and will come on the clouds
of heaven.' And many were convinced and gave
glory on the testimony of James, crying Hosannah
to the Son of David. Whereupon the same Scribes
and Pharisees said to each other, ' We bare dona
ill in bringing forward such a witness to Jesus; bu*.
let us go up, and throw him down, that they may
be terrified, and not believe on him.' And they
cried out, saying, ' Oh ! oh ! even the Just is gone
astray.' And they fulfilled that which is written
in Isaiah, ' Let us take away the just mar., for he
is displeasing to us; therefore shall they eat of the
fruit of their deeds.' They went up therefore, ana
threw down the Just one, snd said to one ancther,
' I>et us stone James the Just.' And they began
to stone him, for he was not killed by the fall ; but
he turned round, and knelt down, and cried, ' I
beseech thee. Lord God Father, forgive them, for
they know not what they do.' And whilst the)
were stoning him, one of the priests, of the sou
of Rechab, a son of the Rechabites to whom Jere-
miah the prophet bears testimony, cried out ana
said, 'Stop! What are you about? TbeJustooe
is praying for you ! ' Then one of them, who was
a fuller, took th« club with which he pres s e d ths
clothes, and brougbt it down on the bead of is*
Digitized by
Google
JAMBS
Jast on* And so ha lore bis witi ■»*. And they
bated him on the spot by the "lt-uple, aw* *he
column (till remaine by the Temple. This man wis
m true witness to Jews and Greeks that Jksus
b the Christ. And immediately Vespasian com-
meneed the siege " (Euseb. ii. 33, and Kouth, ReL
Sacr. p. 308, Oxf. 1846).
For the difficulties which occur in this extract,
reference may be made to Mouth's Rtiiqmt Sacra
(toL i. p. 228), and to Canon Stanley's Apottoiicnl
Age (p. 319, Oxf. 1847). It represents St. James
to us in bis life and in his death more vividly than
any modern words could picture him. We see
him, a married man perhaps (I Cor. ix. 6), but in
all other respects a rigid and ascetic follower after
righteousness, keeping the Naxarite rule, like Anna
the prophetess (Luke ii. 37), serving the Lord -in
the Temple " with tastings and prayers night and
day," regarded by the Jews themselves as one who
had attained to the sanctity of the priesthood,
though not of the priestly family or trilie (unless
Indeed we argue from this that Clopaa did belong
to the tribe of Levi, and draw thence another argu-
ment for the identity of James the son of Clopaa
and James the Lord's brother), and as the very
type of what a righteous or just man ought to be.
If any man could have converted the Jews as a
nation to Christianity, it would have been James.
Josephus' narrative of his death is apparently
somewhat different. He says that in the interval
between the death of Festus and the coming of
Albinos, Ananus the high-priest assembled the
Sanhedrim, and " brought before it James the
brother of him who is called Christ, and some
others, and having charged them with breaking the
laws, delivered them over t»Jbe stoned." But if
we are to reconcile tl ',,,',-. ^ent with that of
Hegerippus, we mtu ,:-*, uel out at they were not
actually stoned on /tlgRir ' The historian
adds that the better p. ,. -be citizens disliked
what was done, and complained of Ananus to
Agrippa and Albums, whereupon Albinus threat-
ened to punish him lor having assembled the San-
hedrim without his consent, and Agrippa deprived
him of the high-priesthood (Ant. xx. 9). The
words " brother of him who is called Christ," are
lodged by U Clerc 1-ardner, etc., to he spurious.
Epiphanius gives the same account that Hege-
sippus does in somewhat different words, having
evidently copied it for the most part from him.
He adds a few particulars which are probably mere
assertions or conclusions of his own (//teres, xxix.
4, and lxxviii. 13). He considers James to have
neen the son of Joseph by a former wife, and calcu-
lates that be must have been 96 years old at the
time of bis death; and adds, on the authority, as
he says, of Eusebius, Clement, and others, that he
wore the w4ra\o* on his forehead, in which he
probably confounds him with St. John (Polycr.
» The monument — part excavation, part edMoe —
watch if now commonly known as the " Tomb of St.
leeseV Is on the vast rid* of the so-called Valley of
JehoshfcP hat , and therefore at a considerable distance
from the spot on which the Apostle was killed, whi.h
the narrative of Hegeslppus would seem to fix as some-
where under the southeast corner of the watt of the
Hiram, at perhaps farther down the slope nearer Che
' Fountain of the Virgin." [s>-aosa. i It cannot at
any rite be said to stand " by the Temple." The tra-
ItUon about the monument In question Is that St.
lasses took refuge there altar the capture of Christ,
■ad iseaahMd, eating aod drinking nothing, notfl oar
JAMES, EPISTLE OF 1801
lpud Euseb. ff. E. v. 34. But see Cotta, Dt Jam
pont. App. Joan. Jac tt Marti, Tab. 1765).
Gregory of Tours reports that he was buried,
not where he fell, but on the Mount of Olives,'' in
a tomb in which he had already buried 2aehariaa
and Simeon (Dt glor. Mart. 1. 37). Eusebiua
tells us that his chair was pre s erved down to his
time; on which see Heinichen's Excursus (Ext. xi.
ad Kmei. II. E. vii. 19, vol. It. p. 957, ed. Burton).
We must add a strange Talmudic legend, wluci
appears to relate to James. It is found in thr
Midi-ash Koheleth, or Commentary on Eccleaiastea
and also in the Tract Abodah Zarah of the Jeru-
salem Talmud. It Is as follows: " H. Eliexer, Ihi
son of Dams, was bitten by a serpent; and then
came to him Jacob, a man of Caphar Secsma, to
heal him by the name of Jeau the son of Pandera;
but K. lamael suffered him not, saying, ■ That is
not allowed thee, son of Damn.' He answered,
' Suffer me, and I will produce an authority against
thee that it is lawful;' but he could not produce
the authority before he expired. And what was
the authority? — This: • Which if a man do, he
shall live in them ' (Lev. xviil. 6). But it is not
said that he shall die in them." The son of Pan*
dera Is the name that the Jews have always given
*a our Lord, when representing him as a magician.
The same name is given in Epiphaniua (ffatrt:
lxxviii.) to the grandfather of Joseph, and by John
Damascene (Dt Fide Ortk. iv. IS) to the grand-
father of Joachim, the supposed father of the Virgin
Mary. For the identification of James of Secama
(a place in Upper Galilee) with James the Just,
see Mill (Huturic. Criticim of the Gotptl, p. 318,
Camb. 1840). The passage quoted by Origen and
Eusebius from Josephus, in which the latter speaks
of the death of James as being one of the causes
of the destruction of Jerusalem, seems to be spuri-
ous (Orig. >'» Malt. xlil. 66; Euseb. H. E. ii. 23).
It is possible that there may be a reference to
James in Heb. xiii. 7 (see Theodoret in Inc.), which
would fix hi* death at some time previous to the
writing of that epistle. His apprehension by Ana-
nus was probably alioat the year 62 or 63 (Lordlier,
Pearson, Mill, Whitby, Le Clerc, Tillemout). Then
is nothing to fix the date of his martyrdom as nar
rated by Hegesippus, except that it must have bees
shortly before the commencement of toe siege of
Jerusalem. We may conjecture that he was be-
tween 70 and 80 years old.' F. M.
JAMES, THE GENERAL EPISTLE
OF. I. lie Genwneiitu ami Otnonicity. — In the
third book of his Ecclesiastical History, Eusebius
makes bis well-known division of the hooks, or
pretended books, of the New Testament into four
classes. Under the bead of 6ftoKoyaifUpa be
places the Gospels, the Acts, the Pauline Epistles,
the First Epistle of St. John, and the First Epistle
Lord appeared to him on the day of his resurrection
(See Quansmlos, etc., quoted In Tobler, SUoak, etc
299.) The legend of his death there semis to be first
mentioned by Maundevllle (A. D. 18B0 : see Early The*.
176). By the old travellers It Is often called the
« Chun-h of St James."
s It Is almost unnecessary to say that the Jaeobit*
ehcrebes of toe But — consisting of the Aramrisu*.
tt* Top .s, and other Monophyctte or Bntyehlan hodMi
— do a»t derive their title from St. James, not fWn
a .ater person of the same name. Jacob Bare la si
who tart Bishop of Basest, to «*
Digitized by
Google
1208 JAMES, EPISTLE OF
J* 8t Peter. In the clam of imi\ty6iura be
places (he Epistle of St James, the Second and
Third Epistles of St. John, and the Epistle of St.
Jade. Amongst the n66a he enumerates the Acts
of St Paul, the Shepherd, the Apocalypse of St
Peter, the Epistle of Barnabas, the Doctrine of the
Apostles, the Gospel to the Hebrews. The aiptrucd
•onsist of the Gospels of Peter, Thomas, Matthias,
and others, the Acta of Andrew, John, and others.
The arriAsTO/ifra, amongst which he places the
Epistle of St James, are, be says, yriiptfui i/uts
rots woAAom, whether the expression means that
the; were acknowledged by, or merely that they
were known to, the majority (//. K. ill. 36). Else-
where he refers the epistle to the class of riSa, for
this is the meaning of roSfirrai pit, which was
apparently misunderstood by St Jerome (De Yir.
Ilhut.); but he bears witness that it was publicly
read in moat churches as genuine (H. E. ii. 33),
and as such accepts it himself. This then was the
state of the question in the time of Eusebius; the
epistle was accepted as canonical, and as the writ-
ing of James, the brother of the Lord, by the ma-
jority, but not universally. Origen bears the same
testimony as Eusebius (torn. iv. p. 308), and prob-
ably, like him, himself accepted the epistle as gen-
uine (torn. ir. p. 63S, Ac.). It is found in the Syriac
version, and appears to be referred to by Clement
of Home {ad Cor. x. ), Hernias (lib. il. Mand. xii. 5 ),
trenseus (Adc. Horn. [lib. iv. c] 16, § 3), and is
quoted by almost all the Fathers of the 4th cen-
tury, e. a. Athanasius, Cyril, Gregory Nazianzen,
Epiphanius, Chrysostom (see Davidson, Inlrod. to
N. T., iii. p. 338). In 397 the Council of Car-
thage accepted it as canonical, and from that time
there has been no further question of its genuine-
ness on the score of external testimony. But at
the time of the Reformation the question of its
authenticity waa again raised, and now upon the
ground of internal evidence. Erasmus and Car-
dinal Cajetan in the Church of Rome, Cyril Lucar
in the Greek Church, Luther and the Magdeburg
Centuriators among Protestants, all objected to it
Luther seems to have withdrawn his expression
that it was "a right strawy epistle," compared
with the Gospel of St. John and the Epistles of
St Paid and St Peter, after that expression had
been two years before the world. The chief objec-
tion on Internal grounds is a supposed opposition
between St Paul and St James, on the doctrine
of Justification, concerning which we shall presently
make some remarks. At present we need only say
that it is easy to account for the non-universal re-
ception of the epistle in the Early Church, by the
fact that it was meant only for Jewish believers,
and was not likely therefore to circulate widely
among Gentile Christians, for whose spiritual neces-
sities it waa primarily not adapted ; and that the
objection on internal grounds proves nothing except
against the objectors, for it really rests on a mis-
take.
II. fit Author. — The anther of the epistle must
De either James the boi. of Zebedee, according to
the subscription of the Syriac version ; or James
rbe son of Alphnus, according to Dr. Davidson's
view (Inltvd. to N. T., iii. 313); or James the
brother of the Lord, wt-oh is the general opinion
(we Euseb. H. K. 11. 83; Alford, G. T. Iv. p. 38);
or an nnknown James (Luther). The likelihood
of thia last hypothesis falls to the ground when the
sanonical character of the epistle is admitted.
waaas the son of Zebedee oould not have written
JAMES, EPISTLE OF
It, because the date of his death, only i
after the martyrdom of Stephen, does not gin
time for the growth of a sufficient number of Jew-
ish Christians, ir rf tuuntom. Internal eridenoa
(see Stanley, Apott. Aye, p. £s)2) points unmistak-
ably to James the Just ss the writer, and we havs
already identified James the Just with the son of
Alpheus.
The Jewish Christians, whether residing at Jeru-
salem or living scattered among the Gentiles, and
only visiting that city from time to time, were the
especial charge of James. To them he addressed
this epistle; not to the unbelieving Jews (Lardntr,
Macknight, Hug, etc.), but only to believers in
Christ, as is undoubtedly proved by i. 1, ii. 1, ii.
r. 7. The rich men of v. 1 may be the unbe-
lieving Jews (Stanley, p 299), but it does not fol-
low that the epistle wa' written to them. It is
usual for an orator to denounce in the second per-
son. It wss written from Jerusalem, which St James
does not seem to have ever left The time at which
he wrote it has been fixed as late as 89, and as early
as 46. Those who see in its writer a desire to
counteract the effects of a misconstruction of St
Paul's doctrine of Justification by faith, in ii 14-
38 (Wiesinger), and those who see a reference to
the immediate destruction of Jerusalem in v. 1
(Macknight), and an allusion to the name Chris-
tians in ii. 7 (De Wette), argue in favor of the
later date. The earlier date is advocated by Schneck-
enburger, Neander, Thiersch, Davidson, Stanley,
and Alford ; chiefly on the ground that the epistle
could not have been written by St James after the
Council in Jerusalem, without some allusion to
what was there decided, and because the Gentile
Christian does not yet appear to be recognized.
III. lit Object. — Theynain object of the epistle,
is not to teach doctrine-^^to improve morality.
St James is the moral —icier of the N. T.; not
in such sense a moral teacher as not to be at the
same time a maintainer and teacher of Christian
doctrine, but yet mainly in this epistle a moral
teacher. There are two ways of explaining this
characteristic of the epistle. Some commentator!
and writers see in St James a man who had not
realized the essential principles and peculiarities of
Christianity, but was in a transition state, half-Jew
and balf-Christian. Schneckenburger thinks that
Christianity had not penetrated his spiritual life.
Neander is of much the same opinion (PJUmxmg
and J^itung, p. 579). And the same notion may
perhaps be traced in Prof. Stanley and Dean Alford.
But there is another and much more natural way
of accounting for the fact St. James was writing
for a special class of persons, and knew what that
class especially needed; and therefore, under the
guidance of God's Spirit, he adapted his instruc-
tions to their capacities and wants. Those for
whom he wrote were, as we have said, the Jewisa
Christians whether in Jerusalem or abroad. St
James, living in the centre of Judaism, saw what
were the chief sins and vices of his countrymen;
and, fearing that his flock might share in them, he
lifted up his voice to warn them against the con-
tagion from which they not only might, but did us
part, suffer. This was his main object; but Inert
is another closely connected with it As Christiana
his readers were exposed to trials which they did
not bear with the patience and faith that would
have become them. Hen then are the two objects
of the Epistie — (1.) To warn against the sins ta
which as Jews they were most liable; (3.)Toesaarb
Digitized by
Google
JAMBS, EPISTLE OF
mi ishjtt them under the sufferings to which as
Cbthajani they vera moat exposed- The warnings
ind consolations are mixed together, for the writer
does not eeem to have set himself down to compose
an essay or a letter of which he had previously
arranged the heads ; but, like one of the old prophets,
to have poured out what was uppermost in his
thoughts, or closest to his heart, without waiting
to connect his matter, or to throw bridges across
bom subject to subject. While, in the purity of
his Greek and the vigor of his thoughts, we mark
a man of education, in the abruptness of his transi-
tions sod the unpolished roughness of his style we
may trace one of the family of the Daride&ns, who
disarmed Domitian by the simplicity of their minds
and by exhibiting their hands hard with toil
(liegesipp. apud A'uteo. iii. 30).
The Jewish vices against which he warns them
are— Formalism, which made the service (fynfowfa)
of God consist in washings and outward ceremonies,
whereas be reminds them (i. 27) that it consists
rather in active lore and purity (see Coleridge's
Aid* to Reflection, Aph. 33; note also Active Ixitve
= Bp. Butler's " Benevolence," and Purity = Bp.
Butler's "Temperance"); fanaticism, which under
the cloak of religious zeal was tearing Jerusalem to
pieces (i. 30); fatalism, which threw its sins on
God (i. 13); meanness, which crouched before the
rich (ii. 2); falsehood, which had made words and
oatna playthings (iii. 3-12); partisanship (iii. 14);
evil-speaking (iv. 11); boasting (iv. 16); oppres-
sion (v. 4). The great lesson which he teaches
them, as Christians, is patience — patience in trial
(i- 3): patience in good works (i. 33-36); patience
under provocations (iii. 17); patience under oppres-
sion (v. 7); patience under persecution (v. 10); and
the ground of their patience is, that the coming
of the Lord draweth nigh, which is to right all
wrongs (v. 8).
IY. There are two points in the epistle which
demand a somewhat more lengthened notice. These
are (/») ii. 14-36, which has been represented as a
formal opposition to St Paul's doctrine of justifi-
cation by faith, and (e) t. 14, 15, whioh is quoted
ss the authority for the sacrament of extreme
unction.
(a.) Justification being an act not of man but
of Goo, both the phrases "justification by faith "
and "justification by works" are inexact. Ju'ti-
ftcation must either be by grace, or of reward.
Therefore our question is, Did or did not St. James
bold justification by grace? If he did, there is no
eontradiction between the Apostles. Now there is
lot one word in St. James to the effect that a man
tan earn his justification by works; and this would
be neoeasary in order to prove that he held justifi-
cation of reward. Still St Paid does use the ex-
pression "justified by faith " (Rom. v. 1), and St
James the expression, "justified by works, not by
faith only." And here is an apparent opposition.
But, if we consider the meaning of the two Apostlfls,
we see at once that there is no contradiction either
intended or possible. St. Paul war opposing the
JudaHn!j party, which claimed to earn acceptance
by £%d works, whether the works ct the Mosaic
aw. or works of piety done by themselves. In
opposition to these, St Paul lays down the great
truth that acceptance cannot be earned by man at
all, but is the free gift of God to the Christian
Ban, for 'he sake of the merits of jesus Christ,
appropriated by each individual, and m-ide his own
>v ths instrumentality of faith. — St. James, on the
JAMES, EPISTLE OF 1209
other hand, was opjiosing the old Jewish tenet tha
to be a child of Abraham was all in all; that god
liuess was not necessary, so that the belief wai
correct. This presumptuous confidence had trans-
ferred itself, with perhaps double force, to the
Christianized Jews. They had said, " Lord, Lord,"
and that was enough, without doing His Father's
will. They had recognized the Messiah: what more
was wanted ? They had failk i what more was
required of thorn ? It is plain that their " faith "
was a totally different thing from the "faith " of
St Paul. St Paul tells us again and again that
his " faitb "' is a "faith that worketh by love; "
but the very characteristic of the " faith " which
St. James is attacking, and the very reason why he
attacked it, was that it did not work by love, but
was a bare assent of the head, not influencing the
heart, a faith such as devils can have, and tremble.
St. James tells us that "Jidei informit" is not
sufficient on the part of man for justification ; St
Paul tells us that "fide* formntn" is sufficient:
and the reason why fidet infurmit will not justify
us is, according to St James, because it lacks that
special quality, the addition of which constitutes it
file* format i. See on this subject Bull's Hur-
monia Apotlolien el Examen Centura; Taylor's
Sermon on " Faith working by Low," vol. viii.
p. 284, Lond. 1850; and, as a corrective of Bull's
view, Laurence's Bampton Lectures, iv., v., vi.
(A.) With respect to r. 14, 16, it is enough to
say that the ceremony of extreme unction and the
ceremony described by St James diner both in their
subject and in their object The subject of extreme
unction is a sick man who is about to die; and Hi
object is not his cure. The subject of the ceremony
described by St James is a sick man who is not
about to die; and its object is his cure, together
with the spiritual benefit of absolution. St James
is plainly giving directions with respect to the
manner of administering one of those extraordinary
gifts of the Spirit with which the Church was
endowed only in the Apostolic age and the age
immediately succeeding the Apostles.
The following editions, etc., of St James' Epistle
may be mentioned as worthy of notice. The edition
of Benson and Michaelis, Hake Magdeburgicse,
1746; Sender's Paraphratu, Halts, 1781; Mori
PraUdionet in Jnoobi et Petri Epuiolas, Lipaue
1794 ; Schueckenburger's Anrtotath ad Epiit. Jot
perpetun, Stuttg. 1833; Davidson's Introduction
to the Nob Teti. iii. 296 ft*., Lond. 1851; Alford's
Greek TetL vol Ir. t. 974, Lond. 1859 [4th ed.,
1866].
The following spurious works have been attrib-
uted to St. James: (1.) The ProtevangeUum, (9.)
/listeria de Natmtate Maria. (8.) Dt Miracmb*
Infnntia Domini nottri, etc. Of these, the Pro-
tevangeliwn is worth a passing notice, not for its
contents, which are a mere parody on the early
chapters of St Luke, transferring the events which
occurred at our Lord's birth to the birth of St
Mary his mother, but because it appears to hava
been known so early in the Church. It is possible
that Justin Martyr (Dial cum Trypn. c. 78), and
Clement of Alexandria (Strom. lib. viii.) refer to
it. Origen speaks of it (in Matt. xiii. 55); Greg-
ory Nyssen {Opp. p. 346, ed. Paris), Epiphaniut
(Hnr lxxix.), John Damascene (Oral, i., ii, ir
JVnbe. Maria), Photiu* (Orat. m ffath. Maria),
and others allude to it It was first published ii
I-atin in 1552, in Greek in 1564. The oldest MS
of it now existing is of the 10th xotury. (Set
Digitized by
Google
1210 JAMBS. EPISTLE OF
IMIo't Cvdex Apocrypha Xovi Testamenti, torn.
L pp. 46, 108, 159, 337, Lips. 1832.) F. M.
* It deserves notice that tbia epistle of James,
like that of Jade, but unlike that of the other
apoitolie writings, never alludes to the outward
facta of the Saviour's life. Yet Jamea apeaka ex-
pressly of the Lord Jesus Christ (aw i. 1, ii. 1,
v. 7, 8, 14, 15); and the frith aa shown by works
on which he lays such emphasis ia that which rests
on Christ aa the Saviour of men. At the same
time the language of Jamea " oners the moat strik-
ing coincidences with the language of our Lord's
discourses." Compare James i. 6, 6 with Mail. vii.
7, xxL 23; i. 22 with Matt. vii. 21; ii. 13 with
Matt r. 7; iil. 1 with Matt, xxiii. 8; Ui. 12 with
Malt vii. 16; and v. 12 with Matt. v. 34-37. See
Westcott's Introduction to the Study of the Gospels,
p. 186 (Anier. ed.).
In speaking of the sources from which the Apostle
Paul derives his favorite metaphors, Dr. Howaon
points out in this respect a striking difference be-
tween him and the Apostle James. The figures
af Paul are drawn almost exclusively from the
practical relations or business of men, as military
life, architecture, agiieultuie, and the contests of
the gymnasium and race-course: while the figures
of James are taken from some of the varied aapects
or phenomena of nature. It is remarked that there
ia more imagery of thia latter kind in the one abort
epistle of James than in all Paul's epistles put
together. This trait of his style appears in his
allusions to " • the waves of the sea driven with the
wind and tossed' (i. 6), 'the flower of the grass'
(ver. 10), < the sun risen with a burning heat ' (ver.
11), 'the fierce winds' (iii. 4), 'the kindling of the
fire ' (ver. 5), ' the beasts, birds, and serpents and
things in the sea ' (ver. 7), ' the fig, olive, and vine,'
•the saltwater and fresh' (ver. 12), ' the vapor that
tppeareth for a little time and then vanisheth
away' (iv. 14), 'the moth-eaten garments' (v. 2),
'the rust' (ver. 3), 'the early and latter rain'
(ver. 7). 'and the earth bringing forth her fruit'
(ver. 18)." (JUetura on the Character ofBU Paul,
pp. 6, 7, Lund. 1864.)
Among the commentaries on thia epistle (see
above) may be mentioned Uebaer, Der Brief Jacoti
ibersetzt u. erkldrl, in which special reference is
made to the views of the ancient Greek and Latin
Interpreters (1828); Theile, Comm. in l-jjitL Jacoti
(1833); Kern, Der Brief JacM untermcht u.
erklart (1838); Cellerier, Etude et Commentaire
far Ctipitre de St. J acquit (1850): Wiesinger,
Olsbauaen's BiU. Comm. vi. pt. t. (2te Aufl., 1854):
Huther, in Meyer's Komm. Her dot N. T. xv.
;*e Aufl., 1863): De Wette, Kxeyet. Handb. vol.
U. pt i. (3te Aufl., by Bruckner, 1865); Lange
sod Ojsteriw, Lange's Bibelictrk, xtli. (1862) and
Aiurr. traofi. with additions by Dr. J. I. Mombert,
pp. 1-148 (1868); Neander, Der Brief JacM,
or aialtch c-UmUrt, with Luther's version corrected
by K. F. Th. Schneider, pp. 1-162; Webster and
Wilkinson. Creek N. Test., with note* grammatical
mi taegetical, ii. 1-6 and 10-30 (Lond. 1661);
Rev 7. Trapp, Commentary on the N. Testament
(pp. 6H3-706), quaint in style but terse and sen-
tentious (Webster's ed. Load. 1865); and Bouman,
Comm. perpetuus in JacM Kpistoinm, Traj. ad
Bben. 1865. For a list of some of the older works,
tee Keuea's Ctschichts da N. TetU p. 131 (3te
Auag. 1860).
Valuable articles on the epistle of James will be
I ia Herzeg's BerU-Encyk. vi. 417 if. by Lange;
JANGLINO
in ZeDer's BiU. Wfrterb. L 668 ft by ZalaT (tit
analysis specially good); and in Kitto's C/cL of
BiU. Literature, by Dr. Eadie (3d ed. 1866). Fes
a compendious view of the critical questions relating
to the authorship, destination, and doctrines of the
letter, see Bleak's KinlrUung in dot JV. Test, pp
639-553 (1862). Rev. T. D. Maurice gives an out-
line of the apostle's thoughts in his Unity of lie
New Testament, pp. 816-331. See abo Stanley's
Sermons and Essays an the Apostolic Age, pp. 297-
324. The monographic literature is somewhat ex-
tensive. The theologian, George Chr. Knapp, treats
of "The Doctrine of Paul and James respecting
Faith and Works, compared with the Teaching of
our Lord," in his Scripta Vara Argumenti, i.
411-456. See a translation of the aame by Prof.
W. Thompson in the Biblical Repository, iii. 189-
228. Neander has an essay in his Gelegenheitt-
schrtften (Ste Ausg. 1827) entitled Paulus tmd
Jacobus, in which be illustrates the " Unity of the
Evangelical Spirit in different Forma." Some ex-
tracts from this essay are appended to the above
translation. Prof. E. P. Barrows has written on the
" Alleged Disagreement between Paul and James "
on the subject of justification, in the BiU. Sacra,
ix. 761-782. On this topic see also Neander's
Pflrintung u. Leitmg, ii. 858-878 (Robinson's
tranaL p. 498 ff.); Lechler's Das apostoL tmd
nachapost. Zeilaher, pp. 252-263; and ScbarTs
Histoiy of the Apostolic Church, p. 625 ff. (N. T.
1853). Stier has published Der Brief des Jacobus
m 32 Betrachtungen ausgelegt (1845). For some
other similar works or discussions, see Lange's
Bibelaerk ss above (p. 94 f.), or Dr. Schaff's tranaL
of Lange's Commentary (p. 83 f.) H.
JATKIN (l-n; [right side or hand]: 'loutl*.
'lout.';*, 'Uudu; [Vat. Ieuuiv, and so Alex. exe. hi
Num.':] Jamin). L Second son of Simeon (Gen.
xlvi. 10; Ex. vi. 15; 1 Chr. iv. 24), founder of the
family (mishpacah) of the Janunltea (Num. xxvi.
18).
2. (Mr! Vat. huwu<;] Alex, lafieir.) A
man of Judah, of the great bouse of Hezron ; aacond
son of Ram the Jerahmeelite (1 Chr. ii. 27).
3. [Comp. 'laptlv.] One of the Levitee who
under Em and Nehemiah read and' expounded the
law to the people (Neh. viU. 7). By the LXX.
[Rom., Vat., Alex.] the greater part of the names
in this passage are omitted.
JATMINITES, THE (^Ojn [patronym.].-
h 'ldfuni [Vat. -mi] : famUia Jammtarum), the
descendants of Jamlh the son of Simeon (Num.
xxvi. 12).
JAMliECH ("H^P! [#«, i- «. God, matt*
king]: 'IsuoAexi [ CoBI P- Aid.] Alex. 'A/iaAs>:
Jemlech), one of the chief men (D^tT?, A. V
" princes ") of the tribe of Simeon (1 Chr. iv. 84),
probably in the time of Hexekiah (an xer. 41).
J AM7TCA Clcutrfo, 'laVcio, and so Josephus
[in 1 Mace. iv. 16, Alex. Iomta, Sin. Isyurcia:]
Jtimnia), 1 Mace. iv. 16, v. 68, x. 69, xv. 4a
[Jabkeex.]
JAM-NITES, THE (el «V 'laurelf, el 'Up
rTrsu: Jammta), 2 Mace. xIL 8, 9, 40. [Jax.
KEEL.]
• JANGLING in 1 Thn. L 6 (A V.), whan
" vain jangling " repr*eenta the Greek uaraie*»yiet
does not signify "wrangling," but "babtibajt.'
Digitized by
Google
J ANNA
This dm of the word * well UIuMimted
by annotation from Chaucer a Pnrxrii Talt, Riven
h Eastwood end Wright's Bible Word-Boot:
» Janytlyixj ia whan a man spekith to moehe biforn
folk, and clappith aa a mille, and taketh no keep
what be aaith." A.
JAN7TA ('Iawd [Laehni. and Tieeh. 'IaW]),
ton of Joseph, and father of Mekhi, in the geneal-
ogy of Christ (Luke iii. 24). It is perhaps onlj a
aviation of Joannas or John. A. C. H.
JANTJES and JAM'BRBS {'lawr,,, 'lu-
fSpijs), the names of two Egyptian magicians who
opposed Moses. St. I'aul alone of the sacred writers
mentions them by name, and says no more than
that they '• withstood Moses," and that their folly
in doing so became manifest (9 Tim. iii. 8, 9). It
appears from the Jewish commentators that these
names were held to be those of the magicians who
opposed Moses and Aaron, spoken of in Exodus (or
perhaps their leaders), of whom we tbere read that
they first imitated tht wonders wrought by Moeea
and Aaron, but, afterwards failing, confessed that
the power of God was with those whom they had
withstood (chap. vii. 11, where the Targum of
Jonathan insert* these names, 32, viii. 18, 19).
With this St Paul's words perfectly agree.
Jambres is written in some codices MafiBptjs'-
both forms, the latter being slightly varied, are found
in the Jewish commentaries (D13D\ DISS) :
the former appears to be the earlier form. We
have been unable to discover an Egyptian name
resembling Jambres or Mambre*. The termination
is like that of many Egyptian compounds ending
with ha " the sun ; " as Men-kau-ra, Htyx^PV*
(Manetho, IVth Dyn.).
Jannes appears to be a transcription of the
Egyptian name Aan, probably pronounced Ian. It
was the nomen of two kings: one of the Xlth
Dynasty, the father or ancestor of Seaertesen I. of
the Xllth; the other, according to our arrangement,
fourth or fifth king of the XVth Dyn., called by
Manetho 'idrrat or 'lariat (Jos.) or 3raaV(Afr.).
(See Hon* jEgyptitun, pp. 174, 175.) There is
also a king bearing the name Annu, whom we
assign to the lid Dyn. (Hor. j£g. p. 101). The
signification of Aan is doubtful: the cognate word
Aant mean* a valley or plain. The earlier king
Aim may be assigned to the twenty-first century
B. c: the latter one we hold to be probably the
snood predecessor of Joseph's Pharaoh. This shows
that a name which may be reasonably supposed to
be tie original of Jaunea, was in use at or near the
period of the sojourn in Egypt- The names of the
ancient Egyptians were extremely numerous and
very fluctuating in use: generally the moat prevalent
at any time were those of kings then reigning or
imt long dead.
Our result as to the name of Jannes throws light
upon a curious question raised by the supposition
hat St Paul took the names of the magicians from
prevalent tradition of the Jews. This conjecture
is as old \e the time of Theodoret, who makes the
upposed tradition oraL (To uwtot rceVtir 4W-
tana, owe tVr ri}f Mot yptupv' miiABiiin* 6 9*ua
iveVroXos, AAA' Ik ttJ» aVypdlipev run 'lovSalur
ttoWKoAiar: ad foe.). This opinion would be of
fHtle importance were it not for the oucumstance
that then name* were known to the Greek* and
Romans at too early a period for us to suppose that
Mr information we* derived from St Paul'*
JANOHAH
1211
tlon (see PUn. B. JV". xxx. 1; ApnL Ap*. p. M
Bipont ; Numenius ap. Kuseb. Prop. Eva*, is. 8)
It baa therefore been generally supposed that St
Paul took then names from Jewish tradition. It
seems, however, inconsistent with the character of
an Inspired record for a baseless or incorrect current
tradition to be cited ; it is therefore satisfactory to
find there is good reason for thinking these name*
to be authentic. Whether Jannes and Jambres
were mentioned in some long-lost book nJating to
the early history of the Israelite*, or whether there
were a veritable oral tradition respecting them, can-
not now be determined. The former is the more
probable supposition — if, as we believe, the natron
are correct — since oral tradition is rarely exact \n
minute particulars.
The conjecture of Majus (Obtert. Saer. ii. 49
ft*., ap. Winer, BeahoUrL a. v.), that Jannes and
Jambres are merely meaningless words put for lost
proper names, ia scarcely worth refuting. The
words are not sufficiently similar to give a color
to the idea, and there is no known instance of the
kind in the Bible.
The Rabbins state that Jannes and Jambres were
sons of Balaam, and among various forms of their
names give Johannes and Ambrosius. There was
an apocryphal work called Jama and Mambru,
condemned by Pope Gelasius.
The Arabs mention the names of several magi-
cians who opposed Moses; among them are none
resembling Jannes and Jambres (D'Herbelot, art
Mouua Ben Antra*).
There are several dissertation* on this subject
(J. Grotius, Ditt. de Jamie it Jambre, Hafn. 1707 1
J. G. Michaelia, Id. Hal. 1747; Zentgrav, 14.
Argent 1669; Lightfbot, Sermon o* James and
Jambrtt, etc. [Kabriciue, Cod. pmudtpigr. VeL
Tat. i. 813-895]).
There is a question of considerable interest as to
then Egyptian magicians which we cannot here
discuss: I* their temporary success attributable
to pure imposture? The passages relating to them
in the Bible would lead us to reply affirmatively, as
we have already said in speaking of ancient Egyp-
tian magic. [Egypt.] R. S. P.
JANOAH (rfa; [rest, jwrf): * -Aweix;
Alex. Icuwy: Janoi), a place apparently in the
north of Galilee, or the "land of NepotaH " — one
of than taken by Tiglath-Pileaer in his first Incur-
sion into Palatine (9 K. it. 99). No trace of is
appears elsewhere. By Euaebins and Jerome
(Onom. «Ianon"), and even by Reland (Pal p
898), it ia confounded with Janohah, in the centre
of the country. G.
JANOHAH (nr^OJ, I «. Tanochah [will
n— local, unto rut] : 'Iovwcd, but in next vent
Ma>x<£; Alex. lam; [Comp. , Iom»x<' : ] ■'"■>•)> *
place on the boundary of Ephraun (possibly that
between it and Manasseh). It ia named between
Taanatb-Sbiloh and Ataroth, the enumeration pro-
ceeding from west to east (Josh. xvi. 6, 7). Euae-
biua (Onomatliam, "Iano") gives it sa twelve
miles east of Neapolia. A little lees than that dis-
tance from Nablit, and about S. E. in direction,
two miles from Akrabeh, Is the village of i'anun,
doubtless identical with the ancient Janohah. It
' aeems to have been first visited m modern times bj
Van de Velde (ii. 303, May 8, 1869; aee also Rob.
Iii. 997). It is In a valley descending sharply east-
I ward toward* the Jordan. The modern vill we b
Digitized by
Google
1218 JANTJM
rary email, but the indent mint "extensive and
Imerestlng." "I have not aeen,' : bti V., "any
of Israel's indent eitiea in aueb a oondiUon : entire
nouse* and wall* exist, covered with immense beape
if earth." But there are also ruina on the hill
N. E. of Yantn, called Khiriet Y., which may be
the lite of the original place (Bob. p. 897). G.
JA'NTJM (D-13;. foDowiug the Keri of the
Masorets, but in the original text, Cttib, it U
0*3\ Janim [slumber] : 'U/ufc [Vat. fir] ; Alex.
Amuu: Jamm), a town of Judah in the mountain
district, apparently not far from Hebron, and named
between Eahean and Beth-tappuah (Joah. xt. 63).
It was not known to Eusebius and Jerome (tee
Onamatt. "Ianun"), nor does it appear to have
been jet met with by any modern investigator.
a
JATHETH ('TT.!|.: '!«>«•: JaphtUi), one
ei' the three sons of Noah. From the order in
which their names Invariably occur (Gen. v. 32, vi.
10) we should naturally infer that Japheth was the
youngest, but we learn from ix. 84 that Ham held
that position, and the precedence of Japheth before
this one of the three is indicated in the order of
the names in x. 8, 6. It has been generally sup-
posed from x. 81 that Japheth was the eldest; but
it should be observed that the word garldl in that
passage is better connected with >• brother," as in
the Vulg. "fratre Jnphtl majore." Not only does
the usage of the Hebrew language discountenance
the other construction, but the sense of the passage
requires that the age of Shem rather than of Ja-
pheth should be there specified. We infer therefore
that Japheth was the second son of Noah. The
origin of the name is referred by the sacred writer
to the root palhnh (nilQ), » to extend," as pre-
dictive of the wide spread of his descendants over
the northern and western regions of the world (Gen.
ix. 87). The name has also been referred to the
root yaphah (n*p"|), "to be lair," as significant of
the light complexion of the Japhetic races (Gesenius,
Tkn. p. 1138; Knobel, VSlkeH. p. 82). From
the resemblance of the name to the mythological
laptttu, some writers have sought to establish a
connection between tbem. Iapetus was regarded
>iy the Greeks as the ancestor of the human race.
The descendants of Japheth occupied the " isles of
Jbe Gentiles " (Gen. x. 6), i. e. the coast-lands of
the Mediterranean Sea in Europe and Asia Minor,
whence they spread northwards over the whole
continent of Europe and a considerable portion of
Asia. [Java* ] W. L. B.
JAPHIA (?"?; ryw.apfemftil: *ayyai;
Alex. Io^crvcu ; [Conip. 'laA^»4 ; Aid. "AcW:]
afihie). The boundary of Zebulun ascended from
Diberath to Japhia, and thence pasaed to Gath-
Hepher (Josh. xix. 18). Daberath appears to be
M: the slopes of Mount Tabor, and Gath-bepher
ns) possibly be tl-Mahhad, 2 miles N. of Naza-
reth Six miles W. of the former, and 8 miles S.
sf Nazareth, is Yifnf which is not unlikely to be
dentin! with Japhia (Bob. ii. 843-44): at least
o It should be remarked that M/o, liL>> <• •»•
modern npnamtattvu of both 15% •'• <■ Joppa, and
, K\ /aphis two names orlatoally very dtotimx.
JAPHO
this is ranch more probable than Chita (Syeasd
nopolis) in the bay of Akka — the suggestion si
Ensebius (Onommt. "Iapheth "), and endorsed by
Beland (PaL p. 886) — an identification which h
neither etymologically nor topographically admissi-
ble. }*4/h may also be the same with the 'laipt
which was occupied by Josephus during his strug-
gle with the Romans — "a very large village of
Lower Galilee, fortified with walls and full of peo-
ple " ( Vita, $ 48; comp. 37, and B. J. ii. 80, § 6),
of whom 15,000 wore killed and 2,130 taken prison-
ers by the Bonnes (B. J. Hi. 7, § 31); though if
Jefat be Jotapata this can hardly ae, as the two
are more than ten miles apart, and be expressly
says that they were neighbors to each other.
A tradition, which first appears in Sir John
Maundeville, makes YAfa the birthplace of Zebe-
dee and of the Apostles James and John, his sons.
Henoe it is called by the Latin monks of Nazareth
" San Giacomo." See Quaresmius, Eluddatio, 11.
843; and Early Trim., p. 186; Maundeville caOa
it the "Castle of Saffra." So too Von Harff, A. D.
1498 : " Saffra, eyn casta! van wylcheme Alpheus
und Sebedeus geboreu waren" (Pilytrfahrt, p.
196). G.
JAPHrA(y!£ [Aini«g,iplendidy. 'Iestta;
Alex. Ioe>i<: Japhia). L King of Lachiah at the
time of the conquest of Canaan by the Israelites
(Joah. x. 3); one of the five "kings of the Aroo-
rites " who entered into a confederacy against
Joshua, and who were defeated at Beth-boron, and
lost their lives at Makkedah. The king of Lachish
is mentioned more than once in this narrative (ver.
5, 83), but his name occurs only as above.
2. ('If«W», 'IoaW; [Vat. In 1 Chr. Iarevs,
lewovov (so FA.);] Alex. Ao)m, [Io^i«:] Japhia.)
One of the sons of David, tenth of the fourteen
born to him by his wives after his establishment in
Jerusalem (2 Sam. v. 15; 1 Chr. iii. 7, xiv. 6).
In the Hebrew form of this name there are no va-
riatio-.j. The Peshito has Nephia, and, in 1 Chr.
iii., Nepheg. In the list given by Josephus (Ant
vii. 3, § 3) it is not recognizable: it may be 'H>
raft*, or it may be 'Ura4. There do not appear
to be any traditions concerning Japhia. The gene-
alogy is given under David, vol. i. p. 660. G.
JAPHXET (Vfyfl [whom God dtlivert]:
"IaaUvrr; (Vat. ♦oAirx', Io4>«Ai|A;] AW. Iwpa-
\wr : Jtphlat), a descendant of Asher through
Kenan, his youngest son; named as the rather of
three Bene-Japhlet (1 Chr. vii 82, 83).
JAPHXETI C < tt 1 29in = the JaphleUte;
[patron., see above:] 'AirratJu [Vat. -A«p] ; Alex.
tov I<a>aA0<: Jtphltti). The "boundary of the
JaphleUte " is one of the landmarks on the south
boundary-line of Ephraim (Joah. xri. 3), west of
Beth-heron the lower, and between it and Ataroth.
Who " the JaphleUte " was who is thus perpetu-
ated we cannot ascertain. Possibly the name pre-
serves the memory of some ancient tribe who at a
remote age dwelt on these hills, just as the fdiwa
presence of other tribes in the neighborhood ma»
be inferred from the names of Zemaraim, Upnni
(the Ophnite), Cephar ha-Ammonai, and others
[Biuuimin, p. 877, note 4.] We can hardly sup-
pose si y connection with Jafhuet of the remots
Asher. No trace of the name has yet bean diaeov
*red in the district. G.
JATHO ClB; rjeostfjr]: 'lonrsj. /«P%
Digitized by
Google
JABAB
IUa ward' ocean in the A. V. but once, Josh. xb.
M. It If the accurate representation of the He-
brew word which on ita other occurrences la ren-
dered in the better knows fonn of Joppa (9 Chr.
H. 18; Est. ill. 7; Jon. i. 3). In ita modern garb
it is Ytya (UL>), whfch is also the Arabic name
of Japhia, a very different word in Hebrew.
[Joppa; Joftk.]
JA'RAH (T<~y¥2, and in aome MSS. TTffl
[kmtg] : 'laid- Java), a man among the descend-
ants of Saul; eon of Micah, and great-grandson
of Heribbaal, or Mephi-bosbeth (1 Chr. is. 43,
corap. 40). In the parallel list of ch. viii. the nam*
ia materially altered to Jehoadah.
JATtBB (3;. J [an advertaty, ho&tik]: 'fe-
t*lfi, as if ETT, in both Hos. t. 13 and x. 6;«
though Theodoret gives 'laptlfl in the former pas-
sage, and 'laptlfi in the latter [and Comp. in x. 6
has 'lapl$] ; and Jerome haa Jarib far the Greek
equivalent of the LXX.) ia either to be explained
aa the proper name of a country or person, as a
noon in apposition, or aa a verb from a root 3T1,
rib, "to contend, plead." All these senaea an
repre s en ted in the A. V. and the marginal read-
ings, and, aa has been not unfrequently the case,
the least preferable baa been inserted in the text.
Had Jarib been the proper name of the king of
Assyria, aa it would be if this rendering were cor-
rect, the word preceding 0j7??i melee, " king ")
would hare required the article. R D. Kinw-M
saw this difficulty, and therefore explained Jareb
m the name of aome city of Assyria, or as another
same of the country itself. The Syriac gives
•^«-«, y&rtb, as the name of a country, which la
applied by Ephrem Syrus to Egypt, reference being
made to Hoshea king of Israel, who had sent to So
the king of Egypt for assistance in his conspiracy
against Shalmanezer (2 K. xrii. 4). So also the
lapttB or 'losclu of Theoduret is Egypt. Toe
clause in which it occurs is supposed by many to
refer to Judah, in order to make the parallelism
complete; and with this in view Jsrchi interprets
it of Ahsz, who sent to Tiglath-Pileser (3 K, xvi.
8) to aid him against the combined forces of Syria
and Israel. But there is no reason to suppose that
the two clauses do not both refer to Ephraim, and
the allusion would then be, as explained by Jerome,
to Pul, who was subsidized by Members (3 K. it.
19), and Judah would be indirectly included. The
rendering of the Vulgate, " avenger " ("ad regem
rdtorem"), which fnUiows Symmachua, aa well aa
those of Aquik (BiKafo/ifrov) and Theodotion,
"judge," are justified by Jerome by a reference to
Jerabbaal, the name of Gideon, which he renders
" ulciscatur se Baal," or " judicet eum Baal," "let
Baal avenge himself," or " let Baal judge him." *
The Targumist evidently looked upon it as a verb,
the apocopated futon Hiphil of 211, rib, and
t rans la ted the clause, " and sent to the king thai
he might come to avenge them." If it be a He-
brew word, H is moat probably a noun formed from
tie above-mentioned root, Uke 2 ,- £, ydv# (Is.
•Hz. 35; P*. xxxv. 1), and is sppCeifto the land
JARHA
Mlv
of Assyria, or to ita king, not in the sens* In which
it is understood in the Targum, bat as rnriwaalng
their determined hostility to Irrael, and their gen-
erally aggressive character. Cocceiua had this Idas
before him when he translated " rex adverasiius."
Michaelia (SyppL ad Urn. Bib.), diasatlafied wifi
the usual explanations, looked for the true meanin;
of Jareb in the Syriac root '4?» * , treb, " to be
great," and for "king Jareb" substituted "the
great king," a title frequently applied to the kings
of Assyria. If it were the proper name of a place,
be says it would denote that of a castle or palace in
which the kings of Assyria resided. But of thir
there can be no proof, the name haa not descended
tu us, and it ia better to take it In a symbolics!
sense as indicating the hostile character of Assyria.
That it is rather to be applied to the country than
to the king may be inferred from ha standing in
parallelism with Aashur. Such ia the opinion of
Furst (Honda, s. v.), who illustrates the symbolical
usage by a comparison with Rahab as applied to
Egypt At the same time be hazards a conjecture
that it may have been an old Assyrian word,
adopted into the Hebrew language, and so modified
as to express an intelligible idea, while retaining
something of Its original form. Hitrig (die 19 ki
Prcph.) goes further, and finds in a mixed dialect,
akin to the Assyrian, a verb jarbam, which denotes
" to struggle or fight," and jarbech, the ^Ethiopia
for "a hero or bold warrior;" but it would ba
desirable to have more evidence on the point.
Two mystical interpretations, alluded to by Je
rome as current among commentators in bis time.
are remarkable for the singularly opposite conclu-
sions at which tbey arrived ; the one referring th»
word to the Devil, the other to Christ. Rivetut
(quoted by Ghsslus. PhUoi. Saer. iv. tr. 8) was of
opinion that the title Jareb or " av e n ger " was a*
sumed by the powerful king of Assyria, aa that ot
" Defender of the Faith " by our own monarcha.
W.A. W
JA'RED (TT [oVscenC, km ground], i. «. Je
red, ss the name is given in A. V. of Chr., but in
pause Ty, from which the present form may have
been derived, though more probably from the Vul -
gate: 'I<L>t8, Alex, also lover; N. T. 'liptt and
[Laehm.J 'la>«0 [Tiech. Idjwr] ; Joseph. •lapJSnf-
.fared), one of the antediluvian patriarchs, the
fifth from Adam; son of Mahahueel, and father of
Enoch (Gen. v. 16, 16, 18, 19, 30; Luke ill 87 •
In the hst« of Chronicles the name is given in to*
A. V. [as] Jkrjcu.
JARESI'AH (ITljH3£ [wkom Jehovah
novrithei]: 'lapael*; [Vat. laeupaia:] Jenin^
a Bnijamit*, one of the Bene-Jerobam [sons of J.] ,
a chief roim of bis tribe, but of whom nothing If
recorded (1 Chr. viii. 37).
JAR'HA (Vrpi [see at end of the art. J:
'I«x4a: [ (onl P- 'If 4; AM. 'Uoai'] Jerai), tin
Egyptian servant «* Sbeshan, about the thne of
Eli, to whom his master gave his daughter and
heir in marriage, and who thus became the founder
of a chief house of the Jerahmeeites, which con-
tinued at least to the time of king HezeUsh, and
ass N.e>M far' » In another paws ha (Ives "Jarib; *ti
ITslmlslsss u s" (rft Hem. Jsw* >
Digitized by
Google
1214
JAMB
from which sprung several illustrious persons* rich
s* Zabad in the reign of David, and Azariah in
the ragn of Joash (1 Cbr. ii. 31 fE). [Azariah
8: Zauad.] It ia a matter of somewhat curious
inquiry what waa the name of Jarha'a wile. In
rer. 31 we read "the children of Sheahan, Ablai,"
and in rer. 84, "Sheahan had no sons, but daugh-
ters." In rer. 35, Sbeshan's daughter " bare him
Altai," whose grandson waa Zabad; and in ch. xi.
41, " Zahnd the son of Ahlai." Hence some hare
Imagined that Jarha on his marriage with Sbeshan's
daughter had the name of Ahlai (interpreted a
« brother-to-me ") given him by Sheahan, to signify
his adoption into Israel. Others, that Ahlai and
Attai are merely clerical variations of the same
name. Others, that Ahlai was a son of Sheahan,
born after the marriage of his daughter. But the
view which the A V. adopts, as appears by their
rendering W \J3 in rer. 81, the children of Sbe-
ihan, instead of son*, is undoubtedly the right one, 6
namely, that Ahlai is the name of Sheahan's daugh-
ter. Her descendants were called after her, just
as Joab, and Abishai, and Asahel, were always
tailed " the sona of Zeruiah," and as Abigail stands
at the head of Amasa's pedigree, 1 Chr. ii. 17. It
may be noticed as an undesigned coincidence that
Jarha the Egyptian was living with Sbeshon, a Je-
rahmeeUtc, and that the Jerahmeelites had their
ponsessiona on the side of Judah nearest to Egypt,
1 Sam. xxrii. 10; comp. 2 Sam. xxiii. 90, 31;
Josh. zr. 31; 1 Cbr. ir. 18. [Jkrahmkkl; Jk-
iiuduah.] The etymology of Jarba's name is
quite unknown (Gea. The*. ; KUrst, Concord., etc.
[in his WSrterb., Egyptian]; Burrington's Gt-
tteaL { Beeston, GtntaL ; Herrey's Geneal., p. 84;
Bwtheau, on 1 Chr. ii. 34, Ac). A. C. H."
JATtlB (3""£ [adhering]: 'lapifl; [Vat
laptiri] Alex. laptifi: Jarib). L Named in the
hst of 1 Chr. ir. 24 only, as a son of Simeon. He
occupies the same place as Jachim in the parallel
lists of Gen. xlri., Ex. ri., and Num. zzri., and
the name is possibly a corruption from that (see
Burrington, I. 56).
3. ['Iap(/3; Vat Aptfl.] One of the "chief
men" (BPP*H"1, " heads ") who accompanied Ezra
on his journey from Babylon to Jerusalem (Ezr.
rtti. 16), whether Lerite or layman is not clear.
In 1 Esdras the name is given as Joriras.
3. ['Iopf/S; Vat AM. 'Uu>«(u; FA. Inpnp..]
A priest of the house of Jeshua the son of Jozadak,
who had married a foreign wife, and waa compelled
.j Ezra to put her away (Ezr. x. 18). In 1 Esdras
the name is Joribus.
4. ('laplfi; Alex. I«a0i0; [Sin. lmapttfi:] 1
Mace. xlr. 29.) A contraction or corruption of the
rune Joarib, which occurs correctly in eh. Ii. 1.
JAxVJMOTH (lapmM [Vat -.«-]: Lari-
tvJ.h), 1 E#dr. ix. 28. [Jkrkmoth.]
JAxVMUTH (mO-£ [height, hiO]). L
\'ifmpobi, ['Upftoi9\ Vat. in Josh. x. and xil.
■jji-; Alex, in Josh. xii. 11, Upt/iov; in Neb..,
Vat. Alex. FA.i omit, FA.» lpifumt: Jervnoth,
fermuUt.]) A town in the Shtftlah or low eoun-
sry of Judah, named with Adullom, Socoh, and
ethers (Josh. xr. 35). Its king, Piram, waa one
I
<• Bsrthsaa's remark, that none of the persons
zooms' In this long geiMalogv near •Imwhere, Is sm-
eolsrij s ri oj l s o si l .
JASHKN
of the Ave who conspired to punish GTbeon Sir hss>
ing made alliance with Israel (Josh. x. 8, 5), ana
who were routed at Beth-boron and pat to destl
by Joshua at Hakkedah (ver. 38). In this narra-
tive, and also in the catalogue of the " royal cities •
destroyed by Joshua, Jarmuth is named next t
Hebron, which, however, was quite in the moun-
tains. In Keh. xi. 29 it ia named as having been
the residence of some of the children of Judah
after the return from captivity. Eusebins and Je-
rome either knew two places of this name, or an
error has crept into the text of the Onomntticon ;
for under "Jarimuth" they state it to be near
Eshtool, 4 miles from Fleutberopolis ; while under
" Jirmus " they give it as 10 miles from FJeuther-
opolis, on the road going up to Jerusalem. A site
named Yarmuk, with a contiguous eminence called
TeU-ErmAd, waa visited by Robinson (ii. 17), and
Van de Velds (ii. 193; Memoir, p. 324). It is
about li miles from Beil-nttif, which again is some
8 miles from BcU-gihrin, on the left of the rood to
Jerusalem. Shuweikeh (the ancient Socoh) lies on
a neighboring hill. We hare yet to discover the
principles on which the topographical divisions of
the ancient Hebrews were made. Waa the Shrfe-
lah — the " low country " — a district which took
its designation from the plain which formed its
major portion, but which extended over some of the
hill-country ? In the hill-country Jarmuth ia un-
doubtedly situated, though specified as in the plain.
Ymrmtk has been last visited by Tobter (3« Wan-
dentng, pp. 130, 463, 468).
2. (»j TWite; Alex. [Aid.] 'UppM: [Jam-
moth.]) A city of Issachar, allotted with its sub-
urbs to the Gershonite I-evitos (Josh. xxi. 39). It
the specification of the boundaries of Issachar, no
mention is made of Jarmuth (see Josh. xix. 17-83),
but a Remkth ia mentioned there (ver. 81); and
in the duplicate list of Levities! cities (1 Chr. ri.
78) Kamoth occupies the place of Jarmuth. The
two names are modifications of the same root, and
might without difficulty be interchanged. This
Jarmuth does not appear to bare been yet iden-
tified. [Ramoth.] O.
JARCAH (n'TP [moon] : •Mat; Alex- Aoal,
[Comp. "lapovii] Jara), a chief man of the tribe
of Gad (1 Chr. r. 14).
JAS'AEL Clao-aqAor; [Vat] Alex. As-«-
uAoj: Azabus), 1 Esdr. ix. 30. [Shbal.]
JA!8HX&(yZ*[itt*pi*g]: 'AirdV; [Coma
'IwrtV:] Jaaen). Bene-Jsshen — "sons of Ja-
shen " — sre named in the catalogue of the heroes
of David's guard in 2 Sam. xxiii. 33. In the
Hebrew, as accented by the Hasorets, the words
hare no necessary connection with the names pre-
ceding or following them ; but in the A. V. they
are attached to the latter — " of the sons of Jasben,
Jonathan." The passage has every appearance of
being imperfect, and accordingly, in the parallel
list in Chronicles, it stands, " the sons of Hsshem
the Gizonite" (1 Chr. xl. 84). Kennieott has
examined it at length (iXsterto/ion, pp. 198-303).
and. on grounds which cannot here be stated, hat
shown good cause for believing that a name has
escaped, and that the genuine text was, "of tns
Bene-Hashem, Gouni; Jonathan ben-Shsmha •
b • This design of the translators Is not cartas* ; to
tba A. V. mas rsnoars Wty "ebJMrsn," rim I
should b»« sons." ■
Digitized by
Google
JASHER, BOOK OF
h the list given by Jerome in his Qwofiono /Te-
Insios), Jsshen and Jonathan an both omitted.
JA'SHER, BOOK OF ("ittJjn 15D), or,
ss the margin of the A. V. gives it, the book of the
upright, a record alluded to in two passages only
of the O. T. (Joah. x. 13, and 3 Sam. i. 18), and
consequently the subject of much dispute. The
former paaaage is omitted in the LXX-, while in
the latter the expression U rendered £i/3\W rov
tbOavt ■ the Vulgate haa liber jwterum in both
Instance!. The Peshtto Syriae in Josh, haa "the
t»<ik of praitt* or Aymns," reading "l^UP i} for
"ItPjn, and a similar transposition will account for
the rendering of the same version in Sam., " the
book of Athir." The Targum interprets it "the
book of the law," and this is followed by .larchi,
who gives, ss the passage alluded to in Joshua, the
prophecy of Jacob with regard to the future great-
new of Kphraim (Uen. xlviii. 19), which was ful-
filled when the sun stood still at Joshua's bidding.
The same Rabbi, in his commentary on Samuel,
■efers to Genesis " the book of the upright, Abra-
ham, Isaac, and Jacob," to explain the allusion to
the book of Jaaher; and Jerome, while discussing
the etymology of " Israel," which he interprets as
" rectus Dei," ■ incidentally mentions the feet that
Genesis was called '• the book of the just " (liber
Genesis appellator ebtitn, id est, justorum), from
its containing the histories of Abraham, Isaac, and
Israel (Comm. in Je$. xliv. 2). The Tabnudists
attribute this tradition to R. Johanan. K. Klieser
thought that by the book of Jaaher was signified
the book of Deuteronomy, from the expressions In
Dent. vi. 18, zxxiii. 7, the latter being quoted in
proof of the skill of the Hebrews in archery. In
the opinion of K. Samuel ben Nachman, the book
of Judges was alluded to as the book of Jaaher
(Aboda Zara, c. ii.); and that it was the book of
the twelve minor prophets was held by some He-
brew writers, quoted without name by Sixtus Se-
neosis (BibL Sonet, lib. il.). K. Levi ben Gersboni
recognizes, though he dees not follow, the tradition
given by .larchi, while Kimchi and Abarbanel adopt
(he rendering of the Targum. This diversity of
crinions proves, if it prove nothing more, that no
<ook was known to have survived which could lay
^aim to the title of the book of Jaaher.
Josephus, in relating the miracle narrated in
Joshua x., appeals for confirmation of his account
to certain documents deposited in the Temple (AM.
t. 1, f 17), and his words are supposed to contain
a covert allusion to the book of Jaaher as the source
of his authority. But in his treatise against Apion
(lib. i.) be says the Jews did not p ossess myriads
of books, discordant and contradictory, but twenty-
two only; from which Abicht concludes that the
books of Scripture were the sacred books hinted at
in the former passage, while Masius understood by
the same the Annals which were written by the
prophets or by the royal scribes. Theodore* ( Quail.
uv. in Jetwn N<m) explains the words in Josh.
S. 13, which be quotes aa to &0\loy to tbptt4r
tprob. an error for «u0«i, as he has in Qucul. iv. •
'<• 2 Beg.), as referring to the ancient record from I
which the compiler of the book of Joshua derived
ibt materials of his history, and applies the passage
in 2 Sam. ii. 18 to prove tha. other documents,
DoosMm ha I overlook** Ibis
that his own anatrals of um word
when
Israel"
JASHEB, BOOK OF 121*
written by the prophets, were made use of In the
composition of the historical books. Jerome, Of
rather the author of the QiaaHmet Bebraiom,
understood by the book of Jaaher the books of
Samuel themselves, inasmuch as they contained the
history of the just prophets, Samuel, Gad, and
Nathan. Another opinion, quoted by Sixtus S»
nensis, but on no authority, that it was the book of
eternal predestination, is scarcely worth more than
the bare mention.
Tbet the book of Jaaher was one of the writings
which perished hi the Captivity was held by R.
Levi ben Gershom, though he gives the traditional
explanation above mentioned. His opinion baa
been adopted by Junius, Hottinger ( The ». PhiL ii.
9, J 8), and many other modem writers (Wclftl
BibL Heb. ii. 233). What the nature of the book
may have been can only be inferred from the two
passages in which it is mentioned and their context,
and, this being the case, there is clearly wide room
for conjecture. The theory of Masius (quoted by
Abicht) was, that in ancient times whatever was
worthy of being recorded for the instruction of pos-
terity, was written in the form of Annals by
learned men, and that among these Annals or
records was the book of Jasher, so called from tbs
trustworthiness and methodical arrangement of the
narrative, or because it contained the relation of
the deeds of the people of Israel, who are elsewhere
spoken of under the symbolical name Jmhurun. Of
the later hypothesis Fiirst approves (llambc. s. v.).
Sanctius (Comm. ad 2 Reg. i.) conjectured that it
was a collection of pious hymns written by diner-
ent authors and sung on various occasions, aW
that from this collection the Psalter was compiled.
That it was written in versa may reasonably be in-
ferred from the only specimens extant, which exhibit
unmistakable signs of metrical rhythm, but that
it took its name from this circumstance is not sup-
ported by etymology. Lowth, indeed (Pral. pp.
306, 307), imagined that it was a collection of na-
tional songs, so called because it probably com-
menced with "VtpJ W, ds yiMhir, "then sang,"
etc., like the song of Moses in Ex. xv. 1 { his view
of the question was that of the Syriac and Arable
translators, and was adopted by Herder. But,
granting that the form of the book was poetical, a
difficulty still remains as to its subject That thr
book of Jasber contained the deeds of national hr
roes of aD ages embalmed in verse, among which
David's lament over Saul and Jonathan bad an ap-
propriate place, was the opinion of Calovius. A
fragment of a similw kind Is thought to appear in
Nam. xxi. 14. Gesenius conjectured that it was
an anthology of ancient songs, which acquired its
name, "the book of the just or upright," from
being written in praise of upright men. He quotes
but does not approve, the theory of Illgen that
like the Hamasa of the Arabs, it celebrated the
achievements of illustrious warriors, and from this
derived the title of "the book of valor." But the
idea of warlike valor is entirely foreign to the root
yithar. Dupin contended from 2 Sam. L 18, thai
the contents of the book were of a military nature)
but Montanua, regarding rather the etymology,
considered it a collection of political and moral pre-
cepts. Abicht, taking the lament of David as s
sample of the whole, maintained that the frai(insol
bad hitherto est
(.faster, >. m
ipsd tbs nooee of aB
Digitized by
Google
1216 JASHER, BOOK OF
farted in the book of Joahua m put of a funeral
ode composed upon the death of that hero, and
narrating his achievement*. At the aame time he
Joes not conceive it neceesarj to suppose that one
book only is alluded to in both instances. It must
be admitted, however, that there is very slight
ground for any conclusion beyond that which af-
fects the form, and that nothing can be confidently
asserted with regard to the contents.
But, though conjecture might almost be thought
to hare exhausted itself on a subject so barren of
premises, a scholar of our own day has not despaired
of being able, not only to decide what the book of
Jasher was in itself, but to reconstruct it from the
fragments which, according to his theory, he traces
tliroughout the several books of the O. T. In the
preface to his Jaahar, or Fragmtnta Arckctypa
CattninHtn Hebraicurum in Masortthico Vtteru
TatamrnH ttxtu paeeim tttttlatti, Dr. Donaldson
advances a scheme for the restoration of this ancient
record, in accordance with his own idea of its scope
and contents. Assuming that, during the tranquil
and prosperous reign of Solomon, an unwonted im-
pulse was given to Hebrew literature, and that the
worshippers of Jehovah were desirous of possessing
something on which their faith might rest, the
book of " Jashar," or " uprightness," he asserts,
was written, or rather compiled, to meet this want.
Its object wss to show that in the beginning man
was upright, but had by carnal wisdom forsaken
the spiritual law; that the Israelites had been
chosen to pi mini and transmit this law of upright-
ness; that David had been made king for his relig-
ious integrity, leaving the kingdom to his son
Solomon, in whose reign, after the dedication of the
Temple, the prosperity of the chosen people reached
its culminating point. The compiler of the book
was probably Nathan the prophet, assisted perhaps
by Gad the seer. It was thus " the first offspring
of the prophetic schools, and ministered spiritual
food to the greater prophets." Kejecting, therefore,
the authority of the Masoretic text, as founded
entirely on tradition, and adhering to his own
theory of the origin and subject of the book of
Jasher, Dr. Donaldson proceeds to show that it
contains the religious marrow of Holy Scripture.
In such a case, of course, absolute proof is not to
be looked for, and it would be impossible here to
discuss what measure of probability should be
■aiigned to a scheme elaborated with considerable
Ingenuity. Whatever ancient fragments in the
sacred books of the Hebrews exhibit the nature
of uprightness, celebrate the victories of the true
srselites, predict their prosperity, or promise future
blessedness, have, according to this theory, a claim
to be considered among the relics of the book of
Jasher. Following such a principle of selection, the
fragments fall into seven groups. The first part,
the olject of which is to show that man wss created
upright (1C5 \ yAtMr), but fell into sin by carnal
wisdom, contains two fragments, an Ebhistic and a
Tehoviittic, both poetical, the latter being the more
full. The first of these Includes Gen. 1. 37, 28, vi.
I, 3, 4, 6, viii 81, vi. 6, 8; the other is made up
>f Gen. H. 7-9, 16-18, 36, ill. 1-19, 81, 93, 94.
The second part, consisting of four fragments, shows
bow the descendants of Abraham, as being upright
(D , "18^;, yesAitrtm), were adopted by God, while
the Mentoring nations were rejected. Fragment
(1) Oca. ix. 18-97; fragment (8) Gen. iv. 8-8
JASHER, BOOK OF
8-18; fragment (8) Gen. xvi. 1-4, 16, 18, stfl
9-16, 18-98, xxi. 1-14, 90, 91 ; fragment (4) Qen
xxv. 90-34, xxvii. 1-10, 14, 18-20, 85-40, rr. 18
19, xxvi. 34, xxxvi. 8, iv. 23, 94, xxxvi. 8, xxviil
9, xxvi. 36, xxvii. 46, xxviil. 1-4, 11-19, xxix. 1
Ac., 34, 99, xxxv. 93-36, xxxiv. 36-99, xxxr. 9-14.
15, xxxii. 31. In the third part is related undei
the figure of the deluge how the Israelites escaped
from Egyp 1 ' wandered forty years in the wilderness,
and finally, in the reign of Solomon, built a temple
to Jehovah. The passsges in which this is found
are Gen vi. 6-14, vii. 6, 11, 13, viii. 6, 7, viii. 8,
12, t. 99, viii. 4; 1 K. vi., viii. 43; Deut vi. 18;
Ps. v. 8. The three fragments of the fourth part
contain the divine laws to be observed by the up-
right people, and are found (1) Deut. v. 1-83; (3)
vi. 1-6; Lev. xix. 18; Deut. x. 12-21, xi. 1-6, 7-9;
(3) viii. 1-3, vi. 6-18, 30-35. The blessings of the
upright and their admonitions sre the subject of
the fifth part, which contains the songs of Jacob
(Gen. xlix.), Balaam (Num. xxiii., xxiv.), and Hoses
(Deut xxxii., xxxiii.). The wonderful victories and
deliverances of Israel are celebrated in the sixth
part, in the triumphal songs of Hoses and Miriam
(Ex. xv. 1-19), of Joshua (Josh. x. 19-13), and of
Deborah (Judg. v. 1-30). The seventh is a col-
lection of various hymns composed in the reigns
of David and Solomon, and contains David's song
of triumph over Golisth (1 Sam. ii. 1-10);° his
lament for Saul and Jonathan (9 Sam. i. 19-87),
and for Abner (2 Sam. iii. 83, 34); his psalm of
thanksgiving (Ps. xviii., 2 Sam. xxii. { ; his triumphal
ode on the conquest of the Kdomites (Ps. Ix.), and
his prophecy of Messiah's kingdom (2 Sam. xxiii.
1-7), together with Solomon's epithalaminm (Ps.
xlv.), and the hvmn sung at the dedication of the
Temple (Ps. lxvtii.).
Among the many strange results of this arrange-
ment, Shem, Ham, and Japhet are no longer the
sons of Noah, who is Israel under a figure, but of
Adam ; and tie circumstances of Noah's life related
in Gen. ix. 18-27 are transferred to the latter.
Cain and Abel are the sons of Shem, Abraham is
the son of Abel, and Esau becomes Lantech the son
of Methuselah.
There are also extant, under the title of "the
Book of Jasher," two Rabbinical works, one a moral
treatise, written in A. ». 1394 by R. Shabbatai
Carrara LevrU, of which a copy in HS. exists in
the Vatican Library; the other, by R. Than, treats
of the laws of the Jews in eighteen chapters, and
was printed in Italy in 1644, and at Cracow in
1580. An anonymous work, printed at Venice and
Prague in 1626, and said to have made its first
appearance at Naples, was believed by some Jews
to be the record alluded to in Joshua. It contains
the historical narratives of the Pentateuch, Joshua,
and Judges, with many fabulous additions. Ii.
Jacob translated it into German, and printed his
version at Frankfort on the Maine in 1674. It a)
said in the preface to Die 1st ed. to have been in
covered st the destruction of Jerusalem, by Sidrua,
one of the officers of Titus, who, while searching a
house for the purpose of plunder, found in a secret
chamber a vessel containing the books of the Law.
the Prophets, and Hagiographa, with many others,
which a venerable man was reading. Sidms tool
the old man under his protection and built for him
a • Ths song In 1 8am. H. 1-10 Is not David's, bmi
Hannah's thanksgiving song for the birth tf eaaraal
a.
Digitized by
Google
JA8H0BEAM
* hoes*) at Seville, where the books ware safely
deposited. Hie book in question U probably the
production of a Spanish Jew of the i3th century
(Abicht, De Libr. B* eft", in The*. Von. ThtoL-PhiL
i. 535-634). A clumsy forgery in English, which
first appeared in 17A1 under the title of " the Book
of Jasher," deserves notice solely for the unmerited
success with which it was palmed off upon the
public. It professed to be a translation from the
Hebrew into English by Alcuin of Britain, who
discovered it in Persia during his pilgrimage. It
was reprinted at Bristol in 1827, and was again
published in 1838, in each case accompanied by a
fictitious commendatory note by Wicklifle. [On this
forgery, see Home's Introduction, It. 741 ft"., 10th
•A — A.] W. A. W.
JASHCBKAM (&????? [<*« /*<?*> re-
tnrn] •■ 'I«re/8aJ<£, [ZoAwrfp, 'Icr/Bodf (Vat
So0aA); Alex, lafkuut, Utr&aa/i, IavSocut:] Jtt-
hnmn, [Jttbonm]). Possibly one and the same
follower of David, bearing this name, is described
as a Haehmooite (1 Chr. xi. 11), a Korhite (1 Cbr.
zii. 6), and son of Zabdiel (1 Chr. xxvii. 2). He
came to David at Ziklag. His distinguishing ex-
ploit was that he slew 300 (or 800, 2 Sam. xxiii. 8)
men at one time. He is named first among the
duef of the mighty men of David (1 Chr. xi. 11);
and he was set over the first of the twelve monthly
Bourses of 24,000 men who served the king (xxvii.
2). Iu 2 Sam. xxiii. 8, his name seems to be
erroneously transcribed, D^&S 3tt? > (A. V.
« that sst in the seat "), instead of Q^f^ '< and
in the same place " Adino the Emits" is possibly
a corruption either of Vv 3rp"»* "VVW, " he
'HI up his spear " (1 Chr. xi. 11), or, as Gesenius
conjectures, of "OV^n '"O'l??, which he trans-
lates, " he shook it! ems his spear." [Ezxitb.]
W. T. b.
JAT3HT7B (3S0Jj [k» vho reterns ] : in the
Csbo of 1 Chr. mi. 1 it is y& ; in the Samaritan
Cod. of Nam. xxri. 3B7V: 'l<uroi$; [Vat in 1
Chr., Itura-ovoi] Jamb). L The third son of
Isaschar, and founder of the family of the Jashubites
(Num-xxvi. 24; 1 Cbr. vii. 1). In the list of Geo.
xlvi. the name is given (possibly in a contracted or
erroneous form, Gee. Tka. p. 583) as Jon; but in
sue Samaritan Codex — followed by the LXX.—
Jasbub.
9. [Vat Aosuoo-ovS, FA. AaawevS, by onion
with the preceding word.] One of the sons of Bani,
a layman in the time of Ezra, who had to put away
kh foreign wife (Ear. x. 29). In Esdras the name
b jASCBtTS.
JASHTJBI-LB'HEM (Uljb vjr^ in
•one copies *> ^tJP [see below] : mi aWtrrpr^s c
■stost, in both MSS. : et qui reverri runt in
Lukem), a perno or a place named among the
descendants of Sbelah, the son of Judah by Bath-
amn the Canaaniteas (1 Chr. iv. 92). The name
aloes not occur again. It is probably a place, and
we should infer from its connection with Mareehe
and Choseba— if Choaeba be Chezib or Achrib —
that it lay on the western side of the tribe, in or
■ear the Skefelnk. The Jewish explanations ol
this and the following verse are verv curious. Tney
77
JASON
1217
[may be seen in Jerome's Quoit. Rebr. on tUa
I passage, and, in a slightly different form, in the
j Targum on the Chronicles (ed. Wilkins, 29, 80).
I The mention of Moab gives the key to the whole.
j Chozeba is Elimelech ; Joash and Saraph an
! Mahlon and Chilion, who '• had the dominion in
1 Moab" from marrying the two Moabite damsels:
Jashubi-Lehem is Naomi and Ruth, who returned
(Joahubi, from 21127, "to return") to bread, or
to Beth-feAem, after the famine: and the "ancient
words " point to the book of Kuth as the source of
the whole. G.
JA13HTJBITES, THE 0?^!? [patro
nym.] ; Samaritan, "OUPYl : t 'ino-ou/M [Vat
-Ptt] : familia Jambitnrum). The family founded
by Jasbub the son of Issacbar (Num. xxvi. 24).
[Jashub, 1.]
JA'SIEL (brjNBS; [Goo" creates] : 'l«o-o-i*>|
[Vat Eco-fi7)X; FA. EcrsinA.;] Alex. Eo-o-n)*.:
Jatiel), the hist named on the increased list of
David's heroes in 1 Chr. xi. 47. He is described
as the Mesobaite. Nothing more is known of
him.
JA'SON ('IaVov), a common Greek name
which was frequently adopted by Hellenizing Jews
as the equivalent otJetut, Joshua ('Ino'oSr; eomp.
Joseph. Ant. xii. 5, § IV probably with some ref-
erence to its supposed connection with iaoicu (t. e.
the Heater). A parallel change occurs in Atcimui
(Eliakim); while Nioolmu, Dotilheiu, Menelaut,
etc., were direct translations of Hebrew names.
L Jason thb box op Eucazar (cf. Ecclus. L
27, 'Ino-oCt vlhi Sipax 'EAtifo, Cod. A.) was
one of the commissioners scut by Judas Maccabssus
to conclude a treaty with the Romans b. c. 181
(1 Mace. viii. 17; Joseph. Ant. xii. 10, § 6).
2. JASOX THE PATHRR OP AjiTIPATER, who
was an envoy to Rome at a later period (1 Mace,
xii. 16, xiv. 22), is probably the same person as
No.1.
3. Jason op Chucks, % Jewish historian who
wrote " in five books " a history of the Jewish war
of liberation, which supplied the chief materials for
the seoond book of the Maccabees. [2 Mac
cabees.] His name and the place of his residence
seem to mark Jason as a Hellenistic Jew, and it la
probable on internal grounds that bis history was
written in Greek. This narrative included the wars
under Antiochus Eupator, and he must therefore
have written after B. c. 162 ; but nothing more Is
known of him than can be gathered from 2 Mace.
U. 19-23.
4. [In 2 Mace. Iv. 13, Alex. Euuruc] Jason
the High-Priest, the second son of Simon II.,
and brother of Oniss in., who succeeded in obtain-
ing the high-priesthood from Antiochus Epiphanes
(c 175 B. G) to the exclusion of his elder brother
(2 Mace. It. 7-26; 4 Mace ir. 17; Joseph. Ant
xii. 5, § 1). He labored in every way to introduce
Greek customs among the people, and that with
great success (2 Msec, iv.; Joseph. (. c). In order
to give permanence to the changes which he de-
signed, he established a gymnasium st Jerusalem,
and even the priests neglected their sacred functions
to take part in the games (2 Msec. iv. 9, 14\ and at
a Jason and Jesus cccur together as Jewish sew
. aoe history of Arlstee*-(Ilodjr, Dt Tat. p vM )
Digitized by
Google
1218
JASPER
ast ha innt so far as to send a deputation to the
Tyrian games in honor of Hercules. [Hercules.]
After three jean (cir. b. c. 179) he was in turn
inppianted in the king's favor by his own emissary
Menelaus [Mkselaos], who obtained the office of
high-priest from Antiochus by the oner of a larger
bribe, and was forced to take refuge among the
Ammonites (3 Mace. iv. 26). On a report of the
death of Antiochus (c. 170 b. c.) he made a violent
attempt to recover his power (3 Msec. v. 6-7), but
was repulsed, and again fled to the Ammonites.
Afterwards he was compelled to retire to Egypt,
and thence to Sparta, whither he went in the hope
of receiving protection " in virtue of his being con-
nected with them by race " (2 Mace v. 9 ; comp.
1 Mace. zii. 7; Frankel, Moaatachrijl, 1863, p.
456), and there " perished in a strange land " (2
Mace. f. «. ,- cf. Dan. zii. 30 ft".; 1 Mace. i. 12 ff.).
B. F. W.
6. Jasok the Thessalonian, who entertained
Paul and Silas, and was in consequence attacked by
the Jewish mob (Acts xvii. 6, 6, 7, 9). He is
probably the same as the Jason mentioned in Rom.
xri. 21, as a companion of the Apostle, and one of
his kinsmen or fellow-tribesmen. Lightfoot con-
jectured that Jason and Secundus (Acts xx. 4)
were the same. W. A. W.
JASPER (nSttfj : Urwtf- jn*pi»), a pre-
cious stone frequently noticed in Scripture. It
was the last of the twelve inserted in the high-
priest's breastplate (Ex. xxviii. 20, xxxix. 13), and
the first of the twelve used in the foundations of
the new Jerusalem (Rev. xxi. 19): the difference in
the order seems to show that no emblematical im-
portance was attached to that feature. It was the
stone employed in the superstructure [iySiiatvit)
of the wall of the new Jerusalem (Rev. xxi. 18).
It further appears among the atones which adorned
the king of Tyre (Es. xxviii. 13). Lastly, it is the
emblematical image of the glory of the Divine
Being (Rev. iv. 3). The characteristics of the
stone, as far as they are specified in Scripture
(Rev. xxi. 11), are that it was " most precious," and
" like crystal " dcptxrraWifay) ; not exactly " clear
as crystal," as in A. V., but of a crystal hue; the
term is applied to it in this sense by Dioscorides
(v. 160; \i8os Urrit, i plv rls «Vti aiAaparfSl-
Cav, t Si KovoroAAa^Snt): we may also infer from
Rev. iv. 3, that it was a stone of brilliant and trans -
parent light. The stone which we name "jasper "
does not accord with this description : it is an
opaque species of quartz, of a red, yellow, green,
or mixed brownish-yellow hue, sometimes striped
and sometimes spotted, in no respect presenting
the characteristics of the crystal. The only feature
in the stone which at all accords with the Scriptu-
ral account is that it admits of a high polish, and
Ibis appears to be indicated in the Hebrew name.
With regard to the Hebrew term, the LXX. and
Vulg. render it by the " onyx " and " beryl " re-
spectively, and represent the jasper by the term
yn/ialom (A. V. "emerald "). There can be no
doubt that the diamond would more adequately
answer to the description in the book of Revela-
tion, and unless that beautiful and valuable stone
is represented by the Hebrew ynthphek and the
Greek idVrir, it does not appear at all in the pas-
sages quoted; for the term rendered " diamond "
in Ex. xxviii. 18 really refers to the emerald. We
ire disposed to think, therefore, that though the
sames »a»spA«A, Urxu, and jatper an identical,
JATTIB
the stones may have bean diArent and thai tts
diamond is meant. [See Chalckdv WT.l
W.L.K
JASTJ'BTJS Cl«roSBof: Jamb), 1 Esdr. fax
80. [Jashub, 2.]
J AT AX ('Ato>, both MSS.; [rather, Rom
Alex.; Vat. is corrupt; Aid. 'IortU:] Aztr), 1
Esdr. v. 28 ; but whence was the form in A. V.
adopted? [From the AWine edition, after the
Genevan version and the Bishops' Bible. A.]
[Atkh, 1.]
JATHIflEL 0~tr>2r^ {whom God baton]:
IsvevfjA: Alex. Noetoa; [Comp. >Ia0anrf)\, Aid.
Natfaj-jVjA:] Jathanall), a Korhite Levite, and •
doorkeeper (A. V. " porter ") to the house of Jeho-
vah, i. e. the tabernacle; the fourth of the family
of Meshelemiah (1 Chr. xxvi. 2).
JATTIB CWfi, in Josh. xr. 48; etsewhen
"VT [emsneiH, extraordinary]: 'l*$4p t Abipt
Ttiiv, 'Uiif [Vat IsWas]; Alex. UBtp, Eic0«:
Jtther), a town of Judah in the mountain district
(Josh. xr. 48), one of the group containing Socho,
Eshtemoa, etc. ; it was among the nine cities which
with their suburbs were allotted out of Judah to
the priests (xxi. 14; 1 Chr. vi. 67), and was out
of the places in the south in which David used to
haunt in his freebooting days, and to his friends in
which, he sent gifts from the spoil of the enemies
of Jehovah (1 Sam. xxx. 27). By Eusebius and
Jerome ( OnomntHcon, Jetber) it is spoken of as a
very large place in the middle of Daroma, near
Malatha, and 20 miles from FJeutberopolis. It is
named by hap-Parchi, the Jewish traveller; but
the passage is defective, and little can be gathered
from it (Zunz in Asher's Ben), of Tudda, U. 442)
By Robinson (i. 494-95) it is identified with 'Attlr,
6 miles N. of Mohda, and 10 miles S. of Hebron,
and baring the probable sites of Socbo, Eshtemoa,
and other southern towns within short distances.
This identification may be accepted, notwithstand-
ing the discrepancy in the distance of 'At&r from
Kleutheropolis (if BeiLJibrm be Elentheropolis)
— which is by road nearer 80 than 20 Roman
miles. We may suspect an error in the text of the
Onomsst., often very corrupt; or Eusebius may
have confounded 'Attlr with Jvtta, which does he
exactly 20 miles from B. Jibrtn, And it is by no
means absolutely proved that B. Jibrm is Eleutber-
opolis. Robinson notices that it is not usual for
the Jod with which Jattir commences to change
into the Am of Mttir (Bibl Be*. L 494, note).
The two Ithrite heroes of David's guard were
probably from Jattir, living memorials to him of
his early difficulties. G.
• Ruins still exist on the ancient site. « It is sit-
uated on a green knoll, in an amphitheatre of brown
rocky hills, studded with natural eaves. . . . Wt
counted upwards of thirty arched crypts . . . some
larger and some shorter; but most of them without
end walla, and having perhaps been merely passages
or streets with houses over them. The arches an
round, slightly domed, or sometimes a little pointed
built of well-dressed stones, generally two or three
feet square. Those which had the gable ends in-
tact had square beveled doorways, at one end flat-
headed, about 6 feet high, and 34 feet wide. Thj
tunnels an generally 18 or 90 feet long, though
measured one upwards of 40 feet. Some aneiesr
earrings remain on the doorways. . . On Ik
Digitized by
Google
JAVAN
Mb ef the UO lay the under stone of a very large |
ill press — an undeniabls evidence of the existence j
»f olive-trees of old, whtre nether trace of tree or
shrub remains. In seven! places we could perceive
the ancient terracing is the hills, and there were
man; wells, all run dry, and ptrtially choked with
rubbish. The eastern face of the knoll consisted
chiefly of natural caves once used as dwellings,
enlarged, and with outside extensions of arched
crypts in front. . . . The only modern building in
sight was a little Wely, or tomb of a Moslem
saint, on the crest of the bill " (Tristram, Land
e/ /trntl, p. 388 f., 3d ed.). H.
JA'VAN (7£: 'ItnW; [in Is. and Ex., 'EA-
Kiti >n Dan. and Zech.'E&Atn'tt: Gracia, Graci]
Juvan). 1. A son of Japheth, and the father of
\21ishah and Tarshish, Kittim and Dodanim (Gen.
t- 2, 4). The name appears in Is. lxvi. 19, where
it is coupled with Tarshish, Pul, and I.ud, and
more particularly with Tubal and the " isles afar
off," as representatives of the Gentile world : again
in Ex. xxvil. 13, where it is coupled with Tubal
and Meshech, as carrying on considerable commerce
with the Tyrians, who imported from these coun-
tries slaves and brazen vessels: in Dan. viii. 21, x.
20, xi. 2, in reference to the Macedonian empire;
and lastly in Zech. ix. 13, in reference to the Gneco-
Syrian empire." From a comparison of these vari-
ous passages there can be no doubt that Javan was
regarded as the representative of the Greek race:
the similarity of the name to that branch of the
Hellenic family with which the Orientals were best
acquainted, namely, the Ionians, particularly in the
older form in which their name appears CloW), is
too close to be regarded as accidental : and the oc-
currence of the name in the cuneiform inscriptions
of the time of Sargon (about b. c. 709), in the
form of YnrwjK or Yunan, as descriptive of the
isle of Cyprus, where the Assyrians first came in
contact with the power of the Greeks, further
shows that its use was not confined to the Hebrews,
but was widely spread throughout the East. The
name was probably introduced into Asia by the
Phomicians, to whom the ionians were naturally
better known than any other of the Hellenic races,
on account of their commercial activity and the
high prosperity of their towns on the western coast
M Asia Minor. The extension ot the name west-
ward tu the general body of tbo Greeks, as they
became known to the Hebrews through the Phcrni-
.-ians, wss but a natural process, analogous to that
which we have already had to notice in the case of
Chittim. It can hardly be imagined that the early
Hebrews themselves had any actual acquaintance
mith the Greeks: it is, however, worth mentioning
as illustrative of the communication which existed
between the Greeks and the East, that among the
artists who contributed to the ornamentation of
Esarbaddon's palaces the names of several Greek
artists appear in one of the inscriptions (Rawlin-
son's flerwt L 481). At a later period the He-
brews must have gained considerable knowledge of
toe Greeks through the Egyptians. Psammetieb.ua
(». c. 664-610) employed Ionians and Carians as
mercenaries, and showed them so much favor that
She war-caste of Egypt forsook him in a body: the
Creeks were settled near Bubastis, in a part of 'he
tsuntry with which the Jews were familiar (//<~W.
JAVAN, SONS OF
1210
ii. 1S4). The same policy was followed by tht
succeeding monarch*, especially Amasla (571-686),
who gave the Greeks Naucratis as a commercial
emporium. It is tolerably certain that any infor-
mation which the Hebrews acquired in relation to
the Greeks must have been through the indirect
means to which we have adverted: the Greeks
themselves were very slightly acquainted with the
southern coast of Syria until the invasion of Alex-
ander the Great. The earliest notices of Palestine
occur in the works of Hecatteus (n. c. 649—186),
who mentions only the two towns Canytis and Car-
dytus; the next are in Herodotus, who describes
the country as Syria Pakestina, and notices inci-
dentally the towns Ascalon, Azotus, Ecbatana
(UatanteaV), and Cadytis, the same as the Canytis
of Hecatcus, probably Gaza. These towns were
on the border of Egypt, with the exception pf the
uncertain Ecbatana; and it is thrrefon highly
probable that no Greek had, down to this late pe-
riod, travelled through Palestine.
2. [Rom. Vat. Alex, omit; Comp. 'loovoV;
Aid. 'IcsraV: Gratia.] A town in the southern
part of Arabia ( Yemen), whither the Phoenicians
traded (Ex. xxvii. 19): the connection with Uzal
decides in favor of this place rather than Greece,
as in the Vulg. The same place may be noticed
in Joel iii. 6: the parallelism to the Sabaeans in
ver. 8, and the fact that the Phoenicians bought
instead of selling slaves to the Greeks (Ex. xxvii.
13), are in favor of this view. W. L. B.
1,'in'theA. V.,
• • The A. T. has "Javan " in •!< the SMmgsa re-
i la OuM, v-rn It Is " diwU."
•JA'VAN, SONS OF
Wei T«»r 'EWtrW.Jilii Gracorum),
" the Grecians," and in the margin, " sons of the
Grecians," Joel iii. 6 (iv. 6 Hebr.). That the Ioni-
ans or Greeks are meant in this passage of Joel,
and p->t a place or tribe in Arabia (see Javan, 9),
is the generally adopted view of scholars (Hitzig,
Havernick, Kiietschi, Delitzsch). According to
this supposition, it is true, the Sidonians and Tyr-
ians are said by Joel to sell their Jewish captives
to the Greeks, and by Ezekiel (xxvii. 13), to pur
chase slaves, probably among them Greek slaves, from
the Greeks themselves. The one statement, how-
ever, does not exclude the other. The traffic of
the Phoenician slave-dealers, like that of modern
slave-dealers, would consist almost inevitably of
both the buying and selling of slaves. Greek
female slaves were in great request among the ori-
ental nations, especially the Persians (see Herod,
iii. 134), and Tyre and Sidon were the porta to
which they would naturally be brought in tie pros
ecution of this trade. The Greeks loved liberty
for themselves, but, especially in the ante-historic
times to which Joel belonged, were not above en-
slaving and selling those of their own race for the
sake of gain. On the other band, it is notorious
that the Greeks at all periods were accustomed to
capture or buy men of other nations as slaves,
either for their own use, or to sell them to foreign-
ers. On the slave-traffic of the Phoenicians and
the Greeks, see the statements of Dr. Pusey, Jotl,
p. 134 f.
Tht name of the Arabian Javan (Ez. xxvii. 19 .
had no doubt the same origin as the Ionian or
Greek Javan. But what that origin was is not
certain. Some conjecture that Javan In Arabia
was originally a Greek colony which had gow
and Zsch. Ix. IS, where It Is " Greece," while In Asasf
IB.O (whloh also belongs hen) it Is "arariana* M
Digitized by
Google
1220 JAVELIN
thither by the my of Egypt at an early period,
and hener were known from the country whence
they emigrated (Tuch, Gaum*, p. 210 f., and Ha-
rernick, jkuchiel, p. 469). Some think tout Javan
(aa an Indo-Germanic word, Sansk. jiwan, com p.
juccnit) meant " new " or " young," and was ap-
plied to the later or new branches of thia Indo-
Germanic stock in the west aa distinguished from
the old parent-stock in the remoter east. (See
Kiietschi in Herzog's Rcat-Encyk. vi. 432, and
Pott, ElymoL Fortdumgco, i. zU.) Javan in the
ethnographic table (Gen. z. 4) may be taken, if
necessary, as the name of the race, and not of ita
founder, and thus, consistently both with the new
last stated, and with history, the Ionians or Greeks
are said to spring from the Japheth branch of
Noah's family. All the modem researches in eth-
nography and geography, as Ritter has remarked,
tend mole and more to confirm this "table of the
nations " in the 10th ch. of Genesis. H.
JAVELIN. [Arms.]
JA'ZAR (it 'laftp; [so Sin.; Comp. rafty i
Alex, lafay- Oaxer), 1 Mace. t. 8. [Jaazkr.]
JA'ZEB ['laflpi 3 Sam., 'EAi*C«>; Alex, in
2 Sam. EAioftr; m 1 clir i Vat r«C«f>, Via£np
(Alex, rofrjp): Jazer, Jour, Jeter], Num. rail.
1, 3; Josh. xxi. 39; 2 Sam. xxiv. B; 1 Chr. vi. 81,
xxri. 31; Is. xvi. 8, 5; Jer. xlviii. 32. [Jaazkr.]
JA'ZIZ (PJJ [Mnmg,brimnnf\: 'lotfC; [Vat.
Ia(«C0 Alex. lmr(i(-- Jaaz), a Hagarite who
had charge of the " flocks," i. e. the sheep and
goats O^Sn), of king David (1 Chr. xxvil. 31),
which were probably pastured on the east of Jor-
dan, in the nomad country where the forefathers
of Jaziz had for ages roamed (comp. rer. 19-22).
JE'ARIM, MOUNT (Onyj— 111: w<Uit
laptr; [Vat. laptivi] Alex, lapift: 'MontJarim),
a place named in specifying the northern boundary
of Judah (Josh. xv. 10). The boundary ran from
Mount Seir to "the shoulder of Mount Jearim,
which i» Cession " — that is, Cession was the
landmark on the mountain. Keth stands, 7 miles
due west of Jerusalem, "on a high point on the
north slope of the lofty ridge between Wadg Ghur&b
and W. Iimail. The latter of these is the south-
western continuation of W. Beit Ifomm, and the
former runs parallel to and northward of it, and
they are separated by thia ridge, which is probably
Mount Jearim " (Rob. Hi. 164). If Jearim be
taken as Hebrew it signifies " forests." Forests
In nnr sense of the word there are none; but we
have the testimony of the latest traveller that
" such thorough woods, both for loneliness and
obscurity, he had not seen since he left Germany "
(Tobler. Wumknmg, 18S7, p. 178). Kirjath-
Jearim (if that be Kuriet tl-JCnab) is only 2,
miles oft' to the northward, separated by the deep
and wide hollow of Wad* Ghurab. [Chesalom.]
G.
JEATERAI [8 syl.] P?."!!?:, [«o*om Je-
kovah leads]: 'U6pl [Vat. -pti] :' Jithrai), a Ger
ihonite Levite. son of Zerah (1 Chr. vi. 21); appa-
rently the hoad of his family at the time that the
■ervice of the Tabernacle was instituted by David
icorop. ver. 31). In the reversed genealogy of the
Ijuendanta of Gflrshom, Zerah's son is stated as
ClUSl (MTH ver. 41). The two names have
JEBCB
quite similarity enough to allow of the east I
a corruption of the other, though the fact 1* not
ascertainable.
JEBERECHI'AH OrPjn^, with thenn*
u [whom Jeliuvnh Ueisei] : Bopax'ar '■ Baractias)
father of a certain Zechariah, in the reign of Aha*,
mentioned Is. viii. 2. As this form occurs nowhere
else, and both the LXX. and Vulgate have Btrt-
chiah, it is probably only an accidental corruption.
Possibly a N was in some copy by mistake attached
to the preceding ?2, so as to make it plural, and
thence was transferred to the following word, Bere-
chiah. Berechiah and Zechariah are both common
names among the priests (Zech. 1. 1). These are
not the Zacharias and Barachiaa mentioned as
father and son, Matt, xxiii. 86, as it is certain that
Zechariah, the son of Jehoiada, in the reign of Joash,
is there meant They may, however, be of the
same family; and if Berechiah was the father of
the house, not of the individuals, the same person
might be meant in Is. viii. 2 and Matt, xxiii.
36. It is singular that Josephus (B. J. iv. 6, § 4)
mentions another Zacharias, son of Baruch, vho
was slain by the Jews In the Temple shortly befor*
the last siege of Jerusalem began. (See Whiston's
note, ad foe.) ' A. C. H.
JE'BUS (D-"n* [see infra]: 'l«/3ov»: Jdxu),
one of the names of Jerusalem, the city of the Jeb-
usites, also called Jebusi. It occurs only twice:
first in connection with the journey of the Levite
and his unhappy concubine from Bethlehem to
Gibeah (Judg. xix. 10, 11); and secondly, in the
narrative of the capture of the place by David in 1
Chr. xi. 4, 6. In 2 Sam. v. 6-9 the name Jerusa-
lem is employed. By Gesenius (7W 189, &13)
and Furst (ttnndwb. 477) Jebua is interpreted to
mean a place dry or down-trodden like a threshing-
floor; an interpretation which by Ewald (iii. 166)
and Stanley (S. <f P. p. 177) is taken to prove that
Jebus must have been the southwestern hill, the
" dry rock "of the modern Zion, and " not the
Mount Moriab, the city of Solomon, in whose centre
arose the perennial spring." But in the great un-
certainty which attends these ancient names, thia
is, to say the least, very doubtful. Jebus was the
city of the Jebusites. Either the name of the town
is derived from the name of the tribe, or the reverse.
If the former, then the interpretation just quoted
falls to the ground. If the latter, then the origin
of the name of Jebus is thrown back to the very
beginning of the Canaanite race — so far at any
rate as to make its connection with a Hebrew root
extremely uncertain. G.
* Jebus and Jerusalem need not be understood
as interchangeable or coextensive names In 2 Sam.
v. 6, but differing only as a part from the whole,
nke Zion and Jerusalem in Joel ii. 32 (iii. 6, Hebr.).
For evidence that Jebus was the southwest hill,
afterward called Mount Zion or the City of David,
see Dr. Wolcott's addition to Jerusalem (Amer.
ed.). It has seemed hitherto almost incredible that
the Jebusites could have kept this acropolis for so
long a time, while the Hebrews dwelt almost under
its shadow (Judg. I. 21). Recent excavations torn
thrown fight on this singular fact. Jebus was t
place of extraordinarv strength; for though Ziot
appears at present almost on a level with sons
parts of the city, it is now proved beyond a owam
Digitized by
Google
JEBUSI
JOB tsatt it M original!; an isolated nmmlt, pre-
sarny m implied in tne account of ibt capture bj
David, (t wee protected not only by the deep
ravine of Hinnom on tne south and west, and the
Tyropoeon on the east, but by a valley which ran
from the Jaffa gate to the Tyropceon on the north
ride of the mount. Tbii hut valley hai been laid
bare, showing at different points a depth of 28 and
33 feet below the present surface, and in one in-
stance a depth of nearly 80 feet below the brow of
Zion. At one spot a fragment of the ancient
northern rampart of Zion was brought to light.
" It was built dose against the cliff, and though
only rising to the top of the rock behind, it was
yet 39 feet high toward the ravine in front "
(Recent Reiearche* m Jerusalem, reprinted from
the BriHsli Quarterly Review, October, 1867, in the
Theoi. Eclectic, t. 393; and Ordnance Survey of
Jenualem, p. 61, Load. 186S). It is not surprisins,
therefore, that the subjugation of this stronghold
should be reserved for the prowess of David, and be
recorded as one of his greatest exploit* (2 San?
v.6-8).
The occurrence of this name in the account of
the Levite's homeward journey (Judg. xix. 10 If.)
suggests a remark or two on the local allusions
which occur in the narrative. Jebus or Jerusalem
is a short 2 hours from Bethlehem, and hence, the
party leaving the latter place somewhat late in the
afternoon (as appears more clear!' from the Hebrew
than in the A. V., see Judg. ^x. 9, 11), they would
be off against Jebus near the close of the day, as
stated in ver. 11. Their journey lay along the
west side of that »ity : and this may be a reason
why it is spoken of as Jebus rather than Jerusalem.
The servant proposed that they should remain here
over night, as the time now left was barely sufficient
to enable them to reach the next halting-place.
But the Lerite objected to this, and insisted that
they should proceed further and lodge either in
Gibeah or in Kamah, an association of the places
which implies that they were near each other and
on the route of the travellers. One of these exists
still under its ancient name Er-Xam, and the other,
such explorers as Robinson, Van de V'elde, Porter,
identify with Tuleil el-Ful: both of them on
heights which overlook the road, nearly opposite
each other, 2J or 3 hours further north from Jebus.
Accordingly we read that as the Levite and his
company drew near Gibeah " the sun went down
upon them," in precise accordance with the tune
and the distance. Here occurred the horrible crime
which standi almost without a parallel in Jewish
history. Shiloh was the Levite's destination, and
on the morrow, pursuing still further this northern
road, he would come in a few hours to that seat
if the Tabernacle, or " house of the Lord," as it is
tailed, ver. 18. H.
JEBTJ8I 0p-"Q»ri=t»e JelmeiU: 'ufiouval,
U$evs, [so Tisch. ; iijfloCi, Holmes, Bos; Also:.
1</S«vt0 Jetmeame, [Jeow]), the name employed
for the city of Jebus, only in the ancient document
describing the landmarks and the towns of toe
iDotioent of Judah and Benjamin (Josh. xv. 8,
iviii. 16, 38). In the first and last place the ex-
planatory words, " which is Jerusalem," are added
In the first, however, our translators have give r
as « the Jebusite."
A pukllel to this mode of designating ite town
17 Its inhahitante is found u. this ntj list in
JEBUSITE
1221
Zemaralm (xriii. 22), Avim (23), Ophti «U), sad
Japhletite (xri. 3), Ac U.
JEBTJSITB, JEBTJSITES, THE. Al
though these two forms are indiscriminately em
ployed in the A. V., yet in the original the name,
whether applied to individuals or to the nation, is
never found in the plural ; always singular. The
usual form is ''D'Q'n; but In a few places —
namely, 2 Sam. v. 6,'xxiv. 16, 18; 1 Chr. xxi. 18
only — it is ^D^il. Without the article, N D-"D\
it occurs In 2 Sam. v. 8; 1 Chr. xi. 6; Zeoh. ix. 7.
In the two fint of these the force is much increased
by removing the article introduced in the A. V.,
and reading "and amiteth a Jebusite." We do
not hear of a progenitor to the tribe, but the name
which would have been his, had he existed, has
attached itself to the city in which we meet with
the Jebuaites in historic times. [Jebus.] The
LXX. give the name 'U$ouertuati [in Judg. xix.
11, 'U&aool, Vat -auri in Ear. Ix. 1, 'U&viwl,
Vat. Alex. -<r«i:] Vulg. Jtbutam.
1. According to the table in Genesis x. "the
Jebusite " is the third son of Canaan. His place
in the list is between Heth and the Amorites (Gen.
x. 16; 1 Chr. i. 14), a position which the tribe
maintained long after (Num. xiii. 29; Josh. xi. 3);
and the same connection is traceable in the words
of Kzekiel (xvi. 3, 45), who addresses Jerusalem as
the fruit of the union of an Amorite with a Hittite.
But in the formula by which the Promised Land
is so often designated, the Jebuaites are uniformly
placed last, which may have arisen from their small
number, or their quiet disposition. See Gen. xv.
21; Ex. iii. 8, 17, xiii. 5, xxiii. 23, xxxiii. 2, xxxiv.
11; Deut vii. 1, xx. 17; Josh. iii. 10, ix. 1, xii.
8, xxiv. 11; 1 K. ix. 20; 2 Chr. viii. 7; Ear. ix.
1; Neh. ix. 8.
2. Our first glimpse of the actual people is in
the invaluable report of the spies — " the Hittite,
and the Jebusite, and the Amorite dwell in the
mountain " (Num. xiii. 29). This was forty years
before the entrance into Palestine, but no change
in their habitat had been made in the interval; for
when Jabin organized his rising against Joshua he
sent amongst others " to the Amorite, the Hittite,
the Veruxite, and the Jebusite in the mountain "
(Josh. xi. 3). A mountain-tribe they were, and a
mountain-tribe they remained. " Jebus, which is
Jerusalem," lost its king in the slaughter of Beth-
horoo (Josh. x. 1, 6, 26; comp. xii. 10) — was
sacked and burnt by the men of Judah (Judg.
i. 21), and its citadel finally scaled and occupied
by David (2 Sam. v. 6); but still the Jebuaites
who inhabited Jenualem, the " inhabitants of the
land," could not be expelled from their mountain-
seat, but continued to dwell with the children of
Judah and Benjamin to a very late date (Josh. xv.
8,63; Judg. i. 21, xix. 11). This obstinacy is
characteristic of mountaineers, and the few traits
we possess of the Jebusites show them as a warlike
people. Before the expedition under Jabin, Adoni-
Zedek, the king of Jerusalem, had himself headed
the attack on the Gibeouites, which ended in the
slaughter of Beth-boron, and cost him his life on
that eventful evening under the trees at Makkedah.*
That they were established in the strongest natural
• In ver. 6 the king of Jerusalem Is styled ona at
the flva kicgs of tea AmoriUs." But to* LXX
(bott al83.) have r*W 'Ii^ovtnuar " of ttw Jeooatats '
Digitized by
Google
1222 JEOAMIAH
Tfatiuss of the country in itself says much for their
aourage and power, and when the; lout it, it m
through bravado rather than from any cowardice
in their part [Jerusalem.]
After this they emerge from the darkness but
slice, in the person of Araunah a the Jebusite,
"Araunah the king" (TT^n njYTtf), who
appears lief ore us in true kingly dignity in his well-
known transaction with David (2 Sam. xxiv. 23;
1 Chr. xxi. 23). The picture presented us in these
well-known passages is a very interesting one. We
see the fallen Jebusite king and his four sons on
their threshing-floor on the bald top of Moriah,
treading out their wheat ( W~l : A. V. " threshing " )
by driving the oxen with the heavy sledges (D'O^fi,
A. V. "threshing instruments") over the corn,
round the central heap. We see Araunah on the
approach of David fall on his face on the ground,
and we hear him ask, " Why is my lord the king
come to his slave?" followed by his willing sur-
render of all his property. But this reveals no
traits peculiar to the Jebusites, or characteristic of
them more than of their contemporaries in Israel,
or in the other nations of Canaan. The early
judges and kings of Israel threshed wheat in the
wine-press (Judg. vi. 11), followed the herd out of
the field (1 Sam. xi. 5), and were taken from the
sheep-cotes (2 Sam. vii. 8), and the pressing courtesy
of Araunah is closely paralleled by that of Ephron
the Hittite hi his negotiation with Abraham.
We are not favored with further traits of the
Jebusites, nor with, any clew to their religion or
rites.
Two names of individual Jebusites are preserved.
In AnoHl-ZKDKK the only remarkable thing is its
Hebrew form, in which it means " Lord of justice."
That of Araunah is much more uncertain — so
much so as to lead to the belief that we possess it
more nearly in its original shape. In the short nar-
rative of Samuel alone it is given in three forms —
"the Avarnah" (ver. 16); Araneah (18); Aravnah,
or Araunah (20, 21). In Chronicles it is Aruan,
while by the LXX. it is 'OprA, and by Josephus
'OooVra. [Araunah; Okham.]
In the Apocryphal Acts of the Apostles the ashes
of Barnabas, after his martyrdom in Cyprus, are
said to bave been buried in a cave, " where the
race of the Jebusites formerly dwelt; " and previ-
ously to this is mentioned the arrival in the island
rf a '• pious Jebusite, a kinsman of Nero " (Act.
Iposfc Apocr. pp. 72, 73, ed. Tisch.). G.
JECAMI'AH (7"PlJi£, ». e. Jekamiah, as
the name is elsewhere given [lie who auemble* Ike
xople] : 'Uin/ita, [Vat.] Alex. ) ( «vii: Jeetmia),
me of a batch of seven, including Salathiel and
Pedaiah, who were introduced into the royal line,
ya the failure of it in the person of Jehoiachim
'1 Chr. ill. 18). They were all apparently sons of
Neri, of the line of Nathan, since Salathiel certainly
was so (Luke iii. 27). [Gekeauxjy of Jksus
Christ, p. 886 A.] A. C. H.
JECHOLI'AH pirnVy [Jthotak u
vaphty], with the final ft: 'I*x<A(a, [Vat. XoAsus,]
Alix. !«x<jaa: Joseph. 'Ax'dAcu: JechtUa), wife
a By Jossphus (Ant. vU. 13, { 9) Araunah is said
m hare own one of David's chief Mends («V row ji»-
Uara AovtSjv), and to have been ex p ressly spared by
At when Ins cttada: was taken. If there is any truth
JEDAIAH
of Amariah king of Judah, and mother J Aaersal
or Uzziah his successor (2 K. xv. 2). Both this
queen and Jehoaddan, the mother of her hull and
are specified as " of Jerusalem." In the A. V. of
Chronicles her name is given as Jecouah.
JECHONI'AS ('Isxorlor: Jedumai). 1.
The Greek form of the name of king Jechomah,
followed by our translators in the books rendered
from the Greek, namely, Esth. xi. 4; Bar. i. 3, 9
Matt i. 11, 12.
2. 1 Esdr. viii. 92. [Shkohahiah.]
• 3. 1 Esdr. L 9. So A. V. ed. 1611, etc , cor-
rectly. Later editions read Jecohias. Ilia same
as Conasiiah, q. v. A.
JECOLI'AH (rn^ [see above]: 'U X o*Smi
[Vat Xooia :] JtchtUa), 2 Chr. xxvi. 8. In
the original the name diners from its form in the
parallel passage in Kings, only in not having the
final u. [Jkcholiah.]
JECONI'AH (n;?3^; excepting once,
1^3? i> with the final A, Jer. xxiv. 1; and once
in Cetib, TVVO'), Set. xxvii. 20 [Jtkocah atab-
liihtt]: 'IcYorlat: Jeekoniat), an altered form of
the name of Jehoiaciiim, last but one of the kings
of Judah, which is found in the following passages''
1 Chr. iii. 16, 17; Jer. xxiv. 1, xxvii. 20, xxviii. 4,
xxix. 2; Esth. ii. 6. It is still further abbreviated
to Cokiaii. See also Jechokias and Joacim.
JECONI'AS ('WroWoi : Jedumas), 1 Esdr.
i. 9. [Jechomab, 3. J
JEDAIAH [8 syl] (TV??. [Jthotak
hmn]: ['I«8(o,l 'I«»8oi, 'UiovA, 'laSii, [ete.:]
Jtdti, Jadaia, [Idaia, Jodaia] ). 1. Head of the
second course of priests, as they were divided in the
time of David (1 Chr. xxiv. 7). Some of them
survived to return to Jerusalem after the Babylonish
Captivity, as appears from Err. ii. 36, Neh. vii. 39
— " the children of Jedaiah, of the house of Jeshua,
973." The addition "of the house of Jeshua"
indicates that there were two priestly families of ths
name of Jedaiah, which, it appears from Neh. xu.
6, 7, 19, 91, was actually the case. If these sons
of Jedaiah had for their head Jeshua, the high-
priest in the time of ZerubbabeL as the Jewish
tradition says they had (Lewis's Orig. Hd>. bk. ii.
ch. vii.), this may be the reason why, in 1 Chr. ix
10, and Neh. xi. 10, the course of Jedaiah is named
before that of Joiarib, though Joiarib's was the first
course. But perhaps Jeshua was another priest
descended from Jedaiah, from whom this branch
sprung. It is certainly a corrupt reading in Neh.
xi. 10 which makes Jedaiah eon of Joiarib. 1 Chr.
ix. 10 preserves the true text In Esdras the name
is Jeduu.
3. [of tyvuxirts cuVrr/y: Idaia.] A priest In
the time of Jeshua the high-priest (Zech. *L 10,
14). A. C. H.
JEDAIAH [3 syl] (rP"J? [praise of J*.
kotah, Ges.]). This is a different name from ths
last, though the two are identical in the A. V.
L Cl«8i<(; [Vat I8ia:] Alex. Etu»: Idaia.)
A man named in the genealogies of Simeon as a
forefather of Ziza, one of the chiefs of the tribe,
in this, David no doubt mads his friendship durkas
his wanderings, when ha also acquired that of Oriel
the Hittite, Ahlmelech, Bibbcchal, and other* of ha
associates who belonged to the old nations.
Digitized by
Google
JXDDTT
■fMtnttf Id Um time of king HeseUah (1 Chr.
«.87).
S. CUScita; [FA. Is88«a:] Jedaia.) Son of
Hirumapb; a nun who did his part in the rebuild-
ing of the wall of Jerusalem (Neb. IIL 10).
JBIXDU CltSSotf: Jeddui), 1 Esdr t. 24.
[Jkdaiah, 1.]
JEDE178 ('Icbubt: Jcddeus), 1 Eidr. ix. 30.
[Adaiah, 5.]
JEDI'AEL Ojtfjp"!? ^ hnowm & Gcd 1 '
'UStJK ; [Vat. A3«»A, ApinA i Alex. InSinX,
A8njA. •A8«ijp:] JadUl, [Jaathti]). L A chief
patriarch of the tribe of Benjamin, from whom
sprung man; Benjamite houses of fathers, number-
ing 17,200 mighty men of valor, in the days of
David (1 Chr. vii. 6, 11). It is usually assumed
that Jediael is the same as Ashbel (Gen. xlvi. 81 ;
Num. xxri. 38; 1 Chr. viii. 1). But though this
may he so, it cannot be aSirmed with certainty.
[Beciikk; Bela.] Jediael might be a later de-
scendant of Benjamin not mentioned in the Penta-
teuch, but who, from the fruitfulnesa of his house
and the decadence of elder branches, rose to the
first rank.
3. ['UMa; Vat lltfmK: JadiheL] Second
son of Heshelemiah, a Lerite, of the sons of
Ebiasapb the son of Korah. One of the door-
keepers of the Temple in the time of David (1 Chr.
xxtL 1, 9). A. C. H.
S. ['Is Ma; Vat KA. EA««nA: JetliM.] Son
ef Shiniri ; one of the heroes of David's guard in
the enlarged catalogue of Chronicles (1 Chr. xi.
4b). In the absence of further information, we
eannot decide whether or not he is the same
JBDTJTHUV
122S
4. ('PwJ^A; Alex. [Aid.] 'LBifa: [Jedihet]).
One of the chiefs (Kt « heads ") of the thousands
of Msnssseh who joined David on his march from
Aphek to Ziklag when he kit the Philistine army
on the eve of Gtlboa, and helped him in his revenge
an the marauding Amalekites (1 Chr. xii. 20;
jomp. 1 Sam. xxix., xxx.).
JEDI'DAH (HTT, darting [or only one]:
'lttia; [Vat ifSfia;] Alex. EJiJo; [Comp. 'I«8-
tlttt:] Idbin), queen of Anion, and mother of the
good king Josiah (2 K. xxii. 1). She was a native
it Boakath near Laehiah, the daughter of a certain
tdaiah. By Josepbus (Ant. x. 4, § 1) her name
s given as 'uih.
JBJDIDIAH (rPTT [darling of Jehovah]:
UM.Jf; [Vat 18f8.i ;] Alex. Ei«8i8u: Amabilis
Domino), the name bestowed, through Nathan the
prophet, on David's son Solomon (2 Sam. xii. 25).
Batb-aheba's first child had died — » Jehovah
struck it" (ver. 16). A second son was born, and
David — whether in allusion to the state of his
items! affairs, or to his own restored peace of
wind — called his name Snelomuh (•'Peaceful");
and Jehovah loved the child, i. e. allowed him to
live. And David sent by the hand of Nathan, to
obtain through him some oracle or token of the
Divine favor on the babe, and the babe's name was
'ailed Jedid-Jah. It is then added that this was
low "because of Jehovah." The clew to the
aaaniiig of these last words, and indeed of the
a The resesB why « son of Jadnthon " Is c^MiaUy
•CSscxsd to ma nam* of Obed-Bdom In this van*, Is to
I Um from the other Obed-Bdom the
whole circumstance, seems to reside in the fact
that "Jedid" and " David " are both derived from
the tame root, or from two very closely related (see
Gesen. Thet. 666 o — " "HJ, idem quod TR ").
To us these plays on words hare little or no signifi-
cance ; but to tie old Hebrews, as to the modern
Orientals, they were full of meaning. To David
himself, the "darling" of his family and his peo-
ple, no more happy omen, no more precious seal of
his restoration to the Divine favor after his late
mil, could have been afforded, than this announce-
ment by the prophet, that the name of his child
was to combine his own name with that of Jeho-
vah — Jkdid-Jah, "darling of Jehovah."
The practice of bestowing a second name on
children, in addition to that given immediately or-
birth — such second name having a religious bear-
ing, as Noor-ed-Din, Saleh-ed-Din (Sahdin), etc
— still exists in the East G.
•JBDITHUH. [Jbduthuw.]
JBDUTHtTN (71.-WT. •»«P t ln 1 C"''
xvi. 88; Neb. xL 17; Ps. xxxlx. title; and IxxviL
title, where it is ^."VT, i. e. Jedithun [prait-
ino, or he who praises]': 'V&avtAp and 'ISieW,
or -aim [Vat I8«eW, -«»/», tWu, etc.:] Idi-
thun; [1 Ksdr. i. 15, 'ESSuwvs. Vat. EtSttrout:
Jeddiimu] ), a Lerite of the family of Merari, who
was associated with Heman the Kohathite, and
Asaph the Gershonite, in the conduct of the musi-
cal service of the tabernacle, in the time of David;
according to what is said 1 Chr. xxiii. 6, that David
divided the Levites " into courses among the sons
of Levi, namely, Gerabon, Kohath, and Merari."
The proof of bis being a Herarite depends upon
bis identification with Ethan in 1 Chr. xv. 17, who,
we learn from that passage as well as from the
genealogy in vi. 44 (A. V.), was a Herarite [Hu-
man]. But it may be added that the very circuni-
stauce of Ethan being a Merarite, which Jeduthun
must have been (since the only reason of there
being three musical chiefs was to have one for each
division of the Levites), is a strong additional proof
of this identity. Another proof may be found in
the mention of Hosah (xvi. 38, 42), as a son of
Jeduthun ° and a gatekeeper, compared with xxu
10, where we read that Hosah was of the children
of Merari. Assuming then that, as regards 1 Chr.
vi. 44, xv. 17, 19, IfVy is a mere clerical variation
for J WT — which a comparison of xv. 17, ID
with xvi. 41, 42, xxv. 1, 8, 6, 9 Chr. xxxv. 16,
makes almost certain — we have Jeduthuc's de-
scent as son of Kishi, or Kushaiah, from Mahli,
the son of Mushi, the son of Merari, the sod of
Levi, being the fourteenth generation from Levi
inclusive. His office was generally to preside over
the music of the temple service, consisting of the
ntbel, or nabiium, the einnor, or harp, and the
cymbals, together with the human voice (the trum-
pets being confined to the priests). But his pecu-
liar part, as well as that of his two colleagues
Heman and Asapb, was " to sound with eymbafa
A Irass," while the others played on the nabliure
_nd the harp. This appointment to the office was
by election of tie chists of the Lerite* (D^fy)
(2 ham. « 10) mentioned in the sua vers* who i
probably a Kohathite (Josh. xxl. 24.'
Digitized by
Google
1224
JEELI
it David's command, each of the three divisions
probably ehonelng one. The first occasion of Jedu-
thun's ministering ires when David brought up
the ark to Jerusalem. He then took his place in
the procession, and played on the cymbals. But
when the division of the Levities! services took
place, owing to the tabernacle being at Gibeon and
the ark at Jerusalem, while Asaph and his brethren
were appointed to minister before the ark, it fell to
Jeduthuu and Heman to be located with Zadok tbe
priest, to give thanks " before the tabernacle of the
Lord in the high place that was at Gibeon," still
by playing the cymbals in accompaniment to the
other musical instruments (comp. Ps. cl. 6). In
the account of Josiah's Passover in 9 Chr. xxxv.
reference is made to the singing as conducted in
accordance with the arrangements msde by David,
and by Asaph, Heman, and Jeduthun the king's
"«" CT^fi 1 ? nth). [Hkman.] perhaps the
phrase rather means the king's adviser in matters
connected with the musical sen-ice. The sons of
Jeduthun were employed (1 Chr. xzv.) partly in
music, namely, six of them, who prophesied with
the harp — Gedaliah, head of the 2d ward, Zeri,
or Izri, of the 4th, Jeshaiah of the 8th, Shimei
of tbe 10th,« Haahabiah of the 12th, and Mat-
tithiah of the 14th ; and partly as gatekeepers
(A. V. " porters") (ivi. 42), namely, Obed-Edom
and Hosah (v. 38), which last had thirteen sons
and brothers (xxvi. 11). The triple division of the
Levities! musicians seems to have lasted as long
as the Temple, and each to have been called after
their respective leaders. At the dedication of Sol-
omon's temple " the Levites which were the sing-
ers, all of them of Asaph, of Heman, of Jeduthun "
performed their proper part. In the reign of Heze-
kish, again, we find the sons of Asaph, the sons of
Heman, and the sons of Jeduthun, taking their
part in purifying tbe Temple (2 Chr. xxht. 13, 14);
they are mentioned, we have seen, in Josiah's reign,
and so late as in Nebemiah't time we still find de-
scendants of Jeduthun employed about the singing
(Neh xi. 17: 1 Chr. ix. 16). His name stands at
the head of the 39th, 62d, and 77th Psalms, indi
eating probably that they were to be sung by his
choir. A. C. H.
• In the title of Ps. xxxix. Jeduthun no doubt
appears at the precentor or choir-master under
whose lead the psalm was to be sung. But in the
titles of Pa. lxii. and lxxvii. (where the preposition
is /7, and not 7, as in the other case) Jeduthun
probably denotes a body of singers named after
this chorister, and consisting in part, at least, of
his sons or descendants (see 2 Chr. xxix. 14), though
not excluding others. The A. V. does not recog-
nize this difference of the prepositions. Of all the
conjectures, that is least satisfactory, says Hupfeld,
which makes Jeduthun the name of a musical in-
itrument,' or of a particular melody. The ready
interchange of *7 an0< 1 account* for the two-fold
orthography of the name. H.
JEEVLI flsrnxj [Vat -An]; Alex. I«,Aj:
3etf), 1 Eadr. v. 33. [Jaalah.]
JKGAB SARADUTUA
JEEXUS ('irijAei ; Alex. itajX: Jc\ehm), 1
Eadr. viii. 82. [Jehiku]
JEE'ZER CT^H [/arter.orotrtor o/Aefr]
'Ax'^C«p : Bkttr), the form assumed in the hat la
Numbers (xxvi. 30) by the name of a descendant
of Hanssseh, eldest son of Gilesd, and founder of
one of the chief families of the tribe. [Jeez*
kites.] In parallel lists the name is given as
Abi-ezer, and the family as the Abikzbitks —
the house of Gideon. Whether this chaisze has
arisen from the accidental addition or omission of
a letter, or is an intentional variation, akin to that
in the case of Abiel and Jehiel, cannot be ascer-
tained. The LXX. perhaps read "IT^nH.
JEE'ZEBITES, THE 0"n?WT [patro-
nym.]: 'Ax'«C«(>< : [ Vat - M. Ax'«C«fwi : ] /«*"&*
Uiatritartun), the family of the foregoing (Num.
xxvi. 30).
JE'GAK SAHADUTHA(Srv"nri»-q\
heap of ttttimong : $ovfis t?j pafrvplas [see be-
low] : tumulus tttiit), tbe Aranuesn name given by
Laban the Syrian to tbe heap of stones which he
erected as a memorial of the compact between
Jacob and himself, while Jacob commemorated the
same by setting up a pillar (Gen. xxxi. 47), as was
his custom on several other occasions. Galeed, a
" witness heap," which is given as the Hebrew
equivalent, does not exactly re p rese nt Jegar-taha-
dutha. The LXX. have preserved the distinction
accurately in rendering the latter by /Sower tt}s
fiaftrvpicu [Alex. MJtyrrvf], and the former by f},
fiaprit [Alex, /laprvpft]- The Vulgate, oddly
enough, has transposed the two, and translated
Galeed by " acervus testimonii," and Jegar Sahsv-
dutba by " tumulus testis." But in the mind of
the writer they were evidently all but identical,
and the manner in which he baa adapted the name
to the circumstances narrated, and to the locality
which was the scene of the transaction, is a curious
instance of a tendency on the part of the Hebrews,
of which there are many examples in tbe O. T. ,*
so to modify an already existing name that it might
convey to a Hebrew an intelligible idea, and at the
same time preserve essentially its original form.
There is every reason to believe that the name Gil-
esd is derived from a root which points to the
natural features of the region to which it is applied
and to which it was in all probability attached be-
fore the meeting of Jacob and I*ban, or at any
rate before tbe time at which the historian was
writing. In fact it is so used in verses 23 and 21
of this chapter. The memorial heap erected by
Laban marked a crisis in Jacob's life which severed
him from all further intercourse with his Syrian
kindred, and henceforth his wanderings were mainly
confined to the land which his descendants were tc
inherit. Sueh a crisis, so oommemt :ated, was
thought by the historian of sufficient importance
to have left its impress upon the whole region, and
in Galeed " the witness heap " was found the orig-
inal name of the mountainous district Gibed.
A similar etymology is given for Hizper in thi
parenthetical clause consisting of the latter part of
• Omtttsd In ver. 8, but necessary to make up the
sons.
* The double account of the origin of Bearehebe
flsn- sal. 81, xxvi. 88), the explanation of Zoar (Gen.
rtx. *. 9) and of the name of Hoses (Ex. U. 10). are
Illustrations of this ; and there an many sash, Thh
tendracv Is not peculiar to tbe Hebrews. It exists is
every language, but hss not yet been rerngntssd ta ate
case of Siebrew.
Digitized by
Google
JBHAIYKLKHL
n. 4» sad 49, wbieh it not unlikely to dm* been
ssggestad, tooagh it is not so stated, by the slm-
Jarity between ng?0, mittpeh, and n^gQ,
matittebab, the "standing (tone" or "statue"
which Jacob set up to be kit memorial of the tran-
section, as the heap of stones was Laban's. On
this pillar or standing stone he swore by Jehovah,
the >' fear of his Esther Isaac," as Laban over his
heap invoked the God of Abraham, and Nabor, the
God of their father Terah ; each marking, by the
most solemn form of adjuration he could employ,
his own sense of the grave nature of the compact.
W. A. W.
JBHALETiEBL C7$f$i?. [he ukopraua
God]: 'AXefjx; [▼•*■ rso-«wXu;J Alex. loXXcXnX:
Jalthtl). Four men of the Hene-Jebaleleel are
introduced abruptly into the genealogies of Judah
(1 Chr. iv. 16). The name is identical with that
rendered in the A. V. Jekaleucl. Neither form
la, however, quite correct
JEHAI/ELEL ( U N 1 ?kn* [as above]: 'IXa-
*X«jX; [EXXw:] Alex. IoXAnX: 'Jalaleel), a Mera-
rita Levite, whose son Axariah took part in the
restoration of the Temple in Uezekiah's time (3
Chr. xxix. 13).
JKHDK1AH [8 syL] (nrP^rT^i. e. Techde-
rslni [whom Jehovah make* jot/out]). L ('l«8(a;
[Vat IoSeiaiJ Alex. IaSaia, Apatt ia- Jehedeia.)
The representative of the Bene-Shubsel, — descend-
ants of Gersbom, son of Hoses — in the time of
David (1 Chr. xxiv. 30). But in xxvi. 84, a man
of the name of Shebuel or Shubaet, is recorded as
the head of the house; unless in this passage the
family itself, and not an individual, be intended.
3. floata: Jadhu.) A Meronothite who had
charge of the she-esses — the riding and breeding
stock — of David (1 Chr. xxvii. 30).
JKHBZ'EKBIj (bSftTn? [ahom God matt*
ftrong]: 6 'Eftirfjx: BettcUet), a priest to whom
was given by David the charge of the twentieth of
the twenty-bur courses in the service of the house
sf Jehovah (1 Chr. xxiv. 16).
The name in the original is almost exactly sim-
ilar to EZEKIEL.
JHHI'AH (n»rTJ [perh. = bMTT*, an
below, Get.]: Ida; Alex. India: Jehiaey He
and Obed-edom were "doorkeepers for the ark"
(Cn^tP, the word elsewhere expressed by " por-
ters") at the time of ita establishment in Jerusa-
lem (1 Chr. xv. 34). Toe name does not recur,
bat it is possible it may be exchanged for the simi-
lar Jehiel or Jeisl in xvi. 5.
JEHI'EL (b^f JT [God fives] : Jahiel).
i- C UH)\ [Vat. FA. in xr. 30 corrupt; Vat xvi.
Si EisrnX.]) One of the Levites appointed by
David to assist in the service of the house of God
(1 Chr. xv. 18, 30; xvi. 6).
3. [Vat I«x.1 One of the sons of Jehosba-
that, king of Judah, who was put to death by his
Mother Jehoram shortly after his becoming king
(9 Chr. rri. 3).
3. ('!«•>.) One of the rulers of the house of
Bod at the time of the reforms of Jostah (9 Or.
ss?. 8). [Steum.]
*■ 0l«v)X; [Vat ii,x, BwiwX.]) A Gershor,
>• Levite, bead of the Bsns-Laadan in the time el
JBHIZKIAH 1286
David (1 Chr. zxUL 8), who had ohaont «f the
treasures (xxix. 8). His family — Jsanau, i. t.
Jebielite, or as we should eay now Jehielitas — is
mentioned, xxvL 31.
6- (IsvjX, Alex. ItptnX.) Son of Haehmoni, ot
of a Hachmonite, named in the list of David's offl-
eers (1 Chr. xxvii. 33) ss "with (Q?) the king's
sons," whatever that may mean. The mention of
Ahithophel (33) seems to fix the date of this list
as before the revolt In Jerome's Quaationa He-
braica on this passage, Jehiel is said to be David's
eon Chileab or Daniel; and "Achsmoni," inter-
preted as SapimtUsimiu, is taken as an alias ot
David himself.
8. (In the original text, blWP, Jehuol — the
A. V. follows the alteration of the Keri: 'l«r)xi
[Vat Zut)K.\) A Invite of the Bene-Heman, who
took part in the restorations of king H«n»Mah (3
Chr. xxix. 14).
7. [Vat EmjA.J Another Levite at the same
period (3 Chr. xxxi. 13), one of the "overseers"
(D^TpS) of the articles offered to Jehovah. His
parentage is not mentioned.
8. fwntx; [Vat Iuut;] Alex. ItfcnX.) Father
of Obadiah, who headed 318 men of the Beoe-Joab
in the return from Babylon with Ezra (Esr. viii. 9).
In Esdras the name is Jezklus, and the number
of his clan is stated at 313.
8. ("IrrjA,, Alex. lronx: Jehiel) One of the
Bene-Elam, father of Shechaniah, who encouraged
Esra to put away the foreign wives of the people
(Est. x. 3). In Esdras it is Jkklus.
10. Cl«J*/A; [Vat to,*;] Alex. AicnjX '.
Jehiel) A member of the same family, who had
himself to part with his wife (Est. x. 96)
[HncnntLOs.]
U. Citf/x Alex, isnjx: Jehiel.) A priest, one
of the Beno-Harim, who also had to put away his
foreign wife (Est. x. 31). [Hiekkbl.]
JEHI HL,<> a perfectly distinct name from the
last, though the same in the A. V. L (bfcjPS^j
so the Keri, but the CtSb has brW\ i. e. Jeuer;
'letjXi [Vat. ErityX;] Alex. Isinx: Jehiel), a man
described ss Abi-Gibeon — father of Gibeon; a
forefather of king Saul (1 Chr. be. 36). In viii. 80
the name is omitted. The presence of the stubborn
letter Am in Jehiel forbids our identifying it with
Abiel in 1 Sam. ix. 1, as some have been tempted
to do.
8. (Here the name is as given in No. 1; [Vat
FA. Icia.]) One of the sons of Hotham the Aroerito;
a member of the guard of David, included in the
extended list of 1 Chr. xl. 44.
JEHIK-LI O^rrP : '1,4*; Alex. [»er. 99,
I«v/X :] JMeti), according to the A. V. a Gershonlte
Levite of the family of Laadaic . The Bene-Jehieli
had charge of 'he treasures of the boose of Jehovah
(i Chr. xxvi. 91, 93). In other fists it is given
as Jkhikl The name appears to be strictly a
patronymi z — Jebielite.
JEHIZKI'AH OinjjTJrP, i. e. YeehixU-
ya/bn; same name as Heaektah [whom Jehotak
<• Ears our translators raprsssnt Jin by H, nnlsei
they simply IbUow the YulgaSs. Qnnp. Jastoaa
Digitized by
Google
1326 JHHOADAH
tfriajttim] : 'Ef«£«u: Eteduas), son of Shalram,
we of the heads of the tribe of Ephraim in tha
tuna of Ahaa, who, at tie instance of Oded the
prophet, nobly withstood the attempt to bring into
Samaria a huge number of captives and much
booty, which the Israelite army under king Pekah
had taken in the campaign against Judah. By the
exertion* of Jehixkiahu and his fellows the captives
were clothed, fed, and tended, and returned to
Jericho en route for Judah (9 Chr. xxviii. 13; comp.
1, 18, 15).
JBHCADAH (rPtjSn^, i. «. Jehoaddah
[tehom Jehovah adorn*, Gee. ; J. unveilt, Furat] :
haii; Alex. IvioSa: Joada), one of the de-
scendants of Saul (1 Chr. riiL 86); great grandson
to Merib-baal, i. e. Mephi-bosheth. In the dupli-
cate genealogy (ix. 43) the name is changed to
Iabah.
JEHOADTXAN fl jyVr ; but in Kings the
sriginal text has FTSliT : and so the LXX.
'lmaSl/t, [Vat. I«m8«u, Aid.] Alex. 'Imaittv, [hi
S Chr.,] 'temoWr, [Vat. Iwnao, Alex. Imat «-:]
Joadan, Joadam). >> Jehoaddan of Jerusalem "
was queen to king Joash, and mother of ajntxiah
of Judah (3 K. sir. 2; S Chr. xxr. 1).
JEHCAHAZ (TT^VT} [tchom Jehovah
koidt or prtttrvet]: 'luixaii [Vat. In 3 K-,
Iemvar: Joachaz]). 1. The son and successor
of Jehu, reigned 17 years n. c. 866-840 over Israel
in Samaria. His inglorious history is given in 2
K. xiii 1-9. Throughout his reign (tot. 32) he
was kept in subjection by Hazael king of Damascus,
who, following up the successes which he had pre-
viously achieved against Jehu, compelled Jehoahax
to reduce his army to 60 horsemen, 10 chariots,
and 10,000 infantry. Jehoabu maintained the
idolatry of Jeroboam; but in the extremity of his
humiliation he besought Jehovah; and Jehovah
gave Israel a deliverer — probably either Jehoash
(w. 23 and 26), or Jeroboam II. (2 K. xiv. 94, 36)
(see Keil, Commentary on Kinge). The prophet
Elisha survived Jehoahu; and Ewald (Gesch. Itr.
iii. 567) is disposed to place in his reign the incur-
sions of the Syrians mentioned in 3 K. v. 8, vi. 8,
and of the Ammonites mentioned in Amos i. 13.
3. [Vat. In 3 K., \wa X ai, and so Alex. 3 K.
xxiii. 34.] Jehoahax, otherwise called Shalutm,
the fourth (ace. to 1 Chr. iii. 15), or third, if Zede-
kiah's age be correctly stated (2 Chr. xxxvi. 11),
son of Josiah, whom he succeeded as king of Judah.
He was chosen by the people in preference to his
eider (comp. 2 K. xxiii. 31 and 86) brother, B. c.
610, and he reigned three months in Jerusalem.
His anointing (ver. 30) was probably some ad-
ditional ceremony, or it is mentioned with peculiar
emphasis, as if to make np for his want of the
ordinary title to the throne. He is described by
his contemporaries as an evil-doer (3 K. xxiii 83)
and an o p p r esso r (Ea. xix. 8), and such is his tre-
.litional character in Josephus (Ant. x. 5, § 2); but
lis deposition seems to have been lamented by the
iconic (Jer. xxii 10, and Ex. xix. 1). Pharaoh-
neeho on his return from Carcbemiah, perhaps
resenting the election of Jehoahax, sent to Jeru-
auem to depose him, and to fetch him to Ribfath.
Inert he was cast into chains, and from thence he
■as taken into Egypt, where he died (see Prideaux,
Connection, anno 610; Ewald, Guch. Itr. iU. 719;
r. Send, in Jerem. xxii. 11).
JTUHOHAWAJT
* tea history of Jehoahax appears to I
more than it records. « Something then had baas
in his character," says Stanley, « or in the popnhu
mode of his election, which endeared him to tht
country. A lamentation, as for his lather, went
up from the princes and prophets of the land for
the lion's cub, that was learning to catch his prey,
caught in the pitfall, and led off in chains — by a
destiny even sadder than death in battle. ' Weep
not for the dead, nor bemoan him, but weep sore
for him that goeth away ' (Jer. nil. 10). He was
the first king of Judah that died in exile." (Jewieh
Church, ii. 683 f.) H. »
3. The name given (3 Chr. xxt 17, where, bow-
ever, the LXX. have 'OroQas [Vat. Oxoft iojt, but
Comp. Aid. 'Ittdxaf ] ) during his father's lifetime
(Bertheau) to the youngest son of Jehoram king
of Judah. As king he is known by the name of
Ahaxiah, which is written Axariah in the present
Hebrew text of 3 Chr. xxii. 6, perhaps through a
transcriber's error. W. T. B.
JEHO'ASH (B^StT 1 [fift of Jehovah]:
'ladj: Joat), the original unoontracted form of the
name which is more commonly found compressed
into Joash. The two forms appear to be used
quite indiscriminately; sometimes both occur in
one verse («. g. 3 K. xiii 10, xiv. 17).
1. The eighth king of Judah; too of Ahaxiah
(8 K. xi 31, xii 1, 9, 4, 6, 7, 18, xiv. IS).
[Joash, 1.]
a. The twelfth king of Israel; eon of Jehoabai
(3 K. xiii 10, 36, xiv. 8, 9, 11, 18, 16, 16, 17).
[Joash, 8.]
JBHOHATfAN (73rrWT = Jehovah'i gift,
answering to Theodore: 'laavdv- Johanan), a name
much in use, both in this form and in the con-
tracted shape of Johahaw, in the later periods of
Jewish history. It baa come down to us as Johx,
and indeed is rendered by Josephus 'Iwarrqr (Ant.
viii. 15, § 3).
1. ClwviBcw; [Vat Iarai;] Alex. Invar.) A
Levite, one of the doorkeepers (A. V. " porters ")
to the house of Jehovah, i. e. the Ta'uemaele, ae-
cording to the appointment of David (1 Chr. xxvi
3; comp. xxv. 1). He was the sixth of the seven
tons of Meahelemiah; a Korhite, that is descended
from Korah, the founder of that great Kohathite
bouse. He la also said (ver. 1) to have been of
the Bene- Asaph; but Asaph is a contraction for
Ebiataph, as is teen from the genealogy in ix. 19.
The well-known Aaaph too was not a Kohathite
but a Gersbonite.
3. ['ItKwdV.] One of the principal men of
Judah, under king Jehoshaphat; he commanded
280,000 men, apparently in and about Jerusalem
(2 Chr. xvii 15; comp. 13 and 19). He is named
second on the list, and is entitled ~V&&, "the
captain," a title alto given to Adnah in the pre-
ceding verse, though there rendered " the chief."
He is probably tha same person aa —
3. Father of IshmaeL one of the " captains
P'yp, at before) of hundreds " — evidently resid
ing in or near Jerusalem — whom Jeboiada tht
priest took into bis confidence about the restoratiaa
of the Una of Judah (8 Chr. xxiii. 1).
4. ritnweV; FA. Idww.] Una of the
Bebai [sons of B.], a lay Israelite who was
by Em to put away his foreign wife (Ear. x.
In Etdrat the name it Johahvk*
Digitized by
Google
JEHOIAOHTN
ft. TImmU.] A priest (Neh. xil. 1> • the reo-
nasnlaitive of the house of Amariah (»mp. S),
taring the high-priesthood of Joiakim (ver. IS),
Juit i» to say in the generation alter the Brit return
bom Captivity.
6. (Vat. LXX. omiU [» Alex. FA.<; Comp.
KA.* 'lannU].) A priest who took put in the
musical service of thanksgiving, at the dedication
of the wall of Jerusalem by Nehemiah (Neb. xti.
43). In two other cases this name is given in the
A. T. as Johaxah.
JEHOIACHIN (]>?;'in;s-< W poiiitoi 0/
Jehomh ; once only, Ez. 1. 9, contracted to VJjH* :
hi Kings 'Imox'Mt Chron. "Uxorlas, Jer. and Ex.
'lucutttpi [Vatf Alex. Imunii throughout [ex-
cept in Chron.] ( Joseph. 'Iwdxtpor: •/«•«*»»)•
Elsewhere the name is altered to Jecoxiah, and
Cosiah. See also Jkchoxias, Joiakim, and
lOACIM.
Son of Jeholakim and Nehushta, and for three
months and ten days king of Judah, after the death
of his lather, being the nineteenth king from David,
or twentieth, counting Jehoahaz. According to
I K. xxiv. 8, Jehoiachin was eighteen years old at
his accession ; but 3 Chr. xxxvi. 9, as well as 1
Esdr. 1. 43, has the far more probable reading eight
years, 11 which fixes his birth to the time of his
Gather's captivity, according to Matt. i. 11.
Jehoiachin came to the throne at a time when
Egypt was still prostrate in consequence of the
victory at CarcbemUh, and when the Jews had
bean for three or four years harassed and distressed
by the inroads of the armed bands of Chaldeans,
Ammonites, and Moabites, sent against them by
Nebuchadnezzar In consequence of Jeholakim's re-
bellion. [Jehoiakim.] Jerusalem at this time,
therefore, was quite defenseless, and unable to offa
any resistance to the regular army which Nebu-
chadnezzar sent to besiege it in the 8th year of his
reign, and which he seems to have joined in person
after the siege was commenced (3 K. xxiv. 10, 11 ).
In a very short time, apparently, and without any
losses from famine or fighting which would indicate
a serious resistance, Jehoiachin surrendered at dis-
cretion ; and he, and the queen-mother, and all his
servants, captains, and officers, came out and gave
themselves up to Nebuchadnezzar, who carried
them, with the harem and the eunuchs, to Babylon
(Jer. xxix. 3; Ex. xvii. 12, xix. 9). All the king's
treasures, and all the treasure of the Temple, were
seized, and the golden vessels of the Temple, which
the king of Babylon had left when he pillaged it in
the fourth of Jehoiakim, were now either cut up or
carried away to Babylon, with all the nobles, and
men of war, and skilled artizans, none but the
poorest and weakest being left behind (3 K. xxiv.
13: 9 Chr. xxxvi. 19). According to 3 K. xxiv.
14, 16, the number taken at this time into captivity
ww 10,000, namely, 7,000 soldiers, 1,000 craftsmen
and smiths, anil 3,000 whose calling is not specified.
But, according to Jer. lii. 38 (a passage which is
emitted in the LXX.), the number carried away
taptive at this time (called the seventh of Nebuchad-
jaxzar, instead of the eighth, as in 2 K. xxiv. 13)
fas 8,033. Whether this difference arises from any
somiption of the numerals, or whether only a
jBitoiAotnsr
122T
portion of those originally taken captive wen ac-
tually carried to Babylon, the others being left with
fledekiah, upon his swearing allegiance to Nebuchad-
nezzar, cannot perhaps be decided. The numbers
in Jeremiah are certainly very small, only 4,600 in
au, whereas the numbers who returned from cap-
tivity, as given in Ear. ii. and Neh. vii. were 43.360.
However, Jehoiachin was himself led away captive
to Babylon, and there he remained a prisoner,
actually in prison ftv?5 ^9)i **>& wearing prison
garments, for thirty-six years, namely, till the death
of Nebuchadnezzar, when Evil-Merodach, succeed-
ing to the throne of Babylon, treated him with
much kindness, brought htm out of prison, changed
his garments, raised him above the other subject or
captive kings, and made him sit at his- own table.
Whether Jehoiachin outlived the two years of Evtt-
Merodach's reign or not does not appear, nor have
we any particulars of his life at Babylon. The
general description of him in 2 K. xxiv. 9, " He
did evil in the sight of Jehovah, according to all
that his father had done," seems to apply to his
character at the time he was king, and but a child:
and so does the prophecy of Jeremiah (xxii. 34-30:
Es. xix. 6-9). We also learn from Jer. xxviil. 4,
that four years after Jehoiachin had gone to Baby-
lon, there was a great expectation at Jerusalem of
his return, but it does not appear whether Jehoi-
achin himself shared this hope at Babylon. [Han-
aniah, 4.] The tenor of Jeremiah's letter to the
elders of the Captivity (xxix.) would, however, indi-
cate that there was a party among the Captivity,
encouraged by false prophets, who were at this time
looking forward to Nebuchadnezzar's overthrow
and Jehoiachin's return; and perhaps the fearful
death of Ahab the son of Kolaiah lii. v. 32), and
the close confinement of Jehoiachin through Nebu-
chadnezzar's reign, may have been the result of
some disposition to conspire against Nebuchadnez-
zar on the part of a portion of the Captivity. But
neither Daniel nor Kzekiel, who were Jehoiachin's
fellow-captives, make any Anther allusion to him,
except that Esekiel dates his prophecies by the
year " of King Jehoiachin's captivity " (i. 2, viii.
1, xxiv. 1, Ac.) ; the latest date being " the twenty-
seventh year" (xxix. IT, xl. 1). We also learn
from Esth. ii. 6, that Kish, the ancestor of Hor-
decai, was Jehoiachin's fellow-captive. But the
apocryphal books are mora communicative. Thus
the author of the book of Baruch (1. 8) introduces
" Jechonias the son of Jehoiakim king of Judah "
into bis narrative, and r e pr es e nts Baruch as reading
bis prophecy in his ears, and In the ears of the
king's sons, and the nobles, and elders, and people,
at Babylon. At the bearing of Baruch's words, it
is added, they wept, and fasted, and prayed, and
sent a collection of silver to Jerusalem, to Joiakim,
the son of Hilkiah, the son of Shalljm the high-
priest, with which to purchase burnt- offerings, and
sacrifice, and incense, bidding them pray for the
prosperity of Nebuchadnezzar and Belshazzar his
son. The history of Susanna and the Elders also
apparently makes Jehoiachin an important person-
age ; for, according to the author, the husband of
Susanna was Joiakim, a man of great wealth, and
the onusf person among the captives, to whose house
all toe people resorted for judgment, a description
• Sash k) the text of the Tat LXX the A. V. Tb» words C?*^ and 1^, applied to Jehoiakim te
Mill the Alex, aad Vulgate la nedlng --Ightesn." Jet xxii. %, SO, Imply six rather than age, and are
I both actually used of install. Sss Oat Iks. s. TV
Digitized by
Google
1228
JBHOIADA
■fetch suits Jehoiachin. Afrlcanus (Ep. ad Orig. ;
Booth, JUL Sac u. US) expressly calls Susanna's
hatband " king," and says that the king of Babylon
nad made him hia royal companion (trirBporot)-
He ia alao mentioned 1 Eadr. T. 5, but the text teem*
to be oorrupt. It probably should be " Zorobabel,
the ton of Salathiel, the eon of Joadm," i. e. Jehoi-
achin. It doea not appear oertainly from Scripture,
whether Jehoiachin n married or had any chil-
dren. That Zedekiah, who in 1 Chr. iii. 16 ia
called ■• hia son," ia the same aa Zedekiah hia uncle
(called "hia brother," 3 Chr. xxxvi. 10), who waa
hia aucceeaor on the throne, seems certain. But it
ia not impossible that Assir PB ;' = captive), who
is reckoned among the " sons of Jeconiah " in 1
Chr. Ui. 17, may have been ao really, and cither
have died young or been made an eunuch (Is. xxxix.
7}. This is quite in aecordanee with the term
"childless," "H'T?! applied to Jeconiah by Jere-
miah (xxii. 30). [Ukmkaloot op Crbist, toL
L p. 886 ».]
Jehoiachin was the last of Solomon's line, and on
its failure in his person, the right to the succession
passed to the line of Nathan, whose descendant,
Shealtiel, or Salathiel, the son of Neri, was conse-
quently inscribed in the genealogy as of " the sons
of Jehoiachin." Hence hia place in the genealogy
of Christ (Matt. i. 11, IS). For the variations in
the Hebrew forms of Jeconiah's name see Hanax-
iah, 8; and for the confusion in Greek and Latin
writers between Jehoiakim and Jehoiachin, 'Imt-
Xtl/t and 'IvoKtifL, aee Gexealogt of Jesus
Crbist, and Hervey's Gmtalogy, pp. 71-73.
N. B. The compiler of 1 Esdr. gives the name
•f Jecbonias to Jehoahai the son of Josiah, who
reigned three months after Josiah's death, and was
deposed and carried to Egypt by Pharaoh-Necho
(1 Esdr. i. 34; 3 K. xxiii. 30). He is followed in
this blunder by Epiphanius (vol. i. p. 81), who says
" Josiah begat Jechoniah, who is also called Shal-
liim. This Jechoniah begat Jechoniah who is called
Zedekiah and Joakim." It has its origin doubtless
in the confusion of the names when written in
Greek by writers ignorant of Hebrew. A. C. H.
JEHOIADA (y^HlT =huxcn cfJthmnh :
'I«oW; Alex. I«aSa<, IauaSa, IwioSm, and also
«s Vat; Joseph, 'lafeSoi: Joiada). In the later
oooks the name is contracted to Joiada.
L Father of Benaiah, David's well known
Tarrior (3 Sam. ▼ill. 18; 1 K. i. and ii. patdm; 1
Chr. xriii. 17, Ac). From 1 Chr. xxvii. 5, we
learn that Benaiah'a father was the chief priest, and
he is therefore doubtless identical with —
2. CletaSis; [Vat-TawJoj; FA.TaraSas; Alex.
I»Sa<.]) leader (T^33) of the Aaronitea (accu-
rately "of Aaron") ». e. the priests; who joined
David at Hebron, bringing with him 3,700 priests
(1 Chr. xii. 37).
3. According to 1 Chr. xxvii. 34, son of Benaiah,
and one of David's chief counsellors, apparently
having succeeded Ahlthophel in that office. But
in all probability Benaiah the son of Jehoiada is
meant, by a confusion similar to that which has
arisen with regard to Ahimelech and Abiathar (1
Chr. xvili. 16; 3 Sam. viii. 17).
4. High-priest at the time of Athaliah's nsurpa-
rion of the throne of Judah (a. C. 884-878), and
luring the greater portion of the 40 years' reign of
loath It does not appear when he first became
JEHOIADA
high-priest, but it may have been at early aa Hal
latter part of Jehoshaphat'a reign. Anyhow, ht
probably succeeded Amariah. (High-pruwt.)
He married Jkhoshkha, or Jehoshabeath, daugh-
ter of king Jehoram, and sister of king Ah.rf.fc
(8 Chr. xxii. 11); <md when Athahah slew all the
seed royal of Judah after Ahaaiah had been put to
death by Jehu, he and his wife stole Joash from
among the king's tons, and hid him for six years
in the Temple, and eventually replaced him on the
throne of his ancestors. [Joash; Athauah.]
In effecting this happy revolution, by which both
the throne of David and the worship of the true
God according to the law of Hoses were rescued
from imminent danger of destruction, Jehoiada die-
played great ability and prudence. Waiting pa-
tiently till the tyranny of Athaliah, and, we may
presume, her foreign practices and preferences, had
produced disgust in the land, he at length, in the
7th year of her reign, entered into secret alliance
with all the chief partisans of the house of David
and of the true religion. He also collected at Je-
rusalem the Levitts from the different cities of
Judah and Israel, probably under cover of provid-
ing for the Temple services, and then concentrated
a large and concealed force in the Temple, by the
expedient of not dismissing the old courses of
priests and Levites when their successors came to
relieve them on the Sabbath. By means of the
consecrated shields and spears which David had
taken in hia wars, and which were preserved in the
treasury of the Temple (oomp. 1 Chr. xviii. 7-11,
xxvi. 30-28; 1 K. xiv. 26, 27), he supplied the
captains of hundreds with arms for their men.
Having then divided the priests and Levites into
three bands, which were posted at the principal en-
trances, and filled the courts with people favorable
to the cause, he produced the young king before the
whole assembly, and crowned and anointed him,
and presented to him a copy of the Law, according
to Dent xvii. 18-20. [Hilkiah,] The excite-
ment of the moment did not make him forget the
sanctity of God's house. None but the priests and
ministering Levites were permitted by him to enter
the Temple; and he gave strict orders that Atha-
liah should be carried without its precincts before
she was put to death. In the same spirit he in-
augurated the new reign by a solemn covenant be-
tween himself, as high-priest, and the people and
the king, to renounce the Baal-worship which had
been introduced by the house of Ahab, and to
serve Jehovah. This was followed up by the im-
mediate destruction of the altar and temple of
Baal, and the death of Mattan his priest He then
took order for the due celebration of the Temple
service, and at the same time for the perfect reea-
tablishment of the monarchy ; all which seems to
have been effected with great vigor and success, and
without any cruelty or violence. The young king
himself, under this wise and virtuous counsellor,
ruled his kingdom well and prosperously, and was
forward in works of piety during the lifetime of
Jehoiada. The reparation of the Temple in the
33d year of his reign, of which a full and interest-
ing account is given 2 K. xii. and 2 Chr. xxiv., was
one of the most important works at this period
At length, however, Jehoiada died, B. c 834, and
though far advanced in years, too soon for the wel-
fare of his country, and the weak, unstable charac-
ter of Joash. The text of 8 Chr. xxiv. 16, sup-
ported by the LXX. and Joaephus, makes him UC
years old when he died. But supposing him t»
Digitized by
Google
JKHOIAXXM
mmM to On 36th year of Joesh (which only
eases 6 years for all the subsequent events of the
reign), he would in that eue have been 96 at the
time of the Insurrection against Athaliah; and 15
yean before, when Jeboram, wooes daughter was
bis wife, was only 39 years obi, he would have been
BO: than which nothing can be mora improbable.
Then must therefore be some early corruption of
the numeral. Perhaps we ought to read D^3BB?
rr^btpl (83), instead of D'tZh H^IQ. Even
103 (as suggested, Gaual of our Lord, p. 304)
would leave an improbable age at the two above-
named epochs. If 83 at his death, be would hare
been 33 yean old at Jonin's accession. For his
signal services to his God, his king and his coun-
try, which have earned him a place among the very
foremost well-doen in Israel, he had the unique
honor of burial among the kings of Judah in the
eity of David. He was probably succeeded by his
son Zechariah. In Josephus's list (Ant. xviii. §
6), the name of IAAEA2 D 7 *•> ett 7 corruption is
transformed into d>IAEA2, and in the Seder Olam
into l'hadea.
In Matt. xxiii. 38, Zechariah the son of Jehoiada
is mentioned as the "son of Barachias," i. t. Be-
rechUh." This is omitted in Luke (xi. 61), and
has probably been inserted from a confusion between
this Zechariah and 2, the prophet, who was son of
Berechiah; or with the son of Jeberacbiah (Is. viii.
»)•
5. [Tnlg. pro Joiade.] Second priest, or sagan,
to Seraiah the high-priest. He was deposed si the
beginning of the reign of Zedekiah, probably for
adhering to the prophet Jeremiah; when Zephan-
iah was appointed sagan in bis room • ( Jer. xxix.
25-28; 2K.xxv. 18). This is a clear instance of
the title " the priest " being applied to the second
priest. The passage in Jeremiah shows the nature
af the sagan'a authority at this time, when he was
doubtless "ruler of the house of Jehovah " (T2J
nirP fT?). [High-fbiest.] Winer (Statu.)
has quite misunderstood the passage, and makes
Jehuiada the same as the high-priest in the reign
of Joash.
0. (STpH\ 1 1. Joiada: 'tanoa; [Vat. IsMioa;]
Alex. lacita: Jofada), son of Paseach, who as-
listed to repair the "old gate" of Jerusalem (Neb,
Jt 6). A. C. H.
JKHOI'AKIM (D^frflT [JeAowiA *U ta>
sr appoint*}: 'iiNurfp, or -tf/i; Joseph. 'Iudxiuot :
lonjhim), 18th (or, counting Jeboahaz, 19th) king
of Judah from David inclusive — 25 yean old at his
accession, and originally caned Eliakih. He was
the son of Jottah and Zebudah, daughter of Pe-
daJeh of Rumah, possibly identical with Arumah
of Judg. ix. 41 (where the Vulg. has Rumah), and
hi that ease in the tribe of Manasseh. His
younger brother Jeboahaz, or Sballum, as he is
ailed (Jer. xxii. 11), was in the first instance made
sing by the people of the land on the death of his
a • The worts out re s p o nding to ™ son of Bsnebias "
. Matt. axU. 36 an omitted in the Sinaiuc manu-
wstai a prima mm*, and a few otbar authorities.
#et may an retained In the text by Tlsshandorf (8th
«rL|, and an in all probability genuine. A.
» It la, however possible that Jebotada vacatsd the
Jatohr
JXHOIAXm 1881
father Jodah, probably with the intention ef fol-
lowing up Jonah's policy, which wan to side with
Nebuchadnezzar against Egypt, being, as Prideeux
thinks, bound by oath to the kings of Babylon (i.
60 ). Pharaoh-Necho, therefore, having borne down
all resistance with his victorious army, immediately
deposed Jeboahaz, and had him brought in chains
to Kiblah, where, it seems, he was on his way to
Carchemiah (3 K. xxiii. 33, 34; Jer. xxii. 10-12).
He then set KJiaarim, his elder brother, upon the
throne, changed his name to Jehoiakim, and hav-
ing charged him with the task of collirting a trib-
ute of 100 talents of silver, and 1 talent of gold =
nearly 40,000i, in which he mulcted the land foe
the part Jostoh had taken in the war with Babylon,
he eventually returned to Egypt taking Jehoahas
with him, who died there in captivity (2 K. xxiii,
84; Jer. xxii. 10-12 ; Ex. xix. 4).< Pharaoh-Neeho
also himself returned no more to Jerusalem, for
after his great defeat at Carchemiah in the fourth
year of Jehoiakim he lost all his Syrian possessions
(2 K. xxiv. 7; Jer. xlvi. 2), and his successor
Psammis (Herod, ii. cud.) made no attempt to
recover them. Egypt, therefore, played no part in
Jewish politics during the seven or eight yean of
Jeboiakim's reign. After the battle of Carchemiah
Nebuchadnezzar earns into Palestine as one of the
Egyptian tributary kingdoms, the capture of which
was the natural fruit of his victory over Neoho.
He found Jehoiakim quite defenseless. After a
short siege be entered Jerusalem, took the king
prisoner, bound him in fatten to carry him to Bab-
ylon, and took also some of the precious vessels of
the Temple and carried them to the land of Shiner
to the temple of Bel his god. It was at this time,
in the fourth, or, as Daniel reckons, in the third
year of his reign,'' that Daniel, and Hananiah,
HiahaeL and Axariah, were taken captives to Bab-
ylon ; but Nebuchadnexzar seems to have changed
his purpose ss regarded Jehoiakim, and to have ac-
cepted hia submission, and reinstated him on the
throne, perhaps in remembrance of toe fidelity of
bis father Josiah. What is certain is, that Jehoi-
akim became tributary to Nebuchadnezzar after his
invasion of Judah, and continued so for three yean,
but at the end of that time broke his oath of alle-
giance and rebelled against him (2 K. xxiv. 1).
What moved or encouraged Jehoiakim to this re-
bellion it is difficult to say, unless it were the rest-
less turbulence of his own bad disposition and the
dislike of paying tribute to the king of Babylon,
which he would have rather lavished upon his own
luxury and pride (Jer. xxii. 18-17), for there is
nothing to bear out Winer's conjecture, or Jose-
phus's assertion, that there was anything in the
attitude of Egypt at this time to account for such
a step. It seems more probable that, seeing Egypt
entirely severed from the attain of Syria since the
battle of Carohemish, and the king of Babylon
wholly occupied with distant wars, he hoped to
make himself independent. But whatever was the
motive of this foolish and wicked proceeding, which
was contrary to the repeated warniiigs of the
prophet Jeremiah, it is certain that It brought
• II doss not appear from toe narrative In i K
xxfll. (whioh Is the fullest) whether Neoho want
straight to Egypt nun Jerusalem, or whether to*
ealamlasus campaign on the Euphrates Intervened
* It Is possible that this diversity of reckoning assy
be earned by some nokonlag a year for Jab in has'
reign, while seme omitted is.
Digitized by
Google
1280 JEHOIAKIM
■faery an] ruin upon the king and hit country.
Though Nebuchadnezzar ru not able it that time
to mat In person to cbaatiie bis rebellion! vassal,
he sent against him numerous bands of Chaldeans,
with Syrians, Moabites, and Ammonites, who were
all now subject to Babylon (2 K. zxiv. 7), and who
cruelly harassed the whole country. It was per-
haps at this time that the great drought occurred
described in Jer. xiv. (comp. Jer. xv. 4 with 8 K.
zxiv. 3, 3). The closing years of this reign must
have been a time of extreme misery. The Am-
monites appear to have overran the land of Gad
(Jer. xlix. 1), and the other neighboring nations to
have taken advantage of the helplessness of Israel
to ravage their land to the ntinost (Ex. xxv.).
There was no rest or safety out of the walled cities.
We are not acquainted with the details of the close
of the reign. Probably as the time approached
for Nebuchadnezzar himself to come against Judssa
the desultory attacks and Invasions of his troops
became more concentrated. Either in an engage-
ment with some of these forces, or else by the hand
of his own oppressed subjects, who thought to con-
ciliate the Babylonians by the murder of their
king, Jehoiakim came to a violent end in the 11th
year of his reign. His body was cast out igiio-
miuiously on the ground; perhaps thrown over the
walls to convince the enemy that he was dead ; and
then, after being left exposed for some time, was
dragged away and buried " with the burial of an
ass," without pomp or lamentation, " beyond the
gates of Jerusalem " (Jer. xxii. 18, 19, xxxvi. 30).
Within three months of his death Nebuchadnezzar
arrived, and put an end to his dynasty by carrying
Jehoiachin off to Babylon. [Jehoiachin.] All
the accounts we have of Jehoiakim conour in as-
cribing to him a vicious and irreligious character.
The writer of 9 K. xxiii. 37 tells us that " he did
that which was evil in the sight of Jehovah," a
statement which is repeated xxiv. 9, and 9 Chr.
xxxvi. ft. The latter writer uses the yet stronger
expression, " the acts of Jehoiakim, and the abom-
inations which he did " (ver. 8). But it is in the
writings of Jeremiah that we have the fullest por-
traiture of him. If, as is probable, the 19th chap-
ter of Jeremiah belongs to this reign, we have a
detail of the abominations of idolatry practiced at
Jerusalem under the king's sanction, with which
Ezekiel's vision of what was going on six years
hter, within the very precincts of the Temple, ex-
jctly agrees; incense offered up to "abominable
beasts;" "women weeping for Thammuz;" and
men in the inner court of the Temple " with their
backs towards the temple of the Lord " worshipping
'the son towards the east" (Ez. viii.). The vin-
iictive pursuit and murder of Urijah the son of
Shemaiah, and the indignities ottered to his corpse
iy the king's command, in revenge for his faithful
prophesying of evil against Jerusalem and Judah,
« The paaoage seems to be corrupt The words
rW a2cA$b» avrov seem to be repeated from the pncod-
kig line but one, and ZepAnfr is a corruption of Ovpuu>.
Xokkafivv arqyaytr is a paraphrase of the Alexandrian
-bdex of Jer. xxxUL 28 (xxvL 28, A. T.), omkifrmr
b Nothing can lie man improbable than an Invasion
of Egypt by Nebochsdneiear at this time. All the
Syrian po s se s s i o ns of Egypt fell Into the power of
fabylon soon after the victory at Oerohemleh, and the
ting of Egypt retired thenceforth Into his own coon-
wy. His Aalatio wan seem to have engrossed Neba-
ihadneasar's attention for the next 7 years; and In
JEHOIAKIM
an samples of his irreligion and tyranny ooaibraei
Jeremiah only narrowly escaped the same fete (Jer
xxvi. 80-81). The curious notice of him in 1
Esdr. i. 38, that he put his nobles in chains, and
caught Zaraces his brother In Egypt " and brought
him up thence (to Jerusalem), also points to his
cruelty. His daring impiety In cutting up and
burning the roll containing Jeremiah's prophecy,
at the very moment when the national fast was
being celebrated, is another specimen of his charac-
ter, and drew down upon him the sentence, " Ha
shall have none to sit upon the throne of David "
(Jer. xxxvi.). His oppression, injustice, covetous-
nets, luxury, and tyranny, are most severely re-
buked (xxii. 18-17), and it has been frequently
o b s erve d, as indicating his thorough selfishness and
indifference to the sufferings of his people, that, at
a time when the land was so impoverished by the
heavy tributes laid upon it by Egypt and Babylon
in turn, he should have squandered large sums in
building luxurious palaces for himself (xxii. 14, IS).
Josephus's history of Jehoiakim's reign is consis-
tent neither with Scripture nor with itself. His
account of Jehoiakim's death and Jeboiachin'a ac-
cession appears to be only his own inference from
the Scripture narrative. According to Joeephua
(Ant. x. 6) Nebuchadnezzar came against Judtea
in the 8th year of Jehoiakim's reign, and compelled
him to pay tribute, which he did for three years,
and then revolted in the 11th year, on hearing that
the king of Babylon was gone to invade Egypt*
He then inserts the account of Jehoiakim's burn-
ing Jeremiah's prophecy in his 6th year, and con-
cludes by saying, that a little time afterwards the
king of Babylon made an expedition against Jehoi-
akim, who admitted Nebuchadnezzar into the city
upon certain conditions, which Nebuchadnezzar
immediately broke; that he slew Jehoiakim and the
flower of the citizens, and sent 8,000 captives to
Babylon, and set up Jehoiachin for king, but al-
most immediately afterwards was seized with fear
lest the young king should avenge his father's death,
and so sent back his army to besiege Jerusalem;
that Jehoiachin, being a man of just and gentle dis-
position, did not like to expose the city to danger on
his own account, and therefore surrendered himself,
his mother, and kindred, to the king of Babylon's
officers on oondition of the city suffering no harm;
but that Nebuchadnezzar, in direct violation of
the conditions, took 10,889 prisoners, and mad*
Zedekiah king in the room of Jehoiachin, whom
he kept in custody — a statement the principal por-
tion of which seems to have no foundation what-
ever in facts. The account given above is derived
from the various statements in Scripture, and
seems to agree perfectly with the probabilities of
Nebuchadnezzar's movements and with what the
most recent discoveries have brought to light con-
cerning him. [Nkbuchadnxzzab.] The reign
like manner the king of Egypt seams to have confined
himself to Ethiopian wan. The first hint we have
of Egypt aiming at recovering her lost lnfluanos In
Syria Is at the secession of Pharaoh-Hophra, In the
4th of Zedekiah. [Hahahuh, 4.] Be made serem
abortive attempts against Nebuehadiuanr In Zed*-
kiah't reign, and detached the SmmnnltM, stoaUtas,
Edomltes, Tyrlana and Ztdonians from the Babylonish
alliance (Jer. xxvli.). In oooeequenee, Nebuohadnes
sar, after thorongmy eobdmug these nations, sad
devoting 18 yean to the elege of Tyn, at length In-
vaded and eubduad Egypt In the 85th year of Mr retn
(Is. xxlx, 17).
Digitized by
Google
JBHOIAKIM
t lahrearhn extendi from B. c. 60S to B. -. 688,
jr aa aoma reckon, 699.
The name of Jehoiakim appears in a eontmeted
farm in Joiakim. a high-priest A. C. H.
* Hardly any tingle act of Jehoiakim reveal* to
much of hie own character and that of hit timet
as hie burning of Jeremiah's - roll." It was the
« roll," on which Baruch, the prophet'* amanuensis
and the aharar of hi* dnngeon, had written the
warning* attend by Jeremiah, to arouse the king
and nobles to a sense of their danger. An attempt
was made to read these warnings to the people, on
one of the public £mU. " On that day," as Stanley
describe* the scene, " a wintry day in December,
Baruch appeared in the chamber of a friendly noble,
Uemariah, the son of Shaphan, which was appar-
ently over the new gateway already mentioned.
There, from the window or balcony of the chamber,
or from the platform or pillar on which the lungs
had stood on solemn occasions, he recited the long
alternation of lament and invective to the vast con-
gregation assembled for the national Cut. Mi^i«h
the ion of hi* host, alarmed by what he heard,
descended the Temple hill, and communicated it to
the princes who, as usual through these disturbed
reigns, were seated in council in the palace in the
apartmenta of the chief secretary. One of them,
Jehudi, the descendant of a noble house, acted ap-
parently a* an agent or spokesman of the rest, and
was sent to summon Baruch to their presence. He
tat down in the attitude of an eastern teacher ( Jer.
ixxvi. 15, eomp. Luke lv. 90), and aa he went on
hie recital struck terror into the hearts of his
bearers. They saw his danger; they charged him
and his msster to conceal themselves, and deposited
the sacred scroll in the chamber where they had
beard it, whilst they announced to the fierce and
lawless king its fearful content*. A. third time it
was recited — this time not by Baruch, but by the
courtier Jehudi — to the king as he sat warming
hlinaulf over the charcoal brasier, with his prince*
standing round him. Three or four columns ex-
hausted the royal patience. He seised a knife,
such as eastern scribes wear for the sake of erasures,
cut the parchment into strips, and threw it into
the brasier till it was burnt to ashes. Those who
bad heard from their fathers of the effect produced
en Josiah by the recital of the warnings of Deuter-
onomy, might well be startled at the contrast
Nona of those well-known sign* of astonishment
and grief were seen; neither king nor attendants
rent their clothes. It was an outrage long remem-
eered. Baruch, in bis hiding-place, was over-
whtlmod with despair (Jer. xlv. 8) at this feilure
af his mission But Jeremiah had now teased to
•war. Ha bade bis timid disciple take up the
pan, and record one* more the terrible messages.
The eouotry was doomed. It was only individuals
who could be saved.
<" But the Divine oracle could not be destroyed in
the destruction of its outward framework. It was
the new form of the vision of the ' Bosh burning,
bat not consumed'; a sacred book, the form in
wmoh Divine truth* were now first beginning to be
known, burnt aa sacred book* have been burnt
It la, howsTar, very singular that the names after
in Nan. xH. 8, ineludtnf Jokrlband Mates,
the appearance of being added on to the pran-
t existing Hst, which aodsd with Shemalah, aa
that m Hah. x. 2-8. For Jotaiib's k introduced
"and;" it la quite out of It* riant
JBHOIABIB UB1
again and again, hi the persecutions of thafoarth
or of the sixteenth century, yet multiplied by that
very cause; springing from the flames to do their
work, living in the voice and life of men, even when
their outward letter seemed to be lost ' Then too*
Jeremiah another roll, and gave it to Baruch the
scribe, the son of Neriah, who wrote therein from
the mouth of Jeremiah all the words of the book
which Jehoiakim, the king of Judab, had burned
in the fire, and there were added beside* unto them
many like words ' (Jer. xxxvi. IS). In this record
of the prophet's feeling, thus emphasised by his
own repetition, is contained the germ of the ' Lib
erty of Unlicensed Printing,' the inexhaustible
vitality of the written word." (ZKstorjr of the
Jacith Church, 11. 691 ffi) H.
JEHOI'ARIB (2 > 1^n>, 1 Car. Ir. 10,
xxiv. 7, only ; elsewhere, both in 'Hebrew and A. V.,
the name is abbreviated to Joiabib [Jehovai a
defender]: 'toopfu; [Vat Imucut, lapetpi] Alex.
'IwutlP and 'laptlff: Joiarib), head of the first
of the 84 courses of priests, according to the ar-
rangement of king David (1 Chr. xxiv. 7). Some
of his descendants returned from the Babylonish
Captivity, ss we learn from 1 Chr. ix. 10, Neb. xL
10. [Jedaiah.] Their chief in the days of
Joiakim the son of Joshua was Mattenal (Neh. xii-
6,19). They were probably of the house of Eleasar
To the course of Jehoiarib belonged the Asmonean
family (1 Mace 11. 1), and Josephus, a* he informs
us (Ant. xU. 6, } 1, and Life, J 1). [Hioh-
priest.] Prideaux indeed (Connection, 1. 129),
following the Jewish tradition, affirms that only 4
of the courses returned from Babylon, Jedaiah,
Immer, Pashur, and Harim — for which last, how-
ever, the Babylonian Talmud has Jolarib — because
these 4 only are enumerated in Ear. U. 86-89, Neh.
vii. 39-42. And he accounts for the mention of
other courses, as of Joiarib (1 Mace. ii. 1), and
Abiah (Luke L 6), by saying that those 4 courses
were subdivided into 6 each, so a* to keep up the
old number of 24, which took the names of the
original courses, though not really descended from
them. But this is probably an invention of the
Jews, to account for the mention of only these 4
families of priests in the list of Ear. U. and Neh.
vii. And however difficult it may be to say with
certainty why only those 4 co ur s e s arc mentioned
in that particular Hst, we have the positive authority
of 1 Chr. ix. 10, and Neh. xi. 10, for asserting that
Joiarib did return ; and we have two other lists of
courses, one of the time of Nebemlah (Neh. x. 8-8),
the other of Zerubbabel (Neh. xli. 1-7); the former
enumerating 31, the latter 22 courses; and the
latter naming Joiarib as one of them, 11 and adding,
at ver. 19, the name of the chief of the course of
Joiarib in the days of Joiakim. So that there can
be no reasonable doubt that Joiarib did return.
The notion of the Jews does not receive any con-
firmation from the statement in the Latin version
of Josephus ( Cant. Apian. U. J 8), that there were
4 courses of priests, aa it is a manifest corruption
of the text for 24, as Whiston and others have
shown (note to L\ft of Joseph*!, § 1). The sub-
joined table gives the three lists of oourses which
order aa the first couras ; and. moraorar, these i
an entirely omitted In the LXX. till v/e coma 1
times of Joiakim at ver 12-21. Still the utmost
oowd b* •woa'uded from this Is, that Joiarib re*
later than tn« alms of ZarubbabaL
Digitized by
Google
1382 JHHONADAB
iilwiil, wtth the original Ust in Dswld's time to
miw i them by: —
ooomsEa of nam
hMA
InUatla
InNahtmtah^
laZtraMav
relfn.
In. U.. Hah.
time.
ber>dme.
lOhr-xxtr.
hSlx.
dak. an.
L Jaholarib.
lCar.lx.U\
_
_
JoUrib.
Nah.xLhV
IMiliL
Children of
Jadalah.
—
Jedalah.
8. Harim.
4. Storim.
Children of
Harlm.
Bute.
Baham
(tUrim.T.18).
4 lUkhUih.
Children of
Faahur, 1
Ckr.lx.is.
MnlirMj^*!
™
6. kujamhi.
~
lfT'jaaillll.
Warn In
(]flDjjUBlB t T.
1"%
Maremoth.
r. Hakfan.
-
Kownoth,
MBof Hak-
kos, Hah.
I. Abfiah.
S. Jaa&uah-
HODMof
Jwhuam
Eit. B.M
H«h.TtL«L
AhtJah.
AbQak.
lAShmmlah.
Shabaalab.
Shachaablh
(Shebanlah,
Tar. 14).
11. Elbahlb.
_
_
It Mia.
_
_
_
18. Huraah.
14. Mwbasb.
—
—
—
14. Blink.
•«
BUjaL
Bllgmh.
18. IroDW.
ChUdranof
Imnwr.
AflMlUk
IwUb
17. Hnir.
lm
_
18. Aphaea.
_»
_
—
18. Pathahlak.
w
_
_
80. JahaatkaL
«K
_a
—
H. 'achln.
—
_
Nah. zl. 10.
1 Chr. ix. 10.
8k. Qamtil.
38. Dciaiah.
_»
—
_
•as
_
— .
St. IbuU.
Maadaa.
HMdt«h
(Mo«dUh,T.
The courses which cannot bt Identified with the
original ones, bnt which en enumerated u existing
after the return, an as fallows: —
8srsJ*h.
AawUh.
Jaramlah.
Pssbur.
Hattusb.
Obadtah.
Omnethon.
Baroaa.
Ibshullam.
Nah. ill.
Melraeh.
Sella,
Jedalah (2).
Nab. *l n 1 Chr. Ix.
Banlah(I)
m
For aome aeoonnt of the oouraes, aee Lewie's
Orig. Bekr. bk. li oh. vii.
In Eadna the name is giren Joaxob.
A. C H.
JEHON'ADAB, end JON'ADAB (the
longer form, a^JITT, is employed in 9 K. x. and
"er. xxxt. 8, It, 18, 18; the shorter one, 2*7$V,
a Jer. xxxt. 6, 10, 19 [Jehovah mdta, Ges.] :
UtmMfi: [Joaadab]), the son of Reohab, founder
at* the Reohabltes. It appears from 1 Chr. ii. 66,
thai hU father or aneeator Beehab ("the rider")
JBHONADAB
belonged to a braneh of the Kanttae; the i
tribe which entered Paleetine with the "
One asttlssaent of them was to be found in tba
extreme north, under the chieftainship of Uebaa
(Judg. iv. 11), retaining their ti-t—t- enstnma
under (he oak which derived its name tram their
nomadic habits. The main settlement wee in the
south. Of these, one branch bad nestled in the
diss of Engedi (Judg. L 16; Num. xmV. 81).
Another had returned to the frontier of their native
wilderness on the south of Jodah (Judg. i. 16). A
third was established, under a fourfold division, at
or near the town of Jabex in Jodah (1 Chr. ii. 65).
To these hut belonged Beehab and Us son Jeho-
nadab. The Bedouin habits, which wen kept up
by the other branches of the Kenite tribe, were
inculcated by Jehonadab with the utmost minute-
ness on bis descendants; the more so, perhaps,
from their being brought into closer connection
with the inhabitants of the settled districts. The
row or rale which he prescribed to them is pre-
served to us: " Ye shall drink no wine, neither ye
nor your eons for ever. Neither shall ye bund
houses, nor sow seed, nor plant vineyard, nor ham
any: but all your days ye shall dwell in tents; that
ye may live many days in the land where ye be
strangers" (Jer. xxxt. 6, 7). This life, partly
monastic, partly Bedouin, was observed with the
tenacity with which from generation to generation
such customs are continued in Arab tribes; and
when, many years after the death of Jehonadab,
the Recbabites (as they were called from his father)
were forced to take refuge from the Chaldatan in-
vasion within the walls of Jerusalem, nothing womr
induce them to transgress the rule of their anontor;
and in consequence a blessing wss pronounced upon
him and them by the prophet Jeremiah (xxxt. 19):
" Jonadab the son of Beehab shall not want a man
to stand before me for ever." [RxcHABnxa.]
Bearing in mind this general character of Jeho-
nadab aa an Arab chief, and the founder of a half-
religious sect, perhaps in connection with the aus-
tere Elyah, and the Nasarites mentioned in Amos
ii. 11 (see Ewald, AUtrtkimer, pp. 99, 93), we are
the better able to understand the single occasion
on which he appears before us in the historical nar-
rative.
Jehu was advancing, after the slaughter of Betb-
ekad, on the city of Samaria, when he suddenly
met the austere Bedouin coming towards him (9 K.
x. 16). It seams that they were already known to
each other (Jos. AM. ix. 6, J 6). The king wss m
bis chariot; the Arab was on foot. It is not deer,
from the present state of the text, which was the
first to speak. The Hebrew text — followed by the
A. T. — implies that the king blessed (A T. ••sa-
inted") Jehonadab. The LXX. and Josepbus
(Ant, ix. 6, J 6) imply that Jehonadab blessed the
king. Each would have its peculiar appropriate-
ness. The king then proposed then - close union
"Is thy heart right, aa my heart is with thv
heart?" The answer of Jehonadab is slightly
varied. In the Hebrew text be vehemently replies,
"It is, His: give me thine hand." jr. tie LXX,
and in the A. V, he replies simply, "It is; " and
Jehu then rejoins, " If it is, give me thine hand.'
The hand, whether of Jehonadab ci Jehu, was
offered and grasped. TTbe king lifted him up to
the edge of the chariot, apparently that he might
whisper his secret into his ear, and said, "Come
with me, and eee my seal for Jehovah." It was
the first ind i cation of Jehu's design upon the war
Digitized by
Google
JBHONATHAIT
»kk* ef Baal, for whieh he perceived that the •tern
aaalst would be a fit coadjutor. Having intrusted
him with the secret, he(LXX) or hie attendente
(Heb. and A. V.) caned Jehonedab to proceed
with him to Samaria in the royai chariot-
So completely had the worihip of Baal become
the national rehgiun, that even Jehonadab wai able
to eonoeal hie purpose under the meek of conformity,.
No doubt he acted in concert with Jehu through-
out; but the onlyoooesioo on whieh be is expressly
mentioned is when (probably from his previous
knowledge. of the secret worshippers of Jehovah)
he went with Jehu through the temple of Baal to
turn out any that there might happen to be in the
mass of Pagan worshippers (8 K. x. 23). [Jkhu.]
This is the last we bear of him. A. P. S.
JEHON'ATHAIT 0'$ ff ^ {ahom Jehotah
puns = Ail aijl] : 'lenUw: Jonathan), the more
accurate rendering of the Hebrew name, which is
nut frequently given in the A. V. as Jonathan.
It is ascribed to three persons : —
1. Son of Usziah; superintendent of certain of
king David's storehouses (nVl^r*: the word
rendered " treasures " earlier in the verse, and in
97, 88 "cellars"); 1 Car. mil. 35.
2. One of the Lerites who were sent by Jehoah-
aphat through the cities of Jndah, with a book of
the Law, to teach the people (9 Chr. xvil. 8).
3. [Vat. Alex. FA.1 omit] A priest (Neh. xll.
18); the representative of the family of Shemalah
(ver. 6), when Joiakim was high-priest, that is in
the next generation after the return from Babylon
under Zerubbabd and Jeahua.
JBHO'KAM (0"jtt"P = exatttd by Jeho-
vah: 'l«p«Vti Joseph. 'Isipeuwt: Jorum). The
name is more often found in the contrasted form
of Joram. X. Son of Ahab king of Israel, who
mr^AmA his brother Ahaiiah (who bad no son)
upon the throne at Samaria, b. o. 886, and died
B. O. 884. During the first four years of his
reign his contemporary on the throne of Judah was
Jeboshaphat, and for the next seven years and up-
wards Joram the son of Jehoahaphat, and for the
last year, or portion of a year, Ahasiah the son of
Joram, who was killed the same day that be was
(9 K. ix. 37). The alliance between the kingdoms
of Israel and Judah, commenced by his father and
Jehoahaphat, was very close throughout his reign
We first find him associated with Jeboshaphat and
. Jm king of Edom, at that time a tributary of the
dngdom of Judah, in a war against the Moabites.
Kasha, their king, on the death of Ahab, had re-
volted from Israel, and refused to pay the customary
tribute of 100,000 iambs and 100,000 rams. Jo-
mu asked and obtained Jehoabaphat'a help to
eduee him to his obedience, and accordingly the
three kings, of Israel, Judah, and Edom, marched
through the wilderness of Edom to attack him.
The three armies were in the utmost danger of per-
suing for want of water. Tbe piety of Jehoaha-
phat suggested an inquiry of some prophet of Jeho-
vah, and Elisha the son of Sbaphat, at that time
and since the latter part of Ahab's reign Ehjah's
attendant (3 K. Hi. 11; 1 K. xix. 19-81), was
found with the host. [Eusha 8, vol i. p. 717.]
From him Jeboram received a severe rebuke, and
was bid to inquire of the prophet* of his father and
■aether, tbe prophete of BaaL Neve-tbeless fo-
Jesnshaphat's sake Elisha inquired of Jehovah, and
the promise of an abundac? supply of
JEHORAM 1238
water, and of a great victory over the Moabitsai
promise which was immediately fulfilled. The
same water which, filling the valley, and the
trenches dug by tbe Israelites, supplied the whole
army and all their cattle with drink, appeared to
the Hoabites, who were advancing, like blood, when
the morning sun shone upon it. Concluding that
the allies had fallen out and slain each other, they
marched incautiously to the attack, and were put
to the rout TTie allies pursued them with great
slaughter into their own land, which they utterly
ravaged and destroyed with all its cities. Kirha-
raaeth alone remained, and there tbe king of Hoab
made his last stand. An attempt to break through
the besieging army having foiled, be resorted to the
desperate expedient of offering up his eldest son,
the heir to his throne, as a burnt-offering, upon
the wall of the city, in the sight of the enemy.
Upon this the Israelites retired and returned to
their own land (3 K. iii.). It was perhaps in con-
sequence of Etiaha'a rebuke, and of the above
remarkable deliverance granted to the allied armies
according to his word, that Jeboram, on his return
to Samaria, put away the image of Baal which
Ahab his father had made (9 K. iii. 3). For In
9 K. iv. we have an evidence of Elisha's being on
friendly terms with Jehoram, in tbe offer made by
him to speak to the king in favor of the Shunam-
mita. The impression on the king's mind was
probably strengthened by the subsequent incident
of Naaman'a cure, and the temporary cessation of
the inroads of the Syrians, which doubtless resulted
from it (3 K. v.). Accordingly when, a little later
war broke out between Syria and Israel, we find
Elisha befriending Jehoram. The king was made
acquainted by tbe prophet with the secret counsels
of the king of Syria, and was thus enabled to de-
feat them; and on tbe other hand, when Elisha
had led a large band of Syrian soldiers whom God
had blinded, into the midst of Samaria, Jehoram
reverentially asked him, " My father, shall I smite
them?" and, at tbe prophet's bidding, not only
forbore to kill them, but made a feast for them,
and then sent them borne unhurt Tbia procured
another cessation from the Syrian invasions for the
Israelites (3 K. vi. 33). What happened after this
to change the relations between the king and the
prophet, we can only ooqjecture. But putting to-
gether the general bad character given of Jehoram
(9 K. iii. 3, 3) with the fact of the prevalence of
Baal-worship at tbe end of his reign (3 K. x. 91
89), it seems probable that when the Syrian inroad*
oeaaed, and he felt less dependent upon the aid of
the prophet, he rektpeed Into idolatry, and waa re-
buked by Elisha, and threatened with a return of
the calamities from whioh he had escaped. Refus-
ing to repent, a fresh invasion by the Syrians, and
a close siege of Samaria, actually came to pass,
according probably to the word of the prophet.
Hence, when the terrible incident arose, in conse-
quence of the famine, of a woman boiling and eat-
ing her own child, the king immediately attributed
the evil to Elisha the ion of Shaphat, and deter-
mined to take away his life. The message whieh
he eent by tbe messenger whom be commissioned
to out off the prophet's bead, " Behold this evil is
from Jehovah, why should I wait for Jehovah any
longer? " coupled with the foot of his having on
sackcloth at tbe time (9 K. vi. 30, 33), also indi-
cates that many remonstrances and warnings, simi-
lar to those given by Jeremiah to the kings of his
day, had peered between the prophet and the weak
Digitized by
Google
1284
JEHORAM
and unstable Km of Ainb. The providential inter-
nosJtkm by wliich both EUsha's life mi saved and the
eitj delivered, U narrated 2 K. vu , and Jehoram
appnn to have returned to friendly feeling! toward*
Eliaha (2 K. viii. 4). Hie life, however, was now
drawing near to iU close. It was very aoon after
the above erenU that Eliaha went to Damascus,
and predicted the revolt of Hazael, and his acces-
sion to the throne of Syria in the room of Ben-
hadad ; and it wai during Eliaha's absence, proba-
bly, that the conversation between Jeboram and
Gehaa, and the return of the Shunammite from
the land of the Philistines, recorded in 2 K. viii.,
took place. Jehoram aeenu to have thought the
revolution in Syria, which immediately followed
EUsha's prediction, a good opportunity to purine
nil father's favorite project of recovering Kamoth-
Gilead from the Syrian*. He accordingly made
an alliance with hia nephew Ahaziah, who had just
succeeded Joram on the throne of Judah, and the
two kings proceeded to occupy Ramoth-Gilead by
force. The expedition was an unfortunate one.
Jeboram was wounded in battle, and obliged to
return to Jezreel to be healed of his wounds (S K.
viii. 29, iz. 11, 15), leaving his army under Jehu
to hold Bamoth-tiilead against Hazael. Jehu,
however, and the army under hi* command, re-
volted from their allegiance to Jehoram (2 K. ix.),
and, hastily marching to Jezreel, surprised Jebo-
ram. wounded and defenseless as he was. Jehoram,
going out to meet him, fell pierced by an arrow
from Jehu's bow on the very plat of ground which
Ahab had wrested from Naboth the Jesreelite; thus
fulfilling to the letter the prophecy of Elijah (1 K.
cd. 21-29). With the life of Jehoram ended the
dynasty of Omri.
-Jehoram's reign was rendered very remarkable
by the two eminent prophets who lived in it, EHjah
and Eliaha. The former seems to have survived
till the sixth year of hia reign ; the latter to have
begun to be conspicuous quite in the beginning of
it. For the famine which Eliaha foretold to the
Shunammite • (2 K. viii. 1), and which seems to
be the same as that alluded to iv. 38, must hare
begun in the sixth year of Jehoram's reign, since
t lasted seven years, and ended in the twelfth
year. In that cue his acquaintance with the Shu-
nammite must have begun not less than five or at
(east four years soi».er, as the child must have been
as much as three years old when it died; which
brings us back at latest to the beginning of the
second year of Jehoram's reign. EUsha's appear-
ance ia the camp of the three kings (2 K. iii.)
was probably as early as the first year of Jeboram.
With reference to the very entangled chronology
of this reign, it ia important to remark that there
ia no evidence whatever to show that Elijah the
prophet was translated at the time of EUsha's first
prophetic ministrations. The history in 2 K., at
this put of it, having much the nature of memoirs
of Eliaha, and the active ministrations of EUjah
having closed with the death of Ahaziah, it was
very natural to complete Elijah's personal history
with the narrative of bis translation in ch. ii. before
•sginning the aeries of EUsha's miracles. But it
y no means follows that ch. ii. is really prior in
a The "then " or the A. V. of 2 K. vtll. 1 Is a thor-
•ufb maerepreeentatlon of the order of the events.
Ike narrative goee back seven years, manly to tntro-
fem the womso's return at this Mas. The king's
JEHORAM
order of time to ch. iii., or that, though the t
from the dead of the Shunammite'! son was I
quent, as it probably was, to Elijah's transition
therefore all the preliminary circumstances related
in ch. iv. were so likewise. Neither again does
the expression (2 K. iii. 11), "Here is Eliaha,
which poured water on the bauds of Ehjah," » im-
ply that this ministration had at that time ceased,
and still less that Elijah was removed from the
earth. We learn, on the contrary, from 2 Cor.
xxl. 12, that be was still on earth in the reign of
Joram eon of Jehoshaphat, who did not begin to
reign till the fifth of Jehoram (2 K. viii. 16); and
it seems highly probable that the note of time in
2 K. L 17, *> in the second year of Jehoram the
son of Jehoshaphat," which is obviously and cer-
tainly out of its place where it now is, properly
belongs to the narrative in ch. ii. With regard to
the other discordant dates at this epoch, it must
suffice to remark that all attempts to reconcile them
are rain. That which is based upon the supposition
of Joram having been associated with his father in
the kingdom for three or seven years, is of all pel
haps the most unfortunate, as being utterly incou
sistent with the history, annihilating hia independent
reign, and after all failing to produce even a verbal
consistency. The table given below Is framed on
the supposition that Jehoshaphat's reign really
lasted only 22 years, and Ahab'a only 19, as appears
from the texts cited ; that the statement that Je-
hoshaphat reigned 25 years is caused by the prob-
able circumstance of his having taken part in the
government during the three last years of Asa's
reign, when bis father was incapacitated by the dis-
ease in his feet (2 Chr. xvi. 12); and that three
years were then added to Ahab's reign, to make
the whole number of the years of the kings of Is-
rael agree with the whole number of those of the
kings of Judah, thus unduly lengthened by an ad-
dition of three years to Jehoshaphat's reign. Thk
arrangement, it ia believed, reconciles the greatest
number of existing texts, agrees best with history,
and especially coincides with what is the most cer-
tain of all the elements of the chronology of this
time, namely, that the twelve years' reign of Jeho-
ram son of Ahab, and the few months' reign of
Ahaziah, the successor of Joram son of Jehosha-
phat, ended simultaneously at the accession of
Jehu.
sivos or issasl. aasee <
Ahab (r'gn'd t» yre.) lit yr. - ]
Ahab. ..... Ubjr.-
Ahab . . laat ind l»th yr. —
AheiIeh(i'gn'di!yra.)I«tyr.-
Ahazlah. M yr.
sod
Jehoram (r'gn'd llyrejlntyr.
Jehoram .... «hyr.— -
Jolmnini .... 6th l —
EUjahaariiad up to heavens
Jehoram Ix
Am (rabraed 41 ym.) I
i k. 171. sr
a.
Jenoehaphat
(reigned XI
yra.) 1st, 1 K. xxtL 0.
Jehnahaphet . . 10th. tb. S.
Jaboahaphai, Irth, 1 K. zxB.
> M.
■Jehoahnphrt. lfftfi, si; EH 1
Jehoahaphat but and ztd,
and CvKL W.
Joram (i
Joram,
Chr. nil. U.
Joram, 8th. * K. Till. D", J K.
and [villa
AhaaJah (reigned I yrj US.
4l*unBi |» ana Tm.
and [Tin. K.
■ (r'an-dsyn.ilsLSK,
a, M, » K* I. IZVU-l I
S. [In 2 Chr. xri. 1, Bom. lupir, but Va»
Alex. Iwpcua as elsewhere.] Eldest son of Jehosb
aphat, succeeded his father on the throne of Judah
conversation with Genu] was doubtless canard by the
providential deliverance related In eh. vB.
6 The nee of the perfect tense In Hebrew earns set
piles the habit or the repetition of an settee, at) s ft
ft. i. L «. L aVa.
Digitized by
Google
JEHOSHAPHAT 1286
tmee they parted at Sfaeghem sixty yean )**ri-
ously. Jehoshaphat'a eldest ton Jehoram marries'
Athaliah, the daughter of Ahab and Jezebel. I
doe* not appear how far Jehoahaphat encouraged
that ill-starred union. The closeness of the alli-
ance between the two kings is shown by many
oiroumatances: EUjah's reluctance when in exile
to set foot within the territory of Judah (Blunt,
Undo. Coinc. ii. § 19, p. 199); the identity of
names given to the children of the two royal fami-
lies; the admission of names compounded with the
name of Jehovah into the family of Jezebel, the
zealous worshipper of Baal ; and the extreme alac-
rity with which Jehoshaphat afterwards accompa-
nied Ahab to the field of battle.
But in his own kingdom Jehoshaphat ever
showed himself a zealous follower of the command-
ments of God : he tried, it would seem not quite
successfully, to put down the high places and the
groves in which the people of Judah burnt incense-
In his third year, apprehending perhaps the evil
example of Iaraelitish idolatry, and considering
that the Levites were not fulfilling eatisfactoril}
their function of teaching the people, Jehoshaphat
sent out a commission of certain princes, priests,
and Levites, to go through the cities of Judah,
teaching the people out of the Book of the Law.
He made separate provision for each of his sons as
they grew up, perhaps with a foreboding of their
melancholy end (2 (Jhr. xxi. 4). Riches and hon-
ors increased around him. He received tribute
from the Philistines and Arabians ; and kept up a
large standing army in Jerusalem.
It was probably about the 16th year of his reign
(b. c. 898) when he went to Samaria to visit Ahab
and to become his ally in the great battle of Ka
moth-Gilead — not very decisive in its result
though fatal to Ahab. From thence Jehoshapha
returned to Jerusalem in peace; and, after receiv
ing a rebuke from the prophet Jehu, went himself
through the people "from Beer-sheba to Mount
Ephraim," reclaiming them to the law of God
He also took measures for the better administration
of justice throughout his dominions; on which set
Selden, Dt Synedriit, ii. cap. 8, $ 4. Turning his
attention to foreign oommeroe, he built at Eziorv
geber, with the help of Ahaziah, a navy designed
to go to Tarshish : but, in accordance with a pre-
diction of a prophet, Eliezer, it was wrecked at
Ezion-geber; and Jehoshaphat resisted a. tuuaah's
proposal to renew their joint attempt.
Before the dose of his reign he was engaged in
two" additional wars. He was miraculously de-
livered from a threatened attack of the people of
Amman, Moab, and Seir; the result of wbioh 1*
thought by some critics to be celebrated in Pa. 48
and 93, and to be alluded to by the prophet JoeL
iii. 2, 13. After this, perhaps, must be dated the
war which Jehoshaphat, in conjunction with Jeho-
ram king of Israel and the king of Edom, oarrJed
3a against the rebellious king of Moab (2 K. iii.).
After this the realm of Jehoshaphat was quiet.
In his declining years the administration of affairs
was placed (probably b. c. 891) in the hands of his
son Jehoram; to whom, as Usher conjectures, the
same charge had been temporarily committed dur-
ing Jehoshaphat's absence at Ramoth-gilead.
Like the prophets with whom he was brought la
do* an* P rof e sse s Newman are of opinion opposed by Kell and Hovers In Qemianr, and bj ISM
hat the two narratives in 2 K. ill. and 3 Car. x. •*■ , Rev. H. Brcwne, Onto Sactantm, p. 286.
Their view bat been snceststnUv I
JBHOSHABBATH
s) Mm age of 82, and reigned eight years, from a.
a. 808-92 to 886-84. [Jehoram, 1.] Jehosheba
ass daughter was wife to the high-priest Jehoiada.
The ill effects of his marriage with Athaliah the
daughter of Ahab, and the influence of that second
Jezebel upon him, were immediately apparent. As
toon as he was fixed on the throne, he put his six
brothers to death, with many of the chief nobles
of the land. He then prooeeded to establish the
worship of Baal and other abominations, and to en-
force the practice of idolatry by persecution. A
prophetic writing from the aged prophet Elijah (2
Cbr. xxi. 13), the last recorded act of bis life, re-
proving him for his crimes and his impiety, and
foretelling the most grievous judgments upon his
person and bis kingdom, failed to produce any good
onset upon him. This was in the first or second
year of his reign. The remainder of it was a series
of calamities First the Edoinitea, who had been
tributary to Jehoshaphat, revolted from his domin-
ion, and established their permanent independence.
It was as much as Jehoram could do by a night-
attack with all his forces, to extricate himself from
their army, which had surrounded him. Next
Libnah, one of the strongest fortified cities in Ju-
dah (2 K. xix. 8), and perhaps one of those " fenced
cities" (3Chr. xxi. 3) which Jehoshaphat had given
to his other sons, indignant at his cruelties, and
abhorring his apostasy, rebelled against him. Then
followed invasions of armed bands of Philistines
and of Arabians (the same who paid tribute to
Jehoshaphat, 3 Chr. xvii. 11), who burst into Ju-
das, stormed the king's palace, put his wives and
all his children, except his youngest son Ahaziah,
to death (3 Chr. xxii. 1), or carried them into cap-
tivity, and plundered all his treasures. And, to
crown all, a terrible and incurable disease in his
bowels fell upon him, of which he died, after two
years of misery, unragretted ; and want down to a
dishonored grave in the prime of life, without either
private or public mourning, and without even a
resting-plaos in the sepulchres of his fathers (3 Chr.
xxi. 10, 90). He died early in the twelfth year of
his brother-in-law Jeboram't reign over Israel.
AC. H.
JEHOSHAB-EATH (fXfV^ 1 ) &**•
swearer by Jehovah, i. e. his uart&ipptr] : 'l»<ra-
BfA; [Vat. IoKraf}f<;] Alex. Imnjki- JotabeiM),
the form in which the name of Jehosheba is
given in 3 Chr. xxii. 11. We are here informed,
what is not told us in Kings, that she was the wife
of Jehoiada the high-priest.
JEH08H'APHAT (ttpBfliT [Jdiovah it
jssfye]: 'Iawa^dV: Jotnphal). L' The son of
Asa and Azubah, succeeded to the throne B. c.
914, when he was 35 years old, and reigned 26
years. His history is to be found among the events
recorded in 1 K. xv. 34 ; 3 K. viii. 18, or in a con- 1
turnout narrative in 3 Chr. xvii. 1-xxl. 8. He was '
sontemporary with Ahab, Ahaziah, and Jehoram. '
At first he strengthened himself against Israel by [
Jrtifyiug and garrisoning the cities of Judah and
the Ephraiinite conquests .if Asa. But soon after- 1
ward* the two Hebrew kiii^s, perhaps appreciating
their common danger fron. Damascus and 'he tribes
an their eastern frontier, came to an understanding.
Israel and Judah drew together for the first time
Digitized by
Google
1286
JEHOSHAPHAT, VALLEY OF
esutaei. we cannot describe the character of thia
pod fang v4thout a mixture of blame. Eminently
piou*, gentle, just, devoted to the spiritual and
temporal welfare of hit subjects, active in mind
and bod;, he m wanting in firmness and eoneist-
tucj. Hie character ha* been carefully sketched
in a aenDon by the Be*. Dr. Heater, Biograp hia
•/ Me King* ofjudah, ii.
3. [Wotfttr, -+iB; Alex, in 2 Sam. ritt. 18,
laws*.] Son of Ahilud, who 6I)ed the office of
recorder or annalut in the court of David (9 Sam.
viii. 16, 4c), and afterwards of Solomon (1 K. tv.
3). Such offioen are found not only in the courts
of the Hebrew kings, but also in those of ancient
and modern Persia, of the Eastern Koman Empire
(Gesenius), of China, etc (Keil). An instance of
the use made of their writings is given in Esth.
vi. 1.
3. One of the priests who, in the time of David
(1 Chr. xv. 84), were appointed to blow trumpets
before the ark in its transit from the bouse of
Obed-Edom to Jerusalem.
4. [Horn. Vat omit; Alex, Iamupar.] Son of
Paraab j one of the twelve purveyors of King Sol-
omon (1 K. iv. 17). His district was Iasaehar,
bom whence, at a stated season of the year, be
collected such taxes as were paid in kind, and sent
them to the king's court.
0. ['I«ra<pdY, Vat. -Act}.] Son of Nimshi, and
father of king Jehu (2 K. ix. 2, 14). W. T. a
JEHOSH'APHAT, VALLEY OF (PJJJ?
bSJIJVmTJ [vaiUji where Jehovah judget]: KoiArfr
'IewoeXtr: VallU Jotaphat), a valley mentioned by
the prophet Jod only, as the spot in which, after
the return of Judah and Jerusalem from captivity,
Jehovah would gather all the heathen (Joel iii. 2;
Heb. iv. 2), and would there sit to judge them for
their misdeeds to Israel (ill. 12; Heb. r. 4). The
passage is one of great boldness, abounding in the
verbal turns in which Hebrew poetry so much de-
lights, and in particular there is a ptay between the
name given to the spot — Jehoahaphat, i. e. " Je-
hovah's judgment," and the "judgment " there to
be pronounced. The Hebrew prophets often refer
to the ancient glories of their nation : thus Isaiah
speaks of the " day of Midian," and of the triumphs
of David and of Joshua in " Mount Perarim," and
in the " Valley of Gibson ; " and in like manner
Joel, in announcing the vengeance to be taken on
the strangers who were annoying his country (iii.
14), seems to have glanced back to that triumphant
day when king Jehoshaphat, the greatest king the
nation had seen since Solomon, and the greatest
champion of Jehovah, led out his people to a valley
In the wilderness of Tekoah, and was there blessed
with such a victory over the hordes of his enemies
s was without a parallel In the national records
J Chr. xx.).
But though such a reference to Jehoshaphat
la both natural and characteristic, it is not certain
that it is intended. The name may be only an
knagiuary one conferred on a spot which existed
a This pillar Is said to hs called tt-Tarii, "the
-eJ" (De Sauley, rbsngt, 11. IBB). From It will
■Bring the Bridge of Ai-Sirat, the crossing of which Is
to awe the true believers. Those who cannot stand
sat teat will drop off Into the abyss of Gehenna In the
•spaas of the valley (All Bey, 234, 226 ; He> ed-Dtn,
tola*. L2B9; [Alger's Hist, of IV Doctrim of a #w-
w* u/i, »p. as, ao8i).
nowhere but in the vision if the prophet
was the view of some of the andeut
Thus Tbeodotion renders it X *V* apia-tani ewi
so the Targtrra of Jonathan — " the plain of tea-
division of judgment" Miahaeua (Bibel ,/Br r7*>
gekhrten, Kemarks on Joel) takes a similar view,
and considers the passage to be a prediction of the
Maecabean victories. By others, however, the
prophet has been suppo se d to have had the end of
the world in view. And not only this, but the
scene of « Jehovah's judgment" has been lectured,
and the name has come down to us attached to
the deep ravine which separates Jerusalem from the
Mount of Olives, through which at one time the
Kedron forced its stream. At what period the
name was Drat applied to this spot is not known.
There is no trace of it in the Bible or in Joaepbua.
In both the only name used for this gorge is Kd>
boh (N. T. Ckdbom). We first encounter its
new title in the middle of the 4th century in the
OnomaHieon of Eusebhu and Jerome (art Qnlos),
and in the Commentary of the latter rather on
JoeL Since that time the name has been recog-
nized and adopted by travellers of all ages and all
faith*. It is used by Christians — as Arcuh* in
700 (Early Trav. i. 4), the author of the Cites *
Jhenualem, in 1187 (Kob. U. 562), ami Maundrell
In 1697 (Eur. TVue. p. 469); and by Jews— as
Benjamin of Todek about 1170 (Asber, i. 71; and
see Rdand, PaL p. 866). By the Modems it I*
still said to be called Wndg Jithafai (Seetaen, ii.
23, 26), or Shnfat, though the name usually given
to the valley is Wadg Sitti-Maryam. Both Mos-
lems and Jews believe that the last judgment is to
take place there. To find a grave there is the
dearest wish of the latter (Briggs, Heathen and
Holy Land*, p. 290), and the former show — aa
they have shown for certainly two centuries — the
place on which Mohammed is to be seated at the Last
Judgment, a atone jutting out from the east wall
of the Haram area near the south comer, one of
the pillars « which once adorned the churches of
Helena or Justinian, and of which multitudes are
now imbedded in the rude masonry of the more
modern wall* of Jerusalem. The steep sides of the
ravine, wherever a level atrip affords the opportu-
nity, are crowded — in places almost paved — by
the sepulchres of the Moslems, or the simpler slabs
of the Jewish tombs, alike awaiting the as s embl y of
the Last Judgment
So narrow and precipitous 6 a glen is quite un-
suited for such an event; but this inconsistency
does not appear to have disturbed those who
framed or those who hold the tradition. It ia how-
ever implied in the Hebrew terms employed in the
two case*. That by Joel is Emdc (~^V), a word
applied to spacious valleys, such as those of Es-
draelon or Gibeon (Stanley, S. <f P. App. { 1).
On the other hand the ravine of the Kidron is In-
variably designated by Jfaehal (bP3) answering
to the modern Arabic ITody. There is no instance
in the 0. T. of these two terms being convertible,
b St Cyril (of Alexandria) either did not know as
•pot, or has another valley In his eye; probably the
former. He des c ribes it as not many stadia from Je-
rusalem ; and says be to toM (4m') that It la "ban
and apt tor hones" (iJnAiv «u inriXoror- Cbtmn. *a
Joel, Quoted by Reland, p. 8G6). Perhaps this mat
catee that the tradition was not at that Haas was*
Digitized by
Google
JEHOSHAPHAT, VALLEY OF
■d this fact alone would warrant the inference
that the tradition of the identity of the Emek of
laboahaphat and the Nachal Kedrm, did not arise
ontii Hebrew had begun to become a dead lan-
guage. The grounds on which it did ariae were
probably two: (1.) The frequent mention through-
out thia paaaage of Joel of Mount Zion, Jerusalem,
and the Temple (U. 39; iil. 1, 6, 16, 17, 18), may
have led to the belief that tee locality of the great
lodgment would be in their immediate neighbor-
hood. Thia would be assisted by the mention of
the Mount of Olives in the somewhat similar pas-
sage in Zechariah (xiv. 8, 4).
(3.) The belief that Christ would reappear in
judgment on the Mount of Olives, from which He
had ascended. Thia was at one time a received
article of Christian belief, and was grounded on the
words of the Angels, " He shall so come in like
manner as ye have seen him go into heaven."*
(Adriehomios, Tkeatr. Ter. Sancta, Jerusalem,
{ 193; Corn, a Lapide, on Acta i.)
(3.) There la the alternative that the Valley of
Jehoshaphat was really an ancient name of the
Valley of the Kedron, and that from the name, the
connection with Joel's prophecy, and the belief in
its being the scene of Jehovah's last judgment hare
followed. Thia may be so; but then we should
expect to find some trace of the existence of the
name before the 4th century after Christ. It was
certainly used as a burying-place as early as the
reign of Jonah (3 K. xxiii- 6), but no inference
can Surly be drawn from thia.
But whatever originated the tradition, It has
held its ground most firmly, (a.) In the valley
itself, one of the four remarkable monuments which
exist at the foot of Olivet was at a very early date
connected with Jehoehapbat. At Arculf's visit
(about 700) the name appears to have been borne
by that now called " Absalom's tomb," bat then
the "tower of Jehoshaphat" (Ear. Trnv. p. 4).
In the time of Maundrell the " tomb of Jehoshaphat "
was, what it still is, an excavation, with an archi-
tectural front, in the face of the rock behind " Ab-
salom's tomb." A tolerable view of thia is given
in plate 33 of Monk's Pakttmt ; and a photograph
by Salzmann, with a description in the Texte (p.
31) to the same. The name may, as already ob-
served, really point to Jehoshaphat himself, though
not to his tomb, as he was buried like the other
kings in the city of David (3 Chr. xxt. 1). (o.)
One of the gates of the city in the east wall, open-
ing on the valley, bore the same name. This is
plain from the Cite* de Jhemakm, where the
Porte de lotnfat is said to have been a " postern "
close to the golden gateway [Porttx Otrit), and to
Me eouth of that gate (part devere midi; { iv.,
near the end, Bob. ii. 559). It was therefore at or
Dear the small walled-up doorway, to which M. de
Beaky has restored the name of the Pdttrae dt
Joeapkat, and which is but a few feet to the aouth
jf the golden gateway. However thia may be, this
JEHOSHEBA
12S7
• It appears In the Targnm on Cant, vtli. 1.
a In Sir John MaundevUle a dlBerant reason Is
zrrau Iter the same. "Toy near this" — the place
where Christ wept over Jerusalem — "Is the stone on
hleh our Lord aat when Be preached ; and on that
tease stone shall He alt on the day of doom, right aa
Be said MsosahV' Bernard the Wise, m the 8th een.
kary, speaks of the church of St Leon, m tLe valley
•when ear Lord will come to jaacment" (
■OH
"postern" U evidently of later date than the wak
in which it occurs, as some of the enormous atones
of the wall hare been cut through to admit it: " and
in so far, therefore, it is a witness to the date of the
tradition being subsequent to the time of Herod,
by whom thia wall was built. It is probably the
little gate'' leading down by steps to the valley,"
of which Arculf speaks (A'nrfy Trnv.). Benjamlu
of Tndela (1163) also mentions the gate of Jehosha-
phat, but without any nearer Indication of its posi-
tion than that it led to the valley and the monu-
ments (Asher, i. 71). (c) Lastly, leading to thia
gate was a street called the street of Jehoshapha'
(Cites de J. § vii., Rob. ii. 561).
The name would seem to be generally oonfli ed
by travellers to the upper part of the glen, from
about the " Tomb of the Virgin " to the southeast
comer of the wall of Jerusalem. [Tombs.]
O.
* Furst speaks of the present Valley of Jehosha-
phat as on toe south of Jerusalem (Handw. i. 497)
That must be an oversight He thinks that the
valley was so named from a victory or victories
achieved there by Jehoehaphat over heathen ene-
mies, but that the name was not actually given to
the place till after the time of Joel.
The correct view, no doubt, is that the valley to
which Joel refers is not one to be sought on any
terrestrial map, of one period of Jerusalem's history
or another, but is a name formed to localize an ideal-
ized scene. It is an instance of a bold, but truth-
ful figure, to set forth the idea that God's perse-
cuted, suffering people hare always in Him an
Almighty defender, and that all opposition to hia
kingdom and hia servants must in the end prove
unavailing. To convey this teaching the more im-
pressively the prophet represents Jehovah aa ap-
pointing a time and a place for meeting his enemies;
they are commanded to assemble all their forces,
to concentrate, as it were, both their enmity and
their power in one single effort of resistance to his
purposes and will. They accept the challenge.
Jehovah meets them thus united, and making trial
of their strength against his omnipotence. The
conflict then follows. The irresistible One scatters
the adversaries at a single blow; be overwhelms
their hosts with oonfuaion and ruin (iii. 3-17, A.
V., and iv. 13-17, Heb.). The prophet cans the
scene of this encounter " the Valley of Jehosha-
phat" (i. e. where "Jehovah judges"), on account
of this display of God's power and justice, and the
pledge thus given to his people of the final issue
of all their labors and sufferings for his name's
sake. With the same import Joel interchanges
thia expres sion in ver. 14 with " valley of decision,"
(yrTOt i. e. of a case decided, judgment de-
clared. ' H.
JBHOSHTSBA (»3#VT? [JtAovah A*
oath, by wham one swears]: LXX. 'I«raj9«;
Joseph- 'IvcajSVflq), daughter of Joram king of Is-
rael, and wife of Jehoiada the high-priest (3 K. xL
3). Her name in the Chronicles is given Jsmo-
o To this Bwt the writer can testify from recent
observation. It Is evident enough to Salimann's pho
tograih, though not In De Saniey s sketch (Atla$, pi
34).
d Next to the above " little gats," Anulf namsi
the gate " Thecal tis." van this strange name centals
an aUaatnn to TSttoa, the valley In which Ishieha
Digitized by
Google
1288
JKHOSHUA
hubeatk. It thus exactly resembles the nun of
the only two other wives of Jewish priests who are
known to as, namely, Eushkba (LXX. and N. T.
£\ura0eY, whence oar ElisaoeM), the wife of
Aaron, Ex. tL S3, and the wife of Zeehariah, Luke
17. In the former case the word signifies " Jeho-
vah's oath; " in the second " God's oath."
As she is called, 3 K. xi. 2, "the daughter of
/oram, sister of A hamuli," it has been conjectured
that she was the daughter, not of Athaliah, but of
Joram, by another wife; and Josephus (Ant. ix. 7,
J 1) calls her 'O^oftif bfunirptm iXfkirf. This
may he; but it is also possible that the omission
of Athaliah'* name may bare been occasioned by
the detestation in which it was held — in the same
way as modern commentators ban, for the same
reason, eagerly embraced this hypothesis. That it
is not absolutely needed is shown by the feet that
the worship of Jehovah was tolerated under the
reigns both of Joram and Athaliah — and that the
name of Jehovah was incorporated into both of
their names.
She is the only recorded instance of the marriage
of a princess of the royal bouse with a high-priest.
On this occasion it was a providential circumstance
(" for she was the sister of Ahaziah," 2 Chr. xxi.
11), as inducing and probably enabling her to rescue
ihe infant Joash from the nunsacre of his brothers.
By ho, he and his nurse were concealed in the pal-
ace, and afterwards in the Temple (2 K. xi. 2. 3;
2 Chr. xxii. 11), where be was brought up prob-
ably with her sons (2 Chr. xxiii. 11), who assisted
at his coronation. One of these was Zeehariah,
wbo succeeded her huslauid in his office, and was
afterwards murdered (2 Chr. xxiv. 20). A. t>. S.
JEHOSHTJA ($tnn? [Jtkoeah a helptr] :
'Iqe~ovi: Joint). In this form — contracted in
the Hebrew, but fuller than usual in the A. V.—
is given the name of Joshua in Num. xiii. 16, on
the occasion of its bestowal by Moses. The addi-
tion of the name of Jehovah probably marks the
recognition by Moses of the important part taken
iu the affair of the spies by him, who till this time
had been Hashes, "help," but was henceforward
to be Je-hoshua, "help of Jehovah" (Ewald, ii.
306). Once more only the name appears in its full
form in the A. V. — this time with a redundant
letter— as —
JEHOSHTJAH (the Hebrew is as above:
'Inaovi, in both MSS.: Jotut), in the genealogy
of Ephraim (1 Chr. vil. 27). We should be thank-
ful to the translators of the A. T. for giving the
first syllables of this great name their full form, If
only in these two cages; though why in these only
it is difficult to understand. Nor is it easier to
see whence they got the final A in the letter of the
tvo. [The final A is not found in the original
edition of the A. V., 1611. — A.] O.
JEHCVAH (nSiTJ, usually with the vowel
points of , J^N ', but when the two occur together
the former is pointed ""tin*, that is, with the
rowels of O'^tf - «n Obsd. L 1, Hab. til. 19:
ibe IJCX. generally render it by Kipiot, the Vul-
cste by Dominut ; and in this respect they hare
sen followed by the A. V., where it is translated
The Lord"). The true pronunciation of this
IBM), by which God was known to the Hebrews,
has beau entirely lost, the Jews themselves scrupu-
JEHOVAH
lotnhr avoiding every mention of it, and snbatMs>
ting in its stead one or other of the words wttl
whose proper vowel-points it may happen to at
written. This custom, which had its origin x
rev e r e nc e, and has almost degenerated into a super-
stition, was founded upon an erroneous rendering
of Lev. xxiv. 16, from which it was inferred that the
mere utterance of the name constituted a capital of-
fense. In the rabbinical writings it is distinguished
by various euphemistic e xp r essi ons; as simply " the
name," or " the name of four letters " (the Greek
tetragr am maton); •» the great and terrible name;"
"the peculiar name," i. e. a pp ro p r ia ted to God
alone; "the separate name," i. e. either the name
which is separated or removed from human knowl-
edge, or, as some render, "the name which has
been interpreted or revealed" (tTTtrjsn CP\
Mm n amm tpMrttk). The Samaritans followed
the same custom, and in reading the Pentateuch
substituted for Jehovah (r*5*tj\ «*eW) "the
name," at the same time perpetuating the practice
in their alphabetical poems and later writings
(Geiger, Urtckrifl, etc. p. 262). According to
Jewish tradition, it was pronounced but once a
year by the high-priest on the day of Atonement
when he entered the Holy of Holies; but on this
point there is some doubt, Maimonides (Jtfor. A'eft.
i. 61 ) asserting that the use of the word was con-
fined to the blessings of the priests, and restricted
to the sanctuary, without limiting it still further
to the high-priest alone. On the same authority
we learn that it ceased with Simeon the Just ( Yad
Chat, c 14, § 10), having lasted through two gen-
erations, that of the men of the Great Synagogue
and the age of Shemed, while others include the
generation of Zedekiah among those who possessed
the use of the them Aamnu/iAoVdsA (.Vidrath on
Ps. xxxvi. 11, quoted by Buxtorf in ReUnd's Dtcat
KxtrcU.). But even after the destruction of the
second temple we meet with instances of individ-
uals who were in possession of the mysterious se-
cret. A certain Bar Kamsar is mentioned in the
Mishna ( Toma, Hi. § 11) who was able to write
this name of God ; but even on such evidence we
may conclude that after the siege of Jerusalem
the true pronunciation almost if not entirely dis-
appeared, the probability being that it had been
lost long before. Josephus, himself s priest, con-
fesses that on this point he was not permitted to
speak (.Ant ii. 12, § 4); and Philo states (oV lit.
Mm. iii. 519) that for those alone whose ears and
tongue were purged by wisdom was it lawful to
hear or utter this awful name. It is evident, there-
fore, that no reference to ancient writers can be
expected to throw any light upon the question
and any quotation of them will only render the
darkness in which it is involved more palpable.
At the same time the discussion, though barren of
actual results, may on other accounts be interesting ;
and as it is one in which great names sre ranged
on both sides, it would for this reason alone be im-
pertinent to dismiss it with a cursor}- notice. Ir
the decade of dissertations collected by Reland,
Fuller, Gataker, and I^eusden do battle for the pro-
nunciation Jebovah, against such formidable antag-
onists as Drusius, Amaru*, Cappellus, Buxtorf, arc!
Altingius, wbo, it is scarcely necessary to eay, fairit
beat their opponents out of the field; the out
argument, in fact, of an» ••eight, which is as
ployed by the advocates of the pronunciation nfUs>
Digitized by
Google
JEHOVAH
sjetsl m it Is written being that derived from the
fcrm in which it appear* n proper names, auch as
lehoahaphet, Jehown, etc Their antagonists make
a atroag point of the fact that, aa haa been noticed
(bore, two different acta of vowels are applied to the
same consonants under certain circumstances. To
this Leusden, of all the champions on hj aide, but
feebly replies. The same may be said of the argu-
t derived from the feet that the letters 2*731Q,
JEHOVAH
1239
when prefixed to HirP, take, not the vowels which
they would regularly receive were the present punc-
tuation true, but those with which they would be
written if ^^tfi <MS"dt, were the reading; and
that the letters ordinarily taking daguk lent when
following mrf would, aceording to the rules of
the Hebrew points, be written without dagesh,
whereas it is uniformly inserted. Whatever, there-
fere, be the true pronunciation of the word, there
can be little doubt that it is not Jthotuh.
In Greek writers it appears under the several
forma of 'lew (Died. Sio. i. 94; Irencus, i. 4, § 1),
'I«w4 (Porphyry in Eusebiua, Prop. Evan. i. 9,
f 21), 'laai (Clem. Alex. Strom, v. p. 066), and in
a catena to the Pentateuch in a MS. at Turin 'la
M; both Theodore* (Quat- 15 m Exod.) and
Epiphaniua (Bar. xx.) give 'la04, the former dis-
tinguishing it aa the pronunciation of the Samari-
tans, while 'Aid represented that of the Jews. But
even if these writers were entitled to speak with
authority, their evidence only tends to show in bow
many different ways the four letters of the word
mrP could be represented in Greek characters,
and throws no light either upon its real pronuncia-
tion or its punctuation. In like manner Jerome
(on Pa. viii.), who acknowledges that the Jews con-
sidered it an ineffable name, at the same time says
H may be read Jnho, — of course, supposing the
passage in question to be genuine, which is open to
doubt. In the absence, therefore, of anything satis-
factory from these sources, there is plainly left a
wide field for conjecture. What has been done in
this field the following pages will show. It will be
better perhaps to ascend from the most improbable
hypotheses to those which carry with them more
show of reason, and thus prepare the way for the
consideration* which will follow.
L Von Bohlen, at once most skeptical and most
credulous, whose hasty conclusions are only paral-
leled by the rashness of his assumptions, unhesita-
tingly asserts that beyond all doubt the word Je-
hovah fat not Semitic in its origin. Pinning his
faith upon the Abraxas gems, in which he finds it
in the form Jao, he connects it with the Sanskrit
ieeat, deto, the Greek Aiit, and Latin Jovit or
Dixit. But, apart from the consideration that his
aut hori t y is at least questionable, he omits to ex-
plain the striking phenomenon that the older form
which has the d should be preserved in the younger
languages, the Greek and ancient Latin, while not
a twee of it appears in the Hebrew. It would be
desirable also that, before a philological argument
of this nature can be admitted, the relation between
he Semitic and Indo-Germanlc languages should
M mora dearly established. In the absence of this,
any in fer e n ce s which may be drawn from apparent
■caemblancea (the resemblance in the present case
sot being even apparent) will bad to certain error.
IW the Hebrews learned the word from the
Egyptians is a theory which has found some advo-
cates. The foundations for this theory are snmV
ciently slight As has been mentioned above,
Diodorua (i. 94) gives the Greek from 'low; and
from this it haa been inferred that 'law was a deity
of the Egyptian*, whereas nothing can be clearer
from the context than that the historian is speak-
ing especially of the God of the Jewa. Again, in
Macrobius (Sat i. c. 18), a line is quoted from an
oracular response of Apollo Clarius —
ip&fto TO* wmmur fcaiw ever fytfjun? 1o»,
which has been made use of for the some purpose.
But Jablonaky (Pcmth. JEg. ii. § 6) has proved
incontestably that the author of the verses from
which the above is quoted, was one of the Judaix-
ing Gnostics, who were in the habit of making the
names 'lam and %t$aM the subjects of mystical
speculations. The Ophites, who were Egyptians,
are known to have given the name 'loot to the
Moon (Neander, Gnat. 852), but this, as Tboluck
suggests, may have arisen from the fact that in
Coptic the Moon Is called ioh ( Verm. Schrf/Un, i.
386). Movers (PhBn. I. 540), while defending the
genuineness of the passage of Macrobius, connects
'lam, which denotes the Sun or Dionysus, with the
root TVlH, so that it signifies "the life-giver."
In any ease, the fact that the name 'low is found
among the Greeks and Egyptians, or among the
Orientals of Further Asia, in the 2d or 3d century,
cannot be made use of as an argument that the
Hebrews derived their knowledge of the word from
any one of these nations. On the contrary, there
can be but little doubt that the process in reality
was reversed, and that in this cose the Hebrews
were, not the borrowers, but the lenders. We have
indisputable evidence that it existed among them,
whatever may hare been its origin, many centuries
before it is found in other records; of the contrary
we have no evidence whatever. Of the singular
manner in which the word baa been introduced
into other languages, we hare a remarkable instance
in a passage quoted by M. Kt'musat, from one of
the works of the Chinese philosopher Lao-tseu, who
flourished, according to Chinese chronology, abort
the 6th or 7th century b. c, and held the opinions
commonly attributed to Pythagoras, Plato, and
others of the Greeks. This passage M. Rlmusat
translates as follows : " Celui que vous regarde*
et que vous ne voyez pas, ae nomine j ; celui que
vous ecoutez et que vous n'entendez pas, ae nomine
Hi ; celui que votre main cberche et qu'elle ne pent
pas saiair, se nomme Wti. Ce sont trois etres
qu'on ne peut comprendre, et qui, oonfondui, n'en
font qu'un." In these three letters J H V Keinuaat
thinks that he recognizes the name Jehovah of the
Hebrews, which might have been learnt by the
philosopher himself or some of his pupils in the
course of his travels; or it might have been brought
into China by some exiled Jews or Gnostics. The
Chinese interpreter of the passage maintains that
these mystical letters signify " the void," so that
in his time every trace of the origin of the word
had in all probability been lost. And not only doe*
it appear, though perhaps in a questionable form,
in the literature of the Chinese. In a letter from
the missionary Plaisont to the Vicar Apostobe
Boucho, dated 18th Feb. 1847, there is mention
maba of a tradition which existed among a tribe In
the jungles of Burmah, that the divine being was
caLsd Joe* or Kara-Jon, and that tht pscuHssllIsi
Digitized by
Google
1840 JEHOVAH
at tfa* Jehovah of the Old Testament wen attrib-
uted to him (Reinke, Beitrtge, Hi. 66). But all
this U very vague and more curioiu than convin-
cing. The inaeription in front of the temple of lata
at Saia quoted by Plutarch (<U It. H Ot.% 9), <> I
am all that hath been, and that is, and that ahall
be," which hat been employed aa an argument to
prove that the name Jehovah waa known among
the Egyptians, la mentioned neither by Herodotus,
Diodorus,' nor Strabo; and Proems, who don allude
to it, aaya it waa in the adytum of the temple-
But, even if it be genuine, its authority ia worth-
leu for the purpose for which it ia adduced. For,
supposing that Jehovah is the name to which such
meaning ia attached, it follows rather that the
Egyptians borrowed it and learned iU significance
from the Jews, unless it can be proved that both
ji Egyptian and Hebrew the same combination of
letters conveyed the same idea. Without, however,
having recourse to any hypothesis of this kind, the
peculiarity of the inaeription is sufficiently explained
by the place which, aa is well known, Isis holds in
the Egyptian mythology as the universal mother.
The advocates of the Egyptian origin of the word
have shown no lack of ingenuity in summoning to
their aid authorities the most unpromising. A
passage from a treatise on interpretation (rtpi
tpfj.r)rtias, § 71), written by one Demetrius, in
which it is said that the Egyptians hymned their
gods by means of the seven vowels, has been tor-
tured to give evidence on the point. Scaliger waa
In doubt whether it referred to Serapia, called by
Hesychlua " Serapia of seven letters " (to twra-
•fpdfifurrw SaosWif )> or to the exclamation Win
njrP, hi jthMM, "He b Jehovah." Of the
latter there can be but little doubt Gesner took
the seven Greek rowels, and arranging them in the
order IEHOOTA, found therein Jehovah. But he
was triumphantly refuted by Didymus, who main-
tained that the vowels were merely used for musical
notes, and in this very probable conjecture he Is
supported by the Milesian inscription elucidated
hy Barthdemy and others. In this the invocation
af God ia denoted by the seven vowels five times
repeated in different arrangements, Atntoiw,
Enunma, Hioimaf , Iev«a«|, Ovwan)i : each group
of vowels precedes a " holy " Uyu), and the whole
concludes with the following: "the city of the
MlU.i«n« and all the Inhabitants are guarded by
archangels." Muller, with much probability, con-
etudes that the seven vowels represented the seven
notes of the octave. One more argument for the
Egyptian origin of Jehovah remains to be noticed.
It ia found in the circumstance that Pharaoh
changed the name of Eliakim to Jehoiakim (8 K.
xxiil. 34), which it is asserted is not in accordance
frith the practice of conquerors towards the con-
quered, unless the Egyptian king Imposed upon the
king of Judah the name of one of his own gods.
But the same reasoning would prove that the origin
of the word was Babylonian, for the king of Baby-
lon changed the name of Mattanlah to ZedekiaA
;» K. xxiv. 17).
Bat many, abandoning aa untenable the theory
t an Egyptian origin, have sought to trace the
name among the Phoenicians and Canaanltlah tribes.
In support of this, Hartmann brings forward a
passage from a pretended fragment of Sanchoniatho
noted by Philo Byblius, a writer of the age of
Ram. But it ia now generally admitted that the
JEHOVAH
so-called fragment* of Sanchoniatho, the
Phoenician chronicler, are moat impudent tu s geia si
concocted by Philo Byblius himself. Besides, the
passage to which Hartmann refers is not found ia
Philo Byblius, but is quoted from Porphyry by
Eusebius (Prop. Eton. i. 9, § 21 ), and, genuine or
not, evidently alludes to the Jehovah of the Jews.
It is there stated that the most trustworthy au-
thority in matters connected with the Jews was
Sanchoniatho of Beyrout, who received his informa-
tion from Hierombalos \jtrubbaal) the priest of
the god 'I««4. From the occurrence of Jehovah
as a compound in the proper names of many who
were not Hebrews, Haniaker (Mite. Pia*. p. 174,
Ac.) contends that it must hare been known among
heathen people. But such knowledge, if it existed,
waa no more than might hare been obtained by
their necessary contact with the Hebrews. The
names of Uriah the Hittite, of Araunah or Aran/oA
the Jebusite, of TobtoA the Ammonite, and of the
Canaanitish town Bizjothjah, may be all explained
without having recourse to Hamaker's hypothesis.
Of aa little value is his appeal to 1 K. v. 7, where
we find the name Jehovah in the mouth of Hiram.
king of Tyre. Apart from the consideration that
Hiram would nec e ssarily be acquainted with the
name aa that of the Hebrews' national god, its
occurrence is sufficiently explained by the tenor of
Solomon's message (1 K. r. 3-6). Another point
on which Hamaker relies for support is the name
'AjBouor, which occurs aa that of a Tynan eufleto
in Menander (Joseph, c Apicm. i. 81), and which
he identifies with Obadlah (7"P"T3fc). But both
FUrst and Hengstenberg represent it in Hebrew
characters by , U3V, 'abdai, which even Hamaker
thinks more probable.
n. Such are the principal hypotheses which have
been constructed in order to account for a non-
Hebraic origin of Jehovah. To attribute much
value to them requires a large share of faith. It
remains now to examine the theories on the opposite
aide; for on this point authorities are by no means
agreed, and have frequently gone to the contrary
extreme. S. D. Luzxatto (Amm. in Jet. Vnt. in
ReeenmuDer's Comptnd. xxiv.) advances with sin-
gular naivete the extraordinary statement that
Jehovah, or rather HIPP divested of pointa, ia
compounded of two interjections, HI, nU, of pain,
and ITT, ydM, of joy, and denotes the author of
good and evil. Such an etymology, from one who is
unquestionably among the first of modern Jewiah
scholars, is a remarkable phenomenon. Ewald,
referring to Gen. xix. 84, suggests as the origin of
Jehovah, the Arab. »(«J&, which signifies « height,
heaven ; " a conjecture, of the honor of which no jus
will desire to rob him. But most have taken far
the basis of their explanations, and the diSereut
methods of punctuation which they propose, the
passage in Ex. ill. 14, to which we must naturally
look for a solution of the question. When Hoses
received his commission to be the deliverer of Israel,
the Almighty, who appeared in the burning bush,
communicated to him the name which he shook
give as the credentials of his mission : • And Qui
Mid unto Moses, I am that I am ("H/H nj"Rf
njrjy, eftye* defter eftaeft); and ha said. Tear
Digitized by
Google
JEHOVAH
Art*, thno say unto the children of brad, I AM
aaJa sett me unto you.*' Thai this passage is
«Imb1»1 tc indicate «ie etyniolngy of Jehovah, u
mderatood by the Hebrews, no one haa ventured
l» doubt: it is in fact the key to the whole myster;
I lot, though it certainly supplies '.he etymo'-gj
Lie interpretation must be determined bom s.her
considerations. According to this view then, 71171*
most be the 3d sing. masc. fut. of the substantive
verb JTTT, the older form of which wa« 71171,
still found in the Chaldee 71171, and Syriac )0?<,
a bet which will be referred to hereafter in dis-
cussing the antiquity of the name. If this ety-
mology be correct, and there seems little reason to
call it in question, one step towards the true punc-
tuation and pronunciation is already gained. Many
learned men, and among them Urotius, (jalatinus,
Crusiua, and Leusdeu, in an age when such fancies
were rife, imagined that, reading the name with
i he rowel points usually attached to it, they dis-
covered an indication of the eternity of God in the
bet that the name by which He revealed himself
to the Hebrews was compounded of the present
participle, and the future and preterite tenses of
the substantive verb. The idea may have been
suggested by the expression in Rev. Iv. 8 (o t)c itol
i&v xai i ipx6u(»os), and received apparent con-
Brmation from the Targ. Jon. on Deut. zxxii. 39,
and Targ. Jer. on Ex. iil. 14. These passages,
however, throw no light upou the composition of
the name, and merely assert that in ita significance
it embraces past, present, and future. But having
agreed to reject the present punctuation, it is use-
less to discuss any theories which may be based
upon it, had they even greater probability in their
fevor than the one just mentioned. As one of the
farms in which Jehovah appears in Greek characters
is 'low, it has been proposed by Cappellus to punc-
tuate it Hirp, j/aktih, which is clearly contrary
jo the analogy of 71 v verba, Guasetius suggested
JTIaTJj JfcMces, or TIT^, yihveh, in the former
of which he is supported by the authority of Furst;
nod Mercer and Corn, a Lapide read It 71V£,
fttvth: but on all these suppositions we should
have irTJ for 1TTJ in the terminations of com-
pound proper names. The suffrages of others are
divided between 7T17"P, or TlllTj, supposed to be
represented by the 'lajSa of Epiptianius above men-
tuned, and 71}7V or 71VP, which Fiirst holds
to be the 'ItvA of Porphyry, or the 'laoi of
Clemens Alexandrinus. Caspar! (Aficha, p. 6, Ac.)
decides in favor of the former on the ground that
this form only would give rise to the contraction
W in proper names, and opposes both Flint's
punctuation 7TJ7TJ or HJJ!JJ» «s well as that of
ny p or njrTJ, which would be contracted Into
TT. Gesenius punctuates the word fTirP, from
rtteh, or from 7TJJTT*, are derived the abbreviated
■rm PJ, jdA, used in poetry, and the form VT; =
jy*tr irp (so V£ becomes VV) which occurs
at the commence) lent o* compound props names
JEHOVAH 12-11
(HiUig, Jtmja, p. *). Delitzsch maintains that,
whichever punctuation be adopted, the quiescent
sheva under 71 is umgrammatical, and Chatepl
Patbacb is the proper vowel. He therefore write*
it 'mrP, yihavAh, to which he aays the 'AH
of Theodoret corresponds; the last vowel being
Kametz instead of Segol, according to the analogy
of proper names derived from ns verbs (e. g
1.0'', n~IO\ 713D\ and others). In uk
opinion the form r * Is not an abbreviate a, but
a concentration of the Tetragrammaton (Comas
fleer den P$aber, Einl.). There remains to be
noticed the suggestion of Gesenius that the form
71171^, which he adopted, might be the Hipb. fut
of the substantive verb. Of the same opinion was
Reuse. Others again would make it Piel, and read
TTj^. Fiirst {Hanhc. a. v.) mentions some other
etymologies which affect the meaning rather than
the punctuation of the name; such, for instance, as
that it is derived from a root 71171, " to over-
throw," and signifies " the destroyer or storm-
sender; " or that it denote) " the light or heaven,"
from a root 71171= 71S\ "to be bright," oi
" the life-giver," from the same root = 71171, « te
live." We have therefore to decide between njrj.'
or "^JOL «nd accept the former, 1. e. YaAiivtk,
as the more probable punctuation, continuing at
the same time for the sake of convenience to adopt
the form "Jehovah " in what follows, on account
of its familiarity to English readers.
HI. The next point for consideration is of vastly
more importance: what is the meaning of Jehovah,
and what does it express of the being and nature
of God, more than or in distinction from the other
names applied to the deity in the O. T. ? That
there was some distinction in these different appel-
lations waa early perceived, and various explanations
were employed to account for it. Tertullian {adv.
Iitrmog. c. 3) observed that God was not called
Lord (itiptot) till after the Creation, and in conse-
quence of it; while Augustine found in it an indi-
cation of the absolute dependence of man upon God
(de (Jen. ad Lit. viii. 2). Chryaostom (//out. xiv.
in Gen.) considered the two names, Lord and God,
as equivalent, and the alternate use of them arbi-
trary. But all their argument* proceed upon the
supposition that the itiptos of the LX X. is the true
rendering of the original, whereas it is merely the
translation of ^"W, iddndi, whose points it bears.
With regard to DTT'bft lldhbn, the othir chirf
name by which the Deity ia designated in th» 0. T.,
it haa been held by many, and the opinion dees not
even now want supporters, that in the plural form
of the word was shadowed forth the plurality of
persons in the godhead, and the mystery of ths
Trinity was inferred therefrom. Such, according
to Peter Lombard, was the true significance of
Elohim. But Calvin, Mercer, Drusius and Bel-
larmine have given the weight of their authority
against an explanation so fanciful mid arbitrary.
Among tne Jewish writer* of the Middle Ages the
question much more nearly approach jd its solution.
K. Jehuda Hallevi (lz.h cent.), the author of ths
Digitized by
Google
124£
JEHOVAH
took Omri, (buna u. 'he usage of Elohim • protest
against idolaters, who call each personified power
R"7))i Mffl>, u»I oil collectively Elohim. Ha in-
terpreted it u the moat general name of the Deity,
distinguishing Him aa manifested in the exhibition
ol" hit power, without reference to hia personality
or moral qualities, or to any special relation which
He bean to man. Jehovah, on the contrary, is the
revealed and known tied- While the meaning of
the former could ho evolved by reasoning, the true
significance of the Utter could only be apprehended
" by that prophetic vision by which a man is, aa it
were, separated and withdrawn from his own kind,
and approaches to the angelic, and another spirit
enter* into him." In like manner Maimonides
(Afor. Neb. i. 61, Buxt) saw in Jehovah the name
which teaches of the substance of the Creator, and
Abartunel (quoted by Buxtorf, de Nom. Dei, § 39)
distinguishes Jehovah, as denoting God according
to what He is in himself, from Elohim which con-
veys the idea of the impression made by his power.
In the opinion of Astruc, a Belgian physician, with
whom the documentary hypothesis originated, the
alternate use of the two names was arbitrary, and
determined by no essential difference. Haase (Ent-
dtckungen) considered them as historical names,
and Sack (de Utu Nom. Dei, etc.) regarded Elohim
as a vague term denoting " a certain infinite, om-
nipotent, incomprehensible existence, from which
things finite and visible have derived their origin "
while to God, as revealing himself, the more definite
title of Jehovah was applied. Ewald, in his tract
on the composition of Genesis 'written when he
was nineteen), maintained that Elohim denoted the
Deity in general, and is the common or lower
name, while Jehovah was the national god of the
Israelites. But in order to carry out hia theory he
was compelled in many places to alter the text, and
was afterwards induced to modify his statement*,
which were opposed by Granilierg and Stahelin.
Doubtless Elohim is used in many case* of the gods
of the heathen, who included in the same title the
God of the Hebrews, and denoted generally the
Deity when spoken of aa a supernatural being, and
when no national feeling influenced the speaker.
It was Elohim who, in the eyes of the heathen,
delivered the Israelites from Egypt (1 Sam. iv. 8),
and the Egyptian lad adjured David by Elohim,
rather than by Jehovah, of whom he would have no
Knowledge (1 Sam. xxx. 15). So Ehud announces
to the Moabitish king a message from Elohim
(Judg. Hi. SO); to the Syrians the Jehovah of the
Hebrews was only their national God, one of the
Elohim (1 K. xx. 23, 28), and in the mouth of a
heathen toe name Jehovah would convey no more
Intelligible meaning than this. It la to be observed
also that when a Hebrew speaks with a heathen be
nses the more general term Elohim. Joseph, in
addressing Pharaoh (Gen. xli. 16), and David, in
appealing to the king of Moab to protect his family
i. Sam. xxii. 3), designate the Deity by the less
specific title; and on the other hand the same rule
la generally followed when the heathen are the
speakers, aa in the case of Abimelech (Gen. xxi.
13). the Hittites (Gen. xxiii. 6), the Midianite
(Judg. vii. 14), and Joseph in hia assumed character
as an Egyptian (Gen. xlii. 18). But, although this
distinction between Elohim, aa the general appella-
tion of Deity, and Jehovah, the national God of
the laraelities, contains some superficial truth, the
of their difference mint be sought for
JEHOVAH
far deeper, and as a foundation fbv the I
which will be adduced recourse must again ha bad
to etymology.
IV. With regard to the derivation of CT1 St*,
iUhiut, the pL of I?1^H etymologist* are IMdad
their opinions ; some connecting it with 7S, «V,
and the unused root VW, iU, "to be
while others refer it to the Arabic tj\, aliha, » to
be astonished," and hence Jul, alaha, "to worship,
adore," Elohim thus denoting the Supreme Bang
who was worthy of all worship and adoration, th*
dread and awful One. But Hint, with much
greater probability, takes the noun in this ease as
the primitive from which i* derived the idea of
worship contained in the verb, and gives as the
true root nbM=VsW, « to be strong." Delhzseh
would prefer a root, P ^V = n , 78=b*4. (Sgmi.
ad Ptnlm. iUustr. p. 39). From whatever root,
however, the word may be derived, moat are of
opinion that the primary idea contained in it ia
that of strength, power ; so that Elohim is the
proper appellation of the Deity, as manifested in
hia creative and universally sustaining agency, and
in the general divine guidance and government of
the world. Hengstenberg, who adheres to the
derivation above mentioned from the Arab., nliia
and alaha, deduces from this etymology hia theory
that Elohim indicates a lower, and Jehovah a
higher stage of the knowledge of God, on the
ground that " the feeling of fear is the lowest which
can exist in reference to God, and merely in respect
of this feeling is God marked by this designation."
But the same inference might also be drawn on
the supposition that the idea of simple power or
strength is the most prominent in toe word : and
it is mora natural that the Divine Being should be
conceived of a* strong before He became the object
of fear and adoration. To this view Gesenius ac-
cedes, when he says that the notion of worshipping
and fearing ia rather derived from the power of the
Deity which ia expressed in his name. The ques-
tion now arises, What is the meaning to be sttached
to the plural form of the word? As has been
already mentioned, some have discovered therein
the mystery of the Trinity, while others maintain
that it point* to polytheism. The Rabbis generally
explain it a* the plural of majesty ; Rabbi Bechai,
as signifying the lord of all powers. Abarbanel and
Kimchi consider it a title of honor, in aceordanat
with the Hebrew idiom, of which examples will Ic
found in Is. liv. 5, Job xxxv. 10, Gen. xxxix. SO,
xlii. 30. In Prov. ix. 1, the plural iTOjn,
ehoembth, " wisdoms," is used for wisdom in the
abstract, as including all the treasures of wisdom
and knowledge. Hence it ia probable that the
plural form Elohim, instead of pointing to poly-
theism, is applied to God a* comprehending in
himself the fullness of all power, and uniting in s
perfect degree all that which the name signifies
and all the attribute* which the heathen ascribe H
the several divinities of their pantheon. The aj»
gular l? >,t ^. *"*>"*, with few exceptions (N«h a
17; 8 Chr. zxxii. lb\ ecun only in poetry, at
Digitized by
Google
JEHOVAH
let to Stand, upon examination of the pa-sages in
which Flnhim ocean, ths. it is chiefly in places
■nan God is exhibited only in the plenitude of his
*nu, and where no especial reference la made to
tie unity, personality, or holiness, or to his relation
jo Israel and the theocracy. (See Ps. rvi. 1, xix.
1, 7, 8.) Hengstenberg's etymology of the word
is disputed by Delitzsch (Stpnb. ad Pa. Uluttr. p.
*9 ».), who refers it, as has been mentioned above,
to a root indicating power or might, and sees in it
so expression not of what men think of God, but
of what He is in Himself, in so far sa He has life
■annipotent in Himself, and according as He is the
beginning and end of all life. For the true ex-
planation of the name be refers to the revelation
of the mystery of the Trinity. But it is at least
extremely doubtful whether to the ancient Israelites
any idea of this nature was conveyed by Elohim ;
and in making use of the more advanced knowledge
•applied by the New Testament, there is some
danger of discovering more meaning and a more
subtle significance than was ever intended to be
expressed.
V. But while Elohim exhibits God displayed in
his power as the creator and governor of the phys-
ical universe, the name .lehovah designates his
nature as He stands in relation to man, as the only,
almighty, true, personal, holy BeiiK;, a spirit, and
"the father of spirits" (Num. id 22; comp.
John iv. 94), who revealed himself to his people,
made a covenant with them, and became their law-
giver, and to whom all honor and worship are due.
If the etymology above given be accepted, and the
name be derived from the future tense of the sub-
stantive verb, it would denote, in accordance with
the general analogy of proper names of a similar
form, " He that is," " the Being," whose chief
attribute is eternal existence. Jehovah is repre-
sented as eternal (Gen. xxi. S3; comp. 1 Tim. vi.
IS), unchangeable (Ex. iii. 14; Mai. iii. 6), the only
being (Josh. xxii. 23; Ps. 1. 1), creator and lord
3f aU things (Ex. xx. 11; comp. Num. xvi. 22
with xxvii. 16; Is. xlii. 5). It is Jehovah who
made the covenant with bis people (Gen. xv. 18;
Num. x. 33, Ac.). In this connection Elohim occurs
but once (Ps. lxxviii. 10), and wen with the article,
ha-Elobim, which expresses more personality than
Elohim alone, is found but seldom (Judg. xx. 37 ;
' 1 Sam- iv. 4). The Israelites were enjoined to
alisuwi the commandments of Jehovah (Lev. iv. 37,
ic-), to keep his law, and to worship Him alone.
Hence the phrase " to serve Jehovah " (Ex. x. 7,
8, Ac) b applied to denote true worship, whereas
"to serve ha- Elohim " is used but once in this
jense (Ex. iii- 12), and Elohim occurs in the same
association only when the worship of idols is spoken
H (Deux. iv. 38; Judg. iii. 6). As Jehovah, the
xdy true God, is the only object of true worship,
to Him belong the sabbaths and festivals, and all
the ordinances connected with the religious services
af the Israelites (Ex. x. 9, xii. 11; Uv. xxiii. 2).
Vis are the altars on which offerings are made to
las true God; the priests and ministers are his
(1 Saw. H. 11, xiv. 3), and so exclusively that a
ariest of Etohim is always associated with idolatrous
worship. To Jehovah alone are offerings made
(Ex. viii. 8}, and if Elohim is ever used in this
""— «"", U is always qualified by pronominal
•affixes, or some word in construction with it, so as
w indicate ita true God ; in all other cases it refers
M idols (Ex. xxii. 20. xxxiv. 15). It follow) nat-
Msty that t to Temple and Tabernacle are Jehovah's.
JEHOVAH 1248
and if they are Attributed to Elohim, the Witter fa-
in some manner restricted as before. The prophets
are the prophets of Jehovah, and their announce-
ments proceed from him, seldom from Elohim.
The Israelites are the people of Jehovah (Ex. xxxvi.
20), the congregation of Jehovah (Num. xvi. 3),
as the Moabites are the people of Chemush (Jer.
xlviii. 46). Their king is the anointed of Jehovah;
their wars are the wars of Jehovah (Ex. xiv. 25;
1 Sam. xviii. 17); their enemies are the enemies
of Jehovah (2 Sam. xii. 14); it is the hand of
Jehovah that delivers them up to their foes (Judg.
vi. 1, xiii. 1, Ac.), and he it is who raises up far
them deliverers and judges, and on whom they call
in times of peril (Judg. U. 18, UL 9, 15; Josh,
xxiv. 7; 1 Sam. xvii. 37). In fine, Jehovah is the
theocratic king of his people (Judg. viii. 23), by
him their kings reign and achieve success against
the national enemies (1 Sam. xi. 13, xiv. 23).
Their heroes are inspired by his Spirit (Judg. iii.
10, vi. 34), and their hand steeled against their
foes (2 Sam. vii. 23); the watchword of Gideon
was " The Sword of Jehovah, and of Gideon ! " ■
(Judg. vii. 30). The day on which God executes
judgment on the wicked Is the day of Jehovah (Is.
ii. 12, xxxiv. 8; comp. Rev. xvi. 14). As the
Israelites were in a remarkable manner distin-
guished as the people of Jehovah, who became their
lawgiver and supreme ruler, it is not strange that
He should be put in strong contrast with (Jhemosh
(Judg. xl. 24), Ashtaroth (Judg. x. 6), and the
Baalim (Judg. iii. 7), the national deities of the
surrounding nations, and thus be preeminently dis-
tinguished as the tutelary deity of the Hebrews in
one aspect of his character. Such and no more
was lie to the heathen (1 K. xx. 23); but all this
and much more to the Israelites, to whom Jehovah
was a distinct personal subsistence, — the living
God, who reveals himself to man by word and deed,
helps, guides, saves, and delivers, and is to the Ok)
what Christ is to the New Testament. Jehovah
was no abstract name, but thoroughly practical
and stood in intimate connection with the religious
life of the people. While Elohim represents God
only in his most outward relation to man, and din
tiuguishes him as recognized in his omnipotence,
Jehovah describes him according to his innermost
being. In Jebovah the moral attributes are pre-
sented as constituting the essence of his nature,
whereas in Elohim there is no reference to person,
alitr or moral character. The relation of Klohim
to Jehovah has been variously explained. The for-
mer, in Hengstenberg's opinion, indicates a lower,
and the latter a higher, stage of consciousness of
God; Elohim becoming Jehovah by an historical
process, and to show how he became so Ijeing the
main object of the sacred history. Kurts considers
the two names as related to each other as power
and evolution; Elohim the God of the beginning,
Jehovah of the development; Elohim the creator,
Jehovah the mediator. Elohim is God of the be-
ginning and end, the creator and the judge; Jeho-
vah the God of the middle, of the development
which lies between the beginning and end (Die
Einhrit der Gen.). That Jehovah is identical witk
Elohim, and not a separate being, is indicated bi
the joint use of the names Jebovah- Elohim.
\ I. The antiquity of the name Jehovah among
« • « lor Jebovah and fbr Qidooo " is the s«nl
translation. The A. T Interpolates " the sword of."
Digitized by
Google
1244
JEHOVAH
the Hebrew* hu formed the subject of mnch dis-
aaaaibn. That it tu not known before the ige
of Hoses hu been inferred from Ex. vi. 3; while
Vou Bohlen assigns to it a much more recent date,
and contend* that we have " no ooncluiive proof of
the worehip of Jehovah anterior to the ancient
hymns of David " (Int. to Gen. i. 150, Eng. tr.).
But, on the other hand, we ahould be inclined to
infer front the etymology of the word that it orig-
inated in an age long prior to that of Hoses, in
whoae time the root Hjn = TX^J waa already
antiquated. Fiom the Aramaic form in which it
appeare (comp. Chald. Hjn, Syr. /OOT), Jahn
refer* to the earliest times of Abraham for its date,
and to Meaopotamia or Ur of the Cbaldeea for its
birthplace. Ita usage in Geneaia cannot be ex-
plained, aa Le (Merc suggests, by rappoaing it to be
employed by anticipation, for it ia introduced where
the peraont to whom the history relates are speak-
ing, and not only where the narrator adopts terms
familiar to himself; and the same difficulty remains
whatever hypothesis be assumed with regard to the
original documents which formed the basis of the
history. At the same time it is distinctly stated
in Ex. vi. 3, that to the patriarchs God waa not
known by the name Jehovah. If, therefore, this
passage has reference to the first revelation of Jeho-
vah simply aa a name and title of God,, there is
dearly a discrepancy which requires to be explained.
In renewing hU promise of deliverance from Egypt,
" God spake unto Hoses and said unto him, I am
Jehovah; and I appeared unto Abraham, unto
Isaac, and unto Jacob, by (the name of) God Al-
mighty (El Shnddai, ^W 7N), but by my name
Jehovah was I not known to them." It follows
then that, if the reference were merely to the name
as a name, the passage in question would prove
equally that before this time Elohim was unknown
as an appellation of the Deity, and God would ap-
pear uniformly as El Shaddai in the patriarchal
history. But although it was held by Tbeodoret
( Quasi, xv. in Ex.) and many of the Fathers, who
lave been followed by a long list of moderns, that
he name waa first made known by God to Hoses,
aid then introduced by him among the Israelites,
Um contrary waa maintained by Cajetan, Lyranua,
Calvin, Roaenmuller, Hengstenberg, and others,
who deny that the passage in Ex. vi. alludes to the
introduction of the name. Calvin saw at onoe that
the knowledge there spoken of could not refer to
toe syllables and letters, but to the recognition of
jiod's glory and majesty. It waa not the name,
jut the true depth of its significance which was
unknown to and uncomprehended by the patriarchs.
They had known God as the omnipotent. El Shnd-
dai (Gen. xvii. 1, xxviii. 3), the ruler of the phys-
ical universe, and of man as one of his creatures;
aa a God eternal, immutable, and true to hia prom
iaes he waa yet to be revealed. In the character
expressed by the name Jehovah he had not hitherto
Veen fully known ; his true attributes had not been
eoognized (comp. Jarchi on Ex. vi. 3) in his work-
ing and acts for Israel. Aben Eire explained the
occurrence of the name in Genesis as simply indi
sating the knowledge of it aa a proper name, not
is a qualificative expressing the attributes and qual-
ties of God. Referring to other passages in which
vi* phitae " the name of God " occurs, it ia dear
hat something more is intended by it than a mere
laaauttion, and that the proclamation of the name
JEHOVAH
of God is a revelation of hia moral attributes, ant
of hia brae character aa Jehovah (Ex. xixUL It
xxxiv. 8, 7) the God of the covenant. Jlaiinonldet
(Afor. Neb. 1. 64, ed. Buxtorf ) explains the nam*
of God aa signifying hia essence and his truth, at J
Olahauaen (on Matt, xviii. 30) interprets " name "
(•roiis) aa denoting " personality and essential
being, and that not as it ia incomprehensible or
unknown, but in ita manifestation." The name
of a thing represents the thing itself, so far aa it
can be ex p i ease d in words. That Jehovah waa not
a new name Havernick concludes from Ex. iii. 14,
where >• the name of God Jehovah is evidently pre-
supposed as already in use, and is only explained,
interpreted, and applied. ... It is certainly not a
new name that is introduced ; on the contrary, the
T/JM "H?;8 nV|y (I am that I am) would be
unintelligible, if the name itself were not presup-
posed ss already known. The old name of antiq-
uity, whoae precious significance had been forgot-
ten and neglected by the children of Israel, here
as it were rises again to life, and is again brought
home to the consciousness of the people " (/ntrcd
to the Pent. p. 61). The same pasaage supplies an
argument to prove that by " name " we are not to
understand merely letters and syllables, for Jehovah
appears at first in another form, ehyek (HVW).
The correct collective view of Ex. vi. 3, Hengsten-
berg conceives to be the following — "Hitherto
that Being, who in one aspect was Jehovah, in an-
other had always been Elohim. The great crisis
now drew nigh in which Jehovah Elohim would be
changed into Jehovah. In prospect of this event
GoB solemnly announoed himself aa Jehovah."
Great stress baa been laid, by those who deny
the antiquity of the name Jehovah, upon the bet
that proper names compounded with it occur but
seldom before the age of Samud and David. It ia
undoubtedly true that, after the revival of the true
faith among the Israelites, proper names so com-
pounded did become more frequent, but if it can lie
shown that prior to the time of Moses any such
names existed, it will be sufficient to prove that the
name Jehovah was not entirely unknown. Among
those which have been quoted for thia purpose are
Jochebed the mother of Hoses, and daughter of
Levi, and Horiah, the mountain on which Abraham
waa commanded to offer up Isaac Against the
former it la urged that Hoses might have changed
her name to Jochebed after the name Jehovah had
been communicated by God ; but thia ia very im-
probable, as he was at this time eighty yeare old,
and his mother In all probability dead. If this
only be admitted aa a genuine instance of a name
compounded with Jehovah, it takes us at once back
into the patriarchal age, and proves that a word
which waa employed in forming the proper name
of Jacob's grand-daughter could not have been un-
known to that patriarch himself. The name Horiah
(n»"VlD) is of more Importance, for in one passage
in which it occurs it Is accompanied by an etv-
mology intended to indicate what was then under-
stood by it (3 Cbr. iii. 1). Hengstenberg regards
it as a compound of ^(0.0, the Hoph. Part.
of 1**^. and »*, the abbreviated form of n^rTj •
so that, according to this etymology, it would sig-
nify " shown by Jehovah." Geaeniua, adopting til)
meaning of TIN") 'm Gen. itli. 8, renders it • da*
Digitized by
Google
JEHOVAH
Mi I J Jehovah," bnt suggests it the nme time
•bat he considers a more probable derivation, ac-
sording to which Jehovah doe* not form a part of
the compound word. But there is reason to believe
from various allusions in Gen. xxii. that the former
ma regarded as the true etymology.
Having thus considered the origin, significance,
and antiquity of the name Jehovah, the reader will
he in a position to judge how much of truth there
is in the assertion of Schwind (quoted by Reinke,
Beilr. iii. 136, n. 10) that the terms Klohim, Jtho-
eak Elokim, and then Jehovah alone applied to
God, show " to the philosophic inquirer the progress
of the human mind from a plurality of gods to a
superior god, and from this to a single Almighty
Creator and ruler of the world."
The principal authorities which have been made
use of in this article are Hengstenberg, On the
Authenticity of the Pentateuch, i. 913-307, Eng.
trans.; Reinke, PhiL hittoi. Abhandlung doer den
GoUesnamen Jehova, BeUrige, vol. iii. ; Tholuek,
Vemdsehtc Schriften, th. i. 377-405; Kurts, Die
Kinheit der Genesis iliii.-Uii. : Ketl, Ueber die
Oottemamen tm Pentatenche, in Rudelbach and
Gosricke's Zatschrift ; Ewald, Die Composition
der Genetu ; Geaeniua, Thesaurus ; Bunsen, Bioel-
werk, tad Reland, Decas excrcuatumum philo-
logiearum it vera pronuntiatione nominis Jehova,
betides those already quoted. W. A. W.
• In regard to the use of nJT* in the 0. T.,
especiaUy in the Pentateuch and the Psalms, con-
sidered at a mark of antiquity and authorship, the
reader it referred to the articles on those books.
The article by Dr. Tholuek (see above) first pub-
lished in his JJtteraritcher Anzeiyer (1832. May,
ft".), wtt translated by Dr. Robinson in the BiU. Re-
pository, hr. 89-108. It examines "the hypoth-
esis of the Kgrptian and Indian origin of the name
Jehovah," and shows that it has no proper founda-
tion. It it held that " the true derivation of the
word it that which the earliest Hebrew records
present, namely, from the verb 7T* '." Prof. E
BaOantine discusses the signiAcancy of the name in
the tame periodical (iii. 730-744), under the head
of " Interpretation of Ex. vi. 2, 3." Of the eleven
different explanations which he reviews, he adopts
the one which supposes Jehovah " to imply simply
real existence, that which is, as distinguished from
that which is not" Hence, when it is said that God
appeared to Abraham, bate, and Jacob at El Shtut-
dai (the Almighty), but was not known to them as
Jehovah, it is "a formal declaration by God him-
self of the commencement of a new dispensation of
religion and providence, the grand design of which
was to make known God as Jehovah, the only
true and living God," in opposition to idols and all
sther false geds. It is not meant that the name
itself of Jehovah was unknown to the patriarchs;
eat that the object of God's dealing with them was
different from that of the Mosaic dispensation,
namely, to vindicate the truth concerning Him
(expressed by rrjiT), that Be alone is Ike tiring
God. Dr. WordrworUTt view of the introduction
JEHOVAH JIBEH
12«
■ »K Is justly anted tnVl a mora exact translation
* the Hebrew (ax. vi. 8) guides us mors directly t>.
It* state than does that of the A. T.; "I appeared to
abaahaia, to bate, and to Jacob In W SiwMal " (i. «.
>; "and my aaaav
of the name is very similar to this. There Is tm
a contrast in the passage (Ex. vi. 2, 3) brtweet
the two names (Shaddai and Jehovah); bnt a com-
parison of attributes, and of the degrees cf cleaniea
with which they were revealed. Hence the atser
tion is not that >' the name Jehovah wss not known
before, but that its full meaning had not bt u made
known " (Holy Bible, with Notes, ii. 21G).»
The more common view (stated in the preceding
article), restricts the idea of this fuller revelation to
God's immutability as the one ever faithful to his
promises. This explanation is preferred by Rev
J. Quarry, in his able work on Genesis and in
Authorship (Lend., 1866). "The l*atriarchs ha I
only the promises unfulfilled; in respect to tit
fulfillment of them they received not the pr>n.-
ises." God is now about to fulfill the great promise
to give the land of Canaan to their seed, and so I Ir
announces himself to Moses in the words, ' I am
Jehovah,' and tells him that while the Patriarchs had
manifestations of God in hit character as El Shad-
dai, they had no experience of him as regard) thw
name, which implied the continuousness and un-
changeableness of his gracious purpose toward them
(p. 296). Ebrard {Hittorische TheoL ZnlschrijX,
1849, iv.) agrees with those who infer the later ori-
gin of the name from Ex. vi. 2, 3. He maintains
that " Jehovah " occurs in Genesis only as prolep-
tic, and on that ground denies that its use there
affords any argument against the unity of the au
thorship of that book. Recent discussions have
rendered this latter branch of the subject specially
important. (For the fuller literature which belongs
here, see under Pentateuch, Atner. ed. ) In regard
to the r e pre se n tation of PJrT* by itvptos in tbt
Septuagint, we refer the reader to Prof. Stuart's
article on Kipun in the BiU. Repository, i. 738 ft".
It is shown that this Greek title is employed in the
great majority of instances to designate that most
sacred of all the Divine appellations. H.
jEHCVAH-jntEH (!"i»5"£ nirp •.
K'ipioj tlBer: Dominus videt), i. e. Jehovah wit
me, or provide, the name given by Abraham to tot
place on which he had been commanded to offer
Isaac, to commemorate the interposition of the
angel of Jehovah, who appeared to prevent the
sacrifice (Gen. xxii. 14) and provided another victim
The immediate allusion is to the expression in the
8th verse, " God will look out for Himself a lamb
for a burnt offering," bnt it it not unlikely that
there is at the tame time a covert reference to
Moriab, the scene of the whole occurrence The
play upon words is followed up in the latter claim
of ver. 14, which appears in the form of a popukr
proverb :" as it is said this day, In the mountain
of Jehovah, He will be seen," or " provision shaD
be made." Such must be the rendering if the
received punctuation be accepted, but on this point
there is a division of opinion. The text from which
the LXX. made their translation must have been
ntci? rrjrp tji^, »v T «7 <>« k<v>k» &$8n,
"on the mountain Jehovah appeared," and the
tame, with the exception of T^fT, for the last
Jehovah " (i. t. as regards my name Jehovab) " was I
not known to them.'' The A. T. ntsnotatat « ths
name of" In the ant part of the verts, and then, as
11 for the sake of comnpnodaiKe, says. " by my lata* '
tat the st ems) tart. n.
Digitized by
Google
1246
JEHOVAH-NISSI
word, mat have been the rending of the Vulgate
and Svriac. The Targuin of Onkeloa u obwure.
W. A. W.
JEHO'VAH-NIS SI CD? rTJIT.: Kopwt
utrmpvy^i fiov'- Domintu tzttUtilio men), i. e. Je-
hovah my banner, the name given by Moses to the
altar which he built in commemoration of the dis-
eotufiture of toe Amalekites by Joshua and his
choaen warriors at Kephidim (Ex. xvii. 15). It
was erected either upon the hill overlooking the
little-field, upon which Moses sat with the staff of
God in his hand, or upon the battle-field itself.
According to Aben Ezra it was on the Horeb. The
Targum of Onkeloa paraphrases tlte verse thus:
" Moses built an altar and worshipped upon it
beiore Jehovah, who bad wrought for him miracles
(^ > D > 3, nfafn)." Such too is Jarehi's explanation
of the name, referring to the miraculous interpoai
lion of God in the defeat of the Amalekitea. The
LXX. in their translation, " the Lord my refuge,''
evidently supposed nun to be derived from the root
D-13, n<?«, « to flee," and the Vulgate traced it to
N$J?J, '• to lift up." The significance of the name
is probably contained in the allusion to the staff
which Moses held in his hand as a banner during
the engagement, and the raising or lowering of
which turned the fortune of battle In favor of the
Israelites or their enemies. God is thus recognized
in the memorial altar as the deliverer of his people,
who leads them to victory, and is their rallying
point in time of peril. On the figurative use of
'• banner," see Ps. lx. 4; Is. xi. 10.
W. A. W.
JEHCVAH-SHAXOM (DSbtJ* TVp]:
eiptrn KuploV- Domini p«x), i. e. Jehovah (is)
peace, or, with the ellipsis of % H ,rj*, " Jehovah,
the God of peace." The altar erected by Gideon in
Ophrah was so called in memory of the salutation
addressed to him by the angel of Jehovah, >' Peace
be unto thee" (Judg. vi. 24). Piscator, however,
following the Hebrew accentuation, which he says
requires a different translation, renders the whole
passage, without introducing the proper name,
'•when Jehovah had proclaimed peace to him;"
but his alteration is harsh and unnecessary. The
LXX. and Vulg. appear to hare inserted the words
as they stand in the present Hebrew text, and to
have read J ljj I ) Dl vtf, but they are supported
by no MS. authority. W. A. W.
• J EHCV AH - SH AMTtf AH (nVT}
TVfW : Kvpwj Utt: Dominut ibidem), i. e. Je-
hurtli there, or lit. thither, a the marginal reading
( A. V . ) of Ezek. xlviii. 35. In the text the trans-
lators have put ■' The Lord is there." In both
respects the A. V. has followed the bishops' Bible.
It is the name that was to be given to the new
city which KzekW saw in his Vision, and has so
gorgeously described (chap, xl.-xlviii.). Compare
Rev. xxii. 3, 4. H.
» JEHCVAH - TSIIVKENTJ (5TJ ~*
*0ijnV> J'l'orah our righteoumets : in Jer.
xxiii. 0, Kvpies 'ItnrtoVic, FA. «. Itnrsunut; in
ncriii. 16, Rom. Vat. Alex. FA. AM. omit, Comp.
copier turaioo-vn) f/iusV: Domintu jtutot rater)
a the marginal reading of the A. V. in Jer. xxiii.
JEHU
6 and xniii. 10, where the text has " The Lots] 0«
Righteousness." It will be seen that the LXX
makes a proper name of 'Dp/IS (pur righteau-
ikss) in the first of the above passages. Tht
hesitation of our translators whether they should
render or transfer the expression may have been the
greater from their supposing it to be one of tht
Messianic titles. The long exegetical note in tht
margin of the Bishops' Bible (Jer. ixxiii. IS) is
curious and deserves to be read. H.
JEHOZ'ABAD ("TJJI'T [«*<>»• Jd**ak
g"ve"\: 'la(a&4S; [Alex. I«fa3a8:] Jotnbad). 1.
A Korachite Ijevite, second son of Obed-edom, and
one of the porters of the south gate of the temple,
and of the storehouse there (D^EDS iT?) in the
time of David (1 Chr. xxvi. 4, 16, compared with
Neb. xU. 25).
2. (riMfajSaK;] Joeeph. 'Oxtfimrt.) A Ben-
jamite, captain of 180,000 armed men, in the day*
of king Jehoshaphat (2 Chr. xvii. 18).
3. [In 2 K., *I«.fa0«'J; in S Chr., 'IatfaJSA;
Vat. Zm(afi(S; Alex. Za£<0-] Son of Sbomcr or
Shimrith, a Moabitish woman, and possibly a de-
scendant of the preceding, who with another eon-
spired against king Joash and slew him in his bed
(3 K. xii. 21; 2 Chr. xxiv. 26). [Joash.] The
similarity in the names of both conspirators and
their parents is worth notice.
This name is commonly abbreviated in the He-
brew to JoZABAl). A C H.
JBHOZ'ADAK (PT^H} [wAom Jehovak
mnketjntf]: 'Isnro3d>; Alex. W<8«r: Joeedec),
son of the high-priest Sekaiah (1 Chr. vi. 14, 15)
in the reign of Zedekiah. When his father was
skin at Kiblah by order of Nebuchadnezzar, in the
11th of Zedekiah (2 K. xxv. 18, 21 ), Jehozadak was
led away captive to Babylon (1 Chr. vi. 15), where
be doubtless spent the remainder of his days. He
himself never attained the high-priesthood, the
Temple being burnt to the ground, and so con-
tinuing, and he himself being a captive all his life.
But be was the father of J kshua the high-priest —
who with Zerubbabel beaded the Return from Cap-
tivity — and of all his successors till the pontificate
of Alcimus (Kzr. iii. 2; N'eh. xii. 26, Ac). [Hich-
PR1K8T.] Nothing more is known about him. It
is perhaps worth remarking that his name is com-
pounded of the same elements, and has exactly the
same meaning, as that of the contemporary king
Zedekiah — "God is righteous;" and that the
righteousness of God was signally displayed in the
simultaneous suspension of the throne of David and
the priesthood of Aaron, on account of the sins of
Judah. This remark perhaps acquires weight from
the fact of his successor Jeshua, who restored the
priesthood and rebuilt the Temple, having the same
name as Joshua, who brought the nation into the
land of promise, and Jesus, a name signiflcatiTC
of salvation.
Iu Haggai and Zechariah, though the name in
the original is exactly as above, yet our translator!
have choaen to follow the Greek form, and presort
it at Josedkch.
In Ezra and Nehemiah it is abbreviated, botr
in Hebrew and A V., to Jokadak.
• a. a n
JEHU. 1. (rfflT = Jehovah it He; [b
1 K., 9 K.J 'Io0, [Vat E,o»; in 2 Our., 'i^f
Vat. Im; in Hot., 'iavtsf;] Alex, [eomnsonb]
Digitized by
Google
JTiHU
^m! loseph. 'InoSr.) The bonder of the fifth
tjnaslj of the kingdom of Israel. Hi* history was
Ml in the lost " Chronicles of the Kings of Israel "
(2 K. z. 84). His father's name was Jehoahaphat
(8 K. iz. 3); his grandfather's (which, as being
better known, was sometimes affixed to his own —
1 K. ix.) was Nimshi. In his youth he had been
one of the guards of Ahab. His first appearance
in history is when, with a comrade in arms, Bidkax,
dt Bar-Dakar (Ephrem. Syr. Opp. hr. 640), he rode »
behind Ahab on the fatal journey from Samaria to
Jezreel, and heard, and laid up in his heart, the
warning of Klyah against the murderer of Naboth
(2 K. ix. 25). But he had already, as it would
teem, been known to Elijah as a youth of promise,
and, accordingly, in the vision at Horeb he is men-
tioned as the future king of Israel, whom Elijah is
to anoint as the minister of vengeance on Israel
(1 K. xix. 16, 17). This injunction, for reasons
unknown to us, Ehjah never fulfilled. It was re-
served long afterwards for his successor Kliaha.
Jehu meantime, in the reigns of Ahaziah and
Jehoram, had risen to importance. The same ac-
tivity and vehemence which had fitted him for his
earlier distinctions still continued, and he was
known far and wide as a charioteer whose rapid
driving, as if of a madman » (2 K. ix. 20), could
be distinguished even from a distance. He was,
nnder the last-named king, captain of the host in
the siege of Ramoth-GUead. According to Kphraim
Syrua (who omits the words " saith the I-ord " in
2K. ix. 26, and makes " I " refer to Jehu) he had,
in a dream the night before, seen the blood of
Naboth and his sons (Ephrem. Syr. Opp. iv. 540).
Whilst in the midst of the officers of the besieging
army a youth suddenly entered, of wild appearance
(2 K. ix. 11), and insisted on a private interview
frith Jehu. They retired into a secret chamber.
The youth uncovered a vial of the sacred oil (Jos.
Ant. ix. 6, 1) which be had brought with him,
poured it over Jehu's head, and after announcing
to him the message from Eliaha, that he was ap-
pointed to be king of Israel and destroyer of the
bouse of Ahab, rushed out of the house and disap-
peared.
Jehu's countenance, as he reentered the assembly
of officers, showed that some strange tidings had
reached bim. He tried at first to evade their ques-
tions, but then revealed the situation in which he
found himself placed by the prophetic call. In a
moment the enthusiasm of the army took fire.
They threw their garments — the large square
btgrd, similar to a wrapper or plaid — under his
feet, so as to form a rough carpet of state, placed
him on the top of the stairs,' as on an extempore
throne, blew the royal salute on their trumpets,
and thus ordained him king. He then cut off all
communication between Ramoth-Gilead and Jez-
1217
JBHTJ
reel, and set off, full speed, with his ancient I
Ridkar, whom he had made captain of the host fas
his place, and a band of horsemen. From the
tower of Jezreel a watchman saw the cloud of dust
(njSKJ, Kovlopror i A. V. "company") and
announced his coming (9 K. ix. 17). The mes-
sengers that were sent out to him be detained, on
the same principle of secrecy which had guided all
his movements. It was not till he had almost
reached the city, and was identified by the watch-
man, that alarm was taken. But even then it
seems as if the two kings in Jezreel anticipated
news from the Syrian war rather than a revolution
at home. It was not till, in answer to Jehorani's
question, "Is it peace, JehuV" that Jehu's Seres
denunciation of Jezebel at once revealed the dangir.
Jehu seized his opportunity, and taking full aim
at Jehoram, with ths bow which, as captain of tin
host, was always with him, shot him through the
heart (ix. 24). The body was thrown out on
the fatal field, and whilst his soldiers pursued and
killed the king of Judah at Beth-gan (A. V. « the
garden-house"), probably Engaunim, Jehu himself
advanced to the gates of Jezreel and fulfilled the
divine warning on Jezebel as already on Jehoram.
[JkzkheuJ He then entered on a work of exter-
mination hitherto unparalleled in the history of ths
Jewish monarchy. All the descendants of Ahab
that remained in Jezreel, together with the officers
of the court, and hierarchy of Aatarte, were swept
away. His next step was to secure Samaria. Every
stage of his progress was marked with blood. At
the gates of Jezreel he found the heads of seventy
princes of the house of Ahab, ranged in two heaps,
sent to him as a propitiation by their guardians hi
Samaria, whom he had defied to withstand him,
and on whom he thus threw the responsibility of
destroying their own royal charge. Next, at " the
shearing-house " (or Beth-eked ) between Jezreel and
Samaria he encountered forty-two sons or nephews
(2 (.'hr. xxii. 8) of the late king of Judah, and
therefore connected by marriage with Ahab, on a
visit of compliment to their relatives, of whose fall,
seemingly, they had not heard. These also were
put to the sword at the fatal well, as, in the later
history, of Mizpah, and, hi our own days, of Cawn-
pore (2 K. x. 14). [Isiimakl, 6.J As he arovt
on he encountered a strange figure, such as might
have reminded him of the great Ely:ih. It was
Jehonadab, the austere Arabian sectary, the son of
Itechab. In him his keen eye discovered a ready
ally. He took him into his chariot, and they con-
cocted their schemes as they entered Samaria (x.
15, 16). [Jkhomadab.]
Some stragglers of the house of Ahab in thai
city still remained to be destroyed. But the great
stroke was yet to come; and it was conceived and
a The Hebrew word sj ^"TO? ! usually employed
•a- the coupling together of oxen. This the LXX
anderstaod as though the two soldiers rode In sep-
arate chariots— infrfrrc&m hr\ fevyr) (2 K. Ix. 23);
Jossphos {Ant. Ix. H, | 8) as though they sat la the
same chariot with the king («a9efoftcrow omaeVv tov
foparov row 'AxaJSov).
o This is the force of ths Hebrew word, which, as
to 2 K. Ix. 11. the LXX translate «V wopoAAayp.
Tosephas (Am. Ir % J 8) says evoAofnaor n xol furr*
• The ex pressi on translated " on the Up of the
■ "hens the clew to which is lest. The word Is
gmm, QTJ! {. t. a bone, and the meaning appears
to be that" they placed Jehu on the very Flairs them
selves — If fTV7*?Q he stairs — without any seat cr
chair below him. 'The stairs doubtless ran round ths
Inside of the quadrangle of the boose, as they do still,
for Instance, In the ruin called the house of Zacebmua
at Jericho, and Jehu sat where they joined the flat
platform which formed the top or roof of the howe.
Thus he was conspicnaus against the rky, while thv
captains were below him in the open quadrangle. Ths
old Versions throw little or no light on the passage :
the LXX. simply repeat ths Hebrew word, «wt v*
ysiis a» aiMw ByJossssuesftleaTcSess)
Digitized by
Google
1243
JEHU
•aerated with that union of intrepid daring and
profound secrecy which marks the whole career of
Jehu. Up to this moment there wu nothing which
showed anything beyond a determination to exter-
minate in all its branches the personal adherents of
Ahab. He might still have been at heart, as he
seems up to this time to hare been in name, dis-
posed to tolerate, if not to join in, the Phoenician
worship. "Ahab served Baal a little, but Jehu
shall serve him much." There was to be a new
inauguration of the worship of Baal. A solemn
assembly, sacred vestments, innumerable victims,
were ready. The vast temple at Samaria raised
by Ahab (1 K. xvi. 82; Jos. Ant. x. 7, § 6) was
trowded from end to end. The chief sacrifice was
offered, as if in the excess of his teal, by Jehu him-
self. Jchonadab Joined in the deception. There
was some apprehension lest worshippers of Jehovah
might be found in the temple; such, it seems, had
been the intermixture of the two religions. As
soon, however, as it was ascertained tb»* " '1, and
none but, the idolaters were there, the signal was
given to eighty trusted guards, and a sweeping
massacre removed at one blow the whole heathen
population of the kingdom of Israel. The inner-
most sanctuary of the temple (translated in the
A. V. "the city of the house of Uaal") was
stormed, the great stone statue of Baal was de-
molished, the wooden figures of the in'erior divin-
ities sitting round him were torn from their places
and burnt (Ewald, Getck. iii. 626), and the site of
the sanctuary itself became the public resort of the
Inhabitants of the city for the basest uses. This
Is the last public act recorded of Jehu. The re-
maining twenty-seven years of bis long reign are
passed over in a few words, in which two points
only are material: He did not destroy the calf-
worship of Jeroboam: The trans-Jordanic tribes
suffered much from the ravages of Hazael (2 K.
x. 29-88). He was buried in state in Samaria,
and was succeeded by his son Jkhoahaz (2 K.
x. 86). His name is the first of the Israelite kings
which appears in the Assyrian monuments.'' It is
found on the black obelisk discovered at Nimroud
(Layard, Nineveh, i. 386), and now in the British
Museum, amongst the names of kings who are
bringing tribute (in this case gold and silver, and
articles manufactured in gold) to Shahnaneser I.
His name is given as " Jehu " (or " Yahua " )
"the son of Khumri " (Omri). This substitution
of the name of Omri for that of his own father
may be accounted for, either by the importance
which Omri had assumed as the second founder of
the northern kingdom, or by the name of " Beth-
Khumri," only given to Samaria in these monu-
ments as " the House or Capital of Omri " (Lay-
ard, ffin, and Bat., 613; Kawlinson's Herod, i.
466), [and Ancient Mrmarchiet, if. 366.]
The character of Jehn is not difficult to under-
stand, if we take it as a whole, and judge it from
a general point of view.
« • This statement respecting Jehn la to be canceled
as incorrect. It Is founded on an error of Prof. Raw-
linson In deciphering an Assyrian Inscription (And-*S
AfmarcAvM, 11. 865, note 8) which ha corrects, vol. lv.
p. 676. The true reading " gives the Interesting Infor-
mation that amoug Benhsdad's allies, when he was
ittscked by the Assyrians In a. o. 858, was ' Ahab of
Jesrsel.' It appears that the common danger of sub-
antlon by the Assyrian arms, united In one, not only
the HltUtfS, Hsffiathltes, Syrians of Damascus, Pho>
Mekns, and Egyptians, but the people of Israel also.
JEHU
B» must be regarded, like many others in his-
tory, as an instrument for accomplishing great
purposes rather than as great or good in himself
In the long period during which his destiny
though known to others and perhaps to himself
lay dormant; in the suddenness of his rise tc
power; in the ruthtessness with which he carried
out his purposes; in the union of profound silence
and dissimulation with a stern, fanatic, wayward
seal, — he has not been without his likenesses in
modern times. The Scripture narrative, although
it fixes our attention on the services which he ren-
dered to the cause of religion by the extermination
of a worthless dynasty and a degrading worship,
yet on the whole leaves the sense that it was a
reign barren in great results. His dynasty, indeed,
was firmly seated on the throne longer than any
other royal house of Israel (2 K.x. ), and under Jero-
boam II. it acquired a high name amongst the
oriental nations. But Elisha, who had raised him
to power, as" far as we know, never saw him. In
other respects it was a failure; the original sin of
Jeroboam's worship continued ; and in the Prophet
Hoeea there seems to be a retribution exacted for
the bloodshed by which he hail mounted the throne:
" I will avenge the blood of Jezreel upon the house
of Jehu " (Hoe. i. 1), as in the similar condemna-
tion of Baasha (1 K. xvi. 2). See a striking poem
to this effect on the character of Jehu in the Lyra
Apottuliea.
9. [In 1 K., 'lot, Tat. 2uv, Alex. Stnov; 2
Chr., 'Ivoi, Vs*. Iov, Iijow.] Jehu, son of Ha-
nani: a prophet of Judah, but whose ministrations
were chiefly directed to Israel. His father was
probably the seer who attacked Asa (2 Chr. xvi.
7). He must have begun his career as a prophet
when very young. He first denounced Baasha,
both for his imitation of the dynasty of Jeroboam,
and also (as it would seem) for his cruelty in de-
stroying it (1 K. xvi. 1, 7), and then, after an
interval of thirty years, reappears to denounce
Jehoshaphat for his alliance with Ahab (2 Chr.
xix. 2, 3). He survived Jehoshaphat and wrote
his life (xx. 34). From an obscurity in the text
of 1 K. xvi. 7 the Vulgate has represented him as
killed by Baasha. But this is not required by the
words, and (except on the improbable hypothesis
of two Jehus, both sons of Hanani) is contradicted
by the later appearance of this prophet.
3. ('Inoti [Vat Ivaovs'] Jehu.) A man of
Judah of the house of Hezron (1 Chr. ii. 38).
He was the son of a certain Obed, descended from
the union of an Egyptian, Jabha, with the daugh-
ter of Sheshan, whose slave Jarba was (comp. 34).
*• ('IrjoiS; [Tat. owes.]) A Simeonite, son of
Joaibiah (1 Chr. iv. 86). He was one of the chief
men of the tribe, apparently in the reign of Hexe-
kiah (comp. 41).
6. ClnooA.) Jehu the Antothite, i. e. native
of Anathoth, was one of the chief of the heroes
of Benjamin, who forsook the cause of Saul for
Ahab, king of Samaria, seeing the Importance of the
crisis, sent a contingent of 10,000 men, and 2-0%
chariots to the confederate foroe , a contingent which
took part In the nrrt gnat battle between the armies
oT Syria and Assyria. Thus the first known oontaet
between the Assyrians and the Israelites b advanced
from the accession of Jehu (ab. B. o. 841) to the last
year, or last year but one, of Ahab (a. o. 868), am
Ahab — not Jehn — Is the first Israelite monarch of
whom we have mention in the Assyrian records "
Digitized by
Google
JBHUBBAH
Mrttf David when the latter wu at Zlklag(l Chr.
lit 3). He doee not reappear in any of the later
fists. A.P. S.
JEHXTB'BAH Can' [he aitt be hidden]:
'Io/kt; [Vat. corrupt;] Alex. Oflo: Hnba), a man
of Aaber; eon of Shamer or Skomer, of the boon
of Beriah (1 Chr. rii. 34).
JEHU'OAL (b?irp [potent, Gee.] : 6 '\mt-
Xa\; Alex. Ia»x<tCi [FA. Io«x a X : ] J"ehal), eon
of Shelemiah; one of two penoni lent by king
Zedekiah to Jeremiah, to entreat his prayers and
advice (Jer. xxxvii. 8). His name is also given as
Jccai, and be appean to bare been one of the
" princes of the king " (eomp. xxxviii. 1, 4).
JB"HTTD ("ITT; [praite]: <A(Ap; Alex. fori:
Jud), one of the towns of the tribe of Dan (Josh.
six. 46), named between Baalath and Bene-berak.
Neither of these two places, however, has been
identified. By Eusebius and Jerome Jehad is not
named. Dr. Robinson (il. 249) mentions that a
place called tl-Ythidiyeh exists in the neighbor-
hood of Zjdi, but he did not visit it. Itis, how-
Jver, inserted on Tan de Velde's map at 7 mike
east of J a fa and 5 north of Lydd. This agrees
with the statement of Schwars (141) that « Jebud
is the village Jehudie, T f miles 8. E. of Jams" ex-
cept as to the direction, which is nearer E. than
S.E. G.
JKB.WD1 CTTP =Jew: 6 'louSlr; Alex.
louSti- Judi), eon of Nethaniah, a man employed
by the princes of Jehoiakim's court to fetch Baruch
to read Jeremiah's denunciation (Jer. xxxvi. 14),
nod then by the king to fetch the volume itself and
rrvl it to him (21, 23).
jEHUDrjAH (n»"jri»n [the jtmuy.
'ASla; [Vat. AWi] Alex. ifa: Jvdaia). There
h really no such name in the Heb. Bible as that
winch our A. V. exhibits at 1 Chr. iv. 18. If it
is a proper name at all it is Ha-jehudyah, like
Hnm-mdech, Hak-kos, etc.; and it seems to be
ra»ber an appellative, "the Jewess." As far as an
opinion can be formed of so obscure and apparently
corrupt a p a ss a ge, Hered, a descendant of Caleb
tin son of Jephunneh, and whose towns, Gedor,
Soebo, and Eshtemoa, lay in the south of Judah,
married two wives — one a Jewess, the other an
Egyptian, a daughter of Pharaoh. The Jewess
was sister of Naham, the father of the cities of
Kailah and Eshtemoa. The descendants of Hered
by his two wives are given in w. 18, 19, and per>
mvs in the latter part of ver. 17. Hodyah in ver.
W is doubtless a corruption of Ha-jehudyah, "the
Jewess," the letters Til having fallen ont from
the end of DB7H and the beginning of the fol-
lowing word; and the full stop at the end of ver.
18 should be removed, so as to read as a recapitu-
lation of what precedes: « These are the sons of
BHhiah, the daughter of Pharaoh, which Hered
took (for his wife), and the sons of his wife, the
Jewess, the sister of Naham (which Naham was)
the father of Kcikh, whose innabitants are Gar-
missa, and of Eshtemoa, whose inhabitants are
Heathathltee;" the last being named possibly
from Haachah, Caleb's concubine, as the Ephra-
thites were from Ephrata. BCrtbeau (.Chronifc)
arrives at the same general result, b T proposing to
pleas the dosing words of ver. 18 before the words
»
JKKAMTAH
1849
"And she bare Mirtam," etc, in Tor. 17. See also
Vatablus. A. C. H.
JE'HUSH (Ufa's* [collecting, bringing to-
gether, Furst, Dietr.]:' 'lit; [Vat. Toy;] Alex.
Ioiat: Ut), son of Eshek, a remote descendant of
Saul (1 Chr. viii. 39). The parallel genealogy in
ch. ix. stops short of this man.
For the representation of Am by H, see Jehiex,
Hehukim, etc.
JEI'EL CW9) [perk- (rearare of God,
ties.] : Jthiel). 1. ("Iw^A.) A chief man among
the Reubenites, one of the house of Joel (1 Chr. v
2. CltfrA; Al«. ooee WenKi [Vat. FA. in xvi.
5, Ei<rnA,.] ) A Herarite Levite, one of the gate-
keepers (D^lVtri A. V. "porters," and "door-
keepers ") to the sacred tent, at the first establish-
ment of the Ark in Jerusalem (1 Chr. xv. 18).
His duty was also to play the harp (ver. 21), or the
psaltery and harp (xvi. 6), in the service before the
Ark.
3. CEAsfljA, [Vat. EAsoqA,] Alex. EXenX.)
A Gershonite Levite, one of the Beno-Asaph [sons
of A.], forefather of Jahaziel hi the time of king
Jehoahaphat (2 Chr. xxi. 14).
4. (SrTO\ ». c Jeuel, but the A. V. follows
the correction of the Keri: 'I«r)\.) The Scribe
OSISn) who kept the account of the numbers
of king Uaxiah's irregular predatory warriors
(n^TIT?, A. V. "bands," 2 Chr. xxvi. 11).
5. (Jeuel, as in the preceding; but the A. V.
again follows the Keri: 'I«ir)A: JahieL) A Ger-
shonite Levite, ooe of the Bene-Eliaaphan, who
assisted in the restoration of the house of Jehovah
under king Hecekiah (2 Chr. xxix. 13).
8. fl«rn>, [Vat. EifeX,] Alex. I«Ii)A.) One
of the chiefc (Tfy) of the Levites In the time of
Josiah, and an assistant in the rites at his great
Passover (2 Chr. xxxv. 0).
7. (Jeuel as above, but hi Keri and A. V. Jeiel :
'I*T/X, [Vat. Eveta,] Alex. EtijX.) One of the
Bene-Adoiiikam who formed part of the caravan of
Earn from Babylon to Jerusalem (Ex. viii. 13). In
Eadras the name is Jewel.
8. ('loJiK, Alex. IssinX.) A layman, of the
Bene Nebo, who bad taken a foreign wife and had
to relinquish her (Ezr. x. 43). In Eadras it is
omitted from the Greek and A. V., though th»
Vulgate has Ideha.
JEKAB'ZEEL (bKSafJ? [God who astern
blet, bring* together]: Vat. [Alex. FA.l omit;
FA.» Comp.] KaArcnA: Cabled), a fuller form
of the name of Kabzeel, the most remote city
of Judah on the southern frontier. This form
occurs only in the list of the places reoceupied after
the Captivity (Neb. xi. 26). G.
JEKATrtEAM (D^J?!? [who aiembla the
people] : 'Imfdat, 'I«itpoa>;' Alex, [in xxiv. 23,]
leas iua: Jecmaam, Jeanaan), a Levite in the time
of Kong David : fourth of the sons of Hebron, the
son of Kohath (1 Chr. xxUL 19, xxiv. 23).
JEK AMI'AH (r™?|T [Jehovah coOectt, or
endure*]: 'U X fniai [Vat. -jut-]; Alex. taroiuat:
Icamiat), son of Shallum, in the line of AhlaL
aoout contemporary with king Abas, 5 snrlhst
Digitized by
Google
1260
JEKUTHIEL
passage the nme name, borne by a different person,
(s gifen Jkoamiah (1 Chr. ii. 41). [Jarha.]
A. C. H.
JEKUTHIEL (VWVWpJ [perh. fear of
Ood, piety, Diotr. Ges.] : i X<ri4Xi Alex. Ick0iii|A.;
[Comp. 'I«xovti4a:] Icuthitt), a man recorded in
the genealogies of Judah (1 Chr. iv. 18) aa the aon
of a certain Ezrah by his Jewish wife (A. V. Jehu-
dyah). and in hia turn the rather, or founder, of
the town of Zanoah. Thia passage in the Targum
is not without a certain interest. Jered is inter-
preted to mean Moaes, and each of the names fol-
lowing are taken as titles borne by him. Jekuthiel
— " trust in God " — is so applied " because in his
days the Israelites trusted in the God of heaven for
forty years in the wilderness."
In a remarkable prayer used by the Spanish and
Portuguese .lews in the concluding service of the
Sabbath, Elijah is invoked as having bad " tidings
of peace delivered to him by the hand of Jekuthiel."
This is explained to refer to some transaction in
the life of Phineas, with whom EUjah is, in the
traditions of the Jews, believed to be identical (see
the quotations in Modern Jvdaitm, p. 389).
JEMI'MA (HlS'tr [dove]: •Hpioa: Diet,
as if from DT\ "a day "), the eldest of the three
daughters born to Job after the restoration of his
prosperity (Job xlii. 14). Bosenmiiller compares
the name to the classical Diana; but Gesenius iden-
tifies it with an Arabic word signifying "dove."
The Bev. C- Forster (Historical Geography of Ara-
bia, ii. 67), in tracing the posterity of Job in Arabia,
considers that the name of Jemima survives in
Jemama, the name of the central province of the
Arabian peninsula, which, according to an Arabian
tradition (see Bochart, Phaleg, ii. § 26), was called
after Jemama, an ancient queen of the Arabians.
W. T. B.
JEMTTAAN ('H/iyadV; [Sin.» Aw">». Sin-"
Ic/iraa?] Vulg. omits), mentioned among the places
on the sea-coast of Palestine to which the panic of
the incursion of Holofemes extended (Jud. ii. 28).
No doubt Jabneel — generally called Jamuia by
the Greek writers — is intended. The omission of
Jopps however is remarkable. G.
JEMU'EL (bt*tt3* [God it light, Furst;
wink, attenting, Dietr. ; but uncertain] : 'UfunrfiM
[Vat. in Ex., I«iui)A:] Jamuel), the eldest son of
Blmeon (Gen. xlvi. 10; Ex. vi. 15). In the lists
yf Num. xxvi. and 1 Chr. iv. the name is given as
Nemuel, which Gesenius decides to be the cor-
mpted form.
JEPHTHAE" ('Ico>ec(«: Jephte), Heb. xJ. 82.
rhe Greek form of the name Jephthah.
JEPHTHAH (n^91, 1. e. Yiphtah [he, i. e.
God, will open, fret] : 'I«A6a«: Jephte), a judge,
about B. c. 11(8-1187. His history is contained
in Judg. xi. 1-xii. 7. He was a Gileadite, the son
of Gilead " and a concubine. Driven by the legiti-
mate sons from his father's inheritance, he went to
Tob, and became the head of a company of free-
booters in a debatable land probably belonging to
Ammon (2 Sam. x. 6). The idolatrous Israelites
hi Gilead were at that time smarting under the
of an Ammonrtish king ; and Jephthah
• * Probably a patronymic than » a native of that
^ sat Oiuud, t, nou (Amer. ««.). H.
JEPHTHAH
was led, as well by the unsettled character uf as*
age as by hia own family circumstances, to adopt ■
kind of life unrestrained, adventurous, and insecure
as that of a Scottish border-chieftain in the middle
ages. It was not unlike the life which David after-
wards led at Ziklag, with this exception, that Jeph-
thah had no friend among the heathen in whose
land he lived. His fame aa a bold and successful
captain was carried back to his native Gilead ; and
when the time was ripe for throwing off the yoke
of Ammon, the Gileadite elders sought in vain for
any leader, who in an equal degree with the base-
born outcast could command the confidence of bis
countrymen. Jephthah consented to become their
captain, on the condition — solemnly ratified before
the Lord in Mizpeh — that in the event of his
success against Ammon he should still remain at
their acknowledged head. Messages, urging their
respective claims to occupy the trans-Jordanie re-
gion, were exchanged between the Ammonitish king
and Jephthah. Then the Spirit of the Lord (t. e.
'< force of mind for great undertakings, and bodily
strength," Tanchum: comp. Judg. iii. 10, vi. 84,
xi. 29, xiv. 6, xv. 14) came upon Jephthah. He
collected warriors throughout Gilead and Manasseh,
the provinces which acknowledged hia authority.
And then he vowed hia vow unto the Lord, •• what-
soever cometh forth [i. e. first] of the doors of my
house to meet me, when I return in peace from the
children of Ammon, shall surely be Jehovah's, and
I will ofier it up for a burnt-oflering." The Am-
monites were routed with great slaughter. Twenty
cities, from Aroer on the Anion to Hinnith and to
Abel Keramim, were taken from them. But as
the conqueror returned to Mizpeh there came out
to meet him a procession of damsels with dances
and timbrels, anil among them — the first person
from his own house — his daughter and only child.
" Alas ! my daughter, thou hast brought me very
low," was the greeting of the heart-stricken father.
But the high-minded maiden is ready for any per-
sonal suffering in the hour of her father's triumph.
Only she asks for a respite of two months to with-
draw to her native mountains, and in their rec e ss es
to weep with her virgin-friends over the early dis-
appointment of her life. When that time waa
ended she returned to her father; and "he did
unto her his vow."
But Jephthah had not long leisure, even if ha
were disposed, for the indulgence of domestic grief.
The proud tribe of Ephraim challenged his right
to go to war, as he had done without tbeir concur-
rence, against Ammon; and they proceeded to vin-
dicate the absurd claim by invading Jephthah in
Gilead. They did but add to his triumph which
they envied. He first defeated them, then inter-
cepted the fugitives at the fords of Jordan, and there,
having insultingly identified them as Efhraimitsa
by their peculiar pronunciation, he put forty-two
thousand men to the sword.
The eminent office for which Jephtiwt had stip-
ulated as the reward of bis exertions, and the glory
which he had won, did not long abide with him.
He judged Israel six years and died.
It is generally conjectured that his jurisdictks)
was limited to the trans-Jordanie region.
The peculiar expression, xi. 34, faithfully trans-
lated in the margin of the A. V., has bean inter
prated as signifying that Jephthah had step-ehO
dren.
That the daughter of Jephthah waa really oraared
up to God in sacrifice, slain by the Band of bet
Digitized by
Google
JEPHTHAH
Mhar and than burned — ia a horrible conclusion;
lot one which it Menu impossible to a-Did. Thii
ma understood to he the meaning of the text by
Jonathan the paraphrast, and Kasbi, by Josephus,
Ant. v. 7, § 10, and by perhapa all the early Chris-
tian Fathers, aa Origeii, in Joamem, torn. r. cap,
36; Chrysostom, Hum. ad pop. Antioch. xiv. 3,
Opp. ii. 145 : Theodoret, Uumt. in Jud. xx. ;
Jerome, Kp. iidJtd. 118, Opp. i. 791, Ac.; Augus-
tine, QmetL in Jud. viii. § 49, Opp. iii. 1, p. 610.
For the first eleven centuries of the Christian era
this was the current, perhaps the universal opinion
of Jews and Christians. Yet none of them exten-
uates the act of Jephthah. Josephua calls it neither
lawful nor pleasing to God. Jewish writers say
that he ought to have referred it to the high-priest ;
but either he (ailed to do ao, or the high-priest
culpably omitted to prevent the rash aci. Origen
strictly confines his praise to the heroism of Jeph-
thah'a daughter.
Another interpretation was suggested by Joseph
Kimchi. He supposed that, instead of being sacri-
ficed, she was shut up in a house which her father
built for the purpose, and that she was there visited
by the daughters of Israel four days in each year
so long as she lived. This interpretation hss been
adopted by many eminent men, as by l*evi ben
Gersom and Bechai among the Jews, and by Uni-
ons, Grotius, Estius, de Dieu, Bishop Hall, Water-
land, Dr. Hales, and others. More names of the
same period, and of not less authority, might how-
ever be adduced on the other aide. Lightfoot once
thought (Erubhin, § 16) that Jephthah did not
slay his daughter; but upon more mature reflection
he came to the opposite conclusion (Harmony, etc. ;
Judg. xi., Works, i. 51).
Each of these two opinions is supported by argu-
ments grounded on the original text and on the
customs of the Jews. (1.) In Judg. xi. 81, the
word translated in the A. V. " whatsoever " knows
no distinction of gender, and may as correctly be
translated " whosoever; " and in favor of the latter
version it is urged that Jephthah could not have
expected to be met by an ox or other animal fit for
sacrifice, coming forth from the door of his house;
and that it was obviously his intention to signalize
his thanksgiving for victory by devoting some
human being to destruction, to that end perverting
.he statute, Lev. xxvii. 28, 89 (given with another
purpose, on which see Jahn, ArchaxJoyia, § 394,
or Ewald, AlUrthimer, 89), to the taking of a life
which was not forfeit to the law. (2.) To J.
Kimchi's proposal to translate " and I will offer."
feme 31, "or I will oiler," it has been replied that
his sense of the conjunction is rare, that It ia not
Mended in two vows couched in parallel phrase-
•ngy, Gen. xxviii. 81, 22, and 1 Sam. 1. 11, and
.hat it creates two alternatives between which there
■ no opposition. (3.) The word rendered in A. V.
• to lament," or " to talk with," verse 40, is trans-
lated by later scholars, as in Judg. r. 11, "to cele-
brate." (4.) It bis been said that if Jephthah
put his daughter to death, according to verse 39,
it ia unmeaning to add that she H knew no man; "
tut on the othei hand it is urged that this circum-
stance is added aa setting in a stronger light the
rashness of Jephthah and the jeioism of his
daughter. (5.) It haa been argu.au that human
aerificea were opposed to the principles of the Jew-
ish law, and therefore a Jew could not have intended
o make a thank-offering of that sort; but It is
«pUed that a Gileadite born In a lawless age, living
JEPHTHAH 1261
as a freebooter in the midst of rude and idolatress
people who practiced such sacrifices, was not likely
to be unusually acquainted with or to pay unusual
respect to the pure and humane laws of Israel.
(6. ) Lastly, it has been argued that a life of religious
celibacy is without injunction or example to favor
it in the 0. T.
Some persons, mindful of the enrollment of Jeph-
thah among the heroes of faith in Heb. xi. 33, as
well aa of the expression " the Spirit of the Lord
came upon him," Judg. xl. 89, have therefore
scrupled to believe that he could be guilty of such
a sin as the murder of his child. Hut it must be
remembered also that deep sins of several other
faithful men are recorded in Scripture, sometimes
without comment; and as Jephthah had time after-
wards, so be may have had grace to repent of his
vow and his fulfillment of it. At least we know
that he felt remorse, which is often the foreshadow
of retribution or the harbinger of repentance.
Doubtless theological opinions hare sometimes
had the effect of leading men to prefer one view of
Jephthah's vow to the other. Selden mentions that
Genebrard was told by a Jew that Kimchi's inter-
pretation was devised in order to prevent Christians
quoting the sacrifice of Jephthah's daughter as a
type of the sacrifice of the Son of God. And
Christians, who desire or fear an example alleged
in favor of celibate vows or of the fallibility of in-
spired men, may become partial judges of the
question.
The subject is discussed at length in Augustine,
I e. Opp. iii. 1, p. 610; a Treatise by L. Capellus
inserted in Crit. Sacr. on Judg. xi.; Bp. Hall's
Contemplation* on 0. T., bk. x. ; Selden, De jurt
nnturaU el gentium, iv. § 11; lightfoot, Sermon
on Judg. xi. 39, in Work*, ii. 1215; Hfeifler, Dt
voto JtphUt, Opp. S91; Dr. Hales' Analytu of
Chronology, ii. 288 ; and in Rosenmiiller's Scholia.
w. T. a
* It may be well to remind the reader that Kim-
chi's suggestion (mentioned above) appears as a mar-
ginal reading of the A. V. : It '• shall surely be
the Lord's, or I will offer It up for a burnt-offer-
ing." This disjunctive construction makes the
vow of Jephthah not absolute, but conditional: It
left him at liberty to pursue one course or another,
according to the nature of the offering which be
might be called to make, on ascertaining who or
what should come forth to meet him from his house.
But this solution does violence to the Hebrew sen-
tence. Prof. Cassel, in his elaborate article on
this subject (Herzog's ReiiUEncyk. vi. 4U6-478),
maintains that Jephthah, when he made his vow,
was not thinking of the possibility of a human
sacrifice, or of an animal sacrifice of any sort, but
employed the term " burnt-offering " in a spiritual
sense; that is, using the expressive word to denote
completeness of consecration, he meant that he wouli*
devote to God's special and perpetual service the
first person of his household whom he should meet
The event showed that among all the contingencies
he had no thought that this person would be his
own child ; but so it proved, and he fulfilled the
vow in consigning her to a life of celibacy, and thus
destroying his own last hope of posterity. The
first clause of the vow, it is argued, defines the
second: a literal burnt-offering cannot he meant,
hut one which consists in being the Lord's. It
must be admitted that no exact Derail;! can hi
found to justify this peculiar meaning of the word
Digitized by
Google
1252 JEPHUNITB
(f VfVS)* This author presents the same new in
Us Richter und Ruth, pp. 106-114. KeU sad
Dditasch discuss the question (BM. Commentary
mlhtO. T., iv. 386-396), sod decide, in like man-
ner, against the ides of a literal sacrifice.
Wordsworth (Holy Bible, with Notu, ii. pt i. 188
IT.) sums up bis review of the different explanations
with the remark, that the predominance of argu-
ment and authority favors the opinion " that Jeph-
thah did actually offer his daughter, not against her
will, but with her consent, a burnt, offering to the
Lord. . . . But we may not pause here. There is
a beautiful light shed upon the gloom of this dark
history, reflected from the youthful form of the
maiden of Uilead, Jephthah's daughter. . . . She
is not like the Iphigeuia of the Greek story. She
utters her own life a willing sacrifice; and in her
love for her father's name, and in calm resolve that
all should know that she is a willing sacrifice, and
with tender and delicate consideration for her
father, and in order that uo one may charge him
with having sacrificed her against her own free will,
she craves respite and liberty for two months, that
she may range freely on the mountains, apart from
the world, and prepare herself for the day of suffer-
ing, and for another life. In full foresight of death,
she comes down from her mountain liberty at the
appointed time to offer her virgin soul for the fulfill-
ment of her father's vow. Her name was held In
honor in Israel. The daughters of Israel went
yearly to lament her — or rather to celebrate her
— for four days."
Finally, let it be said, this is one of those acts
which the Scripture history simply relates, but
leaves the judgment of them to the reader. We
cannot, without being unjust to the morality of
the Bible, insist too much on this distinction. In
itself considered, it is immaterial to the correctness
or incorrectness of our interpretation of Jephthah's
vow, whether this interpretation exalts or lowers
our estimate of his character. The commendation
of his faith (Heb. xi. 32) does not extend to all his
actions. The same allowance is due to him for
frailty and aberrations that we make in behalf of
others associated with him in the same catalogue
jf examples of heroic faith. H.
JEPHTJiraE Clf^wwfj: Jtpkone), Ecclus.
ilri. 7. [Jephdsjcbh.]
JEPHTJN1JEH (n^ [perh. for w»om a
way it prepared]: Jephont). i fI««)owij.) Father
af Caleb the spy, who is usually designated as
■> Caleb the son of Jephunneh." He appears to have
belonged to an Kdomitish tribe caller Kenezites,
from Kenaz their founder; but his fatner or other
ancestors are not named. [Caleb, S; Kekaz.]
t See Num. xiii. 6, Ac., xxxii. 12, Ac. ; Josh. xiv.
H, Ac; 1 Chr. iv. 15.)
a. ('I««W in both MSS. [rather, Rom. Alex.;
Vat IaVwa]-) A descendant of Asher, eldest of
the three sons of Jether (1 Chr. vii. 38).
A. C H.
JETtAH (ITT [new mom]: [in Gen.,] 'Iopo*
[Alex, lapat, Comp. 'UpAx'' m 1 Cm "-» Kom - Vat -
Alex, omit, Aid. 'laMp, Comp. 'Id>«0 Jure), the
fourth in order of the sons of Joktan (Gen. x. 96 ;
I Chr. L 20) and the progenitor of a tribe of
southern Arabia. He has not been satisfactorily
tiajitlflil with the name of any Arabian place or
tribe, though a fortress (and probably an old town,
JEBAH
IDdb the numerous fortified places in the Taxes*
of the old Hlmyerite kingdom) named Yanks
(.>.I*J = rTT) is mentioned as belonging to
the district of the Nijjad (Marind, s. v. Yerakh),
which is In Mahreh, at the extremity of the Yemen
(Kamoos, in article iXsi i ct Arabia). The
similarity of name, however, and the other indies
tions, we are not disposed to lay much stress on.
A very different identification has been pt c p reed
by Bochart (PkaUg, ii. 19). He translates Jerah
= "the moon" into Arabic, and finds the de-
scendants of Jerah in the Aliliei, a people dwelling
near the Red Sea (Agatharch. ap. Diod. Sic. iii.
45), on the strength of a passage in Herodotus
(iii. 8), in which he says of the Arabs, " Bacchus
they call In their language Orotal; and Urania,
Alilat" He further suggests that these AIM
are the Benee-Hilal of more modern times, Hilil
(y JM") meaning, in Arabic, " the moon when,
being near the sun, it shows a narrow rim of light"
Gesenius does not object to this theory, which he
quotes; but says that the opinion of MMiapHs
(Spicileg. ii. 60) is more probable; the latter scholar
finding Jerah in the "coast of the moon" (cor-
rectly, " low bud of the moon
or in the "mountain of the moon" (.
,"P& ti).
(j+&}\ Jut?.;
— in each case the moon being "kamar," not
"hilal." The former is "a place between Zafari
and Eah-Shihr " (Kdmoot); the latter in the same
part, but more inland ; both being, as Gesenius re-
marks, near to Hadramawt, next to which, in the
order of the names, is Jerah in the record in
Genesis; and the same argument may be adduoed
in favor of our own possible identification with the
fortress of Yerakh, named at the commencement
of this article. Whatever may be said in support
of translating Jerah, as both Bochart and Michselis
have done, the former's theory involves some grave
difficulties, which must be stated.
The statement of Herodotus above quoted (cf. 1.
181, " the Arabians call Venus Alitta " ), that Alilat
signifies Urania, cannot be accented without further
evidence than we at present poss e s s Alilat was
almost doubtless the same as the object of worship
called by the Arabs " H-Latt," and any new infor-
mation respecting the latter is therefore important
It would require too much space in this work to
state the various opinions of the Arabs respecting
El-LAtt, its etymology, etc., as collected in the
great HS. Lexicon entitled the " Hohkam," a work
little known In Europe; from which (articles oJ
and («; «J) we give the following particulars. « El-
LAtt" is [generally] said to be originally " H-
Lath," the name of an object of worship, so called
by the appellation of a man who used to moisten
meal of parched barley (saweek) with clarified butter
or the like, at the place thereof, for the pilgrims:
"El-LAtt" signifying "the perx-n who performs
that operation." The object of worship itself is
said to have been a mass of rock [upon which hi
moistened the meal; and which was more prenath
Digitized by
Google
jekahmbSl
"the Rock rfH-Latt"]; after the death of
Jie man above mentioned this nek was worshipped.
But some say that " El-Late" is originally "Et
.* - •
Oaheh" (RjB^t), meaning [not "the Goddess,"
a>
but] " the Serpent." To this we may add from
Q-Beydawee (JTnr-ds), Bii. 19 and 20), FJ-I-att was
an idol of Thakeef, at Et-Talf, or of Kureysh, at
Nakhleh; and was so called from |«}J, because
they used to go round about it: or it was called
'• H-LAtt," bemuse it was the image of a man who
seed to moisten meal of parched barley with clari-
fied butter, and to teed the pilgrims. — Our own
opinion is that it may be a contraction of " H-
rjahet" ("the Serpent," or perhaps "the God-
dess"), pronounced according to the dialect of
Himyer.with "t" instead of "h" in the case of
a pause. (See the Sihdh, MS., art. vyJj-) It "
said in the Lexicon entitled the Tahdkteb (MS., art
oJ)i that El-Kisa-ce used to pronounce it, in the
ease of a pause, " El-Lib; " sod that those who
worshipped it compared its name with that of
'• Allah."
Poooeke has some remarks on the subject of 0-
Latt, which the reader may consult (Spec. HitL
Arab. p. 90); and also Sir G. Wilkinson, in his
notes to Herodotus (ed. Rawlinson, ii. 402, foot-
note, and Essay i. to bk. iii.): he seems to be
wrong, however, in saving that the Arabic " ' aweL'
•first'" [correctly, "awwal"] is "related to"
bN, or Allah, etc.: and that Alitta and Mylitta
are Semitic names derived from " mUdfmtada,
■ to bear children"' (Kany i. 537). The com-
parison of Alitta and Mylitta is also extremely
doubtful; and probably Herodotus assimilated the
former name to the latter.
It is necessary to observe, in endeavoring to
elucidate the ancient religion of the bhmaelite
Arabs, that fetishism was largely developed among
them; and that their idols were generally absurdly
rude and primitive. Beyond that relic of primeval
revelation which is found in moat beliefs — a recog-
nition of one universal and supreme God — the
practices of fetishism obtained more or less through-
out Arabia: on the north giving place to the faith
of the patriarchs ; on the south merging into the
xamic worship of the Himyerites.
That the Alifaei were worshippers of Alilat is an
assumption unsupported by facts; but, whstever
nay be said in its favor, the people in question are
not the Benee-HiLU, who take their name from a
Hmmn of Mohammed, in the fifth generation
More him, of the well-known stock of Keys.
(Canssin, Kaai, Tab. X A ; Abu-1-Fida, Hit.
amteUL, ed. Fleischer, p. 194.) E. S. P.
JERAH"MEEL (bHpTTT [object of Gat$
mercy] : 'UpfirnK ; [Vat. IpauunX, Up*p.n)\,
-«B)A, P<wrsA; Alex. IatuttwA, Upturn*., "")*:]
leramtet). L First-born son of Hesron, the son
d Pharez, the son of Judah (1 Chr. ii. 9, 2«.-27,
J3, 43). His ckacendanu are given it length in
aha same chap. [Azariah, 5; Zj •»«>.] They
Ibhabited the southern border of Judah (1 Sam.
orii. 10, comp. 8; xxx. 29).
S. [Vat Alex. ipovwrsA.] A Mersrito Lsvito;
JEREMIAH 1251
the representative, at the time of the or ganis a tif
of the Divine service by king David, of the thmfly
of Kish, the son of Mahli (1 Chr. xxiv. 99; oomp.
xxiii.21).
3. ["lfps/irfJA, Alex. -«»A, FA. -unjA: Jere-
mUl) Son of Hammdeeh, or, as the LXX render
it, " the king," who was employed by Jehoiakim
to make Jeremiah and Baruch prisoners, after he
had burnt the roll of Jeremiah's prophecy (Jer.
xxxvi. 26). A. C. H.
JERAH'MEfiLITEa, THE OV^rTVn
[patronym. from the above]: 'Uaueyi, 6 'lepe-
j»ef)A; [Vat in xxx. 29, Io-panA;] Alex. lopapnAfi.
I(pcuit)A«: Jerameel). The tribe descended from
the bit of the foregoing persons (1 Sam. xxvii. 10)
Their cities are also named amongst those to which
David sent presents from his Amalekite booty (xxx.
29), although to Achish he had represented that
he had attacked them.
JER'ECHTJS CUptx" l<* Tt»»' VtL 'V
fiXev:] Anew), 1 Esdr. v. 22. [Jkricbo.]
JETIED (T?J [*«»»», going doam] : 'UptS:
JVsred). L One of the patriarchs before the flood,
son of Mahalaleel and father of Enoch (1 Chr. L 2).
In Genesis the name is given as Jared.
2. [Jaret.] One of the descendants of Judah
signalized as the " father — i. e- the founder — of
Gedor" (1 Chr. iv. 18). He was one of the sons
of Ezrah by his wife Ha-Jehudijah, i. e. the Jewess.
The Jews, however, give an jllegorical interpreta-
tion to the passage, and treat this and other names
therein as titles of Moses — Jered, because he caused
the manna to descend. Here — as noticed under
Jabez — the pun, though obvious in Biblical He-
brew, where Jnrad (the root of Jordan) means " to
desoend," is concealed in the rabbinical paraphrase,
which has HTpH, a word with the same mean-
ing, but without any relation to Jered, either for
eye or ear. *»•
JEREMAI [8 syL] CST [dwellers tm
height*]: 'Upa/il; Alex, ltptfui [Vat Upi/uin,
FA. -put:] Jermai), a layman; one of the Bene-
Hashum, who wss compelled by Ezra to put away
his foreign wife (Ear. x. 33). In the lists of Eedras
it is omitted.
JEREMIAH (17"™?"]';, as the more usual
form, or rPTp'T, ch. xxxvi.-xxxviii. : 'Upt/Jat:
Jeremiat, Vulg.; Hieremiat, Hieron. et si.). The
name has been variously explained : by Jerome and
Simonis ( OnonuuL p. 636), ss " the exalted of the
Lord;'' by Gesenius (i. v.), ss "appointed of the
Lord;" by Carpzov (Jntrod. ad lib. V. T. p. iii
e. 8), followed by Hengstenberg (Ckrittologie det
A. B. vol i.), as " the Lord throws" — the latter
seeing in the name a prophetic reference to the
work described in 1. 10 ; [by Dietrich, "whom
Jehovah founds," «. e. establishes.]
I. life. — It will be convenient to arrange what
is known as to the life and work of this prophet in
sections corresponding to its chief periods. The
materials for sueh an account are to be found i
exclusively in the book which bears his
Whatever interest may attach to Jewish or Chris-
tian traditions connected with bis name, they has*
no chum to be regarded as historical, and we are
left to form what picture we can of the man and
</ js times from the narratives and propleessa
which he himself has left. Fortunately, these bass
Digitized by
Google
ISM
JTBHEIHAH
I down to u, though in soma disorder, with
1 fuHnesa; and there is no one in the " goodly
Mowship of the propheta " of whom, in hii work,
feelings, sufferings, we hare to distinct a knowledge.
He is for ns the great example of the prophetic life,
the representative of the prophetic order. It is not
»- be wondered at that he should have seemed to
tM Christian feeling of the Early Church a type
of Him in whom that life received its highest com-
pletion (Hieron. Cotnm. in Jerem. xxiii. 9; Origen.
Horn, in Jerem. i. and viii. ; Aug. dt Proa. Dei,
e. xxxvii.), or that recent writers should have iden-
tified him with the " Servant of the Lord " in the
later chapters of Isaiah (Bunsen, CM in der Ges-
chichtt, i. 425-447; Nagelsbach, art "Jerem." in
Herzog's Becd-Encykiop.).
(1.) Under Josiah, b. c. 638-608. — In the 13th
year of the reign of Josiah, the prophet speaks of
himself as still "a child " PP3- 1- 6). We can-
not rely indeed on this word as a chronological
datum. It may have been used simply as the ex-
pression of conscious weakness, and as a word of
sge it extends from merest infancy (Ex. ii. 6; I
Sam. iv. 21) to adult manhood (1 Sam. xxx. 17;
1 K. iii. 7). We may at least infer, however, as
we can trace his life in full activity for upwards of
forty years from this period, that at the commence-
ment of that reign he could not have passed out of
actual childhood. He is described as " the son of
Hilkiah of the priests that were in Anathoth " (i. 1).
Were we able, with some earlier (Clem. Al. Strom.
1. p. 142; Jerome, Opp. torn. iv. § 116, D.) and
some later writers (Eichhom, Cslovius, Msldonatua,
von Bohlen, Umbreit), to identify this Hilkiah with
the high-priest who bore so large a share in Josiah's
work of reformation, it would be interesting to
think of the king and the prophet, so nearly of the
same age (2 Chr. xxxiv. 1), as growing up together
under the same training, subject to the same in-
fluences. Against this hypothesis, however, there
have been urged the tacts (Carpzov, Keil, l'.waJd,
and others) — (1.) that the name is too common
to be a ground of identification; (2.) that the
manner in which this Hilkiah is mentioned is
inconsistent with the notion of his having been the
High-priest of Israel; (3.) that neither Jeremiah
himself, nor his opponents, allude to this parentage;
(4.) that the priests who lived at Anathoth were
oT the House of Ithamar (1 K. ii. 26 ; 1 Chr. xxiv.
3), while the high-priests from Zadok downwards
were of the line of Eleazar (Carpzov, Introd. in lib.
V. T. Jerem.). The occurrence of the same name
may be looked on, however, in this as in many
other instances in the 0. T., as a probable indica-
Jon of affinity or friendship; and this, together
with the coincidences — (1.) that the uncle of Jere-
miah (xxxii. 7) bears the same name as the husband
of Huldah the prophetess (2 K. nil. 14), and (2.)
'hat Ahikam the son of Shaphan, the great sup-
porter of Hilkiah and Huldah in their work (2 Chr.
xxxiv. 20) was also, throughout, the great protector
of the prophet (Jer. xxvi. 24), may help to throw
tome light on the education by which he was pre-
pared for that work to whiish he was taught he had
been " sanctified from his mother's womb." The
ttnuge Rabbinic tradition (Carpzov, /. c), that
sight of the persons most conspicuous in the relig-
ious history of this period (Jeremiah, Baruch,
Sersiah, Maaseiah, Hilkiah, Hanameel, Huldah,
HuDum) wen all descended from the harlot Kahab,
ztay pwrdhly hive been a distortion of the fact that
■IKIt WMTAIl
they were connected, in some way or
members of a family. If this were so, we can Jbm
a tolerably distinct notion of the influences that
were at work on Jeremiah's youth. The boy would
hear among the priests of his native town, not three
miles distant from Jerusalem [Anathoth], of the
idolatries and cruelties of Manasseh and his ton
Amon. He would be trained in the traditional
precepts and ordinances of the Law. He would
become acquainted with the names and writing*
of older prophets, such as Hicah and Isaiah. At
he grew up towards manhood, he would bear abc
of the work which the king and his counsellors wen
carrying on, and of the teaching of the woman,
who alone, or nearly so, in the midst of that relig-
ious revival, was looked upon as speaking from
direct prophetic inspiration. In all likelihood, as
we have seen, he came into actual contact with
them. Possibly, too, to this period of his life we
may trace the commencement of that friendship
with the family of Neriah which was afterwards so
fruitful In results. The two brothers Baruch and
Seraiah both appear as the disciples of the prophet
(xxxvi. 4, li. 59); both were the sons of Neriah,
the son of Maaseiah (I. c); and Maaseiah (2 Chr.
xxxiv. 8) was governor of Jerusalem, acting with
Hilkiah and Shaphan in the religious reforms of
Josiah. As the result of all these influences we
find in him all the conspicuous features of the
devout ascetic character: intense consciousness of
his own weakness, great susceptibility to varying
emotions, a spirit easily bowed down. But there
were also, we may believe (assuming only that the
prophetic character is the development, purified
and exalted, of the natural, not its contradiction),
the strong national feelings of an Israelite, the
desire to see his nation becoming in reality what it
had been called to be, anxious doubts whether this
were possible, for a people that had sunk so low
(cf. Maurice, PrqplieU and Kingt of the 0. 7\,
Serm. xxii.-xxiv.; Ewsld, Prophet**, ii. p. 6-8).
Left to himself, he might have borne his part
among the reforming priests of Josiah's reign, free
from their formslisru and hypocrisy. But "the
word »f Jehovah came to him " (i. 2) ; and by that
divine voice the secret of his future life was revealed
to him, at the very time when the work of reforma-
tion was going on with fresh vigor (2 Chr. xxxiv. 8),
when be himself was beginning to have the thoughts
and feelings of a man." He was to lay sside all
self-distrust, all natural fear and trembling (1. 7, 8),
and to accept his calling aa a prophet of Jehovah
" set over the nations and over the kingdoms, U
root out and to pull down, and to destroy and to
throw down, to build and to plant " (i. 10). A
life-long martyrdom was act before him, a struggle
against kings and priests and people (i. 18). When
was this wonderful mission developed into action ?
What effect did it have on the inward and outward
life of the man who received it ? For a time, it
would seem, he held aloof from the work which wsa
going on throughout the nation. His name is
nowhere mentioned in the history of the memorable
eighteenth year of Josiah. Though five years had
passed since he had entered on the work of a
prophet, it is from Huldah, not from him, that the
king and his princes seek for counsel. The lie-
covery of the Book of the Law, however (we nee*
not now Inquire whether it were the Pentateuch at
« Osrpsov ((. c.) funs twenty as the probable sat
at Jscamhut at the tuns of his call.
Digitized by
Google
JEREMIAH
, or a kwt portion of it, or a oompllatloB
tstugetlin uew), could not (ail to exercise as influ-
ance on a mind like Jeremiah's: hia later writings
ifciw abundant traces of it (cf. inf.); and the result
apparently was, that he could not share the hopes
which others cherished. To them the reformation
seemed more thorough than that accomplished by
Hesekiah. The; might think that fasts, and sacri-
fices, and the punishment of idolaters, might avert
the penalties of which they heard in the book so
strangely found (Deut. xivii., xxviii., zxxii.), and
might look forward to a time of prosperity and
peace, of godliness and security (vii. *\). He saw
that the reformation was but a surface one. Israel
had gone into captivity, and Judah was worse than
Israel (iii. 11). It was as hard for him as it had
been for Isaiah, to find among the princes and
people who worshipped in the Temple, one just,
truth-seeking man (v. 1, 28). Hia own work, as
a priest and prophet, led him to discern the false-
hood aud lust of rule which were at work under
the form of zeal (v. 31). The spoken or written
prophecies of his contemporaries, Zephaniah, Hab-
akkuk, Uryah, Huldah, may have served to deepen
his convictions, that the sentence of condemnation
waa already passed, and that there was no escape
from it. The strange visions which had followed
upon his call (i. 11-16) taught him that Jehovah
would "hasten" the performance of His word;
and if the Scythian inroads of the later yean of
Jonah's reign seemed in part to correspond to the
"destruction coming from the North" (Ewald,
Prophcttn in he.), they could hardly be looked
opon as exhausting the words that spoke of it.
Hence, though we have hardly any mention of
special incidents in the life of Jeremiah during the
eighteen years between his call and Josiah's death,
the main features of his life come distinctly enough
before us. Ha had even then hia experience of the
bitterness of the lot to which God had called him.
The duties of the priest, even if he continued to
discharge them, were merged in those of the uew
and special office. Strange as it was for a priest
to remain unmarried, his lot was to be one of
solitude (xvi. 2)." It was not for him to enter into
the house of feasting, or even into that of mourning
(xvi. 6, 8). From time to time he appeared, clad
probably in the "rough garment" of a prophet
(Zech. xiii. 4), in Anathoth and Jerusalem. He
waa beard warning and protesting, " rising early
and speaking" (xxv. 8), and as the result of this
there came " reproach and derision daily " (xx. 8).
He was betrayed by his own kindred (xii. 6), perse-
cuted with murderous hate by his own townsmen
"si. 91), mocked with the taunting question, Where
a the word of Jehovah? (xvii. 15). And there
vera inner spiritual trials as well as these outward
sues. He too, like the writers of Job and Pa.
stxiii., was haunted by perplexities rising out of the
Usorders of the world (xii. 1, 2); on him there
came the bitter feeling, that he waa " a man of
sontontion to the whole earth " (xv. 10); the doubt
whether hia whole work waa not a delusion and a
He (xx. 7) tempting him at times to fall back into
lilenee, until the fire again burnt within him, and
\t was weary of forbearing (xx. 9). Whether the
JEREMIAH 1865
' passages that have been referred to belong, sal cf
them, to this period or a later one, they iiiprasui*
that which was inseparable from the prophet's 'I*
at all timet, and which, In a character like Jere-
miah's, was developed in its strongest form. To-
wards the close of the reign, however, he appears
to have taken some part in the great national ques-
tions then at issue. The overthrow of the Assyrian
monarchy to which Manaaseh had become tributary
led the old Egyptian party among the princes of
Judah to revive their plans, and to urge an alliance
with Pharaoh-Necbo as the only means of safety.
Jeremiah, following in the footsteps of Isaiah (Is.
xxx. 1-7), warned them that it would lead only to
confusion (ii. 18, 36). The policy of Josiah was
determined, probably, by this counsel. He chose
to attach himself to the new Chaldaean kingdom,
and lost his life in the vain attempt to stop the
progress of the Egyptian king. We may think of
this as one of the first great sorrows of Jeremiah's
life. His lamentations for the king (2 Chr. xxxv.
2d)" may have been those of personal friendship
They were certainly those of a man who, with
nothing before him but the prospect of confusion
and wrong, looks back upon a reign of righteous-
ness and truth (xxii. 3, 16).
(2.) Under Jehoahaz (= Shallum), b. c. 608. —
The short reign of this prince — chosen by the peo-
ple on hearing of Josiah's death, and after three
months deposed by Pharaoh-Necho — gave little
scope for direct prophetic action. The fact of his
deposition, however, shows that he had been set up
against Egypt, and therefore as representing the
policy of which Jeremiah had been the advocate;
and this may account for the tenderness and pity
with which he speaks of him in his Egyptian exile
(xxii. 11, 12).
(3.) Under Jehoiakim, b. c. 607-597. — In the
weakness and disorder which characterized this
reign, the work of Jeremiah became daily more
prominent. The king had come to the throne as
the vassal of Egypt, and for a time the Egyptian
party was dominant in Jerusalem. It numbered
among its members many of the princes of Judah,
many priests and prophets, the Pashurs and the
Hananiahs. Others, however, remained faithful to
the policy of Josiah, and held that the only way of
safety lay in accepting the supremacy of the Chal-
dauns. Jeremiah appeared as the chief represen-
tative of this party. He bad learnt to discern the
signs of the times; the evils of the nation were
not to be cured by any half-measures of reform, or
by foreign alliances. The king of Babylon was
God's servant (xxv. 0, xxvii. 6), doing his work
and was for a time to prevail over all resistance.
Hard as it was for one who sympathized so deeply
with all the sufferings of his country, this was the
oonviotion to which be had to bring himself. He
had to expose himself to the suspicion of treachery
by declaring it- Men claiming to be prophets bad
their " word of Jehovah " to set against his (xiv.
18,xxiii. 17), and all that he could do was to com-
mit his cause to God, and wait for the result.
Some of the most striking scenes in this conflict
are brought before us with great vividness. Soon
after the accession of Jehoiakim, on one of the sol-
■ This Is clearly toe natanl mfnaoea freer the and has bean denied by Protestant and reasserted by
swsda, and patrlatie writers take the feet for (raniad ' Bomlah critics accordingly (cf. Carpsor, I. e.l.
"at attar times It has been supposed to ban soma I b The hypothesis which ascribes than larjoi cations
I on the question of the celibacy of the ole.£r, i to Jeremiah of Ubnah, Josiah's fathsr-ln-law, Isberdlj
i worth refuting.
Digitized by
Google
1166 JKRKMTAH
Ma feast-days — when the courts of the Temple
•n filled with worahippen from ell the eitiee of
Jndah — the prophet appeared, to otter the mes-
rage that Jeruaalem should become e cone, that
the Temple should share the fide of the tabernacle
of Shiloh (xxvi. 6). Then it was that the great
straggle of his life began: priests and prophets
and people joined in the demand for his death
(xrri. 8). The princes of Judah, among whom
were still many of the counsellors of Josiah, or
their sons, endeavored to protect him (xxri. 16).
His friends appealed to the precedent of Micah the
Morasthite, who in the reign of Hezekiah had ut-
tered a like prophecy with impunity, and so for a
time he escaped. The fete of one who was stirred
up to prophesy in the same strain showed, however,
what be might expect from the weak and cruel
king. If Jeremiah was not at once hunted to
death, like Urijah (xxri. 23), it waa only because
his friend Ahifcam wss powerful enough to protect
him. The fourth year of Jehoiakim was yet more
memorable. The battle of Carchemish overthrew
the hopes of the Egyptian party (xlri. 2), and the
armies of Nebuchadnezzar drove those who had no
defenced cities to take refuge in Jeruaalem (xxxv.
11). As one of the consequences of this, we have
the interesting episode of the Rechabites. The
mind of the prophet, ascetic in his habits, shrink-
ing from the common forms of social life, was nat-
urally enough drawn towards the tribe which waa
at once conspicuous for its abstinence from wine
and its traditional hatred of idolatry (2 K. x. 18).
The occurrence of the name of Jeremiah among
them, and their ready reception into the Temple,
may point, perhaps, to a previous intimacy with
him and his brother priests. Now they and their
mode of life had a new significance for him. They,
with their reverence for the precepts of the founder
of their tribe, were as a living protest against the
disobedience of the men of Judah to a higher law
(xxxv. 18). In this year too came another solemn
message to the king: prophecies which had been
ottered, here and there at intervals, were now to be
fathered together, written in a book, and read as a
whole in the hearing of the people. Baruch, al-
ready known as the Prophet's disciple, acted as
scribe; and in the following year, when a solemn
fast-day called the whole people together in the
Temple (xxxvi. 1-9), Jeremiah — hindered himself,
we know not how — sent him to proclaim them.
The result was as it had been before: the princes
ft Jndah connived at the escape of the prophet
and his scribe (xxxvi. 19). The king vented his
rupotent rage upon the scroll which Jeremiah had
jrritten. Jeremiah and Baruch, in their retirement,
«-wrote it with many added prophecies, among
them, probably, the special prediction that the king
should die by the sword, and be cast out unburied
uid dishonored (xxii. SO). In ch. xlv., which be-
V>ngs to this period, we have a glimpse into the
relations which existed between the master and the
scholar, and into what at that time were the
thoughts of each of them. Baruch, younger and
more eager, had expected a change for the better.
To play a prominent part in the impending crisis,
to he the hero of a national revival, to gain the
finer of the conqueror whose coming he announced
— this, or something like this, had been the vision
that had come before him, and when this passed
away be sank into despair at the seeming fruitless-
sjsbs of hie efforts. Jeremiah had passed through
its* fluae of trial and could sympathize with it
JEREMIAH
and knew how to meet it To the mfaW of lb
disciple, as once to his own, the future was revealed
in all its dreariness. He was not to seek « areas
things " for himself in the midst of his co untr y ' s
ruin: his fife, and that only, was to be given him
" for a prey." As the danger drew nearer, there
was given to the Prophet a clearer insight iota the
purposes of God for his people. He might have
thought before, as others did, that the chastisement
would be but for a abort time, that repentance
would lead to strength, and that the yoke of the
Chaldeans might soon be shaken off: now be learnt
that it would last for seventy years (xxt. IS), til
he and all that generation had passed away. Not
was it on Judah only that the king of Babylon was
to execute the judgments of Jehovah: all nations
that were within the prophet's ken were to drink
as fully as she did of " the wine-cup of His fury "
(xxv. 15-38). In the absence of special dates for
other events in the reign of Jehoiakim, we ma)
bring together into one picture some of the moat
striking features of this period of Jeremiah's life.
As the danger from the Chaldeans became more
threatening, the persecution against him grew hot-
ter, his own thoughts were more hitter and despond-
ing (xtuX). The people sought his fife: his voice
rose up in the prayer that God would deliver and
avenge him. Common facts became significant to
him of new and wonderful truths; the work of the
potter aiming at the production of a perfect form,
rejecting the vessels which did not attain to H,
became a parable of God's dealings with Israel and
with the world (xviii. 1-6 ; comp. Maurice, /Vops.
and Xincs, L c). That thought he soon repro-
duced in act as weO as word. Standing in the
valley of Ben-Hinnom, he broke the earthen vessel
he carried in his hands, and prophesied to the peo-
ple that the whole city should be denied with the
dead, as that valley had been, within their memory,
by Josiah (xix. 10-13). The boldness of the speech
and act drew upon him immediate punishment.
The priest Pashur smote snd put him "in the
stocks" (xx. 2); and then there came upon him,
as in all seasons of suffering, the sense of failure
and weakness. The work of God's messengers
seemed to him too terrible to be borne: he would
fain have withdrawn from it (xx. 9). He used for
himself the cry of wailing that had belonged to the
extremest agony of Job (xx. 14-18). The years
that followed brought no change for the better.
Famine and drought were added to the miseries of
the people (sir. 1), but false prophets still deceived
them with assurances of plenty ; and Jeremiah was
looked on with dislike, as " a prophet of evil," and
" every one cursed " him (xv. 10). He was set,
however, "as a fenced brazen wall" (xv. 20),
and went on with his work, reproving king and
nobles and people; as for other sins, so also espe-
cially for their desecration of the Sabbath (xvii
19-27), for their blind reverence for the Temple,
and yet blinder trust in it, even while they went
worshipping the Queen of Heaven in the very str eet s
of Jerusalem (vii. 14, 18). Now too, as before, his
work extended to other nations: they were not to
exult in the downfall of Judah, but to share it-
All were to be swallowed up in the empire of the
Chaldeans (xlviii.-xKx.). If there had been nothing
beyond this, no hope for Israel or this world but
that of a universal monarchy resting on brass
strength, the prospect would have been altogether,
overwhelming; but through this darkness then
gleamed the dawning of a gkrio n bius. What
Digitized by
Google
JEREMIAH
fos mmttj years were oyer, then m to be »
wiMilluii as wonderful as that bom Egypt had
km (zzxiii. 7). In the far off future there waa
the vision of a renewed kingdom; of a " righteous
•ranch " of the house of David, " executing judg-
ment and justice," of Israel and Judah dwelling
safely, once more united, under "the Lord our
Righteousness " (zxiii. 5, 6).
It is doubtful how far we can deal with the
strange narrative of ch. xlii. as a fact in Jeremiah's
life. Evrald (Propketen da A. B., in loc.) rejects
the reading "Euphrates" altogether; Hitzig, fol-
lowing Bochart, conjectures Ephratah. Host other
modern commentators look on the narrative as
merely symbolic. Assuming, however (with Cal-
met and Henderson, and the contaum of patristic
expositors), that here, as in xix. 1, 10, xxvii. 3; Is.
xx. 2, the symbols, however strange they might
seem, were acts and not visions, It is open to us to
conjecture that in this visit to the land of the Chal-
deans may have originated his acquaintance with
the princes and commanders who afterwards be-
friended him. The special commands given in his
favor by Nebuchadnezzar (xxxix. 11) seem at any
rate to imply some previous knowledge.
(4.) Under Jehoiachin (= Jecoiuah), b. c. 597.
— The danger which Jeremiah had so long fore-
told, at last came near, first Jeholakim, and after-
wards his successor, were carried into exile, and
with them all that constituted the worth and
strength of the nation, — princes, warriors, arti-
sans (3 ft xxiv.). Among them too were some of
the false prophets who had encouraged the people
with the bupe of a speedy deliverance, and could
not yet abandon their blind confidence. Of the
work of the prophet in this short reign we have
bat the fragmentary record of xxii. 24-30. We
may infer, however, from the language of his later
prophecies, that he looked with sympathy and sor-
row on the fate of the exiles in Babylon; and that
the fulfillment of all that he had been told to utter
made him stronger than ever in his resistance to all
schemes of independence and revolt.
(6., Under Zedekiah, b. c. 697-486. — In this
prince (probably, as having been appointed by
Nebuchadnezzar), we do not find the same obsti-
nate resistance to the prophet's counsels as in Jehoi-
akim. He respects him, fears him, seeks his coun-
sel; but he is a mere shadow of a king, powerless
•van against his own counsellors, and in his reign,
accordingly, the sufferings of Jeremiah were sharper
than they had been before. The struggle with the
false prophets went on: the more desperate the
condition of their country, the more daring were
their predictions of immediate deliverance. Be-
tween such men, living in the present, and the true
prophet, walking by faith in the unseen future of a
righteous kingdom (xxiii. 5, 6), there could not but
be an internecine enmity. Ha caw too plainly
that nothing but the most worthless remnant of
the nation had been left in Judah (xxiv. ft-8), and
denounced the falsehood of those who came with
lying messages of peace. His counsel to the exiles
(conveyed in a letter which, of all portions of the
0. T., comes nearest in form and character to the
Epistles of the N. T.) was, that they should submit
to their lot, prepare for a long captivity, and wait
luietly for the ultimate restoration. In this hope
as found comfort for himself which made his sleep
' sweat " unto him, even in the midst of all his
•earmess and strife (xxxl. 36). Even at Ballon,
easss u. there were false prophets opposing him.
JEREMIAH 1S57
speaking of him as a " madman " (txix. 36), wrf-
ing the priests of Jerusalem to more active perse-
cution. The trial soon followed. The king at
first seemed willing to be guided by him, and sent
to ask for his intercession (xxxvii. 3), but the ap-
parent revival of the power of Egypt under Apries
(Pharaoh-Hophra), created false hopes, and drew
him and the princes of the neighboring nations
into projects of revolt. The clearness with which
Jeremiah had foretold the ultimate overthrow of
Babylon, in a letter sent to the exiles in that city
by his disciple, Bench's brother Seraiah (assuming
the genuineness of L and li. ), made him all the mora
certain that the time of that overthrow had not yet
arrived, and that it was not to come from the hand
of Egypt He appears in the streets of the city with
bonds and yokes upon his neck (xxvii. 2), announ-
cing that they were meant for Judah and its allies.
The false prophet Hananiah — who broke the offen-
sive symbol (xxviii. 10), and predicted the destruc-
tion of the Chaldeans within two years (xxviii. 3)
— learnt that " a yoke of iron " wits upon the neck
of all the nations, and died himself while it was
still pressing heavily on Judah (xxviii. 16, 17).
The approach of an Egyptian army, however, and
the consequent departure of the ChtUdieans, made
the position of Jeremiah full of danger; and he
sought to effect his escape from a city in which, fct
seemed, he could no longer do good, and to take
refuge in his own town of Anathoth or its neigh-
borhood (xxxvii. 12). The discovery of this plan
led, not unnaturally perhaps, to the charge of de-
sertion : it was thought that he too was " foiling
away to the Chaldeans," as others were doing
(xxxviii. 19), and, in spite of his denial, he waa
thrown into a dungeon (xxxvii. 16). The interpo-
sition of the king, who still respected and consulted
him, led to some mitigation of the rigor of his con-
finement (xxxvii. 21 ) ; but, as this did not hinder
him from speaking to the people, the princes of
Judah — bent on an alliance with Egypt, and cal-
culating on the king's being unable to resist them
(xxxviii. 6) — threw him into the prison-pit, to die
there. From this horrible fate he was again deliv-
ered, by the friendship of the Ethiopian eunuch,
Ebed-Mekwh, and the king's regard for him ; and
was restored to the milder custody in which he had
been kept previously, where we find (xxxii. 16) he
had the companionship of Baruch. In the impo-
tence of his perplexity, Zedekiah once again secretly
consulted him (xxxviii. 14), but only to hear the
certainty of failure if he continued to resist the
authority of the Chaldeans. The same counsel
was repeated more openly when the king sent
Pashur (not the one already mentioned) and Zeph-
aniah — before friendly, it appears, to Jeremiah
or at least neutral (xxix. 29) — to ask for his ad-
vice. Fruitless as it was, we may yet trace, in the
softened language of xxxir. 5, one consequence of
the king's kindness: though exile was inevitable,
he waa yet to " die in peace." The return of the
Chaldean army filled both king and people with
dismay (xxxii. 1); and the risk now was, that they
would pass from their presumptuous confidence to
the opposite extreme and sink down in despair, with
no faith in God and no hope for the future. The
pronhet was taught how to meet that danger also.
In nis prison, while the Chaldeans were ravaging
the country, he bought, with all requisite fbrmstt-
tiea. the field at Anathoth, which his kinsman
Hanamed wished to get rid of (xxxii. 6V9). Hit
foith in the promises of God did not foil bun
Digitized by
Google
1258 JEHEMIAB.
With a confidence in hii country's future, which
baa been compered (Nagelsbach, L c.) to tint of
(he Roman who bought at its full value the very
pound on which the forces of Hannibal were eu
oemped (Liv. xxxvi. 11), he believed not only that
" houses and fields and vineyards should again be
possessed in the land" (xxxii. 15), but that the
voice of gladness should still be heard there (xxxiii,
11), that, under "the Lord our Righteousness,"
the house of David and the prints the Levites
should never be without representatives (xxxiii. 15-
18). At last the blow came. The solemn renewal
of the national covenant (xxxiv. 19), the oner of
freedom to all who had been brought into slavery,
wen of no avail. The selfishness of the nobles
was stronger even than their fears, and the prophet,
who had before rebuked them for their desecration
of the Sabbath, now had to protest against their
disregard of the sabbatic year (xxxiv. 14). The
city was taken, the temple burnt. The king and
his princes shared the fete of Jehoiachin. The
prophet gave utterance to his sorrow in the Lam-
kotatiohs.
(6). After the capture of Jerusalem, b. c. 586
-(?). The Chaldean party in Judah had now the
prospect of better things. Nebuchadnezzar could
not fail to reward those who, in the midst of hard-
ships of all kinds, had served him so faithfully.
We find accordingly a special charge given to
Nebuzaradan (xxxix. 11) to protect the person of
Jeremiah ; and, after being carried as far as Ramah
with the crowd of captives (xL 1 ), he was set free,
and Gedaliah, the son of his stead&st friend Ahi-
kam, made governor over the cities of Judah. The
feeling of the Chaldeans towards him was shown
yet more strongly in the offer made him by Nebu-
zaradan (xL 4, 5). It was left to him to decide
whether he would go to Babylon, with the prospect
of living there under the patronage of the king, or
remain in his own land with Gedaliah and the
remnant over whom he ruled. Whatever may
hare been his motive — sympathy with the suffer-
ings of the people, attachment to his native land,
or the desire to help his friend — the prophet chose
the latter, and the Chaldean commander "gave
him a reward," and set him free. For a short time
there was an interval of peace (xl. 9-12), soon
broken, however, by the murder of Gedaliah by
(shmael and his associates. We are left to con-
jecture in what way the prophet escaped from a
massacre which was apparently intended to include
all the adherents of Gedaliah. The fullness with
which the history of the massacre is narrated in
thap. xli. makes it however probable that he was
among the prisoners whom Isbmael was carrying
off to the Ammonites, and who were released by
the arrival of Johanan. One of Jeremiah's friends
was thus cut off, but Barach still remained with
him; and the people, under Johanan, who had
taken the command on the death of Gedaliah,
turned to him for counsel. "The governor ap-
pointed by the Chaldaans had been assassinated.
Would not their vengeance fall on the whole peo-
ple? Was there any safety but in escaping to
agypt while they could ? " They came accordingly
to Jeremiah with a foregone conclusion. With the
vision of peace and plenty in that land of fleshpots
(xlii. 14), his warnings and assurances were in vain,
and did but draw on him and Barach the old charge
of treachery (xliii. 3). The people fblowed their
iwn counxel, and — lest the two whom they sus-
sMted aba tld betray or counteract it — took them
JEKBMIAH
also by force to Egypt. There, in the sfrs as
Tahpanhes, we have the last clear glimpse* of lbs
prophet's life. His words are sharper and stronger
than ever. He does not shrink, even there, frorr,
sneaking of the Chakuean king once more as the
"servant of Jehovah " (xliii. 10). He dedans
that they should see the throne of the conqueror
set up in lie very place which they bad chosen as
the securest refuge. He utters a final protest
(xliv.) against the idolatries of which they and
their fathers had been guilty, and which they were
even then renewing. After this all is uncertain.
If we could assume that lii. 31 was written by Jer-
emiah himself, it would show that he reached an
extreme old age, but this is so doubtful that we are
left to other sources. On the one hand, there is
the Christian tradition, resting doubtless on some
earlier belief (Tertull. adv. Gnott. c 8; l'seudo-
Epiphan. Opp. iii. 339; Hieron. adv. Jovm. ii. 37),
that the long tragedy of his lift ended in actual
martyrdom, and that the Jews at Tahpanhes, irri-
tated by his rebukes, at last stoned him to death.
Most commentators on the N. T. find an allusion
to this in Heb. xi. 37. An Alexandrian tradition
reported that his bones had been brought to that
city by Alexander the Great (Chron. Patch, p.
156, ed. Dindorf, quoted by Carpzor and Nagels-
bach). In the beginning of the last century trav-
ellers were told, though no one knew the precise
spot, that he had been buried at Uhizeh (Lucas,
Traveli in the Levant, p. 88). On the other side,
there is the Jewish statement that, on the conquest
of Egypt by Nebuchadnezzar, he, with Baruch,
made his escape to Babylon (Seder Olam Rabba,
c. 96; Genebrerd, Chrmol. Heb. 1608) or Judas
(R. Solomon Jarchi, on Jer. xliv. 14), and died in
peace. Josephus is altogether silent as to bis fate,
but states generally that the Jews who took refuge
in Egypt were finally carried to Babylon as cap-
tives (Ant. x. 9). It is not impossible, however,
that both the Jewish tradition and the silence of
Josephus originated in the desire to gloss over a
great crime, and that the offer of Nebuzaradan (xl
4) suggested the conjecture that afterwards grew
into an assertion. As it is, the darkness and doubt
that brood over the last days of the prophet's lift
are more significant than either of the issues which
presented themselves to men's imaginations as the
winding-up of his career. He did not need a death
by violence to make him a true martyr. To die,
with none to record the time or manner of his
death, was the right end for one who had spoken
all along, not to win the praise of men, but because
the word of the Lord was in him as a " burning
fire " (xx. 9). May we not even conjecture that
this silence wss due to the prophet himself? If
we believe fcf. inf.) that Baruch, who was with
Jeremiah in Egypt, survived him, and had any
share in collecting and editing his prophecies, it is
hard to account for the omission of a fact of so
much interest, except on the hypothesis that his
lips were sealed by the injunctions of the master
who thus taught him, by example as well as by
precept, that he was not to seek "great things"
for himself.
Other traditions connected with the name of
Jeremiah, though they throw no light on his his
tory, are interesting, a* showing the impression
left by his work and life on the minds of later
generations. As the Captivity dragged on, the
prophecy of the Seventy Years, which had at first
been so full of terror, came to be a ground of hon
Digitized by
Google
JEREMIAH
Dm. ix. 3; 3 Chr. xxxri. 31; Ber. I. 1) Pn
ike return from Babjlon, his prophecies wer* col-
lected and received into the canon, as tl Me of the
second of the (ireat I'rophets of Israel In the
urangement followed by the Babylonian Talmudic
writer! {Bain B Ultra, § 14 4; quoted by Lightfoot
on Mail, xxvii. 9), and perpetuated among some of
the mediasval Jewish transcribers (Wolff, Bibt.
Flebr. ii. 148), he, and not Isaiah, occupies the
bat place. The Jewish saying that " the spirit of
Jeremiah dwelt afterwards in Zechariah " (Grotius
in MaU. xxrii. 9) indicates how greatly the mind
of the one was believed to hare been influenced by
the teaching of the other. The fulfillment of his
predictions of a restored nationality led men to
think of him, not as a prophet of evil only, but as
watching over his countrymen, interceding for
them. More than any other of the prophets, he
occupies the position of the patron-saint of Judaea.
He had concealed the tabernacle and the ark, the
great treasures of the Temple, in one of the caves
af Sinai, there to remain unknown till the day of
restoration (3 Mace. U. 1-8). He appears "a man
with gray hairs and exceeding glorious," "the
lover of the brethren, who prayed much for the
holy city," in the vision of Judas Maccabeus ; and
from him the hero receives his golden sword, as a
gift of God (3 Maec. xv. 13-16). His whole voca-
tion as a prophet is distinctly recognized (Ecclus.
xtU 1 . The authority of his name is claimed for
long didactic declamations against the idolatry of
Babylon (Bar. vi. [or Epist of Jer.]). At a later
period it was attached, as that of the representative
prophet, to quotations from other books in the same
volume (Lightfoot, L c), or to prophecies, apocry-
phal or genuine, whose real author was forgotten
(Hieron. in Matt, xxvii. 9; Fabriciiis, Cod. Pira~
depig. V. T. i. 1103; Grot tit Eph. v. 14). Even
in the time of our Lord's ministry there prevailed
the belief (resting, in part perhaps, in this case as
in that of Elijah, on the mystery which shrouded
the time and manner of his death) that his work
was not yet over. Some said of Jesus that he was
"Jeremias, or one of the prophets" (Matt. xvi.
14). According to many commentators he was
" the prophet " whom all the people were expecting
(John i. 31). The belief that he was the fulfill-
ment of Deut xviii. 18 has been held by later Jew-
ish interpreters (Abarbanel in Carpzov, I. c). The
traditions connected with him lingered on even in
the Christian church, and appeared in the notion
that he had never really died, but would return one
day from Paradise as one of the " two witnesses "
of the Apocalypse (Victorinus, Otmn. tit Apt*, xi.
13). Egyptian legends assumed yet wilder and
more fantastic forms. He it was who foretold to
the priests of Egypt that their idols should one
day fall to the ground in the presence of the virgin
bora (Epiphan. dt VU. Proph. Opp. 11. p. 339).
Flaying the part of a St. Patrick, he had delivered
one district on the shores of the Mile from croco-
diles and asps, and even in the 4th century of the
Christian era the dust of that region was looked on
as a specific against their bites (ibid. ). According
'o another tradition, he had returned from Egypt
to Jerusalem, and lived there for 300 years (D'Her-
tatot, BIMiath. Orient, p. 499). The 0. T. nar-
iBtive of his sufferings was dressed out with *he
'incidents of a Christian martyrdom (Eupolem.
folyhlst m Erutb. Prop. Evang. ix. 39).
II. Character ami Style. — It will have been
teen from tlus narrative that there fell to the lot
JEREMIAH
1269
of Jeremiah sharper suffering than any previous;
prophet had experienced. It was not merely that
the misery which others had seen afar off was act
ually pressing on him and on his country, nor that
he had to endure a life of persecution, while they
had intervals of repose, in which they were honored
and their counsel sought. In addition to all differ-
ences of outward circumstances, there was that of
individual character, influenced by them, reacting
on them. In every page of bis prophecies we
recognise the temperament which, while it does not
lead the man who has it to shrink from doing God's
work, however painful, makes the pain of doinz it
infinitely more acute, and gives to the whole clur
acter the impress of a deeper and more lasting
melancholy. He is preeminently "the man that
hath seen afflictions" (Lam. Hi. 1). There is in
sorrow like unto his sorrow (Lam. i. 12). He wit-
nesses the departure, one by one, of all his hopes of
national reformation and deliverance. He has to
appear, Cassandra-like, as a prophet of evil, dash-
ing to the ground the false hopes with which the
people are buoying themselves up. Other prophets,
Samuel, Elisha, Isaiah, had been sent to rouse the
people to resistance. He (like Ihocion in the par-
allel crisis of Athenian history; has been brought
to the conclusion, bitter as It is, that the only safety
for his countrymen lies in their accepting that
against which they are contending as the worst of
evils ; and this brings on him the charge of treach-
ery and desertion. If it were not for his trust in
the God of Israel, for his hope of a better future
to be brought out of all this chaos and darkness,
his heart would fail within him. But that vision
is clear aud bright, and it gives to him, almost as
fully as to Isaiah, the character of a prophet of the
Gospel. He is not merely an Israelite looking for-
ward to a national restoration. In the midst of all
the woes which he utters against neighboring na-
tions he has hopes and promises for them also
(xlviii. 47, xlix. 6, 39). In that stormy sunset
of prophecy, he beholds, in spirit, the dawn of a
brighter and eternal day. He sees that, if there is
any hope of salvation for his people, it cannot be
by a return to the old system and the old ordi -
nances, divine though they onoe had been (xxxi.
31). There must be a New Covenant. That word,
destined to be to full of power for all after-ages,
appears first in his prophecies. The relations be-
tween the people and the lord of Israel, between
mankind and God, must rest, not on an outward
law, with its requirements of obedience, but on that
of an inward fellowship with Him, and the con-
sciousness of entire dependence. For all this lie
saw clearly there must be a personal centre. . The
kingdom of God could not be manifested bit*
through a perfectly righteous man, ruling over vjea
on earth. The prophet's hopes are not merely
vague visions of a better future. They gather
round the person of a ChnsV and are essentially
Messianic.
In much of all this — In their personal character,
in their sufferings, in the view they took of the
great questions of their time — there is a resem-
blance, at once significant and interesting, between
the prophet of Anathoth and the poet of the Di-
f'ta Commedin. What Egypt and Babylon wen
to the kingdom of Judah, France and the Empire
were to the Florentine republic. In each ease the
struggle between the two great powers reproduced
itself in the bitterness of contending factions.
Dante, like Jeremiah, saw himself surrounded hi
Digitized by
Google
1260
JEREMIAH
frill against which he could only bear an anavall-
taf protest. The worst agents in producing those
stilt inn the authorised 'tencheri of hit religion.
Eta) hope* of better thins* connected themselves
with the supremacy of * power which the majority
of hia countryman looked on with repugnance.
For him, also, there wet the long weariness of exile,
brightened at time* by the sympathy of faithful
friend*. In hint, aa in the prophet, we find —
united, it Is true, with greater strength and stern-
ness— that intense susceptibility to the sense of
wrong which shows itself sometimes in passionate
complaint, sometimes in bitter words of invective
and reproach. In both we find the habit of mind
ahlch selects an image, not for its elegance or sub-
limity, but for what it means; not shrinking even
From what seems grotesque and trivial, sometimes
veiling its meaning in allusions mora or leas dark
and enigmatic. Both are sustained through all
their sufferings by their strong faith in the Unseen,
by their belief in an eternal righteousness which
shall one day manifest itself and be notorious. 11
A yet higher parallel, however, presents itself.
In a deeper sense than that of the patristic divines,
the life of the prophet was a type of that of Christ.
In both there is the same early manifestation of the
consciousness of a Divine mission (Luke ii. 49).
The persecution which drove the prophet from An-
atboth has its counterpart in that of the men of
Nazareth (Luke iv. 29). His protests against the
priests and prophets are the forerunners of the woes
against the Scribes and Pharisees (Matt, xxiii.).
His lamentations over the coming miseries of his
country answer to the tears that were shed over the
Holy City by the Son of Man. His sufferings
come nearest, of those of the whole army of mar-
tyrs, to those of the Teacher against whom princes
and priests and elders and people were gathered to-
gether. He saw more clearly than others that
New Covenant, with all its gifts of vpiritual Hfe and
power, which was proclaimed and ratified in the
death upon the cross. On the assumption that
Jeremiah, not David, was the author of the 22d
Psalm (Hitzig, in loc., followed in this instance by
Nagelsbach, L c), the words uttered in the agony
of the crucifixion would point to a still deeper and
mora pervading analogy.
The character of the man impressed itself with
more or less force upon the language of the writer.
Criticisms on the *' style " of a prophet are, indeed,
for the most part, whether they take the form of
praise or blame, wanting both in reverence and dis-
cernment. We do not gain much by knowing that
to one writer he appears at once " sermone quidem
. . . quibusdam aliis prophetis rusticior " (Hieron.
ProL m Jerem.), and yet "majestate sensuum
profundisrimus " (Procem. in c. L); that another
compares him to Simonides (Lowth, Pral xxi. ) ;
a third to Cicero (Seb. Schmidt) ; that bolder critics
find in him a great want of originality (Knobel,
Prnphetunua) ; " symbolical images of an inferior
order, and symbolical actions unskillfully con-
trived " (Davidson, Inlrod. to 0. T. c. xix.). Leov-
jig these judgments, however, and asking in what
« The fact that Jer. v. 6 suggested the imagery of
the opening Canto of the Inferno to not without sig-
nificance, as bearing on this parallelism.
b The system of secret writing which bears this
same forms part of the Kabbala of the later Jews,
the plan adopted Is that of using the letters of the
alphabet in aa inverted order, so that H
JEKEMIAH
way the outward form of his writings nsnuite Ml
life, we find tome striking characteristics that hsjp
us to understand both. As might be expected it
one who lived in the last days of the kingdom, and
had therefore the works of the earlier prophets U
look back upon, we find in him reminiscences and
reproductions of what they had written, which in
dicate the way in which his own spirit had beet
educated (comp. Is. xl. 19, 80, with x. 8-6; Pt
cxxxT. 7, with x. 13; Ps. budx. 6, with x. 26; Is.
xiii. 16, with xxxi. 9; Is. ir. 2, xi. 1, with xxxiii.
15; Is. xr. with xlviii.; Is. xiii. and xlvii. with L,
li. : aee also Kiiper, Jertm. Sbromm §ac interpret
tt vindtx). Traces of the influence of the newly
discovered Book of the Law, and in particular of
Deuteronomy, appear repeatedly in his, as in other
writings of the same period (Dent. nvii. 26. iv.
20, vii. 12, with xi. 3-6; Deut, xv. 12, with xxxiv.
14; Ex. xx. 16, with xxxii. 18; Ex. vi. 6, with
xxxii. 21). It will be noticed that the parallelisms
in these and other instances are, for the most part,
not those that rise out of direct quotation, but such
aa are natural in one whose language and modes of
thought have been fashioned by the constant study
of books which came before him with a divine au-
thority. Along with this, there is the tendency,
natural to one who speaks out of the fullness of his
heart, to reproduce himself — to repeat in nearly
the same words the great truths on which his own
heart rested, and to which he was seeking to lead
others (comp. marginal references patrim, and list
in Keil, Kintrit. § 74). Throughout, too, there are
the tokens of his individual temperament: a greater
prominence of the subjective, elegiac element than
in other prophets, a less sustained energy, a less
orderly and completed rhythm (De Wette, Einleit.
§ 217; Kwald, Propheten, ii. 1-11). A careful
examination of the several parts of his prophecy
has led to the conviction that we may trace an in-
crease of these characteristics corresponding to the
accumulating trials of his life (Kwald, L c.j. The
earlier writings are calmer, loftier, more uniform in
tone : the later show marks of age and weariness
and sorrow, and are more strongly imbued with the
language of individual suffering. Living at a time
when the purity of the older Hebrew was giving
way under continual contact with other kindred
dialects, his language came under the influence
which was acting on all the writers of his time,
abounds in Aramaic forms, loses sight of the finer
grammatical distinctions of the earlier Hebrew, in-
cludes many words not to be found in its vocabu-
lary (Eichhorn, KinlciL in dot A. T. iii. 121). It
is in part distinctive of the man aa well as of the
time, that single words should have appeared full
of a strange significance (i. 11), that whole pre-
dictions should have been embodied in names
coined for the purpose (xix. 6, xx. 3), and that the
real analogies which presented themselves should
have been drawn not from the region of the great
and terrible, but from the moat homely and famil-
iar incidents (xiii. 1-11, xviii. 1-10). Still more
startling is his use of a kind of cipher (the At-
hash;* comp. Hitzig and Ewald on xxv. 26), eon-
stands rbr S, IT for 2, and so on, and the word Is
formed out of the first four letters which an that In-
terchanged (tfsny)- to *• passage referred at
(xxv. 26), the otherwise unintelligible word Hhsehset
becomes, on applying this key, the equivalent of BsM
The position of the tarns word in li. 41 <
Digitized by
Google
JEREMIAH
aaslag, except from the initiated, the meaning of
ah prediction!.
To associate the name of Jeremiah with any
other portion of the 0. T. ia to pass from the field
of history into that of conjecture; but the fact that
Hitxig (Comm. ibtr die Ptaim.), followed in part
by Biidiger (Erich und Griiber, EneyeL art. Jerem. ),
assigns not less thai, thirty psalms (*c v., vi., zir.,
zzii-zU., UL-lr., hdx.-lxxi.) to hit authorship is,
at least, so far instructive that it indicates what
were the hymns, belonging to that or to an earlier
period, with which hin own spirit had most affinity,
and to which he and other like sufferers might
hare turned as the fit expression of their feelings.
III. Arrangement. — The absence of any chrono-
logical order in the present structure of the collec-
tion of Jeremiah's prophecies is obvious at the first
glance; and this has led some writers (Blayney,
Pre/, to Jeremiah) to the belief that, as the book
now stands, there is nothing but the wildest con-
fusion — "a preposterous jumbling together" of
prophecies of different dates. Attempts to recon-
struct the book on a chronological basis have been
made by almost all commentators on it since the
revival of criticism (Simonis, Vitringa, Cornelius a
Lapide, among the earliest; cf. De Wette, KinleiL
i 230); and the result of the labors of the more
recent critics has been to modify the somewhat
hasty judgment of the English divine. Whatever
points of difference there may be in the hypotheses
of Movers, Hitzig, Ewald, Bunsen, Nagelsbach, and
others, they agree in admitting traces of an order
in the midst of the seeming irregularity, and en-
deavor to account, more or less satisfactorily, for
the apparent anomalies. The conclusion of the
three last-named is that we have the book sub-
stantially in the same state as that in which it left
the hands of the prophet, or his disciple Uaruch.
Confining ourselves, for the present, to the Hebrew
order (reproduced in the A. V.) we hare two great
divisions:
(L) Ch. i.-rlv. Prophecies delivered at various
times, directed mainly to Judah, or con-
nected with Jeremiah's personal history.
(2.) Ch. xlri.-li. Prophecies connected with
other nations.
Ch. lii., taken largely, though not entirely, from
I K. xxt., may be token either as a supplement to
the prophecy, or (with Grotius and Lowth) as an
introduction to the Lamentations.
i .poking more closely into each of these divisions,
we have the following sections. The narrative of
ixzvi. 33 serves to explain the growth of the book
in its present shape, and accounts for some, at
Interpretation ; and all other explanations of the word
an conjectural and tar-fetched. ' The application of
the Atbash to these passages nets historically on the
authority of Jerome ( Comm. in Jerem. in loc.), who
renin to toe consensus of the Jewish expositors of his
own saw. There is, of course, something startllog in
the appearance of one or twc solitary instances of a
sebejeal notation like this so long before It became
eonepicuoos as a system ; and this has led commen-
tators to attempt other explanations of the mysterious
word (oomp. J. D. Hichaelis, ta loc). On the other
^and, It sbonld be borne in mind that the age of alpha-
betic Psalms, such ss Ps. cxix., was one in which we
•light expect to Sod the minds of men occupied with
SAo changes and combinations to which the letters of
he Hebrew alphabet might be subjected, and It which,
w, such a system of cipher-writing was likely
Itself. The feet that Jeremiah himself
JEREMIAH 1261
feaet, of it* anomalies. Up to the 1th year at
Jehoiakim, it would appear, no prophecies had beta
committed to writing, or, if written, they had not
been collected and preserved. Then the more mem-
orable among the messages which the word of the
Lord had fron. time to time brought to him wen
written down at the dictation of the prophet him-
self. When that roll was destroyed, a second was
written out, and other prophecies or narratives
added as they came. We may believe that this
MS. was the groundwork of our present text; but
it ia easy to understand how, In transcribing cn.i
a document, or collection of documents, the desire
to introduce what seemed to the transcriber a bettn
order might lead to many modifications. As it is,
we recognize — adopting Bunsen's classification
(Uott in tier Getckichtt, i. 113), sa being the most
natural, and agreeing substantially with Ewald's —
the following groups of prophecies, the sections in
each being indicated by the recurrence of the for-
mula, " The word of the Lord came to Jeremiah,"
in fuller or abbreviated forms.
1. Ch. i.-xxi. Containing probably the substance
of the book of xxxvL 32, and including prophecies
from the 13th year of Josiah to the 4th of Jehoia-
kim : i. 3, however, indicates a later revision, and
the whole of ch. i. may possibly have been added
on the prophet's retrospect of his whole work from
this its first beginning. Ch. xxi. belongs to a later
period, but has probably found its place here as
connected, by the recurrence of the name Pashur,
with ch. xx.
2. Ch. xxii.-xxv. Shorter prophecies, delivered
at different times against the kings of Judah and
the false prophets. Xxv. 13, 14 evidently marks
the conclusion of a series of prophecies; and that
which follows, xxv. 15-38, the germ of the fuller
predictions in xlvi.-xlix., has been placed here as a
kind of completion to the prophecy of the Seventy
Years and the subsequent fall of Babylon.
3. Ch. xxvi.-xxviii. The two great prophecies
of the fall of Jerusalem, and the history connected
with them. Ch. xxvi. belongs to the earlier, ch.
xxvii. and xxviii. to the later period of the prophet's
work. Jehoiakim in xxvii. 1 ia evidently (oomp
ver. 3) a mistake for Zedekiah.
4. Ch. xxix.-xxxi. The message of comfort for
the exiles in Babylon.
5. Ch. xxxii.-xliv. The history of the last two
years before the capture of Jerusalem, and of Jere-
miah's work in them and in the period that fol
lowed. Ch. xxxv. and xxxvi. are remarkable as
interrupting the chronological order, which other-
wise would have been followed here more ckuely
adopted a complicated alphabetic structure for h'i
great dirge over the fell of Jerusalem (comp. Luis*
tatiohs), indicates a special tendency In htm to carry
to its highest point this characteristic of the literature
of his time. Nor Is this the only instance. Hltaai
finds another example of the Atbash In It 1. The
words ^Qp 2T? {qui ear iuum levaotnmi, Yulg. ;
" in the midst of them that rise up against mo," A.
V.), for which the LXX. substitute XaAeWoet, be-
comes, on applying the above notation, the equivalent
of Qt'TCpS. It should be added, howevet. that the
LXX. onus the entire passage in xxv. 28, and the
word 8beshach in U. 41 ; and that Ewald rejects It
accordingly as a later interpolation, conjecturing that
the word lint came Into use among the Jews who Dree
In exile at Baoylon.
Digitized by
Google
1862 JEREMIAH
wkv it any other part. The position of eh. xrr.,
nconuected with anything before or after it, may
he accounted for on the hjpotheai* that Baruch
•Paired to place on record to memorable a passage
in hit own life, and inserted it where the direct
narrative of hit roaster's life ended. The tame
explanation applies in part to ch. xxxvi., which was
evidently at one time the conclusion of one of the
divisions.
6. Ch. xlvi.-li. The prophecies against foreign
nations, ending with the great prediction against
Babylon.
7. The supplementary narrative of ch. lii.
IV. Text. The translation of the LXX. presents
many remarkable variations, not only in details
indicating that the translator found or substituted
readings differing widely from those now extant in
Hebrew codices (Keil, EMtit. } 76), but in the
order of the several parts. Whether we suppose
him to have had a different recension of the text,
or to have endeavored to introduce an order accord-
ing to his own notions into the seeming confusion
of the Hebrew, the result is, that hi no other book
of the 0. T. is there so great a diversity of arrange-
ment. It is noticeable, as illustrating the classifi-
cation given above, that the two agree as far as
xxv. 13. From that point all is different, and the
following table indicates the extent of the diver-
gency. It will be seen that here there was the
attempt to collect the prophecies according to their
subject-matter. The thought of a consistently
chronological arrangement did not present itself in
«oe ease more than the other.
JEREMIAH
As tuning tkt install
rtuumia tx mmtm.
hXX.
Hxsuw.
xxv. 14-18
_
xlix. 84-89.
xxrl.
^
XlTi.
xxrlL-xxvUi
^
l.-ll.
xxU. 1-7
n
xlvll. 1-7.
7-22
H
xlix. 7-22.
XXX. 1-8
H
xlix. 1-6.
6-11
H
28-88-
12-16
_
28-27.
xxxL
M
xlviU.
xxxtl.
m
xxv. 15-88.
XXXM.-U.
H
xxvi.-xlv.
In.
_
UL
The difference in the arrangement of the two
tats was noticed by the critical writers of the
Early Church (Origan, Ep. ad African. Hieron.
Prof. in Jtrem.). For fuller details tending to a
eonchision unfavorable to the trustworthiness of the
Greek translation, see Keil, Einleii. (1. c), and the
authors there re f erred to.
Suppoted Interpolation*. — The genuineness of
some portions of this book has been called in ques-
tion, partly on the hypothesis that the version of
the LXX. presents a purer text, partly on internal
and more conjectural grounds. The following tables
indicate the chief passages affeettd by each class
st* objections:
1. At omitted as (at LXX
(1 ) x. 6, 7, 8, 10.
1.) xxrU. 7.
>.) xxvii. 16-21 [not omitted, but wMh many raita-
HOMl.
(».; xxxUi. 14-26.
«./ xxxlx. 4-ia
2. On oHur ground:
1.) I 1-16. As being altogether the work of a later
witter, probably the to-called Pseudo-Isaiah.
The Annuls of var. 11 Is urged ss conftruuog
(1) xxr. U-M.
(8.) xxvll. 7.
(4.) xxxUi. 14-28.
(6.) xxxlx. 1, 2, 4-18. .
(6.) xxvli.-xxix. As knowing, In the shortened fern
of the prophet's nam* (""VIp")" 1 ), and tot
addition of the epithet " Jeremiah' cat pnfJut,'
the ravislon of a later writer.
(7.) xxx.-xxxlil. As partaking of the .•haiacter st* tht
later propbeclas of Isaiah.
(8 ) xlvill. As betraying In language and statements
the interpolations either of the later propheefce
of Isaiah or of a still later writer.
*&.) L 11. At being a valirimium ex errmtu, inserted
probably by the writer of Is. xxxiv., and nmlza
in language and thought to the general chaxae-
ter of Jeremiah's prophecies.
(10.) 111. As bring a supplementary addition to tha
book, compiled from 2 K. xxv. and othsi
In these, as in other questions connected with
the Hebrew text of the O. T., the impugners of the
authenticity of the above passages are for the most
part— De Wette, Hovers, Hitzig, Ewald, Knobel:
Have-nick, Hengstenberg, Kiiper, Keil, L'mbreit,
are among the chief defenders. (Comp. Keil, A'is-
Icitung, § 76; and, for a special defense of 1. and
li., the monograph of Nagekbaeh, Jtrem tat tmd
Babylon.)
V. Literature — Origen, Bom. M Jtrrm. ,
Theodores, SehoL m Jtrem., Opp. ii. p. 143;
Hieron. Comas, lis Jtrem. oe. i.-xxxii ; Con
mentariet by CEcolampadius (1630); Calvin (1S63);
l'iscator (1614); Sanctiua (1618); Tanema (1768);
Hicbaelis (1783) ; Blayney \Jertm. and Lam. Nat
TrantL with Notts, Oxf.] (1784 [3d ed. Load.
1838] ) ; Dahler [Jeremie traduit, accompaont da
nota, 8 pt. Strasb.] (1825-30); Umbreit \Prakt
Comm. Hamb.] (1842); Henderson [Jtrtm, and
Lam. trantlattd, triti a Commentary, Load. 1851] ;
Neumann [ Weittagungen u. KlaotUtdtr, S Bde.
Leips.] (1856-58).
The following treatises may also be consulted : —
Schnurrer, C. F., Obtervationet ad valid*. Jt-
rtm., 1793 [-94; repr. in the Comment TkeoL by
Velthusen, Kuinoel and Rnperti, vol. IL-r.] ; Gaab,
Erkldrung tehtoertr Sullen in d. Wtittag. Jtrtm.,
1824; Hensler, Bemerkt. ibtr Stttttn m Jtrtm.
Wtittag., 1805 ; Spohn, Jtrem. Vote* t vers. Jnd.
Alex., 1794 [-1824]; Kiiper, Jtrtm. Librorwm
Sacrorum interpret el xvudtx, 1837; Movers, De
vtriutque receutionit vaticin. Jtrtm. indole tt
origint, 1837; Wichelhaus, De Jtrem. rerstone
Alex., 1847; Hengstenberg, Ckruiokgit dtt A. T.
(Section on Jeremiah). E. H. P.
* The prophets are often spoken of in the Bible
as announcing orally their predictions and messages,
but very seldom as writing them out either before
or after their promulgation. In this respect we
have mora distinct notices concerning the habit of
Jeremiah, than of any other prophet We learn
from Jer. xxxvi. 9 ff., that in the fourth year of
Jehoiakim he received a command from God to
collect all that he had spoken " against Israel and
against Judah, and against all the nations from
the days of Josiah," and to write down the same
in a book. In accordance with this direction be
dictated to Baruch his amanuensis all his proph-
ecies up to that time. This collection was burnt
by Jehoiakim on account of the threatening]
which it contained against himself; but Jensnka
immediately prepared another in which b» act oosj
Digitized by
Google
JBBBMIAH
I again what had been destroyed, but added
» that « many like words " (ver. 32). Sea also
t. 60 ff. The prophet's object in thus putting
together his revelations as made known to the
public from time to time, may not hare required
aim to follow any strict chronological order. The
question, therefore, whether the present Hebrew
collocation of these parts of his writings came from
kit hand or that of another, does not depend on
Uk new taken of their chronological relation to
each other. So far as this point is concerned, the
gristing order may have originated with the prophet
binuelf, and not from a reviser or transcriber. The
connection of subjects rather than of time appears
to have controlled the general arrangement of the
book of Jeremiah.
It is a singular fact, that Matthew (xxvii. 9)
■scribes a passage t» Jeremiah which seems to
belong to Zechanah. See, on that difficulty, the
addition to Aceldama. (Amer. ed.). The pre-
dictions of Jeremiah were not only well known in
the times immediately after him, but were cele-
brated for their strict fulfillment. Reference is
made to this character of his writings in 2 Ohron.
avi. 21, and £s. i. 1. His assignment of 70 years
u toe period of the duration of the Captivity was
the ground of Daniel's earnest, effectual prayer for
the end of the exile and the restoration of Israel
(Din. ix. 2 ft.). It is noteworthy that the first
quotation from Jeremiah as we open the Gospel -
butiiry (Matt, ii- 17, 18) brings back te us the
mice of lamentation and sorrow to which we were
accustomed in the Old Testament.
Additional literature. — The following works on
Jeremiah also deserve notice: Seb. Schmid, Comm.
in Libr. Prophetiarum Jeremia, 1685 (also 1697
and 1706), 2 vols. 4to; Leiste, Oba. in Vaticin.
/eras, aliquot locus, 1794, reprinted with large
additions in Pott and Kuperti's Sytioge Comm.
Thiol ii. 203-246; Rosenmuller, Scholia in Vet.
rat. pars viii., 2 vols 1826-27 ; J. C. K. Hofmann,
Die Atbaaig Jakre del Jtrem. u. d. tiebengig
Jakrwoeken de* Daniel, 1836 ; Maurer, Comm. in
Vet Tat i. 490-891 (1838); Heim and Hoffinann,
Die tier grotten Propheten erbaulich autgelegt
sat den Sckriflen der Beformatortn, 1839; J. L.
Kunig, AlttettamenUicke Studien, 2« Heft '{Dat
Deuteronomium u. der Prophet Jeremia, gegen
an Boklen), 1839; Hitrig, Der Prophet Jeremia
trhlart, 1841, 2* Aufl. 1866 (Uef. 11L of the
Kurtgef. txeget. Bandb. sum A. T.), oomp. his
Prep*. Bicker del A. T. Sbtrutzt, 1854; Ewald,
Die Propheten dee Alien Bmdet, vol. ii., 1841 (a
new edition about to be published, 1868); Stanelin,
Feber dat Princip dat der Anordnung der Wett-
tagmgen d. Jerem. zu Grunde liegt, in the
Zalttkr. d. deutecken morgetd. GeteUschnJl, 1849,
iii. 216-230; Nagelsbach, Der Proph. Jtrem. u.
Babylon, 1850; Bunsen's Bibelaerk, Bd. ii. 3»
HihV, 1860; C. F. Graf, Der Prophet Jeremia
trhlart, 1802; G. R. Koyes, New Tramlatim of
Ike Hebrew PropheU, vol. ii., 3d ed. Boston, 1866.
The commentary on Jeremiah for Lange'a Bibel-
eerk is to be prepared by Nagelsbach.
Of the later Introductions to the Old Testament
hoes of Keil (pp. 248-264, 2* Aufl.), Bleek (pp.
169-601), and Davidson (iii. 87-129) contain im-
mrtant sections. The art. on Jeremiah in Ersoh
■ad Gruber's AUgem. Enoyelopddie (Seat. ii. Bd.
it.) Is by Rodiger; that in Henog's Real-EnaykL
[*. 478-489), by Nagelsbach; and that in ZeOer's
MIL Wtrterb. (i. 666 ff.), of • popular character,
JEBBMIAB
12M
by WunderHch. Stanley's sketch of Jerandab
(Jewith Church, ii. 570-622) describes him it b
reality the great personage of his epoch, not merely
in his religious sphere, but in the state. For Ids
poetical characteristics, see Lowth's Lecture* on
Hebrew Poetry, pp. 177, 178 (Stowe's ed.), Meier,
Getch. d. poeU Nat. Lit. der HebrSer (1856), p.
395 S., and Isaac Taylor's Spirit of Hebrew Poetry,
p. 272 (N. Y. 1862). For Mitotan's estimate of
his importance and of his literary merits, see his
Hittory of the J eat, i. 439-448 (Amer. ed.)
" His unrivaled elegies," says this eminent critic,
" combine the truth of history with the deepest
pathos of poetry." He justifies the encomium by
a translation of some of the passages, alike remark-
able for originality of thought and tenderness of
expression, in which the Hebrew patriot laments
the sad fate of Jerusalem on its being captured end
destroyed by Nebuchadnezzar. [Lamentations.]
On the general import of his prophecies the reader
may consult F. R. Hasse's Getchichte det A.
Bundet, pp. 145-157 ; Roster's Die Propheten, pp.
112-115, and Hengstenberg's Chrittolugy, espe-
cially in relation to the Messianic portions, ii. 861
473 (Edinb. 1856). « It is to Jeremiah," says
Stanley (ii. 680), " even more than to Isaiah, that
the writers of the Apostolic age (Hebr. viii. 8, 13,
x. 16, 17) look back, when they wish to describe
the Dispensation of the Spirit His predictions
of the Anointed King are fewer and leas distinct
than those of the preceding prophets. But he is
the prophet beyond all others of ' the New Testa-
ment,' 'the New Covenant,' which first appears
in bis writings. . . . And the knowledge of this
new truth shall no longer be confined to any single
order or caste, but ' all shall know the Lord, from
the least unto the greatest' (Jer. xxxi. 33, 84)."
H.
JEREMI'AH. Seven other persons bearing
the same name as the prophet are mentioned in
the O. T.
1. ['I«p«uf(U '. Jeremiai.] Jeremiah of Libnab,
father of Hamutal wife of Josiah, 2 K. xxili. 31.
2. 3. 4. [2. 'Uptula, Alex, -uieu, FA. -pnpr,
Vat. Uputuu; 3. 'leptuiat, Vat -ana, Alex.
-um. Fa. Uputa; *■ 'Uptuta, Vat -utut, Alex,
-/wat.] Three warriors — two of the tribe of Gad
— In David's army, 1 Chr. xii. 4, 10, 13.
5. ['Uptula; Vat itp/uta.] One of the
« mighty men of valor " of the trans-Jordanio half-
tribe of Manasseb, 1 Chr. v. 24.
6. ['Upeuta; Alex. Icmuo, exc xii. 84, Up*uuu\
Vat Uputa, Uptuta; FA. Uputta, Uptutta.] A
priest of high rank, head of the second or third of
the 21 courses which are apparently enumerated in
Neh. x. 2-8. He is mentioned again, t. e. the
course which was called after him is, in Neh. xii. 1;
and we are told at v. 12 that the personal name of
the head of this course in the days of JoiaHm was
Hanasiah. This course, or its ohief, took part
in the dedication of the wall of frruaalem (Neh.
ill. 34\.
7. [Bom. Vat ■Uptutr.] The father of JaMa.
niah the Reohabita, Jer. xxxv. 3.
• JHBBMIAH, LAMENTATIONS OF.
[Lamentations.]
JBEBMI'AS ClWofi [Alex. In Ecelus.,
lrmtuias.] Jeremiai, Uieremiat). L The Greek
form of the name of Jeremiah the prophet, used la
the A.V. of Eoclus. xlix. 6 ; 2 Msec xv. 14; Matt
xvi. 14. [JiBRtun; Jkrkmt.]
Digitized by
Google
1264
JBREMOTH
2. 1 Esdr ix. 34. [Jebeijai.]
J/ER'EMOTH (nion^ [height*] : 'Uft-
jM, [etc]: Jcrimoth, Jerhmith).
J~ CAoiuett; [Vat laettfute; Alex. IopuiovO;
Oomp. Aid. 'UpifidS: Jerimoth.]) A Benjaniite
chief, a son of the home of Benin of Elpaal, ac-
cording to an obscure genealogy of the age of Hez-
ekiah (1 Chr. viii. 14; oomp. 12 and 18). His
family dwelt at Jerusalem, as distinguished from
the other division of the tribe, located at Gibeon
(ver. 88).
2. ['lapt/u&6: Vat. Apciuo6\] A Herarits Le-
nto, son of Mushi (1 Chr. xxtti. 23); elsewhere
called Jkkimoth.
3. ['Upi/uU ; Vat Zpti/ucS.] Son of Heman ;
head of the 13th course of musicians in the Divine
service (1 Chr. xxv. 22). In ver. 4 the name is
Jerimoth.
*• ['lapifiu0; Vst. laptifioiS; Alex. Upi/tmS.]
One of the sons of Elain, and —
B. f Ap/u£0; [Vat A/utvi FA. Ap/iuy; Alex.
Comp. 'lapfidS: Jerimuth]), one of the sons of
Zattu, who had taken strange wires : but put them
away, and offered each a ram for a trespass offer-
ing, at the persuasion of Ezra (Ezr. x. 26, 27).
In Esdras the names are respectively Hiekemoth
and Jakimuth.
6. The name which appears in the same list as
" and Ramoth " (ver. 29) — following the correc-
tion of the Ktri — is in the original text (Cttib)
Jeremoth, in which form also it stands in 1 Esdr.
ix. 30, 'ltptfuiS, A. V. Hikkkmoth. A. C. II.
JEK'EMY {Itptplasi [Alex, in 9 Mace. ii. 7,
Upi/uias '■] Jerentiat, Hitrtmiai), the prophet Jer-
emiah. 1 Esdr. i. 28, 32, 47, 67, ii. 1; 2 Esdr.
u. 18; 2 Mace. ii. 1, 5, 7; Matt ii. 17, xxvii. 9.
[Jeremiah; Jeremiah.] These abbreviated
forms were much in favor about the time that the
A. V. was translated. Elsewhere we find Esat
for Isaiah; and in the Homilies such abbreviations
as Zachary, Toby, etc., are frequent
•JER'EMY, EPISTLE OP. [Baruch,
the Book op, 7.]
JERI'AH pin»"V, i. e. Veri-ya-hu [founded
by Jehovah]: 'Upii; 'EirSuif; [Vat ISovtf, M«;
Alex. U pia,] IcSmi : Jtriau), a Kohathite Levite,
ehief of the great house of Hebron when David
organized the service (1 Chr. xxiii. 19, xxiv. 23;
in the latter passage the name of Hebron has been
emitted both in the Hebrew and LXX.). The
same man is mentioned again, though with a slight
difference in bis name, as Jeruaii.
JER1BAI [3 syl.] 03" l 1.^ [perh- »*o» Je-
\ovah defends]:^ 'lapi$l; [Vat Iapi0«;] Alex.
lapifiaX: Jeribai), one of the Bene-Ehuam [sons
■f IS.], named among the heroes of David's guard
n tlw supplemental list of 1 Chr. (xi. 46).
JERICHO (TP\ J'rieho, Num. xxU. 1;
also Vm\ J'tieho, Josh. B. 1, 2, 8; and
nh'"!';, J'richoh, 1 K. xvi. 34; Lsaixt, Erika,
place of fragrvnee, from T?T, riach, «to
breathe," ITnn, "to smell:" older commeota-
JERICHO
ton derive tt'from ITT, jarfaek, "the mm; "•
also from FTP, rvtaocA, "to be broad," at in a
wide plain; 'leptrd; [Vat Up*ix<*< «"• ***•
ii. 34, Itptia; Alex. Icp«xo> u> 1 Chr. ft. 19,
Ear. ii. 84, and (with FA.) in Neh. iii. 2, vfl. 36;
FA. in 1 Chr. six. 6, E«j»x»; Sin. in Eecl. xxiv.
14, 1 Mace. xvi. 11, 14, Itpcixu, and so Tisch. is
the N. T., exe. Heb. xi. 30 (7th ed.); Strabo and
Josephus, 'Upixovt: [Jericho]), a city of high an-
tiquity, and, for those days, of considerable import-
ance, situated in a plain traversed by the Jordan,
and exactly over against where that river was
crossed by the Israelites under Joshua (Josh. iii.
16). Such was either its vicinity, or the exta.t of
its territory, that Gilgal which formed their pri-
mary encampment, stood in its east border (ir. 19).
That it had a king is a very secondary considera-
tion, for almost every small town had one (xii. 9-
24); in fact monarchy was the only form of gov-
ernment known to those primitive times — the
government of the people of God presenting a
marked exception to prevailing usage. But Jericho
was further inclosed by walla — a fenced city — its
walls were so considerable that at least one person
(Rahab) had a house upon them (ii. 15), and its
gates were shut, as throughout the East still,
" when it was dark " (v. 5). Again, the spoil that
was found in it betokened its affluence — Ai, Mak-
kedah, Libnah, Ijichish, Eglon, Hebron, Debir,
and even Hazor, evidently contained nothing worth
mentioning in comparison — besides sheep, oxen,
and asses, we hear of vessels of brass and iron.
These possibly may have been the first-fruits of
those brass foundries " in the plain of Jordan " of
which Solomon afterwards so largely availed him-
self'(2 Chr. iv. 17). Silver and gold was found in
such abundance that one man (Achan) could ap-
propriate stealthily 200 shekels (100 oz. avoird.,
see Lewis, Heb. Rep. vi. 57) of the former, and
" a wedge of gold of 60 shekels (25 oz.) weight; "
" a goodly Babylonish garment," purloined in the
same dishonesty, may be adduced as evidence of a
then existing commerce between Jericho and the
far East (Josh. vi. 94, vii. 21). In fact its situa-
tion alone — in so noble a plain and contiguous to
so prolific a river — would bespeak it* importance
in a country where these natural advantages have
been always so highly prized, and in an age when
people depended so much more upon the indigenous
resources of nature than they are compelled to do
now. But for the curse of Joshua (vi. 26) doubt-
less Jericho might have proved a more formidable
oounter-eharm to the city of David than even
Samaria.
Jericho is first mentioned as the city to which
the two spies were sent by Joshua from Shitthc:
they were lodged in the house of Rahab the harir I
upon the wall, and departed, having first promised
to save her and all that were found in her bouse
from destruction (ii. 1-21). In tie annihilation
of the city that ensued, this promise was religiously
observed. Her house was recognized by the scarlet
line bound in the window from which the spies
were let down, and she and her relatives were taken
out of it, and >' lodged without the camp; " but H
is nowhere said or implied that her house escaped
the general conflagration. That she "dwelt hi
■ In which cue It would probably be a remnant of
■» old Canaanltfah worship of the heavenly bodies,
■fetch has left It* traces in sash namss as Ohesil,
Betu-chemesh, and others (sea iDOurar, p. llU *)
which may have been the head-quarters of the wet
ship Indicated In the names they bear.
Digitized by
Google
JERICHO
for the future; that she married Salmon
ton of Naassou, " prince of the children of Judah,"
and had by him Boaz, the husband of Ruth and
progenitor of l)arid and of our Lord; and lastly,
that the is the first and only Gentile name that
appears in the list of the faithful of the O. T. given
by St. Paul (Josh. vi. 26; 1 Chr. ii. 10; Matt. i.
5 ; Heb. xi. 31), all these facts surely indicate that
she did not continue to inhabit the accursed site;
and, if so, and in absence ot all direct evidence
from Scripture, how could it ever have been inferred
that her house was left standing?
Such as it had been left by Joshua, such it was
bestowed by him upon the tribe of Benjamin (Josh,
iviii. 21), and from this time a long interval elapses
I efore Jericho appears again upon the scene. It is
only incidentally mentioned in the life of David in
L*onnection with his embassy to the Ammonite king
(2 Sam. x. 5). And the solemn manner in which
its second foundation under Hiel the Bethelite is
recorded — upon whom the curse of Joshua is said
to have descended in full force (1 K. xvi. 34) —
would certainly seem to imply that up to that time
its site had been uninhabited. It is true that
mention is made of " a city of palm-trees " (Judg.
i. 16, and iii. 13) in existence apparently at the
time when spoken of; and that Jericho is twice —
once before its first overthrow, and once after its
second foundation — designated by that name (see
Ueut. xxxiv. 3, and 2 Chr. xxvii. 16). But it
would be difficult to prove the identity of the city
mentioned in the book of Judges, and as in the
territory of Judah, with Jericho. However, once
actually rebuilt, Jericho row again slowly into con-
sequence. In its immediate vicinity the sons of
the prophets sought retirement from the world:
Elisha "healed the spring of the waters;" and
over and against it, beyond Jordan, Elijah "went
op by a whirlwind into heaven " (2 K. ii. 1-2*2,'
in its plains Zedekiah fell into the hands of the
Chaldieans (2 K. xxv. 6; Jer. xxxix. 5). By what
may be called a retrospective account of it, we may
infer that Hiel's restoration had not utterly failed ;
for in the return under Zerubbabel the " children
of Jericho," 845 in number, are comprised (Or. ii.
34; Neh. vii. 36); and it is even implied that they
removed thither again, for the men of Jericho
assisted Nehemiah in rebuilding that part of ths
wall of Jerusalem that was next to the sheep-gate
(Neh. iii. 2). We now enter upon its more mod-
ern phase. The Jericho of the days of Josephus
was distant 160 stadia from Jerusalem, and 50 from
the Jordan. It lay in a plain, overhung by a bar-
ren mountain whose roots ran northwards towards
Scythopolii, and southwards in the direction of
Sodom and the Dead Sea. These formed the
western boundaries of the plain. Eastwards, its
barriers were the mountains of Moab, which ran
psnllsl to the former. In the midst of the plain —
the great plain as it was called — flowed the Jor-
ian, and at the top and bottom of it were two
lakes: Tiberias, proverbial for its sweetness, and
Asphaltites for it* bitterness. Away from the Jor-
.lan it was parched and unhealthy during summer;
but during winter, even when it snowed at Jerusa-
lem, the inhabitants here wore linen garments.
Hard by Jericho — bursting forth close to the site
of the ok) city, which Joshua took on bis entrance
nto Canaan — was a most exuberant fountain,
«hose waters, before noted for their contrary prop-
stties, had received, proceeds Josephus, ihro-gh
' k's prayers, their then wonderfully ulu ju-y
80
JERICHO
1266
and prolific efficacy. Within its rang* — 70 stadia
(Strabo says 100) by 20 — the fertility of the soil
was unexampled: palms of vario s names and
properties, some that produced hoLey scarce infe-
rior to that of the neighborhood — opobalsamum,
the choicest of indigenous fruits — Cyprus (Ar.
"el-henna") and myrobalanum ("Zukkum")
throve there beautifully, and thickly dotted about
in pleasure-grounds (B. J. iv. 8, $ 3). Wisdom
herself did not disdain comparison with " the rose-
plants of Jericho " (Ecclus. xxiv. 14). Well might
Strabo ( (Jeot/r. xvi. 2, J 41, ed. Muller) conclude
that its revenues were considerable. By the Ho-
niara Jericho was first visited under Pompey : he
encamped there for a single night ; and subse-
quently destroyed two forts, Threx and Taurus,
that commanded its approaches (Strabo, ibtJ. § 40).
Gabinius, in his resettlement of Judaea, Diode it
one of the five seats of assembly (Joseph. B. J. '.
8, § 6). With Herod the Great it rose to still
greater prominence; it had been found full of treas-
ure of all kinds, as In the time of Joshua, so by his
Roman allies who sacked it (ibiu. i. 15. § 6); and
its revenues were eagerly sought, and rented by the
wily tyrant from Cleopatra, to whom Antony had
assigned them (Ant. xv. 4, § 2). Not long after-
wards he built a fort there, which he called " Cy-
prus" in honor of bis mother (ibid. xvi. 6); a
tower, which he called in honor of his brother
"Phasaijlus; " and a number of new palaces —
superior in their construction to those which bad
existed there previously — which he named after his
friends. He even founded a new town, higher up
the plain, which he called, like the tower, I'hasaelis
(B. J. i. 21, § 8). If he did not make Jericho his
habitual residence, he at least retired thither to die
— and to be mourned, if he could have got his
plan carried out — and it was in the amphitheatre
of Jericho that the news of his death was announced
to the assembled r Idlers and people by Salome (B.
J. i. 38, § 8). Soon afterwards the palace was
burnt, and the U>wn plundered by one Simon, a
revolutionary that had been slave to Herod (Ant.
xvii. 10, $ 6); but Archelaus rebuilt the former
sumptuously — founded a new town in the plain,
that bore his own name — and, most important of
all, diverted water from a village called Neera, to
irrigate the plain which he had planted with palms
(AM. xvii. 13, § 1). Thus Jericho was once more
*• a city uf palms " when our Lord visited it: such
as Herod the Great and Archelaus hart left it, such
he saw it. As the city that had so exceptionally
contributed to his own ancestry — as the city which
had been the first to fall — amidst so much cere
mony — before " the captain of the Lord's host,
and his servant Joshua " — we may well suppose
that his eyes surveyed it with unwonted interest.
It is supposed to have been on the rocky heights
overhanging it (hence called by tradition the Qusr-
entana), that be was assailed by the Tempter; and
over against it, according to tradition likewise, He
had been previously baptized in the Jordan. Here
He restored sight to the blind (two certainly, per-
haps three, St. Matt xx. 30; St. Mark x. 46:
this was in leaving Jericho. St. Luke says " as
He was come nigh unto Jericho," etc., xviii. 36).
Here the descendant of Kahab did not disdain the
hospitality of Zacclueus the publican — an office
which was likely to be lucrative enough in so rich
a city. Finally, between Jerusalem and Jericho
was laid the scene of His story of the good Samar-
itan, which, if it is not to be regarded as ■ real
Digitized by
Google
126G JERICHO
juuiumc throughout, at lout derive* interest from
the fcet, that robbers have ever been the terror of
that precipitous road; and so formidable had they
proved only juat before the Christian era, that
Pompey had been induced to undertake the de-
struction of their strongholds (Strabo, at before,
xvi. 2, § 40: comp. Joseph. Ant. xx. 6, § 1 ff.).
Dagon, cr Docus (1 Mace. xvi. 15; comp. ix. 50),
where Ptolemy assassinated hit father-in-law, Simon
the Maccabee, may have been one of these.
Posterior to the Gospels the chronicle of Jericho
may be briefly told. Vespasian found it one of
the toparchies of Judaea (B. J. iii. 3, § 5), but
lesertod by its inhabitants in a great measure when
tie encamped there (ibiiL ir. 8, § 2). He left a
Carrison on his departure — not necessarily the
Kith legion, which is only stated to have marched
through Jericho — which was still there when Titus
advanced upon Jerusalem. Is it asked how Jericho
was destroyed ? Evidently by Vespasian ; for Jo-
aephus, rightly understood, is not to silent as Dr.
ltobin.»D (BibL Res. i. 566, 2d ed.) thinks. The
"Ity pillaged and burnt, in B. J. iv. 9, § 1, was
clearly Jericho with its adjacent villages, and not
(ierasa, as may be seen at once by comparing the
language there with that of c. 8, § 2, and the agent
vras Vespasian. Eueebiut and St. Jerome (Ono-
M'ltL s. v.) say that it was destroyed when Jeru-
salem was besieged by the Romans. They further
add that it was afterwards rebuilt — they do not
say by whom — and still existed in their day; nor
had the ruins of the two preceding cities been ob-
literated. Could Hadrian possibly have planted a
colony there when he patted through Judaea and
founded jElia? (Dion. Cats. If in. lxix. c 11, ed.
Stars. ; more at large Chron. PntcJuiL p. 254, ed.
Du Fretne.) The discovery which Origen made
then of a version of the O. T. (the 5th in his
Heiapla), together with sundry MSS., Greek and
Hebrew, suggests that it could not have been
wholly without inhabitants (Euseb. E. B. vi. 16;
8. Epiphan. Lib. tie Pond, tt Mentur. circa med.);
or again, as is perhaps more probable, did a Chris-
tian settlement arise there under Constantine, when
baptisms in the Jordan began to be the rage? That
Jericho became an episcopal see about that time
under Jerusalem appears from more than one an-
cient Notitia (Geograph. S. a Carolo Paulo, 306,
and the Parergon appended to it; comp. William
of Tyre, BitL lib. xxiii. ad 11. Its bishops sub-
scribed to various councils in the 4th, 5th, and 6th
centuries {ibid, and Le Quien's Orient Christian.
■i. 654). Justinian, we are told, restored a hos-
liee there, and likewise a church dedicated to the
/irgiu (Prooop. Dt JEtRf. v. 9). As early at A.
r>. 337, when the Bordeaux pilgrim (ed. Wessel-
ing) visited it, a house existed there which was
pointed out, after the manner of those days, as the
loose of Rahab. This was roofless when Arculfus
saw it; and not only so, but the third city was
likewise in ruins (Adamn. dt Loot S. ap. Migne,
Patrobg. C. lxxxviii. 799). Had Jericho been
visited by an earthquake, as Antoninus reports (ap.
Ugol. Thaaur. vii. p. mcciiii., and note to c. 3),
and as Syria certainly was, in the 27th year of
Justinian, A. D. 553? If so, we can well under-
stand the restorations already referred to: and when
Antoninus adds that the house of Rahab had now
become a hospice and oratory, we might almost
pronounce that this vnu the very hospice which
bad been restored by that emperor. Again, it may
M atksd. did Christian Jericho receive no injury
JERICHO
from the Persian Reunion, the ferocious general of
Cbosroet II. A. I>. «14? (Bar-Hehrci On*. N
Lai. ▼. ed. Kirteh.) It would rather teem that
there were more religious edifices in the 7th than
in the 6th century round about it. According to
Arculfus one church marked the site of Gilgal;
another the spot where our Lord was supposed to
have deposited his garments jirevioualy to his bap-
tism : a third within the precincts of a vast mon-
astery dedicated to St. John, situated upon tome
rising ground overlook! ig the Jordan. (See as
before.) Jericiw meanwhile had disappeared as a
town to rise no more. Churches and monasteries
sprung up around it on all aides, but only tt
moulder away ill tbeir turn. The anchorite eaves
in the rocky flanks of the Quarentana are the most
striking memorial that remains of early dt mediav
val enthusiasm. Arculfus speaks of a diminutive
race — Canaanites be calls them — that inhabited
the plain in great numbers in his day. They have
retained possession of those fairy meadow-lands
ever since, and have made their bead-quarters fbi
tome centuries round the " square tower or castle '
first mentioned by Willebrand (ap. Leon. Allat
iumtutr. p. 151) in A. D. 1211, when it was in-
habited by the Saracens, whose work it may be
supposed to have been, though it has since been
dignified by the name of the house of Zaicbjeus.
Their village is by Brocardus (ap. Canie. Thanur.
iv. 16), in A. i>. 123d, styled " a vile place: " by
Sir J. Maundeville, in a. d. 1322, "a little vil-
lage; " and by Henry MaundreU, in A. D. 1697,
•'a poor nasty village; " in which verdict all mod-
ern travellers that have ever visited RVia must
concur. (See forty Trm. tit PaL by Wright,
pp. 177 and 451.) They are looked upon by the
Arabs as a debased race; and are probably nothing
more or less than veritable gypsies, who are still to
be met with in the neighborhood of the Frank
mountain near Jerusalem, and on the heights round
the village and convent of St. John in the desert,
and are still called " Scomunicati " by the native
Christians — one of the name* applied to them
when they first attracted notice in Europe in the
15th century (». e. from feigning themselves "pen-
itents " and under censure of the Pope. See Hoy-
land's Bittor. Survey of tilt (Jt/jmet, p. 18; alto
The Gypties, a poem by A. P. Stanley.
Jericho does not seem to have been ever restorea
at a town by the Crusaders; but its plains had not
ceased to be prolific, and were extensively cultivated
and laid out in vineyards and gardens by the monks
(Pbocas ap. Leon. Allat. Svupurr. c. 20, p. 31).
They seem to have been included in the domains of
the patriarchate of Jerusalem, and as such wen
bestowed by Amulf upon his niece as a dowry
(Wm. of Tyre, Hist, xi. 15). Twenty-five years
afterwards we find Heliaendis, wife of king Fulco.
assigning them to the convent of Bethany, which
the had founded A. D. 1137.
The site of ancient (the first) Jericho h with
reason placed by Dr. Robinson (BibL Ret. i. 652-
568) in the Immediate neighborhood of the foun
tain of FJisha; and that of the second (the city of
the N. T. and of Josephus) at the opening of the
Wady Kelt (Cherith), half an hour from the four
tain. These are precisely the sites that one would
infer from Josephus. On the other hand we an
much more inclined to refer the ruined aqueduct*
round Jericho to the irrigationt of Arclielaut (set
above) than to any hypothetical " culture ur pna>
■ration of sugar by the Saracens." Jacob "f Vltti
Digitized by
Google
JKBIOHO
JKBIJAH
1287
Jerboa
says bat generally, that the plains of the Jordan
produced canes yielding sugar in abundance, —
from Lebanon to the Dead Sea, — and when be
•peak* of the mode in which sugar was obtained
from them, he is rather describing what was done
in Syria than anywhere near Jericho (Wit. Hiero-
m>L c. 93). Besides, it may fairly be questioned
whether the same .sugar-yielding reeds or canes
there spoken of are not still as plentiful as ever
they were within range of the Jordan (see Lynch's
Narrative, events of April 18. also p. 966-07).
Almost every reed In these regions distils a sugary
juice, and almost every herb breathes fragrance.
Palms have indeed disappeared (there was a solitary
one remaining not long since) from the neighbor-
hood of the " city of palms ; " yet there were groves
of them in the days of Arculfus, and palm-branches
could still be cut there when Fulcheriua traversed
the Jordan, A. D. 1100 (ap. Gtsta Dei per Franco;
voL i. part 1, p. 403). The fig-mulberry or •' tree-
fig" of Zacchssus — which all modern travellers
confound with our Acer pteudoplatamit, or com-
mon sycamore (see Diet, it Hist. Nat. torn, xliii. p.
918, and Cruden's Concord, a, v.) — mentioned by
the Bordeaux pilgrim and by Antoninus, no longer
■lists." The opobaltnnnun has become extinct both
in Egypt — whither Cleopatra is said to have trans-
planted it — and in its favorite vale, Jericho. The
m y obalanum (Zukkwn of the Arabs) alone survives,
and from its nut oil is still extracted. Honey may
to still found here and there, in the nest of the
wild bee. Pig-trees, maize, and cucumbers, may
be said to comprise all that is now cultivated in the
plain ; but wild flowers of brightest and most va-
ried hue bespangle the rich herbage on all sides.
lastly, the bright yellow apples of Sodom are
still to be met with round Jericho; though Jose-
ph us (B. ./. iv. 84) and others (Havercamp, ad
TerttUL Apol. c. +0, and Jacob of Vitry, as above)
make their locality rather the shores of the Dead
Sea: and some modem travellers assert that they
are found out of Palestine no less (Bibl. Ret. i.
522 ff.). In fact there are two different plants
that, correctly or incorrectly, have obtained that
name, both bearing bright yellow fruit like apples,
but with no more substance than fungus-balls.
The former or larger sort seems confined in Pales-
tine to the neighborhood of the Dead Sea, while
the latter or smaller sort abounds near Jericho.
E. S. Ft
JETUEL (bfcrn? [founded by God]: 'Ie-
prr)\; [Vat PelnA.:] ./erte/), a man of Iseachar,
one of the six heads of the house of Tola at the
time of the oensus in the time of David (1 Cbl.
vii.2).
JEBI'JAH (n»-l} [fomdtd fry Jtaccah]
Oblui [Vat tov Asia*;] Alex. I«pi«: Jeria),
1 Chr. xxvi. 81. [The same man as Jkriah, with
a slight difference in the form of the name.] 'The
difference consisti in the omission of the final n,
■ ■ Sepp alM (Jmitnltm vnd dot hril. land. 1. 610) the Plain of Jericho, as we (bond two aged trass in
»ys that this tree has entirely disappeared from this the little ravine [near the ehsoMl of l*Wy KtU], in
region. Mr. Tristram makes a different statement
* The tree Into which the publican climbed must not
be confosnded with the oriental plana common by the
siibbiiis of Northern Galilee, liut was th» lyjsmore
If (Ttcu* jycomorus). ■ . . We were irraaned by the
ssasoiUT that though scarce it la not yet extinct in |
Illustration of the Gospel narrative" (Land of Imut,
p. 230, and also p. 614, 3d ed.) lie also found a few
of these tress " among the ruins by the wayside at
ancient Jericho " (Natural Hatory o/ Uu Aeis, p. M,
Load. 1867). [Xuxuusui.] H.
Digitized by
Google
1268
JBBIMOTH
JEBOBOAH
not In t'ue insertion of the j, which our translator! daughter, are dearly wrong, as it appears teas nf
should hare added in the former ease. 19 that Azubah was Caleb's wife. A. C. H.
JEttlMOTH (mO , '-VJ [A«oAfc]: UptpM,
"lapipM, 'Upi/ioiS: Jerimoih).
1. ['U(i/w48; Vst Ap«/u*0.] Son or descend-
ant of Bela, ueeording to 1 Chr. vii. 7, and founder
of a Benjamite bouse, which existed in the time of
David (ver. 2). He is perhaps the same as —
2. ('Apipott; [Vat. A/Mituwf;] Alex, Iopr-
uouB; [I'A. apiSfiavt'] Jerimuth), who Joined
David at Ziklag (1 Chr. xU. 5). [Bela.]
3. (n'WV, 1. «. Jeremoth: ['icputett; Vat.
AiptfuuS: Alex. Icpt/u>0.]) A son of Becber (1
Chr. vii. 8), and bead of another Benjamite bouse.
[Bkciikk.]
4- I'ltM/iAe; Vat AptifitcS.] Son of Mushi,
the son of Merari, and head of one of the families
ef the Merarites which were counted in the census
of the Levites taken by David (1 Chr. xxiv. 30).
[See Jkbsmoth, 8.]
8. I'Upt/uie; Vat. Upt/ute: Alex. itpipjovi.]
Son of Heroin, head of the 16th ward of musi-
cians (1 Chr. xxv. 4, 22). In the latter he is
called Jkkkmoth. [Hkuak.]
6. I'UptpM; Alex, -fumt; Vat. Eptipa6.]
Son of AtrieL "ruler" (T33) of the tribe of
Naphtali in the reign of David (1 Chr. xxvii. 19).
The same persons, called rulers, are in ver. 22 called
"princes" (" "1tP) of the tribes of Israel.
7. CUpipAu$\ [Vat. -pei-\\ Alex. EppuntS.) Son
of king David, whose daughter Mahalath was one
of the wives of Reboboam, ber cousin Abihail being
the other (2 Chr. xi. 18). As Jerimoth is not
named in the list of children by David's wives in
1 Chr. iii- or xiv. 4-7, it is fair to infer that he was
the son of a concubine, and this in fact is the Jew-
ish tradition (Jerome, Qmatitmei, ad loc.). It is
however questionable whether Rehoboam would
hare married the grand-child of a concubine even
of the great David. The passage 2 Chr. id. 18 is
not quite clear, since the word "daughter" is a
correction of the Km : the original text had 13,
i. e. "ton."
8. ['UpifMi Vat -p«-.] A Levite in the
reign of Hezekiah, one of the overseers of offerings
and dedicated things placed in the chambers of the
Temple, who were under Cononiah and Shimei the
Leviies, by command of Hezekiah, and Azariah the
high-priest (2 Chr. xxxi. 18). A. C. H.
JETUOTH (nfwnj [cvrtetfu]: 'UpuU;
[Vat EAiotf: Jeriutlt]), according to our A. V.
tnd the LXX., one of the elder Caleb's wives (1
Zhr. ii. 18) ; but according to the Vulgate she was
his daughter by his first wife Azubah. The He-
brew text seems evidently corrupt, and will not
make sense; but tbe probability is that Jerioth
was a daughter of Caleb the son of Hearon. (In
toll cane we ought to read TVjffl$ I'D TTffl
Wff"S.) The Latin version of Santas Pagninus,
which makes Azubah and Jerioth both daughters
if Caleb, and the note of Vatablus, which makes
Iskah (A. V. -wife'') a proper name and a third
« According to tbe old Jewish tradition prewired
•jr Jerome (Quwv. Htbr. 2 Sam. xvl. 10), Nebat, the
felasr if Jeroboam, was identical with Rbimai of Oera,
JEROBCKAH (D? 3 *?? = Tarab'am : 'lajw-
0oift)- The name «ignifl»« "whose people a
many," and thus has nearly the same meaning
with Rehoboam, "enlargerof the people." Roto
names appear for the first time in the reign of Sol-
omon, and were probably suggested by tbe increase
of the Jewish people at that time.
L The first king of the divided kingdom of Is-
rael. Tbe ancient authorities for his reign and his
wars were " the Chronicles of the Kings of Israel "
(1 K. xiv. 19), and " the visions of Iddo the tea
against Jeroboam tbe son of Nebat " (2 Chr. ix.
29). The extant account of bis life is given in two
versions, so different from each ether, and yet each
so ancient, as to make it difficult to choose between
them. The one usually followed is that contained
in the Hebrew text, and in one portion of the LXX.
Tbe other ia given in a separate account inserted
by the LXX. at 1 K. xi. 43, and xii. 24. This
last contains such evident marks of authenticity in
some of its details, and is so much more full than
the other, that it will l« most conveniently taken
as the basis of the biography of this remarkable
man, as the nearest approach which, in the contra-
dictory state of the text, we can now make to the
truth.
I. He was the son of an Ephraimite of the name
of Kebat;" his father had died whilst be was young;
but his mother, who had been a person of loose
character (LXX.), lived in her widowhood, trusting
apparently to her son for support. Her name is
variously given as Zercah (Heb.), or Sarira
(LXX.), and tbe place of their abode on the moun-
tains of Ephraim is given either as Zkueoa, or
(LXX.) as Sarira: in the latter case, indicating
that there was some connection between the wife
of Nebat and ber residence.
At the time when Solomon was constructing the
fortifications of Millo underneath the citadel of
Zion, his sagacious eye discovered the strength
and activity of a young Ephraimite who was em-
ployed on the works, and he raised him to tbe rank
of superintendent CTpE, A. V. ••ruler") over the
taxes and labors exacted from the tribe of Ephraim
(1 K. xi. 28). This was Jeroboam. He made the
most of his position. He completed the fortifica-
tions, and was long afterwards known as the man
who had " enclosed the city of David "(IK. xii.
24, LXX.). He then aspired to royal state. Like
Absalom before him, in like circumstances, though
now on a grander scale, in proportion to tbe en-
largement of the royal establishment itself, he kept
300 chariots and horses (LXX.), and at last was
perceived by Solomon to « aiming at the mon-
archy.
These ambitious design* were probably f ust a e d
by tbe sight of tbe growing disaffection of the great
tribe over which he presided, as well ss by tbe
alienation of the prophetic order from the house of
Solomon. According to the version of the story
in the Hebrew text (Jos. Ant. viii. 7, $ 7), this
alienation was made evident to Jeroboam very ea>**
in his career. He was leaving Jerusalem, and hi
encountered, on one of the black-paved roads which
who was the Unit to Insult David In his flight, aarf
the "first of all the house of Joseph " to congrmfnaur
him on his roturo.
Digitized by
Google
JEROBOAM
«■ oat af the city, Ahjjah, " the prophet ■ of the
indent sanctuary of Shiloh. Ahyah drew him
•tide from the road into the field (IiXX.), and, aa
won aa they found themselves alone, the prophet,
who was dressed in a new outer garment, stripped
it off, and tore it into 13 shred* ; 10 of which he
gave to Jeroboam, with the assurance that on con-
dition of his obedience to His laws, God would
establish for him a kingdom and dynasty equal to
that of David (1 K. xi. 29-40).
The attempts of Solomon to cut short Jeroboam's
designs occasioned his flight into Egypt. There
he remained during the rest of Solomon's reign —
in the court of Shisbak (LXX.), who is here first
named in the sacred narrative. On Solomon's
death, he demanded Shishak's permission to return.
The Egyptian king seems, in his reluctance, to
have oflWed any gift which Jeroboam chose, as a
reason fen- his remaining, and the consequence was
the marriage with Alio, the elder sister of the
Egyptian queen, Tahpenes (LXX. Thekemina), and
of another princess (LXX.) who bad married the
Edomite chief, Hadad. A year elapsed, and a son,
Abyah (or Abii&m), was bom. Then Jeroboam
again requested permission to depart, whieh was
granted ; and he returned with his wife and child
to his native place, Sarira, or Zereda, which he
fortified, and which in consequence became a centre
for his fellow tribesmen (1 K. xi. 43, xii. 34, LXX.)
Still there was no open act of insurrection, and it
was in this period of suspense (according to the
LXX.) that a pathetio incident darkened his do-
mestic history. His infant son fell sick. The
anxious father sent his wife to inquire of Uod con-
eerning him. Jerusalem would have been the obvi-
ous place to visit for this purpose. But no doubt
political reasons forbade. The ancient sanctuary
of Shiloh was nearer at hand ; and it so happened
that a prophet was now residing there, of the high-
est repute. It was Ahijah — the same who, accord-
ing to the common version of the story, had already
been in communication with Jeroboam, but who,
according to the authority we are now following,
appears for the first time on this occasion. He
was 60 yean of age — but was prematurely old,
and bis eyesight had already foiled him. He was
living, as it would seem, in poverty, with a boy
who waited on him, and with his own little chil
dren. For him and for them, the wife of Jeroboam
brought such gifts as were thought likely to be
acceptable ; ten loaves, and two rolls for tie chil-
dren (LXX.), a bunch of raisins (LXX.), and a
jar of honey. She had disguised herself, to avoid
recognition; and perhaps these humble gifts were
part of the plan. But the blind prophet, at her
£nt approach, knew who was coming ; and bade
Lis boy go out to meet her, and invite her to his
Bouse without delay. There he warned her of the
■ucleasneas of her gifts. There was a doom on the
house of Jeroboam, not to be averted ; those who
grew up in it and died in the city would become
the prey of the hungry dogs; they who died in the
Totmtry would be devoured by the vultures. This
child alone would die before the calamities of the
bouse arrived : " They shall mourn for the child,
Woe, O Lord, for in him there is found a good
atrd regarding the Lord," — or according to the
jtber version, >• all Israel shall mourn for him, and
i is bevmr borne out by the Hebrew
*xt, 1 X. xU 3), "when all Israel ktard ttol J. was
JEROBOAM 1269
bury him; for he only of Jeroboam shall come Is
the grave, because in him there is found some giiod
thing toward Jehovah, the God of Israel, in thi
house of Jeroboam " (1 K. xiv. 13, LXX. xii.).
The mother returned. As she reentered the town
of Sarira (Heb. Tirzah, 1 K. xiv. 17), the child
died. The loud wail of her attendant damsels
greeted her on the threshold (LXX.). The child
was buried, aa Ahijah had foretold, with all the
state of the child of a royal house. " All Israel
mourned for him " (1 K. xiv. 18). This incident,
if it really occurred at this time, seems to have been
the turning point in Jeroboam's career. It drove
him from his ancestral home, and it gathered ths
sympathies of the tribe of Ephraim round him. lie
left Sarira and came to Shechem. The Hebrew
text describes that he was sent for. The LXX.
speaks of it as his own act. However that may be,
he was thus at the head of the northern tribes,
when Rehoboam, after he had been on the throne
for somewhat more than a year, came up to be
inaugurated in that ancient capital. Then (if we
may take the account already given of Ahjjah 's
interview as something separate from this), for the
second time, and in a like manner, the Divine
intimation of his future greatness is conveyed to
him. The prophet Shemaiah, the Enlaniite (?)
(4 'EyAtutf, LXX.) addressed to him the same
acted parable, in the ten shreds of a new unwashed
garment (LXX.). Then took place the conference
with Rehoboam (Jeroboam appearing in it, in the
Hebrew text, but not " in the LXX.), and the final
revolt; * which ended (expressly in the Hebrew text,
in the LXX. by implication ) in the elevation of
Jeroboam to the throne of the northern kingdom.
Shemaiah remained on the spot and deterred Re-
hoboam from an attack. Jeroboam entered at once
on the duties of his new situation, and fortified
Shechem aa his capital on the west, and l'enuel
(close by the old traus-Jonlanic capital of Mahanaini )
on the east.
II. Up to this point there had been nothing to
disturb the anticipations of the Prophetic Order
and of the mass of Israel as to the glory of Jero-
boam's future. But from this moment one fatal
error crept, not unnaturally, into his policy, which
undermined his dynasty and tarnished his name aa
the first king of Israel. The political disruption
of the kingdom was complete ; but its religious
unity was as yet unimpaired. He feared that the
yearly pilgrimages to Jerusalem would undo all the
work which he effected, and he took the bold step
of rending it asunder. Two sanctuaries of venerable
antiquity existed already — one at the southern, the
other at the northern extremity of bis dominions.
These he elevated into seats of the national worship,
which should rival the newly established Ternplo
at Jerusalem. As Abderrahman, caliph of Spain
arrested the movement of his subjects to Mecca, by
the erection of the holy place of the Zeeca at Cor-
dova, so Jeroboam trusted to the erection of his
shrines at Dan and Bethel. But be was not satis-
fied without another deviation from the Mosaic idea
of the national unity. His long stay in Egypt had
familiarised him with the outward forms under
which -.» Divinity was there represented ; and now,
for the first time since the Exodus, was an Egyptian
element introduced into the national worship of
D Toe cry of revolt, 1 K. xii. 18, Is Uw i
in 3 8am. xx. 1.
Digitized by
Google
1270 JEROBOAM
Pnallim A golden figure of Mnevls, the sacred
aaif of Heliopolis, ni set up at each sanctuary,
frith the address, "Behold thy God ('FJohim' —
comp- Neh. ix. 18) which brought thee up out of
the laud of Egypt." The sanctuary at Dan, as
the most remote from Jerusalem, was established
first (1 K. xii. 30) with priests from the distant
tribes, whom he consecrated instead of the Lerites
(xii. 31, xiii. 3:]). The more important one, as
nearer the capital and in the heart of the kingdom,
was Bethel. The worship and the sanctuary con-
tinued till the end of the northern kingdom. The
priests were supplied by a peculiar form of conse-
cration — any one from the non-Levitical tribes
could procure the office on sacrificing a young bul-
lock and seven rams (1 K. xiii. 33; 3 Chr. xiii. 9).
Kor the dedication of this he copied the precedent
of .Solomon in choosing the feast of Tabernacles as
the occasion ; but postponing it for a month, prob-
ably in order to meet the vintage of the most
northern parts. On the fifteenth day of this month
(the 8th), he went up in state to offer incense on
the altar which was before the calf. It was at this
solemn and critical moment that a prophet from
,ludah suddenly appeared, whom Josephus with
great probability identifies with Iddo the Seer (be
calls him Iadon, int. viii. 8, § 6; and see Jerome,
Qu. lltbr. on i Chr. x. 4), who denounced the
altar, and foretold Its desecration by Josiah, and
violent overthrow. It is not clear from the account,
whether it is intended that the overthrow took
place then, or in the earthquake described by Amos
(i. 1). Another sign is described as taking place
Instantly. The king stretching out his band to
arrest the prophet, felt it withered and paralysed,
and only at the prophet's prayer saw it restored,
and acknowledged his divine mission. Josephus
adds, but probably only in conjecture from the
■acred narrative, that the prophet who seduced Iddo
on his return, did so in order to prevent his ob-
taining too much influence over Jeroboam, and
endeavored to explain away the miracles to the
king, by representing that the altar fell because it
was new, and that his hand was paralyzed from
the fatigue of sacrificing. A further allusion is
made to this incident in the narrative of Josephus
(Ant. viii. 15, § 4), where Zedekiah is represented
as contrasting the potency of Iddo in withering the
band of Jeroloam with the powerlessness of Micaiah
to wither the hand of Zedekiah. The visit of Ano
to Ahijah, which the common Hebrew text places
titer this event, and with darker intimations in
Ahijah's warning only suitable to a later period,
I. as already been described
Jeroboam was at constant war with the house
of Judah, but the only act distinctly recorded is a
battle with Abtfah, son of Kehoboam ; in which, in
spite of a skillful ambush made by Jeroboam, and
of much superior force, he was defeated, and for the
time lost three important cities, Bethel, Jeahanah,
and Ephraim." The calamity was severely felt; he
never recovered the blow, and soon after died, in
the 23d year of his reign (3 Chr. xiii. 30), and was
buried in his ancestral sepulchre (1 K. xiv. 30).
His son Nadab, or (I.XX.) Nebat (named after the
grandfather), succeeded, and in him the dynasty
was closed. The name of Jeroboam long remained
mder a cloud as the king who '< had caused Israel
• The Taigum on Ruth It. 30 mentions Jeroboam's
taring stationed guards on the roads, which guards
tad bean slain hy the people of Nstophah j but what
JKROHAM
to am." At the time of the Reformation, it wm
a common practice of Roman Catholic writsn U
institute comparisons between his separation frot
the sanctuary of Judah, and that of Henry Vlll
from the see of Rome.
2. jKKonoAM II., the son of Joash, the 4th of
the dynasty of Jehu. The most prosperous of the
kings of Israel. The contemporary accounts of his
reign are, (1.) in the "Chronicles of the Kings of
Israel " (3 K. xiv. 28), which are lost, but of which
the substance is given in 2 K. xiv. 23-39. (2.) In
the contemporary prophets Hosea and Amos, and
(perhaps) in the fragments found in la. xr., x»-'
It had been foretold in the reign of Jeboahaz thai
a great deliverer should come, to rescue Israel frox
the Syrian yoke (comp. 3 K. xiii. 4, xiv. 26. 27 i
and this had been expanded into a distinct predi>
tion of Jonah, that there should be a restoration of
the widest dominion of Solomon (xiv. 35). This
"savior" and "restorer" was Jeroboam. He not
only repelled the Syrian invaders, but took their
capital city Damascus (2 K. xiv. 28; Am. i. 3-5).
and recovered the whole of the ancient dominion
from Hamath to the Dead Sea (xiv. 25: Am. vi.
14). Amnion and Moab were reconquered (Am.
i. 13, ii. 1-3); the trans-Jordanic tribes were re-
stored to their territory (3 K. xiii. 6; 1 Chr. v.
17-23).
But it was merely an outward restoration. The
sanctuary at Bethel was kept up in royal state
(Am. vii. 13), but drunkenness, licentiousness, and
oppression, prevailed in the country (Am. ii. 6-8.
iv. 1, vi. 6; Hos. iv. 13-14, i. 3), and idolatry was
united with the worship of Jehovah (Hos. iv. 13.
xiii. 6).
Amos prophesied, the destruction of Jeroboam
and his bouse by the sword (Am. vii. 9, 17), and
Amaziab, the high priest of Bethel, complained to
the king (Am. vii. 10-13). The effect does not
appear. Hosea (Hot. i. 1) also denounced the
crimes of the nation. The prediction of Amos was
not fulfilled as regarded the king himself. He was
buried with his ancestors in state (2 K. xiv. 29).
Ewald (G'mcA. iii. 661, note) supposes that Jero-
boam was the subject of Pa. xiv. A. P. S.
JERO'HAM (DCV [<me btbetd] : Jen
ham). 1. ('Itpo&oifi, both MSS. [rather, Rom.
Alex.] at 1 Chr. vi. 27; but Alex. Wpeau* at ver.
34; [in 1 Sam., 'Upt/uiiK, Comp. Alex. 'Icpoa>;
in 1 Chr., Vat. ttutp, HaaA; Comp. 'Icaoau,
'Uod/i: Aid. 'I<pfpr/j*.]) Father of Elkanah, the
father of Samuel, of the house of Kohath. Hit
father is called Eliab at 1 Chr. vi. 37, Eliel at ver.
34, and Elihu at 1 Sam. i. 1. Jetcham most have
been about the tame age a* Eli. A. C. II.
3. QlfoifL, [Vat. Ipcuut,] Alex. 1>pea7>.) A
Bei jamite, and the founder of a family of Bene
Jerobam (1 Chr. viii. 97). They were among the
leaders of that part of the tribe which lived in
Jerusalem, and which is here distinguished from
the part which inhabited Gibeon. Probably the
tamo person is intended In —
3. ('I«po/3o4», [Vat. Ipsuut, Comp. Alex.
'I«po«y.]) Father (or progenitor) of Ibneiah, am
of the leading Benjamites of Jerusalem (1 Chr. ix
8; comp. 3 and 9).
4. ('IpaAp, Alex. IcfMuut, [Crmp. AH. 'Icpsd>
Is ben alluded to, or when it tank puna, w» hares
present no claw to.
Digitized by
Google
JERUBBAAL
a Net , Ban. Alex. 'Upai^, Vat FA- 1 omit.])
k deMjendant of Aaron, of the house of Immer, the
aader of the sixteenth course of priest*; son of
Plahur and father of Adaiah (1 Chr. ix. 12). He
appears to be mentioned again in Neh. xi. 12
(a record curiously and puzzlingly parallel to that
of 1 Chr. ix., though with some striking differences),
though there he is stated to belong to the house of
Halchiah, who was leader of the fifth course (and
ecmp. Neh. xi. 14).
0. Clpodn, [Vat. FA. Vaa/i, Alex. Upoap.])
Jaroham of Gedor ("TlTjn }D), some of whose
"sons" joined David wh'en he was taking refuge
Irani Saul at Ziklag (1 Chr. xii. 7). The list pur-
[iorU to be of Henjamites (see ver. 2, where the"
word "even" is interpolated, and the last fire
words belong to ver. 3). But then how can the
presence of Korhites (ver. 6), the descendants of
Korah the Levite, be accounted for?
6. ClpwL0, [Vat. Aid.] Alex, •lupip.) A
Danite, whose son or descendant Azareel was head
of his tribe in the time of David (1 Chr. xxvii. 22).
7. Clup&p,.) Father of Azariah, one of the
'• captains of hundreds " in the time of Athaliah ;
one of those to whom Jehoiada the priest confided
his scheme for the restoration of Joash (2 Chr.
ixiii. 1). , G.
JBBUBBA'AX {>Y2y. [mth whom Ejal
contends]: 'ItpofidaX; [Vat. in Judg. vi. 32, Kp-
BaaX; rii. 1, lopfloA; viii. 29, UapufrxaW 1 Sam.
xii. 11, IspojSocyt;] Alex. ffuraornpiev tod BooA,
Judg. vi. 32, Ipo/9aaA in rii. 1: Jerobanl), the
surname of Gideon which he acquired in conse-
quence of destroying the altar of lieaL when hi*
father defended him from the vengeance of the Abi-
ezritee. 11m A. V. of Judg. vi. 32, which hat
" therefore on that day he called him Jerubbaal,"
implying that the surname was given by Jonah,
should rather be, in accordance with a well-known
Hebrew idiom, "one called him," >'. e. he was
ealled by the men of his city. The LXX. in the
same passage have fedAse-sy avri, " he called il,"
i. e. the altar mentioned in the preceding verse;
but as in all other passages they recognize Jerub-
baal as the name of Gideon, the reading should
probably be ainiv. In Judg. viii. 35 the Vulg.
strictly follows the Heb., Jerobanl Uedeoti. The
Atet. version omits the name altogether from Judg.
be 57. Besides the passages quoted, it ia found in
Judg. rii. 1, viii. 29, ix. 1, 5, 16, 19, 24, 28,- and
1 Sam. xii. 11. In a fragment of Porphyry, quoted
by Eusebius {Prop. Kv. i. 9, § 21), Gideon appears
as Hierombalos {'Upoft04\os), the priest of the
God 'Uud, at Jehovah, from whom the Phoenician
shronicler, Sanchoniatho of Beyrout, received his
nfcrmation with regard to the affairs of the Jews.
11 'Ewi Ttfi ayafidarmf , AfyopcVilc 6" <{°x4*, JOS. Ant.
Ik. 1, § 2.
6 Othw names bora* by Jerusalem an as follows :
1 Ann, the " lion of God," or according to another
kstarpntatkn, (he "hearth of God '• (Is. xxlx. 1 2, 7 j
xunp. Ea. xliH. 15). for ths former slgniScatlan cam-
pan Ps. lxxvl. 1, 2 (Stanley, S. 1/ P. xii). 2. "H irftu
iMd, "ths holy city," Matt. I r. 5 and xxvU. 58 only.
Both then passages woukl nam Co iwfcr to Zion — the
ewred portion of the place, In whicn the Tempi* was
situated. It also occurs, if w. n «y., Bar. xi. 2.
i. JiUa Capttolina, the name bestowed by to* emperor
eTadrian (iKUus lladnanus) on the city s* rebuilt by
aim, a. ». 135, 189. Then two nam** of the Emperor
in mserlb*d on to* wall-known stoo* in the south
JTEKTTSAXEM 1271
R is not a little remarkable that Josaphua •wall*
all mention both of the change of nanvt and of Um
event it commemorates. [Gidkoh.]
W. A. W.
JERTJBBE'SHETH (HfyV : LXX., ft*
lowed by the Vulgate, reads 'Upo$d*A, or [Vat.
H. Upofioap, Vat. M. and] Cod. Alex. IcpojSotut),
a name of Gideon (2 Sam. xi. 21 ). A later gen-
eration probably abstained from pronouncing the
name (Ex. xxiii. 13) of a false god, and therefore
changed Gideon's name (Judg. vi. 32) of Jerub-
baal = " with whom Baal contends," into Jerub-
besheth = " with whom the idol contends." Comp.
similar changes (1 Chr. viii. 38, 34) of Kahtiaal for
hhbosheth, and Meribbaal for Mephibosheth.
w. t. a
JERXJ'EL, th* WILDERNESS or
(bhf^ "'ST? [<!'"'* founded by God] : f,
fpiuios ''Ufu^A*: Jtrutl), the place iu which Je-
hoshaphat was informed by Jahaxiel the Levite thai
he should encounter the hordes of Aiumon, Moab,
and the Mehunims, who were swarming round tha
south end of the Dead Sea to the attack of Jeru-
salem: "Ye shall find them at the end of tha
wady, facing the wilderness of Jeruel " (2 Chr. xx.
16). The " wilderness " contained a watch-tower
(ver. 24), from which many a similar incursion had
probably been descried. It was a well-known spot,
for it has the definite article. Or the word
(nQV&n) may mean a commanding ridge," be-
low which the " wilderness " lay open to view.
The name has not been met with, but may yet be
found in the neighborhood of Tekoa and Berachaa
(perhaps Btrtikut), east of the road between l^rtds
and Hebron. G.
JERU'SALEM (Dbtppj, i. e. YerO-
shalalm ; or, in the more extended form, D^pPJ,
In 1 Chr. iu. 5, 2 Chr. xxv. 1 , xxxii. 9, Ksth. ii. 6, Jer.
xxvi. 18, only; in the Chaldee passages of Ezra and
Daniel, D^ff"'Vt*, I t. Yerftsblem: LXX. 'lepoir
troX+ifi; N. l\ apparently indifferently 'UpoucotJiii
and to 'Upoa6\uiM ■ Vulg. Cod. Amiat. ffienunlem
and IlitrvMilyma, but iu other old copies Jtrutnlem^
Jerotolymn. In the A. V. of 1611 it ia "lens-
salem," in 0. T. and Apocr. ; but in N. T. " Hieru-
salem ").*
On the derivation and signification of the name
considerable difference exists among the authorities.
The Kabbis state that the name Shalem was be-
stowed on it by Shem (identical in their traditions
with Mdchizedek), and the name Jireh by Abra-
ham, after the deliverance of Isaac on Mount
Moriah, c and that the two were afterwards corn-
wall of tbe Akua, on* of th* few Roman relics about
which there can be no dispute. This name is usually
employed by EuseMue (AiAia) and Jerome, hi their
Onomastiam. By Ptolemy it Is given as KamroAiat
(Heland, Pal. p. 462'. 4. Tbe Arabic names an eU
Kkudi, « th* holy," or Brit ti-Makdit, « the holy
noun," "th* sanctuary." To* former Is that la
ordinary un at present. Th* latter Is found In AraUs
chronicles. Th* nam* ah-Shertf, " tb« venenbl*,*
ot < tbe noble," Is also quoted by Scholtens In hit
Index Otogr. in VU. Salad. 6. Ths corrupt form of
Aunanum Is found m Edrfad (Jaobart, 1. 845), possibly
quoting a Christian writer.
c Th* question of the Identity of kenta wttt
Jsrasatoui will be essmhud under thas bead
Digitized by
Google
1272
JERUSALEM
■and, la* displeasure should be felt by either of
the two SeinU at the exclusive use of one (Beretk.
Rob. in Otho. Lex. Rob. s. r., also Light***).
Others, quoted by Keland (p. 833), would make it
mean " fear of Salem," or " sight of peace." The
suggestion of Iteland himself, adopted by Simonis
(Onom. p. 407), and Ewald (Uctch. iii. 155, note)
Is u2$ VTV, " inheritance of peace," but this
Is questioned by Gesenius ( The*, p. 628 b) and
Kiirst {Handah. p. 647 6), who prefer qV» TT?,
the " foundation of peace." * Another derivation,
proposed by the fertile Hitzig (Jetajn, p. 2), is
named by toe two last gnat scholars only to con-
demn it. Others again, looking to the name of the
Canaanite tribe who possessed the place at the time
of the conquest, would propose Jebus-salem (Keland,
p. 834), or even Jebus^Solomon, as 'the name con-
ferred on the city by that monarch when he began
his reign of tranquillity.
Another controversy relates to the termination
"f the name — Jerushalmm — the Hebrew dual;
which, by Simonis and Ewald, is unhesitatingly
referred to the double formation of the city, while
reasons are shown against it by Keland and Geae-
nius. It is certain that on the two occasions where
the latter portion of the name appears to be given
for the whole (Gen. xiv. 18; I's. lxxvi. 2) it is
Shalem, and not Shalaim ; also that the live places
where the vowel points of the Masorets are sup-
eirted by the letters of the original text are of a
te date, when the idea ol the double city, and its
reflection in the name, would hare become familiar
to the Jews. In this conflict of authorities the
suggestion will perhaps occur to a bystander that
the original formation of the name may have been
anterior to the entrance of the Israelites on Canaan,
and that Jerushalaim may be the attempt to give
an intelligible Hebrew form to the original archaic
name, just as centuries afterwards, when Hebrews
in their turn gave way to Greeks, attempts were
made id twist Jerushalaim itself into a shape which
should be intelligible to Greek ears,* 'Upo o-oAvpa,
"the holy Solyma" (Joseph. B. J. vi. 10), 'leper
XaXofimvos, ' the " holy place of Solomon "
(Eupoiemus, in Euseb. Pr. Kv. ix. 34), or, on the
other hand, the curious fancy quoted by Joaephus
(Ap. 1. 84, 35) from Lysimachus — 'IcpoovAa,
"spoilers of temples" — are perhaps not more
violent adaptations, or more wide of the real mean-
ing of " Jerusalem," than that was of the original
name of the city.
The subject of Jerusalem naturally divides itself
into three heads: —
I. The place itself: its origin, position, and
physical characteristics.
II. The annals of the city.
III. The topography of the town; the relative
a Sneh mystical interpretations as then of Origan,
re *r»pa xdptrec ovrav (than TTH and D ;U7),
sr ifpir tifijinrt, where half the name la Interpreted as
freak and half as Hebrew, curious as they are, cannot
la examined here. (See the catalogues un served by
lerome.)
* Other Instances of similar Greek forms given to
Isb ww names an I«r>X" and 'Upo/Ut.
« Phllo carries this a step further, and, bearing In
view only the santtlty of the place, he discards the
lemltio member ot the name, and calls it 'Iae&roAis.
JERUSALEM
localities of its various parts; the sites of III
" Holy Places " ancient and modern, eta.
L Thb flack rrsBU-.
The arguments — if arguments they can be called
— for and against the identity of the " Salem " of
Mdchizedek (Gen. xiv. 18) with Jerusalem — the
"Salem" of a late Psalmist (Pa. lxxvi. 8) — are
almost equally balanced. In favor of it are the
unhesitating statement of Joeephus (Ant i. 10, 2;
vii. 3, 2; B. J. vi. 10') and Euaebins (Onom.
'Icpove-oAfo), the recurrence of the name Salem
in the Psalm just quoted, where it undoubtedly
means Jerusalem,* and the general consent in the
identification. On the other hand is the no leas
positive statement of Jerome, grounded on more
reason than he often vouchsafes for his statements/
(/>. ad Etangeban, § 7), that " Salem wis not
Jerusalem, as Joaephus and all Christians (n»Jt*ri
omnet) believe it to be, but a town near Scythopolis,
which to this day is called Salem, where the mag-
nificent ruins of the palace of Mdchizedek are still
seen, and of which mention is made in a subsequent
passage of Genesis — ■ Jacob came to Salem, a city
of Shechem' (Gen. xxxiii. 18)." Elsewhere (Ono-
tnntlicon, "Salem'') Euaebius and he identify il
with Shechem itself. This question will be discussed
under the head of Salem. Here it is sufficient to
say (1) that Jerusalem suits the circumstances of
the narrative rather better than my place further
north, or more in the heart of the country. It
would be quite as much in Abnjn's road from the
sources of Jordan to his home under the oaks of
Hebron, and it would be more suitable for the visit
of the king of Sodom. In fact we know that, in
later times at least, the usual route from Damascus
avoided the central highlands of the country and
the neighborhood of Shechem, where BaUm is now
shown. (See l'ompey's route in Joseph. Ant xiv.
3, § 4; 4, § 1.) (2) It is perhaps some confirma-
tion of the identity, at any rate it is a remarkable
coincidence, that the king of Jerusalem in the time
of Joshua should bear the title Adoni-zedek —
almost precisely the same as that of Mdchizedek.
The question of the identity of Jerusalem with
" Cadytis, a large city of Syria," " almost as large
as Sardis," which is mentioned by Herodotus (ii.
150, iii. 5) as having been taken by Pbaraoh-Necho,
need not be investigated in this place. It is inter-
esting, and, if dedded in the affirmative, so far
important as confirming the Scripture narrative:
but does not in any way add to our knowledge of
the history of the dty. The reader will find it
fully examined in Bawlinson's Herod, ii. 246;
Blakesley's Herod. — Excurtw on bk. iii. cb. 5
(both against the identification); and in Kenrick's
Egypt, ii. 406, and Diet, of Gr. and Ran. Geogr.
ii. 17 (both for it).
It Is exactly the complement of wiXit 2oA«>a (Pausa-
ufaa, via. 16).
d in this passage be even goes so tar ss »» say thai
Melchbnlek, " the first priest of God," built there the
first Temple, and changed the lame of the dty from
Solum* to Hleroeolume.
« A contraction analogous to others with which ws
are nunlliar In our own poetry ; t. gr. Edln, or Bdlna
for Edinburgh.
f Winer Is wrong In stating (Rttnlwt. it. 79) Ihar
Jerome bases this statement on a rabbinical tredMoa
The tradition that he quotas, In { 6 of the sans X>
Is as to the Identity of MslcbbmM with Sheas
Digitized by
Google
JERUSALEM
■or need «e do more than refer to the tradition!
- it traditions they are, and not mere individual
speculations — of Tacitus {But. v. 2) and Plutarch
(/*. et Otir. o. 31) of the foundation of the citj
ky a certain Hierosolymus, a son of the Typhon
(see Winer's note, i. W6). All the certain infor-
mation to be gathered as to the early history of
Jerusalem, must be gathered from the books of the
Jewish historians alone.
It is during the conquest of the country that
Jerusalem first appears in definite form on the
scene in which it was destined to occupy so prom-
inent a position. The earliest notice is probably
that in Josh. xv. 8 and xviii. 16, 28, describing the
landmarks of the boundaries of Judah and Benja
niin. Here it U styled ha-Jebusi, i. e. " the Jebu-
site " (A. V. Jeliui), after the name of its occu-
piers, just as is the case with other places in these
lists. [Jeuusi.] Next, we find the form Jkbus
(Judg. xix. 10, 11) — "Jebus, which is Jerusalem
.... the city of the Jebusites;" and lastly, in
documents which profess to be of the same age as
the foregoing — we have Jerusalem (Josh. x. 1, Ac.,
riL 10; Judg. L 7, Ac.). To this we have a par-
allel in Hebron, the other great city of Southern
Palestine, which bears the alternative title of Kir-
jath-Arba in these very same documents-
It is one of the obvious peculiarities of Jerusalem
— but to which Professor Stanley appears to have
been the first to call attention — that it did not
'jucome the capital till a comparatively late date in
the career of the nation. Bethel, Shechem, He-
brwi, had their beginnings in the earliest periods
«f uttioual life — but Jerusalem was not only not
4 chief city, it was not even possessed by the Israel-
ites till they had gone through one complete stage
of their life in Palestine, and the second — the
monarchy — had been fairly entered on. (See
Stanley, S. f P. p. 169.)
The explanation of this is no doubt in some
measure to be fouud in the fact that the seats of
the government and the religion of the nation were
originally fixed farther north — first at Shechem
and ShUoh; then at Gibeah, Nob, and Gibson;
but it is also no doubt partly due to the natural
strength of Jerusalem. The heroes of Joshua's
army who traced the boundary-line which was to
separate the possessions of Judah and Benjamin,
when, after passing the spring of En-rogel, they
went along the " ravine of the son of Hinnom,"
and looked up to the "southern shoulder of the
Jebusite" (Josh. xw. 7, 8), must have felt that to
scale heights so great and so steep would have fully
tasked even their tried prowess. We shall see, when
we glance through the annals of the city, that it
did effectually resist the tribes of Judah and Simeon
not many years later. But when, after the death
of Ishbosheth, David became king of a united and
powerful- people, it was necessary for him to leave
the remote Hebron and approach nearer to the bulk
of his dominions. At the same time it was impos-
JERUSALEM
1278
I sible to desert the great tribe to whicL he belonged,
and over whom he had been reigning for seven
years. Out of this difficulty Jerusalem was the
natural escape, and accordingly at Jerusalem David
fixed the seat of his throne and the future sanctuary
of his nation.
The boundary between Judah and Benjamin
the north boundary of the former and the south
of the latter, ran at the foot of the hill on which
the city stands, so that the city itself was actually
in Benjamin, while by crossing the narrow ravine
of Hinnom you set foot on the territory of Judah.*
That it was not far enough to the north to com-
mand the continued allegiance of the tribe of
Ephraini, and the others which lay above hiin, is
obvious from the bet of the separation which at
last took place. It is enough for the vindication
of David in having chosen it to remember that
that separation did not take place during the reigns
of himself or his son, and was at last precipitated
by misgovernment combined with feeble short-
sightedness. And if not actually' ih the centre
of Palestine, it was yet virtually so. " It was on
the ridge, the broadest and most strongly marked
ridge, of the back-boue of the complicated hills
which extend through the whole country from the
Plain of Eadraekra to the Desert- Every wanderer,
every conqueror, every traveller who has trod the
central route of Palestine from N. to S. must have
passed through the table-land of Jerusalem. It
was the water-shed between the streams, or rather
the torrent-beds, which find their way eastward to
the Jordan, and those which pass westward to the
Mediterranean (Stanley, S. (f P. p. 176)."
This central position, as expressed in the words
of Ezekiel (ver. 5), "I have set Jerusalem i.- the
midst of the nations and countries round about
her," led in later ages to a definite belief that the
city was actually in the centre of the earth — in
the words of Jerome, " umbilicus terra," the cen-
tral boas or navel of the world.'' (See the quota-
tions in Keland, Pakutina, pp. 52 and 838; Joseph.
B. J. iii. 3, $ 5; also Stanley, S. <f P.p. 116.)
At the same time it should not be overlooked
that, while thus central to the people of the coun-
try, it had the advantage of being remote from the
great high road of the nations which so frequently
passed by Palestine, and therefore enjoyed a certain
immunity from disturbance. The only practicable
route for a great army, with baggage, siege-trains,
etc., moving between Egypt and Assyria was by
the low plain which bordered the sea-coast from
Tyre to Pelusium. From that plain, the central
table-land on which Jerusalem stood was approached
by vdleys and passes generally too intricate and
precipitous for the passage of large bodies. Una
road there was less rugged thou the rest — that
from Jafra and Lydda up the pass of the Beth-
horons to Gibeon, and thence, over the hills, to the
north side of Jerusalem ; and by this route, with
few if any exceptions, armies seem to have ap-
• This appears from an examination of the two oor-
nspoudlng documents, Josh. xv. 7, 8, and xviil. 16,
17. The line was drawn Tram En-ebemesh — trtoably
4m Hand, below Bethany — to En-rogel — either
4ia 4yvfr, or' the Fountain of the Virgin ; thence It
went by the ravine of Ulnnom and the southern
shoulder of the Jebusite — th» steep slope of the
BOdevn Zion ; eUmWl the heights oo too west of the
ravine, and struck eff to the spring at N'ephtoah,
Avobably r.iAa The other view, which li made the
Bast of ty Blunt in one of his Ingenious " coinci-
dences <• (Pt. 11. 17), and Is also favored by Stanley
(S. If P p. 176), Is derived from a Jewish tradition,
quoted oy Ughtfoot (Prospta of At TmpU, cb. 1),
to the effect that the altars and sanctuary wen fa
Benjamin, the courts of the Temple were In Judah.
& This Is prettily expressed la a rabbinical figure
quoted by Otho (Lfx. p. 286) : " The world is like to
an eye ; the white of the eye is the ocean surround
Ing the world; the black Is the world itself; ths
pupil Is Jerusalem, and the image In the pupil, taw
Temple."
Digitized by
Google
1 274
JERUSALEM
poached the city. But, on the other haul, we
•hail find, in tracing the annals of Jerusalem, that
fnat forces frequently paand between %ypt and
JERUSALEM
Assyria, and Lotties wen fought in the aha bj
large armies, nay, that sieges of the towu on Ik*
Mediterranean coast were conducted, lasting tr
feew, without apparently affecting Jerusalem in
tbe'eeat.
Jeniasiem stands in latitude 31° 46' $5" North,
» Such U the nsnlt of the latest obearnuons poa-
H«rt by the Lords of the Admiralty, and officially
•eetunonleatad to tho Consul of Jsrusalatn In 1863
■V*. UL 181). To what part of the town tba obesj-
and longitude 8fi° 18' 80" East of GreenwKi.'
It is 33 miles distant from the sea, and 18 from th*
Jordan; 90 from Hebron, and 38 from Samaria,
rations apply Is not stated. Other
•lightly dllfcrlog, wUl be round in Tea
Mtmoir, p. M, and In Sob L 188.
Digitized by
Google
JERUSALEM
"Id several respects," says Professor Stanley, "iU
situation is angular among the cities of Palestine.
Its elevation ia remarkable; occasioned not from its
being on the summit of one of the numerous hills
of Judaea, like most of the towns and villages, but
because it is on the edge of one of the highest
table-lands of the country. Hebron indeed is
higher still by some hundred feet, and from the
south, accordingly (even from Bethlehem), the ap-
proach to Jerusalem is by a slight descent. But
from any other side the ascent is perpetual ; and to
the traveller approaching the city from the K. or
\V. it must always have presented the appearance
Ijeyond any other capital of the then known world
— we may say beyond any important city that has
sver existed on the earth — of a mountain city;
breathing, as compared with the sultry plains of
Jordan, a nountain air; enthroned, as compared
with Jericb; or Damascus, Gaza or Tyre, on a
mountain fastness " (S. <f P. p. 170, 171).
The elevation of Jerusalem is a subject of con-
stant reference and exultation by the Jewish writers.
Their fervid poetry abounds with allusions to its
height," to the aseent thither of the tribes from all
parts of the country. It was the habitation of
Jehovah, from which "he looked upon all the in-
nabitants of the world " (IV xxxiii. 14); its kings
were "higher than the kings of the earth" (Ps.
Ixxxix. 37). In the later Jewish literature of nar-
rative and description, this poetry is reduced to
prose, and in the most exaggerated form. Jeru-
salem was so high that the names of Jamnia were
visible from it (2 Mace. xii. 9). From the tower
of Psephinus outside the walls, could be discerned
on the one hand the Mediterranean Sea, on the
other the country of Arabia (Joseph. B. J. v. 4, § 3).
Hebron oould be seen from the roofs of the Temple
(Ligbtfoot, Chor. Cent. xlix.). The same thing
can be traced in Josephus's account of the environs
of the city, in which he has exaggerated what is
in truth a remarkable ravine, to a depth so enor-
mous that the head swam and the eyes failed in
gazing into its recesses (Ant. xv. 11, § 5).'
In exemplification of these remarks it may be
said that the general elevation of the western ridge
of the city, which forms its highest point, is about
2,800 feet above the level of the sea. The Mount
ot Olives rises slightly above this — 2,794 feet.
Beyond the Mount of Olives, however, the descent
is remarkable ; Jericho — 13 miles off — being no
lea* than 3,624 feet below, namely, 900 feet under
the Mediterranean. On the north, Bethel, at a
distance of 11 miles, is 419 feet below Jerusalem.
'On the west Kamleh — 25 miles — is 9,274 feet
below. Only to the south, as already remarked,
are the heights slightly superior, — Bethlehem,
2,704; Hebron, 3,029. A table of the heights of
the various parts of the city and environs is given
further on.
<• 8se the passages quoted by Stanley (S. J P. p.
171).
* * Bsesnt sxmvatloni at Jerusalem show that Jose-
ph us, so ftr from being extravagant, was almost Us-
ually exact In what h* says of toe height of she
anesvot walls. The labors of Uout. Warm in ti»
service of the Palestine Exploration Fund (as reported
by Mr. Grove In the London Ttma, Nov. 11, 1867),
* have established, by actual demonstration, that the
south wall of she aaend enclosure which contained the
Ianrpk, is burled 1st mors than naif its depth beneath
in accumulation of rubbish — prober'- the ruins of
buildings whirl once eon-red It, and
JERUSALEM 1275
The situation of the city in reference to the rest
of Palestine, has been described by Dr. Robinson
in a well-known passage, which is so complete and
graphic a statement of the case, that we take the
liberty of giving it entire.
14 Jerusalem lies near the summit of a broad
mountain ridge. This ridge or mountainous tract
extends, without interruptigo, from the plain of
Esdraelon to a line drawn between the soith end
of the Dead Sea and the S. E. corner of the Modi -
terranean: or more properly, perhaps, it Kay be
regarded as extending as far south as to Tebet
'Araif in the desert; where it sinki down at ones
to the level of the great western plateau. This
tract, which is everywhere not lees than front
twenty to twenty five geographical miles in breadth,
is in fact high uneven table-laud. It everywhere
forms the precipitous western wall of the great
valley of the Jordan and the Dead Sea: while to-
wards the west it sinks down by an offset into a
range of lower hills, which lie between it and the
great plain along the coast of the Mtditerranean.
The surface of this upper region s s everywhere
rocky, uneven, and mountainous ; and is moreover
cut up by deep valleys which run east or west on
either side towards the Jordan or tho Mediterra-
nean. The line of division, or water-shed, between
the waters of these valleys, — a term which here
applies almost exclusively to the waters of the rainy
season, — follows for the most part ths height of
land along the ridge: yet not so but that the heads
of the valleys, which run off in different directions,
often interlap for a considerable distance. Thus,
for example, a valley which descends to the Jordan
often has its head a mile or two westward of the
commencement of other valleys which r:n to the
western sea.
" From the great plain of Esdraelon onwards to-
wards the south, the mountainous country rises
gradually, forming the tract anciently known as
the mountains ot Ephraim and Judah ; until in the
vicinity of Hebron it attains an elevation of nearly
3,000 Paris feet above the level of the Mediterra
nean Sea. Further north, on a line drawn from
the north end of the Dead Sea towards the true
west, the ridge has an elevation of only about 2,600
Paris feet; ynd here, dose upon the water-shed,
lies the city of Jerusalem.
" Six or seven miles N. and N. W. of the eitj
is spread out the open plain or basin round about
rUJH (Gibeoo), extending also towards et-Btrth
(Beenith); the waters of which flow off at its S. E.
part through the deep valley here called by the
Arabs Wady Beit Hanina .- but to which tho m. iks
and travellers have usually given the name of ths
Valley of Turpentine, or of the Terebinth, on the
mistaken supposition that it is the ancient Valley
of Elan. This great valley passes along in a S W.
direction an hour or more west of Jerust Jem : awl
that, h* bond to Its foundation, the wall would pn-
sent an unbroken fcce of solid masonry of nearly 1,000
test long, and for a large portion of the distance more
than 160 that In height ; in other words, the length of
ths Crystal Palace, and the height of ths transept.
Ths wall, as It stands, with less than half that heigh I
■merging bom ths ground, has always been regarded
as a marvel. What must It have been when entuv.lv
exposed to view? No wonder that prophets anc
psalmists have rejoiced In the ' walls ' and ' bulwarks
of ths Tsrnple. and that Tacitus should have asstrlbsd
It ss mo'lo artit cvnstructvm " See also Journal e/
Sa nd Liumtmn, p. 494 (January 188RI. U.
Digitized by
Google
1276
JERUSALEM
open* out from the mountains into the
•ettern plain, at the distance of six or eight hours
8. W. (rem the citj, under the name of Wady tt-
Sfcirtr. The traveller, on his way from Ramleh to
Jerusalem, descends into and crosses this deep val-
ley at the villace of Kilonieh on its western side,
in hour and a half from the latter city. On again
reaching the high ground on its eastern side, he
enters upon an open tract sloping gradually down-
oards towards the south and east ; and sees before
him, ht the distance of a mile and a half, the walls
and domes of the Holy City, and beyond them
the higher ridge or summit of the Mount of Olives.
' The traveller now descends gradually towards
Uu -jty along a broad swell of ground, having at
JERUSALEM
some distance on his left the shallow northern pari
of the Valley of Jehosbaphat; and close at hand
on his right the basin which forms the beginning
of the Valley of Hinnora. Upon the broad ana
elevated promontory within the fork of these two
valleys, lies the Holy City. All around are higher
hills; on the east, the Mount of Olives; on toe
south, the Hill of Evil Counsel, so called, rising
directly from the Vale of Hinnoin ; on the west,
the ground rises gently, as above described, to the
borders of the great Wady ; while on the north, s
bend of the ridge connected with the Mount of
Olives bounds the prospect at the distance of mon
than a mile. Towards the S. W. the view is nm.e
what more open; for here lies the plain of l>epl>a' >
Fua or Jssimiiw.
I Mwu Ztoa. 2. Horlafa. 8. The Tampie. 4. An tool*. 6. Probable site of (
«, Opbal. 7. BoMtha. 8. Cairns of Uu Holy Sepulehrt. 9, 10. The Upper sad
Lower Pools of Olhon. 11. Knrogel. 12. Pool of HaeUah. It- Fountam tf Uu
rugta. It. Slloam. 16 BeUieaia. 16. Mount of Olives. 17 Ustl
Digitized by
Google
JERUSALEM
tbsady dannDed, commencing just at the southern
Mnk of the Valley of Hinnom, and stretching off
8. W., where it runs to the western sea. In the
N. W., too, the eye reaches up along the upper
part of the Valley of Jehoshaphat ; and from many
points can discern the mosque of Ifeby Snmwil,
situated on a lofty ridge beyond the great Wady,
at the distance of two hours" (Robinson's BibL
Ra. i. 258-260).
So much for the local and political relation of
Jerusalem to the country in general. To convey an
idea of its individual position, we may say roughly,
and with reference to the accompanying Plan, that
the city occupies the southern termination of a
table-land, which is cut off from the country round
it on its west, south, and east sides, by ravines
more than usually deep and precipitous. These
ravines leave the level of the table-land, the one on
tho west and the other on the northeast of the
city, and fall rapidly until they form a junction
below its southeast comer. The eastern one — the
valley of the Kedron, commonly called the Valley
of Jehoshaphat, runs nearly straight from north to
south. But the western one — the Valley of Hin-
nom — runs south for a time and then takes a
sudden bend to the east until it meets the Valley
of Jehoshaphat, after which the two rush off as one
to the Dead Sea. How sudden 1* their descent
may be gathered from the fact, that the level at
the point of junction — about a mile and a quarter
from the starting-point of each — is more than 600
feet below that of the upper plateau from which
they commenced their descent Thus, while on the
north there is no material difference between the
general level of the country outside the walls and
that of the highest parts of the city ; on the other
three aides, so steep is the fall of the ravines, so
trench-like their character, and so close do they
keep to the promontory, at whose feet they run, as
to leave on the beholder almost the impression of
the ditch at the foot of a fortress, rather than of
valleys formed by nature.
The promontory thus encircled is Itself divided
by a longitudinal ravine running up it from south
to north, rising gradually from the south like the
external ones, till at last it arrives at the level of
the upper plateau, and dividing the central mass
into two unequal portions. Of these two, that on
the west — the " Upper City " of the Jews, — the
Mount Zion of modern tradition — is the higher
and more massive ; that on the east — Mount
Morlah, the " Akra " or " lower city " of Josephus,
now occupied by the great Mohammedan sanctuary
with its mosques and domes— is at once considerably
lower and smaller, to that, to a spectator from the
south, the city appears to slope sharply towards the
east." This central valley, at about half-way up
its length, threw out a subordinate on its left or
west ride, which apparently quitted it at about right
angles, and made its way up to the general level of
the ground at the present Jaffa or Bethlehem gate.
We say apparently, because covered as the ground
now is, it is difficult to ascertain the point exactly.
Opinions differ as to whether the straight valley
aorta and south, or its southern half, with the
•ranch just spoken of, was the " Tjroposon valley "
H Josephus. The question will be examined to
The chancier of the ravlnea and the eastward
of the sits an very wall and very truthfully
in a view In Uartlett's WaUa, entitled " Moun.
Jerusalem, from the HD1 of Bvil Counsel."
J&RTJSALBM 1277
Section HI. under the head of the Topography of
toe Ancient City.
One more valley must be noted. It was on the
north of Moriab, and separated it from a hill on
which, in the time of Josephus, stood a suburb or
part of the city called Bezetha, or the New-town.
Part of this depression is still preserved in the large
reservoir with two arches, usually sailed »he Pool
of Betheada, near the St Stephen's gate. It also
will be more explicitly spoken of in the examination
of the ancient topography
This rough sketch of the terrain of Jerusalem
will enable the reader to appreciate the two peal
advantages of its position. On the one haiuC lbs
ravines which entrench it td the west, aouth, an I
east — out of which, as baa been said, the nul )
slopes of the city rise almost like the walls of a
fortress out of its ditches — must have rendered it
impregnable on those quarters to the warfare of the
old world. On the other hand, its junction with
the more level ground on its north and northwest
sides afforded an opportunity of expansion, of which
we know advantage was taken, and which gave it
remarkable superiority over other cities of Palestine,
and especially of Judah, which, though secure on
their hill-tops, were unable to expand beyond them
(Stanley, S. <* P. pp. 174, 1T6).
The heights of the principal points in and round
the city, above the Mediterranean Sea, as given by
Lt Van de Vekie in the ifemoir • accompanying
his Map, 1858, are as follows: —
Feet.
N. W. corner of the clly (Kam-JatwC) Uln
Mount Zion ICcenaenhtm) %S.V
Mount Morleh (Huron eJl-Skerif) J,U»
Bridge over the Kedron, near Oetheemene .... 2j»l
Pool of Slloem MM
Bir-AyeS, At the confluence of Hinnom end KedroD . 1JB&
Mount of Ollvee, Church of Ascension on ■ummtt . 2JM
From these figures it will be seen that the ridge
on which the western half of the city is built is
tolerably level from north to south ; that the eastern
hill is more than a hundred feet lower; and that
from the latter the descent to the floor of the vallet
at its feet — the Bir-Ayib — is a drop of nearlv
450 feet.
The Mount of Olives overtops even the highest
part of the city by rather more than 100 feet, and
the Temple-hill by no leas than 300. Its northern
and southern outliers — the Viri Qaliltei, Scopus,
and Mount of Offense — bend round slightly to-
wards the city, and give the effect of " standing
round about Jerusalem." Especially would this be
the case to a worshipper in the Temple. " It is
true," says Pro lessor Stanley, " that this image is
not realized, as most persons familiar with European
scenery would wish, and expect it to be realized.
. . . Any one facing Jerusalem westward, north'
ward, or southward will always see the city itsetl
on an elevation higher than the hills in its imnv>
diate neighborhood, its towers and walls standing
out against the sky, and not against any high back-
ground, such as that whi :h incloses the mountain
towns and villages of our own Cumbrian or West-
moreland valleys. Nor again is the plain on which
it stands Inclosed by a continuous, though distant,
circle of mountains like Athens or Innspruck. The
mountains in the neighborhood of Jerusalem are of
unequal height, and only in two or three Instances
» A table of levels, dUkrlng wmewtaat from those
of Lt. Van de Velde, wl'J be round In Barclay's Cm
H' .* Great King, pp. 108. 104.
Digitized by
Google
1278 JERUSALEM
— JTeej-Simirtf, er-Rtim, and 7Wetf tUFil —
rWng to any considerable elevation. Still they act
■a a shelter; they must be surmounted before the
traveller, can see, or the invader attack, the Holy
City : and the distant line of Moab would always
seem to rise as a wall against Invaders from the
remote east « It is these mountains, expressly in-
cluding those beyond the Jordan, which are men-
tioned as ' standing round about Jerusalem ' in
another and more terrible sense, when, on the night
of the assault of Jerusalem by the Roman armies,
they ' echoed back ' the screams of the inhabitants
tif the captured city, and the victorious shouts of
the soldiers of Titus. The situation of Jerusalem
was thus not unlike, on a small scale, to that of
Rome, saving the great difference that Rome was
in a well- watered plain, leading direct to the sea,
whereas Jerusalem was on a bare table-land, in the
heart of the country. But each was situated on
its own cluster of steep hills ; each had room for
future expansion in the surrounding level; each,
too, had its nearer and its more remote barriers of
protecting hills — Rome its Janiculum hard by, and
Its Apennine and Albsn mountains in the distance ;
Jerusalem iU Olivet hard by, and, on the outposts
of its plain, Mizpeh, Uibeon, snd Ramah, and the
ridge which divides it from Bethlehem" (S. d 1 P.
pp. 174, 175).
* This may be the best place for stating some
of the results of Capt Wilson's measurements by
levels for determining the distance of Jerusalem
from various other places, and its altitude slave
the Mediterranean and the Dead Sea. The repre-
sentations on this subject, founded on reckonings by
time, are more or less inaccurate. The following
abridged table presents the observations moat im-
portant for our purpose. It should be premised that
the line adopted by the engineers begins at Jaffa
(Joppa) and runs through or nearby Lvd (Lydda),
limn (Gimro), Birfilteyn, EUib (Gibeon), Beit-'&r
(Beth-Horon). Jerusalem, Bethany, and then to the
neighborhood of Jericho, where turning to the right
it crosses the plain to the Dead Sea. Kifty-five
bench-marks, on rocks or other permanent objects,
were made along the route, which must be of great
service to future explorers. The line of the levels
appears to be the most direct one practicable be-
tween the two limits: —
Distance la
Place. Miles and Links. Altitude.
Tans 0000 8,800
rasur 8 7668 86.405
Beit-Dajam .... 6 6843 91.435
Lydda 11 6022 104.770
Ihnra 14 6194 411.006
Mount Scopus ... 87 6846 2,716.786
Mount Olivet . . . 88 0286 2,628.790
Summit of Olivet . . 89 1721 2.882.600
Bethany 40 2409 2.281.826
Well of th. Apostles . 416068 1,619.616
Khan Hadhur ... 48 6296 870.690
Did Aqueduct ... 62 6174 89.716
net* Sea . . . . 62 2986 1,292.186
i * Mr. Tristram states that Nebo, one of the sum-
mits oi this Moab range. Is distinctly visible from the
roof of the English Church at Jerusalem, and that
rith suitable glasses the buildings of Jerusalem can
ss seen from Nsso (Land of Itrarl, p. 642, 2d ed.).
The appearance of these mountains ss seen from Jeru-
salem stretching like a curtain along the eastern
■orison Is very unique and Impressive, ■very one
*o hu visited the holv oity will recognise Stanley's de-
JERUSALEM
It thus appears that the highest point uf I
Hon between the two seas — 2,715 feet — occur!
on Mount Scopus, just north of Jerusalem. Thi
hright from the top of the csirn on Scopus is 2,754
feet. The level of the Mediterranean is' crossed
8} miles beyond Khan Hadhur ; and the figures
■gainst the two last stations represent the de-
pression below the level of the Mediterranean.
The party reached the Dead Sea, on the 12th of
March, 1865. It is known that this sea is liable
to be, on the average, six feet lower, a few weeks
later in the season ; and hence the lowest depression
of the surface would be 1,298 feet According to
the soundings by Lieut. Vignes of the French Navy,
the maximum depth of the Dead Sea is 1,148 feet,
making the depression of the bottom 2,446 feet
below the level of the Mediterranean. " The sound-
ing in the Mediterranean, midway between Malta
and Candia, by Capt. Spratt, gave a depth of 13,030
feet, or a depression of the bottom five times grestei
than that of the bottom of the Dead Sea" (Ord-
nance Surrey of Jerutalem, pp. 20-23, Lend.
1865). It should be stated that a line of levels was
also carried from Jerusalem to Solomon's Pools.
The level at the Jaffa gate on the west side of the
city was found to be 2,528 feet below the Mediter-
ranean ; near Mar Elyas, 2,616 ; at Rachel's tomb,
2,478; at the Castle near Solomon's Pools, 2,624*;
near the upper Pool, 2,616, and the tower Pom,
2,513}. (Surrey, p. 88.) H.
Kmuh. — There appear to have been but two
main approaches to the city. 1. From the Jordan
Valley by Jericho and the Mount of Olives. Thii
was the route commonly taken from the north and
east of the country — as from Galilee by our Lord
(Luke xvii. 11, xviii. 35, xix. 1, 29, 45, 4c.), from
Damascus by Pompey (Joseph. Ant xiv. 3, § 4;
4, § 1), to Mahanaim by David (2 Sam. it., xvi.).
It was also the route from places in the central dis-
tricts of the country, as Samaria (2 Chr. xxviii. 15*
The latter part of the approach, over the Mount
of Olives, as generally followed at the present day,
is identical with what it was, at least in one mem-
orable instance, in the time of Christ. A path
there is over the crown of the hill, but the common
route still runs more to the south, round the
shoulder of the principal summit (see S.fP.p. 193).
In the later times of Jerusalem, this road cros se d
the valley of the Kedron by a bridge or viaduct on
a double series of arches, and entered the Temple
by the gate Susan. (See the quotations from the
Talmud in Otho, Lex. Rab. 285 ; and Barclay, pp
102, 282.) The insecure state of the Jordan Valley
has thrown this route very much into disuse, and has
diverted the traffic from the north to a road along
the central ridge of the country. 2. From the
great maritime plain of Philistia and Sharon. This
road led by the two Beth-horons up to the high
ground at Gibeon, whence it turned south, and
came to Jerusalem by Ramah and Gibeab, and over
the ridge north of the city. This is still the route
by which the heavy traffic is carried, though a
scrlption of the view ss not less Just than beautiful .
" From almost every point, there Is visible that loot
purple wall, rising out of Its unfathomable depths, w
us even more Interesting than to the old Jebojdtes oi
Israelites. They knew the tribes who lived there
they had once dwelt there themselves. But so the
inhabitants of modern Jerusalem, of whom oumpara
lively raw have ever visited the other side of the
Jordan, » Is the end of ths world, — and to Mates •
Digitized by
Google
JxtBTJSALBM
r bat mere precipitous road is usually taken
mBers between Jerusalem and JaftV hi
j the annals we shall And that it waa the
I by which large bodies, tuch as armies, always
approached the city, whether from Gaza on the
sato, or from Cs asere a and Ptolemais on the north.
1. The communication with the monntainoua dis-
tricts of the south is tess distinct Even Hebron,
after the establishment of the monarchy at Jeru-
■lem, was hardly of importance enough to main-
tain any considerable amount of communication,
and only in the wars of the Maccabees do we hear
of any military operations in that region.
The roads out of Jerusalem were a special sub-
ject of Solomon's care. He pared them with black
stone — probably the basalt of the trans-Jordanic
district. (Joseph. AnL rUl. 7, § 4).
(rote*. — lie situation of the various gates of
the city is examined in Section III. It may, how-
ever, be desirable to supply here a complete list of
those which are named in the Bible and Josephus,
with the references to their occurrences : —
1. Grate of Ephraim. 2 Chr. xxr. 23; Neh. viii.
16, m. 89. This is probably the same as the —
2. Gate of Benjamin. Jer. xx. S, xxxvii. 13;
Zeeh. xir. 10. If so, it was 400 cubits distant
from the —
3. Comer Gate. 3 Chr. xxr. 93, xxri. 9; Jer.
txxi. 38; Zeeh. xir. 10.
4. Gate of Joshua, governor of the dty. 3 K.
xxin. 8.
5. Gate between the two walls. 3 K. xxv. 4;
Jer. xxxix. 4.
C Hone Gate. Neh. HI. SB; 3 Chr. xxiii. IS;
Jer. txxi. 40.
7. Ravin* Gate (i. e. opening on ravine of Hin-
Dom). 9 Chr. xxri. 9; Neh. il. 18, 16, iii. 13.
8. Fish Gate. 9 Chr. xxxUi. 14; Neh. iii. 8;
Zeph. i. 10.
9. Dung Gate. Neh. il. 13, ill. 13.
10. Sheep Gate. Neh. HI. 1, 39, xii. 39.
It. East Gate. Neh. iii. 39.
12. Hiphkad. Neh. iii. 31.
13. Fountain Gate (Siioam?). Neh. xii. 37.
14. Water Gate. Neh. xii. 87.
15. Old Gate. Neh. xii. 89.
16. Prison Gate. Neh. xii. 39.
17. Gate Harsith (perhaps tbe Sun; A. V. East
Gate). Jer. xix. 9.
18. Fin* Gate. Zeeh. xtr. 10.
19. Gate Gennath (gardens). Joseph. B. J. v.
«.§*•
30. Easnes' Gate. Joseph. B. J. 4, § 3.
To these should be added the following gates of
the Temple:
Gate Sur. 2 K. xt 8. Caned also —
Gate of Foundation. 2 Chr. xxiii. 5.
Gate of the Guard, or behind tbe gnard. 9 K.
ri. 6, 19. Called tbe —
High Gate. 2 Chr. xxiii. 30, xxvtl. 8; 9 K. xv. 86.
Gate ShaDecheth. 1 Chr. xxri. IS.
Bmiat-Gromtdt. — Tbe main cemetery of the
ity seems from an early date to have been where
4 is stall — on the steep slopes of the valley of the
m, than mountains almost have the aflact of a distant
raw of the ess ; tbe buss constantly ehangiog, this
jr that precipitous rock coming out clear In tbs mora-
ag or erasing abade — there, tbs form dimly sbad-
*n& oat by sur ro u nding vaUayi of what may possibly
M rhph ; bars the point of Ksrsk, tbs capital of
af the Orsasaars— and than at
JERUSALEM 1979
Kidron. Here It was that the fragments of the
idol abominations, destroyed by Josiah, were east
on the " gravel of the children of tbe people " (3
K. xxiii. 6), and the valley wss always the recepta-
cle for impurities of all kinds. There Maachah't
idol was burnt by Asa (1 K. xv. 13); there, accord-
ing to Josephus, Athaliah was executed ; and there
the " Althiness " accumulated in the sanctuary, by
the lake-worship of Ahaz, wss ilisohvged (3 Chr.
xxlx. 6, 16). But In addition to this, and ^though
there is only a slight allusion in the Bible to the
met (Jer. vii. 33), many of the tombs now existing
in tbe face of the ravine of Hinnom, on the south
of the city, must he as old as Biblical times — and
if ao, show that this was also used ss a cemetery.
Tbe monument of Ananus the high-priest (Joseph
B. J. r. 18, § 3) would seem to have beon in this
direction.
Tbe tombs of the kings were in the city of David,
that is, Mount Zion, which, as will be shown in the
concluding section [III.] of this article, was an
eminence on the northern put of Mount Moriih.
[See opposite view in § IV. Anter. ed] Tbe royal
sepulchres were probably chambers containing sep-
arate recesses for the successive kings. [Tombs.]
Of some of the kings it is recorded that, not being
thought worthy of a resting-place there, they were
buried in separate or private tombs in Mount Zion
(3 Chr. xii. 30, xxiv. 35; 3 K. xv. 7). Ahaz waa
not admitted to Zion at all, but was buried in
Jerusalem (2 Chr. xxviii. 87). Other spots also
were used for burial. Somewhere to the north of
the Temple, and not far from the wall, was the
monument of king Alexander (Joseph. B. J. v. 7, J
3). Near ihe northwest corner of the city wss the
monumeni of John the high-priest (Joseph, v. 6, §
2, Ac.), and to tbe northeast the " monument of the
Fuller " (Joseph. B. J. v. 4, § 2). On the north, too,
were the monuments of Herod (r. 8, $ 9) and of
queen Helena (v. 2, § 3, 3, § 3), the former dost
to the " Serpent's Pool."
Wood ; Unnlem. — We have very little evidence
ss to the amount of wood and of cultivation that
existed in the neighborhood of Jerusalem. The
king's gardens of David and Solomon seem to have
been in tbe bottom formed by the confluence of the
Kedron and Hinnom (Neh. iii. 15; Joseph. Ant.
vii. 14, § 4, Ix. 10, § 4). The Mount of Olives, ss
its name and those of various places upon it seem
to imply, was a fruitful spot. At its foot was
situated the Garden of Gethsemone. At the time
of the final siege, the space north of the wall of
Agrippa waa covered with gardens, groves, and
plantations of fruit-trees, inclosed by hedges and
walls; and to level these wss one of Titus's first
operations (B. J. v. 3, J 3). We know that the
gate Gennath (t. e. » of gardens "1 opened on this
side of tbe dty (fl. J. v. 4, $ 3). The Valley of
Hinnom was in Jerome's time "a pleasant and
woody spot, full of delightful gardens watered from
the fountain of Silooh " (C'omm. in Jer. vii. 80).
In the Talmud mention is made of a certain rore-
garden outside the dty, which wss of great fame
but no clew Is given to its situation (Otho, Let.
tfanes all wrapt m deep bass — tbs m oun t ains ovsi
hanging the valley of the shadow of death, and all the
mors striking from their contrast with lbs gray is
green oolon of the bills and streets sad walls throngs
which you catch tbs glimpse of Mass." («. 4" 7
P- 166,
•so.)
Digitized by
Google
1280 JERUSALEM
Bak 286). [Garden.] The sieges of Jernnlem
■ere too frequent during its later history to admit
sf an; considerable growth of wood near it, even if
the thin soil, which coven the rocky substratum,
would allow of it. And the scarcity of earth again
necessitated the cutting down of nil the trees that
could he found for the banks and mounds, with
which the ancient sieges were conducted. This is
expressly said in the accounts of the sieges of
Pompey and Titus. In the latter case the country
was swept of its timber for a distance of eight or
nine miles from the city (B. J. vi. 8, § 1, Ac).
Water. — How the gardens just mentioned on
the north of the city were watered it is difficult to
understand, since at present no water exists in that
direction. At the time of the siege (Joseph. B. J. v.
3, § 2) there was a reservoir in that neighborhood
called the Serpent's Pool; but it has not been dis-
covered in modern times. The subject of the waters
is more particularly discussed in the third section,
and reasons are shown for believing that at one
time a very copious source existed somewhere north
of the town, the outflow of which was stopped —
possibly by Hezekiah, and the water led under-
ground to reservoirs in the city and below the
Temple. From these reservoirs the overflow escaped
to the so-called Fount of the Virgin, and thence to
Siloam, and possibly to the Bir-AySb, or " Well
of Nehemlah." This source would seem to have
been, and to be still the only spring in the city —
but it was always provided with private and public
cisterns. Some of the latter still remain. Outside
the walls the two on the west side (Birket MrnniUn,
and Birket et-Sultdn), generally known as the
upper and lower reservoirs of Gihon, the small
"pool of Siloam," with the larger B. et-ffnmm
close adjoining, and the B. Hatnmnm Sitli Afnryam,
dose to the St. Stephen's- Gate. Inside are the so-
caDed Pool of Hezekiah (fl. el-Batrrik), near the
Jaflk gate, which receives the surplus water of the
Birket Mnmilin ; and the B. Jtrail on the opposite
side of the city, close to the St. Stephen's Gate,
commonly known as the Pool of Betheada. These
two reservoirs are probably the Pools of Amygdalon
and Struthius of josephus, respectively. Dr. Bar-
day has discovered another reservoir below the
Mtkemeh in the low part of the city — the Tyro-
poeon valley — west of the /forma, supplied by the
aqueduct from Bethlehem and " Solomon's Pools."
It is impossible within the limits of the present
article to enter more at length into the subject of
the waters. The reader is referred to the chapters
an the subject in Barclay's City of lie Gnat King
(x. and iviii.), and Williams's Holy City; also to
the articles Kid Ron; Siloam; Pool.
Streets, Houses, etc — Of the nature of these
In the ancient city we have only the most scattered
sotices. The "East Street" (2 Chr. xxix. 4); the
"street of the city" — •". e. the city of David
(axil. 6 ) ; the " street lacing the water gate " (Neh.
vlli. 1, 3) — or, according to the parallel account
in 1 Esdr. ix. 38, the " broad place (tbpixtfor)
rf the Temple towards the east; " the street of the
bona- of God {Vxr. x. 9); the street of the gate of
Ephraim" (Neh. viii. 16); and the "open place
sf the first gate towards the east " must have been
act " streets " in our sense of the word, so much
as the open spaces found in eastern towns round
• Iks writer was there In September, and the
aspest above described left an In en a caab k Impression
JERUSALEM
the inside of the gates. This is evident, net orjh)
from the word used, Reekob, which has the fores
of breadth or room, but also from the nature of the
occurrences related in each case. The same places
are intended in Zech. viii. 6. Streets, properly sc
called ( ChvtaKh), there were (Jer. r. 1, xi. 13, dec)
but the name of only one, " the Bakers' Street '
(Jer. xxxrii. 21), is preserved to us. This is con-
jectured, from the names, to have been near the
Tower of Ovens (Neh. xii. 38 ; " furnaces " is incor-
rect). A notice of streets of this kind in the 3d
century B. c. is pre s erved by Aristeas (see p. 1292).
At the time of the destruction by Titus the low
part of the city was filled with narrow lanes, con-
taining the bazaars of the town, and when the
breach was made in the second wall it was at the
spot where the cloth, brass, and wool bazaars
abutted on the walL
To the houses we have even leas clew, but there
is no reason to suppose that in either houses or
streets the ancient Jerusalem differed very materially
from the modern. No doubt the ancient city did not
exhibit that air of mouldering dilapidation which
is now so prominent there — that sooty look which
gives its houses the appearance of " having been
burnt down many centuries ago " (Richardson, in
5. <f P. p. 183), and which, as it is characteristic of
so many eastern towns, must be ascribed to Turkish
neglect. In another respect too, the modern city
must present a different aspect from the ancient —
the dull monotony of color which, at least during a
part of the year, 1 ' pervades the slopes of the hills
and ravines outside the walls. Not only is this the
case on the west, where the city does not relieve
the view, but also on the south. A dull, leaden
ashy hue overspreads all. No doubt this is due.
wholly or in part, to the enormous quantities of
dcbi it of stone and mortar which have been shot
over the precipices after the numerous demolitions
of the city. The whole of the slopes south of the
Haram area (the ancient Ophel), and the modern
Zkm, and the west side of the Valley of Jehoshaphat,
especially near the St. Stephen's Gate, are covered
with these debris, lying as soft and loose ss the day
they were poured over, and presenting the appear-
ance of gigantic mounds of rubbish.
In this point at least the ancient city stood in
favorable contrast with the modern, but in many
others the resemblance must have been strong. The
nature of the site compels the walls in many places
to retain their old positions. The southern part
of the summit of the Upper City and the slopes of
Ophel are now bare, where previous to the final
siege they were covered with booses, and the North
Wall has retired very much south of where it then
stood ; but, on the other hand, the West and East,
and the western corner of the North Wall, are what
they always were. And the look of the walls and
gates, especially the Jaflk Gate, with the " Citadel "
adjoining, and the Damascus Gate, is probably
hardly changed from what it was. True, the min-
arets, domes, sod spires, which give such a variety
to the modern town, must have been absent; bat
their place was supplied by the four great towers
at the northwest part of the wall ; by the upper
stories and turrets of Herod's palace, the palace of
the Asmoneans, and the other public buildings-
while the lofty fortress of Antonia, towering fat
above every building within the dty,* and itself
6 « Oonsplcao nuagio turrls Antonia " (Tea. Mm
T.U).
Digitized by
Google
JKEUSAJLEM
by the keep on Iti southeast comer,
have formed a feature in the new not
altogether unlike (though more prominent than)
the " Citadel " of the modem town. The flat rooft
and the absence of windows, which gire an eastern
city so startling an appearance to a western trav-
eller, must have existed then as now.
But the greatest resemblance must have been on
the southeast side, towards the Mount of Olives.
Though there can be no doubt (see below, Sec-
tion III. p. 1314) that the inrfoeure is now much
larger than it was, vet the precinct of the Haram
et-Shertf, with its domes vtd sacred buildings,
some of them clinging to the very spot formerly
occupied by the Temple, must preserve what we
may call the personal identity of this quarter of tbe
city, but little changed in iti general features from
what it was when tbe Temple stood there. Nay,
more: in the substructions of the inclosure — those
massive and venerable walls, which once to see U
never to forget — is the very masonry itself, its lower
courses undisturbed, which was laid there by Herod
the Great, and by Agrippa, possibly even by still
older builders.
A'nttront of the dig. — Tbe various spots in the
neighborhood of the city will be described at length
under their own names, and to them the reader is
accordingly referred See En-rogf.l; Hinnom;
Kidrox; Olives, Motnrr or, etc, etc
It. Tint AmtALs of the Crrr.
In considering the annals of tbe city of Jerusalem,
nothing strikes one so forcibly as the number and
severity of the sieges which it underwent. We
catch our earliest glimpse of it in the brief notice
of the 1st chapter of Judges, which describes how
the " children of Judah smote it with tbe edge of
tbe •word, and set the city on fire; " and almost
the latest mention of it in the New Testament is
contained in the solemn warnings in which Christ
foretold how Jerusalem should be " compassed with
armies" (Luke xxi. 20), and the abomination of
desolation be seen standing in the Holy Place (Matt.
xxiv. 15). In the fifteen centuries which elapsed
between those two points the city was besieged no
fewer than seventeen times; twice it was razed to
the ground; and on two other occasions its walls
were levelled. In this respect it stands without a
parallel in any city ancient or modem. The feet
is one of great significance. The number of the
sieges testifies to the importance of the town as a
key to the whole country, and as the depositary of
the accumulated treasures of the Temple, no less
forcibly than do the severity of the contests and
their protracted length to the difficulties of tbe
position, and the obstinate enthusiasm of the Jewish
poofli. At tbe same time the details of these
sparationa, scanty as they are, throw considerable
%bt on tbe difficult topography of the place; and
a According to Josephus, they did not ittuk Jeru-
salem till alter they had taken many other towns —
rAffarac re Xnfl6vm, im\iApKow 'I.
» 8m this noticed and contrasted with the situation
of the villages In other parts by Prof. Stanley {S. f P.
161, 877, he.).
e About half way through the period of the Judges
— i.e. eir. a. 0. 1820 — occurred an Invasion of the
•arrKory of the Hlttitss (Khettl) by Sethee I. king of
afeypt, and the capture of the e»pital city, Ketesh, In
the land of Amar. This would not have beea noticed
vara, had not Ket e s h been by some writer* .denttfled
etth Jerusalem (Osborn, Kcw*. krr T"tim>mi/. etc. ;
•1
JERUSALEM 1281
on the whole they are in every way so characteristic,
that it has seemed not unfit to use them as far as
possible as a frame-work for the following rapid
sketch of the history of the city.
The first siege appears to have taken place almost
immediately after the death of Joshua (cir. 1400
B. c. ). Judah and Simeon bad been ordered by
the divine oracle at Shiioh or Shechem to com-
mence the task of actual possession of the portions
distributed by Joshua. As they traversed the
region south of these they encountered a large force
of Canaanites at Bezek. These they dispersed, took
prisoner Adoni-bezek, a ferocious petty chieftain,
who was the terror of the country, and swept on
their southward road. Jerusalem was soon reached.
It was evidently too important, and also too near
the actual limits of Judah, to be passed by. " They
fought against it and took it, and smote it with
the edge of the sword, and set the city on fire "
(Judg. i. 8). To this brief notice Josephus (Ant.
v. 2, § 2) makes a material addition. He tells ui
that the siege lasted some time (aby xp&**>) > that
the part which was taken at last, and in which the
slaughter was made, was the lower city: but that
the upper city was eo strong, "by reason of its
walls and also of the nature of the place," that they
relinquished the attempt and moved off to Hebron
(Ant. v. 2, § 23). These few valuable words of tbe
eld Jewish historian reveal one of those topograph-
ical peculiarities of the place — the possession of an
upper as well as a lower city — which differenced
it so remarkably from the other towns of Palestine
— which enabled it to survive so many sieges and
partial destructions, and which in the former section
we have endeavored to explain. It is not to be
wondered at that these characteristics, which must
have been impressed with peculiar force on the
mind of Josephus during the destruction of Jeru-
salem, of which be had only lately been a witness,
should have recurred to him when writing the
account of the earlier sieges.
A* long as the upper city remained in the hands-
of the Jebusites they practically had possession of
tbe whole — and a Jebuaite city in fact it remained
for a long period after this. The Benjaniitea fol-
lowed the men of Judah to Jerusalem, but with no
better result — " They could not drive out the
Jebusites, but the Jebusites dwelt with the children
of Benjamin in Jerusalem unto this day " (Judg. i.
21). At the time of the sad story of the Levite
(Judg. xix.) — which the mention of Phinehas (xx.
28) fixes as early in the period of the Judges —
Benjamin can hardly hare had even so much foot-
ing as the passage just quoted would indicate; for
the Levite refuses to enter it, not became it was
hostile, but because it was " the city of a stranger,
and not of Israel." And this lasted during the
whole period of the Judges, the reign of Saul, and
the reign of David at Hebron." Owing to several
also Williams in Diet, of Qtogr. H. 28, 24). The
grounds of the identification are (14 the apparent
affinity of the name (which they raed'Chadash) with
the Greek Katvrx, the modern Arabic d-Kvdt, aud
the Syrtse Kndatha ; (2) the affinity of Amar with
Amorites ; (8) a likeness between the form and situa-
tion of the city, as shown in a rode sketch in the
Egyptian records, and that of Je ru salem. But on
closer examination these convependenees vanish.
Egyptian scholars are now agreed that Jerusalem ti
much too fiir south to suit tbe requirements of the
rest of the wmpalgn, ul that Koteah- survive* la
K<aV<,aname i M e niw s til ibv. B ssl n soa a •emit I to «-
Digitized by
Google
1282 JERUSALEM
awiinew » — the realdcnee of the Art at Shiloh
— Seal's connection with Gibeah, and David'* with
ZXklag and Hebron — the diaunion of Benjamin
and Jndah, symbolized bj Saul'a persecution of
David — the tide of affairs waa drawn northwards
and southwards, and Jerusalem, with the places
adjacent, waa left in possession of the Jebuaitee.
But aa soon as a man waa found to assume the rule
OTer all Israel both north and south, so soon was it
Decenary that the seat of government should be
■otrad from the remote Hebron nearer to the een-
JEBtrSAXiEM
tre of the *ountxy, and the choice el David at at*
fell on tin city of the Jebuaite*.
David advanced to the siege at the head of taw
men-of-war of all the tribes who bad come to Ha
bron " to turn the kingdom of Saul to him." That
are stated as 280,000 men, choice warriors of the
flower of Israel (1 Chr. lii. 23-39). No doubt
they approached the city from the south. The
ravine of the Kedron, the valley of Hinnom, the
hills south and southeast of the town, the uplands
on the west must have swarmed with these hard;
JiauuLU.
■art Corner of the South Wall, and the Mount of Olives from the 8. W.
wnrriota. As before, the lower city was imme-
diately taken — and as before, the citadel held out
(Joseph. Ant. vii. 3, § 1). The undaunted Jebusitea,
lake and Island on the Orontes between RMtk and
Hums, and still showing traces of extensive artificial
works. Nor docs the agreement between the repre-
sentation In the records and the site of Jerusalem fare
better. For the stream, which was supposed to repre-
sent the ravines of Jerusalem — the nearest point of
the res e mblance — contained at Ketavh water enough
lo drown several persons (Brugsch, Utogr. Ituekrift.
ft. «, «e.).
a The passage which forms the latter clause of 3
Base. ». 8 Is generally taken to snaan that the blind
■at lbs Jane weaa eaekseed from <tbe Temple. But
believing in the impregnability of their Ilk in.
manned the battlement* " with lame and blind." ■
But they little understood the temper of the Hag
where is the pivof that this was the feet? On ens
occasion at least we know that " the blind and tin
lame " came to Jhrtot in the Temple, and he healed
them (Matt. xxl. 14). And indeed what had the Tem-
ple, which was not founded till long after this, to ae
with the matter T The explanation — wLlch is is
accordance with the accentuation of the
and for which the writer is indebted to the I
of the Rev. J. J. 8. Perowne — would seem to be that
It waa a pio vor b used in future with regard to any
Impregnable fortress — " The blind and the lane an
there ; art him enter the place If ha can." [Q.Tt
Digitized by
Google
JERUSALEM
sr of thaw he commanded. David's anger was
thoroughly roused by the insult (bpyieHtli, Joseph. „
and he at once proclaimed to his host that the flrsi
man who would stale the rocky side of the fortress
and kill a Jebugite should be made chief captain of
the host. A crowd of warriors (raVrer, Joseph.),
rushed forward to the attempt, but Joab's superior
agility gained him the day, 3 and the citadel, the
fastness of Zion, was taken (cir. 1046 B. a). It
is the first time that that memorable name appears
In the history.
David at once proceeded to secure himself in his
now acquisition. He inclosed the whole of the
city with a wall, and connected it with the citadel.
In the latter he took up his own quarters, and the
Zion of the Jebusites became " the city of David." *
[Zion; Millo.] The rest of the town was left
Id the more immediate care of the new captain of
the host.
The sensation caused by the fall of this impreg-
nable fortress must have been enormous. It
reached even to the distant Tyre, and before long
an embassy arrived from Hiram, the king of Phoe-
nicia, with the characteristic offerings of artificers
and materials to erect a palace for David in his
new abode. The palace was built, and oecupiei
by the fresh establishment of wires and concubines
which David acquired. Two attempts were made
— the one by the Philistines alone (2 Sam. r. 17-
81; 1 Ohr. xiv. 8-18), toe other by the Philistines, !
with all Syria and Phoenicia (Joseph. Am, vii. 4, j
51; 2Sam. v. 22-25) — to attack David in his new
situation, but they did not affect the city, and the
actions were fought in the " Valley of Giants," |
apparently north of Jerusalem, near Giljeah or
Uibeon. The arrival of the Ark. however, was an
event of great importance. The old Tabernacle of
Bezaleel and Aboliab being now pitched on the
height of Uibeon, a new tent had been spread by
David in the fortress for the reception of the Ark;
ind here, " in its place," it was deposited with the
most impressive ceremonies, and Zion became at
once the great sanctuary of the nation. It now
perhaps acquired the name of Beth ha-Har, the
" house of the mount," of which we catch a glimpse j
h the I.XX. addition to 8 Sam. xv. 34. In this
tent the Ark remained, except for its short flight to
the foot of the Mount of Olives with David (xr.
'4-29 ), until it was removed to its permanent rest-
ing-place in the Temple of Solomon.
In the fortress of Zion, too, was the sepulchre
af David, which became also that of most of his
in lessors.
The only works of ornament which we can as-
cribe to David are the "royal gardens," as they
«e called by Josephus, which appear to have been
fcrmed by him in the level space southeast of the
eUy, formed by the confluence of the valleys of
Kodron and Hiunom, screened from the sun during
fart of the day by the shoulders of the inclosing
nonntains, and irrigated by the well 'Am Ayui,
which still appears to retain the name of Joab
(Joseph. Ant vii. 14, § 4; ix. 10, § 4).
Untf 1 the time of Solomon we hear of no aldi-
Uons to the city. His three great works werf the
Temple, with its east wall and cloister (Joseph. B. J.
. 5, § 1), his own Palace, and the Wall of Jeru-
JERl SALEM
1281
• A romantic legend Is preserved in the M'tlrtuh
MiUim, on Ps. xvlil. 29, of the stratagem by which
'oab soeesnied In reaching the tr- of the wall. ISm
•aaM In fflsamneagdr, I. 478, 477.1
salem. The two former will be best describee'
elsewhere. [Palack; Solomon; Temple.] Of
the last there is an interesting notice in Josephus
{Ant. viii. 2, J 1; 6, § 1), from which it appears
that David's wall was a mere rampart without
towers, and only of moderate strength and height.
One of the first acts of the new king was to make
the walls larger — probably extend them round
some outlying parts of the city — and strengthen
them (1 K. iii. 1, with the explanation of Josephus,
viii. 2, § 1 )■ But on the completion of the Temple
he again turned his attention to the walls, and both
increased their height, and constructed very large
towers along them (ix. 15, and Joseph. Ant. viii. ti,
§ 1). Another work of his in Jerusalem was the
repair or fortification of Millo, whatever that strange
term may signify (1 K. ix. 15, 84). It was in the
works at Millo and the city of David — it is un-
certain whether the latter consisted of stopping
breaches (as in A. V.) or filling a ditch round the
fortress (the Vulg. and others) — that Jeroboam
first came under the notice of Solomon (1 K. xi.
27). Another was a palace for his Kgyptian queen
— of the situation of which ad we know is that it
was not in the city of David (1 K. vii. 8, ix. 34,
with the addition in 2 Chr. viii. 11). But there
must have been much besides these to fill up the
measure of " all that Solomon desired to build in
Jerusalem " (2 Chr. viii. 6) — the vast Harem for
hia 700 wives and 300 concubines, and their estab-
lishment — the colleges for the priests of the vari-
ous religions of these women — the stables for the
1,400 chariots and 12,000 riding horses. Outsids
the city, probably on the Mount of Olives, there
remained, down to the latest times of the monarchy
(2 K. xxiii. 13), the fanes which he had erected for
the worship of foreign gods (1 K. xi. 7), and which
have still left their name clinging to the " Mount
of Offense."
His care of the roads leading to the city is the
subject of a special panegyric from Josephus (Am.
viii. 7, § 4). They were, as before observed, paved
with black stone, probably the hard basalt from the
region of Argob, on the east of Jordan, where he
had a special resident officer.
As long as Solomon lived, the visits of foreign
powers to Jerusalem were those of courtesy and
amity; but with bis death this was changed. A
city, in the palaces of which all the vessels were of
pure gold, where spices, precious stones, rare woods,
curious animals, were accumulated in the greatest
profusion; where silver was no more valued than
the stones of the street, and considered too mean
a material for the commonest of the royal purposes
— such a city,govemed by such a fniniiaU prince
as Reboboam, was too tempting a prey for the sur-
rounding kings. He had only been on the throne
four years (cir. 970 u. c. ) before Shishak, king of
Egypt, invaded Judah with an enormous host, took
the fortified places and advanced to the capital.
Jerusalem was crowded with the chief men of the
realm who had taken refuge there (2 Chr. xii. 6),
but Kebnboam did not attempt resistance. He
opened his gates, apparently on a promise from
Shishak that he would not pillage (Joseph. Ant.
viii. 10, § 3). However, the promise was not kept,
the treasures of the Temple and palace were car-
ried oft', and special mention is made of the golden
i In the N. T. "the ricy of "avid " neasa Rata
Digitized by
Google
1284
JERUSALEM
iMJlm (]2$), which wen hung by Solomon in
the house of the forest of Lebanon (1 K. sir. 26;
| C3u. xii. 9; comp. 1 K. x. 17).«
Jerusalem m again threatened In the reign of
Aaa (grandson of Kehoboam), when Zerah the
Cuahite, or king of Ethiopia (Joseph. Ant. viii.
19, § 1), probably incited by the success of Shiahak,
invaded the country with an enormous horde of fol-
lowers (2 Chr. xhr. 9). He came by the road through
the low country of Philistia, where his chariots
could find level ground. But Asa was more faith-
ful and more reliant than Kehoboam had been.
He did not remain to be blockaded in Jerusalem,
but went forth and met the enemy at Mareahab,
and repulsed him with great slaughter (cir. 94V).
The consequence of this victory was a great refor-
mation extending throughout the kingdom, but
most demonstrative at Jerusalem. A vast assembly
of the men of Judah and Benjamin, of Simeon,
even of Ephraim and Manasseh — now " strangers "
(Q v "3) — was gathered at Jerusalem. Enormous
sacrifices were offered; a prodigious enthusiasm
seized the crowded city, and amidst the clamor of
trumpets and shouting, oaths of loyalty to Jehovah
were exchanged, and threats of instant death de-
nounced on all who should forsake His service.
The altar of Jehovah in front of the porch of the
Temple, which had {alien into decay, was rebuilt; the
horrid idol of the queen-mother — the mysterious
Asherah, doubtless an abomination of the Syrian
worship of her grandmother — was torn down,
ground to powder, and burnt in the ravine of the
Kedron. At the same time the vessels of the
Temple, which had been plundered by Shishak,
were replaced from the spoil taken by Abyah from
Ephraim, and by Asa himself from the Cushites
(2 Chr. xv. 8-19; 1 K. xv. 12-15). This pros-
perity lasted for nore than ten years, but at the
end of that interval the Temple was once more
despoiled, and the treasures so lately dedicated to
Jehovah were sent by Asa, who had himself dedi-
cated them, as bribes to Ben-badad at Damascus,
where they probably enriched the temple of Rim-
mon (2 Chr. xvL 2, 8; 1 K. xv. 18). Asa was
buried in a tomb excavated by himself in the royal
sepulchres in the citadel.
The reign of his son Jehoshaphat, though of
great prosperity and splendor, is not remarkable
as regards the city of Jerusalem. We hear of a
"new court" to the Temple, but have no clew to
its situation or its builder (2 Chr. xx. 5). An
important addition to the government of the city
was made by Jehoshaphat in the establishment of
courts for the decision of causes both ecclesiastical
and civil (2 Chr. xix. 8-11).
Jehoahaphat'a son Jehoram was a prince of a
different temper. He began his reign (cir. 887) by
a massacre of his brethren, and of the chief men
of the kingdom. Instigated, no doubt, by his wife
JERUSALEM
Athaliah, he reintroduced the profligate '
worship of Aahtaroth and the high places (8 Chr
xxL 11), and built a temple for Baal (9 Chr. xxttL
17; comp. Joseph. Ant. ix. 7, J 4). Though a
msn of great vigor and coinage, he was overcome
by an invasion of one of those huge hordes whiea
were now almost periodical. The Philistines and
Arabians attacked Jerusalem, broke into the palace,
spoiled it of all its treasures, sacked the royal harem,
killed or carried off the king's wives, and all his
sons but one. This wss the fourth siege. Two
years after it the king died, universally detested,
and so strong was the feeling against him that he
was denied a resting-place in the sepulchres of th*
kings, but was buried without ceremony in a pri-
vate tomb on Zion (2 Chr. xxi. 20).
The next events in Jerusalem were the massacre
of the royal children by Joram's widow At hah ih,
and the six years' reign of that queen. During
her sway the worship of Baal was prevalent and
that of Jehovah proportionately depressed. The
Temple was not only suffered to go without repa'r,
but was even mutilated by the sons of Athslish,
and its treasures removed to the temple of Baal (2
Chr. xxiv. 7). But with the increasing years of
Jossh, the spirit of the adherents of Jehovah re-
turned, and the confederacy of Jeboiada the priest
with the chief men of Judah resulted in the res-
toration of the true line. The king was crowned
and proclaimed in the Temple. Athaliah herself
was hurried out to execution from the sacred pre-
cincts into the valley of the Kedron (Joseph. Ant
>z- 7, § 3), between the Temple and Olivet, through
the Horse Gate.' The temple of Baal was demol-
ished, his altars and images destroyed, his priests
put to death, and the religion of Jehovah was once
more the national religion. But the restoration of
the Temple advanced but slowly, and it was not
till three-and-twenty years had elapsed, that through
the personal interference of the king the ravages
of the Baal worshippers were repaired (2 K. xii.
6-16), and the necessary vessels and utensils fur-
nished for the service of the Temple (2 Chr. xxiv.
14. But see 2 K. xii. 13; Joseph. Ant. iv. 8, $ 9).
But this real for Jehovah soon expired. The solemn
ceremonial of the burial of the good priest in the
royal tombs, among the kings, can hardly have been
forgotten before a general relapse into idolatry took
place, and bis son Zechariah was stoned with his
family c in the very court of the Temple for pro-
testing.
The retribution invoked by the dying martyr
quickly followed. Before the end of the year (dr.
838), Hazael king of Syria, after possessing him-
self of Oath, marched against the much richer
prize of Jerusalem. The visit was averted by a
timely offering of treasure from the Temple and
the royal palace (2 K. xii. 18; 2 Chr. xxiv. 2"),
Joseph. Ant. ix. 8, § 4), but not before an actira
had been fought, in which a large army of the Is-
raelites was routed by a very inferior force of Syr-
» According to Josephus be also carried off the
srms which David hud taken from the king of Zobah ;
but than were afterwards in the Temple, and did ser-
rtce at the proclamation of king Joash. [Arms, Shelet,
(..188.J
b The Horse Gate Is mentioned again in connection
with RMron by Jeremiah (xxxl. 40). Possibly the
name was perpetuated In the gate Susan ( Aa «■ hone)
*f the second Temple, the only gate on the east side
of the outer wail (Ughtfoot. Prosp. of Tempi?, HI.).
« flea the expression In xx<« 26, "sons of Je-
hoiada," we are perhaps warranted in believing that
Zwhartah's brethren or his sons were put to death
with him. The LXX. and Vulg. have the wori re
the singular number " son ; " but, on the other hand,
the Sj-rlac and Arabic, and the Targum all agree with
the Hebrew text, and it Is specially mentioned n
Jerome's Qnoai. Htbr. It Is perhaps supported by lbs
special notice taken of the exception made by Amastak
In the case of the murderers of us father (9 K. art
6 : 2 Chr xxv. 4). The case of Naboth la a pernio)
| |See Iumk, p 706, note /.l
Digitized by
Google
JERUSALEM
asm, with the loss of t gnat numbrr of the prin-
elaal people end of a rut booty. Nor ni this all.
lease mes s e s so distressed the king as to bring on
a dangerous illness, in the midst of which he was
issasniistfirt by two of his own servants, sons of
two of the foreign women who were common in
the royal harems. He was buried on Mount Zion,
though, like Jehoram, denied a resting-place in the
royal tombs (2 Chr. nil. 25). The predicted dan-
ger to the city was, however, only postponed.
Amaxiah began his reign (b. c. 837) with a prom-
«e of good ; his first act showed that, while be
knew how to avenge the murder of his father, he
eould also restrain his wrath within the bounds
prescribed by the law of Jehovah. But with suc-
cess came deterioration. He returned from his
victories over the Edomites, and the massacre at
Peers, with fresh idols to add to those which already
defied Jerusalem — the images of the children of
Seir, or of the Anuuekites (Joaephus), which were
erected sod worshipped by the king. His next act
as a challenge to Jossh the king of Israel, and
now the danger so narrowly escaped from Hazed
was actually encountered. The battle took place at
[Irth-shemesh of Judah, at the opening of the
hills, about 13 miles west of Jerusalem. It ended
a a total rout. Amaxiah, forsaken by his people, was
taken prisoner by Joash, who at once proceeded to
Jerusalem and threatened to put bis captive to
death before the walla, if he and his army were not
-lmitt—1 The gates were thrown open, the treas-
ures of the Temple — still in the charge of the
suae family to whom they had been committed by
David — and the king's private treasures, were pil-
laged, and for the first time the walls of the city
wire injured. A clear breach was made in them
of 400 cubits in length '• from the gate of Kphraim
to the corner gate," and through thia Joash drove
in triumph, with his captive in the chariot, into
the city." Thia must have been on the north side,
sod probably at the present northwest corner of
the walk. If so, it is the first recorded attempt
at that spot, afterwards the favorite point for the
attack of the upper city.
The long reign of Uzsiah (8 K. xv. 1-7; 2 Chr.
mi.) brought about a material improvement in
the fortunes of Jerusalem. He was a wise and
good* prince (Joseph, ix. 10, § 8), very warlike,
and a g reat builder. After some campaigns against
■reign enemies, be devoted himself to the care of
Jerusalem for the whole of his life (Joseph.). The
walk were thoroughly repaired, the portion broken
down by Joash was rebuilt and fortified with towers
at the corner gate; and other parts which had been
slowed tn go to ruin — as the gate opening on the
Cdey of Hinnom,' a spot called the " turning "
(see Neh. UL 19, 30, 34), and others, were renewed
tod fortified, and furnished for the first time with
sjs w a im* , then expressly invented, for shooting
■ Thk Is an addition by Jowphus (la. 9, a 9). IT
«t really happened, the chariot must have been lent
nwnd by a flatter road (ban that which at present
voold be the direct road from Ain-SMrmt. Since the
saw of Sokmon, chariots would mm to have become
anknown In Jerusalem. At anv rate we should Infer,
rem the nonce In 3 K. xw. a., that the royal eatab-
H"-—* could not at that time boast of one.
* The story ot his leprosy at any rats shows his
Ml arMmb.
« 3 Chr. xxvL 9. Tbs word raodand " the valley "
s rT]n, always employed for the valley on to* w»et
JEBU8ALBM 1284
stones and arrows against besiegers, later in thk
reign happened the great earthquake, which, al-
though unmentioned in the historical books of tbs
Bible, is described by Joaephus (ix. 10, § 4), and
alluded to by the Prophets as a kind of era (set
Stanley, 3. <f P. pp. 184, 125). A serious breach
was nude in the Temple itself, and below the city
a large fragment was detached from the hill * at
En-rogel, and, rolling down the slope, overwhelmed
the king's gardens at the junction of the valleys
of Hinnom and Kedron, and rested against the
bottom of the slope of Olivet After the leprosy
of Uzziah, he left the sacred precincts, in which
the palace would therefore seem to have been sit-
uated, and resided in the hospital or lazar-house
till his death • He wss buried on /ion, with the
kings (2 K. xv. 7 ) ; not in the sepulchre itself, but
in a garden or field attached to the spot
Jotham (cir. 766) inherited his father's sagacity,
as well as his tastes for architecture and warfare.
His works in Jerusalem were building the upper
gateway to the Temple — apparently a gate com-
municating with the palace (2 Chr. xxiii. 20) — and
also porticoes leading to the same {Ant. ix. 11, § 8).
He also built much on Opbel, — probably on the
south of Moriah (2 K. xv. 85; 2 Chr. xxvii. 3),—
repaired the walls wherever they were dilapidated,
and strengthened them by very large and strong
towers (Joseph.). Before the death of Jotham (B
c. 740) the clouds of the Syrian invasion began to
gather. Tbey broke on the head of Abas his suc-
cessor; Kezin king of Syria and Pekah king of
Israel joined their armies and invested Jerusalen
(3 K. xvi. 5). The fortifications of the two pre
vious kings enabled the city to hold out during a
siege of great length (1*1 roXiiv ypoW, Joseph.).
During its progress Kezin made an expedition
against the distant town of EUth on the Red Sea,
from which he expelled the Jews, and handed it
over to the Edomites (2 K. xvi. 6 ; Ant. ix. 13, J
1). [Ahaz.] Finding on his return that tbs
place still held out, Kezin ravaged Judaea and re-
turned to Damascus with a multitude of captives,
leaving Pekah to continue the blockade.
Ahaz, thinking himself a match for the Israelite
army, opened his gates and came forth. A tre-
mendous conflict ensued, in which the three chief!
of the government next to the king, and a hundred
and twenty thousand of the able warriors of the
army of Judah, are stated to have been killed, and
Pekah returned to Samaria with a crowd of cap-
tives, and a great quantity of spoil collected from
the Benjamite towns north of Jerusalem (Joseph.).
Ahaz himself escaped, and there is no mention, in
any of the records, of the city having been plun-
dered. The captives snd the spoil were however
sent back by the people of Samaria — a fact which,
as it has no bearing on the history of the city, need
here only be referred to, because from the narrative
and south of the town, as sTTi Is for that on the
seat.
d This will be the so-called Mount of BrU Counsel,
or the hill below Moriah, according as JSn-rofel ■
taken to be the « Well of Joeb " or the « Fount of tba
Virgin."
• niBDnn iT3. The Interpretation (Her
above Is that of Klmchl. adopted by Geeenlos, Furs*
»od Bertheau. Keil (on 2 K. xv. 6) and Haafswabsii
however, contend for a different meaning.
Digitized by
Google
1886 JEKTJ8ALEM
n learn that the nearest or most convenient
horn Samaria to Jerusalem at that time m not,
■a now, along the plateau of the < ouiitry, but by
the depths of the Jordan Valley, and through Jeri-
eho (9 K. xvi. 6; 2 Cbr. uriii. 5-16; Joseph.
Ant. ix. 12, § 2).
To oppose the confederacy which had so injured
dim, Ahaz had recourse to Assyria. He appears
first to have sent an embassy to Tiglath-Pileser
with presents of silver and gold taken from the
treasures of the Temple and the palace (2 K. xvi.
8), which had been recruited during the last two
reigns, and with a promise of more if the king
would overrun Syria and Israel (Ant. ix. 12, § 3).
This Tiglath-Pileser did. He marched to Damas-
cus, took the city, and killed Rezin. While there,
Ahaz visited him, probably to make his formal sub-
mission of vassalage," and gave him the further
presents. To collect these he went so far as to lay
hands on part of the permanent works of the
Teniple — the original constructions of Solomon,
which none of his predecessors had been bold enough
or needy enough to touch. He cut off the richly
chased panels which ornamented the brass bases of
the cisterns, dismounted the large tank or "sea"
from the brazen bulls, and supported it on a ped-
estal of stone, and removed the " cover for the sab-
bath," and the ornamental stand on which the
kings were accustomed to sit in the Temple (2 K.
xvi. IT, 18).
Whether the application to Assyria relieved
Ahaz from one or both of his enemies, is not clear.
From one passage it would seem that Tiglath-
Pileser actually came to Jerusalem (2 Chr. xxviii.
20). At any rate the intercourse resulted in fresh
idolatries, and flesh insults to the Temple. A new
brazen altar was made after the profane fashion of
one be had seen at Damascus, and was set up in
the centre of the court of the Temple, to occupy
the place and perform the functions of the original
altar of Solomon, now removed to a lees prominent
position (see 2 K. xvi. 12-15, with the expl- of
Keil) ; the very sanctuary itself ( • ""H, and
tt77|?n) was polluted by idol-worship of some kind
or other (2 Chr. xxix. 5, 16). Horses dedicated to
.he sun were stabled at the entrance to the court,
with their chariots (2 K. xxiii. 11). Altars for
sacrifice to the moon and stars were erected on the
fiat roofs of the Temple (ibid. 12). Such conse-
crated vessels as remained in the house of Jehovah
were taken thence, and either transferred to the
service of the idols (2 Chr. xxix. 19), or cut up and
re-manufactured ; the lamps of the sanctuary were
extinguished 6 (xxix. 7), and for the first time the
doom of the Temple were closed to the worshippers
(xxviii. 94), and their offerings seized for the idols
(Joseph. Ant. ix. 12, J 3). The famous sun-dial was
zrected at this time, probably in the Temple.'
When Abas at last died, it is not wonderful that
■ This follows from the words of 2 K. rrill. 7.
• In the old Jewish Calendar the 18th of Ab was
kept as a tut. to commemorate the putting out the
western light of the gnat candlestick by Ahas.
c There is an a priori probability that the dial would
■ placed In a sacred precinct ; but may we not Infer,
ram comparing 2 K xx. 4 with 9, that It was in the
• diddle court," and that the right of it there as he
awed through had suggested to Isaiah the " sign "
tbtah was to accompany the king's recovery ?
i Sash is the express statement of 2 Chr. xxtU.
JERUSALEM
a meaner fate was awarded him than that of eras.
the leprous Uzztah. He was excluded not only
from the royal sepulchres, but from the products
of Zion, and was buried " in the city— in Jeru-
salem." d The very first act of Hezekiab (a. o
721) was to restore what his father had desecrated
(2 Chr. xxix. 3; and see 36, "suddenly"). The
Levites were collected and inspirited ; the Temple
freed from its impurities both actual and cere-
monial; the accumulated abominations being dis-
charged into the valley of the Kedron. The fug
musical service of the Temple was reorganized
with the instruments and the hymns ordained b)
David and Asaph; and after a solemn sin-offering
the late transgressions had been offered in the
presence of the king and princes, the public wen
allowed to testify their acquiescence in the change
by bringing their own thank-offerings (2 Chr. xxix.
1-36). This was done on the 17th of the first
month of his reign. The regular time for celebrat-
ing the Passover was therefore gone by. But then
was a law (Num. ix. 10, 11) which allowed the
feast to be postponed for a month on special occa-
sions, and of this law Hezekiab took advantage, in
his anxiety to obtain from the whole of his people
a national testimony to their allegiance to Jehovah
and his laws (2 Chr. xxx. 2, 3). Accordingly at
the special invitation of the king a vast multitude,
not only from his own dominions, but from the
northern kingdom, even from the remote Asher
and Zebulun, assembled at the capital. Their first
act was to uproot and efface all traces of the idolatry
of the preceding and former reigns. High-places,
altars, the mysterious and obscene symbols of Baal
and Asherah, the venerable brazen serpent of Moses
itself, were torn down, broken to pieces, and the
fragments cast into the valley of the Kedron e (2
Chr. xxx. 14: 2 K. xviii. 4). This done, the feast
was kept for two weeks, and the vast concourse dis-
persed. The permanent service of the Temple was
next thoroughly organized, the subsistence of the
officiating ministers arranged, and provision made
for storing the supplies (2 Chr. xxxi. 2-21). It
was probably at this time that the decorations of
the Temple were renewed, and the gold or other
precious plating,/ which had been removed by
former kings, reapplied to the doors and pillars
(2 K. xviii. 16).
And now approached the greatest crisis which
had yet occurred in the history of the city: the
dreaded Assyrian army was to appear under its .
walls. Hezekiah had in some way intimated that
be did not intend to continue as a dependent — and
the great king was now (in the 14th year of Heze-
kiah, eh*. 711 B. c.) on his way to chastise him.
The Assyrian army had been for some time in
Phoenicia and on the sea-coast of Philistia (Kawlin -
son, Herod, i. 476), and Hezekiah had therefore
had warning of his approach. The delay was taken
advantage of to prepare for the siege. As heron,
27. The book of Kings repeats Its regular fbra.ala
Jowphus omits all notice of the burial.
* The record, we apprehend, does not recognise this
distinction between Zlon and Jerusalem. See } IT
Ainer. ed. S. W.
< And yet It would seem, from 'he account of
Jordan's reforms (2 K. xrili. 11, 12), that many el
Alias's Intrusions survived even the seal of I
/ The word " gold " Is supplied by our t
but the word " overlaid " (Jl^S) snowa that soaw
sattalBo coating la Intended.
Digitized by
Google
JERUSALEM
i the movement a national on*. A
Ceonoourae came together. The springs round
alem were stopped — that is, their outflow was
prevented, and the water diverted underground to
the interior of the city (2 K. xx. 20 j 2 (Sir. xxxii.
4). This was particularly the. ease with the spring
which formed the source of the stream of the
Kedrcn,* elsewhere called the '■ upper springhead
*f Ginon " (2 Chr. xxxii. 30; A. V. most incor-
rectly "water-course"). It was led down by a
subterraneous channel " through the hard rock "
(2 Chr. xxxii. 30; Kcclus. xlviii. 17), to the west
side of the city of David (2 K. xx. 20), that is, into
the valley which separated the Mount Moriah and
Zion from the Upper City, and where traces of its
presence appear to this day (Barclay, 310, 638).
This done, he carefully repaired the walls of the
eity, furnished them with additional towers, and
built a second wall (2 Chr. xxxii. 5; Is. xxii. 10).
The water of the reservoir, called the " lower pool,"
or the " old pool," was diverted to a new tank in
the city between the two walls 6 (Is. xxii. 11). Nor
was this all : as the struggle would certainly be one
for life and death, he strengthened the fortifications
of the citadel (2 Chr. xxxii. S, " Milk); " Is. xxii.
9), and prepared abundance of ammunition. He
also organized the people, and officered them,
gathered them together in the open place at the
gate, and inspired them with confidence in Jehovah
(xxxii. 6).
The details of the Assyrian invasion or invasions
will be found undei the sepHixU- beads of Sknna-
caaauB and HEZKkiAii. It in possible that Jeru-
salem was once regularly invested by the Assyrian
army. It is certain that the anuy encamped there
on another occasion, that the generals— the Tartan,
the chief Cup-bearer, and the chief Eunuch — held
a conversation with Hezekiah t chief officers outside
the walla, most probably at oi about the present
ATosr Jidud at the N VY. ouruer of the city, while
the wall above was crowded with the anxious in-
habitants. At the time of Titus's siege the name
of "the Assyrian Camp" was still attached to a
spot north of the city, in remembrance either of this
or the subsequent visit of Nebuchadnezzar (Joseph.
B.J. r. 12, i 2). But tbuugl uiitaken — though
the citadel was still the ' virgin daughter of Zion "
— yet Jerusalem did not escape unharmed. Hese-
kiah's treasures bad to be emptied, and the oostly
ornaments he had added to the Temple were stripped
off to make up the tribute. This, however, he had
recovered by the time of the sulnequent visit of the
ambassadors from Babylon, as we see from the
jooount in 2 K. xx. 12; and 2 Chr. xxxii. 87-29.
Ilw death of this good and great king was indeed
national calamity, and so it was considered. He
vr.ia buried in one of the chief uf the royal sepul-
thra, and a vast concourse from the country, as
will as of the citizens of Jenualeui, assembled to
JERUSALEM
1287
a The authority for this Is the use hers of the wort
NaeMal, which Is uniformly applied to the va^ey east
af the city, as Gt is to that west and south. There
era other ground* which an stated In the concluding
■potion of this article. Similar maaauras were taken
tj the Moslems on the approach of the Crusaders
(Will, of Tyre, vitl. 7, quoted by Robinson, I. S48
SAM).
• The r eser voir between the Jaffa (late and the
(buret: of the Sepulchre, now usually called tht -*»1
, eaooot be either of the works allnoW to
If an ancient construction, It Is probabiy the
Join in the waitings at the funeral (9 Chr mfl
83).
The reign of Maosaseh (b. c. 896) must haw
been an eventful one in the annals of Jerusalem
though only meagre indications of its events are tc
be found in the documents. He began by plunging
into all the idolatries of his grandfather — restoring
all that Hezekiah had destroyed, and desecrating
the Temple and the city with even more offensive
idolatries than those of Anas (2 Chr. xxxiii. 2-0;
2 K. xxi. 2-9). In this career of wickedness he
was stopped by an invasion of the Assyrian army,
by whom he was taken prisoner and carried to
Babylon, where he remained for some time. The
rest of his long reign was occupied in attempting
to remedy his former misdoings, and in the repaii
and conservation of the city (Joseph. AnL x. 3, § 2).
He built a fresh wall to the citadel, " from the we*;
side of Gihon-in-the-valley to the Fish Gate," i. e.
apparently along the east side of the central valley,
which parts the upper and lower cities from S. to N.
He also continued the works which had been begun
by Jotham at Ophel, and raised that fortress or
structure to a great height. On his death he was
buried in a private tomb in the garden attached to
his palace, called also the garden of Dzza (3 K.
xxl. 18: 2 Chr. xxxiii. 20). Here also was interred
his son Anion after his violent death, following an
uneventful but idolatrous reign of two years (2 Chr.
xxxiii. 21-25; 9 K. xxi. 19-26).
The reign of Josiah (b. c. 639) was marked by
a more strenuous real for Jehovah than even that
of Hezekiah had been. He began his reign at eight
years of age, and by his 20th year (12th of his
reign — 2 Chr. xxxiv. 3) commenced a thorough
removal of the idolatrous abuses of Manasseh and
Amon, and even some of Ahaz, which must have
escaped the purgations of Hezekiah c (2 K. xxiii.
12). As on former occasions, these abominations
were broken up small and carried down to the bed
of the Kidron — which seems to have served almost
the purpose of a common sewer, and there calcined
and dispersed. The cemetery, which still paves the
sides of that valley, had already begun to exist, and
the fragments of the broken altars and statues were
scattered on the graves that they might be effec-
tually defiled, and thus prevented from further use.
On the opposite side of the valley, somewhere on
the Mount of Olives, were the erections which
Solomon had put up for the deities of his foreign
wives. Not one of these was spared ; they were all
annihilated, and dead bones scattered over the
places where they had stood. These things occu-
pied six years, at the expiration of which, in the
first month of the 18th year of his reign (2 Chr.
xxxv. 1 ; 2 K. xxiii. 23), a solemn passover was
held, emphatically recorded to have been the greatest
since the time of Samuel (2 Chr. xxxv. 18). This
seems to have been the crowning ceremony of the
Almond Fool of Josephua. (For the reasons, ass WU
Hams, Holy Gty, 85-88, 488.)
• 8m opposite view by Robinson, BM. Ra. I. 512 f. ;
1852, p. 243 f. 8. W
c The narrative In Kings appears to place the de-
struction of the Images after the king's solemn covenant
'n the Temple, i. «. after the completion of the repairs
Bat, on the other band, there are the dates given la
3 Chr. xxxiv. 8, xxxv. 1, 19, which fix the Passover
to the 14th of the 1st month of his 18th rear, lot
early in the year for the repair which war sagos as
the asms year to have preceded It
Digitized by
Google
1888 JERUSALEM
nsaiftallim of the Temple; end it was at once M-
knrad by » thorough renovation of the fabric (2 Chr.
voir. 8; 9 K. xxii. 3). The cost was met by
offerings collected at the doors (2 K. xxii. 4), and
also throughout the country (Joseph. Ant. x. 4, § 1),
uot only of Judah and Benjamin, but also of
Ephraim and the other northern tribes (2 Chr.
ixxiv. 9). It was during these repairs that the
book of the Law was found; and shortly after all
the people were convened to Jerusalem to hear it
read, and to renew the national covenant with Je-
hovah." The mention of Huldah the prophetess
(2 Chr. xxxiv. 22; 2 K. xxii. 14) introduces us to
the lower city under the name of " the Mishneh "
(njUJBn, A. V. "college," "school," or "second
part").* The name also survives in the book of
Zephauiah, a prophet of this reign (i. 10), who
seems to recognize " the Fish Gate," and "the lower
city," and " the hills," as the three main divisions
of the city.
Josiah's death took place at a distance from
Jerusalem ; but he was brought there for his burial,
and was placed in " his own sepulchre " (2 EL. xxiii.
30), or " in the sepulchre of his fathers " (2 Chr.
xxxv. 24), probably that already tenanted by Manae-
seh and Amon. (See I Esdr. i. 31.)
Josiah's rash opposition to Pharaoh-Necho cost
him his life, his son his throne, and Jerusalem
much suffering. Before Jehoahaz (b. c 608) had
been reigning three months, the Egyptian king
found opportunity to send to Jerusalem,' from
Kiblah where he was then encamped, a force suffi-
cient to depose and take him prisoner, to put his
brother Eliakim on the throne, and to exact a heavy
fine from the city and country, which was paid in
advance by the new king, and afterwards extorted
by taxation (2 K. xxiii. 33, 35).
The fall of the city was now rapidly approaching.
During the reign of Jehoiakim — such was the new
name which at Necho's order Eliakim had assumed
— Jerusalem was visited by Nebuchadnezzar, with
the Babylonian army lately victorious over the
Egyptians at Carchemish. The visit wss possibly
repeated once, or even twice. 1 * A siege there must
have been ; but of this we have no account. We
.nay infer how severe waa the pressure on the sur-
rounding country, from the fact that the very
Bedouins were driven within the walls by "the
tear of the Chaldeans and of the Syrians " (Jer.
xxv. 11). We may also infer that the Temple
was entered, sinoe Nebuchadnezzar carried off some
of the vessels therefrom for his temple at Babylon
(2 Chr. xxxvi. 7), and that Jehoiakim waa treated
with great indignity (ibid. 6). In the latter part
if this reign we discern the country harassed and
JERUSALEM
pillaged by marauding bands from the east oi Jat
dan (2 K. xxiv. 3).
Jehoiakim was succeeded by his son Jehoiaehis
(b. c. 687). Hardly had his short reign begun
before the terrible army of Babylon reappeared
before the city, again commanded by Nebuchad-
nezzar (2 K. xxiv. 10, 11). Jehoiachin's disposi-
tion appears to have made him shrink from infliet-
iug on the city the horrors of a long siege {B. J.
vi. 2, § 1), and he therefore surrendered in the
third month of his reign. The treasures of the
palace and Temple were pillaged, certain gdden
articles of Solomon's original establishment which
had escaped the plunder and desecrations of the
previous reigns, were cut up (2 K. xxiv. 13), anil
the more desirable objects out of the Temple car-
ried off (Jer. xxvii. 19). The first deportation that
we hear of from the city now took place. The
king, his wives, and the queen mother, with their
eunuchs and whole establishment, the princes, 7,000
warriors, and 1,000 artificers — in all 10,000 souls,
were carried off to Babylon (Md. 14-16). The
uncle of Jehoiachin waa made king in his stead,
by the name of Zedekiah, under a solemn oath
("by God") of allegiance (2 Chr. xxxvi. 13; Ee.
xvii. 13, 14, 18). Had be been content to remain
quiet under the rule of Babylon, the city might
have stood many years longer; but he was not.
He appears to have been tempted with the chance
of relief afforded by the accession of Pharaoh
Hophra, and to have applied to him for assist-
ance (Ez. xvii. 15). Upon this Nebuchadnezzar
marched in person to Jerusalem, arriving in the
ninth year of Zedekiah, on the 10th day of the
10th month* (n. c. 688), and at onoe began a
regular siege, at the same time wasting the country
far and near (Jer. xxxiv. 7 ). The siege was eon-
ducted by erecting forts on lofty mounds round the
city, from which, on the usual Assyrian plan,/ ms-
siles were discharged into the town, and the walls
and houses in them battered by rams (Jer. xxxi -
24, xxxiii. 4, lii. 4; Ez. xxi. 22; Joseph. Ant. x
8, § 1 ). The city was also surrounded with troop
(Jer. lii. 7). The siege was once abandoned, owing
to the approach of the Egyptian army (Jer. xxxvii.
6, 11 ), and during the interval the gates -A the city
were reopened (»A«i 13). But the relief waa only
temporary, and, in the 11th of Zedekiah (B. o. 586),
on the 9th day of the 4th month (Jer. lii. «|, being
just a year and a half from the first investment,
the city was taken. Nebuchadnezzar had in the
mean time retired from Jerusalem to Kihlab to
watch the more important siege of Tyre, then in
the last year of its progress. The besieged seem
to have suffered severely both from hunger and dis-
ease (Jer. xxxii. 24), but chiefly from the former
a This narrative has some interesting correspon-
dences with that of Joash's coronation (2 K. xt.).
Amongst these is the singular expression, the king
stood "on the pillar." In the present can Josephus
understands this as an official spot — hn t©0 popart*,
o Bet Kail on 2 K. xxii. 14. [In regard to this ren-
aenng of the A. V., set addition to Comas, Amer.
«t H.)
1'hls event would surely be more emphatically
related In the Bible, if Jerusalem wen the Oadytls
which Neoho is recorded by Herodotus to have de-
erojed after the battle at Megiddo. The Bible records
•ass over in total sueDce, or notice only in a casual
•ay, events which occurred close to the Israelite ter-
y, when those events do not affect the Israelites
instan» the 29-yaan' siege of Aahdod bv
Psammetichua, Necho's predecessor; the destrooQoa
ofGeeerby a former Pharaoh (IK. Ix. 16), etc. Bat
when events do affect them, they an mentioned with
more or less detail. The question of Cadytls b 41s-
eussed by Sir G. Wilkinson, In Rawllnson's Htrodvlii,
11. 246, note ; also by Kenrlek, Ant. Egypt. II. 406
d It seems impossible to reconcile the accounts of
this period in Kings, Chronicles, and Jeremiah, wish
Josephus and the other sources. For one view are
Jkhoukxm. For an opposite one see BawHnson'i
Hmdotiu, i. 609-614.
« According to Josephus (Ant. x. 7, } 4), this dak)
was the commencement of the final portion of tat
siege. But then Is nothing in the Bible records t>
support this.
/ For the sieges see Uyard's ivutrw* II. 866, ess
Digitized by
Google
JKBUHATiKM
% K. m 8; Jer. Hi. 6; Um. t. 10). But tiwy
■nuM perhaps have held out longer bad not a
breach in the wall been effected on the day named.
[t was at midnight (Joeeph.)- The whole city was
wrapt in the pitchy darkness ■ characteristic of an
eastern town, and nothing wan known by the Jews
of what had happened till the generals of the army
entered the Temple (Joseph.) and took their seats
in the middle court 6 ( Jer. xxxix. 3 ; Joseph. Ant.
x. 8, § 2). Then the alarm was given to Zedekiah,
and, collecting his remaining warriors, they stole
ant of the city by a gate at the south side, some-
where near the present Bnb ei-Afugharibdt, crossed
the Kedron above the royal gardens, and made
their way over the Mount of Olives to the Jordan
Valley. At break of day information of the flight
was brought to the Chaldeans by some deserters.
A rapid pursuit was made: Zedekiah was overtaken
near Jericho, his people were dispersed, and he
himself captured and reserved for a miserable fate
at Riblah. Meantime the wretched inhabitants
suffered all the horrors of assault and sack: the
men were slaughtered, old and young, prince and
peasant; the women violated in Mount Zion itself
(Lam. a. 4, v. 11, 19).
On the seventh day of the following month (2
EC xzv. 8), Nebucaradan, the commander of the
king's body-guard, who seems to have been charged
with Nebuchadnezzar's instructions as to what
should be done with the city, arrived. Two days
were passed, probably in collecting the captives
and booty; and on the tenth (Jer. HI. 12) the
Temple, the royal palace, and all the more impor-
tant buildings of the city, were set on fire, and the
spalls thrown down and left as heaps of disordered
rubbish on the ground (Neh. iv. 2). The spoil of
the city consisted apparently of little more than
the furniture of the Temple. A few small vessels
in gold e and silver, and some other things in brass
were carried away whole — the former under the
aspacial eye of Nebuaaradan himself (2 K. xxv. 15 ;
wrap. Jer. xxvii. 19). But the larger objects,
Solomon's huge brazen basin or sea with its twelve
mils, the ten bases, the two magnificent pillars,
laehin and Boat, too heavy and too cumbrous for
ransport, were broken up. The pillars were al-
mat the only parts of Solomon's original construe
ion which had not been mutilated by the sacrile-
rious hands of some Baal-worshipping monarch or
other, and there is quite a touch of pathos in the
way in which the chronicler lingers over his recol
lections of their height, their size, and their orna-
ments — capitals, wreathen work, and pomegran
atas, "all of brass."
The previous deportations, and the sufferings
endured in the siege, must to a great extent have
drained the place of its able-bodied people, and
thus the captives, on this occasion, were but few
sad unimportant. The high-priest, and four other
officers of the Temple, the commanders of the
• TIM moon being but nine days old, then can
have been little or no moonlight at this hour.
• Tola was th« regular Assyrian custom at the oon-
slasssn of a stage (Layard, Nineveh, it. 876).
e Jonphus (x. 8, f 6) says the candlestick and the
roldeo table of ibewbread wen taken nc w ; but then
van doubtless carried off on the pmvions occasion.
d Jasaaiah (111. 26) says " asvec "
• lbs events of this period an kept In memory by
ns Jews of ths pmssnt day by various commemorative
tarts, which wen instituted Immediately after the oo-
Thass in : ths 10th Tebsth
JEBTJSALBM 1881
fighting men, five <* people of the court, ths nat-
tering officer of the army, and sixty selected private
persons, were reserved to be submitted to the king
at Riblah. The daughters of Zedekiah, with their
children and establishment (Jer. xli. 10, 16; comp.
Ant. x. 9, J 4), sad Jeremiah the prophet (ibid. xl.
S), were placed by Nebuaaradan at Mizpeh under
the charge of Gedaliah ben-Ahikam, who had been
appointed as superintendent of the few poor laboring
people left to carry on the necessary husbandry and
vine-dressing. In addition to these were some small
bodies of men in arms, who had perhaps escaped
from the city before the blockade, or in the interval
of the siege, and who were havering on the out.
skirts of the country watching what might turn
up (Jer. xl. 7, 8). [Ishmael, 6.] The remain-
der of ths population — numbering, with the li
above named, 832 souls (Jer. lii. 29 )— were marched
off to Babylon. About two months after this
Gedaliah was murdered by Ishmael, and then the
few people of consideration left with Jeremiah
went into Egypt. Thus the land was practically
deserted of all but the very poorest class. Even
these were not allowed to remain in quiet. Five
years afterwards — the 23d of Nebuchadnezzar's
reign — the insatiable Nebuaaradan, on his way to
Egypt (Joseph. Am. x. 9, § 7), again visited the
ruins, and swept off 746 more of toe wretched
peasants (Jer. lii. 80).
Thus Jerusalem at last had fallen, and the Tem-
ple, set up under such fair auspices, was a heap of
blackened ruins.* The spot, however, was none
the less sacred because the edifice was destroyed,
and it waa still the resort of devotees, sometimes
from great distances, who brought their offerings
— in strange heathenish guise indeed, but still with
a true feeling — to weep and wail over the holy
place (Jer. xli. 5). It was still the centre of hope
to the people In captivity, and the time soon arrived
for their return to it. The decree of Cyrus author-
izing the rebuilding of the " house of Jehovah, God
of Israel, which is in Jerusalem," was issued b. c.
636. In consequence thereof a very large caravan
of Jews arrived in the country. The expedition
comprised all classes — the royal family, priests,
Levites, inferior ministers, lay people belonging to
various towns and families — and numbered 42,300/
in all. They were well provided with treasure fat
the necessary outlay; and — a more precious bur
den still — they bore the vessels of the old Temple
which had been preserved at Babylon, and were
now destined again to find a home at Jerusaleip
(Ear. v. 14, vi. 6).
A short time was occupied in settling in their
former cities, but on the first day of the 7th month
(Ear. lii. 6) a general assembly was called together
at Jerusalem in " the open place of the first gats
towards the east " (1 Esdr. v. 47); the altar was
set up, and the daily morauir and evening sacri-
(Jan. 6), the day of the Investment of ths city by
I NebuchadneiBsr ; the 10th Ab (July 29), destruction
i of ths Temple by Nebusaradu, and subsequently by
I Titus ; the 8d Tisrl (Sept. 19;, murder of Gedaliah ;
1 9th Tebsth, whet JMiel and< the other captives at
| Babylon received the news of the destruction of ths
hmple. The entrance of ths Ohaldees into the
city Is commemorated on ths 17th Tammus (July 8),
the day of ths breach of ths Antoola by Titus. Ths
modern dates here given are ths days on i
fasts an kept In the present yeaa, M69."
/ Jossphm says 42.Mli
Digitized by
Google
ISM
JERUSALEM
Other festivals were re-insti-
, and we h»Te a record of the celebration of
at heat one anniversary of toe day of the Bret
assembly at Jerusalem (Neh. viii. 1, Ac.)- Ar-
rangements were made for •tone and timber for the
fabric and in the 2d year after their return (b. o.
634), on the lit day of the 3d month (1 Eedr. t.
67), the foundation of the Temple was laid amidst
the songs and music of the priests and Levites
(according to the old rites of David), the tears of
the old men and the shoots of the young. But
the work was destined to suffer material interrup-
tions. The chiefs of the people by whom Samaria
had been colonized, finding that the Jews refused
their offers of assistance (Ezr. iv. 3), annoyed and
hindered them in every possible way ; and by this
and some natural drawbacks — such as violent
storms of wind by which some of the work bad
been blown down (Hag. i. 9), drought, and conse-
quent failure of crops, and mortality amongst both
animals and men — the work was protracted
through the rest of the reign of Cyrus, and that
of Ahasuerus, till the accession of Artaxerxes (Da-
rius I.) to the throne of Persia (b. c. 633). The
Samaritans then sent to the court at Babylon a
formal memorial (a measure already tried without
success in the preceding reign), representing that
the inevitable consequence of the restoration of the
city would be its revolt from the empire. This
produced its effect, and the building entirely ceased
for a time. In the mean time houses of some pre-
tension began to spring up — >' ceiled houses "
(Hag. i. 4), — and the enthusiasm of the builders
of the Temple cooled {ibid. 9). But after two
years the delay became intolerable to the leaders,
and the work was recommenced at all hazards,
amidst the eucouragements and rebukes of the two
prophets, Zechariah and Haggai, on the 34th day
of the 6th month of Darius' 3d year. Another
attempt at interruption was made by the Persian
governor of the district west of the Euphrates *
jEzr. v. 3), but the result was only a confirmation
by Darius of the privileges granted by his prede-
cessor (vi. 6-13), and an order to render all possi-
ble assistance. The work now went on apace, and
the Temple was finished and dedicated c in the 6th
year of Darius (b. c. 616), on the 3d (or 33d, 1
Esdr. vii. 6) of Adar — the last month, and on ,tbe
14th day of the new year the first Passover was
celebrated. The new Temple was 60 cubits less in
altitude than that of Solomon (Joseph. Ant. xv. 11,
§ 1); but its dimensions and form — of which
there are only scanty notices — will be best con-
sidered elsewhere. [Tkmplb.] All this time the
walls of the city remained as the Assyrians had left
them (Neh. li. 12, Ac.). A period of 58 years now
passed of which no sosounts are preserved to us;
but at the end of that time, in the year 467, Ezra
anived from Babylon with a caravan of Priests,
Lerites, Nethinims, and lay people, among the lat-
ter some members of the royal family, in all 1,777
JERUSALEM
(Ezr. vii., vili.), and with valuable c
from the Persian king and his court, a* wcO at
from the Jews who still remained in Babylonia
{ibid. vii. 14, viii. 36). He left Babylon on tht
1st day of the year and reached Jerusalem on the
1st of the 8th month (Ear. vii. 9, viii. 33).
Ezra at once set himself to correct some irregu-
larities into which the community had fallen. The
chief of them was the (raetiee of marrying the
native women of the old C'anaanite nations. The
people were assembled at three days' notice, and
harangued by Ezra — so urgent was the case — in
the midst of a pouring rain, and in very cold
weather, In the open space in front of the main
entrance to the Temple (Ear. x. 9; 1 Esdr. ix. 6).
His exhortations were at once acceded to, a form
of trespass-offering was arranged, and no less than
17 priests, 10 Levites, and 86 laymen, renounced
their foreign wives, and gave up an intercourse
which had been to their fathers the cause sod the
accompaniment of almost all their misfortunes
The matter took three months to carry out, and
was completed on the 1st day of the new year: but
the practice was not wholly eradicated (Neh. xiil.
33), though it never was pursued as before the
Captivity.
We now pass another period of eleven yean until
the arrival of Nebemiah, about b, c 446. He had
been moved to come to Jerusalem by the accounts
given him of the wretchedness of the community,
and of the state of ruin in which the walls of the
city continued (Neh. i. 3). Arrived there he kept
bis intentions quiet for three days, but on the night
of the third he went out by himself, and, as far as
the ruins would allow, made the circuit of the place
(ii. 11-16). On the following day be collected the
chief people, and proposed the immediate rebuilding
of the walls. Cme spirit seized them. P ries t s
rulers, Levites, private persons, citizens of distant
towns,* ss well as those dwelling on the spot, all
pot their hand vigorously to the work. And not-
withstanding the taunts and threats of SenbaUat,
the ruler of the Samaritans, and Tobiah the Am-
monite, in consequence of which one hah* of the
people had to remain armed while the other half
built, the work was completed in 63 days, on the
36th of Elul. The wsll thus rebuilt was that of
the city of Jerusalem as well as the city of David
or Zion, as will be shown in the next section, where
the account of the rebuilding la »«""'"«^ in detail
(Section III. p. 1333). At this time the city must
have presented a forlorn appearance; I ut few bouses
were built, and large spaces remained unoccupied,
or occupied but with the ruins of the Assyrian de-
structions (Neh. vii. 4). In this respect it was not
unlike much of the modern city. The solemn dedi-
cation of the wall, recorded in Neh. xii. 37-43,
probably took place at a later period when the
works had been completely finished.
Whether Ezra was here at this time is uneer-
• The fksat of Tabernacles li also asM to bare been
•alteram at this time (ill. 4 ; Joseph. Ant. id. 4, {
; but tats Is In dinet opposition to Nsh. vili. 17,
vbleh states that it was flnt oalebrsted whan Ian
ass ussssut (owns. IS), which ha was not on the for-
* mn3 "135 »■ beyond ths river, but by our
i tendered "on this aids," ss If aaeakfaf
(8eeawala,4v. UQ.moUA
c Peshn xxx. by Its no* purpo r ts to have bean nssl
on this occasion (Swald, Didtur, I. 310, SB). Iwald
also suggests that Ps. lxvtH. wss Anally used tor sha
festival (Got*. Iv. 1ST, nou).
d Among these we and Jerlelioand the Jordan Tel.
ley (A. T. " plain '<), Beth-iur, near Hebron, fllbssa,
Bstfa-horon, perhaps Bataarla, and the other eVts e*
Jordan (sss tv. 13, referring to these wise Hvei aa»
ReabaUat sod lobtah).
Digitized by
Google
JERUSALEM
tth ■ |Ezba, 1. 8C3 4.] But wo meet him aunng
the government of Nehemiah, especially on one in-
tsresting occasion — the anniversary, it would ap-
pev, of the first return of ZerubbabeTs caravan —
on the l«t of the 7th month (Neh. viii.' 1). He
there appears aa the venerable and venerated in-
structor of the people in the forgotten law of Moan,
amongst other reforms reinstituting the feast of
Tabernacles, which we incidentally learn had not
been celebrated since the time that the Israelites
originally entered on the land (viil. IT).
Nehemiah remained in the city for twelve years
(t. 14, xiii. 6), during which time he held the office
anil maintained the state of governor of the province
(v. 14) from his own private resources (v. IS). He
was Indefatigable in his regulation and maintenance
of the order and dignity both of the city (vii. 8, xi.
1, iffl. IS, 4c.) and Temple (x. 33, 39, xii. 44);
abolished the excessive rates of usury by which the
richer citizens had grievously oppressed the poor
(v. 6-12); kept up the genealogical registers, at
once so characteristic of, and important to, the
Jewish nation (vii. 5, xl., xii.); and in various
other ways showed himself an able and active gov-
ernor, and possessing a complete assendency over
his fellow-citizens. At the end of this time be
returned to Babylon; but it does not appear that
his absence was more than a short one,' and he was
soon again at his post, as vigilant and energetic as
ever (ziii. 7). Of his death we hare no record.
The foreign tendencies of the high-priest Eliuhih
and his family had already given Nehemiah some
concern (xiii. 4, 28), and when the checks exercised
by his vigilance and good sense were removed, they
quickly led to serious disorders, unfortunately the
•nly occurrences which have come down to us during
the next epoch. Eliaehib's son Joiada, who suc-
ceeded him in the high-priesthood (apparently a
few years before the death of Nehemiah), had two
sons, the one Jonathan (Neh. xii. 11) or Johanan
(Neh. xii. 22; Joseph. Am. xi. 7, § 1% the other
Joshua (Joseph, ibid.). Joshua had made interest
with the general of the Persian army that he should
displace his brother in the priesthood : the two quar-
relled, and Joshua was killed by Johanan in the
Temple (b. c. cir. 366): a horrible occurrence, and
even aggravated by its consequences; for the Per-
sian general made it the excuse not only to pollute
the sanctuary (m!i) by entering it, on the ground
that be was certainly leas unclean than the body
of the murdered man — but also to extort a tribute
of W daries on every lamb offered in the daily sacri-
fice for the next seven years (Joseph. Ant. ibid.).
J ihanan in his turn had two sons. Jaddua (Neh.
xii. 11, 22) and Manaeseh (Joseph. Ant xl. T, { 2).
Hanasseh married the daughter of Sanballat the
Jlormite,* and eventually became the first priest
■T the Samaritan temple on Gerizim (Joseph. Ant.
xi 8, §§ 2, 4). But at first be seems to have been
JERUSALEM
1291
a The name occurs among those who assisted In the
ledteauon or th* wall (xii. 83) ; but st as to msa* us
betters that It was soma Inferior psrstn of the same
* Prldaeux says Ave years ; but his reason* am not
ajtWhctory, and would apply to ten as well as to five.
" According to Neh. zlU. 28, the man wb > married
ssnballat's daughter was "son of Joiada ;" bat this
|s In direct contradiction to the clrcunutandsl state-
ments of Jossphus, followed In the tezt ; and the word
T son * Is often used In Hebrew for n grandson," or
VTSB a more remote desean'Uat (see. «. g. Cxxm.
•n t
associated in the priesthood of Jerusalem wHk ma
brother (Joseph, usrtxeir r qr ipxttowtrfo nr), sod
have relinquished it only on being forced to do a.
on account of his connection with Sanballat. Tnt
foreign marriages against which Ezra and Nehe-
miah had acted so energetically had again become
common among both the priests and laymen. A
movement was made by a reforming party against
the practice ; but either it had obtained a firmer
hold than before, or there was nothing to replace
the personal influence of Nehemiah, for the move-
ment only resulted in a large number going over
with Manasaeh to the Samaritans (Joseph. Ant xi.
8, §§ 2, 4). During the high-priesthood of Jaddua
occurred the famous visit of Alexander the Great
to Jerusalem. Alexander had invaded the i.orth
of Syria, beaten Darius's army at the Granicos, and
again at Issue, and then, having besieged Tyre,
sent a letter to Jaddua inviting his allegiance, and
desiring assistance in men and provisions. The
answer of the high-priest was, that to Darius his
allegiance had been given, and that to Darius he
should remain faithful while he lived. Tyre was
taken in July n. c. 331 (Kenrick's Pkankia, 431),
and then the Macedonians moved along the flat
strip of the coast of Palestine to Gaza, which in
its turn was taken in October. The road to Egypt
being thus secured, Alexander bad leisure to visit
Jerusalem, and deal in person with the people who
had ventured to oppose him. This he did appar-
ently by the same route which Isaiah (x. 28-32)
describes Sennacherib as taking. The " Sapha "
at which he was met by the high-priest must be
Hizpeh — Scopus — the high ridge to the north
of the city, the Nob of Isaiah, which is crossed by
the northern road, and from which the first view —
and that a full one — of the city and Temple is
procured. The result to the Jews of the visit wis
an exemption from tribute in the Sabbatical year;
a privilege which they retained for long.*
We hear nothing more of Jerusalem until it was
taken by Ptolemy Soter, about B. c. 320, during
his incursion into Syria. The account given by
Joeephus (Ant xii. 1 ; Apkm, i. § 22), partly from
Agatharchides, and partly from some other source,
is extremely meagre, nor is it quite consistent with
itself. Hut we can discern one point to which mora
than one parallel is found in the later history —
that the city fell into the hands of Ptolemy because
the Jews would not fight on the Sabbath. Great
hardships seem to have been experienced by the
Jews after this conquest, and a large number were
transported to Egypt and to Northern Africa.
A stormy period succeeded — that of the str iggles
between Antigonus and Ptolemy for the |uissiiisliiii
of Syria, which lasted until the defeat of the forma
at Ipsus (b. c. 301), after which the country can- 1
into the possession of Ptolemy. The eontentfcn
however was confined to the maritime region rf
<* The details of this story, and the arguments «b»
and against Its authenticity, are given under Arxx-
Aimsa (i. 69) ; see also Hras-ParsaT (II. 1072). It should
be oossrved that the part of the Temple which Alex-
ander entered, and where he sacrificed to God, was not
the va6t, into which Bagoas had forced himself aflat
~d nwrder of Joshua, but the Up6v — the court only
(jueepn. Am. it. 8, J 6). The Jewish tradition It that
be was induced to put off his shoes before h Billing ths
sacred ground of the court, by being told that they
would slip on the polished marble (Mtg. 1»— ifa, at
Rdaod, A*tfq. I. 8. Ai
Digitized by
Google
U99 JERUSALEM
Passatine,* and Jerusalem appears to have escaped.
Bounty as U the information we possess concerning
the etty, it yet indicates a state of prosperity ; the
anly outward mark of dependence being an annual
tax of twenty talents of silver payable by the high-
priests. Simon the Just, who followed his father
Onias in the high-priesthood (cir. B. c. 300), is one
of the favorite heroes of the Jews. Under his care
the sanctuary (mis) was repaired, and some foun-
dations of great depth added round the Temple,
possibly to gain a larger surface on the top of the
hill (Ecclus. 1. 1, 2). The large cistern or " sea " of
the principal court of the Temple, which hitherto
would seem to hare been but temporarily or roughly
constructed, was sheathed in brass' (ibid. 8); the
walls of the city were more strongly fortified to
guard against such attacks as those of Ptolemy
(id. 4); and the Temple service was maintained
with great pomp and ceremonial (ii. 11-21). His
death was marked by evil omens of various kinds
presaging disasters " (Otho, Lex. Rob. " Measias ").
Simon's brother Eleazar succeeded him as high-
priest (n. c. 291 ), and Antigonus of Socho as
president of the Sanhedrim '' (l'rideaui). The dis-
asters presaged did not immediately arrive, at least
in the grosser forms anticipated. The intercourse
with Greeks was fast eradicating the national char-
acter, but it was at any rate a peaceful intercourse
during the reigns of the Ptolemies who succeeded
Soter, namely, l'hiladelphus (it. c. 285), and Kuer-
getes (b. c. 2-17). It was l'hiladelphus, who, ac-
cording to the story preserved by Josephus, bad the
translation of the Septuegint • made, in connection
with which he sent Aristeas to Jerusalem during
the priesthood of Eleazar. He also bestowed on
the Temple very rich gifts, consisting of a table for
the shewbread, of wonderful workmanship, basins,
bowls, phials, etc., and other articles both for the
private and public use of the priests (Joseph. Ant.
xii. 2, § 5 — 10, 16). A description of Jerusalem at
this period under the name of Aristeas still sur-
vives,/ which supplies a lively picture of both Tem-
ple and city. The Temple was " enclosed with
three walls 70 cubits high, and of proportionate
thickness. . . . The spacious courts were paved
with marble, and beneath them lay immense reser-
voirs of water, which by mechanical contrivance
was made to rush forth, and thus wash away the
blood of the sacrifices." The city occupied the
summit and the eastern slopes of the opposite hill
— the modern Zion. The main streets appear to
have run north and south ; some " along the brow
. . others lower down but parallel, following the
etnme of the valley, with cross streets connecting
them." They were " furnished with raised pave-
ments," either due to the alone of the ground, or
« Mod Sk>. xii. ; Hecatseus In Joseph. Apion. 1. 22.
» So ths A. V., apparently following a different text
M either LXX. or Vulgate, which state that the
i miliar was made smaller. But the passage is prob-
ably corrupt.
e One of the chief of these was that toe scapegoat
was not, as formerly, dashed In pieces by his fall from
the nek, out got off alive Into the desert, waen *«
was sottit fry tht Sarattna.
< atmov the Just was the last of the Illustrious
awn who formed " the Great Synagogue." Antigonus
was lbs Ant of the Ttntaim, or expounders of the
written law, whose dicta an embodied In the MJshna.
truss Sadoc, one of Antlgonus's scholars, Is said so
saws sprung the sect of the Sadducess (Prideaux, H.
, Oat*, lv. 818). It la remarkable that Anttg-
JEBTJSALKM
possibly adopted for the reason given by i
namely, to enable the passengers to avoid <
with persons or things ceremonially unclean. Tht
bazaars were then, as now, a prominent feature of
the city. There were to be found gold, precious
stones, and spices brought by caravans from the
East, and other articles imported from the West
by way of Joppa, Gaza, and Ptolemais, which served
as its commodious harbor. It is not impossible
that among these Phoenician Importations from the
West may have figured the dyes and the tip of the
remote Britain.
Eleazar was succeeded (cir. b. c. 276) by Ml
uncle Manasseh, brother to Onias I. ; and ho again
(cir. 250) by Onias II. Onias was a eon of tbt
great Simon the Just; but he inherited none of
his father's virtues, and his ill-timed avarice at
length endangered the prosperity of Jerusalem.
For, the payment of the annual tax to the court of
Egypt having been for several years evaded, Ptol-
emy Euergetes, about 226, sent a commissioner to
Jerusalem to enforce the arrears (Joseph. Ant. xii.
4, § 1; Prideaux). Onias, now in his second
childhood (Ant. xii. 4, § 8), was easily prevailed on
by his nephew Joseph to allow him to return with
the commissioner to Alexandria, to endeavor to
arrange the matter with the king. Joseph, a man,
evidently, of great ability,' not only procured the
remission of the tax in question,* but also per-
suaded Ptolemy to grant him the lucrative priv-
ilege of fanning the whole revenue of Judaea, Sa-
maria, Corie-Syria, and Phoenicia — a privilege
which he retained till the province was taken from
the Ptolemies by Autiochus the Great. Hitherto
the family of the high-priest had been the most
powerful in the country; but Joseph had now
founded one able to compete with it, and the con-
tention and rivalry between the two — manifesting
itself at one time in enormous bribes to the court,
at another in fierce quarrels at home — at last led
to the interference of the chief power with tht
affairs of a city, which, if wisely and quietly gov-
erned, might never have been molested.
Onias II. died about 217, and was succeeded by
Simon II. In 221 Ptolemy Philopator had suc-
ceeded Euergetes on the throne of Egypt He had
only been king three years when Antiochus the
Great attempted to take Syria from him. Anti-
ochus partly succeeded, but in a battle at Raphia,
south of Gaza, fought in the year 217 (the same
as that of Hannibal at Thrasymene), he was com-
pletely routed and forced to fly to Antioch. Ptol-
emy shortly after visited Jerusalem. He offered
sacrifice in the court of the Temple, and would
have entered the sanctuary, had he not been pre-
ouus Is the first Jsw we meat with bearing a Omsk
• The legend of lbs translation by 72 Interprsters
Is no longer believed ; but It probably rests on secas
foundation of tact The sculpture of the table and
bowls (lilies and vines, without any figures) seams te
have been founded on the descriptions In the Law. la
6 Haco. U. 14, fee., it b said to have had also a mar
of Egypt upon It
i It Is to be found In the Appendix to Bavereampt
Joxphus, and in Oallandll BM. Vet. Paf. <L 806. As
extract to -riven hi article "Jerusalem' (Diet. •/
Geogr. II. 36, 26).
P The story of the stratagem by which be asset
his fortune Is told in Prideaux (anno 226), and sa IB
nan's Hist, o/ Ike Jrm 01. M).
* it Isast we hear nothing of It aftarwirva.
Digitized by
Google
JB&USALHM
by the firmness of the high-print Simon,
and aha bj s tupernatiml tenor which struck him
tad (tretched him paralyzed on tte pavement of
the court (3 Mace. ii. 22).« Thii repulse Ptolemy
lever forgave, and the Jem of Alexandria suffered
•evenly in conaequeoce.
like the reat of Palestine, Jerusalem now be-
came alternately a pre* to each of the contending
parties (Joseph. Ant. xii. 3, $ 8). In 803 it was
taken by Antiochus. In 199 it was retaken by
Soopas the Alexandrian general, who left a garrison
in the citadeL In the following year Antiochus
again beat the Egyptuuu, and then the Jews, who
had suffered most from the latter, gladly opened
their gates to hi* army, and assisted them in
reducing the Egyptian garrison. This service
Antiochus requited by large presents of money and
articles for sacrifice, by an order to Ptolemy to
furnish cedar and other materials for cloisters and
other additions to the Temple, and by material re-
lief from taxation. He also published a decree
tffirming the aaeredness of the Temple from the
intrusion of strangers, and forbidding any infrac-
tions of the Jewish law (Joseph. Ant. xii. 8, §§ 8,
Simon was followed in 195 by Onias III. In
187 Antiochus the Great died, and was succeeded
by his son Seleucus Soter (Joseph. Ant. xii. 4, §
10). Jerusalem was now in much apparent pros-
perity. Onias was greatly respected, and governed
with a firm hand ; and the decree of the late king
was so for observed, that the whole expenditure of
the sacrifices was borne by Seleucus (2 Mace. Hi.
1-3). But the city soon began to be much dis-
turbed by the disputes between Hyrcanus, the ille-
gitimate son of Joseph the collector, and his elder
and legitimate brothers, on the subject of the divi-
sion of the property left by their father. The high-
priest, Onias, after some hesitation, seems to have
taken the part of Hyrcanus, whose wealth — after
the suicide of Hyrcanus (about b. c. 180) — he se-
cured in the treasury of the Temple. The office of
governor (xpocrinit) of the Temple was now held
by one Simon, who is supposed to have been one of
the legitimate brothers of Hyrcanus. By this man
Seleucus was induced to send Heliodonu to Jeru-
salem to get possession of the treasure of Hyrcanus.
How the attempt failed, and the money was for the
time preserved from pillage, may be seen in 3 Msec.
UX. 94-30, and in the well-known picture of Kaf-
tseDe Samdo.
In 175 Seleucus Soter died, and the kingdom of
Syria came to his brother, the infamous Antiochus
ESpipbanes. His first act towards Jerusalem was
to sell the office of high-priest — still filled by the
gwd Onias III. — to Onias's brother Joshua (9
Mace. iv. 7; Ant. xii 5, § 1). Greek manners had
made many a step at Jerusalem, and the new high-
priest was not likely to discourage their further
p ro gr e ss . His first act was to Greeize his own
ume, and to become " Jason;" his next to set up
a gymnasium — that is a place where the young
men of the town were trained naked — to lntro-
luee the Greek dress, Greek sports, and Greek
•MieUatiotts. Now (1 Mace. i. 13, Ac.; 9 Mace.
JKJfttrSAXBM
198*
■ The third book of the Haesaheas, tnough so
aJsd, has no reference to the Maivhawn harass, bat
s total up with the relation of this visit of Ptolemy
to Jerusalem, and Its oonasqneness to the Jew*.
* ibis visit Is omitted In 1 Usee. Joaephus m
lea* H, bat sera that it was marked by a gnat
Iv. 9, 19) for the first time we hear of at i
to efface the distinguishing mark of a Jew— a
to " become uncircumcised." The priests quick!)
followed the example of their chief (2 Mace. ir. 14)
and the Temple service was neglected. A specie
deputation of the youth of Jerusalem — " Anti-
ochians " they were now called — was sent with of-
ferings from the Temple of Jehovah to the festival
of Hercules at Tyre. In 172 Jerusalem was visited
by Antiochus. He entered the city at night by
torch-light and amid the acclamations of Jason
and his party, and after a short stay returned » (9
Msec. iv. 22). And now the treachery of Jason
was to be requited to him. His brother Onias,
who had assumed the Greek name of Menelaua, In
his turn bought the high priesthood from Anti-
ochus, and drove Jason out to the other side of the
Jordan (2 Msec. iv. 28). To pay the price of
the office, Menelaua had laid hands on the conse-
crated plate of the Temple. This became known,
and a riot was the consequence (2 Mace. iv. 32,
89,40).
During the absence of Antiochus in Egypt,
Jason suddenly appeared before Jerusalem with
a thousand men, and whether by the fury of bis
attack, or from his having friends in the city, be
entered the walls, drove Menelaua into the citadel,
and slaughtered the citizens without mercy. Ja-
son seems to have foiled to obtain any of the val-
uables of the Temple, and shortly after retreated
beyond Jordan, where he miserably perished (9
Mace. T. 7-10). But the news of these tumults
reaching Antiochus on his way from Egypt brought
him again to Jerusalem (8. a 170). He appears
to have entered the city without much difficulty.'
An indiscriminate massacre of the adherents of
Ptolemy followed, and then a general pillage of the
contents of the Temple. Under the guidance of
Menelaua, Antiochus went into the sanctuary, and
took from thence the golden altar, the candlestick,
the magnificent table of shewbread, and all the
vessels and utensils, with 1,800 talents out of the
treasury. These things occupied three days. He
then quitted for Antioch, carrying off, besides his
booty, a large train of captives; and leaving, as
governor of the city, a Phrygian named Philip, a
man of a more savage disposition than himself (1
Mace. i. 20-24; 2 Mace. v. 11-21; Joseph. Ant.
xii. 6, § 3; B. J. i. 1, § 1). But something worse
was reserved for Jerusalem than pillage, death, and
slavery, worse than even the pollution of the proa
ence of this monster in the holy place of Jehovah.
Nothing less than the total extermination cf the Jews
was resolved on, and in. two years (B. c. 168) an
army was sent under Apollonius to carry the resohw
into effect. He waited till the Sabbath, and then
for the second time the entry was made while the
people were engaged in their devotions. An-
other great slaughter took place, the city was icw
in its turn pillaged and burnt, and the walla de-
stroyed.
The foreign garrison took up its quarters in what
had from the earliest times been the strongest part
of the place — the ancient city of David (1 Mace.
L 33, vii. 32), the famous hill of Zion, described
sb-'Khtsr •* the Jewish party and by plunder (Ami
xh. 6, { t^ This, however, doss not agree with the
•vtal character given to it In the 2 Mace., and Silts was
c There is a gnat discrepancy be t wsa u lbs ■
of 1 Msec., 3 Mace., and Jesaphos.
Digitized by
Google
ISM JERUSALEM
M Mug on an eminence adjoining ■ the north wall
of the Temple, and to high ai to overlook it (Ami.
tSL 6, § 4). This hill ni now fortified with a
vary strong wall with towers, snd within it the
garrison secured their booty, cattle, and other pro-
viaiona, the women of their prisoners, and a certain
number of the inhabitants of the city friendly to
them.
Antiocbus next issued an edict to compel heathen
worship in all his dominions, and one Atbencua
was sent to Jerusalem to enforce compliance. Aa
a first step, the Temple was reconsecrated to Zeus
Olynipius (2 Mace. vi. 8). The worship of idols
(1 Msec. i. 47), with its loose and obscene accom-
paniments (2 Mace, vi. 4), was introduced there —
an ahar to Zeus was set op on the brazen altar of
JehoTah, pigs-flesh offered thereon, and the broth
or liquor sprinkled shout the Temple (Joseph. Ant.
xiii. 8, § 2). And while the Jews were compelled
not only to tolerate bat to take an attire part in
these foreign abominations, the obserrance of their
own rites and ceremonies — sacrifice, the sabbath,
circumcision — waa absolutely forbidden. Many
no doubt complied (Ant. xii. 6, § 4); but many
also resisted, snd the torments inflicted, snd the
heroism displayed in the streets of Jerusalem at
this time, almost surpass belief. But though a
•evert, it wss a wholesome discipline, and under its
rough teaching the old spirit of the people began
to retire.
The battles of the Maccabees were fought on the
outskirts of the country, and it wss not till the
defeat of Lysiaa at Beth-zur that they thought it
safe to renture into the recesses of the central hills.
Then they immediately turned their steps to Jeru-
salem. On ascending the Mount Moriah, and en-
tering the quadrangle of the Temple, a sight met
their eyes, which proved at once how complete had
been the desecration, and how short-lived the tri-
umph of the idolaters; for while the altar still stood
there with its abominable burden, the gates in
ashes, the priests' chambers in ruins, and, aa they
reached the inner court, the very sanctuary itself
open and empty — yet the place had been so long
diluted that the whole precincts were full of veg-
etation, '< the shrubs grew in the quadrangle like a
forest" The precincts were at once cleansed, the
polluted altar put aside, a new one constructed, and
vhe holy vessels of the sanctuary replaced, and on
(be third anniversary of the desecration — the 25th
sf the month Chisleu, in the year B. c. 165, the
Temple was dedicated with a feast which lasted for
tight days.* After this the outer wall of the Tem-
ple' was very much strengthened (1 Mace. iv. 60),
sad it was in feet converted into a fortress (comp.
■ ma may bs Inferred from maay of the expaae-
daus ao n m rnln g this citadel ; but Josephus expressly
jsas the word Mam (Ant. xU. 9, J 8), and says it
vas on an eminence m the lower dry, i. t. the eastern
liU, at eonuadlatingmshad tram the western bill or
eppar sky.
* fee wrm Zion Is not applied to this eminence by
aVaar of these writers, and " the dry of David," as
wed by one, Is synonymous with Jerusalem, for a
arena! examination and clear elucidation of the tas-
uscwT here referred to, in its connection, by Dr. Rob-
nsao.seeJXU. Sacra, U1. 629-684. It should bs noted,
es BcaOTsr, as la stated further on, that the above n em-
manes ha the lower dty " <vaa subsequently removed
by Bfaaon n and brought to an entire level with the
•mm" (Am*. xttL 6, | 7). According to tl
JERUSALEM
vi. 86, 61, 62), and occupied by a garrison (I*, ft,
The Acre was still held by the soldiers of AamY
ochus. One of the first acta of Judas on enters*]
the Temple had been to detach a party to weieh
them, and two years later (n. c. 163) to frequent
had their sallies and annoyances become — partic-
ularly an attempt on one occasion to confine the
worshippers within the Temple inclosure* (1 Mace.
vi. 18) — that Judas collected his people U take it,
and began a siege with banks snd engines. In the
mean time Antiochus had died (u. c 164), sad was
succeeded by his son Antiochus Eupator, • youth.
The garrison in the Acre, finding themselves pressed
by Judas, managed to communicate with tl e king,
who brought an army from Antioch and attacked
Beth-cur, one of the key-positions of the Macca-
bees. This obliged Judas to give up the siege of
the Acre, and to march southwards against the in-
truder (1 Mace, vi 82; Joseph. Ant. xii. 9, J 4).
Antiochus's army proved too much for his little
force, his brother Elcaxar was killed, and be was
compelled to fell back on Jerusalem and shut him-
self up in the Temple. Thither Lysiaa, Antiochus's
general — and later, Antiochus himself — followed
him (vi. 48, 61, 67, 62) and commenced an active
siege. How long it lasted we are not informed,
but the provisions of the besieged were rapidly be-
coming exhausted, and famine had driven many tc
make their escape (ver. 64), when news of an insur-
rection elsewhere induced Lysiaa to advise Anti-
ochus to offer terms to Judas (vi. 66-68). The
terms, which were accepted by him were, liberty to
live after their own laws, and immunity to their
persons and their fortress. On inspection, how-
ever, Antiochus found the place so strong that be
refused to keep this part of the agreement, and
before he left the walls were pulled down (vi. 62;
Ant. xii. 9, § 7). Judas apparently remained in
Jerusalem for the next twelve months. During
this time Antiochus and Lysiaa had been killed and
the throne seized by Demetrius (». c. 162), and the
new king had despatched Baechidea and Alcimua,
the then high-priest, — a man of Grecian principles,
— with a large force, to Jerusalem. Judaa was
again within the walls of the Temple, which in the
interval he must have rebuilt He could not be
tempted forth, but sixty of the Assideans were
treacherously murdered by the Syrians, who then
moved off, first to a short distance from the dty,
and finally back to Antioch (1 Mace. vii. 1~S»:
Ant. xii. 10, §§ 1-8). Demetrius then sent an-
other army under Nicanor, but with no better
success. An action was fought at Caphar-aalama.
an unknown place not far from the city. Judaa
was victorious, and Nicanor escaped and took
theory, then, "the femoue hill of Bon'
bodily, about a century and a half erfcee Christ!
aw.
• This feast is alluded to In John x. 22. Chaura
was the mid-winter month. The feast of the Dsdlea-
tion fella this year (I860) on the 9th Dee.
c In 1 Mace. Iv. 80 It M mid that they builusd up
"Mount Slon;" but In the parallel passages, vi. 7, 28,
the word used I* " sanctuary," or rather " holy places,
aytavp*. The pinning probably la the antlN mala*
am. Josephus {Ant xii. 7, f 7) aayi " the etty."
• Both writers probably refer to the whole day.
B.W
"* laywAriorm rer Ivaah* avcA*. tot sytaw. The
A. T. "shut up the Israelites round about the asea>
dots not hers give the state, watch warns •>
Digitized by
Google
JERUSALEM
In the Acra at Jerusalem, Shortly after
Nleaiior came down from the fortress and paid a
rlait to the Temple, where be insulted the print!
(1 Hue. vii. 33, 34; 8 Usee. xfr. 31-83). He
aim caused the death of Razis, one of the elders in
Jerusalem, a man greatly esteemed, who lulled him-
self in the most horrible manner, rather than Mi
into his hands (2 Mace. xiv. 37-46). He then
procured some reinforcements, met Judas at Adasa,
probably not far from RanUek, was killed, and his
army thoroughly beaten. Nieanor's head and right
arm were brought to Jerusalem. The head was
nailed on the wall of the Acre, and the hand and
arm on a conspicuous spot being the Temple (2
Haec. zv. 80-35), where their memory was perhaps
perpetuated in the name of the gate Nicanor, the
eastern entrance to the Great Court (Reland, Antiq.
I. 9, 4).
The death of Judas took place in 161. After it
Baechides and Alcimus again established themselves
st Jerusalem in the Aera (Joseph. AnL xiii. 1, § 8),
and in the intervals of their contests with Jonathan
and Simon added much to its fortifications, fur-
nished it with provisions, and confined there the
children of the chief people of Jiuhea as hostages
far their good behavior (1 Mace ix. 50-53). In
the seoond month (May) of 160 the high-priest
Alcimus began to make some alterations in the
Temple, apparently doing away with the inclosure
between one court and another, and in particular
demolishing some wall or building, to which pecu-
liar sanctity was attached as " the work of the
prophets " (1 Mace ix. 64). The object of these
■Iterations was doubtless to lessen the distinction
between Jew and Gentile. But they had hardly
been commenced before be was taken suddenly ill
and died.
Baechides now returned to Antiocb, and Jeru-
salem remained without molestation for a period
of seven years. It does not appear that the Mac-
cabees resided there; part of the time they were at
Hichmash, in the entangled country seven or eight
miles north of Jerusalem, and part of the time
fighting with Baechides at Beth-basi in the Jordan
Valley near Jericho. All this time the Acra was
held by the Macedonian garrison (AnL xiii. 4, §
99) and the malcontent Jews, who still held the
hostages taken from the other port of the com-
munity (1 Haco. x. 6). In the year 153 Alexander
Balsa, the real or pretended son of Antiochus
Epiphanes, having landed at Ptolemais, Demetrius
sent a communication to Jonathan with the view
of keeping him attached to his cause (1 Mace. x. 1,
Ac. ; Ant. xiii. 2, § 1). Upon this Jonathan moved
np to Jerusalem, rescued the hostages from the
Acra, and began to repair the city. The destruc-
tions of the last few years were remedied, the walla
round Mount Zion particularly being rebuilt in the
■cost substantial manner, as a regular fortification
(t. 11 ). From this time forward Jonathan received
■rivilugee and professions of confiflVnoe from both
toes. First, Alexander authorized him to assume
the office of high-priest, which had not been filled
op since the death of Alcimus (oomp. Ant. xx. 10,
} 1). This he took at the Feast of Tabernacle* in
the autumn of the year 153, and at the same fine
toueeted soldiers and ammunition (1 Msec. x. 81 ).
Next, Demetrius, amongst other immunities granted
to the country, recognized Jerusalem and its en-
viron* as again " holy and free," relinquished all
1ght to the Acra — which was henceforward to be
abject to the high-priest (x. 31, 88), endowed the
JERUSALEM
ISM
Temple with the revenues of Ptolsmala, sad aha
with 15,000 shekels of silver charged hi other places
and ordered not only the payment of the same sum.
in regard to former years, but the release of as
annual tax of 5,000 shekels hitherto exacted from
the priests. Lastly, he authorized the repairs of
the holy place, and the building and fortifying of
the walls of Jerusalem to be charged to the roya
accounts, and gave the privilege of sanctuary to all
persons, even mere debtors, taking refuge in the
Temple or in its precincts (1 Mace. x. 31, 32, 30-
45).
The contentions between Alexander and Derie
trim, in which he was actively engaged, prevent »1
Jonathan from taking advantage of these grants
till the year 145. He then began to invest the
Acra (xi. 20; AnL xiii. 4, § 9), but, owing partly
to the strength of the place, and partly to the con-
stant dissensions abroad, the siege made little prog-
ress during fully two years. It was obvious that
no progress could be made as long as the inmates
of the Acra could get into the city or the country,
and there buy provisions (xiii. 49), as hitherto was
the esse; and, therefore, at the first opportunity,
Jonathan built a wall or bank round the base of
the citadel-hill, cutting off all communication both
with the city on the west and the country on the
east (xii. 86; oomp. xiii. 49), and thus completing
the circle of investment, of which the Temple wall
formed the south and remaining side. At the
same time the wall of the Temple was repaired and
strengthened, especially on the east side, towards
the Valley of Kedron. In the mean time Jonathan
was killed at Ptolemais, and Simon succeeded him
both as chief and as high-priest (xiii. 8, 42). The
investment of the Acra proved successful, but three
years still elapsed before this enormously strong
place could be reduced, and at last the garrison
capitulated only from famine (xiii. 49 ; oomp. 21).
Simon entered it on the 23d of the 2d month B. c.
142. The fortress was then entirely demolished,
and the eminence on which it had stood lowered,
until it was reduced below the height of the Temple
hill beside it. The last operation occupied three
years {AnL xiii. 6, § 7). The valley north of Moriah
was probably filled up at this time (B. J. v. 5, $ 1).
A fort was then built on the north side of the
Temple hilL apparently against the wall, so as
directly to command the site of the Acra, and hero
Simon and his immediate followers resided (xiii.
52). This wss the Bans — so called after the
Hebrew word Birah — which, under the name if
Antonia, became subsequently so prominent a
feature of the city. Simon's other achievements,
and bis alliance with the Komans, must be reserved
for another place. We hear of no further occur*
ranees at Jerusalem during his life except Uk
placing of two brass tablets, commemorating his
exploits on Mount Zion, in the precinct of tht
sanctuary (xiv. 27, 48). In 135 Simon was mur-
dered at D6k near Jericho, and then all was again
confusion in Jerusalem.
One of the first steps of his son John Hyrcanua
was to secure both the city and the Temple (Joseph.
AnL xiii. 7, § 4). The people were favorable to him,
and repulsed Ptolemy, Simon's murderer, when
hi attempted to enter (Joseph. AnL xiii. 7, % 4;
B. J. l. 2, § 8). Hyreanus was made high-priest.
Shortly after this, Antiochus Sidetes, king of Syria,
brought an army into southern Palestine, ravages!
and burnt the country, and attacked Ja
To invest the city, and cut off all chance of «
Digitized by
Google
ISM
JERUSALEM
ft wu tnebelad by a girdle of seven camps, lie
estiva operation! of the ilege wen carried on aa
anal at the north, where the level ground come*
up to the walls. Here a hundred towers of attack
were erected, each of three stories, from which pro
jectilee were cast into the city, and a double ditch,
broad and deep, was excavated before them to pro-
tect them from the sudden sallies which the be-
sieged were constantly making. On one occasion
the wall of the city was undermined, its timber
foundations burnt, and thus a temporary breach
effected (9 Mace. xzi. 5). For the first and last
time we hear of a want of water inside the city,
but from this a seasonable rain relieved them. In
other respects the besieged seem to have been well
off. Hyrcanus however, with more prudence than
humanity, anticipating a long siege, turned out
of the city all the infirm and non-fighting people.
The Feast of Tabernacles had now arrived, and, at
the request of Hyrcanus, Antiochus, with a mod-
eration which gained him the title of " the Pious,"
agreed to a tniee. This led to further negotiations,
which ended in the siege being relinquished. Anti-
ochus wished to place a garrison in the city, but
this the late experience of the Jews forbade, and
hostages and a payment were substituted. The
money for this subsidy was obtained by Hyrcanus
from the sepulchre of David, the outer chamber of
which he is said to have opened, and to have taken
3,000 talents of the treasure which had been buried
with David, and had hitherto escaped undiscovered
(Ant. vii. 15, § 3; xiii. 8, § 4; B. J. 1. 2, § 5).
After Antiochus's departure Hyrcanus carefully
repaired the damage done to the walls (6 Mace,
xxi. 18); and it may have been at this time that
he enlarged the Baris or fortress adjoining the
northwest wall of the Temple inclosure, which bad
been founded by his father, and which he used for
bis own residence and for the custody of his sacred
vestments worn aa high-priest (Joseph. Ant. xviii.
4, § 3).
During the rest of his long and successful reign
John Hyrcanus resided at Jerusalem, ably admin-
istering the government from thence, and regularly
fulfilling the duties of the high-priest (see 5 Mace,
xxili. 3; Joseph. Ant. xiii. 10, § 3). The great sects
«f Pharisees and Sadducees first appear in prom-
jience at this period. Hyrcanus, as a Maccabee,
had belonged to the Pharisees, but an occurrence
which happened near the end of his reign caused
him to desert them and join the Sadducees, and
even to persecute bis former friends (see the story
in Joseph. Ant. xiii. 10, J 6; S Mace. xxv. 7-11;
Milman, ii. 73). He died in peace and honor (Ant.
xiii. 10, § 7). There is no mention of his burial,
but it is nearly certain that the " monument of
John the high-priest," which stood near the north-
west corner of the city and is so frequently referred
to in the account of the final siege, was his tomb;
at least no other high-priest of the name of John
is mentioned. [Huhi-phiest, tt. 1074.]
Hyrcanus was succeeded (b. c. 107) by his son
Aristobulus." Like his predecessors he was high-
priest; but unlike them he assumed the title as well
• The ado) tkm of Greek names by tbs family of
the HaoeaOMs, originally ths great opponents of every-
Uung Greek, shows h^w mnoh and how unconsciously
BBS Jews were now tsparting from their ancient
rtaadarls.
* Vor the story of his death, and the aeeompUsh-
aaaf of the prediction that he should die in Street)*
JERUSALEM
aa the power of a king (Joseph. Ant xfii. It, f J|
6 Mace, xxrii. 1 ). Aristobuhts resided in the Beria
(Ant. xiii. 11, § %). A passage, dark and subter-
raneous (B. J. i. 3, § 8), led from the Baris to
the Temple; one part of this passage was canej
" Strata's tower," and here Antigen us, brother of
Aristobulus, was murdered by his order.' Aristo-
bulus died very tragically immediately after, having
reigned but one year. His brother Alexander Jan
nasus (R. c. 105), who succeeded him, was mainl)
engaged in wars at a distance from Jerusalem,
returning thither however in the intervals (Ant. xiii.
13, § 3, ltd Jin.). About the year 95 the animoi*
itiea of the Pharisees and Saddncees came to aa
alarming explosion. Like bis father, Alexander
belonged to the Sadducees. The Pharisees bad
never forgiven Hyrcanus for having deserted them,
and at the feast of Tabernacles, as the king was
officiating, they invited the people to pelt him with
the citrons which they carried in the feast (Joseph.
Ant. xiii. 13, § 5: comp. 10, § 5; Reland, Ant. iv.
S, { 9). Alexander retaliated, and six thousand
persons were at that time killed by his orders. But
the dissensions lasted for six years, and no fewer
than 50,000 are said to have lost their Hves (Ant.
xiii. 13, J 5; 5 Mace. xxix. 2). These severities
made him extremely unpopular with both parties,
and led to their inviting the aid of Demetrius
Kuchterus, king of Syria, against him. The actions
between them were fought at a distance from Jeru-
salem ; but the city did not escape a share in the
horrors of war; for when, after some fluctuations,
Alexander returned successful, he crucified publicly
800 of his opponents, and had their wives and chil-
dren butchered before their eyes, while he and bis
concubines feasted in sight of the whole scene
(Ant xiii. 14, § 2). Such an iron sway aa this was
enough to crush all opposition, and Alexander
reigned till the year 79 without further disturbances.
He died while besieging a fortress called Ragabr,
somewhere beyond Jordan. He is commemorated
as having at the time of his disputes with the
people erected a wooden screen round the altar and
the sanctuary (rods), as fax as the parapet of the
priests' court, to prevent access to him as he was
ministering « (Ant. xiii. 13, § 5). The " monnnent
of king Alexander " was doubtless his tomb. It
stood somewhere near, but outside, the north wall
of the Temple (B. J. v. 7, $ 3), probably not far
from the situation of the tombs of the old kings
(see section III. p. 1325). In spite of opposition
the Pharisees were now by far the moat powerful
party in Jerusalem, and Alexander had therefor*
before his death instructed his queen, Alexandra —
whom he left to succeed him with two situ — to
commit herself to them. She did so, snd the eon-
sequence was that though the feuds b e tween ths
two great parties continued at their height, yet the
government, being supported by the strongest, was
always secure. The elder of the two sons, Hyrcenus,
was made high-priest, and Aristobulus had the
oommand of the army. The queen lived till the
year 70. On her death, Hyrcanus attempted to
take the crown, but was opposed by his brother, as
Tower — «.«. Cawarea— compare tbs well-known story
of ths death of Henry IT. In Jsrusalam, t c. the Jan
salsm Chamber at Westminster.
' Jossphus's words are not very ciieJ : — >» » > «» m
fiiAow npt re* paps* ««1 rW m*r flaAJ frn f s |ts\u>
roS fprymv, tit 1* parses ifs> ro>< iterinv Stevens
Digitized by
Google
JKBCSALHM
(hsan ha three month* ha yielded iu possession,
AffatBonlna becoming king in the year 69. Before
Alexandra'! death aha had impriioned the family
rf Aristobulm in the Bans (B. J. i. 5, $ 4). There
tea Hyrcana* took refuge during the negotiations
with hi* brother about the kingdom, and from
thence had attacked and vanquished hi* opponent*
who were collected in the Temple (Ant. xiv. 1, § 3).
Joaephua here first speaks of it as the Acropolis,"
and aa being above the Temple (iwip tou Itpov)-
After the reconciliation, Aristobulus took possession
of the royal palace (to. QcurlKtta)- This can hardly
be other than the " palace of the Asmooeans," of
which Joaephua gives aome notices at a subsequent
adt of the history (Ant. xx. 8, $ 11; B. J. ii. 16,
( 3) From these it appears that it was situated
■est of the Temple, on the extreme highest point
of the upper city (the modern Zion) immediately
facing the aouthweat angle of the Temple inclosure,
and at the west end of the bridge which led from
the Temple to the Xystua.
The brothers soon quarreled again, when Hyr-
eanua called to his assistance Aretes, king of Da-
masnis Before this new enemy Aristobulus fled
to Jerusalem and took refuge within the fortifica-
tions of the Temple. Aud now was witnessed the
strange anomaly of the high-priest in alliance with
a heathen king besieging the priests in the Temple.
Suddenly a new actor appears on the scene; the
siege is interrupted and eventually raised by the
interference of Seanrua, one of Pompey's lieuten-
ant*, to whom Aristobulus paid 400 talents for the
renef. This was in the year 65. Shortly after,
Pompey himself arrived at Damascus. Both the
tou th a s came before him in person (Ant. xiv. 8,
}i), and were received with moderation and civility.
Ariatobolua could not make up hi* mind to submit,
ad after a good deal of shuffling betook himself
to Jerusalem and prepared for resistance. Pompey
by way of Jericho. Aa he approached
Aristobulus, who found the city too
i divided for effectual resistance, met him and
offered a large sum of money and surrender. Pom-
pey sent forward Gabinius to take possession of the
pbiaa; hot the bolder party among the adherent*
of Ariatobabj* bad meantime gained the ascend-
ency, and he found the gates closed. Pompey on
that threw the king into chains and advanced on
Jerusalem. Hyrcanus waa In possession of the city
and received the invader with open arms. The
Temple on the other hand was held by the party
of Ariatoburas, which included the priests (xiv. 4,
f 3). They cut off the bridges and causeways
wmeh connected the Temple with the town on the
wast and north, and uie p a i e d for an obstinate de-
fense, Pompey put a garrison into the palace of
the Aamoneana, and into otner positions in the
upper city, and fortified the huiises adjacent to the
Temple. The north ride was the most practicable,
aad then he commenced hi* Attack. But even
urn the hill wis intrenched b.r an artificial ditch
a addition to the very deep natural valley, and waa
tafcnded by lofty towers on the wall of the Temple
[AM. xiv. 4, § 2; B. J. 1. 7, § 1).
Pompey appears to have stationed some part of
hi* force on the high ground west of the city
4 caeph. B. J. v. 12, $ 2), but he himself commanded
at the north. The first effort* of his
JERUSALEM
1297
« Bs also bare appuat to it the tarm fcxniptor (Am
bBL 10, *, 6 ; B. I I. 5, { 4), vroeh he commonly on*
rfortiassa*.
8-
soldiers were devoted to filling up th« ditch » and
the valley, and to constructing the banks on which
to place the military engines, for which purpose
they cut down all the timber in the environ-.
These hod in the mean time been sent for from
Tyre, aud as soon aa the banks were sufficiently
raised the batiste were set to work to throw stones
over the wall into the crowded court* of the Tem-
ple ; and lofty towers were erected, from which to
discharge arrows and other missiles. But these
operations were not carried on without great diffi-
culty, for the wall of the Temple was thronged
with slingers, who moat seriously interfered with
the progress of the Romans, l'ompey, however,
remarked that on the seventh day the Jews regu-
larly desisted from fighting (Ant. xiv. 4, § 2; Strab.
xvi. p. 763), and this afforded the Romans a great
advantage, for it gave them the opportunity ot
moving the engines and towers nearer the walls,
filling up the trenches, adding to the banks, and
in other ways making good the damage of the past
six days without the slightest molestation. In fact
Joaephus gives it as his opinion, that but for the
opportunity thus afforded, the necessary works
never oould have been completed. In the Temple
itself, however fierce the attack, the daily sacrifices
and other ceremonials, down to the minutest detail,
were never interrupted, and the priests pursued
their duties undeterred, even when men were struck
down near them by the stones and arrows of the
besiegers. At the end of three months the lie-
siegers had approached so close to the wall that the
battering rams could be worked, and a breach was
effected in the largest of the towers, through which
the Romans entered, and after an obstinate resist
anee and loss of life, remained masters of the Tem-
ple. Many Jews were killed by their countrymen
of Hyrcanus's party who had entered with the Ro-
mans; some in their confusion set fire to the houses
which abutted on a portion of the Temple walls,
and perished in the flames, while others threw
themselves over the precipices (B. J. 1. 7, $ 4).
The whole number slain is reported by Joaephua' at
12,000 (Ant. xiv. 4, § 4). During the assault the
priests maintained the same calm demeanor which
they had displayed during the siege, aud were act
ually slain at their duties while pouring their drink-
offerings and burning their incense (B. J. i. 7, $ 4).
It should be observed that in the account of this
siege the Bans is not once mentioned ; the attack
was on the Temple alone, instead of on the fortress,
as in Titus's siege. The inference is that at this
time it waa a small and unimportant adjunct to the
main fortification* of the Temple.
Pompey and many of his people explored the
recesses of the Temple, and the distress of the Jew*
waa greatly aggravated by their holy places being
thus exposed to intrusion and profanation (B. J.
i. 7, § 6). In the sanctuary were found the great
golden vessels — the table of shew-bread, the candle*
stick, the censers, aud other article* proper to that
place. But what most astonished the intruders,
on passing beyond the sanctuary and exploring
the total darkness of the Holy of Holies, was to
find in the adytum neither image nor shrine. It
evidently caused much remark ("indevnlgatum"),
and was the one fact regarding the Temple which
the historian thought worthy of preservation —
ft The sun of the ditch 1» given by Strab- as (0 fas
deep and SO wide (xvi. p. 768).
Digitized by
Google
129? JERUSALEM
* muss intus deum effigie ; vacuam ndem *t insole '
■raws " (Tacitus, Ilia. v. 9). Pompey'* conduct ]
on this occasion doe* him great credit. Ha left
the treasures tbua exposed to hi* view — even the |
•pice* and the money iii the treasury — untouched, j
sr-f hia fiamin-.itiuii over, he ordered the Temple
to tie cleansed and purified from the bodies of the .
•bun, and the daily worahip to be resumed. HjT- '
cuius waa continued in hia high-priesthood, but '
without the title of king [Ant. xx. 10); a tribute
waa laid upon the city, the walla were entirely de-
molished (laaaa-miaax . . . . t4 r«iVf weVra.
Strabo, xvi. p. 703), and Pompey took hi* depar-
ture for Kome, carrying with him Ariatobulua, hi*
aou* Alexander and Antigonus, and hia two daugh-
ter*. The Temple wa* taken in the year 63, in
the 3d month (Sivsn), on the day of a great fast
(Ant. xir. 4, § 3); probably that lor Jeroboam,
which wa* held on the 23d of that month.
During the next few years nothing occurred to
affect Jerusalem, the struggles which desolated the
unhappy Palestine during that time having taken
place away from it* vicinity. In 56 it wa* made
the seat of one of the five senate* or Sanhedrim, to
which under the constitution of Gabiniu* the civil
?>wer of the country waa for a time committed.
wo year* afterward* (u. c. 54) the rapaciou* Cras-
•ua visited the city on hi* way to Parthia, and
plundered it not only of the money which Pompey
had spared, but of a considerable treasure accumu-
lated from the contribution* of Jews throughout the
world, in all a sum of 10,000 talents, or about
2,000,000£ sterling. The pillage wa* aggravated
by the bet of hia having first received from the
priest in charge of the treasure a most costly beam
of solid gold, on condition that everything else
mould be (pared (AnL xiv. 7, § 1).
During thia time Hyrcanus remained at Jeruaa-
aalem, acting under the advice of Antipater the
Idumean, hi* chief minuter. The assistance which
they rendered to Mitliridate*, the ally of Julius
Cesar, in the Egyptian campaign of 48-47, in-
duced Caesar to confirm Hyrcanus in the high-
priesthood, and to restore him to the civil govern-
ment under the title of Ethnarch (Ant. sir. 10).
At the *ame time be rewarded Antipater with the
procuratorship of Judaea, [Ant. xir. 8, § 5), and
allowed the wall* of the city to be rebuilt (AnL
sir. 10, § 4) The year 47 i* also memorable for
the first appearance of Antipater'* *on Herod in
'eruaalem, when, a youth of fifteen (or more prob-
My" 25), he characteristically overawed the as-
sembled Sanhedrim. In 43 Antipater was mur-
dered in the palace of Hyrcanus by one Malichus,
who waa very soon after himself alain by Herod
(Ant. xir. 11, §§ 4. 6). The tumults and revolt*
consequent on these murder* kept Jerusalem in
commotion for some time (B. J. i. 12). But a
more serious danger waa at hand. Antigouua, the
younger and now the only surviving sou of Aristob-
ulus, suddenly appeared in the country supported
by • Parthian army. Many of the Jews of the
tuirict about Carmel and Joppa ' nocked to him,
■ad be instantly msde for Jerusalem, giving out
that his only object wa* to pay a visit of devotion
to the Temple (5 Msec. xlix. 5). So sudden was
bis approach, that he got into the city and reached
the palace in the upper market-place — the modern
Zhn — without resistance. Here however be wss
JERUSALEM
met by Hyrcanus and Phaaaehis (Herod's I
with a strong party of soldiers. A fight enaasd,
which ended in Antigonus being driven over tat
bridge into the Temple, where he wa* conatautl]
harassed and annoyed by Hyrcanus and Pbasaelua
from the city. Pentecost arrived, and the city,
and the suburb* between it and the Temple, wen
crowded with ppatsnt* and others who had come
up to keep the feast- Herod too arrived, and with
a small party had taken charge of the palace.
Phssseius kept the wall. Antigonus' people seem
(though the account is very obscure) to have got
out through the Baria into the part north of tb*
Temple. Here Herod sod Phasselus attacked,
dispersed, snd cut them up. Pacorua, the Par-
thian general, wss lying outside the walk, snd at
the earnest request of Antumnua, he and 600 hone
were admitted, ostensibly to mediate. The result
wss, that Phasaelu* and Hyrcanu* were outwitted,
and Herod overpowered, and the Parthian* got
possession of the place. Antigonus was made king,
and as Hyrcanus knelt a suppliant before him, the
new king — with sll the wrongs which his lather
and himself had suffered full in hi* mind — bit off
the ear* of hi* uncle, ao aa effectually to incapaci-
tate him from ever again taking the high priest-
hood. Phasaelu* killed him—df in prison. Herod
alone escaped (Ant. xir. 13).
Thus did Jerusalem (B. c. 40) find itself in the
hands of the Parthian*.
In three month* Herod returned from Kama
king of Judaea, and in the beginning of 39 appeared
before Jerusalem with a force of tinm«"« t com-
manded by Silo, snd pitched hia camp on the west
side of the city (B. J. i. 16, f 6). Other occur-
rences, however, called him away from the siege at
this time, and for more than two years be was
occupied elsewhere. In the mean time Antigonus
held the city, and had dismissed his Parthian allies.
In 37 Herod appeared again, now driven to fury by
the death of hia favorite brother Joseph, whose dead
body Antigonus had shamefully mutilated (B. J. i.
17, § 2). He came, aa Pompey had done, from
Jericho, and, like Pompey, be pitched his camp snd
made his attack on the north aide of the Temple.
The general circumstance* of the «iege *eem also
very much to have resembled the former, except
that there were now two walls north of the Temple,
and that the driving Oi mines was a great feature
in the siege operation* (B.J.i. 18, J 1 ; AnL ax.
16, § 2). The Jew* distinguished theuiaelve* by
the same reckless courage ss before; and although
it is not expressly said that the service* of the
Temple were carried on with such minute regularity
as when they excited the astonishment of Pompey,
yet we may infer it from the fact that, during tbr
hottest of the operations, the besieged desired a
short truce in which to bring in animals for sacri-
fice (Ant. xiv. 16, § 2). In one respect — the fac-
tions which raged among the besieged — Uiia siege
somewhat foreshadows that of Titus.
r'or a short time after the commencement of tbs
operation* Herod absented himself for his marriag*
at Samaria with Mariamne. On his return he waa
joined by Sosius, the Roman governor of Syria,
with a force of from 50,000 to 60,000 men, ant
the siege was then resumed in earnest {AnL xhr
16).
The first of the two walla waa taken in fart)
■ lea ths nuoa ury»d by Prideux, ad lot.
• At that tuns, sad uvea as lata as lb* Crusade*,
called tbs Woodland or the Forest cnuttttr (i
wsoh Ant xiv. 18, 1 81
Digitized by
Google
JERUSALEM
Jays, and the second in fifteen more.* Thtn the
setter jourt of the Temple, and the lower city —
jing in the hollow between the Temple and the
nodern Zion — ni taken, and the Jews were driveu
Into the inner parte of the Temple and to the upper
market-place, which communicated therewith by the
bridge. At this point some delay seema to hare
arisen, as the siege is distinctly said to have occu-
pied in all fire months (B. J. i. 18, § 2; see also
Ani. xi*. 16, § 2). At last, losing patience, Herod
allowed the place to be stormed; and an indis-
criminate massacre ensued, especially in the narrow
streets of the lower city, which was only terminated
at his urgent and repeated solicitations.' Herod
and his men entered first, and in his anxiety to
prerent any plunder and desecration of the Temple,
he himself hastened to the entrance of the sanctuary,
and there standing with a drawn sword in his hand,
threatened to cut down any of the Roman soldiers
who attempted to enter.
Through all this time the Bans had remained
impregnable: there Antigonus bad taken refuge,
and thence, when the whole of the city was in the
power of the conquerors, he descended, and in an
abject manner craved bis lire from Sosius. It was
granted, but only to be taken from bim later at the
order of Antony.
Antigonus was thus disposed of, but the Asmo-
nean party was still strong both in numbers and
influence. Herod's first care was to put it down.
The chiefs of the party, including the whole of the
Sanhedrim but two, c were put to death, and their
property, with that of others whose lives were spared,
was seised. The appointment of the high-priest
was the next consideration. Hyrcnnus returned
from Parthia soon after the conclusion of the siege;
but even if his mutilation had not incapacitated
him for the office, it would have been unwise to
appoint a member of the popular family. Herod
therefore bestowed the office (». c. 38) on one
Ananel, a former adherent of his, and a Babylonian
Jew (Ant. XT. 3, § 1), a man without interest or
influence in the politics of Jerusalem (xv. 2, $ 4).
Ananel was soon displaced through the machina-
tions of Alexandra, mother of Herod's wife
Mariamne, who prevailed on him to appoint her
son Aristobulus, a youth of sixteen. But the young
Asmonean was too warmly reoeived by the people
(B. J. i. 32, § 2) for Herod to allow him to remain.
Hardly had be celebrated his first feast before he
■as murdered at Jericbo, and then Anauel resumed
the office (Ant. xv. 3, § 3).
The intrigues and tragedies of the next thirty
yean are too complicated and too long to be treated
of hare. A general sketch of the events of Herod's
His will be (bund under his name, and other oppor-
tunities will occur I'or noticing them. Moreover,
a great part of these occurrences have no special
Ouonectiou with Jerusalem, and therefore have no
place in a brief notice, like the present, of those
laiugs which more immediately concern the city.
In many respects this period was a repetition of
thai of the Maccabees and Antiocbus Epipbanas.
o Than periods probably date from the return of
fserod with Sosius, and the resumption of mors arise
kjstulrjss.
* True be was one of the same not who at a r mar
sack of Jerusalem bad orled " Down with h. oywn with
I even to the ground ! " But times bad altered since
Jeaa.
< Tbars two were HDlal and Bhammal. renowned la
JERUSALEM 1299
True, Herod was more politic, and man pradssst.
and also probably bad more sympathy with tht
Jewish character than Antiocbus. But the spirit
of stern resistance to innovation and of devotion to
the law of Jehovah burnt no less fiercely in the
breasts of the people than it had done before ; and
it is curious to remark how every attempt on
Herod's part to introduce foreign customs was met
by outbreak, and how futile were all the benefits
which he conferred both on the temporal and
ecclesiastical welfare of the people when these ob-
noxious intrusions were in question.''
In the year 34 the city was visited by Cleopatra,
who, having accompanied Antony to the Euphrates
wss now returning to Kgypt through her estates si
Jericho (Ant. xv. 4, $ 2).
In the spring of 31, the year of the battle of
Actium, Judaea was visited by an earthquake, the
effects of which appear to hare been indeed tre-
mendous: 10,000 (Ant. xv. 5, § 2) or, according
to another account (B. J. i. 19, § 3), 20,000
persons were killed by the fall of buildings, and an
immense quantity of cattle. 'Hie panic at Jeru-
salem was very severe; but it was calmed by the
arguments of Herod, then departing to a campaign
on the east of Jordan for the interests of Cleopatra.
Tbe following year was distinguished by the
death of Hyrcnnus, who, though more than 80
years old, was killed by Herod, ostensibly for s
treasonable correspondence with the Arabians, but
really to remove the last remnant of the Asmonean
race, who, in the fluctuations of the times, and in
Herod's absence from his kingdom, might hare
bean dangerous to him. He appears to have re-
sided at Jerusalem since his return ; and bis accu-
sation was brought before the Sanhedrim (Ant xv.
6, i 1-3).
Mariamne was put to death in tbe year 29,
whether iu Jerusalem or in the Alexandreion, in
whioh she had been placed with her mother when
Herod left for his interview with OcUvius, is not
certain. But Alexandra was now in Jerusalem
again; and in Herod's absence, ill, at Samaria
(Sebaste), she began to plot for possession of the
Maris, and of another fortress situated in the city.
The attempt, however, cost her her life. The same
year saw the execution of Costobaraa, husband of
Herod's sister Salome, and of several other persons
of distinction (Ant. xv. 7, $ 8-10).
Herod now began to euoourage foreign practices
and usages, probably with the view of " counter-
balancing by a strong Grecian party tbe turbulent
and exclusive spirit of the Jews." Amongst his
acts of this description was the building of a
theatre* at Jerusalem (Ant. xv. 8, § 1). Of its
situation no information is given, nor have any
indications yet been discovered. It was ornamented
with the names of the victories of Ootsvius, and
with trophies of arms conquered in the wars of
Herod. Quinquennial games in honor of Coaeai
were instituted on the most magnificent scale, with
racing, boxing, musical contests, fights of gladiators
and wild beasts. The aealous Jews took fire at
the Jewish literature as the founders of the two gnat
rival schools of doctrine and practice.
<f ThJ principles and results of ths wools of this
later period an ably summed up In afarivels'B Roman,
IU., chap. 28.
• Tbe amphitheatre " In the plain " —— "~ir1 hi
this passage Is commonly supposed to bare been alas
at Jen* em (Barclay. CUy c/ Unas Car. 174, and
Digitized by
Google
1S00 JBRUbAU£M
then innovations, but tbeir wrath m specially
excited by the trophies round the theatre at Jeru-
salem, which they believed to contain figure* of
men. Even when shown that their suspicions were
groundless, the; remained discontented. The spirit
sf the old Msceabees was still alive, and Herod only
narrowly escaped assassination, while his would-be
assassins endured torments and death with the
greatest heroism. At this time he occupied the old
palace of the Asiuoneaus, which crowned the eastern
face of the upper city, and stood adjoining the
Xystus at the end of the bridge which formed the
communication between the south part of the Temple
and the upper city (xv. 8, § & ; comp. xx. 8, § 11,
and B. J. ii. 16, § 3). This palace was not yet so
magnificent as he afterwards made it, but it was
already most richly furnished (xv. 9, § 2). Herod
had now also completed the improvements of the
Bans — the fortress built by John Hyrcanus on the
foundations of Simon Maccabssus — which ha had
enlarged and strengthened at great expense, and
named Antonia — after his friend Hark Antony."
A description of this celeliratetl fortress will be
given in treating nf the Th.mtlk, of which, as
reconstructed by Herod, it formed an intimate part.
It stood at the west end of the north wall of the
Temple, and was inaccessiMe on all sides but that.
See section III p. 1318.
The year 2& — the next after the attempt on
Herod's life in the theatre — was one of great mis-
fortunes. A long drought, followed by unproduc-
tive seasons, involved Judtea in famine, and its
usual consequence, a dreadful pestilence (Ant. xv.
9, § 1 ). Herod took a noble and at the same time
a most politic course, lie sent to Egypt for corn,
sacrificing for the purchase the costly decorations
of his palace and his silver and gold plate. He was
thus able to make regular distribution of corn and
clothing, on an enormous scale, for the present
necessities of the people, as well as to supply seed
for the next year's crop (Ant. xv. 9, $ 2). The
result of this was to remove to a great degree the
animosity occasioned by his proceedings in the
previous year.
In this year or the next, Herod took another
wife, the daughter of an obscure priest of Jerusalem
named Simon. Shortly before the marriage Simon
was made high-priest in the room of Joshua, or
Jesus, the son of Phaneus, who appears to have
succeeded Ananel, and was now deposed to make
way for Herod's future father-in-law (Ant. xv. 9,
§ 8 ). It was probably on the occasion of this mar-
riage that be built a new and extensive palace'
immediately adjoining the old wall, at the north-
west comer of the upper city (B. J. v. 4, f 4). about
the spot now occupied by the Latin convent, in
which, as memorials of his connection with Caesar
and Agrippa, a large apartment — superior m size
to the Sanctuary of the Temple — was named after
each (Ant ibid.; B. J. i. 21, § 1). This palace
was very strongly fortified ; it communicated with
the three great towers on the wall erected shortly
«fter, and it became the citadel, the special fortress
then) ; but tb's is not a necessary rafcrrnce. The
ford witlov is generally used of the plain of the Jordan
ivnr Jericho, where we know then was an amphi-
(nserre (5. /. i. 88, § 8). From another passage
t B. J 1. 21, % t It appears there was one at Ca ss re s
(Oil the ntier it Jerusalem is mentioned in B. J. Ii.
l.M
• lbs BStae was probably net bes t ow ed laser than
JERUSALEM
BoW ttWp«w, B. J. t. 5, § 8), of the cpsjar s%
A road led to it from one of the gates — natu rals]
the northern — in the west wall of the Temple in.
closure (Ant xv. 14, § 5). But all Herod's works
in Jerusalem were eclipsed by the rebuilding of thf
Temple in more than its former extent and mag-
nificence. He announced his intention in the year
19, probably when the people were collected in
Jerusalem at the Passover. At first it met with
some opposition from the fear that what he had
begun he would not be able to finish, and the con-
sequent risk involved in demolishing the old Temple.
This he overcame by engaging to make all the
nec e ss a ry preparations before pulling down any part
of the existing buildings. Two years appear to
have been occupied in these preparations — among
which Josephus mentions the teaching of some of
the priests and Levites to work as masons and car-
penters — and then the work began (xv. 11, $ 9).
Both Sanctuary and Cloisters — the latter double
in extent and far larger and loftier than before —
were built from the very foundations (B. J. i. 21,
S 1; Ant. xv. 11, § 3). [Tkmi-ue.] The holy
house itself (raor), i. e. the Porch, Sanctuary, and
Holy of Holies — was finished in a year and a hah*
(xv. 11, § 6). Its completion on the anniversary
of Herod's inauguration, n. c. 16, was celebrated
by lavish sacrifices and a great feast. Immediately
after this, Herod made a journey to Rome to fetch
home his two sons, Alexander and Aristobulus —
with whom be returned to Jerusalem, apparently
in the spring of 15 (Ant. xvi. 1, § 2). In the
autumn of this year he was visited by bis friend
Marcus Agrippa, the favorite of Augustus. Agrippa
was well received by the people of Jerusalem, whom
he propitiated by a sacrifice of a hundred oxen and
by a magnificent entertainment (Ant. xvi. 9, § 1).
Herod left again in the beginning of 14 to join
Agrippa in the Black Sea. On his return, in the
autumn or winter of the same year, he addressed
the people assembled at Jerusalem — for the Feast
of Tabernacles — and remitted them a fourth of the
annual tax (xv. 2, { 4). Another journey was fol-
lowed by a similar assembly in the year 11, at which
time Herod announced Antipater as his immediate
successor (xvi. 4, § 6; B. J. i. 23, § 4).
About B. c. 9 — eight years from the commence-
ment — the court and cloisters of the Temple were
finished (Ant xv. 11, § 5), and the bridge between
the south cloister and the upper city — demolished
by Pompey — was doubtless now rebuilt with that
massive masonry of which some remains still sur-
vive (see the wood-cut, p. 1314). At this time
equally magnificent works were being carried on in
another part of the city, namely, in the old wall at
the northwest corner, contiguous to the jiaraee,
where three towers of great size and magnificence
were erected on the wall, and one as an outwork al
a small distance to the north. The latter was
called Psephinus (B. J. v. 4, §§ 2, 3, 4), the three
former were Hippicus, after one of his friends —
Pbaaaehu, after his brother— and Mariamne, after
his queen (Ant xvi. 6, § 2; B. J. v. 4, % 8). *<*
a. 0. 84 or 88 — the data of Herod's closest r atastoas
with Antony : and we may therefore infer that sot
alterations to the fortress bad been at least 7 or I
in progress.
* The old palace of the Asmoneana eonltwsfl s» k)
known ss " the royal palace," re fiowiUtm (.4a*. n
8, §11)
Digitized by
Google
JKKU8A1JSM
tions mb section HT. p. 1317. Pbasaelus
tppears to hare been erected first of the three (AnL
nil. 10, § 2), though it cannot have beer begun
it the time of Fhasaelus's death, aa that tock place
some years before Jerusalem came into Herod's
bands.
About this time occurred — if it occurred at all,
which seems more than doubtful (Prideaux, Anno
131) — Herod's unsuccessful attempt to plunder
the sepulchre of David of the remainder of the
treasures left there by Hyrcanus (Joseph. AnL xvi.
T, S 1).
In or about the year 7 occurred the affair of the
Golden Eagle, a parallel to that of the theatre, and,
like that, important, as showing how strongly the
Maccabeean spirit of resistance to innovations on
the Jewish law still existed, and how vain were any
concessions in the other direction in the presence
of such innovations. Herod had fixed a large
golden eagle, the symbol of the Roman empire, of
which Judas was now a province, over the entrance
to the Sanctuary, probably at the same time that
he inscribed the name of Agrippa on the gate (B.
J. i. 21, §8). As a breach of the 2d command-
ment — not aa a badge of dependence — this had
excited the indignation of the Jews, and especially
of two of the chief Rabbis, who instigated their
disciples to tear it down. A false report of the
king's death was made the occasion of doing this
in open day, and in the presence of a large num-
ber of people. Being taken before Herod, the Kab-
bis defended their conduct and were burnt alive.
The high-priest Matthias was deposed, and Joazar
look his place.
This was the state of things in Jerusalem when
Herod died, in the year 4 b. c. of the common
chronology (Dionysian era), but really a few months
after the birth of Christ. [Jksus Chhist.]
The government of Judasa, and therefore of Jeru-
salem, had by the will of Herod been bequeathed
to Arcbelaus. He lost no time after the burial of
his father in presenting himself in toe Temple,
and addressing the people on the affairs of the
kingdom — a display of confidence and modera-
tion, strongly in contrast to the demeanor of the
late king. It produced an instant effect on the
excited minds of the Jews, still smarting from the
failure of the affair of the eagle, and from the chas-
tisement it had brought upon them; and Arcbe-
laus was besieged with clamors for the liberation
of the numerous persons imprisoned by the late
long, and for remission of the taxes. As the peo-
ple collected for the evening sacrifice the matter
became more serious, and assumed the form of a
public demonstration, of lamentation for the two
martyrs, Judas and Matthias, and indignation
against the intruded high-priest. So loud and
shrill were the cries of lament that they were heard
JERTJSAUBM
1801
a The determination of the locality of the legion
during this aSUr Is most pooling. On the one hand,
the position of the Insurgents, who lay completely
round 'be Temple, South, East, North, and West, and
who are expressly said thus to have hemmed m the
Romans on all sides (Am. xvil. 10, } 2), and also the
sxpression used about the sally of the legion, namely,
hat they " leaped out " into the Temple, m, u. ywut
nevilahly to the Antonia On the other hand, SaM-
sus gave the signal for the attack from the town
■las {Ant. Ibid. ). Bnl Pbuaeius was on the old
I to Ibrod's palace, fully halt a mile, as the
. frees the Tnuple — a strange osstauee far a
over the whole city. Archelaua meanwhile I
rized and promised redress when his gorcrnmer,
should be confirmed by Rome. The Passover waw
dose at hand, and the city was fast filling with thi
multitudes of rustics and of pilgrims (In ttjj farr-
popias), who crowded to the great Feast (B. J. ii.
1, J 3; Ant. xvii. 9, § 3). These strangers, not
being able or willing to find admittance into the
houses, pitched their tents (robs airr60i iettnvtt
kotos) on the open ground around the Temple
(Ant. ibid.). Meanwhile the tumult in the Temple
itself was maintained and increased daily; a mul-
titude of fanatics never left the courts, but con-
tinued there, incessantly clamoring and impre-
cating.
Longer delay in dealing with such a state of
things would have been madness; n small party of
soldiers had already been roughly handled by the
mob (B. J. ii. 1, § 3), and Archiiaus at last did
what his father would have done at first. He de-
spatched the whole garrison, horse and foot, the
foot-soldiers by way of the city to clear the Temple,
the horse-soldiers by a detour round the level
ground north of the town, to surprise the pilgrims
on the eastern slopes of Moriah, and prevent their
rushing to the succor of the fanatics in the Temple.
The movement succeeded : 3,000 were cut up and
the whole concourse dispersed over the country.
During Arcbelaus' absence at Rome, Jerusalem
was in charge of SaMnua, the Roman procurator
of the province, and the tumults — ostensibly on
the occasion of some exactions of Sabinus, but
doubtless with the same real ground as before —
were rene w e d with worse results. At the next
feast, Pentecost, the throng of strangers was enor-
mous. They formed regular encampments round
the Temple, and on the western hill of the upper
city, and besieged Sabinus and his legion, who
appear to have been in the Antonia." At last the
Romans made a sally and cut their way into the
Temple. The struggle wss desperate, a great many
Jews were killed, the cloisters of the outer court
burnt down, and the sacred treasury plundered of
immense sums, but no reverses could quell the
fury of the insurgents, and matters were not ap-
peased till Varus, the prefect of the province, arrived
from the north with a large force and dispersed the
strangers. On this quiet was restored.
In the year 3 b. c. Archelaua returned from
Rome ethnarch of the southern province. Us im-
mediately displaced Joazar, whom his father had
made high-priest after the affair of the Eagle, and
put Joazar's brother Ekaaar in hie stead. This is
the only event affecting Jerusalem that is recorded
in the 10 years between the return of Arcbelaus and
his summary departure to trial at Rome (A. D. 6).
Judass was now reduced to an ordinary Roman,
province; the rroeurator of which resided, not At
Borneo comuunuor to be off from hb troops! The
only suggestion that occurs to the writer Is that Pba-
saelus vu the name not only of the tower on the
wall, but of the soutbeart corner turret of Antonia,
which we know to have been 20 cubits higher than
the other three (B./. v. 6, J 8). This would agree with
all the oiremmstanets of the narrative, and with the
account lbs' ««Mnus wss " m the highest tower of th»
fljitims ; ids very position occupied by Titus during
sue assault on the Temple from Antonia. But tbJf
suggestion is quite unsupported by any duvet est
Digitized by
Google
1802 JERUSALEM
'arusaleta, bat at Own on the coast (Joseph
dot. xviii. 8, $ 1). The lint appointed m Copo-
aius, who accompanied Quirinot to the country
immediately on the disgrace of Archelaus. Qulri-
oiu (the Cyhkmus of the N. T.) — now for the
second time prefect of Syria — was charged with
the unpopular meuure of the enrolment or assess-
ment of the inhabitant* of Judaea. Notwithstand-
ing the rbts which took place elsewhere, at Jeru-
salem the enrollment was allowed to proceed without
resistance, owing to the prudence of Joazar (Ant.
xviii. 1, § 1 ), again high-priest for a short time.
One of the first acts of the new governor had been
to take formal possession of the state vestments of
the high-priest, worn on the three Festivals and on
the Day of Atonement. Since the building of the
Doris by the Maccabees these robes had always
been kept there, a custom continued since its re-
construction by Herod. But henceforward tbey
were to be put up after use in an underground stone
chamber, under the seal of the priests, and in charge
of the captain of the guard. Seven days before
use they were brought out, to be consigned again
to the chamber after the ceremony was over (Joseph.
AnL xviii. 4, § 8).
Two incidents at once most opposite in their
character, and in their significance to that age and
to ourselves, occurred during the procuratorship of
Ooponius. tint, in the year 8, the finding of
Christ in the Temple. Annas had been made high-
priest about a year before. The second occurrence
must have been a most distressing one to the Jews,
unless they had become inured to such things.
But of this we cannot so exactly fix the date. It
was nothing less than the pollution of tin Temple
by some Samaritans, who secretly brought human
bones and strewed them about the cloisters during
the night of the Passover." Up to this time the
Samaritans had been admitted to the Temple; they
were henceforth excluded.
In or about A. v. 10, Ooponius was s u cceeded by
M. Ambiiius, and he by Annius Rufus. In 14,
Augustus died, and with Tiberius came a new pro-
curator — Val. Gratus, who held office till 38, when
be was replaced by Pontius 1'ilate. During this
period the high-priests had been numerous, 6 but it
Is only necessary here to say' that when Pilate ar-
rived at his government the office was held by
Joseph Caiaphas, who had been appointed but a
few months before. The freedom from disturbance
which marks the preceding 30 years at Jerusalem
was probably due to the atnence of the Koman
troops, who were quartered at Cessna out of the
way of the fierce fanatics of the Temple. But
Pilate transferred the winter quarters of the army
to Jerusalem (Ant. xviii. 3, § 1 ), and the very first
day there was a collision. The offense was given
by the Koman standards — the images of the em-
peror and of the eagle — which by former com-
manders had been kept out of the city. A repre-
sentation was made to Pilate; and so obstinate was
the temper of the Jews on the point, that he
yielded, aud the standards were withdrawn (AnL
bid.). He afterwards, as if to try how far he
.night gu, consecrated some gilt shields — not con-
taining figures, but inscribed simply with the name
af the deity and of the donor — and bung them
an the pahee at J-romlem. This act again aroused
• Ha* moss cT pollution adopt* 1 by Joaiah
sslMskew shrhiM (sm p. 1287).
JERUSALEM
the resistance of the Jews; sod on anneal to lib*
rius they were removed (Phifo, irpoi riior, MwgsJ
li. 689).
Another riot was caused by his appropriatim of
the Corban — a sacred revenue arising from thi
redemption of vows — to the cost of an aqueduct
which he constructed for bringing water to the city
from a distance of 300 (AnL xviii. 3, § 3) or 400
(B. J. ii. 9, § 4) stadia. This aqueduct baa been
supposed to be that leading from " Solomon's
Pools " at Drtat to the Temple hill (Kraft, in
Bitter, hrdtmtde, Pal 376), but the distance of
TJrtas is against the identification.
A. D. 39. At the Passover of this year our Lord
made his first recorded visit to the city since his
boyhood (John ii. IS).
A. I). 33. At the Passover of this year, occurred
his crucifixion and resurrection.
In a. ». 37, Pilate having been recalled to Borne
Jerusalem was visited by ViteUius, the prefect of
Syria, at the time of the Passover. ViteDius con-
ferred two great benefits on the city. He remitted
the duties levied on produce, and be allowed the
Jews again to hare the free custody of the high-
priest's vestments. He removed Caiaphas from the
high-priesthood, and gave it to Jonathan son of
Annas. He then departed, apparently leaving a
Roman officer (Apoipapx") m charge of the An-
tonia (AnL xviii. 4, § 3). ViteUius was again at
Jerusalem this year, probably in the autumn, with
Herod the tetrarch (xviii. 5, $ 8); while there, he
again changed the high-priest, substituting for Jon-
athan, Theophilus his brother. The news of the
death of Tiberius and the accession of Caligula
reached Jerusalem at this time. Marcettus was ap-
pointed procurator by the new emperor. In the
following year Stephen was stoned. The Chris-
tians were greatly persecuted, and all, except the
Apostles, driven out of Jerusalem (Acta viii. I, xi.
19).
In A. D. 40, ViteUius was superseded by P. Pe-
tronius, who arrived in Palestine with an order to
place in the Temple a statue of Caligula. This
order was ultimately, by the intercession of Agrippa,
countermanded, but not until it bad roused the
whole people ss one man (AnL xviii. 8, §§ 3-9; and
see the admirable narrative of Milnian, Mist, of
Jem, bk. x.).
With the accession of Claudius in 41 came an
edict of toleration to the Jews. Agrippa arrived in
Palestine to take possession of his kingdom, and
one of his first acts was to visit the Temple, where
be offered sacrifice and dedicated the goiden chain
which the late emperor had presented him after his
release from captivity. It was hung over the Treas-
ury (Aid. xix. 6, § 1). Simon was made high-
priest; the house-tax was remitted.
Agrippa resided very much at Jerusalem, and
added materially to its prosperity and convenience.
The city hsd for some time been extending itself
towards the north, and a Urge suburb had corns
into existence on the high ground north of the
Temple, and outside of the " second wall " which
inclosed the northern part of the great central val-
ley of the city. Hitherto the outer portion of toil
suburb — which wss called Bezetha, or "New
Town," and had grown up very rapidly — was un-
protected by any formal wall, and practically ks»
* Their names and succession will be nasal 1
v, p. 107*. See also Anus.
Digitized by
Google
JEBTJSAIJBM
to attack.* This defenseless condition ai-
I the attention of Agrippa, who, like the fin*
Herod, m a great builder, and he commenced in-
doaing it in so substantial and magnificent a man-
ner aa to excite the auepicions of the Prefect, at
whose instance it was stopped by Claudius (Ant.
ibid.; B. J. ii. 11, § 6, v. 4, § 3). Subsequent.;
the Jews seem to have purchased permission to
complete the work (Tac flitt. v. 12; Joseph. B. J.
t. 4, J 3, adfin.). This new wall, the outermost
of the three which inclosed the city on the north,
started from the old wall at the Tower Hippicus,
near the N. W. corner of the city. It ran north-
ward, bending by a large circuit to the east, and
at last returning southward along the western brink
of the Valley of Kedron till it joined the southern
wall of the Temple. Thus it inclosed not only the
new suburb, but also the district immediately north
and northeast of the Temple on the brow of the
Kedron Valley, which up to the present date had
lain open to the country. The huge atones which
■till lie — many of them undisturbed — in the east
and south walls of the Haram area, especially the
southeast comer under the " Bath and Cradle of
Jesus," are parts of this wall. 6
The year 43 is memorable as that of St. Paul's
fi'.it visit to Jerusalem after his conversion. The
3 ear 44 began with the murder of St. James by
Agrippa (Acts zii. 1), followed at the Passover by
the imprisonment and escape of St. Peter. Shortly
after, Agrippa himself died. Cuspius Fadus arrived
from Rome as procurator, and Longinus as prefect
of Syria. An attempt was made by the Romans
to regain possession of the pontifical robes; but on
reference to the emperor the attempt was aban-
doned. In 45 commenced a severe famine which
lasted two years (liwald, Getch. ri. 40!*, note).
To the people of Jerusalem it was alleviated by the
presence of Helena, queen of Adiabene, a convert
to the Jewish faith, who visited the city in 46 and
imported corn and dried fruit, which she distrib-
uted to tbe poor (.Ant. xx. 8, § 5; 5, § 3). Dur-
ing her stay Helena constructed, at a distance of
three stadia from the city, a tomb, marked by three
pyramids, to which her remains, with those of her
son, were afterwards brought (Ant. xx. 4, § 3). It
was situated to the north, and formed one of the
points in the course of the new wall (B. J. v. 4, §
3). At the end of this year St. Paul arrived in
Jerusalem for the second time.
a. D. 48. Fadna was succeeded by Ventidius
Oumanus. A frightful tumult happened at the
Passover of this year, caused, as on former occa-
sions, by tbe presence of the Roman soldiers in the
Antonia and in the courts and cloisters of the Tem-
ple during the festival. Ten, or, according to an-
other account, twenty thousand, are said to have
met their deaths not by the sword, but trodden to
death bi the crush through the narrow lanes which
led from tbe Temple down into the city (Ant. xx.
5, J 8; B.J. ii. 13, § 1). Oumanus was recalled,
and Felix appointed in his room (Ant xx. 7,
| 1; B. J. ii. 12, § 8), partly at the -atanee of
Jocathan, Uw then high-priest (Ant. xx. 8, § 5).
.nCTt.1T HAT.TtHt
1808
« Ths statements of Josephus an not quite
suable. In one passu*? he says distinctly that Be-
etha lay quite naked (S. J. V. 4, J 2), In another that
had some kind of wall (Am. xtx. 7. } 2).
* •!*» she view wbleh claims a higher anttqntty Ihr
bass walls— making them coeval with tbe remaining
lasMstlons— sss { IT., Amer. ed. B. W.
A set of ferocious fanatics, whom Joetphas esffi
Sioarii, had lately begun to make their appearance
in the city, whose creed it was to rob and murder
all whom they judged hostile to Jewish interest*
Fehx, weary of the remonstrances of Jonathan ol
his vicious life, employed some of these wretches
to assassinate him He was killed in the Temple,
while sacrificing. The murder was never inquired
into, and, emboldened by this, the Sicarii repeated
their horrid act, thus adding, in the eyes of the
Jews, the awful crime of sacrilege to that of mur-
der (B. J. 11. 13, $ 3; Ant. ibid.). The city, too,
was filled with impostors pretending to inspiration,
but inspired only with hatred to all government
and order. Nor was tbe disorder confined to the
lower classes : the chief people of tbe city, the very
high-priests themselves, robbed the threshing-floors
of the tithes common to all the priests, and led
parties of rioters to open tumult and fighting Id
the streets (Ant. xx. 8, § 8). In fact, not only Je-
rusalem, but the whole country far and wide, was
in the most frightful confusion and insecurity.
At length a riot at Csesarea of the most serious
description caused the recall of Felix, and in the
end of SO or the beginning of SI, Porcius Festub
succeeded bun aa procurator. Festus was an able
and upright officer (B. J. ii. 14, § 1), and at the
same time conciliatory towards the Jews (Acts
xxv. 8). In the brief period of his administration
he kept down the robbers with a strong hand, and
gave the province a short breathing time. His in-
terview with St. Paul (Acts xxv., xxvi.) took place,
not at Jerusalem, but at Csnarea. On one occa-
sion both Festus and Agrippa came into collision
with the Jews at Jerusalem. Agrippa — who had
been appointed king by Nero in 63 — had added
an apartment to the old Asmonean palace on the
eastern brow of the upper city, which commanded
a full view into the interior of the courts of tor
Temple. This view the Jews intercepted by build
ing a wall on the west side of the inner quad-
rangle.' But the wall not only intercepted Agrippa,
it also interfered with the view from the outer
cloisters in which the Roman guard was stationed
during the festivals. Both Agrippa and Festus
interfered, and required it to be pulled down ; but
the Jews pleaded that once built it was a part of
the Temple, and entreated to be allowed to appeal
to Nero. Nero allowed their plea, but retained as
hostages the high-priest and treasurer, who had
headed the deputation. Agrippa appointed Joseph,
called Cabl, to the vacant pi iesthood. In 63 (prob-
ably) Festus died, and was succeeded by Albinus,
and he again very shortly after by Annas or Ana-
nus, son of the Annas before whom out Izird was
taken. In tbe interval a persecution was com-
menced against the Christiana at the instance of
the new high-priest, a rigid Sadducee, and St.
James and others were arraigned before the San
hedrim (Joseph. Ant. XX. 9, § 1). They werc
•'delivered to be stoned," but St James at any
rate appears not to have been killed till a few years
h'er. The act gave great offense to all, and cost
Annas his office after be had held it but threw
' So one in Jerusalem might build so high tbat hit
bouse could overlook the Temple It was the subject
of a distinct prohibition by ths Doctors. St Maimon
Ides, quoted by Otho, Lex. Rab. 286. Probably tbh
funuaaed one reason «ir so hnatH* a strtfc •eMsaOty
a peseta as Afrippa.
Digitized by
Google
1304
JERUSALEM
months. Jesua (Joshua), the son of Damneus,
succeeded him. Albinus began hit rule by en-
deavoring to keep down the Siearii and other dis-
turbers of the peace: and indeed he preserved
throughout a show of justice and vigor (Ant. xx.
11, {1), though in secret greedy and rapacious.
But before his recall he pursued his end more
openly, and priests, people, and governors alike
seem to have been lient on rapine and bloodshed :
rival high-priests headed bodies of rioters, and
stoned each other, and in the words of Josephus,
'•all things grew from worse to worse" {Ant. xx.
9, § 4). The evils were aggravated by two occur-
rences — first, the release by Albinus, before his
departure, of all the smaller criminals in the pris-
ons (Anl. xx. 9, § 5); and secondly, the sudden
discharge of an immense body of workmen, on the
completion of the repairs to the Temple (xx. 9, J
7). An endeavor was made to remedy the latter
by inducing Agrippa to rebuild the eastern cloister;
but he refused to undertake a work of such mag-
nitude, though he consented to pave the city with
marble. The repairs of a part of the sanctuary
that had fallen, and the renewal of the foundations
of some portions were deferred for the present, but
the materials were collected and stored in one of
the courts (B.J. v. 1, § 5).
Bad as Albinus had been, Cessius Horns, who
succeeded him in 65, was worse. In fact, even
Tacitus admits that the endurance of the oppressed
Jews could last no longer — " duravit patientia Ju-
dssis usque ad Uranium Klorum " (///«(. v. 10). So
great was his rapacity, that whole cities and dis-
tricts were desolated, and the robbers openly allowed
to purchase immunity in plunder. At tbe Passover,
probably in 66, when Cestius Uallus, the prefect of
Syria, visited Jerusalem, tbe whole assembled
people" besought him for redress; but without
effect. Florua'a next attempt was to obtain some
of the treasure from the Temple. He demanded
17 talents in the name of the emperor. The de-
mand produced a frantic disturbance, in the midst
of which be approached tbe city with both cavalry
and foot-soldiers. That night Florus took up his
quarters in the royal palace — that of Herod, at the
N. VV. corner of the city. On the following morn-
ing be took his seat on the Benin, and the high-
priest and other principal people being brought
before him, he demanded that the leaders of the
late riot should lie given up. On their refusal he
ordered his soldiers to plunder the upper city. This
order was but too faithfully carried out; every
house was entered and pillaged, and tbe Jews driven
out. In their attempt to get through the narrow
streets which lay in the valley between the upper
eity and the Temple, many were caught and slain,
others were brought before Horns, scourged, and
then crucified. No grade or class was exempt
Jew* who bore the Roman equestrian order were
among tbe victims treated with most indignity.
Queen Berenice herself (B. J. II. 16, $ 1) —
residing at that time In the Asmonean palace
in th< very midst of the slaughter — was so af-
fected by the scene, as to intercede in person and
barefoot before Florus, but without avail, and in
returning she was herself nearly killed, and only
escaped by taking refuge in her palace and calling
Ur guards about her. The further details of this
JERUSALEM
dreadful tumult must be passed over.* Hera wtt
foiled in his attempt to press through the old dtj
up into the Antonia — whence he would hare has
nearer access to the treasures — and finding that
the Jews had broken down the north and west
| cloisters where they joined tbe fortress, so as to cut
off the communication, he relinquished the attempt
and withdrew to Cessna (B. J. ii. IS, § 6).
I Cestius Gsllus, the prefect, now found it neces-
sary for him to visit the city in person. He sent
one of his lieutenants to announce him, but before
he himself arrived events had become past remedy.
Agrippa had shortly before returned from Alexan-
dria, and had done much to calm the people. At
his instance they rebuilt the part of the cloisters
which had been demolished, and collected the trib-
ute in arrear, but the mere suggestion from him
that they should obey Florus until he was repiacea,
produced such a storm that he was obliged U
leave the city (B. J. ii. 16, § 5; 17, § 1). The
seditious party in the Temple led by young FJea-
zar, son of Ananias, rejected the offerings of the
Koman emperor, which since the time of Julius
Csnsr had been regularly made. This, as a direct
renunciation of allegiance, was the true beginning
of the war with Rome (B. J. 11. 17, § 2). Such
acts were not done without resistance from the
older and wiser people. But remonstrance was
unavailing, the innovators would listen to no repre-
sentations. The peace party, therefore, despatched
some of their number to Florus and to Agrippa,
and the latter sent 3,000 horse-soldiers to assist in
keeping order.
Hostilities at once began. Tbe peace party,
headed by the high-priest, and fortified by Agrippa 's
soldiers, threw themselves into the upper city. The
insurgents held the Temple and the lower city. In
tbe Antonia was a small Koman garrison. Fierce
contests lasted for seven days, each aide endeavoring
to take poss es sion of the part held by the other.
At last the insurgents, who behaved with the
greatest ferocity, and were reinforced by a number
of Siearii, were triumphant. They gained the upper
city, driving all before them — tbe high-priest and
other leaders into vaults and sewers, the soldiers
into Herod's palace. The Asmonean palace, the
high- priest's house, and the repository of the
Archives — in Josephus's language, " the nerves
of the city " (B. J. ii. 17, § 6) — were set on fire.
Antonia was next attacked, and in two days they
had effected an entrance, sabred the garrison, and
burnt the fortress. The batistes and catapults
found there were preserved for future use (v. 6,
§ 3). The soldiers in Herod's palace were next
besieged ; but so strong were the walls, and so stout
tbe resistance, that it was three weeks before an
entrance could be effected. The soldiers were at
last forced from the palace into the three great
towers on the adjoining wall with great loss; and
ultimately were all murdered in the most treacher-
ous manner. Tbe high-priest and his brother were
discovered hidden in tbe aqueduct of the police:
they were instantly put to death. Thus the iiiMJ-
gents were now completely masters of both city sad
Temple. But they were not to remain so long
After the defeat of Cestius Gallus at Beth-boron, dis-
sensions began to arise, and it soon became knovr
that there was still a large moderate party; sat
a Joseph us says three millions In number! Three
-IITr" is wry little iindtir the population of London
VM* all Ms soburt.
6 The wtaoto tragic sVwy Is most forcibly «sM k
(H. 218-33*)
Digitized by
Google
JERUSALEM
took advantage of this to advance from
Scopus on the city. He made hia way through
Bexetha, the new suburb north of the Temple, and
through the wood-market, burning everything as
he went (B. J. v. 7, § 2), and at last encamped
opposite the palace at the Lot of the second wall.
The Jews retired to the upper city and to the
Temple. For five days Cestius assaulted the wall
without success; on the sixth he resolved to make
one mora attempt, this time at a different spot —
the north wall of the Temple, east of, and behind,
the Antonia. The Jews, however, fought with such
fury from the top of the cloisters, that be could
effect nothing, and when night came he drew off to
bis camp at Scopus. Thither the insurgents fol-
lowed him, and in three days gave him one of* the
most complete defeats that a Roman army bad aver
undergone. His catapults and balistse were taken
■rom him, and reserved by the Jews for the final
siege (v. 6, { 3). This occurred on the 8th of
Marchesvan (beginning of November), 66.
The war with Home was now inevitable, and it
was evident that the siege of Jerusalem was only a
question of time. Ananus, the high-priest, a mod-
erate and prudent man, took the lead ; the walls
were repaired, arms and warlike instruments and
machines of all kinds fabricated, and other prepara-
tions made. In this attitude of expectation — with
occasional diversions, such as the expedition to
Aacalon {B. J. iii. 2, §§ 1, 2), and the skirmishes
with Simon Bar-liioras (ii. 22, $ 2) — the city
remained while Vespasian was reducing the north
of the country, and till the fall of Giscala (Oct. or
Nov. 07), when John, the son of Levi, escaped
thence to Jerusalem, to become one of the most
prominent persons in the future conflict.
From the arrival of John, two years and a half
elapsed till Titus appeared before the walla of Jeru-
salem. The whole of that time was occupied in
contests between the moderate party, whose desire
was to take such a course as might yet preserve the
nationality of the Jews and the existence of the
city, and the Zealots or fanatics, the assertors of
national independence, who scouted the idea of
compromise, and resolved to regain their freedom
or perish. The Zealots, being utterly unscrupulous,
and resorting to massacre on the least resistance,
soon triumphed, and at last reigned paramount,
with no resistance but such as sprang from their
own internal factions. For the repulsive details of
this frightful period of contention and outrage the
reader must he referred to other works.* It will
be sufficient to say that at the beginning of 70,
when Titus made his appearance, the Zealots them-
selves were divided into two parties — that of John
of Giscala and Eleazar, who held the Temple and
its courts and the Antonia — 8,400 men ; that of
Simon Bar-Gioras, whose head-quarters were in the
tower Phasaelus (v. 4, § 3), and who held the upper
city, from the present Coanaculum to the Latin
Convent, the lower city in the valley, and the dis-
trict where the old Acra bud formerly stood, north
JERUSALEM
1306
a It Is remarkable that nothing Is said of any
tstkrtance to his passage through the gnat wall of
Agxippa, which encircled Bexetha.
* Dean HUman's History of the Jiva, bks. xtv., xv.,
wV ; and Mt-rivale's History of fa« Romans, vi. ch.
]B. To both of these works the writer begs leave to
l his obligHtU as throughout the above meagre
of "the most soul-stirring struggle of all
hltavry.*' Of course the materials for all
i Mtgnk ate In Josephus only, excepting the
of uie Temple — 10,000 men, and 0,000 Idiimaxsw
(H. J. v. 6, $ 1), in all, a force of between 23,000
and 24,000 soldiers trained in the civil encounters
of the last two years to great skill and thorough
recklessness.' The numbers of the other inhabi-
tants, swelled, as they were, by the strangers and
pilgrims who flocked from the country to the Pass-
over, it is extremely difficult to decide. Tacitus
doubtless from some Koman source, gives the whol
at 600,000. Josephus states that 1,100,000 perish*
during the siege (B. J. vi. 9, § 8; comp. v. 13, § 7)
and that more than 40,000 were allowed to depart
into the country (vi. 8, § 2), in addition to an
" immense number " sold to the army, and who of
course form a proportion of the 97,001) "carried
captive during the whole war " (vi. 9, § 3). We
may therefore take Josephus's computation of the
numbers at about 1,200,000. Reasons are given
in the third section of this article for believing that
even the smaller of these numbers is very greatly
in excess, and that it cannot have exceeded 60,001
or 70,000 (see p. 1320).
Titus's force consisted of four legions, and some
auxiliaries — at the outside 30,000 men (B. J. v. 1,
§ 6). These were disposed on their first arrival in
three camps — the 12th and 15th legions on the
ridge of Scopus, about a mile north of the city; the
5th a little in the rear; and the 10th on the top
of the Mount of Olives (v. 2, §§ 3, 5), to guard the
road to the Jordan Valley, and to shell the place
(if the expression may be allowed) from that com-
manding position. The army was well furnished
with artillery and machines of the latest and most
approved invention — " cuncta expngnandis urbibus,
reperta apud veteres, aut novis ingeniis," says
Tacitus {Hist. v. 13). The first operation was to
clear the ground between Scopus and the north
wall of the city — fell the timber, destroy the fences
of the gardens which fringed the wall, and level
the rocky protuberances. This occupied four days-
After it was done the three legions were marched
forward from Scopus, and eucamped off the north-
west comer of the walls, stretching from the Towel
Psepbinus to opposite Hippicus. The first step was
to get possession of the outer wall. The point of
attack chosen was in Simon's portion of the city,
at a low and comparatively weak place near the
monument of John Hyrcanus (v. 6, § 2), dose to
the junction of the three walls, and where the upper
city came to a level with the surrounding ground.
Hound this spot the three legions erected banks,
from which they opened batteries, pushing up the
rams and other engines of attack to the foot of the
wall. Oneof the rams, more powerful than the lest,
went among the Jews by the sobriquet of Nikon,'
" the conqueror." Three large towers, 75 feet high,
were also erected, overtopping the wall. Meantime
from their camp on the Mount of Olives the 10 h
legion opened fire on the Temple and the east si It
of the city. They had the heavier t baliatn, and
did great damage. Simon and his men did not
suffer these works to go on without molestation.
sew touches — strong, but not always accurate — In
the 6th book of Tacitus' Histories.
c These an the numbers given >>» Joeepbur ; but
it 1» probable that the} an exaggerated.
* *0 Nucwf . . . air. tw iraVra rucaV (JL J. T. 7
i 2;. A curious questicn is raised by the occurrence
of this and other Greek names in Josephus ; so stated
as to leau to the Inference that Greek was familiarly
iiwd by the Jews indiscriminately with Hebrew. Baa
tb* catalogues of names in B. J. v. 4, g 2.
Digitized by
Google
1806 JERUSALEM
Hie catapults, both those taken from Cestius, and
those found in the Antonia, were get up on the
wall, and constant desperate sallies were made. At
last the Jews began k> tire of their fruitless assault*.
They saw that the trail must fall, and, as they had
done during Nebuchadnezzar's siege, they left their
posts at night, and went home. A breach was
made by the redoubtable Nikon on the 7th Arte-
•nisius (cir. April 15); and here the Romans entered,
iriving the Jews liefore them to the second wall.
A great length of the wall was then broken down ;
such puts of Uezetlia as had escaped destruction
by Cestius were levelled, and a new camp was
formed, on the spot formerly occupied by the As-
syrians, and still known as the " Assyrian camp." °
This was a great step in advance. Titus now
lay with the second wall of the city close to him
on his right, while before him at no considerable
distance rose Antonia and the Temple, with no
obstacle in the interval to his attack. Still, how-
ever, he preferred, liefore advancing, to get posses-
sion of tie second wall, and the neighborhood of
John's monument was again chosen. Simon was
no less reckless in assault, and no less fertile in
stratagem, than before; but notwithstanding all his
efforts, in five lavs a breach was again effected.
The district in'o which the Romans bad now pene-
trated was the great Valley which lay between the
two main hills of the city, occupied then, as it is
still, by an intricate mags of narrow and tortuous
lanes, and containing the markets of the city — no
doubt very like the present bazaars. Titus's breach
was where the wool, cloth, and brass bazaars came
up to the wall (v. 8, § 1). This district was held
by the Jews with the greatest tenacity. Knowing,
as they did, every turn of the lanes and alleys, they
had an immense advantage over the Romans, and
it was only after four days 1 incessant fighting, much
loss, and one thorough repulse, that the Komans
were able to make good their position. However,
at last, Simon was obliged to retreat, and then
Titus demolished the wall. This was the second
step in the siege.
Meantime some shots had lieen interchanged in
the direction of the Antonia, but no serious attack
was made, liefore beginning there in earnest, Titus
resolved to give his troops a few days' rest, and the
Jews a short opportunity for reflection. He there-
fore called in the 10th legion from the Mount of
Olives, and held an inspection of the whole army
Mi the ground north of the Temple — full in view
tf both tho Temple and the upper city, every wall
u.d bouse in which were crowded with spectators
( B. J. v. 9, § 1 ). But the op|»rtunity was thrown
way upon the Jews, and, after four days, orders
were given to recommence the attack. Hitherto
he assault hid been almost entirely on the city : it
fas now to be simultaneous on city and Temple.
Accordingly two pain of large batteries were con-
structed, the one pair in front of Antonia; the other
at the old point of attack — the monument of John
Hyrcanus. The first pair was erected by the 5th
and 12th legions, and was near the pool Struthiua
— probably the present Bii tti Itniit, by the St.
Btepnen's Gate; ths second by the 10th and 15th,
at the pool called the Almond Pool — possibly that
now known as the Pool of Hezekiah — and near the
high-priest's monument (v. 11, { 4). These banks
■tern to hare been constructed of Umber and fas-
» Comnus Mahaneh-Dan, " camp of Pan " (Judg.
Rift. 12
JERUSALEM
cine*, to which the Romans must bane be
by. the scarcity of earth. They absorbed the liiuss
sant labor of seventeen days, and were completed
on the 29th Artemisius (cir. May 7). John in the
mean time had not been idle; he had employed the
seventeen days' respite in driving mines, through
the solid limestone of the bill, from within the
fortress (r. xi. § 4; vi. 1, § 3) to below the banks.
The mines were formed with timber roofs and sup-
ports. When the banks were quite complete, and
the engines placed upon them, the timber of the
galleries was fired, the superincumbent ground gave
way, and the labor of the Romans was totally de-
stroyed. At the other point Simon had maintained
a resistance with all his former intrepidity, and
mose than his former success. He had now greatly
increased the number of his machines, and his
people were much more expert in handling them
than before, so that be was able to impede materially
the progress of the works. And when they were
completed, and the battering rams bad begun to
make a sensible impression on the wall, he made a
furious assault on them, and succeeded in firing the
rams, seriously damaging the other engines, and
destroying the banks (v. 11, §§ 5, 6).
It now became plain to Titus that some other
measures for the reduction of the place must be
adopted. It would appear that hitherto the southern
and western parts of the city had not been invested,
and on that aide a certain amount of communica-
tion was kept up with the country, which, unless
stopped, might prolong the siege indefinitely (B. J.
v. 12, § 1; 10, | 3; 11, § 1 ; 12, § 3). The num-
ber who thus escaped is stated by Josephus at mora
than 500 a day (r. 11, § 1). A council of war was
therefore held, and it was resolved to encompass
the whole place with a wall, and then recommence
the assault. The wall began at the Roman camp
— a spot probably outside the modern north wall,
between the Damascus Gate and the N. E. corner.
From thence it went to the lower part of Beretha
— about St Stephen's Gate; then across Kedron
to the Mount of Olives; thence south, by a rock
called the " Pigeon's Kock," — possibly the modern
" Tombs of the Prophets " — to the Mount of
Offense. It then turned to the west : again dipped
into the Kedron, ascended the Mount of Evil
Counsel, and so kept on the upper side of the ravine
to a village called Beth-Krebinthi, whence it ran
outside of Herod's monument to its starting point
at the camp. Its entire length was 39 furlongs —
very near 5 miles; and it contained 13 stations or
guard-houses. The whole strength of the army was
employed on the work, and it was completed in the
short space of three days. The siege was then
vigorously pressed. The north attack was relin-
quished, and the whole force concentrated on th*
Antonia (12, § 4). Four new banks of greater size
than before were constructed, and as all the timber
in the neighborhood had been already cut down,
the materials had to be procured from a distance
of eleven miles (vi. 1, § 1). Twenty-one days were
occupied in completing the banks. Their position
is not specified, but it is evident, from some of the
expressions of Josephus, that they were at a con-
siderable distance from the fortress (vi. 1, § 3). At
length on the 1st Panemus or Tamuz (cir. June 7),
the Are from the banks commenced, under cover of
which the rams were set to work, and that night •
part of the wall fell at a spot where the foundations
had been weakened by the mines employed against
the former attacks. Still this was but an outwork
Digitized by
Google
JERUSALEM
end bttuwn it and the fortress itself a nw wal
mi discovered which Johi, had taken tie pre-
eaution to build At length, after two desperate
attempt*, this wall and that of the inner fortress
wen scaled by a bold surprise, and on the 5th °
Panemus (June 11) the Antonia was hi the hands
of the Romans (vi. 1, § 7). Another week was
occupied in breaking down the outer walls of the
fortress for the passage of the machines, and a
further delay took place in erecting new banks, on
the fresh level, for the bombardment, and battery
of the Temple. During the whole of this time —
the miseries of which are commemorated in the
traditional name of yornin deekn, " days of wretch-
edness," applied by the Jews to the period between
the 17th Tamuz and the 9tb Ab — the most des
perate hand-to-hand encounters took place, some in
the passages from the Antonia to the cloisters, some
in the cloisters themselves, the Romans endeavoring
to force their way in, the Jews preventing them.
But the Romans gradually trained ground. First
the western, and then the whole of the northern
external cloister was burnt (27th and 28th Pan.),
and then the wall enclosing the court of Israel and
the holy house itself. In the interval, on the 17th
Panemus, the daily sacrifice had failed, owing to
the want of officiating priests ; a circumstance which
had greatly distressed the people, and was taken
advantage of by Titus to make a further though
fruitless invitation to surrender. At length, on the
tenth day of I-ous or Ab (July 15), by the wanton
act of a soldier, contrary to the intention of Titus,
and in spite of every exertion he could make to stop
it, the sanctuary itself was fired (vi. 4, § 5-7). It
was, by one of those rare coincidences that some-
times occur, the very same month and day of the
month that the first temple had been burnt by
Nebuchadnezzar (vi. 4, § 8). John, and such of
his party as escaped the flames and the carnage,
made their way by the bridge on the south to the
upper city. The whole of the cloisters thai had
hitherto escaped, including the magnificent triple
colonnade of Herod on the south of the Temple,
the treasury chambers, and the rooms round the
outer courts, were now all burnt and demolished.
Only the edifice of the sanctuary itself still remained.
On its solid masonry the fire had had comparatively
little effect, and there were still hidden in its re-
eaases a few faithful priests who had contrived to
rescue the most valuable of the utensils, vessels,
and spices of the sanctuary (vi. A. § 1; 8, § S).
The Temple was at last gained ; but it seemed
as if half the work remained to he done. The
upper city, higher than Moriah, inclosed by the
original wall of David and Solomon, and on all
sides precipitous except at the north, where it was
defended by the wall and towers of Herod, was still
to be taken.* Titus first tried a parley — he stand-
JEBTJSALBM
1807
« Joaephns contradict* himself about this dats,
sine* In t1. 2, * 1, he Bays that the 17th Panemus was
the " very day '* that Antonia was entered. The date
siren In the text agree* beet with the narrative But
« the other hand the 17th Is the day comnwruoreted
In the Jewish Calendar.
» • The realtor will note that all which remained to
tm taken was the western hill, protected as above de-
scribed. If the topographical theory of this artfoU
to oorreet, namely, that Zlon, the city of Davii. was
Brtarfor to this hill, then then monarchs deprived
nsvuerree nod their royal residence not only of the
Hvmtsgs of the strongest natural position, but also
ing on tlie east end of the bridge between tbl
Temple and the upper city, and John and Sunoa
on tie west end. His terms, however, were re-
jected, and no alternative was left him but to foree
on the liege. The whole of the low part of tbj
town — the crowded lanes of which we have so often
heard — was burnt, iu the teeth of a frantic resist-
ance from the Zealots (vi. 7, § 1), together with
the council-house, the repository of the records
(doubtless occupied by Simon since its former de-
struction), and the palace of Helena, which were
situated in this quarter — the suburb of Opbel
under the south wall of the Temple, and the houses
as far as Siloam on the lower slopes of the Temple
Mount.
It took 18 days to erect the necessary works for
the siege; the four legions were once more stationed
at the west or northwest corner where Herod's
palace abutted on the wall, and where the three
magnificent and impregnable towers of HippicuB,
Phasaelus, and Mariamne rose conspicuous (vi. 8, §
1, and § 4, ad Jin.). This was the main attack.
Opposite the Temple, the precipitous nature of tbl
slopes of the upper city rendered it unlikely that
any serious attempt would be made by the Jews,
and this part accordingly, between the bridge and
the Xystus, was left to the auxiliaries. 'Che attack
wan commenced on the 7th of Gorpheus (cir. Sept.
11), and by the next day a breach was nude in
the wall, and the Romans at last entered the city.
During the attack John and Simon appear to have
stationed themselves in the towers just alluded to;
and had they remained there they would probably
have been able to make terms, as the towers were
considered impregnable (vi. 8, § 4). But on the
first signs of the breach, they took flight, and,
traversing the city, descended into the Valley of
Hinnom below Siloam, and endeavored to force the
wall of circumvallation and so make their escape
On being repulsed there, they took refuge apart in
some of the subterraneous caverns or sewers of the
city. John shortly after surrendered himself; but
Simon held out for several weeks, and did not make
his appearance until after Titus had quitted the
city. They were both reserved for the Triumph
at Rome.
The city being taken, such parts as bad escaped
the former conflagrations were burned, and the
whole of both city and Temple was ordered to be
demolished, excepting the west wall of the upper
city,' and Herod's three great towers at the north-
west corner, which were left standing as memorials
of the massive nature of the fortifications.
Of the Jews, the aged and infirm wen." killed;
the children under seventeen were sold as slaves ;
the rwt were sent, some to the Egyptian miner,
some to the provincial amphitheatres, and some to
grace the Triumph of the Conqueror.' Titus lion
of the protection of their own wall ! There k S3
escape from this conclusion ; and the abort ttrtoruent
of Mr. drove, which Is strictly accurate, Is a complete
refutation of Mr. Fergwon'H theory. S. W.
' The prisoners were collected for this final partition
In the Court of the Women. Joeephus stales that
during *he process eleven thousand died! It Is •
good Instance of the exaggeration In which he Indulges
on thoee matters ; tor taking the largest estimate at
thr Court of the Women (Llghtfbot's), It contained
85^00 squan. Aet, i. *. little more than 8 square
ft*: for woh of those who died, '<* to sank at rks
UTtns
Digitized by
Google
1308
JKRUSALEM
lilted, leaving the tenth legion under the eom-
mand of Terentius Rufui to carry out the work of
demolition. Of this Joeephua insures ua that " the
whole ■ waa so thoroughly leveled and dug up that
no one visiting it would believe It had ever been
inhabited " (B. J. vii. 1, § 1). G.
Medal of Veapawui, ooinmemonitlng the capture of Jerusalem.
>Vom itt dtttruclum by Tilut to the /weseftf time.
— For more than filly yean after its destruction by
Titus Jerusalem disappears from history. During
the revolts of the .lews hi Cyrenaica. Egypt, Cy-
prus, and Meso|>utaiiiia, which disturl«d the latter
years of Trajan, the recovery of their city was never
attempted. There is indeed reason to believe that
Uicuas, the head of the insurgents in Kgypt, led
his followers into Palestine, where they were de-
feated by the Roman general Turbo, but Jerusalem
is not once mentioned as the scene of their opera-
tions. Of its annaU during this period we know
nothing. Three towers and part of the western
wall alone remained of its strong fortifications to
protect the cohorts who occupied the conquered
city, and the soldiers' huts were long the only
buildings on its site. But in the reign of Hadrian
it again emerged from its obscurity, and became
the centre of an insurrection, which the best blood
of Home was shed to subdue. In despair of keep-
ing the Jews in subjection by other means, the
Emperor had formed a design to restore Jerusalem,
liid thus prevent it from ever becoming a rallying
point for this turbulent race. In furtherance of
his plan he had sent thither a colony of veterans,
in numbers sufficient for the defense of a position
so strung by nature against the then known modes
of attack. To this measure Dion Cassius (lxix.
12) attributes a renewal of the insurrection, while
Kusebius asserts that it was not carried into eiecu-
ri in till the outbreak was quelled. Be this as it
.nay, the embers of revolt, long smouldering, burst
ito a flame soon after Hadrian's departure from
he East in A. D. 132. The contemptuous indif-
ference jf the Romans, or the secrecy of their own
[Uat, enabled the Jews to organize a wide-spread
conspiracy. Bar Cocheba, their leader, the third,
according to Rabbinical writers, of a dynasty of the
tame name, princes of the Captivity, was crowned
king at Bother by the Jews who thronged to him,
nd by the pop'ilace was regarded as the Messiah.
lis irmor-bearer, K. Akiba, claimed descent from
aiaera, and hated the Romans with the fierce rancor
of his adopted nation. All the Jews in Palestine
flocked to his standard. At an early period in the
revolt they became masters of Jerusalem, and at-
" The word used by Josephus — mpifiokoc rvjt mt-
twK — may mean either the whole place, or the in-
tlestng walls, or the precinct of the Temple. The
of the Talmud perhaps Imply that tbe
JERUSALEM
tempted to rebuild the Temple. The
of this attempt is uncertain, but the fact is inferred
from allusions in Chrysostom ( Or. 3 in ,/ndcus).
Nieephorus (//. K. iii. 24), and George Cedronm
{Hut. Com//, p. 249), and the collateral evidence of
a coin of the period. Hadrian, alarmed at tile rapit
spread of the insurrection, and
tlie ineffectual efforts of his
troops to repress it, summoned
from Britain Julius Severus,
the greatest general of his time,
to take the command of the
army of Judaea. Two years
were spent in a fierce guerilla
warfare before Jerusalem was
taken, after a desperate defense
in which liar Cocheba perished.
The courage of the defenders
was shaken by the falling in of
the vaults on Mount Zion, and
the Romans became masters
of the position (Milman, But, iff J tin, iii. 123).
But the war did not end with the capture of
the city. The Jews in great force had occupied
the fortress of liether, and there maintained ■
struggle with all the tenacity of despair against
the repeated onsets of the Romans. At length,
worn out by famine and disease, they yielded on
the 9th of the month Ab, A. I). 135, and the
grandson of Bar Cocheba was among the slain.
The slaughter was frightful. The Romans, say the
Rabbinical historians, waded to their horse-bridles
in blood, which flowed with the fury of a mountain
torrent. The corpses of the slain, according to the
same veracious authorities, extended for more than
thirteen miles, and remained uuburied till the reign
of Antoninus. Five hundred and eighty thousand
are said to have fallen by the sword, while the
number of victims to the attendant calamities of
war was countless. On the aide of the Romans
the loss was enormous, and so dearly bought waa
their victory, that Hadrian, in bis letter to the
Senate, announcing the conclusion of the war, did
not adopt the usual congratulatory phrase. Bar
Cocheba has left traces of his occupation of Jeru-
salem in coins which were struck during the first
two years of the war. Four silver coins, three of
them undoubtedly belonging to Trajan, have been
discovered, restamped with Samaritan characters.
But the rebel leader, amply supplied with the pre-
cious metals by the contributions of his followers,
afterwards coined his own money. The mint waa
proliably during the first two years of the war at
Jerusalem; the coins struck during that period
bearing the inscription, " to the freedom of Jeru-
salem," or " Jerusalem the holy." They are men-
tioned in both Talmuds.
Hadrian's first policy, after the suppression of
the revolt, was to obliterate the existence of Jeru-
salem as a city. The ruins which Titus had left
were razed to the ground, and the plough passed
over the foundations of the Temple. A eoloi y of
Roman citizens occupied the new city which rose
from the ashes of Jerusalem, and their number waa
afterwards augmented by the Emperor's veteran
legionaries. A temple to the Capitoline Jupiter
was erected on the site of the sacred edifice of the
foundations of the Temple only were dog up (see Saw
quotations in Schwan, p. 685) ; and even th ais ssssa
to have been In existence In the tin of Ohrrststa*
(M Judaoi, 111. 481).
Digitized by
Google
JERUSALEM
Ifws, aid among the ormuoents of the new city
wrrr s> theatre, two market-places (SiutoVui), a
building called Ttrpiyvfupov, aua another called
KiiSpa. It was divided into seven quarters, each
yt which had its own warden. Mount Zion lay
without the walls (Jerome, Mic. iii. 12; /tin.
Hierot. p. 593, ed. Wesseling). That the northern
wall inclosed the so-called sacred places, though
asserted by Deyling, is regarded oy Milnter as a
(able of a later date. A temple to Astarte, the
Phoenician Venus, on the site afterwards identified
with the sepulchre, appears on coins, with four
columns and the inscription C. A. C, Cokmia
jElin CnpUolina, but it is more than doubtful
whether it was erected at this time. The worship
of Serapia was introduced from Egypt. A statue
of the emperor was raised on the site of the Holy
of Holies (Niceph. //. K. iii. 24); and it must
have been near the same spot that the Bordeaux
pilgrim saw two statues of Hadrian, not far from
the " lapis pertusus " which the Jews of his day
yearly visited and anointed with oil (/fin. Hitrot.
P. 591).
It was not, however, till the following year, A. D.
136, that Hadrian, on celebrating his Vuennalia,
bestowed upon the new city the name of jElia
Capitolina, combining with his own family title
the name of Jupiter of the Capitol, the guardian
deity of the colony. Christians and pagans alone
were allowed to reside. Jews were forbidden to
enter on pain of death, and this prohibition re-
mained in force in the time of Tertullian. But the
conqueror, though stern, did not descend to wan-
ton mockery. The swine, sculptured by the em-
peror's command over the gate leading to Bethle-
hem (Euseb. Claim. Hadr. Ann. xx.) was not
intended as an insult to the conquered race to bar
their entrance to the city of their fathers, but was
one of the $iyna militnria of the Koman army.
About the middle of the 4th century the Jews
were allowed to visit the neighborhood, and after-
wards, once a year, to enter the city itself, and weep
over it on the anniversary of its capture. Jerome
(on Ztph. i. 15) has drawn a vivid picture of the
wretched crowds of Jews who in his day assembled
si the waiting-place by the west wall of the Temple
to bemoan the loss of their ancestral greatness.
On the ninth of the month Ab might be seen the
aged and decrepit of both sexes, with tattered gar-
ments and disheveled hair, who met to weep over
the downfall of Jerusalem, and purchased permis-
sion of the soldiery to prolong their lamentations
("et miles mereedem postulat ut wis flere plus
lieeat").
So completely were all traces of the ancient city
sbliterated that its very name was in process of
time forgotten. It was not till after Constantino
built the Martyrim on the site of the crucifixion,
thai its ancient appellation was revived. In the
7th canon of the Council of Nirara the bishop of
MSm is mentioned; but Macarins, in subscribing
lo the eanons, designated himself bishop of Jeru-
salem. The name jElia occurs as late as Adam-
sanos (». n. B!17), and is even found in Kdrlsi
end Meyr ed-Din about 1496.
After the inauguration of the new colony of
BHa the annals of the city ags>n relapse into ac
Maturity which is only represented in history by a
iet of twenty- three Christian bishops, who fined
tp the interval between the election of Marcos, the
tins «f the series, and Macarins in the reign of
" Already in the third ssntnry tb«
JERUSALEM
1809
Holy Places had become objects of enthusiasm, ant)
the pilgrimage of Alexander, a bishop in Capps-
docia, and afterwards of Jerusalem, is nutter of
history. In the following century such pilgrimages
became more common. The aged Empress Helena,
mother of Constantine, visited Palestine in A. i>.
328, and, according to tradition, erected magnifi-
cent churches at Bethlehem, and on the Mount qf
Olives. Her son, fired with the same zeal, swept
away the shrine of Astarte, which occupied the site
of the resurrection, and founded in its stead a
chapel or oratory. On the east of this wss a large
court, the eastern side being formed by the Bnnliat,
erected on the spot where the cross was said to have
been found The latter of these buildings is that
known as the Martyrim} the former was the
church of the AnnitaiU, or Resurrection : their
locality will he considered in the following section
(p. 1824, Ac). The Martyrion was completed
A. D. 335, and its dedication celebrated by a great
council of bishops, first at Tyre, and afterwards
at Jerusalem, at which Eusebius was present. In
the reign of Julian (A. i>. 362) the Jews, with the
permission and at the instigation of the emperor,
made an abortive attempt to lay the foundations
of a temple. From whatever motive, Julian had
formed the design of restoring the Jewish worship
on Mount Moriah to its pristine splendor, and dur-
ing his absence in the East the execution of his
project was intrusted to his favorite, Alypius of
Antioch. Materials of every kind were provided
at the emperor's expense, and so great was the en-
thusiasm of the Jews that their women took part
in the work, and in the laps of their garments
carried off the earth which covered the ruins of
the Temple. Bat a sudden whirlwind and earth-
quake shattered the stones of the former founda-
tions; the workmen fled for shelter to one of the
neighboring churches (M ti raw wK^eioy It pay,
Greg. Naz. Or. iv. Ill), the doors of which were
closed against them by an invisible hand, and a
fire issuing from the Temple-mount raged the
whole day and consumed their tools. Numbers
perished in the flames. Some who escaped took
refuge in a portico near at hand, which fell at night
and crushed them as they slept (Tbeodor. B. K
iii. 15; Sozomen, v. 21; see also Ambros. Epal
ad Theodomum, lib. ii. ep. 17). Whatever may
have been the coloring which this story rec ei ved as
it passed through the hands of the ecclesiastical
historians, the impartial narrative of Ammianus
Mareellinus (xxiii. 1), the friend and companion in
arms of the emperor, leaves no reasonable doubt of
the truth of the main facts that the work was in
terrupted by fire, which all attributed to supernrt-
ural agency. In the time of Chrysostom the foun-
dations of the Temple still remained, to which the
orator could appeal {tut Judam, iii. 431; Paris,
1636). The event was regarded as a judgment of
God upon the impious attempt of Julian to falsify
the predictions of Christ: a position which Bishop
Warburton defends with great skill in his treaties
on the subject.
Daring the fourth and fifth centuries Jerusalem
became the centre of attraction for pilgrims from
all regions, and its bishops contended with those
of Csesarea for the supremacy ; but it was not til!
after the iwncil of Chalcedon (461-453) that it
was made an independent patriarchate. In the
theological controversies which followed the decision
of that council with regard to the two naturu of
Jbrirt, Jerusalem bora its share v ! 'h otbsr oriental
Digitized by
Google
1810 JERUSALEM
(burcnes, and two of it* bishops were deposed by
Monophysite fanatics The synod of Jerusalem in
a. D. 536 confirmed the decree of the synod of
Constantinople against the Monophysites.
In 539 the Emperor Justinian founded at Jeru-
salem a splendid church in honor of the Virgin,
which has been identified by most writers with the
building known in modem times as the Mosque
el-Aksa, but of which probably no remains now
exist (see p. 1339). [Against this view see Amer.
ed. | IV.] Procopius, the historian, ascribes to
the same emperor the erection of ten or eleven
monasteries in the neighborhood of Jerusalem and
Jericho. Eutychius adds that he built a hospital
for strangers in Jerusalem, and that the church
above mentioned was begun by the patriarch Elias,
anil completed by Justinian. Later in the same
century Gregory the Great (590-604) sent the abbot
Probua to Jerusalem with a large sum of money,
and endowed a hospital for pilgrims, which Robin-
sou suggests is the same as that now used by the
Muslims for the like purpose, and called by the
Arabs ct-Taldyek.
For nearly five centuries the city had been free
from the horrors of war. The merchants of the
Mediterranean sent their ships to the coasts of
Syria, and Jerusalem became a centre of trade, as
well as of devotion. But this rest was roughly
broken by the invading Persian army under Chos-
roea II., who swept through Syria, drove the impe-
rial troops before them, and, after the capture of
Antioch and Damascus, marched upon Jerusalem.
A multitude of Jews from Tiberias and Galilee fol-
lowed in their train. The city was invested, and
taken by assault in June, 614; thousands of the
monks and clergy were slain; the suburbs were
burnt, churches demolished, and that of the Holy
Sepulchre injured, if not consumed, by fire. The
invading army in their retreat carried with them
the patriarch Zacharias, and the wood of the true
cross, besides multitudes of captives. During the
exile of the patriarch, his vicar Modestus, supplied
with money and workmen by the munificent John
Eteemon, patriarch of Alexandria, restored the
churches of the Resurrection and Calvary, and
also that of the Assumption. After a struggle of
fourteen years the imperial arms were again victo-
rious, and in 628 Heraclius entered Jerusalem on
foot, at the head of a triumphal procession, bearing
the true cross on his shoulder. The restoration of
the chinches is, with greater probability, attributed
by William of Tyre to the liberality of the empe-
ror (flitt. i. 1).
The dominion of the Christians in the Holy City
was now rapidly drawing to a close. After an ob-
stinate defense of four months, in the depth of
winter, against the impetuous attacks of the Arabs,
be patriarch Sophronius surrendered to the Khalif
Omar in person A. n. 637. The valor of the be-
sirged extorted unwilling admiration from the vio-
tici, and obtained for them terms unequaled for
lentKuy in the history of Arab conquest. The
Khalif, after ratifying the terms of capitulation,
rhich secured to the Christiana liberty of worship
in the churches which they had, but prohibited the
wectkm of more, entered the city, and was met at
the gates by thv patriarch. Sophronius received
Mid with the uncourteous exclamation, "Verily
this is the abomination of desolation, spoken of by
Daniel the prophet, standing in the holy place! "
and the chronicler does not forget to record the
Mfgsd draw and " Satanic hypocrisy " of the hardy
JERUSALEM
khalif (Cedrenus, Hist. Comp. 436). Omar Uea
in company with the patriarch, visited the Count
of the Resurrection, and at the Muslim time ot
prayer knelt down on the eastern steps ot ths
Basilica, refusing to pray within the buildings, in
order that the possession of them might be secured
to the Christians. Tradition relates that he re-
quested a site whereon to erect a mosque for the
Mohammedan worship, and that the patriarch as-
signed him the spot occupied by the reputed stone
of Jacob's vision: over this he is said to have built
the mosque afterwards known by his name (Eutychii
CArwi. ii. 285; Ockley, Hit. of Stir. pp. 205-311
Bonn), and which still exists in the S. E. coma
of the Aksa. Henceforth Jerusalem became foi
Muslims, as well as Christiana, a sacred place, and
the Mosque of Omar shared the honors of pilgriniac
with the renowned Kaaba of Mecca.
In the reign of Charlemagne (771-814) ambas-
sadors were sent by the Emperor of the West tn
distribute alms in the Holy City, and on their
return were accompanied by envoys from the en-
lightened Khalif Harun er-Rashld, bearing to
Charlemagne the keys of Calvary and the Holy
Sepulchre. But these amenities were not of bug
continuance. The dissensions which ensued upon
the death of the khalif spread to Jerusalem, and
churches and convents suffered in the general
anarchy. About the same period the feud between
the Joktanite and Isbmaelite Arabs assumed an
alarming aspect. The former, after devastating the
neighboring region, made an attempt upon Jeru-
salem, but were repulsed by the signal valor of its
garrison. In the reign of the Khalif el-Motasem
it was held for a time by the rebel chief Tamiui
Abu-Hareb.
With the fall of the Abassides the Holy City
passed into the hands of the Fatimite conqueror
Muex, who fixed the seat of bis empire at Must el-
Kahirah, the modern Cairo (a, d. 969). Under the
Fatimite dynasty the sufferings of the Christians hi
Jerusalem reached their height, when el-Hakem,
the third of his line, ascended the throne (a. d.
996). The church of the Holy Sepulchre, which
bad been twice dismantled and burnt within the
previous seventy years (Eutych. Arm. ii. 529, 530;
Cedren. Hist Comp. p. 661), was again demolished
(Ademari Citron. A. n. 1010), snd its successor
was not completed till A. D. 1048. A small chapel
(" oratoria valde modica," Will. Tyr. viii. 3) sup-
plied the place of the magnificent Basilica on Gol-
gotha,
The pilgrimages to Jerusalem in the 11th cen-
tury became a source of revenue to the Muslims,
who exacted a tax of a byzant from every visitor to
the Holy Sepulchre. Among the most remarkable
pilgrimages of this century were those of Robert
of Normandy (1035), Uetbert of Cam bray (1Q54),
and the German bishops (1065).
In 1077 Jerusalem was pillaged by Afsis the
Kharismian, commander of the army sent by Mekk
Shah against the Syrian dominions of the khalif.
About the year 1084 it was bestowed by Tutush,
the brother of Melek Shah, upon Ortok, chief of a
Turkman horde under his command. From thv
time till 1091 Ortok was emir of the city, and ox
his death it was held as a kind of fief by his som
Ilghaxy and Sukman, whose severity to the Chris-
tians became the proximate cause of the Crusades
Rudhw&n, son of Tutush, made an ineffectual attack
upon Jerusalem in 1096. The city was ultimate)}
taken, after a siege of forty days, by Afaal, risk
Digitized by
Google
JKRU&ALEM
If the khelif of Egypt, and for eleven montns had
lata governed by the Emir Iftikar ed-Dauleh. when,
on the 7th of June, 109'J, the crusading army ap-
peared before the wills. After the fall of Antioch
in the preceding year the remains of their numerous
host marched along between 1-ebanon and the sea,
passing Bybkw, Beyrout, and Tyre on their road,
and so through l.ydda, Raiuleh, and the ancient
Emmaus, to Jerusalem. The crusaders, 40,000
in number, but with little more than 20,000 effective
troops, reconnoitred the city, and determined to
attack it on the north. Their camp extended from
the Gate of St Stepheu to that beneath the tower
of David. Godfrey of Lorraine occupied the extreme
left (East): next him was Count Robert of Flanders:
Robert of Normandy held the third place; and
Taucred was posted at the N. \V. comer tower, after-
wards called by his name. Raymond of Toulouse
originally encamped against the West Gate, but
afterwards withdrew half his force to the part be-
tween the city and the church of Zion. At the
tidings of their approach the khalif of Egypt gave
orders for the repair of the towers and walls; the
fountains and wells for fire or six miles round (Will.
Tyr. vii. 23), with the exception of Siloain, were
stopped, as in the day* of Hezekiah, when the city
was invested by Sennacherib's host of Assyrians.
On the fifth day after then- arrival the crusaders
attacked the city and drove the Saracens from the
outworks, but were compelled to suspend their
operations till the arrival of the Genoese engineers.
Another month was consumed in constructing
engines to attack the walls, and meanwhile the
besiegers suffered all the horrors of thirst in a burn-
ing sun. At length the engines were completed
and the day fixed for the assault. On the night
of the 13th of July Godfrey had changed his plan of
attack, and removed his engines to a weaker part
of the wall between the (Jate of St. Stephen and
the corner tower overlooking the Valley of Jehosha-
phat on the north. At break of day the city was
assaulted in three points at once. Tancred and
Raymond of Toulouse attacked the walls opposite
their own positions. Night only separated the com-
batants, and was spent by both armies in prepara-
tions for the morrow's contest. Next day, after
seven hours' bard fighting, the drawbridge from
Godfrey's Tower was let down. Godfrey was first
upon the wall, followed by the Count of Flanders
and the Duke of Normandy; the northern gate was
thrown open, and at three o'clock on Friday the
16th of July Jerusalem was in the hands of the
crusaders. Raymond of Toulouse entered without
opposition by the Zion Gate. The carnage was
terrible: 10,000 Muslims fell within the sacred
mclosure. Order was gradually restored, and God-
frey of Bouillon elected king (Will. Tyr. viii.).
i.hurcbes were established, and for eighty-eight
rears Jerusalem remained in the hands of the
Christians. In 1187 it was retaken by Saladin
JERUSAIJ5M
1811
» • Some account or Jerusalem as It now is will be
Jbund under the head of Mntlern Jerusalem, appended
to the present nrticle (A mar. ed.). This review of
.be vicissitudes of the Holy City would be incomplete
without such an addition. H.
* * This article of Mr. Pergnsson on the " Topograph/
jf the City " Is one of great value, aside altogether
from the correctness or Incorrectness of bis peculiar
views respecting tbu Ideotrflcatlon or Mount Zion and
tie site of the Holy Sepulchre. On these particular
points his views, though approved by some In *"g'""«
tad s»| iiu«a nl by no little ingenuity, si* not those
attar a siege of several weeks. Five years afterwards
(1192), in anticipation of an attack by Richard of
England, the fortifications were strengthened and
new walls built, and the supply of water again cut
off (Barhebr. Chron. p. 421). During the wintei
of 1191-2 the work wat prosecuted with the utmost
vigor. Fifty skilled masons, sent by Alaeddiu oi
Mosul, rendered able assistance, and two thousand
Christian captives were pressed into the service.
The Sultan rode round the fortifications each day
encouraging the workmen, and even brought than
atones on his horse's saddle. His sons, his brother
Malek al-Adel, and the Emirs ably seconded his
efforts, and within six months the works wen
completed, solid and durable as a rock (\ViUt?n,
Kreuzzuge, iv. 467, 468). The walls and tow en
were demolished by order of the Sultan Melek el-
Mu'adbdliem of Damascus in 1219, and in this
defenseless condition the city was ceded to the
Christians by virtue of the treaty with the Emperor
Frederick II. An attempt to rebuild the walls in
1239 was frustrated by an assault by David of
Kerak, who dismantled the city anew. In 1243 it
again came into the hands of the Christians, and
in the following year sustained a siege by the wild
Kharisinian hordes, who slaughtered the priests and
monks who had taken refuge in the church of the
Holy Sepulchre, and after plundering the city with-
drew to Gaza. After their departure Jerusalem
again reverted to the Mohammedans, in whose
hands it still remains. The defeat of the Christians
at Gaza was followed by the occupation of the Holy
City by the forces of the Sultan of Egypt.
In 1277 Jerusalem was nominally annexed to the
kingdom of Sicily. In 1617 it passed under the
sway of the Ottoman Sultan Selim I., whose suc-
cessor Sulimaii built the present walls of the city
in 1642. Mohammed Aly, the I'asha of Egypt,
took possession of it in 1832. In 1834 it was
seized and held for a time by the Fellahin during
toe insurrection, and in 1840, after the bombard-
ment of Acre, was again restored to the Sultan.
Such in brief is a sketch of the checkered for-
tunes of the Holy City since its destruction by
Titus." The details will be found in Gibbon's
Decline and Fall; Prof. Robinson's Bibl Res. i
366-407; the Rev. G. Williams' Holy City, vol. i.
Wilken's Cetcli. der Kreuzzuge ; Deyling's Out.
de jEtia Cnp'Uolina orig. et historia; and tip.
Miinter's History of the Jewish War under Trajtm
and Hadrian, translated in Robinson's BiMiriketa
Sacra, pp. 393-466. W. A. W
HI. TopooiMPiir of the Crrr.'
There is perhaps no city in the ancient wosW lb*
topography of which ought to be so easily deter-
mined as that of Jerusalem. In the first place, lbs
city always was small, and is surrounded by diey
valleys, while the form of toe ground within II*
limits is so strongly marked that there never oouW
which Biblical scholars generally entertain. We Inau t
therefore (at the end of the article) a somewhat ex-
tended examination of his theory on this part of the
subject, by Dr. Wolcott, who writes with the advantage
I of a personal knowledge of the localities in question.
We pursue this course, Instead of setting aside or
•.bridging the article, bolt as an act of Justice to Mr
Fergussox, who enjoys a high reputation as aa
arehlteet and arehssologlst and as required also bv
our pledge to the reader to omit nothing In this edition
of the Dictionary which he would find in the 1
Digitized by
Google
1312
JERUSALEM
HHwrently be an; great difficulty In ucertaining
its general extent, or in fixing it* more prominent
features; and on the other hand we have in the
works of Josephu* a more full and complete topo-
graphical description of this city than of almost
any other in the ancient world. It it certain that
he was intimately acquainted with the localities he
describes, and as his copious descriptions can be
tested by comparing tliem with the details of the
siege by Titus which he afterwards narrates, there
ought to be no difficulty in settling at least all the
main points. Nor would there ever have been any,
but for the circumstance that for a long period after
the destruction of the city by Titus, the place was
practically deserted by its original inhabitants, and
the continuity of tradition consequently broken in
upon ; and after this, when it again appears in his-
tory, it is as a sacmi city, and at a period the most
uncritical of any known in the modern history of
the world. During at least ten centuries of what
are called most properly the dark ages, it was
thought necessary to find a locality for every event
mentioned in the Sacred Scriptures which had
taken place within or near its walls. These were
in most instances fixed arbitrarily, there being no
constant tradition to guide the topographer, so that
the confusion which has arisen has become perplex-
ing, to a degree that can only be appreciated by
those who have attempted to unravel the tangled
thread; and now that long centuries of constant
tradition have added sanctity to the localities, it is
extremely difficult to shake one's self free from Its
influence, and to investigate the sulgect in that
critical spirit which is necessary to elicit the truth
to long buried in obscurity.
It is only by taking up the thread of the narra-
tive from the very beginning, and admitting nothing
which cannot be proved, either by direct testimony
or by local indications, that we can hope to clear
up the mystery; but, with the ample materials
that still exist, it only requires that this should be
done in order to arrive at a correct determination
of at least all the principal points of the topography
of this sacred city.
So little has this been done hitherto, that there
are at present before the public three distinct views
of the topography of Jerusalem, so discrepant from
one another in their most essential features, that a
disinterested person might fairly feel himself justi-
fied in assuming that there existed no real data for
the determination of the points at issue, and that
the disputed questions must forever remain in the
tune unsatisfactory state as at present.
1 . The first of these theories is the most obvious,
and Has at all events the great merit of simplicity.
It consists in the belief that all the sacred localities
were correctly ascertained in the early ages of
Christianity; and, what is still more important,
that none have been changed during the dark ages
that followed, or in the numerous revolutions to
which the city has been exposed. Consequently,
inferring that all which the traditions of the Middle
Ages hare handed down to us may be Implicitly
relied upon. The advantages of this theory are so
manifest, that it is little wonder that It should be
to popular and find so many advocates.
The first person who ventured publicly to express
his dissent from this view was Korte, a German
printer, who travelled in Palestine about the year
1788. On visiting Jerusalem he was struck with
list apparent impossibility of reconciling the site of
1st present church of the Holy Sepulchre with the
JERUSALEM
exigencies of the Bible narrative, ani on fab l
home published a work denying the authenticity
of the so-called sacred localities. His heresies ex-
cited very little attention at the time, or for long
afterwards; but the spirit of inquiry which hat
sprung up during the present century has revived
the controversy which has so long been dormant
and many pious and earnest men, both Protestant
and Catholic, have expressed with more or less dis-
tinctness the difficulties they feel in reconciling the
assumed localities with the indications in the Bible.
The arguments in favor of the present localities
being the correct ones are well summed up by the
Rev. George Williams in his work on the Holy
City, and with the assistance of Professor Willis all
has been said that can lie urged in favor of their
authenticity. Nothing can exceed the ingenuity
of the various hypotheses that are brought forward
to explain away the admitted difficulties of the
case; but we look in vain for any new facts to
counterbalance the significance of those so often
urged on the other side, while the continued appeals
to faith and to personal arguments, do not inspire
confidence in the soundness of the data brought
forward.
2. Professor Robinson, on the other hand, in his
elaborate works on Palestine, has brought together
nil the arguments which from the time of Korte
have been accumulating against the authenticity of
the medieval sites and traditions. He hss done
this with a power of logic which would probably
have been conclusive had he been able to carry the
argument to its legitimate conclusion. His want
of knowledge of architecture and of the principles
of architectural criticism, however, prevented him
from perceiving that the present church of the Holy
Sepulchre was wholly of an age subsequent to that
of the Crusades, and without a trace of the style of
Constantino. Nor was he, from the same causes,
able to correct in a single instance the erroneous
ademptions given to many other buildings in Jeru-
salem, whose dates might have afforded a clew to
the mystery. When, in consequence, be announced
as the result of his researches the melancholy con-
clusion, tint the site of the Holy Sepulchre was
now, and mutt in all probability for ever remain a
mystery, the effect was, that those who were opposed
to his views clung all the more firmly to those they
before entertained, preferring a site and a sepulchre
which had been hallowed by the tradition of ages
rather than lsunch forth on the shoreless sea of
speculation which Dr. Robinson's negative con-
clusion opened out before them.
3. The third theory is that put forward by the
author of this article in his " Essay ou the Ancient
Topography of Jerusalem." It agrees generally
with the views urged by all those from Korte U
Robinson, who doubt the authenticity of the preseni
site of the sepulchre; but instead of acquiescing Li
the desponding view taken by the latter, it goes ou
to assert, for reasons which will be given hereafter,
that the building now known to Christians as th»
Mosque of Omar, but by Moslems called the Done
of the Rock, it the identical church which Cou-
stantine erected over the Rock which contained the
Tomb of Christ.
If this view of the topography can be maintained,
it at once seta to rest all questions that can pos-
sibly arise as to the accordance of the sacred sites
with the Bible narrative; for there is no doubt bit)
that at the time of the crucifixion this locality was
outside the walls, " near the judgment atst," sat
Digitized by
Google
JERUSAl EM
Digitized by
-Google
Digitized by VaOOQ IC
JERUSALEM
•towards the country;" and it agrees in ever;
vapeet with the minutest indication of the Scrip-
JBRU8ALKM
1818
It coufimu all that was aaid by Euaebiut, and
all Christian and Mohammedan writers before the
time of the Crusade*, regarding the sacred localities,
and bring! the Jewish, Christian, and Mohammedan
topography into order, and explains all that before
was so puzzling.
It substitutes a building which no one double
was bi'ilt lent, before the time of the Crusades, for
one which as undoubtedly was erected after that
event; and ono that now possesses in its centre a
mass of living rock with one cave in it exactly is
described by Eusebius, for one with only a sm.tll
tabernacle of marble, where no rock ever was seen
by human eyes; and it groups together buildings
undoubtedly of the age of Constantine, whose juxta-
position it is otherwise impossible to account for.
A theory offering such advantages as these ought
either to be welcomed by all Christian men, or
assailed by earnest reasoning, and not rejected
without good and solid objections being brought
against it. For it never can be unimportant even
to the best established creeds to deprive scoffers of
every opportunity for a sneer, and it is always wise
to oner to the wavering every testimony which may
tend to confirm them in their faith.
The most satisfactory way of investigating the
subject will probably be to commence at the time
of the greatest prosperity of Jerusalem, immedi-
ately before its downfall, which also happens to be
the period when we hare the greatest amount of
knowledge regarding its features. If we can de-
termine what was then its extent, and fix the more
important localities at that period, there will be no
great difficulty in ascertaining the proper sites for
the events which may have happened either before
or after. All that now remains of the ancient city
of course existed then ; and the descriptions of Jo-
eephus, in so far as they are to be trusted, apply to
the city as he then saw it; so that the evidence is
at that period more complete and satisfactory than
at any other time, and the city itself being then at
Its greatest extent, it necessarily included all that
existed either before or afterwards.
It will not be necessary here to dwell upon the
much disputed point of the veracity of the his-
torian on whose testimony we must principally rely
in this matter. It will be sufficient to remark that
every new discovery, every improved plan that has
been made, has served more and more to confirm
the testimony of Josephus, and to give a higher
idea of the minute accuracy of his local knowledge.
In no one instance has he yet been convicted of any
material error in describing localities In plan.
Many difficulties which were thought at one time
to he insuperable have disappeared with a more
careful investigation of the data; and now that the
eity has been carefully mapped and explored, there
seems every probability of our being able to recon-
cile all his descriptions with the appearance of the
existing localities. So much indeed is this the case
that one cannot help suspecting that the Roman
army was provided with surveyors who could map
out the localities with very tolerable precision ; and
that, though writing at Rome, Josephus bad before
him data which cheiked and guibjd him in all ha
said as to horizontal dimensions. This becomes
snore probable when we consider how moderate all
liaese are, and how consistent with existing remains
itui compete them with his strangely exaggerated
statements whenever he speaks of heights or de-
scribes the arrangement of buildings which had
been destroyed in the siege, and of which it may
be supposed no record or correct description then
existed. He seems to have felt himself it liberty
to indulge his national vanity in respect to these,
but to have been checked when speaking of what
still existed, and eould never be falsified. The con-
sequence is, that in almost all instances we may im-
plicitly rely on anything he says with regard to the
plan of Jerusalem, and as to anything that existed
or eould be tested at the time he wrote, but must
receive with the greatest caution any assertion with
regard to what did not then remain, or respecting
which no accurate evidence eould lie adduced to
refute his statement.
In attempting to follow the description of Jo-
sephus there are two points which it is necessary
should be fixed in order to understand what fol-
lows.
The first of these is the position and dimensions
of the Temple; the second the position of the
Tower Hippicus.
Thanks to modern investigation there now seems
to be little difficulty in determining the first, with
all the accuracy requisite to our present purposes.
The position of the Tower Hippicus cannot be de-
termined with the same absolute certainty, but can
be fixed within such limits as to allow no reason-
able doubts as to its locality.
I. Site of the Tern/ik. — Without any excep-
tion, all topographers are now agreed that the
Temple stood within the limits of the great area
now known as the Haram, though few are agreed
as to the portion of that space which it covered;
and at least one author places it in the centre, and
not at the southern extremity of the inckisum.
With this exception all topographers
No. 1. — Remains of Arch of Bride*. (B. W. aasjks
of Haram.)
that the southwestern angle of the Haram area was
one of the angles of the ancient Jewish Temple.
In the first place it is admitted that the Temple
was a rectangle, and this happens to be the only
right angle of the whole inclosure. In the next
place, in his description of the great Stoa Basilica
of the Temple, Josephus distinctly states that it
stood on the southern wall and overhung the valley
(Ant. xr. 16, § 6). Again, the discovery of the re-
mains of the arch of a bridge, commencing about
40 feat from the S. W. angle in the western wall,
and consequently coinciding with 'he centre of tha
Digitized by
Google
1814
JERUSALEM
great StoA (as will be shown under the head Tem-
RJE), so exactly corresponds with the description
of Josephus (Ant. xiv. 4. § 2: B.J. i. 2, §§ 5, 2,
H. 16, § 2, vi. 6, § 3, vi. 7, § 1) as in itself to be
sufficient to decide the question. 01 The size of the
stones and the general character of the masonry at
the Jews 1 Wailing-place (wood-cut No. 2) in the
western wall near its southern extremity hare been
considered by almost all topographers as a proof
that the wall there formed part of the substruc-
tures of the Temple: and lastly, the discovery of
one of the old gateways which Josephus (B. J. vi.
6, § 2) mentions as leading from the Temple to Par-
bar, on this side, mentioned by AH Bey, ii. 220, and
Dr. Barclay (City of the Great King, p. 490), be-
sides minor indications, make up such a chain of
proof as to leave scarcely a doubt on this point.
The extent of the Temple northwards and east-
wards from this point is a question on which there
is much less agreement than with regard to the
fixation of its southwestern angle, though the evi-
dence, both written and local, points inevitably to
the conclusion that Josephus was literally correct
when he said that the Temple was an exact square
of a stadium, or 600 Greek feet, on each side (Ant.
xv. 11, § 3). Thib assertion he repeats when de-
scribing the great Stoa Basilica, which occupied the
whole of the southern side (xv. 11, § 9); and again,
in describing Solomon's, or the eastern portico, he
says it was 400 cubits, or 600 feet, in extent (xx.
10, § 7); and lastly, in narrating the building of
the Temple of Solomon (viii. 3, § 9), he says he
elevated the ground to 400 cubits, meaning, as the
context explains, on each side. In fact there is no
point on which Josephus repeats himself so often,
and is throughout so thoroughly consistent
There is no other written authority on this sub-
ject except the Talmud, which asserts that the
« * This rrch Is known among travellers as " Bob-
buon's Arch.'* Though Dr. Robinson wu not the
first to recognise these projecting stones as connected
with some ancient bridge or viaduct, he was unques-
tionably the first to Identify (hem with the bridge so
particularly described by Josephus. (Sea Bibl. Res.,
3d ed., 1. 287 ff., and 606 ff.). It will be observed that
thaw stones spring out of the Haram wall on the east
side of the Tyropoeon. One of the most remarkable of
the recent discoveries at Jerusalem Is the disinterring
of the opposite buttress or pier of the bridge on the
western side of the valley, and of the stones of the
pavement which formed the floor of this causeway.
The following account of this discovery is drawn up
from the report of Lieut. Warren, who superintended
the excavation : " At the depth of about 56 feet a
gallery from one of the shafts wu traced along an
ancient artificial cutting in the solid rock until it was
stopped by a mass of masonry, constructed of fine
beveled stones of great size, and evidently still remain-
ing In their original position. This masonry, of which
three courses remain, proved to be the lowermost portion
of the original western pier of ' Robinson's Arch.' . . .
The remains ol the pier consist of ' splendid stones *
of a peculiarly hard texture, of great magnitude and
In perfect preservation ; the lowest course, resting on
the rock, is 8 feet 6 inches high, and the nut 8 feet 9
Inches — the height of the large stones still visible,
above the present surface of the ground in the Haram
wall. The pier was rather more than 12 feet In thick-
ness east and west ; and ft was constructed not as a
solid mass, but so built with the great stones (already
mentioned}, that it had a hollow space in the inside,
with openings leading to this space through the ex-
torter masonry ; and thus the whole pier may be satd
la be made up of smaller ones. . . .
JERUSALEM
Temple was a square of 500 cubits each bjom
(Mishna, v. 334); but the Rabbis, as if aware that
this assertion did not coincide with the localities,
immediately correct themselves by explaining that
it was the cubit of 15 inches which was meant,
which would make the side 625 feet. Their author-
ity, however, is so questionable, that it is of the
least possible consequence what they said or meant.
No. 2. — Jews' Wailing-Place.
The instantin cruris, however, is the existing
remains, and these confirm the description of Jo-
sephus to the fullest possible extent. Proceeding
eastward along the southern wall from the south-
western angle we find the whole Haram area filled
up perfectly solid, with the exception of the great
tunnel-like entrance under the Mosque el-Aksa,
until, at the distance of 600 feet from the angle,
we arrive at a wall running northwards at right
" East of these remarkable and most Interesting
remains of this arcb-pier, and on a lerel with the rock
surface, a pavement of stone was found (o extend to-
wards the Haram wall ; and here, ou this pavement,
upwards of 50 feet beueath the present surface, when
they rad cleared away a cavern-like sp«ce sufficiently
large for them to examine the ancient relics that were
lying before them, the explorers discovered, ranged in
two lines north and south, and huddled together just
as they fell, the actual voussoirs, or wedge-shaped
arch-atones, of which when in its complete condition,
the great viaduct of Kobiuson's Arch had been con-
structed. That viaduct had led from the Jerusalem
on the western portion of the rock-plateau that
formed the site of the city, over the Tyropoeou Valley
— to the Temple on Zion — the eastern portion. . .
The great arch, its span 41 feet 6 inches and its width
upwards of 50 feet, which supported this causeway,
was broken down by command of Titus, when at
length the whole of Jerusalem had fallen Into his
power; and the arch-stones, hard, and their forms
still as clearly defined as when they fell, and ee/*h one
weighing at least 20 tons, may now be seen in tlte
excavated cavern, at the bottom of the shaft, preserved
In safety while hidden from sight through eighteen cen-
turies by the gradually accumulating covering of ruins
and earth, that at length rose 50 feet above them. . .
It would be difficult to find any relic of ancient times
more interesting than this broken archway. The
Apostles must very often have passed over it, while
yet the arch remained entire ; and so also must their
Master and ours often have parsed over it with them."
(See Report of the Palestine Exploration Fund, for
1867-68, pp. 52-58 (by Lieut. Warren), and the articls
Krploration of Palrstint, In The Quiv*r, p. 619, by
Rev. G. Boutell (Lond. 1868).) H
Digitized by
Google
JERUSALEM
i to the southern wall, and bounding the solid
Beyond this point the Harem area is filled
up with a aeries of light arches supported on square
piers (shown in the annexed woodcut, No. 8), the
whole being of so alight a construction that it may
be affirmed with absolute certaintr that neither the
Stoa basilica, nor any of the larger buildings of
the Temple, ever stood on them. The proof of this
is not difficult. Taking Joaephiu'a account of the
great Stoa as we find it, be states that it consisted
of four rows of Corinthian pillars, 40 in each row.
If they extended along the whole length of the
present southern wall Obey must have Iweu spaced
between 23 and 24 feet apart, and this, from our
knowledge of the works of the ancients, we may
assert to be architecturally impossible. But, far
more than this, the piers that support the vault* in
question are only about 3 feet 6 inches by 3 feet 3
Inches square, while the pillars which it is assumed
they supported were between 5 and 6 feet in diam-
JEKUSALEM
1816
eter (Ant xv. 11, § 6), so that, if this were so, tfas
foundations must have been practically about half
the area of the columns they supported. Even
this is not all : the piers in the vaults are so irreg-
ularly spaced, some 17, some 20 or 21, and on*
eveu 30 feet apart, that the pillars of the Stoa
must have stood in most instances on the crown or
sides of the arches, and these are so weak (as may
be seen from the roots of the trees above having
struck through them) that they could not for one
hour have supported the weight. In fact there can
be no doubt whatever that the buildings of the
Temple never stood on this frail prop, and also that
no more solid foundations ever existed here ; for the
bare rock is everywhere visible, and if ever more
solidly built upon, the remains of such construc-
tions could not have disappeared. In so far, there-
fore, as the southern wall is concerned, we may rest
perfectly satisfied with Joeephus's description that
the Temple extended east and west 600 feet.
Ma 8. — Becuoo of vaults in 3. E. angle of Hanoi,
The position of the northern wall is as easily
fixed. U the Temple was square it must have com-
menced at a point 600 feet from the southwest
angle, and in fact the southern wall of the platform
which now surrounds the so-called Mosque of Omar
runs parallel to the southern wall of the inclosure,
at a distance of exactly 600 feet, while westward it
la continued in a causeway which crosses the valley
just 600 feet from the southwestern angle. It may
also bo mentioned that from this point the western
wall of the Harem area no longer follows the same
direction, but inclines slightly to the westward, in-
dicating a .difference (though perhaps not of much
value) in the purpose to which it was applied.
Moreover the south wall of what is now the plat-
form of the Dome of the Rock runs eastward from
the western wall for just 600 feet; which again
?'vea the same dimension for the north wall of the
ample as was found for the southern wall by the
Imitation of the solid space before the commence-
ment of the vaults. AU these points will be now
dear by reference to the plan on the next page
(wood-cut No. 4), where the dimensions are stated
In English feet, according to the best available au-
thorities, not in Greek feet, which alone are used in
the text.
The only point in Joseplus's description which
teams to have misled topographers with regard to
these dimensions is his assertion that the Temple
((tended from one valley to the other (Ant. xv. 11,
| 8). If he had named the valley or Identified It
h any way with the Valley of Kedron this might
■are been a difficulty; but as it is only a valW it
« of less importance, especially as the manner in
which the vaults extend northwards immediately
beyond the eastern wall of the Temple is sufficient
to show that such a depression once existed here as
to justify his expression. But. whatever importance
may be attached to there indefinite words, they
never can be allowed to outweigh the written dimen-
sions and the local indications, which show that the
Temple never could have extended more than 600
feet from the western wall.
It has been objected to this conclusion that if
the Temple were only 600 feet square, it would oe
impossible to find space within its walls for all the
courts and buildings mentioned by Josephus and
in the Talmud. This difficulty, however, has no
real foundation in fact, and the mode in which the
interior may have been arranged, so as to meet all
the exigencies of the ease, will be explained in
treating of the Temple. But in the mean while
it seems impossible to escape from the conclusioa
that the square space indicated by shading in the
plan (wood-cut No. 4) was the exact area occupied
by the Jewish Temple as rebuilt by Herod, and as
described by Josephus. [Against tins view, see §
IV. Amer. ed.]
II. Hippiau. — Ot all the towers that ones
adorned the city of Jerusalem only one now exists
in anything like a state of perfection. Being in the
centre of the citadel, on one of the most elevated
points of the city, it strikes the traveller's eye
whichever way he turns; and from its prominence
now, and the importance which Josephus ascribes
to the tower Hippicus, it has been somewhat hastily
assumed that the two are identical. The reasons,
however, against this assumption are too cogent to
Digitized by
Google
IBM
JKBU8AUEM
M*. *.— ItaufBiim Am at
Digitized by
Google
JERUSALEM
mW of the identity being admitted. Josephus
fives the dimensions of the Hippieua as 36 cubits,
jr 37 J bet square, whereas the tower in the citadel
is 56 feet 6 inches by TO feet 3 inches (Rob. BiU.
Ret. 1st ed. i. 456), and, as Josephus never dimin-
ish? i the size of anything Jewish, this alone should
make us pause. Even if we are to assume that it
is one of the three great towers built by Herod, as
far as its architecture b concerned, it may as well
be Phasaelus or Mariamne as Hippieua. Indeed its
dimensions accord with the first named of these far
better than with the last. But the great test is
the locality, and unfortunately the tower in the
citadel hardly agrees in this respect in one point
with the description of Josephus. In the first place
he makes it a corner tower, whereas, at the time he
wrote, the tower in the citadel must hare been in a
reentering angle of the wall, as it is now. In the
next be says it was "over against Psephinus"
{B. J. v. 4, % 3), which never could be said of this
tower. Again, in the same passage, he describes
the three towers as standing on the north side of
the waB. If tills were so, the two others must have
been in his time in the centre of the city, where
Herod never would have placed them. They also
are said to have stood on a height, whereas east-
ward of the citadel the ground falls rapidly. Add
to these that the position of the army of Titus when
he sat down before Jerusalem is in itself almost
sufficient to settle the point After despatching
the 10th Legion to the Mount of Olives he located
himself with the principal division of his army
opposite the Tower Psephinus, but his right wing
" fortified itself at the tower called Hippieua, and
was distant in like manner about two stadia from
the city" (B. J. v. 8, J 6). It Is almost im-
possible to apply this paaaage to the tower in the
citadel, against which no attack ever was made or
intended. Indeed, at no period of the siege did
Titus attempt to storm the walls situated on the
heights. His attack was made from the northern
plateau, and it was there that his troops were en-
camped, and consequently it must have been
opposite the angle now occupied by the remains
called the Katr Jatud that they were placed. From
the context it seems almost impossible that they
could hare been encamped in the valley opposite
the present citadeL
These, and other objections which will be noticed
In the sequel, seem fatal to the idea of the tower in
the citadel being the one Josephus alludes to. But
at the northwestern angle of the present city there
are the remains of an ancient building of beveled
masonry and large stones, like those of the founda-
tions of the Temple (Rob. BiU. Ren. 1. 471; Schultz,
96; Krafft, 37, Ac.), whose position answers so com-
tely every point of the locality of Hippieua as
riled by Josephus, as to leave no reasonable
donkt that it marks the site of this celebrated
edifice. It stood and stands " on the northern side
if the old wall " — "out height," the very highest
point in the town — " over against Psephinus " —
■ * Nothing could seam to bs men palpable to an
abssrver, than that In the Tower of David, so called,
to Che present citadel of Jerusalem, wo have the re-
sales of one of the three great Hendlan towers.spared
■y Tins, when the city was demolished (B. /. vi. 7,
1 1). Mo theory, which would make It u ire modern,
MB explain the structure. Its lower part bears every
park of antiquity, and Its cuMe volkllty (an unusual
•stars) accords with Jeeaphus's dsscripooo of these
JERUSALEM 1817
- is a comer tower," and just such a one as wouk
naturally be taken as the starting-point for the
description of the walls. Indeed, if it had hap-
pened that the A"a«r Jahtd were as wed pre s erve d
as the tower in the citadel, or that the latter had
retained only two or three courses of its masonry,
it is more than probable that no one would have
doubted that the Kotr. Jahtd was tho Hippicus;
but with that tendency which prevails to ascribe a
uame to what is prominent rather than to what is.
less obvious, these remains have been overlooked,
and difficulties have been consequently introduced
into the description of the city, which have hitherto
seemed almost insuperable.
III. If alb. — Assuming therefore for the present
that the Katr Jahtd, as these ruins sre now popu-
larly called, Is the remains of the Hippicus, we have
no difficulty in determining either the direction or
the extent of the walla of Jerusalem, as described
by Josephus (B. J. v. 4, § 3), and as shown in
Hate I.
The first or oM wall began on the north at the
tower called Hippicus, and, extending to the Xystua,
joined the council house, and ended at the west
cloister of the Temple. Its southern direction is
described as passing the Gate of the Essenes (prob-
ably the modern Jaffa Gate), and, bending above
the fountain of Siloam, it reached Ophel, and was
joined to tie eastern dottier of tie Temple. The
importance of this last indication will be apparent
in the sequel when speaking r f the third wall.
The second wall began at the Gate Gennath, in
the old wall, probably near the Hippicus, and passed
round the northern quarter of tie city, inclosing,
as will be shown hereafter, the great valley of the
TyropcBon, which leads up to the Damascus Gate;
and then, proceeding southward, joined the fortress
Antonia. Recent discoveries of old beveled masonry
in the immediate proximity of the Damascus Gate
leave little doubt but that, to far at least, its direc-
tion was identical with that of the modern wall;
and some part at least of the northern portion of
the 'western wall of the Harem area is probably
built on its foundations.
The third wall was not commenced till twelve
years after the date of the Crucifixion, when it was
undertaken by king Herod Agrippa; and was in-
tended to inclose the suburbs which had grown out
on the northern sides of the city, which before this
had been left exposed (B. J. v. 4, § 3). It began
at the Hippicus, and reached as far as the tower
Psephinus, till it came opposite the monument of
Queen Helena of Adiabene; it then paaaed by the
sepulchral monuments of the kings — a well-known
locality — and turning south at the monument of
the Fuller, joined lie old wall at lie ralley called
til Valley of Kedram. This last is perhaps the
most important point in the description. If the
Temple had extended the whole width of the modem
Haram area, this wall must have joined its northern
clcisier, or if the whole of the north side of the
Temple were covered by the tower Antonia it might
towers. (.B. /. v. 4, J 8.) If It was either of them, It
must have been Hippicus, for Phaaaelui and Harbmne
lay els'' of it, and there could not have been a fortress
west ct '.his point. Its position relative to the rite of
the Temple, and to the wall which stretched between
them, along the northern brow of Zlon, harmonxsas
with this view. The ruins of KOTai tt-jiltul oner ne
rlva. claim — suggesting nothing more than a roodare
basLuO and an ancient wall. 8. W.
Digitized by
Google
1818 JERUSALEM
ante been laid to have extended to that fortran,
bat in either of these cues it is quite impossible
that it could hare passed outside the present Haram
•all so as to meet the old wall at the southeastern
angle of the Temple, where Josephus in his de-
scription makes the old wall end. There does not
seem to be any possible solution of the difficult;,
except the one pointed out -above, that the Temple
was only 600 feet square; that the space between
the Temple and the Valley of Kedron was not In-
closed within the walls till Agrippa's time, and
that the present eastern wall of the Haram is the
identical wall built by that king — a solution which
not only accords with the words of Josephus but
with all the local peculiarities of the place.
It may also be added that Josephus's description
(B. J. v. 4, § 3) of the immense stones of which
this wall was constructed, fully bears out the ap-
pearance of the great stones at the angles, and does
away with the necessity of supposing, on account
of their magnificence, that they are parts of the
substructure of the Temple proper.
After describing these walls, Josephus adds
that the whole circumference of the city was 33
stadia, or nearly four English miles, which is as
near as may be the extent indicated by the localities.
He then adds (B. J. v. 4, § 3) that the number of
towers in the old wall was 60, the middle wall 40,
and the new wall 99. Taking the distance of these
towers as 150 feet from centre to centre, which is
probably very near the truth on the average, the
first and last named walls are as nearly as may be
commensurate, but the middle wall is so much too
short that either we must assume a mistake some-
where, or, what is more probable, that Josephus
enumerated the towers not only to where it ended
at the Antonia, but round the Antonia and Temple
to where it joined the old wall abore Siloam. With
this addition the 160 feet again is perfectly con-
sistent with the facts of the case and with the
localities. Altogether it appears that the extent
and direction of the walls is not now a matter ad-
mitting of much controversy, and probably Would
never have been so, but for the difficulties arising
from the position of the Church of the Holy
Sepulchre, which will be alluded to hereafter."
IV. Antonin. — Before leaving the subject of
the walls, it may be well to fix the situation of the
Turrit Antonia, as far as the data at our command
will admit It certainly was attached to the Temple
buildings, and on the northern side of them ; but
whether covering the whole space, or only a portion,
has been much disputed. After stating that the
Temple was foursquare, and a stadium on each side,
Josephus goes on to say (B. J. v. 6, $ 3), that with
Antonia it was six stadia in circumference. The
most obvious conclusion from this would be that
the Antonia was of the same dimensions as the
Temple, and of the form shown in the diagram
;wood-cut No. 5), where A marks the Temple, and
B Antonia, according to this theory. In other
• * Josephus (23. /. v. 4, J 4, vt. 8, J 1) represent*
the oU wall, with its towers, to have been carried
along the brow of an emlneoce, Increasing their ap-
parent elevation. The course given In the preceding
Bap (Plate I) could never have been the line which
he describes.
This wall extended from Hippicus to the Xystas,
vbleh was an open place, used for popular assemblies,
m the eastern brow of Son, and connected by the
MMsa with the Temple. (B. J. U. 16, § 8, Tt. 6, { 2,
* t, | L) A flanes at the map will show that n
JERUSALEM
words, it assumes that the Anfamia oonnplon' sjas>
tically the platform on which the so-called Mosqat
of Omar now stands, and there is nothing In the
locality to contradict such an assumption (sat B. J
o e
i
A
No. 6.
He 6.
vi.8,§4). On the contrary, tiM fs4 c*MI» Sikhrt
being the highest rock in the immediate neighbor-
hood would confirm all we are told of the situation
of the Jewish citadel. There are, however, certain
facta mentioned in the account of the siege which
render such a view nearly if not quite untenable.
It is said that when Titus reviewed his army on
Besetha (B. J. v. 9, § 1), the Jews looked on from
the north wall of the Temple. If Antonia, on higher
ground, and probably with higher walls, had inter-
vened, this could not have been possible; and the
expression must have been that they looked on
from the walls of Antonia. We have also a pssssge
(B. J. v. 7, § 3) which makes this even clearer; it
is there asserted that " John and his faction de-
fended themselves from the tower Antonia, and
from the northern cloisters of the Temple, and fought
the Romans " (from the context evidently simul-
taneously) " before the monument of king Alex-
ander." We are therefore forced to adopt the
alternative, which the words of Josephus equally
justify, that the Antonia was a tower or keep
attached to the north we st er n angle of the Temple,
as shown in the plan. Indeed, the words of Jose-
phus hardly justify any other interpretation ; for he
says (£. J. v. 5, § 8) that " it was situated at the
corner of two cloisters of the court of the Temple —
of that on the west, and that on the north." Prob-
ably it was surrounded by a wall, inclosing courts
and other appurtenances of a citadel, and with its
inclosing wall at least two stadia in circuit. It may
hare been two and a half, or even three, as shown
in the diagram (wood cut No. 6), where C marks
the size and position of the Antonia on the sup-
position that its entire circumference was two stadia,
and D D the size it would attain if only three of its
sides were counted, and if Josephus did not reckon
the (bur stadia of the Temple as a fixed quantity,
and deducted the part covered by the fortress from
the whole sum ; but in this instance we have ne
local indication to guide us. The question hoi be-
come one of no very great importance, as it is quits
certain that, if the Temple was only 600 feet square,
it did not occupy the whole of the northern half of
this feature the line given does not correspond with
the description.
The third wall, as above stated, joined the (south-
ward part of the) old wall at the valley called the
Valley of Kldron. It could not, then, have Joined It
at the point Indicated In the text and map, fur tfcos
point lies between the Kldron and the Tyropceon valleys,
more than one third of the distance from the trnia i .
The specification which this writer considers R ths
most Important point m the description," hi nlslsasl
by Dr. Bobineon in support of the theory which a*
seeks to dtapUee. (KM. Bu L 461.) ft. W
Digitized by
Google
JERUSALEM
i area, and consequently that neither was
Ja> " pool of Bethesda " ita northern ditch, nor the
lock on which the govemo- s houae now stands its
rock foundation. With the Temple area fixed aa
above, by no hypothesis could it be made to stretch
as far aa that; and the object, therefore, which
many topographera had in view in extending the
dimensions, must now be abandoned."
V. Bills and Valley. — Notwithstanding the
very great degree of certainty with which the site
of the Temple, the position of the Hippicus, and
the direction of the walls may be determined, there
are still one or two points within the city, the
positions of which have not yet been fixed in so
satisfactory a manner. Topographers are still at
1»> a aa to the true direction of the upper part of
the Tyropoeon Valley, and, consequently, as to the
position of Acre, and various smaller points de-
pendent on the fixation of these two. Fortunately
the determination of these points has no bearing
whatever on any of the great historical questions
ariaing out of the topography; and though it would
no doubt be satisfactory if they could be definitively
settled, they are among the least important points
that arise in discussing the descriptions of Josephus.
The difficulty of determining the true oourse of
the upper part of the Tyropomn valley is caused by
our inability to determine whether Josephus, in
describing the city (B. J. v. 4, § 1), limits his de-
scription to the city of Jerusalem, properly so called,
as circumscribed by the first or old widl, or whether
he includes the City of David also, and speaks of
the whole city as inclosed by the third or great
wall of Agrippa. In the first case the Tyropoeon
must have been the depression leading from a spot
opposite the northwest angle of the Temple towards
the Jaffa Gate; in the second it was the great valley
leading from the same point northwards towards
the Damascus Gate.
The principal reason for adopting the first hy-
pothesis arises from the words of Josepbus himself,
who describes the Tyropoeon as an open space or
depression within the city, at " which the corre-
sponding rows of houses on both hills end " (B. J.
v. 4, § 1). This would exactly answer the position
of a valley running to the Jaffa Gate, and conse-
quently within the old walls, and would apply to
such a ravine as might easily have been obliterated
by accumulation of rubbish in after times; but it
U not so easy to see how it can be made applicable
to such a valley aa that running towards the Da-
mascus Gate, which must have had a wall on either
side, and the slope of which is so gradual, that then,
aa now, the "rows of houses" might — though it
by no means follows that they must — have run
serosa it without interruption. We cannot indeed
apply the description to this valley, uzuess we assume
that the bouses were built close up to the old wall,
so as to leave almost no plain space in front of it,
or that the formation of the bottom of the valley
was originally steeper and narrower than it now is.
On the whole, this view presents perhaps less dif-
ficulty than the obliteration of the other valley,
which ita most zealous advocates an now forced to
admit, after the most patient search ; added to the
lifSeulty that must have existed in carrying the old
wall across ita gorge, which Josepbus would have
Muted at had it existed.
JERUSALEM
1819
The direct evidence seems so nearly balaaoai,
that either hypothesis might be adopted if we wen
content to fix the position of the hill Acra front
that of this valley, as is usually done, instead of
from extraneous evidence, ss we fortunately are abk
to do with tolerable certainty in this matter.
In all the transactions mentioned in the 12th
and 13th books of the Antiqudlitt, Joaephus com-
monly uses the word 'Axpa ss the corresponding
term to the Hebrew word Mttz&duh, translated
stronghold, fortress, and tower in the books of the
Maccabees, when speaking of the fortress which ad-
joined the Temple in the north ; and if we might
assume that the hill Acre and the tower Acra were
one and the same place, the question might be con-
sidered aa settled.
It is more than probable that this was so, for in
describing the " upper market place," which was
called the "citadel" by David (B. J. r. { 1).
Joaephus uses the word (ppoipioy, which he also
applies to the Acra after it was destroyed (Ant. xiii.
16, § 5), or Brfpu, as the old name apparently
immediately before it was rebuilt by Herod, and by
him called the Antonia (Ant. xviii. 4, § 3).
It is also only by assuming that the Acra was
on the Temple Hill that we can understand the
position of the valley which the Asmoneaus filled
up. It certainly was not the northern part of the
Tyropoeon which is apparent at the present day,
nor the other valley to the westward, the filling up
of which would not have joined the city to the
Temple (B. J. v. 4, § 1). It could only hare been
a transverse valley running in the direction of, and
nearly in the position of, the Via Dolorosa.
It is true that Josephus describes the citadel or
Acra of Jerusalem (Ant. xiii. 4, 9) as situated in
the " lower city " (ip tjj tcir* irikfi, xii. fi, § 4,
B. J. i. 1, § 4), which would equally apply to either
of the assumed sites, were it not that he qualifies
it by saying that it was built so high as to dominate
the Temple, and at the same time lying close to it
(Ant. xii. 9, § 3), which can only apply to a build-
ing situated on the Temple Hill. It must also be
observed that the whole of the Temple Hill is very
much lower than the hill on which the city itself
was located, and, consequently, that the Temple
and its adjuncts may, with great propriety, be
called the lower city, as contradistinguished from
the other half, which, from the superior elevation
of the plateau on which it stands, is truly the upper
city.
If we adopt this view, it will account for the
great leveling operations which at one time have
been carried on at the northwestern angle of the
Haram area, and the marks of which have been
always a puzzle to antiquaries. These are utterly
unmeaning on any hypothesis yet suggested, for so
far from contributing to the defense of any work
erected here, their effect from their position must
have been the very reverse. But if we admit that
they were the works which occupied the Jews for
three years of incessant labor (Ant. xiii. 7, § 8)
after the destruction of the Acre, their appearance
is at once accounted for, and the description of
Josephus made plain.
If this view of the matter be correct, the word
ifupdcvprot (B. J. v. 6, § 1), about which eo much
controversy has bean raisrl, most be translated
» *Tbe opposite view, namely, that the fortress
latatua apparently occupied the whole northern part
a? aha peasant Haram area, is strongly pre s ented by
Dr. Jottnson, in BM. Sam, m. «II-«M. Alto k
su &»., ima, pa. ao-at* a w.
Digitized by
Google
1820 JERUSALEM
'■ doping down on either ride," a meaning which it
•HI bear equally as well u "gibbons," which is
usually affixed to it, and which only could be ap-
plied if the hill within the old wall were indicated.
On renewing the whole question, the great pre-
ponderance of evidence aeemt to be in favor of the
aanunption that the hill Acra and the citadel Acra
were one and tho same place ; that Acra was sit-
uated on the northern aide of the Temple, on the
same hill, and probably on the same spot, originally
occupied by David as the stronghold of Zion (2 Sam.
v. 7-9), and near where Baris and Antonia after-
wards stood ; and consequently that the great
northern depression running towards the Damascus
Gate is the Tyropceon valley, and that the Valley of
the Aamoneans was a transverse cut, separating
the hill Bezetha from the Acra or citadel on the
Temple Hill.
If this view of the internal topography of the
city be granted, the remaining hills and valleys fall
into their places easily and as a matter of course.
The citadel, or upper market-place of Joaephus, was
the modern Zion, or the city inclosed within the
old wall ; Acra was the ancient Zion, or the hill on
which the Temple, the City of David, Baris, Acra,
and Antonia, stood. It lay over against the other;
and apparently between these two, in the valley,
stood the lower city, and the place called MiBo.
Bezetha was the well-defined hill to the north of
the Temple, just beyond the valley in which the
Piscina Probation was situated. The fourth hill
which Joaephus enumerates, but does not name,
must have been tbe ridge between the last-named
valley and that of the Tyropceon, and was separated
from the Temple Hill by the Valley of the Aa-
moneans. The other minor localities will be pointed
out in the sequel as they occur in order."
VI. Population. — There is no point in which
tbe exaggeration iu which Joeephus occasionally
indulges is more apparent than in speaking of the
population of the city. The inhabitants were dead ;
no record remained ; and to magnify the greatness
of tbe city was a compliment to the prowess of the
conquerors. Still the assertions that three millions
were collected at the Passover (B. J. vi. 9, § 3);
that a million of people perished in the siege; that
100,000 escaped, etc., are so childish, that it is sur-
prising any one could ever have repeated them.
Even the more moderate calculation of Tacitus of
600,000 inhabitants, is far beyond the limits of prob-
ability.'
Placing the Hippicus on the farthest northern
point possible, and consequently extending the walls
as fat as either authority or local circumstances will
admit, still the area within the old walls never could
have exceeded 180 acres. Assuming, as is some-
times done, that the site of the present Church of
the Holy Sepulchre was outside the old walls, this
area must be reduced to 130 or 130 acres; but
taking it at the larger area, its power of accom-
nodating such a multitude as Joaephus describes
nay be illustrated by reference to a recent example.
The great Exhibition Building of 1861 covered 18
seres — just a tenth of this. On three days near
to closing 100,000 or 105,000 persons visited it;
* * for an answer to tt» speetriatlens under this
toad, me. in part, BM. &tcn,m. 417-438, Bob. AM.
*>i. 1863, pp. 307-311, and, in part, Meson IV.,
toiow. a. w.
a It fa tnsaroetlve to compsie these with>tb»modcrete
F Jeremiah (IU. 38-80) where or .enumerates
JERUSALEM
but it is not assumed that more than from 60,0(1
to 70,000 were under its roof at the same moment
Any one who was in the building on these days
will recollect how impossible it was to more from
one place to another ; how frightful in fact the
crush was both in the galleries and on the floor,
and that in many places even standing room could
hardly be obtained ; yet if 600,000 or 700,000 people
were in Jerusalem after the fall of the outer wall
(almost at the beginning of the siege), the crowd
there must have been denser than in the Crystal
Palace; eating, drinking, sleeping, or figblng, lit-
erally impossible; anu considering bow the site of a
town must be encumbered with buildings, 300^XiC
in Jerusalem would have been more crowded than
were the sight-seen at the Crystal Palace in ill
moat crowded moments.
But fortunately we are not left to such vagiu
data aa these. No town in the east can be pointed
out where each inhabitant has not at least 60 square
yards on an average allowed to him. In some of
the crowded cities of the west, such as parts of
London, Liverpool, Hamburg, etc., the space is
reduced to about 30 yards to each inhabitant; but
this only applies to the poorest and more crowded
places, with houses many stories high, not to cities
containing palaces and public buildings. London,
on the other hand, averages 800 yards of superficial
space for every person living within its preclude.
But, on the lowest estimate, the ordinary popula-
tion of Jerusalem must have stood nearly as fol-
lows: Taking the area of the city inclosed by the
two old wails at 760,000 yards, and that inclosed by
the wall of Agrippa at 1 ,600,000, we have 8,360,000
for the whole. Taking the population of the old
city at the probable number of one person to M
yards we have 16,000, and at the extreme limit of
80 yards we should have 86,000 inhabitants for the
old city. And at 100 yards to each individual if
the new city about 15,000 more; so that the popu
lation of Jerusalem, in its days of greatest proa
parity, may have amounted to from 30,000 to 48,
000 souls, but could hardly ever have reached
50,000; and assuming that in times of festival one
half were added to this amount, which ia an extreme
estimate, there may hare been 60,000 or 70,000 in
the city when Titus came up againat it. Aa no one
would atay in a beleaguered city who had a home to
flee to, it ia hardly probable that the men who came
up to fight for the defense of the city would equal
the number of women and children who would seek
refuge elsewhere; so that the probability is that
about the usual population of the city were in it at
that time.
It may also be mentioned that the army which
Titus brought up against Jerusalem did not exceed
from 85,000 to 30,000 effective men of all arms,
which, taking the probabilities of the case, is slant
the number that would be required to attack a for-
tified town defended by from 8,000 to 10,000 men
capable of bearing arms. Had the garrison been
more numerous the aiege would have been improb-
able, but taking the whole incidents of Josephns'i
narrative, there ia nothing to lead lis to suppose
that the Jews ever cotul have mustered 10,00*
the number of persona carried Into captivity fey Neba
ebadnaaaar In three deportations from both tUf and
province as only 4,600, though they eeem to have ewes'
off every one who could go, ntar>y dipopalaamg fht
Digitized by
Google
JERUSALEM
at on; period of the siege; half that
U probably nearer the truth. The main
Interest thi* question has in a topographical point
if view, is the additional argument it affords for
placing Hippicus as far north as it has been placed
above, and generally to extend the wails to the
greatest extent justifiable, in order to accommodate
a population at all worth j of the greatness of the
sit;. It is also interesting as showing the utter
impossibility of the argument of those who would
except the whole northwest corner of the present
dty from the old walls, so as to accommodate the
Holy Sepulchre with a site outside the walls, in
ace irdanoe with the Bible narrative.
VII. Zim. — One of the great difficulties which
has perplexed most authors in examining the ancient
topography of Jerusalem, is the correct fixation of
the locality of the sacred Mount of Zion. It can-
not be disputed that from the time of Constantine
downwards to the present day, this name has been
applied to the western hill on which the city of
Jerusalem now stands, and in fact always stood.
Notwithstanding this, it seems equally certain
that up to the time of the destruction of the city
by Titus, the name was applied exclusively to the
eastern hill, or that on which the Temple stood.
Unfortunately the name Zion is not found in the
works of Joeephua, so that we hare not his assist-
ance, which would be invaluable in this case, and
there is no passage in the Bible which directly
asserts the identity of the hills Moriah and Zion,
though many which cannot well be understood
without this assumption. The eumulutive proof,
however, is such as almost perfectly to supply this
want.
From the passages in 3 Sam. v. 7, and 1 Cbr.
xL 5-8, it is quite clear that Zion and the city of
David were identical, for it is there said, " David
took the castle of Zion, which is the City of David."
*' And David dwelt in the castle, therefore they
called it the City of David. And he built the rity
round about, even from Millo round about, and
Joab repaired the rest of the city." This last ex-
pressixi would seem to separate the city of Jeru-
salem which was rtpnired, from that of David
which was built, though it is scarcely distinct enough
to be relied upon. Besides these, perhaps the most
distinct passage is that in the 48th Psalm, verse 3,
where it is said, « Beautiful for situation, the joy
of the whole earth, is Mount Zion, on the mk§ of
At north, the city of the great King," which it
seems almost impossible to apply to the modern
Zion, the most southern extremity of the city.
There are also a great many passages in the Bible
wliere Zion is spoken of as a separate city from
Jerusalem, as for instance, " For out of Jerusalem
shall go forth a remnant, and they that escape out
jf Mount Zion " (3 K. six. 31). " Do good in thy
good pleasure unto Zion ; build thou the walls of
Jerusalem" (Ps. li. 18). '•The Lord shall yet
jomfbrt Zion, and shall yet choose Jerusalem"
(Zech. i. 17). " For the people shall dwell in Zion
at Jerusalem" (Is. xxx. 19). "The Lord shall
•oar out of Zion, and utter his voice from Jeru-
salem" (Joel ill. 16; Am. 1. 3). There am also
aumberless passages in which Zion is spoken of as
a Holy place in such terms aa are never applied to
Jerusalem, and which can only be understood aa
(polled to the Holy Temple Mount. Such expres-
sions, for instance, as " I set my king on my holy
Vffl of Zion" (Ps. ii. 6) — » The Lord loveth the
•ajfsef Zioo mm than all the dwellings of Janob "
JERUSALEM 1821
(Ps. lxxxvii. 3) — "The Lord has chosen Ztea"
(Ps. exxxii. 13) — " The city of the Lcrd, the Zion
of the Holy One of Israel " (Is. tx. 14) — " Arise ye,
and let us go up to Zion to the Lord " (Jer. xxcb
6) — " Thus saith the Lord, I am returned to Zion "
(Zech. riii. 3) — - 1 am the Lord thy God, dwelling
in Zion, my holy mountain" (Joel iii. 17) — "For
the I.ord dwelleth in Zion" (Joel iii. 31), and
many others, which will occur to every one at all
familiar with the Scriptures, seem to us to indicate
plainly the hill of the Temple. Substitute the word
Jerusalem for Zion in these passages, and we fed
at once how it grates on toe ear; for such epithet*
as these are never applied to that city; on the con-
trary, if there is a curse uttered, or term of dis-
paragement, it is seldom applied to Zion, but always
to her unfortunate sister, Jerusalem.. It is never
said, — The Lord dwelleth in Jerusalem ; or, loveth
Jerusalem; or any such expression, which surely
would have occurred, had Jerusalem and Zion been
one and the same place, as they now are, and gen-
erally supposed to hare been. Though these cannot
be taken as absolute proof, they certainly amount
to strong presumptive evidence that Zion and the
Temple Hill were one and the same place. There
is one curious passage, however, which is scarcely
intelligible on any other hypothesis than this; it is
known that the sepulchres of David and his suc-
cessors were on Mount Zion, or in the City of David,
but the wicked king Abaz for his crimes was buried
in Jerusalem, "in the tit>,'' and "not in the
sepulchres of the kings" (3 Cbr. xxviii. 37). Je-
horam (2 Chr. xxi. 30) narrowly escaped the same
punishment, and the distinction is so marked that
it cannot be overlooked. The modern sepulchre of
David (JVrdj Dnid) is, and always must have been
in Jerusalem ; not, as the Bible expressly tdh us,
in the dty of David, as contradistinguished from
the dty of the Jebudtes.
When from the Old Testament we tum to the
Books of the Maccabees, we come to some passages
written by persons who certainly were acquainted
with the localities, which seem to fix the site of
/km with a considerable amount of certainty; as,
for instance, " They went up into Mount Zkm, and
saw the sanctuary desolate and the altar profaned,
and the shrubs growing in the courts as a forest "
(1 Mace. iv. 87 and 60). " After this went Nicanor
up to Mount Zion, and there came out of the
sanctuary certain persons " (1 Macs. vil. 33), and
several others, which stem to leave no doubt that
at that time Zion and the Temple Hill were con-
sidered one and the same place. It may ak» bs
added that the Rabbis with one accord place the
Temple on Mount Zion, and though tbrir authority
in matters of doctrine may be valueless, still their
traditions ought to hare been sufficiently distinct
to justify their bang considered as authorities on a
merely topographical point of this sort. There is
aaw a passage in Nehemlah (iii. 16) which will bs
alluded to Ui the next section, and which, added to
the above, seems to leave very little doubt that in
ancient times the name of Zion was applied to the
eastern and not to the western hill of Jerusalem.
[See I IT. Amer. ed.]
VIII. Topograph} of tht Book of Nthmink,—
The only description of the ancient dty of Jeru-
salem which exists in the Bible, so extensive in
form as to ruble us to follow it as a to pog ra ph ical
I description, u that found in the Book of Nehemiah,
land ahhouga it is hardly sufficiently distinct U
snabl* us to sstUs aU the moot points, h mmttlmt
Digitized by
Google
1822 JERUSALEM
such valuable Indications that It if well worthy of
the most attentive examination.
WW Wt
The easieet way to arrive at any correct conclu-
sion regarding it, is to take first the description of
the Dedication of the Walls in eh. xii. (31-40), and
drawing such a diagram as this, we easily get at
the main features of the old wall at least.
The order of procession was that the princes of
Judah went up upon the wall at some point as
nearly as possible opposite to the Temple, and one
half of them, turning to the right, went towards
the Dung Gate, " and at the Fountain Gate, which
was over ngninst them " (or. In other words, on the
opposite or Temple side of the city), " went up by
the stairs of the City of David at the going up of
the wall, above the house of David, even unto the
Water Gate eastward." The Water Gate, therefore,
was one of the southern gates of the Temple, and
the stairs that led up to it are here identified with
those of the City of David, and consequently with
Zkm.
The other party turned to the left, or north-
wards, and passed from lieyond the tower of the
furnaces even " unto the broad wall," and passing
the Gate of Ephralm, the Old Gate, the Fish Gate,
the towers of Hananeel and Mean, to the Sheep
Gate, " stood still in the Prison Gate," as the other
party had in the Water Gate. " So stood the two
companies of them that gave thanks in the house
of God."
If from this we turn to the third chapter, which
gives a description of the repairs of the wall, we
have no difficulty in identifying all the places men-
tioned in the first sixteen verses, with those enu-
merated in the 13th chapter. The repairs began
at the Sheep Gate on the north side, and in imme-
diate proximity with the Temple, and all the places
named in the dedication are again named, but in
the reverse order, till we come to the Tower of the
Furnaces, which, if not identical with the tower in
the cita.lel, so often mistaken for the Hippicus,
jamt at least have stood very near to it- Mention
is then made, but now in the direct order of the
dedication, of "the Valley Gate," the "Dung Gate,"
" the Fountain Gate-. " and lastly, the " stairs that
go down from the City of David." Between these
last two places we find mention made of the pool
if SUoah and the king's garden, so that we hare
jocg passed the so-called sepulchre of David on the
Zion, and are in the immediate proximity
JERUSALEM
of the Tempo.; most probably In the nicy te
tween the City of David and the city of Jerusalem
What follows Is most important (ver. 16), '• Aftet
him repaired Kehemiah, the son of Azbuk, the
ruler of the half part of Beth-zur, unto the place
over against the sepulchres of David, and to the
pool that was made, and unto the house of the
mighty." This passage, when taken with the con-
text, seems in itself quite sufficient to set at rest
the question of the position of the City of David,
of the sepulchres of the kings, and consequently of
Son, all which could not he mentioned after Si-
loan if placed where modem tradition has located
them.
If the chapter ended with the 16th verse, there
would be no difficulty in determining the sites men-
tioned above, but unfbrturately we have, according
to this view, retraced our steps ver)' nearly to the
point from which we started, and ha' e got through
only half the places enumerated. Two hypotheses
may be suggested to account for this difficulty;
the one that there was then, as in the time of
Josephus, a second wall, and that the remaining
names refer to it; the other that the first 18 verses
refer to the walls of Jerusalem, and the remaining
16 to those of the City of David. An attentive con-
sideration of the subject renders it almost certain
that the latter is the true explanation of the case.
In the enumeration of the places repaired, in the
last part of the chapter, we have two which we
know from the description of the dedication really
belonged to the Temple. The prison-court (iii.
85), which must have been connected with the
Prison Gate, and, as shown by the order of the ded-
ication, to have been on the north side of the Tem-
ple, is here also connected with the king's high
house; all this clearly referring, as shown above, to
the castle of David, which originally occupied the
site of the Tunis Antonia. We have on the op-
posite side the " Water Gate," mentioned in the
next verse to Ophel, and consequently as clearly
identified with the southern gate of the Temple.
We have also the Horse Gate, that by which Atha-
liah was taken out of the Temple (3 K. xi. 16; S
Chr. xxiii. 16), which Josephus states led to the
Kedron (Ant. ix. 7, § 3), and which is here men-
tioned as connected with the priests' bouses, and
probably, therefore, a part of the Temple. Men-
tion is also made of the bouse of Eliashib, the
high-priest, and of the eastern gate, probably that
of the Temple. In fact, no place is mentioned in
these last verses which cannot be more or less di-
rectly identified with the localities on the Temple
Hill, and not one which can be located in Jerusalem.
The whole of the City of David, however, was so
completely rebuilt and remodeled by Herod, thst
there are no local indications to assist us in ascer-
taining whether the order of description of the
places mentioned after verse 16 proceeds along the
northern face, and round by Ophel, and up behind
the Temple back to the Sheep Gate; or whether,
after crossing the causeway to the armory and
prison, it does not proceed along the western face
of the Temple to Ophel in the south, and then
along the eastern face, back along the northern, to
the place from which the description started. The
latter seems the more probable hypothesis, but the
determination of the point is not of very great con-
sequence. It is enough to know that the descrip-
tion in the first 16 verses applies to Jerusalem, and
In the last 16 to Zion, or the City of David; as
this is sufficient to explain almost all the difleak
Digitized by
Google
m
BOO «M) .TOO 500 100.0
-V
^:Al I
tatttb'.&fo , "''''.
I
1 - -\ \
-
K$
J.
;; : 6^"
TThu-TI
JERUSALEM
Digitized by
Google
Digitized by LjOOQlC
JERUSALEM
in the Old Testament whict refer to the
ancient topograph; of the city. [See § IV., Amer.
sd.]
EC Watert of Jerusalem. — The above deter-
mination explain* moat of the difficulties in under-
standing what is slid in the Bible with regard to the
water-supply of the city. Like Mecca, Jerusalem
seems to have been in all ages remarkable for some
secret source of water, from which it was copiously
supplied during even the worst periods of siege
and famine, and which never appears to have failed
during any period of its history. The principal
source of this supply seems to have been situated
to the north; either on the spot known as the
" camp of the Assyrians," or in the valley to the
northward of it. The earliest distinct mention of
these springs is in 2 Chr. xxxii. 1, 30, where Hez-
ekiah, fearing an attack from the Assyrians,
" stopped the upper water-course of Gihon, and
brought it straight down to the west side of the
City of David; " and again " he fortified the city,
and brought in water into the midst thereof, and
digged the rock with Iron, and made wells for wa-
ter " (Ecclus. xlviii. 17), in other words, he brought
the waters under ground down the valley leading
from the Damascus Gate, whence they have been
traced at the present day "to i pool which he
made" between "the two walls," namely, those of
the cities of David and Jerusalem. Thanks to the
researches of Drs. Robinson and Barclay, we know
bow correct the description of Tacitus is, when he
describes the city as containing, "fons perennis
aquae et carati sub terra montes," etc., for great
rock-cut reservoirs have been found under the Tem-
ple area, and channels connecting them with the
fountain of the Virgin, and that again with the
pool of Siloam ; and many others may probably yet
be discovered.
It would appear that originally the overflow
•rom the great reservoir under the Temple area
must have been by some underground channels,
probably alongside of the great tunnel under the
Mosque el Aksa. This may at least be inferred
from the form of the ground, as well as from the
fact of the southern gate of the Temple being called
the Water Gate. This is further confirmed by the
fact that when the Caliph Omar was searching for
the Sakrah or Holy liock, which was then covered
with filth by the Christians (Jelnt Addin, p. 174),
he was impeded by the water which " ran down
the steps of the gate, so that the greater part of
the steps were under water: " a circumstance which
might very well occur if these channels were ob-
structed or destroyed by the ruins of the Temple
Of course, if it is attempted to apply this tradition
to the Sakrah under the " Dome of the Kock," it
U simply absurd : as, that being the highest point
in the neighborhood, no water could lie around it:
but applying it to the real Sakrah under the Aksa,
.t is not only consistent with facts, but enables us
to understand one more circumstance with regard
to the waters of Jerusalem. It will require, how-
iver, a more critical examination than even that of
Dr. Barclay before we can feel quite certain by
#hich channel the underground waters were co'-
iscted into the great "excavated sea" (wood-cut
No. 4) under the Temple, or by what exact means
lie overflow was managed.
A considerable portion of these waters was at one
time diverted to the eastward to the g-sat reservoir
mown sometimes as the pool of lV'hesda, but,
Vara its probable proximity to the Sheep Gate, as
JEETJ8ALBM
182J
shown above, more properly the " piscina probatlca,"
and which, from the curiously elaborate cbaraatef
of its hydraulic masonry, must always have been
intended as a reservoir of water, and never could
have been the ditch of a fortification. From the'
wood-cut No. 8 it will be perceived that the masonry
consists first of large blocks of stone, 18 or 2C
inches square, marked A. The joints betweeu
their courses have been hollowed out to the depth
of 8 inches, and blocks 16 inches deep inserted in
them. The interstices are then filled up with
smaller stones, 8 inches deep, n. These are cov-
ered with a layer of coarse plaster and concrete (c),
and this again by a fine coating of plaster (u) half
au inch in thickness. It is impossible to conceive
such elaborate pains being taken with a ditch of a
fortress, even if we had any reason to suppose that
a wet ditch ever formed part of the fortifications
of Jerusalem ; but its locality, covering only one
half of one side of the assumed fortress, is suf-
ficient to dispose of that idea, even if no other
reason existed against converting this carefully
formed pool into a ditch of defense-
It seems, however, that even in very ancient
times this northern supply was not deemed suffi-
cient, even with all these precautions, for tb»
supply of the city; and consequently largo reser-
voirs were excavated from the rock, at a place near
Etham. now known as Solomon's pools, and the
water brought from them by a long canal which
enters the city above Siloam, and, with the northern
No. 8. — Section of Masonry lining Pool of
(from Salimann.)
supply, seems at all times to have been sufficient
for the consumption of its limited population, aided
of course by the rain water, which was probably
always stored in cisterns all over the town. The
tank now known as the pool of Hezekiah, situated
near the modern church of the Holy Sepulchre,
cannot possibly be the work referral to, as executed
by him. It is merely a receptacle within the Tails
for the surplus rain water drained into the pool
now known as the Birktt MnmilLi, and as nc cut-
let eastwards or towards the Temple has been fennd,
it cannot ever have been of the importance ascribed
to the work of Hezekiah, even supposing the ob-
jections to the locality did not exist. Tbetie, how-
ever, cannot possibly be got over. [S«e § IV.,
Amer. ed.]
X. Site of Holy S<pufc*re. — If toe preceding
investigations have rendered the topography of the
ancient cit* at all clear, there ought to be no dtfs-
euUy in determining the localities mentioned in lbs
Digitized by
Google
1824
JERUSALEM
K. T. as than in which the niton* scene* of the
Passion and Crucifixion of our Lord took piece,
•"here would in fact be none, were it not that, as
will be shown hereafter, change) were made in the
•ark age*, which have confused the Christian to-
pography of the city to even a greater extent than
the change of the name of Zion from the eastern
to the western hill did that of the Jewish descrip-
tion of the place.
As the question now stands, the fixation of the
sites depends mainly on the answers that may be
given to two questions: First, did Constantine
and those who acted with him possess sufficient
Information to enable them to ascertain exactly the
precise localities of the crucifixion and burial of
Christ? Secondly, is the present church of the
Holy Sepulchre that which he built, or does it
stand on the same spot ?
To the second question a negative answer must
be given, if the first can be answered with any
reasonable degree of probability. Either the local-
Hies could not have been correctly ascertained in
the time of Constantine, or it must be that at some
subsequent period they were changed. The site
of the present church is so obviously at variance
with the facts of tbe Bible narrative, that almost
all the best qualified Investigators have assumed
that the means did not exist for ascertaining the
localities correctly when the church was built, with-
jut its suggesting itself to them that subsequent
ihange may perhaps contain the true solution of the
difficulty. On the other hand everything seems to
tend to confirm the probability of the first question
being capable of being answered satisfactorily.
In tbe first place, though the city was destroyed
by Titus, and the Jews were at one time prohibited
from approaching it, it can almost certainly be
proved that there were Christians always present on
the spot, and tbe succession of Christian bishops
can be made out with very tolerable certainty and
completeness ; so that it is more than probable they
would retain the memory of the sacred sites in
unbroken continuity of tradition. Besides this, it
can be sho*n (Findlay, On the Site of the Holy
Sepulchre) that tbe Koreans recorded carefully all
tbe principal localities in their conquered provinces,
and had maps or plana which would enable them
to ascertain any Important locality with very toler-
able precision. It must also be borne in mind that
during the three centuries that elapsed between the
crucifixion and the age of Constantine, the Christ-
ians were too important a sect, even in the eyes of
the Romans, to be neglected, and their proceedings
and traditions would certainly attract the attention
of at least tbe Roman governor of Judaea; and some
records must certainly have existed in Jerusalem,
which ought to have been sufficient to fix the local-
ities. Even if it is argued that this knowledge
might not have been sufficient to identify the exact
rock-cut sepulchre of Joseph of Arimathasa, it must
*ave been sufficient to determine tbe site of such a
yiace as Golgotha, and of the Pmtorium ; and as
the scenes of toe fassion all lay near one another,
materials must have existed for fixing them with
at least very tolerable approximate certainty. As
the question now lie* between two sites which are
vary far apart, one bri-g- bi the town, the other
m it* eastern boundary, it is nearly certain that
the authorities had the knowledge sufficient to de-
termine at leas* which of the two was tbe most
srobaMe.
Tbe swoon t given by Eusabius of the tm o o v irm y
JBRUSALBM
of the rock, express es no doubt or nuou s aint s steal
the matter. In order to insult the Christian) ac-
cording to his account ( VUn ContL iii. 86), « impi-
ous persons had heaped earth npon it, and erected
an idol temple on the site." The earth was rem o ve d,
and he says ( Theophanin, Lee's Tratuluion, p.
199), " it is astonishing to see even the rock stand-
ing out erect and alone on a level land, and having
only one cave In U; lest, had there been many, the
miracle of Him who overcame death might have
been obscured;" and a* if in order that then
might be no mistake as to it* position, he con-
tinues, " Accordingly on the very spot that wit-
nessed our Saviour's sufferings a new Jerusalem
was constructed over again* the one so celebrated
of old, which since the foul stain of guilt brought
on it by the murder of the Lord has experienced
tbe last extremity of desolation. It was oppotitt
this city that tbe emperor began to rear a monu-
ment of our Saviour's victory over death with rich
and lavish magnificence" (Vita Const iii. 83).
This passage ought of itself to be sufficient to set
the question at rest, for it is minutely descriptive
of the site of tbe building now known as the Mosque
of Omar, but wholly inapplicable to tbe site of the
present church, which was then, and must certainty
in the time of Titus or of Herod have been within
the walls of the city of Jerusalem, and neither
opposite to nor over against it
The buildings which Constantine or his mother,
Helena, erected, will be more particularly described
elsewhere [Setulchre] ; in the mean while it is
sufficient to say that it will be proved by what fol-
lows, that two of them now remain — the one the
Anastasis, a circular building erected over the tomb
itself; the other the " Golden Gateway," which was
the propylsaa described by Eusebiu* as leading to
tbe atrium of the basilica. He says it opened '< M
•rijt wKarelat ayop&s," In other words, that it had
a broad market-place in front of it, aa all sacred
places or places of pilgrimage had, and have, in the
East. Beyond this wss an atrium leading to the
basilica. This was destroyed in the end of the tenth
century by el-Hakeem, the mad Khalif of Egypt;
in the words of William of Tyre (lib. I. e. iv.),
" usque ad solum diruta," or as it is more quaintly
expressed by Albericus(LeQuien, Orient ChrMtma,
p. 476), •' Solo cosequare mandavit" Fortunately,
however, even the Moslems respected the tomb of
Christ, whom they consider one of the seven
prophets, inferior only to the Founder of their own
religion; and they left the "Dome of the Rock"
uninjured as we now see it.
In order to prove these assertions, there are three
classes of evidence which may be appealed to, and
which must coincide, or the question must remain
still in doubt: —
First, it is nec e s s ary that the circumstances of
the locality should accord with those of the Bible
narrative.
Secondly, tbe Incidental notices furnished by
those travellers who visited Jerusalem between the
time of Constantine and that of the Crusades mot
be descriptive of these localities ; and,
Thirdly, tbe architectural evidence of the build-
ing* themselves must be that of the age to wbJeh
they are assigned.
Taking the last first, it is hardly miliary to
remark bow important this class of evidence ha*
become in all questions of this sort of lata yean
Before the gradation of styles had been property
investigated nothing ooold be more wild than the
Digitized by
Google
JBKTJBALKM
Mil mil Mini of the data assigned to ill the
■Milan al building! of Europe. Now that the
ehronometric scale has been fixed, nothing u either
■o omj or so certain w to fix the date of any build-
ing, or any part of one, and it is admitted by all
arctueolouUte that it is the most sure and con-
clusive evidence that can be adduced on the sub-
ject
In this country the pr o gre ssion of style is only
generally understood as applied to mediseval build-
ings, but with sufficient knowledge it is equally
applicable to Indian, Mohammedan, Classical, or
Roman, in fact to all true styles, and no one who
m familiar with the gradation of styles that took
place between the time of Hadrian and that of
Justinian can fail to aee that the Golden Gateway
and Dome of the Kock are about half-way in the
series, and are in fact buildings which must have
been erected within the century in which Cou-
stantine flourished. With regard to the Golden
Gateway, which is practically unaltered, this is
undoubted. It is precisely of that style which is
found only in the buildings of the end of the third,
or beginning of the fourth century, and accords ao
completely with those found at Rome, Spalatro,
and elsewhere, as to leave no reasonable doubt on
the subject. Had it been as early as the time of
Hadrian, the bent entablature which covers both
the external and internal openings could not have
existed, while had it been as late as the age of Jus-
tinian, its classical features would have been ex-
changed for the peculiar incised style of his build-
ings. It may also be remarked that, although in
the outer wall, it is a festal, not a fortified entrance,
and never could hare been intended as a city gate,
tut miut have led to some sacred or palatial edifice.
It la difficult, indeed, to suggest what that wuM
hare been, except tie basilica described by <£use~
Wo. 9. — Interior of Golden Gateway, from a Photo-
graph.
The exterior of the other building (the Anaataab)
has been repaired and covered with colored tile*
and inscriptions in more modem times; but the
Interior is nearly unaltered (vide Plates by Cather-
•ood and Amndide, in Ferguason's Topoympni) <f
Ancient Jerusalem), and even externally, wherever
this coating of tiles has peeled off, the old Roman
mind arch appears in lieu of its pointed substitute.
It must also be added that it is essentially a tomb-
MkHng, similar in form and arrangement, as it is
■ derail, to the Tomb of the Emperor Coustantine
JEBUSAXEM
at Rome, or of his daughter Constant!*, tntndt
the walls, and indeed more or less like all the tomb-
buildinga of that age.
Though the drawings of these buildings have
been published for more than ten years, and photo-
graphs are now available, no competent archaeologist
or architect has ventured to deny that these an
buildings of the age here ascribed to them; and
we have therefore the pertinent question, which still
remains unanswered, What tomb-like building did
Coustantine or any one in hia age erect at Jetn-
salem, over a mass of the living rock, rising eight
or nine feet above the bases of the columns, uid
extending over the whole central area of the
church, with a sacred cave in it, unless it wen
the church of the Holy Anastasis, described by
Eusebius?
Supposing it were possible to put this evidci.ee
aside, the most plausible suggestion is to appeal to
the presumed historical fact that it was built by
Omar, or by the Moslems at all events. There i:
however, no proof whatever of this assu-Titiun
What Omar did build is the small mosque on the
east of the Aksa, overhanging the southern wall
and which still bears bis name; and no Moham-
medan writer of any sort, anterior to the recovery
of the city from the Christians by Saladin, ventures
to assert that his countrymen built the Dor-* of
the Rock. On the contrary, while they an moat
minute in describing the building of the Aksa, they
are entirely silent about this building, and only
assume that it was theirs after they came into
permanent possession of it after the Crusades. It
may also be added that, whatever it is, it certainly
is not a mosque. The principal and essential featun
in all these buildings is the Kibleh, or niche point-
ing towards Mecca. No mosque in the whole
world, of whatever shape or form, u without this;
but in the place where it should be in this building
is found the principal entrance, so that the worship-
per enters with his back to Mecca — a sacrilege
which to the Mohammedans, if this were a mosque,
would be impossible. Had it been called the Tomb
of Omar, this incongruity would not have been
apparent, for all the old Moslem and Christian
tombs adopt nearly the same ordinance; but no
tradition hints that either Omar or any Moslem
saint was ever buried within its precincts.
Nor aill it answer to assume, as is generally
done, that it was built in the first century of the
Hegiraover the Sacred Rock of the Temple; for
from the account of the Moslem and Christian his-
torians of the time it is quite evident that nt that
time the site and dimensions of the Jewish Tempi*
could be ascertained, and were known. As shown
above, this building certainly always was outside
the limits of the Temple, so that this could not be
the object of its erection. The Mosque of Omar
properly so called, the great Mosque el-Aksa, the
mosques of the Mogrebins and of Abu Itekr, an
all within the limits of the old Temple, and were
meant to be ao (see wood-cut No. 4) They an
so because in all ages the Mohanime<Uns held the
Jewish Temple to be a sacred spot, aa certainly a*
the Christians held it to be accursed, and all their
sacred buildings stand within its precincts. So fu
as we now know there was nothing in Jerusalem
of a sacred character built by the Mohammedans
outside the four walls of the Temple anterior to toe
recovery of the city by Saladin
Irrefragable as this evidence appears to to, il
would be impossible to maintain it otherwise tne»
Digitized by
Google
1826
JERUSALEM
by warnin g that Constantino blindly adopted a
wrong jocality, if the sites now assumed to be true
•ere such a* did not aooord with the details of the
Bible narrative! : fortunately, however, they agree
with them to the minutest detail.
To understand tliia it U necessary to bear in
mind that at the time of the crucifixion the third
wall, or that of Agrippa (aa shown in Plate II.).
did not exist, but waa commenced twelve jean
afterwards: the spot where the Dome of the Rock
theicfore now etanda waa at that time outaide tin
walla, and open to tlie country.
It wu alio a place where certainly tombs did
exist. It ha* been shown above that the sepulchres
of David and the oilier kings of Israel were in this
neighborhood. We know from Josephus (B. J. v.
7, { 3) that "John and his faction defended them-
selves from the Tower of Antonia, and from the
orUiem cloister of the Temple, and fought the
JEBUBALBM
Romans before the monument of king Aktandst-, "
so that there certainly were tomb* hereabouts; and
there is a passage hi Jeremiah (xxxi. 88-40",
whieh apparently describes prophetically the build-
ing of the third wall and the indoaura of the
northern part* of the city from Gareb — most prob-
ably the hill on which Psephinos stood — to Goath,
which is mentioned as in Immediate juxtaposition
to the Horse Gate of the Temple, out of which the
wicked queen Athaliah waa taken to execution;
and the description of "the whole valley of the
dead bodies and of the ashes, and ail the fields
unto the brook of Kidron, and the corner of the
horse-gate toward the east," is in itself sufficient
to prove that this locality was then, as it is now,
the great cemetery of Jerusalem ; and as the sepul-
chre was nigh at hand to the place of execution
(John xix. 43), every probability exists to prow*
that this may have been the soene of the T '
The Pnetorium where Christ was judged was
most probably the Antonia, which at that time, as
before and afterwards, was the citadel of Jerusalem
and the residence of the governors, and the Xystus
and Council-house were certainly, as shown above,
in this neighborhood, l^eaving these localities the
ftiV-our, bearing his cross, must certainly have gone
towards the country, and might well meet Simon
or any one coming towards the city; thus every
detail of the description is satisfied, and none of-
fended by the locality now assumed.
The third class of evidence is from its nature by
nc means so clear, but there is nothing whatever in
it to contradict, and a great deal that directly oon-
a " Behold the day is come, salth toe Lord, that
das city shall be built to the Lord, from the tower of
Hauansel unto the gale of the corner. And the
n— awing linn shall yet go forth over against it upon
■w bill Garsb, and shall compass about to Goats.
firms the above statements. The earliest of the
travellers who visited Jerusalem after the discovery
of the Sepulchre by Constantine is one known as
the Bordeaux pilgrim ; he seems to have visited the
place about the year 333. In his Itinerary, after
describing the palace of David, the Great Syna-
gogue, and other object* inside the city, he adds,
" Inde ut eas forii murum de Sione euntibua ad
Portam Neopolitanam ad partem dextram deorsum
in valle sunt parietes ubi domus rait sive r*Hhim
Pontii Pilati. Ibi Dominua audit us eat antequam
pateretur. A sinistra autem parte eat monticuhai
Golgotha, ubi Dominua crociflxus eat. Inde quasi
ad lapidem miaaum est cripta ubi corpus ejus poai-
Aod the whole valley of the dead bodies and of
ashas, and all the fields unto the brook of
unto the comer of the bone-gate toward the
shall be holy uoto the Lord ; it shall not b»
or nor thrown oown any mors Sir ever."
Digitized by
Google
JERUSALEM
«o (kit. ct tertia die resurrexit. Ibidem modo
Jam Constantini luiperatoris Basilica facta est,
ii ad Dominicum mine pulchritudinis." From
this it li evident tiut passing out of the modern
Zion Gate he turned round the outeide of the walls
to the left. Had he gnne to the right, put the
Jafli gate, both the ancient and modern Golgotha
would have been nn hia right hand ; but passing
round the Temple area he may have had the house
of Pilate on his right in the valley, where some
traditions placed it- He must hate had Golgotha
and the Sepulchre ou his left, as he describes them.
In so far therefore as his testimony goes, it is clear
be was not speaking of the modern Golgotha, which
is inside the city, while the very expression " foris
murum " seems to indicate what the context con-
Arms, that it was a place on the verge of the city,
and ou the left hand of one passing round the walls,
or in other words the place marked on '.he accom-
panying map.
Antoninus Martyr is the only other traveller
whose works have come down to us, who visited
the city before the Mohammedan conquest; his de-
scription is not sufficiently distinct for much reli-
ance to be placed on it, though all it does say is
more in accordance with the eastern than the west-
ern site; but br incidentally supplies one fact. He
says, " Juxta ipsum altars est crypta uhi si ponas
aurem audies flumen aquarum, et si jactas intus
pomun) aut quid natare potest et vade ad fonteni
Siloara et ibi illud suscipie* " (Ant. Mart. /(m. p.
14). There is every reason to believe, from the
researches of Drs. Robinson and Barclay, taat the
whole of the llaram area is excavated with subter-
ranean water-channels, and that therefore if you
place your ear almost anywhere you may hear the
Bowing of the water ; and all these waters can only
drain out towaids Siloain. We also know that
under the cave in the Dome of the Rock there is
a well, called the Bir Arruafi, and that it does
communicate with the great excavated rea or cistern
in front of the Alua, and that its overflow is to-
wards Siloam, so that if an apple were dropped
Into it, in so far as we now know, it would come
out there. If we presume that Autoninus was speak-
ing of the present sepulchre the passage is utterly
unintelligible. There is no well, and no trace has
ever been discovered of any communication with
Siloam. As far as our present knowledge goes,
this objection is in itself fatal to the modern site.
A third and most important narrative has been
preserved to us by Adamnanus, an abbot of Iona,
who took it down from the mouth of Arculfus, a
French bishop who visited the Holy Land in the
end of the seventh century. He not only describes,
but gives from memory a plan of the Church of
the Holy Sepulchre, hut without any very precise
indication of its locality. He then describes the
Mosque el-Aksa as a square building situated on
the site of the Temple of Solomon, and with details
that leave no doubt as to its identity; but either
ke omits all mention of the Dome of the Rock,
fhich certainly was then, as it is now, the most
.onspicuous and most important building in Jeru-
salem, or the inference is inevitable, that he has
slraady described it under the designation of the
Chimb of the Sepulchre, which the whole oorttext
would had us to^fer was really the case.
Resides 'iiese, there are various passages in the
writings of the Fathers which are unintelligible if
ra assume that the present church was the one
MK by Constantino. Dositheus, for instance (U.
JERUSALEM
1327
1, § 7), says, that owing to tbe steepness of Ik*
ground, or to the hill or valley, to the westward ot
the Church of tbe Holy Sepulchre it had only its
one wall on that aide, "Egst i mot • >3 bytov tir
<pov Kara uir r))r tsViv iia to tlrtu toot [tiro*
rbv toTxo* avroii. This cannot be appii fi to tba
present church, inasmuch as towards the west in
that locality there is apace for any amount of build-
ing; but it is literally correct as applied to the so-
called Dome of the Rock, which does stand so ucstr
the edge of the valley between the two towns that
it would be impossible to erect any conitiderallt
building there.
The illuminated Cross, mentioned by St. Cyril
( /Cpitt. nil Const. ) is unintelligible, unless we aasmui
the Sepulchre to have been on the side of the eitj
next to the Mount of Olives. But even more dis-
tinct than this is a passage in the writings of St.
Epiphanius, writing in the 4th century, who, break-
ing of Golgotha, says, " It does not occupy an ele-
vated position as compared with other places sur-
rounding it. Over against it, the Mount of Olives
is higher. Again, the hill taat formerly existed in
Zion, but which is now leveled, was once higher
than the sacred spot." As we cannot be sure to
which hill he app'jes the name, Zion, no great stress
can be laid on that; but no one acquainted with
the localities would speak of the modern Golgotha
as over against the Mount of Olives. So far there-
fore, as '.his goes, it is in favor of the proposed
view.
The slight notices contained in other works are
hardly sufficient to determine the question one way
or the other, but the mass of evidence adduced
above would probably never have been questioned,
were it not that from the time of the Crusades
down to the present day (which is the period dur-
ing which we are really and practically acquainted
with the history and topography of Jerusalem), it
is certain that the church in tbe Latin quarter of
the city ha* always been considered as containing
the Tomb of Christ, and as being the church which
Constantine erected over the sacred cave; and as
no record exists — nor indeed is it likely that it
should — of a transference of the site, there is a
difficulty in persuading others that it really took
place. As however there is nothing to contradict,
and everything to confirm, the assumption that a
transference did take place about this time, it is
not important to the argument whether or not we
are able to show exactly how it took place, though
nothing seems to be more likely or natural under
the circumstances.
Architecturally, there is literally no feature or
[and] no detail which would induce us to believe
that any part of the present church is older than the
time of the Crusades. The only things about 11
of more ancient date are the fragments of an old
classical cornice, which are worked in at st.ituj
courses with the Gothic details of the external
facade, and singularly enough this cornice is idea
tical in style with, and certainly belongs to the age
of, the Golden Gateway and Dome of the Rock,
and consequently can scarcely be anything else than
a fragment of the old basilica, which el-Hakeem
had destroyed in the previous century, and the re-
mains of which must still have been scattered about
when the Crusaders arrived.
It is well known that a furious persecution of
the Christians wsa carried on, as above mentioned,
at the end of the 10th century. Their ere** hsj.
silica was destroyed, their Tomb appropriated, Use)
Digitized by
Google
1828
JERUSALEM
m' drive* from Use city, and dared not approach
Um Inly place* under pain of death. A» the perse-
sntlon relaxed, a few crept back to their old ',ucrter
of the city, and there roost naturally built them-
selves a church in which to celebrate the sacred
mysteries of Easter. It is not necessary to assume
fraud in this proceeding any more than to impute
It to those who built sepulchral churches in Italy,
Spain, or England. Thousands have prayed and
wept in these simulated sepulchres all over the
world, and how much more appropriately at Jeru-
salem ! Being in the city, and so near the spot,
it was almost impossilile but that it should event-
ually come to be assumed that instead of a simu-
lated, it was the true sepulchre, and it would have
required more than human virtue on the part of
the priests if they had undeceived the unsuspecting
pilgrims, whose faith and liberality were no doubt
quickened by the assumption. Had the Christiana
never recovered the eity, the difference would never
have been discovered in toe dark sges; but when
unexpectedly those who had knelt and prayed as
pilgrims, came back as armed men, and actually
possessed the city, it was either necessary to confess
the deception or to persevere in it; and, aa was too
jften the case, the latter course was pursued, and
hence all the subsequent confusion.
Nothing, however, can be more remarkable than
the different ways in which the Crusaders treated
the Dome of the Hock and the Mosque el-Aksa.
The latter they always called the " Temptuni sea
ual&tium Soiomonis," and treated it with the con-
tempt always applied by Christians to anything
Jewish. The Mosque was turned into a stable,
the buildings into dwellings for knighM, who took
the title of Knights Templars, from their residence
in the Temple. But the Dome of the Rock they
called '• Templum Domini." (Jacob de Vitry, c.
62; Seswuif, Set. de Voytyr, iv. 833; Maundeville,
Fossae, etc, 100, 10S: Msr. Sanutus, iii. xiv. 9;
firocardus, vi. 1047.) Priests and a choir were
appointed to perform service in it, and during the
whole time of the Christian occupation it was held
certainly as sacred, if not more so, than the church
of the Holy Sepulchre in the town. (Will, of Tyre,
viii. 3.) Had they believed or suspected that the
rock was that on which the Jewish temple stood it
would have been treated as the Akaa was, but they
oiew that the Dome of the Rock was a Christian
ouildmg, and sacred to the Saviour; though in the
uncritical spirit of the age they never seem exactly
M have known either what it was, or by whom it
was erected. [See § IV. Amer. ed.]
XI. Rebuilding of the Temple bu Julian. —
Before leaving the subject, it is necessary to revert
to the attempt of Julian the Apostate to rebuild
the Temple of the Jews. It was undertaken avow-
edly as a slight to the Christians, and with the idea
of establishing a counterpoise to the influence and
position they had attained by the acta of Constan-
tino. It was commenced about six months before
his death, and during that period the work seems
to have been pushed forward with extraordinary
activity under the guidance of his friend Alypius.
Not only were large sums of money collected for
toe purpose, and an enormous concourse of the
Jews assembled on the spot, but an immense mass
JERUSALEM
of materials was brought together, and Mai «ctw*
of the foundations at least carried vigorously on
during this period of excitement, before the mines)
occurred, which put a final stop to the undertaking.
Even if we have not historical evidence of then
facta, the appearance of the south wall of the He-
rein would lead us to expect that something of th#>
sort had been attempted at this period. Aa before
mentioned, the gnat tunnel-like vault under tor
Mosque el-Aksa, with it* four-domed vestibule, is
almost certainly part of the temple of Herod [sea
Temple], and coeval with his period, but exter-
nally to this, certain architectural decorations have
No. 10. — Itonltsnlses at Julian In
Hanoi.
seata wall tf
" This feet the writer owes, with many other val-
a*n!« iscaneations, to the observation of his Mend
alt H tin vs. The wood-out, etc., Is from a larn
afe**mmsf« which, with many others, was taken
been added (wood-cut No. 10), and that so slightly,
that daylight can be perceived between the old
walla and the subsequent decorations, except at the
points of attachment." It is not difficult to ascer-
tain, approximately at least, the age of these ad-
juncts. From their classical forms they cannot be
so late as the time of Justinian ; while on the other
hand they are slightly more modern in style than
the architecture of the Golden Gateway, or than
any of the classical details of the Dome of the
Rock. The; may therefore with very tolerable
certainty be ascribed to the age of Julian, while,
from the historical accounts, they are just such a*
we would expect to find them. Above them an
inscription bearing the name of Hadrian has been
inserted in the wall, but turned upside down ; and
the whole of the masonry being of that interme-
diate character between that which we know to be
ancient and that which we easily recognise aa the
especially for the writer on the spot, sxd to
ha owes much of the information details*
though It has ban Impossible to refer to it
Digitized by
Google
(00 400 300 300 100 O
' ■ ■
loppy
m^ «.**. ■<■■■
$fc : ■■■'■■%,.. '""A':'!'*-.-.,..,, ' ^
— )\
*
"jj
5,
r.t ? #** , /V ^.J' arf '^ f ' y ' vA " 1
a ;]
> BmkSAbnbm
-
! *~o
Wl-
Mount
i, ; , of Offence
'
Krrofc-I
||lanof£itt£88aUH
ofllolietnCiti. *«* E *^,
Counril
>-«1
Pl.tr in
JERUSALEM
Digitized by
Google
Digitized by VaOOQ IC
JERUSALEM
work U the Mohammedans, there ceo be little
dsnot but that it belongs to this period.
Among toe incident* mentioned as occurring at
this time it one bearing rather distinctly on the
topography of the site. It is said (Gregory Naxian-
eco, ad .fid. ei Gent. 7, 1, and confirmed by Sozo-
men) that when the workmen were driven from
their works by the globes of Are that issued from
the foundations, they sought refuge in a neighbor-
ing church (»jrf rt raw *kr)<rlor Up&r, or, as
Sozomen has it, els to Up6v) — an expression
which would be unintelligible did not the buildings
of Constantine exist at that time on the spot: for,
except these, there could not be any church or
sacred place in the neighborhood to which the ex-
pression could be applied. The principal bearing,
bowerer, of Julian's attempt on the topography of
Jerusalem consists in the net of its proving not
Ml* that the site of the Jewish Temple was perfectly
JERUSALEM
1*39
well known at this period — A. D. 869 — bat that
the spot was then, as always, held aocuraed by the
Christians, and as doomed by the denunciation of
Christ himself never to be reestablished ; and this
consequently makes it at absurd to suppose that
the Aksa is a building of Justinian as that the
Dome of the Rock or the Golden Gateway— if
Christian buildings — ever stood within its pre-
cincts."
XII. Church of JtattHum. — Nearly two cen-
turies after the attempt of Julian, Justinian erected
a church at Jerusalem; of which, fortunately, we
have so full and detailed an account in the works
of Prooopius (de jEdifiau Com!.) that we can have
little difficulty in fixing its site, though no remains
(at least above ground) exist to verify our conjec-
tures. The description given by Procopius is so
clear, and the details he gives with regard to the
necessity of building up the substructure point si
BOOTH
SOTOa..
Wo. 11. — Plan of
smmstakably to the spot near to which it must
base stood, that almost all topographers have
jumped to the conclusion that the Mosque el- Aksa
U the identical church referred to. Apart from the
consideration already mentioned, the architecture
of that building is alone sufficient to refute any
such idea. No seven-aisled basilica was built in that
age, and least of all by Justinian, whose favorite
plan was a dome on pendentives, which in fact, in
his age, had become the type of an Oriental Church.
Besides, the Aksa has no apse, and, from its situa-
tion, never could have had either that or any of the
essential features of a Christian basilica. Its whole
architecture is that of the end of the 7th century,
and its ordinance it essentially that of a mosque.
It is hardly necessary to argue this poiut, however,
as the Aksa stands on a spot which was perfect!]
known then, and ever afterwards, to be the ver.
(autre of the site of Solomon's Temple. Not onlj
84
is this shown from Julian's attempt, but all to*
historians, Christian and Mohammedan, woo refer
to Omar's visit to Jerusalem, relate that the Sakhrah
wat covered with filth and abhorred by the Chris-
tians; and more than this, we have the direct testi-
mony of Eutychius, writing in the 9th century,
from Alexandria (AnrniUt, ii. 289), •'That the
Christians had built no church within the area of
the Temple on account of the denunciations of the
Lord, anil had left it in ruins."
Notwithstanding this there is no difficulty hi
fixing on the site of this church, inasmuch as the
vaults that fill up the southeastern angle of the
Haram area are almost certainly of the age of Jus-
tinian (woodcuts Nos. 3, 4), and are just such ss
a • The only authentic historical flwt,
head, Is that toe emperor Julian
\ attempt to rebuild toe Temple.
B. W
Digitized by
Google
1830
JERUSALEM
Prosopius describes; so that if it were situated at
the northern extremity of the vaults, all the argu-
ments that apply to the Aksa equally apply to this
situation.
We have also direct testimony that a church did
exist here immediately after Justinian's time in the
following words of Ant. Martyr. : " Ante ruinas
vero tenipli Solomonis aqua decurrit ad fontem
Siloam, secus porticum Solomonis in eccletia est
tides in qua sedit Pilatus quando andivit Dominum "
(/tin. p. 16). As the portico of Solomon was the
eastern portico of the Temple, this exactly describes
the position of the church in question.
But whether we assume the Aksa, or a church
outside the Temple, on these vault*, to have been
the Marr church of Justinian, how comes it that
Justinian chose this remote corner of the city, and
so difficult a site, for the erection of bis church ?
Why did he not go to the quarter where — if the
modern theory be correct — all the sacred localities
of the Christians were grouped together in the
middle of the city ? The answer seems inevitable :
that it was because in those times the Sepulchre
and Golgotha wre here, and not on the ipot to
which ihe Sepulchre with hie Mary-church have
lubttquenily been tram/erred. It may also be
added that the fact of Justinian having built a
church in the neighborhood is in itself almost suf-
ficient to prove that in bis sge the site and dimen-
sions of the Jewish Temple were known, and also
that the localities immediately outside the Temple
were then considered as sacred by the Christians.
[See § IV., Amer. ed.]
XIII. Conclusion. — Having now gone through
all the principal sites of the Christian edifices, as
they «tood anterior to the destruction of the churches
by el-Hakeem, the plan (No. 4) of the area of the
Hanoi will be easily understood. Both Constan-
tine's and Justinian's churches having disappeared,
of course the restoration of these is partly conjec-
tural. Nothing now remains in the Haram area
but the Mohammedan buildings situated within
the area of Solomon's Temple. Of the Christian
buildings whioh once existed there, there remain
only the great Anastasis of Constantine — now
known as " the Mosque of Omar " and " the Dome
of the Rock " — certainly the most interesting, as
well as one of the most beautiful Christian build-
ings in the East, and a small but equally interesting
jttle domical building called the Little Sakhrah at
the north end of the inclosure, and said to contain
s fragment of the rock which the angel sat upon,
snd which closed the door of the sepulchre (Ali Bey,
J. 229). These two buildings are entire. Of Con-
stantino's church we have only the festal entrance,
known as the Golden Gateway, and of Justinian's
only the substructions.
It is interesting to compare this with a plan of
the city (wood-cut No. 11) made during the Cru-
sades, and copied from a manuscript of the twelfth
eentury, in the Library at Brussels. It gives the
traditional localities pretty much as they are now;
vith the exception of St. Stephen's Gate, which was
>*i name then appbed to that now known as the
Damascus Gate. The gate which now bears his
name was then known as that of the Valley of
Jehoshaphat. The " Temple of Solomon," i. e. the
Mosque of el Aksa, is divided by a wide street from
that of our Lord ; and the Sepulchre is represented
as only a smaller copy of its prototype within the
Hanoi sma, bat very remarkably similar in oVngn,
so asj tec least of it.
JERUSALEM
Havmg now gone through the main onUkasi at
the topography of Jerusalem, in so tar as the Hmitt
of this article would admit, or as seems necessary
for the elucidation of the subject, the many details
which remain will be given under their separate
titles, as Temple, Tomb, Palace, etc It only
remains, before concluding, to recapitulate here that
the great difficulties which seem hitherto to have
rendered the subject confused, and in fact inex-
plicable, were (1) the improper application of the
name of Zion to the western hill, and (2) the
assumption that the present Cfiurch of the Holy
Sepulchre was that built by Constantine.
The moment we transfer the name, Zion, from
the western to the eastern hilL and the scenes of the
Passion from the present site of the Holy Sepulchre
to the area of the Haram, all the difficulties dis-
appear; and it only requires a little patience, and
perhaps in some instances a little further investiga-
tion on the spot, fur the topography of Jerusalem
to become as well, or better established, than that
of any city of the ancient world. J. F.
• IV. TojtXJBAPHY OF THE Cm.
It will be seen from the preceding that the two
points in the topography of Jerusalem which Mr.
Kergusson regarded ss demanding special elucida-
tion are the site of Mount Zion, and the site of the
Church of the Holy Sepulchre. With reference to
both, he has advanced theories which are original
— theories which not only have not been broached
before, and are unsupported by a single tradition,
but which, so far as is known, contradict the previ-
ous impressions of the Christian world. Specula-
tions so novel respecting localities so prominent in
the history of the sacred city, naturally awaken the
reader's surprise and suspicion, and demand a can-
did scrutiny.
We will examine these points separately —
I. Mount Zion. — Mr. Ferguson's theory is, that
the Mount Zion of the sacred writers is not "the
western hill on which the city of Jerusalem now
stands, and in fact always stood," but " the eastern
hill, or that on which the Temple stood."
On this point we will consider —
(1.) The testimony of the Sacred Scr ip ture * .—
The sacred historian says, " As for the Jebusites,
the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the children of Israel
could not drive them out, but the Jebusites dwell
with the children of Judah at Jerusalem unto this
day " (Josh. xv. 63). Four hundred years later,
" David and all Israel went to Jerusalem, which is
Jebus, where the Jebusites were, the inhabitants
of the land. And the inhabitants of Jebus said to
David, Thou shalt not come hither. Nevertheless,
David took the castle of Zion, which Is the City of
David. And David dwelt in the castle; therefore
they called it, The City of David " (1 Chr. xL 4,
5, 7). Here was his citadel, and here bis residence;
and hence the frequent allusions in the Bible to the
towers, bulwarks, and palaces of Zion. 'A few years
later, " David made him houses in the City of David,
and prepared a place for the ark of God, and
pitched for it a tent." " So they brought the ark
of God, and set it in the midst of the tent that
David had pitched for it " (1 Chr. xv. 1). Thiuy
years after, " Solomon began to build the house of
the Lord at Jerusalem, in Mount Moriah " (3 Che
til. 1). Seven years later, "Solomon assembled
the elders of Israel unto Jerusalem, to bring up to*
ark of the covenant of the Lord, out of the City of
David, which is Zion " tf Ohr. v. *>, end then fo>
Digitized by
Google
JERUSALEM
mm the aioount of their removing the ark and
isaosfting H in the Temple.
From toil it is clear that the Jebushe strong-
sold which David stormed, and where ue dwelt,
was Zion, or the City of David ; that the ark of the
covenant ni brou jht to toil spot, and from it wan
transferred to the Temple on Mount Moriah; and
that Mount Moriah, the site of the Temple, could
not have been identical with Zion, the City of David.
This view appears on the face of the narrative, and
'here la not a passage of Scripture which conflicts
iith it, or which it renders difficult or obscure.
Mr. Fergusson says, " There are numberless pas-
sages in which Zion is spoken of as a holy place, in
such terms as are never applied to Jerusalem, and
which can only be applied to the holy Temple
Mount" Surely, no strains could be too elevated
to be applied to the mount on which the tabernacle
was pitched, and where the ark of the covenant
abode — the seat of the theocracy, the throne alike
of David arid of David's Lord, the centre of domin-
ion and of worship. Indeed, the verse quoted,
" Yet have I set my king upon my holy hill of
Zion," oould only be affirmed of that western hill
which was the royal residence. The same may be
said of the verse quoted as specially difficult, on the
received theory, in its allusion to the tide* of the
north, the reference here being to the lofty site of
the city j and to one who approaches it from the
south, the precipitous brow of Zion invests the
description with a force and beauty which would
be lost by a transfer to the other eminence.
It is, moreover, a mistaken impression that greater
sanctity Is ascribed to Zion than to Jerusalem, or
that the two names are, in this respect, carefully
distinguished. What passage in the Bible recog-
nizes greater sacrednees in a locality than the plain-
tive apostrophe: •' If I forget thee, O Jerusalem,
let my right hand forget her cunning; if I do not
remember thee, let my tongue cleave to the roof of
my mouth; it I prefer not Jerusalem above my
chief joy " ? The Song of songs sets forth the
■Irvine beauty of the bride, or loved one, by the
simile, " comely as Jerusalem " ; and the call of the
evangelical prophet is, " Awake, put on thy strength,
Zion, put on thy beautiful garments, O Jeru-
salem, the holy city." The localities are thus con-
stantly identified, " To declare the name of the
Lord in Zion and his praise in Jerusalem." The
names are, and may be, used interchangeably, with-
out "grating on the ear"; and the extraordinary
assertion, " It is never said, The Lord dwelleth in
Jerusalem, or loveth Jerusalem, or any such expres-
sion," we meet with the inspired declarations from
the Chronicles, the Psalms, and the Prophets, " I
ban chosen Jerusalem that my name might be
then"; " The God of Israel, whose habitation Is
m Jerusaacn "; " Blessed be the Lord out of Zion,
who dwelleth at Jerusalem"; "Thus saith the
Lord, I am returned unto Zion, and will dwell in
the midst of Jerusalem." Our Saviour expressly
forbade the profanation of the name; and through
the force of the same sacred associations, the be-
loved disciple could find no more fitting type of
heaven Itself, as he beheld it In vision — the New
Jerusalem of the saints in glory.
Mr. Fergusson remarks " that the sepulohres of
David and bis enorrariTs wen on Mount Zion, or
« • if fas southeast slop* if Hon, down which
festc was, both at the time of Hehemlah v«l- 16) and
t J oaaahas (Kraffi, Tbpograyk*, » U, 1*3). » fligb'
JERUSALEM 1881
it the City of David, but the wicked king Aha*,
for bis crimes, was buried in Jerusalem, • in tb*
city,' atd 'not in the sepulchres of the kings.
Jehoram narrowly escaped the same punishment,
and the distinction is so marked, that it cannot be
overlooked-" The burial of King Ahax is thus
recorded : " And they buried him in the city, in
Jerusalem, but they brought him not into the sep-
ulchres of the Kings " (9 Chr. xxviii. 37). That
of King Jehoram is as follows : " He departed with
out being desired, nowbeit they buried him in the
City of David, but not in the sepulchres of the
kings'' (9 Chr- xxi. 90). That of King Joash
(which Mr. Fergusson overlooks) is as follows :
" They buried him in the City of David, but they
buried him not in the sepulchres of the kings"
(3 Chr. xxiv. 35). Mr. Fergusson assumes that
then is a " marked distinction " between the first
and the last two records. We assume that the
three accounts are, in substance, identical; and we
submit the point to the judgment of the reader,
merely adding, that of the three monarch*, Jehoram
was apparently the most execrated, and Josephus,
who is silent about the burial of Abas, describes
that of Jehoram as ignominious.
Mr. Fergusson says, " There are a great many
passages in which Zion is spoken of as a separate
city from Jerusalem," and adduces instances in
which the Hebrew scholar will recognise simply the
parallditm of Hebrew poetry; no more proving
that Zion was a separate city from Jerusalem, than
the exclamation, " How goodly are thy tents,
Jacob, and thy tabernacles, O Israel," proves that
Jacob was a separate people from Israel.
The term Zion came, naturally, to be employed
both by sacred and profane writers, as the repre-
sentative of the whole city, of which it formed so
prominent a part. It was thus used by the later
prophets, quoted above, as also in the Book of the
Maccabees, where it evidently mdhtia the Temple
and adjacent mount.
The passage cited by Mr. Fergusson from Nehe-
miah (iii. IS) which he pronounces "important,'
is as follows: " After him repaired Nehenuah the
son of Azbuk, the ruler of the half part of Beth-zur,
unto the place over against the sepulchres of David,
and to the pool that was made, and unto the bouse
of the mighty." These localities, with many others
named in the chapter, can only be fixed eonjeetur-
ally . On the face of the passage they accord weB
with the received theory respecting Mount Zion,
with which locality Dr. Barclay, after carefully ex-
amining the matter on the ground, associates them,
and represents the wall here described as running
"along the precipitous brow of Zion" (City, etc.,
pp. 136, 105). This interpretation has just received
striking confirmation, and the verse preceding (Neh.
iii. 16) be s om ei a proof-text in the argument which
Identifies the ancient City of David with the modern
Zion. In this verse mention is made of " the stain
that go down from the City of David," and Mr.
Tristram reports the interesting discovery of a flight
of steps in the rock, in some excavations made by
the Anglican Bishop below the English Cemetery
on Mount Zion {Land of /trad)." From this,
as from the previous Scripture quotations, Mr. Fer-
gusson's theory derives uo support. This disposal
of the Biblical testimony
of steps leading down from the ' City of David,' ss wsl
as the southwest slops down which anather mxnt ass,
etc- (Bitter, Otog. of Fat. tv. M»
Digitized by
Google
1883 JERUSALEM
We wffl dow consider —
(9.) The testimony ofjottphta. — Josephus does
Bat on the word 2aon ; but hU paraphrase of the
Scriptural narrative sooords entirely with the above :
1 David took the lower city by force, but the citadel
held out still" {Ant. xiv. 4, § 2), with the other
particulars as already given. He also says, " He
city was built upon two hills, and that which oon-
taiiis the upper city, is much higher, and accord-
ingly it was called the citadel by King David"
(Ant. xiv. 16, J 8). In the siege by Pompey, one
party within counseling resistance and the other
submission, the former " seized upon the Temple
and cut off the bridge which reached from it to the
city, and prepared themselves to abide a siege, but
the others admitted Pompey's army in, and deliv-
ered up both the city and the king's palace to him "
(Ant. xiv. 4, $ 2), and, having secured these, be
laid siege to the Temple, and captured its occupants.
In the siege by Herod, " When the outer court of
the Temple and the lower city were taken, the Jews
fled into the inner court of the Temple and into the
upper city" (Ant xiv. 16, § 2). In the siege by
Titua, after the lower city had been taken, and It
became necessary to raise an embankment against
the upper city, "the works were erected on the
west side of the city, over against the royal palace "
(B. J. vi. 8, $ 1). Describing the Temple, Josephus
says, " In the western parts of the Incloture of the
Temple were four gates, one leading over to the
royal palace: the valley between being interrupted
to form a passage " (Ant. zv. 11, $ 6). Ee lays
that "king Agrippa built himself a very large
dining-room in the royal palace," from which he
'could observe what was done in the Temple";
which so displeased the Jews, that they " erected a
wall upon the uppermost building which belonged
to the inner court of the Temple, to the west; which
wall, when it was built, intercepted the prospect
of the dining-room in the palace" (Ant. xx. 8,
5 ll).
Nothing ean be plainer than that the upper city
of Josephus is identical with the Zion, or City of
David, of the sacred Scriptures; that the citadel
and the royal palace were on this western hill; that
the Temple was on the lower eastern hill, separated
from the western by a deep valley, which was
spanned by a bridge; and that the site of the Temple
is identical with the Mount Horiah of the Bible,
and distinct from Mount Zion. This view, which is
in harmony with the Scriptural view already given,
accords also with every other allusion in Josephus
to these localities. And the substructions of the
bridge above referred to, are the most striking
feature in the remains of the modem city. With
this, we take leave of Josephus.
(3.) Ctirutian Jtinerarie*. — laia brings us to
the Christian Itineraries, etc., and their testimony
is uniform and unbroken. Except one or two wild
speculations, no other Mount Zion has been known,
from the days of Eusebius down, than the high
western hill of Jerusalem which now bears the
same. So late as 1868, Prof. Robinson referred to
this as one of the few points "yet unossalled"
(BibL Re$. p. 206).
The careful reader of the preceding article, in
eluding the " Annals " of tbe city, will notice the
aonfuuon which has been introduced into it by this
theory of its " Topography." The writers of the
riatorisl portions (Messrs. Grove and Wright),
both eminent Biblical scholars, have passed over to
thaw fellow-contributor (Mr. Fergusson) most of
JERUSALEM
the topographical points; but It wot
for them to write on intelligible narrative i
contradicting him. From many sentences of tits
some kind, we select three or four which exhibit
the necessary failure of the attempt to harmonise
the theory with the facts of history and topog-
raphy.
" As before, the lower city was immediate!} jokeo
and, as before, the citadel held out. The unda inted
Jebuaitea believed in the impregnability of their
fortress. A crowd of warriors nuhed forward, and
the citadel, the fastness of Zion, was token. It h)
the first time that that memorable name appears
in the history. David at once proceeded to secure
himself in his new acquisition. He inclosed the
whole of the city with a wall, and connected it with
the citadel. In the latter he took up his own
quarters, and the Zion of the Jebusites became the
City of David." — (pp. 1282, 1288.)
" The Temple was st last gained ; but it seemed
as if half the woric remained to be done. The upper
city, higher than Moriah, inclosed by the original
wall of David and Solomon, and on all rides pre-
cipitous, except at the north, where it was defended
by the wall and towers of Herod, wss still to be
taken. Titus first tried a parley, he standing on
the east end of the bridge, between the Temple and
the upper city, and John and Simon on the west
end." — (p. 1807.)
" Acre was situated on the northern side of the
Temple, on the same hill, and probably on the soma
spot occupied by David as the stronghold of Zion."
-(p. 1380.)
" There is no passage in the Bible which directly
asserts the identity of the hills Zion and Moriah,
though [there are] many which cannot well be
understood without this assumption. The cumula-
tive proof, however, is such as almost perfectly to
supply this want." — (p. 1821.)
The first two extracts are from the historical,
and the last two from the topographical, portion
of the article; and the reader will see that they are
in irreconcilable conflict Before quitting the
theme, let us gather into one sentence such points
as are consistent with each other and with known
facts and probabilities.
The city or stronghold of the Jebusites wss the
southern portion of the western ridge, the highest,
most inaccessible, and easily fortified ground in the
city; conquered by David, it became his fortified
abode; his castle or citadel was here, and remained
here; his palace was built here, and through suc-
cessive reigns and dynasties, down to the Christian
era, it continued to be the royal residence; it was
the ancient as it is the modern Zion, inclosed by
the old wall, the original wall; it was the upper
city, the upper market-place; it was here that the
ark abode until its removal to the Temple ; the royal
sepulchres were here; and Moriah was the southern
portion of the eastern ridge, and on this the Temple
was built. This statement embodies, we believe,
the truth of history, and with this we close the dis-
cussion of the site of Mount Zion.
We pass now to the other point:
II. The Chunk of the Holy Sepulchre. — lb
Fergusson's theory is, " that the budding now
known to Christians as the Moeque of Omar, but
by Moslems called the Dome of the Bock, Is the
identical church which Constantino erected cirst
the rock which contained the tomb of Christ'
Since the publication of the preceding article, ht
has renewed the discussion of this point hi
Digitized by
Google
JBBUSAIiHM
ssasjsua*,* from which we shall alar quote, h It
■kin a more compact summary of hii ereu-
He ooncedee. above, tha conclusiveness of tin
sr gament by which Dr. Robinaon haa abown that
tea pnaant church doea not oorar " the place where
the Lord lay." This haa been the battle-ground
af resent writera on the topography of the city, and
the eoneeaaion renders it unnecessary to adduce
her* the proofs which the Professor haa brought
together, and which may be found in hia Bibtical
Saeartia (in 1838, ii. 84-80; in 1862, pp. 254-
283, 831-633). The •> power of logio " with which
they an presented is not attested by any theory
which may be held respecting the identity of any
ather spot. The argument reaches " its legitimate
ondmdon," alike whether the reader accepta aome
ather site, or whether be regards the true site as
beyond the reach of modern discovery. The theory
bare offered, like the one which we have examined,
is novel and startling, and like that, is put forth
with much confidence by a writer who has never
— »»»— «i the localities. We submit our reasons
for rejecting it; and as we agree with Mr. Fergus-
am that the site of the church is not the place of
nor Lord's burial, our interest in the question is
purely historical.
Mr. Ferg ua a ou 'a theory fails to explain the pree-
•vit church, a building of great intrinsic and his-
toric interest. When, and by whom were its early
foundations laid? Who built up its original walls ?
For how many centuries has it been palmed upon
the public as the Church of the Sepulchre? Has
the largest and most remarkable Christian sanctuary
m the East, planted in the very centre and conflu-
■nee of Christian devotion, come down to us with-
out a chronicle or even an intimation of its origin ?
We repeat that the early history of such an edifice
could not, since the Christian era, and in the most
ansamicuoua spot in Christendom, have faded into
atter oblivion, like that of some temple of the Old
World, around which the sands of the desert had
lathered for ages before Christ.
Mr. Ferguson's theory, while failing to account
for the existence of the most imposing church in
the East, fails also to account for the disappearance
of every vestige of another church of imperial
•uagnifioanes. This argument, like the preceding,
la collateral, and we do not offer it as independent
proof. Church edifices in Palestine, large and
assail, have been destroyed by violence, or have
eruaabled by decay. Some of them have been re-
built or repaired, and perpetuated on their present
sites, nk* that of the Nativity In Bethlehem, or
that of the Sepulchre in Jerusalem ; and others are
snarly traceable, if not impressive, in their ruins,
ate that of the Baptist in Samaria, that of St
George in Lydda, that of St. Anne in Eleutherop-
aiie, and the ancient cathedral church in Tyre.
But what church of the largest class hsa had a Wa-
stry which corresponds with this theory? The
smp n w Justinian had a passion for ohurch-buiid-
ssg, and decorated bis metropolis with a majestic
temple, which k still its boast He erected another
Ik Jerusalem, which he designed to be worthy of
•the City of the Great King," and cf the Virgin
Mother, in whose special honor it was built, "on
emeh great expense and labor wire bestowed to
saeke it one of the moat splendid in the world."
• •"Hoses on the flit* of the Holy Sepclebm at
, la answer to the JOUmkmgk Kmne."
JERUSALEM 1888
It does not appear to have been disturbed by th»
subsequent convulsions of the country; writers wu
describe the injury done to the Church of the Sep-
ulchre in the sack of the city by the Persians, and
under the Fatimite Khalifs of Egypt, so far as we
know, are silent respecting this edifice. The Mosque
el-Aksa, which in accordance with prevalent tradi-
tion, is almost universally regarded as the original
church of Justinian, Mr. Fergusson appropriates as
the Mosque of Abd el-Melek. This leaves the
church to be provided for, and in the plan of the
Haram area, which he has introduced into the Dic-
tionary and republished in his Notes, he places the
church of Justinian, and sketches its walls, where
not the slightest trace appears of a foundation an-
cient or modern. It is purely a conjectural site,
demanded by the exigencies of his theory, accord -
ing to which the solid walls, pillars, and arches of
a church described by a contemporary historian,
and sketched by Mr. Fergusson as four hundred
feet in length and one hundred and more in breadth,
have vanished as utterly as if they had been pul-
verised ana Mattered to the winds. It has disap-
peared, withal, from a quarter of the city which
was never needed nor used for other purposes,
where no dwellings could have encroached upon it,
and where no rubbish has accumulated. Consid-
ering the character, the location, and the dimen-
sions of this building, and the date of its erec-
tion, we hazard the assertion that no parallel to
such complete annihilation -an be found in the
East.
The Mosque of Omar near it, Mr. Fergusson
claims to have been converted by the Muslim con-
querors into a mosque from a church ; we advance
the same claim for the Mosque el-Aksa; and there
were similar transformations, sa is well known, of
the Church of St John in Damascus, and of the
Church of St Sophia in Constantinople, built aha
by Justinian. Instead of converting to the same
uae the substantial and splendid church which the
same emperor had erected here, what could have
prompted the Moslems to obliterate every memo -
rial of it? Within the same inclosure, according
to Mr. Fergusson, the "great Anaatasis of Con.
stantine," the preterit Mosque of Omar, built two
centuries earlier, survives in all its essential features.
" The walls of the octagon still remain untouched
in their lower parts; the circle of columns sod piers
that divide the two aisles, with the entablatures,
discharging arches, and cornices, still remain en-
tirely unchanged and untouched; the pier arches
of the dome, the trifbrium belt, the clerestory, an
all parts of the unaltered construction of the age
of Conatantlne " (Afoes, p. 89). The Mosque of
Abd el-Melek, the present el-Aksa, abides within
the same inclosure in its original strength. " Its
whole architecture is that of the end of the serectl)
century " (p. 1339.) But the church of Justinian,
standing by their side in rival glory, mysteriously
passu! away from that open area — wall and col-
umn and arch and architrave — from foundation
to top-stone, smitten like the psalmist's bay-tree:
"And to, it vanished from the ground,
Destroyed by hands unseen ;
Ifor root, nor branob, nor law was sound,
Where all that pride had beau"
Mr. Fergusson'a theory leaves the later history of
the church of Justinian enveloped in the suae
darknesa aa the earlier history of the Church of
the Sepulchre.
Digitized by
Google
1884
JEBU8ALBM
Ifce rejecters of hli theory recognize this ancient
tone of worship in the building adjacent to the
southern wall of the Haram, two handled and
eighty (set long by one hundred and ninety broad,
and which, with hter appendages, both Chriitian
and Saracenic, answers to the description of Jus-
tinian's Mary Church, and whose faulted passages
below, from which Christian visitors had long been
excluded, were among the impressive objects which
It was our fortune to examine In Jerusalem.
What baa been said of Justinian's church may
be repeated on his theory respecting the church
which he affirms that Constantine built within the
same inclosure, whose walls he conjeeturally traces
in the same way, with no more signs of a founda-
tion or site, and which has vanished in tike man-
ner, except a festal entrance which he identifies
with the present Golden Gateway in the eastern
wall of the Haram area.
On the hypothesis of a transfer of site, not the
Christian world alone, but the Moslem world like-
wise, haa been imposed upon, and by parties who
could not have concocted the fraud together. And
all this has been done subsequent to the seventh
century. So late as the close of that century, if
this theory is true, all Christians and all Moslems,
who knew anything about Jerusalem, knew that
the present Mosque of Omar was not then a mosque,
and never had been ; and that the present Church
of the Sepulchre, or one on its site, was not the
Church of the Sepulchre. On both sides they
have since that date been misled by designing men.
All Christians, residents in Jerusalem, and visitors,
so far as is known, have from the first ascribed the
site of the present church to the emperor, and all
Moslems, residents in Jerusalem and visitors, so far
as is known, have from the first ascribed the pres-
ent mosque to the Khalif. and yet in all these cen-
turies they have alike been the dupes and victims
of a double delusion and imposition, commencing
we knew not when. Can this fact be matched,
either in historic annals, or in the fabulous legends
of the Dark Ages?
An incident in the Mohammedan conquest of the
city, narrated by both Christian and Arabian writ-
ers, may properly he cited in this connection. We
quote from the historic portion of the article:
" The Khalif, after ratifying the terms of capita
brtion, which secured to the Christians liberty of
worship in the churches which they had, but pro-
hibited the erection of more, entered the city and
was met at the gates by the patriarch. Omar
then, in company with the patriarch, visited the
Church of the Kesumsction, and at the Muslim
time of prayer knelt down on the eastern steps of
the basilica, refusing to pray within the buildings,
in order that the possession of them might be se-
cured to the Christians. Tradition relates that
he requested a site whereon to erect a mosque for
the Mohammedan worship, and that the patriarch
offered him the spot occupied by the reputed stone
of Jacob's vision," etc. (p. 13t0). Passing by the
tradition, we have the historic fact that the Khalif
declined entering the church, for the reason above
giten, stated in almost the same words by another
writer: "In order that his followers might have
no pretext to claim poss e ssion of the church after
bis departure, under the pretense that he had wor-
shipped in it " (BUL Set. ii. 37). Yet if we may
••here Mr. Fergaason, this plighted faith, under-
stood alike by both parties, and on the testimony
af both scrupulously respected at the outset, was
JBKtlBALKM
afterwards violated without any known _
remonstrance on the part of Christians, wo I
not when, history and tradition being both as sflsal
respecting this transaction as in regard to tht
"pious fraud-" by which the homage of Christen-
dom wss subsequently transferred to ""t>fT
locality.
We pass now to the testimony of early visitors
and writers.
Eusebius, who wss contemporary with Coiutan*
tine, and bis biographer, represents the church
which he built over the supposed sepulchre, as
having an open court on the east, towards the
entrances, with cloisters on each side and gates in
front, " after which, in the very midst of ths street
of the market (or in the middle of the broad
market-place) the beautiful propyuea (vestibule) of
the whole structure presented to those passing by
on the outside the wonderful view of the things
seen within" (VU. Const ill. 89). Along the
street of the bazaars, east of the present church,
which would make their site identical with " the
market-place" of Eusebius, and correspond with
the position of the propyuea, are three granite col-
umns, the apparent remains of an ancient portico,
and which can be referred to no other structure
than the church of Constantine. Mr. Ferguson
admits that the propyuea of the church " had a
bread market-place in front of it," and to P rofe ssor
Willis's criticism that this would be " ludicrously
impossible " where he locates the building, he re-
plies: "There is now an extensive cemetery on the
spot in front of this gateway; and where men can
bury they can buy; where there is room for tombs,
there is room for stalls" (NoUt, p. 50). With
reference to this locality, we quote Mr. Grove:
" The main cemetery of the city seems from an
early date to have been where it ia still, on the
steep stupes of the Valley of the Kidron. Here it
was that the fragments of the idol abominations,
destroyed by Josiah, were cast out on the ' graves
of the children of the people ' (S K. xxiii. 6), and
the valley was always the receptacle for impurities
of all kinds" (p. 1279). Connect with this the
fact that the spot was then, as it is now, outside
the city, and on its least populous side, and wa
leave the reader to judge what element of absurdity
is lacking in Mr. Fergusson's supposition.
The testimony of Eusebius on another point, and
that of all the other writers whom Mr. Ferguson
depends upon, is thus summed up in his Nottt : —
" In so far as the argument is concerned I would
be prepared, if necesssry, to waive the architectural
evidence altogether, and to rest the proof of what
is advanced above on any one of the following four
points: —
"1. The assertion of Eusebius that the new
Jerusalem, meaning thereby the buildings of Con-
stantine, was opposite to, and over against, the) oal
city.
" 2. The position assigned to the Holy Places br-
ibe Bordeaux Pilgrim.
" 8. The connection pointed out by Antonhns
between the Bir Arroah and Siloarn.
"4. The assumed omission by Arcnlfns of aL
mention of the Dome of the Rock, and, I may add,
the building of a Mary Church by Justinian withia
the precincts of the Haram area." — (p. 65.)
We will take up in their order and fairly examms
the "four points" here named, with which lb
Ferguson agrees to stand or to fall.
"1. Ths assertion of Eusebius that the as*
Digitized by
Google
JERUSALEM
_ thereby the building* of Con-
i opposite to, and over against, the old
The saw i I inn referred to, he quotes as f jilows : —
" Accordingly on the very spot which witnessed
the Saviour's sufferings a new Jerusalem »«s con-
structed, over against the one so celebrated of old,
which, since the foul slain of guilt brought upon
it by the murder of the Lord, had experienced the
extremity of desolation. It was opposite the city
that the emperor began to rear a monument to the
Saviour's victory over death, with rich and lavish
magnificence."
To this h« sods the following passage from Soo-
rtUs: —
" 1 he mother of the emperor built a magnificent
boose of p*ayer on the place of the sepulchre,
linny'i' 1 ^ a new Jerusalem opposite to the old and
asserted city."
- The old city," in respect to its dwellings, was
itvided into two parts, " the upper " and " the
lower." The former was on Mount Zion and the
latter on Mount Akra, and in the adjacent valleys.
The site of the Mosque of Omar is directly opposite
lo the latter, or to the site of the Church of the
Holy Sepulchre, which "stands directly on the
ridgeof Akra." (BibL Ra. i. 391). The site of the
Temple and that of the church lie " over against "
each other. These are the points which Eusebius
is comparing. Ha does not refer directly to the
ruined dwellings of either the upper or the lower
city; be refers especially to the deserted ruins of
the Temple. By " the new Jerusalem," says Mr.
Kergusson, he means **<he buildings of Constan-
tine.'' Exactly — be means these and nothing else.
And by " the old Jerusalem " he means the build-
ings of the Temple, neither more or less. Or rather,
while the primary meaning is on each side thus
restricted, he intends to designate by the latter the
ancient city, of which the Temple was the crown,
and by the former, the modern city, of which the
church was to be the future glory. The antithesis
is oomplete. The other interpretation makes the
comparison ineongruoi;- — the old city meaning a
collection of dwellings, and the new city meaning
simply a church. Dr. Stanley has justly observed:
" Whatever differences of opinion have arisen about
the other hills of Jerusalem, there is no question
that the mount on which the Mosque of Omar
stands, overhanging the valley of the Kidron, has
from the time of Solomon, if not of David, been
regarded as the most sacred ground in Jerusalem "
IS. f P. p. 177, Amer. ed.). This is the bet
which the Christian Fathers recognize, using each
ocality as, in a religious sense, the representative
•i the city, when they say that the emperor Con-
stantine '* founded a new Jerusalem, opposite to
it* old and deserted city," a phrase, withal, more
applicable to the essln u hill, which was burned
ovist, swept " clear of houses," and was still for-
saken, than to the western hill, which had never
bean thus completely desolated, and was still in-
habited. Opposite the deserted site of the Hebrew
Temple Constantine reared the Christian sanctuary.
.Tos is our interpretation of Eusebius and Socrates:
tad this disposes of the first point.
« 8. The position assigned to the Holy Places by
fee Bordeaux Pilgrim."
His testimony is:— •
" fade nt ess foris nmrnm ds Stone euntibus ad
Vrtam NeopolHanam ad partem dextram deorsum
■ sails sunt psrtetes abi domus fait sirs pabulum
JERUSALEM 188£
Poutli Pilati. Ibi Dominus auditus est anteqnass
pateretur. A sinistra autem parte eat monticnhis
Golgotha, ubi Dominus crucifixua est. Inde quasi
sd lapidem missum est cripta ubi corpus ejus
positum fuit, et tenia die resurrexit Ibidem mode
jussu Constantini Imperatoris Uasilica facta est, id
est Dominicum mine pulchritudinis."
There is no allusion here to a " Zion Gate," and
none then existed. (Arcutf. i. 1.) Had the mod-
ern gate been there, no visitor would have passed
out of it to go to the opposite side of the city,
either to the right or the left, xod especially not to
the left It involves, further, the absurd supposi-
tion that the governor's bouse, where the Saviour
was arraigned, was in a valley, unprotected, outside
of the city, when in the preceding paragraph the
writer hss asserted that the residence of the gov-
ernor and the probable scene of the trial was the
castle of Antonia.
The natural course of one who passed out of the
Mty northward, going from Zion to the Neapolis
Gate, would have been formerly, as now, between
the Temple area and the site of the Church of the
Sepulchre, near to the latter, and the objects seen
would have been in just the relative position in
which this traveller describes them.
Mr. Kergusson assumes that the phrase " (oris
murum " requires us to believe that the visitor's
course, here described, from Zion to the Neapolis
Gate -(exiled Neapolis then, for the same reason
that it is now called Damascus), lay outside of the
wall. If so, the reference is to the inner wall along
the brow of Zion, the first of the " three walls "
which surrounded this part of the city. This may
be the meaning of the barbarous Latin of the old
Pilgrim, but far more probably, we think, he means
simply what we hare indicated above. There never
was % road from Zion southward, and no suggestion
could bo more improbable than that of plunging
from Zion into the lower Tyropceon, outside the
city, ascending the opposite slope, and making the
long detour by the northeast corner of the city to
reach the gate named. The point of destination
was northward from Zion, and the Pilgrim says
that one who would go beyond the wall, or outside
of the city, passing from Zion to the Neapolis
Gate, would see the objects described, on th*
right and left. The peculiar construction of tha
sentence favors this rendering of *' foris nviruni '
and we have an authority for it, exactly in point.
" Fori* ; in lata Latin, with the accusative = be
yond. ' Constitutus si sit fluvius, qui foris agrura
non vagatur' " (Andrews's Lex. in he.). Eitha
of these interpretations we claim to be more natural
and probable than Mr. Fergusson's, for the reason*
already given ; and this disposes of the sssona
point.
" 3. The connection pointed out by Antoninus
between the BIr Arroah and Siloam."
This testimony is : —
" Near the altar is a crypt, where, if you place
your ear, you will hear the flowing of water; and
if you throw in an apple, or anything that wilt
swim, sod go to Siloam you will find it thrre."
In the 'preceding article, Mr. Fergusson says' u In
so far as we know." the connection exists; meaning
merely, We dp not know that it does not exist In
the Notes he says: " It is, therefore, a fact at this
I hour," that the connection exists. This is an un-
' supported assertion. The connection has not beet
I established, sod the subterranean watercourses of
Jerusalem are still involved in much iinoeruuntr
Digitized by
Google
1886 JERUSALEM
Ik* witness cited in support of the sieged fact
pronounces directly against its probability, sod in
■wor of the opposite theory. Or. Barclay gins
his reasons for believing that the subterranean con-
duit of Hezekiah was brought down on the west
side of the valley running south from the Damascus
(late, and says that on this hypothesis " it would
pass just by the rock Golgotha," the traditionary
site of the sepulchre, as described by Antoninus
( City, tie., pp. 94, 300). Furthermore, in examin-
ing the fountain of Siloam, he found a subterranean
channel which supplied it, and which he traversed
for nearly a thousand feet; and on locating its
course, he was " perfectly satisfied that this sub-
terraneous canal derived its former supply of water,
not from Moriah, but from Zion " (io. p. 523). He
also says: " If this channel was not constructed for
the purpose of conveying to Siloam the surplus
waters of Hezekiah's aqueduct, then I am unable
to suggest any purpose to which it could have been
applied " (io. p. 309). [Siloam, Amer. ed.] So
little countenance, so palpable a contradiction,
father, is given to the "fact" by the witness cited
tu corroborate it; and this disposes of the third
point.
"4. The sesnmed omission by Arculfus of all
mention of the Dome of the Rock, and, I may add,
the building of a Mary Church by Justinian within
the precincts of the Haram area."
We do not see the bearing of the last-named
particular. Churches in honor of the Virgin were
. erected in many localities, and it is not necessary
to account for the selection of this site, though it
were easy to conjecture a reason. It proves nothing.
The remaining specification, like the other, is an
argument drawn from silence and conjecture, and
rates no higher as proof. It runs thus: If this
building were then in existence, this visitor must
have described it; the building was in existence,
and the opposite theory assumes that he did not
allude to it; therefore, the current theory is false.
We cannot but be struck with the difference be-
tween this position and the principle with which
Mr. Kergusson professedly started, of " admitting
nothing which cannot be proved, either by direct
testimony or by local indications" (p. 1312).
There is no pretense that this argument rests on
either of these: it rests on nothing but an unac-
countable " omission." And this silence is offered
at not merely corroborative evidenoe, but as vital
•roof. Mr. Kergusson adduces this as one of four
points, "any one" of which establishes his theory
beyond question. As if the existence of St. Paul's
in London, or of St Peter's in Home, at any period,
would be absolutely disproved by the silence of a
visitor respecting either, in a professed description
of the object* of interest in the city. At the best,
it could only be a natural inference; it could never
be proof positive. And here we might rest; for if
we proceed no further, Mr. Fergusson's last point
is disposed of, and his claim is prostrate.
But we join issue with him, and affirm that what
Arculfus descrilies as the Church of the Sepulchre,
was the building standing on the site of the present
church, and not the Mosque of Omar, or any part
of it. Neither could " the square house of prayer
arreted m the site of the Temple," have been, as
he allege*, the Mosque el-Akss. The phrase •' vili
hbricati sunt opere," could never have been applied
to this structure. The immense quadrangle, rudely
soOt with beams and planks over the remains of
Trias, as described by the bishop, would seem to be
JERUSALEM
ling eras
Khalif Omar over the rock es-Sukhnh, ss Dr. Bav-
clay suggests, " which in the course of half a esav
tury gave place to the present elegant octagonal ed-
ifice, erected by Abd el-Melek " ( C%, etc., p. 880)
If the assigned date of the completion of the latter
edifice is correct, this would serve to fix more
definitely the date of Arculras's visit, which is only
known to have been "in the latter part of the
seventh century " (Wright's Introduction, p. xii.
Bonn's ed.).
In the Bishop's description of " the Church of
the Holy Sepulchre," whatever other changes may
have taken place, we have a crucial test of the iden-
tity of the building described with the church or
the mosque, in the account of the cave which was
the reputed tomb of the Saviour. For this, together
with that of Willibald, a few years later, and that
of Sawulf, still later, we refer the reader to Biil
Sacra, xxiv. 137, 138.
The sepulchral cave of the church, described by
these writers, Mr. Fergusson claims to have been
the cave in the rock es-Sukhrah, beneath the dome
of the present Mosque of Omar, ITu* rock oat
been the most stationary landmark in Jerusalem,
and has probably changed as little as say other
object. For such accounts as have reached as of
the cave within it, we refer the reader to JBiH.
Sacra, xxiv. 138. 139.
It is not credible that these and the preceding
all refer to the same excavation. The narrative of
Arculfus can be sdjusted to the present Church
of the Sepulchre and its reputed tombs, Disking
due allowance for the changes wrought by the de-
struction of the building. But by no practicable
change, by no possibility, can it be adjusted to the
rock es-Sukhnh and the care beneath it; and this
disposes of the fourth point.
We have now completed our examination of Mr.
Fergusson's " four points." He offered to "rest
the proof" of his theory "on sny one" of them;
and we have shown that on a fair investigation not
one of them sustains his theory in a single partic-
ular, and for the moat part they pointedly refute H.
There remains an objection to this theory, as
decisive aa any, which can be best appreciated by
those who have been on the ground. The site of
the so-called Mosque of Omar could not have been,
in our Saviour's day, outside of the walls. Ins
theory would break up the solid masonry of the
ancient substructions of the Temple area, still exist-
ing, making one portion modem and the other
ancient, leaving one without the city, and retaining
the other within it, in a way which is simply in-
credible. Whstever may have been the bearings
and dimensions of the Temple, with its courts and
porticoes, in the indosure above, the massive foun-
dations of the area are one work, and that a work
of high antiquity. The immense beveled stones in
the southeast corner were laid at the same time
with the stones in the southwest corner. They are
of the same magnitude, and it does not need tic
eye of an architect to assure us that they are of Ue
same age and style of workmanship. Hey wets
the two extremities of the ancient southern wall
as they are of the modern, stretching, as Joeepont
informs us, from valley to valley, and laid with
stones " immovable for all time: " and to-day they
confirm his testimony, and contradict this theory
" We are led irresistibly to the conclusion," sail
Dr. Robinson, on his first visit, " that the area af
the Jewish temple wss Identical on its
Digitized by
Google
JERUSALEM
, and southern tides with the present en*
i of the Haram." " Ages upon ages have
•oiled away, jet these foundations endure, and are
knmovable aa at the beginning " (oibl. Re: i. 437).
The investigations of hU second *isit confirmed the
conclusion of his first, — from which we see not
how any visitor who has inspected this masonry can
withhold his asseut — that in the southwest corner,
In the southern part of the western wall, in the
southeast comer on both sides, and along the south-
ern wall, we have before us " the massive sub-
structions of the ancient Jewish Temple. Such has
been the impression received by travellers for cen-
turies, and such it will probably continue to be so
long as these remains endure " (BiU. Jits. (1852)
220).
These are our main reasons for rejecting Mr
Ferguson's theory of the Topography of Jerusalem,
in its two principal points; and if these points are
untenable, almost the entire reasoning of his section
of the article tails with them. 8. W.
* V. Moiikkm Jerusalem. — WnlU and
Gate*. — The present walls of Jerusalem are not
older than the 16th century, though the materials
of which they are built belonged to former walls
and are much more ancient. They consist of hewn
stones of a moderate size, laid in mortar. They
are H built for the most part with a breastwork;
that is, the exterior face of the wall is carried up
several feet higher than the interior part of the
wall, leaving a broad and convenient walk along
the top of the latter for the accommodation of the
defenders. This is protected by the parapet or
breastwork, which has battlements and loopholes.
There are also flights of steps to ascend or descend
at convenient distances on the inside " (Itob. BiU.
Set. i. 352). The walls embrace a circuit of about
H miles. On the west, south, and east sides
they stand generally as near the edge of the val-
leys as the ground will allow; except that the
southern extremity of Zion and a part of Moriah
(known as Ophel) being outside of the city, the
mils there run across the ridge of those hills
They vary in height from 20 to 50 feet, according
to the depth of the ravines below, which formed an
important part of the natural defenses of the city.
The walls on the north side, where the ground is
more open and level, are protected to some extent
by ditches or trenches. It is a peculiarity of a
part of this northern wall that it consists of a mass
sf natural rock, 75 feet high, with strata so exactly
sorrasponding with those of the opposite ledge that
the passage between them must be artificial. It
may have been a quarry for obtaining stones for
the walls of the city. Fortifications of this character,
surrounded as they are by higher positions in the
ticinity, would be utterly useless against European
putties. Vet, imperfect as they are in this respect,
these walls so notched with battlements and seeming
to rise and fall (like a waving line) with the de-
clivities of the ground, especially as they suddenly
show themselves to the traveller approaching the
eity from the west, form a picturesque oriental sight
never to be forgotten.
The city has four gates at present in use, which
look towards the cardinal points. Though they
Sear other names among the natives, they are known
to travellers as the YAfu (Joppa) Gate on the west
tide, too Damascus Gate on the north tile, the
3ate of St. Stephen on the east, and of Zkm on the
oath. The first two are so called after the plans
a which the roads starting from them lead: that
JERUSALEM 1887
of St. Stephen from a popular belief that thJamsftyl
was put to death in that quarter, and that of Zion
from its situation on the hill of this name. Near
the Damascus Gate are the remains of towers, sup-
posed by Robinson to have been the guard-houses of ■
gate which stood there as early as the age of Herod.
The Y&fa Gate forms the main entrance, and on
that account is kept open half an hour later than
the other gates. The custom of shutting the gates
by night (see Rev. xxi. 23-25) is common in eastern
cities at the present day. Three or four smaller
gates occur in the walls, but have been closed up,
and are now seldom or never used. The moat
remarkable of these is the Golden Gate in the uat •
em wall which overlooks the Valley of the Kednm
" It is in the centre of a projection 55 feet bog
and standing out S feet. Its portal is double,
with semicircular arches profusely ornamented. Tot
Corinthian capitals which sustain the entablature
spring like corbels from the wall, and the whole
entablature is bent round the arch. The exterior
appearance, independently of its architecture, bears
no mark of high antiquity .... for it bears no
resemblance to the massive stones along the lower
part of the wall on each side, and indeed the new
masonry around is sufficiently apparent " (Porter,
Handbook, i. 115 f.). The style of architecture,
whether the structure occupies its original place or
not, must be referred to an early Konian period.
[Wood-cut, p. 1325.] It is a saying of the Franks
that the Mohammedans have walled up this gat*
because they believe that a king is to enter by it
who will take possession of the city and become
Lord of the whole earth (Rob. BiU. Ha. i. 323).
It may be stated that the largest stones in the
exterior walls, bearing incontestable marks of a
Hebrew origin, and occupying their original places,
are found near the southeast angle of the city and
in the substructions of the Castle of David so called,
not tar irora the Yafa Gate, near the centre of the
western wall of the city. Some of the alternate
courses at the former point measure from 17 to 19
feet in length by 3 or i feet in height. One of the
stones there is 24 feet in length by 3 feet in height
and 6 in breadth. This part of the wall is common
both to the city and the Temple area. One of the
stones in the foundations of the Castle is 12} feat
long and 3 feet 5 inches broad; though most of
them are smaller than those at the southeast angle.
The upper part of this Castle or Tower, one of the
most imposing structures at Jerusalem, is com-
paratively modem ; but the lower part exhibits a
different style of workmanship and is unquestionably
ancient, though whether a remnant of Herod's
Hippie tower (as Robinson supposes) or not, is still
disputed. [Pbjctobiuh.] The Saviour's language
that " not one stone should be left on another "
(Matt. xxiv. 2) is not contradicted by such facta.
In the first place the expression may be a proverbial
one for characterizing the overthrow as signal, the
destruction as desolating, irresistible. In the next
place this was spoken in reality not of the city and
its walls, but of " the buildings of the temple," and
in tntt application was fulfilled in the strictest
manner.
Area, Street!, etc. — The present' dronmferaiei
of the city includes 209.6 seres, or ons third of •
square mile. Its longest line extends from N. E
to S. W., somewhat less than a mile in length
[See Plate III.] But this space is not all built
upon; for the lnclosure of the Haram eeh-Sktrff
(Moriah or the site of the Temple) omtaha M
Digitized by
Google
1888
JERUSALEM
(almost one sixth of the whole), and large
especially on Mount Zion and the hill
Wealths at the north end, are unoccupied. Jut
within the Gate of St Stephen is an open tract
where two or three Arab tenta may often be seen,
spread out and occupied after the manner of the
desert. To what extent the territory of the ancient
city coincided with the modem city is not altogether
certain. The ancient city embraced the whole of
Zion beyond question, the southern projection of
Horiah or Ophel, and possibly a small tract on the
north, though the remains of the cisterns there are
too modern to be alleged as proof of this last addi-
tion. On the other Sand, those who maintain the
genuineness of the Holy Sepulchre must lean that
section of the city out of the Jerusalem of the
Saviour's day.
" The city is intersected from north to south by
its principal street, which is three fifths of a mile
long, and runs from the Damascus Gate to Zion
Gate. From this principal street, the others, with
the exception of that from the Damascus Gate to
the Tyropoeon Valley, generally run east and west,
at right angles to it; amongst these is the ' Via
Dolorosa ' along the north of the Haram, in which
is the Roman archway, called Ecce Homo. The
city is divided into quarters, which are occupied by
the different religious sects. The boundaries of
these quarters are defined by the intersection of the
principal street, and that which crosses it at right
angles from the Jaffa Gate to the Gate of the Ha-
ram, called Bib as-SiUile, or Gate of the Chain.
The Christians occupy the western half of the city,
the northern portion of which is called the Chris-
tian quarter, and contains the Church of the Holy
Sepulchre; the southern portion is the Armenian
quarter, having the Citadel at its northwest angle.
The Mohammedan quarter occupies the northeast
portion of the city, and includes the Haram esh-
Shertf. The Jewish quarter is on the south, be-
tween the Armenian quarter and the Haram."
(Ordnance Survey of Jerusalem, p. 9, Lond. 1865.)
It has been stated that, the streets are not known
by any particular names. A detailed report of
inquiries on this subject (appended to the Ordnance
Survey) shows that most of them are thus known:
jeing distinguished by the names of persons or
families, from trades carried on in them, or from
the places to which the streets or alleys lead. The
streets are narrow, uneven, and badly paved, for
the most part with a gutter or channel in the
jiiddle for beasts of burden. Some of them, those
TioH frequented, are darkened with mats or stone
trches for the purpose of excluding the heat. The
nouses are built of limestone, many of them mere
hovels, others more substantial, but seldom with
any pretension to elegance. The low windows
guarded with iron grates give to many of them. a
dreary, prison-like appearance. Some of them have
lattice windows toward the street; but generally,
these open toward the inner courts on which the
houses stand.
Population. — In proportion to the extent of the
place, the population of Jerusalem is very dense,
rhe houses in general are closely tenanted, and in
tome quarters they are piled upon one another, so
m to extend across the streets, and make them
appear almost like subterranean passages. It is
difficult (as no proper system of registration exists)
sr fix the precise number of the Inhabitants. Dr.
Befausti, Sinreriy Prussian Consul at Jerusalem,
time* h. ji 1846 at r.,000. The following table
JERUSALEM
exhibits the different classes of this
according to their nationalities and religious cow
Sessions: —
I. Mohammedans . . .
U. Christians
(a) Greeks . . .
(6) Roman Catholics
(c) Armenians .
(d) Copts . .
(<) Syrians . .
SUMO
900
860
100
SO
SO
MI. Jews
6.0W
(a) Turkish subjects (Stph-
ardim) .... 8,000
(&) Foreigners (Ashkenazim)
Poles, Russians, Ger-
mans, etc. . 1,100
(e) Caraitaa . . SO
T,JJ»
UySlO
To the foregoing we are to add the 66 or 7'.
persons, European Protestants or Catholics, eon
nected with consulates or ecclesiastical establish-
menta, and the Turkish garrison of 800 or 1,00C
men; and we have then the aggregate (as stated
above) of about 17,000. The number of pilgrims,
greatest at Easter, varies from time to time; the
maximum may be 10,000. It was about 6,000 in
1843, and about 3,000 in 1844 (Schultz, Jerusalem,
Eine Vorlesung, pp. 83, 84). The estimate in the
Ordnance Survey (1886) — 18,000 — shows that
hardly any change has taken place in the popula-
tion during the last twenty years. The statement
(in this latter work) that the travellers and pilgrims
at Easter swell the sum to 30,000, seems almost
incredible, unless it be understood of some altogether
exceptional year. ToMer complains (DenWatter
nus Jerusalem, p. 353) that the Turkish statistics
are extremely uncertain. It is generally allowed
that the Christian inhabitants slowly increase at
the expense of the Mohammedans.
Water Sup/ily. — Most of the houses an fur-
nished with cisterns in which the rain-water is
collected by means of gutters during the rains from
December to March. The better houses often have
two or three such cisterns, so arranged that when
one is full the water flows into another. " As the
water which runs through the filthy streets la alas
collected in some of these cisterns, it can only be
drunk with safety after it is filtered and freed from
the numerous worms and insects which are brad
in it." Some water is obtained from Joab'a Well
[En-Rogel], whence it is brought in goat-skins or
donkeys and sold to the inhabitants. The ancient
city was supplied with an abundance of pure water
from the three Pools of Solomon near Bethlehem.
The works constructed for this purpose, " in bold-
ness of design and skill in execution, rival even
the most approved system of modern engineers "
(Ordnance Survey, p. 10). The Pacha of Jeru-
salem has recently repaired the conduit from Sol-
omon's Pools to Jerusalem, which is now supplied
from Am Eton, and " the sealed fountain " abort
the upper pool.
yews. — The Jew* constitute an interesting class
of the inhabitants. Very many of them an aft
grims who have come to Jerusalem to fulfill a tow
and then return to the countries when they wssf
bom, or aged persons who desire to spend that
Digitized by
Google
JHBT78ALBM
ha* days In the holy city, and bo buried In the
Valey of Jehoahaphat, which according to their
tradiUjn* ii to be the scene of the hut judgment.
For the privilege of being buried there they ere
obliged to pay a large sum; bnt if any one Ii too
poor to incur this expense, the body is taken to the
■lope on Mount Zion where the Tomb of David is
situated. Among them are rep r e se n tat i ves from
almost every land, though the Spanish, Polish, and
German Jews compose the greater number. like
their brethren in other parts of Palestine, with the
exception of a few in commercial places, they are
wretchedly poor, and live chiefly on alms contrib-
uted by their countrymen in Europe and America.
They devote most of their time to holy employ-
ment*, as they are called. They frequent the syn-
agogues, roam over the country to visit places mem-
orable in their ancient history, and read assiduously
the Old Testament and the Talmudio and Kabbinic
writings. Thoue of them who make any pretension
to learning understand the Hebrew and Rabbinic,
and speak as their vernacular tongue the language
jf the country where they formerly lived, or whence
•heir fathers emigrated. As would be expected,
bom the character of the motive which brings them
to the Holy Land, they are distinguished, as a class,
for their bigoted attachment to Judaism. The Jaws
at Jerusalem have several synagogues which they
attend, not promiscuously, but according to their
national or geographical affinities. The particular
bond which unites them in this religious associ-
ation is that of their birth or sojourn in the same
foreign land, and their speaking the same language
(Comp. Acts vi. 9 ff.). For information respecting
the Jews in Palestine, the reader may see especially
Wilson's Land of the Bible (3 vols. Edinb. 1JU7)
and Bonar and M'Cbeyne's tfarratire of a Mit-
rim of Inquiry to the Jem, in 1839 (23th thousand,
Edinb. 1853). The statements in these works re-
main substantially correct for the present time.
Burial Placet. — Modem burial places surround
the city on all sides. Thus, on our right as we go
out of St. Stephen's Gate is a Mohammedan cem-
etery, which covers a great part of the eastern slope
of Morlah, extending to near the southeast angle
of the Haram. This cemetery, from its proximity
to the sacred area, is regarded as specially sacred.
The largest cemetery of the Mohammedans is on
the west side of the city, near the Birktt Mamilla,
or Upper Gihon, a reservoir so named still in use.
•> The Moslem Sheikhs or ' Saints ' are buried In
various parts of the city and neighborhood, especially
along the western wall of the Haram. The Moslems
are buried without coffins, being simply wrapped in
a sheet, and are carried to the grave in a sort of
wooden box, borne on the shoulders of six men.
The body is preceded by a man bearing a palm
iranch and followed by the mourners. Prayers ore
offered up in the mosque whilst the body is there,
and at the grave the Koran is recited, and the
virtues of the deceased extolled." The outside
portion of Mount Zion is occupied chiefly as a place
af burial for the Christian communities, i. »., Cath-
acs, Greeks, Armenians, and Protestants. Not
ar from David's Tomb there is a little enuetery
which contains the remains of several Americans
•ho have died at Jerusalem. One of the graves is
that of the lue Prof. Flake of Amherst College,
whose memory is still cherished among us by so
■tany pupils and friends. The great Jewish eem-
Itery, «s already mentioned, lies along the base and
If the aides of Olivet The white slabs which cover
JERUSALEM
1889
the graves are slightly elevated and marked with
Hebrew inscriptions. It should be stated that tar
Canute Jews have a separata place of burial on tiki
southwest side of Hinnom, near the intersection
of the road which crosses the valley to the tombs of
Aceldama.
Churches. — It Is impossible to do more than
glance at this branch of the subject The Church
of the Holy Sepulchre, in the northwest part of
the city, stands over the reputed place of the Sa-
viour's tomb, mentioned in the history of the Pas-
sion. It is the most imposing edifice in Jerusalem,
after the Mosque of Omar. It was built in 1808,
on the site of a more ancient one destroyed by Art
Some monument of this kind has marked the spot
ever since the time of the Empress Helena, about
A. o. 328, and perhaps earlier still. It does net
belong to this place to discuss the question of the
genuineness of the site. For a convenient resume
of the arguments on both sides, Stanley refers to
the Museum of Classical Antiquities, April, 1853
Nothing decisive has more recently been brought to
light This church is in reality not so much a single
church as acluster of churches or chapels. The church
is entered by a door leading out of an open court on
the south, never opened except by a member of the
Moslem family. It is always open for a few hours
in the morning and again in the afternoon. The
open court is paved with limestone and worn as
smooth as glass by the feet of pilgrims. Here the
venders of souvenirs of the Holy Land from Beth-
lehem expose their wares and drive a thriving trade.
On the east side are the Greek convent of Abraham,
the Armenian church of St John, and the Coptic
church of the Angel; on the west side are thres
Greek chapels, that of St James, that of the Forty
Martyrs, in which is a very beautiful font, and that
of St John; at the eastern end of the south sidt
of the court is a Greek chapel, dedicated to tbs
Egyptian Mary, and east of the entrance a flight
of steps leads to the small Latin Chapel of the Ag
ony. The Chapel of the Holy Sepulchre is in th<
centre of the Rotunda, built principally of the
limestone known as " Santa Croce marble." What
is shown as the Tomb of our Lord is a raised
bench, 9 feet high, 8 feet 4 inches bng, covered on
the top by a marble slab. " No rock is visible at
present," says Capt Wilson, » but may exist below
the marble slab, as in forming the level floor of the
Rotunda a great quantity of rock must have ben
cut nway, and the portion containing the tomb
would naturally be left intact" The church is at
present undergoing important repairs.
Near St Stephen's Gate is the Church of St
Anne, built over a grotto, which looks like an
ancient cistern. The church belongs to France,
and is being almost rebuilt at great expense. It
shows the scarcity of wood that the timber required
in these repairs has to be imported at Yd/a, and
then transported over the heavy roads to Jerusalem.
The Church of St James in the Armenian con-
vent is one of the richest In gilding, decorations
and pictures in the city. Nearly opposite the Pool
of Hesekiah is the Greek church and convent of
"the Forerunner," comparatively modern and
dressed out with gilding and paintings in the usual
' Greek style.' The church of the Anglo-Prussian
a 'We have taken these brief statements (to sums
•stent, verbally), from the Ontnmut Burner ef Jesw ,
totem, our best recent authority (1866). It may be as
asaes te say base that CeJ. James, the Uresis* af ths
Digitized by
Google
1340 JERUSALEM
tyheop rt e on Mount Zk>n, though not luge, It a
Mat edifice, built of limestone, in the form of a
crass. Hie preaching in this church on the Sab-
bath and at other times is in German and in Eng-
lish. See an interesting sketch of the origin and
objects of this episcopate by Giider in Herzog's
Real-EtuyU. vi. 603-606. The I^ndon Jews'
Society expends large sums of money for the benefit
of the Palestine Jews, through the agency of this
Jerusalem bishopric On the rising ground.west of
the city stands " the immense Russian pile, a new
building, which completely overshadows every other
architectural feature. It combines in some degree
the appearance and the uses of cathedral close,
public offices, barracks, and hostelry; the flag of
the Russian consulate doats over one part, while
the tall cupola of toe church commands the centre.
There are many Russian priests and monks, and
shelter is provided for the crowds of Muscovite
pilgrims " (Tristram, Land of Israel, p. 174, 3d
ed.). All recent travellers testify that the distinc-
tive oriental character of Jerusalem is rapidly Fad'
big away and a European coloring taking its place.
Subttrraman Qmtrry. — It is ascertained that
a labyrinth of great extent and of complicated in
tricacy exists under the present Jerusalem. It is
Unquestionably very ancient, but having been so
recently discovered or rediscovered, belongs in that
point of view to our own times, quite as much as to
Its own proper antiquity. Dr. Barclay has the
merit of bringing this wonderful excavation to the
knowledge of European and American travellers.
We insert an abridged account of this discovery in
the words of Dr. R. G. Barclay (in the C% of the
(treat King, pp. 460-463, 1st ed.): —
" Having provided ourselves with all the requisites
for such a furtive adventure — matches, candles,
sompass, tape-line, paper, and pencils — a little
previous to the time of closing the gates of the city,
*e sallied out at different points, the better to avoid
rxciting suspicion, and rendezvoused at Jeremiah's
Pool, near to which we secreted ourselves within a
white enclosure surrounding the tomb of a departed
Arab Sheik, until the shades of darkness enabled
is to approach unperceived, when we issued from
our hiding-place, amid the screeching of owls,
screaming of hawks, howling of jackals, and the
chirping of nocturnal insects. The mouth of the
cavern being immediately below the city wall, and
the houses on Reaetha, we proceeded cautiously in
the work of removing the dirt, mortar, and stones;
and, after undermining and picking awhile, a hole
(commenced a day or two previous by our dog) was
Hide, though scarcely large enough for us to worm
rar way serpentinely through the ten foot wall.
" On scrambling through and descending the
Inner side of the wall, we found our way apparently
obstructed by an immense mound of soft dirt, which
■ad been thrown in, the more effectually to close
ip the entrance; but, after examining awhile, dis-
overed that it had settled down in some places
sufficiently to allow us to crawl over it on hand
and knee; which having accomplished, we found
survey, avoirs his belief " that the traditional sites are
the true sites of Mount Son, and the Holy Sepulchre,
and Mount Morlah and the Temple " (Pre/ace, p. 16).
He says that an examination of the ground confirms
me report that (XnstenUne " caused the rock all round
Mas SepulshT* *<t be cut away to form a spacious In-
I round It, .oaring the Sepulchre Itself standing
' (pu 11). for the traditions, sacred to-
JKBTJ8ALRH
ourselves enveloped in thick darkness, that snsjki
be felt, but not penetrated by all our lights, s» vest
is the hall.
" For some time we were almost overcome wit)
feelings of awe and admiration (and I must sa)
apprehension, too, from the immense impending
vaulted roof), and felt quite at a loss to decide ic
which direction to wend our way. There is a con-
stant and in many places very rapid descent from
the entrance to the termination, the distance be-
tween which two points, in a nearly direct line, is
760 feet; and the cave is upwards of 8,000 feet in
circumference, supported by great numbers of rude
natural pillars. At the southern extremity there
is a very deep and precipitous pit, in which we
received a very salutary warning of caution from
the dead — a human skeleton ! supposed to be that
of a person who, not being sufficiently supplied with
lights, was precipitated headlong and broke his
neck.
11 We noticed bats clinging to the ceiling hi
several places, in patches varying from fifty to a
hundred and fifty, hanging together, which flew
away at our too near approach, and for some time
continued to flit and scream round and about our
beads in rather disagreeable propinquity. Numerous
crosses marked on the wall indicated that, though
unknown to Christendom of the present day, the
devout Pilgrim or Crusader had been there; and a
few Arabia and Hebrew inscriptions (though too
much effaced to be deciphered) proved that the
place was not unknown to the Jew and Arab.
Indeed, the manner in which the beautiful white
solid limestone rock was everywhere carved by the
mason's rough chisel into regular pillars, proved
that this extensive cavern, though in part natural,
was formerly used as the grand quarry of Jeru-
salem. . . . There are many intricate meandering
passages leading to immense halls, as white as the
driven snow, and supported by colossal pillars of
irregular shape — some of them placed there by the
hand of nature, to support the roof of the various
grottos, others evidently left by the stone quarrier
in quarrying the rock to prevent the intumbling
of the city. Such reverberations I never heard
before.
" What untold toil was r ep r e s e nted by the vast
piles of blocks and chippings, over which we had
to clamber, in making our exploration I A melan-
choly grandeur — at once exciting and depressing —
pervaded these vast saloons. This, without doubt,
is the very magazine from which much of the
Temple rock was hewn — the pit from which was
taken the material for the silent growth of the
Temple. How often, too, had it probably been the
last place of retreat to the wretched inhabitants of
this guilty city in the agonizing extremities of her
various overthrows ! It will probably yet form the
grave of many that are living over it ! for the work
of disintegration and undermining is going on
surely, though slowly."
More recent explorers confirm this report, and
supply other information. "The roof of rock,"
e&lloes. and ecclesiastical establishments, u far v
relates to Jerusalem, Dr. Sepp's Jerusalem uwi asi
Hfil. Land (1868), Amines to be consulted, tress
Tobler's Den/Matter out Jerusalem (1868) we (sen
much respecting the religious eultus, employ s asnta
and domestic lift of the Inhabitant*, flee also Porter*
H mmdbetk, i. 76 IT. B
Digitized by
Google
JERUSALEM
says Tkomaoa, "i» about 30 fed higk, ran above
the huge heaps of rubbish, and ii sustained by
jrge, shapeless columns of the original rock, left
lor th^ purpose by the quarriere, I suppose. ... In
tome places we climbed with difficulty over large
masses of rock, which appear to have been shaken
down from the roof, and suggest to the nervous the
possibility of being ground to powder by similar
masses which hang overhead The general
direction of these excavations is southeast, and about
parallel with the valley which descends from the
Damascus Gate. I suspect that they extend down
to the Temple aim, and also that it was into these
caverns that many of the Jews retired when Titus
took the Temple, as we read in Josephus. The
whole city might be stowed away in them ; and it
is my opinion that a great part of the very white
stone of the Temple must have been taken from
these subterranean quarries " {Land and Book, ii.
491 f.).
Copt Wilson says further : " In places the stones
have been left half cut out, aud the marks of the
chisel and pick are as fresh as if the workmen had
just left, and even the black patches made by the
smoke of the lamps remain. The tools employed
seem to have been much the same as those now in
use, and the quarrymen to have worked in gangs
of 5 or 6, each man carrying in a vertical cut 4
inches broad till he had reached the required depth.
The height of the course would determine the dis-
tance of the workmen from each other; in these
quarries it was found to be about 1 foot 7 inches.
When the cuts had all obtained the required depth,
the stones were got out by working in from the
end. The cuts were apparently made with a two-
handed pick, and worked down from above. . . .
In one part of the quarry is the so-called well,
which is nothing more than the leakage from the
cisterns above, and the constant dripping has worn
away the rock into the form of a basin. . . . The
steps left by the quarrymen for getting about can
be easily' traced. On the opposite side of the road
is another old quarry, worked in a similar manner,
but not to the same extent, to which the name of
Jeremiah's Grotto has been given " ( Ordnance
Sumy, p. 63 A). " In many places," says Mr.
Tristram {Land of Israel, p. 191, 3d ed.), "the
very niches remained out of which the great blocks
had been hewn which form the Temple wall. There
lay on the ground in one corner a broken monolith,
which had evidently split in the process of removal
and had been left where it fell. The stone here is
very soft, and must easily have been sawn, while,
like some other limestones, it hardens almost to
marble on exposure."
Antiquitiu in and around lie City. — Some ac-
count has been given of these in previous sections
of this article. The only point on which we pro-
pose to remark here, is that of the obscurity still
resting on some of these questions connected with
the ancient topography of the city and the im-
possibility of identifying the precise scene of many
•f the events of the Old and the New Testament
history. Traditions, it is true, are current among
the oriental Christians, which profess to give us
ill the information on this subject that one could
satire. But, in general, such traditions are nothing
•son than vague conjectures; they are incapable
sf being traced back far enough to give them the
vitas of historical testimony, and often are oon-
vadkted by facts known to us from the Bible, or
Mb with other traditions maintained with equal
JERUSALEM
184*
confidence. Even conclusions once admitted is
facts into our manuals of geography and archeology
have been from time to time drawn into questioa
or disproved by the results of further study and
research.
But this state of our knowledge should not dis-
appoint or surprise the reader. It admits of a
ready and satisfactory explanation. "No ancient
city," says Kaumer, "not excepting Rome itself,
has undergone (since the time of Christ) so many
changes as Jerusalem. Not only houses, palaces
temples, have been demolished, rebuilt, aud de-
stroyed anew, but entire hills on which the city
stood have been dug down, and valleys filled up"
(PaiOilina, p. 333, 3*> Aufl.). When, a few yean
ago, the Episcopal Church was erected on Mount
Zion, it was found necessary to dig through the
accumulate rubbish to the depth of 50 feet or
more, in order to obtain a proper support for the
foundations. In some more recent excavations the
workmen struck on a church embedded 40 feet
below the present surface. Capt. Wilson makes
some statements on this subject so Instructive that
they deserve to be mentioned. " We learn from
history, and from actual exploration under ground,
that the Tyropceon Valley has been nearly filled
up, and that there is a vast accumulation of ruins
in most parts of the city. Thus, for example, it
has been found, by descending a well to the south
of the central entrance to the Haram, that there is
an accumulation of ruins and rubbish to the extent
of 84 feet; and that originally there was a spring
there, with steps down to it out in the solid rock."
. . . The stairs cut in the rock on the northern
slope of Mount Zion " were covered up by about
40 feet of rubbish." <>...« There was not less
than 40 feet of rubbish in the branch of the Val-
ley of the Cheesemongers (Tyropceon) near the
citadel. ... In fact, we know that it was part
of the settled policy of the conquerors of the citj
to obliterate, as far as possible, those features upon
the strength of which the upper city and the Tem-
ple mainly depended. The natural accumulation
of rubbish for the last 3,000 years has further con-
tributed to obliterate, to a great extent, the natural
features of the ground within the city " ( Ordnanot-
Survey of Jtrumlem, p. 7 f.). The latekt excava-
tions by Lieut Warren near " Robinson's Arch "
have gone to a depth of 55 feet below the surface
before coming to the bottom of the valley between
Zion and Moriah ( The Quiver, p. 819, June, 1868,
Load.). In many places the present level of the
••Via Dolorosa" is not less than 30 or 40 feet
above its original level; disproving, by the way,
the claim set up for the antiquity of its sites. In
digging for the foundations of the house cf li t
Prussian Deaconesses, a subterranean street of
booses was found several feet below the street
above it. (Survey, p. 56.)
Vitvn of Jerusalem. — 1 he summit of Olivet
furnishes, on the whole, the best look-out in the
vicinity of Jerusalem. Yet the view of the oity
from this point is too distinct to be very imposing,
for, having few edifices that will bear inspection, it
must be seen, like Damascus, at a distance and in
the mass. In order to produce the best effect The
vaulted domes surmounting the roofs of the better
houses, and giving to them solidity and support,
tern iim> as ornaments, and are striking object* as
• For an account of mass stab* ess toL IL s> IBs,
Digitized by
Google
JERUSALEM
1242
asm from this direction. Such domes are aid to
be peculiar to a few towns in the south of Palestine.
The want of foliage and verdure ii a tbtj noticeable
defect. A few cypresses and dwarfiah palms are the
only treea to be discovered within the city itaetf.
The minarets, only 8 or 10 in number, which often
display elsewhere a graceful figure, are here very
ordinary, and add little or nothing to the scene.
On the other hand, the buildings which compose
the Church of the Holy Sepulchre, arrest attention
at once, on account of their comparative size and
elegance. But wore conspicuous than all is the
Mosque of Omar, which being so near at hand, on
the east aide of the city, can be surveyed here with
great advantage. It stands near the centre of an
inclosure which coincides very nearly with the
court of the ancient Temple. It is built on a plat-
form, 450 feet from east to west, and 650 from
north to south, elevated about IS feet, and paved
in part with marble. It is approached on the west
side by three flights of stairs, on the north by two,
on the south by two, and on the east by one. The
building itself is an octagon of 67 feet on a side,
the walls of which are ornamented externally with
variegated marbles, arranged in elegant and intri-
cate patterns. The lower, story of this structure is
46 feet high. From the roof of this story, at the
distance of about one half of its diameter from the
outer edge, rises a wall 70 feet higher, perforated,
towards the top, with a series of low windows.
Above this wall rises a dome of great beauty, 40
feet high, surmounted by a gilt crescent. The en-
tire altitude, therefore, including the platform, is
170 feet The dome is covered with lead, and the
roof of the first story with tiles of glazed porcelain.
The Mosque has four doors, which face the cardi-
nal points, guarded by handsome porches. The
Mohammedans regard it as their holiest sanctuary
after that of Mecca, (For these and other details
an Williams's Boig City, ii. 801 ff.) The ample
eourt which surrounds the Mosque, as seen from
Olivet, appears as a grass-plot, shaded with a few
trees, and intersected with walks."
When about half way up this mount, the trav-
eller finds himself, apparently, off against the level
of Jerusalem. In accordance with this, the Evan-
gelist represents the Saviour as being " over against
the Temple " as be sat on the Mount of Olives, and
foretold the doom of the devoted city (Mark xiil.
3). Hence the disciples, ss they listened to him at
that moment, had the massive " buildings of the
Temple " in full view before them across the valley
of the Kedron, to which they had just callrd his
attention with so much pride, and of which they
were told that soon "not one stone would be left
en another."
Visitors to Jerusalem by the way of Yafa ( Joppa)
tnd Wadg Aly r asun\ly obtain their first sight of the
city from the northwest. Even from this side the
lew is not unimpressive. The walls with their
Mttlements, — the entire circuit of which lies at
jnce beneath the eye; — the bold form of Olivet;
tho distant hills of Moab in dim perspective; the
turrets of the Church of the Sepulchre; the lofty
•apola nt the Mosque of Omar; the Castle of Da-
• • 'ilM Ordnanet Sitnxy (Loud. 1865) famishes an
elaborate description of the Harem with Its mosques
sad various appurtmanoes, founded on careful Inspec-
tion (pp. 20-46) On the premises were found 20
suits or cisterns, tarring in depth from B to 62}
bat; some •uotslning watsr, others dry. Thej are
JBSHAIAH
vid, so antique and massive; — all oonss I
into view, and produce a startling effect.
Yet, as Dr. Robinson remarks, the traveller asaf
do better to " take the camel-road from Ftsmleh v>
Jerusalem; or, rather, the road lying still further
north by the way of Beth-boron. In this way hi
will pass near to Lydda, Gimxo, Lower and Upper
Beth-horon, and Gibson ; he will see Ramah and
Gibeah near at hand on his left; and he may pause
on Scopus to gaze on the city from one of the finest
points of view" {Later Rts. in. 160). Stanley
prefers the approach from the Jericho road. « Mo
human being could be disappointed who first saw
Jerusalem from the east. The beauty consists in
this, that you thus burst at ones on the two great
ravines which out the city off from the surround-
ing table-land, and that then only you have a
complete view of the Mosque of Omar " (S. d 1 P.
p. 167, Amer. ed.). Mr. Tristram coincides in this)
impression. " Let the pilgrim endeavor to enter
from the east, the favorite approach of our Lord,
the path of his last and triumphal entry. It is a
glorious burst, as the traveller rounds the shoul-
der of Mount Olivet, and the Harem wall starts
up before him from the deep gorge of the Kedron,
with Its domes and crescents sparkling in the sun-
light — a royal city. On that very spot He once
paused and gazed on the same bold dinl supporting
a far more glorious pile, and when He beheld the
city He wept over it " (Land of Israel, p. 173 I
9d ed.). The writer was so fortunate as to have
this view of Jerusalem, and would add that no one
has seen Jerusalem who has not had this view.
H.
JEBTJ'SHA (Mtfsn^ [possessed or v-met-
*»!>»]: 'Itpouai; [Tat. Eoovr;] Alex. Upout'- Je-
rvta), daughter of Zadok, queen of Uzziah, and
mother of Jotham king of Judah (S K. zv. 83).
In Chronicles the name is given under the altered
form of —
JERU'SHAH (rr£TT [as above]: 'Is-
povo-i; [Vat. -o<ro:] Jermsa), a Chr. xxvii. 1.
See the preceding article.
JESAI'AH [8syl.] (rPJW) [Jehovah sores t
or his solvation]: 'It alas \ [Vat IcaBa; Alex.
Iscrsia:] J ottos). 1. Son of Hananiah, brother
of Felatiah, and grandson of Zerubbabel (1 Chr.
iii. 31). But according to the LXX. and the Vul-
gate, he was the son of Pelatiah. For an explana-
tion of this genealogy, and the difficulties connected
with it, see Lord A. Hervey's Genealogies of our
Lord, oh. iv. § v.
8. (i"Pyt»\ i. e. Jeshalah: 'lee-fa; Alex. lev
via; [FA.* IcewiaO Isala.) A Benjamito, whose
descendants were among those chosen by lot to re-
side in Jerusalem after the return from Babylon
(Neh. xi. 7).
JB8HAI'AH[8syL]. L (■yTJP'T'* [sofeo-
tum of Jehovah] : 'io-eVu [Vat lata) in' 1 Chr.
xxv. 3, and 'Iwo-fa [Vat -o-tw] In ver. 16; in the
former the Alex. MS. has Issid ml Sepet, and la
the latter Icuui [Comp. 'lcata-] the Vulg. has
now supplied by surface drainage. Same are of mod
em date, but In others the mouths of old uuu d unt
can be seen. The splendid photographic views of vsa*
ons sections of the Harem wall and other objsoss, eas
greatly to the veins of this publication. B.
Digitized by
Google
JK8HANAH
> and Jemiat.) One of the six sons of Ted-
Mt apart for the musical serrice of the
lampfe, under the leadership of their father, tbe
Inspired minstrel : he was the chief of the eighth
division of the singers. Tbe Hebrew name is iden-
tical with that of the prophet Isaiah.
& ('I«xr(a»; [Vat] Alex. a<rataf. Itaiat.) A
Levite in the reign of David, eldest son of Keha-
biah, a descendant of Amram through Moses (1
Chr. xxvi. 96). He is called Isshiah in 1 Cbr.
xxiv. 31, in A. V., though the Hebrew u merely
the shortened form of the name. Shebuel, one of
his ancestors, appears among the Hemanites in 1
Chr. xxt. 4, and is said in Targ. on 1 Chr. xxvi.
24 to be the same with Jonathan the son of Ger-
•hom, the priest of tbe idols of the Danites, who
afterwards returned to the fear of Jehovah.
3. (■"Pytt^.: 'Io-a&u; ITst. Ioo-«ia;] Alex.
Hiram: I tula:) The son of Athsliah and chief
of the house of the Bene [sons of] Elam who re-
turned with Ezra (Ezr. viii. 7). In 1 Esdr. viii.
33 he is called Josias.
4. ('Iffolo; [Vat. no-oioj:] Itaiat.) A Mera-
rite, who returned with Ezra (Ezr. viii. 19). He
is called Ohaiah in 1 Esdr. viii. 48.
JESH'ANAH (H3^> [andau]: 4, 'Uovri;
[Vat. Kara;] Alex. Ara; Joseph. i t 'Io-aVat: J*-
tarn), a town which, with its dependent villages
(Heb. and Alex. LXX. "daughters "), was one of
the three taken from Jeroboam by Abijah (2 Chr.
xiii. 19). The other two were Bethel and Ephraim,
and Jeshanah is named between them. A place
'if the same name was the scene of an encounter
between Herod and Pappus, the general of Antig-
onus's army, related by Josephus with curious
details {Ant. xiv. 15, § 12), which however convey
no indication of its position. It is not mentioned
in tbe Ommattiam, unless we accept the conjecture
of Rdand (Palattina p. 861) that " Jethaba, urbs
sntiqua Judeees," is si once a corruption and a
translation of the name Jeshana, which signifies
•old." Nor has it been identified in modern
imes, save by Sohwars (p. 168), who places it at
'Al-Sanim, a village two miles W. of Bethel,"
snt nnduKoverable in any map which the writer
■as consulted. G.
JBSHABcTLAH (nbHTjaft [upright to-
tard God: but see Font]: 'Itrtpttix; [Alex.] I<r-
Mi)Aa: Itreela), head of the seventh of the 24
muds Into which the musicians of the Levites were
divided (1 Chr. xxv. 14). [Heman; Jeduthum.]
He belonged to the house of Asaph, and had 12
if his house under him. At ver. 2 his name is
written Asahelah, with an initial S instead of , ;
bi the LXX. 'Epa4j\. A. C. H.
JESHE'BEAB (3r<3^ [a father' tuniot
abode]: 'IfirjSaiU; [Alex. la&aaK: Comp. 'I<rflo-
iff:] /ibaab), head of the 14th course of priests
;i Chr. xxiv. 13). [Jeroiarib.] A. C. H.
JBBHBR (""1$ [»prio*»JWSt] : 'taadp ;
I Vat. J Alex. Iteocop: Jour), one of the sons >f
Sleb the son of Hezron by his wife Azubah (1
Chr. ii. 18). In two of Kenuiiotf'i MSS. it is
sritten TV, Jether, from the preceding verse,
sod in one MS. the two names are combiner!- The
Paahlto Syriae hss Othir, the same form in which
/osier la represented in 2 Sam. i. 18.
JE8HISHAI
1941
JBSmMON (PO^i^ = As touts < hi
Num. f) (priiios; in [1] Sam. [xxiii.,] 6 'Ieevau
fiit\ [xxiv., Rom.] 'I«ro-<n^i; Alex. Ei«o-<raipo*
daertum, tolitudo, Jetimon), a name which oceun
in Num. xxi. 20 and xxiii. 28, in designating the
position of Pisgah and Peor: both Jescribed as
« facing ( , .?9"b5) the Jeshimon.'' Not knowing
more than tbe general locality of either Peor or
Pisgah, this gives us no clew to the situation of
Jeshimon. But it is elsewhere used in a similar
manner with reference to the pontic n of two placet
very distant from both the above — the hill of Ha-
ehilah, •> on the south of," or " being, the Jeahi-
mon " (1 Sam. xxiii. 19, xxvi. 1, 3), and the wil-
derness of Maon, also south of it (xxiii. 24). Zipt
(xxiii. 18) and Maun are known at the present day.
They lie a few miles south of Hebron, so that the
district strictly north of them is the hill-oountry
of Judah. But a line drawn between Macn and
the probable position of Peor — on the high conn
try opposite Jericho — passes over the dreary,
barren waste of tbe hills lying immediately on the
west of the Dead Sea. To this district the name,
if interpreted as a Hebrew word, would be not in-
applicable. It would also suit as to position, as it
would be full in view from an elevated point on the
highlands of Moab, and not far from north of Maon
and Ziph. On the other hand, the use of the word
ha-Araoah, in 1 Sam. xxiii. 24, must not be over-
looked, meaning, as that elsewhere does, the sunk
district of the Jordan and Dead Sea, the modern
Ghor. Beth-Jeshimoth too, which by its name
ought to have some connection with Jeshimon,
would appear to have been on the lower level, some-
where near the mouth of the Jordan. [Beth-
Jkshimoth.] Perhaps it is not safe to lay much
stress on the Hebrew sense of the name. The
passages in which it is first mentioned are indis-
putably of very early date, and it is quite possible
that it is an archaic name found and adopted by
the Israelites. Q.
• Mr. Tristram (Land of ltratl, p. 540, 2d ed.)
supposes Jeshimon to be used for " the barren plain
of the Ghor," about thii mouth cf the Jordan.
Assuming this, he makes It one of his proofs, that
the brow of the Belka range " over against Jeri-
cho" (Deut. xixiv. 1), ascended by him, is tbe
Nebo or Pisgah of Moses. [Nebo, Amer. ed.]
The article is always prefixed in the Hebrew, with
the exception of a few poetic passages (Deut. xxxii.
10; Ps. lxviii. 7, lxxviii. 40, cvi. 14, cvii. 4; and Is
xliii. 19, 20). It is really questionable whether
the word should not be taken as appellative rathst
than a proper name. In the former esse the par-
ticular desert meant must be inferred from the etn-
text, and may be a different one at different tlaitt.
Ueut. Warren reports that after special inquiry
on the ground he was unable to find any trace of
the name of Beth-Jeshimoth (see above) in lha
vicinity of the mouth of the Jordan. I [n speaks,
however, of a ruin at the northeast of the Dead Sea
called Swoimth, as if possibly the lost lite may
hav been ther* \Rcport, etc., 1867-68, p. 13). H.
JESHI'SHAI [3 syl.] ( s Bfttf) [offtprmg
of one old]: 'Uaat; [Vat. Io-tu;] Alex, nam:
Jetiri), one of the ancestors of the Gadiles who
dwelt in Gilead, and whose genealogies were mads
out in the days of Jotbam king of Judah (1 Chr.
v. 14). In the Peehito Syriao the latter part of
the verse is omitted.
Digitized by
Google
1S44
JESHOHAIAH
JESHOHAIAH [4 syl.] (rPmtC^ [bowed
lam by Jehovah] : 'lcurouia- /tuhala), a chief of
ana of tbe faipilJAs of that branch of the Simeoo-
ites, which waa descended from Shimet, and was
more numerous than the rest of the tribe (1 Chr.
It. 36). He waa concerned in the raid upon the
Hamitea in the reign of Uexekiah.
JESHTJA [//«*. Jeshu'a] (Wtt^ [Jehovah
kelpt, or sores]: "IiproDt: J erne, [Jena,] tad Jo-
toe), a later Hebrew contraction for Joshua, or
rather Jehoahua. [Jkhoshua.]
1. [Jotue.] Joshua, the son of Nun, is called
Jeahua in one passage (Neb. viii. 17). [Joshua.]
9. [Jctua, Jotue.] A priest in the reign of
David, to whom the ninth oourse fell by lot (1 Chr.
xxiv. 11). He is called Jeshuah In the A. V.
One branch of tbv house, namely, tbe children of
Jedaiah, returned from Babylon (Ear. L. 88; but
sue Jedaiah).
3. [Jesse.] One of the Levites in the reign
of Hezekiah, after the reformation of worship,
placed in trfast in the cities of the priests in their
-Imsri. to distribute to their brethren of the ofler-
ings of the people (3 Chr. xxxi. 15).
4. [Jotue.] Son of Jehozadak, first higb-prieat
of tbe third aeries, namely, of those after the Baby-
lonish Captivity, and ancestor of the fourteen high-
priests his successors down to Joshua or Jason, and
Onias or Menelaus, inclusive. [High-priest.]
Jeahua, like his contemporary Zerubbabel, was
probably born in Babylon, whither his father Jehoz-
adak had been taken captive while young (1 Chr.
ri. 15, A. V.). He came up from Babylon in the
first of Cyras with Zerubbabel, and took a leading
part with him in the rebuilding of the Temple, and
the restoration of the Jewish commonwealth.
Everything we read of him indicates a man of
earnest piety, patriotism, and courage. One of
less faith snd resolution would never have sur-
mounted all the difficulties snd opposition be had
to oontend with. His first care on arriving at
Jerusalem waa to rebuild the altar, and restore tbe
daily sacrifice, which had been suspended for some
fifty years. He then, in conjunction with Zerub-
babel, hastened to oollect materials for rebuilding
the Temple, and was able to lay the foundation of
it as early as the second month of the second year
of their return to Jerusalem. The services on this
occasion were conducted by the priests in tbeir
ntoper apparel, with their trumpets, and by the
sons of Asaph, the Levites, with their cymbals,
according to the ordinance of king David (Ear. iii.).
However, the progress of the work waa hindered
by the eumity of the Samaritans, who bribed the
counsellors of the kings of Persia so effectually to
obstruct it that the Jews were unable to proceed
with it till the second year of Darius Hystaspls —
an interval of about fourteen years. In that year,
B. c. 680, at the prophesying of Hsggai and Zeeh-
ariah (Kzr. v. 1, vi. 14: Hagg. i. 1, 12, 14, ii. 1-9;
Zech. i.-viii.), the work was resumed by Jeahua
and Zerubbabel with redoubled vigor, and was hap-
pily completed on the third day of the month Adar
(= March), in the sixth of Darius. The dedica-
tion of the Temple, and the celebration of the Pass-
over, in the next month, were kept with great sol-
emnity and rejoicing (Ear. vi. 15-83), and especially
■ Tbe Tth, after the Babylonian reckoning,
aaa to staasattx.
< Iks ocoBsettoB with Ban!, Hasoabiab (or
JESHTJKUN
" twelve he-goats, aoaording to the number of bat
tribes of Israel," were offered as a sin-offering fat
all Israel. Joshua's zeal in the work la commended
by the Son of Sirach (Eeclue. xlix. 19). Beside!
the great importance of Jeahua as a historical char-
acter, from the critical times in which he lived,
and the great work which he accomplished, his
name Jesus, his restoration of the Temple, his
office as high- priest, and especially the two prophe-
cies concerning him in Zech. iii. and vi. 9-15,
point Urn out aa an eminent type of Christ.
[High-priest.] Nothing is known of Jeshua
later than the seventh year of Darius, with which
the narrative of Ear. i.— vi. closes. Joeephua, who
says the Temple waa seven years in building, and
places the dedication of it in tbe ninth of Darius,
contributes no information whatever concerning
him: his history here, with the exception of the
9th sect, of b. xi. eh. iv., being merely a paraphrase
of Ezra and 1 Esdras, especially the latter. [Zer-
ubbabel.] Jeahua had probably conversed often
with Daniel and Ezakiel, and may or may not have
known Jehoiachin at Babylon in his youth. He
probably died at Jerusalem. It is written Jthimhua
or Joshua in Zech. Hi. 1, 8, Ac.; Hagg. i. 1,
12,4c.
5. [In Ear. Ii. 40, Vat bprotw ; Neh. xii. 8,
Alex. Iqirov: Jotue, Jetua, once.] Head of .a
Levitical house, one of those which returned from
the Babylonish Captivity, and took an active part
under Zerubbabel, Ezra, and Nebemiah. The
name is used to designate either the whole family
or the successive chiefs of it (Ear. ii. 40, iii. 9;
Neb. iii. 19,* viii. 7, ix. 4, 5, xii. 8, Ac). Jeahua,
and Kadmiel, with whom he is frequently associa-
ted, were both " sons of Hodaviah " (called Judah,
Ear. iii. 9), but Joshua's more immediate ancestor
was Azaniah (N«h. x. 9). In Neh. xii. 84 "Jeahua
the son of Kadmiel " is a manliest corruption of
the text Tbe LXX. read col viol KoJ/u^X- It
is more likely that |2 is an accidental error for 1.
6. [Jotue.] A branch of the family of Pahjth-
Hoab, one of the chief families, probably, of the
tribe of Judah (Neh. x. 14, vii. 11, Ac; Ear. x,
30). Hie descendants were the moat numerous of
all the families which returned with Zerubbabel.
Hie verse is obscure, and might be translated,
>' The children of Pahath-Moab, for (i. c repre-
senting) the children of Jeshua and Joab;" so
that Pahath-Moab would be the head of tbe family.
A.C.H.
JESHTJ A [Heb. Jeshu'a] (JW? [see above] :
"lijcoS: Jttue), one of the towns re-inhabited by
the people of Judah after tbe return from captivity
(Neh. xi. 88). Being mentioned with Mobdah,
Beer-eheba, etc., it waa apparently in tbe extreme
south. It does not, however, occur in the original
lists of Judah and Simeon (Josh, it., xix.), nor is
there any name in those lists of which this would
be probably a corruption. It is not mentioned
elsewhere. <*■
JESHUAH [Heb. Jeshu'ah] (VVP^'lnroif-
Jtiua), a priest In the reign of David (1 Chr
xxiv. 11), the same aa Jeshua, No. 3.
JESHUTRUN, and once by mistake in A. V
abnlah), Henadad, and the Uvttas (17-19), !
that Jeshua, the tamer of Xaar, Is the saaas |
hi toe other passages eltsd
Digitized by
Google
JESHUBUN
JESU'RUN, Is. xliv. 3 finiT^ [see n/ra]:
b fryomi/wVoj, once with the addition of 'lo-pafik,
which the Arabic of the Lond. Polyglot adopt* to
the exclusion of the former: dUeclui, rectiuimus),
a symbolical name for Israel in Deut. xxxii. 15,
xxxiii. 5, 98; Is. xliy. S, for which Tarioiis etymol-
ogies have been suggested. Of its application to
Israel there seems to be no division of opinion.
The Targuni and Peshito Syriac uniformly render
Jeshurun by "Israel." Kimchi (on Is. xliv. 2)
derives it from the root "ICJJ, j/Athar, " to be right
or upright." because Israel was "upright among
the nations;" as D , "in? , , ) yetkMm, "the up-
right" (Num. ixiii. 10; Pa. exL 1) is a poetical
appellation of the chosen people, who did that
which was right ("llj'n, hay-yithdr) in the eyes
of Jeborah, In oontradistinction from the idolatrous
beathet who did that which was preeminently the
•ril (S^n, Ad-r'n), and worshipped false gods.
This see ns to have been the view adopted by Aquila,
Symmachus, and Theodotion — who, according to
the account of their version given by Jerome (on
Is. xliv. :!), must have had ttiiis or tMrarot —
tnd by tlie Vulgate in three passages. Malvenda
(quoted i>i Poole's Synn/m, Deut xxxii. 15), tak-
ing the tame root, applies it ironically to Israel.
For the Use reason, on the authority of the above-
mttitioned Father, the book of Genesis was called
"the boon of the just" («M««r), as relating to
Oil histora of Abraham, Isaac, and Israel. The
tenninatio.i fV b either intensive, as the Vulgate
takes it, or In affectionate diminutive (" Frtmm-
chtn," Hibdg, and FUrst; "lAcbHng," Hendewerk,
and Bunsen). Simonia (Lex. Hebr. s. v., and
Arc. Form. Horn. p. 589) connects Jeshurun with
the Arable root **mJ, yiuiro, which in the second
conj. signifies "to prosper," and in the 4th "to be
wealthy," and is thus cognate with the Hebrew
"IttJM, iihar, which in Paul signifies "to be
blessed." With the intensive termination Jeshu-
run would then denote Israel as supremely happy
or prosperous, and to this signification it must be
allowed the context in Deut. xxxii. 15 point*.
Michaelis (SuppL ad Lex. Bib.) considers it as a
diminutive of Israel, and would read ]T"H{P, yi$-
nJn, contracted from JVTNTlijP, yi$rellin. Such
too was the opinion of Grotius and Vltringa, and
of the author of the Veneto-Gk. version, who ren-
ders It 'lapatKl<TKot. For this theory, though
supported by the weight of Gesenius' authority, it
is scarcely necessary to say there is not the smallest
fctridatioii, either in analogy or probability. In
the application of the name Jeshurun to Israel, we
ma/ iliscover that fondness for a play upon words
of which there are so many examples, and which
mif'ht be allowed to have some influence in the
selection of the appellation. But to derive the one
from the other is a fancy unworthy of a scholar.
Two other etymologies of the name may be
noticed as showing to what lengths conjecture may
JESSE
184C
go when not regulated by any definite prindphe.
The first of these, which is due to Raster (quoted
by Glassius, Phil. Sacr. lib. if. tr. 9), connects it
with ~vW, Mr, " an ox," in consequence of the
allusion in the context of Deut. xxxii. 15; the othei
with "WO?, Air, *to behold," because Israel be
held the presence of God. W. A. W.
JESI'AH OWtjqr, I e. Ybahiyv/hu [tatas
Jehovah lends) : 'l-qaovri [Vat FA. -r«] ; Alex
Isvia: Jetia). 1. A Korhite, one of the might]
men, "helpers of the battle," who joined David'i
standard at Ziklag during his flight from Saul (I
Chr. xii. 6).
2. (n»»V 'lmii [Vat Io-«a;] Alex. Iemrm.
The second son of UzzieL the son of Kohath (1
Chr. xxiii. 20). He is the same as Jeshiah, whose
representative was Zechariah (IChr. xxiv. 25); but
our translators in the present instance followed the
Vulg., as they have too often done in the case of
proper names.
JESIM1EL (bHD^ [wAom God sets *s>
or placet]: 'I<ruav)A; [Vat omits:] Itmiel), s
Simeonite, descended from the prolific family of
Shimei, and a prince of his own branch of the tribe,
whom he led against the peaceful Handles in the
reign of Hezekiah (1 Chr. Iv. 30).
JES'SE ('IT?, i. e. Ishai [perh. ttrong, Ges.
or gift, 1. e. of (iod, Dietr.]:" 'Uo-cat; Joseph.
'Ico-o~aioi : lini : in the margin of 1 Chr. x. 14,
our translators have given the Vulgate form), the
father of David, and thus the immediate progenitor
of the whole line of the kings of Judah, and ulti-
mately of Christ He is the only one of his name
who appears in the sacred records. Jesse was the
son of Obkd, who again was the fruit of the uniov.
of Boaz and the Moabitess Ruth. Nor was Ruth's
the only foreign blood that ran in his reins ; for his
great-grandmother was no less a person than Kahab
the C'anaanite, of Jericho (Matt. i. 5). Jesse's
genealogy b is twice given in full in the Old Testa-
ment, namely, Ruth iv. 18-22, and 1 Chr. ii. 5-12.
We there see that, long before David had rendered
his familydHiistrious, it belonged to the greatest
house of Judah, that of l'harez, through Hezron
his eldest son. One of the links in the descent was
Nshshon (N. T. Naasson), chief man of the tribe
at the critical time of the F-xodus. In the N. T.
the genealogy is also twice given (Matt 1. 8-6;
Luke iii. 32-34).
He is commonly designated as " Jesse the Beth-
kthemite " (1 Sam. xvi. 1, 18). So he is called by
his son David, then fresh from home (xvii. 58),
but his full title is " the Ephrathite of Bethlehem
Judah" (xvii. 12). The double expression and the
use of the antique word Ephrathite perhaps imply
that he was one of the oldest families in the place.
He is an " old man " when we first meet with him
(1 Sam. xvii. 12), with eight sons (xvi. 10, xvii. 12),
residing at Bethlehem (ivi. 4, 6). It would appear,
however, from the terms of xvi. 4, 5, and of Josephiis
(Ant. vi. 8, § 1), that Jesse was not one of the
" elders " of the town. The few slight glimpses we
can cai:h of him are soon recalled; According to
• Jerome (liber rfe Nominitmi) gives the Strang* window* of taigllsh churches. One ot the nnest Is at
laestyielalluu of iiurste libamen. Dorchester, Oxon. The eras springs trrm Jesss, who
» Tills ssoaalogr Is smbodM In the « Jesss tras," Is recumbent at the bottom of the window, and ess>
M ssxfjsqusaHy to be found In the rsredos and east | tains 26 members of the lb», — '-nlnating In oar Lead
M
Digitized by
Google
1846 jesbb
■i MatJgsjt Jewish tradition, raoorded in the Targum
am 9 Sun. xzi. 19, he mi a weaver of the Tails of
the aanctnarj, but as there U no contradiction,
no there is no corroboration of this in the Bible,
and it is possible that it was suggested by the
occurrence of the word orgim, " wearers," in con-
nection with a member of hie family. [Jaare-
Obegim.] Jesse's wealth seems to hare consisted
of a flock of sheep and goats (]KX, A.V. "sheep"),
which were under the care of David (ivi. 11, ivii.
34, 85). Of the produce of this flock we find him
on two occasions sending the simple presents which
in those days the highest persons were wont to
accept — slices %f milk cheese to the captain of the
division of the army in which his sons were serving
(xvii. 18), and a kid to Saul (xvi. 20); with the
accompaniment in each ease of parched corn from
the fields of 13oez, loaves of the bread from which
Bethlehem took its very name, and wine from the
vineyards which still enrich the terraces of the hill
below the village.
When David's rupture with Saul had finally
driven him from the court, and he was in the cave
of Adullam, "his brethren and all his father's
house" joined him (xxii. 1). His " brother" (prob-
ably Eliab) is mentioned on a former occasion (xx.
89) as taking the lead in the family. This is no
more than we should expect from Jesse's great age.
David's anxiety at the same period to find a safe
refuge for his parents from the probable vengeance
of Saul is also quite in accordance with their help-
less condition. He took his father and his mother
into the country of Moab, and deposited them with
the king, and there they disappear from our view
in the records of Scripture. But another old Jewish
tradition (Rabboth Seder, KIM, 266, col. 9) states
that after David had quitted the hold, bis parents
and brothers were put to death by the king of Moab,
so that there remained, besides David, but one
brother, who took refuge with Nahash, king of the
Bene- Amnion.
Who the wife of Jesse was we are not told. His
eight sons will be found displayed under David,
I. 662. The family contained in addition two
female members, Zeruiah and Abigail but it is
uncertain whether these were Jesse's daughters, for
though they are called the sisters of his sons (1 Chr.
ii. 16), yet Abigail is said to have been the daugh-
ter of Nahash (8 Sam. xvii. 85). Of this two
explanations have been proposed. (1.) The Jewish
— that Nahash was another name for Jesse
(Jerome, Q. Ilebr. on 2 Sam. xvii. 36"). (8.) Pro-
fessor Stanley's— that Jesse's wife had been formerly
wife or concubine to Nahash, possibly the king of
the Ammonites (David, i. 558).
An English reader can hardly fail to remark
how often Jesse is mentioned long after the name
of David had become famous enough to supersede
a This is given also in the Tarwum to Ruth iv. 32-
" And Obad begat Iibai (Jane), whose name Is Nachash,
because there were net found in him iniquity and cor-
ruption, that be nhould be delivered Into the hand of
the Angel of Death that be should take away his soul
from him ; and he lived many days until was fulfilled
before Jehovah the counsel which the Serpent gave to
Chawah the wife of Adam, to. eat of the tree, of the
frott of which when they did eat they were able to
tknsrn be t ween good ao4 evil ; and by reason of this
saaMsl an the inhabitant of the earth tisnams gadlty
JBSTJS THE SON OF BIKAOH
that of his obscure and humble parent. Wk*
David was a struggling outlaw, it was natural that
to friend and foe — to Saul, Doeg, and Nabal, no
less than to the captains of Judah and Benjamin —
he should be merely the "son of Jesse" (1 Sam.
xxii. 9, 13; eomp. xxiv. 16, xxv. 10; 1 Chr. afi. 18);
but that Jesse's name should be brought forward
in records of so late a date as 1 Chr. xxix. 86, and
Ps. lxxli. 30, long after the establishment of David's
own house, is certainly worthy of notice.' Espe-
cially is it to be observed that It is in his name —
the "shoot out of the stump of Jesse . ... the
root of Jesse which should stand as an ensign to
the people " (Is. xi. 1, 10), that Isaiah announces
the most splendid of his promises, intended to rouss
and cheer the heart of the nation at the time of it*
deepest despondency. G.
JES"8UE ('Inrovr: Alex. 'I»*W; [AM. 'lev
ffovi-} Jem), a Levite, the same as Joshua (1 Esdr.
v. 86; eomp. Ear. ii. 40).
JE'SU ('iqo-oSt: Jau), the same as Jeahos
the Levite, the fitther of Joeabad (1 Esdr. viii. 63
see Ear. viii. 33), also called J casus, and Jesus.
JESTtt CKP? [ere*, few/] : 'IW ; Alex.
Ucovi '• Jamt), the sou of Asher, whose descendant*
the Jesuites were numbered In the plains of
Moab at the Jordan of Jericho (Num. xxvi. 44).
He ia elsewhere called Isn (Gen. xhri. 17) and
Ishuai (1 Chr. vii. SO).
JESTJITES, THE CjtfM : i 'lee-orf (T**.
-si]: Janata). A family" of the tribe of Asher
(Num. xxvi. 44).
JESUTftUN. [Jxairtnnia.] *
JE'SUS Clne-oSj: •fern, Jam, Joint), the
Greek form of the name Joshua or Jeshua, a eon-
traction of Jeboahua (SttniT), that is, " help of
Jehovah" or "Saviour" (Num. xiil. 16). [J*-
HOSHUA.]
1. Joshua toe priest, the son of Jehoxadak (1
Esdr. v. 5, 8, 84, 48, 66, 68, 70, vi. 3, ix. 19;
Ecclus. xlix. 19). Also called Jeshua. [Jeshua,
No. 4.]
2. (Jtmu.) Jeshua the Levite (1 Esdr. v. 68,
ix.48).
3. Joshua the son of Nun (9 Esdr. vii. 37;
Ecclus. xlvi. 1 ; 1 Mace. ii. 66; Acta vii. 46; Heb.
iv. 8). [Joshua.]
JE'SUS THE FATHER OF SIEACH.
[Jesus the Sox of Sikach.]
JE'SUS THE SON OF SIRACH ('Iwevis
vi'os Sfipdy [Alex, itpax) ■ J aut Jilitu Siraek)
is described in the text of Ecclesiasticus (1. 97) as
the author of that book, which in the LXX., and
generally, except in the Western Church, ia called
by his name the Wiidom of Jtttu the Son of
at death, and In that Iniquity only died lafaal the
righteous.*'
» • In the phraseology here referr e d to, the reader
will reoognlas the taste of the oriental mind, whlea
delights In a sort of poetic paraphrase. Hence the
frequent parses, " Son of David,'' " Seed of David,*
etc., as applied to Christ. The son Is often designates'
by the lather's name, as above, where the latter Is
known only through such association of his name af
m the address to Barak : " Thou son of Abmoass'
(Judg. v. 12), and the Saviour's sppssl to Petal
em of Jonas" (John xxt. 16). a. W
Digitized by
Google
JESUS
er simply the Wisdom of Sirach (Eo-
nmASTiccs, { 1). The aame passage tvnlu
if him as a native of Jerusalem (Kcclus. £ C), and
Uw internal character of the book confirms ita
Pkkstinian origin. The name Jesus was of fre-
quent occurrence, and mi often represented by the
Greek Jason. In the apocryphal list of the lxxii
rommiaaioiiers sent by KJeazar to Ptolemy it occurs
iwiee (Arist. Hist, ap. Hody, De text. p. vii.); but
there is not the slightest ground for connecting the
author of Kcclesiasticus with either of the persons
there mentioned. The various conjectures which
have been made as to the position of the son of
Sirach from the content* of his book; as, for
balance, that he was a priest (from vii. 29 ffi, xlr.,
ilir-, I), or a physician (from xxxviii. 1 It.), an
•putty unfounded.
Among the later Jews the « Son of Sirach " was
celebrated under the name of Ben Sira as a writer
sf proverbs, and some of those which have been
preserved offer a close resemblance to passages in
Eeclesiastieus [Ecclesiasticus, § 4, vol. i. p. 651,
note a] ; but in the course of time a later com-
pilation was substituted for the original work of
Ben Sira (Zuni, UoUetd. Vortr. d. ./Wen, p. 100
IE), and tradition has preserved no authentic details
sf his person or bis life.
The chronological difficulties which have been
raised as to the date of the Son of Sirach have been
already noticed [Ecclksiasticoh, § 4], and do
sot eaD for further discussion.
According to the first prologue to the book of
Eeclesiastieus, taken from the Synopri* of the
Pseudo-Athanasius (iv. p. 877, ed. Hlgne), the
translator of the book bore the same name as the
author of it. If this conjecture were true, a gene-
alogy of the following form would result: 1. Sirach.
i. Jesus, son (father) of Sirach (author of the
book). 3. Sirach. 4. Jesus, son of Sirach (trmu-
Inlar of the book). It is, however, most likely
that the last chapter, '• The prayer of Jetui tht
son of Struck," gave occasion to this conjecture.
The prayer was attributed to the translator, and
then the table of succession followed necessarily
from the title attached to it B. F. W.
JB-SUS rinw*&*J, c " IIed JUSTUS [jtuf],
Christian who was with St. Paul at Rome, and
jjined him in sending salutations to the Colossians.
He was one of the fellow-workers who were a com-
fort to the Apostle (Col. iv. It). In the Acta
Sonet. Jun. iv. 67, he is commemorated as bishop
sf Eleutheropolis. W. T. B.
* This Jesus or Justus cannot be identical with
the Justus at Corinth (Acts xviii. 7). The one
here mentioned was a Jewish Christian (one " of the
*mi7idsion," Col. iv. 11), but the other a Gentile
(2-0 had been a Jewish proselyte (atfiijuros tow
IW» I before be embraced the Gospel. [Justus.]
H.
JB"t5U8 CHRIST. The name Jesus ('iqe-ovt )
■Unifies Saviour. Ita origin is explained above,
•nil it seems to have been not an uncommon name
tmong the Jews. It is assigned in the New Testa-
Bent (1) to our Lord Jesus Christ, who "saves
•lis people from their sins" (Matt. i. SI); alsoi
!>) to Joshua the successor of Moses, who brought I
the Israelites into the land of promise (Num. xxvii.
11: Act* vii. 4S; Heb. iv. 8): and (3) to Jesus
HTiamed Justus, a converted Jew, anociateo with
U. Paul (Col ir. 11).
Ta» name of Christ (Xpurris from *><'«. I
JESUS CHRIST
1841
anoint) signifies Anointed. Priests were anointed
amongst the Jews, as their inauguration to their
office (I Chr. xvi. 22: Ps. cv. 15), and kings also
(2 Mace. i. 24; Ecclus. xlvi. 1»). In the New
Testament the name Christ is used as equivalent
to Messiah (Greek M«r<rlas ; Hebrew rTtT^:
John 1. 41), the name given to the long promised
Prophet and King whom the Jews had been taught
by their prophets to expect; and therefore = o
ifx4f u '">* (Acta xix. 4; Matt. xi. 3). The use
of this name as applied to the Lord has always a
reference to the promises of the Prophets. In Matt.
U. 4, xi. 2, it is assumed that the Christ when He
should come would lire and act in a certain way,
described by the Prophets. So Matt. xxii. 42, xxiii.
10, xxiv. 5, 23; Mark lii. 35, xiii. 21 ; Luke iii. l. r >,
xx. 41 ; John vii. 27, 31, 41, 42, xii. 34, in all which
places there is a reference to the Messiah as de-
lineated by the Prophets. That they had foretold
that Christ should suffer appears Luke xxlv. 26, 46.
The name of Jesus is the proper name of our Lord,
and that of Christ is added to identify Him with
the promised Messiah. Other names are sometimes
added to the names Jesus Christ, or Christ Jesus:
thus " Lord " (frequently), " a King " (added as a
kind of explanation of the word Christ, Luke xxiii.
2). >• King of Israel " (Mark xr. 32), Son of David
(Mark xii. 35; Luke xx. 41), chosen of God (Luke
xxiii. 35).
■ Remarkable are such expressions as " the Christ
of God " (Luke ii. 26, ix. 20; Kev. xi. 15, xii. 10);
and the phrase " in Christ," which occurs about
78 times in the Kpistles of St. Paul, and is almost
peculiar to them. But the germ of it is to be found
in the words of our Lord Himself, " Abide in roe,
and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of
itself, except it abide in the vine, no more can ye,
except ye abide in me" (John xv. 4, also 5, 6.
7, 9, 10). The idea that all Christian life is not
merely an imitation and following of the Ix>rd, but
a living and constant union with Him, causes the
Apostle to use such expressions as " fallen asleep
in Christ" (1 Cor. xv. 18), "I knew a man in
Christ" (9 Cor. xii. 2), " I speak the truth in
Christ" (1 Tim. ii. 7), and many others. (See
Schleusner's Ltxicon ; Willi's Cl>ivii ; Fritzsche on
St. Malthas ; I)e Wette's Commentary ; Schmidt's
Greek Concordance, etc.)
The life, the Person, and the Work of our Ix>rd
and Saviour Jesus Christ occupy the whole of the
New Testament. Of this threefold subject the
present article includes the first put, namely, the
Life and Teaching; the Person of our Ixird will he
treated under the article Son op God; and IIi<
Work will naturally fall under the word Savihuk.
Towards the close of the reign of Herod the
Great, arrived that " fullness of time "' which God
in His inscrutable wisdom had appointed for the
sending of His Son : and Jesus was born at Beth-
lehem, to redeem a sinful and rained world. Ac-
cording to the received chronology, which is in fact
that of Dionysiu* Exiguus iu the 6th century, this
event occurred in the year of Rome 754. But
modern writers, with hardly an exception, believe
that this calculation places the nativity some years
too late: a'though they differ a* to the amount of
error. Herod the Great died, according to Josephus,
in the thirty-seventh year after he was appointed
king (Ant. xvii. 8. § 1 ; B. J. 1. 33, § 8). His
elevation coincide* with the consulship of Cm.
Dcnllius Calvin-is md C. Asiniu* PolBo, and tUi
Digitized by
Google
1848
JESUS CHRIST
ietarmlnes the date a. tr. a 714 (Joseph. Ant. xiv.
14, J B). There U reason to think that in nich
oalculatioi.s Jusephus reckons the yean from the
month Nisan to the same month; and also that
the death of Herod took place in the beginning of
the thirty-seventh year, or just before the Passover
(Joseph. Ant. xvii. 9, $ 3) ; if then thirty-six com-
plete yean are added they give the year of Herod's
death A. u. c. 750 (see Note on Chronology at the
end of this article). As Jesus was born during
the life of Herod, it follows from these data that
the Nativity took place some time before the month
of April 760, and if it took place only a few months
before Herod's death, then its date would be
four years earlier than the Dionysian reckoning
(Wieaeler).
Three other chronological data occur in the
Gospels, but the arguments founded on them are
not conclusive. 1. The Baptism of Jesus was fol-
lowed by a Passover (John ii. 13), at which certain
Jews mention that the restoration of their Temple
had been in progress for forty-six years (ii. 20),
lesus himself heing at this time "about thirty
years of age" (Luke iii. 23). As the date of the
Temple-restoration can be ascertained, it has been
argued from these facts also that the nativity took
place at the beginning of A. v. c. 750. But it is
sometimes argued that the words that determine
our Lord's age are not exact enough to serve as the
bads for such a calculation. 2. The appearance
of the star to the wise men has been thought likely,
by the aid of astronomy, to determine the date-
But the opinion that the star in the East was a
remarkable conjunction of Jupiter and Saturn in
the sign Pisces, is now rejected. Besides the dif-
ficulty of reconciling it with the sacred narrative
(Matt. ii. 9) it would throw back the birth of our
I<ord to A. u. c. 747, which is too early. 3.
Zacharias was ■' a priest of the course of Abia "
(Luke i. 5), and be was engaged in the duties of
his course when the birth of John the Baptist was
foretold to him; and it has been thought possible
to calculate, from the place which the course of
Abia held in the cycle, the precise time of the
Saviour's birth. All these data are discussed below
(p. 1381).
In treating of the Life of Jesus, a perfect record
of the events would be no more than a reproduction
rf the four Gospels, and a discussion of those events
would swell to the compass of a voluminous com-
mentary. Neither of these would be appropriate
here, and in the present article a brief sketch only
of the Life can be attempted, drawn up with a view
to the two remaining articles, on the Sox or God
and Saviour.
The Man who was to redeem all men and do
for the human race what no one could do for his
brother, was not bom into the world as others are.
Tlie salutation addressed by the Angel to Mary His
.nother, " Hail ! Thou that art highly favored,"
was the prelude to a new act of divine creation ; the
Ant Adam, that sinned, was not bom but created ;
the second Adam, that restored, was bom indeed,
but in supernatural fashion. "The Holy Ghost
ihaD come upon thee, and the power of the Highest
shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy
uing ifhicn shall be bom of thee shall be called
the Son of God " (Luke i. 35). Mary received the
announcement of a miracle, the rail import of which
she could not have understood, with the submis-
sion of one who knrw that the message came from
Sod ; and the Angel departed from her. At first.
JESUS CHRIST
her betrothed husband, when he beard from bar
what had taken place, doubted her, but a super-
natural communication convinced him of her purity
and he took her to be his wife. Not only was the
approaching birth of Jesus made the subject of
supernatural communications, but that of John the
Baptist the forerunner also. Thus before the birth
of either had actually taken place, a small knot of
persons had been prepared to expect the fulfillment
of the divine promises in the Holy One that should
be bom of Mary (Luke i.).
The prophet Micah had foretold (v. 2) that the
future king should be bom in Bethlehem of Judas,
the place where the house of David had its origin;
but Mary dwelt in Nazareth. Augustus, however,
had ordered a general census cf the Rinnan empire,
and although Judas, not being a province of the
empire, would not necessarily come under such an
order, it was included, prolmbly because the inten-
tion was already conceived of reducing it after a
time to the condition of a province (see Note en
Chronology). That such a census was made we
know from Cassiodorus ( Var. iii. 52). That in it*
application to Palestine it should be made with
reference to Jewish feelings and prejudices, being
carried out no doubt by Herod the Jewish king,
was quite natural; and so Joseph and Mary went
to Bethlehem, the city of David, to be taxed. From
the well-known and much- canvassed passage in Si.
Luke (ii. 2) it appears that the taxing was not
completed till the time of Quirinus (Cyrenius), some
years later; and bow far it was carried now, cannot
be determined ; all that we learn is that It brought
Joseph, who was of the house of David, from his
home to Bethlehem, where the Lord was bom. As
there was no room in the inn, a manger was the
cradle in which Christ the Lord was laid. But
signs were not wanting of the greatness of the event
that seemed so unimportant. Lowly shepherds
were the witnesses of the wonder that accompanied
the lowly Saviour's birth ; an sngel proclaimed to
them "good tidings of great joy; " and then the
exceeding joy that was in heaven amongst the angels
about this mystery of lore broke through the silence
of night with the words — " Glory to God in the
highest, and on earth peace, good will towards
men " (Luke ii. 8-20). We need not suppose that
these simple men were cherishing in their hearts
the expectation of the Messiah which others had
relinquished; they were chosen from the humble,
as were our lord's companions afterwards, in order
to show that God " hath chosen the weak things
of the world to confound the things which are
mighty" (1 Cor. 1. 26-31), and that the poor and
meek could apprehend the message of salvation to
which kings and priests could turn a deaf ear.
The subject of the Genealogy of our Lord, as
given by St. Matthew and St. Like, is discussed
fully in another article. [See Genealogy of
Jesus Christ.]
The child Jesus is circumcised in due time, is
brought to the Temple, and the mother makes the
offering for her purification. That offering wanted
its peculiar meaning in this case, which was an act
of new creation, and not a birth after the common
order of our fallen nature. But the seed of the
new kingdom was to grow undiscemibly as yet; nc
exemption was claimed by the " highly favored *■
mother, and no portent intervened. She made hec
humble offering like any other .Tudmui mother, an.
would have gone her wn\ unnoticed ; hut hen toe
God suffered not His beloved Son to be without I
Digitized by
Google
JKSTTS CHRIST
sfltnaaj, and Simeon and Anna, taught ban God
that the object of their earnest longings waa before
ibem, prophesied of His divine work : the one re-
joking that his eyes had seen the salvation of God,
and the other speaking of Him '• to all that looked
far redemption in Jerusalem" (Luke U. 28-38).
Thus recognized amongst His own people, the
Saviour was not without witness amongst the
heathen. " Wise men from the East " — that is,
Persian magi of the Zend religion, in which the idea
of a Zozioah or Redeemer was dearly known
guided miraculously by a star or meteor created for
the purpose, came and sought out the Saviour to
pay him hoinage. We have said that in the year
747 occurred a remarkable combination of the
planets Jupiter and Saturn, and this is supposed
lo be the sign by which the wise men knew that
lbs birth of some great one had taken place. But,
as has been said, the date does not agree with this
view, and the account of the Evangelist describes a
single star moving before them and guiding their
steps. We must suppose that God saw good to
apeak to the magi in their own way : they were
seeking light from the study of the stars, whence
only physical light could be found, and He guided
them to the Source of spiritual light, to the cradle
of his Son, by a star miraculously made to appear
to them, and to speak intelligibly to them through
their preconceptions. The offerings which they
brought have been regarded as symbolical : the gold
was tribute to a king, the frankincense was for the
use of a priest, and the myrrh for a body preparing
for the tomb —
" Auraa nascent! fbderant munera rsgl,
Thura daden Deo, mjrrham tribuera sepulto,**
says Sedulius: but in a more general view these
were at any rate the offerings made by worshippers,
sod in that light must the magi be regarded. The
events connected with the birth of our Lord are
aD significant, and here some of the wisest of the
heathen kneel before the Redeemer as the first-fruits
of the Gentiles, and as a sign that his dominion
was to be not merely Jewish, but as wide as the
whose world. (See Matt. ii. 1-19; Miinter, Der
Stern der Weiten, Copenhagen, 1837; the Com-
mentaries of Alford, Williams, Olshausen, and
Henbner, where the opinions as to the nature of
the star are discussed.)
A little ehild made the great Herod quake upon
Ida throne. When he knew that the magi were
come to hail their King and Lord, and did not
stop at his palace, but passed on to a humbler roof,
and when he found that they would not return to
ketray this ehild to him, he put to death all the
children in Bethlehem that were under two years
lid. The crime was great; but the number of the
frtiras, in a little place like Bethlehem, was small
enough to escape special record amongst the wicked
sets of Herod from Josephus and other historians,
as it had no political interest. A confused indica-
tion of it, however, is found in Macrobius (Saturn.
Ii. 4).
Joseph, warned by a dream, flees to Egypt with
lbs young ehild, beyond the reach of Herod's arm. I
His flight of our Lord from his own land to the '
md of darkness and idolatry — a land associated
«ven to a proverb with all that waa hostile to God
Wd his people, impresses on us the reality of his
lemiuatioa. Herod's cup was well uigh full; and
"ho doom that soon overtook him could have arrested
trim then la his bloody attempt; bnt Jesus, in
JiSaUS CHRIST
1849
accepting humanity, accepted all its incidents. He
was saved, not by the intervention of God, but by
the obedience of Joseph; and from the storms of
persecution He had to use the common means of
escape (Matt. ii. 13-23; Thomas a Kempis, iii. 16,
and Commentaries). After the death of Herod, in
less than a year, Jesus returned with his parents to
their own land, and went to Nazareth, where they
abode.
Except as to one event the Evangelists are silent
upon the succeeding years of our Lord's life down
to the commencement of his ministry. When He
was twelve years old He was found in the temple,
hearing the doctors and asking them questions
(Luke ii. 40-52). We are shown this one fact that
we may know that at the time when the Jews con-
sidered childhood to be passing into youth, Jesus
was already aware of his mission, and consciously
preparing for it, although years elapsed before its
actual commencement. This fact at once confirms
and illustrates such a general expression as " Jesus
increased in wisdom and stature, and in favor with
God and man " (Luke ii. 52). His publio ministry
did not begin with a sudden impulse, but was pre-
pared for by his whole life. The consciousness ol
bis divine nature and power grew and ripened and
strengthened until the time of his showing unto
Israel-
Thirty years had elapsed from the birth of our
Lord to the opening of his ministry. In that time
great changes bad come owt the chosen people.
Herod the Great had united under him almost all
the original kingdom of David ; after the death of
that prince it was dismembered for ever. Archelaus
succeeded to the kingdom of Judaea, under the title
of Ethnarcli; Herod Antipas became tetnrch of
Galilee and Penea, and Philip tetrarch of Tracho-
nitis, Gaulonitis, Batanasa, and i'aneas. The Em-
peror Augustus promised Archelaus the title of
king, if be should prove worthy; but in the tenth
year of his reign (u. c. 759) he was deposed in
deference to the hostile feelings of the Jews, was
banished to Vienne in Gaul, and from that time
his dominions passed under the direct power of
Rome, being annexed to Syria, and governed by a
procurator. No king nor eUmarch held Judaea
afterwards, if we except the three years when it was
under Agrippa I. Marks are not wanting of toe
irritation kept up in the minds of the Jews by the
sight of a foreigner exercising acts of power over
the people whom David once ruled. The publicans
(Bortuores) who collected tribute for the Roman
empire were everywhere detested ; and as a marked
class is likely to be a degraded one, the Jews saw
everywhere the most despised among the peopl*
exacting from them all, and more than all (Lukn
iii. 13), that the foreign tyrant required. Constant
changes were made by the same power in the office
of high priest, perhaps from a necessary policy.
Josephus sajs that there were twenty-eight high-
priests from the time of Herod to the burning of
the Temple (.An/, xx. 10). The sect of Judas the
Gaulonite, which protested against paying tribute
to Gsesar, and against bowing the neck to an alien
yoke, expressed a conviction which all Jews shared.
The sense of oppression and wrong would tend to
shape ah the hopes of a Messiah, so far as they still
existed, to the conception of a warrior who should
deliver them from a hateful political bondage
It was in the fifteenth year of Tiberius the Em-
peror, reckoning from his joint rule with Augustus
(Jan. V. C. 765, *-id uut from bu sole rue (Aug
Digitized by
Google
1860
JESUS CHRIrJT
C o. M" ), that John the Baptist began to teach.
In this year (u. c. 770) Pontius Pilate m pro-
surator of Judaa, the worldly and time-serving
re presen tative of a cruel and imperious master ;
Herod Antipos and l'hilip still held the tetrarchies
left them bj their father. Annas and Caiaphas are
both described as holding the office of high-priest;
Annas was deposed by Valerius Gratus in this very
year, and his son-in-law Joseph, called also Caiaphas,
was appointed, after some changes, in his room ;
but Annas seems to have retained after this time
(John xviii- 13) much of the authority of the office,
which the two administered together. John the
Baptist, of whom a full account is given below
under his own name, came to preach in the wilder-
ness. He was the lost representative of the prophets
of the old covenant; and his work was twofold —
to enforce repentance and the terrors of the old law,
and to revive the almost forgotten expectation of
the Messiah (Matt. iii. 1-10; Mark i. 1-8; Luke
iii. 1-18). Both these objects, which are very
apparent in his preaching, were connected equally
with the coming of Jesus, since the need of a
Saviour from sin is not felt but when sin itself is
felt to be a bondage and a terror. The career of
John seems to have been very short; and it has
been asked how such great influence could have
been attained in a abort time (Matt. iii. 6). But
his was a powerful nature which soon took po s s e s
sion of those who came within its reach; and his
success becomes less surprising if we assume with
Wieseler that the preaching took place in a sab-
batical year (Baumgarten, Geschiclite Jink, 40).
It is an old controversy whether the baptism of
lohn was a new institution, or an imitation of the
baptism of proselytes as practiced by the Jews.
But at all events there is no record of such a rite,
conducted in the name of and with reference to a
particular person (Acts xix. 4), before the ministry
of John. Jesus came to Jordan with the rest to
receive this rite at John's hands; first, in order
that the sacrament by which all were hereafter to
be admitted into his kingdom might not want his
example to justify its use (Matt iii. 15); next, that
John might have an assurance that his course as
the herald of Christ was now completed by his ap-
pearance (John i. 33); and last, that some public
token might be given that He was indeed the
Anointed of Cod (Heb. v. 5). A supposed dis-
crepancy between Matt. iii. 14 and John i. 31, 33,
disappears when we remember that from the rela-
tionship between the families of John and our Lord
(Luke i.), John must have known already some-
thing of the power, goodness, and wisdom of Jesus ;
what he did not know was, that this same Jesus
was the very Messish for whom be had come to
prepare the world. Our Lord received the rite of
baptism at his servant's hands, and the Father
attested Him by the voice of the Spirit, which also
was seen descending on Him in a visible shape:
"This is my beloved Son in whom I am well
pleased" (Matt. iii. 13-17; Mark L 9-11; Luke
Hi. 21, 99).
Immediately after this inauguration of his min-
istry Jesus was led up of the Spirit into the wilder-
ess to be tempted of the Devil (Matt iv. 1-11;
vlerk i. 12, 13; Luke iv. 1-13). As the baptism
sf onr Lord cannot have been for Him the token
if repenUnce and intended reformation which it
las for sinful men, so does our Lord's sinlessness
•fleet the nature of his temptation ; for it was the
vial of one who could not possibly have fallen.
JESUS CHRIST
This makes a complete conception of the t
impossible for minds wherein temptation is always
associated with the possibility of sin. But whilst
we most be content with an incomplete conception
we must avoid the wrong conceptions that are oftec
substituted for it Some suppose the account be-
fore us to describe what takes place in a vision ar
ecstasy of our Lord ; so that Loth the temptation
and its answer arise from within. Others think
that the temptation was suggested from within, but
in a state, not of sleep or ecstasy, but of complete
consciousness. Others consider this narrative to
have been a parable of our Lord, of which He has
made Himself the subject All these suppositions
set aside the historical testimony of the Gospels:
the temptation as there described arose not from
the sinless mind of the Son of God, where indeed
thoughts of evil could not have harbored, but from
Satan, the enemy of the human race. Nor can it
be supposed that this account is a mere parable,
unless we assume that Matthew and Luke have
wholly misunderstood their Master's meaning. The
story is that of a fact, hard indeed to be under-
stood, but not to be made easier by explanations
such ss would invalidate the only testimony on
which it rests (Heubner's Practical Cosunniarj
on Maltliae).
The three temptations are addressed to the three
forms in which the disease of sin makes its appear-
ance on the soul — to the solace of sense, and the
love of praise, and the desire of gain (1 John ii.
16). But there is one element common to them
all — they are attempts to call up a willful and
wayward spirit in contrast to a patient self-denying
one.
In the first temptation the Redeemer is an
hungered, and when the Devil bids Him, if He be
the Son of God, command that the stones may be
made bread, there would seem to be no great sin
in this use of divine power to overcome the pressing
human want Our Lord's answer is required to
•how us where the essence of the temptation lay.
He takes the words of Moses to the children of
Israel (Deut viii. 3), which mean, not that men
must dispense with bread and feed only on the
study of the divine word, but that our meat and
drink, our food and raiment, are all the work of the
creating hand of God ; and that a sense of dtjitnd-
tnce on God is the duty of man. He tolls the
tempter that as the sons of Israel standing in the
wilderness were forced to humble themselves and
to wait upon the hand of God for the bread from
heaven which He gave them, so the Son of Man,
{tinting in the wilderness from hunger, will be
humble and will wait upon his Father in heaven
for the word that shall bring Him food, and will
not be hssty to deliver Himself from that dependent
state, but will wait patiently for the gifts of hfc.
goodness. In the second temptation, it is not prob-
able that they left the wilderness, but that Sataa
was allowed to suggest to our Lord's mind the
place, and the marvel that could be wrought there.
They stood, as has l>een suggested, on the lofty
porch that overhung the Valley of Kedron, where
the steep side of the valley was added to the height
of the Temple (Joseph. Ant. xv. 1 1, § 6), and made
a depth that the eye could scarcely have borne is
look down upon. " Cast thyself down " — perform
in the Holy City, in a public place, a wonder thai
will at once make all men confess that none but
the Son of God could perform it A passage
from the 91st Psalm it quoted to give a color Is
Digitized by
Google
JBSTJ8 CHRIST
Oar Lard replies by an allusion
la another text that carries us beck again to the
Israelites wandering in the wilderness- " Ye shall
not tempt the Lord your God, as ye tempted Him
in Haatah " (Deut. vL 16). Their conduct is more
fully described by the Psalmist as a tempting of
God : " They tempted God in their heart by asking
meat for their lust; yes, tbey spake against God:
they said, Can God furnish a table in the wilder-
ness .' Behold he smote the rock that the waters
gushed out, and the streams overflowed. Can He
give bread also? Can He provide flesh for his
people?" (l's. lzxviii.) Just parallel was the
temptation here. God has protected Thee so far,
brought Thee up, put his seal upon Thee by man-
ifest proofs of his favor. Can He do this also?
Can He send the angels to buoy Thee up in Thy
descent? Can He make the air thick to sustain,
and the earth soft to receive Thee? The appro-
priate answer is, u Thou shalt not tempt the Lord
thy God." In the third temptation it is not
asserted that there i* any mountain from which the
eyes of common men can see the world and its
kingdoms at once displayed ; it was with the mental
vision of One who knew all things that these king-
doms and their glory were seen. And Satan has
now begun to discover, if he knew not from the
beginning, that One is here who can become the
King over them all. He says, " All these things
will I give Thee if Thou wilt fall down and worship
dm." In St Luke the words are fuller: « All this
power will I give Thee, and the glory of them, for
that is delivered unto me, and to whomsoever I will
I give it:" but these words are the lie of the
tempter, which he uses to mislead. " Thou art
come to be great — to be a King on the earth; but
I am strong, and will resist Thee. Thy followers
shall be imprisoned and shin ; some of them shall
fall away through fear; others shall forsake Thy
cause, loving this present world. Cast in Thy lot
with me; let Thy kingdom be an earthly kingdom,
only the greatest of all — a kingdom such as the
Jews seek to see established on the throne of David.
Worship me by living as the children of this world
live, and so honoring me in Thy life: then all shall
be Thine." The Lord knows that the tempter is
right in foretelling such trials to Him ; but though
clouds and darkness hang over the path of his min-
istry He must work the work of Him that sent
Him, and not another work: He must worship
God and none other. " Get thee hence, Satan; for
It is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God,
and Him only shalt thou serve." As regards the
rder of the temptations, there are internal marks
Wat the account of St. Matthew assigns them their
historical order: St Luke transposes the two last,
for which various reasons are suggested by com-
mentators (Matt. It. 1-11; Mark L 13, 13; Luke
Iv. 1-18).
Deserting for a time the historical order, we
shall find that the records of this first portion of
his ministry, from the temptation to the transfig-
uration, consist mainly — (1) of miracles, which
prove his divine commission; (2) of discourses and
parables on the doctrine of "the kingdom of
leaven:" (3) of incidents showing the behavior
i* various persons when brought into contact with
.or Lord. The two former may -squire some gen-
eral remarks, the last will unfold themselves with
thenamtive.
1. Tk» Miracle: — The power of working mir-
tdas wis granted to many under tb« Old Covenant:
•TUBUS CHRIST 186]
Moses (Ex. lit. 90, vii.-xl.) delivered the people of
Israel Cram Egypt by means of them ; and Joshua,
following in his steps, enjoyed the same power fa
the completion of his work (Josh. iii. 13-18). Sam-
son (Judg. xv. 19), Ehjah (1 K. xvii. 10, Ac), and
Elisha (2 K. ii.-vi.) possessed the same gift. Tbf
prophets foretold that the Messiah, of whom Moses
was the type, would show signs and wonders as he
had done. Isaiah, in describing his kingdom, says
— " Then the eyes of the blind shall be opened,
and the ears of the deaf shall be unstopped. Then
shall the lame man leap as an hart, and the tongue
of the dumb sing" (xxxv. S, 6). According to
the same prophet, the Christ was called " to open
the blind eyes, to bring out the prisoners from the
prison, and them that sit in darkness out of the
prison-house" (xlii. 7). And all who looked for
the coming of the Messiah expected that the power
of miracles would be one of the tokens of hit com-
mission. When John the Baptist, in hie prison,
heard of the works of Jesus, he sent his disciples
to inquire, >' Art Thou He that should come (i
ifxtiunt = the Messiah), or do we look for an-
other? " Our Lord, in answer to this, only points
to his miracles, leaving to John the inference from
them, that no one could do such works exeept the
promised One. When our Lord cured a blind and
dumb demoniac, the people, struck with the mira-
cle, said, " Is not this the Son of David? " (Matt,
xii. 23). On another like occasion it was asked,
" When Christ oometh will He do more miracles
than these which this man hath done? " (John vii
31). So that the expectation that Messiah would
work miracles existed amongst the people, and was
founded on the language of prophecy. Our Lord's
miracles are described in the New Testament by
several names: they are signs (o-7)/ifta), wonders
(Wjwto.), works (fff-yo, most frequently in St.
John), and mighty works (Ivydpcir), according to
the point of view from which tbey are regarded.
Hey are indeed astonishing works, wrought as
signs of the might and presence of God ; and tbey
are powers or mighty works because they are such
as no power short of the divine could have effected
But if the object had been merely to work wonders,
without any other aim than to astonish the minds
of the witnesses, the miracles of our Lord would
not have been the beat means of producing the
effect, since many of them were wrought for the
good of obscure people, before witnesses chiefly of
the humble and uneducated class, and in the course
of the ordinary life of our Lord, which lay not
amongst those who made it their special business
to inquire into the claims of a prophet. When
requests were made for a more striking sign than
those which He had wrought, for "a sign from
heaven " (Luke xl. 16), it was refused. When
the tempter suggested that He should cast Himself
down from the pinnacle of the Temple before all
men, the temptation was rejected. The miracles of
our Lord were to be, not wonders merely, but signs:
and not merely signs of preternatural power, but of
the scope and character of his ministry, and of the
divine nature of his Person. This will be evident
from an examination of those which are more par-
ticularly' described in the Gospels. Nearly forty
cases of this kind appear; but that they are only
examples taken out of a very great number, the
Evangelists frequently remind us (John ii. 23;
Mat*, viii. 16 and parell.; iv. 23; xii. 15 and par-
all.; Luke vi. 19; Matt. xi. 5; xlll. 68: ix. U,
air. 14, 36; xv. 30; xU. 2; xtt It). The* csaas
Digitized by
Google
1852
JESUS OHBIST
aright be daasined. Then in three '"***"«** of
restoration to life, each under peculiar condition! :
the daughter of Jairua tu lately dead; the wid-
ow's ton at Nam waa being carried out to the
gram; and Lazarus had been four days dead, and
was returning to corruption (Matt. iz. 18; Luke
vii. 11, 12; John xi. 1, Ac.)- There are about six
cases of demoniac possession, each with its own
circumstances : one in the synagogue at Caper-
naum, where the unclean spirit bore witness to
Jesus as •• the holy one of God " (Hark 1. 24); a
second, that of the man who dwelt among the
tombs in the country of the Gadarenes, whose
state is so forcibly described by St. Mark (v. 2),
and who also bore witness to Him as " the Son of
the Most High God ; " a third, the ease of a dumb
man (Matt. ix. 32); a fourth, that of a youth who
was brought to Him as He came down from the
Mount of Transfiguration (Matt xrii. 15), and
whom the disciples had vainly tried to heal; a
fifth, that of another dumb man, whom the Jews
thought he had healed " through Beelzebub the
prince of the devils " (Luke xi. 15); and a sixth,
that of the Syro-Phosnician girl whose mother's
fiaith was so tenacious (Matt. xv. 22). There are
about seventeen recorded cases of the cure of bodily
sickneas, including fever, leprosy, palsy, inveterate
weakness, the maimed limb, the issue of blood of
twelve years' standing, dropsy, blindness, deafness,
and dumbness (John iv. 47; Matt. viii. 2, 14, ix.
2; John v. 5; Matt. xU. 10, viii. 5, ix. 20, 27;
Mark viii. 22; John ix. 1; Luke xiii. 10, xvii. 11,
xviii. 85, xxii. 51). These three groups of mira-
cles all pertain to one class; they all brought help
to the suffering or sorrowing, and proclaimed what
love the Man that did them bore towards the chil-
dren of men. There is another class, showing a
complete control over the powers of nature ; first by
acts of creative power, as when in the beginning
of his ministry He made the water wine; and when
He fed at one time five thousand, and at another
four, with bread miraculously provided (John ii. 7,
vi. 10; Matt. xv. 32); secondly, by setting aside
natural laws and conditions — now in passing un-
seen through a hostile crowd (Luke iv. 30); now
in procuring miraculous draughts of fishes, when
the fisher's skill had failed (Luke v. 4; John xxi.
6); now in stilling a tempest (Matt. viii. 26); now
in walking to his disciples on the sea (Matt. xiv.
25); now in the transformation of his countenance
by a heavenly light and glory (Matt. xvii. 1); and
again in seeking and finding the shekel for the cus-
tomary tribute to the Temple in the fish's mouth
(Matt. xvii. 27). In a third class of these mira-
cles we find our Lord overawing the wills of men ;
as when He twice cleared the Temple of the traders
(John ii. 13; Matt. xxi. 12); and when his look
staggered the officers that came to take Him (John
xviii. 6). And in a fourth subdivision will stand
jne miracle only, where his power was used for
destruction — the case of the barren fig-tree (Matt.
xxi. 18). The destruction of the herd of swine
does not properly rank here; it was a permitted act
sf the devils which he cast out, and is no more to
be laid to the account of the Redeemer thaa are all
3» sicknesses and sufferings in the land of the
a Ike Saviour's miracles are —
!In raising toe dead.
In curing mental
In healing the body.
JESUS CHBJBT
Jews which He permitted to waste and ilwlmj
having, as He showed by his miracles, abundant
power to prevent them. All the miracles of this
latter class show our Lord to be one who wields the
power of God. No one can suspend the laws of
nature save Him who made them : when bread is
wonderfully multiplied, and the fickle sea becomes
a firm floor to walk on, the God of the universe is
working the change, directly or through his deputy.
Very remarkable, as a claim to divine power, is the
mode in which Jesus justified acta of healing on
the Sabbath — "My Father worketfa hitherto, and
I work" (John v. 17): which means, "As *Jnd
the Father, even on the Sabbath-dny, keeps all las
laws of the universe at work, making the jJaceU
roll, and the grass grow, and the animal puses
beat, so do I my work; I stand above the law of
the Sabbath, as He does." «
On reviewing all the recorded miracles, we see at
once that they are signs of the nature of Christ's
Person and mission. None of them are done
merely to astonish : and hardly any of them, even
of those which prove his power more than hia love,
but teud directly towards the good of men in
some way or other. They show how active and
unwearied was his love; they also show the diver-
sity of its operation. Every degree of huiuan
need — from Lazarus now returning to dust —
through the pslsy that has seized on brain and
nerves, and is almost death — through the leprosy
which, appearing on the skin, wss really a subtle
poison that had tainted every drop of blood in the
veins — up to the injury to the particular limb —
received succor from the powerful word of Christ;
and to wrest his buried friend from corruption and
the worm was neither more nor less difficult than
to heal a withered hand or restore to its place an
ear that had been cut off. And this intimate con-
nection of the miracles with the work of Christ will
explain the fact that faith was in many cases
required as a condition for their performance.
According to the common definition of a miracle,
any one would seem to be a capable witness of its
performance: yet Jesus sometimes refrained from
working wonders before the unbelieving (Mark vi.
5, 6 ), and sometimes did the work that was asked
of him because of the faith of tliem that asked it
(Mark vii. 29). The miracles were intended to
attract the witnesses of them to become followers
of Jesus and members of the kingdom of heaven.
Where faith was already so far fixed on Him as tc
believe that He eou>d do miracles, there was the fit
preparation for a faith in higher and heavenly
things. If they knew that He could heal the body,
they only required teaching to enlarge their view
of him into that of a healer of the diseased spirit,
and a giver of true life to those that ate dead in
trespasses and sins. On the other hand, where
men's minds were in a state of bitterness and an-
tagonism against Him, to display miracles before
them would but increase their condemnation. " If
I had not done among them the works which none
other man did, they had not had sin; but now
have they both seen and hated both Me and mj
In greeting.
In destroying.
n Of power i In setting aside the ordinary law* el
being.
la overawing the opposing wills of ssaa
In the account in the tut, the mlrajlss the* toss
plsos after the Transfiguration have bean taataded
for the sake of ooriplsteneas.
Digitized by
Google
JKSTJ8 0HBI8T
Father" (John xt. 34). Thii remit mi inevita-
ble): in order to offer salvation to tone who are to
be tared, the offer must be heard by some of those
who will reject it. Miracles then have two par-
poses — the proximate and subordinate purpose of
doing a work of love to them that need it, and the
higher purpose of revealing Christ in his own Per-
son and nature as the Son of God and Saviour of
men. Hence the rejection of the demand for a
sign from heaven — for some great celestial phe-
nomenon which all should see and none could
dispute. He refused to give such a sign to the
"generation " that asked it: and once He offered
them instead the fact that Jonah was a type of
Him as to his burial and resurrection : thus refug-
ing them the kind of sign which they required.
So again, in answer to a similar demand, He said,
" Destroy this temple and in three days I will raise
it up " — alluding to his death and resurrection.
It is as though He had said, " All the miracles
that I have been working are only intended to call
attention to the one great miracle of My presence
on earth in the form of a servant. No other kind
of miracle will I work. If you wish for a greater
sign, I refer you to the great miracle about to be
wrought in Me — that of My resurrection." The
Lord's words do not mean that there shall be no
sign ; He is working wonders daily : but that He
will not travel out of the plan He has proposed for
Himself. A sign in the sun and moon and stars
would prove that the power of God was there; but it
would not teach men to understand the mission of
God Incarnate, of the loving and suffering friend and
brother of men. The miracles which He wrought
are those best suited to this purpose; and those
who had faith, though but in small measure, were
the fittest to behold them. They knew Him but
a little; but even to think of Him as a Prophet
who was able to heal their infirmity was a germ of
faith sufficient to make them fit hearers of his doo-
trine and spectators of His deeds. But those
(gained nothing from the Divine work who, unable
Co deny the evidence of their eyes and ears, took
refuge in the last argument of malice, " He casteth
out devils through Beelzebub the prince of the
devils."
What is a miracle? A miracle must be either
something done in eontravention of all law, or it is
a transgression of all the laws known to us, but
not of some law which further research may dis-
cover for us, or it is a transgression of all natural
laws, whether known now or to be known hereafter,
on account of some higher law whose operation
interferes with them. Only the last of these def-
initions could apply to the Christian miracles. God
having chosen to govern the world by laws, having
impressed on the face of nature in characters not
to be mistaken the great truth that He rules the
universe by law and order, would not adopt in the
kingdom of grace a different plan from that which
kt the kingdom of, nature He has pursued. If the
r*an universe requires a scheme of order, and the
spiritual world is governed without a scheme (so to
speak), by caprice, then the God of Nature appears
to contradict the God of Grace. Spinoza has not
tailed to make the most of this argument; but he
■Mils not the true Christian idea of a miracle, but
«M which he substitutes for it (Tract. TktaL
°aUi- 6). Nor can the Christian miracles be re-
puted as cases in which the wonder depends on
d» entieipiCMiu only of some law that is not now
d, but shall be so hereafter. In the first
JK8U8 OHKIST 1868
piaee many of them go beyond, in the amount of
their operation, all the wildest hopes of the scientific
discoverer. In the second place, the very concep-
tion of a miracle is vitiated by such an explanation.
All distinction In kind between the man who is
somewhat in advance of his age in physical knowl-
edge, and the worker of miracles, would be taken
away; and the miracles of one age, u the steam-
engine, the telegraph-wire, become the tools and
toys of the next. It remains then that a miracle
is to be regarded as the overruling of some physical
law by some higher law that is brought in. We
are invited in the Gospels to regard the miracles
not as wonders, but as the wonderful acts of Jesus
of Nazareth. They are identified with the work of
redemption. There are even cautions against teach-
ing them separately — against severing them from
their connection with his work. Eye-witnesses of
Us miracles were strictly charged to make no report
or them to others (Matt ix. 30; Mark v. 43, vii.
36). And yet when John the Baptist sent his dis-
ciples to ascertain whether the Messiah were indeed
come or not, the answer they took back was the
very thing which was forbidden to others — a report
of miracles. The explanation of this seeming con ■
tradiction is that wherever a report of the signs and
wonders was likely to be conveyed without a right
conception of the Person of Christ and the kind
of doctrine which He taught, there He suffered Dot
the report to be carried. Now had the purpose
been to reveal his divine nature only, this caution
would not have been needed, nor would faith have
been a needful preliminary for the apprehension of
miracles, nor would the temptations of Satan in
the wilderness have been the cunning snares they
were intended to be, nor would it have been neces-
sary to refuse the convincing sign from heaven to
the Jews that asked it- But the part of his work
to whieb attention was to be directed in connection
with the miracles, was the mystery of our redemp-
tion by One "who being in the form of God,
thought it not robbery to be equal with God, but
made Himself of no reputation, and took upon Him
the form of a servant, and was made in the likeness
of men : and being found in fashion as a man, He
humbled Himself, and became obedient unto death,
even the death of the Cross " (Phil. ii. 6-8). Very
few are the miracles in which divine power is exer-
cised without a manifest reference to the purpose
of assisting men. He works for the most part as
the Power of God in a state of humiliation for the
good of men. Not insignificant hero are the cases
in which He condescends to use means, wholly
inadequate indeed in any other hands than his;
but still they are a token that He has descended
into the region where means are employed, from
that in which even the spoken word can control
the subservient agents of nature. He laid his hand
upon the patient (Matt. riii. 3, 15, ix. 29, xx. 34;
Luke vii. 14; xxii. 51). He anointed the eyes of
the blind with clay (John ix. 6). He put bis finger
into the ear and touched the tongue of the deaf and
dumb sufferer in Decapolis (Mark vii. 33, 34). He
treated the blind man at Bethsaida in like fashion
(Mark viii. 23). Even where He fed the five
thousand and the four, He did not create bread
out of nothing which would have been as easy for
Him, o'lt much bread out of little; and He looked
up to neaven and blessed the meat as a thankful
man would do (Matt. xiv. 19 ; John vi. 11 ; Matt.
XT. 86). At the grave of Lazarus Hs lifted up his
eyes and gave thanks that the Father had heard
Digitized by
Google
1854
JESUS CHRIST
BIm (John xl. 41, 49), and thii great miracle la
asoompaaled by tears and groanings, that ahow how
ftie so mighty to save hai truly become a man
with human aoul and aympathlea. The worker of
the miracles U God become Han; and aa signs of
Ida Peraon and work are they to be measured.
Hence, when the question of the credibility of
miracles la discussed, it ought to be preceded by
the question, la redemption from the sin of Adam
a probable thing? la it probable that there are
spiritual laws aa well aa natural, regulating the
relations between us and the Father of our spirits?
Is it probable that, such laws existing, the needs
of men and the goodness of God would lead to an
expression of them, complete or partial, by means
of revelation ? If these questions are all decided
in the affirmative, then Hume's argument against
miracles is already half overthrown. " No testi-
mony," says Hume, " is sufficient to establish a
miracle, unless the testimony be of such a kind
that its falsehood would be more miraculous than
the tact which it endeavors to establish ; and even
in that ease there is a mutual destruction of argu-
ments, and the superior only gives us an assurance
suitable to that degree of force which remains after
deducting the inferior" (Assays, vol. 11. p. 130).
If the Christian miracles are parts of a scheme
which bean other marks of a divine origin, they
point to the existence of a set of spiritual laws with
which Christianity is connected, and of which it is
the expression ; and then the difficulty of believing
them disappears. They are not " against nature,"
but above it; they are not the tew caprices of Prov-
idence breaking in upon ages of order, but they are
glimpses of the divine spiritual cosmos permitted to
be seen amidst the laws of the natural world, of
which they take precedence, just as in the physical
world one law can supersede another. And as to
the testimony for them let Paley speak : •' If
twelve men, whose probity and good sense I had
long known, should seriously and circumstantially
relate to me an account of a miracle wrought before
their eyes, and in which it was impossible they
should be deceived ; if the governor of the country,
hearing a rumor of this account, should call those
men into bis presence, and offer them a short pro-
posal, either to confess the imposture or submit to
be tied up to a gibbet; if they should refuse with
one voice to acknowledge that there existed any
falsehood or imposture in the case; if this threat
*ere communicated to them separately, yet with
no different effect; if it was at last executed, if I
myself saw them one after another consenting to
be racked, burnt, or strangled, rather than give up
the truth of their account ; . . . there exists not
a skeptic in the world who would not believe them,
at who would defend such incredulity " (Evidences,
Introduction, p. 6). In the theory of a "mutual
destruction " of arguments so that the belief in
miracles would represent exactly the balance be-
tween the evidence for and against them, Hume
contradicts the commonest religious, and indeed
worldly, experience; he confounds the state of de-
dberation and examination with that of conviction.
When Thomas the Apostle, who had doubted the
great central miracle of the resurrection, was allowed
to touch the Saviour's wounded aide, and in an
access of undoubting faith exclaimed, " Hy Lord,
and my God ! " who does not see that at that
vornant all the former doubts were wiped out, and
ware sa though they had never been ? How could
ho awry about those doubts or any recollection of
JHSTJS CHRIST
(hem, to be a set-off against the comjiste casual
tion that had succeeded them? It is so with As
Christian hie in every case; faith, which is "taw
substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things
not seen," could not continue to weigh and bsaaoas
evidence for and against the truth ; the conviction
either rises to a perfect moral certainty, or it con-
tinues tainted and worthless as a principle of ac-
tion.
The lapse of time may somewhat alter the aspect
of the evidence for miracles, but it does not weaken
it It is more difficult (so to speak) to cross-
examine witnesses who delivered their testimony
sges ago; but another kind of evidence has been
gathering strength in successive ages. The miracles
are all consequences and incidents of one great
miracle, the Incarnation; and If the Incarnation is
found true, the rest become highly probable. But
this very doctrine has been thoroughly proved
through all these ages. Nations hare adopted h,
and they are the greatest nations of the world.
Hen hare lived and died in it, have given np then*
lives to preach it; have found that it did not dis-
appoint them, but held true under tbem to the
last. The existence of Christianity itself has be-
come an evidence. It is a phenomenon easy to
understand if we grant the miracle of the Incarna-
tion, but is an effect without an adequate cause if
that be denied.
Miracles then are offered us in the Gospels, not
as startling violations of the order of nature, but as
consequences of the revelation of Himself made by
Jesus Christ for men's salvation, and aa such they
are not violations of order at all, but interferences
of the spiritual order with the natural. They are
abundantly witnessed by earnest and competent
men, who did not aim at any earthly reward for
their teaching ; and they are proofs, together with
his pure life and holy doctrine, that Jesus wss the
Son of God. (See Dean Trench On the Miracles,
an important work; [Mozley, Bampton Lectures,
1865;] Baumgarten, Leben Jem; Paley'a £ti-
dences; Butler's Analogy; Hase, Leben Jet*; with
the various Commentaries on the New Testament.)
8. The Parables. — In considering the Lord's
teaching we turn first to the parables. In all ages
the aid of tbe imagination has been sought to assist
in the teaching of abstract truth, and that in various
ways : in the parable, where some story of ordinary
doings is made to convey a spiritual meaning, be-
yond what the narrative itself contains, and without
any assertion that the narrative does or does not
present an actual occurrence: in tbe fable, where
a story, for the most part an impossible one, of
talking beast and reasoning bird, is made the vehicle
of some shrewd and prudent lesson of worldly wis
dom : in the allegory, which is a story with a moral
or spiritual meaning, in which the lesson taught is
so prominent as almost wholly to supersede the
story that clothes it, and the names and actions
are so chosen that no interpreter shall bs r e q uir ed
for the application : and lastly, in the proverb,
which is often only a parable or a falje ccmriwmwd
Into a few pithy words [Parable] (Ernestl, Lea.
Tech. Gretcum, under wapafioK^, Xiyot, iAAwyw
pfct; Trench, On the Parables ; AUbrd on Matt,
xiii. 1, and other Commentators; Hase, Leben Jems
% 67, 4th ed. ; Neander, Leben Jesv, p. 568, fofl.).
Neariy fifty parables are preserved In tbe Gospels,
and they are only selected from a larger nnmba
(Hark iv. S3). Each Evangelist, even St. Mark
has unau i td some that are peculiar to
Digitized by
Google
JESUS 0HRIS1
ft. John oarer uses the word parable, but that of
pro c ure (wapoi/xta), which the other Evangelists
nowhere employ. Id reference tc this mode of
Inching, onr Lord tells the disciples, " Unto you
it is given to know the mysteries oJ the kingdom
sf God ; but to others in parables, that seeing they
might not see, and hearing they might not under-
stand " (Luke viii. 10); and some hare hastily con-
cluded from this that the parable -— the clearest of
all modes of teaching — was employed to conceal
knowledge from those who were not susceptible of
it, and that this was its chief purpose. But it was
chosen not for this negative object, but for its
positive advantages in the instruction of the dis-
ciples. The nature of the kingdom of heaven was
not understood even by disciples; hard even to them
were the sayings that described it, and the bearing
of them caused many to go back and walk no more
with Him (John ri. 66). If there was any mode
of teaching better suited than another to the pur-
pose of preserving truths for the memory that were
not yet accepted by the heart — for keeping the
seed safe till the time should arrive for the quicken-
ing Spirit to come down and give it growth — that
mode would be the beat suited to the peculiar posi-
tion of the disciples. And any means of translating
an abstract thought into sensuous language has
ever been the object of poet and teacher in all
countries. He who can best employ the symbols
of the risible world for the deeper acta of thought
has been the clearest and most successful expositor.
The parable affords just such an instrument as was
required. Who could banish from his mind, when
once understood, the image of the house built on
the sand, as the symbol of the faithless soul unable
to stand by the truth in the day of temptation ?
To whom does not the parable of the prodigal son
bring back the thought of God's merciful kindness
towards the erring? But without such striking
images it would hare been impossible (to use mere
human language) to make known to the disciples
In their half-enlightened state the mysteries of faith
In the Son of God as a principle of life, of repent-
ance from sin, and of an assurance of peace and
welcome from the God of mercy. Kastern teachers
have made this mode of instruction familiar; the
originality of the parables lay not in the method
of teaching by stories, but in the profound and new
truths which the stories taught so aptly. And
Jesus had another purpose in selecting this form
of instruction : He foresaw that many would reject
Him, and on them He would not lay a heavier
burden than they needs must bear. He did not
ofler them daily and hourly, in their plainest form,
the grand truths of sin and atonement, of judgment
and heaven and hell, and in so doing multiply
occasions of blaspheming. " Those that were with-
out " heard the parable ; but it was an aimless story
to them if they sought no 'moral purpose under it,
and a dark saying, passing comprehension, if they
did so seek. When the Lord gathered round Him
those that were willing to be bis, and explained to
them at length the parable and its application
(Matt. xiii. 10-18), then the light thus thrown on
'Jt was not essy to extinguish in their memory.
And amongst th ne without there was no doubt a
lifierence ; some liitened with indifferent, and some
rith unbelieving and resisting minds ; and of both
Binds some remained in their aversion, m?re or
less active, from the Son of God unto tlie end, and
jome were converted after He was risen. To th»se
■e asm] suppose that the parables which had rested
JESUS CHRIST
1365
in their memories as vivid pictures, yet stlD ■ dead
letter, so far ss moral import is concerned, became
by the Holy Spirit, whose business it was to teach
men all things and to bring all things to their
remembrance (John xiv. 26), a quick and powerfu.
light of truth, lighting up the dark places with a
brightness never again to fade from their eyes.
The parable unapplied is a dark saying; the parable
explained is the clearest of all teaching. When
language is used in Holy Scripture which would
seem to treat the parables as means of concealment
rather than of instruction, it must be taken to refer
to the unexplained parable — to the cypher with-
out the key — the symbol without the interpreta-
tion.
Besides the parables, the more direct teaching of
our Lord is conveyed in many discourses, dispersed
through the Gospels ; of which three may be here
selected as examples, the Sermon on the Mount
(Matt, v.-vii.), the discourse after the feeding of
the five thousand (John vi. 22-65), and the final
discourse and prayer which preceded the Passion
(John xir.-xvii.). These are selected principally
because they mark three distinct periods in the
ministry of Jesus, the opening of it, the principal
change in the tone of its teaching, and the solemn
close.
Notwithstanding the endeavor to establish that
the Sermon on the Mount of St. Matthew is dif-
ferent from the Sermon on the Plain of St. Luke,
the evidence for their being one and the same dis-
course greatly preponderates. If so, then its his-
torical position must be fixed from St. Luke; and
its earner place in St. Matthew's Gospel must be
owing to the Evangelist's wish to commence the
account of the ministry of Jesus with a summary
of his teaching; an intention further illustrated by
the mode in which the Evangelist has wrought in
with his report of the discourse several sayings
which St. Luke connects with the various facts
which on different occasions drew them forth (comp.
Luke xiv. 34, xi. 33, xvi. 17, xii. 58, 99, xri. 18,
with places in Matt. r. ; also Luke xi. 1-4, xii. 33,
34, xi. 34-36, xri. 13, xii. 22-31, with places in
Matt, ri.; also Luke xi. 9-13, xiii. 24, 25-27, with
places in Matt. rii.). Yet this is done without
violence to the connection and structure of the
whole discourse. Matthew, to whom Jesus is ever,
present as the Messiah, the Anointed l'rophet of
the chosen people, the successor of Moses, sets at
the head of his ministry the giving of the Christian
law with its bearing on the Jewish. From Luke
we learn that Jesus had gone up into a mountain
to pray, that on the morning following He made
up the number of his twelve Apostles, and solemnly
appointed them, and then descending He stood
upon a level place (wxTojSaj urr' airrur ton) M
toVov wsSiroS, Luke vi. 17), not necessarily at the
bottom of the mountain, but where the multitude
could stand round and hear ; and t!-.ere he taught
them in a solemn address the laws and constitution
of his new kingdom, the kingdom of Heaven. He
tells them who are meet to be citizens of that
heavenly polity, and in so doing rebukes almost
every quality on which the world sets a value. The
poor in spirit, that is the lowly-minded, the mourn-
ers and the meek, those who hunger and thirst for
righteousness, the merciful, the pure, and the peace-
makers, are all " blessed," are all possessed of the
temper which will assort well with that heavenly
kingdom, in contrast to the proud, the confkhsit,
the great and swiessfui, whom the world boners.
Digitized by
Google
1856 JESUS CHRIST
(Sk Loke adds denundstiont of woe to the temper*
Which are opposed to the Gospel, which St. Matthew
emit*.) Thia novel exordium •tartlea all the hearers,
for it seems to proclaim a new world, new hopes, and
new virtues; and our Lord then proceeds to meet the
question that rises np in their minds — "If these
dispositions and not a literal obedience to minute
precepts constitute a Christian, what then becomes
of the law? " Answering this tacit objection, the
Lord bids them " think not that I am come to de-
stroy (traraACo'eu, noo/isA) the law and the prophets,
I am not come to destroy but to fulfill " (sAnpaxroi,
complete, Matt. v. 17). He goes on to tell them
that not one point or letter of the Law was written
in rain ; that what was temporary in it does not
Ml away till its purpose is answered, what was of
permanent obligation shall never be lost. He then
shows how far more deop and searching a moral
lawgiver He is than was Moses his prototype, who
like Him spoke the mind of God. The eternal
principles which Moses wrote in broad lines, such
as a dull and unapiritual people must read, He
applies to deeper seated sins and to all the finer
shades of evil. Murder was denounced by the Law;
but anger and provoking speech are of the same
stock. It is not only murder, but hate, that is the
root of that poisonous fruit which God abhors.
Hate defiles the very offering that a man makes to
God ; let him leave his gift unoffered, and get the
hate cast out, and not waste his time in an unac-
ceptable sacrifice. Hate will affect the soul forever,
if it goes out of the world to meet its Judge in
that defiling garment: "agree with thine adversary
quickly, whiles thou art in the way with him "
(ver. 25). The act of adultery is deadly, and Moses
forbade it. But to permit the thought of lust to
rest in the heart, to suffer the desire to linger there
without combating it (0A«Vr«r root to i-wiSvpir
voi) is of the same nature, and shares the condem-
nation. The breach of an oath (Ijev. xii. IS) was
forbidden by the Law; and the rabbinical writers
had woven a distinction between oaths that were
and oaths that were not binding (Mairoonides in
Iightfoot, Hor. Ihk. ii. p. 127). Jesus shows that
all oaths, whether they name the Creator or not,
are an appeal to Him, and all are on that account
equally binding. But the need of an oath " cometh
of evil; " the hare asseveration of a Christian should
be as solemn and sacred to him as the most binding
oath. That this in its simple literal application
would go to abolish all swearing is beyond a ques-
tion; but the Lord is sketching out a perfect Law
for a perfect kingdom; and this is not the only
part of the sermon on tbe Mount which in the
jreeent state of the world cannot be carried out
completely. Men there are on whom a word is less
binding than an oath ; and in judicial proceedings
the highest test must be applied to them to elicit
tbe truth : therefore an oath must still form part
ef a U-_sU process, and a good man may take what
Is really kept up to control the wicked. Jesus Him-
«olf did not refuse the oath administered to Him
in the Sanhedrim (Matt. xxvi. 63). And yet the
seed of an oath " cometh of evil," for among men
•ho respect the truth it would add nothing to the
weight of their evidence. Almost the same wnnki
spply to tbe precepts with which our Lord replaces
it much-abused law of retaliation, " An eye for
SB eye, and a tooth for a tooth" (Ex. xxi. 24 v.
To conquer an enemy by submission where be
stressed resistance is of the very essence of the
3*sfsl; it is so exact imitation of our Lord's own
JESUS CHRIST
pie, who, when He might have
more than twelve legions of Angels In his aid
allowed the Jews to revile and slay Him. And yet
it is not possible at once to wipe out from oof
social arrangements the principle of retribution.
The robber who takes a coat must not be encouraged
to seise the cloak also ; to give to every one that
asks all that he asks would be an encouragement
to sloth and shameless importunity. But yet the
awakened conscience will find out a hundred ways
in which the spirit of thia precept may be carried
out, even in our imperfect social state; and ths
power of this loving policy will be felt by those who
attempt it Finally, our Lord sums up this portion
of his divine law by woods full of sublime wisdom.
To the cramped and confined love of the Rabbis,
" Thou shalt lore thy neighbor and hate thine
enemy," He opposes this nobler rule — " Lore your
enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to
them that hate you, and pray for them whidt
despiteful/ use you, and persecute you, that ye
may be the children of your Father which is in
heaven ; for He maketh his sun to rise on tbe evil
and on the good, and sendeth rain on the just and
on the unjust. ... Be ye therefore perfect, even u
your Father which is in heaven is perfect " (Matt.
r. 44, 45, 48). To thia part of the seiroon, which
St Luke has not preserved, but which St Matthew,
writing as it were with his face turned towards his
Jewish countrymen, could not pretermit, succeed
precepts on almsgiving, on prayer, on forgiveness,
on fasting, on trust in God's providence, and on
tolerance; all of them tuned to one of two notes:
that a man's whole nature must be offered to God,
and that it is man's duty to do to others as he
would have them do to bim. An earnest appeal on
tbe difficulty of a godly life, and the worthleasnesj
of mere profession, cast in the form of a parable,
concludes this wonderful discourse. Tbe differences
between the reports of the two Evangelists an
many. In the former Gospel the sermon occupies
one hundred and seven verses: in the latter, thirty.
Tbe longer report includes the exposition of ths
relation of tbe Gospel to tbe Law: it also draws
together, as we have seen, some passages which St
Luke reports elsewhere and in another connection ;
and where the two contain the same matter, that
of Luke is somewhat more compressed. But in
taking account of this, the purpose of St Matthew
is to be borne in mind: tbe morality of the Gospel
is to be fully set forth at tbe beginning of our
Lord's ministry, and especially in its bearing on
tbe Law as usually received by the Jews, for whose
use especially this Gospel was designed. And when
this discourse is compared with the later examples
to which we shall presently refer, the fact comes oct
more distinctly, that we have here the Code of the
Christian Lawgiver, rather than the whole Gospel;
that the standard of Christian duty is here fixed,
but the means for raising men to the level where
tbe observance of such a law is at all possible an
not yet pointed out The hearers learned how
Christians would act and think, and to what de g r e e
of moral purity they would aspire, in the state of
salvation ; but how that state was to be purchased
for them, and conveyed over to them, is not jot
pointed out
rhe next example of the teaching of Jeans mast
be taken from a later epoch in his ministry. It if
probable that the great discourse in John vL toot
] place about the time of tbe Transfiguration, Jam
IbeiorewfakfcHebegwtoreTealtotnair '"
Digitized by
Google
JBSUS CHRIST
story at hit sufferings (Matt. xvL and pa r alle l s),
which wag the special and frequent theme of hie
teaching until the end. The effect of hia peraonal
work on the disciples now becomes tne prominent
subject, lie had taught them that He was the
Christ, and had given them his law, wider and
deeper far than that of Hoses. But the objection
to ever; law applies more strongly the purer and
higher the law is ; and " how to perform that which
1 will " is a question that grows more difficult to
answer as the standard of obedience is raised. It
is that question which our Lord proceeds to answer
here. The feeding of the five thousand had lately
taken place; and from this miracle He preaches yet
a greater, namely, that all spiritual life is imparted
to the disciples from Him, and that they must feed
on Him that their souls may live. He can feed
them with something more than manna, even with
Himself; " for the bread of God is He which cometh
down from heaven and giveth life unto the world "
(John vL 36-40). The Jews murmur at this hard
doctrine, and He warns them that it is a kind of
teat of those who have been with Him : " No man
can come to Me except the Father which hath sent
He draw him." He repeats that He is the bread
of life; and they murmur yet more (vers. 41-52).
He presses it on them still more strongly : " Verily,
verily, I say unto you, Except ye eat the flesh of
the Son of Han and drink his blood, ye have no
life in you. Whoso eateth my flesh and drinketh my
blood hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at
the last day. For my flesh is meat indeed, and
my blood is drink indeed. He that eateth my flesh,
and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me and I in
him. As the living Father hath sent me, and I
live by the Father, so he that eateth me, even he
shall live by me" (w. 53-57). After this dis-
course many of the disciples went back and walked
no more with Him. They could not conceive bow
salvation could depend on a condition so strange,
nay, even so revolting. However we may blame
them for their want of confidence in their Teacher,
it is not to be imputed to them as a fault that they
found a doctrine, which in itself is difficult, and
here was clothed in dark and obscure expressions,
beyond the grasp of their understanding at that
time. For that doctrine was, that Christ had taken
our fleshly nature, to suffer in it, and to shed his
blood in it; and that those to whom the benefits
at his atoning death are imparted find it to be
their spiritual food and life, and the condition of
Ibdir resurrection to life everlasting.
Whether this passage refers, and in what degree,
to the sacrament of the Lord's Supper, is a ques-
tion on which commentators have been much di-
vided, but two observations should in some degree
guide our interpretation : the one, that if the pri-
mary reference of the discourse had been to the
Lord's Supper, it would have been uttered at the
institution of that rite, and not before, at a time
when the disciples could not possibly make applica-
tion of it to a sacrament of which they bad never
pen heard ; the other, that the form of speech in
this discourse comes so near that which is used in
instituting the Lord's Supper, that it is impossible
to exclude all reference to that Sacrament. The
Redeemer here alludes to his death, to the body
which shall suffer on the Cross, and to the blood
which shall be poured out This great sacrifice is
■ot only to be looked on, but to be believed: and
sot only believed, but appropriated to the believer,
to became part of his very heart and life. Faith,
JJHSUS CHRIST 1851
here as elsewhere, is the means of apprehending kt,
but when it is once laid hold of, it will be as musk
a part of the believer as the food that nourishes the
body becomes incorporated with the body. In three
passages in the other Evangelists, in which our
Lord about this very time prepares them for his
sufferings, He connects with the announcement a
warning to the disciples that all who would come
after Him must show the fruit of his death in their
lives (Matt, xvi., Mark viii., Luke ix.). And this
new principle, infused into them by the life and
death of the Redeemer, by bis taking our flesh and
then suffering in it (for neither of these is excluded),
is to believers the seed of eternal life. The be-
liever '■ hath eternal life ; and I will raise him up
at the last day " (John vi. 54). Now the words
of Jesus in instituting the Lord's Supper come very
near to the expressions in this discourse : " This is
my body which is given for you (Irrip ii/j.ur) • • ■
This cup is the new testament in my blood, which
is shed for you" (Luke nil. 19, 80). That the
Lord's Supper is a means of applying to us through
faith the fruits of the incarnation and the atone-
ment of Christ, is generally admitted ; and if so,
the discourse before us will apply to that sacrament,
not certainly to the exclusion of other means of
appropriating the saving death of Christ, but still
with great force, inasmuch as the Lord's Supper is
the most striking symbol of the application to us
of the Lord's body. Here in a bold figure the dis-
ciples are told that they must eat the flesh of Christ
and drink hia blood; whilst in the sacrament the
same figure becomes an act. Here the language is
meant to be general ; and there it finds its most
striking special application, but not its only one.
And the uttering of these words at an epoch that
preceded by some months the first celebration of
the Lord's Supper was probably intended to pre-
clude that special and limited application of it
which would narrow it down to the sacrament only,
and out of which much false and even idolatrous
teaching baa grown. (Compare Commentaries of
Alford, Liicke, Meyer, Stier, Heubner, Williams,
Tholuck, and others, on this passage.) It will still
be asked how we are to account for the startling
form in which this most profound Gospel-truth was
put before persons to whom it was likely to prove
an offense. The answer is not difficult. Many
had oompanied with the Lord during the early part
of his ministry, to see his miracles, perhaps to de-
rive some fruit from them, to talk about Him, and
to repeat hia sayings, who were quite unfit to go
on as hia followers to the end. There was a wide
difference between the two doctrines, that Jesus was
the Christ, and that the Christ must hang upon
the tree, as to their effects on unregenerate and
worldly minds. For the latter they were not pre-
pared: though many of them could poadbly accept
the former. Now this discourse beloLgs to the
time of transition from the easier to the harder
doctrine. And we may suppose that it was meant
to sift the disciples, that the good grain might re-
main in the garner and the chaff be scattered to
the wind. Hence the hard and startling form la
which it was east; not indeed that this figure of
eating and drinking in reference to spiritual things
was wholly unknown to Jewish teachers, for Light-
foot, Schottgen, and Wetstein, have shown the
contrary. But hard it doubtless was; and if the
condition of discipleship had been that they should
then and there understand what they heard, their
timing back at this time would have been inerlt-
Digitized by
Google
1868
JE8US CHRI8T
kbit. Bat even an the twelve Jenu Imposes no
such condition. He only ulu them, " Will ye slso
go sway ? " If a beloved teacher ssyt something
which overturns the previous notions of the taught,
and shocks their prejudices, then whether they will
continue by his side to hear him explain further
what they find difficult, or desert him at once,
will depend on the amount of their confidence in
him. Many of the disciplea went back and walked
oo more with Jesus, because their conviction that
He was the Messiah had no real foundation. The
net remained with Him for the reason so beauti-
fully expressed by Peter: •'Lord, to whom shall
we go ? Thou hast the words of eternal life. And
we believe and are sure that Thou art that Christ,
the Son of the living God" (John vi. 68, 69).
The sin of the faint-hearted followers who now
deserted Him was not that they found this diffl-
sult; but that finding it difficult they had not
confidence enough to wait for light
The third example of our Lord's discourses
which may be selected is that which closes his
ministry — " Now is the Son of Man glorified, and
God is glorified in Him. If God be glorified in
Him, God shall also glorify Him in Himself, and
shall straightway glorify Him " (John xiii. 31, 83).
This great discourse, recorded only by St. John,
extends from the thirteenth to the end of the seven-
teenth chapter. It hardly admits of analysis It
announces the Saviour's departure in the fulfillment
of his mission ; it imposes the " new commandment "
on the disciples of a special love towards each other
which should be the outward token to the world of
their Christian profession; it consoles them with
the promise of the Comforter who should be to
them Instead of the Saviour; It tells them all that
He should do for them, teaching them, reminding
them, reproving the world and guiding the disciples
into all truth. It offers them, instead of the bodily
presence of their beloved Master, free access to the
throne of his Father, and spiritual blessings such
as they had not known before. Finally, it cul-
minates In that sublime prayer (ch. xvii. ) by which
the High-priest as it were consecrates Himself the
victim; and so doing, prays for those who shall
bold fast and keep the benefits of that sacrifice,
offered for the whole world, whether his disciples
already, or to be brought to Him thereafter by the
ministry of Apostles. He wills that they shall be
with Him and behold his glory. He recognizes
the righteousness of the Father in the plan of sal-
vation, and in the result produced to the disciples;
In whom that highest and purest love wherewith
the Father loved the Son shall be present and with
uid in that love the Son Himself shall be present
with them. " With this elevated thought," says
Olshausen, "the Redeemer concludes his prayer
St the disciples, and in them for the Church
through all ages. He has compressed into the last
moments given Him for intercourse with his own
the most sublime and glorious sentiments ever
uttered by human lips. Hardly has the sound of
the last word died away when Jesus passes with
his disciples over the brook Kedron to Gethsemane;
uid the bitter conflict draws on. The seed of the
jew world must be sown in death that thence life
way spring up."
These three discourses are examples of the Sav-
iour's teaching — of its progressive character from
the opening of his ministry to the close. The first
shibita bis practical precepts as Lawgiver of his
'i; the second, an exposition of the need of bis
JBSUS CHBI8T
sacrifice, but addressed to the world withosst, sal
intended to try them rather than to attract; aasl
the third, where Christ, the Lawgiver and the High-
priest, stands before God as the Son of God, and
speaks to Him of his inmost counsels, sat one who
had known them from the beginning. They will
serve as illustrations of the course of his doctrine;
whilst others will be mentioned in the narrative as
it proceeds.
The Scene of the Lord's Mimtrg. — As to the
scene of the ministry of Christ no less than as to
its duration, the three Evangelists seem at first
sight to be at variance with the fourth. Matthew,
Mark, and Luke record only our Lord's doings in
Galilee ; if we put aside a lew days before the Pas-
sion, we find that they never mention his visiting
Jerusalem. John, on the other hand, whilst be
records some acts in Galilee, devotes the chief part
of his Gospel to the transactions in Judaea. Bat
when the supplemental character of John's Gospel
is borne in mind there is little difficulty in explain-
ing this. The three Evangelists do not profosu to
give a chronology of the ministry, but rather a
picture of it: notes of time are not frequent in
their narrative. And as they chiefly confined them-
selves to Galilee, where the Redeemer's chief acta
were done, they might naturally omit to mention
the feasts, which being passed by our Lord at Jeru-
aalem, added nothing to the materials for his Gal-
ilean ministry. John, on the other hand, writing
later, and giving an account of the Redeemer's
life which is still less complete as a history (for
more than one half of the fourth Gospel is occupied
with the last three months of the ministry, and
seven chapters out of twenty-one are filled with
the account of the few days of the Passion), vindi-
cates his historical chum by supplying severs! pre-
cise notes of time: in the occurrences after the
baptism of Jesus, days and even hours are speci-
fied (i. 39, 39, 39, 43, ii. 1); the first miracle is
mentioned, and the time at which it was wrought
(U. 1-11). He mentions not only the Passovers
(ii. 13, 33; vi. 4; xiii. 1, and perhaps v. 1), but
also the feast of Tabernacles (vii. 3) and of Dedi-
cation (x. 33); and thus it is ordered that the
Evangelist who goes over the least part of the
ground of our Lord's ministry is yet the same who
fixes for us its duration, and enables us to arrange
the facts of the rest more exactly in their historical
places. It is true that the three Gospels record
chiefly the occurrences in Gslilee: but there is evi-
dence in them that labors were wrought in Judaea.
Frequent teaching in Jerusalem is implied in the
Lord's lamentation over the lost city (Matt xxiii.
37). The appearance in Galilee of scribes and
Pharisees and others from Jerusalem (Matt iv. 35,
xr. 1) would be best explained on the supposition
that their enmity had been excited against Hhn
during visits to Jerusalem. The intimacy with
the family of Lazarus (Luke. x. 38 ff.), and the
attachment of Joseph of Arimsthca to the Lord
(Matt xxvtt. 57), would imply, most probably,
frequent visits to Jerusalem. But why was Galilee
chosen as the principal scene of the ministry?
The question is not easy to answer. The prophet
would resort to the Temple of God ; the King of
the Jews would go to his own royal city; the
Teacher of the chosen people would preaeh in Ins
midst of them. But their hostility prevented it
The Saviour, who, accepting all the infirmities of
"the form of a servant," which He had taken, tat
tn his childhood to Egypt betakes Himself la Oa>
Digitized by
Google
JEHUS OHBIST
fat to Moid JewUh hatred and machinations, and
ley* the foundation* of hia church amid a people
of impure and despised race. To Jerusalem He
aomes occasionally, to teach and suffer persecution,
ud finally to die: " for it cannot be that a prophet
perish out of Jerusalem " (Luke xiii. 83). It ires
upon the first outbreak of persecution against Him
that He left Judssa: « When Jesus had heard that
John was cast into prison, He departed into Gal-
ilee" (Matt. iv. 12). And that this persecution
aimed at Him also we gather from St. John:
"When therefore the Lord knew how that the
Pharisees had heard that Jesus made and baptized
more disciples than John ... He left Judea and
departed into Galilee" (ir. 1,8). If the light of
the Sun of Righteousness shone on the Jews hence-
forward from the far-off shores of the Galilean lake,
it was because they had refused and abhorred that
light
Duration of the Ministry. — It is impossible to
determine exactly from the Gospels the number of
years during which the Redeemer exercised his
ministry before the Passion; but the doubt lies
between two and three; for the opinion, adopted
from an interpretation of Isaiah lxi. 2 by more than
one of the ancient*, that it lasted only one year,
cannot be borne out (Euseb. iii. 24; Clem. Alex.
Strom, lib. i.e. 21; Origen, Princ. iv. 5). The data
are to be drawn from St. John. This Evangelist
mentions six feast*, at fire of which Jesus was pres-
mt; the Passover that followed his baptism (ii. 13);
■' a feast of the Jews " (Joprrj without the article,
r. 1), a Passover during which Jesus remained in
Galilee (vi. 4); the feast of Tabernacles to which
the Lord went up privately (vii. 2); the feast of
Dedication (x. 22); and lastly the bast of Pass-
over, at which He suffered (xii., xiii.). There are
certainly three Passovers, and it is possible that
"a feast" (v. 1) may be a fourth. Upon this
possibility the question turns. Lucke in his Com-
mentary (vol. ii. p. 1), in collecting with great
research the various opinions on this place, is un-
able to arrive at any definite conclusion upon it,
and leaves it unsolved. But if this feast is not a
Passover, then no Passover is mentioned by John
between the first (ii. 13), and that which is spoken
of in the sixth chapter; and the time between
those two must be sssumed to be a single year
only. Now, although the record of John of this
period contains but few feet*, yet when all the
Evangelists are compared, the amount of labor
compressed into this single year would be too much
for its compass. The time during which Jesus
was baptizing (by his disciples) near the Jordan
vas probably considerable, and lasted till John's
imprisonment (John iii. 22-36, and aw below).
The circuit round Galilee, mentioned in Matt. iv.
13-25, was a missionary journey through a oouutry
.f considerable population, and containing two
handled towns; and this would occupy some time.
Bat another such journey, of the most comprehen-
sive kind, is undertaken in the same year (Luke
viii. 1), in which He " went throughout every city
sod village." And a thud circuit of the same
and, and equally general \Matt. ix. 85-:i8), would
tlose the same year. Is it at aC probable that
jjeui, sfter spending a considerable time in Judaea,
would be able to make three circuits of Galilee in
the remainder of the year, preaching and doing
■a The article Is Inserted In manynuunserlpta, In-
the aualtic, and this rasdlng I* adopted by
JBSTJ8 CHBIST 1869
wonders in the various places to which He earner
This would be more likely if the journeys wen
hurried and partial; but all three are spoken of as
though they were the very opposite. It is, to say the
least, easier to suppose that the " feast " (John v.
1) wss a Passover, dividing the time into two, and
throwing two of these circuits into the second year
of the ministry; provided there be nothing to make
this interpretation improbable in itself. The words
are, " After this there was a feast of the Jews; and
Jesus went up to Jerusalem." These two facts
are meant as cause and effect; the feast caused the
visit If so, it was probably one of the three feasts
at which the Jews were expected to appear before
God at Jerusalem. Was it the Passover, the Pen-
tecost, or the Feast of Tabernacles? In the pre-
ceding chapter the Passover has been spoken of as
" the feast " (ver. 45) ; and if another feast were
meant here the name of it would have been added,
as in vii. 2, x. 22. The omission of the article is
not decisive, 11 for it occurs in other cases where the
Passover is certainly intended (Matt, xxvii. 15;
Mark xv. 8); nor is it clear that the Passover was
called the feast, as the most eminent, although the
Feast of Tabernacles was sometimes so described.
All that the omission could prove would be that
the Evangelist did not think it needful to describe
the feast more precisely. The words in John iv.
35, " There are yet four months and then cometh
harvest," would agree with this, for the barley har-
vest began on the 16th Nisan, and reckoning back
four months would bring this conversation to the
beginning of December, i. e. the middle of Kisleu.
If it be granted that our Lord is here merely quot-
ing a common form of speech (Alford), still it is
more likely that He would use one appropriate to
the time at which He wss speaking. And if thee*
words were uttered in December, the next of the
three great feasts occurring would be the Passover
The shortness of the interval between v. 1 and vi
4, would afford an objection, if it were not for the
scantiness of historical details in the early part of
the ministry in St John: from the other Evan-
gelist* it appears that two great journeys might
have to be included between these verses. Upon
the whole, though there is nothing that amount*
to proof, it is probable that there were four Pass-
overs, and consequently that our Lord's ministry
lasted somewhat more than three years, the " be-
ginning of miracles " (John ii. ) having been wrought
before the first Passover. On data of calculation
that have already been mentioned, the year of the
first of these Passovers was u. c. 780, and the
Baptism of our Lord took place either in the begin-
ning of that year or the end of the year preceding.
The ministry of John the Baptist began in u. c.
779. (See Commentaries on John v. 1, especially
Kuinol and Lucke. Also Winer, SenboSrltrbuch,
Art Jesus Christ ; GreswelL Dissertations, vol. L
Diss. 4, voL U. Diss. 22.)
After this sketch of the means, the scene, and
the duration of the Saviour's ministry, the his-
torical order of the events may be followed without
interruption.
Our Lord has now passed through the ordeal of
temptation, and his ministry is begun. At BeUv
abara, to which He returns, disciple* begin to b*
drawn towards Him; Andrew and soother, prob-
ably John, the sole narrator of the fact, see Jena,
Tlschsndorf In the 2d ed. of his Synopsis Bta*fHm
0864). A.
Digitized by
Google
1860
JESUS OHBI8T
tod hear tli* Baptist's testimony concerning Him.
Andrew brings Simon Peter to eee Him also; and
He metres from the Lord the name of Cephas.
Then Philip and Nathanael are brought into oon-
tact with our Lord. AU these reappear as Apostles,
if Nathanael be, as has often been supposed, the
same as Bartholomew ; but the time of their calling
to that office was not jet. But that their minds,
even at this early time, were wrought upon by the
expectation of the Messiah appears by the confes-
sion of Nathanael: "Thou art the Son of God;
Thou art the King of Israel" (John i. 85-51).
The two disciples last named saw Him as He was
•bout to set out for Galilee, on the third day of his
sojourn at Bethalara. The third day" after this
interview Jesus is at Cans in Galilee, and works
his first miracle, by making the water wine (John
i. 39, 35, 43 ; ii. 1 V All these particulars are sup-
plied from the fourth Gospel, and come in between
the 11th and 12th verses of the 4th chapter of St
Matthew. They show that our Lord left Galilee
expressly to be baptized and to suffer temptation,
and returned to his own country when these were
accomplished. He now betakes Himself to Caper-
naum, and after a sojourn there of "not many
days," sets out for Jerusalem to the Passover, which
was to be the beginning of his ministry in Judaea
(John ii. 12, 13).
The cleansing of the Temple is associated by St
John with this first Passover (ii. 13-22), and a
similar clfcansing is assigned to the last Passover
by the other Evangelists. These two cannot be
amfounded without throwing discredit on the his-
torical character of one narrative or the other; the
notes of time are too precise. But a host of inter-
preters have pointed out the probability that an
action symbolical of the power and authority of
Messiah should be twice performed, st the opening
of the ministry and at its close. The expulsion of
the traders wss not likely to produce a permanent
effect, and at the end of three years Jesus found
the tumult and the traffic defiling the court of the
Temple as they had done when He visited it before.
Besides the difference of time, the narrative of St.
John is by no means identical with those of the
others ; he mentions that Jesus made a scourge of
mall cords (pjxry/AAiov iic axotriuv, ii. 15) as a
lymbol — we need not prove that it could be no
more — of his power to punish ; thst here He cen-
sured them for making the Temple " a house of
merchandise," whilst at the last cleansing it was
pronounced " a den of thieves," with a distinct
reference to the two passages of Isaiah and Jeremiah
(Is.lvi.7; Jer.vii. 11). Writers like Strauss would
persuade us that ■■ tact and good sense " would pre-
vent the Kedeemer from attempting such a violent
measure at the beginning of his ministry, before
Ids authority was admitted. The aptness and the
greatness of the occasion have no weight with such
iritics. The usual sacrifices of the law of Jehovah,
and the usual half-shekel paid for tribute to the
Teniple, the very means that were appointed by
God to remind them that they were a consecrated
people, were made an excuse for secularizing even
the Temple ; and in its holy precincts all the busi-
ness of the world went on. It was a time when
" the zeal of God's house " might well supersede
the " tact " on which the German philosopher lays
' s; and Jesus failed not in the zeal, nor did the
• ■ This third day may be reckoned from different
Qttauauu, Amsr. ed] B.
JESUS CHRIST
accusing consciences of the traders fail to Ju s tify ■
for at the rebuke of one man they retnattchfroat
the scene of their gains. Their hearts told them
even though they had been long immersed in hard-
ening traffic, that the house of God could belong
to none other but God; and when a Prophet
claimed it for Him, conscience deprived them of
the power to resist Immediately after this, the
Jews asked of Him a sign or proof of his right to
exercise this authority. He answered them by s
promitt of a sign by which He would hereafter
confirm his mission, " Destroy this Temple and in
three days I will raise it up " (John ii. IV), aUnd
ing, as the Evangelist explains, to his resurrection
But why is the name of the building before than
applied by our Lord to darkly to Himself? There
is doubtless a hidden reference to the Temple as a
type of the Church, which Christ by his death and
resurrection would found and raise up. He who
has cleared of buyers and sellers the courts of a
perishable Temple made with hands, will prow
hereafter that He is the Founder of an eternal
Temple made without hands, and your destroying
set shall be the cause. The reply waa indeed ob-
scure; but it was meant as a refusal of then-
demand, and to the disciples afterwards it became
abundantly clear. At the time of the Passion this
saying waa brought against Him, in a perverted
form — '• At the last came two false w i t n ess es , and
said, This fellow said, I am able to destroy the
temple of God, and to build it in three days "
(Matt. xxvi. 61). Tbey hardly knew perhaps how
utterly false a smsll alteration in the tale had mads
it They wanted to hold him up as one who dared
to think of the destruction of the Temple; and to
change " destroy " into " I can destroy," might
seem no great violence to do to the truth. But
those words contained not a mere circumstance but
the very essence of the saying, " you are the de-
stroyers of the Temple; yon that were polluting it
now by turning it into a market-place shall destroy
it, and also your city, by staining its stones with my
blood." Jesus came not to destroy the Temple but
to widen its foundations; not to destroy the law
but to complete it (Matt v. 17). Two syllables
changed their testimony into a lie.
The visit of Nicodemus to Jesus took place about
this first Passover. It implies that our Lord had
done more at Jerusalem than is recorded of Him
even by John; since we have here a Master of
Israel (John ill. 10), • member of the Sanhedrim
(John vii. 501 expressing his belief in Him, although
too timid at this time to make an open profession.
The object of the visit, though not directly stated,
is still dear: he was one of the better Pharisees,
who were expecting the kingdom of Messiah, and
hiving seen the miracles that Jesus did, he earn*
to inquire more fully about these signs of its ap-
proach. This indicates the connection between the
remark of Nicodemus and the Lord's reply : « Ton
recognize these miracles ss signs of the kingdom
of God; verily I say unto you, no one can truly see
snd know the kingdom of God, unless be be bora
again {iyadtv, from above ; see lightfoot, Bor.
Hear, in foe., vol. It.). The visitor boasted tne
blood of Abraham, and expected to stand high in
the new kingdom in virtue of that birthright He
did not wish to surrender it, snd set his hopes
upon some other birth (corop. Matt Hi. 9); and
there is something of willfulness in the question —
" How can a man be born when he it old?" (sta?
4). Our Lord again insists on the meesstxj of the
Digitized by
Google
JBSTJfa OHBIST
heart, in him who would be admitted to
Jw kingdom oi beaten. The new birth is real
though it ia unseen, like the wind which blows
hither and thither though the eye cannot watch it
save in its effects. Er«n so the Spirit sways the
heart towards good, carries it away towards heaven,
brings over the soul at one time the cloud, at an-
other the sunny weather. The sound of Him is
heard in the soul, now as the eager east wind bring-
ing pain and remorse; now breathing over it the
soft breath of consolation. In all this He is as
powerful as the wind ; and as unseen is the mode
of his operations. For the new birth, of water and
of the Holy Ghost, without which none can come
to God, faith in the Son of God is needed (ver. 18);
and as implied in that, the renouncing of those mil
deeds that blind the eyes to the truth (vr. 19, 20).
It has been well said that this discourse contains
the whole Gospel in epitome; there is the kingdom
of grace into which God will receive those who have
offended Him, the new truth which God the Holy
Spirit will write in all those who seek the kingdom ;
and God the Son crucified and slain that all who
would be saved may look on Him when He is lifted
up, and find health thereby. The three Persons
of toe Trinity are all before us carrying out the
scheme of man's salvation. If it be asked how
Nieodemus, so timid and half-hearted as yet, was
allowed to hear thus early hi the ministry what our
Lord kept back even from his disciples till near the
end of it, the answer must be, that, wise as it was
to keep back from the general body of the hearers
the doctrine of the Crucifixion, the Physician of
souls would treat each case with the medicine that
it most required. Nieodemus was an inquiring
spirit, ready to believe all the Gospel, but for his
Jewish prejudices and his social position. He v
one whom even the shadow of the Cross would not
estrange; and the Lord knew it, and laid open to
him all the scheme of salvation. Not in rain. The
tradition, indeed, may not be thoroughly certain,
which reports his open conversion and his baptism
by Peter and John (Phot Siblioth. Cod. 171).
But three years after this conversation, when all
the disciples have been scattered by the death of
Jens, be comes forward with Joseph of Arimathaea,
at no little risk, although with a kind of secrecy
still, to perform the last offices for the Master to
whom his soul cleaves (John six. 39).
After a sojourn at Jerusalem of uncertain dura-
tion, Jesus went to the Jordan with his disciples;
and they there baptized in his name. The Baptist
was now at Maoo near Salim; and the jealousy of
bis disciples against Jesus drew from John an
avowal of his position, which is remarkable for its
humility (John iii. 27-80), "A man can receive
nothing except it be given him from heaven. Ye
JESUS CHRIST
1361
• • W« have the data, on the whole, for a probable
eonoloslon In regard to this question. If the Saviour
passed through Samaria near the and of November or
the beginning of December (about 4 months before the
tune of harveet) he must have spent the Interval be-
tween the Passover sod that time (John U. 13 and lr,
36) at Jerusalem and In Judaaa, t. «., about 8 months,
Of course there Is some doubt whether in speaking of
the interval between sowing and reaping as " rbnr
months -' He employed the language of a proverb
merely, or meant that this was the actual tine to
elapse before the fields around them Just sown would
yMrl a harvest. Even If such a proverb was la use
(whlen has not been shown) his availing Himself of It
•wild be the more significant If the 4 months of the
86
yourselves bear me witness, that I said, I am not
the Christ, bnt that I hare been sent before Him
He that hath the bride is the bridegroom ; but the
friend of the bridegroom, which standeth and hesieth
him, rejoiceth greatly because of the bridegroom's
voice : this my joy therefore is fulfilled. He must
increase, but I must decrease.'' The speaker is one
who has hitherto enjoyed the highest honor and
popularity, a prophet extolled by all the people.
Before the Sun of Righteousness his reflected light
is turning pale; it shall soon be extinguished. Yet
no word of reluctance, or of attempt to cling to a
temporary and departing greatness, escapes him.
" He must increase, but I must decrease." It had
been the same before; when the Sanhedrim sent to
inquire about him he claimed to be no more than
" the voice of One crying in the wilderness, Make
straight the way of the Lord, as said the prophet
Esaias" (John i. 23); there was one " who coming
after me is preferred before me, whose shoe's latchet
I am not worthy to unloose" (i. 27). Strauss
thinks this height of self-renunciation beautiful, but
impossible (Ltbcn Jem, ii. 1, § 46); but what divine
influence had worked in the Baptist's spirit, adorn-
ing that once rugged nature with the grace of
humility, we do not admit that Dr. Strauss is in a
position to measure.
How long this sojourn in Judtea lasted is uncer-
tain.* But in order to reconcile John iv. 1 with
Matt. iv. 12, we must suppose that it was much
longer than the " twenty-six or twenty-seven " days,
to which the learned Mr. Greawell upon mere con-
jecture would limit it. From the two passages
together it would seem that John was after a short
time cast into prison (Matt ), and that Jesus, seeing
that the enmity directed against the Baptist would
now assail Him, because of the increasing sucores
of his ministry (John), resolved to withdraw from
its reach.
In the way to Galilee Jesus passed by the shortest
route, through Samaria. This country, peopled by
men from fire districts, whom the king of Assyria
had planted there in the time of Hoshea (2 K.
xvii. 24, Ac.), and by the residue of the ten tribes
thai was left behind from the Captivity, had once
abounded in idolatry, though latterly faith in the
true God had gained ground. The Samaritans
even claimed to share with the people of Judssa the
restoration of the Temple at Jerusalem, and were
repulsed (Kara iv. 1-3). In tbe time of our Lord
they were hated by the Jews even more than if they
had been Gentiles. Their oorrupt worship was a
shadow of the true; their temple on Gerizim was a
rival to that which adorned the hill of Zion- " He
that eats bread from the band of a Samaritan,"
says a Jewish writer, " is ss one that eats swine's
flesh." Yet even in Samaria were souls to be saved ;
proverb happened on this occasion to eoinelde with
the season of the year.
It may be added that so prolonged a sojourn of the
Saviour In Judne at this time accounts best for his
having so many Mends and followers In that province
who are mentioned quite abruptly In the later parts
of the history. The Bethany family (John xi. 1 oT).
the owner of the guest-chamber (Luke xxil. 10 ff.), the
owner of Qethsemane (which must have belonged to
some one friendly to Him), Joseph of Arimathna (Luke
xxHt. 60), and others (Luke xlx. 88 ff.), are example!
of this dlselplsshlp, more or leas Intimate, the origin
of which presupposes some such sojourn In Judssa at
this early period ot Christ's ministry. a
Digitized by
Google
1362
JESUS CHKIST
•ml Jesus nould not (hike off even that dust from
hit feet. He came in his journey to Sicbetn, which
the Jem in mockery bad changed to Sychar, to
indicate that its people were drmkardt (Lightlbot),
or that the; followed idola ("ifttP, Reland, see Hab.
H. 18). Wearied and athirat He sat on the aide
of Jacob's well. A woman from the neighboring
town came to draw from the well, and waa aston-
ished that a Jew should address her as a neighbor,
with a request for water. The conversation that
ensued might be taken Sir an example of the mode
in which Christ leads to Himself the souls of men.
The awakening of her attention to the privilege she
is enjoying in communing with Him (John ir. 10-
15) ; tho self-knowledge and self-conviction which
He arouses (vr. 15-19), and which whilst it pains
does not repel ; the complete revelation of Himself,
which she cannot but believe (w. 19-29), are effect*
that Ho has wrought in many another case. The
woman's lightness and security, until she finds her-
self in the presence of a Prophet, who knows all
her past sins; her readiness afterwards to enter on
a religious question, which perhaps had often been
revolved in her mind in a worldly and careless way,
are so natural that they are almost enough of them-
selves to establish the historical character of the
account.
In this remarkable dialogue are many things to
ponder over. The living water which Christ would
give; the announcement of a change in the worship
of Jew and Samaritan ; lastly, the confession that
He who speaks is truly the Messiah, are all note-
worthy. The open avowal that He is the Messiah,
made to the daughter of an abhorred people, is
accounted for if we remember that this waa the
first and last time when He taught personally in
Samaria, and that the woman showed a special
fitness to receive it, for she expected in the Christ
a spiritual teacher, not a temporal prince: " When
He is come He will tell us all things'" (ver. 25).
The very absence of national pride, which so beset
the Jews, preserved in her a right conception of the
Christ Had she thought — had she said, •• When
He is come He will restore the kingdom to Israel,
and set his followers in high places, on his right
and on his left," then He could not have answered,
aa now, " I that apeak unto thee am He." The
words would have conveyed a falsehood to her.
The Samaritans came out to Him on the report of
the woman ; they heard Him and believed : ■■ We
have heard Him ourselves, and know that this is
bideed the Christ, the Saviour of the world " (ver.
t2). Was this great grace thrown away upon them ?
Did it abide by them, or was it lost? In the per-
secution that arose almut Stephen, Philip " went
down to a city of Satnnria (not " tkt city," aa in
the English version), and preached Christ unto
them " (Acts viii. 5). We dare not pronounce as
certain that this city was Sychar: but the readi-
ness of the Samaritans to believe (viii. 6) recalls
the candor and readiness of the men of Sychar,
and it is difficult not to connect the two events
together.
Jesus now relumed to Galilee, and came to
Nazareth, his own city. In the Synagogue He
expound). 1 to the people a passage from halah
(hi. 1), tolling them that its fulfillment was now
•t ban] in his person. The same truth that had
Sued the Samaritans with gratitude, wrought np
to fury the men of Nazareth, who would have de-
stroyed Him if He had not escaped oat of their
JESUS CHBIST
hands (take iv. 16-30). He came now to Capsi
naum. On his way hithei, when He had reached
Cans, He healed the son of one of the courtiers of
Herod Antipas (John iv. 46-64), who " himself be-
lieved, and his whole bouse." This was the second
Galilean miracle. At Capernaum He wrought many
miracles for them that needed. Here two riiHrJ—
who had known Him before, namely, Simon Peter
and Andrew, were called from their fishing to he-
oome " fishers of men " (Matt iv. 19), and the two
sons of Zebedee received the same summons. After
healing on the Sabbath a demoniac in the Syn-
agogue, a miracle which was witnessed by many,
and was made known everywhere, He returned tht
same day to Simon's house, and healed the mother-
in-law of Simon, woo was sick of a fever. At sun-
set, the multitude, now fully aroused by what they
had heard, brought their sick to Simon's door to
get them healed. He did not refuse his succor,
and healed them all (Mark i. 29-34). He now,
after showering down on Capernaum so many cures,
turned his thoughts to the rest of Galilee, where
other " lost sheep " were scattered : " Let us go into
the next towns (Kupox-oXfir) that I may preach
there also, for therefore came I forth " (Mark i. 38).
The journey through Galilee, on which He now
entered, must have been a general circuit of that
country. His object waa to call on the Galileans
to repent and believe the Gospel. This could only
be done completely by taking such a journey that
his teaching might be accessible to all in turn at
some point or other. Josephus mentions that then
were two hundred and four towns and villages in
Galilee ( VUa,iS): therefore such a circuit as should
in any real sense embrace the whole of Galilee would
require some months for its performance. " The
course of the present circuit," says Mr. GrcsweD
(DUiertatiow, vol. ii. 293), <* we may conjecture,
waa, upon the whole, as follows : First, along the
western side of the Jordan, northward, which would
disseminate the fame of Jesus in Decapolis ;
secondly, along the confines of the tetrarehy of
Philip, westward, which would make Him known
throughout Syria; thirdly, by the coasts of Tjn
and Sidon, southward ; and, lastly, along the verge
of Samaria, and the we ste rn region of the Lake of
Galilee — the nearest points to Judaea proper and
to Perm — until it returned to Capernaum." In
the course of this circuit, besides the works of mercy
spoken of by the Evangelists (Mstt. iv. 23-25;
Msrk i. 32-34: Luke iv. 40-44), He had probably
called to Him more of his Apostles. Four at least
were his companions from the beginning of it. The
rest (except perhaps Judas Iscariot) were Galileans,
and it is not improbable that they were found by
their Master during this circuit. Philip of Ueth-
saida and Nathanael or Bartholomew were already
prepared to become his disciples by an earlier inter-
view. On this circuit occurred the first case of the
healing of a leper; it is selected for record by the
Evangelists, because of the incurableneas of the ail-
ment. So great was the dread of this disorder —
so strict the precautions against its infection — that
even the raising of Jairus' daughter from the dead,
which probably occurred at Capernaum about the
end of this circuit, would hardly impress the be-
holders more profoundly.
Seconl Year of lie Ministry. — Jesus went up
to Jerusalem to " a feast of the Jews," which wt
have shown (p. 1369) to have been probably tht
Passover. At the pool Betbesda (= bouse of
merey), which waa near the Sheep uate (Seh. in 1
Digitized by
Google
JKST7S CHRIST
n the nortbeut side of the Temple, Jena taw
uany infirm persons waiting their turn for the
healing virtues of the water. (John v. 1-18. On
the genuineness of the fourth verse, see Scholz,
N. T. ; Teschendorf, If. T. ; and Liicke, wi foe. It
it wanting in three out of the four chief MSS- [and
in Sin.] ; it is singularly disturbed with variations in
the MSS. that insert it, and it abounds in words
which do not occur again in this Gospel.) Among
them was a man who had had an infirmity thirty-
eight years: Jesus made him whole by a word, bid-
ding him take up his bed and walk. The miracle
was done on the Sabbath ; and the Jews, by which
name in St. John's Gospel we are to understand the
Jewish authorities, who acted against Jesus, re-
buked the man for carrying his bed. It was a
labor, and as such forbidden (Jer. xvii. 81). The
answer of the man was too logical to be refuted :
* He that made me whole, the same sairt unto me,
Take up thy bed and walk " (v. 11). If lie had
not authority for the latter, whence came his power
to do the former? Their anger was now directed
against Jesus for healing on the Sabbath, even for
well-doing. They sought to put Him to death. In
our Lord's justification of Himself, "My Father
worketh hitherto, and I work " (v. 17), there is an
unequivocal claim to the Divine nature. God the
Father never rests : if sleep could visit his eyelids
for an instant ; if his hand could droop for a
moment's rest, the universe would collapse in ruin.
He rested on the seventh day from the creation of
new beings; but from the maintenance of those
that exist He never rests. His love streams forth
on every day alike; as do the impartial beams from
the sun that he has placed in the heavens. The
Jews rightly understood the saying : none but God
eould utter it; none could quote God's example, as
setting Him over and above God's law, save One
who was God Himself. They sought the more to
kill Him. He expounded to them more fully his
relation to the Father. He works with the strength
of the Father and according to his will. He can
do all that the Father does. He can raise men out
of bodily and out of spiritual death ; and He can
judge all men. John bore witness to Him; the
works that He does boar even stronger witness.
The reason that the Jews do not believe is their
want of discernment of the meaning of the Scrip-
tures; and that comes from their worldlinrss, their
desire of honor from one another. Unbelief shall
bring condemnation ; even out of their Law they
•an be condemned, since they believe not even
Moses, who foretold that Christ should oome (John
T. MM7).
Another discussion about the Sabbath arose from
the disciples plucking the ears of corn as they went
through the fields (Matt. xii. 1-8). The time of
this is somewhat uncertain : some would place it a
year later, just after the third Passover (Clausen);
but its place is much more probably here (New-
some, Robinson, etc.). The needy were permitted
by the Law (Deut xxiii. 25) to pluck the ears of
torn with their hand, even without waiting for the'
iwner's permission. The disciples must have been
•iving a hard and poor life to resort to such means
of sustenance. But the Pharisees would not allow
that it was lawful on the Sabbath-day. Jesus
reminds them that David, whose example they an
tot likely to challenge, ate the sacred snewbread in
the tabemae'e, which it was not lawful to eat. The
arietta might partaae of it, but not a stranger (Ex.
ah.. 83; Lev. xxiv. 5, 9 : David, on the prinelp'e
JESUS OHBIST
1868
that mercy was better than sacrifice (Hos. vi. 8)
took it and gave to the young men Unit were with
him that they might not perish for hunger. In
order further to show that a literal mechanical ob
servance of the law of the Sabbath would lead U
absurdities, Jesus reminds them that this law is
perpetually set saide on account of another: " The
priests profane the Sabbath and are blameless"
(Matt. xii. 5). The work of sacrifice, the placing
of the shewbread, go on on the Sabbath, and labor
even on that day may be done by priests, and may
please God. It was the root of the Pharisees' fault
that they thought sacrifice better than mercy, ritual
exactness more than love : " If ye had known what
this meaneth, I will have mercy and not sacrifice,
ye would not have condemned the guiltless. For
the Son of Man is Lord even of the Sabbath-day "'
(Matt. xii. 7, 8). These last words are inseparable'
from the meaning of our Lord's answer. In plead-
ing the example of David, the king and prophet,
and of the priests iu the Temple, the Lord tacitly
implies the greatness of his own position. He is
indeed Prophet, Priest, and King; and had he been
none of these, the argument would have been not
merely incomplete, but misleading. It is unde-
niable that the law of the Sabbath was very strict.
Against labors as small as that of winnowing the
corn a severe penalty was set. Our Lord quotes
cases where the law is superseded or set aside, be-
cause He is One who has power to do the same.
And the rise of a new law is implied in those words
which St. Mark alone has recorded : " The Sabbath
was made for man, and not man for the Sabbath."
The law upon the Sabbath was made in love to
men, to preserve for them a due measure of rest,
to keep room for the worship of God. The Son
of Man has power to readjust this law, if it* work
is done, or if men are fit to receive a higher.
This may have taken place on the way from
Jerusalem after the Passover. On another Sab-
bath, probably at Caperuaum, to which Jesus had
returned, the Pharisees gave a far more striking
proof of the way in which their hard and narrow
and unloving interpretation would turn the be-
neficence of the Law into a blighting oppression,
Our Lord entered into the synagogue, and found
there a man with a withered hand — some poor
artisan, perhaps, whose handiwork was his means
of life. Jesus was about to heal him — which
would give back life to the sufferer — which would
give joy to every beholder who had one touch of
pity in bis heart. The Pharisees interfere: " Is it
lawful to heal on the Sabbath-day? " Their doc-
tors would have allowed them to pull a sheep out
of a pit; but they will not have a man rescued
from the depth of misery. Rarely is that loving
Teacher wroth, but here his anger, mixed with
grief, showed itself: He looked round about upon
them " with anger, being grieved at the hardness
of their hearts," and answered their oavils by heal
ing the man (Matt. xii. 9-14; Mark ill. 1-6; Luke
»•. 9-11).
In placing the ordination or calling of tho Twelve
Apostles just before the Sermon on the Mount, we
are under the guidance of St Luke (vi. 13, 17).
But this more solemn separation for their work by
no means marks the time of their first approach to
Jesus. Scattered notices prove that some of them
at least were drawn gradually to the Lord, *> thai
it would be difficult to identify the moment wheal
they earned the name of disoiples. In the ease of
St Peter, five degrees or stages might be traced
Digitized by
Google
1364
JESUS CHRIST
(Mm i. 41-43; Hatt iv. 19, xvi. 17-19; Luke
odL 31, 32; John «j. 15-19), at each of which
he came somewhat nearer to his Hatter. That
whieh takes place here it the appointment of twelve
aitciples to be a distinct body, under the name of
Apostles. The; are not sent forth to preach until
later in the same year. The number twelve must
have reference to the number of the Jewish tribes ;
it it a number selected on account of its symboli-
cal meaning, for the work confided to them might
have been wrought by more or fewer. Twelve is
used with the tame symbolical reference in many
passages of the 0. T. Twelve pillars to the altar
which Hoses erected (Ex. xxiv. 4); twelve stones
to commemorate the passing of the ark over Jor-
dan (Josh. iv. 3); twelve precious stones in the
breastplate of the priest (Ex. xxviiL 21); twelve
cxeu bearing up the molten sea in the Temple of
Solomon (1 K. vii. 26) ; twelve officers over Solo-
mon's household (1 K. iv. 7): all these are exam-
plea of the perpetual repetition of the Jewish num-
ber. Biihr (Sj/mhoiik, vol. i.) has accumulated
passages from various authors to show that twelve,
the multiple of four and three, is the type or sym-
bol of the universe; but it it enough here to say
that the use of the number in the foundation of
the Christian Church has a reference to the tribes
of the Jewish nation. Hence the number continues
to be used after the addition of Paul and Barnabas
had made it inapplicable. The Lord Himself tells
them that they " shall sit on thrones judging the
twelve tribes of Israel" (Matt xix. 27, 28).-\Vben
He began his ministry in Galilee, He left, his own
home at Nazareth, and separated himself from his
kinsmen after the flesh, in order to devote Himself
more completely to hit prophetical office; and these
Twelve were « to be with Him " (Hark), and to
be instead of family and friends. But the enmity
of the Jews separated Him also from his country-
men. Every day the prospect of the Jews receiving
Him as their Messiah, to their own salvation, be-
came more faint; and tbe privileges of the favored
people passed gradually over to the new Israel, the
new Church, the new Jerusalem, of whieh the
Apostles were the foundation. The precise day in
which this defection was completed could not be
specified. The Sun of Righteousness rote on the
world, and set for the Jews, through all the shades
of twilight. In the education of the Twelve for
their appointed work, we see tbe superaedure of tbe
Jam; in the preservation of the symbolical number
we see preserved a recognition of their original
right.
In the four lists of tbe names of the Apostles
preserved to us (Matt, x., Hark iii., Luke vi., Acts
i.), there is a curtain order preserved, amidst varia-
tions. The two pairs of brothers, Simon and An-
diew, and tbe sons of Zebedee, are always named
the first ; and of these Simon Peter ever holds the
first place. Philip and Bartholomew, Thomas and
Matthew, are always in tbe next rank; and of
them Philip is always the first. In the third rank
James tbe son of Alphaeut it tbe first, at Judas
!scariot is always the last, with Simon the Zealot
wid Thaddteus between. Tbe principle that gov-
erns this arrangement cannot be determined very
eositively; but as no doubt Simon Peter stands
first because of his zeal in his Hatter's service, and
Indus ranks last because of his treason, it is nat-
ural to suppose that they are all arranged with
tome reference at least to their zeal and fitness for
he apostolic office. Some of the Apostles were
JESUS CHRIST
certainly poor and unlearned men; it is probabk
that the rest were of the tame kind. Four of that
were fishermen, not indeed tbe poorest of then
class; and a fifth was a "publican," one of the
portiioret, or tax-gatherers, who collected the taxes
farmed by Romans of higher rank. Andrew, who
it mentioned with Peter, is leu conspicuous in the
history than he, but he enjoyed free access to his
Hatter, and seems to bare been more intimate with
him than tbe rest (John vi. 8, xii. 22, with Hark
liii. 3). But James and John, who are sometimes
placed above him in the list, were especially distin-
guished by Jesus. They were unmarried ; and their
mother, of whose ambition we have a well-known
instance, seems to have had much influence over
them. The zeal and fire of their disposition Is in-
dicated in tbe name of Boanerges bestowed upon
them. One teems hardly to recognize in the fierce
enthusiasts who would have called down fire from
heaven to consume the inhospitable Samaritans
(Luke ix. 52-66) the Apostle of Love and his
brother. It it probable that tbe Bartholomew of
the Twelve it tbe same as Nathaniel (John L);
and the Lebbnus or Thaddaeus the same as Judas
the brother of James. Simon the Zealot was so
called probably from bis belonging to the sect of
Zealots, who, from Num. xxv. 7, 8, took it on them-
selves to punish crimes against the law. If the
name Iscariot (=man of Cariot = Kerioth) refers
tbe birth of the traitor to Kkrioth in Judah (Josh.
xv. 25), then it would appear that the traitor alone
was of Judsesn origin, and the eleven faithful ones
were despised Galileans.
From henceforth the education of the Twelve
Apojtfes will be one of the principal features o
the Lord's ministry. First He instructs them
then He taket them with Hun as companions of
his wayfaring; then He sends them forth to teach
and heal for Him. Tbe Sermon on (lie Motmi,
although it is meant for all tbe disciples, seems to
have a special reference to the chosen Twelve (Matt
v. 11 ff.). Its principal features have been sketched
already; but they will miss their full meaning if it
is forgotten that they are the first teaching which
the Apostles were called on to listen to after then-
appointment
About this time it was that John the Baptist,
long a prisoner with little hope of release, sent hit
disciples to Jesus with the question, " Art thou He
that should come, or do we look for another? "
In all the Gospels there it no more touching inci-
dent Those who maintain that it was done solely
for tbe sake of tbe disciples, and that John himself
needed no answer to support his faith, show ss
little knowledge of the human mind at exactness
in explaining the words of tbe account The great
privilege of John's life was that he was appointed
to recognize and bear witness to the Hctsiah (John
i. 81). After languishing a year in a dungeon,
after learning that even yet Jesus had made no
steps towards the establishment of his kingdom of
the Jews, and that his following consisted of only
twelve poor Galileans, doubts began to cloud over
bit spirit- Was tbe kingdom of Messiah as near as
he had thought? Was Jesus not the Messiah, but
some forerunner of that Deliverer, as be himself
had been ? , There is no unbelief; he does not sup-
pose that Jesus bat deceived; when the doubts
arise, it is so Jesus that he submits them. But a
waa not wjtbout great depression and perplexity
that he puf the question, " Art thou He that should
? " (The scone of the answer given lies in it
Digitized by
Google
JESUS CHBISI
trailing John to the ground* of hi* former jonfi-
lence. The very miracles are being wrought that
•ere to be the signs of the kingdom of heaven;
and tnaefore that- kingdom is come (I*, xxxv. 5,
xlii. 6, 7). There is more of grave encourage-
ment than of rebuke in the words, " Blessed is he
who shall not be offended in me " (Matt. zi. 6).
They bid the Forerunner to hare a good heart, and
to hops and believe to the end. He has allowed
sorrow, and the apparent triumph of wickedness,
which is a harder trial, to trouble his viewof the
divine plan ; let him remember that it is blessed to
attain that state of confidence which these things
cannot disturb; snd let the signs which Jesus now
exhibits suffice him to the end (Matt. xl. 1-6;
Luke vii. 18-23).
The temimony to John which our Lord graciously
adds is intended to reinstate him in that place in
the minds of his own disciples which he had occu-
pied before this mission of doubt. John is not a
weak waverer; not a luxurious courtier^ attaching
himself to the new dispensation from worldly mo-
tires; but a prophet, and more than a prophet, for
the prophets spoke of Jesus afar off, but John stood
before the Messiah, snd with his hand pointed Him
out. He came in the spirit and power of Kigah
(Mai. iii. 1, ir. 5), to prepare for the kingdom of
heaven. And yet, great as he was, the least of those
in the kingdom of heaven when it is completely
planted should enjoy a higher degree of religious
illumination than he (Matt xi. 7-11; Luke vii
14-88).
New commences the second circuit of Galilee
(Luke viii. 1-3), to which belong the parables in
Matt xiii., the visit of our Lord's mother and
brethren (Luke viii. 19-31), and the account of
his reception at Nazareth (Mark vi. 1-6).
Poring this time the twelve have journeyed with
Him. But now a third circuit in Galilee is re-
corded, which probably occurred during the last
three months of this year (Matt. ix. 35-38); and
during this circuit, after reminding them how great
is the harvest and how pressing the need of labor-
ers, He carries the training of the disciples one step
further by sending them forth by themselves to
teach (Matt, x., xi.). Such a mission is not to be
considered as identical in character with the mis-
sion of the Apostles after the Resurrection. It was
limited to the Jews ; the Samaritans and heathen
were excluded; but this arose, not from any nar-
rowness in the limits of the kingdom of heaven
(Matt xxviii. 19; Mark xvi. 15), but from the
limited knowledge and abilities of the Apostles.
They were sent to proclaim to the Jews that " the
kingdom of heaven," which their prophets taught
thorn to look for, was at hand (Matt x. 7); but
They were unfit as yet for the task of explaining to
Jews the true nature of that kingdom, and still
■note to Gentiles who had received no preparation
for any such doctrine. The preaching of the Apos-
:les whilst Jesus was yet on earth was only ancil-
ary to bis and a preparation of the way for Him.
It was probably of the simplest character. " As ye
go, preach, saying, The kingdom of Heaven is at
band." Power was given them to confirm it by
signs and wonders; and the purpose of it was to
Juow the minds of those who heard it into an in-
quiring state, so that they might seek and find the
Lord Himself. But whilst their instructions as to
Jba matter of their preaching were thus brief and
simple, the cautions, warnings, and enoourage-
l a* to their own eondltion were for more full.
JESUS CHRIST
1865
They were to do their work without anxiety fat
their welfare. No provision was to be made for
their journey; iu the house that first received them
in any city they were to abide, not seeking to find
the best Dangers would befall them, for they
were sent forth " as sheep in the midst of wolves '
(Matt x. 16); but they were not to allow this to
disturb their thoughts. The same God who
wrought their miracles for them would protect
them; and those who confessed the name of Christ
before men would be confessed by Christ before the
Father as his disciples. These present* for the
Apostles even went somewhat beyond what their
present mission required ; it does not appear that
they were at this time delivered up to councils, or
scourged in synagogues. But in training their
feeble wings for their first flight the some rules anil
cautions were given which would be needed even
when they soared the highest in their seal and
devotion to their crucified Master. There is no
difficulty here, if we remember that this sending
forth was rather a training of the Apostles than a
means of converting the Galilean people.
They went forth two and two; and our Lord
continued his own circuit (Matt. xi. 1), with what
companions does not appear. By this time the
leaven of the Lord's teaching had begun powerfully
to work among the people. Herod, we read, " was
perplexed, because that it was said of some, that
John was risen from the dead, and of some that
Elyah had appeared ; and of others, that one of the
old prophets was risen again " (Luke ix. 7, 8).
The false apprehensions about the Messiah, that he
should be a temporal ruler, were so deep-rooted,
that whilst all the rumors concurred in assigning
a high place to Jesus as a prophet, none went be-
yond to recognize Him as the King of Israel — the
Saviour of his people and the world.
After a journey of perhaps two months' duration
the twelve return to Jesus, and give an account of
their ministry. The third Passover was now draw-
ing near; but the Lord did not go up to it, because
his time was not come for submitting to the malice
of the Jews against Him ; because his ministry in
Galilee was not completed ; and especially, because
He wished to continue the training of the Apostles
for their work, now one of the chief objects of his
ministry. He wished to commune with them pri-
vately upon their work, and, we may suppose, to
add to the instruction they had already received
from Him (Mark vi. 30, 31 ). He therefore went
with them from the neighborhood of Capernaum
to a mountain on the eastern shore of the Sea of
Tiberius, near Bethsaida Julias, not far from the
head of the sea. Great multitudes pursued them ;
and here the Lord, moved to com] nation by the
hunger and weariness of the people, wrought for
them one of his most remarkable miracles. Out
of five barley loaves and two small fishes, He pro-
duced food for five thousand men besides women
and children. The act was one of creation, and
therefore was both an assertion and a proof of divine
power ; and the discourse which followed it, re-
corded by Jolin only, was an important step in the
training of the Apostles, for it hinted to them for
the first time the unexpected truth that the body
and blood of Christ, that is, his Passion, must be-
come the means of man's salvation. This view of
the doctrine of th» kingdom of heaven which they
had been preaching, could not have been under-
stood; but it would prepare those who still clave U
Jew* to expect the Mid /acts that were to folk*
Digitized by
Google
1866
JESUS CHRIST
Jmm hard rn.nl*. The dlsoourw itself has already
oeen examined (p. 1336). After the miracle, but
before the comment on it was delirered, the dis-
eiplei craned the aea from Bethsaida Juliai to
Bethsaida of Galilee, and Jeiua retired alone to a
mountain to commune with the Father. They were
toiling at the oar, for the wind waa contrary, when,
aa the night drew towards morning, they saw Jesus
walking to them on the sea, having passed the
whole night on the mountain. They were amazed
and terrified. He came into the ship and the wind
ceased. They worshipped Him at this new proof
of divine power — "Of a truth thou art the Son
of God " (Matt. xiv. S3). The storm had been
another trial of their faith (comp. Matt. viii. 23-
80), not in a present Master, as on a former occa-
sion, but in an absent one. But the words of St.
Mark intimate that even the feeding of the five
thousand had not built up their faith in Him, —
" for they considered not the miracle of the loaves:
for their heart was hardened" (vi. 62). Peter,
however, as St. Matthew relates, with his usual
seal wishing to show that he really possessed that
faith in Jesus, which perhaps in the height of the
storm had been somewhat forgotten, requests Jesus
to bid him come to Him upon the water. When he
made the effort, his faith began to fail, and he cried
out for succor. Christ's rebuke, " thou of little
faith, wherefore didst thou doubt? " does not imply
that he had no faith, or that it wholly deserted him
now. All the failings of Peter were of the same
kind; there was a faith full of seal and eagerness,
but it was not constant. He believed that he could
walk on the waters if Jesus bade him ; but the roar
of the waves appalled him, and be sank from the
tame cause that made him deny his Lord after-
wards.
When they reached the shore of Gennesaret the
whole people showed their faith in Him as a Healer
of disease (Mark vi. 53-66); and he performed very
many miracles on them. Nothing could surpass
the eagerness with which they sought Him. Yet
on the next day the great discourse just alluded to
was uttered, and " from that time many of his dis-
ciples went back and walked no more with Him "
(John vi. 06).
Third Year of the ifinutry. — Hearing perhaps
that Jesus was not coming to the feast, Scribes and
Pharisees from Jerusalem went down to see Him
at Capernaum (Matt. xv. 1). They found fault
with his disciples for breaking the tradition about
purifying, and eating with unwashen hands. It is
not necessary to suppose that they came to lie in
wait for Jesus. The objection was one which they
would naturally take. Our Lord in his answer
tries to show them how far external rule, claiming
to be religious, may lead men away from the true
spirit of the Gospel. " Ye say, whosoever shall say
to his father or bis mother, It is a gift, by what-
soever thou mightest be profited by me; and honor
not his father or his mother, he shall be free "
(Matt. xv. 5, 6). They admitted the obligation
of the fifth commandment, but had introduced a
means of evading it, by enabling a son to say to
his father and mother who sought his help that he
had made his property " a gift " to the Temple,
which took precedence of his obligation. Well
might He apply to a people where such a miserable
evasion could find place, the words of Isaiah (xxix.
13) — "This people draweth nigh unto me with
their mouth, and honoreth me with their lips, but
Mr heart is far from me. Bat in vain they do
JE8TJB CHRIST
worship me, teaching for doctrines the
ments of men."
Leaving the neighborhood of Capernaum on
Lord now travels to the northwest of Galilee, tc
the region of Tyre and Sidon. The time is not
strictly determined, but it waa probably the early
summer of this year. It does not appear that He
retired into this heathen country for the purpose
of ministering; more probably it waa a retreat front
the machinations of the Jews. A woman of the
country, of Greek education ('EAAqrlr Supoator-
rUiova, Mark), came to entreat Him to heal her
daughter, who was tormented with an evil spirit.
The Lord at first repelled her by saving that He
was not sent but to the lost sheep of the house of
Israel; but not so was her maternal love to be
baffled. She besought Hun again and waa again
repelled ; the bread of the children was not to be
given to dogs. Still persisting, she besought his)
help even as one of the dogs so despised : " the
dogs eat of the crumbs that fall from the Master's
table." Faith so sincere waa not to be resisted.
Her daughter was made whole (Matt. xv. 31-28;
Mark vii. 24-30).
Returning thence He passed round by the north
of the sea of Galilee to the region of Decapolis on
its eastern side (Mark vii. 81-37). In this district
He performed many miracles, and especially the
restoration of a deaf man who had an impediment
in his speech, remarkable for the seeming effort
with which He wrought it. To these succeeded
the feeding of the four thousand with the seven
loaves (Matt. xv. 32). He now crossed the Lake
to Magdala, where the Pharisees and Sadducees
asked and were refused a " sign ; " some great won-
der wrought expressly for them to prove that He
was the Christ. He snswers them as He had an-
swered a similar request before : " the sign of the
prophet Jonas " was all that they should have.
His resurrection after a death of three day* should
be the great sign, and yet in another anne no sin
should be given them, for they should neither tee
it nor belie™ it. The unnatural alliance between
Pharisee and Sadducee is worthy of remark. The
zealots of tradition, and the political partisans of
Herod (for "leaven of the Sadducees," in Matt
xvi. =" leaven of Herod," Mark viii. IS) joined
together for once with a common object of hatred.
After they bad departed, Jesus crossed the lake with
bis disciples, and, combining perhaps for the use of
the disciples the remembrance of the feeding of the
four thousand with that of the conversation tbey
had just heard, warned them to " beware of the
leaven of the Pharisees and of the leaven of
Herod" (Mark viii. 15). So little however
the disciples prepared for this, that they tiirtook
it for a rrproof for having brought only one knf
with them! Tbey had forgotten the five thousand
and the four thousand, or tbey would have known
that where He was, natural bread could not fail
them. It was needful to explain to them that the
leaven of the Pharisees was the doctrine of those
who had made the word of God of none enact by
tradition* which, appearing to promote religion,
really overlaid and destroyed it, sod the leaven «
the Sadducees was the doctrine of those who, un-
der the show of superior enlightenment, denied tic
foundations of the fear of God by denying a future
state. At Bethsaida Julias, Jesus restored sight to
a blind man; and here, a* in a former case, ths
form and preparation whfca He adopted are to U
remarked. A* though the human Saviour has t>
Digitized by
Google
JESUS CHRIST
mestle with and painfull; overcome the sufferings
of Hli people, He takes him by the hand, and lead*
him oat of the town, and apita on his eyes and askg
him If he sees aught. At firtt the aenie ii restored
imperfectly; and Jesus lays his hand again upon
him and the cure is complete (Mark viii. 23-96).
The ministry in Galilee is now drawing to its
dose. Through the length and breadth of that
country Jesus has proclaimed the kingdom of Christ,
and has shown by mighty works that He is the
Christ that was to come. He begins to aak the
disciples what are the results of all his labor.
« Whom say the people that I am? " (Luke ix. 18).
It is true that the answer shows that they took
Him for a prophet But we are obliged to admit
that the rejection of Jesus by the Galileans had
been as complete as his preaching to them had been
universal. Here and there a few may hare received
the seeds that shall afterwards be quickened to their
conversion. But the great mass had heard without
earnestness the preached word, and forgotten it
without regret. '« Whereunto shall I liken this
generation ? " says Christ " It is like unto chil-
dren sitting in the market, and calling unto their
fellows, and saying, We hare piped unto you, and
ye hare not danced ; we have mourned unto you,
and ye have not lamented " (Matt xi. 16, 17).
This is a picture of a wayward people without
earnest thought As children, from want of any
real purpose, cannot agree in their play, so the
Galileans quarrel with every form of religious teach-
ing. The message of John and that of Jesus they
did not attend to; but they could discuss the ques-
tion whether one was right in fasting and the other
in eating and drinking. He denounces woe to the
cities where He had wrought the most, to Chorazin,
Bethsaida, and Capernaum, for their strange insen-
sibility, using the strongest expressions. " Thou,
Capernaum, which art exalted unto heaven, shalt
be brought down to hell ; for tf the mighty works
which have been done in thee had been done in
Sodom, it would have remained until this day.
But I aay unto you that it shall be more tolerable
for the bind of Sodom in the day of judgment than
for thee " (Matt xi. 33, 24). Such awful language
could only be used to describe a complete rejection
of the Lord. And in truth nothing was wanting
to aggravate that rejection. The lengthened jour-
neys through the land, the miracles, far more than
we recorded in detail, had brought the Gospel home
to all the people. Capernaum was the focus of his
ministry. Through Chorasin and Bethsaida He had
no doubt passed with crowds behind Him, drawn
together by wonders that they had seen, and by
the hope of others to follow them. Many thousands
bad actually been benefited by the miracles; and
yet of all these there were only twelve that really
slave to Him, and one of them was Judaa the
traitor. With this rejection an epoch of the his-
ory is connected. He begins to unfold now the
Joctrine of his Passion more fully, first inquiring
who the people said that He was, He then put the
same question to the Apostles themselves. Simon
Peter, the ready spokesman of the rest, answers,
" Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living God."
It might almost seem that such a manifest inference
Yom the wonders they had witnessed was too ob-
vious to deserve praise, did not the sight of a whole
■ountry which had witnessed the same wonders,
and despised them, prove how thoroughly callous
th* Jewish heart was. " Blessed art thou, Simon
Bar Jona: for Bash and blood hath not revealed it
JESTTS CHRIST
1867
unto thee, but my Father which is in heavun. And
I say also unto thee, That thou art Peter, ant
upon this rock I will build my church ; and the
gates of hell shall not prevail against it And I
will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of
heaven : and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth
shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou
shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven"
(Matt xvi. 16-30). We compare the language
applied to Capernaum for its want of faith with
that addressed to Peter and the Apostles, and we
see how wide is the gulf between those who believe
sod those who do not Jesus now in the { lamest
language tells them what is to be the mode of his
departure from the world ; " how that He must go
unto Jerusalem, and suffer many things of the
elders and chief priests and scribes, and be killed,
and be raised again the third day " (Matt xvi. 31).
Peter, who had spoken as the re pre sen tative of all
the Apostles before, in confessing Jesus as the
Christ, now speaks for the rest in offering to our
Lord the commonplace consolations of the children
of this world to a friend beset by danger. The
danger they think will be averted : auch an end can-
not befall one so great The Lord, " when he had
turned about and looked on his disciples " (Mark),
to show that He connected Peter's words with
them all, addresses Peter as the tempter — " Get
thee behind me, Satan ; thou art an offense unto
me." These words open up to us the fact that
this period of the ministry was a time of special
trial and temptation to the sinless Son of God.
'* Escape from sufferings and death ! Do not drink
the cup prepared of Thy Father; it is too bitter;
it is not deserved." Such was the whisper of the
Prince of this World at that time to our Lord ;
and Peter has been unwittingly taking it into his
mouth. The doctrine of a suffering Messiah, so
plainly exhibited in the prophets, had receded from
sight in the current religion of that time. The
announcement of it to the disciples was at ones
new and shocking. By repelling it, even when
offered by the Lord Himself, they fell into a deeper
sin than they could have conceived. The chief
of them was called " Satan," because he was un-
consciously pleading on Satan's side (Matt xvi. 21
33).
Turning now to the whole body of those who
followed Him (Mark, Luke), Ho published the
Christian doctrine of self-denial. The Apostles had
just shown that they took the natural view of suf-
fering, that it was an evil to be shunned. They
shrank from conflict, and pain, and death, as it is
natural men should. But Jesus teaches that, in
comparison with the higher life, the life of the scul,
the life of the body is valueless. And as the re-
newed life of the Christian implies his dying to
his old wishes and desires, suffering, which causes
the death of earthly hopes and wishes, may bo a
good. " If any man will come after Me, let him
deny himself, and take up his cross and follow Me.
For whosoever will save his life shall lose it, and
whosoever will lose his life for My sake shall find it
For what is a man profited, if be should gain the
whole world, and lose his own soul ? or what shall
a man give in exchange for his soul ? " (Matt xvi.)
From this part of the history to the end we shaO
not lose sight of the sufferings of the Lord. fh»
Cross is darkly seen at the end of our path; and
we shaU ever draw nearer that mysterious imple-
ment of hun-uk salvation (Matt xvi. 81-38, Mart
viii. 81-88; :jum ix. 38-87).
Digitized by
Google
1368
JESUS CHBI8T
The Transfiguration, which took place jut a
reek ifter this conversation, is to be understood Ie
sonnection with it. The minds of the twelve were
greatly disturbed at what they had heard. The
Messiah was to perish by the wrath of men. The
Master whom they served was to be taken away
from them. Now, if ever, they needed support for
their perplexed spirits, and this their loving Master
failed not to give them. He takes with Him three
chosen disciples, Peter, John, and James, who
formed as it were a smaller circle nearer to Jesus
than that of the rest, into a high mountain apart
by themselves. There are no means of determining
the position of the mountain; although Coaarea
Fhilippi was the scene of the former conver sa tions,
It does not follow that this occurred on the eastern
tide of the lake, for the intervening week would
have given time enough for a long journey thence.
There is no authority for the tradition which iden-
tifies this mountain with Mount Tabor, although it
may be true. [Hebmon; Tabor.] The three
disciples were taken up with Him, who should after-
wards be the three witnesses of his agony in the
garden of Gcthaemane: those who saw his glory in
the holy mount would be sustained by the remem-
brance of it when they beheld his lowest humilia-
tion. The calmness and exactness of the narrative
preclude all doubt as to its historical character. It
is no myth, nor vision ; but a sober account of a
miracle. When Jesus had come up into the moun-
tain He was praying, and as He prayed, a great
ehuige came over Him. " His face did shine as
thn sun (Matt); and His raiment became shining,
sxeeeding white as snow: so as no fuller on earth
can white them " (Mark). Beside Him appeared
Moses the great lawgiver, and Elijah, great amongst
the prophets ; and they spake of his departure, as
though it was something recognized both by Law
and prophets. The three disciples were at first
asleep with weariness; and when they woke they
saw the glorious scene. As Moses and Elijah were
departing (Luke), Peter, wishing to arrest them,
uttered those strange words, " Lord, it is good for
■a to be here, and let us make three tabernacles,
one for Thee, and one for Moses, and one for Eli-
jah." They were the words of one astonished
and somewhat afraid, yet of one who felt a strange
peace in this explicit testimony from the Father
that Jesus was his. It was good for them to be
there, he felt, where no Pharisees could set traps
for them, where neither Pilate nor Herod could
take Jesus by force. Just as he spoke a cloud came
over them, and the voice of the Heavenly Father
attested once more his Son — " This is my beloved
Son; hear Him." There has been much discus-
sion on the purport of this great wonder. But
thus much seems highly probable. First, as it was
connected with the prayer of Jesus, to which it was
no doubt an answer, it is to be regarded as a kind
of Inauguration of Him in his new office as the
High-priest who should make atonement for the
■Ins of the people with his own blood. The mys-
tery of his trials and temptations lies too deep for
■peculation : but He received strength against hu-
man infirmity — against toe prospect of sufferings
to terrible — in this his glorification. Secondly,
as the witnesses of this scene were the same three
disciples who were with the Muter in the garden
if Gethsemane It may be assumed that the one
was intended to prepare them for the other, and
that they were to be borne up under the spectacle
jf his humiliation by the remembrance that they
JESUS CHRIST
had been eye-witnesses of his majesty (9 I'et 1
16-18).
As they came down from the mountain H«
charged them to keep secret what they had seen
till after the Resurrection ; which shows that this
miracle took place for his use and for theirs, rather
than for the rest of the disciples. This led tc
questions about the meaning of his rising again
from the dead, and in the course of it, and arising
out of it, occurred the question, " Why then (otr,
which refers to some preceding conversation) say
the scribes that Elias must first come?" They
had been assured by what they had just seen that
the time of the kingdom of God was now come;
and the objection brought by the Scribes, that be-
fore the Messiah Elijah must reappear, seemed hard
to reconcile with their new conviction. Our Lord
answers them that, the Scribes have rightly under-
stood the prophecies that Elijah would first come
(Mai. iv. 5, 6), but have wanted the discernment
to see that this prophecy was already fulfilled.
" Elias has come already, and they knew him not,
but have done unto him whatever they listed."
In John the Baptist, who came in the spirit and
power of EUjah, were the Scriptures fulfilled (Matt,
xvii. 1-13; Mark ix. 2-13; Luke ix. 28-36).
Meantime amongst the multitude below a seen*
was taking place which formed the strongest con-
trast to the glory and the peace which they had
witnessed, and which seemed to justify Peter's
remark, " It is good for us to be here." A poor
youth, lunatic and possessed by a devil — for here
as elsewhere the possession is superadded to some
known form of that bodily and mental evil which
came in at first with sin and Satan — was brought
to the disciples who were not with Jesus, to be
cured. They could not prevail; and when Jena)
appeared amongst them the agonized and disap-
pointed father appealed to Him, with a kind of
complaint of the impotence of the disciples. " O
faithless and perverse generation ! " said our Lord ;
11 how long shall I be with you ? how long shall I
suffer you ? " The rebuke ia not to the disciples,
but to all, the father included; for the weakness
of faith that hindered the miracle was in them alL
St. Mark's account, the most complete, describes
the paroxysm that took place in the lad on our
Lord's ordering him to be brought; and also records
the remarkable saying, which well described the
father's state, " Lord, I believe, help Tbou my
unbelief! " What the disciples had failed to do,
Jesus did at a word. He then explained to
them that their want of faith in their own power
to heal, and in his promises to bestow the power
upon them, was the cause of their inability (Matt
xvii. 14-21; Mark ix. 14-29; Luke ix. 37-43).
Once more did Jesus foretell his sufferings or.
their way back to Capernaum ; but " they under-
stood not that aaying, and were afraid to ask Hint "
(Mark ix. 30-32).
But a vague impression seems to have been pro-
duced on them that his kingdom was now very
near. It broke forth in the shape of a dispute
amongst them as to which should rank the highest
in the kingdom when it should come. Taking a
little child, He told them that, in his kingdom, not
ambition, but a childlike humility, would entitle to
the highest place (Matt xviii. 1-6; Mark ix. 83-
87; Luke ix. 46-48). The humility of the Chris-
tian is so closely connected with consideatlon for
the souls of others, that the transition to a warn-
ing against causing offense (Mat*., Mark), rhles
Digitized by
Google
JESUS CHRIST
night appear abrupt it first, is most natural.
From this Jesus passes naturally to the subject of
s tender consideration for '■ the lost sheep; " thence
to the dutj of forgiveness of a brother. Both of
these last, points are illustrated by parables. These,
and some other discourses belonging to the same
time, are to be regarded as designed to carry on
the education of the Apostles, whose views were
still erode and unformed, even after all that had
been done for them (Matt xviii.).
From the Feast of Taotrnacla, Third Year. —
The Feast of Tabernacles was now approaching.
For eighteen months the ministry of Jesus had
been confined to Galilee; and his brothers, not
hostile to Him, yet only half-eonvinced about his
doctrine, urged llim to go into Judaea that his
claims might be known and confessed on a more
conspicuous field. This kind of request, founded
in human motives, was one which our Lord would
not assent to; witness his answer to Mary at Cans
in Galilee when the first miracle was wrought. He
told them that, whilst all times were alike to them,
whilst they could always walk among the Jews
without danger, his appointed time was not come.
They set out for the feast without Him, and He
abode in Galilee for a few days longer (John vii.
8-10). Afterwards He set out, taking the more
direct but less frequented route by Samaria, that
his journey might be " in secret." It was in this
journey that James and John conceived the wish —
so closely parallel to facts in the Old Covenant, so
completely at variance with the spirit of the New,
that fire should be commanded to come down from
heaven to consume the inhospitable Samaritans
(Luke ix. 51-68).
St. Luke alone records, in connection with this
Journey, the sending forth of the seventy disciples,
fhis event is to be regarded in a different light
from that of the twelve. The seventy had received
no special education from our Lord, and their com-
mission was of a temporary kind. The number
has reference to the Gentiles, as twelve had to the
Jews; and the scene of the work, Samaria, reminds
ns that this is a movement directed towaiils the
stranger. It takes place six months after the send-
ing forth of the twelve ; for the Gospel was to be
delivered to the Jew first and afterwards to the
Gentile. In both cases probably the preaching was
of the simplest kind — « The kingdom of God is
some nigh unto you." The instructions given were
the same in spirit; but, on comparing them, we
lee that now the danger was becoming greater and
the time for labor shorter (Luke x. 1-16).
After healing the ten lepers in Samaria, He came
"about the midst of the feast" to Jerusalem.
Here the minds of the people were strongly excited
and drawn in different ways concerning him. The
Pharisees and rulers sought to take Him ; some of
the people, however, believed in Him, but concealed
their opinion for fear of the rulers. To this divis-
ion of opinion we may attribute the failure of the
repeated attempts on the part of the Sanhedrim to
take One who was openly teaching in the Temple
(John vii. 11-53; see especially w. 30, 32, 44, 45,
46). The officers were partly afraid to seise in the
presence of the people the favorite Teacher; and
Jhey themselves were awed and attracted by Him.
rhey came to seize Him, but could not lift their
lands against Him. Notwithstanding the ferment
if opinioi., and the fixed hatred of those in power,
Bo seem to have taught daily to the end of the
taat la the Tempt before the people.
JESUS CHRIST 1369
The history of the woman taken in adultery be-
longs to this time. But it must be premised that
sevenu MSS. of highest authority omit this passage,
and that in those which insert it the text is singu-
larly disturbed (see LUcke, tn foe., and Teschendorf,
Gr. Tett., ed. vii.). The remark of Augustine it
perhaps not far from the truth, that this story
formed a genuine portion of the apostolic teaching,
but that mistaken people excluded it from their
oopies of the written Gospel, thinking it might be
perverted into a license to women to sin (Ad PoUaU.
ii. eh. 7). That it was thus kept apart, without
the safeguards which Christian vigilance exercised
over the rest of the text, and was only admitted
later, would at once account for its absence from
the MSS. and for the various forms assumed by the
text where it is given. But the history gives do
ground for such apprehensions. The law of Moses
gave the power to stone women taken in adultery.
But Jewish morals were sunk very low, like Jewish
faith ; and the punishment could not be inflicted
on a sinner by those who had sinned in the same
kind: "Etonim non est ferendus accusator is qui
quod in altera vitiuni reprehendit, in oo ipso depre-
henditur " (Cicero, c. Verrem, iii. ). Thus the pun-
ishment had passed out of use. But they thought,
by proposing this case to our Lord, to induce Him
either to set the Law formally aside, in which case
they might accuse Him of profaneness; or to sen-
tence the guilty wretch to die, and so become ob-
noxious to the charge of cruelty. From such
temptations Jesus was always able to escape. He
threw back the decision upon them ; He told them
that the man who was free from that sin might
cast the first stone at her. Conscience told them
that this was unanswerable, and one by one they
stole away, leaving the guilty woman alone before
One who was indeed her Judge. It has been sup-
posed that the words " Neither do I condemn thee"
convey an absolute pardon for the sin of which she
had just been guilty. But they refer, as has long
since been pointed out, to the doom of stoning only.
" As they have not punished thee, neither do I;
go, and let this danger warn thee to sin no more"
(John viii. 1-11).
The conversations (John viii. 13-59) show in a
strong light the perversity of the Jews in misun-
derstanding our Lord's words. They refuse to see
any spiritual meaning in them, and drag them as
it were by force down to a low and carnal interpre-
tation. Our Lord's remark explains the cause of
this, " Why do ye not understand my speech [way
of speaking] ? Even because ye cannot hear my
word" (ver. 43). His mode of expression was
strange to them, because they were neither able nor
willing to understand the real purport of his tesiih-
ing. To this place belongs the account, given by
John alone, of the healing of one who was born
blind, and the consequences of it (John ix. 1-41, x.
1-31). The poor patient was excommunicated for
refusing to undervalue the agency of Jesus in re-
storing him. He believed on Jesus; whilst the
Pharisees were only made the worse for what they
had witnessed. Well might Jesus exclaim, " For
judgment I am come into this world, that they
which see not might see; and that they which set
might be made blind " (ix. 39). The well-known
parable ol the good shepherd is an answer to the
calumny of the Pharisees, that He was an impostor
and breaker of tbf law, " This man is not of God,
because he keepett not the Sabbath day " (ix. 16).
We now ijproaeh a difficult portion of the taasis
Digitized by
Google
1870
JESUS CHRIST
tistory. The note of time given ua by John im-
mediately afterwards it the Feut of the Dedication,
- which ni celebrated on the 26th of Kisleu, answer-
ing nearly to December. According to this Evange-
list our Lord does not appear to hate returned to
Galilee between the Feast of Tabernacles and that
of Dedication, but to have passed the time m and
near Jerusalem. Matthew and Hark do not allude
to the Feast of Tabernacles. Luke appears to do
so in ix. 51 ; but the words there used would imply
that this was the last journey to Jerusalem. Now
in St. Luke's Gospel a large section, from ix. 51 to
xviii. 14, seems to belong to the time preceding the
departure from Galilee; and the question is how is
this to be arranged, so that it shall harmonize with
the narrative of St. John ? In most Harmonies a
return of our Lord to Galilee lias been assumed, in
order to find a place for this part of Luke's Gospel.
" But the manner," says the English editor of
Robinson's Harmony, " in which it has been ar-
ranged, after all, is exceedingly various. Some, as
Le Clerc, Harm. Kvang. p. 264, insert nearly the
whole during this supposed journey. Others, as
Lightfoot, assign to this journey only what precedes
Luke ziii. 23 ; and refer the remainder to our Lord's
sojourn beyond Jordan, John z. 40 ( C'Aron. Temp,
tf. T. Opp. II. pp. 37, 39). Greswell {DitMtrU zvi.
voL ii.) maintains that the transactions in Luke iz.
fil-zviii. 14, all belong to the journey from Ephraim
(through Samaria, Galilee, and Penea) to Jeru-
salem, which he dates in the interval of four months,
between the Feast of Dedication and our Lord's
last 1'assover. Wieseler ( Chivn. Syaopt. p. 328)
makes a somewhat different arrangement, according
to which Luke iz. 61 — ziii. 21 relates to the
period from Christ's journey from Galilee to the
Feast of the Tabernacles, till after the Feast of
Dedication (parallel to John vii. 10— z. 42). Luke
ziii. 22 — zvii. 10 relates to the interval between
that time and our Lord's stay at Ephraim (parallel
to John xi. 1-64); and Luke zvii. 11 — zviii. 14
relates to toe journey from Ephraim to Jerusalem,
through Samaria, Galilee, and Penea " (Robinson's
Barnumy, English ed. p. 92). If the table of the
Harmony of the Gospels given above is referred to
[Gospels], it will be found that this great division
of St. Luke (z. 17 — xvlii. 14) is inserted entire
between John x. 21 and 22; not that this appeared
certainly correct, but that there are no points of
contact with the other Gospels to assist us in
breaking it up. That this division contains partly
or chiefly reminiscences of occurrences in Galilee
prior to the Feast of Tabernacles, is untenable. A
journey of some kind is implied in the course of it
(see ziii. 22), and beyond this we shall hardly ven-
ture to go. It it quite possible, as Wieseler sup-
poses, tha* part of it should be placed before, and
part after the Feast of Dedication. Notwithstand-
ing the uncertainty, it is as the history of this
period of the Redeemer's career that the Gospel of
St. Luke possesses its chief distinctive value for us.
Some of the most striking parables, preserved only
by this Evangelist, belong to this period. The
•arables of the good Samaritan, the prodigal son,
the unjust steward, the rich man and Lazarus, and
the Pharisee and publican, all peculiar to this
Gospel, belong to the present section. The in-
structive account of Mary and Martha, on which
so many have taken a wrong view of Martha's con-
tact, reminds us that there are two ways of serving
the truth, that of active exertion, and that of con-
templation. TV preference is given to Mary's
JESTJS CHRIST
meditation, because Martha's labor belonged to
household cares, and was only indirectly religions
The miracle of the ten lepers belongs to this portion
of the narrative. Besides these, scattered sayings
that occur in St. Matthew are here repeated in a
new connection. Here too belongs the return of
the seventy disciples, but we know not precisely
where they rejoined the Lord (Luke x. 17-20). They
were full of triumph, because they found even the
devils subject to them through the weight of Christ's
word. In anticipation of the victory which was
now begun, against the powers of darkness, Jesus
replies, " I beheld Satan as lightning fall from
heaven." He sought, however, to humble their
triumphant spirit, so near akin to spiritual pride;
" Notwithstanding, in this rejoice not, that the
spirits are subject unto yon; but rather rejoice,
because your names are written in heaven."
The account of the bringing of young children
to Jesus unites again the three Evangelists. Here,
as often, St. Mark gives the most minute account
of what occurred. After the announcement that
the disposition of little children was the most meet
for the kingdom of God, " He took them up in hit
arms, put his hands upon them and blessed them."
The childlike spirit, which in nothing depends upot
its own knowledge but seeks to be taught, is L,
contrast with the haughty pharisaiam with its
boast of learning and wisdom ; and Jesus tells them
that the former is the passport to his kingdom
(Matt zix. 13-15; Mark z. 13-16 ; Luke xviii.
16-17).
The question of the ruler, " What shall I do to
inherit eternal life? " was one oonoeived wholly in
the spirit of Judaism. The man asked not how
he should be delivered from tin, but bow hit will,
already free to righteousness, might select the best
snd most meritorious line of conduct. The words,
u Why callest thou me good ? there is none good
but one, that is, God," were meant first to draw
him down to a humbler view of his own state; the
title good is easy to give, but hard to justify, except
when applied to the One who is all good. Jesus
by no means repudiates the title ae applied to
Himself, but only ss applied on any other ground
than that of a reference to his true divine nature.
Then the Lord opened out to him all the moral
law, which in its full and complete sense no man
has observed; but the ruler answered, perhaps sin-
cerely, that be had observed it all from his youth
up. Duties however there might be which had not
come within the range of his thoughts; and it the
demand had reference to his own special case, our
Lord gives the special advice to sell all his posses
sions and to give to the poor. Then for the first
time did the man discover that his devotion to God
and his yearning after the eternal life were not so
perfect as he had thought; and he went away sor-
rowful, unable to bear this sacrifice. And Jesus
told the disciples bow hard it was for those whs
had riches to enter the kingdom. Peter, ever tb»
most ready, now contrasts, with somewhat too much
emphasis, ibe mode in which the disciples had left
all for Him, with the conduct of this rich ruler.
Our Lord, sparing him the rebuke which he might
have expected, tells them that those who have mads
any sacrifice shall have it richly repaid even in this
life in the shape of a consolation and comfort, which
even persecutions cannot take away (Mark); and
shall have eternal life (Matt. zix. 16-30; Mark z.
17-31; Luke xviii. 18-30). Words of warning
dote the narrative, •' Many that are first stall hi
Digitized by
Google
JESUS CHRIST
swt. and the last shall be first," lest the disciples
ihouM be thinking too much of the sacrifices, not
so very gnat, that the; had made. And in St.
Matthew only, the well- known parable of the hbor-
srs in the vineyard is added to illustrate the same
lesson. Whatever else the parable may contain of
reference to the calling of Jews and Gentiles, the
first lesson Christ was to give was one of caution
to the Apostles against thinking too much of their
early calling and arduous labors. They would see
many, who, in comparison with themselves, were as
the laborers called at the eleventh hour, who should
be accepted of God as well as they. But not merit,
not self-sacrifice, but the pure love of God and his
mere bounty, conferred salvation on either of them :
" Is it not lawful for roe to do what I will with my
own?" (Matt. zz. 1-16).
On the way to Jerusalem through Perssa, to the
Feast of Dedication, Jesus again puts before the
minds of the twelve what they are never now to
forget, the sufferings that await Hun. Tbey " un-
derstood none of these things" (Luke), for they
could not reconcile this foreboding of suffering with
the signs and announcements of the coming of his
kingdom (Matt. xx. 17-19; Mark x. 32-34; Luke
xviii. 31-34). In consequence of this new, though
dark, intimation of the coming of the kingdom,
Salome, with her two sons, James and John, came
to bespeak the two places of highest honor in the
kingdom. Jesus tells them that they know not
what they ask; that the places of honor in the
kingdom shall be bestowed, not by Jesus in answer
to a chance request, but upon those for whom they
an prepared by the Father. As sin ever provokes
tin, the ambition of the ten was now aroused, and
they began to be much displeased with James and
John. Jesus once more recalls the principle that
the childlike disposition is that which He approves.
u Ye know that the princes of the Gentiles exercise
dominion over them, and they that are great exer-
nse authority upon them. But it shall not be so
among you: but whosoever will be great among
you, let him be your minister; and whosoever will
be chief among you, let him be your servant: Even
as the Son of Man came not to be ministered unto
but to minister, and to give his life a ransom for
many" (Matt. xx. 30-28: Mark x. 35-16).
The healing of the two blind men at Jericho is
chiefly remarkable among the miracles from the
difficulty which has arisen in harmonizing the ac-
counts. Matthew speaks of taw blind men, and of
the occasion as the departure from Jericho; Mark
of one, whom he names, and of their arrival at
Jericho; and Luke agrees with him. This point
has received much discussion; but the view of
Lightfbot finds favor with many eminent expositors,
tut there were two blind men, and both were
uealed under similar circumstances, except that
Bartinueus was on one side of the city, and was
healed by Jesus as He entered, and the other was
healed on the other side as they departed (see Gres-
weU, Din. xx. it; Wieseler, CAron. Syn. p. 332;
Matt. xx. 29-34; Mark x. 46-52; Luke xviii.
J5-43). [Uaktim.kus, Amer. ed.J
The calling of Zaccheus has more than a mere
lersooal interest. He was a publican, one of a class
sated and despised by the Jews. But he was one
who sought to serve God; he gave largeW to the
/oat, and restored fourfold when he had injured
stay man. Justice and love were the law of his
ik. from such did Jesus wish to call his dis-
tfplsa, whethet they were publicans or not. " This
JESUS CHRIST
1371
day is salvation come to this house, for that be alee
is a son of Abraham. For the Son of Man is come
to seek and to save that which was lost " (Luke
xix. 1-10).
We have reached now the Feast of Dedication .
but, as has been said, the exact place of the events
in St. Luke about this part of the ministry has not
been conclusively determined. After being present
at the feast, Jesus returned to Bethabara beyond
Jordan, where John had formerly baptized, and
abode there. The place which the beginning of
his ministry had consecrated, was now to he
adorned with his presence as it drew towards its
dose, and the scene of John's activity was now to
witness the presence of the Saviour whom he had
so faithfully proclaimed (John x. 22-42). The Lord
intended by this choice to recall to the minds of
many the good which John had done them, and
also, it may be, to prevent an undue exaltation of
John in the minds of some who had heard him
only. "Many," we read, "resorted to Him, and
said, John did no miracle, but ail things that John
spake of this man were true. And many believed
on Him there " (w. 41, 42).
How long He remained here does not appear.
It was probably for some weeks. The sore need of
a family in Bethany, who were what men call the
intimate friends of our Lord, called Him thence.
Lazarus was sick, and his sisters sent word of it to
Jesus, whose power they well knew. Jesus an-
swered that the sickness was not unto death, but
for the glory of God, and of the Son of God. This
had reference to the miracle about to be wrought;
even though he died, not his death but his restora-
tion to life was the purpose of the sickness. But
it was a trial to the faith of the sisters to find the
words of their friend apparently falsified. Jesus
abode for two days where Ha was, and then pro-
posed to the disciples to return. The rage of the)
Jews against him filled the disciples with alarm;
and Thomas, whose mind leant always to the
desponding side, and saw nothing in the expedition
but certain death to all of them, said, " Let us also
go that we may die with Him." It was not till
Lazarus had been four days in the grave that the
Saviour appeared on the scene. The practical
energy of Martha, and the retiring character of
Mary, show themselves here, as once before. It was
Martha who met Him, and addressed to Him words
of sorrowful reproach. Jesus probed her faith
deeply, and found that even in this extremity of
sorrow it would not fail her. Mary now joined
an, summoned by her sister; and she too re-
proached the Lord for the delay. Jesus does not
resist the contagion of their sorrow, and as a Man
He weeps true human tears by the side of the
grave of a friend. But with the power of God He
breaks the fetters of brass in which Lazarus was
held by death, and at His word the man on whom
corruption had already begun to do its work came
forth alive and whole (John xL 1-45). It might
seam difficult to account for the omission of this
perhaps the most signal of the miraeles of Jesus,
by the three synoptical Evangelists. No doubt it
ma tntectional; and the wish not to direst atten-
tion, and perhaps persecution, to Taaarus in his
lifetime may go far to account fur it. But it atai!^>
well in the pages of John, whose privilege it has bees
to announop the highest truths ooun%ted with the
divine natx-s of Jesus, and who is now also per-
mitted to show Him touched with sympathy for •
sorrowing family with whom he lived in intimacy.
Digitized by
Google
J
1372
JESUS CHRIST
A miracle so public, for Bethany wai dose to
Jerusalem, and the family of Lazarus well known
to many people in the mother-city, could not
esc&pe the notice of the Sanhedrim. A meeting
of this Council was called without loss of time, and
the matter diacuned, not without symptoms of
alarm, for the members believed that a popular
outbreak, with .Tenia at it* bead, was impending,
and that it would excite the jealousy of the Komans
and lead to the taking away of their " place and
nation." Caiaphas the high-priest gave it as bis
opinion that it was expedient for them that one
nun should die for the people, and that the whole
nation should not perish. The Evangelist adds
that these words bore a prophetic meaning, of
which the speaker was unconscious: " This spake
he not of himself, but being high-priest that year
he prophesied that Jesus should die for that nation."
That a bad and worldly man may prophesy the
ease of Balaam proves (Num. xxii.); and the Jews,
sa Sehottgen shows, believed that prophecy might
also be unconscious. But the connection of the
gift of prophecy with the office of the high-priest
offers a difficulty. It has been said that, though
this gift is never in Scripture assigned to the high-
priest as such, yet the popular belief at this time
was that be did enjoy it. There is no proof, how-
ever, except this passage, of any such belief; and
the Evangelist would not appeal to it except it
were true, and if it were true, then the 0. T.
would contain some allusion to it. The endeavors
to escape from the difficulty by changes of punctua-
tion are not to be thought of. The meaning of
the passage seems to be this: The Jews were about
to commit a crime, the real results of which they
did not know, and God overruled the words of one
of them to make him declare the reality of the
transaction, but unconsciously; and as Caiaphas
was the liigh-priest, the highest minister of God,
and therefore the most conspicuous in the sin, it
was natural to expect that he and not another
would be the channel of the prophecy. The con-
nection between bis office and the prophecy was not
a necessary one; but if a prophecy was to be ut-
tered by unwilling lips, it was natural that the
high-priest, who offered for the people, should be
the person compelled to utter it. The death of
Jesus was now resolved on, and He fled to Ephraim
for a few days, because his hour was not yet come
(John si. 46-57).
We now approach the final stage of the history,
and every word and act tend towards the great act
of suffering. The hatred of the Pharisees, now
converted into a settled purpose of murder, the
• * Thin arrangement places the supper fu the boose
f Simon " six days*' before the Passover (John xli. Ill),
vheraas, according to Matt. xxvi. 2 and Hark xiv. 1,
the supper appears to have taken place on the evening
before the Passover. It is no doubt correct to under-
stand John xil. 1 of our Lord's oomlug from Jericho
to Bethany. This apparent discrepancy between the
niters baa been variously explained. The following
to perhaps the best solution of the difficulty. John,
it will be seen, Is the only one of the Evangelists who
speaks of the Saviour's stopping at Bethany on the
Sfey between Jericho and Jerusalem. Hence, this feast
being the principal event which John sssociatss with
Bethany during these last days, be not unnaturally
snsrts the account of the least immediately after
■peaking of the arrival at Bethany. Bnt having (so
to speak) discharged his mind of that rvrollectton, he
thsa turns back and resumes the historical order,
JBrJTJS CHRIST
vile wickedness of Judas, and the utter fk klensas oi
the people are all displayed before us. Each da)
is marked by its own events or instructions. Out
Lord entered into Bethany on Friday the 8th of
Nisan, the en of the Sabbath, and remained ovei
the Sabbath.
Saturday At 9th of Nisan (April It).'— At
He was at supper in the house of one Simon, sur-
named " the leper," a relation of Lazarus, who was
at tabic with Him,' Mary, full of gratitude for the
wonderful raising of her brother from the dead, took
a vessel containing a quantity of pure ointment of
spikenard and anointed the feet of Jesus, and wiped
his feet with her hair, and anointed his head likewise.
She thought not of the cost of the precious oint-
ment, in an emotion of love which was willing to
part with anything she possessed to do honor to so
great a Guest, so mighty a Benefactor. Judas the
traitor, and some of the disciples (Matt., Mark',
who took their tone from him, began to murmur
at the waste: " It might have been sold for mora
than three hundred pence, and have been given to
the poor." But Judas cared not for the poor;
already he was meditating the sale of his Master's
life, and all that he thought of was bow he might
lay hands on something more, beyond the price of
blood. Jesus, however, who knew how true was
the love which had dictated this sacrifice, silenced
their censure. He opened out a meaning in the
action which they had not sought there: "She to
come aforehand to anoint my body to the bury-
ing."
Pamon Wttk. Sunday the 10th of Niton
(April 3d). — The question of John the Baptist
had no doubt often been repeated in the hearts of
the expectant disciples: " Art thou He that should
come, or do we look for another?" AU his eon*
venations with them of late had been filled, not
with visions of glory, but with forebodings of
approaching death. The world thinks them de-
ceived, and its mockery begins to exercise some
influence even over them. They need some en-
couraging sign under influences so depressing, and
this Jesus affords them in the triumphal entry into
Jerusalem. If the narrative is carefully examined,
it will be seen how remarkably the assertion of a
kingly right is combined with the most scrupulous
care not to excite the political jealousy of the
Jewish powers. When He arrives at the Mount of
Olives He commands two of his disciples to go into
the village near at hand, where they would find an
ass, and a colt tied with her. They were neither
to buy nor hire them, and " if any man shall say
aught unto you, ye shall say the Lord hath need of
namely, that on the next day after coming to Bethany
(xli. 12 ft), Jesus made his public entry into Jerusa-
lem, ss related by the Synopttsts (Matt. xxi. 1 B. ;
Mark xl. 1 S. ; Luke ill. 29 fl\). But the Synopttsts
pass over the night sojourn at Bethany, and thus rep-
resent Christ ss making apparently an uninterrupted
journey from Jericho to Jerusalem. What John
therefore states, as compared with the other £vsxumi-
Ists, is that Jesus came to Bethany 6 days before the
Passover, and not that He attended the least then 6
days before the Passover; and, further, that Jesuf
went to Jerusalem on the following day after His ar-
rival at Bethany, and not on the day after the supper.
This view, If adopted, requires soma transposition fa
the scheme given above. H.
s • It Is said that Lasarns was one of the goes*)
(tls tA- tMmaew, Jshn xil. 3), but not the* «*
was a i
Digitized by
Google
JESTTS GHRIS1-
imn, and straightway he will send them." Whh
■hete beasts, impressed u for the terries of a King,
He was to enter into .Jerusalem." The disciples
■preed upon the us their ragged cloaks for Him to
■it on. And the multitudes cried aloud before
Him, in the words of the 118th Psalm, " Hosanna,
Save now 1 blessed is He that cometh in the name
of the Lord." This Messianic psalm the; applied
to Him, from a belief, sincere for the moment, that
He was the Messiah. It was a striking, and to the
Pharisees an alarming sight; but it onlj serves in
the end to show the feeble hearts of the Jewish
people. The same lips that cried Hosanna will
before long be crying, Crucify Him, crucify Him 1
Meantime, however, all thoughts were carried back
to the promises of a Messiah. The very act of
riding in upon an ass revived an old prophecy of
Zechariah (ix, 9). Words of prophecy out of a
psalm sprang unconsciously to their lips. All the
city was moved. Blind and lame came to the
Temple when He arrived there and were healed.
The august conspirator* of the Sanhedrim were sore
displeased. But all these demonstrations did not
deceive the divine insight of Christ. He wept over
the city that was hailing Him as its King, and said,'
" If thou hadat known, even thou, at least in this
thy day, the things which belong unto thy peace !
but now they are hid from thine eyes" (Luke).
He goes on to prophesy the destruction of the city,
just as it afterwards came to pass. After working
miracle* in the Temple He returned to Bethany.
The 10th of Nisan was the day for the separation
of the paschal Iamb (Ex. xii. 3). Jesus, the Lamb
of God, entered Jerusalem and the Temple on this
day, and although none but He knew that He was
the Paschal Lamb, the coincidence is not unde-
signed (Matt. xxi. 1-11, 14-17; Mark xi. 1-11;
Lake xix. 29-44; John xii. 13-19).
Monday the 1NA of Nivm (April 3d).- The
next day Jesus returned to Jerusalem, again to
take advantage of the mood of the people to in-
struct them. On the way He approached one of
the many fig-trees which grew in that quarter
(Bethphage = " house of figs "), and found that it
was full of foliage, but without fruit. He said,
"No man eat fruit of thee hereafter for ever!"
and the fig-tree withered away. This was no
doubt a work of destruction, and as such was un-
like the usual tenor of His acta. But it is hard to
understand the mind of those who stumble at the
destruction of a tree, which seems to have ceased to
bear, by the word of God the Son, yet are not
jflended at the famine or the pestilence wrought by
God the Father. The right of the Son must rest
an the same ground as that of the Father. And
this was not a wanton destruction ; it was a type
and a warning. The barren fig-tree had already
been made the subject of a parable (Luke xiii. 6),
and here it is made a visible type of the destruction
ef the Jewish people. He had come to them seek-
ing fruit, and now it was time to pronounce their
doom as a nation — there should be no fruit on
'hem for ever (Matt xxi. 18, 19; Mark xi. 13-14).
c*roceeding now to the Temple, He cleared its court
af the crowd of traders that gathered there. He
Vad performed the tame act at the beginning of
his ministry, and now at the close He repeats it,
tor the boose of prayer was as much a den of
i ever. With teal for God's h?ute his
JESUS CHRIST
1373
ministry began, with the same it ended (see p
1360; Matt xxi. 13, 13; Mark xi. 15-19; Luke
xix. 46-48). In the evening He returned again tc
Bethany.
Tuaday the 13<A of Niton (April ith).— 0»
this the third day of Passion Week Jesus went into
Jerusalem as before, and visited the Temple. The
Sanhedrim came to Him to call Him to account
for the clearing of the Temple. " By what au-
thority doeat thou these things?" The Lord
answered their question by another, which, when
put to them in their capacity of a judge of spiritual
things, and of the pretensions of prophets aul
teachers, was very hard either to answer or to pen
in silence — what was their opinion of the baptism
of John ? If they replied that it was from heave: ■,
their own conduct towards John would accuse
them; if of men, then the people would not listen
to them even when they denounced Jesus, because
none doubted that John was a prophet They
refused to answer, and Jesus refused in like manna
to answer them. In the parable of the Two Sons,
given by Matthew, the Lord pronounces a strong
condemnation on them for saying to God, •' I go,
Sir," but not going (Matt. xxi. 23-32; Mark xi.
27-33; Luke xx. 1-8). In the parable of the
wicked husbandmen the history of the Jewa is rep-
resented, who had stoned and killed the prophets,
and were about to crown their wickedness by the
death of the Son. In the parable of the wedding
garment, the destruction of the Jews, and the in-
vitation to the Gentiles to the feast in their stead,
are vividly represented (Matt xxi. 33—46, xxii. 1-
14; Mark xii. 1-2; Luke xx. 9-19).
Not content with their plans for his death, the
different parties try to entangle Him in argument
and to bring Him into contempt First come the
Pharisees and Herodians, as if to ask Him to settle
a dispute between them. " Is it lawful to give
tribute to Cesar, or not? " The spirit of the
answer of Christ lies here: that, since they had
accepted Ceesar's money, they had confessed his
rule, and were bound to render to the civil power
what they had confessed to be due to it, as they
were to render to God aud to bis holy temple the
offerings due to it Next appeared the Saddueeea,
who denied a future state, and put before Him a
contradiction which seemed to them to arise out of
that doctrine. Seven brethren in succession mar-
ried a wife (Dent xxv. S): whose wife should she
be in a future state? The answer was easy to find.
The law in question re ferre d obviously to the pres-
ent time: it would pass away in another state, and
so would all such earthly relations, and all jealous-
ies or disputes founded on them. Jesus now retorts
the argument on the Saddueeea. Appealing to the
Pentateuch, because his hearers did not acknowl-
edge the authority of the later books of the Bible
He recites the words, " I am the God of Abraham,
and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob," as
used to Moan, and draws from them the argument
that these men must then have been alive. Al-
though the words would not at first sight suggest
this inference, they really contain it ; for the form
of expression implies that He still exists and they
still exist (Matt xxii. 15-33; Mark xii. 13-37;
Luke xx. 30-40). Fresh questions awaited Him,
but his wisdom never failed to give the appropriat*
answer. And then he uttered to all the people
■ •Stanley has a graphs) p a s sa g e relating to the 'out to* j one apuu dencas between the nermtwe text ft
fcvkMfs entry Into Jerusalem, to whisk h> paints ' leeaUtias (* f P. pp. 187-190, Asssr. ea.k D
Digitized by
Google
1874
JUSTJS CHRIST
that terrible denunciation of woe to the Pharisees,
with which we are familiar (Matt, zziii. 1-39).
If we compare it frith our Lord's account of his
own position in reference to the Law, in the Ser-
mon on the Mount, we see that the principles there
laid down are everywhere violated by the Pharisees.
Their almsgiving was ostentation ; their distinctions
about oaths led to falsehood and profaneness ; they
were exact about the small observances and neg-
lected the weightier ones of the Law ; they adorned
the tombs of the prophets, saying that if they had
lived in the time of their fathers they would not
hare slain them ; and yet they were about to All
up the measure of their fathers' wickedness by
slaying the greatest of the prophets, and perse-
cuting and slaying his followers. After an Indig-
nant denunciation of the hypocrites who, with a
show of religion, had thus contrived to stifle the
true spirit of religion and were in reality its chief
persecutors, He apostrophizes Jerusalem in words
full of compassion, yet carrying with them a sen-
tence of death: "0 Jerusalem, Jerusalem, thou
that killest the prophets and stonest them which
an sent unto thee, bow often would I have gath-
ered thy children together, even as a hen gatbereth
her chickens under her wings, and ye would not !
Behold, your house is left unto you desolate. For
I say unto you, ye shall not see me henceforth, till
ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh in the name
of the Lord " (Matt, zxiii.).
Another great discourse belongs to this d*y,
which, more than any other, presents Jesus as the
C Prophet of His people. On leaving the
_>le his disciples drew attention to the beauty
of its structure, its "goodly stones and gifts,"
their remarks probably arising from the threats of
destruction which had so lately been uttered by
Jesus. Their Master answered that not one stone
of the noble pile should be left upon another.
When they reached the Mount of Olives the dis-
ciples, or rather the first four (Mark), speaking for
the rest, ssked Him when this destruction should
be accomplished. To understand the answer it
must be borne in mind that Jesus warned them
that He was not giving them an historical account
such as would enable them to anticipate the events.
II Of that day and hour knoweth no man, no, not
the angels of heaven, but my Father only." Exact
data of time are to be purposely withheld from
them. Accordingly, two events, analogous in char-
acter but widely sundered by time, are so treated
n the prophecy that it is almost impossible to dis-
entangle them. The destruction of Jerusalem and
the day of judgment — the national and the uni-
versal days of account — are spoken of together or
alternately without hint of the great interval of
time that separates them. Thus it may seem that
s most important fact is omitted ; but the highest
work of prophecy is not to fix times and seasons,
but to disclose the divine significance of events.
What was most important to them to know was
that the destruction of Jerusalem followed upon
the probation and rejection of her people, and that
tbe crucifixion and that destruction were connected
is cause and effect 'Matt. xxiv. ; Mark xdii.; Luke
<xi.). The conclusion which Jesus drew from his
wn awful warning was, that they were not to at-
tempt to fix the date of his return : '< Therefore be
.e also ready, for in such an hour as ye think not
the Son of Man cometh." Tbe lesson of the par-
able of the Ten Virgins is the same; tin Christian
tool is to be aver in a stale of vigilante and prepar-
JE8TJS CHltlST
atlon (Matt. xxiv. 44, xxv. 13). And the parakk
of the Talents, here repeated in a modified form,
teacheu how precious to souls are the usee of tin*
(xxv. 14-30). In concluding this momentous dis-
course, our Lord puts aside the destruction of Jeru-
salem, and displays to our eyes the picture of the
final judgment. There wilt He Himself be present,
and will separata all the vast family of mankind
Into two classes, and shall appraise tbe works of
each class as works done to Himself, present in the
world though invisible; and men shall see, some
with terror and some with joy, that their life here
was spent either for Him or against Him, and that
the good which lay before them to do was provided
for them by Him, and not by chance, and the re-
ward and punishment shall be apportioned to each
(Matt. xxv. 31-46).
With these weighty words ends the third day;
and whether we consider the importance of His
recorded teaching, or the amount of opposition and
of sorrow presented to His mind, it was one of the
greatest days of all His earthly ministrations. The
general reflections of John (xii. 37-50), which con-
tain a retrospect of His ministry and of the strange
reception of Him by his people, may well be read
as if they came in here.
Wednetday the 13th of Mum {April 6C*J.—
This day was psssed in retirement with tbe Apos-
tles. Satan had put it into the mind of one of
them to betray Him ; and Judas Iscariot made a
covenant to betray Him to the chief priests for
thirty pieces of silver. The character of Judas,
and the degrees by which be reached the abyss of
guilt in which he was at last destroyed, deserve
much attention. There is no reason to doubt that
when he was chosen by Jesus he possessed, has
the rest, tbe capacity of being saved, and was en-
dued with gifts which might have made him an
able minister of the New Testament. But the
innate worldliness and covetousness were not
purged out from him. His practical talents mads
him a kind of steward of the slender resources of
that society, and no doubt he conceived the with
to use the same gifts on a larger field, which the
realization of " the kingdom of Heaven " would
open out before him. These practical gifts were
his ruin. Between him and the rest there could
be no real harmony. His motives were worldly,
and theirs were not. They loved the Saviour more
as they knew Him better. Judas, living under tin
constant tacit rebuke of a most holy example, grew
to hate the Lord; for nothing, perhaps, more
strongly draws out evil instincts than tbe enforced
contact with goodness. And when he knew that
his Master did not trust him, was not deceived by
him, his hatred grew more intense. But this did
not break out into overt act until Jesus began to
foretell his own crucifixion and death. If these
were to happen, all his bopes that he had built on
following the Lord would be dashed down. If th»7
should crucify the Master they would not spare the
servants ; and, in place of a heavenly kingdom, be
would find contempt, persecution, and probably
death. It was high time, therefore, to treat with
the powers that seemed most likely to prevail v
tbe end; and be opened a negotiation with the
high-priests in secret, in order that, if bis Master
were to fall, he might be the Instrument, and si
make friends among the triumphant persecutors
And yet, strange contradiction, be did not wbollj
cease to believe in Jesus: possibly he thought
that he would so set that he might be safe eKla
Digitized by
Google
JEHUS CHRIST
my. If Jesus was the Prophet and Mighty One
that he had once thought, then the attempt to take
Him might force Him to put forth all his resources
and to aatume the kingdom to which He laid claim,
and then the agent in the treaaon, even if discov-
ered, might plead that he foresaw the result: if
He wen unable to save Himself and his disciples,
then it were well for Judas to betake himself to
those who were stronger. The bribe of money,
not very considerable, could not have been the chief
motive; bnt as two vicious appetites could be grat-
ified instead of one, the thirty pieces of silver be-
came a part of the temptation. The treason was
successful, and the money paid ; but not one mo-
ment's pleasure did those silver pieces purchase
for their wretched possessor, not for a moment did
he reap any fruit from his detestable guilt After
the crucifixion, the avenging belief that Jesus wss
what He professed to be rushed back in full force
upon his mind. He went to those who had hired
him ; they derided bis remorse.' He cast away the
accursed silver pieces, defiled with the " innocent
blood " of the Son of God, and went and hanged
himself (Matt zzvi. 14-16 ; Mark xtv. 10-11 ; Luke
xxii. 1-6).
Thundny Me 1«A of Niton (April 9th). — On
"the first day of unleavened bread," when the
Jews were wont to put away all leaven out of their
houses (Lightfoot, Hor. ITeb. on Mark xiv. 12),
the disciples asked their Master where they were to
eat the Passover. He directed Peter and John to
go into Jerusalem, and to follow a man whom they
should see bearing a pitcher of water, and to de-
mand of him, in their Master's name, the use of
the gueatohamber in his house for this purpose."
All happened as Jesus had told them, and in the
evening they assembled to celebrate, for the last
time, the paschal meal. The sequence of the events
is not quite clear from a comparison of the Evan-
gelists; but the difficulty arises with St Luke, and
there is external evidence that he is not following
the chronological order (Wieseler, Chron. Syn. p.
899). The order seems to be ss follows. When
they had taken their places at table and the supper
had begun, Jesus gave them the first cup to divide
amongst themselves (Luke). It was customary to
drink at the paschal supper four cups of wine mixed
with water; and this answered to the first of them.
There now arose a contention among the disciples
which of them should be the greatest; perhaps in
connection with the places which they had taken
■t this feast (Luke). After a solemn warning
against pride and ambition Jesus performed an act
which, as one of the last of his life, must ever hare
been remembered by the witnesses ss a great lesson
of humility. He rose from the table, poured water
into a basin, girded himself with a towel, and pro-
ceeded to wash the disciples' feet (John). It was
an office for slaves to perform, sod from Him,
knowing as He did, " that the Father had given
all things into his hand, and that He was come
from God and went to God,'' it was an unspeakable
xmdescension. But his love for them was infinite,
snd if there were any way to teach them the humility
which as yet they had no* learned, He would not
kil to adopt it Peter, with his usual readiness,
wss the first to refuse to accept such menial ser-
• ■ The tosh of fetching water for domasoe nses ts
MnuDflnlr performed in the flast by woman. The
recalls but two instances during a period of
tores months In Pafastbas, n whfah he saw
JESTJS CHRIST 1375
rice — "Lord, dost thou wash my feet? " Wbe>
he was told that this act was significant of the
greater act of humiliation by which Jesus saved
his disciples and united them to Himself, his ecru
pies vanished. Alter all had been washed, tht
Saviour explained to tbem the meaning of what
He had done. " If I, your Lord and Master, have
washed your feet, ye also ought to wash one
another's feet For I hare given you an example,
that ye should do as I have done to yon." But
this act was only the outward symbol of for greater
sacrifices for them than they could as yet under-
stand. It wss a small matter to wash their feet|
it was a great one to come down from the glories
of heaven to save them. Later the Apostle Paid
put this same lesson of humility into another form,
and lested it upon deeper grounds. " Let this
mind be in you which was also in Christ Jeans:
who, being in the form of God, thought it not rob-
bery to be equal with God ; but made himself of
no reputation, and took upon him the form of a
servant, and was made in the likeness of men, and
being found in fashion as a man He humbled Him-
self and became obedient unto death, even the
death of the cross " (Phil ii. 6-8; Matt xxrl. 17-
80; Mark xiv. 13-17; Luke xxii. 7-30; John xilL
1-30).
From this act of love it does not seem that even
the traitor Judas was excluded. But his treason
was thoroughly known : and now Jesus denounces
it One of tbetu should betray Him. They were
all sorrowful at this, and each ssked "Is it I? "
and even Judas asked and recei v e d an affirmative
answer (Matt), but probablj in an undertone, for
when Jesus said "TTiat thou doest do quickly,"
none of the rest understood. The traitor having
gone straight to his wicked object, the end of the
Saviour's ministry seemed already at hand. " Now
is the Son of Man glorified, and God is glorified
in Him." He gave them the new commandment,
to love one another, as though it were a last be-
quest to them. To love was not a new thing, it
was enjoined in the old Law; but to be distin-
guished for a special Christian love and mutual
devotion was what He would have, and this was
the new element in the commandment Founded
by a great act of love, the Church was to be marked
by love (Matt. 'xxvi. 31-29; Mark xiv. 18-31;
Lake xxii. 31-23; John iiii. 21-39).
Towards the close of the meal Jesus instituted
the sacrament of the Lord's Supper. He took bread
and gave thanks and brake it, and gave to his dis-
ciples, saying, " This is my body which b given for
yon ; this do in remembrance of me." He than
took the cup, which corresponded to the third cup
in the usual course of the paschal supper, and after
giving thanks, He gave it to them, saying, " Thai
is my blood of the new testament [covenant] wbick
is shed for many." It was a memorial of his jas-
sion and of this last supper that preceded it, utd
in dwelling on his Passion in this sacrament, in
true faith, all believers draw nearer to the cross of
his sufferings and taste more strongly the sweetnesi
of his love and the effHwy of his atoning death
(Matt xxvi. 36-39; Mara xiv. 23-35; Luke xxH.
19 30; 1 Cor. xi. 33-35).
The denial of Peter is now foretold, and to no
"a man bearing a pttcbtr of water." As to* hor"
was to be Idsnansd br this dreumstaaes, It sessas M
bs fanpUsd that the sesashw was aa ssaal, «.
Digitized by
Google
1876
JESUS CHRIST
ane would such an announcement be more incredible
than to Peter himself. " Lord, why cannot I follow
thee now ? I will lay down my life for thy sake."
The zeal was sincere, and as such did the Lord
regard it; but here, as elsewhere, Peter did not
count the cost. By and by, when the Holy Spirit
has come down to give them a strength not then-
own, Peter and the rest of the disciples will be bold
to resist persecution, even to the death. It needs
strong love and deep insight to view such an act as
this denial with sorrow and not with indignation
(Matt zxvi. 81-35; Mark xiv. 87-31; Luke xxh\
81-38; John xiii. 38-88).
That great final discourse, which John alone
has recorded, is now delivered. Although in the
middle of it there is a mention of departure (John
ilv. 31), this perhaps only implies that they pre-
pared to go: and then the whole discourse was
delivered in the house before they proceeded to
Uetnaemane. Of the contents of this discourse,
which is the voice of the Priest in the holy of
holies, something has been said already (p. 1368;
John xiv.-zvii.).
Friday the 15th of Niton (April 7), including
part of the ere of it — "When they had sung a
hymn," which perhaps means, when they had
sung the second part of the HalleL or song of praise,
which consisted of Psalms cxv.-cxviii., the former
part (Psalms cziii.-cxiv.) having been sung at an
earlier part of the sapper, they went out into the
Mount of Olives. They came to a place called
Gethsemank (oU-prea), and it is probable that
the place now pointed out to travellers is the real
scene of that which follows, and even that its huge
olive-trees are the legitimate successors of those
which were there when Jesus visited it A moment
of terrible agony is approaching, of which all the
Apostles need not he spectators, for He thinks of
them, and wishes to spare them this addition to
their sorrows. So He takes only his three proved
companions, Peter, James, and John, and passes
with them farther into the garden, leaving the rest
seated, probably near the entrance. No pen can
attempt to describe what passed that night in that
secluded spot He tells them " my soul is exceed-
ing sorrowful, even unto death: terry ye here and
watch with me," and then leaving even the three
He goes further, and in solitude wrestles with an
inconceivable trial. The words of Mark are still
more expressive— "He began to be sore amazed, and
to be very heavy " (tVeoplcurfa ml aftiMton ir,
xiv. 33). The former word means that he was
struck with a great dread ; not from the fear of
physical suffering, however excruciating, we may
well believe, but from the contact with the sins of
the world, of which, in some inconceivable way, He
here felt the bitterness and the weight He did
not merely contemplate them, but bear and feel
them, ■t ia impossible to explain this scene in
Gethsemane in any other way. If it were merely
the fear of the terrors of death that overcame Him,
then the martyr Stephen and many another would
surpass Him in constancy. But when He says,
« Abba, Father, all things are possible unto Thee;
sake away this cup from me: nevertheless not what
I will but what thou wilt" (Hark), the cup was
filed with a far bitterer potion than death; it was
flavored with the poison of the sins of all mankind
• • << Having song" Is mora comet for aVrtmmt,
U. xxvi. 80 and Mark xhr. 26. A group of Psalms
I no doubt sung at that dm*. The A. Y. imam
JESUS CHRIST
against its God. Whilst the sinless Son is thus
carried two ways by the present horror and the
strong determination to do the Father's will, the
disciples have sunk to sleep. It was in search of
consolation that He came back to them. The dis-
ciple who had been so ready to ask " Why cannot
I follow thee now ? " must hear another question,
that rebukes his former confidence — " Couldest
not thou watch one hour? " A second time He
departs and wrestles in prayer with the Father;
but although the words He utters are almost the
same (Hark says " the same *'), He no longer asks
that the cup may pass away from Him — " If this
cup may not pass away from me except I drink it,
Thy will be done " (Matt). A second time He
returns and finds them sleeping. The same scene
is repeated yet a third time ; and then all is con-
cluded. Henceforth they may sleep and take then-
rest; never more shall tiey be asked to watch one
hour with Jesus, for bis ministry in the flesh is at
an end. " The hour is at hand, and the Son of
Man is betrayed into the hands of sinners " (Matt).
The prayer of Jesus in this place has always been
regarded, and with reason, as of great weight against
the monothelite heresy. It expresses the natural
shrinking of the human will from a horror which
the divine nature has admitted into it, yet without
sin. Never does He say, " I will flee; " He says,
" If it be possible; " and leaves that to the decision
of the Father. That horror and dread arose front
the spectacle of human sin ; from the bearing the
weight and guilt of human sin as about to make
atonement for it; and from a conflict with the
powers of darkness. Thus this scene is in complete
contrast to the Transfiguration. The same com-
panions witnessed both ; but there there was peace,
and glory, and honor, for the sinless Son of God ;
here fear and conflict: there God bore testimony
to Him ; here Satan for the last time tempted Him.
(On the account of the Agony see Krummacber,
Der LeUknde Chrvtou, p. 206 ; Matt xxvi. 36-46 ;
Mark xiv. 33-42; Luke xxii. 39-46; John xvtti. 1.)
Judas now appeared to complete his work. In
the doubtful light of torches, a kiss from him was
the sign to the officers whom they should take.
Peter, whose name is first given in John's GospeL
drew a sword and smote a servant of the high-priest,
and cut out off his ear; but his Lord refused such
succor, and healed the wounded man. [Malchob-]
He treated the seizure as a step in the fulfillment
of the prophecies about Him, and resisted H not
All the disciples forsook Him and fled (Matt xxvi.
47-56; Mark xiv. 43-52; Luke xxii. 47-53; John
xviii. 2-12).
There is some difficulty in arranging the events
that immediately follow, so as to embrace ad the
four accounts. — The data will be found in the
Commentary of OMuuisen, in Wieseler ( Chron. Sgn.
p. 401 ft.), and in GreswelTs Dittertatioiu (iii
200 ff.). On the capture of Jesus He was firs
taken to the house of Annas, the father-in-law rt
Caiaphas (see p. 1350) the high-priest It has been
argued that as Annas is called, conjointly with
Cuanhas, the high-priest, he must have held soma
actual office in connection with the priesthood, ana
Lightfoot and others suppose that he was the vieat
or deputy of the high-priest, and Selden that ha-
wse president of the Council of the Sanhedrim
word "sang ui al s ss /
> Hab. a. IS.
Acts xtL K,
Digitized by
Google
•TESTIS GHBIST
out thil i» uncertain." It might appear from the
course of John's narrative that the examination of
our Lord, and the first denial of Peter, took place
in the house of Annai f John xviii. 13, 14). But
the 34th vene is retrospective — • Now Annas had
sent Him bound unto Caiaphas the high-priest "
(aartVrsiAs, aoriit for pluperfect, see Winer's
Grammar); and prooaoly aU that occurred after
verse 14 took place not at the house of Annas, but
at that of Caiaphas. It is not likely that Peter
gained admittance to two houses in which two
separate judicial examinations took place with which
ha had nothing ostensibly to do, and this would be
■breed on us if we assumed that John described
what took place before Annas, and the other
Evangelists what took place before Caiaphas. The
house of the high-priest consisted probably, like
other Eastern houses, of an open central court with
chambers round it. Into this court a gate admitted
them, at which a woman stood to open. Peter,
who had fled like the rest from the side of Jesus,
followed afar off with another disciple, probably
John, and the latter procured him admittance into
the court of the high-priest's house. As he passed
in, the lamp of the portress threw its light on his
face, and she took note of him ; and afterwards, at
the fire which had been lighted, she put the ques-
tion to him, " Art not thou also one of this man's
disciples? " (John.) All the zeal and boldness of
Peter seems to have deserted him. This wss indeed
i time of great spiritual weakness and depression,
and the power of darkness had gained an influence
over the Apostle's mind. He had come ss in
secret; he is determined so to remain, and he
denies his Master ! Feeling now the danger of his
situation, he went out into the porch, and there
some one, or, looking at all the accounts, probably
several persons, ssked him the question a second
time, and he denied more strongly. About an hour
after, when he had returned into the court, the
same question wsa put to him a third time, with
the same result. Then the cock crew; and Jesus,
who was within sight, probably in some open room
■ommunicating with the court, " turned and looked
upon Peter. And Peter remembered the word of
the Lord, how He had said unto him, Before toe
oock crow, thou shalt deny Me thrice. And Peter
went out and wept bitterly " (Luke). Let no man
who cannot fathom the utter perplexity and distress
•f such a time presume to judge the zealous dis-
ciple hardly. He trusted too much to his strength;
ie did not enter into the full meaning of the words,
» Watch and pray lest ye enter into temptation."
Self-confidence betrayed him into a great sin; and
he most merciful Lord restored him after it. " Let
iun that thinketh be standeth take heed lest he
fall" (1 Cor. x. 19; Matt xxvi. 67, 68, 69-76;
Mark xiv. 63. 64, 66-78; Luke xxii. 64-62; John
xviiL 13-18, 84-37).
The first interrogatory to which our Lord was
subject (John xviii 19-84) was addressed to Him
by Caiaphas (Annas?, Olshausen, Wieseler), prob-
ably before the Sanhedrim had time to assemble.
It was the questioning of an inquisitive person who
bad an important criminal in his preeenee, rather
than a formal examination. The Lord's refusal to
answer Is thus explained and justified. Whan the
nun regular proceedings begin He is read) to
a Mr. Qreswell seas no uncertainty ; sad assarts as
• fost that he wss the high-priest, n», and ofst
- k of the Sanhedrim (p. 300).
87
JESUS CHRIST 1377
answer. A servant of the high-priest, knowing
that he should thereby please his master, smote the
cheek of the Son of God with the palm of his hand.
But this was only the beginning of horrors. At
the dawn of day the Sanhedrim, summoned by the
high-priest in the course of the night, assembled,
and brought their band of false witnesses, whom
they must have had ready before. These gave their
testimony (see Psalm xxvii. 12), but even before
this unjust tribunal it could not stand, it was so
full of contradictions. At last two false witnesses
came, and their testimony was very like the truth
They deposed that He had said, " I will destroj
this temple, that is made with hands, and within
three days I will build another made without
hands" (Mark xiv. 58). The perversion is slight
but important; for Jesus did not say that He would
destroy (see John ii. 19), which was just the point
that would irritate the Jews. Even these two fell
into contradictions. The high-priest now with a
solemn adjuration asks Him whether He is the
Christ the Son of God. He answers that He is,
and foretells his return in glory and power at the
last day. This is enough for their purpose. They
pronounce Him guilty of a crime for which death
should be the punishment. It appears that thr
Council was now suspended or broken up ; for Jesus
is delivered over to the brutal violence of the people,
which could not have occurred whilst the supreme
court of the Jews was sitting. The prophets had
foretold this violence (Is. 1. 6), and also the meek-
ness with which it would be borne (Is. liii. 7). And
yet this " lamb led to the slaughter " knew that it
was He that should judge the world, including
every one of his persecutors. The Sanhedrim had
been within the range of its duties in taking cog-
nizance of all who claimed to be prophets. If the
question put to Jesus had been merely, Art Thou
the Messiah ? this body should have gone into the
question of his right to the title, and decided upon
the evidence. But the question was really twofold,
"Art Thou the Christ, and in that name dost
Thou also call Thyself the Son of God ? " Then
was no blasphemy iu claiming the former name,
but there was in assuming the latter. Henae the '
proceedings were cut short. They had closed their
eyes to the evidence, accessible to all, of the miracles
of Jesus, that He was indeed the Son of God, and
without these they were not likely to believe thai
He could claim a title belonging to no other among
the children of men (John xviii. 19-24; Luke xxu
63-71; Matt. xxvi. 69-68; Mark xiv. 66-66).
Although they bad pronounced Jeaua to be guilty
of death, the Sanhedrim possessed bo power to
carry out such a sentence (Josepbus, Ant. xx. 6).
So as soon as it was day they took Him to Pilate,
the Roman procurator. The halll of judgment, or
prsetorium, was probably a part of the tower of
Antonia near the Temple, where the Koman gar-
rison was. Pilate bearing that Jesutwae an offender
under their law, was about to give them leave to
treat him accordingly; and this would have made it
quite safe to execute Him- But toe council, wish-
ing to shift the responsibility from themselves, from
a fear of some reaction amongst the- people in favor
of 'the Lord, such as they had* seen on the first day
of that week, said that if) was not lawful for them
to put any man to death; and having condemned
Jesus for blasphemy, they now strove to hare Him
condemned by Pilate for a political crime, for calling
Himself the King of the Jaws. But the Jewish
pinlahmant was. stoning; whilst croniflilon was a
Digitized by
Google
1878 jsatre ohwst
Roman punishment, Inflicted occasionally on those
who were not Roman citizens; and thua it came
about that the Lord's saying as to the mode of hit
death was fulfilled (Matt. rx. 19, with John xB.
33, 88). From the tint Jenia found favor In the
eyes of Pilate; his answer that hit kingdom waa
not of this world, and therefore could not menace
the Roman rule, was accepted, and Pilate pro-
nounced that he found no fault in Him. Not to
easily were the Jewt to be cheated of their prey.
The; heaped up accusations against Him as a dis-
turber of the public peace (Luke xziii. 6). Pilate
was no match for their vehemence. Finding that
Jesus wit a Galilean, he sent Him to Herod to be
dealt with; but Herod, after cruel mockery and
persecution, sent Him back to Pilate. Now com-
menced the fearful struggle between the Roman
procurator, a weak as well as cruel man, and the
Jews. Pilate was detested by the Jews as cruel,
treacherous, and oppressive. Other records of his
fife do not represent him merely as the weakling
that he appears here. He hsd violated their na-
tional prejudices, anil had used the knives of assas-
sins to avert the consequences. But the Jews knew
the weak point in his breastplate. He was the
merely worldly and professional statesman, to whom
the favor of the Emperor was life itself, and the
only evil of life a downfall from that favor. It was
their policy therefore to threaten to denounce him
to Caesar for lack of zeal in suppressing a rebellion,
the leader of which was aiming at a crown. In his
way Pilate believed in Christ; this the greatest
crime of a stained life was that with which his own
will had the least to do. But he did not believe,
so as to make him risk delation to his Muter and
all its possible consequences. He yielded to the
stronger purpose of the Jews, and suffered Jesus to
be put to death. Not many years after, the con-
sequences which he had stained hit soul to avert
came upon him. He was accused and banished,
and like Judas, the other great accomplice in this
crime of the Jews, put an end to his own life [see
Pilate]. The well-known incidents of the second
Interview are soon recalled. After the examination
by Herod, and the return of Jesus, Pilate proposed
to release Him, as it was usual on the feast-day to
release a prisoner to the Jews out of grace. Pilate
knew well that the priests and rulers would object
to this; but it was a covert appeal to the people,
also present, with whom Jesus had so lately been
in favor. The multitude, persuaded by the priests,
preferred another prisoner, called Barabhas. In
the mean time the wife of Pilate sent a warning to
Pilate to have nothing to do with the death of
" that just man," at she hsd been troubled in a
dream on account of Him. Obliged, as he thought,
to yield to the clamors of the people, he took
water and washed his hands before them, and
adopting the phrase of his wife, which perhaps rep-
resented the opinion of both of them formed before
this time, he said, " I am innocent of the blood of
this just person ; see ye to it" The people im-
precated on their own heads and those of their
children the blood of Him whose doom was thus
sealed.
Pilate released unto them Barabbaa "that for
sedition and murder was cast Into prison whom
they had desired " (comp. Acts Hi. 14). This was
no unimportant e l e m ent in their crime. Tne choice
was offered than between one who had broken the
inn of God and man, and One who had given his
•stale Hfe up to the doing good and s pe a kin g truth
JE8TJ8 CHRIST
amongst them. They condemned the latter tc
death, and were eager for toe deliverance of Lbs
former. " And in fact their demanding the ac-
quittal of a murderer is but the parallel to tbefe
requiring the death of an innocent person, as St.
Ambrose observes: for it is but the very law of
Iniquity, that they which hate innocence should
love crime. They rejected therefore the Prince of
Heaven, and chose a robber and a m ur derer, and
an insurrectionist, and they received the object of
their choice; so waa it given them, for insurrections
and murders did not fail them till the hat, when
their city was de str o y ed in the midst of murders
and insurrections, which they now demanded of
the Roman governor " (Williams os Ikt Patmm,
p. 315).
Now came the scourging, and the blows and in-
sults of the soldiers, who, uttering truth when they
thought they were only reviling, crowned Him and
addressed Him as King of the Jews. According
to John, Pilate now made one more effort for his
release. He thought that the acourglng might ap-
pease their rage, he saw the frame of Jesus bowed
and withered with all that it had gone through;
and, hoping that this moving sight might inspire
them with the tame pity that he felt himself, be
brought the Saviour forth again to them, and said,
" Behold the man ! " Not even so was their violence
assuaged. He had made Himself the Son of God,
and must die. He still sought to release Jeans:
but the last argument, which had been in the minds
of both sides all along, was now openly applied to
him : " If thou let this man go, thou art not Cesar's
friend." This saying, which had not been uttered
till the vehemence of rage overcame their decent
respect for Pilate's position, decided the question.
He delivered Jesus to be crucified (Matt xxrli
16-80; Mark xv. 6-19; Luke xfiii. 17-85; John
xviii. 89, 40, xix. 1-16). John mentions that this
occurred about the sixth hour, whereat the cruci-
fixion, according to Mark, was accomplished at the
third hour; but there is every reason to think, with
Greswell and Wieseler, that John reckons from
midnight, and that this took place at six in the
morning, whilst in Mark the Jewish reckoning from
six in the morning is followed, so that the cruci-
fixion took place at nine o'clock, the intervening
time having been spent in preparations. [Houn,
Amer. ed.]
Difficult, but not insuperable, chronological ques-
tions arise in connection with (a) John xiii. 1, " be-
fore the feast of the Passover; " (ft) John xviii 88,
■• and they themselves went not into the judgment-
hall lest they should be defiled, but that they might
eat the Passover; " and (c) John xix. 14, "And it
was the preparation of the Passover, about the sixth
hour," in all of which the account of John seems
dissonant with that of the other Evangelists. These
passages are discussed in the various commentaries,
but nowhere more fully than in a paper by Dr
Robinson (BM. Saera, 1845, p. 405), reproduced
in his (English) Barmtmy in an abridged form.
One Person alone has been calm amidst the ex-
citements of that night of horrors. On Him Is
now laid the weight of hit cross, or at least of the
transverse beam of it; and, with this pressing Him
down, they proceed out of the city to Golgotha or
Calvary, a place the site of which is now uncertain.
At He began to droop, hit persecutors, unwilling tc
deflk themselves with the accursed burden, lay hot.
of Simon of Cyrene and compel him to cany tbi
to Jesus. Ajnongst the great multitask
Digitized by
Google
JESUS CHRIST
Jut followed, wera several women, who bewailed
tnd lamented Him. He bade them not to weep
lor Him, bat for the widespread destruction of their
nation which should be the punishment for his
death (Lake). After offering Him wine and myrrh,
they crucified Him between two thieves. Nothing
was wanting to his humiliation ; a thief had been
preferred before Him, and two thieves share his
punishment. The soldiers divided his garments
and east lots for them (see Psalm xxii. 18). Pilate
set over Him in three languages the inscription
" Jesus, the King of the Jews." The chief-priests
took exception to this that it did not denounce
Him as falsely calling Himself by that name, but
Pilate refused to alter it The passers-by and the
Soman soldiers would not let even the minutes of
deadly agony pass in peace ; they reviled and
mocked Him. One of the two thieves underwent
a change of heart even on the cross: he reviled at
first (Matt.); and then, at the sight of the con-
stancy of Jesus, repented (Luke) (Matt zzvii.;
Mark xv. ; Luke xxiii. ; John rix.).
In the depths of his bodily suffering, Jesus calmly
commended to John (?), who stood near, the care
of Mary his mother. « Behold thy son ! behold
thy mother." From the sixth hour to the ninth
there was darkness over the whole land. At the
ninth hour (3 p. *f.) Jesus uttered with a loud
voice the opening words of the 22d Psalm, all the
inspired words of which referred to the suffering
Messiah. One of those present dipped a sponge in
the common sour wine of the soldiers and pat it
on a reed to moisten the sufferer's lips. Again He
cried with a loud voice, " It is finished " (John),
" Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit "
(Lake); and gave up the ghost His words upon
the cross had all of them shown how truly He pos-
sessed his soul Tn patience even to the end of the
sacrifice He was making : " Father, forgive them ! "
was a prayer for his enemies. " This day shalt
thou be with me in Paradise," was a merciful ac-
ceptance of the offer of a penitent heart " Woman,
behold thy son," was a sign of loving consideration,
even at the last, for those He bad always loved.
» Why bast Thou forsaken me?" expr es s ed the
fear and the need of God. " I thirst," the only
word that related to Himself, was uttered because
it was prophesied that they were to give Him
vinegar to drink. " It is finished," expresses the
completion of that work which, when He was twelve
years old, had been present to his mind, and never
absent since; and -'Into Thy hands I commend
My spirit," was the last utterance of his resignation
of Himself to what was laid upon Him (Matt, xxvii.
31-56; Mark xv. 30-41; Luke xxiii. 33-49; John
six. 17-80).
On the death of Jesus the veil which covered the
most Holy Place of the Temple, the place of the
more especial presence of Jehovah, was rent in
twain, a symbol that we may now have u boldness
to enter into the holiest by the blood of Jesus by
a new and living way which He hath consecrated
for us, through the veil, that is to say, through his
flesh " (Heb. x. 19, 90). The priesthood of Christ
-uperseded the priesthood of the law. There was
s great earthquake. Many who were dead rose
from their graves, although they returned to the
lust again after this great token of Christ's quick-
ening power had been given to many (Matt) : they
Ten "saints" that slept — probably those wbo had
Boat earnestly longed for the salvation of Christ
Here the first to taste the fruits of his conqowt of
JESUS CHRIST
1876
death. [Saints, Amer. ed.] The centurion whs
kept guard, witnessing what had taken place, cam*
to the same conclusion as Pilate and his wife,
" Certainly this was a righteous man; " he went
beyond them, " Truly this man was the Son of
God " (Mark). Even the people who had joined
in the mocking and reviling were overcome by the
wonders of his death, and " smote their breasts
and returned " (Luke xxiii. 48). The Jews, very
acajous for the Sabbath in the midst of their mur-
derous work, begged Pilate that he would put an
end to the punishment by breaking the legs of the
criminals (Lactant iv. 26) that they might be taken
down and buried before the Sabbath, for which
they were preparing (Deut xxi. 33; Joseph., B. J.
iv. 5, { 3). Those who were to execute this duty
found that Jesus was dead and the thieves still
living; so they performed this work on the latter
only, that a bone of Him might not be broken
(Ex. xii. 46; Psalm xxxiv. 20). Hie death of the
Lord before the others was, no doubt, partly the
consequence of the previous mental suffering which
He had undergone, and partly because his will to
die lessened the natural resistance of the frame to
dissolution. Some seek for a " mysterious cause "
of it, something out of the course of nature; bat
we must beware of such theories as would do away
with the reality of the death, as a punishment in-
flicted by the hands of men. Joseph of Arimathasa,
a member of the Council but a secret disciple of
Jesus, came to Pilate to beg the body of Jesus, that
he might bury it. Nicodemus assisted in this work
of love, and they anointed the body and laid it in
Joseph's new tomb (Matt, xxvii. 60-61; Mark xv.
37-47; Luke xxiii. 46-56; John xix 30-43).
Saturdny tkt 16m n/Nitan (April 8/A). — Love
having done its part, hatred did its pa.1 also. The
chief priests and Pharisees, with Pilate's permis-
sion, set a watch over the tomb, " lest his disciples
come by night and steal Him away, and say unto
the people He is risen from the dead " (Matt, xxvii.
63-66).
SuikAtj Me 17M of Niton (April 9/*). — The
Sabbath ended at six on the evening of Nisan 16th.
Early the next morning the resurrection of Jesus
took place. Although He had lain in the grave for
about thirty-six or forty hours, yet these formed
part of three days, and thus, by a mode of speaking
not unusual to the Jews (Josephus frequently
reckons years in this manner, the two extreme por-
tions of a year reckoning as two years), the time
of the dominion of death over Him is spoken of as
three days. The order of the events that follow is
somewhat difficult to harmonize; for each Evangelist
selects the facts which belong to his purpose." The
exact hour of the resurrection is not mentioned by
any of the Evangelists. But from Mark xvi. 9 and
9 we infer that it was not long before the coming
of the women ; and from the time at which the
guards went into the city to give the alarm the
same inference arises (Matt xxviii. 11). Of the
great mystery itself, the resumption of life by Him
who was truly dead, we see but little. "There
was a great earthquake, for the angel of the Lord
descended from heaven, and came and rolled back
the stone from the door and sat upon it His
countenance was like lightning, and his raiment
white as snow ; and for fear of him the keepers did
a In what follows, much uss has keen mads of aa
excellent paper by Dr. HoUusoo, BM. Ana, Ms*
Digitized by
Google
1880
JESUS CHRIST
shake, and became m dead men " (Matt.). The
women, who had stood by the cross of Jesus, had
prepared spices on the evening before, perhaps to
complete the embalming of our Ix>rd's bod;, already
performed in haste by Joseph and Nicodemus.
They came very early on the first day of the week
to the sepulchre. The names of the women ore
differently put by the several Evangelist*, but with
no real discrepancy. Matthew mentions the two
Marys; Mark adds Salome to these two; Luke has
the two Marys, Joanna, and others with them ; and
John mentions Mary Magdalene only. In thus
citing such names as seemed good to him, each
Evangelist was no doubt guided by some reason.
John, from the especial share which Mary Mag-
jaleue took in the testimony to the fact of the
resurrection, mentions her only. The women dis-
2uss with one another who should roll away the
stone, that they might do their pious office on the
body. But when they arrive they find the stone
rolled away, and Jesus no longer in the Sepulchre.
He had risen from the dead. Mary Magdalene at
this point goes back in haste ; and at once, believing
that the body has been removed by men, tells Peter
and John that the Lord has been taken away. The
other women, however, go into the Sepulchre, and
they see an angel (Matt., Mark), or two angels
(Luke), in bright apparel, who declare to them that
the Lord is risen, and will go before the disciples
into Galilee. The two angels, mentioned by St.
Luke, are probably two separate appearances to
different members of the group; for he alone men-
tions an indefinite number of women. They now
leave the sepulchre, and go in haste to make known
the news to the Apostles. As they were going,
" Jesus met them, saying, All hail. And they came
and held Him by the feet, and worshipped Him.
Then said Jesus unto them, Be not afraid ; go tell
My brethren that they go into Galilee, and there
shall they see Me." The eleven do not believe the
account when they receive it In the mean time
Peter and John came to the Sepulchre. They ran,
in their eagerness, and John arrived first and looked
in ; Peter afterwards came up, and it is character-
istic that the awe which had prevented the other
iisciple from going in appears to have been unfelt
by Peter, who entered at once, and found the grave-
clothes lying, but not Him who had worn them.
This fact must have suggested that the removal
was not the work of human hands. They then
returned, wondering at what they had seen. Mary
Magdalene, however, remained weeping at the tomb,
and she too saw the two angels in the tomb, though
Peter and John did not. They address her, and
she answers, still, however, without any suspicion
that the Lord is risen. As she turns away she sees
tesus, but in the tumult of her feelings does not
even recognize Him at his first address. But He
calls her by name, and then she joyfully recognizes
her Master. He says, " Touch Me not, for I am not
yet ascended to My Father: but go to My brethren,
and say unto them, I ascend unto My Father and
your Father, and to My God and your God." The
meaning of the prohibition to touch Him must be
sought in the state of mind of Mary, since Thomas,
for whom it was desirable as an evidence of the
Identity of Jesus, was permitted to touch Him.
Hitherto she had not realized the mystery of the
Resurrection. She saw the Lord, and would have
touched his hand or his garment in her Joy. Our
Lord's answer means, " Death has now set a gulf
Touch not, as you ones might have
JESUS CHRIST
done, this body, which in now glorified by its east
quest over death, for with this body I aserod to ths
Father " (so Euthymius, Tbeophylact, and others).*
Space has been wanting to discuss the difficulties
of arrangement that attach to this part of the nar-
rative. The remainder of the appearances present
less matter for dispute; in enumerating tbem the
important passage in 1 Cor. zv. must be brought
in. The third appearance of our Lord was to Peter
(Luke, Paul ) ; the fourth to the two disciples going
to Emmaus in the evening (Mark, Luke) ; the fifth
in the same evening to the eleven as they sat at
meat (Mark, Luke, John). All of these Occurred
on the first day of the week, the very day of ths
Resurrection. Exactly a week after, He appeared
to the Apostles, and gave Thomas a convincing
proof of his Resurrection (John ) ; this was the sixth
appearance. The seventh was in Galilee, where
seven of the Apostles were assembled, some of them
probably about to return to their old trade of fish-
ing (John). The eighth was to the eleven (Matt.)
and probably to five hundred brethren assembled
with them (Paul) on a mountain in Galilee. The
ninth was to James (Paul); and the last to the
Apostles at Jerusalem just before the Ascension
(Acts).
Whether this be the exact enumeration, whether
a single appearance may have been quoted twice,
or two distinct ones identified, it is clear that for
forty days the Lord appeared to His disciples and
to others at intervals. These disciples, according
to the common testimony of all the Evangelists
were by no means enthusiastic and prejudiced ex-
pectants of the Resurrection. They were sober-
minded men. They were only too slow to appre-
hend the nature of our Ijord's kingdom. Almost
to the last they shrank from the notion of his suf-
fering death, and thought that such a calamity
would be the absolute termination of all their
hopes. But from the time of the Ascension they
went about preaching the truth that Jesus was
risen from the dead. Kings could not alter their
conviction on this point: the fear of deatn could
not hinder them from proclaiming it (sea Acts ii.
24, 32, iv. 8-13, HI., x., xiil.: 1 Cur. x». 6; 1 Pet.
i. 21). Against this event no real objection has
ever been brought, except that it is a miracle. So
far as historical testimony goes, nothing is better
established.
In giving hb disciples their final commission,
the Lord said, <• All power is given unto me iu
heaven and earth. Go ye therefore and teach all
uationa, baptizing tbem in the name of the Father,
and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: teaching
tbem to observe all things whatsoever I have com-
manded you : and lo, I am with you always, even
unto the end of the world " (Matt, xxviii. 18-20).
The living energy of Christ is ever present who
his Church, even though He has withdrawn from
it his bodily presence. And the facts of the life
that has been before us are the substance of the
apostolic teaching now as in all ages. That God
and man were reconciled by the mission of the
Redeemer into the world, and by bis self-devotion
to death (2 Cor. v. 18; Eph. i. 10; CoL i. 20),
that this sacrifice has procured for man the restora-
tion of the divine love (Kom. v. 8, viii. 82; 1 Johr.
iv. 9); that we by his incarnation become the ehil
• *On the
not," ate., see
of this axpsasaton
under Hist M tomans (,
Digitized by
Google
JESUS CHRIST
treo at God, knit to Him Id bondi of Ion, Instead
rf slave* under the bondage of the law (Rom. viii.
15, 38; GaL it. 1); these an the common Ideas
of the apostolic teaching. Brought into aueh a
relation to Chriat and his lift, we sea in all its acta
and stages something that belongs to and instructs
us. His birth, his baptism, temptation, lowliness,
of life and mind, his sufferings, death, burial, resur-
rection, and ascension, all enter into the apostolic
preaching, as furnishing motives, examples, and
analogies for our use. Hence every Christian
should study well this sinless life, not in human
commentaries only, still less in a bare abstract like
the present, but in the living pages of inspiration.
Even if he began the study with a lukewarm belief,
he might hope, with God's grace, that the oonvio-
tion would break In upon him that did upon the
Centurion at the cross — " Truly this is the Son
of God."
Chbonoloot. — Tear of tht Birth of Christ.
— It is certain that our Lord was born before the
death of Herod the Great Herod died, according
to Josephus (Ant. xvii. 8, § 1), "having reigned
thirty-four years from the time that he had pro-
cured Antigomis to be slain; but thirty-seven from
the time that he had been declared king by the
Romans " (see also B. J. i. 33, § 8). His appoint-
ment as king, according to this same writer (Ant.
xiv. 14, § 6), coincides with the 184th Olympiad,
and the consulship of C. Domitius Calrinus and
C. Asinius Pollio. It appears that he was made
king by the joint influence of Antony and Octarius ;
and the reconciliation of these two men took place
on the death of Fulvia in the year 714. Again,
the death of Antigoaua and the siege of Jerusalem,
which form the basis of calculation for the thirty-
four years, coincide (Joseph. Aid. xiv. 16, § 4) with
the consulship of M. Vipsanius Agrippa and L.
Canhnus Gallus, that is with the year of Rome
TIT; and occurred in the month Sivan (=June
or July). From these facts we an justified in
placing the death of Herod in A. u. o. 750. Those
who pkwe it one year later overlook the mode in
which Josephus reckons Jewish reigns. Wieseler
shows by several passages that he reckons the year
from the month Nisan to Nisan, and that he counts
the fragment of a year at either extreme as one
complete year. In this mode, thirty-Tour years,
from June or July 717, would apply to any date
between the first of Nisan 760, and the first of
Nisan 751. And thirty-seven years from 714
would apply likewise to any date within the same
termini. Wieseler finds facts confirmatory of this
in the dates of the reigns of Herod Antipas and
Archelaus (see bis Chranologuche Synopse, p. 55).
Between these two dates Josephus furnishes means
►r a more exact determination. Just after Herod's
death the Passover oocurred (Nisan 15th), and
upon Herod's death Archelaus caused a seven-days'
mourning to be kept for him (Ant. xvii. 9, § 8,
xvii. 8, § 4) ; so that it would appear that Herod
died somewhat more than seven days before the
Passover in 750, and therefore in the first few days
*f the month Nisan a. o. o. 760. Now, as Jesus
was born before the death of Herod, it follows that
She Dionysian era, which corresponds to a. II. t,
r M, is at least four years too late.
Many ham thought that the star seek by the
vise men gives grounds for an exact calculation of
the time of our Lord's birth. It will be found
however, that this is not the case. For it has first
wtn assumed that the star was not properly a scat
JESUS CHRIST 1381
bat an astronomical conjunction of known star*
Kepler finds Sj conjunction of Jupiter and Saturn
in the sign Pisces in A. u. o. 747, and again in the
spring of the next year, with the planet Mars
sdded; and from this he would place the birth of
Jesus in 748. Ideler, on the same kind of calcu-
lation, places it in A. u. C. 747. But this process
only proves a highly improbable date, on highly
improbable evidence. The words of St Matthew
are extremely hard to reconcile with the notion of a
conjunction of planets; it was a star that appeared,
and it gave the Magi ocular proof of its purpose
by guiding them to where the young ehUd was.
But a new light has been thrown on the subject by
the Rev. C. Pritchard, who has made the calcula-
tions afresh. Ideler (Handbuch d. Chronologit)
asserts that there were three conjunctions of Jupi-
ter and Saturn in b. o. 7, and that in the third
they approached so near that, " to a person with
weak eyes, the one planet would almost seem to
come within the range of the dispersed light of the
other, so that both might appear as one star."
Dean Alfbrd puts it much more strongly, that on
November 12 in that year the planets were so close
" that on ordinary eye would regard them as one
star of surpassing brightness " (Greek Test in fee).
Mr. Pritchard finds, and his calculations have been
verified and confirmed at Greenwich, that this con-
junction occurred not on November 13 but early
on December 5 ; and that even with Meier's some-
what strange postulate of an observer with weak
eyes, the planets could never have appeared as one
star, for they never approached each other within
double the apparent diameter of the moon (iit-
moirt it. Atir. Doc vol. xxv.). [Star im thb
East.] Most of the chronologists find an clement
of calculation in the order of Herod to destroy all
the children " from two years old and under " (Awe
8<*rovs koI Karmriov, Matt. ii. 16). But the
age within which he destroyed, would be measured
rather by the extent of his fears than by the accu-
racy of the calculation of the Magi. Greswell has
labored to show that, from the inclusive mode of
computing years, mentioned above in this article,
the phrase of the Evangelist would apply to all
children just turned one year eld, which is true;
but he assumes that it would not apply to any that
were older, aay to those sged a year and eleven
months. Herod was a cruel man, angry, and
afraid ; and it is vain to assume that he adjusted
the limit of his cruelties with the nicest accuracy.
As a basis of calculation the visit of the Magi,
though very important to us in other respects,
must be dismissed (but see Greswell, Diuertatbm
etc., Diu. 18th; Wieseler, Chron. Syn. p. 57 ft*.,
with all the references there).
The census taken by Augustus Caesar, which
fed to the journey of Mary from Nazareth just
before the birth of the Lord, has also been looked
on as an important note of time, in reference to
the chronology of toe life of Jesus. Several dif-
ficulties have to be disposed of ir considering it.
(i.) It is argued that then is no record in other
histories of a census of the whole Roman empire
in the time of Augustus, (ii.) Such a census, if
held during the reign of Herod the Great, would
not hare included Judas, for it was not yet a Ro-
man province, (iii.) The Roman mode of taking
such a census was with reference to actual residence,
so that It would not have been requisite for Joseph
to go to Bethlehem, (iv.) The state of Mary at
the time would render such a journey less probalisa.
Digitized by
Google
1382 JRSTJ8 CHRIST
(t.) St Loke himself seems to say tint this
nt not actually taken until ten yens later (ii. 2).
To then objection*, of which it need not be laid
Strauss has made the wont, answers may be given
in detail, though scarcely in this place with the
proper completeness, (i.) "As we know of the
legit actiotut and their abrogation, which were
quite at important in respect to the early period
of Roman history, as the census of the empire was
in respect to a later period, not from the historical
works of Liry, Dionysius, or Polybius, but from a
legal work, the ImtiiuUi of Gaius; to we should
think it strange if the works of Paullus and Ulpian
De Cetwbut had come down to us perfect, and no
mention were made in them of the census of Au-
gustus ; while it would not surprise us that in the
ordinary histories of the time it should be passed
over in silence" (Hnschke in Wieteler, p. 78).
" If Suetonius in hia life [of Augustus] does not
mention this census, neither does Spartian in bis
lift of Hadrian devote a single syllable to the edic-
tum perpetuum, which, in later times, has chiefly
adorned the name of that emperor " (ibid.). Thus
it teems that the argumenium de taciturnitale is
very far from conclusive. The edict possibly af-
fected only the provinces, and in them was not car-
ried out at once; and in that case it would attract
less attention at any one particular moment.
In the time of Augustus all the procurators of
the empire were brought under his sole control and
supervision for the first time A. u. c. 731 (Dion.
Cass. liii. 32). This movement towards central-
isation render* it not improbable that a general
census of the empire should be ordered, although
it may not have been carried into effect suddenly,
nor intended to be so. But proceedings in the
way of an estimate of the empire, if not an actual
census, are distinctly recorded to have taken place
In the time of Augustus. " Huio addenda: sunt
mensune limitum et terminorum ex libris August!
et Neronis Oeaarum: sed et Balbi mensoria, qui
temporibus August! omnium provinciarum et civi-
tatum formas et mensural compertas in commen-
taries retulit et legem agrariam per unirersitatem
provinciarum distinxit et declaravit" (Frontinus,
in the Kei Agrar. Aud. of Goes, p. 109, quoted
by Wiesekr). This is confirmed from other sources
(Wieteler, pp. 81, 82). Augustus directed, as we
learn, a "breviarium totius imperii" to be made,
.n which, according to Tacitus, "Opes publics!
oontinebantur: quantum avium sociorumque in
amis, quot classes, regna, provincial, tributa aut
vectigalia et necessitates ac largitiones" (Tacit.
Aim. I. 11; Sueton. Aug. 28, 101; Dion. Can.
liii. 30, M. 33, given in Wieteler; see also Ritaebl,
in Rhein. Mm. fir PhiloL New Series, L 481).
All this makes a census by order of Augustus in
the highest degree probable, apart from St. Luke's
'estimony. The time of our Lord's birth was most
wopitious. Except some troubles in Dacia, the
$oman world was at peace, and Augustas was in
the fall enjoyment of his power. But there are
persons who . though they would at once believe this
fact on tbe testimony of some inferior historian,
added to these confirmatory facta, reject it just be-
) an Evangelist has said it. (ii. and iii.) Next
i tbe objection, that, as Judas was not yet a
Roman province, inch a census wouid not have in-
traded that country, and that It was not taken from
the residence of each person, but from the place
jf bis origin. It is very probable that the mode
xf taking the census would afford a eitw to tbe
JESUS CHRIST
origin of it Augustus was willing to include ta
hia census all the tributary kingdoms, for tbe regna
are mentioned in the passage in Tacitus; but this
could scarcely be enforced. Perhaps Herod, deair
ing to gratify the emperor, and to emulate him u>
his lore for this kind of information, was ready ta
undertake the census for Judaea, but in order that
it might appear to be his rather than the emperor's,
he took it in the Jewish manner rather than in the
Roman, in the place whence the family sprang,
rather than in that of actual residence. There
might be some hardship in this, and we might
wonder that a woman about to become a mother
should be compelled to leave her home for inch ■
purpose, if we were sure that it was not voluntary.
A Jew of the house and lineage of David would
not willingly forego that position, and if it were
necessary to assert it by going to the city of David,
he would probably make some sacrifice to do so.
Thus tbe objection (iv.), on the ground of the state
of Mary's health, is entitled to little consideration.
It is said, indeed, that " all went to be taxed, every
one into his own city " (Luke ii. 8); but not that
the decree prescribed that they should. Nor could
there well be any means of enforcing such a regu-
lation. But the principle being adopted, that Jews
were to be taxed in the places to which their fam-
ilies belonged, St Luke tells us by these words that
at a matter of fact it was generally followed, (v.)
The objection that, according to St Ijike's own
admission, the census was not taken now, but when
Quirinus was governor of Syria, remains to be dis-
posed of. St Luke makes two statements, that at
the time of our Lord's birth ("in those days")
there was a decree for a census, and that this taxing
first came about, or took effect (vroaVn iyivvro),
when Cyrenius, or Quirinus, was governor of Syria
(Luke ii. 1, 2). And as the two statements are
quite distinct, and the very form of expression calk
special attention to seme remarkable circumstance
about this census, no historical inaccuracy is proved,
unless the statements are shown to be contradic-
tory, or one or other of them to be untrue. That
Straws makes such a charge without establiahing
either of these grounds, is worthy of a writer as
dishonest (Leben Jen, i., iv. 32). Now, without
going into all the theories that have been proposed
to explain this second verse, there is no doubt that
the words of St. Luke con be explained in a nat-
ural manner, without violence to the sense or con-
tradiction. Herod undertakes tbe census according
to Jewish forms; but his death the same year put)
an end to it, and no more is heard of it: but for
its influence sa to the place of our Lord's birth it
would not hsre been recorded at alL But the
Evangelist knows that, as soon as a census (Awo-
ypaip4i) is mentioned, persons conversant with Jew-
ish history will think at once of the census taken
after the banishment of Archelaus, or about ten
years later, which was avowedly a Roman census,
and which caused at first some resistance in con s* -
queue* (Joseph. Ant. xviil. 1, § 1). The second
verse therefore means — >' No census was actually
completed then, end I know that the first Romas
census was that which followed the banishment of
Archelaus; but the decree went out much ea rl ie r
in the time of Herod." That this is the only pos-
sible explanation of so vexed a passage cannot of
ooune be affirmed." But It will bear this Inter-
a Bee a summary of the older theories In Xtanoaj
OnLua.B.2); also in Mayer (In Luc IL 2), who ghat
Digitized by
Google
JESUS CHRIST
pretation, and upon the whole evidence there ia no
ground whatever for denying either assertion of the
Evangelist, or for oonsideruig them irreconcilable.
Many writers have confounded an obscurity with a
proved inaccuracy. The value of this census, as a
(act in the chronology of the life of Christ, depends
on the connection which is sought to be established
between it and the insurrection which broke out
under Matthias and Judas, the son of Sariphasus,
in the last illness of Herod (Joseph. Ant. zv. 6, §
1). If the insurrection arose out of the census, a
point of connection between the sacred history and
that of Josephus is made out Such a connection,
however, has not been clearly made out (see Wiese-
far, OUhuusen, and others, for the grounds on which
it is supposed to rest).
The age of Jesus at his baptism (Luke iiL 23)
aflbrds an element of calculation. "And Jesus
Himself began to be about (&«0 thirty y«*rs of
age." Born in the beginning of A. v. ft 760 (or
the end of 719), Jesus would be thirty in the be-
ginning of A. v. c. 780 (a. d. 37). Greswell is
probably right in placing the baptism of our Lord
in the beginning of this year, and the first Passover
during his ministry would be that of the same
year; Wieseler places the baptism later, in the
spring or summer of the same year. (On the
sense of Apxo/icror, see the commentators.) To
this first Passover after the baptism attaches a note
of time which will confirm the calculations already
made. " Then said the Jews, Forty and six years
was this Temple in building (qlcoSsu^Oi)), and wilt
Thou rear it up in three days?" There can be
no doubt that this refers to the rebuilding of the
Temple by Herod: it cannot mean the second
Temple, built after the Captivity, for this was fin-
ished in twenty years (b. C. 636 to B. c 516).
Herod, in the eighteenth year of his reign (Joseph.
AM. zv. 11, § 1), began to reconstruct the Temple
on a larger and more splendid scale (a. u. C 7341.
The work was not finished till Ion; after his death,
till A. u. c. 818. It is inferred from Josephus
(AM. xv. 11, §§ 5, 6) that it was begun in the
month Cialeu, A. u. a 731. And if the Passover
at which this remark was made was that of A. D.
ft 780, then forty-five years and some months hare
elapsed, which, according to the Jewish mode of
reckoning (p. 1381), would be spoken of as "forty
and six years."
Thus the death of Herod enables us to fix a
boundary on one side to the calculations of our
Lord's birth. The building of the Temple, for
forty-six years, confirms this, and also gives a
boundary on the other. From the star of the Magi
nothing conclusive can be gathered, nor from the
aansus of Augustus. One datum remains: the
eommencement of the preaching of John the Bap-
tist ia connected with the fifteenth year of the reign
if Tiberius Cesar (Luke iii. 1). The rule of Ti-
jerius may be calculated either from the beginning
at* his sole reign, after the death of Augustus, A.
U. c. 767, or from his joint government with Au-
gustus, ». e. from the beginning of A. u. c. 766.
In the latter case the fifteenth year would corre-
JESUS CHRIST
1388
an aesount of the view, e s po us ed by many, that QsJv-
eaas was now a sptcial eommwwmtr for this emeu in
Syria (tyqunworrot rfc Svjxm), wUeh the Greek
wUl not bear. But if the theory of the younavr Zmnpt
{aw above, Oraamos) be eomot, than Qulrlnus was
Swiee governor of Syria, and the Kvangelist would , pothesU than some others. [See addition to Or
hare refer to h'v former rule. The dtflculty la that . ay Dr. Vvoolsar. Amar. sd.— H.]
apond with A. u. o. 779, which goes to confirm tbt
rest of the calculations relied on in this article.
An endeavor has been made to deduce the time
of the year of the birth of Jems from the fact that
Zacharias was "a priest of the course of Abia"
(Luke i. 6). The twenty-four courses of priests
served in the Temple according to a regular weekly
cycle, the order of which is known. The date of
the conception of John would be about fifteen
months before the birth of our Lord, and if the
date of the latter be A. u. c. 750, then the former
would fall in A. u. ft 748. Can it be ascertained
in what part of the year 748 the course of Abia
would be on duty in the Temple? The Talmud
preserves a tradition that the Temple was destroyed
by Titus, A. D. 70, on the ninth day of the month
Ab. Josephus mentions the date as the 10th of
Ab (A J. vi. 4, §§ 5, 8). Without attempting to
follow the steps by which these are reconciled, it
seems that the "course" of Jehoiarib had just
entered upon its weekly duty at the time the Tem-
ple was destroyed. Wieseler, assuming that the
day iu question would be the same as the 6th of
August, A. u. C. 823, reckons back the weekly
courses to A. c. c. 748, the course of Jehoiarib
being the first of all (1 Chr. xxiv. 7). "It fol-
lows," he says, " that the ministration of the course
of Abia, 74 years 10 months and 2 days, or (reck-
oning 19 intercalary years) 27,335 days earlier (=
162 hieratic circles and 119 days earlier), fell be-
tween the 3d and 9th of October, A. u. C. 748.
Reckoning from the 10th of October, on which
Zacharias nvght reach his house, and allowing
nine months for the pregnancy of Elizabeth, to
which six months are to be added (Luke i. 96),
we have in the whole one year and three months,
which gives the 10th of January as the date of
Christ's birth." Greswell, however, from the same
starting-point, arrives at the date April 5th; and
when two writers so laborious can thus differ in
their conclusions, we must rather suspect the sound-
ness of their method than their accuracy in the use
of it
Similar differences will be found amongst eminent
writers il every part of the chronology of the Gos-
pels. For example, the birth of our Lord is placed
in B. c. 1 by Pearson and Hug: b. c. 2 by Scaliger ;
b. c. 3 by Baronius, Calvisius, Suskind, and Paulus;
B. ft 4 by Lamy, Bengel, Anger, Wieseler, and
Greswell; B. ft 6 by Usher and Petavius; B. ft 7
by Ideler and Sanclemente. And whilst the cal-
culations given above seem sufficient to determine
us, with Lamy, Usher, Petavius, Bengel, Wieseler,
and Greswell, to the close of B. c. 5, or early part
of B. c. 4, let it never be forgotten that there ia a
distinction between these researches, which the
Holy Spirit has left obscure and doubtful, and " the
weightier matters " of the Gospel the things which
directly pertain to man's salvation. The silence of
the inspired writers, and sometimes the obscurity
of their allusions to matters of time and place,
have given rise to disputation. But their words
admit of no doubt when they tell us that Christ
Jesus came into the world to save sinners, and that
Jew thus (Int. xvM. i, f 1) matins that Qumnas
w«e sent, altar she banishment of Arahelaus, to sake
a eaaaus. tsthar Zmnpt would sat this authority
astai, or would hold that Qulrlnus, twice govsmor,
twice made a oausns ; which la scarcely an easier hy-
Digitized by
Google
1884
JESUS CHRIST
wicked hands crucified and slew Him, and that we
and all men must own Him as the Lord and Re-
deemer.
SOURCES. — The bibliography of the subject of
the Life of Jesus has been most full; set out in
Base, Leben Jesu, Leipsic, 1854, 4th edition. It
would be vaiu to attempt to rival that enormous
catalogue. The principal works employed in the
present article are the Four Gospels, and the
best-known commentaries on them, including those
of Bengel, Wetatein, Lightfoot, De Wette, LUcke,
Olshausen, Stier, Alford, Williams, and others;
Neander, Leben Jem (Hamburg, 1837 [6« Aufl.
1852, Eng. transl. by M'Clintock and Blumenthal,
New York, 1848]), as against Strauss, Leben Jem
(Tubingen, 1835), also consulted; Stackhouse'a
History of the Bible ; Ewald, Geschichte da Volket
Israel, vol. v., Christus (Giittingen, 1857 [3« Ausg.
1867] ) ; Baumgarten, Gachichtt Jem (Brunswick,
1859); Krummacher, Der Leidend* Christus
(Bielefeld, 1854). Upon the harmony of the Gos-
pels, see the list of works given under Gospkus:
the principal works used for the present article have
been, Wieseler, Chronohgische Synapse, etc., Ham-
burg, 1843 ; Greswell's Harmony, Prolegomena,
and Dissertations, Oxford, v. y. ; two papers by Dr.
Robinson in the BibL Sacra for 1845 ; and Clausen,
Tabula Synoptical, Karaite, 1829. Special works,
such as Dean Trench on the Parables and on the
Miracles, have also been consulted ; and detached
monographs, sermons, and essays in periodicals.
For toe text of the Go&pels, the 7th edition of
Teschendorf's Greek Test, has been employed.
W. T.
• Moral Character of Jems. — According to
the unanimous teaching of the Apostles, and the
faith of universal Christendom, Jesus was a divine-
human person, the God-Man (BtivBpeswos), and
hence the Mediator between God and man and the
Saviour of the race. The idea and aim of religion,
as union and communion of man with God, was
fully actualized in Christ, and can be actualized in
at only in proportion as we become united to Him.
The Synoptic Gospels represent Him predominantly
is the divine man, the Gospel of John as the inear-
late God ; the result in both is the same.
The human side of Christ is expressed by the
lesignation the Son. of Man (t vlbi tov artpdhrov
— mark the article), the divine side by the term
the Son of God (b vibs rot 9tov, also with the
definite article, to distinguish Him as the eternal,
only begotten Son from ordinary viol or rixra Btov
whose adoption is derived from his absolute Son-
ship). The term 6 vlbt toE la>Bp\irou, which Christ
applies to himself about eighty times in the Gospels,
is probably derived from Dan. vii. 13, where it sig-
nifies the Messiah, as the head of a universal and
iternal kingdom, and from the ideal representation
. f man as the divine image and head of creation in
Pa. viii. In the Syriac, the Saviour's native dialect,
bar notho, the son of man, is man generically;
the filial part of the compound denotes the identity
and purity of the generic idea. This favorite des-
ignation of the Gospels places Christ, on the one
hand, on a common level with other men as par-
taking of their nature and constitution, and, on the
other, above all other men as the absolute and per-
fect man, the representative head of the race, the
second Adam (eomp. Rom. v. 19 ff. ; 1 Cor. xv. 97,
Heb. 1. 9-8). The best and greatest of men are
bounded by their nationality. Abraham, Moses,
■ad E2ya> were Jsws, and could not command
JESUS CHRIST
universal sympathies. Solon, Socrates, and Plata
were Greeks, and can only be fully appreciated as
types of the Greek character. Christ is the king
of men, who " draws all men " to him, because bs
is the universal, absolute man, elevated above the
limitations of race and nationality and the prejudices
of any particular age. He had the purest humanity,
free from the demoniac adulteration of sin. He is
most intensely human. Never man felt, spake,
acted, suffered, died so humanly, and so as to ap-
peal to the sympathies and to call out the affection*
of all men without distinction of race, generation,
and condition of society. It was an approach to
this idea of an universal humanity when the Jewish
philosopher Philo, a contemporary of Christ, called
the Logos, the eternal Word. 6 iXnBwbs (Utysrrot
As sin and death proceeded from the first Adam
who was of the earth earthly, so righteousnasi and
life proceed from the second Adam who is tram
heaven heavenly.
The perfect humanity of Christ has been the
subject of peculiar interest and earnest investiga-
tion in the present age, and a deeper insight Into
it is perhaps the most substantial modern contribu-
tion to Christology, which is the very heart of the
Christian system.
(1. ) The singular perfection of Christ's character
viewed as a man, according to the record of the
Gospels confirmed by the history of the church and
the experience of the believer, consists first in his
absolute freedom from sin both original and actual.
This must not be confounded with freedom from
temptation. Temptability and peccability (posse
peccare) is an essential feature in the moral eoo-
stitution of man, and actual temptation is necessary
as a test of virtue; hence Christ as a true man was
tempted, like Adam and all other men (wewtunur-
uiyov Kara wdyra muT buoiimrra), not only in the
wilderness but throughout his whole life (Matt. iv.
1-11; Luke xxU. 28; Heb. it. 15). Bat be never
yielded to temptation, and turned every assault of
the power of sin into a victory of virtue. He and
he alone of all men stood in no need of pardon
and redemption, of regeneration and conversion ; be
and he alone could challenge even bis bitter (bat
with the question (John viii. 46): "Which of yon
can convince me of sin ? " No such claim has ever
been set up by any great man. It is true, Xenophon
says of Socrates, that no one ever saw him do or
heard him say any thing impious or unholy (obttXt
toVotc XwKpirovs ovbtv aVcjStt oo8* hyotriow
oOrt lrpdTToyTOs etbey, oorc \4yovroi Ijieovtrtr,
Memorab. i. 11). But this is the judgment not
of Socrates himself, but of a warm admirer, a judg-
ment moreover that must be judged by the heathen
standard of morality. Christ's sinlessness rests not
only on the unanimous testimony of John the
Baptist and of his disciples (Acts iii. 14; 1 Pet. L
19, ii. 22, iii. 18; 2 Cor. T. 91; 1 John it. 99,
iii. 5,7; Heb. iv. 18, vii. 96), and even his enemies
or outside observers (Matt xxvii. 19, 24-54; Luke
xxiii. 22-47 ; Matt, xxvii. 4), but is confirmed by
his own solemn testimony, the whole coarse of hi
life, and the very purpose for which he appeared.
Setf-deoeption in this case would border on mad-
ness; falsehood would overthrow the whole moral
foundation of Christ's character. If be was a sin-
ner, be must have been conscious of it, and shown
it in some word or deed, or confessed it in the name
of common honesty. To maintain a successful show
of sinless perfection without a corresponding reality
through the meat trying situations of life, wools
Digitized by
Google
JESUS CHBIST
M itself the greatest man. miracle, or monstrosity
.rather, that can be imagined.
(S). Ptrftd ho&nett is the positive aide of sin-
t mi 1 1 II It consists in the beautiful harmony and
symmetry of aD Tirtnei and graces. Christ's life
was one oontinoed act of lore or aulf-eonsecration
to God and to man. " It was absolute love to God
in purest humanity." The opposite and to us ap-
parently contradictory virtues were found in him
in equal proportion. He was free from all one-
sidedness, which constitute! the weakness as well
as tbe strength of the most eminent men. The
moral forces were so well tempered and moderated
by each other that none was unduly prominent,
none carried to excess, none alloyed by the kindred
failing. Each was checked and completed by tbe
opposite grace. He combined innocence with
strength, km with earnestness, humility with dig-
nity, wisdom with courage, devotion to God with
interest in man. He is justly compared to the
lamb and the lion. His dignity was free from
pride, his self-denial free from moroseness; his zeal
never degenerated into passion, nor his constancy
into obstinacy, nor his benevolence into weakness,
nor his tenderness into sentimentality; be was
squally removed from tbe excesses of the legalist,
the pietist, the mystic, tbe ascetic, and tbe enthu-
siast. His character from tender childhood to ripe
manhood was absolutely unique and original, moving
in unbroken communion with God, overflowing with
the purest love to man, free from every sin and
error, exhibiting in doctrine and example the ideal
sf virtue, sealing the purest life with the sublimest
death, and ever acknowledged since as the perfect
model of goodness for universal imitation. AH
human greatness loses on closer inspection; but
Christ's character grows more pure, sacred, and
lovely, tbe better we know him. The whole range
of history and fiction furnishes no parallel to it
His person is the great miracle of which his works
sic only the natural manifestations.
Such a perfect man hi the midst of universal
Imperfection and sinfulness can only be understood
on the ground of the godhead dwelling in Him.
Tbe perfection of his humanity is the proof of his
divinity. All other theories, tbe theory of enthu-
siasm and self-deception, the theory of imposture,
snd the theory of mythical or legendary fiction,
explain nothing, but substitute an unnatural mon-
strosity for a supernatural miracle. Only a Jesus
sould have invented a Jesus. Even Kenan must
admit that " whatever be the surprises of the future,
Jesus will never be surpassed; his worship will grow
young without ceasing; his legend (?) will call forth
tsars without end ; his sufferings will melt the
noblest hearts ; all ages will proclaim that, among
the sons of men, there is none bom greater than
Jesus." But this snd similar admissions of modem
infidels refute their own hypothesis, snd have no
meaning unless we admit the truth of Christ's
testimony concerning his unity with the Father and
his extraordinary claims which in the mouth of
svery other man would be blasphemy or madness,
while from his lips they excite no surprise snd ap-
pear as natural and easy as the rays of ths shining
am. The church of all ages and denoft .nations
in response to these claims worships and adores,
sxdaiming with Thomas: "My Lon'indmyGodl"
This is the testimony of the soul left to its deepen
'nstincts and noblest aspirations, the soul which
was originally made for Christ snd finds in Him
*t solution of all moral problems, the sattsmcrion
JESUS CHRIST 188£
of all its wants, the unfailing fountain of everlasting
life and peace.
Perto»ai Apptartmct of Jtuu. — None of the
Evangelists, not even the beloved disciple snd
bosom friend of Jesus has given us the least hint
of his countenance and stature. In this respect our
instincts of natural affection have been wisely over-
ruled. He who is the Saviour of all and the perfect
exemplar of humanity should not be identified with
tie particular lineaments of one race or nationality.
We should cling to the Christ in the spirit and in
glory rather than to the Christ in the flesh. Never-
theless there must have been an overawing majesty
and irresistible charm even in his personal appear-
ance to the spiritual eye, to account for the readi-
ness with which the disciples forsaking all things
followed him in reverence snd boundless devotion.
He had not the physiognomy of a sinner. Ha
reflected from his eye and countenance the serene
peace and celestial beauty of a sinless soul in blessed
harmony with God. In the absence of authentic
representation, Christian art in its irrepressible
desire to exhibit in visible form the fairest among
the children of men, was left to its own imperfect
conception of Ideal beauty. The church under
persecution in the first three centuries was rather
averse to all pictorial representations of Christ, and
associated with him in his state of humiliation (but
not in his state of exaltation) the idea of uncomell-
nesa ; taking too literally the prophetic description
of the suffering Messiah in the twenty-second Psalm
and the fifty-third chapter of Isaiah. The victorious
church after Constantine, starting from the Mes-
sianic picture in the forty-fifth Psalm and the Song
of Solomon, saw the same Lord in heavenly glory,
•• fairer than tbe children of men " and " altogether
lovely." Yet the difference waa not so great as it is
sometimes represented. For even the ante-Nicene
fathers (especially Clement of Alexandria), besides
expressly distinguishing between the first appear-
ance of Christ in lowliness and humility, and bis
second appearance in glory and majesty, did not
mean to deny to the Saviour even in the days of
his flesh a higher order of spiritual beauty, " the
glory of the only begotten of the Father full of
grace and of truth," which shone through the veil
of his humanity, snd which at times, as on the
mount of transfiguration, anticipated his future
g»T-
The first formal description of the personal ap-
pearance of Christ, which, though not authentic and
certainly not older than the fourth century, exerted
great influence on the pictorial representations, is
ascribed to the heathen Publius Lenttdus, a sup-
posed contemporary of Pilate and Proconsul of
Judisa, in an apocryphal Latin lettes to the Roman
Senate which was first discovered in a MS. copy
of the writings of Ansehn of Canterbury, and is ss
follows: —
"In this time appeared a man, who lives till
now, a man endowed with great powers. Men call
Him a great prophet; his own disciples term Him
the Son of God. His name is Jesus Christ Hs
restores the dead to life, and cures the sick of all
manner of diseases. This man k> of noble and well-
proTortloned stature, with a face full of kindness
and yet firmness, so that the beholden both lovs
His and fear Him. His hair is the color of wine,
and golden at the not; straight, and without
lustre, but from the level of the sen curling and
glossy, and divided down the centre after the fashion
af the Nasarenes. Hiatseahsadlssren snd smooth
Digitized by
Google
1386
JESUS CHRIST
fcta face without blemish, and enhanced by a tem-
pered bloom. HU countenance ingenooue and kind.
Nose and mouth are in no way faulty. Hie beard
■i full, of the lame color as his hair, and forked in
form ; his eyes blue, and extremely brilliant. In
reproof and rebuke he is formidable; in exhortation
and teaching, gentle and amiable of tongue. None
have seen Him to laugh; but many, on the con-
trary, to weep. His person is tall; his hands beau-
tiful and straight In speaking He is deliberate
and grave, and little given to loquacity. In beauty
surpassing most men." Another description is
found in the works of the Greek theologian John
of Damascus of the 8th century. It ascribes to
Christ a stately person, beautiful eyes, curly hair,
" black beard, yellow complexion and long fingers,
like his mother."
On the ground of these descriptions and of the
Abgar and the Veronica legends, arose a vast num-
ber of pictures of Christ which are divided into two
classes: the Sahmtor pictures, with the expression
of calm serenity and dignity, without the faintest
mark of grief, and the Ecce Homo pictures of the
suffering Saviour with the crown of thorns. But
" no figure of Christ, in color, or bronze, or marble,
can reach the ideal of perfect beauty which came
forth into actual reality in the Son of God and Son
of Man. The highest creations of art are here but
feeble reflections of the original in heaven ; yet
prove the mighty influence which the living Christ
continually exerts even upon the imagination and
sentiment of the great painters and sculptors, and
which He will exert to the end of the world."
(SebafTs Hilary of the Church, vol. iii. p. 671.)
Literature. — I. General tcorki on the Life
of Christ not mentioned in the above article. —
J. J. Hess, Leoemgtichichte Jem, 8 vols. Zurich,
1781, 8th ed. 1823. H. E. G. Paulus, An Ltben
Jem, 2 Theile in 4 Abth. Heidelb. 1828, and C. F.
•on Ammon, Die Gesch. dtt Ltben Jem, 8 vols.
Leips. 1842-47 (rationalistic). K. Hase, Dot Le-
btn Jem, 5th ed. 1805 (abridged trans, from an
earlier ed. by J. F. Clarke, Boston, 1860). J. P.
Lange, Dai Ltben Jem, 3 vols. Heidelb. 1847
(English trans. 6 vols. Edinb. 1864). J. J. van
Oosterzee, Leven van Jemi, 8 vols. 1846-51, 2d
ed., 1863-65. Riggenbsch, Vorlemngen Sber dai
Ltben Jem, Basel, 1858. J. N. Sepp (R. Cath.),
Dai Ltben Jem, 2d ed. 6 vols. Regensburg, 1866.
1. Buchcr (R. Cath.), Dai Ltben Jem, Stuttgart,
1869. F. Schleiermacher, Dat Ltben Jem, Berlin,
1866 (a posthumous work of little value). D. F.
Strauss, Dat Ltben Jem, krititeh bearbtittt, the
large work in I vols. Tubingen, 1835 sq., 4th ed.
1840, English transl., 3 vols. Lond. 1846, 2 vols.
New York, 1856; the smaller and more popular
work, Dat Leben Jem fur dat Deuttcht Volk, in
1 vol. Leipzig, 1864, English transl. 2 vols. Lond.
1886 (the mythical theory). Comp. also Straus's
Dtr Chrittui del Glaubent und dtr Jemi der Get-
ehichlc, and Die Halben und die Ganten (against
Sehenkel and Hengstenberg), Berlin, 1866. The
literature against Strauss is very large; sea Hase.
E. Return, Vie de Jimt, Paris, 1868, 13* id., revue
st augmentee, 1867 (the legendary hypothesis).
Renan also called forth a whole library of books
«nd essays in reply. E. de Pressens& Jimt Chritt,
wn tempt, la tie, mm autre (against Renan),
Paris, 1866. (Translated into German and Eng-
ssh.) G. Chlborn, Die moderntn DanteBungen
sat i^beni Jem, Hanover, 1866, English transl.,
Tie Modem Stprittntatiomt of me Uft y Jtmt,
JESUS CHRIST
by C. E. Grinneli, Boston, 1868. Tbeod. Kales
Gachichte Jem ton AVunm, voL L, Zurich, 1867
English sod American works: C. i. EUieott, Hit-
torical Lecture* on the Life of our Lord Jam
Chritt, 1859, reprinted Boston, 1862. 3. J. An
draws, The Life of our Lord upon the Earth, New
York, 1862. Of a popular character, Henry Wan.
Jr., The Lift of the Saviour, Boston, 1833, re-
printed 1868; Z. Eddy, Tht Lift of Chritt, 1888
In course of preparation, H. W. Beeeber, Life of
Chritt. See further the literature under Gomu,
II. Or the Chronology of tht Life of Chritt. —
K. Wlesder, Chronologuche Bynopte dtr tier Evan-
gtlien, Hamb. 1843 (English trans. Lond. 1864)|
R. Anger, Zur Chronoi. del Lehramtei Chritti,
1848; C.J. A. Krafft, Chronologit «. Harmonie
dtr tier EvangeUen, Erlangen, 1848; F. W. J.
Licbtonstein, Lebcnigtiduchte da fferrn J. C. as
ehronoL Ueberneht, Erlangen, 1866; comp. his
art. J etui Chrittui in Hersog's J>'tai-EncykL vi.
663-696. On the year of Christ's birth see also
F. Piper, De externa Vila J. C. Chronologia,
Getting. 1836 ; Seyffarth, Chronologia Sacra, Leips.
1846; G. Rosch, Zum Gtburttjahr Jem, in tht
Jahrb. f. Deuttcht TheoL 1866, xi. 8-48, 838.
III. On the Moral Character and SuUettnem of
Chritt. — Abp. Newcome, ObttrvaHont on our
Lord' i Conduct at a Dame Jnttructor, etc., Land.
1782, reprinted Charlestown, 1810. ¥. V. Bent-
hard, Vtrtuch uber den Plan Jem, 6th ed. by
Heubner, Wittenberg, 1830 (English transl. by O.
A. Taylor, N. Y. and Andover, 1831). C. UaV
mann, Die SindhtigkeU Jem, 7th ed., Hamburg;,
1864 (English translation by R. C. L. Brown,
Edinb. 1858, from the sixth edition, which is su-
perseded by the seventh ). W. E. Channing, sermon
on the Character of Chritt (Hat*. xvii. 6), in his
Worn, Boston, 1848, voL Iv. pp. 7-28. Andrews
Norton, Internal Evidence! of tht Gin u inenem of
the Gotpeli, Boston, 1866, pp. 64-62, 246 f£ John
Young, The Chritt of Hittory, Lond. and New
York, 1855, new ed. 1868. W. F. Gess, Die Lthrt
ton der Perton Chritti eutmckeli out dem SelbmU
heumnttein Chritti und out dem Zeugma der Apot-
tel, Basel, 1856. Fred, da Rougemont, Chritt a
tei timoini, 2 vols. Paris, 1866. Horace Bushnell,
7"*« Character of Jtmt, forbidding kit potnblt
Clauiftcation with Men, New York, 1861 (a sepa-
rate reprint of the tenth chapter of his Nature
and tht Supernatural, N. Y. 1869). J. J. van
Oosterzee, Dai Bild Chritti nock der Schrifl, from
the Dutch, Hamb. 1864. Dan. Sehenkel, Dai
CharaJeterbild Jem (a caricature rather), Wies-
baden, 3d ed. 1864 (translated, with Introduc-
tion and Notes, by W. H. Furness, 2 vols. Boston,
1866; comp. Fumess's Hilton) of Jeiut, Boston,
1853, and other works). Theod. Keim, Der ga-
chichlHche Chrutut, Zurich, 3d ed. 1866. PbJL
Schaff, Tht Perton of Chritt the Mtradt of Hit-
tory ; with a Reply to Btrautt and Renan, and a
Collection of Tetthnonia of Unbeliever*, Boston,
1865 (the same in German, Gotha, 1866; in
Dutch, with an Introduction by Dr. van Oosteraee,
Groningen, 1866; and hi French). Eeet Homo,
London and Boston, 6th ed. 1867 (an anony-
mous sensation book of great ability, classical style,
and good tendency, but bad exegesis, on the h man
perfection of Christ ss the founder of a new king
dom, and the kindier of erthuaiasm for humanity.
Comp. among the innumerable reviews favorablt
and unfavorable, those of Doner in the Jahrb. f
Deuttcht TheoL for 1867, p. 344 ff., and Ghdstnm
Digitized by
Google
JETHER
m (hod Words, 1868, reprinted in a separate vo.-
Bt). Eeet Deiu, load. 1867 (in anonymous coun-
terpart of Ecce Homo). Dent Homo, by Theophi-
us Parsons, Chicago, 1867 'Swedenborgian). C. A.
Row, The Jetut of the EvangeUttt : or, an Exam-
ination of the Internal Evidence for our Lords
Divine Minim, Loud. 1868.
17. On Image* of Christ. — P. E. Jablonski
(1767), De origine imnginum Christi Domini, Lugd.
Batav. 1804. W. Grimm, Die &ige mm Ursprung
itr ChristusHlder, Berlin, 1843. Dr. LegisGliick-
atlig, Chrittus-Arch&ologie. Dae Buch von Jttut
Chrisius und itinem wahren EbenbUae, Prag, 1863,
♦to. Mr*. Jameson and Lady Eastlake, The His-
tory of our Lord at exemplified in Works of Art
(with illustration!), 3d ed., 9 roll., Lond. 1865.
P. 8.
JETHER ("in? [firing, cord, and aowa-
danee, residue]). L ('loSip: Jethro.) Jethro,
the father-in-law of Moaea, U to called in Ex. iv.
18 and the margin of A. V., though in the Heb.-
8am. text and Sam. version the reading it WV,
aa in the Syriae and Targ. Jon., one of Kennicott's
MSS., and a MS. of Targ. Onk., No. 16 in De
Roaai'a collection.
2. Clttip- Jtther.) The fi rstborn of Gideon'i
seventy sons, who were all, with the exception of
Jotham, the youngest, slain at Ophrah by Abime-
fech. At the time of his father's victorious pursuit
of the Midianites and capture of their kings he was
still a lad on his first battle-field, and feared to
draw his sword at Gideon's bidding, and avenge, as
the representative of the family, the slaughter of
his kinsmen at Tabor (Jndg. viii. 80).
3. CuBtp in I K. ii. 5, 33; 'lotio in 1 Chr. ii.
17; the Alex. MS. has U$tp in all the passages:
Jether.) The father of Aniasa, captain-general of
Absalom's army. Jether is merely another form
•f Ithra (3 Sam. xvii. 25), the Utter being prob-
ably a corruption. He is described in 1 Chr. ii.
17 aa an Islimaelite, which again is more likely to
be correct than the " Israelite " of the Heb. in 3
8am. xvii., or the " Jezreelite " of the LXX. and
Vulg. in the same passage. " Ishmaelite " is said
by the author of the Q/aest. Iltbr. in lib. Reg. to
have been the reading of the Hebrew, but there is
qo trace of it in the MSS. One MS. of Chronicles
leads "Israelite," as does the Targum, which adds
that he was called Jether the Ishmaelite, " because
be girt his loins with the sword, to help David
with the Arabs, when Abner sought to drive away
David and all the race of Jesse, who were not pure
to enter the congregation of Jehovah on account
of Ruth the Moabitess." According to Jarchi,
Jether was an Israelite, dwelling in the land of
Ishmnel, and thence acquired his surname, like the
house of Obededom the Gittite. Josephus calls
him 'ueifxnii (Ant. vil. 10, § 1). He married
Abigail. David's sister, probably during the sojourn
of the family of Jesse in the land of Moab, under
the protection of its king.
4. The son of Jada, a descendant of Hesron, of
the tribe of Judah (1 Chr. ii. 33). He died with
vnt children, and being the eldest son the suocea-
■Vm fell to his brother's family.
0. The son of Ezra, whose name occurs In a dis-
tasted passage in the genealogy of Judah (1 Chr.
«. 17). In the LXX. the name is repeated : "and
' r begat Miriam," etc. By the author of tae
JETHRO
1381
Htbr. in Par. be is said to bare beta
Aaron, Eara being another name for Aniram.
0. CuHfi Alex. Uitp.) Tho chief of a fam-
ily of warriors of the line of Asher, and father of
Jephunneh (1 Chr. vii. 38). He is probably tb%
same as Ithran in the preceding verse. One of
Kennicott's MSS. and the Alex, had Jether in both
W. A. W.
JETHETH (nn^ [pin, nail, Sim.]: 1«Mp ,
[Alex. U$tp, U0e0; Vat in 1 Chr. I««Vr:] J-
thttk), one of the phylarcht (A. V "dukes") whs
came of Esau (Gen. xxxvi. 40; 1 Chr. L 61).
enumerated separately from the genealogy of Esau's
chi'ilren in the earlier part of the chapter, '• accord-
ing to their families, after their places, by theil
names," and " according to their habitatirns in the
land of their possession " (w. 40-43). This record
of the Edomite phylarehs may point specially to
the placet and habitations, or towns, named after,
or occupied by them ; and even otherwise, we may
look for some trace of their names, after the custom
of the wandering tribes to leave such footprints in
the changeless desert. Identifications of several in
the list hare been proposed : Jetheth, as far as the
writer knows, has not been yet recovered. He may,
however, be probably found if we adopt the likely
suggestion of Simonla, n.|V=rnCC> "a nail,"
<* a tent-pin," etc. (and metaphorically "a prince,"
etc., as being stable, firm) = Arab. (X3«, jJo>,
with the tame signification. H-Wetideh, 5cXJi«J!
(n. of unity of the former), is a place in Nejd, said
to be in the Dahna (see Ishbak); there is also a
place called El-Wetid; and El-Wetidat (perhaps
pi. of the first-named ), which is the name of moun-
tains belonging to Benee 'Abd-Allah Ihn Ghatfan
(Maraud, a. w.). E. S. P.
JETHXAH (nbri>, i. ». JIthlah [high,
elevated, Gee.; hill-place, ' Fiirst] : 2iAo«<(; [Vat.
a«iAo»o;] Alex. [Aid. Comp.] 'It0\d: Jethela),
one of the cities of the tribe of Dan (Josh. xix.
43), named with Ajalon and Thimnathah. In the
Onomasticon it is mentioned, without any descrip-
tion or indication of position, as 'ItiKar. It bat
not since been met with, even by the indefatigable
Tobler in his late Wandering in that district. G.
JETHTtO ("VliT, i. e. Jlthro [pree'iroiieiice,
superiority] : '\o96p ■ [Jethro] ), called also Jether
and Hobab ; the son of Rf.uei., was priest or prince
of Midian, both offices probably being combined in
one person. Moses spent the forty years of his
exile from Egypt with him, and married his daugh-
ter Zipporah. By the advice of Jethro, Moses ap-
pointed deputies to judge the congregation and'
share the burden of government with himself (Ex.
xviii.)- On account of his local knowledge he was
entreated to remain with the Israelites throughout
their journey to Canaan; his room, however, was
supplied by the ark of the covenant, which super-
naturally Indicated the places for encamping (Num.
x- 11, 33). The idea conveyed by the nam* of
Jethro or Jether Is probably that of excellence,
and as Hobab may mean Moved, it is quite possi-
ble that both appellations were given to the tame
parson fcr similar reasons. That the custom of
having d ore than one nam* was common amoaf,
Digitized by
Google
1388
JETHBO
the Jewi we we in the cue of Benjamin, Benoni;
Solomon, Jedidiah, etc
It is said in Ex. U. 18 that the priest of Hidian
whose daughter Hoses married was Renel; after-
wards, at ch. iii. 1, he la called Jethro, as also in
ah. xriii. ; but in Num. x. 89 " Hobab the son of
Raguel the Hidianite " is called Moses' father-in-
law : assuming the identity of Hobab and Jethro,
we must suppose that " their father Keud," in Ex.
ii. 18, was really their grandfather, and that the
person who " said, How is it that ye are come so
soon to-day? " was the priest of ver. 16: whereas,
proceeding on the hypothesis that Jethro and Ho-
bab are not the same individual, it seems difficult to
determine the relationship of ReueL Jethro, Hobab,
and Hoses. The hospitality, freehearted and un-
sought, which Jethro at once extended to the un-
known homeless wanderer, on the relation of his
daughters that be had watered their flock, is a pic-
ture of eastern manners no less true than lovely.
We may perhaps suppose that Jethro, before his
acquaintance with Moses, was not a worshipper of
the true God. Traces of this appear in the delay
which Hoses had suffered to take place with respect
to the circumcision of his son (Ex. ir. 24-26):
Indeed it is eren possible that Zipporah had after-
wards been subjected to a kind of divorce (Ex.
xriii. 2, fTTPlvB?), on account of her attachment
to an alien creed, but that growing convictions
were at work in the mind of Jethro, from the cir-
cumstance of Israel's continued prosperity, till at
hut, acting upon these, he brought back his daugh-
ter, and declared that his impressions were con-
firmed, for "now he knew that the Lord was
greater than all gods, for in the thing wherein they
dealt proudly, he was above them : " consequently
we are told that "Jethro, Hoses' father-in-law,
took a burnt-offering and sacrifices for God: and
Aaron came and all the elders of Israel to eat bread
with Hoses' father-in-law be/ore God ; " as though
to celebrate the event of his conversion. Whether
or not the account given at Num. x. 29-32 refers
to this same event, the narrative at Ex. xriii. 27
coincides with Hobab's own words at Num. x. 30 ;
and, comparing the two, we may suppose that
Hoses did not prevail upon his father-in-law to
stay with the congregation. Calvin (in 6 tib. Motit
Comment.) understands w. 31, 32 thus: "Thou
hast gone with us hitherto, and hast been to us
Instead of eyes, and now what profit is it to tbee
if, having suffered so many troubles and difficulties,
thou dost not go on with us to inherit the promised
blessing?" And Hat. Henry imagines that Ho-
bab complied with this invitation, and that traces
of the settlement of his posterity in the land of
Canaan are apparent at Judg. i. 16 and 1 Sam. xv.
I. Some, and among them Calvin, take Jethro
and Eeuel to be identical, and call Hobab the
broihtr-in-hw of Hoses. The present punctuation
ef our Bibles does not warrant this. Why, at
Judg. 1. 16, Hoses' father-in-law is called >3'£
(Kenite, eomp. Gen. xv. 19), or why, at Num. xii.
1, Zipporah, if it be Zipporah, is called JTB73,
A. Y. Ethiopian, is not clear.
The Mohammedan name of Jethro Is Sboaib
•Koran, 7, 11). There is a tale in the Hidrash
that Jethro was a counsellor of Pharaoh, who tried
"a dissuade him from slaughtering the hraeuush
enfldren, and consequently, on account of his clem-
ency, was (breed to flee into Hidian, bat was n-
JKW
warded by becoming the father in- W» of Hans
(see Weil's Biblical Legend*, p. 93, not*). I Ja
thxr; Hoi>ar.] & L.
'JET UK ("flB} [prob. noma&c camp or car-
eft] : "Jrrovtt, 'lmoip, Itowkuih; [Tat. in 1 Che
v. 19, Toupawr:] Jetkw, [Jetur, Itmvi]), Gen
xxv. 15; 1 Cbr. i 31, v. 19. [Itotlsa.]
JEVEL. L (byp|J?> [perh. treasure of
God]: 1>*>; [Vat IIcmA.':] JelmtL) A chief
man of Judah, one of the Bene-Zerah [sons of
Z.] ; apparently at the time of the first "•'"r-ffli i l
in Jerusalem (1 Chr. ix. 6; eomp. 2).
8- (r«wv/A; Alex. IcovnA: Gebel) One of the
Bene-Adonikam [sons of A.] who returned to Je-
rusalem with Esdras (1 Esdr. riii. 89). [Jem.]
For other occurrences of this name see Jem.
JETJSH (tEW> [coBteUng or haitatmg]:
'I*o**, 'ltoiK, ItvVlaob. 1«b. W*: Jttm,
Jam).
1. pUofit, 'ImiA; Alex, in Gen. xxxri. 14,
lev*: Jtkut.] Son of Esau, by Abolibamah, the
daughter of Anah, the son of Zibeon the Hivito
(Gen. xxxri. 6, 14, 18; 1 Chr. L 36). It appears
from Gen. xxxvi. 20-26, that Anah is a man's name
(not a woman's, as might be thought from ver. 2),
and by comparison with ver. 2, that the Horitea
were Hlvites. Jeush was one of the Edomitiah
dukes (ver. 18 j. The Cethlb has repeatedly tt^V.,
Jebh.
2. ['iaois; Alex. I»>.] Head of a Benjamito
house, which existed in David's time, son of BuV
han, son of Jediael (1 Chr. vii. 10, 11).
3. ['Ivdii Alex, omits: Jatu.] A Levite, of
the bouse of Shimei, of the family of the Gersbon-
ites. He and his brother Beriah were reckoned
as one house in the census of the Levites taken in
the reign of David (1 Chr. xxiii. 10, 11).
4. ['Icovr; Vat. Iaoi/0; Alex, omits: Jdrnt.]
Son of Behoboam king of Judah, by AbihaQ, the
daughter of Eliab, the son of Jesse (2 Chr. xl. 18,
19). A. a H.
JETJZ QfiS) [eomuting] : 'Ufalf, [Vet.
loWsO Alex. Icovi: Jehut), head of a Benjamito
bouse in an obscure genealogy (1 Chr. riii. 10),
apparently son of Shaharaim and Hodesh his third
wife, and bom in Moab. A. C. H.
JEW CWTJ [patronym., see Judah]: 'lew
Joiet : Judasus, "i. e. Judasan; 'Io»8aff>, Esth.
riii. 17, [Gal. ii. 14; 'lovUXictt, 2 Msec, riii 11,
xiii. 21 ; 'Uv8cuKit, " as do the Jews," GaL ii 14;
n^TVfJ, 'lovtdiaTi, "in the Jews' language,"
2 K.* xriii. 26, 28; 9 Chron. xxxti. 18; Neb. iii.
24; Is. xxxri. 11, 13]). This name was properly
applied to a member of the kingdom of Judah after
the separation of the ten tribes. In this sense it
occurs twice in the second book of Kings, 2 K.
xvi. 6, xxv. 25, and seven times in the lster chap-
ters of Jeremiah : Jer. xxxii. 12, xxxiv. 9 (in con-
nection with Hebrew), xxxriii. 19, xl. 12, xli. 8,
xliv. 1, Iii. 28. After the Return the word received
a larger application. Partly from the predominance
of the members of the old kingdom of Judah among
those who returned to Palestine, partly from the
identification of Judah with the religious ideas and
hopes of the people, all the members of the new
state were called Jews (Judaana), and the name
was extended to the remnants of the rata I
Digitized by
Google
JEW
througboit the nations (Dan. ili. 8, 13; Ear. hr.
13, as, 4c; Neh. L 2, ii. 16, t. 1, Ac; Esth. Ui.
i ff., etc Cf. Joe ^iK. xi. 6, § 7, ixK^trao »>
re jro/ia Clovtafoi) /{ v) » ii/tipat ir4fitierar «
Da3vAaro? faro tt/t 'XovSa $ifA7;r • • .).
Under the name of " Judeans," the people of
Israel wen' knows to classical writers. The most
bmoui end interesting notice by a heathen writer
ii that of Taeitui (Hut. v. 9 ff.; cf. Ordli'i Ex-
ourtu). The trait of extreme exclusivenees with
which he specially charged them is noticed by many
other writers (Jut. Sat. xir. 103; Diod. Sic Ed.
84, 1; Quint. lad. ill. 7, 31). The account of
Strabo (xri. p. 760 ff.) is more favorable (cf. Just,
xxxvi. 8), but it was impossible that a stranger
could clearly understand the meaning of Judaism
as a discipline and preparation for a universal relig-
ion (F. C. Meier, Judnica, sea tttmm scryAwitm
profammm de rebut Jvdaidt fragmenta, Jenae,
1838).
The force of the title 'lovSatot is seen particu-
larly in the Gospel of St John. While the other
evangelists scarcely ever use the word except in
the title " King of the Jews " (as given by Gen-
tiles)," St John, standing within the boundary of
the Christian age, very rarely uses any other term
to describe the opponents of our Lord. The name,
Indeed, appeared at the close of the Apostle's life to
be the true antithesis to Christianity, as describing
the limited and definite form of a national religion ;
but at an earlier stage of the progress of the faith,
it was contrasted with Greek (*EaAt|k) as implying
an outward covenant with God (Rom. I. 16, ii. 9,
10; CoL lii. 11, Ac). In this sense it was of
wider application than Htbrtw, which was the
correlative of HeUcniU [Hellenist], and marked
a division of language subsisting within the entire
body, and at the same time less expressive than
Israelite, which brought out with especial clearness
the privileges and hopea of the children of Jacob
(3 Cor. xi. 23; John i. 47; 1 Mace i. 43, 53, and
often).
The history of Judaism is divided by Jost — the
most profound writer who has investigated it —
into two great eras, the first extending to the close
of the collections of the oral laws, 536 b. c. — 600
A. D.: the second reaching to tile present time
According to this view the first is the period of
original development, the second of formal construc-
tion; the one furnishes the constituent dements,
the second the varied shape of the present faith.
Bat as far as Judaism was a great stage in the Di-
vine revelation, its main interest closes with the
destruction of Jerusalem in 70 A. p. From that
date its present living force was stayed, and its
history is a record of the human shapes in which
the Divine truths of earlier times were enshrined
and hidden. The old sge (alM passed away, and
the new age began when the Holy City was finally
wrested from its citizens and the worship of the
Temple closed.
Yet this shorter period from the Retain to the
sestruction of Jerusalem was pregnant with great
lhanges- Four different dynasties in succession
directed the energies and influenced the character
af the Jewish nation. The dominion of Persia
536-333 b. c), of Greece (333-167 B c), of the
A s monmn s (167-63 b. a), of the Herods (tJ B. a,
JHVVKY
1339
a n» exceptions an, Matt. xxvtU. 16 (a sots tf th*
H l t l H lt <rf later data than the ilbstun of the
70 A. D.) sensibly furthered in vaiious ways ths
discipline of the people of God, and prepared the
way for a final revelation. An outline of the char-
acteristic features of the several periods is given in
other articles. Briefly it may be said that the su-
premacy of Persia was marked by the growth of
organization, order, ritual [Cybds; Dispersios.
op the Jews], that of Greece by the spread of
liberty, and speculation [Alexander; Alexan-
dria; Hellenists], that of the Asmoiueans by
the strengthening of independence and faith [Mac-
cabees], that of the Herods by the final separa-
tion of the elements of temporal and spiritual do-
minion into antagonistic systems [Herod]; and
so at length the inheritance of six centuries, pain-
fully won in times of exhaustion and persecution
and oppression, was transferred to the treasury of
the Christian Church. B. F. W.
JBW CTVT}: [•iouooiot i ^«oVsia]), JEWS
(D" ,, Tfi-fy Ch. TrrTirp in Ear. and Dan.).
Originally " man, or men of Judah." The term
first makes its appearance just before the Captivity
of the ten tribes, and then is used to denote the
men of Judah who held Elath, and were driven out
by Rezin king of Syria (2 K. xvi. 6). Elath bad
been taken by Azariah or TJzziah, and made a col-
ony of Judah (2 K. xir. 22). The men of Judah
in prison with Jeremiah (Jer. xxxii. 12) are called
"Jews " in our A. V., as are those who deserted
to the Chaldeans (Jer. xxxviii. 19), and the frag-
ments of the tribe which were dispersed in Moab,
Edom, and among the Ammonites (Jer. xl. 11).
Of these latter were the confederates of Ishmael
the son of Nethanlah, who were of the blood-royal
of Judah (Jer. xli. 3). The fugitives in Egypt
(Jer. xliv. 1) belonged to the two tribes, and were
distinguished by the name of the more important;
and the same general term is applied to those who
were carried captive by Nebuchadnezzar (Jer. lii.
28, 30) as well as to the remnant which was left hi
the land (2 K. xxr. 25; Neh. i. 2, ii. 16, Ac).
That the term Ylhtidi or " Jew " was in the latter
history used of the members of the tribes of Judah
and Benjamin without distinction is evident from
the case of Mordecai, who, though of the tribe of
Benjamin, is called a Jew (Esth. ii. 5, Ac), while
the people of the Captivity are called " the people
of Mordecai " (Esth. Ui. 6). After the Captivity
the appellation was universally given to those who
returned from Babylon. W. A. W.
JEWEL. [Precious Stones.]
JEWESS ('Iovtoia: Jvdata), a woman of
Hebrew birth, without distinction of tribe (Acts
xvi. 1, xxir. 24). It is applied in the former pas-
sage to Eunice the mother of Timothy, who was
unquestionably of Hebrew origin (comp. 2 Tim. iii.
15), and in the latter to Drusilla, the wife of Felix
and daughter of Herod Agrippa I.
JEWISH ClovSaticis: Judaicm), of or be
longing to Jews : an epithet applied to the rabbin-
ical legends against which the elder apostle warns
his younger brother (Tit. L 14).
JEWRY ("WP. : 'loudoio: /aviso), the same
word elsewhere rendered Jcdah and Jud/KA. It
occurs bat once in the O. T., Dan. ». 18, In wolds
Terse the Hebrew is translated both by Judah and
Oosrol); Mark via. 8 (a similar ante'
xxtf U.
Lake vJL «,
Digitized by
Google
1390
JKWS' IjANGTJAGB
Jewry: the A. V. retaining tba latter as it standi
in Coverdsle, Tyndale, and the Genera Bible. The
variation possibly aroae from a too faithful imitation
af the Vulg., which baa Juda and Judaa. Jewry
some* to ua through the Norman-French, and U
of frequent occurrence in Old English. It is found
besides in 1 Eadr. i. 89, li. 4, ir. 49, v. 7, 8, 67,
rt 1, viii. 81, ix. 8; Bel, 83; a Maes. z. S4;
Luke zxiii. 6; John rii. 1. [The eariier English
tendons hare generally " Jewry " (Juri») for Ju-
nto in the N. T. See Trench, Authorised Vtr-
aiow,p. 49, Med. — H.]
JEWS* LANGUAGE, IN THE (rVVIIVX
Literally "Jewishly:" for the Hebrew mutt be
taken adverbially, u In the LXX ('lovoourrf ) and
Vulgate (Judaici). The term is only used of the
language of the two southern tribes after the Cap-
tivity of the northern kingdom (3 K. zviii. 36, 39;
> Chr. xxxii. 18; Is. xxxvi. 11, 18), and of that
spoken by the captives who returned (Neh. ziii.
94). It therefore denotes as well the pun Hebrew
as the dialect acquired during the Captivity, which
was characterized by Aramaic forms and idioms.
Elsewhere (Is. xix. 18) in the poetical language of
Isaiah it is called " the lip of Canaan."
•JEWS' RELIGION (3 Mace viii. 1, xiv.
38; GaL i. 14, 15). [Judaism.]
JEZANI'AH pin\jr [whtmJdunah heart] :
'Ef>Wcu [Vat FA.] Aleit. n(oruu in Jer. xl. 8:
'Tfft! ; 'Afapfoj in Jer. xlii. 1 : Jetomai), the aon
of Hoahaiah, the Maachathite, and one of the cap-
tains of the forces, who had escaped from Jerusa-
lem during the final attack of the beleaguering
army of the Chaldeans. In the consequent pur-
suit which resulted in the capture of Zedekiah, the
army was scattered from him and dispersed through-
out the open country among the neighboring Am-
monites and Moabites, watching from thence the
progress of events. When the Babylonians had
departed, Jezaniah, with the men under his com-
mand, was one of the first who returned to Geda-
Hah at Mizpab. In the events which followed the
assassination of that officer Jezaniah took a prom-
inent part. He joined Johanan in the pursuit of
fahmael and his murderous associates, and in the
general consternation and distrust which ensued he
became one of the foremost advocates of the mi-
gration into Egypt, so strongly opposed by Jere-
miah. Indeed in their interview with the prophet
it the Khan of Chinham, when words ran high,
fezaniah (there called Azariah) was apparently the
sader in the dispute, and for once took precedence
jf Johanan (Jer. xliii. 3). In 9 K. xxv. 93 be is
called Jaakamah, in which form the name was
easily cotrupud into Azariah, or Zechariah, as one
US. of the LXX. reads it. The Syrlas and Jo-
seph™ Utow the Hebrew. In the LXX. his father's
cams is Haaaeiah.
JEZ'EBBL (bar<rj: LXX. and N. T. 'Ufo-
Jv)a; Joseph. 'lt(a$£\y- Jaabtl: probably a
dame, like At/net, signifying " chaste," »'n« coitu.
a Amongst the Spanish Jaws Um bum of Jaaabel
aas given to Isabella " tha Catholic," In consequence
af the detestation in which her memory was held as
their persecutor (Ford's Handbook of Spain, 2d ed.
a. 488). Whether the name Isabella was orlaually
Hoaected with that of Joebel la donbtfoL
• According to the reading of A. T. and I
. nty.if.M iEf,
Gssenlns as eoc.), wife of Ahab, king of Israel and
mother of Athaliah, queen of Jndah, and Ahaaiah
and Joram, kings of Israel. She was a Phomi-
cian princess, daughter of "Ethbaal king of the
Zidoniana " (or Ithobal king of the Syrians and
Sidonians, Henander apod Joseph. Ant. viii. 13,
§ 9; c. Apion, i. 18). Her marriage with Ahab
was a turning point in the history of Israel. Not
only was the union with a Canaanitiah wife unpre-
cedented in the northern kingdom, but the charac-
ter of the queen gave additional force and signifi-
cance to what might else have been regarded merely
as a commercial and political measure, natural to a
king devoted, as was Ahab, to the arts of peace
and the splendor of regal luxury. She was a wo-
man in whom, with the reckless and licentious
habits of an oriental queen, were united the stern-
est and fiercest qualities inherent in the Phoenician
people. The royal family of Tyre was remarkable
at that time both for its religious fanaticism and
its savage temper. Her father Ethbaal united with
his royal office the priesthood of the goddess Aa-
tarte, and had come to the throne by the murder
of his predecessor Phelles (Joseph, c. Apian, i. 18).
The next generation included within itself Sichaeos,
or Matgenes, king and priest of Baal, the murderer
Pygmalion, and Eliaa or Dido, foundress of Car-
thage (to.). Of this stock came Jezebel. In her
hands her husband became a mere puppet (1 K.
xxi. 35). Even after his death, through the reign*
of bis sons, her influence was the evil genius of
the dynasty. Through the marriage of her daugh-
ter Athaliah with the king of Judali, it extended
even to the rival kingdom. The wild license of
her life, the magical fascination of her arts or of
her character, became a proverb in the nation (9
K. ix. 29). Long afterwards her name lived as
the byword for all that was execrable, and in the
Apocalypse it is given to a church or an individual *
in Asia Minor, combining in like manner fanaticism
and profligacy (Rev. ii. 30). If we may trust the
numbers of the text, she must have married Ahab
before his accession. He reigned 33 yean; and
13 years from that time her grandson Ahaziah was
91 years of age. Her daughter Athaliah must
have been born therefore at least 37 years before.
The first effect of her influence was the imme-
diate establishment of the Phoenician worship on a
grand scale in the court of Ahab. At her table
were supported no less than 450 prophets of Baal,
and 400 of Astarte (1 K. xvi. 81, 38, xviU. 19).
The prophets of Jehovah, who up to this time had
found their chief refuge in the northern kingdom,
were attacked by her orders and put to the sword
(1 K. xviii. 13; 9 K. ix. 7). When at last the
people, at the instigation of Elijah, rose against her
ministers, and slaughtered them at the foot of
CarmeL and when Ahab was terrified into submis-
sion, she slone retained her presence of mind; and
when she received in the palace of Jezreel the tid-
ings that her religion was all but destroyed (1 K.
xix. 1), her only answer was one of those fearful
vows which have made the leaders of Semitic
nations so terrible whether for goid or evil —
versions, It Is tV yw«W <rov, « thy wjfc." la that
case she must be the wile of the " angel ; " and the
expression would thus confirm the m tsrpreta noa
which makes " the angel " to be the bishop or are
siding ameer of the Church of Inyattm ; seat the
woman would thus be Ids wtaV
Digitized by
Google
JEZBKBL
I m a message to the very man who, as it
night ham seemed but an hour before, had her
life in his power: " As surely as thou art Elijah
and as / am Jezebel (LXX.) so may God do to
me and more also, if by this time to-morrow I
make not thy life as the life of one of them "
(1 K. xiz. 2). Elijah, who had encountered un-
daunted the king and the whole force of the
prophets oT Baal, "feared" (LXX.) the wrath of
the awful queen, and fled for his life beyond the
furthest limits of Israel (1 K. xix. 3). [Elijah.]
The next instance of her power is still more
sfaaraeteristie and complete. When she found her
husband cast down by his disappointment at being
thwarted by Naboth, she took the matter into her
own hands, with a spirit which reminds us of
Orytemnestra or Lady Macbeth. " Dost Mom now
govern the kingdom of Israel? (play the king,
WMur jSao-iAeo, LXX). Arise and eat bread and
1st thine heart be merry, and I will give thee the
vineyard of Naboth the Jezreelite" (1 K. xxi. 7).
She wrote a warrant in Ahab's name, and sealed
it with his seal. It was couched in the official
language of the Israelite law — a solemn fest —
witnesses — a charge of blasphemy — the author-
ised punishment of stoning. To her, and not to
Ahab, was sent the announcement that the royal
Irishes were accomplished (1 K. xxi. 14), and she
bade her husband go and take the vacant property ,
and on her accordingly fell the prophet's curse, as
well as on her husband (1 K. xxi. 23).
We hear no more of her for a long period. But
she s u rvive d Ahab by 14 years, and still, as queen-
mother (after the oriental custom), was a great
personage in the court of her sons, and, as such,
became the special mark for vengeance when Jehu
advanced against Jezreel to overthrow the dynasty
of Ahab. " What peace so long ss the whoredoms
of thy mother Jezebel and her witchcrafts are so
many?" (2 K. ix. 23). But in that supreme
hour of her house the spirit of the aged queen rose
within her, equal to the dreadful emergency. She
was in the palace, which stood by the gate of the
eity, overlooking the approach from the east. Be-
neath lay the open spue under the eity walls.
She determined to face the destroyer of her family,
«faom she saw rapidly advancing in his chariot*
She painted her eyelids in the eastern fashion with
antimony, so as to give a darker border to the
eyes, and make them look larger and brighter
(Kailj, possibly in order to induce Jehu, after the
■Muter of eastern usurpers, to take her, the widow
of his predecessor, for his wife, 6 but more probably
as the last set of regal splendor." She tired
C made good ") her head, and, looking down upon
him from the high latticed window in the tower
(Joseph. AnL ix. 6, § 4), she met him by an allu-
sion to a former act of treason in the history of
her adopted country, which oonveys a different ex-
« A graphic conniption of this soene occurs in
■seine's AUuilu, Act II. So. 6.
• According to the explanation of 8. Epbnro Syrus
set loe.
« *Th* iV. (2 1. Ix. 80) renders tt* Hebrew
(iT , 3 , 5 TPQ? DtfFI]), in the text, "painted her
fees; " but In the margin mora strictly, " put bar eyes
m painting " (or •< In paint "). The act referred to is
a femiltar one among Syrian women at the present
Haas. "They 'paint' or blacken to* eyelids and
■sows with ***(, and prolong the applioattoa In a it-
■searing pencil, so as to l e ng t h en and reduce the eye
JEZEBEL 139)
preasion, according as we take one or other of the
different interpretations given to it. (1.) "Wat
there peace to Zimri, who slew his ' lord ' ?•" as If
to remind Jehu, now in the fullness of his triumph,
how Omri, the founder of the dynasty which he
was destroying, had himself come into power ss
the avenger of Zimri, who bad murdered Baasha,
as be now had murdered Jehoram : or (2) a direct
address to Jehu, as a second Zimri: "Is it
peace ? " (following up the question of her son in
2 K. ix. 31). " Is it peace, O Zimri, slayer of his
lord? " (8o KeU and LXX. f, eip^vn Zau&ol i
fovturfit rev Kuolav afrroSO Or (3) « Peace to
Zimri, who slew his ' lord ' " — (according to Jo-
sephus, Ant. ix. 6, § 4, xoAor tovAet i aworrtf
w to» JeoTro-rttf) —which again may be taken
either as an ironical welcome, or (according to
Ewaid, iii. 166, 260) as a reminder that as Zimri
had spared the seraglio of Baasha, an she was pre-
pared to welcome Jehu. The general character of
Jezebel, and the doubt as to the details of the his-
tory of Zimri, would lead us rather to adopt the
sterner view of her speech. Jehu looked up from
his chariot — sod his answer, again, is variously
given in the LXX. and in the Hebrew text. In
the former he exclaims, " Who art thout — Come
down to me." In the latter, " Who is on my side,
woo ? " In either case the issue is the same. Two
or three eunuchs of the royal harem show their
faces at the windows, and at his command dashed <•
the ancient princess down from the chamber. She
fell immediately in front of the conqueror's chariot.
The blood flew from her mangled corpse over the
palace-wall behind, and over the advancing horses
in front The merciless destroyer passed on ; and
the but remains of life were trampled out by the
horses' hoofs. The body was left in that open
space ealled in modern eastern language " the
mounds," where oflal is thrown from the city-walls.
The dogs of eastern cities, which prowl around
those localities, and which the present writer met
on this very spot by the modern village which oo-
cupies the site of Jezreel, pounced upon this unex-
pected prey. Nothing was left by them but the
hard portions of the human skeleton, the skull,
the hands, and the feet. Such was the sight which
met the eyes of the messengers of Jehu, whom he
had sent from his triumphal banquet, struck with
a momentary feeling of compassion for the fall of
so much greatness. " Go, see now this cursed
woman and bury her, for she is a king's daughter."
When he heard the fate of the body, he exclaimed
in words which no doubt were long remembered ss
the epitaph of the greatest and wickedest of the
queens of Israel — " This is the word of Jehovah,
which He spake by his servant EUjah the Tishbite,
saying, In the portion ' of Jezreel shall the dogt
eat the flesh of Jezebel; and the carcase of Jezebel
■ball be as dung on the face of the earth; so that
in appea ra nce to what is ealled almond inapt. ....
Tea powder from which IcIM is made is collected Ires*
burning almond shells, or frankincense, and Is lav
tenseiy black. Antimony, and various ores of leal,
an sjo employed. The powder is applied by a small
probe of wood, ivory, or silver, called med." (Those*
son. Land and Boot, 11. 184.) *or figures of the
tnsCrcasnts used in the pi Disss, sss also the work re-
ferred to. a.
'dash," saltan a
(Pa,.
Digitized by
Google
1892
JEZBLUS
Ibey shall not eay, This U Jezebel" (3 K. ix. 86,
*7). A. P. S.
JEZxTLUS ClstfjAoti U**- IeevjAoi :] Zk*-
ofeai). L The nma as Jahazibl (1 Esdr. viii.
»)•
3. (risftAo*:] /eAe&v.) Jkhikl, the father
of Obadiah (1 Esdr. TiiL 86).
JEZER (~l?£ [/ormanVsi, tmaoe]: 'Vrviap
in Gen. xrri. 34; 'Ieo-sp, Nam. xxvi. 49, Ala.
leapt; 'AiWip, 1 Chr. «i 13, Alex. 7m, [Vat.
Iavsnio, Comp. Aid. 'IcoWp:] Jeter), the third
•on of Naphtali, and father of the family of the
Jezerites, who were nambered in the plains of
limb.
JE'ZERITES, THE 0H??ri: « 'i««of
[Vat. -j>«], Alex, o Ito-pi: Jatrila). A family
of the tribe of Naphtali, descendants of Jeaer (Num.
uti.49).
JEZI'AH (n>^ [atom Jehovah cormUet,
sr «coia<es] : 'Afla ; [Vat. Affio, FA. AStta :]
/eon), properly Yizriyyah, a descendant of Paroah,
and one of thoae among the laymen after the return
from Babylon who had married atrange wives, and
at Ezra's bidding had promiaed to put them away
(Ear. x. 95). In 1 Eadr. ix. 26 he is called Eddias.
The Syriac of Ezra reads Jaaniah.
JWZFEL (btW 1 , Keri btft^, which is the
reading of some MSS.' [oaiemWy of God] : 'inrtix ;
FA. AfiflA; [Aid. 'IofifjA; Comp. 'EfifjA:] J«i*/),
one of the skilled Benjamite archers or slingers who
joined David in his retreat at Ziklag. He was
probably the son of Axmaveth of Beburim, one of
David's heroes (1 Chr. xii. 3). In the Syriac Jeziel
is omitted, and the sons of Azmaveth are there
Peist and Berachah.
JEZLI'AH (rfefbr. [Jehovah deliver*,
FOrst]: 'If^Joi! [Vat. Zop«ia;] Alex. E0Ua;
[Comp. Aid. 'IfftAfa: JezSa]), one of a long list
of Benjamite beads of bouses, sons of FJpaaL, who
dwelt at Jerusalem (1 Chr. TiiL 18).
A. C. H.
JEZOAB (TT3; [**«•>■«, brilliant, as a
verb] : Soda: Itaar), the son of Hdah, one of the
wires of Asher, the father or founder of Tekoa, and
posthumous son of Hezron (1 Chr. iv. 7). The
Keri has "TTO1 " » n<J Zohar," which was followed
by the LXX. and by the A. V. of 1611. [Zoab,
at the end.]
JEZRAHI'AH (n^rnr [Jehovah etrntet
,i break forth, 1. e. into &fe\\ [Vat. Alex. FA.
■nit; FA.»] I«^m»; [Comp. AM. 'I.foop:]
irxraXn), a Levite, the leader of the choristers at
be solemn dedication of the wall of Jernamkui
jndW Nebemiah (Neb. xii 43). The singers had
built themselves villages in the environs of the city,
and the Oasis of the Jordan, and with the minstrels
Shey gathered themselves together at the first sum-
jtoot to keep the dedication with gladness.
JEZTtEBI, (bM5"!T'; [God witt mm or
sootier]: 'U(pai,X\ [Vat AfranA; Alex.l I»f-
aeanA, Alex.* Is£»nA:] Jetrnkel), according to the
received text, a descendant of the father or founder
af Etam, of the line of Judah (1 Chr. iv. 3). But
a In Jot. Ant. TiiL 18, f 8, It to ealtod Imp****.
10am *eA»; to TB. U, } 7 Ijape. «£uc ataxr/ :
JEZEBEL
sa the verse now stands, we moat supply some soon
word as " families; " "these (are the families of)
the father of Etam." Both the LXX. and Vulg.
read ^33, "sons," for "OH, "father," and six
of Kennioott's HSS. have the same, while in two
of De Rossi's the readings are combined. The
Syriac is singularly different from all : " Anal
these are the sons of Aminodob, Aehizar'ci, ete-,
Neshmo, and Diboah," the last clause of ver. 3
being entirely omitted. But, although the Syria*
text of the Chronicles is so corrupt as to be of little
authority in this case, there can be no doubt that
the genealogy in w. 3, 4 is so confused as to
be attended with almost insuperable riifflniltina
Tremellius and Junius regard Etam as the proper
name of a person, and Jexreel as one of his sons,
while Bertheau considers them both names of
places. The Tsrgum on Chron. has, " And these
are the Rabbis dwelling at Etam, Jexreel,'' etc. In
ver. 4 Hur is referred to as the ancestor of thai
branch of the tribe of Judah, and therefore, if the
present text be adopted, we must read, " and these,
namely, Abi-Etam, Jexreel," etc. But the prob-
ability is that in ver. 8 a clause has been omitted.
W. A. W.
JEZTtERL frN?1£ [see above] : LXX.
'Uapatk, ri«0>aiA, 'I«(>a4A, 'EoW; Alex, also
IQxxtiK Io-ponA, U(a0t\, etc.: Vulg. Jetrahet,
Jexrall, Jesrall,] Joseph. 'Inrod'nAa, Art. »iii.
13, $ 6, 'Ise-odtAa, Ant. ix. 6, § 4, 'l(apa,* Art.
viii. 15, §§ 4, 6; 'EatyrjAau, or 'Zatpt{knr, Jud.
1. 8, iv. 6 ; 'E<rS,K(i)Aa, Eusebius ami Jerome, in
Onomattieon, voce Jexrael, Latinized into Stradela.
See Bordeaux Pilgrim in Itm. Hicronl p. 586).
Its modern name is Zerin, which is in fact the
same word, and which first appears in William of
Tyre (xxi. 36) as Gertn (6'trusm), and Benjamin
of Tudela as Zarm. The history of the identifica-
tion of these names is well given in Robinson, B. X.
1st ed. iii. 163, 165, and is curious as an example
of the tenacity of a focal tradition, in spite of the
carelessness of modem travellers.
The name is used in 3 Sam. ii. 9 and (?) iv. 4,
and Hos. i. 5, for the valley or plain between Gilboa
and Little Hermon; and to this plain, in its widest
extent, the general form of the name Bsdraeloo
(first used in Jud. L 8) has been applied in modern
times. It is probably from the richness of the plain
that the name is derived, '• God has sown," " God's
sowing." For the events connected with this great
battle-field of Palestine, see EbdbabXOH.
In its more limited sense, as applied to the city,
it first appears in Josh. six. 18, where it is men-
tioned as a city of Issachar, in the neighborhood
of Chesulloth and Shunem; and it had citizens
(1 K. xxi. 1-8), elders, and nobles of its own (1 K.
xxL 8-11). But its historical importance dates
from the reign of Abab; who cbuee it for his chi»'
residence, as Omri had chosen Samaria, and Basahs
Tirzah.
The situation of the modern village of 2erm staB
remains to show the fitness of his choice. It is on
one of the gentle sweus which rise out of the fertue
phunof Eadraelon; but with two peculiarities which
mark it out from the rest. One is its strength
On the N. E. the bill presents a steep rocky descent
of at least 100 feet (Robinson, 1st ed. iii. 168).
mvm.lo,fi4,6,*u>pa. Tatioaa
of -UCi^, '***>.,'*{*>» "
Digitized by
Google
JEZREEL
Ilie other it it* central locality. It lUnda at the
opening of the middle branch of the three eastern
forks of the plain, and looks straight towards the
vide western level ; thus commanding the view
towards the Jordan on the east (3 K. ix. 17), and
risible from Carmel on the west (1 K. xviii. 46).
In the neighborhood, or within the town prob-
ably, was a temple and grove of Astarte, with an
establishment of 400 priests supported by Jezebel
(1 K. xvi. 83; 2 K. z. 11). The palace of Ahab
(1 K. xxi- 1, zviii. 46), probably containing his
» ivory bouse " (1 K. xxii. 39), was on the eastern
side of the city, forming part of the city wall (comp.
1 K. xxi. 1; 2 K. iz. 25, 80, 33). The seraglio,
in which Jezebel lived, was on the city wall, and
b»1 a high window facing eastward (2 K. ix. 30).
Clnee by, if not forming part of this seraglio (as
Josepbus supposes, araaa M rov ripyov, Ant.
ix. 6, § 4), was a watch-tower, on which a sentinel
stood, to give notice of arrivals from the disturbed
district beyond the Jordan (2 K. ix. 17). This
watch-tower, well-known at " the tower in Jezreel,''
may possibly have been the tower or " migdol " near
which the Egyptian army was encamped in the
battle between Necho and Josiah (fiend, ii. 160).
An ancient square tower which stands amongst the
hovels of the modem village may be its representa-
tive. The gateway of the city on the east was also
the gateway of the palace (2 K. ix. 34). Imme-
diately in front of the gateway, and under the city
wall, was an open space, such at existed before the
neighboring city of Bethshan (2 Sam. zzi. 12), and
is usually found by the walls of eastern cities, under
the name of " the mounds " (see Arabian Night*,
jxuam), whence the dogs, the scavengers of the
Kast, prowled in search of offal (2 K. ix. 25). Here
Jezebel met with her end (2 K. ix. 35). [Jezebel.]
A little farther east, but adjoining to the royal
domain (1 K. xxi. 1), was a smooth tract of land
cleared out of the uneven valley (2 K. ix. 25),
which belonged to Naboth, a citizen of Jezreel
(2 K. Ix. 25), by an hereditary right (1 K. xxi. 3);
but the royal grounds were so near that it would
have been easily turned into a garden of herbs for
the royal use (1 K. zzi. 2). Here Ehjah met
Ahab, Jehu, and Bidkar (1 K. xxi. 17) ; and here
Jehu met Joram and Ahaziah (2 K. ix. 21, 25).
[Bluah ; Jehu.] Whether the vineyard of
Naboth was here or at Samaria is a doubtful ques-
tion. [Naboth.]
Still in the same eastern direction are two
springs, one 12 minutes from the town, the other
■JO minutes (Robinson, 1st ed. iii. 167). This latter
spring " flows from under a sort of cavern in the
wall of conglomerate rock, which here forms the
l«te of Gilboa. The water is excellent; and issuing
ram crevices in the rocks, it spreads out at once
into a fine limpid pool, 40 or 50 feet in diameter,
foil cf fish " (Robinson, BibL Re*, iii. 168). This
probably, both from its size and situation, was
known as "the Spkino or Jezebel" (mis-
translated A. V. "a fountain," 1 Sam. xxix. 1),
where Said was encamped before the battle of Gil-
boa; and probably the same at the spring of
" Harod," where Gideon encamped before his night
attack on the Midianitea (Judg. vii. 1, mistrans-
lated A. V. "the well"). The name of Harod,
« trembling," probably was taken from tiv '• trem-
bling " of Gideon's army (Judg. vii. 31. It was the
scene of successive encampments of t' 5 Crusaders
and Saracens; and was called by the Christians
Tubania, and by the Arabs 'Am J&litt, > the sprir.e
M
JEZKEELITE
1398
of Goliath " (Robinson, BiU. Re*. iiL 69). This
last name, which it still bean, is derived from a
tradition mentioned by the Bordeaux Pilgrim, that
here David killed Goliath. The tradition may be a
confused reminiscence of many battles fought in Its
neighborhood (Ritter, Jordan, p. 416); or the word
may be a corruption of " Gilead," supposing that
to be the ancient name of Gilboa, and thus explain-
ing Judg. vii. 3, "depart from Mount Gilead"
(Schwarz, 884).
According to Josephus (Ant. viii. 15, §§ 4, 6),
this spring, and the pool attached to it, was the
spot where Naboth and his sons were executed,
where the dogs and twine licked up their blood and
that of Ahab, and where the harlots bathed in the
blood-stained water (LXX). But the natural in-
ference from the present text of 1 K. xxii. 38 makes
the scene of these events to be the pool of Samaria.
[See Naboth.]
With the fall of the house of Ahab the glory of
Jezreel departed. No other king is described as
living there, and the name was so deeply associated
with the family of its founder, that when the Divine
retribution overtook the house of their destroyer,
the eldest child of the prophet Hoses, who was to
be a living witness of the coming vengeance, was
called " Jezreel ; " "for I will avenge the blood of
Jezreel upon the house of Jehu . . . and at that
day I will break the bow of Israel in the valley of
Jezreel ; . . . and great shall be the day of Jet-
reel" (Hot. i. 4, 5, 11). And then out of that
day and place of humiliation the name is to go
back to tits original signification as derived from
the beauty and fertility of the rich plain, and to
become a pledge of the revived beauty and richness
of Israel. " I will ' hear and answer ' the heavens,
and > they will hear and answer ' the earth, and the
earth shall 'hear and answer' the corn and the
wine and the oil [of that fruitful plain], and they
shall ' hear and answer ' Jezreel [that is, the seed
of God], and / will tote her unto me in the earth "
(Hot. ii. 22: see Ewald ad be., and Gesenius in
race Jezreel). From this time the image seems to
have been continued as a prophetical eiprestion for
the sowing the people of Israel, as it were broad-
cast; as though the whole of Palestine and the
world were to become, in a spiritual sense, one rich
plain of JezreeL " I will ma them among the
people, and they shall remember me in far coun-
tries " (Zech. x. 9). " Ye shall be tilled and sown,
and I will multiply men upon you " (Ex. xzzvi. 0,
10). " I will tow the house of Israel and the house
of Judah with the seed of men and with the seed
of beasts " (Jer. xxxl. 27). Hence the consecration
of the image of "sowing," aa it appears in the
N. T., Matt ziii. 2.
2. ['laprf)\; Alex. UaSpae\; Comp. Aid. 'U(-
p*i\: JezraiL] A town in Judah, in the neigh-
borhood of the southern Carmel (Josh. xv. 56).
Here David in his wanderings took Ahinoam the
Jezreelitess for bis first wife (1 Sam. xxvU. 3, xxx.
6). A. P. S.
JEZ3EEL (bWJ-ip: 'ufraik: Jezrahet).
The eldest son of the prophet Hosea (Hos. I. 4),
significantly so called because Jehovah said to the
prophet, "Yet a little while and I will avenge
the blood of Jezreel upon the bouse of Jehu," and
« I will break the bow of Israel in the valley of
Jezreel." W. A. W.
JEZTIEKLITE tfJWFin 5 'I«fi»»»(T«tt
Digitized by
Google
1394
JEZREELITES8
Ala. IspatiXiTi)*, once 2 K. iz. 91 l£xn)Airi)s:
JttrahtUta). An inhabitant of Jezreel (1 K. xxi.
1, 4, 6, 7, 15, 16; 2 K. ix. 21, 35).
W. A. W.
JEZ'REELITESS (n-bsyTT^ : 'i,{-
MifAirn; [Vat larpariKtiTis, exc. 2 'Sam. Hi. 2,
-A|-;] Alex. EifpanAcinr, lAwifArrif, IffpaijXint:
letrahelitis, [Jezrnhetiles,] JezrieUles, Jexraelilis).
A woman of Jezreel (1 8am. zzvil. 8, xxz. 5 ; 2
8am. ii. 2, iii. 2; 1 Ctar. Ui. 1). W. A. W.
JIB'SAM (Ffyy] [pleasant, lovely]: 'i tfLa -
trir : [Vat. Bacrat/ ;] Alex. It /tarap i [Comp.
'lafkrily] Jebsem), one of the eons of Tola, the
•on of Iasachar, who were heads of their father'*
bouse aud heroes of might in their generations
(1 Chr. vii. 2). His descendants appear to have
•erred in David's army, and with others of the
same clan mustered to the number of upwards of
22,000.
JIDXAPH 0tf?T. Sleeping, Ges. [melting,
tangmshing, FUrst] : 'ItXlAtp: Jedlaph), a son of
Nabor (Gen. xxil. 22), whose settlements have not
been identified, though they most probably are to
be looked for in the Euphrates country.
E. S. P.
JIM1TA (njt}? [good fortune, fact] : 'larfy,
[Vat.] Alex. Iopfir: Jemna), the firstborn of
Asher, represented in the numbering on the plains
of Moab by his descendants the Jimnites (Num.
xxvi. 44). He is elsewhere called in tie A. V.
Jimkah (Gen. xlvi. 17) and Imnaii (1 Chr. vii.
30), the Hebrew in both instances being the same.
JIMTfAH (rrap*: 'Ufiri; Alex, lepra:
/aimw) = JiMNA = lMHAH (Gen. xlvi. 17).
JIM'NITES, THE (njt?»n [see above]:
i. e. the Jimnah ; Sam. and one MS. "MICH : A
'lafuyl; [Vat. o Uuuirei;] Alex, o lafuani Jem-
nalta), deseendanta of the preceding (Num. xxvi.
JIPHTAH (n^l?% t. e. YHUcli [he, 1. e.
lehoeah openj, frees]: Vat. omita; Alex. [Comp.
lid.] 'U$6i: Jephtha), one of the cities of Judah
n the maritime lowlands, or Shefelnh (Josh. xv.
13). It is named in the same group with Mareshah,
Nezib, and others. Both the last-mentioned places
have been discovered, the former to the south, the
itter to the east of Beit-fibrin, not as we should
gxpect on the plain, but in the mountains. Hen
Jiphtah may some day be found, though it hat not
yet been met with.' G.
JIPHTHAH-EL, THE VALLEY OP
(bKTUil9? N 2 : Toiipo^A, '£«>«: col *»att)\;
Alex. To? I«60ai)A, Ervai IfpSariK: [mtfu] Jeph-
tahel), a valley which served as one of the land-
marks for the boundary both of Zebulun (Josh. xix.
14) and Asher (27). The district was visited in
1852 by Dr. Kobinson, who suggests that Jiphtah-el
was identical with Jotapata, the city which so long
withstood Vespasian (Joseph. B. ./. iii. 7), and that
they survive in the modern Jefdt, a village in the
mountains of Galilee, half-way between the Bay of
Acre and the Lake of Genneeareth. [Jotapata,
» * The A. V. icprawnti the same Hebrew word by
Jephthah (which see), but without any reason Sir the
. variation. B.
• By Joajpbus (Ami. vU. 1, } 8), his name Is riven
JOAB
Amer. ed.] In this ease the valley is the |_
Wndy-Ab&H, whieh •• has its bead in the hills near
Jefit, and runs thence westward to the maritime
plain " (Robinson, iii. 107 ). Van de Velde coneen
in this, and idet.tifies Zebulun (Josh. xix. 27),
whieh he considers to be a town, with the ruins of
Abilin (Memoir, p. 128). It should, however, be
remarked that the Hebrew word Ge, here re nde red
" valley," has commonly rather the force of a ravine
or glen, and is distinct from /facial, which answers
exactly to the Arabic Waehi (Stanley, B. o* P.
App. §5 2, 88). G.
JCAB (2JJ1V /«eoc<t»-/ntter [or,
/<itter is Jehovah] : <l*4fi: Jonb), the eldest and
moat remarkable of the three nephews of David, the
children of Zeruiah, David's sister. Their father
is unknown, 6 but seems to have resided at Beth-
lehem, and to have died before his eons, aa we find
mention of his sepulchre at that place (2 Sam. it
32). They all exhibit the activity and courage of
David's constitutional character. But they never
rise beyond this to the nobler qualities whieh lift
him above the wild soldiers and chieftains of the
time. Aaahd, who was cut off in his youth, and
seems to have been the darling of the family, is
only known to us from his gazelle-like agility (2
Sam. ii. 18). Abiahai and Joab are alike in their
implacable revenge. Joab, however, combines with
these ruder qualities something of a more states-
man-like character, which brings him more nearly
to a level with his youthful uncle; and unquestion-
ably gives him the second place in the whole history
of David's reign.
I. He first appears after David's accession to the
throne at Hebron, thus differing from his brother
Ahishai, who was already David's companion during
his wanderings (I Sam. xxvi. 6). He with his two
brothers went out from Hebron at the head of
David's " servanta," or guards, to keep a watch on
the movements of Abner, who with a considerable
force of Benjamites had, crossed the Jordan, and
some as far aa Gibeon, perhaps on a pilgrimage to
the sanctuary. The two parties sate opposite each
other, on each side of the tank by that city. Abner's
challenge, to whieh Joab assented, led to a desperate
struggle between twelve champions from either aide.
[Gibkox.] The left-handed Benjamites, and the
right-handed men of Judah — their sword-hands
thus coming together — seized each hia adversary
by the bead, and the whole number foil by the
mutual wounds they received.
This roused the blood of the rival tribes; a gen-
eral encounter ensued ; Abner and his company
were defeated, and in hia flight, being hard p res s e d
by the swift-footed Asahel, he reluctantly killed the
unfortunate youth. The expressions which be uses,
" Wherefore should I smite thee to the ground :
how then should I hold up my face to Joab th>
brother?" (2 Sam. ii. 22), imply that up to tb>
time there had been a kindly, if not a friendly, feel-
ing between the two chiefs. It was rudely extin-
guished by this deed of blood. The other soldiers
of Judah, when they came up to the dead body of
their young leader, halted, struck dumb by grief.
But his two brothers, on seeing the corpse, only
hurried on with greater fury in the pursuit. At
•unset the Benjamite force rallied round Abner,'
at 8uri (XovpO ; but this may be mamly a :
of Saromah (Sopovtn).
c The wont describing the bait of Abner's '
«tnop"in tbe A.T. (Iftun.ll. J6),s
Digitized by
Google
JOAB
tad he then made an appeal to the generosity of
Joab not to posh the war to extremities. Joab
W ha I intly consented, drew off his troops, and re-
turned, after the loss of only nineteen men, to
Hebron. They took the corpse of Asahel with them,
and on the way halted at Bethlehem In the early
morning, or at dead of night, to inter it in their
easily burial-place (9 Sam. ii. 32).
Bat Juab's revenge on Abner was only postponed.
Ha had been on another of these predatory excur-
sions from Hebron, when he was informed on his
return that Abner had in his absence paid a visit
to David, and been received into favor (2 Sam. in.
23). He broke out into a violent remonstrance
with the king, and then, without David's knowl-
edge, immediately sent messengers after Abner, who
was overtaken by them at the well of Sirah, accord-
ing to Josephus (Ant. vii. 1, J 5), about two miles
front Hebron." Abner, with the unsuspecting gen-
erosity of his noble nature, returned at once. Joab
and Abishai met him in the gateway of the town ;
Joab took him aside (2 Sam. iii. 27), as if with a
peaceful intention, and then struck him a deadly
hbw " under the fifth rib." It is possible that
with the passion of vengeance for his brother may
hare been mingled the fear lest Abner should sup-
plant him in the king's favor. David burst into
passionate invective and imprecations on Joab when
be heard of the set, and forced bim to appear in
Mckdoth and torn garments at the funeral (iii. 31).
But it was an intimation of Joab's power, which
David never forgot. The awe in which be stood
sf the sons of Zeruiah cast a shade over the whole
remainder of his life (iii. 39).
II. There was now no rival left in the way of
Joab's advancements, and soon the opportunity
occurred for his legitimate accession 'to the highest
post that David could confer. At the siege of
Jehus, the king offered the office of chief of the
army, now grown into a '• host," to any one who
would lead the forlorn hope, and scale the precipice
do which the besieged fortress stood. With an
agility equal to that of David himself, or of his
brother Asahel, Joab succeeded in the attempt, and
became in consequence commander-in-chief — •• cap-
tain of the host " — the same office that Abner had
held under Saul, the highest in the state after the
king (1 Chr. xi. 8; 2 Sam. viii. 16). His im-
portance was immediately shown by his undertaking
the fortification of the conquered city, in conjunc-
tion with David (1 Chr. xi. 8).
In this post he was content, and served the king
with undeviating fidelity. In the wide range of
wars which David undertook, Joab was the acting
general, and he therefore may be considered as the
founder, as far as military prowess was concerned,
the Marlborough, the lteliaarius, of the Jewish em-
sire. Abishai, his brother, still accompanied him,
u captain of the king's " mighty men " (1 Chr. xi.
SO; 2 Sam. x. 10). He had a chief armor-bearer
sf bis own, Naharai, a Beerothite (2 Sam. xxiii.
17 ; 1 Chr. xi. 39), and ten attendants to carry his
iqulpment and baggage (2 Sam. xviii. 15). He
iad the charge, formerly belonging to the king or
judge, of giving the signal by trumpet for advance
w retreat (9 Sam. xviil. 18). He was called by
the almost regal title of "Lord " (2 Sam. xl. 11),
JOAB
1895
one, ll^J^I (AgwUah\, elsewhere em-
stoTsa for a bun in or knot of hyssop.
• fnsslhlj the lprmf which still exists about that
" the prince of the king's srmy " (1 Chr. xxvil. S*>
His usual residence (except when campaigning) was
in Jerusalem — but he had a house and property,
with barley-fields adjoining, in the country (2 Sam.
xiv. 30), in the '• wilderness " (1 K. ii. 34), prob-
ably on the N. E. of Jerusalem (comp. 1 Sam. xiii.
18, Josh. viii. IS, 90), near an ancient sanctuary,
called from its nomadic village " Baal-hutoi " (8
Sam. xiii. 23 ; comp. with xiv. 30), where then
were extensive sheepwalks. It is possible that this
"house of Joab" may have given its name to
Ataroth, Beth~Joab (1 Chr. ii. 64), to distinguish
it from Ataroth-adar. There were two Ataroth*
in the tribe of Benjamin [see Atakotii].
1. His great war was that against Ammon, whict
he conducted in person. It was divided into three
campaigns. («.) The first was against the allied
forces of Syria and Ammon. He attacked and
defeated the Syrians, whilst his brother Abishai
did the same for the Ammonites. The Syrians
rallied with their kindred tribes from beyond the
Euphrates, and were finally routed by David him-
self. [Hadarezeh.] (&.) The second was against
Kdom. The decisive victory was gained by David
himself in the " valley of salt," and celebrated by a
triumphal monument (2 Sam. viii. 13). But Joab
had the charge of carrying out the victory, and
remained for six months, extirpating the male pop-
ulation, whom he then buried in the tombs of Petra
(1 K. xi. IS, 16). So long was the terror of his
name preserved that only when the fugitive prince
of Edom, in the Egyptian court, heard that " David
slept with his fathers, and that Joab the captain
of the Ami wat dead" did he venture to return to
his own country (ib. xi. 21, 22). (c.) The third
was against the Ammonites. They were again left
to Joab (2 Sam. x. 7-19). He went against them
at the beginning of the next year " at the time
when kings go out to battle " — to the siege of
Kabbah. The ark was sent with him, and the
whole army was encamped in booths or huts round
the beleaguered city (2 Sam. xi. 1, 11). After a
sortie of the inhabitants, which caused some loss to
the Jewish array, Joab took the lower city on the
river, and, then, with true loyalty, sent to urge
David to come and take the citadel, " Rabbah,"
lest the glory of the capture should pass from the
king to his general (2 Sam. xii. 26-28).
2. The services of Joab to the king were not
confined to these military achievements. In the
entangled relations which grew up in David's do-
mestic life, he bore an important part, (a.) The
first occasion was the unhappy correspondence which
passed between him and the king during the Am-
monite war respecting Uriah the Hittito, which led
to the treacherous sacrifice of Uriah in the above-
mentioned sortie (2 Sam. xi. 1-25). It shows both
the confidence reposed by David in Joab, and Joab's
too unscrupulous fidelity to David. From the pos-
session which Joab thus acquired of the terrible
secret of the royal household, has been dated, with
some probability,* his increased power over the
mind of the king.
(b.) The next occasion on which it was displayed
was in his successful endeavor to reinstate Absalom
in David's favor, after the murder of Amnon. It
would almost seem as if he had been guided by
distance out of Hebron on the left of the road going
northward, and bears the name of Ai»-SeraA. The
roevf hat doubtless always followed the sai
t gas Brant's Ceinadttuu. H. v»
Digitized by
Google
1396
JOAB
the effect produced on the king bj Nathan's parable.
A timUar apologue he put into the mouth of a
"wise woman of Tekoah." The exclamation of
David on perceiving the application intimates the
high opiuion which be entertained of his general,
"Is not the hand of Joab in all this?" (2 Sam.
air. 1-20). A like indication is found in the con-
fidence of Absalom that Joab, who had thus pro-
cured his return, could also go a step further and
demand his admission to his father's presence.
Joab, who evidently thought that be had gained as
much aa could be expected (2 Sam. xiv. 22), twice
refused to visit the prince, but having been en-
trapped into an interview by a stratagem of Absa-
lom, undertook the mission, and succeeded in this
also (ft. xiv. 28-33).
(c.) The same keen sense of his master's interests
(bat bad prompted this desire to besl the breach in
the royal family ruled the conduct of Joab no less,
when the relations of the father and son were re-
versed by the successful revolt of Absalom. His
former intimacy with the prince did not impair
his fidelity to the king. He followed bini beyond
the Jordan, and in the final battle of Ephraim
assumed the responsibility of taking the rebel
prince's dangerous life in spite of David's injunc-
tion to spare him, and when no one else bad cour-
age to act so decisive a part (2 Sam. xviii. 2, 11-15).
He was well aware of the terrible effect it would
have on the king (ii. xviii. 20), and on this account
possibly dissuaded his young friend Ahimaaz from
bearing the news; but, when the tidings had been
broken, he had the spirit himself to rouse David
from the frantic grief which would have been fatal
to the royal cause (2 Sam. xix. 6-7). His stern
resolution (aa he had himself anticipated) well-nigh
proved fatal to his own interests. The king could
not forgive it, and went so far in his unreasonable
resentment aa to transfer the command of the army
from the too faithful Joab to bis other nephew
Amass, the son of Abigail, who had even sided
with the insurgents (2 Sam. xix. 13). In like
manner he returned oidy a reproachful answer to
the vindictive loyslty of Joab's brother, Abishai
(<?.) Nothing brings out more strongly the good
sod bad qualities of Joab than his conduct in this
trying crisis of his history. On the one hand, he
remained still faithful to his master. On the other
land, as before in the case of Abner, he was de-
termined not to lose the post he so highly valued.
Amasa was commander-in-chief, but Joab bad still
his own small following of attendants; and with
him were the mighty men commanded by hit
brother Abishai (2 Sam. xx. 7, 10), and the body-
guard of the king. With these he went out in
pursuit of the remnants of the rebellion. In the
heat of pursuit, be encountered his rival Areata,
awn leisurely engaged in the same quest. At
"the great stone" in Gibeon, the cousins met.
Joab's sword was attached to his girdle; by de-
sign or accident it protruded from the sheath:
\masa rushed into the treacherous embrace, to
whu.ii Joab invited him. holding fast his sword by
his own right hand, whilst the unsheathed sword
hi his left hand plunged into Amaca'a stomach;
a single blow from that practiced arm, as in the
tM> jf Aimer, sufficed to do its work. Joab and
kia brother hurried on to discharge their commis-
oon, whilst one of his ten attendants staid by the
. callir^ on the royal party to follow after
But the deed produced a frightful bnpret-
JOAB
The dead body was lying in a pool of blood
by the roadside; every one halted, as tbey cams
up, at the ghastly sight, till the attendant dragged
it out of the road, and threw a cloak over it.
Then, as if the spell was broken, tbey followed
Joab, now once more captain of the host (3 Sam
xx. 8-13). He, too, when they overtook him,
presented an aspect long afterwards remembered
with horror. Tbe blood of Aman had spirted all
over the girdle to which the sword was a t ta ches! ,
and the sandals on his feet were red with the stains
left by the Ming corpse (1 K. ii. S).
(e.) But, at the moment, all were absorbed in
the pursuit of the rebels. Once more a proof was)
given of the wide-spread confidence in Joab's judg-
ment In the besieged town of Abel Beth-maachah,
far in the north, the same appeal was addressed to
his sense of the evils of an endless civil war, that
had been addressed to him years before by Abner
near Gibeon. He demanded only the surrender of
the rebel chief, and on the sight of his head thrown
over the wall, withdrew the army and returned to
Jerusalem (2 Sam. xx. 18-22). [Shbba.]
(/.) His last remonstrance with David was on
the announcement of the king's desire to number
the people. "The king prevailed against Joab"
(2 Sam. xxiv. 1-4). But Joab's scruples were so
strong that he managed to avoid numbering two
of the tribes, Levi and Benjamin (1 Chr. xxi. 6).
3. There is something mournful in the end of
Joab. At the close of his long life, his loyalty, so
long unshaken, at last wavered. "Though he
had not turned after Absalom (or, as in LXX. or
Joseph. AnL viii. 1, § 4, > He turned not after Sol-
omon'), be turned after Adonyah" (1 K. ii. 28).
This probably filled up the measure of the king'*
long cherished resentment. We learn from Da-
vid's last song that his poweriessnesa over his cour-
tiers was even then present to his mind (2 Sam.
xxiii. 6, 7), and now, on his deathbed, be recalled
to Solomon's recollection the two murders of Abner
and Amaaa (1 K. ii. 5, 6), with an injunction not
to let the aged soldier escape with impunity.
The revival of the pretensions of Adonijah aftet
David's death was sufficient to awaken the suspi-
cions of Solomon. The king deposed the high-
priest Abiathar, Joab's friend and fellow-conspir-
ator — and the m ws of this event at once alarmed
Joab himself. He claimed the right of sanctuary
within the curtains of the sacred tent, under the
shelter of the altar at Gibeon. He was pursued
by Benaiah, who at first hesitated to violate the
sanctuary of the refuge; but Solomon urged that
the guilt of two such murders overrode all such
protection. With his hands on the altar therefore,
the gray-headed warrior was slaughtered by his
successor. The body was carried to bis house " in
tbe wilderness," and there interred. He left de-
scendants, but nothing is known of them, unless
it may be inferred from the double curse of David
(2 Sam. tii. 29) and of Solomon (1 K. ii. 33) thai
they seemed to dwindle away, stricken by a suc-
cession of visitations — weakness, leprosy, lameness
murder, starvation. His name is by some supposed
(in allusion to his part in Adonyah's ooronation oa
that spot) to he preserved In the modern appella-
tion of En-rogel —" the weQ of Job " — corrupted
from Joab. A. P. 8.
2. (3KV : 'l«,043; Alex, lam/): Joab.) Sesj
of Seraiah, and descendant of Kenas (1 Chr. W
14). He was father, or prince, as Jarehi
Digitized by
Google
JOACHAZ
it, of the valley of Charashim, or smiths, so called,
seeording to the tradition quoted by Jerome ( Quasi.
//cor. in Paral), because the architects of the
Temple were selected from among his sons.
3. ('laifi; [Vat in Ear. ii. 6, Nth. rii. 11,
lafiafi: Joab,] Job in 1 Eedr.) The head of a
family, not of priestly or Levitical rank, whose
descendants, with those of Jeshua, were the most
numerous of all who returned with Zerubbabel
(Ezr. U. 6, riii. 9; Neh. vii. 11; 1 Eedr. viii. 36).
It is not clear whether Jeshua and Joab were two
E eminent men among the children of Pahath-
oab, the ruler or sultan (thiltin) of Moab, as the
Syriac renders, or whether, in the registration of
those who returned, the descendants of Jeshua and
Joab were represented by the sons of Pahatb-Moab.
The latter is more probably the true solution, and
the verse (Ear. ii. 6; Neh. vii. 11) should then be
rendered: "the sons of Pahath-Moab, for («. e.
representing) the sons of Jeshua and Joab.*' Ju
this ease the Joab of Ear. riii. 9 and 1 Esdr. riii.
36 was probably a distinct personage.
JO'ACHAZ ('iexorfos; Alex. I«xa(*; i fM -
'latcfyaf:] Jechomut) = Jkhoaiia7. (1 Esdr. i.
SI), the son of Josiah. The LXX. and Vulgate
are in this case followed by St Matthew (i. 11), or
have been altered so as to agree with him.
JCr-ACHIM Cl<««f/t; [Aid. 'l*a X 'W Jo-
atom). X. (Bar. i. 3)=Jkhoiakim, called also
JoACIM.
2. ['Ishw«'m : JoaJam.] A "high-priest" (4
Itptis) at Jerusalem in the time of Baruch "the
son of Chdcias," ». e. Hilkiab (Bar. i. 7). The
name does not occur in the list 1 Chr. vL 13 ff.
B.F. W.
JO'AOIM Cl*Nw(f>i [Vat IsnunimO Alex.
Im«fi and ImaKuu'- Joacim). L =Jehoiakim
(1 Esdr. i. 37, 38, 89). [Jehoiakim, 1.]
2. {['lmuilu; Vat Alex, -mi/i'] Joachin) =
Jkhoiachix (1 Esdr. i. 43).
3. ['ItKUttu; Vat Alex. -xti/i: Joacim.] ■=
Joialdm, the son of Jeshua (1 Esdr. v. 6). He is
by mistake called the son of Zerubbabel, as is clear
from Neh. xii. 10, 88; and the passage has in con-
sequence been corrected by Junius, who renders it
"Jeschuahh Alius Jebotxadaki cum Jehojakimofilio."
Burlington (OenenL i. 73) proposed to omit the
words 'IsMutl/* t rod altogether as an interpolation.
W. A.W.
4. ['tmutl/t. Vat Sin. Alex. -««t/«: Jilinckim,
Joacim.] « The high-priest which was in Jerusa-
lem" (Jud. iv. 6, 14) in the time of Judith, who
welcomed the heroine after the death of Holofernes,
in oompany with " the ancients of the children of
farael " (^ ytpovcla rm» vt&y 'lcpafiK, xv. 8 ff.).
The name occurs with the various reading Eliakim,
hot it is impossible to identify him with any his-
torical character. No such name occurs in the
Kate of high-priests in 1 Chr. vi. (Joseph. Ant. x.
8, i 8); and it is a mere arbitrary conjecture to
suppose that Eliakim mentioned in 2 K. xriii. 18
WW afterwards raised to that dignity. Still less
san be said for the identification of Joacim with
Hilkiah (9 K. xxii. 4; 'EAiaicIoj, Joseph. Ant. x.
4, § »i XeAxfct, LXX.). The name Itself U ap-
propriate to the position which the high-priest
soeupies in the story of Judith (" The Lord hath
a* np "), and the person must be regarded as a
jeeenary part of the Action.
0. FUtmlp: Jonkhn, but ed. Ib90 Joachim.]
to* husband of Susanna (Sua. 1 ff.). The
JOAHAZ
1397
seems to have been chosen, as in the former east,
with a reference to its meaning; and it was prob
ably for the same reason that the husband of Anna,
the mother of the Virgin, is called Joacim m earl;
legends (/Vote*. Jac. L, Ac.).
JOADA'NTJS ('taxridW Joadevt), one of
the sons of Jeshua, the son of Jozadak (1 Esdr. ix.
19). His name occupies the same position as that
of Gedaliah in the corresponding list in Ezr. 1. 18,
but it is uncertain how the corruption originated.
Probably, as Burrington suggests ( GcncaL '.. 167).
the r was corrupted into I, and AI into N, a Bhangs
which in the uncial character would be very slight
JO'AH (ny V [Jehovah kit brother = friend] :
'IsNtt in Kings, 'Icodx in Isaiah; Alex. Iwrwfrcrr
in 9 K. xriii. 18, 28, and tear In ver. 37; [Vat
and Comp. IttAt in Is. xxxvi. 11 ; Sin. 1 Iwv m !*■
xxxvi. 3, rer. 11 omits, ver. 99, IcmxO Jouke).
1. The son of Asaph, and chronicler, or keeper
of the records, to Mezekiah. He was one of the
three chief officers sent to communicate with ths
Assyrian general at the conduit of the upper pool
(Is. xxxvi. 3, 11, 99), and probably belonged to the
tribe of Levi.
2. ('Iv43; Alex. Icmy: Joah.) The son or
grandson of Zimmah, a tiershonite (1 Chr. vi. 21),
and apparently the same as Ethan (ver. 42), unless,
as is not improbable, in the latter list some names
are supplied which are omitted in the former, and
vice rerad. For instance, in ver. 42 Shimei is
added, and in ver. 43 Libni is omitted (comp. ver.
20). If Joah and Ethan are identical, the passage
must have been early corrupted, as all ancient ver-
sions give it as it stands at present, and there an
no variations in the MS9.
3. ('Iwdfl; Alex. \maa: Joaha.) The third
son of Obed-edom (1 Chr. xxvi. 4), a Korhite, and
one of the door-keepers appointed by David. With
the rest of his family he is characterized a* a man
of excellence in strength for the service (ver. 8).
They were appointed to keep the southern gate oif
the Temple, and the house of Asuppim, or " gath-
erings," which was either a storehouse or council •
chamber in the outer court (ver. 16).
*. ('IcoWJ; [Vat omits;] Alex. Ism; [Comp.
'IatdxO Jun)l -) A Gershonite, the son of Zim-
mah, and lather of Eden (2 Chr. xxix. 12). As
one of the representatives of the great Levities!
family to which be belonged, he took a leading part
in the purification of the Temple in the reign of
Hezekiab. In the lost clause of the verse the LXX.
bare 'laaxi, which is the reading of both MSS.;
but there is nothing to show that the same person
is not in both instances intended, nor any MS.
authority for the various reading.
»• ('lovdxi [ AM -] Alex - 'I«w»i [Comp- 'Uti'-l
Joha.) The son of Joahaz, and keeper of the rec-
ords, or annalist to Josiah. Together with the chief
officers of state, Shapban the scribe, and Msnseish,
the governor of the city, he superintended the repair
of the Temple which had been neglected during the
two previous reigns (2 Chr. xxxiv. 8). Josephus
calls him 'Iufrnr, as if be read J7JV. The
Syriac and Arabic omit the name altogether.
JO'AHAZ (TnsV [whom Jehovah kola*,
takes as by the hid]: 'lmix"(< IT**- I««X']
Joachaz), the father of Joah, the chronicler of
keeper of the records to king Josiah (S Chr. xxxiv.
S> One tf-^sonioott's MS. reads Tt ,i s.Ahaa
Digitized by
Google
1898
JOAN AN
tod the margin of Bomberg's Bible gives TfTNUT,
i. e. Jehoahax. In the Syr. and Arab, veniom the
uarue it omitted.
JOA'NAN ('iMMlr; Alex. [Aid.] 'laxwdV:
fonatliat) — Johakam 9, the eon of Etiashib (1
Esdr. iz. 1).
JOAN'NA [properij Joa.n'kas] Cl«o>»t;
[Lachm. Tisch. Treg.,] 'IwovdV: Joanna), eon of
llhesa, according to the text of Luke iii. 87, and
one of the ancestors of Christ But according to
the view explained in a previous article, son of
Zerubbaliel, and the same as Hananiah in 1 Chr.
Hi. 19. [Gk.ne.vu op CmiisTj Hasaxiah, 8.]
A. C. H.
JOAJfNA CloMU'ra, modem form "Joan,"
of the same origin with 'Imarras, the reading of
most MSS., also rendered A. V. "Joanna," St.
Lake iii. 27, and 'It»<(yntr = Hebr. Jeiioiianax),
the name of a woman, occurring twice in Luke
(viii. 3, xxiv. 10), but evidently denoting the same
person. In the first passage she is expressly stated
to have been " wife of Chusa [Chuzas], steward
{iwlrpms), of Herod," that is, Antipas, tetrarch
of Galilee. Professor Blunt has observed in his
Coincide nces, that " we find here a reason why
Herod should say to his $ervanl$ (Matt. xiv. 2),
1 This is John the Baptist ' . . . because his
steward's wife was a disciple of Jesus, and so there
would be frequent mention of him among the ser-
vants in Herod's court " (Alibrd, ad foe. ; comp.
Luke ix. 7). Professor Blunt adds the still more
interesting instance of Manaen (Acts xiii. 1), the
tetrarch's own " foster-brother " (aivrpatyos, Blunt,
p. 263, ed. 1859). Another coincidence is, that
our Lord's ministry was mostly confined to Galilee,
the seat of Herod's jurisdiction. Further, if we
might suppose Herod at length to hare dismissed
Chusa [Chuzas] from his service, on account of
Joanna's attachment to one already in ill odor with
the higher powers (see particularly Luke xiii. 31),
the suppression of her husband's name, now no
longer holding a distinguished office, would be very
natural in the second passage. However, Joanna
continued faithful to our Lord throughout his min-
istry; and as she was one of those whose circum-
stances permitted them to " minister unto Him out
of their substance " during his lifetime, so she was
one of those who brought spices and ointments to
embalm his body when dead. £. S. Ff.
JOAN'NAN CuMuxxtr; Alex. touvnt :
Joannei), the eldest brother of Judas Maccabeus
(1 Mace. ii. 2). He had the surname of Caddis,
and is elsewhere called John. [Jons, 8.]
• JOAlfNAS, Luke iii. 27. [Joasma.]
JCARIB CleMffjS; Alex. ItMpcut; [Sin.
ItHuup:] Joarib), chief of the first of the twenty-
four courses of priests in the reign of David, and
ancestor of the Maccabees (1 Mace. ii. 1). His
name appears also in the A. V. as Jkhoiabib
(1 Chr. xxiv. 7), and Jamb (1 Mace. xiv. 29).
josephus retains the form adopted by the LXX.
jAnt. xii. 6, $ 1).
JCASH (trtVv [kwom Jehovah emit], the
contracted form of the name Jeiioabh, in which
k is frequently found: 'JWj: Joa$). 1. Son of
lasxtth king of Judah, and the only one of his
■hildren who escaped the murderous hand of Ath-
alah. Jebonm having himself killed all his own
, and all his sons, except AheaJah, having
JOASH
been killed by the irruption of foe Philistines anf
Arabians, and all Ahaaiah's remoter relations hav-
ing bean shun by Jehu, and now all his sons being
put to death by Athaliah (2 Chr. xxi. 4, 17; oil
1, 8, 9, 10), tlie house of David was reduced to the
lowest ebb, and Joash appears to have been the only
surviving descendant of Solomon. After his father's
sister Jehoahabeath, the wife of Jeboiada, had stolen
him from among the king's sons, he was hid for 8
years in the chambers of the Temple. In the 7th
year of his age and of his concealment, a successful
revolution placed him on the throne of his ances-
tors, and freed the country from the tyranny and
idolatries of Athaliah. [Jeiioiada.] For at least
23 years, while Jeboiada lived, this reign was very
prosperous. Excepting that the high-places wen
still resorted to for incense and sacrifice, pun re-
ligion was restored, large contributions were made
for the repair of the Temple, which was accordingly
restored ; and the country seems to have been free
from foreign invasion and domestic disturbance.
But, after the death of Jeboiada, Joash, who was
evidently of weak character, fell into the hands of
bad advisers, at whose suggestion he revived the
worship of Baal and Asbtaroth. When be was
rebuked for this by Zecbariah, the son of Jeboiada,
who had probably succeeded to the high-priestbood,
with base ingratitude and daring impiety Joash
caused him to be stoned to death in the very court
of the Lord's house, " between the Temple and the
altar" (Matt, xxiii. 36). The vengeance impre-
cated by the murdered high-priest was not long
delayed. That very year, H&zael king of Syria,
after a successful campaign against the Philistines,
came up against Jerusalem, and carried off a vast
booty as the price of his departure. A decisive
victory, gained by a small band of Syrians over a
great host of the king of Judah, had thus placed
Jerusalem at his mercy. This defeat is expressly
said to be a judgment upon Joash for having for-
xaken the God of his fathers. He had scarcely
escaped this danger, when be fell into another and
a fatal one. Two of his servants, taking advantage
of his severe illness, some think of a wound received
in battle, conspired against him, and slew him in
his bed in the fortress of Millo, thus avenging the
innocent blood of Zecbariah. He was buried in
the city of David, but not in the sepulchres of the
kings of Judah. Possibly the fact of Jeboiada
being buried there had something to do with Una
exclusion. Joash's reign lasted 40 years, from 878
to 838 b. c. He was 10th king from David in-
clusive, reckoning the reign of the usurper Athahab.
He is one of the three kings (Ahariah. Joash,
Amasiah) omitted by St Matthew in the genealogy
of Christ.
With regard to the different accounts of the
Syrian invasion given in 2 K. and in 2 Chr., which
hive led some (ss Tbenius and many older com-
mentators) to Imagine two distinct Syrian invaaiont
and others to see a direct contradiction, or at least
a strange incompleteness in the narratives, as Winer,
the difficulty exists solely in the minds of the critics.
The narrative given above, which is also that of
Keil and F. Bertbean (Errs. Rimdb. «. A. T.) sa
well as of Josephus, perfectly suits the two accounts,
which are merely different abridgments of the one
fuller account contained in the original chrotnea*
of the kingdom. Gramberg pushes the system of
incredulous criticism to such an absurd pitch, that
he speaks of the murder of Zacharias as a furs
fable (Winer, JRtabrSrH. art. Jthoateh).
Digitized by
Google
JuAbH
It should be added that the propoet Eliiha
lourished in Israel throughout the days of Joash;
and there ia some ground for concluding with Winer
(agreeing with Cietlner, Movers, Hitzig, Meier, and
others) that the prophet Joel alio prophesied in the
former part of this reign. (See Movers, Chromic,
pp. 119-121.)
3. Son and successor of Jehoahaz on the throne
of Israel from B. o. 840 to 836, and for two full
years a contemporary sovereign with the preceding
(8 K. liv. 1; oomp. with xii. 1, xiii. 10). When
be succeeded to the crown, the kingdom was in a
deplorable state from the devastations of Hand
and Ben-hadad, kings of Syria, of whose power at
tliis time we had also evidence in the preceding
article. In spite of the perseverance of Joash in
the worship set up by Jeroboam, God took com-
passion upon the extreme misery of Israel, and in
remembrance of his omenant with Abraham, Isaac,
and Jacob, interposed to save them from entire
destruction. On occasion of a friendly visit paid
by Joash to Eliaha on his deathbed, where be wept
over bis face, and addressed him as " the chariot
of Israel and the horsemen thereof," the prophet
promised him deliverance from the Syrian yoke in
Aphek, the scene of Ahab's great victory over a
former Ben-hadad (1 K. zz. 36-30). He then bid
him smite upon the ground, and the king smote
thrice and then stayed. The prophet rebuked him
for staying, and limited to three his victories over
Syria. Accordingly Joash did beat Ben-hadad JJiree
times on the field of battle, and recovered' Irom
him the cities which Hazael had taken from Je-
hoahax. The other great military event of Joaah's
reign was his successful war with Amaziah king
of Judah. The grounds of this war are given fully
In 2 Chr. xxt. [Amaziah. J The hiring.of 100,-
uUO men of Israel for 100 talents of silver by
Amaziah is the only instance on record of such a
transaction, and implies that at that time the king-
dom of Israel was free from all fear of the Syrians.
These mercenary soldiers having been dismissed by
Amaziah, at the instigation of a prophet, without
being allowed to take part in the Edomitish expe-
dition, returned in great wrath to their own coun-
try, and sacked and plundered the cities of Judah
in revenge for the slight put upon them, and also
to indemnify themselves for the loss of their share
of the plunder. It was to avenge this injury that
Amaziah, on his return from his triumph over the
Edomites, declared war against Joash, in spite of
the warning of the prophet, and the contemptuous
dissuasion of Joash under the fable of the cedar
and the thistle. The result was that the two
armies met at Beth-shemeah, that Joash was vic-
torious, put the army of Amaziah to the rout, took
him prisoner, brought him to Jerusalem, broke
town tlie wail of Jerusalem, all along the north aide
from the Gate of Epbraim to the Cornr Gate, a
distance of 400 cubits, plundered the Temple of its
gold and silver vessels, seized the king's treasures,
took hostages, and then returned to Samaria, where
he died, probably not very long afterwards, and
was buried in the sepulchres of the kings of Israel
He died in the 15th year of Amaziah king »>f Judah,
titd was succeeded by his son Jeroboam II. There
fc a discrepance between the Bible account of his
tbaracter and that given by Josephus. For whereas
bs former says of him, " He did that which was
■ri] in the sight of the Lord " (2 K. xiii. 11), the
•ays that he was a good man, and very dif-
from his father. Josephus probably was
JOASH
139*
guided by the account of Joaah's friendly inter-
course with FJisha, which certainly indicates scnu)
good disposition in him, although be followed the
sin of Jeroboam. A. C. H.
3. The rather of Gideon, and a wealthy man
among the Abiezrites. At the time of the Mldisn-
itish occupation of the country, he appears to have
gone so far with the tide of popular opinion in
favor of idolatry, that he had on his own ground
an altar dedicated to Baal, and an Asherah. In
this, however, he submitted rather to the exigencies
of the time, and the influence of his family and
neighbors, and was the first to defend the daring
act of his son, and protect him from the vengeance
of the Abiezrites, by sarcasm only less severe than
that which Elijah employed against the priests of
Baal in the memorable scene on Carmel (Judg. vi
11, 29, 80, 31, vii. 14, nil. 13, 29, 32). The LXX.
put the speech in vi. 31 most inappropriately into
the mouth of Gideon, but this is corrected in the
Alex. MS. In the Vulg. the name is omitted in
vi. 31 and viil. 13.
4. Apparently a younger son of Ahsb, who held
a subordinate jurisdiction in the lifetime of his
father, or was appointed viceroy (Hpxoyra, LXX.
of 2 Chr. xviii. 25) during his auence in the attack
on Kamoth-Gilead (1 K. xxii. 26 ; 2 Chr. xviii. 26).
Or he may have been merely a prince of the blood-
royal. But if Geiger be right in his conjecture,
that Maaseiah, " the king's son," in 3 Chr. xxviii.
7, was a prince of the Moloch worship, Joash would
be a priest of the same. There is, however, but
slender foundation for the belief (Geiger, Urtekrift,
etc., p. 307). The Vulgate calls him " the sou of
Amelech," taking the article as part of the noun,
and the whole as a proper name. Theuius suggests
that he may have been pUced with the governor
of the city for the purpose of military education.
5. [Vat corrupt.] A descendant of Sbelah the
son of Judah, but whether his son or the son of
Jokim, as Burlington (Clineabc/ie$, i. 179) sup-
poses, is not clear (1 Chr. iv. 22). The Vulgate
rendering of this name by Seamu, according to its
etymology, as well as of the other names hi the
same verse, is very remarkable. The Hebrew tra-
dition, quoted by Jerome ( Quatt. Ifetr. in ParaL)
and Jarchi ( Comm. in loc.), applies it to Mahlon,
the son of Elimelech, who married a Moabitess.
The expression rendered in A. V., •' who had the
dominion (V7?.^, b&tili) in Moab," would, accord-
ing to this interpretation, signify "who married
in Moab." The same explanation is given in the
Targum of R. Joseph.
6. [Rom. FA. 'Wi; Vat Ion; Alex. Iatpot.]
A Benjamite, son of Shemaab of Gibeah (1 Chr.
xii. 3). He was one of the heroes, " helpers of the
battle," who resorted to David at Ziklag, and as-
sisted him in bis excursions against the marauding
parties to whose attacks he was exposed (ver. 21).
He was probably with David in his pursuit of the
Amalekltes (oomp. 1 Chr. xii. 21, with 1 Sam. xxx.
8, where TH? should be "troop" in both pas
sages). The Peshito-Syriae, reading 123 far
^33, makes him the son of Ahiezer.
7. One of the officers of David's household, to
whose charge were entrusted the store-houses of
oil, the produce of the plantations of sycamores
and the olive-yards of the km lands of Judah (1
Chr. xxvii. SB). W. A W
Digitized by
Google
1400
JOASH
JCKASH ftfy'V [to whom Jehovah hatlttu],
a different name from the preceding: 'lata*: J oat),
•on of Becher, and head of a Benjamite home,
which existed in the time of king David (1 Chr.
rii. 8). A. C H.
JO'ATHAM (Wfeut: Joaiham) = Joth am
the eon of Czziah (Matt. i. 9).
JOAZABDUS Cl<i(aBtof, [Vat. Zoflooj;
Aid. 'lmi(afitos :] Jm-adut) = Jozaiiad the
Ijrrtte (1 Etdr. ix. 48; eomp. Neh. viii. 7).
JOB (3V [perh. =3 : tE s ; will return, or re-
turner, convert]: 'Atroip: Alex. Iao-ovoK [AM.
'la«roi//3:] Jo*), the third ion of Istachar (Gen.
xlvi. 13), called in another genealogy Jashub
(1 Chr. rii. 1), which is the reading of the Heb.
8am. Codex in Genesis, at it vu also in all prob-
ability of the two MSS. of the LXX., 2 being
frequently represented by /a.
JOB (3VH, i. e. Iyob [one penecuted, of-
flitted: see further, Flint, Handle, s. t.; G«.
Thetaur. s. r.]: '160: Job). The numerous and
iifficult questionaatouching the integrity of this
book, its plan, object, and general character; and
the probable age, country, and circumstances of its
author, cannot be satisfactorily discussed without
a previous analysis of its contents. It consists of
fire parts: the introduction, the discussion between
Job and his three friends, the speech of Elihu, the
manifestation and address of Almighty God, and
the concluding chapter.
I. Analysit. — 1. The Introduction supplies all
the facts on which the argument is based. Job, a
chieftain in the land of Us,° of immense wealth
and high rank, " the greatest of all the men of the
East," is represented to us ss a man of perfect
integrity, blameless in all the relations of life,
declared indeed by the Lord Himself to be " with-
out his like in all the earth," " a perfect, and an
upright man, one that feareth God, and escheweth
evil." The highest goodness, and the most perfect
temporal happiness are combined in bis person;
under the protection of God, surrounded by a nu-
merous family, be enjoys in advanced life 6 an
almost paradisiacal state, exemplifying the normal
results of human obedience to the will of a right-
eous God. One question could be raised by envy ;
may not the goodness which secures such direct
»nd tangible rewards be a refined form of selfish-
ness ? In the world of spirits, where all the mys-
teries of existence are brought to light, Satan, the
accusing angel, suggests the doubt, " doth Job fear
tlod for nought ? " and asserts boldly that if those
external blessings were withdrawn Job would cast
off his allegiance, — "be will curse thee to thy
face." The problem Is thus distinctly propounded
which this book is intended to discuss and solve.
[See addition, Amer. ed.] Can goodness exist
a The situation of Us Is doubtful. Ewald {Das Bach
fob, p. 20) supposes it to have been the district south
of Baihan. Sp&nhetm and RosemnUUer (ProU pp.
18-88) fix It iu the N. K. of the desert near the Ku-
ebntes. See also Dr. Lee, Introduction to Job, p. 28.
' Prom eh. xlll. 16 It may be Inferred that he was
•boat TO years old at this time.
* 'Q« KmX 9cov tear' airrov jrvpovprov . Dtdrmus Alex.
«L Migno, col. 1125.
d • The Hebrew words are properly rendered (ao-
to Gewnius and other eminent Hebraists),
God and die." It is a taunting reproach,
JOB
irrespective of reward, can the fear of God be *»
tained by man when every inducement to asintfa.
nets is taken away ? The problem is obviously of
infinite importance, and could only be answered by
inflicting upon a man, in whom, while prosperous,
malice itself could detect no evil, the calamities
which are the due, and were then believed to bt
invariably the results, even in this life, of wicked-
ness. The accuser receives permission to make the
trial. He destroys Job's property, then his chil-
dren; and afterwards, to leave no possible opening
for a cavil, is allowed to inflict upon him tbe most
terrible disease known in the East. Each of these
calamities assumes a form which produces an im-
pression that it must be a visitation from God,'
precisely such ss was to be expected, supposing that
the patriarch had been a successful hypocrite, re-
served for the day of wrath. Job's wife break*
down entirely tinder the trial — in the very words
which Satan had anticipated the patriarch himself
would at last utter in his despair, she counsels him
" to curse God and die." «* Job remains steadfast.
Tbe destruction of his property draws not from
him a word of complaint: the death of his children
elicits the subliniest words of resignation which
ever fell from the lips of a mourner — the disease
which made him an object of loathing to man, and
seemed to designate him at a visible example of
divine wrath, is borne without a murmur; be re-
pels his wife's suggestion with the simple words,
"What! shall we receive good at the hand of the
Lord, and shall we not receive evil ? " " In all
this Job did not sin with his lips."
The question raised by Satan was thus answered.
His assaults had but issued in a complete removal
of the outer forms which could mislead men's judg-
ment, and in developing tbe highest type of disin-
terested worth. Had the narrative then ended,
the problem could not*be regarded as unsolved,
while a sublime model would have been exhibited
for men to admire and imitate.
9. Still in that case it is clear that many point*
of deep interest would have been left in obscurity.
Entire as was the submission of Job, he must have
been inwardly perplexed by events to which be had
no clew, which were quite unaccountable on any
hypothesis hitherto entertained, and seemed repug-
nant to tbe ideas of justice engraven on man's
heart. It was also most desirable that tbe im-
pressions made upon the generality of men by
sudden and unaccountable calamities should be
thoroughly discussed, and that a broader and firmer
basis than heretofore should be found for specula-
tions concerning the providential government of
the world. An opportunity for such discussion is
afforded in the most natural manner by the intro-
duction of three men, representing the a isdom and
experience of the age, who came to condole with
Job on hearing of his misfortunes. Some time'
appears to have elapsed in the interim, during
"Blest God (If you will), and die ; " for that U all
that will come of it This language Is cooalsttnt with
her own spirit of dlftrust, which could see no ground
for hit unshaken confidence In God. But no reason
can be given, why she should say to him, "Curst
God, and die." Did she want to be rW of him ♦
T. J. V.
• Otherwise it would be difficult to meet Roam
mailer's objection (p. 8). It seems Indeed probable
that some months even might past by before the new
would reach the friends, and they could arrange their
Digitized by
Google
JOB
•Met) the disease fani] made formidable progress,
and J.-b had thoroughly realised tha extent of his
srist*;. The lueeting it described with singular
beauty. At a Jistanee they greet him with the
■rild demonstrations of sympathizing grief usual in
the East; coming near they are overpowered by
the sight of his wretchedness, and sit seven days
■ad seven nights without uttering a word. This
awful silence, whether Job felt it as a proof of real
sympathy, or as an indication of inward suspicion "
so their part, drew out all his anguish. In an
agony of desperation be curses the day of his birth,
•ad sees and hopes for no end of his misery, but
death.
With the answer to this outburst begins a series
«f discussions, continued probably (as Ewald shows,
p. 5a) with some intervals, during several successive
days. Elipbaz, Bildad, and Zophar in turn, bring
forward arguments, which are severally answered
by Job.
The results of the fir* discussion (from c. ill.
-xiv.) may be thus summed up. We have on the
part of Job's friends a theory of the divine govern-
ment resting upon an exact and uniform correlation
between sin and punishment (iv. 6, 1 1 , and through-
oat).* Afflictions are always penal, issuing in the
destruction of those who are radically opposed to
God, or who do not submit to his chastisements.
They lead of course to correction and amendment
of life when the sufferer repents, confesses his sins,
puts them away, and turns to God. In that case
restoration to peace, and even increased prosperity
may be expected (w. 17-27). Still the fact of the
suffering always proves the commission of some
**• ial sin, while the demeanor of the sufferer in-
dicates the true internal relation between him and
Uod.
These principles are applied by them to the esse
of Job. They are in the first place scandalised by
the vehemence of his complaints, and when they
and that he maintains his freedom from willful, or
eonscious sin, they are driven to the conclusion
that his faith is radically unsound ; his protesta-
tions appear to them almost blasphemous, they
become convinced that he has been soeretly guilty
sf some unpardonable sin, and their tone, at first
jO Bit su u s, though warning (comp. c. ir. with c.
it.), becomes stern, and even harsh and menacing.
It hi dear that unless they are driven from their
partial and exclusive theory they must be led on to
an unqualified condemnation of Job.
In this part of the dialogue the character of the
three friends is clearly developed. Elipbaz repre-
sents the true patriarchal chieftain, grave and dig-
nified, and erring only from an exclusive adherence
to tenets hitherto unquestioned, and influenced in
the first place by genuine regard for Job, and sym-
pathy with his affliction. Bildad, without much
•rigmality or independence of character, reposes
partly on the wise saws of antiquity, partly on the
authority of his older friend. Zophar differs from
both, be seems to be a young man ; his language
is violent, and at times even ooane and offensive
(see especially bis second speech, c xx.) He rep-
resents the prejudiced and narrow-minded bigots
of hit ace.
In order to do justice to the position and argt-
tunts of Job, it must be borne in mind, that the
(Rrect object of the trial was to ascertain whether
JOB
1401
a Thus Schlo t rn v in a
I It is cariosi fiat this tuwrv was rsitva n and
he would deny or forsake God, and that his real
integrity is asserted by God Himself. His answers
throughout correspond with these data. He knows
with a sure inward conviction that be is not an
offender in the sense of his opponents: be is there
fore confident that whatever may he the object of
the afflictions for which he cannot account, God
knows that he is innocent. This consciousness,
which from the nature of things cannot be tested
by others, enables him to examine fearlessly their
position. He denies the assertion that punishment
follows surely on guilt, or proves its commission.
Appealing boldly to experience, he declares that in
point of fact prosperity and misfortune are not
always, or generally, commensurate; both are often
irrespective of man's deserts, " the tabernacles of
robbers prosper, and they that provoke God are
secure" (c. xii. 6). In the government of Provi-
dence he can see but one point clearly, namely,
that all events and results are absolutely in God's
hand (xii. 9-85), but as for the principles which
underlie those events he knows nothing. In fact,
be is sure that his frirnds are equally uninformed,
and are sophists, defending their position, out of
mere prejudice, by arguments and statements false
in themselves and doubly offensive to God, being
hypocritically advanced in his defense (xiii. 1-18).
Still he doubts not that God is just, and although
he cannot see how or when that justice can be
manifested, he feds confident that his innocence
must be recognized. " Though He slay me, yet
I will trust in Him ; He also wUl be my salvation "
(xiii. 14, IS). There remains then but one course
open to him, and that be takes. He turns to sup-
plication, implores God to give him a fair and open
trial (xiii. 18-38). Admitting his liability to such
sins as are common to man, being unclean by birth
(xiii. 36, xiv. 4), he yet protests bis substantial
innocence, and in the bitter struggle with his
misery, he first meets the thought which is after-
wards developed with remarkable distinctness. Be-
lieving that with death all hope connected with
this world ceases, he prays that be may be hidden
in the grave (xiv. 13), and there reserved for the
day when God will try his cause and manifest Him-
self in love (ver. 15). This prayer represents but
a dim, yet a profound and true presentiment, drawn
forth, then evidently for the first time, as the pos-
sible solution of the dark problem. As for a re-
newal of life here, he dreams not of it (14), nor
will he allow that the possible restoration or pros-
perity of his descendants st all meets the exigen-
cies of nis *Me (31, 32).
In the tecond discussion (xv.-xxi.) there is a
mora resolute elaborate attempt on the part of
Job's friends to vindicate their theory of retributive
justice. This requires turn entire overthrow of the
position taken by Job. They cannot admit hit
innocence. The fact that his osk-uities are unpar-
alleleu, proves to them that there must be some,
thing quite unique in his guilt Eliphas (c. xv.),
who, as usual, lays down the basis of the argument,
does not now hesitate to impute to Job the worst
crimes of which man could be guilty. His defense
is blasphemous, and proves that lie is quite godless;
that be disregards the wisdom of age and experi-
ence, denies the fundamental truths of religion (3-
16), and by his rebellious struggles (25-37) against
God deserves every calamity which can befall him
syss e manssd by BasUMes, to the gnat scandal of the
mrlv lathers, gee Clam. Al. Strom. Iv. p. 60S.
Digitized by
Google
1402
JOB
(38-30). BikUd ^rviii.) takes up this suggestion
of ungodliness, and after enlarging upon the inev-
itable results of ell iniquity, eoneludei that the
■peeial evila which had come upon Job, auch ai
agon j of heart, ruin of home, destruction of family,
are peculiarly the penalties due to one who is with-
out Clod. Zophar (xx.) dram the further inference
that a tinner's sufferings must needs be propor-
tioned to his former enjoyments (6-14), and his
losses to hi* former gains (15-19), and thus not
only accounts for Job's present calamities, but men-
aces him with still greater evils (80-29).
In answer Job recognizes the hand of God in his
affliction, (xvi. 7-16, and xix. 6-80), but rejects
the charge of ungodliness; he has never forsaken
his Maker, and never ceased to pray. This being
a matter of inward consciousness cannot of course
be proved. He appeals therefore directly to earth
and heaven : " My witness is in heaven, and my
record is on high " (xvi. 19). The train of thought
thus suggested carries him much farther in the way
towards the great truth — that since in this life the
righteous certainly are not saved from evil, it fol-
lows that their ways are watched and their suffer-
ings recorded, with a view to a future and perfect
manifestation of the divine justice. This view be-
comes gradually brighter and more definite as the
controversy ■ proceeds (xvi. 18. 19, xvii. 8, 9, and
perhaps 13-16), and at last finds ex p ression in a
strong and clear declaration of his conviction that
at the latter da} (evidently that day which Job had
expressed a longing to see, c. xiv. 12-14) God will
personally manifest Himself, and that be, Job, will
then see him, in his body, 1 ' with his own eyes, and
notwithstanding the destruction of his skin, t. «.,
the outward man, retaining or recovering his per-
sonal identity (xix. 26-27). There can be no
doubt that Job here virtually anticipates the final
answer to all difficulties supplied by the Christian
revelation.
On the other hand, stung by the harsh and
narrow-minded bigotry of his opponents, Job draws
out (xxi.) with terrible force the undeniable fact,
that from the beginning to the end of their lives
ungodly men, avowed atheists (w. 14, 15), persons,
In fact, guilty of the very crimes imputed, out of
mere conjecture, to himself, frequently enjoy great
and unbroken prosperity. From this he draws the
inference, which be states in a very unguarded
uanner, and in a tone calculated to give just offense,
hat an impenetrable veil hangs over the temporal
dispensations of God.
In the third dialogue (xxii.-xxxi.) no real prog-
ress is made by Job's opponents. They will not
give up and cannot defend their position. Kliphaz
(xxii.) make* a last effort, and raises one new point
which he states with some ingenuity. The station
in whiih Job was formerly placed presented tempta-
tions to certain crimes; the punishments which he
mdergoes are precisely sueh as might be expected
" This gradual and pi cKiueslve development was
perhaps first brought out distinctly by Xwald.
» vjUyjOj lit. " from my flesh," may mean In
the body, or out of the body. Bach rendering Is
squally tenable on grammatical grounds; but the
syoaficatton of the lima (fVir^) and the place
("lyyVy) requires a personal manHbstauon of God,
•nd a personal recognition on the part of Job. Com-
stete permmallt- In the mind c* the ancients bnpUaa
living bod)
JOB
had those crimes been committed; hence be kafoa
they actually were eommitted. The tone of tab
discourse thoroughly harmonizes with the character
of Eliphai. He could scarcely cone to a different
conclusion without surrendering his fundamental
principles, and he urges with much dignity and
impressivenets the exhortations and warnings which
in his opinion were needed. Bildad hat nothing
to add but a few solemn words on the incompre-
hensible majesty of God and the nothingness of
man.' Zophar, the most violent and least rational
of the three, it put to silence, and retires from the
contest.
In his two last discourses Job does not alter hit
position, nor, properly speaking,' adduce any new
argument, but he states with incomparable force
and eloquence the chief points which he regards as
established (c xxri.). All creation it confounded
by the majesty and might of God ; man catches bat
a faint echo of God's word, and is baffled in tin
attempt to comprehend his ways. He then (c xxvii. )
describes even more completely than his opponent!
had done <* the destruction which, as a rule, ulti-
mately falls upon the hypocrite, and which he cer-
tainly would deserve if be were hypocritically to
disguise the truth concerning himself, and deny
his own integrity. He thus recognizes what wet
true in hit opponent's arguments, and corrects hie
own hasty and unguarded statements. Then fol-
lows (xxriii.) the grand description of Wisdom, and
the declaration that human wisdom does not con -
sist in exploring the hidden and inscrutable ways
of God, but in the fear of the Lord, and in turning
away from evil. The remainder of this discourse
(xxix.-xxxi.) contains a singularly beautiful de-
scription of his former life, contrasted with bit
actual misery, together with a full vindication of
his character from all the charges made or insin-
uated by his opponents.
8. Thus ends the discussion, in which it it
evident both parties bad partially failed. Job hat
been betrayed into very hazardous statements, while
his friends had been on the one hand disingenuous,
on the other bigoted, harsh, and pitiless- The
points which had been omitted, or imperfectly de-
veloped, are now taken up by a new interlocutor
(xxxii.-xxxvii.). Elibu, a young man, descended
from a collateral branch of the family of Abraham,*
has listened in indignant silence to the arguments
of his eiders (xxxii. 7), and, impelled by an inward
inspiration, be now addresses himself to both parties
in the discussion, and specially to Job. He shows,
1. that they had accused Job upon false or insuf-
ficient grounds, and failed to convict him, or to
vindicate God's justice. Job again had assumed
his entire innocence, and had arraigned thnt justice
(xxxiii. 9-11). These errors he traces to their both
overlooking one main object of all suffering. God
aauubj to man by chastisement (14,/ 19-82) —
warns him, teaches him self-knowledge and humility
e Mr. Fronde, on Ttu Book of Job, se em s not %t
perceive, or to Ignore, the ground on which JSUphar
"* See Herder's excellent remarks, quoted by ]
mttller, p. 24. Mr. Froude quite overlooks the feet
that Job here, as elsewhere, takes up his opponents
arguments, and urges all the truth which they raay
Involve with greater force, thus showing himself metta)
of the position.
« ABuxhb.
/ A point well drawn out by Bchlottmaun, p. ■
Job bad specially complained of the alienee of So*.
Digitized by
Google
JOB
,lt, IT) — and prepare* him '23) by the mediation
aT » spiritual interpreter (the angel Jehovah « of
ijeneris) to implore and to obtain pardon (94),
renewal of life (35), perfect access and restoration
(18). This statement does not involve any charge
y special guilt, such as the friends had alleged and
Job had repudiated. Since the warning and suffer-
ing are preventive, as well as remedial, the visita-
tion anticipates the commission of sin ; 't saves man
from pride, and other temptations of wealth and
power, and it effects the real object of all divine
interpositions, the entire submission to God's will.
Again, Elihu argues (xxziv. 10-17) that any charge
of injustice, direct or implicit, against God involves
i contradiction in terms. God is the only source
of justice; the very idea of justice is derived from
his governance of the universe, the principle of
which is love. In his absolute knowledge God sees
si secrets, and by his absolute power he controls
sO events, and that, for the one end of bringing
righteousness to light (21-80). Man has of course
do claim upon God ; *what he receives is purely a
matter of grace (xxrv. 6-8). The occasional ap-
pearance of unanswered prayer (9), when evil seems
to get the upper hand, is owing merely to the fact
that man prays in a proud and insolent spirit (IS,
13). Job may look to his heart, and he will ate
if that is true of himself.
Job is silent, and Elihu proceeds (xxxvi.) to show
that the Almightinest of Gad is not, as Job seems
to assert, associated with any contempt or neglect
of his creatures. Job by ignoring this truth, hss
been led into grave error, and terrible danger (13;
ef. 18), but God is still drawing him, and if he
yields and follows he will yet be delivered. The
rest of the discourse brings out forcibly the reasons
taught by the manifestations of goodness, as well
M greatness in creation. Indeed, the great object
of all natural phenomena is to teach men — " who
teacheth Eke Him ? " This part differs from Job's
magnificent description of the mystery and majesty
of God's works, inasmuch as it indicates a clearer
recognition of a loving purpose — and from the
address of the Lord which follows, by its discursive
and argumentative tone. The last words are evi-
dently spoken while a violent storm is coming on,
in which Khhu views the signs of a Theophany,
which cannot fail to produce an intense realization
of the nothingness of man before God.
4. From the preceding analysis it is obvious that
many weighty truths have been developed in the
course of the discussion — nearly every theory of the
object* and uses of suffering has been reviewed —
while a great advance has been mads towards the
sppreheneion of doctrines hereafter to be revealed,
inch as were known only to God. But the mystery
is not aa yet really cleared up. The position of the
three original opponents is shown to be untenable
— the views of Job himself to be but imperfect —
while even Elihu gives not the least intimation
that be recognizes one special object of calamity.
In the case of Job, as we are express)'- told, that
JOB
1408
• Thus A. Sehulasna. There oan be no doubt that
"snast," not « imamcar," Is the true tranaUooi. ,
ear that tha angel, the on* of a thousand, Is the
.T*TP "JHbD of Genesis.
» TUs bsaiinf of to* statement upon the whole
srgnsasnt Is ssttsrhetoritv shown by Hahn {fmtnduction
** Joo, p. 4), and by Sehlotsmann In his eommsnsary
■ the passage (p. 486).
• TMs Is Hi* Strang*!' •xagferated form in which
object was to try his sincerity, and to demonstrate
that goodness, integrity in all relations, and devout
faith in God, can exist independent of external cir-
cumstances. [See addition, Amer. ed.] Thia object
never occurs to the mind of any one of the inter-
locutors, nor could it be proved without a revelation.
On the other hand, the exact amount of censure due
to Job for the excesses into which he had been be-
trayed, and to bis three opponents fur their harshness
and want of candor, could only be awarded by an om-
niscient Judge. Hence the necessity for the Tbeopli-
any — from the midst of the storm Jehovah speak*
In language of incomparable grandeur He re-
proves and silence* the murmurs of Job. God does
not condescend, strictly speaking, to argue with
his creatures. The speculative questions discussed
in the colloquy are unnoticed, but lbs declaration
of God's absolute power is illustrated by a marve-
Ioualy beautiful and comprehensive survey of the
glory of creation, and his all-embracing Provideno*
by reference to the phenomena of the animal king-
dom. He who would argue with the lord must
understand at least the objects for which instinct*
so strange and manifold are given to the beings far
below man in gifts and powers. This declaration
suffices to bring Job to a right mind : he confesses
his inability to comprehend, and therefore to answer
his Maker (xl. 3, 4). A second address complete*
the work. It prove* that a charge of injustice
against God involves the consequence that the ac-
cuser is more competent than He to rule tha uni-
verse. He should then be able to control, to punish,
to reduce all creatures to order — but he cannot
even subdue the monsters of the irrational creation.
Baffled by leviathan and behemoth, how can ha
hold the reins of government, how contend with
Him who made and rules them all? 6
6. Job's unreserved submission terminate* the
trial. He expresses deep oontrition, not of course
for sins falsely imputed to him, but for the bitter-
ness and arrogance which had characterised some
portions of his complaints. In the rebuke then
addressed to .lob's opponents the integrity of his
character is distinctly recognised, while they are
condemned for untruth, which, inasmuch aa it was
not willful, but proceeded from a real but narrow-
minded conviction of the Divine justice, is pardoned
on the intercession of Job. The restoration of his
external prosperity, which is an inevitable result
of God's personal manifestation, symbolizes tho
ultimate compensation of the righteous for all suf-
ferings undergone upon earth.
From this analysis it seems clear that certain
views concerning the general object of the book are
partial or erroneous. It cannot be the oljject of
the writer to prove that there is no connection be-
tween guilt and sorrow,' or that the old orthodox
doctrine of retribution was radically unsound. Job
himself recognizes the general truth of the doctrine,
wbioh is in fact confirmed by his ultimate restora-
tion to happiness. 1 ' Nor is the development of the
great doctrine of a future state the primary object.*
Mr. Fronde represents to* views of Iwald. Nothhaj
•an bs more ooatrary to tha wool* tenor of th* book.
d Ss* Kwald's remarks In his Ja»i*. 1858, p. 88
The notion that Job I* a typ* of th* Hebrew natioa
la their sunsriass, and that th* book was written t*
eonsok th*m In their Mile, held by Clerical and Bp.
Warburton, Is aansmUy rejected. Sea zVossrunuUst,
■» '8-M-
» Bwald's tboory, on which Soblottmsoa has soau
excellent oossrvatlons (p. 481.
Digitized by
Google
1404
JOB
ft would not in thul cms have bam passed aver b
Job's hat discount, in the speech of Eunu, or in
the address of toe Lord God. In fact, critic* who
hold that view admit that the doctrine it nther
suggested than developed, and amounts to scarcely
more than a wish, a presentiment, at the most a
subjective conviction of a truth first fully repealed
bj Him " who brought life and immortality to
light." The great object must surely he that which
la distinctly intimated in the introduction, and
confirmed in the conclusion, to snow the effects of
calamity in its worst and most awful form upon a
truly religious spirit. Job is no Stoic, no Titan
(En-aid, p. 26), struggling rebeUionsly against God;
no Prometheus," victim of a jealous and unrelenting
Deity: be ia a suffering man, acutely sensitive to
all impressions inward and outward, grieved by the
loss of wealth, position, domestic happiness, the
respect of his countrymen, dependents, and fol-
lowers, tortured by a loathsome and all but unen-
durable disease, and stung to an agony of grief and
passion by the insinuations of conscious guilt and
hypocrisy. Under such provocation, being wholly
without a dew to the cause of his misery, and
hopeless of restoration to happiness on earth, be is
shaken to the utmost, and driven almost to des-
peration. Still in the centre of his being he re-
mains firm and unmoved — with an intense con-
sciousness of his own integrity — without a doubt
as to the power, wisdom, truth, or absolute justice
of God, anil therefore awaiting with longing expec-
tation' the final judgment which be is assured
must come and bring him deliverance. The repre-
sentation of sueh a character, involving the dis-
comfiture of man's great enemy, and the develop-
ment of the manifold problems which such a
spectacle suggests to men of imperfect knowledge,
but thoughtful and inquiring minds, is the true
object of the writer, who, like all great spirits of
the ancient world, dealt less with abstract proposi-
tions than with the objective realities of existence.
Snch is the impression naturally made by the book,
and which is recognized more distinctly in propor-
tion as the reader grasps the tenor of the arguments,
and realizes the characters and events. [See ap-
pended remarks, Amer. ed.]
II. Integrity of tie book. — It is satisfactory to
find that the arguments employed by those who
impugn the authenticity of considerable portions
jf this book are for tbe most part mutually de-
structive, and that the most minute and searching
investigations bring out the most convincing proofs
}f the unity of its composition, and the coherence
if its constituent parts. One point of great im-
portance is noted by the latest and one of the most
lgenious writers (M. E. Kenan, Lt Imrt dt Job,
.'aria, 1859) on this subject After some strong
.-emarks upon the inequality of the style, and ap-
pearance of interpolation, M. E. Kenan observes
'p. xliv.) : " The Hebrews, and Orientals in general,
differed widely from us in their views about com-
petition. Their works never have that perfectly
<> eVhlottmann (p. 46), who draws also a very In-
teresting comparison between Job and Vicramitm, in
the Ua.maya.na ip. 12S).
6 See the passages quoted by Ewald, p. 27.
c It is a very remarkable Instance both of tbe In-
.'eoslstency of If. Kenan, and of the little reliance
artdeh can be placed upon the judgment of critics npon
such questions, tbat he and Kwald an at direct Issue
is to the state In which the text of this book has been
nra to us. Kwald oonstdars that It Is pass
JOB
defined outline to which we are accustomed, sad «jc
should ha careful not to assume interpolations of
alterations (retouoses) when we meet with defects
of sequence which surprise us." He then shows
that in parts of the work, acknowledged by aa
critics to be by one band, there are very strong in-
stances of what Europeans might regard as repeti-
tion, or suspect of interpolation : c thus Ehni
recommences his argument four times ; while dis-
courses of Job, which hare distinct portions, such
ss to modern critics might seem unconnected and
even misplaced, are impressed with such a charac-
ter of sublimity and force as to leave no doubt that
tbey are tbe product of a single inspiration. Ta
thia just and true observation it must be added
that the assumed want of coherence and of logical
consistency is for the most part only apparent, and
results from a radical difference in the mode of
thinking and enunciating thought between the oh)
Eastern and modern European.
Four parts of the book have been most generally
attacked. Objections have bees made to the intro-
ductory and concluding chapters (1 ) on account of
tbe style. Of course there is an obvious and nat-
ural difference between the prose of the narrative
and the highly poetical language of the colloquy.
Yet the beat critics now acknowledge tbat the style
of these portions is quite ss antique in its simple
and severe grandeur 1 ' as that of tbe Pentateuch
itself (to which it bears a striking resemblance'),
or aa any other part of thia book, while it b aa
strikingly unlike the narrative style of all the later
productions of the Hebrews. Ewald says with
perfect truth, "these prosaic words harmonize
thoroughly with the old poem in subject-matter
and thoughts, in coloring and in art, also in lan-
guage, so far as prose can be like poetry." It kt
said again that tile doctrinal views are not in har-
mony with those of Job. This is wholly unfounded.
The fundamental principles of tbe patriarch, aa
developed in the most solemn of his discourses, an
identical with those maintained throughout the
book. The form of worship belongs essentially to
the early patriarchal type; with little of ceremonial
ritual, without a separate priesthood, thoroughly
domestic in form and spirit. The re pre s ent a tio n
of the angels, and their appellation, " sons of God."
peculiar to this book and to Genesis, accord entirely
with the intimations in the earliest documents of
the Semitic race. It is moreover alleged that there
are discrepancies between the facts related in the
introduction, and statements or allusions in the
dialogue. But the apparent contradiction between
xix. 17 and the statement that all Job's children
had perished, rests upon a misinterpretation of the
words ^StpS ^S, « children of mj womb," i. e.
" of the womb that bare me " — " my brethren,"
not "my children" (cf. in. 10): Indeed the de-
struction of tbe patriarch's whole family is re-
peatedly assumed in the dialogue (e. g. viii. 4, xxix-
5). Again, the omission of all reference to the
— that tbe Mas. must hare been very good— aa
verbal eonaeeBon Is accurate— sad tanendaooris un-
easary (aes p. 66). H. Benan assarts. « Oat antique
monument nouf eat parvenu, J'en aula persuade, dans
un etet fort miserable et macule en plastron as*
dretta " (p. lx.).
* itanaa: "La grand oareetere du reeJt est saw
prssrre ds son sndennats."
« For a list of comctdsneas sea Dr. taw's Jab, s
4ft.
Digitized by
Google
JOB
Meat of Satan in the bat chapter ii quits in as-
sordance with the grand simplicity of the poem
(Schiottmann, pp. 39, 40). It was too obvious a
result to need special notice, and it had in fact
been accomplished by the steadfast faith of the
patriarch eran before the discussions commenced.
No allusion to the agency of that spirit was to be
expected in the colloquy, since Job and his friends
are represented as wholly ignorant of the transac-
tion* in heaven. At present, indeed, it is generally
acknowledged " that the entire work would be un-
intelligible without these portions.
9. Strong objections are made to the passage
txvii. from ver. 7 to the end of the chapter. Here
Job describee the ultimate fate of the godless hypo-
crite in terms which some critics hold to be in di-
rect contradiction to the whole tenor of his argu-
ments in other discourses. Dr. Kennioott, whose
opinion is adopted by Eichhorn, Froude, and others,
held that, owing to asms confusion or omission in
the MS., the missing speech of Zophar has. been
put into the mouth of Job. The fact of the con-
tradiction is denied by able writers, who hare shown
that it rests upon a misapprehension of the patri-
arch's character and fundamental principles. He
had been provoked, under circumstances of peculiar
aggravation, into statements which at the close of
the discussion he would be anxious to guard or re-
call: ha was bound, having spoken so harshly, to
recognize, what beyond doubt he never intended to
deny, the general justice of divine dispensations
even in this world. Moreover he intimates a belief
or presentiment of a future retribution, of which
there are no indications in any other speaker (see
ver. 8). The whole chapter is thoroughly cohermt :
the first part is admitted by all to belong to Job;
nor can the rest be disjoined from it without in-
jury to the sense. Ewald says, " only a grievous
misunderstanding of the whole book could have
misled the modern critics who hold that this pas-
sage is interpolated or misplaced." Other critics
have abundantly vindicated the authenticity of the
passage (Hahn, Schiottmann, etc.). As for the
style, E. Kenan, a most competent authority in a
matter of taste, declares that it is one of the finest
developments of the poem. It certainly differs ex-
ceedingly in its breadth, loftiness, and devout spirit,
from the speeches of Zophar, for whose silence sat-
isfactory reasons have been already assigned (see
the analysis).
a. The last two chapters of the address of the
Almighty have been rejected as interpolations by
many, of course rationalistic, writers (Stuhlmaan,
Bernstein, Eichhorn, Ewald, Meier); partly - be-
cause of an alleged inferiority of style; partly as
not baring any bearing upon the argument; but
the connection of reasoning, involved, though, as
was to be expected, not drawn out in this discourse,
has been shown in the preceding analysis; and as
JOB
1405
for the style, few who have a true ear for the re-
sonant grandeur of ancient Hebrew poetry will dis-
sent from the judgment of E. Kenan,* whose sug-
gestion, that it may have been written by the same
author at a later date, is far from weakening the
force of bis observation as to the identity of the style.
4. The speech of Elihu presents greater diffi-
culties, and has been rejected by several rationalists,
whose opinion, however, is controverted not only
by orthodox writers, but by some of the most
skeptical commentators.' The former support then-
decision chiefly on the manifest, and to a certain
extent the real, difference between this and other
parts of the book in tone of thought, ui doctrinal
views, and more positively in language and general
style. Much stress also is laid upon the facts tm,t
Elihu is not mentioned in the introduction nor at
the end, and that his speech is unanswered by Jol ,
and unnoticed in the final address of the Almighl).
These points were observed by very early writers,
and were accounted for in various ways. On the
one hand, Elihu was regarded as a specially inspired
person (Schiottmann, p. 63). In the Seder Ohm
(a rabbinical system of chronology) he is reckoned
among the prophets who declared the will of God
to the Gentiles before the promulgation of the law.
S. Bar Xachman (13th century) notes his connec-
tion with the family of Abraham as a sign that he
was the fittest person to expound the ways of God.
The Greek Fathers generally follow Chrysostom in
attributing to him a superior intellect; while many
of the best critics of the two last centuries <* con-
sider that the true dialectic solution of the great
problems discussed in the book is to be found in his
discourse. On the other hand, Jerome,* who is
followed by Gregory,/ and many ancient as well as
modern writers of the Western Church, speak of
his character and arguments with singular eon-
tempt Later critics, chiefly rationalists,' see in
him but an empty babbler, introduced only to
heighten by contrast the effect of the last solemn
and dignified discourse of Job. The alternative of
rejecting his speech as an interpolation was scarcely
less objectionable, and has been preferred by Stuhl-
mann, Bernstein, Ewald, Kenan, and other writers
of similar opinions in our country. A candid and
searching examination, however, leads to a different
conclusion. It is proved (see Schiottmann, EM.
p. 65) that there is a dose internal connection be-
tween this and other parte of the book ; there are
references to numerous psssages in the discourses
of Job and his friends; so covert as only to be dis-
covered by dose inquiry, yet, when pointed out, so
striking and natural as to leave no room for doubt.
Elihu supplies exactly what Job repeatedly demands
— a confutation of his opinions, not merely pro-
duced by an overwhelming display of divine power,
but by rational and human arguments, and pro-
ceeding from one, not like his other opponents
a Hahn, p. 18; Kossumulier, p. 48; Mehhom,
■wald, Schlottmaon, Kenan, eta,
b "ha style du fragment dont nous paiionf est cent
fcs meUleurs endrotts du poems. Nulls part la coupe
n'est plus vigouieuas, Is paralMUasM piss sonata:
tout tndique que cs slnguller moroean est d> ( a mane
•sun, nets non pas du mini J**, qua Is raws du dle-
eooss da Jehovah " (p. t).
• Bartholdt, Oasanlus, Sehfaer, Jaan, Umtaatt,
iteamsuUsr; and of course by moderate or orthodox
eiltan, as IIKnrnlck, Hahn, Bucket, Hangstsnbeig,
■at sawJotoaann. Mr. fronds
at assart that this Sfsesu la
by Hebrew aenoUrs not to bs genuine," aw!
he dlsposss of the questtoa In a abort Dots ( Iks Booh
of Job, p. 24).
d Thus Garvin, Thomas Aquinas, and A. flchultsns.
who speaks of his speech thus : « Blhul moderata*
alma Ula qufdem, sad tamen ado Del nagranttasuna
radargutio, qua Jobum subtllltar non minus quaes
graviter uomp ss u a i s sggndltur."
< The eomments-v on Job Is not by Jerome, ban
one of hie iMselples, and probably sapressss Ws
/ Monlia Magna, lib. xxvffl. 1, 11.
« asohharn, Bartheldt, Ombrsta.
Digitized by
Google
1406
JOB
bigoted or hypocrltic-d, bat upright, candid, and
truthful (comp. xxxiii. S with ri. M, 86). The
reasonings of Elihu are. moreover, auoh a* are
needed for the development of the doctrine* incul-
cated In the book, while tbty are necessarily cut
in a form which could not withiut irr e v eren ce be as-
signed to the Almighty." As to the objection that
the doctrinal system of Elihu is in some points
more advanced than that of Job or his friends, it
may be answered, first, that there are no traces in
this discourse of certain doctrines which were un-
doubtedly known at the earliest date to which those
critics would assign the interpolation ; whereas it is
evident that if known they would have been ad-
duced as the very strongest arguments for a warn-
ing and consolation. No reader of the Psalms and
of the prophets could have foiled to urge such topics
as the resurrection, the future judgment, and the
personal advent of Messian. Secondly, the doc-
trinal system of Elihu diners rather in degree than
in kind from that which has been either developed
or intimated in several passages of the work, and
consists chiefly in a specific application of the me-
diatorial theory, not unknown to Job, and in a
deeper appreciation of the lore manifested in all
providential dispensations. It is quite consistent
with the plan of the writer, and with the admirable
skill shown in the arrangement of the whole work,
that the highest view as to the object of afflictions,
and to the source to which men should apply for
comfort and instruction, should be reserved for this,
which, so far as regards the human reasoners,* is
the culminating point of the discussion. Little can
be said for Lightfbot's theory, that the whole work
was composed by Elihu; or for E. Kenan's con-
jecture that this discourse may have been composed
by the author in his old age; 1 yet these views
Imply an unconscious impression that Elihu is the
fullest exponent of the truth. It is satisfactory to
know that two <* of the most impartial and discern-
ing critics, who unite in denying this to lie an
original and integral portion of the work, fully
acknowledge its intrinsic excellence and beauty.
There is no difficulty in accounting for the omis-
sion of Elihu's name in the introduction. No per-
sons are named in the book until they appear as
agents, or as otherwise concerned in the events.
Thus Job's brethren are named Incidentally in one
of his speeches, and his relatives are for the first
time in the concluding chapter. Had Elihu been
.nentioned at first, we should of course nave ex-
pected him to take part in the discussion, and the
impression made by his startling address would
have been lost. Job does not answer him, nor in-
deed could he deny the cogency of his arguments ;
while this silence brings out a curious point of coin-
cidence with a previous declaration of the patriarch
(vi. 34, 25). Again, the discourse being substan-
tially true did not need correction, and is therefore
« Sea Schlottmann (I. c). The reader will rsmsm-
jsr the just, though sarcastic, criticism of Pops on
If'un's irreverence and bad taste.
b Hahn says of Klihu : " A young wise man, rep-
rasenttnir all the Intelligence of his age " (p. 6). Of.
V. Mehultens and Ilengstsnberg in Kitto's qjrel. of
But. Lit.
c Psge IvU. This Implies, at any rate, that In his
ephrioa there is no absolute incompatibility be t ween
•his and other parts of the book In point of style or
mooght The collectors is a striking Instance of y>
srastoteney in a very dogmane writer.
* «V»M and Renaa. Braid saya t " The thought*
JOB
left unnoticed in the final decision of the Almighty.
Nothing indeed could be more in harmony wilt
the ancient traditions of the East than that a youth,
moved by a special and supernatural impulse tc
speak out God's truth in the presence of his elders,
should retire into obscurity when be had done his
work. Hon weight is to be attached to the objec-
tion resting upon diversity of style, and dialectic
peculiarities. The most acute critics differ indeed
in their estimate of both, and are often grossly
deceived (see Schlottmann, p. 61 ), still there can
be little doubt as to the fact. It may be accounted
for either on the supposition that the author ad-
hered strictly to the form in which tradition handed
down the dialogue; in which case the speech of a
Syrian might be expected to bear traces of his dia-
lect: 'or that the Chakbuc forms and idioms, which
are for from resembling later vulgarisms or coemp-
tions of Hebrew, and occur only in highly poetic
passages of the oldest writers, are such as pecu-
liarly suit the style of the young and fiery speaker
(see Schlottmann, Eird. p. 61). It has been ob-
served, and with apparent truth, that the discourses
of the other interlocutors have each a very distinct
and characteristic coloring, shown not only in the
general tone of thought, but in peculiarities of
expression (Ewald and Schlottmann). The exces-
sive obscurity of the style, which is universally
admitted, may be accounted for in a similar man-
ner. A young man speaking under strong excite-
ment, embarrassed by the presence of his elders,
and by the peculiar responsibility of his position,
might be expected to use language obscured by
repetitions; and, though ingenious and true, yet
somewhat intricate and imperfectly developed argu-
ments; such as in feet present great difficulties in
the exegesis of this portion of the book.
III. Historical Character of the Work. — Three
distinct theories hare been maintained at various
times — some believing the book to be strictly his-
torical ; others a religious fiction ; others a composi-
tion based upon facts. Until a comparatively late
time the prevalent opinion was, not only that the
persons and events which it describes are real, but
that the very words of the speakers were accurately
recorded. It was supposed either that Job himself
employed the latter years of his life in writing it
(A. Schultens), or that at a very early age some
inspired Hebrew collected the facts and sayings,
faithfully preserved by oral tradition, and presented
them to his countrymen in their own tongue. By
some the authorship of the work was attributed to
Moses; by others it was believed (and this theory
has lately been sustained with much ingenuity »)
that Moses became acquainted with the documents
during his residence in Midian, and that he added
the introductory and concluding chapters.
The feet of Job's existence, and the substantial
truth of the narrative, were not likely to be denied
SB this speech are in themselves exceedingly pore and
true, conceived with greater depth, and presented with
more fores than In the net of the book n (p. MO).
• This seems a sufletant answer to an uuj a utluu
men likely to occur to a modern European than to a
/ Stkkel supposes that the Aramaic
Intentionally Introduced by the author on
the Syrian descent of aWho,
I By Dr. lee ; see his Introduction. He
Shasta- the net of U»
sasjspaien, only m these s h a p e — .
Digitized by
Google
JOB
by Hebrews nr Christiana, considering the term*
in which the patriarch ti named in the 14th of Ese-
kiel and in the Epistle of St. James (ver. 11). It
seemed to early writers incompatible with an; idea
of inspiration to assume that a narrative, certainly
not allegorical, should be a mere Action ; and irrev-
erent to suppose that the Almighty would be in-
troduced as a speaker in an imaginary colloquy,
In the East numerous traditions (Ewald, pp. 17, 18;
see D'Herbelot, s. c. Ayoub) about the patriarch
and his family show the deep impression made by
bis character and calamities: these traditions may
possibly have been derived from the book itself;
but it is at least equally probable that they had an
independent origin. We are led to the same con-
clusion by the soundest principles of criticism.
Ewald says (AVn/. p. IS) most truly, "The inven-
tion of a history without foundation in facts — the
creation of a person, represented as baring a real
historical existence, out of the mere bead of the
poet — is a notion so entirely alien to the spirit of
all antiquity, that it only began to develop itself
gradually in the latest epoch of the literature of
any ancient people, and in its complete form belongs
only to the most modern times." In the canonical
books there is not a trace of any such invention.
Of all people the Hebrews were the least likely to
mingle the mere creations of imagination with the
sacred records reverenced as the peculiar glory of
their race.
This principle is corroborated by special argu-
ments. It is, to say the least, highly improbable
that a Hebrew, had he invented such a character
as that of Job, should hare represented him as be-
longing to a race which, though descended from
* common ancestor, was never on friendly, and
generally on hostile, terms with his own people.
Uz, the residence of Job, is in no way associated
with Iaraelitish history, and, apart from the patri-
arch's own history, would have no interest for a
Hebrew. The names of most persons introduced
have no meaning connected with the part attribu-
ted to them in the narrative. The name of Job
himself is but an apparent exception. According
to most critics 3"1*N Is derived from 3JH, infen-
nu fuil, and means '• cruelly or hostilely treated : "
according to others (Ewald and RosenmuOer) of
Ugh authority it may signify "a true penitent,"
»■*
corresponding to l_>'«1, so applied to Job, and
evidently with reference to his name, in the Koran
(8ar. 88, 44). In either case the name would give
tat a very partial view, and would indeed tail to
represent the central principle « of the patriarch's
heroic character. It is moreover far from improb-
able that the name previously borne by the hero
may have been changed in commemoration of the
JOB
1401
• A fictitious nam* would of course have meant
what sua ancients supposed that Job most stgnirjr-
Td *la>0 oropa vwoftm^f pmitoa, ml tow, mt yfWofoi
owtmt 6 *po«KAi)#i}, ij KAijftjrcu orcp ryftvro. DtdymUS
aiaxand. col. 1130, ed. Hlgm.
o This Is assumed by all the critics who boiler* tfcs
Mails of the work to be a purs creation of the post.
"Be has represented the atmpls relations of sacri-
wehal lift, and sustained the assumed character o. a
rich Arabian chieftain of a nomad tribe, with the
(Tsatatt truthfulness." (Hahn.) Thus Xwald, Bchlott-
aiann, ate., p. 70.
• Both races probably dwelt near the lead of Us.
. Proll. pp. 80. 8L
event. Such was the ease with Abraham, Jacob
Joshua, and in all probability with many other his-
torical personages in the Old Testament. It is
worth noting, without laying much stress upon the
fact, that in a notice appended to the Alexandrian
version it is stated, " he bore previously the name
of Jobab ; " and that a tradition adopted by the
Jews and some Christian Fathers, identifies Job
with Jobab, prince of Edom, mentioned in Gen.
xxxvi. 83. Moreover a coincidence between the
name and the character or history of a real person
is not uncommon in any age. To this it is objected
that the resemblance in Greek does not exist in th(
Hebrew — a strange assertion: 3VH and 331*
are certainly not much less alike than '1*5/3 sod
'IwjMA
To this it must be added that there is a singular
air of reality in the whole narrative, such ss must
either proceed naturally from a faithful adherence
to objective truth, or be the result of the most con-
summate art. 6 The effect is produced partly bj
the thorough consistency of all the characters,
especially that of Job, not merely as drawn in
broad strong outlines, but as developed under a
variety of most trying circumstances: partly also
by the minute and accurate account of incidents
which in a fiction would probably hare been noted
by an ancient writer in a vague and general man-
ner. Thus we remark the mode in which the
supernatural trial Is carried into execution by nat
ural agencies — by Chaldean and Sabean c robbers
— by whirlwinds common in and peculiar to the
desert — by fire — and lastly by the elephantiasis
(see Schlottmann, p. IS ; Ewald, L c. ; and Heng-
stenberg), the most formidable disease known in
the East. The disease was indeed one which the
Indians d and most Orientals then probably behaved
to be peculiarly indicative of divine wrath, and
would therefore be naturally selected by the writer
(see the analysis above). But the symptoms are
described so faithfully as to leare no doubt that
the writer must either have introduced them with
a view of giving an air of truthfulness to his work,
or have recorded what he himself witnessed, or
received from an exact tradition. The former sup-
position is confuted by the fact that the peculiar
symptoms are not described in any one single pas-
sage so as to attract the reader's attention, but are
made out by a critical and scientific examination
of words occurring here and there at intervals in
the complaints of the sufferer.* Hie most refined
art fails in producing such a result: It is rarely
attempted in the most artificial ages; was never
dreamed of by ancient writers, and must here be
regarded as a strong instance of the undesigned
coin -idences which ton soundest criticism regards
as the best evidence of genuineness and authet.-
tWty in any work.
<* Thus Orlsan, c. Cats, vt 6, 1; AbnlMa, Hit
m m
Anttitl^ l)al)a aJ^SXJi P- "i •*■ *Mtshar,
i. his body was smitten with ekphantssels (lbs
lsd»
»tcX»>> and eaten by worms, lbs i
scribed by Abash* Irsauoetimj JL S., and
8** Ewald, p. 38,
« Ch. 11. 7,8; VB.8,18; xvtg; xlx. 17, JO; m.
18; and other pasasaae 8*s th* valuahl* remarks
of Bwald, p. SS.
Digitized by
Google
1408
JOB
Forcible as these argument) mm; appear, many
antics have adopted the opinion either that the
whole work u a moral or religious apologue, or
that, upon a substratum of a few rudiments! facta
preserved by tradition, the genius of an original
thinker has raised this, the most remarkable mon-
ument of the Semitic mind. The first indications
of this opinion are found in the Talmud (Baba
JBathra, 14-16). In a discussion upon the age ef
this hook, while the Rabbins in general maintain
its historical character, Samuel Bar Nachiuon de-
clares his conviction " Job did not exist, and was
not a created man, but the work is a parable."
Hal Gaon,* A. D. 1000, who is followed by Jarchl,
alters this passage to " Job existed and was created
to become a parable." They had evidently no crit-
ical ground for the change, but bore witness to the
prevalent tradition of the Hebrews. Maimonides
{Morih NevHChim, iii. 22), with his characteristic
freedom of mind, considers it an open question of
tittle or no moment to the real value of the inspired
nook. Ralbag, i. e. R. Levi Ben Uershom, treats
it as a philosophic work. A late Hebrew commen-
tator, Simcha Arieh (Schlottmann, p. 4), denies
the historical truth of the narrative, on the ground
that it is incredible the patriarchs of the chosen
nee should be surpassed in goodness by a child of
Edom. This is worth noting in corroboration of the
argument that such a fact was not likely to have
been invented by an Israelite of any age. c
Luther first suggested the theory which, in some
form or other, is now most generally received. In
his introduction to the first edition of his transla-
tion of the Bihli , be speaks of the author as having
so treated the historical facts as to demonstrate the
truth that (Sod alone is righteous — and in the
Tischreden (ed. Walch, torn. xxii. p. 2093), be says,
" I look upon the book of Job as a true history, yet
I do not believe that all took place just as it is
written, but that an ingenious, pious, and learned
man brought it into its present form." This po-
sition was strongly attacked by Bellarmin, and other
Roman theologians, and was afterwards repudiated
by most Lutherans. The fact that Spinoza, Cler-
icus [I* Clerc], Du Pin, and Father Simon, held
nearly the same opinion, the first denying, and the
others notoriously holding low views of the inspira-
tion of Scripture, had of course a tendency to bring
it into disrepute. J. D. Michaelis first revived the
old theory of Bar Nachman, not upon critical but
dogmatic grounds. In a mere history, the opinions
or doctrines enounced by Job and his friends could
have no dogmatic authority ; whereas if the whole
book were a pure inspiration, the strongest argu-
ments could be deduced from them on behalf of the
great truths of the resurrection and a future judg-
ment, which, though implied in other early books,
are nowhere so distinctly inculcated. The arbitrary
ehai-acter of such reasoning is obvious. At present
no critic doubts that the narrative rests on facts,
although the prevalent opinion among continental
scholars is certainly that in it* form and general
• b»c «bs K-Q3 kVi rrn Mb aw
rTTt. Mashat has a much wider signification than
■arable, or any English synonym.
e Sirald and Dukes's Eritragt, m". 165.
o Theodoras of Mopsmstta somas alone in denying
the Inspiration, while he admits the historical char-
terer of the book, whlnh he asserted, In a passage
ncrtemned at the second Council of Constantinople,
• be replete with •tateinente derogatorj to God, and
JOB
features, in its reasonings and repre s eot at i olal of
character, the book is a work of creative geuina.
The question, however, cannot be settled, not
indeed thoroughly understood, without reference U
other arguments by which critics have endeavored
to determine the date at which the work was com-
pleted in its present form, and the circumstances
under which it was composed. We proceed, then-
fore, to consider —
IV. The probable Age, Country, and Position of
the Author. — The language alone does not, as some
have asserted, supply any decisive test as to the date
of the composition. Critics of the last century gen-
erally adopted the opinion of A. Scbultens {Prtef.
ad Ubrum Jobi), who considered that the indications
of external influences were best accounted for on
the supposition that the book was written at a very
early period, before the different branches of the
Semitic race had completely formed their distinct
dialects. The fact that the language of this work
approaches far more nearly to the Arabic than any
other Hebrew production was remarked by Jerome
and is recognized by the soundest critics. On the
other hand, there are undoubtedly many Aramai*
words,'' and grammatical forms, which some critics
have regarded as a strong proof that the writers
must hare lived during, or even after the Captivity.
At present this hypothesis is universally given up
as untenable. It is proved (Ewald, Kenan, Schloti-
mann, and Kosegarten) that there is a radical dif-
ference between the Aramaisms of the later Hebrew
writings and those found in the book of Job. These
latter are, without an exception, such as charac-
terize the antique and highly poetic style; they
occur in parts of the Pentateuch, in the Song cf
Deborah, in the earliest Psalms, and the Song of
Solomon, all of which are now admitted even by
the ablest rationalistic critics to he among the ear-
liest and purest productions of Hebrew literature.'
So far as any argument can be drawn from idiom-
atic peculiarities, it may be regarded as a settled
point that the book was written long before the
exile (see some good observations by HKvemick,
I. c): while there is absolutely nothing to provt a
later date than the Pentateuch, or even those parts
of the Pentateuch which appear to belong to the
patriarchal age.
This impression is borne out by the style. All
critics have recognized its grand archaic character.
Firm, compact, sonorous as the ring of a pun
metal, severe and at times rugged, yet always dig
nified and majestic, the language belongs altogetbet
to a period when thought was slow, but profound
and intensely concentrated, when the weighty and
oracular sayings of the wise were wont to be en-
graved upon rocks with a pen of iron and In char-
acters of molten lead (see xix. 24). It is truly a
lapidary style, such as was natural only in an age
when writing, though known, was rarely used, before
language had acquired clearness, fluency, and flex-
ibility, but lost much of its freshness and native
force. Much stress has been laid upon the tact
such as could only proceed from a vain and Ignorant
heathen. Aben Ezra, among the Jews, maintained the
same opinion.
d A list is given by lee, p. 60. See also niven**.
Intnd. to O. T. p. 178, Kng. Trans.
« Beoan's good taste and candor hen, as elsewhere,
neutralise his rationalistic tendency. In the Jttststr
da Laxftui Semitiqua, ed. 1867, he held that ns)
Aramaisms Indicate a very late date ; In the ]
to Job he has adopted the opinion hen I
Digitized by
Google
JOB
that the book bean a closer rcoaiiiliUnco to the
P ro verbs of Solomon than to anj other Hebrew
wbrk (en especially BoeeamUllei, ProU. p. 38).
This is true to a remarkable extent with regard to
the thoughts, words, and forms of expression, while
the metre, which is somewhat peculiar and strongly
marked,* is almost identical. Hence it has been
inferred that the composition belongs to the Solo-
monian era, or to the period between Solomon and
Heaekiah, by whose orders, as we are expressly in-
formed, a great part of the book of Proverbs was
compiled. But the argument loses much of its
force when we consider that Solomon did not merely
jvent the proverbs, but collected the most ancient
and curious sayings of olden times, not only of the
Hebrews, bat probably of other nations with whom
he had extensive intercourse, and in whose philos-
ophy he is supposed, not without good reason, to
hue taken deep interest, even to the detriment of
his religious principles (see Benan's Job, p. xxiii.);
while those proverbs which he invented himself
would as a matter of course be east in the same
metrical form and take an archaic character.
Again, there can be little doubt that the passages
in which the resemblance is most complete and
striking, were taken from one book by the author
of the other, and adapted, according to a Hebrew
custom oommon among the prophets, to the special
purposes of his work. On comparing these pas-
sages, it seems impossible to deny that they be-
longed in toe first instance to the book of Job, 6
where they are in thorough harmony with the
tenor of the argument, and have all the character-
istics of the author's genius. Taking the resem-
blance as • fact, we are entitled to conclude that
we have in Job a composition not later than the
most ancient proverbs, and eertainly of much earlier
date than the entire book.
The extent to which the influence of this book
Is perceptible in the later literature of the Hebrews
is a subject of great interest and importance; but
it has not yet been thoroughly investigated. H8-
vemick has a few good remarks in his general In-
troduction to th* Old Testament, § 30. Dr. Lee
{Introd. section vii.) has led the way to a more
eomplete and searching inquiry by a close examina-
tion of five chapters, in which he produces a vast
number of parallel passages from the Pentateuch
(which he holds to be contemporary with the Intro-
duction, and of a later date than the rest of the
book), from Ruth, Samuel, the Psalms, Proverbs,
Ecclesisstes, Isaiah, Jeremiah, Eeekiel, Hoses, Joel,
Amos, Hioah, and Nahum, all of which are probably,
and some of them demonstrably, copied from Job.
JOB
1409
• Huh verse, with very lew exceptions, constats of
Sao parallel members, and each member of three
words: when that number is caneoacd, it is owing to
the particles or labordinate words, which are almost
always so eomMned as to leave only thiea tones In
each member (SesJotteaann, p. 88).
» to RosenmuUsr, Pratt, p. 40. Xven Benan, who
kslisves that Job was written aftrr the mas of Solo-
msn, holds that the description of Wisdom (eh. xxvin.)
la the original soars* of am Use which we And In
Proverbs (ehs. viii., ix.).
c See some excellent remarks by Benan, p xxxvil.
d ihaMakamat of Hariri, and she lift o» Ihaewr
sy Arabshah, in Arable, the works of Lrtvohion hi
Brea k, are Rood siamplee Wsmswiist of "lis char-
acter may perhaps be found hi the last dhaptaes of
, while it Is uu Ms p t uuuu s In the apocryphal
of Wisdom, B i nl iasisl lin s, sent Baraeh. Ia-
m
Considerable weight must also be attached to
the fact that Job is far more remarkable for obscu-
rity than any Hebrew writing. There is an ob-
scurity which results from confusion of thought,
from carelessness and inaccuracy, or from studied
involutions and artificial combination of metaphors
indicating a late age. 1 ' But when it is owing to
obsolete words, intense concentration of thought
and language, and incidental allusions to long-for-
gotten traditions, it is an all but infallible proof of
primeval antiquity. Such are precisely the diffi-
culties in this book. The enormous mass of notes
which a reader must wade through, before he can
feel himself competent to decide upon the most
probable interpretation of a single chapter, 1 proves
that this book stands apart from all other produc-
tions of the Hebrews, belongs to a different epoch,
and, in accordance with the surest canons of crit-
icism, to an earlier age.
We arrive at the same conclusion from consider-
ing the institutions, manners, and historical facta
described or alluded to in this book. It must bo
borne in mind that no ancient writer ever succeeded
in reproducing the manners of a past age;/ to use
the words of M. Kenan, "antiquity had not at.
idea of what we call local coloring." The attempt
was never made by any Hebrew ; and the age of
any writer can be positively determined when we
know the date of the institutions and customs which
he describes. Again it is to the last degree improb-
able (being without a precedent or parallel) that an
ancient author ' should intentionally and success-
fully avoid all reference to historical occurrences,
and to changes in religious forms or doctrines of a
date posterior to that of the events which he nar-
rates. These points are now generally recognized,
but they hare rarely been applied with consistency
and candor by commentators on this book.
In the first place it is distinctly admitted that
from the beginning to the end no reference what-
ever ia made to the Mosaic law, or to any of the
peculiar institutions of Israel, * or to the great car-
dinal events of the national history after the Ex-
odus. It cannot be proved' that such re f ere u os
was unlikely to occur in connection with the argu-
ment. The sanctions and penalties of the Law, if
known, could scarcely have been passed over by the
opponents of Job, while the deliverance of Israel
and the overthrow of the Egyptians supplied ex-
actly the examples which they required in order to
silence the complaints and answer the arguments
of Job. The force of this argument ia not affected
by the answer that other books written long after
the establishment of the Mosaic ritual contain few
stances in our own literature will ocour to every
the
for
• Ihe Iwmt AeyoMow, Slid passsgis of which
Interpretation Is wholly a matter of conjecture,
surpass those of any portion of the 0. T.
/This Is tons of the Omsk dramatists, and of
greatest origins! writers of oar own, and Indeed
every country before the 1Mb century.
t In nut, scarcely one week of notion
which a searching criticism doss not detect
Isms or laeonel stendes.
» See Benan, p. xvL It should be weed that
the word IT1VT, so ernnmnn hi eves
espedslly In those of the post-Davtdk age,
ones ia Job (xrlL J2)» and then not la the speaks
technical sbjnlfWstisn of a reserved cods.
< lea, en ths ieh*»ska> Panama?, leans*
the
of
Digitized by
Google
1410
JOB
ar no altrauens to thoee Institutions or event*. The
statement ii inaccurate. In each of the boob •pe-
rilled ■ there are abundant traces of the Law. It
tn not to be expected that a complete Tie* of the
Identical rites, or of historical beta unconnected
with the subject-matter of those works, osnld be
derived from them ; but they abound in allusions
to customs and notions peculiar to the Hebrews
trained under the law, to the serriee* of the Tab-
ernacle or Temple, and they all recognize most dis-
tinctly the existence of a sacerdotal system, whereas
our author ignores, and therefore, as we may rea-
sonably conclude, was unacquainted with any forms
of religious serriee, sere those of the patriarchal age.
Ewald, whose judgment in this case will not be
questioned,* asserts very positively that in all the
descriptions of manners and customs, domestic,
social, and political, and even in toe indirect allu-
sions and illustrations, the genuine coloring of the
age of Job, that is of the period between Abraham
and Hoses, is rery faithfully obserred ; that all his-
torical examples and allusions are taken exclusively
from patriarchal times, and that there is a com-
plete and successful avoidance of direct reference to
later occurrences,'' which in his opinion may hare
been known to the writer. All critics concur in
extolling the fresh, antique simplicity of manners
described in this book, the genuine air of the wild,
free, vigorous life of the desert, the stamp of boar
antiquity, and the thorough consistency in the
development of characters, equally remarkable for
originality and force. There is an absolute con-
trast between the manners, thoughts, and feelings,
and those which characterized the Israelites during
the monarchical period ; while whatever difference
exists between the customs of the older patriarchs
as described in Genesis and those of Job's family
and associates, is accounted for by the progress of
events in the Intervening period. The chieftain
lives in considerable splendor and dignity; menial
offices, such as commonly devolved upon the elder
patriarchs and their children, are now performed
by servants, between whom and the family the dis-
tinction appears to be more strongly marked. Job
visits the city frequently, and is there received with
high respect as a prince, judge, and distinguished
warrior (xxix. 7-9). There are allusions to courts
of judicature, written indictments, 1 ' and regular
forms of procedure (xiii. 26, and xxxl. 28). Hen
had begun to observe and reason upon the phe-
nomena of nature, and astronomical observations
were connected with curious speculations upon
primeval traditions. We read (xx. IS, xxiii. 10,
xxvii. 16, 17, xxviii. 1-21) of mining operations,
great buildings, ruined sepulchres, perhaps even of
sculptured figures of the dead,* and there are
• at Hasan says: "On s'etonnalt de ns (Tourer
dans le llvre de Job aucune trace dee proscriptions
motaiques. Mais on n'en troure pat davantage dans
le llvre des Proverbes, dans l'blttoln das Jutes «t dee
rentiers Sols, at en general dons les eerlvslns ante-
.eurs a la dernlcre epoque du royauma as Judo."
(t must be remembered that this writer denies the
authenticity of the Pentateuch.
o Emleitung, p. (7. M. Kenan, Hahn, Behlott-
SBsnn, and other critics, agree rally with this opinion.
e The entire disappearance of the bushmeu (Job
xxx. 4-7) belongs to a very early age. Ewald supposes
them to have been descendants of the Uorltss ; and
(tahlcttmonn (p. 15) observes, truly, that the wrMsr
oast have known them from his own observation.
Bus shrews ns of course back to the Mosses sea.
JOB
throughout copious aSusiou to the natural p
ductioos and the arts of Egypt. Gnat revokttti
had occurred within the time of the writer: i
ones independent had been overthrown, and wheat
races reduced to a state of misery and degradation.
All this might be expected, even supposin g the
work to have been written before or near the date)
of the Exodus. The communications with Egypt
were frequent, and indeed uninterrupted during the
patriarchal age, and in that country each one of
the easterns upon which most renanee is placed an
indicating a later date is now proved to have been
common long before the age of Hoses (an Tj T* 1 *'^.
SehlotUnann, p. 107). Honover, there is sorBcsasm
reason to behove that under favorable circumstance*
a descendant of Abraham, who was himself a war-
rior, and accustomed to meet princes on term* ot
equality, would at a very early age acquire the
habits, position, and knowledge which we admire in
Job. He was the head of a great family, sin una
ful in war, p io sp eio u s in peace, supplied abundantly
with the necessaries of life, and enjoying many of
its luxuries; be lived near the great cities on the
Euphrates/ and Tigris, and on the route <f the
caravans which at the remotest periods exchanged
the productions of Egypt and the far East, and had
therefore abundant opportunities of proe m i ug in-
formation from those merchants, supposing that he
did not himself visit a country so full of interest to
a thoughtful mind.
Such a piugi es s in civilization may or may not
be admitted by historical critics to be probable
within the limits of time thus indicated, bat no
positive historical fact or allusion can be prod u ce d
from the book to prove that it could not have been
written before tht time of Hoses. The single ob-
jection (Kenan, p. 40) which presents any dhfknky
is the mention of the Chaldeans in the in tr oductory
chapter. It is certain that they appear first in
Hebrew history about the year B. c. 770. Bat the
name of Chesed, the ancestor of the race, i* found
in the genealogical table in Genesis (nil 92), a
fact quite sufficient to prove the early existence of
the people as a separate tribe. It is highly prob-
able that an ancient race bearing that name hi
Curdistan (see Xenoph. C'yr. iii. 1, § S4; A*ab.
iv. 3, { 4, t. 0, $ 17) was the original source of the
nation, who were there trained in predatory habits,
and accustomed, long before their appearance in
history, to make excursions into the neighboring
deserts; * a view quite in harmony with the part
assigned to them in this book.
The arguments which hare induced the generality
of modern critics to assign a later date to Una book,
notwithstanding their concurrence in most of the
points and principles which we have just (xxandered,
d Known In Xgypt at an early period (Mod. as. L
P- 76).
• Oh. xxL 82. The Interpretation Is very uuweUui,
/ The remarkable treatise by Chwolsohn, Vtttr sat
VtbaraU der BabyUmudtm liumtm m Irniitcsii ■
Vibmetamgm, proves an advance In mental eala
ration in those regions at a far earlier ago, ssors
than sufficient to answer every objection of this na-
ture.
g This Is now gsosraOy admitted. Be* at. sasasn,
Kuoirt QintraU da Imgutt Smitteaaa, ed. 1868,
p. 66. He says truly that they were » redoutes eons
tout POrlant pour lems brigandages " (p. 66). 8*e
also Ohwolsohn, Du Stabier, rot. L p. 812. TJr of ens
Onauueans was undoubtedly so named bacons* H was
founded or ue uua tsd by that people.
Digitized by
Google
JOB
way be reduced to two heads, which we will now
namlne separaHy : —
1. We are told that the doctrinal system u con-
siderably in advance of the Mosaic; in fact that it
is the result of a recoil from the stern, narrow dog-
matism of the Pentateuch. Here of course there
can be no common ground between those who
admit, and those who secretly or openly deny the
authenticity and inspiration of the Mosaic writings.
. Still even rationalistic criticism cannot show, what
it so confidently assumes, that there is a demon-
strable difference in any essential point between the
principles reoognixed in Genesis and those of our
author. The absence of all recognition of the
peculiar views and institutions first introduced or
developed ia the Law has been already shown to be
an evidence of an earlier date — all that is really
proved ia that the elementary truths of primeval
revelation are represented, and their consequences
developed under a great variety of striking and
original forma — a fact sufficiently accounted for by
the highly thoughtful character of the book, and
the undoubted genius of the writer (eomp. Job x.
0; Geo. iii. 19; lea. xxvii. 8; Gen. u. 7, vii. 32;
Job Jtxii. 15, 18, with the account of the deluge).
In Genesis and in this work we have the same
theology; the attributes of the Godhead are iden-
tical. Man is r ep r e s en ted in all his strength and
in all his weakness, glorious in capacities, but infirm
and impure in his actual condition, with a soul and
spirit allied to the eternal, but with a physical con-
stitution framed from the dust to which it must
return. The writer of Job knows just so much of
the fall of Adam and the early events of man's his-
tory, including the deluge (xxii. IS, 16), as was
likely to be preserved by tradition in all the families
descended from Shem. And with reference to those
points in which a real progress was made by the
Israelites after the time of Moses, the position from
which this writer starts is precisely that of the law-
giver. One great problem of the book is the recon-
ciliation of unmerited suffering with the love and
justice of God. In the prophets and psalina the
subject is repeatedly discussed, and receives, if not
a complete, yet a substantially satisfactory settle-
ment in connection with the great doctrines of
Messiah's kingdom, priesthood, sufferings, and sec-
ond advent, involving the resurrection and a future
judgment In the book of Job, as it has been
shown, there is no indication that the question had
previously been raised. The answers given to it
are evidently elicited by the discussions. Even in
the discourse of FJihu, in which the nearest ap-
proach to the full development of the true theory
•f providential dispensations is admitted to be found,
and which indeed for that very reason has been
suspected of interpolation, there ia no sign that the
writer knew those characteristics of Messiah whioh
from the time of David were oontinually present to
Ilia mind of the Israelites.
Again it ia said that the representation of angels,
and still more specially of Satan, belongs to a later
tpooh. Some have even asserted that the do' ion
uust have been derived from Persian or Assyrian
JOB
1411
a To the epoch of the ashamenlaje.
• See Renan, p. mix. This was previously printed
ent by Heritor.
» Dr. Lee (Introduction re Job, p. 18) observes laX
although Satan la not named In Genesis, yet the ohar-
tstar which that name Implies ia dearly Intimated
■ tie words, « I wUl pat enmity (HS^H) between
mythology. That hypothesis is now generally re-
jected — on the one hand it would fix a far lata
date « for the composition than any critic of the
least authority would now assign to the book; on
the other it is proved' that Satan bears no resem-
blance to Ahriman; he acts only by permission
from God, and diners from the angels not in essence
but in character. It is tine that Satan is not
named in the Pentateuch, but there is an exact
correspondence between the characteristics of the
malignant and envious accuser in this book and
those of the enemy of man and God, which are
developed in the history of the Kail." The appella-
tion of " eons of God " ia peculiar to this book and
that of Genesis.
It is also to be remarked that no charge of idol-
atry ia brought against Job by his opponents when
enumerating all the crimes which they can imagine
to account for bis calamities. The only allusion
to the subject (xxxi. 26) refers to the earliest form
of false religion known in the East."' To an Israelite,
living after the introduction of heathen rites, such
a charge was the very first which would have sug-
gested itself, nor can any one satisfactory reason be
assigned for the omission.
2. Nearly all modern critics, even those who
admit the inspiration of the author, agree in the
opinion that the composition of the whole work, the
highly systematic development of the plot, and the
philosophic tone of thought indicate a considerable
progress in mental cultivation far beyond what can,
with any show of probability, be supposed to have
existed before the age of Solomon. We are told
indeed that such topics as are here introduced occu-
pied men's minds for the first time when schools
of philosophy were formed under the influence of
that prince. Such assertions are easily made, and
resting on no tangible grounds, they are not easily
disproved. It should, however, be remarked that
the persons introduced in this book belong to a
country celebrated for wisdom in the earliest times;
insomuch that the writer who speaks of those
schools considers that the peculiarities of the Sol
omonian writings were derived from intercourse
with its inhabitant* (Kenan, pp. xxiii.-xxv.). The
book of Job differs from those writings chiefly in
its greater earnestness, vehemence of feeling, vivacity
of imagination, and free independent inquiry into
the principles of divine government; characteristics
as it would seem of a primitive race, acquainted
only with the patriarchal form of religion, rather
than of a scholastic age. There is indeed nothing
in the composition incompatible with the Mosaic
age, admitting (what all rationalistic critics who
assign a later date to this book deny) the authen-
ticity and integrity of the Pentateuch.
We should attach more weight to the argument
derived from the admirable arrangement of the
entire book (Schlottmann, p. 108), did we not
remember how completely the same course of
reasoning misled the acutest critics in the case of
the Homeric poems. There is a kind of artifice in
style and arrangement of a subject which is at once
recognized a* an infallible indication of a highly
thee and htm." The connection between this word
and the name of Job la perhaps more than an acci-
dental coincidence.
<* The worship of the moon was introduced Into
Mesopotamia, probably In the earliest age, by the
Aryans Bee Ohwoleohn, Bit Sw si V L p. 818.
Digitized by
Google
1412
JOB
cultivated or declining literature. This, however,
differs essentially from the harmonious and majestic
simplicity of form, and the natural development of
a great thought which characterize the first grand
productions of genius in uvery nation, and produce
so powerful an impression of reality as well as of
grandeur in every unprejudiced reader of the book
of Job.
These considerations lead of course to the con-
clusion that the book must have been written before
the promulgation of the Law, by one speaking the
Hebrew language, and thoroughly conversant with
the traditions preserved in the family of Abraham.
Whether the writer had access to original docu-
ments " or not is mere matter of conjecture; but it
can scarcely be doubted that he adhered very closely
to the accounts, whether oral or written, which he
received.
It would be a waste of time to consider the ar-
guments of those who hold that the writer lived
near the time of the Captivity — that view is now
all but universally repudiated : but one hypothesis
which has been lately brought forward (by Stickel,
who is followed by Sehlottmann), and supported
by very ingenious arguments, deserves a more spe-
cial notice. It meets some of the objections which
have been here adduced to the prevalent opinion of
modern critics, who maintain that the writer must
have lived at a period when the Hebrew language
and literature had attained their full development;
while it accounts in a satisfactory manner for some
of the most striking peculiarities of the book. That
supposition is, that Job may bare been written after
the settlement of the Israelites by a dweller in the
sooth of Judaea, in a district immediately bordering
upon the Idumean desert. The inhabitants of that
district were to a considerable extent isolated from
the rest of the nation : their attendance at the fes-
tivals and ordinances of the Tabernacle and of the
Temple before the time of the later kings was prob-
ably rare and irregular, if it were not altogether
interrupted during a long period. In that case it
would be natural that the author, while recognizing
and enforcing the fundamental principles of religion,
should be sparing in allusions to the sanctions or
ob s erva nces of the Law. A resident in that district
would have peculiar opportunities of collecting the
varied and extensive information which was pos-
sessed by the author of Job. It was not tar from
the country of Eliphaz ; and it is probable that the
intercourse with all the races to which the persons
named in the book belonged was frequent during
the early years of Israelitish history. The caravans
of Terna and Sbeba (Job vi. 19) crossed there in
a route much frequented by merchants, and the
communications with Egypt were of course regular
and uninterrupted. A man of wealth, station, and
cultivated mind, such as we cannot doubt the au-
thor must have been, would either learn from con-
versation with merchants the peculiarities to which
he so frequently alludes, or, as is highly probable,
be would avail himself of the opportunity thus
afforded of visiting that country, of all the most
Interesting to an ancient The local coloring, so
atriklngly characteristic of this book, and so evi-
dently natural, is just what might be expected from
Job
such a writer: the families In Southern Palestine,
even at a later age, lived very much after the man-
ner of the patriarchs', and illustrations denied
from the free, wild, vigorous life of the desert, and
the customs of pastoral tribes, would spontaneously
suggest themselves to his mind. The people appear
also to have been noted for freshness and originality
of mind — qualities seen in the woman of Tekoah,
or still more remarkably In Amos, the poor and
unlearned herdman, also of Tekoah. It has also
been remarked that Amos seems to have known
and imitated the book of Job (eomp. Am. iv. 13,
v. 8, ix. 6, with Job ix. 8, 9, xxrrifl. 81, xfl. 15|
Sehlottmann, p. 109) : a circumstance scarcely ta
be explained, considering the position and imper-
fect education of that prophet, excepting on the
supposition that for some reason or other this book
was peculiarly popular in that district. Some
weight may also be attached to the observation
(Stickel, p. 376; Sehlottmann, p. Ill) that the
dialectic peculiarities of Southern Palestine, espe-
cially the softening of the aspirates and exchanges
of the sibilants, resemble the few divergences * from
pure Hebrew which are noted in the book of Job.
The controversy about the authorship cannot
ever be finally settled. From the introduction It
may certainly be inferred that the writer lived many
years after the death of Job. From the strongest
internal evidence it is also clear that he must either
have composed the work before the Law was pro-
mulgated, or under most peculiar circumstances
which exempted him from its Influence. The for-
mer of these two suppositions hss nothing against
it excepting the arguments, which have been shown
to be far from conclusive, derived from language,
composition, and indications of a high state of
mental cultivation and general civilisation. It has
every other argument in its favor, while it is free
from the great, and surely insuperable, difficulty
that a devout Israelite, deeply interested in all re-
ligious speculations, should ignore the doctrines
and institutions which were the peculiar glory of
his nation : a supposition which, in addition to its
intrinsic improbability, is scarcely consistent with
any sound view of the inspiration of holy writ
A complete list and fair estimate of all the pre-
ceding commentators on Job is given by Rosen-
muller (Elmc/im lntrrpp. Jobi, 1824). The best
rabbinical commentators are — Jarchi, in the 18th
century; Aben Ezra, a good Arabic as well ss He-
brew scholar, i a. d. 1168; Levi Ben Gershom,
commonly known as Balbag, f 1S70; and Nach-
manidea in the 13th century. Saadia, the well-
known translator of the Pentateuch, has written a
paraphrase of Job, and Tanchum a good commen-
tary, both in Arabic (Ewald, Vomit, p. xi.). The
early Fathers contributed little to the explanation
of the text; but some good remarks on the general
argument are found in Chrysostom, DMymus Alex-
andrinus, and other Greek Fathers quoted in the
Catenas of Nieetas, edited by Junius, London, fbL,
1637 — a work chiefly valuable with re fe re n ce to
the Alexandrian version. Ephrern Syras has schofia,
chiefly doctrinal and practical, vol. iL, Sonne, 1740
The translation in the Latin Vulgate by Jerome is
of great value; but the commentary ascribed at
a The most skeptical critics admit that the Israel-
■as had written documents m the age of Mesas. Bat
f. twin, HMotn da Langaa BttiMqua, p. 118.
• If. SMTta tor 27DQ, vl. 8; FflDB far
rpttm, rL 10 ; DVD *r 0013, v. U ; f
*» JT!S\tH. It-
Digitized by
Google
JOB
tint constats merely of excerpts from the work of
Philip, one of Jerome'* disciples (see TUlemont,
JrVm. Eee. xU. 661): it Is of little or no use for
the interpretation. The gnat work of Gregory M.
is practical, spiritual, or mystical, but nas little
connection with the literal meaning, which the au-
thor does not profess to explain. Among the long
Hat of able and learned Romanists who hare left
commentaries on the book, few had any knowledge
of the Hebrew language: from Caietan, Zuniga,
UtUe can be learned; but A. Sehultens speaks very
highly of Pineda, whose commentary has passed
through many editions. Rosenmuuer says the
German translation of Job by T. A. Denser is one
of the best in that language. The early Protes-
tants, Bucer, Oeeobunpadius, and Calvin, contrib-
uted somewhat to the better understanding of the
text; but by far the best commentary of that age
la that prepared by C. Bertram, a disciple of Mer-
ser, after the death of his master, from his MS.
notes, litis work is well worth consulting. Mercer
was a sound Hebrew scholar of Reuchlin's school,
and a man of acute discernment and excellent judg-
ment. The gnat work of Albert Sehultens on Job
(a. d. 1737) 1st surpasses all preceding and con-
temporary expositions, nor hss the writer as yet
been surpassed hi knowledge of the Hebrew and
cognate languages. He was the first who brought
all the resources of Arabic literature to bear upon
the interpretation of Job. The fault of his book
is diffuseness, especially in the statement of opin-
ions long since rejected, and uninteresting to the
student. The best works of the present century
are those of Rosenmuller, 3 vols. 1824; and H.
Kwald, whose translation and commentary an re-
markable for accurate learning and originality of
genius, but also for contempt of all who believe in
the inspiration of Scripture. The Vorredt is most
painful in tone. The commentaries of Umbreit,
Vaihinger, Langs, Stiokd, Hahn, Hired, De Wette,
Knobel, and Vatke are generally characterized by
diligence and ingenuity: but have for the most
part a strong rationalistic tendency, especially the
three last. The most useful analysis is to be found
In the Introduction to K. Schlottmann's transla-
tion, Berlin, 1881 ; but his commentary is deficient
in philological research. M. Renan has lately given
an excellent translation in French (Lt linn <fe
Job, Paris, 1859), with an introduction, which,
notwithstanding its thoroughly skeptical character,
shows a genial appreciation of some characteristic
excellences of this book. In England we hare a
great number of translations, commentaries, etc.,
of various merit: among which the highest rank
must be assigned to the work of Dr. Lee, espe-
cially valuable for its copious illustrations from
oriental sources. F. C. C.
* The personal character of Job, and his senti-
ments and conduct under his afflictions, are to be
learned from the statements respecting them in the
Introductory and concluding chapters. These an
Id be taken as the complete exposition of his char-
acter and conduct. The whole is summed up in
his memorable words (eh. i. iV, « The Lord gs~e,
tod the Lord bath taken away; blessed be the
lame of the Lord."
The poetical portion, intervening between the
introductory and concluding chapters, is tia in-
spired writer's own discussion of the topics therein
considered, under the names of Job snd his friends.
His immediate object, in this instructive discussion,
a to exhibit, in st r o n gest contrast, the antagonistic
JOB
1413
views suggested by observation of the moral gov-
ernment of God, in order to deduce from them the
only practical lessons which that observation esa
teach, or is capable of comprehending. Hence he
gives to these conflicting views the freest scope and
the most impassioned expression, so ss to exhibit
their antagonisms in the strongest light. To im-
pute to Job, personally, sentiments which the writer
himself desired to express through one of the par-
ties in the discussion, would be no less absurd, than
it would be to regard the sublime poetry of this
book as the verbatim report of an actual debate.
But what is the object of the book, and what
an the lessons which it teaches? To say (as
above, p. 1100, col. 1) that the problem is, " Can
goodness exist irrespective of reward," is to ignore
the greater part of the discussion; for it takes a
far wider range than this. It is justly said (on p.
1403, coL 2) that the object of the calamities in-
flicted on Job was "to try his sincerity;" but
this throws no light on toe object of the book and
its discussions, to which the sufferings of Job only
furnished the occasion.
Nor can it be said (as on p. 1404, col 1) that
the object is, "to show the effects of calamity,
In its worst and most awful form, upon a truly
religious spirit." If this were the object, it was
already attained in the record of Job's conduct
given in the two introductory chapters. It is seen
in his tender and faithful expostulation with hie
erring wife (ch. ii. 10), "shall we receive good at
the hand of God, and shall we not receive evil? "
It is expressed in his grateful and submissive recog-
nition of God's hand, in what he gives snd what
he withholds (oh. i. 31), " The Lord gave, and the
Lord hath taken away; blessed be the name of toe
Lord." Hen is seen " the effect of calamity on a
truly religious spirit; " and in all ages of the church
it has been justly regarded as the highest and fullest
attainment of the religious life. (Compare James
v. 11.) This, moreover, is the historical record of
Job's calamities, and of their effect on him. The
poetical discussion, which follows, is of quite so
other character, and has a very different object.
The discussion, on the part of the human dispu-
tants, covers all which observation can attain, re-
specting the moral government of God, and (includ-
ing the discourses of Elihu) the uses of adversity.
But all fails to solve the great problem of the
divine government, in view of the apparently in-
discriminate distribution of happiness sod misery
to the good and evil among men. Many facts of
human life are oorrectly stated, as all experience
proves, and much also that is false; many princi-
ples are avowed, that are true and just and salu-
tary, as well ss many that are false sod injurious.
The whole discussion is instructive, ss exhibiting
the various aspects under which the divine govern-
ment may be viewed; and especially as snowing
the conflicts which may agitate the breast even of
the good man, in view of the strange and unex-
plained distribution of good and evU in this life-
It is no solution of the problem, that this life is
fragmentary; that all will be rightly adjusted in
another state of existence. For if it will be just
to make the distinction there between right snd
wrong, whr is it not made here? "
• • A vtrr utensttng and lnstruetlw slsnusslnn of
this problem in one of its aspects, as it prsssntsj Is*
self to the mind of an InttUigant and rsBsnUng hea-
then, la given la Plutarch's tsaatss < On the Daiaf of
Digitized by
Google
1414
JOB
By a ikillflJ manoeuvre, uiother disputant U now
Introduced. An important, though a subordinate,
tin of the subject still remained, whieh oould not
be considered in connection with the topica of the
preceding discussion. To have presented it in the
person of one equal or superior in age to those who
had ahead; spoken, would hare giren to bun the
appearance of an umpire, and to his views an im-
portance not at all deserved ; for the; do not pene-
trate to the heart of the subject, and onl; offer cer-
tain practical suggestions, which might occur to a
superficial observer, but are worth; to be taken into
account. In the final arbitrament, the; are passed
over in silence, as something aside from the main
issue. It is to a young man, therefore, that this
part is fitly assigned ; and with admirable skill he
ia made to speak in character, both in the views
ascribed to him, and In the manner of expressing
them.
According to this speaker, the divine judgments
an corrective in their design; the chastisement of
a wise and tender parent, seeking to reclaim a way-
ward child. Such chastisement is an index, there-
fore, of the moral state of its subject. It must be
graduated, consequent!;, to the necessities of the
ease, and its severity is an exact measure of the
moral desert of the recipient The view neces-
sarily assumes, that a great sufferer must have
been a great sinner; and consequently that Job,
contrary to the whole tenor of his outward life, and
to the express testimony of the Searcher of the
heart, must have been secretly as eminent in sin as
be was now in suffering.
Human wisdom is thus shown to be utterly at
fault, in its efforts to eomprehend the mystery of
God's government on earth. Is there, then, no
help ? Is there no rest for the human spirit, no
stable ground of trust and confiding submission,
where it may find secure repose ?
The sacred writer now breaks off the discussion,
which has reached no satisfactory result, by the
sudden manifestation of the Deity in the terrors of
the storm. As the office had been assigned to Job
of refuting the false assumptions of the three friends,
and of boldly questioning the rectitude of the di-
vine government, the answer of God is addressed
directly to him. This answer demands special
attention, as the key to the design and instructions
of the book. That it is so, is clear; for why should
the Deity be introduced at all, except as the su-
preme Arbiter, to whom the final decision is
assigned? The introduction of the Almighty,
the supreme Judge of all. for any leas purpose,
would have been a gross violation of every rule of
propriety in composition, and one with whieh the
author of a work so perfect in design and execu-
tion should not be charged.*
These sublime discourses are justly regarded as
the most fitting reply, on the part of the Supreme
Kuler and Judge, to the presumptuous charges
against his moral government. They do not con-
descend to vindicate his ways, or attempt to make
them intelligible to finite comprehension. But they
tonish overwhelming proofs, from the vast system
•ne TMty m punishing the wicked ; " the Cheek text,
litb ncsia, by PidSj. Hackett and Tyler, 1867.
T. J. 0.
• *It is one of the Strang* Incongruities of Hang-
aeabsrg's theory of the design and teachings of the
Soak, that the Almighty Is made to appear, simply for
■ he purpose of Indorsing the opinions of the youthful
JOB
jf Nature and Providence, of infinite [
dom, and goodness; and in tUese the gruuuds fcs
the firm belief, that He governs aright the worlds
which he has made, and that for those who confide
in him it is safe to trust him.
From this brief analysis, the subject of the> book
appears to be, Thb Mtstxbt of God's Pbot
idemtial GovsKitmorr over Mzx. In the
treatment of it, the sacred writer shows Brat, the
difficulties whieh it presents to the finite mind,
and the conflicting views and false nmwlnaiona of
the human spirit, in its attempts to reconcile then ;
and secondly, the tree position of man, in icJar-
ence to the Eternal and Infinite.
The important lessons of the hook an expfaaanl
in the following propsitions:* —
1. The apparently arbitrary distribution of the
good and evil of this life is not the result of etuuvw
or caprice. God, the Creator and Judge of all,
presides over and controls the affidrs of earth. Hie
providential care extends to all his creature*. Ha
has the power to restrain or ch a st is e wrong, and
avenge suffering innocence; and this power he) usee,
when and how he will.
8. The government of the world belongs, of
right, to Him who created it; whose infinite justice
can do no wrong: whose perfect wisdom and love
devise only what is best; whose omniscience can-
not err in the choice of means; who is ■"*"*>» in
power, and does all his pleasure.
8. To know this is enough for man; and mora
than this he cannot know. God can impart to
him no more; since omniscience alone can eom-
prehend the purposes and plans of the Infinite.
4. Man's true position is implicit trust in the
infinitely Wise, Just, and Good, and submission
to his will Here alone the finite comes into har-
mony with the Infinite, and finds true peace; for
if it refuses to trust, until it can comprehend, it
must be in eternal discord with God and with
itself.
Such an the grand and imposing *— >M "g« of
this book. They have never been set aside or
superseded. The ages hare not advanced a step
beyond them ; nor is the obligation or the neces-
sity less now than then, of this implicit trust of
the finite in the Infinite.*
Many objections have been raised against the
genuineness of the discourses of Elinu (chs. xxxiL-
xxxvii.). They an of little weight, however, ex-
cept those drawn from certain peculiarities of lan-
guage, namely i in moras, in form* end ugwqfico-
(tons of words, and in amttmctiont and pkrntt*.
A careful examination shows that these alleged
peculiarities are less numerous than has bean sup-
posed. But few of them an reatt; c haracteri stis
of Elihu's manner; and these ma; justly be re-
garded as intentional on the part of the anther,
who distinguishes each of the speakers b; peculiar
modes of thought and expression. The writer has
given (Book of Job, Part First, Introduction, pp.
viii.-x.) a list of all these alleged peculiarities, with
the reasons for their use in the connection in which
KHhu, having himself nothing to say that has aay
bearing on the subject of the discussion. T. 1. 0.
s • From the writer's work on the Book of Job,
Part Second, | 4 of the Introduction. T.J.C.
e • The theories of Xwald and rtsiigatanliaig, es
the design and teachings of this book, an fully con
sldend in the writer's work on the Book of Job, Pes
Pint, § 8 of the Introduction. T. J. 0.
Digitized by
Google
JOB
.hay are found ; showing that they furnish no
rridence against the genuineness of then dis-
literaturc. — Boullier, Obiervatt. mitcel in Ubr.
Job, 1768. Vogel, Schuliemii com. in Mr. JoW m
oonip. redact., 1778. Hufnagel, 2/ibA imu ioers.
mil Anmerkungen, 1781. Henke, Narraao crit.
it mterp. loci Job ni. 36-37, 1783. Grave, Ult.
eapp. Ubr. Jobi ad Or. vent, recau., 1788. Staud-
liu, Utber die Philot., Zweck, u. Urtpr. d. B.
Hiob (Beitrige ear Phi*. Bd. il. 1797). Kreys-
iig, Obiervatt. phil crit. in Jobi xxxix. 19-25,
1803. Stuhlmann, Biob, tin rtligUSttt Gtdicht,
1804. Gaab, Dai Buck Hiob, 1809. Good, The
Book of Job, Ut. (rant, from the Htb., with Notei
and a Diet., 1813. Bernstein, Utber Alter, Jn-
kalt, Zweck, u. gegenw. Geetalt d. B. Hub (Keil
n. Tzsch. Anal), 1813. Koeegarten, Com. exegeU
crit. M Jobi xix. 35-37, 1815. Middeldorpf, Cur*
Bexapl. in Jobum, 1817. Bridal, Le litre de Job
worn, trad., 1818. SehSrer, Dae Buch Hiob metr.
»Ur,., 1818. Melaheimer, Dae Bach Hiob metr.
uber:, 1823. Blumenfeld, Dae Buck Biob mil
deuttch. Uebtrt., 1836. Kern, Obiervatt. ad Ubr.
Job, 1836. Bockel, Dae Buck Hiob uber: u. fur
gtbild. Ltter erkl, 1830. Lange, Dae Buck Biob
mj Uber:, 1831. Koster, Dai Buch Hiob, nebtt
AbkandL uber den Strophbau, 1831. Umbreit,
Dae Buch Biob, 2" Aufl. 1833. StickeL t'n Jobi
foe xix. 35-37 de Ooele comment, 1833. Sachs,
aw CkarakL u. EriduL d. B. Hiob (Theol Stud.
u. Krit. 1834). Knobd, De earn. Jobi arg. fine,
ac dupoeU., 1835. Middeldorpf, Codex Syr. Hex-
apl (in Jobum, etc.), 1835. Foekens, Comment,
it Jobddt, 1836. Arnheim, Da* Buch Biob uber:
u. toilet, commenliri, 1836. Baumgarten-Crusius,
Lib. deJobo arg. deter. (Opute. TkeoL, 1836).
Lea, The Book of the Patriarch Job, 1837.
Noyee, G. B-, A ffew Tram, of the Book of Job,
with Introd. and Nottt, 3d ed., Boston, 1867.
HirzeL Hiob erkldrt (ExegeU Handb^ 1839); V
Aufl. durcbges. von J. Olshausen, 1853. Wemyss,
Job and Hit Timet, 1839. Holacher, Da* Buck
Biob, 1839. Holihauaen, Uebertet*. d. B. Hiob,
1839. Laurens, Job et let Pieaumei, trad, now.,
1839. Justi, Hiob neu ubert. u. erlcL, 1840.
Steudel, Utber Inhalt u. Zuinmmenk. d. B. Biob
( Vorleu. flo. Theol d. A. T., 1840). Vaihinger,
Dot Buch Hiob metr. uber: u. erkL, 1843; Utber
He Zeitalttr d. B. Hiob {ThtoL Stud. u. Krit.
1846). Stickel, Hiob rhythm. gegUed. u. Uber:,
1843. Knobel, Bemerkk. 0b. Slellen d. B. Biob
(Theol. Stud. u. Krit. 1843). Glelsa, BeilrSge
wr krit. d. B. Biob, 1845. Heiligstedt, Com.
tram. hitt. crit. in Jobum, 1847. Welte, Da*
Buck Hiob uber: u. erkl, 1849. Hahn, Com. iber
iat Buch Hiob, 1850. Schlottmann, Dot Buch
Bl3b verdeuucht u. erkldrt, 1851. Hupfeld, QuaaL
In Tobeidai foe. vexatot, 1858. Koeegarten, Utber
la* Buch Biob (Kieler Monattchr. fur Wit: u.
At. 1853). Weber, Die pott Buch. d. A. T.,
1868. Froude, The Book of Job, Westminster
Rev. 1853 (Short StutHet on Grtat Subject; 1868).
Barnes (Albert), Note* on the Book of Job, with a
tew Trantl., 3d ed., New Tork, 1854. Ewald,
Tm* Buch /job Ober*. u. erkl., 3* Aufl. 1854.
Hangstenberg, art Job, In Kitto's Cyclop. ; Utber
tat Buck Hiob, tin Vortrag, 1856. Conant, T. J.,
Book of Job ; Part FWtt, Tram, with Crit. and
"lot Note*! Part Second, Tram, with unpl
Hotel ,■ New Tork, 1866. Bauer (Gustav), Dai
Buck Biob u. Dantt'i G9tU. KomScKe (ThtoL Stud.
JOCHEBKD 1416
u. Krit. 1856). Krahmer, Dot Buch Biob u. aVc
ten neueUe Erklarer ( Theol LiteralwbL, 1896).
Carey, The Book of Job Tram: and ExpL, 1858.
Renan, Le tivrt de Job, 1859. Crelier (Aboe), L*
Here de Job venee' da inierpr. fauna et impie* de
M. Renan, 1860. Davidson, A. B., Com. on the
Book of Job, with a Iran:, 1862. Delitssch,
Da* Buck Job, 1864; art. Biob in Henog's Real-
Encyklop., 1865. Hatthes, J. a, Bet bock Job
vertaald en verktaard, 3dln., Utrecht, 1866. Da*
Buck Biob (in Lange's Bibeheerk, in press, 1868*
T. J. C.
JCBAB. L (3JV [AowSno, and then place
of = desert]: [in Gen.,] 'ImBdfi; pn lChr.,Rom.
Vat omit, Alex. Opa/ii Comp. Aid. 'lai$:] Jo-
bab.) The last in order of the sons of Joktan
(Gen. x. 39; 1 Chr. L 88). His name has not
been discovered among the Arab names of places
in Southern Arabia, where he ought to be found
with the other sons of Joktan. But Ptolemy men-
tions the 'ImBafirat near the Sachalits; and Bo-
ohart (Pkaleg, ii. 31), followed by Salmasius and
Gesenius, suggests the reading 'IhBoBTtu, by the
common interchange of p and B. Tat identifica-
tion is perhaps correct, but it has not been con-
nected with an Arab name of a tribe or place; and
Bochart's conjecture of its being i. q. Arab. y_tV«%^
" a desert," etc., from \_>J, though regarded as
probable by Gesenius and Michaelis, seems to be
unworthy of acceptance. Kalisch (Com. on Gen.)
says that it is, " according to the etymology, a dis-
trict in Arabia Deterta," in apparent ignorance
of the famous desert near Hadramawt, called the
Ahkaf, of proverbial terror; and the more exten-
sive waste on the northeast of the former, called
the "deserted quarter," Er-Ruba el-Khalee, whieh
is impassable in the summer, and fitter to be called
desert Arabia than the country named deterta by
the Greeks.
3. [Alex, in Gen. xxxri 38, Ia/9a8; Vat in 1
Chr., laaBaB.] One of the •• kings " of Edom
(Gen. xxxvi. 83, 34; 1 Chr. i. 44, 45), enumerated
after the genealogy of Esau, and Seir, and before
the phylarchs descended from Esau. [Edom.]
He was " son of Zerah of Boxrah," and suoceasor
of Bala, the first king on the list It is this Jobab
whom the LXX., quoting the Syriae, Identify with
Job, his father being Zerah son of Esau, and his
mother, Booo^ba. E.8.P.
3. pltBiB.] King of Madom; one of the
northern chieftains who attempted to oppose
Joshua's conquest, and were routed by him at
Heron (Josh. ri. 1, only).
4. ('l-\d$; [Vat Comp. AM.] Alex. 'l*,Bd$.)
Head of a Benjamite house (1 Chr. Till. 9).
[Jkui.] A. C. H.
JOOH'BBED ("95^ [tsAose glory ii Jtho.
vah\: 'ImxuBit; [Alex, in Num.. Ittvav3e9:J
Jochabed), the wue and at the same time the aonl
of Amram, and the mother of Hoses and Aaron
(Ex. vi. 90). In order to avoid the apparent ille-
gality of the marriage between Amram and his
aunt, the LXX. and Vulg. render the word dddak
" oousin " instead of •• aunt" But this is unne-
cessary: the *'* m r l f of Abraham himself (Genu
xx. 19) proves that in the pre-Hosaio age a g rat er
latitude was permitted in regard to marriage than
in a later age. Moreover it a expressly stated ess*
where (Ex. a. 1; Nam. xxvi. 69), that Jochabed
Digitized by
Google
1416 JODA
awe the daughter of fori, and consequently sister
of Kohath, Amrem't father. W. L. B.
JODA CtoSd; [V»t TovSa: Vulg. omits] ) =
/udah the Levlte, in a passage which is difficult to
unravel (1 Esdr. t. 68; aw Ear. 1U. 9). Some
words are probably omitted. The name elsewhere
appears in the A. V. in the forma Hodaviah (Ear.
U. 40), Hodeveh (Neb., ni. 43), Hod\jah (Neb., x.
10), and Sudiaa (1 Eadr. t. 98).
JO'ED ("iy'V [Jekovak is irbwm]: 'I«w«-
Joed), a Benjamite, the son of Pedaiah (Neh. zi.
7). Two of Kannioott'a MSS. read ~lTOV, t e.
Joeaer, and two 7NY 1 , i. a. Joel, eonmondlng Joed
with Joel the son of Pedaiah, the Manaarite. The
Syrieo must have had BTl\
JOEL fajV [Jekom* " Oorf; or mtoM Ood
u Jehovah, Ges.]: 'I«W)A: JoeA ■"* -Awef). L
Eldest son of Samuel the prophet (1 Sam. viii. 9;
1 Chr. tL 83, xt. 17), and father of Heman the
singer. He and his brother Abiah were made
Judges in Beer-sbeba when their Cither was old,
and no longer able to go his accustomed circuit.
But they disgraced both their office and their
parentage by the corrupt way in which they took
bribes and perverted judgment. Their grievous
misconduct gave occasion to the change of the con-
stitution of Israel to a monarchy. It is in the case
of Joel that the singular corruption of the text of
1 Chr. vi. 13 (98 A. V.) has taken place. Joel's
name has dropped out; and Passat, which means
••and the second," and is descriptive of Abyah,
has been taken for a proper name.
8. [JoheL] In 1 Chr. vi. 88, A. V., Joel aw
ta be merely a corruption of Shaul at tot. 94.
A. a H.
3. One of the twelve minor prophets; the son
of Pethnel, or, according to the LXX., BethueL
Beyond this met all is oonjectore as to the personal
history of Joel. Pseudo-Epiphanius (ii. 946) re-
oorda a tradition that he was of the tribe of Reuben,
born and buried at Beth-horoo, between Jerusalem
and Canarea. It is most likely that he lived in
Judam, for his commission was to Judah, as that
of Hosaa had been to the ten tribes (St. Jerome,
Comment M Joel). He exhorts the priests, and
makes frequent mention of Judah and Jerusalem.
It has been made a question whether he were a
priest himself (Winer, Realm.), but there do not
seem to be sufficient grounds for determining it in
the affirmative, though some recent writers (e. o.
Maurice, Prophets nnd Kings, p. 179) have taken
this view. Many different opinions have been ex-
pressed about the date of Joel's prophecy. Credner
his placed it in the reign of Joaah, Bertholdt of
ilerakiah, Kimchi, Jahn, etc. of Manaasah, and
Cahnet of Joaiah. The LXX. place Joel after
Amos and Micah. But there seems no adequate
nasi in for departing from the Hebrew order. The
majority of critics and com m en t at or s (Abarbanel,
Titringa, Hengitenberg, Winer, etc) fix upon the
reign of Uaxiah, thus »■— Hig Joel nearly contem-
porary with Hoaaa and Amos. The principal
asanas for this conclusion, besides the order of the
»xke, are the special and exclusive mention of the
Egyptians and Edomites as enemies of Judah, no
sBoakm being made to the Assyrians or Baby-
Mans, wfcj arose at a later period. Nothing, says
, has yet been food to
JOEL
eoaehskm, ami M la c onfirm e d on ether
eapsetaly—
The nature, state, and contents of the prophet*/
We find, what we should expect on the supposi-
tion of Joel being the first prophet to Judah, only
a grand outline of the whole terrible scene, whiek
was to be depleted more and more in detail by sub-
sequent prophets (Browne, Crab Bad. p. 691).
The scope, therefore, la not any particular Invasion,
but the whole day of the Lord. « This book of
Joel is a type of the early Jewish prophetical dis-
course, snd may explain to us what distant events
in the history of the land would expand It, ami
bring fresh discoveries within the sphere of the
inspired man's vision" (Maurice, Prophets deal
Kings, p. 179).
The proximate event to which the prophecy re-
lated was a public calamity, then impending on
Jndam, of a twofold character: want of water, and
a plague of locusts, continuing for several years.
The prophet exhorts the people to turn to God with
penitence, fasting, and prayer, and then (he says)
the plague shall cease, and the rain descend in Ha
season, and the land yield her accustomed fruit.
Nay, the time will be a most joyful one; for God,
by the outpouring of his spirit, will impart to Us
worshippers increased knowledge of Himself, and
after the excision of the enemies of his people, wB
extend through them the blessings of true religion
to heathen lands. This is the simple argument of
the book ; only that it is beautified and enriched
with variety of ornament and pictorial description.
The style of the original fa) perspicuous (except
towards the end) snd elegant, surpassing that of
all other prophets, except Isaiah and Habakkuk, la
sublimity.
Browne (Ordo Sad p. 699) regards the eon-
tents of the prophecy ss embracing two visions, but
it is better to consider it as one connected repre-
sentation (Hengst-, Winer). For its interpretation
we must observe not isolated facts of history, but
the idea. The swarm of locusts was the medium
through which this idea, « the ruin upon the
apostate church," was represented to the inward
contemplation of the prophet. But, in one un-
broken connection, the idea goes on to penitence,
return, blessing, outpouring of the Spirit, Judg-
ments on the enemies of the Church (1 Pet. iv. 17),
final establishment of God's kingdom. All prior
destructions, judgments, and victories are like the
smaller circles; the final consummation of all things,
to which the prophecy reaches, being the outmost
one of alL
The locusts of eh. U. were regarded by many
interpreters of the last century (Lowth, Shaw, etc)
as figurative, and introduced by way of comparison
to a hostile army of men from the north country.
This view is now generally abandoned. L oaaaa
are spoken of in Dent xxviii. 88 as instruments of
Divine vengeance; and the earn* seams implied la
Joel ii 11, 95. Maurice (Prophets and King*, f>
180) strongly maintains the fiteral Interpretation
And yet the plague oootained a parable in it, whiek
it mi the prophet's mission to unfold. The font
kinds or swarms of locusts (i. 4) have been sup-
posed to indicate four Assyrian invasions (TKoomh,
Bible Studies), or four crises to the chosen people
of God, the Babylonian, Syro-Macedonian, Reman
and Antichriitian (Browne). In accordance with
the Eteral (and certainly the primary) mtispi e tali ea
of the prophecy, we aaoaH render TTTKn rt*
Digitized by
Google
JOEL
m In our A. V., ' the former rain," with Rosenm.
ind the lexicographers, rather than " a (or the)
teacher of righteousness " with marg. of A. V.,
Hengst, and others. The allusion to the Messiah,
which Hengst. finds in this word, or to the ideal
teacher (DeuL xviii. 18), of whom Messiah was the
chief, scarcely accords with the immediate context.
The IP'HOtf of eh. UL 1 la the Hebrew,
» afterwards " eh. U. 38 of the A. V., raises OS to
a higher level of vision, and brings into view Mes-
sianic times and scenes. Here, says Steudel, we
hare a Messianic prophecy altogether. If this pre-
diction has ever yet been fulfilled, we must certainly
refer the event to Acts II. The best commentators
are agreed upon this. We must not, however,
interpret it thus to the exclusion of all reference to
preparatory events under the earlier dispensation,
and still less to the exclusion of later Messianic
times. Acts ii. virtually contained the whole sub-
sequent development. The outpouring of the Spirit
on the day of Pentecost was the hempxhi wnu * tne
(nil accomplishment and the final reality are yet to
some. But here both are blended in one, and the
whole passage hss therefore a double aspect. The
passage is well quoted by St. Peter from the first
prophet to the Jewish kingdom. And his quoting
it shows that the Messianio reference was the pre-
vailing one in his day; though Acts ii. 39 proves
that he extended his reference to the end of the
dispensation. The expression •• ill flesh " (ii. 17)
Is explained by the following onuses, by which no
principle of distribution is meant, but only that all
classes, without respect of persons, will be the sub-
jects of the Spirit's influences. All distinction of
noes, too, will be done away (cf. Joel ii. 33, with
Bom. x. 13; 13).
Lastly, the accompanying portents and judg-
ments upon the enemies of God find their various
solutions, according to the interpreters, in the re-
peated deportations of the Jews by neighboring
merchants, and sale to the Macedonians (1 Mace,
ill. 41, and Ex. xxvii. 13), followed by the sweeping
away of the neighboring nations (Maurice); in the
events accompanying the crucifixion, in the fall of
Jerusalem, in the breaking up of all human polities.
But here again the idea includes all manifestations
of judgment, ending with the last. The whole is
shadowed forth in dim outline; and while some
crises are past, others are yet to come (comp. iii.
18-81 with St. Matt xxiv., and Rev. xix.).
Among the commentators on the book of Joel,
enumerated by Kosenmiiller, Scholia in Vet. TaL,
art 7, roL I., may be specially mentioned Leusden's
"«•/ Explicate,, Ultraj. 1687; Dr. Edw. Poeock's
Commentary on Ms Prophecy of Joel, Oxford,
1691; and A Paraphrnet and Critical Commentary
in the Prophecy of Joel, by Samuel Chandler,
London, 173S. See also Di« Prophettn dee alien
Thmdet erkUtrt, von Heinrich Ewald, Stuttgart,
1M0 [Bd. i. * Ausg. 1867]; Praktuclitr Com-
mentor ibtr die Kldnen Propheten, von Dr. Urn-
breit, Hamburg, 1844; and Book of the Tatlve
Knar Prophet*, by Dr. E. Henderson, London,
1846 [Amer. ed. I860]. H. B.
* The principal commentators on Joel as one
•J the- minor prophets (not mentioned above), are
JOBL
1417
• * The locusts, says the eminent naturalist, Mr.
Metres*, "always come with the wind from the coun-
ty of their origin ; and this, ss all observers attest,
"•ah a south or so uth ea st wind into Palestine with
Hiteig, Maurer, Keil, Noyes, sod Cowles. For Um
titles of their works, see Habaxkuk (Amer. ed.)
To the other separate writers on this book may bit
added Fr. A Holzhausen (1839), K, A. Crednei
(1831), E. Meier (1841), and E. B. Puaey (1861)
in pt*. ii. and iii. of his Minor Prophets (not yet
completed). Credner's Der Prophet Joel iber—tmt,
etc., (pp. 316) is " a rich store-house of philological
and historical illustration," but is deficient in
method and a skillful use of the abundant material.
The natural history of the locusts supplies much of
the imagery of the book. Dr. Pusey, by his singular
industry in the collection of illustrative facts, ad-
vances our knowledge on this subject fsr beyond all
previous interpreters. For useful information here,
see also Thomson's Land and Book, ii. 103-108.
The Introductions to the 0. T. (HSvemick, Scholz,
De Wette, Welte-Herbst, Keil, Bleek, Davidson)
treat, more or less fully, of the person and prophecies
of our author. Auberlen has written on " Joel " in
Herzog's ReaUEncyk. vi. 719-731. Stanley de-
scribes this prophet ss " the connecting link between
the older prophets who are known to us only through
their actions and sayings, and the later who are
known chiefly through their writings . . . With a
glance that reached forward to the most distant
ages ... he foretold as the chiefest of blessings,
that the day was at hand when the prophetic spirit
should no longer be confined to this or that class,
but should be poured out on all humanity, on male
and female, on old and young, even on the slaves
and humblest inhabitants of Jerusalem" {Janih
Church, ii. 490).
Dr. Pusey adopts the figurative interpretation
of the scourge of locusts. Though so many of the
recent commentators, as remarked above, discard
this view, it must be confessed that some of the
arguments adduced for it are not easily set aside.
Among these is the nut that in ii. 17 the prophet
says, " Give not thy heritage to reproach that the
heathen should rule over them." The connection
here is obscure, unless we suppose that, having
hitherto employed an allegory, the writer at this
point relinquishes the figure and passes over to its
real import, namely, the devastation of the country
by a heathen army. Again, in ii. 30, the enemy
who is to inflict the threatened calamity is calks!
" the northern " or northman (" northern army,"
A. T.) 0^0?i?)« »• «• one who is to oome from
the north, which is not true of literal locusts; for
they are not accustomed to invade Palestine from
that quarter,' nor could they be dispersed by any
natural process in precisely opposite directions ss
there represented. A finger-sign appears also in
i. 6 : the locusts just spoken of are here " a heathen
people" 013), who have oome upon the land and
inflicted on it the misery of which the prophet
goes on to portray so fearral a picture. It is said
that the preterites (i. 6.ff.) show that the locusts
ss literally understood have accomplished or at least
begun the work of devastation, and therefore can-
not prefigure another and future calamity. But on
the other hand, it is possible that these preterites
so called may be rhetorical merely, not historical:
the act may be repre sent ed as past, In order to affirm
witfc greater emphasis tha-certainty of the oocm-rencs
a watt wind Into Pants, and' with an east wind tots
Isjpt. Stmllawy toe Assyria! hordes would eoaas
from their 000007 " (Natural Hit fry «/ the BUM
1867V ■.
Digitized by
Google
1418
JOBL
hi due Urn* It agrees with thla view that to I. 18
x the day " of Jehovah ii ipoken of u not yet ar-
rived i and " the day " ia certainly identical with the
viaitation of the locusts with which the book opens.
The hat five verses (38-49) of ch. U. (A. T.)
form a distinct chapter in the Hebrew Bible. In
this division the A. V. follows the LXX. It may
be remarked that the transition at this point arises
from the relation of subjects, not of time. The pros-
perity of the ancient people of God if they repented
and turned to Him, leads the prophet to apeak of
the still richer blessings which then awaited those
who should believe on Christ under the new and
hat economy (Acta ii. 16 fit). On thh Meashule
passage aee especially Hengstenberg's Cariatoiooy,
faX 135-141 (Keith's tr., 1839).
The style sf Joel places him, in the judgment
of the best critics, among the most classical of the
Hebrew writers. His language is copious and pol-
ished; his parallelism regular and well balanced;
his imagery bold and picturesque. His description
of the warlike locusts — their march, onset and
victory, as they spread themselves with Irresistible
might through the land — forma by universal con-
sent one of the mo«l graphic sketches of this nature
to be found in the poetry of any language. The
calamity was to come " like morn spread upon the
mountains " (U. 2), t. «. suddenly and swiftly as the
first beams of the sun glance from one mountain-
top to another. The brute creation suffers as well
as men. The Hebrew (1. 20) puts before us a more
distinct image than that presented in the A. V.
The heat and drought penetrate into the recesses
of the desert. The grass B withered ; the streams
an dried up. The suffering animals turn their
eyes towards heaven, and by their silent agony
implore relief from the hunger and thirst which
they endure. For the battle-scene in Jkhosh-
aphat (iii. 2 ff. or Hehr. iv. 2 At) see on that
word (Amer. ed.). John's Apocalypse itself has
reproduced more from Joel (compared with his
extent) than from any other Hebrew poet. The
closing verses (iii. 18 ff.) show us how natural it
was to foreshadow the triumphs of Christianity
under the symbols of Judaism (comp. Is- ii. 2, 3;
ific iv. 1-3; Kzek. xl.-xlriii.). H.
4. (bghV'ivrj*: Joil.) The head of one of
the families of the Simeonites (1 Chr. iv. 85). He
formed part of the expedition against the Hamites
of Gedor in the reign of Hezekiah.
5. [Alex. BaaX] A descendant of Reuben.
Junius and Tremellius make him the son of Henoch,
while others trace his descent through Carmi (1
Chr. T. 4). The Syriac for Joel substitutes Carmi,
but there is reason to believe that the genealogy is
that of the eldest son. Burrington (GeneaL i. 53)
maintains that the Joel mentioned in v. 8 was a
descendant, not of Henoch, but of one of his
brethren, probably Carmi, as Junius and Tremellius
print it in their genealogical table. But the passage
<~a which he relies for support (ver. 7), as conclud-
ing the genealogy of Henoch, evidently refers to
Beerah, the prince of the Reubenites, whom the
Assyrian king carried captive. There is, however,
sufficient similarity between Shemalah and Shema,
who an both re pres e n ted ss sons of Joel, to render
K probable that the latter is the same Individual
b both instances. Bertbeau con j e ctu res that he
•as contemporary with David, which would be ap-
aroximatery true tf the genealogy wen traced in
taeh case from father to son.
JOOBKHAH
0. Chief of the Gadites, who dwelt in Iks has)
of Baahan (1 Chr. v. IS).
7. ([Vat corrupt:] JoktL) The sex of Izrahiah,
of the tribe of Iaaaehar, and a chief of one of "the
troops of the host of the battle " who numbered ia
the days of David 80,000 men (1 Chr. vii. 3). Four
of Kennieott's MSS. omit the words " and the sons
of Ianhiah; " so that Joel appears as one of the
Ave sons of UaxL The Syriac retains the present
test, with the exception of leading "fcssr" for
" Ave."
8. The brother of Nathan of Zobuh (1 dar. at
88), and one of David's guard. He h called Isai.
in 2 Sam. xziil. 38; but Kennicott coo tends that
in this case the latter passage fa) corrupt, though ia
other words it preserved the trne reading.
9. The chief of the Gerahomitaa in the reign of
David, who sanctified themselves to bring up the
ark from the house of Obededom (1 Chr. xt. 7,
11). .
10. A Gersbomite Levite in the reign of David,
son of Jehiel, a descendant of Laadan, and probably
the same as the preceding (1 Chr. xxiil. 8; xxvi.
22). He was one of the officers appointed to take
charge of the treasures of the Temple.
11. The son of Pedaiah, and prince or chief of
the half-tribe of Manasseh, west of Jordan, in the
reign of David (1 Chr. xxvii. 20).
12. A Kobathite Levite in the reign of Heaekhh.
He was the son of Axariah, and one of the two
representatives of his branch of the tribe In the
solemn purification by which the Levitea p se sjai ed
themselves for the restoration of the Temple (2 Chr.
xxix. 12).
13. One of the sons of Nebo, who returned with
Ezra, and had married a foreign wife (Ear. x. 48).
He is called Jura, in 1 Esdr. ix. 86.
14. The son of Zichri, a Benjamite, placed fat
command over those of his own tribe and the tribe
of Judah, who dwelt at Jerusalem after the return
from Babylon (Neh. xt 9). vV. A. W.
JOEXAH (nbK^'V [pert, trios* JeJumk
htlpi\ : •u\la; [Vat EAw; Comp. Aid.] Alex.
'IarnAd : Joila), son of Jeroham of Gedor, who with
his brother joined the band of warriors who tallied
round David at Ziklag (1 Chr. xii, 7).
JOBBER Cg$V [ttftoM kt^bJdnmAy.
'laCapd; Alex, b&ap, [Comp. 'lm(4p:] Joatr\
a Korhite, one of David's captains who fought by
his side while living in exile among the Philistines
(1 Chr. xii. 6).
JOG'BEHAH (nn5QJ [«»Wttd]: in Num.
the LXX. have translated it, as if from W^| —
tycww euVrcts; in Judg. IrytfiiK; Aha. it eW-
riot Zt&if- Jegbaa), one of the cities on the east
of Jordan which wen built and fortified by the
tribe of Gad when they took possession of then-
territory (Num. xxxii. 85). It is then associated
with Jaazeb and Beth-huibah, places which
there is reason to believe were not far from the
Jordan, and south of the Jtbei-JOad. It ia men-
tioned once again, this time in connection with
Nobah, in the account of Gideon's pursuit of the
Hidianltes (Judg. vOL 11). They were at Heritor
and he made his wsy from the upper part of the
Jordan valley at Succoth and PenueL and '■ went
up" — ascended from the Gbor by one of the to*
rent-beds to the downs of the higher level — by tht
way of the dwdlan in tents — the pastoral push
Digitized by
Google
JOGLI
rto avoidsd the district of the town* — to the east
if Nobah and Jogbehah — miking nil my towards
Hie mute country in the southeast. Here, accord-
ing to the scanty information we possess, Karkor
would seem to have been situated. No trace of
any name like Jogbehah has yet been met with in
the above, or any other direction. Q.
JOG/LI PV£ l**Ued]s 'EyA< [Vat -A..];
Ate. E«Ai! [Comp. 'i«ka(s] JogH), the fother
tf Bukki, a chief man among the Danltea (Num.
xxxiv. 22).
JCHA. 1. (MTJ T [perh., Jtkovah revive;
tringtlotife] : 'IwU: [Vat. l«ox«»0 Alex - I««x« :
Joha.) One of the sons of Beriah, the Benjamite,
who was a chief of the fathers of the dwellers in
Agalon, and had put to flight the inhabitants of
Gath (1 Cbr. riii. 16). His fiunily may possibly
hare founded a colony, like the Danites, within the
limits of another tribe, where they were exposed,
as the men of Ephraim had been, to the attacks of
the Gittites. Such border-warfare was too common
to render it necessary to suppose that the narratives
in 1 Chr. vii. SI and riii. IS refer to the same
encounter, although it is not a little singular that
the name Beriah occurs in each.
8. Cl«»Wi [Vat FA.] Alex. Io«f«; [Comp.
logo'.] ) The Tizite, one of David's guard [1 Chr.
d. 45]. Kennieott decides that he was the son
of Shimri, as he is represented in the A. V., though
In the margin the translators have put " Shimrite "
for " the son of Shimri " to the name of his brother
JediheL
JOHATTAN fljrfu : •iswrdV; [Vat imums,
and so Alex. ver. 10 : Johanan] ), a shortened form
of Jehohanan = Jehomh'$ gift. It is the same
a* John. [Jehohanan.] 1. Son of Asariah
[Azariah, 1], and grandson of Ahimaaz the son
sf Zadok, and father of Asariah, 8 (1 Chr. vi. 9,
10, A. V.). In Josephua (Ant. x. 8, § 6) the name
is corrupted to Joramus, and in the Seder Olam
to Joahas. The latter places him in the reign of
Jeboahaphat; but merely because it begins by
wrongly placing Zadok in the reign of Solomon.
Since however we know from 1 K. iv. 3, supported
by 1 Chr. vi. 10, A. V., that Azariah the father of
Johanan was high-priest in Solomon's reign, and
Amariah his grandson was so in Jehoshaphat's
reign, we may conclude without much doubt that
Johanan's pontificate fell in the reign of Beboboam.
(See Herrey's Gauatuyiu, etc., ch. x.)
2. [Alex. IaMrcp.] Son of Elioenai, the son
of Neariah, the son of Shemaiah, in the line of
Zerubbabel's heirs [Shkhaiah] (1 Chr. Hi. 34).
A. C. H
3. Clamf. In 2 K. [xxr. S3], 'lmirar to Jer.;
Uex. luarav in 2 K., and Icmuvov to Jer., except
xii. 11, xlii. 8, xliii. 8, 4, 6; [Vat I.mr to Jer.
il. 8; FA.1 Arwu-Jer. xl. IB, lawn-or ver. 16 :]
Johanan.) The son of Kareah, and one of toe
captains of the scattered remnants of the army of
Judah, who escaped to the final attack upon Jeru-
salem by the Chaldseans, and, after the capture of
the king, remained to the open country of Moab
and the Ammonites, watching the tide of events
He was one of the first to repair to Mizpab, alter
the withdrawal of the hostile army, and tender his
allegiance to the new governor appointed by the
ttog of Babylon. From his acquaintance with the
.raacherous designs of Ishmael, against which
adatuth aas unhappily warned to rain. It is not
JOHN
1119
unreasonable to suppose that he may have been a
companion of Ishmael in his exile at the court of
Baaua king of the Ammonites, the promoter of the
plot (Jer. xL 8-16). After the murder of Gedaliah,
Johanan was one of the foremost in the pursuit of
his assassin, and rescued the captives he had carried
off from Hizpah (Jer. xli. 11-16). Fearing the
vengeance of the Chaldeans for the treachery of
Ishmael, the captains, with Johanan at their head,
halted by the Khan of Chimham, on the road to
Egypt, with the intention of seeking refuge there;
and, notwithstanding the warnings of Jeremiah,
settled in a body at Tahpanhes. They were after-
wards scattered throughout the oountry, in Migdo],
Noph, and Pathros, and from this time we loss
sight of Johanan and his fellow-captains.
4. ('ItmrdV; [AM. *I«x«raV-]) Tne nrstbcm
son of Josiah king of Judah (1 Chr. iii. 15), who
either died before his father, or fell with him at
Megiddo. Junius, without any authority, identifies
him with Zaraces, mentioned 1 Esdr. i. 88.
6. A valiant Bei^jamite, one of David's captains,
who joined him at Ziklag (1 Chr. xii. 4).
6. (Alex. 'Iamsr; [Vat.] FA. law) The
eighth to number of the lion-faced warriors of Gad,
who left their tribe to follow the fortunes of David,
and spread the terror of their arms beyond Jordan
in the month of its overflow (1 Chr. xii 12).
7. Oj^irP: 'fear**; [Alex. loamy.]) The
father of Azariah, an Ephraimite in the time of
Ahaz (2 Chr. xxviii. 12).
8. The sou of Hakkatan, and chief of the Bene-
Azgad [sons of A.] who returned with Ezra (Ext.
viii. 12). He is called Johannes to 1 Esdr. riii.
38.
9. OjrTWT: [FA.» to Est., i««u».]) The
son of Eliashib, one of the chief Lerites (Neh. xii.
23) to whose chamber (or " treasury," according
to the LXX.) Esra retired to mourn over the foreign
marriages which the people bad contracted (Ear.
x. 6). He is called Joan as to 1 Esdr. ix. 1 ; and
some have supposed him to be the same with Jon-
athan, descendant of another Eliashib, who was after-
wards high-priest (Neh. xii. 11). [Jonathan, 10.]
10. OjrTVT;: 'IswdV; Alex. lowaeW; FA.»
Ihisk.) The son of Tobiah the Ammonite, who
had married the daughter of Meshullam the priest
(Neh. ri. 18). W. A. W.
JOHANNES ('Ivdrrnt: Joanna) = Jeho-
hanan son of Bebai (1 Esdr. ix. 29; comp. Est. x.
28). [Jehohanan, 4.]
•JOHAN'NES ClvoVr-Bf; Vat lawns :
Joannes), son of Aeatan or Hakkatan, 1 Esdr. viJL
38. See Johanan, 8. A.
JOHN CtodVmt [•»» below]: [/oannes]),
names in the Apocrypha. 1. The father of Mai.
tathias, and grandfather of the Maccabean family
(1 Mace. ii. 1).
2. The (eldest) son of Mattathias Cloarrirl
[Sin. Alex. loNuvni ], sumamed Caddis (Kattls,
cf. Grimm, ad 1 Mace. ii. 2), who wss slain by
« the children of Jambri " [Jambri] (1 Mace. ii.
2, ix. 36-38). In 2 Mace. riii. 22 he is called
• T ~«eph, by a common confusion of name. [Mao -
CABKE8-]
3. The father of Eupolemus, one of the envoys
whom Judos Maccabeus sent to Rome (1 Maes.
viii. 17; 2 Mace. ir. 11).
4. The son of Simon, the brother of Judss Mao
Digitized by
Google
\42Q Joha
sabaraa (i Mao. xiii. S3, xri. 1), "a valiant Dili,"
who, under the title of Johannes Hyrcanus, nobly
mpported in after time the glory of hie bouse.
[Maccabees.]
6. An envoy from the Jew* to Lysiaa (9 Haoc
iL 17). B. F. W.
JOHN ffeaVrns [from 1jnV=«»oiji Jeho-
vah hat gradotult) given]: Cod. Bezas, Iwdtto:
Jommn). L One of the high-priest's family, who,
with Annas and Caiaphaa, sat in judgment upon
the Apostles Peter and John for their cure of the
lame man and preaching in the Temple (Acts It. 6).
Lightfoot identifies him with R. Johanan ben Zao-
ani, who lived forty years before the destruction of
the Temple, and was president of the great Syna-
gogue after its removal to Jabne, or Jamnia (Light-
foot, Cent. Chor. Afatth. prof. eh. 15; see also
Selden, De Synedriu, ii. eh. 16). Grotius merely
says he was known to rabbinical writers as •' John
the priest" (Comm. in Act. iv.).
3. Tbe Hebrew name of the Evangelist Mark,
who throughout the narrative of the Acts is desig-
nated by the name by which he was known among
his countrymen (Acta xiL IS, 85, xiii. 5, 13, xv. 37).
JOHN, the Apostle ('lairrnt [•» above]).
It will be convenient to divide the life which is the
subject of the present article into periods corre-
sponding both to the great critical epochs which
separate one part of it from another, and to marked
differences in the trustworthiness of the sources
from which our materials are derived. In no in-
stance, perhaps, is such a division more necessary
than in this. One portion of the Apostle's life and
work stands out before us as in the clearness of
broad daylight. Over those which precede and
follow it there brood the shadows of darkness and
uncertainty. In the former we discern only a few
isolated facta, and are left to inference and con-
jecture to bring them together into something like
a whole. In the latter we encounter, it is true,
Images more distinct, pictures more vivid ; but with
these there is the doubt whether the distinctness
and vividness are not misleading — whether half-
traditional, half-mythical narrative has not taken
tbe place of history.
I. Btfore the call to the auciplethip. — We have
no data for settling with any exactitude the time
of the Apostle's birth. The general impression left
on us by the Gospel-narrative is that be waa younger
than the brother whose name commonly precedes
his (Matt. iv. 21, x. 3, xrii. 1, Ac.; but comp.
Luke ix. 28, where the order is inverted «), younger
than his friend Peter, possibly also than his Master.
The life which was protracted to the time of Trajan
(Euseb. //. E. iii. 23, following trencus) can hardly
live begun before the year B. o. 4 of the Dionysian
era. The Gospels give us the name of his father
Zebedeus (Matt. iv. 21) and his mother Salome
(Matt xxrii. 56, compared with Mark xv. 40, xvi.
1). Of tbe former we know nothing more. The
traditions of the fourth century (Epiphan. iii. Bar.
78) make the latter the daughter of Joseph by his
first wife, and consequently half-sister to our Lord.
Ely some recent critics she has been identified with
a • The name John precedes that of James alas In
Lake vHI. 61 and Aota L 18 to the critical editions of
Lvhmann, Tisohendurf, and TrarsUes. A.
ft InU (titoe*. Imult, v. p. 171) adopts Winder's
lecdeerare, and oomnects It with hla own hypothesis
fast the sens of Zebedee, and our Lord, as well as the
JOHN, THE APOSTLE
the sister of Mary the mother of Jeans, in Jobs xts
35 (Wieaeler, Stud. u. KriL 1840, p. 648).» They
lived, it may be inferred from John L 44, in at
near the same town [BETHSAmA] as those whs
were afterwards the companions and partners of
their children. There, on the shares of the Sea of
Galilee, the Apostle and his brother grew up. The
mention of the " hired servants " (Mark L 30), of
hla mother's "substance" (awe riv iwnpximr.
Lake viii. 3), of "his own home" (ra Urn, John
xlx. 37), implies a position removed by at least
some steps from absolute poverty. The met that
the Apostle was. known to the high-priest Caiaphaa,
as that knowledge was hardly likely to have began
after be had avowed himself the disciple of Jesus
of Nazareth, suggests the probability of some early
intimacy between the two men or their families.*
The name which the parents gave to their younger
child was too common to serve as tbe ground of
any special inference; but it d e s erve s notice (1) that
the name appears among the kindred of Caiaphaa
(Acts iv. 6); (3) that it was given to another
priestly child, the son of Zacharias (Lake i. 18), as
the embodiment and symbol of Messianic hopes.
The frequent occurrence of the name at this period,
unconnected as it was with any of the great deeds
of the old heroic days of Israel, is indeed in itself
significant as a sign of that yearning and expecta-
tion which then characterized, not only tbe more
faithful and devout (Luke ii. 25, 38), but tbe whole
people. The prominence given to it by the wooden
connected with the birth of the future Baptist may
have given a meaning to it for the parents of the
future Evangelist which it would not otherwise
have bad. Of the character of Zebedasns we hare
hardly the slightest trace. He interposes no refusal
when his sons are called on to leave him (Matt. iv.
81). After this be disappears from the scene of the
Gospel-history, and we are led to infer that he had
died before hit wife followed her children in their
work of ministration. Her character meets ns as
presenting the same marked features as those which
were conspicuous in her son. From her, who fol-
lowed Jesus and ministered to Him of her sub-
stance (Luke viii. 3), who sought for her two sons
that they might sit, one on his right hand, the
other on his left, in his kingdom (Matt. xx. 20),
he might well derive his strong affections, his
capacity for giving and receiving love, bis eagerness
for the speedy manifestation of the Messiah's king-
dom. The early years of the Apostle we may be-
lieve to have passed under this influence. He would
be trained in all that constituted the ordinary
education of Jewish boyhood. Though not taught
in the schools of Jerusalem, and therefore, in later
life, liable to the reproach of having no recognized
position ss a teacher, no rabbinical education (Acta
iv. 13), be would yet be taught to read the Law
and observe its precepts, to feed on the writings of
the prophets with the feeling that their accomplish-
ment was not far off. For him too, as bound by
the Law, there would be, at the age of thirteen, the
periodical pilgrimages to Jerusalem. Ha would
become familiar with the stately worship of the
Temple with the sacrifice, the incense, the altar
Baptist, were of the tribe of Levi. On
more sober critics, Uks Naandar (P/tanx. m.
008, 4th ad.), and Luoke (/oAaamt, L p. »),
the tradition and the conjecture.
c Swsld (I. c.) praam this also Into the
Bk strange hypothesis.
■
Ik
h»aj
Digitized by
Google
JOHN, TUB APOSTLE
«hd the priestly robes May we not oonjecture that
then the Impressions were first made which never
tfterwards wore off? Assuming that there is some
harmony between the previous training of a prophet
and the form of the visions presented to him, may
we not recognize them in the rich liturgical imagery
of the Apocalypse — in that onion in one wonder-
ful vision of all that was most wonderful and glorious
in the predictions of the older prophets ?
Concurrently with this there would be alto the
boy's outward life as sharing in his father's work.
The great political changes which agitated the
whole of Palestine would in some degree make
themselves felt «ven in the village-town in which
he grew np. 'the Galilean fisherman must have
beard, possibly with some sympathy, of 'the efforts
made (when he was too young to join in them) by
Judas of Gamala, as the great asaerter of the free-
dom of Israel against their Roman rulers. Like
other Jews he would grow up with strong and
bitter feelings against the neighboring Samaritans.
Lastly, before we pass into a period of greater cer-
tainty, we must not forget to take into account
that to this period of his life belongs the com-
mencement of that intimate fellowship with Simon
Bar-jonah of which we afterwards find so many
proofs. That friendship may even then have been,
in countless ways, fruitful for good upon the hearts
of both.
II. From At Call to the Ditdplakip to the De-
parture from Jerusalem The ordinary life of the
fisherman of the Sea of Galilee was at last broken
in upon by the news that a prophet had once more
appeared. The voice of John the Baptist was heard
In the wilderness of Judna, and the publicans,
peasants, soldiers, and fishermen of Galilee gathered
round him. Among these were the two sons of
Zebedaeus and their friends. With them, perhaps,
was One whom as yet they knew not They heard,
It may be, of his protests against the vioes of tbeir
own ruler — against the hypocrisy of Pharisees and
Scribes. But they heard also, it is clear, words
which spoke to them of their own sins — of their
own need of a deliverer. The words " Behold the
Lamb of God that taketh away the sins " imply
that those who heard them would enter into the
blessedness of which they spoke. Assuming that
the unnamed disciple of John i. 37-40 was the
Evangelist himself, we are led to think of that
meeting, of the lengthened interview that followed
it, as the starting-point of the entire devotion of
heart and soul which lasted through his whole life.
Then Jesus loved him as He loved all earnest seekers
after righteousness and truth (oomp. Mark z. SI).
The words of that evening, though unrecorded,
were mighty in their effect. The disciples (John
apparently among them) followed their new teacher
to Galilee (John L 44), were with him, as such, at
the marriage-feast of Cana (ii. 2), journeyed with
him to Capernaum, and thence to Jerusalem (ii.
13, 33), came back through Samaria (iv. 8), and
then, for some uncertain Interval of time, returned
to their former occupations. The uncertainty which
hangs over the narratives of Matt. iv. 18, and Luke
v. 1-11 (comp. the arguments for and against their
relating to the same events in Lamps, Comment
id Joonn. i. 20), leaves us in doubt whether they
received a special call to become " fishers of men "
JOHN, THE APOSTLE 1421
once only or twice. In either case they gave up
the employment of their life and went to do a work
like it, and yet unlike, In God's spiritual kingdom.
From this time they take their place among the
company of disciples. Only here and there are
there traces of individual character, of special turn-
ing-points in their lives. Soon they find themselves
in the number of the Twelve who ire chosen, not
a* disciples only, but as their Lord's delegates —
representatives — Apostles. In all the lists of the
Twelve those four names of the tons of Jonah and
Zebedaeus stand foremost They come within the
innermost circle of their Lord's friends, and are as
the iKKfKri* <7cAe«-r<fr<poi. The three, Peter,
James, and John, are with him when none else are
in the chamber of death (Mark v. 37), in the glory
of the transfiguration (Matt xvB. 1), when be
forewarns them of the destruction of the Holy City
(Mark xiii. 3, Andrew, in this instance, with them),
in the agony of Gethsemane. St. Peter is through-
out the leader of that band ; to John belongs the
yet more memorable distinction of being the dia-
dple whom Jesus loved. This love is returned
with a more single undivided heart by him than
by any other. If Peter is the <f>iX<fxpi<rroj, John
is the <pi\ii)<rovs (Grolius, ProUgom, in Joan*.).
Some striking facts indicate why this was so; what
the character was which was thus worthy of the
love of Jesus of Nazareth. They hardly sustain
the popular notion, fostered by the received types
of Christian art, of a nature gentle, yielding, fem-
inine. The name Boanerges (Mark in. 17) implies
a vehemence, zeal, intensity, which gave to those
who had it the might of Sons of Thunder." That
spirit broke out, once and again, when they joined
their mother in asking for the highest places in the
kingdom of their Master, and declared that they
were ready to face the dark tenors of the cup that
he drank and the baptism that he was baptized with
(Matt xx. 30-24; Mark x. 88-41)— when they
rebuked one who cast out devils in their Lord's
name because he was not one of their company
(Luke ix. 49) — when they sought to call down fire
from heaven upon a village of this Samaritans (Luke
ix. 54). About this time Salome, as if her hus-
band had died, takes her place among the women
who followed Jesus in Galilee (Luke vuL 3), minis-
tering to him of their substance, and went up with
him in his last journey to Jerusalem (Luke xxiii
68). Through her, we may well believe, St John
first came to know that Mary Magdalene whose
character he depicts with such a life-like touch, and
that other Mary to whom be was afterwards to
stand in so close and special a relation. The fullness
of his narrative of what the other Evangelists omit
(John xi.) leads to the conclusion that he was united
also by some special ties of intimacy to the family
of Bethany. It is not necessary to dwell at length
on the familiar history of the Last Supper. What
is characteristic is thst he is there, as ever, the dis-
ciple whom Jesus loved; and, as the chosen and
favored friend, reclines at table with his bead upon
his Master's breast (John xiii. 23). To him the
eager Peter — they had been sent together to pre-
pare the supper (Luke xxii. 8) — makes signs of
impatient questioning that he should ask what was
not likely to be answered if it came from any other
(John xiii. 24). As they go out to the Mount of
of patristic Interpretation asas ut
fUe prophesy of their work as preachers of
This, however, would deprive the epithet I
of all dlstingulsblnf ferae. (Oomp.
A*wt<- i aaAUmps, I. 87.)
Digitized by
Google
1422 JOHN, THB APOSTLB
Olives the chosen three in nearest to their Heater.
rUey only ire within eight or hearing of the eon-
Diet in Getheemane (Matt. xxvi. 87). When the
betrayal U accomplished, Peter and John, after the
list moment of confusion, follow afar off, while the
otbera limply aeek safety in a hasty flight « (John
xviii. 16). The personal acquaintance which ex-
isted betweo. John and Caiaphas enabled him to
glim access both for himself end Peter, but the
latter remains in the porch with the officers and
servants, while John himself apparently is admitted
to the council-chamber, and follows Jesus thence,
even to the pnetorium of the Roman Procurator
(John xviii. IS, 19, 88). Thence, as if the desire
to eee the end, and the lore which wis stronger than
death, sustained him through all the terrors and
sorrows of that day, be followed — accompanied
probably by his own mother, Mary the mother of
Jesus, and Mary Magdalene — to the place of cru-
cifixion. The Teacher who bad been to him as a
brother leaves to him a brother's duty. He is to
be ss a son to the mother who is left desolate (John
six. 26-87). The Sabbath that followed was spent,
it would appear, in the same company. He receives
Peter, in spite of his denial, on the old terms of
friendship. It is to them that Mary Magdalene
fast runs with the tidings of the emptied sepulchre
(John xx. 9); they an the fast to go together to
see what the strange words meant Not without
some bearing on their respective characters is the
fact that John is the more impetuous, running on
most eagerly to the rock-tomb ; Peter, the least re-
strained by awe, the first to enter in and look (John
xx. 4-6). For at least eight days they continued
in Jerusalem (John xx. 96). Then, in the interval
between the resurrection and the ascension, we find
them still together on the sea of Galilee (John xxi.
1), as though they would calm the eager suspense
of that period of expectation by a return to their
old calling and their old familiar haunts. Here,
too, there is a characteristic difference. John is
the first to recognize in the dim form seen in the
morning twilight the presence of his risen Lord;
Peter the first to plunge into the water and swim
towards the shore where He stood calling to them
(John xxi. 7). The last words of the Gospel reveal
to us the deep affection which united the two friends.
It is not enough for Peter to know his own future.
That at once suggests the question — '• And what
shall this man do? " (John xxi. 91). The history
of the Acta shows the same union. They are of
oourse together at the ascension and on the day of
Pentecost Together they enter the Temple as
worshippers (Acts iii. 1) and protest against the
threats of the Sanhedrim (iv. 13). They an fel-
low-workers in the first great step of the Church's
expansion. The Apostle whose wrath had been
roused by the unbelief of the Samaritans, overcomes
bis national exclustreoess, and receives them as his
brethren (viiL 14). The persecution which was
Hashed on by Saul of Tarsus did not drive him or
ny of the Apostles from their post (viii. 1). When
a A somewhat wild conjecture Is found in writers
f the Western Church. Ambrose, Gregory the Gnat,
and Beds, Identity the Apostle with ths mmm nt
of Mark xlv. 51, 62 (Lamps, i. 88).
b Ths hypothecs of Baronlus and TiUemont, that
Hie Virgin accompanied him to Mphasus, has not even
ths authority of tradition (Lamps, I. 61).
e Lamps fixes a. 9. 66, when Jerusalem wee be-
aagsd by the Roman forces under Oestrus, sa the most
JOHN, THE APOSTUS
the persecutor came back as the convert, he, it k
true, did not see him (GaL 1 19), but this of eoajM
does not involve the inference that be had left Je-
rusalem. The sharper though shorter persecution
which followed under Herod Agrippa brought a
great sorrow to him in the martyrdom of hie
brother (Acts xii. 9). His friend was driven to
seek safety in flight Fifteen years after St Pasta
first visit be was still at Jerusalem, and helped to
take part in the great settlement of the controversy
between the Jewish and the Gentile f *- 1 ^—
(Act* xv. 6). His position and reputation then
were those of one nuking among the chief "pil-
lars " of the Church (Gal. ii »). Of the work of
the Apostle during this period we have hardly the
slightest trace. Then may bare been special calls
to mission-work like that which drew him to Sa-
maria. Then may have been the work of teach -
ing, organising, exhorting the churches of Jades*.
His fulfillment of the solemn charge intrusted to
him may have led him to a lib of loving and rev-
erent thought rather than to one of conspscnoas
activity. We may, at all events, feel sure that it
was a time in which the natural elements of his
character, with all their fiery energy, were being
purified and mellowed, rising step by step to that
high serenity which we find perfected in the closing
portion of bis life. Here, too, we may, without
much hesitation, accept the traditions of the Church
as recording a historic fact when they ascribe to
him a life of celibacy (TertulL dt Mtmag. c II).
The absence of his name from 1 Cor. ix. 5 tends
to the same conclusion. It harmonises with all we
know of his character to think of his heart at ae
absorbed in the higher and diviner love that than
was no room left for the lower and the human..
IH. From Ml Dtparturt from Jenualtm to ait
Dtath.— The traditions of a later age come in, with
more or less show of likelihood, to fill up the gnat
gap which separates the Apostle of Jerusalem from
the Bishop of Ephesus. It wss a natural o anj oo tara
to suppose that he remained in Judasa till the
death of the Virgin released him from Ins treat*
When this took place we can only eoujeetaro.
There are no signs of his being at Jerusalem at
the time of St Paul's last visit (Acts xxi.). The
pastoral epistles set aside the notion that he had
come to Ephesus before the work of the Apostle of
the Gentiles wss brought to its conclusion. Out
of many contradictory statements, fixing nil de-
parture under Claudius, or Nero, or as late even as
Domitian, we have hardly any dam for doing nun
than rejecting the two extremes.' Nor is it certain
that his work ss an Apostle wss transferred at ease
from Jerusalem to Ephesus. A tradition current
in the time of Augustine ( Qwest. Etang. ii. 19),
and embodied in some MSS. of the N. T., repre-
sented the 1st Epistle of St John as addressed to
the Parthian*, and so for implied that his Apos-
tolic work had brought him into contact with *
them. When the form of the aged disciple meets
us again, in the twilight of the Apostolic age, we
d In the earlier tradition which made the
formally partition out the world known to
thia fell* to the lot of Thomas, while John
the Proconsular Asia (Boseb. H. H. iii. 1).
of ths legends connected with the Apostles'
Peter contributes the first article, John the
but ths tradition appears with gnat variations
time and order (eomn. Pseado^anfuet
esxlL).
them, Par-
la one
Orel,
Digitized by
Google
JOHN, THK APOSTLK
era still left in great doubt as to the extant of hU
Work and the .circumstances of his outward life.
Assuming the authorship of the Epistle* and the
Herniation to be his, the bote whish the N. T.
writings asset t or imply are — (1) that, having eome
to Ephesus, some persecution, local or general, drove
him to Patmos (Rev. i. 9):» (2) that the seven
churches, of which Asia was the centre, were spe-
cial objects of his solicitude (Rev. i. 11); that in
bis week bo had to encounter men who denied the
truth on which his faith rested (1 John iv. 1; S
John 7), and others who, with a railing and malig-
nant temper, disputed his authority (3 John 9, 10).
If to this we add that he must have outlived all,
or nearly all of those who had been the friends and
companions even of bis maturer years — that this
lingering age gave strength to so old imagination
that his Lord had promised him immortality (John
xxt S3) — that, as if remembering the actual words
which had been thus perverted, the longing of his
soul gathered itself up in the cry, " Even so, come,
Lord Jesus" (Hot. xxii. 20) — that from some who
spoke with authority he received a solemn attesta-
tion of the confidence they reposed in him (John
xxi. 94) — we have stated all that has any claim to
the character of historical truth. The picture
which tradition fills up for us has the merit of be-
ing full and vivid, but it blends together, without
math regard to harmony, things probable and im-
probable. He is shipwrecked off Ephesus (Simeon
Metaph- in vild Johan. c. S; Lamps, i. 47), and
arrives then in time to check the pro gr es s of toe
heresies which sprang up after St. Paul's departure.
Then, or at a Utter period, he numbers among bis
disciples men like Polycarp, Papku, Ignatius
(Hieron. de Vir. Musi. c. 17). In the persecution
under Domitian he is takea to Rome, and there,
by hie boldness, though not by death, gains the
grown of martyrdom. The boiling oil into which
be is thrown has no power to hurt him (TertulL de
Prescript, c 36.).* He is then sent to labor in
the mines, and Patmos is the place of his exile
(Tietorinus, in Apoe. ix. ; Lamps, i. 68). The
secession of Narva frees him from danger, and he
returns to Ephesus. There be settles the canon of
the Gospel-history by formally attesting the truth
ef the first three Gospels, and writing his own to
supply what they left wanting (Euseb. B. E. iii
94). The elders of the Church are gathered to-
gether, and be, as by a sudden inspiration, begins
with the wonderful opening, " In the beginning was
JOHN, TUB APOSTLfl 1428
a Han again the hypothesis of commentators rang*
rrose Claudius to Domitian, the consensu! of patristie
tradition preponderating in nvvor of the latter. [Oomp.
UsnuTioa.]
> The soeoa of the supposed miracle was outside the
Porta Latine, and hence the Western Ohureh com-
Bamontes it by the special festival of " St John Port.
Usui." on May 6th.
• Musebins and Iransras make Osrinthns the heretic.
In Epiphanies (Near. xxx. c. 24) Bblon is the hero of
the story. To modern feelings the anecdote may seem
at variance with the character of the Apostle of Love,
hot it Is hardly mora than to* development In act of
the prhuiple of 2 John 10. To the mind of Kptpbanlue
■Jure was a dlmculty of another kind Nothing less
than a special Inspiration could account fcr such a
Ifertnn bom an undo Ills as going to a bath at
111
d The story of the rtVoAe* Is perhaps the most
ssralextng of all the traditions s* to the age of the
tpostlee. Whrt nukes It still stranger is the aaps
IMS « a like tradition (Hsgestppos in Jcuasb. U. X.
the word " (Hieron. de Jfr. /oust. o. 99).
continue to show themselves, but he meets them
with the strongest possible protest. He refuses to
pats under the same roof (that of the pubiio bathe
of Ephesus) u their foremost leader, lest the house
should foil down on them and crush them (lien,
iii. 8; Euseb. B. E. iii. 88, lv. H).« Through hit
agency the great temple of Artemis U at last reft
of its magnificence, and even (I) leveled with
the ground (Cyril. Alex. Oral, de Mar. Vh-g.\
Nieephor. B. E. ii. 49; Lamps, L 90). He intro-
duces and perpetuates the Jewish mode of celebrat-
ing the Easter feast (Euseb. H. E. iii. 8). At
Ephesus, if not before, as one who was a true priest
of the Lord, bearing on his brow the plate of gold
(wrraKow; eomp. Suieer. Thes. a. v.), with the
sacred name engraved on it, which was the badge
of the Jewish pontiff (Poly-crates, in Euseb. B. E.
iii. 81, v. 2*).<* in strange contrast with thie ideal
exaltation, a later tradition tells how the old man
used to find pleasure In the playfulness and fond-
ness of a favorite bird, and defended himself against
the charge of unworthy trifling by tbe familiar
apologue of the bow that must sometimes be unbent
(Caasian. CoUaL xxiv. c 2).« More true to the
N. T. character of the Apostle is tbe story, told
with so much power and beauty by Clement of
Alexandria ( Quit dices, c 42), of his special and
loving interest in the younger members of his flock ;
of his eagerness and courage in the attempt to
rescue one of them who had fallen into evil courses.
Tbe scene of the old and loving man, standing race
to face with the outlaw-chief whom, in days gone
by, be had baptised, and winning him to repent-
ance, is one which we could gladly look on as be-
longing to his actus] life — part of a story which
is, in Clement's words, oft uvfior, 4AA& Ktyot-
Not less beautiful is that other scene which comes
before us M the last act of his life. When ad
capacity to work and teach is gone — wben there
is no strength even to stand — the spirit still retains
its power to love, and the lips are still opened to
repeat, without change and variation, the command
which summed up all his Master's will, " Little
children, love one another" (Hieron. in Gal. vL).
Other stories, more apocryphal and lrss interesting,
we may pass over rapidly. That he put forth his
power to raise the dead to life (Euseb. B. E. v. 18);
that he drank tbe cup of hemlock which was in-
tended to cause his death, and suffered no barm
from it/ (Pseudo-August Sdiloq.; Isidor. HispsL
11. 28 ; Hplpo. Her. 78) about James the Just Meas-
ured by our notions, the statement seems altogether
improbable, and yet how can we account for its en*
pearanoe at so early a date ! Is it possible that this
was the symbol that the old exclusive priesthood bad
passed away f Or are we to suppose that a strong
statement as to the new priesthood was misinterpreted,
and that rhetoric pessed rapidly into legend ! (Comp.
Neand. PJIanz. «. Lett. p. 1318 ; Stanley, Sonant and
Buayi on ApottoUt Age, p. 288.) Kwald ((. c.) finds
in it an evidence In support of the hypothesis abova
referred to.
• The authority of Oaaslan Is bnt slender m snea e
ease ; but the story Is hardly to be rejected, on d alien
grounds, as Incompatible with the dignity of an 1
Does It not Illustrate the truth —
" He roeoreth best who loveth best
/ The memory of this eanVaranco is preserved te
the symbolic cup, with the serpsnt Issuing frees It,
which esteem In the meduevsl rspessentsMons of the
Digitized by
Google
1424 JOHN, THK APOSTLH
it Mori* Sonet, o. 73); that when be felt his
death approaching he gave orders for the construc-
tion of his own sepulchre, and when it was finished
ealmlj laid himself down in it and died (Augustiu.
Tract in Joann. cxxiv.); that after his interment
there were strange movements in the earth that
covered him (ibid.); that when the tomb was sub-
sequently opened it wss found empty (Niceph. H.
E. ii. 42) ; that he was reserved to reappear again
in conflict with the personal Antichrist in the last
days (Suicer. The*, s. v. 'laKUfnr ) : these tradi-
tions, for the most part, indicate little else than the
uncritical spirit of the age in which they passed
current. The very time of his death lies within
the region of conjecture rather than of history, and
the dates that have been assigned for it range from
A. D. 89 to A. D. 120 (Lampe, i. OS).
The result of all this accumulation of apocryphal
materials is, from one point of view, disappointing
enough. We strain our sight in vain to distin-
guish between the (aloe and die true — between the
shadows with which the gloom is peopled, and the
living forms of which we are in search. We find
it better and more satisfying to turn again, for all
our conceptions of the Apostle's mind and character,
to the scanty records of the N. T., and the writings
which he himself has left. The truest thought
that we can attain to is still that be was " the dis-
ciple whom Jesus loved " — 6 hrurrtiStos — return-
ing that love with a deep, absorbing, unwavering
devotion. One aspect of that feeling is seen in the
seal for bis Master's glory, the burning indignation
against all that seemed to outrage it, which runs,
with its fiery gleam, through his whole life, and
makes him, from first to last, one of the Sons of
Thunder. To him, more than to any other dis-
ciple, there is no neutrality between Christ and
Antichrist. The spirit of such a man is intolerant
of compromises and concessions. The same strong
personal affection shows itself, in another form, in
the chief characteristics of his Gospel While the
other Evangelists record principally the discourses
and parables which were spoken to the multitude,
be treasures up every word and accent of dialogues
snd conversations, which must have seemed to most
men less conspicuous. In the absence of any
-eoorded narrative of his work ss a preacher, in the
silence which be appears to have kept for so many
years, he comes before us si one who lives in the
unseen eternal world, rather than in that of secular,
or even spiritual activity. If there is less apparent
power to enter into the minds and hearts of men
of different temperament and education, less ability
to become all things to all men than there is in St.
Paul, there is a perfection of another kind. The
image mirrored in his soul Is that of tile Son of
Vlan, who is also the Son of God. He Is the
Apostle of Love, not because he starts from the
«sy temper of a general benevolence, nor again as
Doing of a character soft, yielding, feminine, but
jecause he has grown, ever more and more, into
the likeness of Him whom he loved so truly.
Nowhere is the vision of the Eternal Word, the
glory as of the only-begotten of the Father, so un-
clouded; nowhere are there suoh distinctive per-
■vaogelist. Is It possible that the symbol originated
In Hatk x. 89, and that the legend grew out of the
symbol?
<" The older Interpretation made Hark answer to
ms eagle, John to the lion (Butter, TSa. s. v.
sfcayyaWrfr).
♦ anther vesss of this hymn, "Tola* avis Has
JOHN THE BAPTIST
tonal reminiseenoes of the Christ, care eipm, b
his most distinctively human characteristics. It
was this union of tile two aspects of the Truth
which made him so truly the » Tneologus " of the
whole company of the Apostles, the instinctive op-
ponent of all forms of a mystical, or logical, or
docetie Gnosticism. It was a true fading which
led the later interpreters of the mysterious forms
of the four living creatures round the throne (Bar.
iv. 7) — departing in this Instance from the earlier
tradition — to see in him the eagle that soars into
the highest heaven and looks upon the uocknsded
sun. It will be well to end with the noble words
from the hymn of Adam of St. Victor, in wUeh
that feeling is embodied: —
« Cerium transit, veri rotssa
Bolls vMlt, 1U totem
Mentis flgens seism ;
Speculator sphitalla
Quasi seraphim sub alls,
Del Tidlt fcoism."*
(Comp. the exhaustive Prolegomena to Lamps'*
Commentary; Neander, Pflan*. u. Lett pp. 609-
852 [pp. 364-379, comp. pp. 608-681, Robinson's
ed., N. T. 1866]; Stanley, Sermon* and Euan*
on the Jpottoiic Age, Sermon iv., and Eton on Me
Tradition* respecting St. John; Maurice On tk*
Gotpel of St. John, Senn. i. ; and an interesting
article by Ebrard, s. v. Johanna, in Hersog's Beat-
Encyklcp&Hc.) E. H. P.
• See also Lardner, Hi*L of the Apottle* and
Evangetult, oh. ix. ( Iforss, vol. v. ed. of 1899);
Francis Trench, Life and Character of Si. John
the Etangehtt, Lond. 1860; and, on the legends
respecting the Apostle, Mrs. Jameson's Soared and
Legendary Art, L 167-172, 6th ed. A.
JOHN THE BAPTIST Cl«<W t Baw-
Turrrjs [and « /Smrlfaw]), » saint more signally
honored of God than any other whose name is
recorded in either the O. or the N. T. John was
of the priestly race by both parents, for his father
Zachsrias was himself a priest of the course of Abb,
or Abgah (1 Chr. xxiv. 1U), ottering incense at the
very time when a son wss promised to him ; and
Elizabeth was of the daughters of Aaron (Luke
i. 6). Both, too, were devout persons — walking in
the commandments of God, and waiting for tin
fulfillment of his promise to Israel. The divine
ml«pnn of John was the subject of prophecy many
centuries before his birth, for St. Matthew (iiL 8)
tells us that it was John who wss prefigured by
Iaaiah as " the Voice of one crying in the wilder-
ness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, mate his
paths straight" (Is. xL 3), while by the prophet
Mslschi the spirit announces more definitely, ".Be-
hold, I will send my messenger, and ha shall pre-
pare the way before Me" (ill. 1). His birth — a
birth not according to the ordinary laws of nature,
but through the miraculous interposition of Al-
mighty power — was foretold by an angel sent from
God, who announced it as an occasion of joy and
gladness to many — and at the same time assigned
to him the name of John to signify either that he
was to be bam of God's especial favor, or, ]
roets," et sag.., is ntmlliar to most students ss Ins
motto prefixed by Olshaossn to his oramentair on St
John's Gospel. The whole hymn is to be found tr
Trench's Sound latin Pottry, p. 71 ; [also In Danist*
Tkesattnu Bfnmatogku t , H. 108, and Mane's ImUtm
seat Htnuun da mulatto, in. 118 1
Digitized by
Google
JOHN THE BAPTIST
tint ha mi to be the harbinger of grace. The
angel Gabriel moreover proclaimed the character
and office of thii wonderful child even before hit
ooiioeption, foretelling that he would be filled with
the Holy Ghost from the first moment of his ex-
istence, and appear as the great reformer of his
countrymen — another KUjah in the boldness with
which he would speak truth and rebuke vice — but,
above all, as the chosen forerunner and herald of
the long-expected Messiah.
These nianeloui revelations as to the character
and career of the son, for whom he had so long
prajed in rain, were too much for the faith of the
'aged Zacharias; and when be sought some assur-
ance of the certainty of the promised blessing, God
gave it to him in a judgment — the privation of
speech — until the event foretold should happen —
a judgment intended to serve at once as a token of
God's truth, and a rebuke of his own incredulity.
And now the Lord's gracious promise tarried not—
Elizabeth, for greater privacy, retired into the hill-
eountry, whither she was soon afterwards followed
by bar kinswoman Mary, who was herself the object
and channel of divine grace beyond measure greater
and more mysterious. The two cousins, who were'
thus honored above all the mothers of Israel, came
together in a remote city of the south (by some
supposed to be Hebron, by others Jutta), and im-
mediately God's purpose was confirmed to them by
a miraculous sign ; for as soon as Elizabeth beard
the salutations of Mary, the babe leaped in her
womb, thus acknowledging, as it were even before
birth, the presence of his l^ord (Luke i. 43, 44).
Three months after this, and while Mary still re-
mained with her, Elizabeth was delivered of a son.
The birth of John preceded by six months that of
our blessed Lord. [Respecting this date, see Jksus
Christ, p. 1381.] On the eighth day the child
of promise was, in conformity with the law of Moses
(Lev. xii. 8), brought to the priest for circumcision,
and as the performance of this rite was the accua-
twned time for naming a child, the friends of the
family proposed to call him Zacharias after the
name of his father. The mother, however, required
that he should be called John — a decision which
Zacharias, still speechless, confirmed by writing on
• tablet, " his name is John." The judgment on
his want of faith was then at once withdrawn, and
the first use which lie made of his recovered speech
was to praise Jehovah for his faithfulness and mercy
(Luke i. 64). God's wonderful interposition in the
birth of John had impressed the minds of many
with a certain solemn awe and expectation (Luke
iii. 16). God was surely again visiting his people.
His providence, so long hidden, seemed ones more
about to manifest itself. The child thus super-
natnrally born must doubtless be commissioned to
perform some important part in the history of the
chosen people. Could it be the Messiah ? Could
it be Elyah ? Was the era of their old prophets
about to be restored ? With such grave thoughts
were the minds of the people occupied, as they
nosed on toe events which had been passing under
their eyes, and said one to another, '■ What manner
of chikl sliall this be?" while Zacharias himself,
" filled with the Holy Ghost," broke forth in tha.
glorious strain of praise and prophecy so familia.
to us in the morning service of our church — a
strain in which it is to be observed that tin father,
before speaking of his own child, blesses God for
ntneraberiiij; his covenant and promise in the
■ademption and salvo 1 ion of his pet pie through
W
JOHN THE BAPTIST 1425
Him, of whom his own son was the prophet and
forerunner. A single verse contains all that we
know of John's history for a space of thirty years —
the whole period whieh elapsed between his birth
and the commencement of his public niinutry.
" The child grew and waxed strong in the spirit,
and was in the deserts till the day of his showing
unto Israel " (Luke I. 80). John, It will be remem-
bered, was ordained to be a Nazarite (see Num. vi.
1-21) from his birth, for the words of the angel
werec "He shall drink neither wine nor strong
drink " (Luke i. IS). What we are to understand
by this brief announcement is probably this: The
chosen forerunner of the Messiah and herald of his
kingdom was required to forego the ordinary pleas-
ures and indulgences of the world, and live a life
of the strictest self-denial in retirement and soli-
tude.
It was thus that the holy Nazarite, dwelling by
himself in the wild and thinly peopled region west-
ward of the Dead Sea, called "Desert "in the text,
prepared himself by self-discipline, and by constant
communion with God, for the wonderful office to
which he bad been divinely called. Here year after
year of his stern probation passed by, till at length
the time for the fulfillment of his mission arrived.
The very appearance of the holy Baptist was of
itself a lesson to his countrymen; his dress was
that of the old prophets — a garment woven of
camel's hair (2 K. i. 8), attached to the body by a
leathern girdle. His food was such as the desert
afforded — locusts (Lev. xi. 22) and wild honey
(Ps. Ixxxi. 10).
And now the long secluded hermit came forth to
the discharge of his office. His supernatural birth
— his hard ascetic life — his reputation for extra-
ordinary sanctity — and the generally prevailing
expectation that some great one was about to ap-
pear — these causes, without the aid of miracdoos
power, for "John did DO miracle" (John x. 41),
were sufficient to attract to him • great multitude
from " every quarter " (Matt. iii. 6). Brief and
startling was his first exhortation to tbem— " Re-
pent ye, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand."
Some score verses contain all that is recorded of
John's preaching, and the sum of it all is repent-
ance; not mere legal ablution or expiation, but a
change of heart and life. Herein John, though
exhibiting a marked contrast to the Scribes and
Pharisees of his own time, was but repeating with
the stimulus of a new and powerful motive tha
lessons which had been again and again impressed
upon them by their ancient prophets (cf. Is. i. 16
17, lv. 7; Jar. vii. 8-7; Ex. xviii. 19-32, xxxrL
20-27; Joel ii. 12, 13; Mic. vi. 8; Zech. i. 3, 4).
Hut while such was his solemn admonition to the
multitude at large, be adopted towards the leading
sects of the Jews a severer tone, denouncing
Pharisees and Sadduceea alike as "a generation
of vipers," and warning them of the folly cf trust-
ing to external privileges as descendants of Abraham
(Luke iii. 8). Now at last be warns them that
•' the axe was laid to the root of the tree " — that
formal righteousness would be tolerated no longer,
and that none would be acknowledged for children
of Abraham but such as did the works of Abraham
(cf. John viii. 89). 8ueh alarming declarations pro-
duced their effect, and many of every class pressed
forward to confess their sins and to be baptized.
Wbtt then was the baptism which John admin-
istered ? Not altogether a new rite, for it was the
custom a the Jews to baptize proselytes to thef*
Digitized by
Google
1426 JOHN THE BAPTIST
religion — not an ordinance in itaelf conveying
remission of sins, but rather a token and symbol
of that repentance which was an indispensable con-
dition of forgiveness through Him, whom John
pointed out aa " the Lamb of God that taketh away
the lint of the world." Still lea did the baptism
of John impart the grace of regeneration — of a new
spiritual Ufa (Acts xix. 3, 4). This was to be the
mysterious effect of baptism " with the Holy Ghost,"
which was to be ordained by that " Mightier. One,"
whose coming he proclaimed. The preparatory
baptism of John was a risible sign to the people,
and a distinct acknowledgment by them, that a
hearty renunciation of tin and a real amendment
of life were necessary for admission into the king-
dom of heaven, which the Baptist proclaimed to be
at band. But the fundamental distinction between
John's baptism unto repentance, and that baptism
accompanied with the gift of the Holy Spirit which
our Lord afterwards ordained, is clearly marked by
John himself (Matt. iii. 11, IS).
As a preacher, John was eminently practical and
discriminating. Self-love and covetousness were
the prevalent sins of the people at large: on them
therefore be enjoined charity, and consideration for
others. The publicans he cautioned against extor-
tion, the soldiers against violence and plunder. His
answers to them are, no doubt, to be regarded as
instances of the appropriate warning and advice
which be addressed to every class.
The mission of the Baptist — an extraordinary
one for an extraordinary purpose — was not limited
to those who had openly forsaken the covenant of
God, and so forfeited its principles. It was to the
whole people alike. This we must infer from the
baptism of one who had no confession to make, and
no sins to wash away. Jesus Himself came from
Galilee to Jordan to be baptised of John, on the
special ground that it became Him " to fulfill all
righteousness," and, as man, to submit to the cus-
toms and ordinances which were binding upon the
rest of the Jewish people. John, however, naturally
at first shrank from offering the symbols of purity
to the tiniest Son of God. But here a difficult
question arises — How is John's acknowledgment
of Jesus at the moment of his presenting Himself
for baptism compatible with his subsequent assertion
that he knew Him not, save by the descent of the
Holy Spirit upon Him, which took place after his
baptism ? If it be difficult to imagine that the two
oousint were not personally acquainted with each
other, it must be borne in mind that their places of
residence were at the two extremities of the country,
with but little means of communication between
them. I'erbaia, too, John's special destination and
.node of life may have kept him from the stated
festivals of his countrymen at Jerusalem. It is
possible therefore that the Saviour and the Baptist
bad never before met It was certainly of the
itmost importance that there should be no suspicion
jf concert or collusion bet^^en them. John, bow-
ever, must assuredly have ueen in daily expectation
of Christ's manifestation to Israel, and so a word
r sign would have sufficed to reveal to him the
aerson and presence of our Lord, though we may
well suppose such a fact to be made known by a
Jirect communication from God, at in the ease of
Simeon (1-iike ii. SB; cf. Jackson "on the Creed,"
Workt, Ox. ed. ri. 404). At all events It it wholly
tuoonceival.le that John should have been permitted
to baptize the Son of God without being enabled
la sUstingiiiih Him from any of the ordinary mn'ti-
JOmr THB BAPTIST
taste. Upon the whole, the true meaning «f Iks
words csrydb oiuc fjltw asroV would teem to le at
follows: And I, even I, though standing in so near
a relation to Him, both personally and niirusteriiSy,
had no assured knowledge of Him at the Uttnak.
I did not know Him, and I had not authority to
proclaim Him aa such, till I taw the predicted sign
in the descent of the Holy Spirit upon Him. It
must be borne in mind that John had no meant
of knowing by previous announcement, whether this
wonderful acknowledgment of the Divine Son would
be vouchsafed to his forerunner at his baptism, of
at any other time (see Dr. Mill's Hit. Ckaraefer
of St Lube't (lapel, and the authorities quoted
by him).
With the baptism of Jesus John's more especial
office ceased. The king had come to his kingdom.
Tne function of the herald was discharged. It waa
this that John had with singular humility and self-
renunciation announced beforehand: " He must
increase, but I must decrease."
John, however, still continued to present himself
to his oountryruen in the capacity of iriintu to
Jesus. Especially did he bear testimony to Him
at Bethany beyond Jordan (for Bethany, not Beth-
abara, is the reading of the beat MSS.). So con-
fidently indeed did he point out the Lamb of God,
on whom he had seen the Spirit alighting like a
dove, that two of his own disciples, Andrew, and
probably John, being convinced by his testimony,
followed Jesus, si the true Messiah.
From incidental notices in Scripture we learn
that John and his disciples continued to baptise
some time after our Lord entered upon his ministry
(see John iii. 33, iv. 1; Acts xix. 3). We gather
also that John instructed his disciples in certain
moral and religious duties, as fasting (Matt. ix. 14;
Luke v. 33) and prayer (Luke xi. 1).
But shortly after he had given hit testimony to
the Messiah, John's public ministry was brought
to a close. He had at the beginning of it con-
demned the hypocrisy and worldliness of the Phari-
sees and Sadducees, and he now had occasion to
denounce the lust of a king. In daring disregard
of the divine laws, Herod Antipaa had taken to
himself the wife of his brother Philip; and when
John reproved him for this, as well as for other sins
(Luke iii. 19), Herod cast him. into prison. The
place of his confinement was the castle of Maehsra
— a fortress on the eastern shore of the Dead Sea.
It was here that reports reached him of the miracles
which our Lord was working In Judas — miracles
which, doubtless, were to John's mind but the con-
firmation of what be expected to hear as to the
establishment of toe Messiah's kingdom. But if
Christ's kingdom were indeed established, it was
the duty of John's own disciples no less than of all
others to acknowledge it. They, however, would
naturally cling to their own master, snd he slow to
transfer their allegiance to another. With a view
therefore to overcome their scruples, John sent twa
of them to Jesus Himself to ask the question, " Art
IIkw He that should come?" They were answered
not by words, but by a series of miracles wrought
before their eyes— the very miracles which prophecy
had specified as the distinguishing credentials of
the Messiah (la. xxxv. 6, bri. 1); and, while Jeans
bade the two messengers carry back to John as hit
only answer the report of what they had teen and
heard, He took occasion to guard the multitude
who surrounded Him against supposing that tat
Baptist himself was shaken in mind, hy a dh-SBf
Digitized by
Google
JOHN THE BAPTIST
ippeai to their own knowledge of his life and ehar-
icter. Well might they be appealed to at witnesses
'MM the stern prophet of the wilderness waa no
waverer, bending to (very breeze, like the reeds on
the banks of Jordan. Proof abundant bad they
that John was no worldling with a heart set upon
rich clothii. a and dainty fere — the luxuries of a
king's court — and they must have been ready to
acknowledge that one so inured to a life of hard-
ness and privation was not likely to be affected by
the ordinary terrors of a prison. But our Lord not
only vindicates his forerunner from any suspicion of
inconstancy, He goes on to proclaim him a prophet,
and more than a prophet, nay, inferior to none born
of woman, though in respect to spiritual privileges
behind the least of those who were to be born of the
Spirit and admitted into the fellowship of Christ's
body (Matt. zi. 11). It should be noted that the
expression 6 M luKfimoos, K.T.A. is understood
by Chrysostom, Augustin, Hilary, and some modern
commentators, to mean Christ Himself, but this
interpretation is less agreeable to the spirit and
tone of our Lord's discourse.
Jesus further proceeds to declare that John was,
according to the true meaning of the prophecy, the
Elyah of the new covenant, foretold by Malachi
(iii. 4). The event indeed proved that John waa
to Herod what Elijah bad been to Abab, and a
prison waa deemed too light a punishment for his
boldness in asserting God's law before the face of a
king and a queen. Nothing but the death of the
Baptist would satisfy the resentment of Herodias.
Though foiled once, she continued to watch her
opportunity, which at length arrived. A court fes-
tival was kept at Machterus [see Tiberias] in
honor of the king's birthday. After supper [or
during it, Mark vi. 31, 22J, the daughter of Herodias
came in and danced before the company, and so
charmed was the king by her grace that he prom-
ised with an oath to give her whatsoever she should
ask.
Salome, prompted by her abandoned mother,
demanded the head of John the Baptist. The
promise had been given in the hearing of his dis-
tinguished guests, and so Herod, though loth to be
■mule the instrument of so bloody a work, gave in-
structions to an officer of his guard, who went and
executed John in the prison, and his head was
brought to feast the eyes of the adulteress whose
sins be had denounced.
Thus was John added to that glorious army of
martyrs who have suffered for righteousness' sake.
His death is supposed to have occurred just before
the third Passover in the course of the Lord's min-
istry. It is by Josephus (Ant. xviii. 5, § 3) attrib-
uted to the jealousy with which Herod regarded
kis growing influence with the people. Herod un-
bubtedly looked upon him ss some extraordinary
person, for no sooner did be hear of the miracles
sf Jesui than, though a Sadducee himself, and as
ash a disbeliever in the Resurrection, he ascribed
litem to John, whom he supposed to be risen from
Use dead. Holy Scripture tells us that the body
of the Baptist was laid in the tomb by his disciples,
and 4ccksiutical history records the honors which
•nocessive generations paid to his memory.
The brief history of Johu's life is marked through-
lot with the characteristic graces of self-denial,
jumility, and ho'y courage. So great indeed waa
bis abstinence that worldly men considered him
msessed. '< John came neither eating nor drink-
tag, and they said he hath a devil." His humility
JOHN, GOSPEL OP 142?
waa such that he had again and again to disavow
the character, and decline the honors which ai
admiring multitude almost forced upon him. T«
their questions he answered plainly, he was not Us*
Christ, nor the Elijah of whom they were thinking,
nor one of their old prophets. He was no one —
a voice merely — the Voice of God calling his
people to repentance in preparation for the coming
of Him whose shoe latchat he was not worthy to
unloose.
For his boldness in speaking truth, he went a
willing victim to prison and to death.
The student may consult the following works,
where he will find numerous references to ancient
and modern commentators: Tillemont, Hut. A'e-
des. ; Witsius, Miiceil. vol. iv. ; Thomas Aquinas,
Catena Aurea, Oxford, 1843; Neander, Life of
Ckrut; Le Baa, Scripture Biography; Taylor,
Life of ChrUt ; Olshausen, Com. on the GotpeU.
E.H— a.
JOHN, GOSPEL OP. 1. Authority. — No
doubt has been entertained at any time in the
Church, either of the canonical authority of this
Gospel, or of its being written by St John. The
text 3 Pet. i. 14 is not indeed sufficient to support
the inference that St. Peter and his readers were
acquainted with the fourth Gospel, and recognized
its authority. But still no other book of the N. T.
is authenticated by testimony of so early a date as
that of the disciples which is embodied in the Gospel
itself fxxi. 34, 35). Among the Apostolic Fathers,
Ignatius appears to have known and recogLzed
this Gospel. His declaration, " I desire the I ead
of God, which is the flesh of Jesus Christ the Son
of God . . . and I desire the drink of God, bis
blood, which is incorruptible love " (ad Limn, e. 7 ;
Cureton, Corpux Lt/natianum, p. 331), could scarcely
have been written by one who had not read St. John
vi. 33, Ac. And in the Ep. ad Philadelphtnot, c. 7
(which, however, is not contained in Mr. Cureton's
Syriac MSS.), the same writer says, •' [The Holy
Spirit] knoweth whence He cometh and whither
He goeth, and reproreth the things which are hid-
den: " this is surely more than an accidental verbal
coincidence with St. John iii. 8 and xvi. 8. The
fact that this Gospel is not quoted by Clement of
Rome (a. n. 68 or 96) serves, as Dean Alford sug-
gests, merely to confirm the statement that it is a
very late production of the Apostolic age. Polyoarp
in his short epistle, Hennas, and Barnabas do not
refer to it. But its phraseology may be clearly
traced in the Epistle to Diognetua ("Christians
dwell in the world, but they are not of the world ; "
eomp. John zvii. 11, 14, 16 : " He sent his only-
begotten Son ... as loving, not condemning;"
eomp. John iii. 16, 17), and in Justin Martyr,
A. d. 150 (" Christ said, Except ye be born again
ye shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven : and
it is manifest to all that it is impossible for those
who have been once born to enter into the wombs
of those that bare them; " Apnl. c. 61; eomp. John
iii. 8, 6: and again, "His blood having been pro-
duced, not of human seed, but of the will of God ; "
Ti-ypho, c. 63; eomp. John L 13, 4c.). Tatiac,
A. D. 170, wrote a harmony of the four Gospels;
and he quotes St. John's Gospel in his only extant
work so do his contemporaries Apollinaris of
Hierapolia, Atbenagoras, and the writer of tht
Epistle of the churches of Vienna and Lyons. The
' Valentinians made great use of it; and one of theb
1 m-t, Heracleon, wrote a commentary on it. Yet
I its authority among orthodox Christians waa to*
Digitized by
Google
1428 JOHN, GOSPEL OF.
firmly established to be shaken thereby. Theophllue
jf Antioch (ad Autolycum, ii.) expressly ascribes
this Goepel to St John ; and he wrote, according
to Jerome (£)>. 53, ad Algat.), a harmonized com-
mentary on tht four Goeptlt. And, to eloee the
tilt of writen of the second century, the numerous
and full testimonies of Ireneus in Gaul and Ter-
tullian at Carthage, with the obacure but weighty
testimony of the Roman writer of the Huratorian
Fragment on the Canon, sufficiently show the au-
thority attributed in the Western Church to this
Gospel. The third century introduces equally de-
cisive testimony from the Fathers of the Alexandrian
Church, Clement and Origen, which it is unneces-
sary here to quote at length.
Cerrton, Marciou. the Montanitts, and other an-
cient heretics (see Lampe, Commentarhu, 1. 136),
did not deny that St. John was the author of the
3ospel, but they held that the Apostle was mis-
taken, or that his Gospel had been interpolated in
those passages which are opposed to their tenets.
The Alogi, a sect in the beginning of the third
century, were singular in rejecting the writings of
St John. Guerike (EinUUung in JV. T. p. 803)
enumerates later opponents of the Gospel, beginning
with an Englishman, Edw. Evanson, On Ote D\»-
tonance of (ha Four EonnotUttt, Ipswich, 1792,
and closing with Bretschneider's Probnbitia de
Etangetio Johannu, etc., origine, Lips. 1820. His
arguments are characterized by Guerike as strong
in comparison with those of his predecessors. They
are grounded chiefly on the strangeness of such
language and thoughts as those of St John coming
from a Galilean fisherman, and on the difference
between the representations of our Lord's person
and of his manner of speech given by St John and
the other Evangelists. Guerike answers Bretsch-
neider's arguments in detail. The skepticism of
more recent times has found its fullest, and, accord-
ing to Week, its most important, expression in a
treatise by Liitzelberger on the tradition respecting
the Apostle John and his writings (1840). His
arguments are recapitulated and answered by Dr.
Davidson (Introduction to the If. T., 1848, vol. i.
p. 244, Ac.). It may suffice to mention one speci-
men. St Paul's expression (Gal. ii. 6), oweioi
wore Tjcav, is translated by Liitzelberger, " what-
soever they [Peter, James, and John] were for-
merly: " be discovers therein an implied assertion
-hat all three were not living when the Epistle to
he Galatians was written, and infers that since
Peter and James were undoubtedly alive, John
must have been dead, and therefore the tradition
which ascribes to him the residence at Ephesus,
and the composition, after A. n. 60, of various
writings, must confound him with another John.
Still more recently the objections of Baur to St.
'obn's Gospel have been answered by Ebrard, Da$
Evangelium Johanna, etc., Zurich, 1848.
2. Place and Time at which it tool written. —
Ephesus and Patmos are the two places mentioned
by early writers ; and the weight of evidence seems
to preponderate in favor of Ephesus Irenaeus (iii.
1; also apud Euseb. H. E. v. 8) states that John
published his Gospel whilst he dwelt In Ephesus
af Asia. Jerome (ProL in Mntth. ) states that John
was in Asia when he complied with the request of
the bishops of Asia and others to write more pro-
vjandly concerning the Divinity of Christ The-
odore of Mopsuestia (ProL in Joannem) relates that
John was living at Ephesus when he was moved by
Us disciples to write his GospeL
"JOUST, GOSPEL OF
The evidence in favor of Patmos comes from tax.
anonymous writers. The author of the Synopsis
of Scripture, printed in the works of Athanasius.
states that the Gospel was dictated by St. John is
Patmos, and published afterwards in Ephesus. The
author of the work De XII. Apottolii, printed in
the Appendix to Fabrieius's Bijrpolytm (p. 962, ed.
Migne), states that John was banished by Domitian
to Patmos, where he wrote his Gospel. The later
date of these unknown writers, and the seeming
inconsistency of their testimony with St John's
declaration (Rev. L 2) in Patmos, that he had
previously borne record of the Word of God, render
their testimony of little weight
Attempts hive been made to elicit from the lan-
guage of the Gospel itself some argument which
should decide the question whether It was written
before or after the destruction of Jerusalem. But
considering that the present tense " is " is used in
v. 2, and the past tense « was " in xL 18, xviii. 1,
xix. 41, it would seem reasonable to concluoe that
these psassges throw no light upon the question.
Clement of Alexandria (apud Euseb. II. E. vi
14) speaks or St John as the latest of the Evan
gelist*. The Apostle's sojourn at Ephesus probabl)
began after St Paul's Epistle to the Ephesians was
written, »'. e. after A. D. 62. Eusebius (H. E. iii.
20) specifies the fourteenth year of Domitian, i. e.
A. D. 95 as the year of his banishment to Patmos.
Probably the date of the Gospel may lie about mid-
way between these two, about A. D. 78. The ref-
erences to it in the First Epistle and the Revelation
lead to the supposition that it was written decidedly
before those two books; and the tradition of its
supplementary character would lead us to place it
some little time after the Apostle had fixed his
abode at Ephesus.
3. Oecntiun and Scope. — After the destruction
of Jerusalem A. n. 69, Ephesus probably became
the centre of the active life of Eastern Christendom.
Even Antioch, the original source of missions to
the Gentiles, and the future metropolis of the
Christian Patriarch, appears, for a time, less con-
spicuous in the obscurity of early church history
than Ephesus, to v-hich St Paid inscribed his
epistle, and in which St John found a dwelling-
place and a tomb. This half-Greek, half-Orients)
city, " visited by ships from all parts of the Mediter-
ranean, and united by great roads with the markets
of the interior, was the common meeting-place of
various characters and classes of men " (Conybeare
and Howson's St. Paul, ch. xiv.). It contained a
large church of faithful Christians, a multitude of
zealous Jews, an indigenous population devoted to
the worship of a strange idol whose image (Jerome,
Prof, in Ephte.) was borrowed from the East, its
name from the West : in the Xystus of Ephesus,
free-thinking philosophers of all nations disputed
over their favorite tenets (Justin, Trypho, cc- 1, 7).
It was the place to which Crrinthus chose to bring
the doctrines which be devised or learned at Alex-
andria (Neauder, Church ffittory, ii. 42, ed. BohnY.
In this city, and among the lawless heathens in its
neighborhood (Clem. Alex. Quit divet talc. § 42;,
St John was engaged in extending the Christian
Church, when, for the greater edification of that
Church, his Gospel was written. It was obviously
addressed primarily to Christians, not to heathens
and the Apostle himself tells us (xx. 31) what wst
the end to which he looked forward in all hi
teaching.
Modern criticism has indulged ir much raits*
Digitized by
Google
JOHN, GOSPEL OF
■peculation u to the exclusive or the principal
motive which induced the Apostle to write His
design, according to some critics, wss to aupp'ement
the deficiencies of the earlier three Gospels; accord-
ing to others, to confute the Nieolaitans and Cerin-
thus ; according to others, to state the true doctrine
it the Divinity of Christ. But let it bo home in
mind first of all that the inspiring, directing im-
pulse given to St John was that by which all
" prophecy came in old time," when " holy men
of God spake," " not by the will of man," " but
as they were moved by the Holy Ghost." We can-
not fed confident of our own capacity to analyze
the motives and circumscribe the views of a mind
andor the influence of Divine inspiration. The
Gospel of St. John is a boon to all ages, and to
Ben in an infinite variety of circumstance*. Some-
thing of the feelings of the chronicler, or the polemic,
or the catechiat may have been in the heart of the
Apostle, but let us not imagine that his motives
•ere limited to any, or to all of these.
It has indeed been pronounced by high critical
authority that " the supplementary theory is en-
tirely untenable; " and so it becomes if put forth
in its most rigid form, and as showing the whole
design of St. John. But even Dr. Davidson, while
•announcing It unsupported by either external tra-
dition or internal grounds, acknowledges that some
truth lies at the bottom of it. Those who bold the
theory in its extreme and exclusive form will find
it hard to account for the fact that St John has
many things in common with his predecessors ; and
those who repudiate the theory entirely will find it
hard to account for bis omission, e. o. of such an
event as the "Transfiguration, which he was admitted
to see, and which would have been within the scope
(under any other theory) of his Gospel. Luthardt
concludes most judiciously that, though St Johu
may not have written with direct reference to the
earlier three Evangelists, he did not write without
any reference to them.
And in like manner, though so able a critic as
Liicke speaks of the anti-Gnostic reference of St
John as prevailing throughout his Gospel, while
Luthardt is for limiting such reference to his first
vers es, and to his doctrine of the Logos; and,
though other writers have shown much ingenuity
In discovering, and perhaps exaggerating, references
to Docetiam, Ebionitism, and Sabianism; yet, when
controversial references are set forth as the principal
design of the Apostle, it is well to bear In mind
the cautious opinion expressed by Dr. Davidson :
" Designed polemical opposition to one of those
errors, or to all of there does not lie in the con-
tents of the sacred book itself; and yet it is true
that they were not unnoticed by St John. He
Intended to set forth the faith alone, and In so
doing he has written passages that do confute those
erroneous tendencies."
There is no intrinsic improbability in the early
tradition as to the occasion and scope of this Gospel,
which is most fully related in the commentary of
Theodore of Mopsuestia, to the effect that while
St John lived at Ephesus, and visited all parU of
Asia, tin writings of Matthew, Mark, and even
Luke same into the hands of the Christians, and
were diligently circulated everywhere. Then it
Mcurred to the Christians of Asia that St. John
was a more credible witness than all others, furas-
nuch ss from the beginning, even before Matthew,
at was with the Lord, and enjoyed more abundant
paw through the love which the Lord ben to him.
JOHN, GOSPEL OF 1428
And they brought him the books, and sought to
know his opinion of them. Then he praised thai
writers for their veracity, and said that a few things
had been omitted by them, and that all but a litU
of the teaching of the most important miracles was
recorded. And he added that they who discourse
of the coming of Christ in the flesh ought not to
omit to speak of his Divinity, lest in course of time
men who are used to such discourses might suppose
that Christ war only what He appeared to be.
Thereupon the brethren exhorted him to write at
once the things which he judged the most important
for instruction, and which he saw omitted by the
others. Add he did so. And therefore from the
beginning he discoursed about the doctrine of the
Divinity of Christ, judging this to be the necessary
beginning of the Gospel, and from it he went on to
the incarnation. [See above, p. 1423.]
4. QmtmU and Integrity. — Luthardt says that
there is no book in the X. T. which more strongly
than the fourth Gospel impresses the reader wits'
the notion of its unity and integrity. And yet it
does not appear to be written with such close ad-
herence to a preconceived plan as a western writer
would show in developing and illustrating some one
leading idea. The preface, the break at the end of
the twelfth chapter, and the supplementary chapter,
are divisions which will occur to every reader. The
ingenious synopsis of Bsngel and the thoughtful
one of Luthardt an worthy of attention. But none
is so elaborate and minute u that of Lamps, of
which the following is an abridgment: —
A. The Proloooe, 1. 1-18.
B. The History, i. 19-xx. SO.
a. Various events relating to our Lord's ministry,
narrated in connection with seven journeys, L 19-
xil. 60: —
1. First journey into Judaea and beginning of
his ministry, i. 19-ii. 13.
9. Second journey, at the Passover in the first
year of his ministry, ii. 13-iv. (The manifestation
of his glory in Jerusalem, ii. 13— ill. 81, and In the
journey back, iii. 93-iv.)
8. Third journey, in the second year of hi* mbv
istry, about the Passover, v.
4. Fourth journey, about the Passover, In tot
third year of his ministry, beyond Jordan, vi. (His
glory shown by the multiplication of the loaves, and
by bis walking on the sea, and by the discourses
with the Jews, his disciples and his Apostles. )
6. Fifth journey, six months before his death,
begun at the Feast of Tabernacles, vii.-x. 81. (Cir-
cumstances in which the journey was undertaken,
ril. 1-13 : five signs of his glory shown at Jerusalem,
vB. 14-x. 21.)
6. Sixth journey, about the Feast of Dedication,
x. 23-42. (His testimony in Solomon's porch, and
his departure beyond Jordan.)
7. Seventh journey in Judaea towards Bethany,
xl. 1-M. (The raising of Lazarus and its conse-
quences.)
8. Eighth Journey, before his last Passover, xl.
D5-x!i. (Plots of the Jews, his entry Into Jeru-
salem, and into the Temple, and the manifestation
of his glory there.)
*. History of the Death of Christ, xlll.-xi. 89.
1. Preparation for his Passion, liii.-xvii. (Last
Sapper, discourse to his disciples, his commendatory
prayer.)
8. The circumstances of his Passion and Death,
xriii., six. (His apprehension, trial, and cruet-
Digitized by
Google
1480 JOBN, OOSPKL OF
i. His Boumetion, nd the proofs of it, xx,
i-a>.
C Tint Coxclusiox, xx. 80-nd.: —
1. Scope of tlie foregoing history, xx. 30, 81.
8. Confirmation of the authority of the Evan-
gelist by addition*] historical bets, and by the
testimony of the elders of the Church, xxi. 1-84.
3. Keason of the termination of the history, xxi.
86.
Some portions of the Gospel have been regarded
by certain critics as interpolations. Luthardt dis-
Misses at considerable length the objections of
Paulus, Weisee, Schenkel, and Scbweizer to ch. xxi.,
rlii. 1-11, t. 3, ii. 1-18, ir. 44-54, vi. 1-26.* The
discussion of these passages belongs rather to a
Commentary than to a brief introduction. But as
the question as to ch. xxi. has an important bearing
on the history of the Gospel, a brief statement re-
specting it may not be out of place here.
Guerike (Einltittmg, p. 310) gives the following
lists of (1) those who have doubted, and (8) those
who have advocated its genuineness: (1) Grotius,
Le Clerc, Pfaff, Semler, Paulus, Gurlitt, Bertholdt,
Seyflarth, Liicke, De Wette, Schott; (8) K. Simon,
Lampe, Wetstein, Osiander, Micbaelis, Beck, Eich-
horn, Hug, Wegscheider, Handschke, Weber, Tho-
tuck, Scbener. The objections against the first
twenty-three verses of this chapter are founded
entirely on internal evidence. The principal objec-
tions as to alleged peculiarities of language are
« • A distinction should be made between these
leessawa. The genuineness of John v. 8 (or rather ▼.
4, with the last clause of rer. 8) and vlll. 1-11 (or more
accurately vli. 68-vili. 11) Is a question of textual
criticism, these verses being wanting In the oldest and
most Important manuscripts, and In other authorities.
They are accordingly regarded as interpolations or as
of very doubtful genuineness, not only by the writers
mentioned above, but by Grtaebach, Knapp, Schott.
Tlttmann, Thelle, Iaehmenn (John vli. 58 — vlll. 1-11
only), Tiacheixlorf, Tregelles, AlforJ, De Wette, Bruck-
ner, Meyer, Lucke, Tholuek, Olsheusen, Ncander,
Luthardt, Bmld, Baumletn, Bleek, Godot, Norton,
Porter, Davidson, Oreen, Scrivener, and many other
critics, except that some of these receive the last clause
of v. 8 as genuine. But there Is no external evidence
against the genuineness of the other passages referred
to. A.
o • This account of Bwald's view ts not entirely
correct. He regards the 21st chapter as Indeed pro-
ceeding substantially from the Apostle, but as betray-
ing here and there (as In w. 20, 24, 26), even more
than the main body of the Gospel, the hand of Mends
who aided him In committing his recollections t»
writing. (Die johan. Sc/irijlm, L 58 If.) The main
abject of the addition he supposes to have been to
correct the erroneous report referred to in ver. 28 re-
ipocting the exemption of the beloved disciple from
death.
That the two last verses of the 21st chapter (or
rather vor 25 and the last clause of ver. 24) have the
sir of an editorial note Is obvious. The extravagant
typerbuie In rer. 25, and the use of several words
era, If this ts the true reading, for t, mat ir, oV<")
tfe also foreign from the style of John. Perhaps there
Is no supposition respecting these verses more probable
than that of Mr. Norton, who observes : " According
to ancten' accounts, St. Jobs, wrote his Gospel at
Bahesur . . It Is not Improbable that, before his
Isath, Its circulation had been conflned to the mem-
bars of that church. Thence copies of It would be
aferwards obtained ; and the copy provided for tran-
rrrlntion wss, we may suppose, accompanied by the
■eons; attestation which we now Bod, given by the
iharrfa or toe «iden of the church, to their fall faith
JOHN, GOSPEL OF
completely answered in a note in Gnerike's Bants]
fatso, p. 310 [or NoUuL Jtagogik, 3» Ami IMS,
p. 888 f.], and are given up with one exception b]
De Wette. Other objections, though urged by
Lucke, are exceedingly trivial and arbitrary, e. «.
that the reference to the author in verse 80 ia un-
like the manner of St. John; that xx. 30, 31 would
have been placed at the end of xxi. by St John if
he had written both chapters; that the u e iinti w
descends to strangely minute circumstances, etc
The 85th verse and the latter half of the 94411
of ch. xxi. are generally received as an undisguised
addition, probably by the elders of the Fpheeisi
Church, where the Gospel was first published.
There ia an early tradition recorde d by the ran
tbor of the Synopsis of Scripture in Allisii— lie,
that this Gospel was written many years before the)
Apostle permitted its general circulation. Tata
met — rather improbable in itself — is rendered leas
so by the obviously supplementary character of the
letter part, or perhaps the whole of ch. xxi. Ewald
((Inch, da Volia /trati, vii. 217), less skeptical
herein than many of his countrymen, comes to the
conclusion that the first 80 chapters of this Gospel,
having been written by the Apostle, about A. D.
80, at the request, and with the help of his mora
advanced Christian friends, were not made pahne
till a abort time before his death, and that oh. xxL
was a later addition by his own hand.*
6. IMeraturt. — The principal Commentators
In the accounts which It contained, and by the ■
eluding remark made by the writer of this s
In his own person" (tfrnaiamus of Hu On avals, 8»
ed., vol. I. Add. Notes, p. xcvl. ; for a fuller dss i—tiai
comp. Oodet, Comm. ear r&xmg. d« SI. Jeea, M.
OH ft).
On the supposition that the Gospel is genuine, this
view of the last two verses removes all objections of
any real weight to the ascription of the remainder of
the chapter to the Apostle John. The weakness of meet
of thess objections is fully recognised even by Bans
(Die kanon. Kcangetien, p. 286 If.) ; and Credner, wbe
contends against the genuineness of the chapter, sdrnjaj
that « It exhibits almost all the peculiarities of John's
style " (.Bint, m tat N. T. I. 282). The points of def-
erence which hsve been urged sre sltogether Inshj
nincant In comparison with the striking agreement,
not merely In phraseology, but In manner, and ra the
structure and connection of sentences ; note especially
the absence of conjunctions, w. 8 (ter), 6, 10, 11, IS
(bis), 18, 16 (bis), 16 (ter), 17 (ter), 20, 82, and the
frequent nss of otV.
On the supposition, however, that the Gospel Is not
genuine, this Appendix presents a problem which
aeona to admit of no reasonable solution. What motive)
could there have been for adding such a supplement
to a spurious work after the middle of the eecood
century ? Was It needful, fifty years or more after
the Apostle's death, to correct a tab* report that It
was promised him that be should not die ? Or what
dogmatic purpose could this addition serve ? And how
is its minuteness of detail, and Its extraordinary agree-
ment In style with the rest of the Gospel to be ea>
plained! It may be said that it was designed b give
credit to the forged Gospel by a pretended attesteetou.
But wee the whole chapter needed for this ? And
what credit could a fictitious work of that period derive
from an ancmymmu testimony ? Hod such been toe
object, moreover, how strange that the Apostle John
should not be named as the author !
The only plausible explanation, then, of w. 24, M
sssms to be, that they are an attestation of the trust
worthiness of the Oispsl by those who first pnt It met
general circulation — companions and Meads of ess
to thess to whom It was see*
Digitized by
Google
JOHN, GOSPEL OF
in St John will be found in the following lbt:
(I) Origeo, in Opp. ed. 1759, It. 1-460- (S)
Chrysostom, in Opp. ed. 1728, riii. 1-530- (3)
Theodore of Mopsuestia and other*, in Corderii
Catena in Jomuum, 1630 ; [for Theodore, see
MJgne's Patrol. Graca, torn. IxtL , (3>) Cyril of
Alexandria, Opp. ed. Aubert, torn, iv., or Migne's
Patrol, torn, lxxiii., lxxiv. ; the poetical paraphraae
of Nonnus may also be noted, Migne, PatroL torn,
xliii.;] (4) Augustine, in Opp. ed. 1690, iii., put
9, 290-826; (5) Tbeophylact; (6. Euthymius
Zigabenns; (7) MaUonatus ; (8) Luther; (9) Cal-
Tin j (10) Grotius and others, in the Cntid Baeri ;
(II) Cornelius a Lapide; (19) Hammond; (13)
Lamps, Commentiiriiu txtgttioo-analytiaa in
Joannem [3 vol. Amst. 1794-98, and Bas. 1785-
17]; (14) Bengel; (15) Whitby; (16) Lflcke, Com-
mtninr Qb. da$ Etang. da Joham. 1890 [-34,
3« AnS. i rota. 1840-43]; (17) Obhausen, Vblu-
cher CommtnUir, 1834; (18) Meyer, JTritucV
emoet Commeniar; (19) Da Wette, Extgtt.
Handbuch z. N. T.; (30) Tholuck, Comm. s.
Evang. Johan. t (91) C. E. Luthardt, dm johtm-
nexscht Ewmgelium tuieh teiner EigmthUmUdikeit,
* vols., 1853-53.
Until very lately the English reader had no better
critical helps in the study of St. John's Gospel than
those which were provided for him by Hammond.
Lightfoot, and Whitby. He now has access through
the learned Commentaries of Canon Wordsworth
and Dean Alford to the interpretations and explana-
tions of the ancient Fathers, and several English
theologians, and to those of all the eminent German
critics.
The Commentaries of Chrysostom and Augustine
hate been translated into English in the Oxford
library of the Faliers [Chrysostom, toI. xxviii.,
xxxvi., Augustine, vol. xxix.] (Pxrker, 1848). Eng-
lish translations hare been published also of the
Commentaries of Bengel and Olshausen. And the
Rev. F. D. Maurice has published an original and
derout Commentary under the title of Ducouriti
m th« Gospel of St. John, 1857. W. T. B.
* Gesuimks ess. — Since the rise of the Tubingen
critical school, the question of the genuineness of
the fourth Gospel has been much discussed. The
opponents of the Johannean authorship are far
from being agreed among themselves respecting
the date whteh they assign to the book. Baur
placed it at about 160, Hilgenfeld at from 120 to
140, Scbenkel at from 110 to 190, and Renan in
his 13th ed. (Paris, 1867) before 100. The posi-
tion of the Tubingen school on this question is a
part of their general theory concerning the rise of
Catholic Christianity, which they attribute to the
gradual pacifying of the supposed antagonism of
the Jewish-Christian or Petrine, and Gentile-Chris-
tian or Pauline, branches of the Church. As the
mtralcated ; and tha only plausible account of the lint
28 Te rs es of Che chapter Is, that they are a supple-
mentary addition, which proceeded directly from the
pan, or substantially from the dictation, of the author
sf the net of the Gospel.
It should farther be noted that Ttaoheodorf, in the
Id edition of his Synoprti Rtxmgelua (1884), brackets
?er. 25 as spurious, chiefly on the ground of its omis-
sion In the Codex SlnalUcus a rWma manu. (The
part of Teschendorf i 8th critical edition of ths N. T.
wotelnlng the Gospel of John has not yst appeared.)
rbr Tens stands at present in the Codex BraaifTOS,
sat Tisoheodorf belteree that the color of tha Ins and
sight dlnVrwice In lbs bandwrUlag www that H est
JOHK, GOSPEL Of 1431
book of Act* was an earlier, so the temth Goafs*
was a later product of this compromising tendency.
The writer of it assumed the name of John in or-
der to give an Apostolic unction to his higher
theological platform, on which love takes the place
of faith, and the Jewish system is shown to be ful-
filled, and ao abolished, by the offering of Christ,
who is represented as the true Paschal lamb. The
history is artificially contrived as the symbolical
vestment of Ideas, such as the idea of unbelief cul-
minating in the crucifixion of the self-manifested
Christ, and the idea of faith as not real and gen-
uine so for as it rests on miracles. Kenan differs
from most of the German critics in receiving as
authentic much more of the narrative portion of
the Gospel. He conceives the work to hare been
composed by some disciple of the Evangelist John, '
who derived from the hitter much of his informa-
tion. In particular Kenan accepts as historical
the belief in the resurrection of Lazarus (which,
however, he holds to have been a counterfeit miracle,
the result of collusion), and much besides which
John records in connection with the closing scenes
of the life of Jesus.
We shall now review the principal arguments
which bear on the main question. That John spent
the latter part of his life, and died at an advanced
age, in Proconsular Asia, in particular at Kphesus,
is a wrll attested fact. Polycrates, bishop at Kph-
esus near the close of the second century, who had
become a Christian as early as 131, and seven of
whose kinsmen had been bishops or presbyters, says
that John died and was buried in that place (Euseb.
H. E. v. 34; cf. iii. 31). Irenasus, who was born
in Asia, says of those old presbyters, immediate
disciples of the Apostles, whom he had known,
that they had been personally conversant with John,
and that he had remained among them up to the
times of Trajan, whose reign was from 98 to 117.
(See Iran. «tfe>. liar. ii. 92, al. 89, § 5.) That
bis informants were mistaken on such a point a*
the duration of the Saviour's ministry does not
invalidate their testimony in regard to the duration
of John's life, about which they could not well be
mistaken. His Gospel, according to Irenteus,
Clement, and others, and the general belief, was
the last written of the four, and the tradition
placed its composition near the end of his life.
In support of this proposition, we have the tes-
timony of Jerome and Eusebius, both diligent
inquirers, and knowing how to discriminate between
books universally received and those which had been
questioned. In an argument which depends for its
force partly on an accumulation of particulars,
their suffrages are not without weight. We may
begin, however, with the indisputable fact that in
the hist quarter of the second century, the fourth
Gospel wss received in every part of Christendom
not proceed from the original scribe, bat was added
by a oontsmponry reviser of the manamripL On this
pahsogrephlcal question, however, Tngslhs differs
from blm. (See Tlsehendorfs N. T. Gract ex Sbutitico
Codict, pp. xxxxvttk, IxxtL) MS. 68 has been errans
ously cited as omitting the verse (see Scrivener's Full
Collation of Uu Cod. 8m., p. Ux., note). The scholia
of many M39., however, speak of It as regarded by
some ss an aaditton by a foreign hand ; and a schoUoa
to this effect, ascribed u one manuscript to Theodore
ofMopsuesua, Is given in Card. Hal's edition of the
Commentaries of this father (Jveeo Pair. AM. eft. 40T
or Mlgw's rami. lxvt. TBI ft). a.
Digitized by
Google
143* JOHN, GOSPEL OF
u the work of the Apostle John. The prominent
witneiues are Tertuilian in North Africa, Clement
ii> Alexandria, and Irenceus in Gaol. Tertuilian
in hie treatise againat Marcion, written in 207 or
806, appeals in behalf of the exclusive authority
of the lour canonical Gospels, to tradition coming
down from the Apostles — to historical evidence.
(Adv. Marc'um. iv. 3, 6.) Clement, an erudite
and travelled scholar, not only ascribed to the Four
Gospels exclusively canonical authority (Shim. iii.
13), but also, in his but work, the " Institutions,"
quoted by Eusebius (vi. 14), " gave a tradition con-
cerning the order of tbe Gospels which he bad re-
ceived from presbyters of more ancient times;"
that is, concerning the chronological order of their
toniposition. He became tbe bead of the Alexan-
drian school about the year 190. But the testi-
mony of Irenesua has the highest importance, and
is, in truth, when it is properly considered, of de-
vSsive weight on the main question. He was a
Greek, born in Asia Minor about 140. He after-
wards went to Lyons in Gaul, where be first held
tbe office of presbyter, and then, A. d. 178, that
of bishop; and was therefore acquainted with the
Church both in the East and the West He bad in
his youth known Polycarp, the immediate disciple
of John, and retained a vivid recollection of his
person and words. Irenteus not only testifies to
the universal acceptance of the fourth Gospel, but
he argues fancifully that there mutt be four, and
only four, as there are four winds, etc. This fan-
ciful analogy, so far from impairing the force of
his testimony, only serves to show how firmly
settled was his faith, and that of others, in the ex-
elusive authority of the canonical Gospels. (Adv.
Bar. iii. 1, $ 1, and iii. 11, § 8.) If the occa-
sional use of fanciful reasoning, or similar viola-
tions of logic, were to discredit a witness, nearly
all of the Fathers would be at once excluded from
court. If Irenaeus had, to any extent, derived his
belief in the Gospels from Ms reasoning, the objec-
tion to his testimony might have some solidity;
but such was not tbe fact The objection of Schol-
ten and others that he misdated the Apocalypse,
attributing it to the time of Domltian, does not
materially affect the value of bit statement on the
Kbit before us. It is impossible to believe that
metis could express himself in this way, in case
John's Gospel bad first made its appearance during
his lifetime, or shortly before. His relation to
Polycarp — not to speak of other Christians likewise
elder than himself — forbids the supposition, more-
over, that this Gospel was a fictitious product of
any part of the second century. Polycarp visited
Borne and conferred with Anicetus, about the year
160. Several years probably elapsed after this,
before he was put to death. But at the date of
that visit Irenteus had reached the age of 90.
That John's Gospel was universally received at
that time, might be safety inferred from what Ire-
nams a»ys in the passages referred to above, even
If there were no other proof In the case. Polycarp
mutt have been among the number of those who
accepted it as a genuine and authoritative Gospel.
Ircnams's testimony, considering his relation to
Polycarp and tbe length of Polycarp's life, affords
well-nigh as strong evidence in fevor of the Johan-
tean authorship at if we had the distinct and direct
ass e rtion of the feet from that very disciple of
John. The ample learning and critical spirit of
Orlgen, though his theological career is later than
that of tbe Fathers just named, give to hit ttttt-
JOHN. GOSPEL OF
mony to the universal reception of this Dobs.
much weight If he was not free from mistakes,
it should be remembered that an error on a topic
of engrossing interest and capital importance, and
lying in the direct line of his researches, was not
likely to be committed by him ; so that his judg-
ment or. the question before us goes beyond the
mere fact of tie reception of the Gospel by tbe
generation just before him. In the same category
with Clement, Irenaeus, and Tertuilian, is the Canon
of Muratori and the Pethito version, in both of
which the Gospel of John stands in its proper pise*.
Polycrates, too, in his letter to Victor (a. d. 196),
characterizes the Apostle John in words borrowed
from the Gospel (Euteb. v. 34). His own life, at
a Christian, began, as we have said, in 131, and
with that of his kinsmen, also officers of the Church,
covered the century. His home was at Epbetut,
the very spot where John died, and where the Gos-
pel, if be was the author of it, first appeared.
Looking about among the fragments of Christian
literature that have come down to us from the sec-
ond half of the second century, we meet with
1'atian, said to have been a pupil of Justin Martyr,
though after Justin's death he swerved from hit
teaching. It is conceded by Uaur and Zeller that
in the Oratio ad GVacut he quotes repeatedly from
the fourth Gospel (See cc. 13, 19, 6, 4.) In
this, as in similar instances, it is said by Scholten
and others, that since Tatian does not mention
the name of the author of tbe Gospel, we cannot
be certain that he referred it to John. But be
quotes as from an authoritative Scripture, and
there is not the slightest reason to suppose that he
differed from his contemporaries on the question,
who was its author. This work was written not
far from A. i>. 170. He also composed a sort of
exegetical harmony on the basis of our four Gos-
pels. Eusebius says (//. E. iv. 39), that " having
formed a certain body or collection of Gospels, 1
know not how, he has given this the title Dinttme-
roa, that is, the Gospel by tbe Four, or the Gospel
formed of the Four, which is in the possession of
some even now." From his manner of speaking, it
would seem that Eusebius had not seen the book.
But, at the beginning of tbe fifth century, Tbeod-
oret tells us that be had found two hundred copies
of Tatian's work in circulation, and had taken
them away, substituting for (hem the four Gospels.
Theodoret adds that the genealogies and the descent
from David were left out of Tatian's work. (Ha-
ret Ftii. 1. 30.) We hare, then, the fact from
Eusebius, that Tctian named his book Dlalrntron,
and the fact from Theodoret, that he found it in
use among Catholic Christiana, in the room of the
Gospels. These facta, together with the known
use of the fourth Gospel by Tatian, at seen In hit
other work, would justify the conclusion that thit
Gospel was one of the four st the basis of the Dia-
teutron. But an early Syriac translation of thit
work, began, according to Bar Salibi, with the
opening words of the Gospel of John : •» In the be-
ginning was the Wad." If the IHnlentron was
occasionally confounded by Syrians with the Har-
mony of Ammonius, this was not done by Bar
Salibi, who distinguishes the two works. The ob
jeotions of Scholten (Die Sltetten Zeugni—e, etc
p. 96 IT.), which are partly repeated by Davidson
(introduction to the New Teitament (1868), p. 89J
ff.), are aufficiently met by the remarks of Week
and. by the observations of Riggenbach (Die Ztmp
mate Jir dot Ev. Jokatm. etc., p. 47 ff). The
Digitized by
Google
JOHN, GOSPiSL OF
•philus, who became bishop of Antioeh in 189, in
?» work Ad Autolycum describes John's Gospel
u a part of the Holy Scriptures, and John himself
ss a writer guided by the Holy Spirit (ii. S3) In
addition to thia, Jerome states that Theophihu
composed a commentary upon the Gospels, in which
be handled their contents synoptieally: "quatuor
Erangaustorum in unum opus dicta- oompingens."
(De nit-it ill c. 95, and Ep. 161. Of. Bleek, EM.,
p. 330.) A contemporary of Theophilus is Athe-
nagoras. His acquaintance with the Prologue of
John's Gospel may be inferred with a high degree
of probability from bis frequent designation of
Christ as the Word. '• Through him," be says,
"all things were made, the Father and Son being
one; and the Son being in the Father, and the
Father in the Son," — language obriously founded
en John i. 3, x. 30, 38, xir. 11. (SuppL pro Chrit-
tionit, c. 10.) Another contemporary of Theoph-
ilus, ApoUinaris, bishop of Hierapolis in Phrygia,
in a fragment found in the Paschal Chronicle, re-
fers to a circumstance which is mentioned only in
John xix- 34; and in another passage clearly im-
plies the existence and authority of the fourth
Gospel (CAron. Patch., pp. 13, 14, ed. Dindorf,
or Kouth, Rtluf. Sacra, I 160, 161, 3d ed. See,
also, Meyer, EM. in d. Evang. J oh.). There ap-
pears to be no sufficient reason for questioning the
genuineness of these fragments, as is done by
Lardner, Wonts, ii. 315, and Neander, Ch. Hi*, i.
298, n. 2, Torrey's transl. (See, on this point,
Schneider, Aechthat da joham. Evang., 1854.)
The fourth Gospel was recognised by Justin
Martyr as an authoritative Scripture. He was born
iSout the year 89, and the date of his death was not
far from 160. He refers, in different places, to " the
Kecords or Memoirs — t4 awouriiuorsvuaTa — by
the Apostles and their followers " or companions,
which, as he observes, " are called Gospels " (Apol
i. 67 ; Dial. c. Tryph. c 103 ; Apol. I 66).
Twice he uses to tvayytKioy , as the later Fathers
often do, to denote the Gospels collectively (DiaL
c. Tryph. 10, 100). These Gospels are quoted as
authentic and recognized sources of knowledge in
respect to the Saviour's life and teaching; it is de-
clared that they are read on Sundays in the Chris-
tian assemblies where " all who live in cities or in
sountry districts " meet for worship, and like the
a • For example. Jeremy Taylor quotes the passage
mm: " Unless a man be born of water and the Holy
spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of Juaven " ( Workt,
.1. 340. ed. Heber, Load. 1828). A.
» • Clement of Alexandria ( Cohan, ad Otnt. e. 9,
-■PP- p. 69, ed. Potter) has apparently confused the
ssssajes John 111. 5 and Matt xvlli. 8 In a manner
dmilar to that of Justin. The two principal devia-
tions of Justin from toe text of John — the use of
arayrvpoM for ytyyam, and 0<ur&«ia w ovpeaw
(or (loo-, t. s«o5 — are both found in Iranaras, who
qnotas the passage thus: tor /iij m amytwrtfi 4V
SSoTov vol trvrifiaroi , ov pi) tur*\*wrrreu tic i^v fiairiX-
w ii> ovpamv (Fragm. xxxv. ed. Sclera). So also
la Bambtus : ia* ni tk avaynnnfly i( v&aroc ml vwij-
jmrot, ov hi eiWA0n cU ttiv fitur. mv owp a ss W (Cbntm.
in Is. L 16, 17, Opp. vl. 98e ed. Hlgne). 'Araytwia
In ver. 5 Is also the reading of the Old Latin and Vnl-
jptte ver. Ions {rtnalua fturit), and occurs In Athaoasius
'De In-arn. c. 14), Ephrem Syrns (De Pom. Opp. III.
188), and Cbrysostom (Horn, in 1 Cor. xv. 29). The
reading 0aWAcut iw •wpavwv Is not only found In
Ilea, and Kuaeb. as above (see also lose), t'a It. ni.
L, 3). but also in LtlppotyPis (quoting fron. the Doeetss).
he apuasil • Vmstitutlonr, Origan (Lat. Int.) Bphran.
JOHN, GOSPEL OV 1438
writings of the O. T. prophets serve as the founda-
tion of exhortations to the people (Apol i. 67).
Nearly all of Justin's numerous allusions to the
sayings of Christ and events of his life correspond
to passages in our canonical Gospels. rAere is is*
citation from tk* Mentoirt, which it not found m
the canonical Gotpelt; for there is no such refer-
ence either in c 108 or e. 88 of the DiaL e. TVjp*.
(See Westcott, Cation of the N. T. 3d ed., p. 137
f.) Justin may have been acquainted with the
Gospel of the Hebrews; but even this cannot be
established. That it formed one of the authorita-
tive memoirs of which he speaks, is extremely Im-
probable. Having attained to such an authority,
how could it be thrown out and discarded without
an audible word of opposition ? How oould this
be done, when ireuaws had already reached his
manhood ? — for he had attained to this age before
Justin died. In the long list of passages collected
by Semisnh (Dmhoirdigheiten da liartynn
Juttinut) and by other writers, there are soma
which are obviously taken from the fourth Gospel.
One of these is the passage relative to John the
Baptist (Dial, c Tryph. c 88), which is from
John i. 20, 33. Another is the passage on regen-
eration (Apol i. 61) from John iii. 8-5. The oc-
currence of this passage respecting regeneration in
the Pseudo-Clementine Homilies (Horn. xi. 26),
with the same deviations from John that are found
in Justin's quotation, has been made an argument
to prove that both writers must have taken it from
some other Gospel — the Gospel of the Hebrews.
But the addition to the passage in the Homilies,
and the omission of the part concerning the im-
possibility of a second physical birth, — pointa of
difference between Justin and the Homilies, — an
quite ss marked as the points of resemblance, which
may be an accidental coincidence. The deviations
in Justin's citation from the original in John an
chiefly due to the confusion of the phraseology of
this passage with that of Matt, xviii. 8 — than which
nothing was more natural. Similar inaocuraciea,
and from a similar cause, in quoting John iii. 3 or
5, are not uncommon now." That Justin uses tut
compound word avayrvew, is because he had
found occasion to use the same verb just before in
the context, and because this had become the cur-
rent term to designate regeneration.*
Syrns, Chrysostom (at least 6 times), Basil of Selencla
(Oral, xxvili. 88), Pseudo-Atbanaslus (Qxautumei ad
Antiochum, o. 101), and Tbeodomt ( Quatl. in Hum. 85) i
in Tertulliao, Jerome, Pbilastrios, Augustine, and
other Latin fathers ; and In the Codex Slnalticus with
two other Qreek manuscripts, and Is even adopted as
genuine by Tisehendorf in the 2d ed. of his Svnopvt
Ecangetita (1884). Chrysostom in his Homilies on
John 111. quotes the verse 8 tunes with the res dug
pair, r. tooi (Opp. vlU. 148u, 148d, ed. Montf.), and 8
times with the reading par. t. evp. ( Opp. Till. 1481s
144s, see also Opp. Iv. 68W, xl. 259*). These (bets
show how natural such variations were, and how little
ground they afford for the supposition that Justin de-
rived the passage In question from some other source
than the Gospel of John. The change from the In-
definite singular to the definite plural Is made in John
Itself In the immediate context (ver. 7): "Marvel not
that I said unto thee, ye must be born again."
The length of this note may be partly excused by
the fcef that most of the psamgas of the fathers here
ra ft ered to in Illn-vatton of the variations from the
common, text In Justin's quotation do not appear Is
haw been noticed in any critical edition of the area
Digitized by
Google
143 i JOHN, GOSPEL OF
Ba'ir, in on* place, adduces John til. 4 a* an
Instance of the fictitious Mcription to the Jem,
M the part of the author of thli Gospel, of incred-
ible misunderstandings of the words of Jesus. If
thia be ao, surely Juatin muat be indebted to this
Goapel for the passage. Anxioua to avoid thia
conclusion, and apparently forgetting what he had
said before, Baur in another paaaage off the tame
work affirms that thia same expression is borrowed
alike by the author of John and by Justin from
the Gospel of the Hebrews! (See Baur'a Kanon.
Evang. pp. 890, 800, compared with pp. 358, 369.)
There were two or three other citations, however,
in the Homilies, in which it was claimed that the
same deviations are found as in corresponding
dtttiona in Juatin. But if this drcumstanee lent
any plausibility to the pretense that these passages
in Justin were drawn from some other document
than the canonical John, thia plausibility vaniahed
and the question was really set at rest by the pub-
lication of Dressel's edition of the Homilies. This
edition gives the concluding portion, not found in
Cotelerius, and we are thus furnished (Horn. lii.
82; comp. John ix 2, 8) with an undented and
undeniable quotation from John. Thia makes it
evident that Horn. iii. 52 ia a citation from John
x. 9, 87, and also removes all doubt aa to the source
whence the quotation of John iii. 8-6 was derived.
The similarity of the Homilies to Justin, in the
few quotations referred to above, ia probably acci-
dental. If not, it simply proves that Juatin was
in the hands of their author. Thia may eaaily be
supposed. The date of the Homilies is in the
neighborhood of 170. (See, on these points, Meyer,
EM. p. 10; Week, p. 828; Semiach, p. 193 ff.)
The objections of the skeptical critics, drawn from
Justin's habit of quoting ad maw, and from bis
not naming the authors of the Memoirs, an with-
out force, as all scholars must see. His manner
of citation was not unusual, and be was writing to
heathen who knew nothing of the Evangelist*.
The supposition that Justin borrowed the passages,
to which we hare referred, from the apocryphal
Goapel of Peter, which Hilgenfeld and others have
advocated, hardly deserves a refutation. It ia sup-
ported partly by the misinterpreted passage in
Truph. 108 (aae Otto's note, ad foe), and partly
by conjectures respecting this apocryphal book, for
which there is no historical warrant.
Justin's doctrine of the Logos and of the Incar-
nation must have been derived from some author-
itative source, and this could only be the fourth
Gospel. In one passage {Dial. c Tryph. 105), he
iirectly appeals for the truth of the Incarnation,
' that Christ became man by the Virgin," to the
Memxrs. Scbolten baa labored to prove that a
great diversity exists between Justin's conception
of the Logos and that which ia found in the Gos-
pel; but there is no greater difference than might
yurily exist between an author and a somewhat in-
exact theological interpreter.
That J'utin used our four Gospels and desig-
jates tone aa the Memoirs, Norton has cogently
rgutd (6'en. off the Ooepth, i. 237-339).
Papias, whom Ireneus calls " an ancient man —
SX«"o* artip (Etutb. iii. 39) — had, according to
9 same Father, heard the Apostle John. Euse-
tins supposes that Ireneus is mistaken in thia, and
that it was the Presbyter John whom Papias per-
sonally knew. This, however, Is doubtful; and the
•try existence of such a personage as the l'resbyter
John, in distinction from the Apostle of the same
JOHN, GOSPEL, OF
name, la an open question. However this may be
Eusebius states that Papias " made use of testi-
monies from the First Epistle of John." Whether
he quoted from the Gospel or not, Eusebius does
not state. If it were shown that he did not do ao
his silence could not he turned into an argument
against its genuineness, as we do not know the par-
ticular end hM had in view in m^lring nia fitfltfons
But the First Epistle wsa written by the author of
the Gospel. (Sea De Wette, EM. in dot N. Tee-
lament, § 177 o.) So that the testimony of P*»
pias to the First Epistle ia likewise a testimony to
the genuineness of the Goapel.
Turning to the Apostolic Fathers, we find not a
few expressions, especially in the Ignatian EpWi—
which remind ua of passages peculiar to John. In
one liMaamw, such a reference can scarcely be
avoided. Pol) carp, in his Epistle to the Philip-
piane, says: Tlas yip if tw pb ouoXoyjj 'Ino-oiia 1
XpMTea' fV croon AnAvScVtu irrlxpurrit icri
(c. 7). It is much more probable that thia thought
was taken from 1 John iv. 3, than that it was de-
rived from any other source. Especially ia this
seen to be the case, when it ia remembered that
l'olycarp was a diaoiple of John. John xxi. 84,
coming from another hand than that of the »*,tl^p
of the Gospel, ia also a testimony to its genuineness.
The Artemonites, the party of Unitarians at Rome
near the end of the second century, did not think
of disputing the canonical authority of the fourth
Gospel. Marcion was acquainted with it, but re
jected it for the reason that he did not acknowl
edge any Apostles but Paul (Tertullian, Adv. Marc
iv. 3, 2, 6. De Curne Chritli, 3. For other pas-
sages to the same effect from Irenaeus and Tertul-
lian, see De Wette, EM. in d. N. T. § 78 c,
Anm. d.) The Valentinian Gnostics admitted the
genuineness of this Gospel, and used it much
(Irenaeus, Adv. liar. iii. 11, § 7). Ptolemeua, a
follower of Valentine's doctrine, explicitly acknowl-
edges this Gospel (EpitL ad Fbram, e. 1, ap.
Epiph. Har. xxxiiL 3. See Grabe, SpidUgmm,
ii. 70, 2d ed., or Stieren's Irenanis, i. 981). Herae-
leon, another follower, wrote a commentary on it,
which Origen frequently quotes (Grabe, Spicilegium,
vol. ii., and Stieren's ed. of Irenaeus, i. 938-971)
Scbolten has attempted to abow that Heracleon was
late in the century. One of hia argument*, that
Irenaeus does not mention him, is met by Tiachen-
dorf, who produces from Irenaeus a paaaage In which
he is named in connection with I'tolemama. The
use of the fourth Goapel by leading followers of
Valentinus, and the need they have to apply a
perverse interpretation to the statements of the
Goapel, render it probable that their master also
acknowledged the Gospel aa genuine. Thia is im-
plied by Tertullian (De Pnacript. Barret, c. 38).
" If Valentine," aaya Tertullian, " appears (videtur)
to make use of the entire instrument " — that ia,
the four Gospels, — "be has done violence to th»
truth," etc. The videtur may be the reluctant con-
cession of an adversary, but the word ia frequently
used by Tertullian in the sense, to be teen, to bt
ffuUy apparent (comp. Tert. adv. Prax. e. 96, 89,
adv. Marc, iv. 2; de Oral. c. 21; ApoL, e. 19;
Adv. Jud. c. 6, quoted from Isaiah i. 12). Such
ia probably its meaning here. But Hippolyttn,
explaining the tenet* of Valentine, writes as fol-
lows: "All tin prophet* and the law spoke from
the Demiurg, a foolish god, he aaya — fools, know-
ing nothing. On this account it is, he says, thai
the Sari jm* says: < AH that came before me an
Digitized by
Google
JOHN, GOSPEL OF
•fain a and robbers' (HippoL RefuL
Hetret. vi 38). The passage is obviously from
John x. 8. It is pretended that the a>i»W — be
■it* — refers not to Valentine, but to some un-
known author among his disciples. But this, though
possible, is surely much leas probable than the sup-
position that he refers to a work of Valentine him
self- Hippolvtiw distinguishes the various branches
of the Valentinian sect and the phases of opinion
that respectively belong to them. In the place
referred to, he is speaking of the founder of the
sect himself. A similar remark is to be made of
Basilides and of the passages of Hippolytus relating
to his use of John (Ref. Hast. rii. 22, 27). The
early date of Basilides is shown by various proofs.
(See Hofstede de Groot, Batilidei ale enter Zeuge,
etc., Leipzig, 1868.) The work of Basilides " on
the Gotpei" (Euaeb. H. E. ir. ?) was not improb-
ably a commentary on the four Gospels (see Norton,
Gem. of the Gospel*, Hi. 338). How widely ex-
tended was the knowledge and use of the fourth
Gospel among the heretics of the second century,
Is further illustrated by the numerous quotations
that were made from it hy the Ophites or Naasseni,
and the Persia?, which are preserved by Hippolytus
(v. 7, 8, 9, 12, 16, 17). The opposition of the
insignificant party of the Alogi is an argument for,
rather than against, the genuineness of the Gospel.
(Iran. iii. 11, § 9). We assume, what is most
probable, that the party referred to by Irenanis is
the same which Kpiphanius designates by this name.
Their opposition shows the general acceptance of
the Gospel not long after tbe middle of the second
century. Moreover, they attributed the Gospel to
Oerinthna, a contemporary of John, — a testimony
to its age. They rejected, also, the Apocalypse,
vhieh even the Tubingen school holds to be the
work of John. (See, on the character of the Alogi,
Schneider, p. 38 f.) Celsus refers to circumstances
in the Evangelical history which are recorded only
in John's Gospel. (For the passages, see Lardner,
Work*, vii. 220, 221, 239.)
Tbe great doctrinal battle of the Church in the
second century was with Gnosticism. The strug-
gle began early. Tbe germs of it are discovered
in the Apostolic age. At the middle of the second
•entury, the conflict with these elaborate systems
of error was raging. We find that the Valentinians,
the Baai'idians, the Marcionitea (followers either
v( Marcus or of Marcion) are denounced as warmly
hy Justin Martyr as by Irenanis sod bis contem-
poraries. (DinL e. Tryph. c. 32). By both of the
parties in this wide-spread conflict, by the Gnostics
and by the Church theologians, the fourth Gospel
is accepted as the work of John, without a lisp of
opposition or of doubt. In that distracted period,
with what incredible skill must an anonymous coun-
terfeiter have proceeded, to be able to frame a sys-
tem which should not immediately excite hostility
and cause his false pretensions to be challenged !
The particular testimonies to the recognition of
the fourth Gospel in the second century simply
afford a glimpse of the universal, undisputed tradi-
tion on which that acceptance rested. From this
point of view their significance and weight must
be estimated. The Church of the second century
was so situated that it could not be deceived on a
;uestion of this momentous nature. It was a great
community, all of whose members were deeply in-
terested in too life of the Lord for whom they were
naking so great sacrifices, and wnich comnrised
within its pals men of literary cultivation and cn«- ■
sal lodgment.
JOHN, GOSPEL OF I486
Id considering the Internal Evidence for the
genuineness of the fourth Gospel, we notice tat
following points: —
1. The Gospel claims to be the work of the
Apostle John, and the manner of this claim is a
testimony to its truth. The author declares him-
self an eye-witness of the transactions recorded
(i. 14, of. 1 John i. 1-3, iv. 14; John xix. 35; com-
pare also xxi. 24). He is distinguished, from Peter
(xiii. 24, xx. 2 ff., xxi. 7, 20 ff.). He omits to
attach the name i fjcrrrurr^s to John the Baptist,
though be attaches some explanation in the case
of Peter and of Judas. This would be natural for
John the EvanyelUt, himself a disciple of the Bap-
tist It is held by Baur that the design of the
writer is to lead the reader to the inference that
John is the author. But the modest, indirect style
in which the authorship is made known is wholly
unlike the manner of apocryphal writings.
2. The Johannean authorship is confirmed by
the graphic character of the narrative, the many
touches characteristic of an eye-witness, and by
other indications of an immediate knowledge, on
the part of the writer, of the things he relates. (Sew
John i. 35, xiii. 21, xviii. 15, xix- 26, 27, 84, 35
and the whole chapter, xx. 3-8, 24-29, xiii. 9, etc.)
There are many passages which show that the
author wrote from an interest in the story as such.
(See Bruckner's ed. of De Wette's Comm. Hint. p.
xv.) Among these are the allusions to Nicodemus
(John iii. 2; vii. 50; xix. 39); also the particular
dates attached to occurrences, as in ii. 13 ; iv. 6,
40, 43; v. 1; vi. 4, 22; vii. 2, 14; xii. 1, 12; xviii.
27 ff.; xix. 14. See also John xviii. 10, iii. 23;
v. 2; xii. 21; iii. 24; i. 45, 46; vi. 42, comp. i.
46; vi. 67 (" the twelve "); xi. 16, xx. 24, xxi. 2
(where Didymut is connected with the name of
Thomas). In c xi. 2, the Evangelist assumes that
an occurrence is known, which he does not himself
record until later (xii. 3).
3. The general structure and content* of the
fourth Gospel, considered aa a biography of Christ,
are a convincing argument for its historical truth
and genuineness. In regard to the plan of Christ's
life, this Gospel, while it is not contradicted by the
Synoptists, presents a very different conception from
that which they themselves would suggest. This
is true of the duration and of the theatre of the
Ijord's ministry. But, in the first place, this vary-
ing conception is one which a faltariut would not
venture upon ; and, in the second place, it is one
which accords with probability, and is even cor-
roborated incidentally by the Synoptists themselves.
(1.) It is probable that Christ would make mors
journeys to Jerusalem and teach more there than
the Synoptists relate of him. The Synoptists coo-
firm this view (Matt, xxvii. 57 ff. ; Luke xxiii. 60
ff. ; Mark xv. 43 ff. ; also, Luke xiii. 34 ff., and
Matt, xxiii. 37 ff. — the Saviour's lament over Jeru-
salem, which no conjectures of Strauss can make
to imply anything less than repeated and oontinued
labors on the part of Christ for the conversion of
tbe inhabitants of that city). The fourth Gospel
gives the clearest and most natural account of the
growing hostility of the Jews, and of the way in
which the catastrophe was at length brought on.
So strongly is Kenan im pr essed by this character-
istic of the Gospel, that be feels obliged to assume
a pretended miracle in the case of I-axaxus, which
imposed upon the people and awakened a feeling
whljh the Jewish Rulers felt obliged to most by s
snwnary and violent measure. (2.) In oorapi
Digitized by
Google
1436 JOHN, GOSPEL OF
tint fourth Gospel, at to its contents, with the other
three, we have to DOtice the apparent discrepancy
upon the date of the crucifixion, and alao the
i*aschal controversies of the second century, in
their bearing upon this point of chronology. The
Synoptists appear to place the Lord's Supper on
the evening when the Jews ate the Passover-meal,
the 14th Nisan (or, according to the Jewish reek-
eniui?, the 15th); John, on the evening before.
Dr. E. Kobinson, Tfaoluck, Norton, Basmlein,
Kiggenbach, and others believe themselves able to
harmonize tile statements of John with those of the
other three. (See the question very fully discussed
In Andrews's Lift of our Lord, p. 426 ff.) If they
are successful in this, there is no discrepancy to be
explained. Assuming here, with most of the later
critics, that there is a real difference, Bleek draws
a strong argument in favor of the fourth Gospel.
No sufficient motive can be assigned why ifakarua
should deviate from the accepted view on this sub-
ject. The probability that the fourth Gospel is
correct, is heightened by circumstances incidentally
brought forward by the Synoptists themselves (Matt.
xxvi. fi, xxvii. 69 ff. ; Hark xv. 42, 46; Luke xxiii.
50). See EUicott, life of Christ (Ainer. ed.), p.
393, n. 3.
The so-called Quartodeeimans of Asia Minor
observed a festival on the 14th of Nisan, on what-
ever day of the week it might occur. Roman and
other Christians kept up, on the contrary, the pre-
paratory last until Easter Sunday. Hence the dis-
pute on the occasion of Polycarp's visit to Anicetus,
about the year 160; then ten years later, in which
Claudius Apollinaris, bishop of Hierapolis, and Me-
lito of Sardis took part; and especially at the end
of the second century, when Victor of Borne was
rebuked by Irenseus for his Intolerance. The Asia
Minor bishops, in these controversies, appealed to
the authority of the Apostle John, who had lived
in the midst of them. But what did the Quarto-
deeimans commemorate on the 14th of Nisan?
The Tubingen critics ssy, the Last Supper; and
Infer that John could not have written the Gospel
that bean his name. But, to say the least, it is
equally probable that the Quartodeeimans com-
memorated the crucifixion of Jesus, the true pass-
over-lamb ; or that the theory of Bleek is correct,
that their festival was originally the Jewish Pass-
over, which Jewish Christians continued to observe,
which took on naturally an association with the
Last Supper, and with which John djd not inter-
fere. We should add that not improbably Apol-
Unaria was himself a Quartodeciman, and was
opposing a Judaizing faction of the patty, who dis-
sented from their common view. We do not find
that Victor, the Roman opponent of Polycrates,
appealed to the fourth Gospel, although he must
have been familiar with it; and the course taken
by the disputants on both sides at the end of the
second century, shows that if it was written with
the design which the negative critics affirm, it foiled
of its end. Had the Quartodeeimans been called
upon to receive a new Gospel, purporting to be
from John, of which they had not before heard,
sr.i which was partly designed to destroy the fbun-
lation of their favorite observance, would they not
hats promptly rejected such a document, or, at
least, called in question Its genuineness?
4. The discourses of Christ in the fourth Gos-
pel have been used as an argument against its
apostolic origin But the contrast between them
ex*l the towhinip of Christ recorded by the Synop-
JOHN, GOSPEL, OF
lists may be explained on the supposition that cask
of the disciples apprehended Jesus from his owa
point of view, according to the measure of his owa
individuality. Jesus did not confine himself in
his teaching to gnomes and parables (Matt. xiil. 10
ff.). The Synoptists occasionally report sayings
which an strikingly in the Johannean style (Matt
xL 25, eomp. Luke xL 31). On the contrary, tits
aphoristic style is met with in the reports of the
fourth Gospel (John xii. 24, 26; xiii. 16, 30). Es-
sentially the same conception of Christ is found in
the fourth Gospel ss in the other three (Matt xi.
27; also Matt xxU. 41 ff. compared with Mark xii.
35 ff., and Luke xx. 41 ff.). See particularly on
this point, Row's Jena of At JEnmgeMtu, London,
1868, p. 317 ff. The resemblance between the style
of the discourses and of the narrative portion of the
book is accounted for, if we suppose that the teach-
ings of Jesus were fully assimilated and freshly re-
produced by the Evangelist, after the lapse of a con-
siderable period of time. Here and there, in tin
discourses, an incidental expressions which mark
the fidelity of the Evangelist, ss John xiv. 31. The
interpretations affixed to sayings of Christ are an
argument in the same direction (John ii. 19; xii. 33).
5. The Hellenic culture and the theological point
of view of the author of the fourth Gospel an
made an objection to the Johannean authorship.
The author's mode of speaking of the Jews (ii. 6,
13; Ui. 1; v. 1; vi. 4; vii. 3; xi. 55) is accounted
for by the fact that the Gospel wss written late in
the apostolic age, and by a writer who was himself
outside of Palestine, among Gentiles and Gentik
Christians. For the special proofs that the writer
was of Jewish and Palestinian extraction, see Bleek,
EM. p. 307 f. The probability is that " Sychar " was
the name of a town distinct from Sichem, though
near it. That the writer did not misplace Beth-
any where Lazarus dwelt, is demonstrated by John
xL 18. The book indicates no greater acquaintance
with the Greek culture than John, from the cir-
cumstances of his early life and his long residence
in Asia, may watt be supposed to have gained.
The Christology of the fourth Gospel, especially the
use of the term Logot, constitutes no valid objec-
tion to its genuineness. Even if this term wss
taken up by John from the current speculations of
the time, he simply adopted a fit vehicle for convey-
ing his conception of the Son in his relation to the
Father- After the first few verses, which define the
term, we bear no more of the Logos. No allusion
to the Logos is introduced into the report of the
discourses of Christ The free and liberal spirit
of the fourth Gospel towards the Gentiles would be
natural to the Apostle at the time, and under the
circumstances, in which his work was composed.
The objection of the Tubingen school, drawn from
this characteristic of the Gospel, rests also upon
their untenable and false assumption of a radical
antagonism between the original Apostles and Paul
The differences between the Apocalypse and the
Gospel, in regard to style and contents, have been
much urged by the opponents of the genuineness
of the latter. But a long interval elapsed between
the composition of the two books. The state c
the authcr's mind and feeling in the two cases was
widely different And Baur himself regards ths
Gospel as so for resembling the Apocalypse that
the former Is a general transmutation or spiritual
[ration of the latter. If the community of as
tborship between the two works were disproved,
the weight of evidence woulc be in favor of ths
Digitized by
Google
JOHN, GOSPEL OF
psraineneaa of the Gospel. Bat the difficulty of
nippoang * common author has been greatly mag-
nified. See Gieeder, K. G. bk. i. J 127, n. 8.
The special theory of the Tubingen school in
reference to the ohincter and aim of the fourth
Gospel is only sustained by an artificial and inde-
fensible exegesis of its contents. On this branch
of the subject, we may refer to the acute and can-
did criticisms of Bruckner in his edition of De
Wette's Commentary on the Gospel.
On the whole, the external evidenoe for the gen-
uineness of this book is strong and unanswerable;
and the proofs derived from its internal character-
istics, notwithstanding minor difficulties, are equally
convincing. They who consider a miracle to be
something impossible, and therefore utterly incred-
ible, will of course deny that the book had an
Apostle for its author. But those who approach
the inquiry with minds free from this unphilosoph-
ical bias, may reasonably rest with confidence in
the opposite conclusion. O. P. F.
•Litkbaturb It will be convenient to ar-
range the more recent literature relating to the
Gospel of John under several beads.
1. enuinenai and Credibility. — In addition
to the works referred to above, and under the art.
Gospels, p. 969 ff., the following may be noticed.
Against the genuineness: Bruno Bauer, Kritik
d. evang. Geieh. d. Johanna, Bremen, 1840; Kritik
d. Erangelien, Th. i., Berl. 1860. Schwegler, Der
MonUmumm, Tub. 1811, pp. 183-416; Dai nach-
tifxmt. ZeUalter, Tub. 1846, ii. 846-374. F. C.
Baur, tfber d. Cump. n. d. Chamber d. johan.
Evangetitunt, three articles in Zeller's TheoL Jahrb.
far 1844, republished, substantially, in his KrU.
Untemchungen do. d. kanon. Evangetien, Tub.
1847, an " epoch-making work," as the Germans
say; sea also his articles in the TheoL Jahrb. 1847,
pp. 89-136 (against Bksek); 1848, pp. 964-286
(Paschal question); 1854, pp. 196-387 (against
Luthardt, Delitcsch, Bruckner, Uase); 1867, pp.
309-267 (against Luthardt and Steitc); Ail Chrit-
tenthum n. s. w. der drei ertten Jahrhunderte,
Tub. 1853, 2. Aufl. 1860, pp. 146-173, a compre-
hensive summary; An Herrn Dr. Karl Bait,
Beanuoortmtj, u. s. w. Tub. 1866, pp. 5-70; Die
T ihinger SchuU, Tub. 1859, 2« Aufl, 1860, pp. 85-
171 (against Weisse, Weixaiicker, Ewald). Zeller, Die
Jhmeren Zeugniue fio. oVij Dentin «. d. Urtprung
d. vierten Ev., in the TheoL Jahrb. 1845, pp. 679-
666; Einige voters Bemerkungen, ibid. 1847, pp.
136-174; and on the Gnostic quotations in Hip-
polytus, ibid. 1868, pp. 144-161. Kiistlin, Die
pteudonyme LiUernlur d. Sitaten Kirche, in the
TheoL Jahrb. 1861, pp. 149-331, cap. p. 183 ff.
Hilgenfeld, One Evang. u. die Britfe johamu,
Haue, 1849 (escribes to it a Gnostic character);
Die Evangetien, Leips. 1854; Dai Urchriitenthum,
Jena, 1856; Der Kanon u. die KriL d. N. T.,
Halle, 1863, p. 318 ff.; also articles in the TheoL
Jahrb. 1857, pp. 498-533, Die johan. Evangetien-
frage ; and in his Zeitichr. f. aim. TheoL 1869,
pp. 381-348, 383-448, Dai Johamei-Evang. u.
wim gegenwartigen Auffatmngen ; ibid. 1865, pp.
16-103 (review of Aberle); pp. 196-313 (review
sf Weisaacker); p. 339 ff. (review of Tisehendorf);
*id, 1866, p. 118 ff (against Paul); ibid. 1867, p.
13ff. (against Teschendorf again); p 179 ff. (against
Riggenbach); ibid. 1868, p. 313 ff. (notice of
Sofrtede de Groot, Kehn, and ScboHen). VoUmar,
KeMgion Jen, Lsipc. 1867, pp. 488-176; Urtprung
t Evangekm, Zurich, 1866, p. 91 ff h
JOHN, GOSPEL OF 148?
TbehenJtTf); also arts, in rAeoi Jahrb. 1854, p
446 ff, aad Zeitichr. f. win. TheoL 1860, p. 3M
ff (J. T. Tobler) Die Evangelien/rage in Allge-
meinen u. d. Johamtiifrage irubetondere, Zurich,
1868, ascribes the Gospel to Apollo* I comp. HuV
genfeld, in his Zeitichr. f. win. TheoL 1859, p.
407 ff, and Tobler, ibid. 1860, pp. 169-303. M.
Schwalb, Notei lur teeang. de Jean, in the Stras-
bourg Bet. de TheoL 1863. p. 118 ff, 349 ff. B.
W. Mackay, The Tubingen School and iti Ante-
cedente, Lond. 1863, pp. 358-311. Martineeu, art.
on Kenan's Life of Jesus, in National Ren. for Oct.
1863. SchenkeL Dai CharakterbUd Jem, 8« Ann.
Wiesbaden, 1864, pp. 17-36, 348-358. Strauss,
Leben Jem f. d. dcuttche Volk, Leipc 1864, H
IS, 18, 16-18, 23. Michel Nicolas, £tudei criL
mrla Bible— N. T., Paris, 1864, pp. 127-321,
ascribes the Gospel to a disciple of John, perhaps
John the presbyter, towards the end of the first
century, who derived the substance of il from his
master. Weiniicker, Unteiiuchungen 0b. d. evang.
Geiehickte, Gotha, 1864, pp. 220-302, takes nearly
the same view. Comp. YVeise's review in the TheoL
Stud. «. KriL 1866, p. 137 ff J. U. Scholten,
[let Evangelie nanr Johanna, Isrit. hitt onderxoek,
Leiden, 1865 (1864), and Suppl. 1866; French
trans, by A. Reville in the Strasbourg Revue de
TheoL 1864-66, German trans. (An Ev. nach
Johanna, ktii.-huL Unlet mchung), Berl. 1867;
eomp. bis Die SUeiten Zeugmue betreffend die
Sehrtflen da N. T. (bom the Dutch), Bremen,
1867. A. Reville, La gwition da Exangila, I.,
in the Revue del Deux Monda 1" mai, 1866.
Kenan, Vie de Jinn, 13* eo". revue et augmented,
Paris, 1867, p. x. ff, Iviii. ff, and appendix, •' De
I'usage qu'il convient de fiure du quatrieme Evan-
gile en ecrivant la vie de Jesus," pp. 477-641.
Theodor Keim, Geicliichte Jem von Naiara,
ZUrich, 1867, i. 103-172 (assigns the date A. d.
110-115). J. C. Matthes, De ouderdom van net
Jnhannetevangetie tolgeai de uihoendige getaige-
niisen, Leiden, 1867 (against Uofetede de Groot).
J. J. Taylor, Attempt to ascertain the Character
of the Fourth Gomel, Lond. 1867. S. Davidson,
Introd. to the N. T., Lond. 1868, ii. 833-108.
Wai John the Author of the Fvtrth Gomel t By
a Layman. Lond. 1868. H. Spaeth, Nattumaei,
tin Beitrag turn Verttandniti d. Comp. d. Logon-
Evang., in Hilgenfeld's Zeitichr. f. mm. TheoL
1858, pp. 168-313, 309-313 (identifies NaUnnasI
with John!).
For the genuineness: Frommann, Ueber out
EchtheU u. IntegriUU da Ev. Johanna (against
Weisse), in the TheoL Stud. o. KtiL 1840, pp.
853-930. Grimm, in Ersch u. Gruber's AUgetn.
EncykL S> Sect TbeU xxii. (1843) p. 18 ff. II.
Men, Zur johan. Frage, in the Stud. d. ev.
GeuthchkeU Wnrtembergi, 1844, Heft 3 (against
Baur). Ebrard, Das Ev. Johamii u. d. neurit!
Bgpothae «b. seine Enutehung, Zurich, 1846;
WiuenichaJUiche Kritik d. evang. Gaehichte,
* Aufl. Erlangen, 1850, pp. 828-963. Bkwk,
Beitrige mr Evangetien-Kritik, Berl. 1846; EinL
in dot If. T, Berl. 1862, 2> Aufl. 1866, pp. 148-
287, French translation of this part, entitled &uek
criL mr t Evang. lelon taint Jean, Paris, 1864.
Hauff, tfbtr d. Comp. d. johan. Evang., in the
Thvi. Stud. u. KrU. 1846, pp. 660-689 (against
Baur) ; Bemeik u neen no. ehnge Stellen da wsiSwi
Evang., ibid. 1849, pp. 106-180. A. Vigide, An-
tkenttati de t&tang. de taint Jean, Montaok.
:S48 (40 pp.). WeitaeL Dai Belbitteugnm 4m
Digitized by
Google
1488 JOHN, GOSPEL, OF
nterten Evangehsten 6k. sane Person, in ThtoL
Btud. u. Art*. 1849, pp. 678-688. Ewald, arts,
m his Jahrb. d. BibL mssenschaft, iii. 146 ff., v.
178 ffi, viii. 100 ff., 180 IT., i. 83 ff., xU. 818 ff.,
mid OM. Gekhrte Anteigen, 1866, p. 918 ff. ; also
Diejohan. SchriJIen aim*, u. erklart, 8 Bde. Gctt
1861-68, esp. ii. 400 ff. A. Nienneyer, Verhan-
deling over de tchthtid d. Joh. scliriften, '■ Hage,
1853 ( Verhmul. van htt Haagtch genootschop,
13* dL) Da Costa, De Aputlel Johanna en ty'ne
schriJXen, Amat. 1853. C. P. Tide, Specimen
theoL continent Annotationem in lucot normullot
A'*. Joan., ad vindic. hujus Ev. Authentiam, (inest
Excursus dt Cap. xxi.), Amat. 1863. G. K. Mayer
(Oath.), Die jCcht/teit d. Ev. nach Johanna,
Behaffhauaeu, 1854. K. F. T. Schneider, Die
ASehlheit d. johan. Ev. nach den ihuteren Zeugnis-
wt, IJerl. 1854. K. Hase, Die Tubinger Schule.
Sendschreibcn an Dr. Saw, Leipz. 1855. I*. H.
Slotemaker, Disquisitio, qua, aomparatu nonmUtis
Huang, ovarii tt Synopt. lode, utrorumque Fidel
\ittorica confirmatm; Ijigd. Bat. 1866. Art. in
National Rev. July, 1857, pp 83-137 (Bam- and
•Mere on the Fourth Gospel). Aberie (Cath.),
Ueber A. Zwtck d. Johanmt-Ev., in TheoL Quar-
talschrifl, 1861, p. 37 ff., alao arte, ibid. 1863, p.
487 ff., and 1864 (Papias), p. 3 ff. G. P. Fisher,
The Genuineness of the Fourth Gospel, in BibL
Sacra for April, 1864, reprinted, with additions,
in his Essnys on the Supernatural Origin of
Christianity, New York, 1866, pp. 33-163. Godet,
Examen dee princip. questions soulevies de not
Cs au sujet da 4* evangile, Paris, 1865 (separate
of the Appendix to his Commentaire); German
trans. (Prifung d. urichtigsien bit. Streitfragen,
a. s. ▼.), Zurich, 1866. Otto Thenius, Dot Evan-
gcUum der EvangeUen, Leipz. 1865 (70 pp.).
llschendorf, Warm Burden unsere EvangeUen
verfasstT I-eipz. 1866, 4th ed., greatly enlarged,
1866, trans, by W. 1. Gage with the title Origin of
the Four Gospels, Boston, 1868 (Amer. Tract Soc.).
C. A. Hase. Von Evang. dee Joltannee, Leipz.
1866 (pp. vii., 71). Kiggenbaeh, Die Zeugnisse
flr das Ev. Jahannie neu untertucht, Basel, 1866
(with special reference to Volkmar), presenting the
ease very fairly and clearly. Presaenari, Jesus-
Christ, son temps, sa tie, etc. 8« id. Paris, 1866,
pp. 314-251 ; Engl, translation, I-ond. 1866. C. A.
Row, Histm-ical Character of the Gospels tested,
etc. in the Journal of Sacred Lit. Oct. 1865 and
July 1866, valuable; see alao his Jesus of the
Evangelists, Ixmd. 1868, pp. 383 ff., 391 ff. J. I.
Mombert, Origin of the Gospels, in BibL Sacra
for Oct. 1866 (against Strauss). J. J. van Oostenee,
Das Johnnnesewmgelium, vier Vortrage (from the
Dutch), Giitersloh, 1867 (against Scholten). H.
Jonker, Het Evangelic van Johannes. Bedenkmgen
\tgen Scholten's krit. hist, ondermek, Amst. 1867.
Hofstedc de Grcot, Batilides alt enter Zeuge . . .
des Johamesevangtliums in Verbindung mil andem
Zeugfn bis ear Mitte des tweiten Jahrhunderts,
fcutsche vermehrte Ausg., Leipz. 1868 (1867).
. . F. Clarke, The Fourth Gospel and itt Author,
hi the Christian Examiner for Jan. 1868. J. P.
Deraniey (tlie AbW), Defense du quatrieme Evan-
tile, Paris, 1868. See also the commentaries of
Lttcke, Tholuek, Mejer, Luthardt, Baumlein, Astie\
Godet, and particularly Bruckner's edition of De
Wette. Fur a general view of the whole subject,
and an historical sketch of the discussion, aee Holtz-
•tann in Bunnell's BibeUeerk, vol. viii. (1886) pp.
M-7T
JOHN, (JOSPEL OF
The history of the Paschal controversy in law
second century has been the subject of much de-
bate with reference to its supposed bearing upon
the genuineness of the Fourth Gospel. The prin-
cipal separate works are by WeitzeL Die clirittL
Passafeier d. drei ertten Jahrhunderte, Pfbrs.
1848, and Hilgenfeld, Der Paschattreit der alien
Kirche, Halle, 1860. See also Schwegler, Mon-
tamsmut, p. 191 ff. ; Baur, Die Icauo*. EvangeUen,
pp. 369, 334 ff.. 853 ff, also in rAeot Jahrb. for
1847, 1848, 1867, Zeitechr. f. mist. TheoL 1858,
and his Christenthum, u. a. w., 2» Aufl., p. 166 ft:
Hilgenfdd in TheoL Jahrb. for 1849 and 1867,
and Zeitschr. f. wits. TheoL 1868, 1861; Tayler
and Davidson, as referred to above. On the other
side, see Bleak, Bdtrdge, p. 166 ff, EM. p. 189
ff. (8» Aufl.); WeitzeL in TheoL Blvd. u. Krit. far
1848; Steitz, ibid. 1866, 1857, 1869, Jahrb. f.
deuttcht TheoL 1861, and Henog's Rtai-Encyk.
art. Patcha. Sea also W. HiUigan, The Easter
Controversies of the Second Century tit their rela-
tion to the Gospel of John, in the Contemp. Review
for Sept 1867. —On the interpretation of the pas-
sages in John supposed to be at variance with the
Synoptic Gospels, there are recent articles by L.
Paul, in the TheoL Stud. u. Krit. 1866, p. 363 ff,
1867, p. 634 ff, Graf, ibid. 1867, p. 741 ff, and W.
Milligan, The Last Supper of our Lord at rela-
ted in the Three Earner Evangelists and in St.
John, in the Contemp. Review for Aug. 1868, to
be followed by another article. [Passovkk.]
2. Commentaries — In addition to those already
mentioned, the following are worthy of notice : —
C. C. Tittmann, Meletemata Sacra, lips, 1816,
trans, with Notes by James Young, 3 vols. Edin.
1837 (Bibl. Cab). Adalb. Maier (Cath.), Cbmm,
Ob. d. Ev. det Johannes, 8 Bde. Carbruhe, 1848-
45. There are other Catholic commentaries by
Klee (1829), Patritius (1857), Mesamer (I860),
Klofutor (1868), and Bisping (1865). Baumgar-
ten-Crusius, Theol. Autlcyung d. johan. SchriJIen,
3 Bde. Jena, 1844-45. W. F. Better, Dus Ev.
St. Juh. in Bibelstunden ausgelegt, 1851, 4« Aufl.
Halle, 1860. James Ford, The Gospel of BL John
Illustrated from Ancient and Modern Authors,
Lond. 1852. Tholuek, Comm. turn Ev. Johannes,
T umgearb. Aufl., Gotha, 1857, trans, by C P.
Krauth from the 6th Germ. ed. with additions
from the 7th, Philad. 1859. Olahaoaen, BibL
Comm. Bd. ii. Abth. 1, Das Ev. d. Joh., 4« Aufl,
umgearb. von Ebrard, 1862, and Abth. 2, Die
Leulensgeschichte nach den 4 Em., revidirt von
Ebrard, 4* Aufl. 1863 (the Engl, trans, is from
the previous edition). J. P. Lange, Das Ev. nach
Johannes, theoL-homiletisch bearbeitet, Bielefeld,
1860 (Theil iv. of hie Bibehoerk), English trans,
in press, New York, 1868. EwaM, DU johan.
Scltriften ibersett u. erklart, Bd. i. Gutting. 1861,
oomp. National Renew for July, 1863. Heng-
stenberg, Das Ev. d. heiL Johannes erlautert, 3
Bde. Bert. 1861-63, Engl, trans., 3 vols., Edin.
1866, 3d Germ. ed. of vol. i. 1867. H. A. W.
Meyer, Krit. exeg. ffandb. So. d. Ev. d. Johannes,
4« Aufl. Getting. 1863 (Abth. ii. of his Ko~
mentor). Holtzmann in Bunsen's Btbelwerk, Bd.
iv. Th. i. Leipz. 1863. 1. F. Astiii, Expticatkm
de t £vang. seim St. Jean, trad. now. avec ap-
pendice, 8 livr. Geneve, 1862-64 (fin. 1, 3, anon.1
W. Baumlein, Cbmm. lb. d. Ev. d. Johannes
Stuttg. 1863. De Wette, Knrte ErUdrung «
Ev. u. d. Brief e Johannes, 6* Ausg. v»u B. Briiek
nar (moth enlarged and improved), lisinc. 1861
Digitized by
Google
JOHN, GOSPEL OF
(BUi.Th.rH. of hi* Emg. Hani*-.). F. Godet,
Comm, our PEvang. dr St. Jean 3 torn. Paris,
1864-66. < Anon. ) Erlduterunger. d. Ev. S<. 7o-
tam, BerL 1865 (popular). C. H. A. von Bur-
g*r. An -fc'e. nack Joh. dtutsch erkldrt, Niirdl.
1M (1867). For the popuUr American commen-
taries of Barnes, Kipley, livermore, Paige, Jacobus,
Ball, Owen, Whedon, and Warrsn, and for other
works, sm the literature under Gospkls, pp. 960,
ML
On the Proem of the Gospel, see alio Prof. Stu-
art's Eammmaiion of John i. 1-18, in toe BioL
Sm, 1850, vii. 18-64, 281-337, oomp. Norton's
Statement of Seasons, eto., 8d ed., pp. 307-481.
Hoiilsinann, De Evang. Jonraia Introitu, Lips.
1855. F. A. Philippi, Der Eingang da Jokan-
nesevangeliumt ausgtlegt, Stuttg. 1867. On John
ri. 85-65, see E. P. Barrows in Biol. Sacra, xi.
673-739; on John xi. 1-16, Gumlioh, Die Rdlhsel
J. Erweckung Latarus, in TkeoL Stud. u. KriL
1863, pp. 65-110, 948-336.
8. Doctrine. — Passing by earlier and less' im-
portant works, tot which see Rents, Ouch. d. heiL
Sekriften N. T. $ 317, 3* Ann., we may notice the
fallowing: F. W. Rettberg, An Joannes in txhi-
•sanVi Jet* Natura rtSq. canon. Scriptu sere re-
pugneit Gotting. 1836. C. L. W. Grimm, De
Joannea Chriiiologia Indole Paulina comparata,
lips. 1833. I. A. Simeon, Summa TheobgiaJo-
saus, Keg. 1839. Karl Frommann, Der johan-
ntiscke Lekrbegriff, Lelps. 1839. Reuas, Idem
ear KM. in d. Ev. d. Johannes, in the Denkschrift
A IheoL Gesellschaft en Strassburg, 1840, pp. 7-
80; Die johan. Theologie, in the Strassburg Bei-
trige tu den IheoL Wissenecknften, 1847, i. 1-84,
and mora fully in his Hist, de la thiol. ckrHietme,
*««. Strisb. 1860, ii. 869-400. a R. Kostlin,
Der Lekrbegriff d. Ev. u. d. Briefs Johnmit,
Qeri. 1843, thorough; eomp. ZeOer't review in his
TkeoL Jahrb. 1845, It. 75-100. Lntterbeck
(Oath.), Die neatest Lrhrbtyriffe, Mains, 1853,
U. 359-399. Neander, Pflarmmg u. Leitung, 4«
Aufl. 1847, EngL trans, rerised by Robinson, N.
T. 1865, pp. 508-531. Hilgenfeld, D.\s Ev. u. die
Briefs Johimnu, nach ihrem Lekrbegriff dargt-
eteBt, Halle, 1849. Meaner, Die Lekre der Apos-
ttl, Leipz. 1856, pp. 316-360. Lecbler, Ait apost.
n. d. nachaposL ZdlaUer, 9* Aufl. Stuttg. 1857,
pp. 196-333. C. F. Schmid, Biol. TheoL dee If.
7% 2» Aufl. Stuttg. 1859, pp. 688-617. Weix-
aneker, Dae Selostseugniss d. joh. Christus, in the
Jakrb. f. deuteche TkeoL 1857, 11. 154-308, snd
tteilrige nur Char. d.joh. Ev. ibid. 1859, iv. 685-
767 ; eomp. Hilgenfeld's review in his Zeitschr. f.
Miss. TheoL 1859, pp. 383-813, and 1863, p. 95 ff.
Watts, Der johan. Lekrbegriff, Berl. 1863, eomp.
HUgenfeld't reriew in Ins Zeitechrift u. s. w. 1863,
ri. 96-116, 914-338, snd WeixaSeker, Die Johan.
Logoolehre, in the Jahrb. f. deutsche TheoL 1863,
ril. 619-708. Baur, VorUsurgen uoer neulett.
TkeoL, Ldps. 1864, pp. 351-407. Beytchlag, Die
Cnristologit dee N. T., BerL 1866, pp. 65-107,
jomp. Pfleidenr'a reriew in the Zeitschr. f. win.
TheoL ix. 341-366. Scbolter One Ev. nach Jtt-
knao, Berl. 1867, pp. 77-171. Groos, fiber den
Begriff der nolatt bet Johannes, in TkeoL Stud, u
KriL 1868, pp. 344-978.
On John's doctrine of the Logos one may alsc
ess E. G. Bengal, Oboe, de xiyts Joasmie, Part. I.
MM (in hi. Opusc. Acad. 1884, pp. 407-496);
Riedner, De Subsistentxn r$ (Mat »Jys apud
-Ulonem JwL tt Joamtm Apost. tributa. in his
JOHN, FIRST EPISTLE OF 1486
Zeitschr. f. d. hist TheoL, 1849, Heft 8; Jo*.
Ochs (Cath.), Der johan, LogosbegnjJ, Hamb.
1848: Jordan Bucber (Cath.), Dee Apostels Johan-
na Lehrt vom Logos, Schaifbausen, 1856; and
Rohricht, Zur jokan. Logoolehre, in the TkeoL
Stud. u. KriL 1868, pp. 999-816. Uteke't disser-
tation on the Logos, prefixed to his commentary, it
translated by Dr. Noyes In the Christian Exam-
iner tor March and May, 1849. Domer's remarks
on the 18018 subject, Lekre con der Person Christ!,
1846, i. 16 ff. (Engl, trans. 1. 13 ff.) are translated
by Prof. Stout Id tits Biol Sacra for Oct. 1850.
4. Style. — See J. D. Schulze, Der sehr\flrM-
lerieche Charakter a. Werih da Johanna, Lcipau
1803. T. G. Seyflkrth, Bdtrag tur Bpeaakkat*-
akteristik d. johan. Schriften, l^ipr. 1833. Cred-
ner, EinL in d. ff. T., Halle, 1836, i. 928 ff., re-
produced In Davidson's Introd. to the If. T. Land.
1848, 1. 841 ff., eomp. his Introd. 1868, ii. 469 ft
T. P. C. Kaiser, De eptdaH Joan. Apost. Gram-
mitica Culpa NegKgentia liberanda, 2 Progr.
Erbuig. 1849. Wilke, Neatest. Rhetorik, 1848,
passim. Luthardt, Dae johrm. EvangeHum, 1869,
i. 91-69. B. F. Westoott, Introd. to the Study of
the Gospels, Boston, 1869, pp. 964-376. A.
JOHN, THE FIRST EPISTLE GEN-
ERAL OF. Ite Authenticity.— The external
evidence is of the most satisfactory nature. Eusebius
places it In his list of buoKoyoi/unn [tee above, p.
373], and we have ample proof that it was acknowl-
edged and received as the production of the Apostle
John in the writings of Polycarp (Ep. ad PhiUpp.
o. 7); Papiaa, as quoted by Eusebius (ff. E. lit. 39):
IrensiUS (Ado. Haw. ill. 18); Origen (apud Em
H. E. vi. 95); Clement of Alexandria (Strom, lib
ii.); Tertullian (j4oV Prate, a. 15); Cyprian (Ep.
xxviil.): and there Is no voice in antiquity raised
to the contrary.
On the grounds of internal evidence It has been
questioned by [S. G.] Lange (Die Schrift. Johannis
abersettt tmd erklart, vol. iii.); Oudius (Vran-
n'cA/en da Christenthums); Bretschneider (Proba-
bilia de Evang. et EpisL Joan. Ap. indole tt origine) ;
Zelter ( Thtologische Jahrbucher tor 1846). The
objections made by these critics are too slight to
be worth mentioning. On the other hand the in-
ternal evidence for its being the work of St. John
from its similarity in style, language, and doctrine
to the Gospel is overwhelming. Macknight ( Preface
to First Epistle of John) has drawn out a list of
nineteen passages in the epistle which are so similar
to an equal number of passages in the Gospel that
we cannot but conclude that the two writings
emanated from the tame mind, or that one author
was a strangely successful copyist both of the wcrdt
and of the sentiments of the other. The allusion
again of the writer to himself is such as would roil
St. John the Apostle, and very few but St. John
(1 Ep. L 1).
Thus m see that the high probability of the
authorship is established both by the internal evi-
dence and by the external evidence taken apart.
Unite them, and this probability rises to a moral
certainty.
With regard to the time at which St John wrote
i the epistle (fur an epistle it essentially is, though
1 not commencing or concluding in the epistolary
| form) then is considerable diversity of opinion.
Qrotlus, Hammond, Whitby, Benson, Macknight,
fix a date previous to the destruction of Jerusalem,
(but probably not oorrtctly) the as-
Digitized by
Google
1440
JOHN, FIRST EPISTLE OF
{ration "It is the hut time" (ii. 18) to refer to
the Jewish Church and nation. Lardner, Whiston,
Lampe, Mill, Le Clero, Basnage, Beausobre, Dupin,
Davidson, assign it to the close of the first century.
This is the more probable date. There are several
indications of the epistle being posterior to the
Gospel.
I jke the Gospel it was probably written from
Ephesna. Grotius fixes Patmos as the pinct at
which it was written — Macknight, Judaea. But a
late date would involve the conclusion that it was
Epbesus. The persau atUrturU are certainly not
the Parthians, according to the inscriptions of one
Greek and several Latin MSS. There is however
a somewhat widely spread Latin tradition to this
(fleet resting on the authority of St. Augustine,
Caasiodoras, and Bede; and it is defended by Eatius.
The Greek Church knew no such report. Lardner
h dearly right when he says that it was primarily
meant for the Churches of Asia under St. John's
inspection, to whom he bad already orally delivered
his doctrine (i. 3, ii. 7).
The main object of toe epistle does not appear
to be that of opposing the errors of the Docetae
(Schmidt, Bertholdt, Niemeyer), or of the Gnostics
(Kleuker), or of the Nioolaitans (Macknight), or
of the Cerinthians (Micbaelis), or of all of them
together (Townsend), or of the Sabians (Barkey,
Storr, KeU), or of Judaiaers (Loeffler, Sender), or
of apostates to Judaism (Lange, Eichbom, Han-
lein): the leading purpose of the Apostle appears
to be rather constructive than polemical. St. John
is remarkable both in bis history and in his writings
for bis abhorrence of false doctrine, but he does not
attack error as a controversialist He states the
deep truth and lays down the deep moral teaching
of Christianity, and in this way rather than directly
condemns heresy. In the introduction (i. 1-4) the
Apostle states the purpose of his epistle. It is to
declare the Word of life to those whom he is ad-
dressing, in order that he and they might be united
in true communion with each other, and with God
the Father, and his Son Jesus Christ. He at once
begins to explain the nature and conditions of com-
munion with God, and being led on from this point
into other topics, be twice brings himself back to
the same subject. The first part of the epistle
may be considered to end at ii. 88. The Apostle
begins afresh with the doctrine of sonsbip or com-
munion at ii. 29, and returns to the same theme at
iv. 7. His lesson throughout is, that the means
of union with God are, on the part of Christ, his
atoning blood (i. 7, ii. 2, ill. {, iv. 10, 14, v. 6)
and advocacy (ii. 1 ) — on the part of man, holiness
(I. 6), obedience (il. 3), purity (iii. 8), faith (ill. 23,
iv. 3, v. 5), and above all love (ii. 10, iii. 1 4, iv. 7,
v. 1). St John is designated the Apostle of Love,
and rightly; but it should be ever remembered that
Us " love " does not exclude or ignore, but em-
braces both faith and obedience as constituent parts
ef itself. Indeed, St. Paul's " faith that worketh
by love," and St James's " works that ate the
fruit of faith," and St. John's '• love which springs
from faith and produces obedience," are all one
and the same state of mind described according to
the first, third, or second stage into which we are
>ble to analyse the complex whole.
There are tiro doubtful passages in this epistle,
ii. 28, " but he thai acknowledgeth the Son hath
the Father also," and v. 7, •< For there are three
that hear record in heaven, the Father, the Word,
and the Holy Uhost, and these three an one." The
question of their authenticity is argued at Icrgth
by Hill (note at the end of 1 John v.), and Home
(Introduction to H. S. iv. p. 448, Loud. 1834 [a
ioth ed., 1890, pp. 366 ff.]). It would appear
without doubt that tbey are not genuine. The
latter passage is contained in bur only of the IK
[260] MSS. of the epistle, the Codex Gnelpberbyta-
nus of the seventeenth century, the Codex Marianne,
a forgery subsequent to tbe year 1514, the Codex
Britannicus or Montfortii of the fifteenth or six-
teenth century, and tbe Codex Ottobonianns of the
fifteenth century. It is not found in the Syria*
versions, in the Coptic, the Sahidk, the Ethiopic,
the Armenian, the Arabic, the Slavonic, nor in any
ancient version except the Latin; and the best
editions of even the I-atin version omit it It was
not quoted by one Greek Father or writer previous
to the 14th century. It waa not inserted in Eras-
mus's editions of the Greek Testament, published
in 1610 and 1619, nor in that of Aldus, 1618; nor
in that of Gerbeliua, 1621; nor of Cepbaleos, 1624;
nor of Colinaeus, 1634; nor in Luther's version of
1646. Against such an amount of external testi-
mony no internal evidence, however weighty, could
be of avail. For tbe exposition of the passage as
containing the words in question, see (as quoted by
Home) Up. Horsley's Sermon* (i. p. 193). For
the same passage interpreted without the disputed
words, see Sir Isaac Newton's HitL of Too Text*
(Works, v. p. 628, Lond. 1779). See also Emlyn's
Enouiry, etc., I/md. 1717. See farther, Travis
(.Letter* to Gibbon, Lond. 1786); Porson (letter*
to Trav'u, I/>nd. 1790); Bishop Marsh (fatten to
Travis, Lond. 1795); Micbaelis (Intr. to New Test
iv. p. 412, Lond. 1802); Griesbach (Diatribe ap-
pended to vol. ii. of Greek TetU Hake, 1800);
Butler (Bora Bibtiax, ii. p. 246, Lond. 1807);
Clarke (Succession, etc., i. p. 71, I/md. 1807);
Bishop Burgess ( Itruhcntion of 1 John r. 7, Lond.
1822 and 1823; AJnotatione* Miltii, etc, 1822;
letter to the Clergy of St. David; 1825; Tm
Letter* to Mr*. Joanna Baillie, 1831, 1836). to
which may be added a dissertation in the Life of
Bp. Burgess, p. 898, Lond. 1840. . F. M.
* It is far from correct to speak of tbe last clause
of 1 John ii. 23 as " doubtful," and even, as is
done above, to include it in the same category with
1 John v. 7, as " without doubt ... not genuine."
The clause in question, though omitted in tbe so-
called " received text," is supported by decisive
evidence, and is regarded as genuine by all critics
of any note. Its emission in some manuscripts
was obviously occasioned by the like ending (in the
original) of the preceding clause.
To prevent a mistake which has often been made,
it may be well to say explicitly that the «Aofe of 1
John v. 7 fa) not spurious, but the words which
follow '• bear record," together with the first clause
of ver. 8, *' and there are three that bear witness
in earth." The genuine text of w. 7, 8 reads
simply, " For there are three that bear record [or
rather, ' bear witness, 1 ss the same verb is rendered
in ver. 6], the spirit, and the water, and the biooo
and tbe three agree in one."
For $> full account of tbe controversy on this
famous passage, one may consult tbe Rev. WiHiatu
Orme's Memoir of the Controeerty respecting the
Three Heavenly Witnesses, published under the
name of "Critleus," London, 1830; new edition, with
notes and an Appendix, bringing the history of the
dlseasstot) down to the present time, by E Abbot
New York, 1868. To the list of publications as
Digitized by
Google
JOHN, THE SECOND AND THIRD EPISTLES OF
1441
ska j uuiiwsj given above the following deserves
to be added far it* signal ability, and the valuable
faubrmatioa it contains : A Vindication of the
Literary Character of Prof 'tuor Parson, from the
Amntadctrrimi of the Jit. Ret. Thomas Bur gut,
. . . By Crito Cantabrioiensis, Cambridge, 1827.
Tie author was Dr. Thomas Turton, afterward!
Bishop of Ely; and to him an probably to be
ascribed the able articles which had previously ap-
peared on the subject in the Quarterly Review for
March 1893, and Dec 1888. On the other side
may be mentioned Cardinal Wiseman's Two LeUeri
on noma Parte of the Controversy concerning the
Qmuinnen of John v. 7, in the Caih. Mag. for
1833 and 1833, reprinted in voL i of his Eeeaye,
Load. 1853. These letters relate almost wholly to
the reading of the passage in the Old Latin version.
lor an answer, see Dr. William Wright's Appendix
so his translation of Seller's BibL Bermeneutict
(1839), pp. 633 ft*. ; Tregelles in Home's Jntrod.,
10th ed., p. 363 f.; and the Appendix to the
American edition of Orme's Memoir, pp. 186-191.
Dr. Tregelles, in the Journ. of Sac. I At. for April,
1858, p. 167 ft*., has exposed the extraordinary mis-
statements of Dr. Joseph Tumbull in relation to
this passage The New Plea for the Authenticity
ftke Text of the Three Heavenly Witnesses, by
the Bev. Charles Forster, London, 1867, deserves
eotiee only as a literary and psychological curiosity.
Literature relating to the Epistles of John in
general ami the First Epistle in particular. — Be-
sides the older general commentaries on the New
Testament or the Epistles, as those of Calvin, Beza,
Grotiaa, BengeL Whitby, Doddridge, Macknight,
ind general works on the Catholic Epistles, as those
of Geo. Benson (3d ed. 1756), J. B. Carpzov (1790),
August! (1801-08), Grsshof (1830), Jachmann
(1838), Abp. Sumner (Practical Exposition, Lond.
1840), Barnes (Notes, Explan. and Practical, New
York, 1847), Karl Brauna (Die tieben Id. KathoL
Briefs atr Erbauung ausgelegt, 3 Hefts, Grimma,
1847-18), and the mora recent editions of the Greek
Testament by Bloomfield, Alford, Webster and
Wilkinson, and Wordsworth, the following special
works may be noticed: Whiston, Comm. on the
Three Calk. Epistles of John, Lond. 1719. Semler,
Paraphr. in primam Joan. EpisU cam Protegg.
tt Animndn. Rigs), 1793. Moras, PraUctiones
ezegeC. in tree Joanuis Epistolas, Lips. 1796, also
1810. Rich. Shepherd, Notes, Critical and Disser-
tatary, on the Gospel and Epistles of John, Lond.
1798, also 1803, new ed. 1841. T. Hawkins, Comm.
on the First, Second, and Third Epistles of John,
Haliux, 1808. Karl Rickli, Johamus enter Brief
erktart u. angewendet in Predtgten, mil hist. Vor-
kericht u. exegeL Anhange, Luzero, 1838. Paulus,
Die dreg Lekrbriefe son Johannes Bbers. u. erklart,
Hddelb. 1839. Lilcke, Comm. do. d. Briefs da
Em. Johannes, 8» Aufl. Bonn, 1836, Engl, trans.
by T. O. Repp, Edin. 1837 (Bibl. Cab.), 3d German
ed. by E. Bertheau, 1856. O. F. Fritasche, De
Epistt. Johan. Lode d\ficiUoribus Comm. I., Turicl,
1837, reprinted in Fritzschiorum Opuscc. Acad.,
Lips. 1838, pp. 376-308. Robt. Shepherd, Notes
on Ike Gospel and Epistles of John, >ond. 1840.
Neander, Der ertte Brief Johanme, prakUsch
erUkttert, BerL 1851, Engl, trail, by Mrs. H. C
Consnt, New York, 1853. I. E. F. Sarder, Comm.
sa d. Brr. Joh. Etberf. 1851, not important. G.
K. Mayer (Oath.), Comm. tk. d. Brr. d Ap. Joh.,
Wisn, 1851 . W. F. Besser, rie Brief e St. Johan-
ms as Bikekmewien mmg e ls g t. Hall*, 1851, 3« Ann.
91
18C2. Diisterdieck, Die drei johan. Briefe, mi
voUstand. theoL Commentar, 2 Bde. G6tt- 1853-56.
D. Erdmann, Prima Joatmis EpisL aryumentum,
etc. Berol. 1865. F. D. Maurice, The Epistles of
St. John. A Series of Lectures on Christian
Ethics, Camb. 1857, new ed. 1867. Myrberg,
Comm. in Epist. Johanna primnm, UpsaL 186W
(pp. xiv., 74). Ebrard, Die Briefe Juhamus, u. a. w.
Konigsb. 1859 (Bd. ri. Abth. iv. of Olshsusen's
BibL Comm.), English trsnsl. Edin. 1860 (Clark's
For. TheoL Libr.). Karl Braune, Die drei Briefe
d. AposL Johannes, theoL-hotnUet. bearbeitet, Biele-
feld, 1865 (Tbeil xv. of Luge's Bibelwerk), EngL
trsnsl., with additions, by J. I. Mombert, New
York, 1867 (part of vol. ix. of Lange's Comm.).
R. S. Candlish, The First Epistle of John ex-
pounded in a Series of Lectures, Edin. 1866. For
the commentaries of Baumgarten-Cruaius (1845),
Ewald (1861), and De Wette, 5th ed. by Bruckner
(1863), see the literature under John, Gospbl or.
Of the commentaries named above the most vain-
able are those of LUcke, Neander, Diisterdieck
(rather prolix), and Huther. " The Epistles of
John, with Introduction, Notes, and Dissertations,
by the Rev. B. F. Weatcott, B. D." is announced
as in preparation (1868) and will be looked for
with interest by Biblical students. An excellent
sketch of the history of the interpretation of the
First Epistle is given in Liicke's Comm. 8* Aufl.
pp. 75-108.
For further information respecting the critics!
questions relating to the three epistles of John,
one may consult the Introductions of De Wette,
Reuss, Bleek, Guericke, and Davidson; see also
Ewald's Jahrb. d. Bibl. aissensch. iii. 174 ft*., x.
83 ft"., and Die johan. Schriften, ii. 391 ft*. Blur's
view is set forth in the TheoL Jahrb. 1848, pp.
393-337, and ibid. 1857, pp. 315-331; Hilgenfeld's
in his Das Ev. u. die Briefe Joliannis, u. s. w.
(1849), and TheoL Jahrb. 1855, p. 471 ft*. On the
Gospel and First Epistle of John as works of the
same author, and on the First Epistle and its rela-
tion to the fourth Gospel, see two good articles by
Wilibald Grimm, in the Theol. Stud. u. Krit. 1847,
p. 171 ft*, and 1849, pp. 269-303.
On the doctrine of the epistle, see L. Thomas,
Htwies dogm. sur la premiere epttre de Jean,
Geneve, 1849, and the works referred to in the
addition under John, Gospel of. A.
JOHN, THE SECOND AND THIRD
EPISTLES OF. Their Authenticity. — These
two epistles are placed by Eusebius in the class of
hmktyiixera, and be appears himself to be doubt-
ful whether they were written by the Evangelist, or
by some other John (H. E. iii. 25). The evidence
of antiquity in their favor is not very strong, but
yet it is considerable. Clement of Alexandria
speaks of the First Epistle ss the larger (Strom, lib.
ii. [c. 15, p. 464, ed. Potter]), and if the Adum-
brationes are his, he bears direct testimony to the
Second Epistle (Adumbr. p. 1011, ed. Potter).
Origen appears to have had the same doubts aa
Eusebius (apud Euseb. H. E. vi. 35). Dionydua
(apud Euseb. H. E. vii. 35) and Alexander of
Alexandria (apud Soar. B.E.L8) attribute them
to St. John. So does Iranasos (Adv. Bar. i. 16).
[The Muratorian canon mentions two epistles of
John.] Aurelius quoted them in the Council of
Carthage, A. d. 356, as St John's writing (Cyprian,
Opp. II. p. 130, ed. Oberthur). Ephrem Syne
speaks of them In the same way in the foustb aaav
Digitized by
Google
1442
JOHN, THE SECOND AND THIRD EPISTLES OF
tmrj [though the; are wanting in the Peehito].
In the fifth century they are almost universally
received. A homily, wrongly attributed to St.
Chryscetom, declares tbem uncanonicaL
If the external testimony is not as decisiTe as we
might wish, the internal evidence is peculiarly
strong. Hill has pointed out that of the 18 verses
which compose the Second Epistle, 8 are to be
found in the First Epistle. Either then the Second
Epistle proceeded from the same author as the
First, or from a conscious fabricator who desired to
pan off something of his own as the production of
the Apostle. But if the latter alternative had been
true, the fabricator in question would assuredly
hare assumed the title of John the Apattle, instead
of merely designating himself as John the elder,
and he would have introduced some doctrine which
it would have been his object to make popular.
The title and contents of the epistle are strong
arguments against a fabricator, whereas they would
account for its non-universal reception in early
times. And if not the work of a fabricator, it must
bom style, diction, and tone of thought, be the work
of the author of the First Epistle, and, we may add,
of the Gospel
The reason why St. John designates himself as
wpevfiirtpos rather than airoVroAot (Ep. ii. 1, Ep.
iii. 1), is no doubt the same at that which made
St Peter designate himself by the same title (1 Pet.
t. 1), and which caused St. James and St Jude to
give themselves no other title than " the servant
of God and of the Lord Jesus Christ " (Jam. i. 1),
u the servant of Jesus Christ and brother of James "
(Jude 1). St. Paul had a special object in declar-
ing himself an apostle. Those who belonged to
the original Twelve bad no such necessity imposed
upon them. With them it was a matter of indif-
ference whether they employed the name of apostle
like St Peter (1 Pet i. 1, 2 Pet i. 1), or adopted
in appellation which they shared with others like
l)t John and St James, and St. Jude.
The Second Epistle is addretted inKtmn mipla.
This expression cannot mean the Church (Jerome),
nor a particular church (Cassiodorus [so Davidson,
Jnlrod. ed. 1868]), nor the elect Church which
cornea together on Sundays (Michaelis), nor the
Church of Philadelphia (Whiston), nor the Church
of Jerusalem (Whitby). An individual woman who
had children, and a sister and nieces, is clearly in-
dicated. Whether her name is given, and if so,
what it is, has been doubted. According to one
interpretation she is " the Lady Electa," to another,
"the elect Kyria," to a third, "the elect Lady."
The first interpretation is that of Clement of Alex-
andria (if the passage above referred to in the
Adumbrationea be his), Wetstein, Grotius, Middle-
ton. The second is that of Benson, Carpzov,
Schleusner, Heumann, Bengel, Rosenmiiller, De
Wette, Liicke, Neander, Davidson [Introd, ed. 1851,
otherwise 1868]. The third is the rendering of the
English version, Mill, Wall, Wolf, Le Clerc, Lardner,
Beza, Eichhom, Newcome, Wakefield, Macknight
For the rendering " the Lady Electa " to be right,
the word Kvpiq must have preceded (as hi modern
Greek) the word 4k\ikt7], not followed it; and
■rther, the last verse of the epistle, in which her
sister is also spoken of as cVAcktv), is fatal to the
hypothesis. The rendering " the elect Kyria," is
probably wrong, because there is no article before
the adjective 4x\tm-f. It remains that the render-
ing of the English version is probably right, though
hare too we should have expected the article.
The Third Epistle Is addretted to Gains or Cahis
We have no reason for identifying him with Cairn
of Macedonia (Acta xix. 29), or with Cains of Derbe
(Acts xx. 4), or with Caiua of Corinth (Rom. xvi.
23; 1 Cor. i. 11), or with Cains Bishop of Ephesus,
or with Caius Bishop of Thessalonica, or with
Caiua Bishop of Pergamos. He was probably a
convert of St John (Ep. iii. 4), and a layman of
wealth and distinction (Ep. Iii. 8) in some city near
Ephesus.
The object of St. John it writing the Second
Epistle was to warn the lady to whom he wrote
against abetting the teaching known as that of
Basilides and his followers, by perhaps an undue
kindness displayed by her towards the preachers of
the lake doctrine. After the introductory saluta-
tion, the Apostle at once urges on his correspondent
the great principle of Love, which with bim (as we
have before seen) means right affection springing
from right faith and issuing in right conduct The
immediate consequence of the possession of this
love is the abhorrence of heretical misbelief, be-
cause the latter, being Incompatible with right
faith, is destructive of the producing cause of love,
and therefore of love itself. This is the secret of
St John's strong denunciation of the "deceiver"
whom be designates as "anti-Christ" Love is
with him the essence of Christianity; but love can
spring only from right faith. Wrong belief there-
fore destroys love and with it Christianity. There-
fore says he, " If there come any unto you and
bring not this doctrine, receive him not into your
bouse, neither bid him God speed, for he that bid-
deth him God speed is partaker of his evil deeds "
(Ep. ii. 10, 11).
The Third Epistle was written for the purpose
of commending to the kindness and hospitality of
Caius some Christians who were strangers in the
place where he lived. It is probable that these
Christians carried this letter with them to Caius
aa their introduction. It would appear that the
object of the travellers was to preach the Gospel to
the Gentiles without money and without price
(Ep. iii. 7). St. John had already written to the
ecclesiastical authorities of the place (typwfay ver.
9, not " scripsissem," (Vulg.)\ but they, at the
instigation of Diotrephes, had refused to receive the
missionary brethren, and therefore the Apostle now
commends them to the care of a layman. It is
probable that Diotrephes was a leading presbyter
who held Judaizing views, and would not give assist-
ance to men who were going about with the purpose
of preaching solely to the Gentiles. Whether Deme-
trius (ver. 12) was a tolerant presbyter of the same
community, whose example St John holds up as
worthy of commendation in contradistinction to that
of Diotrephes, or whether he was one of the stran-
gers who bore the letter, we are now unable to deter-
mine. The latter supposition ia the more probable.
We may conjecture that the two epistles wen
written shortly after the First Epistle from Ephesus.
They both apply to individual cases of conduct the
principles which had been laid down in their fullness
in the First Epistle.
The title Catholic does not prrperly belong to
the Second and Third Epistles. It lecame attached
to them, although addressed to individuals, because
they were of too little importance to be classed by
themselves, and so far as doctrine went, were re-
garded as appendices to the First Epistle.
P. M.
• On the Second and Third Epistles of Jchf
Digitized by
Google
JOTADA
lie works most worthy of notice are referred to In
Ibe addition to the article on tbe Pint Epistle.
Ih following may also be mentioned: J. B.
Carparr, Cbmm. in Ep. tec Joanna, and Brevit
EnnrraHo m Joan. Apott Epitt. tertinm, appended
to his edition of F. Rapport's Theoiogia aphorutxca
Jomnu, Lipa. 1688, also in nil Theoiogia Exeget-
ica, Lipa. 1751, p. 101 ffi; praised by Walch. 0.
J. Sonunelius, ling, is 9 el 3 Joh. Epitt., Lund.
1798-99. P. L. Gachon, Authenticite de la 2« et
le ep. de Jean, Montaub. 1851. Sam. Cox, The
Prkatt Utter* of St. Paul and John, Land. 1867.
1. J. Rambonnet, Spec aead. dt tee. Ep. Joannea,
Tnj. ad Rhen. 1819. A. W. Knauer, Ueber die
*E*A«rH| Kuaia, on velche der tweite Brief
JoAannit gerwktet itt, in TheoL Stud. u. KriU
1833, pp. 453-458. J. C. M. Laurent, Wer tear
eSs Evpia «■ 2. Briefe Johanmt t in the ZeiUchr.
f. lath. TkevL 1865, p. 219 ff. (comp. his NeutesL
Studien, p. 137 f.) takes Kvpfa to represent the
Latin Curia, not Cyria; ana (Juericke, Nevteet.
Imgogik, 3* Aufl. (1868), p. 477, regards this as
unquestionable. On the Third Epistle, 0. A. Heu-
mann, Oat. cxhibeni Comm. in Joan. Epitt. ter-
tian, Gotting. 1742, reprinted in his Nova Syllogt
iKat, eta. (1752), i. 216 ft. A.
JOI'ADA (S^ [Jehovah knowt]: 'l,OaJ,
laaM; [Vat. Neb, xii. 10, 11, l«J a ;] Alex.
[Ivata,] lutaSa [and so FA.' in Neh. xii. 22] :
Jvinda), high-priest after his father Eliashib, but
whether in the lifetime of Neh&niah is not clear,
as it is doubtful whether the title in Neh. xiii. 28
applies to him or his father. One of his sons
married a daughter of Sanballat the Horonite. He
was succeeded in the high-priesthood by his son
Jonathan, or Johanan (Neh. xii. 11, 22). Josephus
calls this Jehoiada, Judas. A C. H.
JOI'AKJM (DMJV [Jehovah ettabluhet,
rnuet ap] : 'lamjelfi; [Vat. Alex. FA. ImaKuu-]
Joaeim), a high-priest, son of the renowned Jeahua
who was joint leader with Zerubbabel of the first
return from Babylon. His son and successor was
Euashib (Neb, xii- 10). In Neh. xii. 12-26 is
preserred a catalogue of the beads of the various
families of priests and Levitea during the high-
priesthood of Joiakim.
The name is a contracted form of Jbhoiakim.
JOI' ARIB Cri^l [whom Jehovah defends] :
'mxptp, 'laapl$ i Alex. lotootui : Joarib). 1.
I Imapift.; Vat. Apn$: Alex. lamofip: Joiarib.]
A iavxnaii who returned from Babylon with Ezra
(Est. riii. 16).
2. [Neh. xi. 10, tMutjS; Vat. I«p<ij3; Alex.
tmpifi; FA. luptifi; in Neh. xii. 6, 19, Vat. Alex.
FA. 1 omit, and so Kom. in ver. 6 : Joarib, Joiarib.]
Ihe founder of one of the courses of priests, else-
where called in full .Iehoiarib. His descendants
titer tbe Captivity are given, Neb. xii. 6, 19, and
also in xi. 10; though it is possible that in this
passage another person is intended. .
3. [Uhum/8; Vat. WpetB: FA. Iwiu, eotr.
ImeetBi Alex. ImiapiB: Joiarib.] A Shilonite —
i. «. probably a descendant of Shklaii the sou of
Jndah — nained in tbe genealogy of Haaseiah, tbe
dan head of the family (Neh. xi. 6}.
JOK/DEAM CS^f^ [pottetttd by At
people]: 'Apucdii; [Vat loourou;] Alex \iieSaau-
Jaeafham), a city of Jndah, in the ijointains
Josh, it. 66;, named In the same group wttl Maon.
JOKNEAM
1448
Carmel, and ZIph, and therefore apparently to bf
looked for south of Hebron, where they are situated.
It has not, however, been yet met with, nor was 1'
known to Eusebius and Jerome. O.
JO'KIM (CPfW [Jehovah ettabluhet]: 'I«r
kIu; [Vat] Alex. Iaan^: qui ttare fecit totem),
one of the sons of Shelah (the third according to
Burrington) the son of Judah (1 Chr. ir. 22), of
whom nothing further is known, it would be
difficult to say what gave rise to the rendering of
the Vulgate or the Targum on the verse. Tbe
latter translates, "and the prophets and scribe)
who came forth from the seed of Joshua." The
reading which they had was evidently D'p% which
some rabbinical tradition applied to Joshua, and
at the same time identified Joaah and Sarapa,
mentioned in the same verse, with Mahlon and
Chilion. Jerome quotes a Hebrew legend that
Jokini was Elimelech the husband of Naomi, in
whose days the sun stood still on account of the
transgressors of the law ( Quatt. Heb. in ParaL).
JOK/MEAM (Oypf£ [auembled by the
people]: [in 1 K., Kom.' Vat. Aovxif/i; Alex.
leK/iuar, but united with preceding word; in 1
Chr.,] 'UKpaAr; [Vat. Ia-oop: Jeemaan,] Jee-
maam), a city of Ephraim, given with its suburbs
to the Kohathite Levitea (1 Chr. vi. 68). Taw
catalogue of the towns of Ephraim in the book of
Joshua la unfortunately very imperfect (see xvi.),
but in the parallel list of Levities! cities in Josh,
xxi., Kibzaim occupies the place of Jokmeam (ver.
22). The situation of Jokmeam is to a certain
extent indicated in 1 K. iv. 12, where it is named
with places which we know to have lieen in the
Jordan Valley at the extreme east boundary of the
tribe. (Here the A. V. has, probably by a printer's
error, Jokneam.) This position is further sup-
ported by that of tbe other Levitical cities of this
tribe — Shechem in the north, Beth-horon in the
south, and Gezer in the extreme west, leaving Jok-
meam to take the opposite place in tbe east (sea,
however, tbe contrary opinion of Robinson, iii. 115
note). With regard to tbe substitution of Kibzaim
— which is not found again — for Jokmeam, we
would only draw attention to the fact of the sim-
ilarity in appearance of the two names, D3?Op*
and tTSap.
Q.
JOK/NEAM (Qy?|£ [pottettedbythepto.
pie] : pltniu,] 'I«a>tdV, ii MwtV; Alex. UKora/t,
Iuwoya, 1) Ea-rau*: Jachanan, Jeamam, Jecnam),
a city of the tribe of Zebulun, allotted with its
suburbs to tbe Merarite Levitea (Josh. xxi. 34), but
entirely omitted in the catalogue of 1 Chr. vi.
(comp. ver. 77). It is doubtless tbe same place as
that which is incidentally named in connection with
the boundaries of tbe tribe — " the torrent which
faces Jokneam" (xix. 11), and as tbe (anaanite
town, whose king was killed by Joshua — '• Jok-
neam of Carmel " (xii. 22). The requirements of
these passages are sufficiently met by tbe modem
site Tell Kaimon, an eminence which stands just
below the eastern termination of Carmel, with the
Kiahon at its feet about a mile off. Dr. Kobinson
has shown (B. H. iii. 115, note) that the modern
name is legitimately descended from the ancient:
the Ctamon of Jud. vii. 8 being a step in ths
pedigree. (See also Van de Velde. i. 331, an*
A. mow-, 826.) Jokneam is found in the A V
Digitized by
Google
1444
JOKSHAN
rf 1 K. I». 13, but this is unwarranted by either
Bebrew text, Alex. LXX. or Vulgate (both of
which haw the reading Jokmeam, the Tat. LXX.
b quite corrupt), and also by the requirements of
the passage, as stated under Jokmeam." G.
JOK'SHAN (l^r?; [prob. foniUr]: 'U(d»,
1«{dV; [Alex. •* lt\ay, It«rw>:] Jeaan), a son
of Abraham and Keturah (Gen. xxt. 3, 3; 1 Chr.
L 83), whose sons were Sheba and Oedan. While
the settlements of his two sons are presumptively
placed on the borders of Palestine, those of Jokshan
are not known. The Keturahites certainly stretched
across the desert from the head of the Arabian,
to that of the Persian, gulf; and the reasons for
supposing this, especially in the ease of Jokshan,
are mentioned in art. Dedan. If those reasons
be accepted, we must suppose that Jokshan re-
turned westwards to the trans-Jordanic country,
where are placed the settlements of bis sons, or at
least the chief of their settlements; for a wide
spread of these tribes seems to be indicated in the
passages in the Bible which make mention of them.
Places or tribes bearing their names, and conse-
quently that of Jokshan, may be looked for over
the whole of the country intervening between the
heads of the two gulfs.
The writings of the Arabs are rarely of use in
the case of Keturahite tribes, whom they seem to
confound with Ishmaelites in one common appella-
tion. They mention a dialect of Jokshan (" Ya-
kish, who is Yokshan," as having been formerly
spoken near 'Aden and El-Jened, in Southern
Arabia, Yakoot's Moajam, cited in the Zeittchri/l
d. DtuUch. MorgenL GewlUchafl, viii. 600-1, X.
30-1 ) : but that Midianites penetrated so far into
the peninsula we hold to be highly improbable [see
Arabia]. " E. 8. P.
JOKTAN 0Pi?T> """4 Ga - [*> made
mall]: 'Uier&r'- Jtctnn), son of Eber (Gen. x.
«5; 1 Chr. i. 19); and the fether of the Joktanite
Arabs. His sons were Almodad, Sheleph, Hazar-
maveth, Jerah, Hadoram, Uzal, Diklah, Obsl, Abi-
mael, Sheba, Ophir, Harilah, and Jobab; progen-
itors of tribes peopling southern Arabia, many of
whom are clearly identified with historical tribes,
and the rest probably identified in the same man-
ner. The first-named identifications are too well
proved to admit of doubt; and accordingly scholars
are agreed in placing the settlements of Joktan in
the south of the Peninsula. The original limits
are stated in the Bible, " their dwelling was from
Mesha, as thou goeat unto Sephar, a mount of the
East " (Gen. x. 30). The position of Mesha, which
is reasonably supposed to be the western boundary,
is still uncertain [Mesha]; but Sephar is well
established as being the same as Zafari, the sea port
town on the east of the modern Yemen, and for-
merly one of the chief centres of the great Indian
and African trade [Sephar; Arabia]. Besides
the genealogies in Gen. x., we hare no record of.
Joktan himself in the Bible; but there are men-
lions of the peoples sprung from him, which must
guide all researches into the history of the race.
The subject is naturally divided into the history of
Joktan himself, and that of his sons and their
(ascendants.
JOKTAN
The native traditions respecting Joktan com-
mence with a difficulty. The ancestor of the great
southern peoples were called Kahtan, who, say the
Arabs, was the same as Joktan. To this soma
European critics have objected that there is no
good reason to account for the change of name,
and that the identification of Kahtan with Joktan
is evidently a Jewish tradition adopted by Moham-
med or his followers, and consequently at or after
the promulgation of El-Islam. M. Causiin de Per-
ceval commences his essay on the history of Yemen
(A'ssnt, i. 39) with this assertion, and adds, " La
nom de Caht&n, disent-ils [lea Aiabei], est It txan
de Yectan, legerement altlre' en passant d'une ls>«-
gue eirangere dans la kngue arabe." In reply to
these objectors, we may state: —
1. The Rabbins bold a tradition that Joktan
settled in India (see Joseph. Ant. i. 6, § 4), and
the supposition of a Jewish influence in the Arab
traditions respecting him is therefore untenable. 6
In the present case, even were this not so, there is
an absence of motive for Mohammad's adopting
traditions which alienate from the race or Isbmaet
many tribes of Arabia: the influence here suspected
may rather be found in the contradictory assertion,
put forward by a few of the Arabs, and rejected by
the great majority, and the most judicious, of their
historians, that Kahtan was descended from Ish-
mael.
2. That the traditions in question are post-
Mohammedan cannot be proved; the same may
be said of everything which Arab writers tell us
dates before the Prophet's time; for then oral tra-
dition alone existed, if we except the rock-cut in-
scriptions of the Himyerites, which are too few, and
our knowledge of them is too slight, to admit of
much weight attaching to them.
3. A passage in the Mir^H a-Zeman, hitherto
unpublished, throws new light on the point It is
follows: " Ibn-H-Kelbee says. Yuktan [whew
name is also written Yukbtn] is the same as Kah-
tan son of 'ATjir," i. e. Eber, and so say the gener-
ality of the Arabs. " El-Beladhiree say\ People
differ respecting Kahtan; some say be is the same)
as Yuktan, who is mentioned in the Pentateuch ;
but the Arabs arabicized his name, and said Kah-
tan the son of Hood [because they identified their
prophet Hood with Eber, whom they call 'ATrfr] ;
and some say, son of Ea-Semeyfa'," or as is said
in one place by the author here quoted, " El-He-
meysa', the son of Nebt [or Nabit, t. e. Nebaioth],
the son of IsmA'eel," i. e. Iahmael. He then
proceeds, in continuation of the former passage,
Aboo-Honeefeh Ed-Deenawaree says, He is Kah-
tan the son of 'A"bir; and was nsmed Kahtan only
because of his suffering from drought" [which is
termed in Arabic Kaht]. (Jfir-dt u-Zman,
account of the sons of Sbem.) Of similar changes
of names by the Arabs there are numerous in-
stances. Thus it is evident that the name of
"Saul" (VlNip) was changed by the Arabs to
» » <»
"Tflootu" («yjJUs), because of bit taOssas,
6 > .- -
from J^fo (tattneas) or JUfi (hewsataB); at
a • Sea addition to Crura* (Amsr. ad.) Nothzag
bat the name (Till Xoiman) and the mound "too
raxaaw to be natural," remain to attest the analsnt
.Ms. <TrsB»m,l<M<l»/Jiro«/,p. 118, Msd.). H.
ft It to remarkable that in historical qn
Babbtns am singularly wide of the truth, dtoparyhx
a dafkkney of the erlnoal faculty that to i
tone of ghamltk races.
Digitized by
Google
JOKTAK
though the Utter name, being Imperfectly declina-
ble, U not to be considered u Arabic (which sev-
eral Arabian writer* assert it to be), but u a
variation of » foreign name. (See the remarks
on this name, aa occurring in the Knr-an, oh. ii.
848, in the Expotitiont of Es-Zamakhaheree and
Q-Beydawee.) We thui obtain a reuon for the
change of name which appears to be satisfactory,
whereat the theory of it* being arabieized it not
readily to be explained nnleai we iuppuse the term
"arabidzed" to be loosely employed in thii in-
stance.
4. If the tradition! of Kahtan be rejected (and
h thU rejection we cannot agree), they are, it must
be remembered, immaterial to the (act that the
people* called by the Arabe descendants of Kahtan,
are certainly Joktanites. Hit sou' colonisation of
Southern Arabia is prored by indisputable, and
undisputed, identifications, and the great kingdom,
which there existed for many ages before our era,
and in its later days was renowned in the world of
rr'mi'iil antiquity, was aa surely Joktanite.
The settlements of the sons of Joktan are exam-
ined in the separate articles bearing their names,
and generally in Akabia. They colonized the
whole of the south of the peninsula, the old " Ara-
bia Felix," or the Yemen (for this appellation had
a very wide significance in early times), stretching,
according to the Arabs (and there is in this case
no ground for doubting their general correctness),
to Mekkeh, on the northwest, and along nearly
the whole of the southern coast eastwards, and far
Inland. At Mekkeh, tradition connects the two
great races of Joktan and Ishmael, by the marriage
of a daughter of Jurhum the Joktanite with Ish-
mael. It is necessary in mentioning this Jurhum,
who is called a " son " of Joktan (Kahtan), to ob-
serve that " son *' in these cases must be regarded
aa signifying " descendant " (cf. Chronology) in
Hebrew generations, and that many generations
(though bow many, or in what order, ia not known)
are missing born the existing list between Kahtan
(embracing the most important time of the Jok-
tanites), and the establishment of the compara-
tively modern Uimyerite kingdom ; from this latter
date, stated by Caussin, Euai, i. 63, at a. o. dr.
100, the succession of the Tubbaaa is apparently
preserved to us." At Mekkeh, the tribe of Jurhum
long held the office of guardians of the Kaabeh, or
temple, and the sacred enclosure, until they were
expelled by the lahnuelites (Kutb-ed-Deen, But. of
Mekkeh, ed. Wustenfeld, pp. 39 and 39 ft".; and
Caussin, Euai, i. 194). But it was at Seba, the
ttiblical Sbeba, that the kingdom of Joktan at-
tained its greatness- Iu the southwestern angle
of the peninsula, San'a (Uxal), Seba (Sheba), and
Hadramawt (Hasarmaveth), all closely neighboring,
formed together the principal known settlements
of the Joktanite*. Here arose the kingdom of
Sbeba, followed in later times by that of Himyer.
Hie dominant tribe from re note ages seems to have
been that of Seba (or Shaba, the Sabai of the
Greeks): while the family >f Himyer (Bimerita)
held the first place in the tribe. The kingdom
sailed that of Himyer we believe to have been
JOKTHXEL
1445
• It I* curious that the Greeks Brat mention the
Ohnjnttes In the expedition of JElliu Gauus, torarde
the close of the 1st century s. o., although ffimjer
khoaalf lived long bafbrs ; agreeing with oar bsHsf
.net his SUDilT was Important baton the eeatbttsh-
asnt at the so-called kingdom. 8a* Oaoasla, t c
merely a late phasis of the old Sbeba, dating, bote
in its rise and its name, only shortly before oui
era.
Iu Akabia we have alluded to certain curious
indications in the names of Himyer, Oram, the
Phoenicians, and the Erythraean Sea, and the traces
of their westward spread, which would well repay
a careful investigation ; as well aa the obscure rela-
tions of a connection with Chaldan and Assyria,
found in Berosus and other ancient writers, and
strengthened by presumptive evidence of a connec-
tion closer than that of commerce, in religion, etc.
between those oountries and Arabia. An equally
interesting and more tangible subject, is the appa-
rently proved settlement of Cushite races along the
coast, on the ground also occupied by Joktanites,
involving intermarriages between these peoples, and
explaining the Cyclopean masonry of the so-called
Himyerite rains which bear no mark of a Shemite'a
hand, the rigorous character of the Joktanites and
their sea-faring propensities (both qualities not
usually found in Shemitea), and the Cushitie ele-
ments in the rock-out inscriptions in the "Him-
yeritic" language.
Next in importance to the tribe of Seba was that
of Hadramawt, which, till the fall of the Himyerite
power, maintained a position of independence and
a direct line of rulers from Kahtan (Caussin, i.
135-6). Joktanite tribes also passed northwarda,
to Heereh, in E1-' Irak, and to Ghaasan, near Da-
mascus. The emigration of these and other tribes
took place on the occasion of the rupture of a great
dyke (the Dyke of El-'Arim), above the metropolis
of Seba; a catastrophe that appears, from the con-
current testimony of Arab writers, to have devas-
tated a great extent of country, and destroyed the
city Ma-rib or Seba. This event forms the com-
mencement of an era, the dates of which exist in
the inscriptions on the Dyke and elsewhere; but
wben we should place that commencement is still
quite an open question. (See the extracts from
El-Mes'oodee and other authorities, edited by
Schultens; Caussin, i. 84 ft*.; and Akabia.)
The position which the Joktanites hold (in na-
tive traditions) among the successive races who an
said to hare inhabited the peninsula has been fully
stated in art. Arabia; to which the reader is re-
ferred for a sketch of the inhabitants generally,
their descent, history, religion, and language.
There are some existing places named after Jok
tan and Kahtan (Kl-Idreesee, ed. Jaubert; Niehuhr,
Dacr. 238 ») ; but there seems to be no safe ground
for attaching to them any special importance, or
for supposing that the name is ancient, when w*
remember that the whole country is full of the tra-
ditions of Joktan. E. S. P.
JOKTHEEL (*?Nnr"} [suooWrf or mad*
tributary by God]). JL ('iaxoprflA. [Vat -sate-];
Alex, IsvfanX : Jecthti. ) A city in the low country
of Judah (Josh. xv. 88), named next to Lachish —
probably Um-Laku, on the road between Bdt-
gibrm and Gaza. The name does not appear to
have been yet discovered.
8. ('l,9<^\; [Vat. KaBonKi] Alex. IacovnA:
JectduL) "God-subdued," the title given by
» Mebuhr also (Orscr. 319) mentions the repassf
tomb of Kahtan, bat probably ream to the tomb of
the anphet Hood, who, as we have mentkajisd, Is by
as -nought a> as the other of Kansas.
Digitized by
Google
1446 jona
Amaziah to the cliff (Vb&H, A. V. Selah) — the
stronghold of the Edomitea — after he had captured
it from them (2 K. xiv 7). The parallel narrative
of 9 Chr. xxv. 11-13 supplies fuller details. From
it we learn that, having beaten the Edomite army
with a great slaughter is the •• Valley of Salt " —
the valley south of the Dead Sea — Amaziah took
those who were not slain to the cliff, and threw
them headlong over it. This cliff is asserted by
Eusebius ( Onomait. WtjkO to be " a city of Edom,
also called by the Assyrians Rekem," by which there
is no doubt that he intends Petra (see Onomatticon,
*P«/u, and the quotations in Stanley's 8. d* P.
94, note). The title thus bestowed is said to have
continued " unto this day." This, Keil remarks,
is a proof that the history was nearly contemporary
with the event, because Amaziah '• conquest was
lost again by Ahaz less than a century afterwards
(9 Chr. xzviil. 17). G.
JOT* A {'lava: Jona [sea below]), the fetter
of the Apostle Peter (John i. 43 [Gr. 43]), who is
hence addressed as Simon Barjona in Matt xvi. 17.
In the A. V. of John xxi. 16-17 he is called Jonab,
though the Greek is 'lmiyrnt, and the Vulg.
Johannes throughout. The name in either form
would be the equivalent of the Hebrew Johanan.
* In all the passages in John the received text
reads 'Iwrii, for which Lachm. and Treg. adopt the
reading 'lmarou, Tisch. 'IwdWou. The Clementine
Vulg. has Jomi in John i. 42, but the Cod.
Amiatinus reads Johanna, and the Sixtine edition
Joanna. The reading of the received text would
have been properly represented in our translation
by Jona* throughout. A.
JON'ADAB. 1. (2T}V, and once 37?'Vr,
i. t. Jehonadab [whom Jehovah impels] : 'IuvaSd/S :
Jonadab), son of Shimeah and nephew of David.
He is described as " very subtil " (troths cpitpa;
the word is that usually translated " wise," as in
the case of Solomon, 2 Sam. xiii. 3). He seems to
have been one of those characters who, in the midst
of great or royal families, pride themselves, and are
renowned, for being acquainted with the secrets of
the whole circle in which they move. His age
naturally made him the friend of his cousin Amnon,
heir to the throne (2 Sam. xiii. 3). He perceived
from the prince's altered appearance that there was
some unknown grief — " Why art thou, the king's
son, so lean ? " — and, when he had wormed it out,
be gave bim the fatal advice, for ensnaring his
sister Tamar (6, 6).
Again, when, in a later stage of the same tragedy,
Amnon was murdered by Absalom, and the exag-
gerated report reached David that all the princes
were slaughtered, Jonadab was already aware of
the real state of the ease. He was with the king,
and was able at once to reassure him (8 Sam. xiii.
89,88).
8. Jer. xxzt. 6, 8, 10, 14, 16, 18, 19, in which
It represents sometimes the long, sometimes the
mrrt Heb. form of the name. [Jkiionadab.]
A. P. 8.
JCNAH (njV [dove] s 'hwfi,, LXX. and
Matt xiu 39), a prophet, son of Amittal (whose
name, confounded with flOt*, used by the widow
of Zarepheth, 1 K. xvil. 94,' 'has given rise to an
aid tradition, recorded by Jerome, that Jonah was
Mr son, and that Amittal was a prophet himself).
We further learn from 2 K, xiv. 96, he was of
JONAH
Gath-hepher, ■ town of Lower GaiuVe, In Zebuhm
This verse enables us to approximate to the time
at which Jonah lived. It was plainly after the reign
of Jehu, when the losses of Israel (2 K. x. 39) be-
gan ; and it may not have been till the latter part
of the reign of Jeroboam II. The general opinion is
that Jonah was the first of the prophets (Kosenm.,
Bp. Lloyd, Davison, Browne, Drake); Hengstenberg
would place him after Amos and Hosea, and indeed
adheres to the order of the books in the canon for
the chronology. The king of Nineveh at this time
is supposed (Ussher and others) to have been Pul,
who is placed by Layard (JVta. and Bab. 624) at
b. c 760; but an earlier king, Adrammeleeh IL,
R. o. 840, is regarded more probable by Drake.
Our English Bible gives B. c. 862.
The personal history of Jonah is brief, and weB
known; but is of such an exceptional and extra-
ordinary character, as to have been set down by
many German critics to fiction, either in whole or
in part. The book, say they, was composed, or
compounded, some time after the death of the
prophet, perhaps (Rosenm.) at the latter part of the
Jewish kingdom, during the reign of Josiah (S.
Sharpe), or even later. The supposed improbabil-
ities are accounted for by them in a variety of ways ;
e. g. as merely fabulous, or fanciful ornaments to a
true history, or allegorical, or parabolical and moral,
both in their origin and design. A list of the
critics who have advanced these several opinions
may be seen in Davidson's Introduction, p. 966.
RosenmUUer (Proleg. in J (mam) refutes them In
detail ; and then propounds bis own, which is
equally baseless. Like them, he begins with pro-
posing to escape the difficulties of the history, but
ends in a mere theory, open to still greater difficul-
ties. » The fable of Hercules," he says, " devoured
and then restored by a sea-monster, was the foun-
dation on which the Hebrew prophet built up the
story. Nothing was really true in it." We feel
ourselves precluded from any doubt of the reality
of the transactions recorded in this book, by the
simplicity of the language itself; by the historical
allusions in Tob. xiv. 4-6, 16, and Joseph. Ant. ix.
10, § 2; by the accordance with other authorities
of the historical and geographical notices; by the
thought that we might as well doubt all other
miracles in Scripture as doubt these ('« Quod ant
omnia divina miracula credenda non sint, aut hoe
cur non credetur causa nulla sit," Aug. Ep. eiL
in Quant. 6 it Jona, ii. 984; cf. Cyril. Alex. Com-
ment, m Jonam, Hi. 367-389); above all, by the
explicit words and teaching of our lilrasert Lord
Himself (Matt. xii. 39, 41, xri. 4; Luke xi. 29),
and by the correspondence of the miracles In the
histories of Jonah and of the Messiah.
We shall derive additional arguments for the
same conclusion from the history and meaning of
the prophet's mission. Having already, as It salens
(from 1 1n L 1), prophesied to Israel, he was sent
to Nineveh. The time was one of political revival
in Israel; but ere long the Assyrians were to be
employed by God as a scourge upon them. The
Israelites consequently viewed them with repukuve-
ness ; and the prophet, in accordance with his nam*
(rnV, a dove), out of timidity and lore for hit
country, shrunk from a commission which he fell
sure would result (iv. 9) in the sparing of a hostile
dty. He attempted therefore to escape to Tarahish,
either Tartessus in Spain (Bochart, Titoomi
Digitized by
Google
JONAH
3angst), or more probably (Drake) Tarsus In
3fceia, a port of commercial intercourse. The
rividence of God, however, watched over him, first
a itorm, and then in hie being (wallowed by a
large fish (Vvi} 23) for the apace of three dayi
and three night*. We need not multiply miraclee
by auppoaing a great fish to have been created for
the occasion, for Bochart (ffierae. ii. pp. 753-764)
hat shown that there is a sort of shark which de-
vours a man entire, as this did Jonah while cast
Into the water (August Ep. 49, ii. 284).
After bis deliverance, Jonah executed his com-
mission; snd the king, •'believing him to be a
minister from the supreme deity of the nation"
(Layard's Nineveh and Babylon), and having heard
of his miraculous deliverance (Dean Jackson On
Ike Creed, bk. ix. c. 43), ordered a general fast,
and averted the threatened judgment But the
prophet, not from personal but national feelings,
grudged the mercy abown to a heathen nation. He
was therefore taught, by the significant lesson of
the "gourd," whose growth and decay (a known
(act to naturalists, Layard's Nineveh, i. 133, 124)
brought the truth at once borne to him, that he
was sent to testify by deed, as other prophets would
afterwards testify by word, the capacity of Gentiles
(or salvation, and the design of God to make them
partakers of it This was « the sign of the prophet
Jonas " which was given to a proud and perverse
generation of Jews after the ascension of Christ by
the preaching of His Apostles. (Luke xi. 39, 30,
13; Jackson's Comm. on the Creed, ix. c 43.)
But the resurrection of Christ itself was also
shadowed forth in the history of the prophets, as
la made certain to us by the words of our Saviour.
(See Jackson, as above, bk, ix. o. 40.) Titcomb
(Bible StndU; p. 337, n.) sees a correspondence
between Jon. i. 17 and Hotea vi. 3. Besides
which, the fact and the faith of Jonah's prayer in
the belly of the fish betokened to the nation of
Israel the intimation of a resurrection and of im-
mortality.
We thus see distinct purposes which the mission
of Jonah was designed to serve in the Divine econ-
omy; and in these we have the reason of the his-
tory's being placed in the prophetic canon. It was
highly symbolical. The facts contained a concealed
prophecy. Hence, too, only so much of the prophet's
personal history is told us as suffices for setting
forth the symbols divinely intended, which accounts
for its fragmentary aspect. Exclude the symbolical
meaning, and you have no adequate reason to give
of this history : admit it, and you have images here
of the highest facts and doctrines of Christisnity.
(Davison, On Propheeg, p. 875.)
For the extent of the site of Nineveh, see
Tlksvkh.
The old tradition made the burial-plaos of Jonah
to be Gath-hepher; the modern tradition places it
st Ntbi- Yuma, opposite Mosul. See the account
of the excavations in Layard's Nineveh and Babylon,
pp. 596, 597. And consult Drake's ..Voles on Jonah
(Macmillan and Co., 1858/.
See Leusden's Jonat lttuttraUa, TrajetM ad
Khen. 1892; Kusenmiiller's Scholia in Vet. "'est
mcpotition town the Prophet Jonah, by Abp. Abbot
{reprinted ), London, 1845 ; JVotes on Me Propheeiet
♦/" Jonah and Hotea, by Rev. W. Drake, Cam-
Iridge, 1858; Ewald; Umbreit; Henderson, Minor
Prrhete. H. B.
* The passages in which our Lord asserts the
JONAH
1411
truth of the story of Jonah, and the Divine author
it j of his book, and it* intimate connection with
himself, are full and explicit See especially Matt
xii. 39-41, xvi.: -4, Luke xi. 29-88. It was one great
object of our Lord's mission to interpret and oon-
firm the Old Testament (Matt v. 17-19). Much
of bis time was spent in explaining the 0. T. to
his disciples. We read, for example, that " Begin-
ning at Moses, and all the prophets, he expounded
unto them in all the Scriptures the things concern-
ing himself." (See Luke xxiv. 27-33, 46.)
His authority on this subject is just at good a*
it is on any other; and if we reject his sanctions
and interpretations of the 0. T., we reject his
whole mission. No one can say, without absurdity
and self-contradiction, " I admit that Christ brought
life and immortality to light through the Gospel;
but I do not admit that he understood the 0. T.,
or was an accurate and safe interpreter of it" A
miracle is always a direct exertion of creative power;
and so tar as the physical fact is concerned, one
miracle is just as easy, snd just as probable, and
just as natural, as another. There is no question
of hard or easy, natural or unnatural, probable or
improbable, in regard to a real miracle. The ex-
ertion of creative power is to the Creator always
natural, whatever the product of the creative act
may be; there can, in snch a problem, be no ques-
tion in regard to the actual facts. The only ques-
tion must be a moral one, whether the alleged fact
has a purpose worthy of God, and is appropriate
to the object intended ; and this question we are
authorized and required by God himself to ask.
(See Deut. xiii. 1-5.)
The country which was the scene of Jonah's
activity has many traditions analogous to his story,
which seem to rest on some basis of actual facts
which once oecurred among the people of that
region.
Neptune sent a monstrous serpent to ravage the
coast in the neighborhood of Joppa (whence Jonah
sailed), and there was no remedy but to expose
Andromeda, the daughter of king Cepheus, to be
devoured. As she stood chained to the rocks await-
ing her fate, Perseus, who was returning through
the air from his expedition against the Gorgons,
captivated by her beauty, turned the monster into
a rook by showing him Medusa's head, and then
liberated and married the maiden. Jerome informs
us that the very rock, outside the port of Joppa,
was in his day pointed out to travellers.
At Troy, more northerly, on the same Mediter-
ranean coast, Neptune in anger sent out a devour-
ing sea-mouster, which with every returning tide
committed fearful ravages on the people. There
was no help till king Laomedon gave up his beau-
tiful daughter Hesione to be devoured. While the
monster with extended jaws was approaching her
chained to the rocks, Hercules, sword in hand,
leaped into his throat, and for three days snd three
night* maintained a tremendous conflict in the
monster's bowels, from which he at length emerged
victorious and unharmed, except with the loss of
his hair, which the heat of the animal had loosened
fron- the scalp. For this exploit Hercules was sur-
named ToieVnrtpst ( Threenight).
Aia, the daughter of the king of Beirut, a city
north of Joppa, on the same coast, for the salvation
of her country was about to be devoured by a
frightful dragon. St George, in full armor, as-
saulted the dragon, and after an obstinate eouflM
of several days' oontinuance, slew him and del? awl
Digitized by
Google
1448
JONAH
the prisma. He ii the patron Mint of Armenia
tud England, of the Franeonian and Swabian
knights, and of the cniaadei generally.
According to Babylonian tradition, a fish-god or
fan-man, named Oannea, was divinely eent to that
country, the region of the Euphrates and Tigris,
to teach the inhabitant* the fair of God and good
morale, to instruct them in astronomy and agricul-
ture, the sciences and useful arte, legislation and
anil polity. He came from the sea and spake with
a man's raise, teaching only in the daytime, and
returning again every night to the sea. Sculptures
of this fish-god are frequently found among the
ruins of Nineveh. The head and bee of a dig-
nified and noble-looking man are seen just below
the mouth of the fish, the bands and arms project
from the pectoral fins, and the feet and ankles from
the ventral; and there are other forma, but it ia
always a man m ajitk.
The Assyrian Ninevites were of the same race
as the Hebrews, and spoke a language very like the
Hebrew. The Greek name Oannea may be derived
from the oriental Jonah, just as Euphrates is de-
rived from the oriental Phrath. For a fuller dis-
cussion of these oriental traditions illustrative of
the book of Jonah, the reader may see an essay by
the writer in the BM. Sacra for October, 1853.
Consult especially Creuzer, Symbolik md MythU-
ogie der Allot Votlker, ii. 22, 74-41, Ac
Jonah was probably born about 860 b. c., and
prophesied during the reign of Jeroboam II., from
885 to 789 a. c. He was a child when Homer was
an old blind bard singing his rhapsodies on the
eastern shores of the Mediterranean ; a contemporary
of the Spartan lawgiver, Lycurgus; by a century the
senior of Romulus, and four centuries more ancient
than Herodotus. He is the oldest of the prophets,
any of whose writings hare reached our times. This
hoary antiquity, the rough manners of the time,
and the simplicity of the people who were his con-
temporaries, must be taken into consideration in an
T* 5 *""** of the book. It is throughout in keeping,
eminently appropriate to the times and circum-
stances in which it claims to have originated. God
tlwava adapt* bis revelations to the character and
arcunutances of those to whom he makes them,
and never stands on dignity as men do. Human
notions of dignity are a small matter with him;
his field of observation ia so large that he is not
much affected by trifles of this sort.
Jonah was evidently a man of hypochondriac
temperament, easily discouraged and easily elated ;
timid and courageous at rapid intervals; in his
Idsas of God a good deal under the influence of
the heathenism of his time; yet a God-fearing
man, a patriotic lover of his own people, and an
earnest hater of their idolatrous opp re ss ors , the
Niuevite Assyrians. A consideration of these trait*
nptains the oddities of his history, and illustrates
the condescension and patience of his God.
The Carckarim of the Mediterranean ia of suf-
ficient size to swallow a man, and God was under
no necessity of creating a fish for this special pur-
pose.' 1 The king in Nineveh was at this time either
Adrammelech II. or Pul; the city was at least 60
miles (three days' journey) in circumference, and
there is nothing in the least strange or inconsistent
with the ideas of the time, that the Ninevites and
• •fCrnraoBaf this settament, ss* BOi. Sacra, x.
M) Bocbart, Sum. in. 988; and asehharn's MmL
*^Xr.b.H0,W. O.B.S.
JONAH
their king should be alarmed by a threat from tan-
God of the Hebrews; and their mode of fasting,
and repenting, and manifesting sorrow, is just what
we find described by other ancient authors, such as
Herodotus, Plutarch, Virgil, etc (Herod, iz. 27).
The plant which shaded Jonah is treated in the
story as miraculous- Such rapidly growing and
suddenly withering plants, however, are still found
in the east, and have been well described by our
American missionaries, and by such travellers ss
Niebuhr [Gourd]. The castor-oil bean, cultiva-
ted in some of our gardma, will give us a grod idea
of the kind of plant referred to.*
The Orientals have always had a high regard
for Jonah, and his tomb Is still shown with ven-
eration near the ruins of Nineveh, as wel aa at
Gath-hepher. The Rabbins, who make two Messiahs,
one the son of David, and the other tie son of
Joseph, affirm that Jonah was the Messiah the SOB
of Joseph.* The respect shown to him by the
Mohammedans is slso remarkable. In the Koran
one entire chapter is inscribed with his name.
In one passage he is called Dhu'bam, that is,
the dwtller m the Jith ; and in the tbirty-eeventh
chapter the following narrative is given <f him:
" Jonah was one of our ambassadors. When be
fled in the fully laden ship, the sailors csst lota,
and by that he was condemned ; and then the fish
swallowed him, because he merited punishment. . . .
We cast him upon the naked shore, and he felt
himself sick; and therefore we caused a vine to
grow over him, and sent him to a hundred thousand
men, or more; and when they believed, we granted
them their lives for a definite time." In the twenty-
first chapter it ia said : " Remember Dhu'lnun (the
dxctlter in thejiih, that ia, Jonah), how he departed
from us in wrath and believed that we could exer-
cise no power over him. And in the darkness hi
prayed to us in these words : ' There is no God but
thee. Honor and glory be to thee. Truly I have
been a sinner, but thou art merciful beyond all the
power of language to express.' And we heard him,
and delivered him from his distress; as we an
always accustomed to deliver the believers." This
brief prayer, which the Koran represents Jonah as
uttering in the belly of the fish, the Mohammedans
regard aa one of the holiest and most efficacious
of all prayers, and they often use it in their own
devotions. Certainly it is simple, expressive, and
beautiful, and reminds us of the prayer of the pub-
lican In the Gospel. The tenth chapter of the Koran
says: " It is only the people of Jonah, whom we,
after they had believed, did deliver from the punish-
ment of shame in this world, and granted them
the enjoyment of their goods for a certain time."
The Mohammedan writers say that the ship in
which Jonah had embarked stood still In the sea
and would not be moved. The seamen, therefore,
cast lots, and the lot falling upon Jonah, he cried
out, / am Ike fugitin, and threw himself into the
water. The fish swallowed him. The time he
remained in the fish is differently stated by then
as three, seven, twenty, or forty days; but when
he was thrown upon the land he was in a state el
great suffering and distress, his body having be-
come like that of a new-born infant. When he
went to Nineveh, the inhabitant* at first toeassi
him harshly, so that he was obliged to flee, aft*
» HoMnmtUh>*i JUUrUumukmtd; I
• SMsnnmnsi. AitdKHn Jwlnakmn, B.
Digitized by
Google
JONAH
be had declared that the city should be destroyed
within three days, or, as some my, forty. As the
time approached, a black cloud, shooting forth fire
and smoke, rolled itself directly over the city; and
pat the inhabitants into dreadful consternation, so
that they proclaimed a fast and repented, and God
spared them.
From all the oriental traditions on the subject, it
Is very plain that the men of the old East, the men
of the country where Jonah lived, and who were
acquainted with the manners and modes of thought
there prevalent, never felt any of those objections
to the prophet's narrative, which have so much
stumbled the men of other nations and other times-
God deals with men just as their peculiar circum-
stances and habits of thought require; and the
sailors and fishermen of Palestine, three thousand
years ago, are not to be judged of by the standard
of culture at tne present day ; and a mode of treat-
ment might have been very suitable for them, which
would be quite inappropriate to modern fashionable
society; and they, we doubt not, in the sight of
God, were of quite as much importance in their
time as we are in ours. Christ himself so far honors
Jonah as to make his history a type of His own
resurrection*
Tne place of the book in the Hebrew Canon in
the time of Christ, and in all previous and all sub-
sequent time, is unquestionable and unquestioned.
See the apocryphal book of Tobit, xiv. 7, 8.
A consideration of the real state of both the
heathen and the Jewish mind, at that time and in
that land, will show the utter groundlessness of the
objection sometimes made to the credibility of the
book of Jonah, because it represents a Hebrew
prophet as being sent to a heathen city, and preach-
ing there with great acceptance and power. Com-
pare 1 K. xx. 23-26; 2 K. viii. 7-10, xvi 10-15;
1 Chr. xxi. 31; Am. ix. 7, 8.
To understand the feelings of the prophet in
regard to Nineveh, and the failure of his prophecy,
we must call to mind the circumstances in which
he lived. He was a native of Gath-hepher, in the
northern part of Israel, where the people hod been
greatly corrupted by constant intercourse with idol-
atry; and they were continually exposed to the
cruelty and oppression of their northern and eastern
neighbors, especially from the powerful empire of
Nineveh, by which they had been greatly injured.
Among the prophetic utterances of Moses, God
had declared in respect to his people (Deut xxxii.
21): "/ will move them to jeatomy with thoee
which are not a people ; I mil provoke them to
onger with a foolith nation." This they under-
stood to imply that the time would come when the
Israelites would be rejected for their sins, and some
Pagan nation received to favor instead of them;
and this is the use which the Apostle Paul makes
sf the text in Rom. x. 19. Jonah had seen enough
of the sins of the Israelites to know that they de-
MTed rejection ; and the favor which God showed
to the Ninevites, on their repentance, might have
led him to fear that the event so long before pre-
dicted by Moses was now about to occur, and that
too by his instrumentality. Israel would be re-
jected, and the proud, oppressive, hateful Nineveh,
sdlous to the Israelites for a thousand cruelties
(9 K. xr. 19, 20), might then be received, on their
repentance and reformation, as the people of God.
\ was to him a thought insupportabfy painful, and
Sod had made him unwillingly the means of bring-
kw. sua lboat He thought he did wtO to be
JONAN
1449
angry -to he displeased, grieved, distressed — fa
such is the import of the original phrase in Jon.
iv. 1, 9.
Alone, unprotected, at the hazard of his life, and
most reluctantly, he had, on his credit as a prophet,
made a solemn declaration of the Divine purpose
in regard to that city, and God was now about to
falsify it. Why should he not be distressed, the
poor hypochondrias, and pray to die rather than
live? Everybody is against him ; everything goes
against him; God himself exposes him to disgrace
and disregards his feelings. So he feels ; so every
hypochondriao would feel in like circumstances.
He cannot bear to remain an hour in the hated
city; he retires to the neighboring field, exposed to
the dreadful burning of the sun, which is so in-
tolerable that the inhabitants of the cities on the
Tigris find it necessary, at the present day, to con-
struct apartments under ground to protect them-
selves from the noon-day heat. God causes a spa-
cious, umbrageous plant to spread its broad leaves
over the booth and afford him the needed shelter.
He rejoices in its shade; but before the second day
has dawned, the shade is gone; the sirocco of the
desert beats upon him with the next noon-day sun,
he is distracted with pains in his head, he faints
with the insupportable heat, and alone, disconsolate,
unfriended, thinking that everybody despises him
and scorns him ss a lying prophet, hypochondriac-
like, he again wishes himself dead. Prophetic in-
spiration changed no man's natural temperament
or character. The prophets, just like other men,
had to struggle with their natural infirmities and
disabilities, with only such Divine aid as is within
the reach of all religious men. The whole repre-
sentation in regard to Jonah is in perfect keeping;
it is as true to nature as any scene in Shakespeare,
and represents hypochondria as graphically as
Othello represents jealousy or Lear madness.
Jonah is not peculiarly wicked, but peculiarly
unoomfortable, and to none so much so as to him-
self ; and his kind and forgiving God does not
hastily condemn him, but pities and expostulates,
and by the most significant of illustrations justifies
his forbearance towards the repentant Nineveh.
The prophets, in the execution of their arduous
mission, often came to places in which they felt as
if it would be better for them to die rather than
live. For example, of Elijah, who was of a very
different temperament from Jonah, far more cheer-
ful and self-relying, we have a similar narrative in
1 K. xix. 4-10.
Dr. Puaey has given us an excellent •Momentary
on Jonah. There is a more ancient one of great
value by John King, D. D., and seme excellent
suggestions in regard to the book may be found In
Davison on Prophecy, disc. vi. pt. 2. P. Fried-
richsen's Krititche Ueberticht der verechiedtnm
Aneichten ton dan Buche Jonat,*he. (Leipx. 1841)
is a useful work. The commentaries on the book
are well-nigh innumerable. A formidable catalogue
of them is given in RosenmuUer's Scholia in Vet.
Tat. For the later writers on Jonah as one of
the minor prophets, see Habakkuk. (Amer. ed.).
C Bk S
JCNAN flvrdV; [Tteoh. Treg. 'tovaV :]
Jona), son of Eliakim, in the genealogy of Christ,
in the 7th generation after David, i. s. about the
time of king Jehoram (Luke iii. 30). The name
i» probably only another form, of Johanan, which
occurs so frequently in this genealogy. The se-
quence of names. Jonan, Joseph, Jnda, Simeon
Digitized by
Google
1450
JONAS
Levi, Mallhat, U angularly Hke that In tt. M, 87 ,
Joanna, Judah, Joseph, Semei — Mattathlsa.
A. C. H.
JOTNAS. 1 ("laWj; [Vat Imw;]' *!«*•
OouJoj: JEtonnj.) This name occupies the Mine
position in 1 Eedr. iz. 33 as Eiiezer in the corre-
sponding list in Esr. x. S3. Perhaps the corruption
originated in reading "»3 W^M for "IttPbH, aa
appears to hare been the ease in 1 Eadr. iz. 33
(eomp. Ear. z. 31). The former would hare caught
the compiler's eye from Ear. z. 83, and the original
lam EUonas, as it appears in the Vulg., could
•nil} have become Jonas.
3. Clanus: Jonas.) The prophet Jonah (3 Eedr.
. 80; Tob. xir. 4, 8; Matt zii. 89, 80, 41, zvi. 4).
3. ([Rec text, 'IawSt; Lachm. Treg. 'Wrnt ;
Tiaeh.] 'laMuwqtl Johamet), John xxl. 16-17.
[JORA.]
JON'ATHAN Onj'TP, i. a. Jehonathan,
and ?n3.V> ; the two forms are need almost alter-
nately: 'lardBay, Joe. 'IsmlOns: Jonathan), the
eldest son of kin; Saul The name (the gift of
Jehovah, corresponding to Theodima in Greek)
seems to hare been common at that period ; possi-
bly from the example of Saul's son (see Jonathan,
the nephew of David, Jonathan, the son of
Abiathar, Jonathan, the son of Shage, and
Nathan the prophet).
He first appears some time after his father's ac-
cession (1 Sam. xiii. 3). If his younger brother
Ishbosheth was 40 at the time of Saul's death (3
Sam. ii. 8), Jonathan must have been at least 30,
when he is first mentioned. Of his own family we
know nothing, except the birth of one son, 6 years
before his death (3 Sam. ir. 4). He was regarded
In his father's lifetime as heir to the throne. Like
Saul, he was a man of great strength and activity
(9 Sam. i. 33), of which the exploit at Michmash
was a proof. He was also famous for the peculiar
martial exercises in which his tribe excelled —
arebery and slinging (1 Chr. zii. 3). His bow was
to him what the spear was to his father: " the bom
of Jonathan turned not back " (3 Sam. i. 33). It
was always about him (1 Sam. xviii. 4, xx. 35).
It is through his relation with David that he is
chiefly known to us. probably as related by his
descendants at David's court. But there is a back-
ground, not so clearly given, of his relation with
his father. From the time that he first appears
he is Saul's constant companion. He was always
present at his father's meals. As Abner and David
teem to have occupied the places afterwards called
the captaincies of >• the host " and " of the guard ; "
so he seems to have been (as Husbai afterwards)
••the friend " (eomp. 1 Sam. zx. 25; 2 Sam. zv.
87). The whole story implies, without expressing,
the deep attachment of the father and son. Jon-
athan can only go on his dangerous expedition
(1 Sam. xiv. 1 ) by concealing it from Saul. Saul's
vow is confirmed, and its tragic effect deepened, by
his feeling for his son, " though it be Jonathan my
son" (to. xiv. 89). "Tell me what thou hast
done" (t'6. ziv. 43). Jonathan cannot bear to he-
lm his father's enmity to David, " my father will
do nothing great or small, bat that be will show it
to me: and why should my father hide this thing
from me? it is not so" (1 Sam. zz. 8). To him,
V to any one, the wild frenzy of the Ung was
amenable — "Saul hearkened nnto the voice of
«onathan"(lSam.ziz.ft). Theh- jnotaal affection
JONATHAN
was Indeed interrupted by the growth of Santa
insanity. Twice the father would hare sacrificed
the son: once in consequence of his vow (1 Sam.
xiv.); the second time, more deliberately, on the
discovery of David's Sight : and on this hist occa-
sion, a momentary glimpse is given of some darker
history. Were the phrases " son of a p e rvers e
rebellious woman," — » shame on thy mother's
nakedness " (1 Sain. zz. 80, 81), mere frantic in-
vectives? or was there something in the story of
Ahinoam or Rizpah which we do not know ? " In
fierce anger " Jonathan left the royal presence (»&
84). But he cast his lot with his father's decline,
not with his friend's rise, and •• in death they were
not divided " (3 Sam. 1. 33; 1 Sam. xxiii. 18).
His lire may be divided into two main parts.
1. The war with the Philistines; commonly
called, from its locality, " the war of Michmash,"
as the last years of the Peloponnesian War were
called for a similar reason " the war of Decelea "
(1 Sam. xiii. 23, LXX.). In the previous war with
the Ammonites (1 Sam. xi. 4-15) there is no men-
tion of him; and his abrupt appearance, without
explanation, in xiii. 3, may seem to imply that
some part of the narrative has been lost
He is already of great importance in the state.
Of the 3,000 men of whom Saul's standing army
was formed (xiii. 8, xxiv. 3, zzvi. 1, 2), 1,000 were
under the command of Jonathan at Gibeah. The
Philistines were still in the general command of
the country; an officer was stationed at Geba,
cither the same as Jonathan's position or close to
it In a sudden act of youthful daring, aa when
Tell rose against Gessler, or aa in sacred history
Moees rose against the Egyptian, Jonathan slew
this officer," and thus gave the signal for a general
revolt. Saul took advantage of it, and the whole
population rose. But it was a premature attempt
The Philistines poured in from the plain, and the
tyranny became more deeply rooted than ever.
[Saul-] Saul and Jonathan (with their imme-
diate attendants) alone had arms, amidst the gen-
eral weakness and disarming of the people (1 Sam.
xiii. 33). They were encamped at Gibeah, with a
small body of 600 men, and as they looked down
from that height on the misfortunes of their coun-
try, and of their native tribe especially, they wept
aloud {( K \mov, LXX.; 1 Sam. xiii. 16).
From this oppression, aa Jonathan by his former
act had been the first to provoke it so now he wan
the first to deliver his people. On the former occa-
sion Saul bad Veen equally with himself involved
in the responsibility of the deed. Saul " blew the
trumpet; " Saul had "smitten the officer of the
Philistines " (xiii. 8, 4). But now it would seem
that Jonathan was resolved to undertake the whole
risk himself. " The day," the day fixed by him
(■yfwroi $ Woo, LXX.; 1 Sam. xiv. 1) ap-
proached; and without communicating his project
to any one, except the young man, whom, like all
the chiefs of that age, he retained as his armor-
bearer, he sallied forth from Gibeah to attack the
garrison of the Philistines stationed on the other
side of the steep defile of Michmash (xiv. 1). Hit
words are short, but they breathe exactly the an-
cient and peculiar spirit of the Israelite warrior.
" Come, and let us go over unto the garrison of
these uncireumcised ; it may In that Jehovah wl
work for us: for there is no leatreint to Jeaovat
• (A.T. "Garrison") ri» lla*#, UX; 1 I
xflLS.4. 8» Kwald. K. 4TO.
Digitized by
Google
JONATHAN
o save by many or by few." The answer it no
jess characteristic of the close friendship of the two
young men : already like to tnai which afterwards
■prang up between Jonathan and David. " Do all
that is in thine heart; .... behold, 1 am with
thee; a> thy heart ii my heart (LXX.; 1 Sam.
xiv. 7)." After the manner of the time (and the
man, probably, from having taken no counsel of
the high-priest or any prophet before his depart-
ure) Jonathan proposed to draw an omen for their
eourse from the conduct of the enemy. If the
garrison, on seeing them, gave intimations of de-
scending upon them, they would remain in the
ralley; if, on the other hand, tbey raised a chal-
lenge to advance, they were to accept it The lat-
ter turned out to be the case. The first appear-
ance of the two warriors from behind the rocks was
taken by the Philistines as a furtive apparition of
" the Hebrews coming forth out of the holes where
they had hid themselves; " and they were welcomed
with a scoffing invitation (such as the Jebusites
afterwards offered to David), " Come up, and we
will show you a thing" (xiv. 4-12). Jonathan
immediately took them at their word. Strong and
active as he was, " strong as a lion, and swift as an
eagle " (2 Sam. i. 33), be was fully equal to the
adventure of climbing on his hands and feet up the
face of the cliff. When he came directly in view
of them, with his armor-bearer behind him, they
both, after the manner of their tribe (1 Chr. xii.
2) discharged a flight of arrows, stones, and peb-
bles, 11 from their bows, crossbows, and slings, with
such effect that 20 men fell at the first onset
[Arks, vol. i. p. ISO &.]. A panic seized the gar-
rison, thence spread to the camp, and thence to
the surrounding hordes of marauders; an earth-
quake combined with the terror of the moment;
tiie confusion increased; the Israelites whs had
been taken staves by the Philistines during the last
8 days (LXX.) rose in mutiny: the Israelites who
lay hid in the numerous caverns and deep holes in
which the rocks of the neighborhood abound, sprang
out of their subterranean dwellings. Saul and his
little band had watched in astonishment the wild
retreat from the heights of Gibeah — he now joined
in the pursuit, which led him headlong after the
fugitives, over the rugged plateau of Bethel, and
down * the pass of Beth-boron to Ajalon (xiv. 15-
31). [GiBitAif, p. 915.] The father and son had
not met on that day: Saul only conjectured his
son's absence from not finding him when be num-
bered the people. Jonathan had not heard of the
rash curse (xiv. 24) which Saul invoked on any one
who ate before the evening. In the dizziness and
darkness (Hebrew, 1 Sam. xiv. 27) that came on
after his desperate exertions, he put forth' the staff
whiih apparently had (with his sling and bow) been
his jluef weapon, and tasted the honey which lay
on the ground as they passed through the forest.
The pursuers in general were restrained even from
this alight indulgence by fear of the royal curse;
Vat the moment that the day, with Its enforced
last, was over, they flew, like Muslims at sunset
JONATHAN
1451
■ We have taken the LXX. version or xii 13, U :
ImsftafsVav Kara vpoffmror ' Iw aflar, rat £**>*£»' «&-
Sjftf • . . . sV 0*Wl ami 4rTrrpo0oAoi« ui iv «b;(JU£t
lev naw, for "they fcu before Jonathan . .
etthui ss it were a half acre of ground, which a yoke
sf oxen might plough." The alteration of the He-
brew necessary to produce this rending of the LXX.
M given bj Kennlcott (Distert. on 1 Omm. xl. p. 458).
threat (II. 4P0) makes tab hurt to be, " Jonathan and
during the fast of Ramadan, on the captured cattle;
and devoured them, even to the brutal negleot
of the law which forbade the dismemberment of
the fresh carcases with the blood. This violation
of the law Saul endeavored to prevent and to expi-
ate by erecting a large stone, which served both as
a rude table and as an altar; the first altar that
was raised under the monarchy. It was in the
dead of night after this wild revel was over that he
proposed that the pursuit should be continued till
dawn ; and then, when the silence of the oracle of
the high-priest indicated that something had re-
curred to intercept the Divine favor, the lot was
tried, and Jonathan appeared as the culprit. Jeph-
thah's dreadful sacrifice would have been reiwafed ,
but the people interposed in behalf of the hero of
that great day ; and Jonathan was saved c (xiv. 94-
48).
2. This is the only great exploit of Jonathan's
life. But the chief interest of his career is derived
from the friendship with David, which began on
the day of David's return from the victory over the
champion of Oath, and continued till his death.
It is the first Biblical instance of a romantic friend-
ship, such as was common afterwards in Greece,
and baa been since in Christendom ; and Is remark-
able both as giving its sanction to these, and at
filled with a pathos of its own, which has been
imitated, but never surpassed, in modern works of
fiction. " The soul of Jonathan was knit with the
soul of David, and Jonathan loved him »s his own
soul " — " Thy love to me was wonderful, passing
the love of women " (1 Sam. xviii. 1 ; 2 Sam. i.
26). Each found in each the affection that he
found not in his own family: no jealousy of rivalry
between the two, as claimants for the same throne,
ever interposed: "Thou shall be king in Israel,
and I shall be next unto thee " (1 Sam. xxiii. 17)
The friendship was confirmed, after the manner of
the time, by a solemn compact often repeated.
The first was immediately on their first acquaint-
ance. Jonathan gave David as a pledge his royal
mantle, his sword, bis girdle, and his famous bow
(xviii. 4). His fidelity was soon called into action
by the insane rage of his father against David.
He interceded for his life, at first witli success (1
Sam. xix. 1-7 ). Then the madness returned and
David fled. It was in a secret interview during
this flight, by the stone of Ezel, that the second
covenant was made between the two friends, of s
still more binding kind, extending to their mutual
posterity — Jonathan laying such emphasis on this
portion of the compact, as almost to suggest the
belief of a slight misgiving on his part of David's
future conduct in this respect. It is this interview
which brings out the character of Jonathan in the
liveliest colors — his little artifices — bis love for
both his father and his friend — bis bitter disap-
pointment at his father's unmanageable fury — his
familiar sport of archery. With passionate em-
braces and tears the two friends parted, to meet
only once more (1 Sam. xx.). That one more
meeting was far away in the forest of Ziph, during
his friend were as a yoke of oxen ploughing, and re-
sisting the sharp ploughshares.' 1
* In xiv 28, 31, the LXX. reads "Bamoth " ft*
" Betfa-av«V and omits « Aj»loo."
c Josephs Ant. (vt. 6, § 0) puts Into Jonathan's
mouth a speech of patriotic self-devotion, after the
I manner of « Greek or Roman. JSwald (II. 488) sup-
I poses that a substttufes was killed In his place. Then
I la no trees of dther of there In the seared Dnr»4ve
Digitized by
Google
1452
JONATHAN
Baal's pursuit of David. Jonathan'* alarm fcc hii
friend's life is now changed into a confidence that
he will escape: " He strengthened hia hand in
God." Finally, and for the third time, they re-
newed the covenant, and then parted forever (1
Sam. xxiii. 16-18).
From thii time forth we hear no more till the
battle of Gilboa. In that battle he fell, with bis
two brother! and hia father, and his corpse shared
their fate (1 Sam. xxxi. 2, 8). [Saul.] His ashes
were buried first at Jabesh-Gilead (UM. 13), but
afterwards removed with those of bis father to
Zebh in Benjamin (3 Sam. xxL 13). The news
of his death occasioned the celebrated elegy of
David, in which he, as the friend, naturally occu-
pies the chief place (2 Sam. i. 23, 23, 25, 26), and
which seems to have been sung in the education of
the archers of Judah, in commemoration of the one
great archer, Jonathan : " He bade them teach the
children of Judah the use of the bow " (2 Sam. i.
17, 18).
He left one son, five years old at the time of
his death (2 Sam. iv. 4), to whom be had prob-
ably given hia original name of Merib-baal, after
wards changed for Mephibosbeth (comp. 1 Chr. viii.
34, ix. 40). [Mcphibosheth.] Through him
the line of descendants was continued down to the
time of Ezra (1 Chr. is. 40), and even then their
great ancestor's archery was practiced amongst
them. [Saul]
8. fl/TjiiT.) Son of Shimea, brother of Jon-
adab, and nephew of David (2 Sam. xxi. 21; 1 Chr.
xx. 7). He inherited the union of civil and military
gifts, so conspicuous in his uncle. Like David, he
engaged in a single combat and slew a gigantic
Philistine of Gath, who was remarkable for an
additional finger and toe on each hand and foot
;2 Sam. xxi. 21). If we may identify the Jonathan
of 1 Chr. xxvii. 32 with the Jonathan of this pas-
sage, where the word translated •' uncle " may be
" nephew," he was (like his brother Jonadab)
» wise " — and as such, was David's counsellor and
secretary. Jerome ( Quatl. fftb. on 1 Sam. xvii. 12)
Conjectures that this was Nathan the prophet, thus
making up the 8th son, not named in 1 Chr. ii.
13-15. But this is not probable
3. [JmaOiai.] The son of Abiathar, the high-
priest. He is the last descendant of Eli, of whom
we hear anything. He appears on two occasions.
1. On the day of David's flight from Absalom,
having first accompanied his father Abiathar as far
u Olivet (2 Sam. xv. 36), he returned with him
to Jerusalem, and was there, with Ahimaaz the
son of Zadok, employed as a messenger to carry
back the news of Hushai's plans to David (xvii.
16-21). 2. On the day of Solomon's inauguration,
be suddenly broke in upon the banquet of Adonyah,
to announce the success of the rival prince (1 K. i.
42, 43). It may be inferred from Adongah's ex-
pression (" Thou art a valiant man, and bringest
good tidings "), that he had followed the policy of
ok father Abiathar in Adonyah's support.
On both occasions, it may be remarked that he
appears as the swift and trusty messenger.
4. The son of Sbage the Hararite (1 Chr. xu
M; 3 Sam. xxtii. 32). He was one of David's
heroes (j/ibborim). The LXX. makes his lather's
tame Sola (l&xA ), and applies the epithet " Ara-
■tta " (« 'AfHwO to Jonathan himself. " Harar"
* not mentioned elsewhere as a place; bat it is a
poetical word for 'Her" (mountain), and, as snob,
JONATHAN
may possibly signify in this passage " the moun-
taineer." Another officer (Ahiam) is mentionea
with Jonathan, as bearing the aamo designation
(1 Chr. xi. 36). A. P. S.
S. OnjVl?.) The son, or descendant, of
Gershom the eon of Hoses, whose name in the
Masoretic copies is changed to Hanasseh, in order
to screen the memory of the great lawgiver from
the disgrace which attached to the apostasy of one
so closely connected with him (Judg. xviii. 30).
While wandering through the country in search
of a home, the young Levite of Bethlebnn-Judah
came to the house of Hicsh, the rich Ephraimite,
and was by him appointed to be a kind of private
chaplain, and to minister in the house of gods, or
sanctuary, which Hicah had made in imitation of
that at Shiloh. He was recognizee! by the fiva
Danite spies appointed by their tribe to search the
land for an inheritance, who lodged in the house
of Micah on their way northwards. The favorable
answer which he gave when consulted with regard
to the issue of their expedition probably induced
them, on their march to Laish with the warrion
of their tribe, to turn aside again to the house of
Hicah, and carry off the ephod and teraphim, snper-
stitiously hoping thus to make success certain.
Jonathan, to whose ambition they appealed, accom-
panied them, in spite of the remonstrances of his
patron ; he was present at the massacre of the de-
fenseless inhabitants of Laish, and in the new city,
which rose from its ashes, he was constituted priest
of the graven image, an office which became hered-
itary in his family till the Captivity. The Torgum
of K. Joseph, on 1 Chr. xxiii. 16, identifies him
with Shebuel the son of Gershom, who is there
said to have repented (H^W] IJJ?) In his old
age, and to nave been appointed by David as chief
over bis treasures. AU this arises from a play
upon the name Shebuel, from which this meaning
is extracted in accordance with a favorite practice
of the Targumist.
0- 0nj'"l\) One of the eons of Adin (Ear.
viii. 6), whose representative Ebed returned with
Ezra at the head of fifty males, a number which ia
increased to two hundred and fifty in 1 Esdr. viii.
33, where Jonathan is written 'IvriBat-
7. [In 1 Esdr., 'Ittriias' Jonaliuu.] A priest,
the son of Asahel, one of the four who assisted Ezra
in investigating tile marriages with foreign women,
which hod been contracted by the people who
returned from Babylon (Ezra x. 15; 1 Esdr. ix.
14).
& [Vat Alex. FA.» omit.] A priest, and one
of the chiefs of the fathers in the days of Joialrim,
son of Jeshua. He was the representative of the
family of Helicu (Neh. xii. 14).
9. One of the sons of Kareah, and brother of
Johanan (Jer. xL 8). The LXX. in this pa— ga
omit his name altogether, and In this they are sup-
ported by two of Kennicott's HSS., and the paralle!
passage of 3 K. xxv. 33. In three others of Ken-
nicott's it was erased, and was originally omitted
in three of De Rossi's. He was one of the captains
of the army who had escaped from Jerusalem in
the final assault by the Chaktoens, and, after the
capture of ZedeUah at Jericho, had cro ss ed the
Jordan, and remained in the open country of the
Ammonites till the victorious army had retired with
their spoils and capt'res. He accompanied hit
brother Johanan and the other captains, who s»
Digitized by
Google
JONATHAN
lotted to Gedaliah at Mkpah, and from that time
we hear nothing more of him. Hitzig decides
■gainst the LXX. and the MS8. which nmit the
um ( Der Propk. Jeremiat), on the ground that
the very similarity b e tween Jonathan and Jobanan
■won the belief that they were brothers.
W. A W.
10. ftroV: 'htritw; [FAoneelwowftw.])
Son of Joiada, and hia successor in the high-prlest-
bood. The only fact oonneoted with hia pontificate
recorded in Scripture, ii that the genealogical ree-
orda of the priests and Levitea were kept in hia
day (Neh. xii. 11, 82), and that tbe chronicle! of
the state were continued to hii time (to. S3). Jon-
athan (or, at he ii called in Neh. xii. 22, 23, John
[Jobanan]) lived, of course, long after the death of
Nehemiah, and in the reign of Artaxerxea Hnemon.
Josepbus, who alas calk him John, as do Eusebius*
and Nicephorus likewise, reiatea that he murdered
hia own brother Jeaua in tbe Temple, because Jesus
was endeavoring to get tbe high-priesthood from
him through the influence of Bagoses the Persian
general. He adda that John by this misdeed
brought two great judgments upon the Jews: the
one, that Bagoses entered into the Temple and
polluted it; the other, that be imposed a heavy tax
of 60 shekels upon every lamb oflered in sacrifice,
to punish them for this horrible crime (A. J. xi.
7, § 1). Jonathan, or John, was high-priest for
32 years, according to Eusebius and the Alexandr.
Chron. (SeU- de Buccal, in P. E. cap. vi.,*ii.).
Human speaks of the murder of Jesus as " tbe only
memorable transaction in the annals of Judaea from
the death of Nehemiah to the time of Alexander
the Great" {Bit. of Jem, ii. 29).
11. [Vat FA.1 Imara,.] Father of Zecharlah,
a priest who blew the trumpet at the dedication of
the wall (Neh. xii. 86). lie seems to haw been
of the course of Shemaiah. The words " son of"
team to be Improperly inserted before the following
tame, liattaniak, as appears by comparing xi. 17.
A. C. H.
12. Clawdfai.) 1 Esdr. viii. 32. [See No. 6.]
13. [Sin. 1 1 Mace Ii t, la>rat>5t Sin." Alex.
IwraOar; so Sin. in r. 17: JomUAaj.] A son of
MsMathlss, and leader of the Jews in their war of
independence after the death of his brother Judas
Mtocabtsus, B. c 161 (1 Mace, ix. 1» «.). [Mao-
oabkxs.]
14. [Alex, in xi. 70 InraBov, gen.] A too of
Absalom (1 Msec xiii. 11), sent by Simon with a
force to occupy Joppa, which was already in the
bands of the Jews (1 Mace xii. 83), though prob-
ably bold only by a weak garrison. Jonathan ex-
pelkvl the inhabitants (roes (Wat eV ofrrf : ef.
Jot. AtU. xiii. 6, i 3) and secured the city. Jon-
athan was probably a brother of Mattathlat (3)
(1 Mate. xi. 70).
15. Plewdftu; Alex, in viii. 22, ItenBnf. Jona-
tiuu.'] A priest who is said to bare oflered up a
solemn prayer on the occasion of the sacrifice made
by Nehemiah after the recovery of the sacred fire
(9 Mace. i. 23 If: ef. Ewald, CacK. d. V. Itr. ir.
184 f.). The narrative is interesting, sa it presents
i singular example of the combination of public
prayer with sacrifice (Grimm, ad 9 Jfoec. 1. e.).
B. F. W.
JOPPA
1458
Cba. lib. potter.
Jhnaf. Ub. vtB., Ja
p. SsO. Bwt in the
JON'ATHAS v'IokMw; [Vat. Alex. I«0w
[Vulg. omits; Old LaU] Jona&ut; alii, Xatkan)
tbe Latin form of the common name Jonathan,
which is preserved in A V. in Tob. v. IS.
B. F. W.
JOTIATH-B'LEM-BECHOXIM (fljY»
n^n'VTJ tfjft a dumb dot* of (in) distant
plant), a phrase found once only in tbe Bible, at a
beading to the 66th psalm. Critics and commen-
tators are very far from being agreed on it*, mean-
ing. Bashi considers that David employed the
phrase to describe his own unhappy condition when,
exiled from the land of Israel, he was living with
Achish, and was an object of suspicion and hatred
to the countrymen of Goliath : thus was he amongst
the Philistines as a mute (/YD 1 **.) dove. KimeU
supplies the following commentary: ••The Philis-
tines sought to seize and slay David (1 Sam. xxix.
4-11), and he, in his terror, and pretending to have
lost his reason, called himself Jonalk, even at a
dove driven from her cote." Knapp's explanation
'• on the oppression of foreign rulers " — fisirtg-'nt;
to EUm tbe same meaning which it has in Ex. xv.
16 — is in harmony with the contents of the psalm,
and is worthy of consideration. De Wette trans-
lates Jonalk Eiem Rechokim « dove of tbe distant
terebinths," or " of the dove of dumbness (Stumm-
heit) among the strangers " or " in distant places."
According to the Septuagint, Awes roii Knot rev
at-o r&r kylttr lUpuuipvufUmv, " on the people
far removed from the holy places" (probably
ObrWD^N, the Temple-hall; see Orient, lit-
eralur-BlaU, p. 679, year 1841 ), a rendering which
very nearly accords with tbe Chaldee paraphrase:
" On tbe congregation of Israel, compared with n
mute dove while exiled from their cities, but who
come hack again and offer praise to the Lord of the
Universe." Aben Ezra, who regards Jonalk Eltm
Rechokim at merely indicating the modulation or
the rhythm of the psalm (oomp. the title DTH
"iniDn, Ps. xxii.), appears to come the nearest
to the meaning of the psassge in his explanation,
" after the melody of the air which begins Jonalk-
eUm-Secholdm." In the Biour to Mendelssohn's
version of the Psalms Jonalk Elan RtchoUm is
mentioned as a musical instrument which produced
dull, mournful sounds. " Some take it for a pips
called hi Greek iXv/tot, H3T, from ]Y*, Greek,
which would make the Inscription read " the long
Grecian pipe," but this does not appear to us ad-
missible " (Bkrarist's Preface, p. 26).
D. W. M.
JOITA 0*J, i. *. Tofo, beautu ; the A V.
follows the Greek form, except once, J apho: 'IoWe,
LXX. N. T. and Vulg. [Jappt]; 'Urn, Joseph.
— at least in the most recent editions — Strabo,
and others: now Ytfa or Jaffa), a town on the
S. W. coast of Palestine, the port of Jerusalem in
the days of Solomon, at it has been ever since.'
Its etymology is variously explained ; some deriffopj
it from •• Japhet," others from " lops," daughter
of jEoha and wife of Cepbeus, Andromeda's father,
it* reputed founder; others interpreting it "the
» • The Odna
vat SB milts from Ja
r (p. 21) makes Joppa a Uttk
(Olivet) ay the wiy af
8
Digitized by
Google
1454
JOPPA
evtoh-tower of Jo;," or "beauty," and to fcrth
(Reland, Pakudnu, p. 864). The beta, that from
it* being a tea-port, it had a profane, an well aa a
lacred history. Pliny following Mda (Ot atu Orb.
I. 12) says, that it waa of ante-diluvian antiquity
(Nat. Out. v. 14); and even Sir John Maundeville,
In the 14th century, bean witness — though it
muat be confeawd a clumay one — to that tradition
(Early TrattU in P. p. 142). According to
Joeephus, it originally belonged to the Phoenicians
(Ant. xiii. 15, $ 4). Here, writes Strabo, some say
Andromeda was exposed to the whale (Geograph.
xri. p. 759; oomp. Miilkr's HuL Grae. Fragm.
vol. ir. p. 325, and his Geoyraph. Grac. Min. vol.
L p. 79), and he appeals to its elevated position in
behalf of those who laid the scene there; though
In order to do so consistently, he had already shown
that it would be necessary to transport ^Ethiopia
"into Phoenicia (Slrab. i. p. 43). However, in Pliny's
age — and Joeephus had Just before affirmed the
same (Bell. Jud. iii. 9, § 3) — they still showed
the chains by which Andromeda was bound; and
not only so, but H. Scaurus the younger, the same
that was so much employed in Judaea by Pompey
(Sett Jud. i. 6, § 2 ft.), had the bones of the
monster transported to Rome from Joppa — where
till then they had been exhibited (Mela, ibid.) —
and displayed them there during his tadileship to
the public amongst other prodigies. Nor would
they have been uninteresting to the modern geol-
ttgist, if his report be correct. For they measured
40 feet in length ; the span of the ribs exceeding
that of the Indian elephant; and the thickness of
the spine or vertebra being one foot and a half
" sesquipedalis," i t. in circumference — when
Solinos says " semipedalit," he means in diameter,
tee PBu. ffaL Hut ix. 5 and the note, Ddphin
ed.). Reland would trace the adventures of Jonah
in this legendary guise (see above) ; but it is far
more probable that it symbolizes the first inter-
change of commerce between the Greeks, personified
in their errant hero Perseus, and the Phoenicians,
whose lovely — but till then unexplored — clime
may be well shadowed forth in the fair virgin
Andromeda. Perseus, in the tale, is said to have
plunged his dagger into the right shoulder of the
monster. Possibly he may have discovered or im-
proved the harbor, the roar from whose naming
reef* on the north, could scarcely have been sur-
passed by the barkings of SeyUa or Charybdia.
Even the chain shown there may have been those
by which Us ship was attached to the shore. Rings
used by the Romans for mooring their vessels are
still to be seen near Terracina in the S. angle of
the ancient port (Hurray's Handbk. for 8. Italy,
p. 10, 2d ed.).
Returning to the province of history, we find
that Japho or Joppa was situated in the portion of
Daa(Josh. xix. 46) on the coast towards the south;
sad on a hill so high, say* Strabo, that people
stnrmed (but incorrectly) that Jerusalem waa visible
from its summit Having a harbor attached to
It — though always, aa still, a dangerous one — it
the port of Jerusalem, when Jerusalem
I metropolis of the kingdom of the house of
• • The statsmeat bar* la not strictly asenraas.
,aul starting tram Anttcoh on his 2d mlaaooary
iouraav did not go by sea (Acts xr. 89) but travailed
it fend through Syria and CUfcia (ver. 41). Nor waa
tyro bis "landing psm » on Ms last Journey to Jeru-
aUsau (Acts zxL 8). far though the vassal tsuehsd
then the voyage larmlnatsn (r*r a*aaV tWeoami) a*
JOPPA
David, and certainly never did port and lnetropnBt
more strikingly resemble each other in difficulty
of approach both by sea and land. Hence, except
in journeys to and from Jerusalem, it was not much
used. In Si. Paul's travels, for instance, the
starting-points by water are, Antioch (Acts xr. 39,
via the Chronica, it is presumed — xviii. 22, 23, waa
probably a land- journey throughout) : Caesarea (ix.
30, and xxvii. 2), and once Seleuck (xiii. 4, namely
that at the mouth of the Orontes). Also one*
Antioch (xiv. 28) and once Tyre, as a landing
place (xxi. 3).° And the same preference for the
more northern porta is ohservable in the eaity
pilgrims, beginning with him of Bordeaux.
But Joppa waa the place fixed upon for the cedar
and pine-wood, from Mount Lebanon, to be landed
by the servants of Hiram king of Tyre; thence to
be conveyed to Jerusalem by the servants of Solo-
mon — for the erection of the first » bouse of habi-
tation " ever made with hands for the invisible
Jehovah. It waa by way of Joppa, similarly, that
like materials were conveyed from the same locality,
by permission of Cyrus, for the rebuilding of the
2d Temple under Zerubbabel (1 K. v. 9; 9 Chr.
ii. 16; Ear. iii. 7). Here Jonah, whenever and
wherever be may have lived (2 EL xiv. 25 certainly
does not clear up the first of these points), ".took
ship to flee from the presence of his Maker," and
accomplished that singular history, which our Lord
has appropriated aa a type of one of the principal
scenes in the great drama of Hi* own (Jon. L 8;
Matth. xii. 40). Here, lastly, on the house-top of
Simon the tanner, "by the sea-aide" — with the
view therefore circumscribed on the E. by the Ugh
ground on which the town stood ; but commanding
a boundless prospect over the western waters — St.
Peter had his •' vision of tolerance," as K has been
happily designated, and went forth Bice a 2d Per-
seus — but from the East— to emancipate, from stiB
worse thraldom, the virgin daughter of the West.
The Christian poet Arator haa not failed to dis-
cover a mystical connection between the raising to
life of the aged Tabitha— the occasion of St Peter's
visit to Joppa — and the baptism of the first Gentile
household (Dt AH. Apod. L 840, ap. Migne, Patrol
Cm. CompL hviii. 164).
These are the great Biblical events of which
Joppa haa been the scene. In the interval that
elapsed between the OU and New Dispensations it
experienced many vicissitudes. It had aided with
ApoUonius, and waa attacked and captured by Jon-
athan Maceabama (1 Mace. x. 76). It witnessed
the meeting between the latter and Ptolemy (ibid.
xL 9). Simon had his suspicions of its inhabitants,
and set a garrison there (ibid. xii. 34), which ha
afterwards strengthened considerably (ibid. xiii. 11).
But when peace waa restored, he re e s tab lished it
once more ss a haven (Hid. xiv. 5). He likewise
rebuilt the fortifications (ibid. ver. 34). This eecev
pation of Joppa waa one of the ground* of eoaa-
plaint urged by Antioehut, ton of Demetrius,
against Simon; but the latter alleged in excuse the
mischief which had been done by its inhabitants to
his feUow-citizeus (ibid. xr. 30 and 35). It would
appear that Judas Maeoabsraa had burnt their
(vac. 7). Possibly also Paul dhaaaharxad
at Saleuda, not Antioch (Acts xiv. 86), far tat rati.
e aa ss It was vary common to spsak of the town and tai
harbor as one (camp. Acts xx. 6). The Ouaitaa. at *>
true, was ■arkmH* at that thaw (though at la m
longer so) as fcr up as Aaaoah. ■
Digitized by
Google
JOFPA
MM we time back &r a groM act of barbarity
(9 Mace. xii. 0). Tribute ni subsequently exacted
for iti posaensinn from Hyrcanus by Antiochus
Sidetes. By Pompey it was owe mora made inde-
pendent, and comprehended under Syria (Joseph.
Ant xiv. 4, § 4); but by Clear it waa not only
restored to the Jem, but ita revenue! — whether
from land or from export-dutlea — were beatowed
upon the 2d Hyrcanus, and hia heirs (xiv. 10, J 6).
When Herod the Great commenced operation*, it
waa seized by him, lest he should leave a hostile
stronghold in hia rear, when he marched upon
Jerusalem (xiv. 15, § 1), and Augustus confirmed
him in its possession (xr. 7, § 4). It was after-
wards assigned to ArcheUus, when constituted
ethnarch (xvii. 11, J 4), and passed with. Syria
under Cyrenius, when ArcheUus had been deposed
(xvii. 13, § 5). Under Cestius (i. e. Gessius rlorus)
it was destroyed amidst great slaughter of its in-
habitants (BttL JwL ii. 18, § 10; and such a nest
of pirates had it become, when Vespasian arrived
in those parts, that it underwent a second and
entire destruction — together with the adjacent vil-
lages — at his hands (iii. 9, { 8). Thus it appears
that thia port had already begun to be the den of
robbers and outcasts which it was in Strabo's time
(Gtograph. xvi. p. 759); while the district around
it waa so populous, that from Jaranla, a neighbor-
ing town, and ita vicinity, 40,000 armed men could
bo collected (ibid). There was a vast plain around
it, as we learn from Josephus (Ant. xiii. 4, § 4); it
lay between Jamnia and Csssarea — the latter of
which might be reached " on the morrow " from
it (Acta x. 9 and 84) —not far from Lydda (Acts
Ix. 38), and distant from Antipatria 160 stadia
(Joseph. Ant. xiii. 15, § 1).
When Joppa ftrat became the seat of a Christian
biahop is unknown; but the subscriptions of its
prelates are preserved in the acts of various synods
of the 5th and 6th centuries (La Quien, Orient
ChrMan. iii. 639). In the 7th century Arculfus
sailed from Joppa to Alexandria, the very route
usually taken now by those who visit Jerusalem;
but be notices nothing at the former place (AViWy
Travels in P. by Wright, p. 10). Saswulf, the
next who set sail from Joppa, a. d. 1103, la not
more explicit (Hid. p. 47). Meanwhile Joppa had
been taken possession of by the forces of Godfrey
de Bouillon previously to the capture of Jerusalem.
The town had been d e serted and waa allowed to
fail into ruin : the Crusaders contenting themselves
with possession of the citadel (William of Tyre,
Hut. viii. 9); and It waa in part assigned subse-
quently for the support of the Church of the Resur-
rection (ibid. ix. 16); though there seem to have
been bishops of Joppa (perhaps only titular after
all) between A. D. 1253 and 1363 (La Quien, 1291;
»mp. p. 1341). Saladin, in a. d. 1188, destroyed
its fortifications (Sanut Secret. Fid. Cruets, lib.
111. part x. c 5); but Richard of England, who
was confined here by sickness, rebuilt them (ibid.,
tad Richard of Devizes in Bonn's Ant IAb. p 61).
Ita last occupation by Christians wss that of St.
Louie, A. D. 1253, and when he came, it waa still
i eity and governed by a count. " Of the Immense
sums," says Jolnville, " which It cost the king to
inclose Jafla, it does not become me to speak; for
they were countless. He inclosed the town from
one aide of the sea to the other; and there were 94
towers, including small and great. The ditches
were well scorned, sad kept clean, both within and
ttthout There were I gates" . . . (Chron. of
JOBAH
1456
Cnu. p. 495, Bohn). So restored it fell into the
hands of the Sultans of Egypt, together with the
rest of Palestine, by whom it was once more laid
in ruins. So much so, that Bertrand de la Broo-
quiere viaiting it about the middle of the 15th cen-
tury, states that it then only consisted of a few
tents covered with reeds; having been a strong
place under the Christians. Guides, accredited by
the Saltan, here met the pilgrims and received the
customary tribute from them ; and here the papal
indulgences offered to pilgrims commenced (JCarlg
7Vaeefs, p. 286). Finally, Jaffa fell under to.
Turks, in whose hands it still is, exhibiting the
usual decrepitude of the cities possessed by Stem
and depending on Christian commerce for its feeble
existence. During the period of their rule it bai
been three times sacked — by the Arabs in 1732;
by the Mamelukes in 1775; and lastly, by Na-
poleon I. in 1799, upon the glories of whose early
career » the massacre of Jaflh " leaves a stain that
can never be washed out (r. Moroni, Dixum. Ecd
s. v.; Porter, Bandbk. pp. 238, 339).
The existing town oontains in round numbers
about 4,000 inhabitants, and has three convents,
Greek, Latin, and Armenian; and a* many, or
more mosques. Its bazaars are worth a visit; yet
few places could exhibit a harbor or landing more
miserable. Its ehief manufacture is soap. The
house of Simon the tanner of course purports to be
shown still : nor is its locality badly chosen (Stanley,
8. if P. 363, 274; and see Seddon's Memoir, 86,
87, 185).
The oranges of Jafnt are the finest in all Pales-
tine and Syria: its promegranates and water-melons
are likewise in high repute, and its gardens and
orange and citron-groves delicioiuly fragrant and
fertile. But among its population are fugitives
and vagabonds from all countries; and Europeans
hare little security, whether of life or property, to
induce a permanent abode there. E. S. Ft
JOPTB Cl<fmn, ; [Alex. 2 Mace It. 91,
law*:] Jqpp«; [in 3 Maes. xii. 3, 7, 'iewwrraus
JoppUa\), 1 Esdr. r. 55; 1 Mace. x. 75, 76, xi. 6,
xii. 38, xiii. 11, xiv. 5, 34, xv. 38, 35; 3 Mace. It.
81, xii. 3, 7. [Jon*.]
JCKAH (rn'V [torn in ouftmn, Font; —
nnV, earey row, Gee.]: 'topel; [Vat Oupe,:]
Jora), the ancestor of a family of 119 who returned
from Babylon with Ears (Ear. ii. 18). In Neh.
viL 84 he appears under the name Hariph," or more
correctly the same family are represented as the
Bene-Harlph, the variation of name originating
probably in a very slight eonfusion of the letters
which compose it. In Ear. two of De Rossi's MSS^
and originally one of Kennicott's, had rTTP, i. e
Jodah, which is the reading of the Syr. and Arab.
One of Kennicott's MSS. had the original
reading in Ear. altered to DTP, i. e. Joram; and
two in Neh. read D"Hn, «. e. Harim, which ear.
-•spends with • Aflp of the Alex. Ma, and ffmnm
of the Syriao. In any case the change or confusion
of letters which mignt have caused the variation
of the name ia so alight, that it is difficult to pro-
nounce which is the true form, the corruption of
Jorah Into Hariph Doing as easily conceivable as
the reverse. Burlington (Gemot ii 76) "
a • Possibly Jama and Hariph are mtarahanaal
aa eantvalsnt la sense (see not* a, B. 1003). B
Digitized by
Google
1456
JORAI
ji favor of the latter, but from a comparison of both
passages with Eor. x. 81 we should be Inclined to
regard Harlm (Cnn) M the true reading in all
eaeee. But on any supposition it i* difficult to
teoount for the form Azephurith, or more properly
Apoiftwptt, in 1 Esdr. T. 16, which Burrington
considers at having originated in a oorruption of
the two reading! in En and Nehemiah, the second
syllable ariaing from an error of the transcriber in
miataking the uncial E for X W. A. W.
JCTOAI [S «yl.] (TjV [««"**< *» JesoeaA,
Get.]: 'lmp<4; Alex. I«p«t; [Comp. 'Ittptl; AM.
'Iapd:] Jorat). One of the Gadites dwelling in
Gilead in Baslisn, wboee genealogies were recorded
in the reign of Jotham king of Judah (1 Chr. v.
18). Four of Kennioott'i MSS., and the printed
copy used by Luther, read ^"TV, i. a. JodaL
JCRAM (D^Vi?, and O^V, apparently in-
alecriminately : 'Ivadp: Joram)- i. SonofAhab;
'dug of Israel (8 K. viii 16, 86, 88, 89 j ix. 14, 17,
U-88, 89). [Jbhoxam, 1.]
2. Son of Jehoebaphat; king of Judah (8 K.
viii. 81, 23, 84; 1 Chr. iii. 11; 8 Chr. xxii. 6, 7.
Matt. i. 8). [Jkhohax, 8.]
3. [Tat laepay: Joran.] A priest [Jehorak
in A. V.] in the reign of Jenoehaphat, one of those
employed by him to teach the law of Hoses through
the cities of Judah (8 Chr. xvii. 8).
4. (BlS) A Levite, ancestor of Shdomlth in
the time of David (1 Chr. xxvi. 86).
«. ('IeSSoiueVi; [Vat] Alex. UtSoupa*) Son
of Tol, king of Hamath, sent by his father to con-
gratulate David on his rictories orer Hadadesscr
(2 Sam. riii. 10). [Hadoram.]
6. 1 Esdr. L 9. [Vulg. Cbra&a?] [Jozabad,
8.] A. C. H.
JOB'DAK OTJi *• *■ Y<»**, always with
the definite article lTj'Ci <"*pt Pe. xUL 6 and
Job xL 83, from TV, Jarad, "to descend:"
'Iop8aiT|f : Jordan** : now called by the Arabs
tsh-Shtrlah, or "the watering-plaoe," with the
addition of et-JTeou-, " the gnat," to distinguish
It from the Skeriai tt-Mandhir, the Hieromax), a
river that has nerer been navigable (see below),
flowing into a sea that has never known a port —
has never been a high road to more hospitable
coasts — has never possessed a fishery — a river
that has never boasted of a single town of eminence
upon its banks. It winds through scenery remark-
able rather for sameness and tameness than for
bold outline. Its course is not much above 800
miles from first to last, less than l-15th of that of
the Mile — from the roots of Anti-Lebanon, where
it bursts forth from its various sources in all its
purity, to the head of the Dead Sea, where it loses
itself and its tributaries in the unfathomable brine.
Such is the river of the " great plain " of Palestine
— the "Descender " — if not " the river of God "
a the book of Psalms, at least that of His chosen
t ieople throughout their history.
As Joppa could never be made easy of access or
commodious for traffic as a commercial city, so
■either could Jordan ever vie with the Thanes or
foe Tiber as a river of the world, nor with the
rivers of Naaman's preference, the Pharpar and
Abena, for the natural beauty of its banks. These
tat could boast of the same superiority, in respect
JORDAN
of the picturesque, over the Jordan, that Garish*,
and Samaria could over Zion and Jerusalem.
We propose to inquire, (I.) what is said about
the Jordan in Holy Scripture; (ii.) the accounts
given of it by Joseph™ and others of the same date'
(ill.) the statements respecting it by later writers
and travellers.
I. There is no regular description of the Jordan
to be met with in Holy Scripture, and it is only
by putting scattered notices of it together that we
can give the general idea which runs through the
Bible respecting it
And 1, the earliest allusion is not so much to
the river itself as to the plain or plains which it
traversed: " Lot lifted up his eyes, and beheld aJ
the plain of Jordan, that it was well watered every-
where . . . even as the garden of the Lord, like
the land of Egypt " (Gen. xiiL 10). Abram bad
Just left Egypt (xii 10-40), and therefore the oosc-
parieon between the fertilizing properties of the
Jordan and of the Nile is very apposite, though it
has since been pushed much too far, ss we shall see.
We may suppose Lot to have had his view from
one of the summits of those hills that run north
in the direction of Scytbopolis (B. J. it. 7, J 2),
bounding the plains of Jordan on the W. ; for Lot
and Abram were now sojourning between Bethel
and Ai (Gen. xiii. 3). How far the plain extended
in length or breadth is not said : other passages
speak of "Jordan and his border" (Josh. xiii. 87),
" the borders of Jordan " (xxii. 11), and " the
plains of Jericho" (iv. 18; comp. 8 K. xxv. 6);
all evidently subdivisions of the same idea, com-
prehending the east bank equally with the west
(Josh. xiii. 87).
8. We must anticipate events slightly to be abb
to speak of the fords or psaeages of the Jordan.
Jordan is inexhaustible in the book of Job (xL 83),
and deep enough to prove a formidable passage for
belligerents (1 Mace ix. 48); yet, aa in all rivers
of the same magnitude, there were shallows when
it could be forded on foot There were fords over
against Jericho, to which point the men of Jericho
pursued the spies (Josh. ii. 7), the same probably
that are said to be "toward Hoab" in the book of
Judges, where the Hoabites were slaughtered (12.
28). Higher up, perhaps over against Succoth,
some way above where the little river Jabbok
(Zerka) enters the Jordan, were the fords or pas-
sages of Bethbarah (probably the Bethabara, " bouse
of passage," of the Gospel, though most moderns
would read " Bethany," see Stanley, 8. f P. p.
808, note, 2d ed.), where Gideon lay in wait for the
Hidisnites (Judg. riL 84), and where the men of
Gilead slew the Ephraimitee (xii. 6). Not for ofT,
in "the clay ground between Succoth and Zar-
tban," were the brass foundries of king Solomon
(1 K. vii. 46). These fords undoubtedly witnessed
the first recorded pssssge of the Jordan in the O.
T. : we say recorded, because there can be littls
dispute but that Abraham must have crossed it
likewise. But only the passage of Jacob is men-
tioned, and that in remarkable language: ■ With
my suiff I passed over this Jordan, and now I ass
become two bands " (Gen. xxxii. 10, and Jabbok
in connection with it, ver. 28). And Jordan was
next cro ss e d — over against Jericho — by Joshua
the son of Nun, at the head of the descendants of
the twelve sons of him who slgnsHwid the first pas-
sage. The magnitude of their operations may be
inferred from the fact, that— of the children of Reu-
ben and of Gad, and half the tribe of Maneesefc
Digitized by
Google
JORDAN
snly — "about 10,000 prepared for war pe t ted orer
before the Lard unto battle." . . . (Joeh. to. IS
mdl3.)
The oeremonial of thii aecond crossing is too
well known to need recapitulation. It may be ob-
lerred, however, that, unlike the paaaage of the
Bed Sea, where the intermediate agency of a strong
aatt wind ia freely admitted (Ex. xlv. SI), it ia
here aaid, in terms equally explicit, not only that
the river wai then unusually full of water, but that
• the waters which came down from above stood
and rose np upon an heap . . . while those that
tame down toward the tea of the plain . . . {ailed
and were cut off," as toon as ever ■' the feet of the
priests that bare the ark were dipped in the brim
af the water" (Josh. iii. 10, 16). That it hap-
pened in harvest-time is seen also from oh. v. 10-
12. Finally, with regard to the memorial of the
twelve stones, such had been the altar erected by
Hoses " under the hill " (Ex. xxiv. 4) ; such, prob-
ably, the altar erected by Joshua upon Mount Ebal,
though the number of stones is not defined (Josh.
viii.31); and such, long afterwards, the altar erected
by Eujah (1 K. xviii. 31). Whether these twelve
stones were deposited in, or on the banks of, the
Jordan, or whether there were two sets, one for each
locality, has been disputed. Joaephut only recog-
nizee a single construction — that of an altar — in
either case; and this waa built, according to him,
n the present instance, 50 stadia from the river,
and 10 stadia from Jericho, where the people en-
camped, with the stones which the heads of their
tribes had brought from out of the bed of the Jor-
dan. It may be added that Josephus seems loth
to admit a miracle, both in the passage of the Jor-
dan and that of the Bed Sea (Ant. v. 1, § 4, ii.
16, § 5). From their vicinity to Jerusalem these
lower fords were much used ; David, it is probable,
passed over them in one instance to fight the Syr-
ians (S Sam. x. 17); and subsequently, when a
fugitive himself, In his way to Mahanaim (xvii. 82),
on the east bank. Hither Judah came to recon-
duct the king home (9 Sam. xix. 15), and on this
one occasion a ferry-boat — if the Hebrew word
has been rightly rendered — it said to have been
employed (ver. 18). Somewhere in these parts
Elijah mutt have smitten the waters with hit man-
tle, "so that they divided hither and thither " (9
K. II. 8), for he had just left Jericho (ver. 4), and
by the same route that be went did Elisha proba-
bly return (ver. 14). Naaman, on the other hand,
may be supposed to have performed his ablutions
hi the upper fords, for Elisha was then in Samaria
(v. 3), and it waa by these fords doubtless that the
Syrians fled when miraculously discomfited through
his instrumentality (vii. 15). Finally, it waa prob-
ihlr by these upper fords that Judas and hit fol-
lowers went over into the great plain before Beth-
tan — not that they crossed over against Bethsan
(Joseph. Ant. xii 8, | 5), when they were retracing
their steps from the land of Galaad to Jerusalem
(1 Mace. v. 52).
Thus there were two customary placet, at which
the Jordan was fordable, though there may have
been more, particularly during the summer, which
are not mentioned. And it mutt have been at one
«f these, if not at both, that baptism waa after-
wards administered by S*.- John and by the disci-
ples of our Lord. The plain inference from the
Gospels would appear to be that these baptisms
mm administered in more places than one. There
■at one place where St John baptized In the first
JORDAN
1467
instance (to wpAror, John x. 40), though it it not
named. There wai Bethabara — probably the up-
per fords — where the Baptist, having previously
baptized our Lord — whether there or elsewhere —
bears record to the descent of the Holy Ghost upon
Him which ensued (i. 99-34). There was Moaa,
near to Salim, to the north, where St. John was
baptizing upon another occasion, "because there
was much water there " (iii. 23). [jEnom.] This
wai during the summer evidently (eomp. ii. 13-23),
that is, long after the feaat of the Passover, and the
river had become low, so that it waa necessary to
retort to some place where the water was deeper
than at the ordinary fords. There was some place
" in the land of Judaea " where our Lord, or rather
his disciples, baptized about the same time (iii. 92).
And lastly, there wsa the place — most probably
the lower ford near Jericho — where all " Jerusalem
and Juthea " went out to be baptized of John in
the Jordan (Matt iii. 6; Mark i. 6).
Where our Lord waa baptized ia not stated ex-
pressly. What is stated is, (1) that as St John
waa a native of some " city in the hill-country of
Judas" (Luke i. 39), so his preaching, commen-
cing " in the wilderness of Judasa " (Matt iii. 1),
embraced " all the country about Jordan " (Luke
iii. 8), and drew persona from Galilee, as for off ss
Nazareth (Mark i. 9) and Bethsaida (John i. 36,
40, 44), as well at from Jerusalem; (9) that the
baptism of the multitude from Jerusalem and Ju-
daea preceded that of our Lord (Matt. iii. 6, 13;
Mark i. 6, 9); (3) that our Lord's baptism waa
also distinct from that of the aaid multitude (Luke
iii. 91); and (4) that He came from Nazareth in
Galilee, and not from Jerusalem or Judasa, to be
baptized. The inference from all which would
seem to be, (1) that the first (to wpSror) baptisms
of St John took place at the lower ford near Jeri-
cho, to which not only he himself, a native of Ju-
dasa, but all Jerusalem and Judasa likewise, would
naturally resort as being the nearest; where simi-
larly our Lord would naturally take refuge when
driven out from Jerusalem, and from whence He
would be within reach of tidings from Bethany,
the scene of his next miracle (John x. 89, 40, xL
1) ; (2) that hit second baptisms were at the upper
ford, or Bethabara, whither he had arrived in the
course of his preachings, and were designed for the
inhabitants of the more northern parts of the Holy
Land, among whom were Jesus and Andrew, both
from Galilee; (3) that hia third and last baptisms
were in the neighborhood of JEntea and Salim,
still further to the north, where there was not gen-
erally so much of a ford, but, on the contrary,
where the water was still sufficiently deep, notwith-
standing the advanced season. Thus St John
would seem to have moved upwards gradually to-
wards Galilee, the seat of Herod's jurisdiction, by
whom he was destined to be apprehended and exe-
cuted; while our Lord, coming from Galilee, prob-
•ably by way of Samaria, at in the converse cast
(John iv. 3, 4), would seem to have met him half
way, and to nave been baptized in the ford nearest
to that locality — a ford which had been the scent
of the first recorded crossing. The tradition which
asserts Christ to have been baptized in the ford
near Jericho, has been obliged to invent a Betha-
bara near that spot, of which no trace exittt in
history, to appear consistent with Scripture (Origan,
q-oted by Alford on John i. 28).
3. These fords — and more light will be thrown
upno their exact site presently — were rendered it
Digitized by
Google
1468
JORDAN
Bach the more precious in time days from tin
aueumstaiices. First, it doet not appear thai there
wer j then any bridges thrown over, or boats regu-
larly established on, the Jordan, for the purpose of
transporting either pedestrians or merchandise
bom one bank to the other. One case, perhaps,
of either bridge or boat is upon record; but it
would seem to have been got up expressly for the
occasion (3 Sam. xiz. 18).« Neither the LXX.
nor Vulg. oontein a word about a "boat," and
Josaphus says expressly that it was a " bridge "
that was then extemporized {Ant. vii. 8 [11], { 8).
And secondly, because, in the language of the au-
thor of the book of Joshua (iii. 15), "Jordan
overflowed all his banks all the time of harvest: "
a " swelling " which, according to the 1st book of
Chronicles (xii. 15), commenced "in the first
month " (i. e. about the latter end of our March),
drove the lion from his lair in the days of Jere-
miah (xii. 5, xlix. 19, L 44), and had become a
proverb for abundance in the days of Jesus the son
of Sirach (Eceius. xxiv. 36). The context of the
first of these passages may suffice to determine the
extent of this exuberance. The meaning is dearly
that the channel or bed of the river became brim-
full, so that the level of the water and of the bauka
was then the same. Dr. Kobinaon seems therefore
to have good reason for saying that the ancient rise
of the river has been greatly exaggerated (i. 640,
JM ed.), so much so ss to have been compared to
that of the Nile (Keland, PnkuL xL 111). Evi-
dently too there is nothing extraordinary whatever
in this occurrence. On the contrary, it would be
more extraordinary were it otherwise. All riven
that are fed by melting snows are fuller between
March and September than between September
and March; but the exact time of their increase
varies with the time when the snows melt the
Po and Adige ere equally Kill during their harvest-
time with the Jordan; but the snuws on Lebanon
melt earlier than on the Alps, and harvest begins
later in Italy than in the Holy Land. "The
heavy rains of November and December," as Dr.
Bobinson justly remarks, " find the earth in a
parched and thirsty state, and are consequently
absorbed into the soil as they fail. The melting
of the snows, on the other hand, on the mountains
can only affect the rivers. Possibly ' the basins of
HQleh and Tiberias' may to for act as 'regulators'
upon the Jordan as to delay its swelling till they
have been replenished. On the other hand, the enows
on Lebanon are certainly melting fast in April.
4. The but feature which remains to be noticed
in the Scriptural account of the Jordan is its fre-
quent mention as a boundary: "over Jordan,"
« this," and " the other side," or « beyond Jordan,"
were expressions as familiar to the Israelites as
"across the water," "this," and "the other side
of the Channel," are to English ears. In one sense
indeed, that is, in so far as it was the eastern
boundary of the land of Canaan, it was the eastern
boundary of the promised land (Num. xxxiv. 18).
In reality, it was the long serpentine vine, trailing
over the ground front N. to S., round which the
■ •The A. T. has la that passage « ferry-boat •" ;
alth the article in Hebrew,* probably denoting the one
provided (or David, and not the one in nee at that
eaatton. This to the proper sense of iTI^S, and
generally accei ted. (See Then! as, Biither SammU, p.
U0.) Tristram save then la but one single ferry-boat
etas ea the Lake ef dailies at the smsi turn {Land
JORDAN
whole family of the twelve tribes wure iilmtuwA
Four fifths of their number — nine tribes and a
half — dwelt on the W. of it, and one fifth, or tws
tribes and a half, on the E. of it, with the Levitea
in their cities equally distributed amongst both,
and it was theirs from its then reputed fountain-
head to its exit into the Dead Sea. Those who
lived on the E. of it had been allowed to do so on
condition of assisting their brethren in their con-
quests on the W. (Num. xxxii. 20-33); and those
who lived on the W. " went out with one consent "
when their countrymen on the E. were threatened
(1 Sam. xi. 6-11). The great altar built by the
children of Beuben, of Gad, and the half-tribe of
Manaseeh, on the banks of the Jordan, was designed
as a witness of this intercommunion and mutual
interest (Josh. xxii. 10-29). In fact, unequal as
the two sections were, they were nevertheless re-
garded as integral parts of the whole land; and
thus there were three cities of refuge for the man-
slayer appointed on the E. of the Jordan ; and there
were three cities, and no more, on the W. — in both
cases moreover equi-distant one from the other
(Num. xxxv. 9-15; Josh. xx. 7-9; Lewis, Htb.
RepubL ii. 13). When these territorial divisions
had been broken up in the captivities of Israel and
Judah, some of the " coasts beyoud Jordan " seem
to have been retained under Judasa. [Jud.ea.]
II. As the passage which is supposed to speak
of "the fountain of Daphne" (Num. xxxiv. 11,
and Patrick ad L, see below) is by no means clear,
we cannot appeal to Holy Scripture for any infor-
mation respecting the sources of the Jordan. What
Josephus and others say about the Jordan may be
briefly told. Panium, says Josephus (i. e. the
sanctuary of Pan), appears to be the source of the
Jordan ; whereas it has a secret passage hither un-
der ground from Phiala, as it is called, about 180
stadia distant from Csasarea, on the road to Tra-
chonitis, and on the right hand side of, end not for
from the road. Being a wheel-shaped pool, it is
rightly called Phiala from its rotundity (wteieW-
ptlatt; yet the water always remains there up to
the brim, neither subsiding nor overflowing. That
this is the true source of the Jordan was first dis-
covered by Philip, tetrsrch of Trachonitis — for by
his orders chaff was east into the water at Phiala,
and it was taken up at Panium. Panium was
always a lovely spot; but the embellishment* of
Agrippa, which were sumptuous, added greatly to
its natural charms (from BdL Jud. 1. 81, $ 3; and
Ant. xv. 10, § 3, it appears that the temple there
was due to Herod the Great). It is from this care
at all events that the Jordan commences his osten-
sible course above ground ; traversing the marshes
and fens of Semechonitia (L. Merom or ll&Uh), and
then, after a course of 120 stadia, passing by the
town Julias, and intersecting the Lake of tienneee-
ret, winds its way through a considerable wilder-
ness, till it finds its exit in the Lake Aspbaltites (B.
J. iii. 10, § 7). Elsewhere he somewhat modifies
his assertion respecting the nature of the great plain
[Jkhicho]; while on the physical beauties of
Genneaaret, the palms and figs, olives and grapes,
of Jmut, p. 80, 2d ad.). Borne explorers, ss CosIssb^,
Uolynaaux, and Lynch, have launched boats on the
Jordan, and with difficulty have made their way to the
Dead Sea ; but for ordinary usee boating was and ecu,
la impracticable on account of the many violent i
In the river, and to soma extent t
count of the twee.
Digitized by
Google
JORDAN
hat flourished round it, and the fish for which
ta waters were nr-famed, be ia (till more elo-
quent (B. J. Iii. 10, } 8). In the first chapter
k the next book (iv. 1, J 1) he notice* more foun-
tain* at a place called Daphne (still Difnth, aee
Rob. BM. Ret. ml. iii. p. 393, note), immediately
under the temple of the golden calf, which he call*
the sources of the little, and it* communication
with the great, Jordan (comp. Ami. i. 10, § 1, t.
3, § 1, and nil. 8, § 4). While Joeephua dilate*
upon it* sources, Pauaanias, who had visited the
Jordan, dilate* upon its extraordinary disappear-
ance. He cannot get over iU losing iUelf in the
Dead Sea, and comparaa it to the aubmarine oonrae
of the Alpheua from Greece to Sicily (lib. v. 7, 4,
ed. Dindorf. ). Pliny goea *o for as to aay that the
Jordan instinctively shrinks from entering that
dread lake by which it ia swallowed up. On the
other band Pliny attributes its rise to the fountain
of Paneaa, from which, he adds, Oeaaree was sur-
iiamed (//. TV. v. 15). Lastly, Strabo speaks of
the aromatic reeds and rushes, and even balsam,
that grew on the shore* and marshe* round Gennes-
aret; but can he be believed when be assert* that
the Aradions and others were in the habit of suit-
ing up Jortim with ear jot (xri. 3, 16.) It will
be remembered that he wrote during the fint day*
of the empire, when there were boats in abundance
upon Gennesaret (John ri. 23-21).
III. Among the latest travellers who have ex-
plored and afterwards written upon the course or
sources of the Jordan, are Messrs. Irby and Mangles
(Journal of 7Vne.), Dr. Robinson, Lieut Lynch
and party (JfarraL and Off. Rep.), Cept Newbold
(Journal of R. Anal. 8., vol. xri. p. 8 ff.), Rev.
W. Thomson (BibL Sac, vol HI. p. 184 ft*.), and
Professor Stanley. While making our best ac-
knowledgments to these writers for what is con-
tained in the following summary, we shall take the
liberty of offering one or two criticisms where per-
sonal inspection constrains our demurring to their
conclusions. According to the older commentators
" Dan " was a stream that rose in a fountain called
Phiala, in the district called Paniuni, and among
the roots of Lebanon ; then after a subterraneous
course, reappeared near the town called Paneaa,
Dan, or Oesarea Philippi, where it was joined by a
small stream called " Jor; " and henceforth united
both names in one — Jordan (Corn, a Lap. in
Deut. xxxiii. 33). But it has been well observed
that the Hebrew word *f*j"*£, Jarden, has no rela-
tion whatever to the name Dan ; and also that the
river bad borne that name from the days of Abra-
ham, and from the day* of Job, at least five cen-
I arias before the name of Dan was given to the
tlty at IU source (Robinson, iii. 413). It should
be added that the number of streams meeting at or
about Banias very far exceeds two.
This is one of the points on which we are com-
pelled to dissent from one and all of the foregoing
travellers — not one of them dwells upon the phe-
nomenon that from the village of Haihbaun on the
"*f. W. to the village of 8/iuYa on the N. E. of
BAniAt, the entire slope of Anti- Lebanon ia alive
with bursting fountains and gushing; streams
every one of which, great or small, finds its way
sooner or later into the swamp between BAniAt and
lake Bihh, and eventually becomes part of the
Jordan. I iddentaHy this ot course comes out ; but
rarely this, and not those three prime sources ex-
toataly, fa which Captain Newbold has most justly
JORDAN 1459
added a fourth, passed over without a word by the
rest — should be made the prominent feature ol
that charmed locality. The feet is, that with the
exception of Messrs. Irby and Mangles, he is the
only traveller of them all who has in any degree
explored the S. E. side of the slope ; the route of
the others being from BAniAt to HaMeiya on the
western side. Then again all have travelled in the
months of April, May, or June — that is, before
the melting of the snows had oeased to have influ-
ence — except Messrs. Irby and Mangles, whose
scanty notices were made in February, or just after
the heavy rains. Whereas in order to be able to
decide to which of those sources Jordan is most
indebted, the latter end of October, the end of tho
dry season, and just before the rains set in — when
none but streams possessed of inherent vitality are
in existence — should hare been chosen. Far be
it from us to depreciate those time-honored parent
spring* — the noble fountain (of Daphne) under
the Tell, or hill of Dan (Tell tUKadu), which
" gushes out all at once a beautiful river of delicious
water " in the midst of verdure and welcome shade;
still leas, that magnificent " burst of water out of
the low slope" in front of the picturesque cava
of BAniAt, inscriptions iu the nicbes of which still
testify to the deity that was once worshipped there,
and to the royal munificenoe that adorned his shrine.
Travellers, nevertheless, who have seen Clitumnus
(and to read of it in Pliny, Ep. lib. rili. 8, is almost
to aee), Vaucluee, or even Holywell in N. Wales,
will hare seen something of the kind. But what
shall we say to " the bold perpendicular rock " near
Hashbeiya, " from beneath which," w* are told,
" the river gushes copious, translucent, and cool,
in two rectangular streams, one to the N. E., and
the other to the N. W.?" for if this source, being
the most distant of all, may " claim in a strictly
scientific sense to be the parent stream of the
whole valley," then let us be prepared on the same
principle to trace the Mississippi back to the Mis-
souri. Besides, Captain Newbold — and we can
here vouch for his statement — ha* detected a 4th
source, which according to the Arabs, is never dry,
what Mr. Thomson hastily dismisses as the
mountain-torrent Wady el-Kid, and Messrs. Irby
and Mangles as a " rivulet; " but which the Captain
appears to hare followed to the spring* called Kik-
Shar, though we must add, that iu sources, ac-
cording to our impression, he considerably more to
the N. It runs past the mined wall* and forts of
BAniAt on the 8. E. Nobody that has seen ita
dixsy cataracts in the month of April, or its deep-
rock-hewn bed at all other seasons, can speak
lightly of it; though it is naturally lost upon all
those who quit BAniAt for the N. W.
Again, we make bold to aay, that the Phiala of
Josephus ha* not yet been identified. Any lake
would have been called Phiab by the Greeks that
bore that shape (Reland, Paint 41; comp. Hof-
mann's Lex. Unit. s. r. ; if we mistake not, the Lake
of Delos is a further instance). But Birkrt er-Ram,
or the alleged Phiala, lying to the S. E. of, and at
some distance from, the care of Bdniit, we are not
surprised that the story of Josephus should be voted
absurd ; for he is thus made to say seriously, -hat
even to a tragic poet was the climax of inipcafbil-
itles (Eur. M-d. 410), that " the fountain* of sacred
streams flow *<eokwards," or up-hill The Arabs
doubtless heard if the story of the chaff through
as dragoman, fbo heard it from his masters j
but the direeUot of S*i»'a— «sU hour* higher
Digitized by
Google
1460
JORDAN
■p the southern declivity of Mount Hermon," and
therefore to the N. E. of Birddt— it beyond doubt
the true one, as long once pointed out by Rdand
(ibid., and eee hia Map) for the aite of the lake.
According to Lynch, " a very large fountain inning
from the bote of a high rock " exuta there (Off.
Hep. 113). Laatly, the actual description given by
Captain Newbold of the lake Mtrj eC-.Van, " 8 hrs.
E. 10° N. from Bdmai," prove; at all event*, that
there it ow circular lake, besides Birket er-Ram,
in those regions, and in the very direction indi-
cated by the historian. We cannot help, therefore,
entertaining a suspicion that Mtrj el-Man will
turn out to be the true Phfada.
Once more, Mr. Thomson had stated that " the
Bathbtiya, when it reaches the L. BHek, has been
immensely enlarged by the waters from the great
fountains of Bdnidt, Tell ct-Kddy, el-MeUahaJi,
Derate or Btlit" (both on the western aide of
the plain), " and innumerable other springs." Cap-
tain Newbold, on the other hand, found it impos-
sible to ascertain whether such a junction took
place, or not, before they enter the lake (p. 15).
His Arabs strongly maintained the negative. It
was reserved for Dr. Robinson in 1852 to settle the
question of their previous junction, which according
to him may be witnessed one third of a mile N. of
Tell Bheikh Yimf: so that they enter H&lek, as
they depart from it, in one united stream (vol. Hi.
395). Its passage through and from Uennesaret
is that of uninterrupted unity. But that the waters
of the Jordan do not condescend to mingle in any
sense with those of the lake, is as true as that the
Rhone and the Lake of Genera never embrace. Any
comparison between the waters of the Jordan, as a
fertilizer, or aa a beverage, with those of the Kile,
would be no leas unreal; while from the immense
amount of vegetable matter which they contain,
the former decompose with a rapidity perfectly
marvelous when kept. Travellers, therefore, who
are desirous of preserving them, will do well to go
to the fountain-heads for their supply. There alone
they sparkle and look inviting.
" The Jordan enters Gennesaret about two miles
below the ruins of the ancient city Julias, or the
Bethsaida of Gaulonitis, which lay upon its eastern
bank. At its mouth it is about 70 feet wide, a
lazy, turbid stream, flowing between low alluvial
banks. There are several bars not far from Its
mouth, where it can be forded. . . . From the site
of Bethsaida to Jitr Ben/a Ya'kHb it about six
miles. The Jordan here rushes along, a foaming
torrent (much of course depending on the season
when it is visited), through a narrow winding
ravine, shut in by high precipitous banks. Above
the bridge the current is less rapid and the banks
are lower. The whole distance from the lake tU
Uitett to the Sea of Tiberias is nearly nine miles,
..nd the fall of the river is about 600 feet " (Porter's
Handbook, part ii. pp. 426-87 ; comp. Stanley's
S. <f P. p. 364, note 1, 2d ed.).
The two principal features in the course of the
Jordan are its descent and its sinuosity. From its
fountain-beads to the point where it is lost to
nature, it ruslie* down one continuous Inclined
plane, only oroken by a series of rapids or pre-
cipitous falls. Between the Lake of Tiberias and
he Dead Sea, Lieutenant Lynch passed down 27
rapids which he calls threatening; besides a great
mny more of lesser magnitude. According to the
nmputatiuns which were then made, the descent
af the Jordan in each mile was about 11 J English
JORDAN
feet; the depression of the Lake of Tiberias bean
the level of the Mediterranean 658.3; and that oi
the Dead Sea 1816.7 (Robinson. 1. 613, note ax.).
Thus " the Descender " may be said to have fairly
earned hia name. Its sinuosity is not so remark-
able in the upper part of its course. Lieutenant
Lynch would regard the two phenomena in the
light of cause and effect. « The great secret," he
says, " of the depression b etween Lake Tiberias and
the Dead Sea is solved by the tortuous course of
the Jordan. In a space of 60 miles of latitude and
4 or 5 miles of longitude, the Jordan traverses at
least 200 miles " (Off. Letter, p. 265 of tfarrat.).
During the whole passage of 8, days, the time
which it took his boats to reach the Dead Sea from
Gennesaret, only one straight reach of any length,
about midway between them, t. e. on the 4th day,
ia notieed. The rate of stream seems to have varied
with its relative width and depth. The greatest
width mentioned was 180 yards, the point where
it enters the Dead Sea. Here it was only 3 feat
deep. On the 6th day the width in one place was
yards, and the depth only 2 feet; while the cur-
rent on the whole varied from 8 to 8 knot*. On
the 5th day the width was 70 yards, with a current
of 3 knots, or 30 yards with a current of 6 knots.
The only living tributaries to the Jordan notieed
particularly below Gennesaret were the Yannik
(Hieromax) and the Zerka (Jabbok). The mouth
of the former of these was passed on the 3d day,
40 yards wide, with moderate current; while the
latter, whose course became visible on the 7th day,
was, on the 8th day, discovered to hare two dis-
tinct outlets into the main stream, one of which
was then dry. Older writers had distinguished two
beds and banks of the Jordan ; the first, that oc-
cupied by the river in its normal state; the second,,
comprising the space which it occupied during its
swelling or overflow (Martiniere, Did. Gtogrnpk.
s. v.). Similarly Lieutenant Lynch has remarked,
" There are evidently two terraces to the Jordan,
and through the lowest one the river runs its ser-
pentine course. From the stream, abate the im-
mediate bankt, there ia, on each side, a singular
terrace of low hills, like truncated cones, which is
the bluff terminus of an extended table-land, reach-
ing quite to the mountains of Hauran on the E.,
and the high hills on the western side " (Narrat,
April 13, and comp. what Opt. Newbold says, p.
22). There are no bridges over Jordan to which
an earlier date has been assigned than that of the
Roman occupation ; and there are vestiges of Roman
roads in different parts of the country — between
Ndbulta and Btitin for instance — that may well
have crossed by these bridges. The Saracens after-
wards added to their number, or restored those
which they found in ruins. Thus the bridge called
eUGIngan over the llashbtiya, has two pointed
arches and one round (Newbold, p. 13), while the
entire architecture of the Jitr Bendt Ya'btb (of the
daughters of Jacob), 2 J miles to the S. of L. Hulefa,
as well as of the khan adjacent to it on the eastern
side, is pronounced to be Saracenic (ibid., p. 30).
A Roman bridge of ten arches, Jitr Semakb, spans
the Jordan near the village bearing that name, and
was doubtless on the route from Tiberias and Ten-
ches to Gadara and Decapolis (ibid., p. 31, Irby
p. 90). Lastly, the bridge of Mejamieh wiiica
crosses the Jordan about six miles from the Lake
of Gennesaret, was Saracenic; while that near tht
ford Damieh was more Roman (Newbold, p. 3C
and Lynch, Xarr., April 16).
Digitized by
Google
JORDAK
Tssr-ilng from thaw artificial construction* to the
aid bridges of nature — the Scads — we find a re-
markable yet perfectly independent concurrence
between the narrative of Lieutenant Lynch and
what has been asserted previously respecting the
fords or passages of the Bible. We do not indeed
affirm that the localities fit into each other like the
pieces of a puzzle. Yet still it is no alight coinci-
dence that no more than three, or at most four
regular fords should have been set down by the
chroniclers of the American e (edition. The two
first occur on the same day wi bin a few hours of
aadb otter, and are called respectively Wacnbtt and
S6k*xt ( Off Rrp. pp. 25 and 26). Eighteen miles
£• by N. of the last of these were the ruins of
Jerash (which our authority confounds with Pel's),
exactly in a line with which is placed the site of
Saeeoth, or Saiit, in the map of Dr. Kobinjon;
though he admit* that argument* are not wanting
for placing it some way to the 8. (vol. iii. p. 310).
The Best ford is passed the followfag, or the Tib
JOBDAJf 1461
day, the ford of DAmiefi, as it is called, opposite to
the commencement of the Wady Ztrka, some mike
above the junction of that river with the Jordan,
and where the road from NAbulw to ei-Snlt crossed.
Could we ascertain the true site of Succoth, we
might be better able to decide which of these two
fords answered best to the lleth-barah of the Old
Test, or Bethabar* of the New; and then Anon
might be the ford, or one of the two fords, to the
N. of it It is perhaps worthy of note that the
neighborhood of the ford SiUaoa is represented
as the dreariest wild imaginable — fearful solitude
and monotony (Narr., April 15). That Messrs.
Irby and Mangles forded the Jordan near Taricnea
was probably due to the ruins of the old Roman
1 bridge ; on the contrary, where they forded it on
horseback, 1} hour from BeitAn, Lynch found the
water between 5 and 8 feet deep.
The ford cl-Sfmlira'a over against Jericho was
the last ford put upon record, and it is too well
known to need any lengthened notice. Her* fa*
The Jordan on the road from Nablus to es-Salt.
dition has chosen to combine the passage of the
Israelites under Joshua with the baptism of our
Lord — a more distant ford would have been found
highly inconvenient for the Jerusalem pilgrims;
and here accordingly, three miles below the ruined
convent of St John — in honor of these events —
the annual bathing of the Oriental pilgrims takes
,daee: of which Professor Stanley has given a lively
picture (3. <f P. pp. 311-16; oomp. Off. Rep. pp.
89,30).
We have jbserved that not a single city ever
crowned the banks of the Jordan. Still Bethshan
and Jericho to the W., Genua, Pella, and Gadara
to the K. of it, were Important cities, and caused a
ddesl of traffic between the two opposite banks.
a the sway of the Egyptian sultans, the bridge
<i the Daughter* of Jacob seems to have been oat
of the high-roads to Damascus. Another road to
Damascus was from NAtmltu through Btudm, aud
was brought over by the bridge at the mouth of
the Yarm&k. The sites of these cities, with their
history, are discussed under their respective names ;
and for the same reason we abstain from going
deeply into the physical features of the Jordan or
of the Ghor, for these will be treated of more at
large under the general head of Palestine. We
shaL confine ourselves therefore to the most cursory
notice. As there were slime-pits, or pita of bitu-
men, and salt-pita (Gen. xi. 3; Zeph. 11. 9) in the
vale of Siddim, on the extreme south, so Mr.
Thomson speaks of bitumen wells 90 minutes
from the bridge over the Hmhbtiyn on the extreme
north; while Ain tt-UtUikaX above L. Bikk la
emphatically " the fountain of the salt
Digitized by
Google
1462
JORDAN
(Ljneh'i Narrat., p. 470). Thermal springs are
frequent about the Lake of Tiberias; the moat cele-
brated, below the town bearing that name (Robin-
ion, ii. 384, 386); some near Emtnaus (Lynch, p.
487), some near Magdala, and some not far from
Gadara (Irby, pp. 90,91). The hill of Dan is said
to be an extinct crater, and masses of volcanic rock
and tufa are noticed by Lynch not far from the
month of the Yarmuk (ffarrat., April 12). Dark
basalt is the characteristic of the rocks in the upper
stage; trap, limestone, sandstone, and conglomerate
in the lower. On the Sd day of the passage a
bank of fuller's-earth was observed.
How far the Jordan in olden time was ever a
rone of cultivation like the Nile is uncertain.
Mow, with the exception of the eastern shores of
the L. Oileh, the hand of man may be said to
have disappeared from its banks. The genuine
Arab is a nomad by nature, and contemns agricul-
ture. There, however, Dr. Robinson, in the month
of Hay, found the land tilled almost down to the
lake; and large crops of wheat, barley, maize,
sesame, and rice rewarded the husbandman.
Horses, cattle, and sheep — all belonging to the
Ghawarinth tribe — fattened on the rich pasture ;
and large herds of black buffaloes luxuriated in the
streams and in the deep mire of the marshes (vol.
lii. p. 396). These are doubtless lineal descendant*
of the "fat bulls of Uashan," as the "oaks of Ba-
shan " are still the magnificent staple tree of those
regions. Cultivation degenerates as we advance
southwards. Corn-fields ware round Gennesaret
on the W., and the palm and vine, fig and pome-
granate, ore still to be seen here and there. Melons
grown on its shores are of great size and much
esteemed. Pink oleanders, and a rose-colored spe-
cies of hollyhock, in great profusion, wait upon
every approach to a rill or spring. These gems of
nature reappear in the lower course of the Jordan.
There the purple thistle, the bright yellow marigold
and scarlet anemone saluted the adventurers of the
New World : the laurestinus and oleander, cedar
and arbutus, willow and tamarisk, accompanied
them on their route. As the climate became more
tropical and the lower Ghor was entered, large
gburrah trees, like the aspen, with silvery foliage,
overhung them ; and the cane, frequently impene-
trable and now in blossom, " was ever at the water's
edge." Only onoe during the whole voyage, on the
4th day, were patches of wheat and barley risible,
but the hand that had sowed them lived far away.
As Jeremiah in the 0. T., and St Jerome and
Phocas (see Keland as above) among Christian pil-
grims, had spoken of the Jordan as the resort of
lions, so tracks of tigers, wild boars, and the like,
presented themselves from time to time to these
explorers. Flocks of wild ducks, of cranes, of
pigeons, and of swallows, were scared by their ap-
proach ; and a specimen of the bulbul, or Syrian
nightingale, fell into their hands. The scenery
throughout wsa not inspiring — it was of a sub-
dued character when they started; profoundly
gloomy and dreary near ford Sihoa; and then
■tteiiy sterile just before they reached Jericho.
With the exception of a few Arab tribes — so sav-
age as scarce to be considered exceptions — hu-
Jianity hod Income extinct on its banks.
We cannot take leave of our subject without
• for general sketches of the Jordan Valley the
' may an, also, Robinson, Phyi. Qtogr. of Pal-
stku, D. 891 fc, pp. 144-184 ; Bawlhuoo, Inamt Mm-
JOSEPH
expressing oar warmest thanks to our Traoeatleotk
brethren. It was not enough that Dr. Kobinsoa
should have eclipsed all other writers who had pre-
ceded him in his noble work upon Palestine, bfri
that a nation from the extreme W. — from a con-
tinent utterly unknown to the Old or New Testa-
ment — should hare been the first to accomplish
the navigation of that sacred river, which has been
before the world so prominently for nearly 4000
years; this Is a fact which surely ought not to be
passed over by any writer on the Jordan in slimes),
or uneommemorated.* K. 8. Ft
JOR1BAS Cidpifios- Joribu4)=jAtUB (1
Esdr. viii. 44; eomp. Ed-, viii. 16).
JOR1BUS flaWes: Jonbw) = Jabto (1
Esdr. ix. 19; eomp. Exr. x. 18).
JC/RIM Qlmptlu: {Jorim]), son of Matthat
in the genealogy of Christ (Luke lit 89), in the
13th generation from David inclusive; about eon-
temporary, therefore, with Aha*. The form of the
name is anomalous, and should probably be either
Joram or Joiarim. A. C. H.
JORTCO AM (Qyi?"S [d?/wfo« of the pec
pit, Fiirst]: 'IsxAdV; [Vat UutAo»;] Alex. Up-
Kaon'- Jcrcaam), either a descendant of Caleb the
son of Hezron, through Hebron, or, as Jarchi says,
the name of a place in the tribe of Judah, of which
Raham was prince (1 Chr. ii. 44). It was proba-
bly in the neighborhood of Hebron. Jerome gives
it in the form Jerchaam ( QucuL J/ebr. in ParaL).
JOS'ABAD. 1 ("9P {JeJtotah U oteer] :
'IomO&M [Vat -0a0]; Alex. ia>(aflat; FA.
I«{a/9a/B: Jtzabnd.) Properly Jozabad, the
Geaerathite, one of the hardy warriors of Benjamin
who left Saul to follow the fortunes of David during
his residence among the Philistines at Ziklag (1
Chr. xii. 4).
9. Cl«<ro3»<J»; [Vat l«v«u3«cr; AM. 'lmai$-
aSat'] Jwnibu) = Jozabad, eon of Jeshna the
Levite (1 Esdr. viii. 63; eomp. Exr. viii. 33).
3. ([Rom. *Iȣa/93o>; Vat Zo/BJoj; AM. 'Isr
o-djSaJoj:] Alex. n(a$aiof- Zttbdini), one of the
sons of liebai (1 Esdr. ix. 29). [Zabbai.]
J08'APHAT ('I«w«^dV: Jotnphat)=J%-
HoeiiAi'iiAT, king of Judah (Matt i. 8).
JOSAPHI'AS ClavwpUs: Jo*»p*wu)=Jo-
bipiiiaii (1 Esdr. riii. 36 ; eomp. Ear. viii. 10).
• JO'SK, A. V., Luke lii. 99 incorrectly for
Joses, which see. A.
JOS'EDEC ('too-eSs*: Jotethe, Jotedcch)
1 Esdr. v. 6, 48, 56, ii. 2, ix. 19; Ecclus. xlix. 12,
= J khozauak or Jozadak, the father of Jeshna,
whose name also appears as Joskukch (Hag. LI).
JOSEPH (HP'V [we w/m]; 'lew**: Jo*
itph). 1. The elder of the two sons of Jacob by
Rachel. Like his brethren, he received his name
on account of the circumstances of his birth. We
read that Rachel wsa long barren, but that at length
she " bare a son ; and said, God hath taken awav
(F^DN) my reproach : and she called his name Joseph
(*1PV); saying, the Lord will add (*|D*) to me
another son" (Gen. xxx. 23, 94); a hope fulfilled
In the birth of Benjamin (eomp. xtxv. 17). This
arMts, Iv. 266, 277 ; Tristram, Natural History of tin
Bible, pp. 6, 10, 22 ; and, aspedallr, Qags's translation •
Utter* 0MtT.^n^iw,U. 14, M-ol. ttl.au> U.
Digitized by
Google
JOSEPH
i to indicate a dc-jble etymology (from
*|!?y uxl H?J)- ' n>era to "ofung improbable in
thil explanation, beeauae of the relation of the tak-
ing away the reproach to the expectation of another
■on. Sueh double etymologies are probably more
common in Hebrew names than is generally sup-
1461
The date of Joseph's birth relatively to that of
the coming of Jacob into Egypt is fixed by the
mention that be was thirty yean old when be be-
came governor of Egypt (xli. 46), which agrees
with the statement that he was "seventeen years
old " (xxxvii. S) about the time that bis brethren
sold him. He was therefore born about 39 years
before Jacob came into Egypt, and, according to the
chronology which we hold to be the most probable,
B, a dr. 1906.
After Joseph's birth he is first mentioned when
• youth, seventeen years old. As the child of
Rachel, sod " son of bis old age " (xxxvii. 8), and
doubtless also .for bis excellence of character, he
was beloved by his father above all his brethren.
Probably at this time Rachel was already dead and
Benjamin but an infant, Benjamin, that other
"child of his old age" (xliv. 30), whom Jacob
afterwards loved as all that remained of Rachel
when he supposed Joseph dead — •' bis brother is
dead, and he alone is left of his mother, and his
father lovetb him" (t c.|." Jacob at this time
had two small pieces of land in Canaan, Abraham's
buryiiig-place at Hebron in the south, and the
" parcel of a field, where he [Jacob] had spread
his tent " (Gen. xxxiii. 19), at Shechem in the
north, the latter being probably, from Its price, the
lesser of the two. He seems then to have stayed
at Hebron with the aged Issae while his sons kept
his flocks. Joseph, we read, brought the evil re-
port of his brethren to bis father, and they hated
him because his father loved him more than them,
and had shown his preference by making him a dress
(D^BJ njh?), which appears to have been a
■ According to the order of the narrative, Rachel's
death preceded the felling of Joseph ; It to unlikely
that 17 years should have elapsed between the birth
of Joseph and that of Benjamin ; and as Benjamin
had ten sons at the coming Into Egypt (xlrl. 21), it la
scarcely probable that be wea born no more than 22
years before. There Is moreover no mention of Rachel
beside; the allusiou In the speech of Judah to Joseph,
quote] above (xliv. 20), In the whole subsequent nar-
rative, until dying Jacob, when he b les ses Ephralm
and Manasssh, returns to the thought of hie beloved
wile, and says, tf And as for me, when I came from
Fadan, Rachel died by me In the land of Canaan In
the way, when yet [there was] but a little way to come
onto Kphrath : and 1 burled her there In the way of
Ephrath ; the same [is] Beth-lehem " (xlvili. 7). Jo-
seph's anxiety In Egypt to see Benjamin seems to mvor
the idea that he had known htm as a child. When
Joseph was sold, Benjamin can, however, have only
been very yonng.
o The name of this dress seems to signify " a tunic
reaching to the extremities." It was worn by David's
laughter Tamar, being the drees of " the king's daugh-
ters [that were] virgins " (2 9am. xlH. 18, see- 19).
ftore seems no rasson for the LXX. rendering ^w
vouriAot, or the Vulg. po/vmi'Ja, except that it Is very
likely that such a tunle would be ornamented with
nloted stripes, or embroidered. The richer classes
among the ancient Egyptians wore long dresses of
white linen. The people of Palestine and Syria, rep-
SjoenVt on the Egyptian monuments as enemies c,
JOSEPH
long tonic with sleeves, worn by youths and
ens of the richer class.* The hatred of Joseph'!
brethren was increased by his telling of a drear*
foreshowing that they would bow down to Urn,
which was followed by another of the same import*
It is remarkable that thus early prophetic dreams
appear in Joseph's life. This part of the history
(xxxvii. 8-11) may perhaps be regarded as a retro-
spective introduction to the narrative of the great
crime of the envious brethren. They had gone to
Shechem to feed the flock, and Joseph was sent
thither from the vale of Hebron by bis father to
bring him word of their welfare and that of the
flock. They were not at Shechem, but were gone
to Dothan, which appears to have been not very far
distant, pasturing their flock like the Arabs of the
present day, wherever the wild country (ver. 8S)
was unowned. On Joseph's approach, his brethren,
except Reuben, resolved to kill him ; but Reuben
saved him, persuading them to cast him into a dry
pit with the intent that he might restore him to
his father. Accordingly when Joseph was ome,
they stripped him of bis tunic and cast him into
the pit, " and they sat down to eat bread : and
they lifted up their eyes and looked, and behold, a
company of Ishmaelites came from Gilead, with their
camels bearing spieery [?] and balm and gum
ladannm [?], going to carry [it] down to Egypt "
(ver. 25). — In passing we must call attention to
the interest of this early notice of the trade be-
tween Palestine and Egypt — The Ishmaelites are
also called Midianites in the narrative: that the
two names are used interchangeably is evident from
ver. 28 ; it must therefore be supposed that one of
them is generic; the caravan "came from Gilead "
and brought balm ; rf so that it is reasonable to
infer the merchants to have been Midianites, and
that they are also called Ishmaelites by a kind of
generic use of that name. Judah suggested to his
brethren to sell Joseph to the Ishmaelites, appeal-
ing at once to their covetousness and, in proposing
a less cruel course than that on which they were
tributaries, wore stmilar if reams, partly colored, gen-
erally with a strips round the skirts and the borders
of the sleeves.
c from Joseph's second dream, and his lather's
rebuke, it might be inferred that Rachel was living
at the time that be dreamt it. It la Indeed pomtb.'e
that It may have occurred some time before the sell-
ing of Joseph, and been interpreted by Jacob of Ra-
chel, who certainly was not alive at Its fulfillment, so
that It could not apply to her. Tet, tf Leah only
survived, Jacob might have spoken of hsr ss Joseph's
mother. The dream, moreover, indicates eleven breth-
ren besides the father and mother of Joseph ; If there-
fore Benjamin were already born, Rachel must have
been deed : the reference to therefore more probably
to Leah, who may nave been living when Jacob went
Into Egypt
d The three srrJcles of commerce carried by the
caravan we have rendered spieery, balm, and gum
ladanum. The meaning of riiOJ Is extremely
doubtful : there is nothing to guide us but the ren-
derings of the LXX SvpAuui and the Vulg. anmatm,
and the congrulty of their meaning with that of ths
name of ths second ertxZa. As to ths ^S, there
can be no doubt that It was a kind of balm, although
h> exact kind Is dlmoult to determine. The ■
of Of Is not certain : perhaps gum ladaaa
a not improbable ooqfceturs.
Digitized by
Google
1464
JOSEPH
probably itill resolved, to what remnant of broth -
atly feeung they may still hare bad. Accordingly
they took Jowph out of the pit and told him " for
twenty [shekels] of silver" (ver. 38), which we
find to ban keen, under the Law, the value of a
male from five to twenty years old (Lav. xxvii. 6).°
Probably there was a constant traffic in white slaves,
and the price, according to the unchangeableness
of eastern customs, long remained the same. It is
worthy of remark that we here already find the
descendants of Abraham's concubines oppressing
the lawful heirs. Reuben was absent, and on his
return to the pit was greatly distressed at not find-
ing Joseph. His brethren pretended to Jacob that
Joseph had been killed by some wild beast, taking
to him the tunic stained with a kid's blood, while
even Reuben forbore to tell him the truth, all speak-
ing constantly of the lost brother as though they
knew not what had befallen him, and even as dead.
"And Jacob rent his clothes, and put sackcloth
upon his loins, and mourned for his son many days.
And all his sons and all his daughters rose up to
comfort him; but he refused to be comforted; and
he said, For I will go down unto my son mourning
into the grave. Thus his father wept for bim "
(Gen. zxxvii. 34, 35).* Jacob's lamentation shows
that he knew of a future state, for what comfort
would he have in going into his own grave when
he thought that his lost sou had been torn by wild
beasts? This is one of the cases in which we
should certainly understand " Hades " by " the
grave," and may translate, " For I will go down
unto my son mourning to Hades." *
The Midianites sold Joseph in Egypt to Potiphar,
" an officer of Pharaoh, captain of the execution-
ers, an Egyptian" (xxxix. X; comp. xxxvii. 36). d
We have probably no right to infer, as Gesenius
has done (77ies. a. v. D^**), that by the execu-
tioners we are to understand the same as the king's
guard or body-guard. This may be the case when
the Chaldeans are spoken of, for the immediate in-
fliction of punishment under the very eye of the
sovereign was always usual both with Sheinites and
Tartars, as a part of their system of investing the
regal power with terror; but the more refined
Egyptians and their responsible kings do not seem
to have practiced a custom which nothing but ne-
cessity could render tolerable. That in this case
the title is to be taken literally, is evident from the
control exercised by Potiphar over the king's prison
(xxxix. 20), and from, the fact that this prison is
afterwards, shown to have been in the house of the
captain of the executioners, that officer then being
doubtless a successor of Potiphar (xl. 8, 4). The
name Potiphar is written in hieroglyphics Pet-
PA-ra or Pet-p-ra, and signifies " belonging to
« Kallsah remarks (od toe.) that twenty shekels
was "a print leas than that ordinarily paid for a
Hebrew stare (Ex. xxl. 83; Uv. xxvii. 6)." The
former reference Is to the floe to be paid, thirty shek-
els of silver, to the owner of a slave, male or female,
cored to death by an ox : the latter disproves his
assertion. The payment most have been by weight,
since there la no reason to believe that coined money
was known at this remote period. [Monet.]
* The daughters here mentioned were probably the
elves of Jacob's sons : he seems to have had but one
laughter ; and if he had many grand-daughters, few
vould have been born thus early.
« for this Interesting inference we are Indebted to
tar. Marks. On the knowledge ot the future state
JOSEPH
Re" (the sun). It occurs again, with a slight!)
different orthography, Poti-pherah, as the name of
Joseph's father-in-law, print or prince of On. Il
may be remarked that as Ra was the chief divinity
of On, or Heliopolia, it is an interesting undesigned
coincidence that the latter should bear a name in-
dicating devotion to Ra. [Potiphar.]
It is important to observe that a careful com-
parison of evidence has led us to the conclusion
that, at the time that Joseph was sold into Egypt,
the country was not united under the rule of a
single native line, but governed by several dynas-
ties, of which the Fifteenth Dynasty, of Shepherd
Kings, was the predominant line, the rest bemg
tributary to it The absolute dominions of this
dynasty lay in Lower Egypt, and it would there-
fore always lie most connected with Palestine.
The manners described are Egyptian, although
there is apparently an occasional slight tinge of
Shemitism. The date of Joseph's arrival we should
consider b. c. cir. 1880. [Egypt: Chbokoloot.]
In Egypt, the second period of Joseph's Ufa
begins. As a child he had been a true son, and
withstood the evil example of bis brethren. He
is now to serve a strange master in the bard state
of slavery, and his virtue will be put to a severer
proof than it had yet sustained. Joseph prospered
in the house of the Egyptian, who, seeing that God
blessed him, and pleased with his good service,
" set him over his house, and all [that] he had he
gave into his hand" (xxxix. 4, comp. 6). He was
placed over all his master's property with perfect
trust, and " the Lord blessed the Egyptian's house
for Joseph's sake " (ver. 5). The sculptures and
paintings of the ancient Egyptian tombs bring
vividly before us the daily life and duties of Joseph.
The property of great men is shown to have been
managed by scribes, who exercised a most method-
ical and minute supervision over all the operations
of agriculture, gardening, the keeping of live stock,
and fishing. Every product was carefully regis-
tered to check the dishonesty of the laborers, who
in Egypt have always been famous in this respect.
Probably in no country was farming ever more sys-
tematic. Joseph's previous knowledge of tending
flocks, and perhaps of husbandry, and his truthful
character, exactly fitted him for the post of over-
seer. How long he filled it we are not told.
" Joseph was fair of form and fair in appearance "
(xxxix. 6). His master's wife, with the well-known
profligacy of the Egyptian women, tempted him,
and failing, charged him with the crime she would
have made him commit. Potiphar, incensed against
Joseph, cast him into prison. It must not be sup-
posed, from the lowness of the morals of the Egyp-
tians in practice, that the sin of unfaithfulness in
among the Israelites during and after the sojourn In
Egypt, see art. Earn.
d The word D^HD, which we have
"olllcer," with the A.' V., properly means "eunuch,"
as explained In the margin, although It Is also used
in the Bible In the former sense (Qesen. Tka. a. T.)
Podphar's offlce would scarcely have been given to a
eunuch, and there Is, we believe, no evidence that
there were such in the Egyptian courts In ancient
times. This very word first occurs in hleroglyphloa,
written bars, as a title of Fenian raneUonariee, m
Inscriptions of the tune of the Persian dominion.
• O^nj'Sn "ItP mue» mean « captain of she
executioners," from Potrphar's conneeuVa with the
prison, although the LXX. renders it if) ip d ytiest.
Digitized by
Google
JOSEPH
wife m not nuked among the heaviest riots.
The punishment of adulterers wae severe, and a
■oral tale recently interpreted, •» Tht Two Broth-
srs," ie tended upon a esss nearly wmmhllng
that of Joseph. It has, indeed, bean Imagined
that this story ins based upon the trial of Josep h ,
and as it was written tor the heir to the throne of
Egypt at a later period, there is some reason in the
idea that the virtue of one who had bald so high
» position as Joseph might hare been in the mind
of the writer, were this part of his history watt
known to the priests, which, however, is not likely,
fhis incident, moreover, is not so remarkable a* to
justify great street being laid upon the similarity
to it of the main event of a moral tale." The
story of BeUeropbou might as reasonably be traced
to it, were it Egyptian and not Greek. The Mus-
lims have founded upon the history of Joseph and
Potiphar's wife, whom they call Voosuf and Ze-
leakha, a famous religious allegory. This is much
to be wondered at, as the Kur-an relates the tempt-
ing of Joseph with no material variation in the
main particulars from the authentic narrative. The
eommenUtors say, that after the death of Potiphar
(Kitfeer) Joseph married Zeleekha (Sale, ch. xii.),
This mistake was probably caused by the circum-
stance that Joseph's father-in-law bore the same
name as his master.
Potiphar, although convinced of Joseph's guilt,
does not appear to have brought him before a tri-
bunal, where the enormity of his alleged crime,
especially after the trust placed in him, and the
hot of his being a foreigner, which was made much
of by his master's wife (xxxix. 14, 17), would prob-
ably have insured a punishment of the severest
kind. He seems to have only cast him into the
prison, which appears to have been in his house,
or, at least, under his control, since afterwards
prisoners are related to have been put " in ward
[in] the house of the captain of the executioners,
into the prison " (xL 3), and simply, " in ward [in]
the captain of the executioners' house " (xli. 10,
jomp. xL 7). The prison is described as "a place
where the long's prisoners [were] bound " (xxxix.
90). Here the hardest time of Joseph's period of
probation began. He was cast into prison on a
Use accusation, to remain there for at least two
years, sod perhaps for a much longer time. At
first be was treated with severity; this we learn
from Pa. ev., « He sent a mau before them, Joseph
[who]: was sold for a slave: whose feet they af-
JOSBPH
1465
a • This remarkable « Tale of the Two Brothers " Is
found In a papyrus In the British Museum, dating
from the 10th Dynasty Some of the points of ran
Maoee batman this Isjyptlan romance and the story
af Joaapb axe, — a similar temptation overcome, the
vpuroed woman's hatred, prolonged disappointment,
tnd a Anal succession to the throne, 'or a transla-
te! of the tale sea the OambtUgt Aaays tor 1868.
J. P. T.
• Joseph's complaint to the chief of the cupbearers,
" And here also have I dona nothing that they should
pat me Into the dungeon " (T>33, *!• tf)i does not
throw light upon this matter ; for although the word
ssed seams properly to mean the wont kind of prison,
ur the worst part of a prison, hen it most be manlr
•aolvalsnt, as In xlL 14, to "inbrnT-? (xxxix.
V, fee.), whlah seems properly a milder term.
< It has been Imagined, from the account of the
.ream of the chief of the cupbearers, that the wine
was trunk by the king of Bgypt may have bean the
flicted with the fetter: the iron entered into his
soul" (ver. 17, 18). There is probably here a
connection between "fetter" and "Iron" (eonrp
cxttx. 8), in which esse the signification of the last
clause would be " the iron entered into him,"
meaning that the fetters cat his feet or legs. This
is not inconsistent with the statement in Genesis
that the keeper of the prison treated Joseph well
(xxxix. 81), for we are not justified in thence in-
ferring that he was kind from the first
In the prison, ss in Potiphar' s house, Joseph was
found worthy of complete trust, aud the keeper of
the prison placed everything under his control,
God's especial blessing attending his honest service.
After a while, Pharaoh was incensed against two
of his officers, "the chief of the cup-bearers"
(Q^tpgn -ID?), and " the chief of the bakers"
(D^DTMn "Hff), and east them into the prison
where Joseph was. Here the chief of the execu-
tioners, doubtless a successor of Potiphar (for, had
the latter been convinced of Joseph's innocence, he
would not have left him in the prison, and if not
so convinced, he would not hare trusted him),
charged Joseph to serve these prisoners. Like
Potiphar, they were >• officers" of Pharaoh (xl. 9),
and though it may be a mistake to call them gran-
dees, their easy access to the king would give them
an importance that explains the care taken of them
by the chief of the executioners. Each dreamed a
prophetic dream, which Joseph interpreted, dis-
claiming human skill and acknowledging that in-
terpretations were of God. It is not necessary hers
to discuss in detail the particulars of this part of
Joseph's history, since they do not materially affect
the leading events of his life; they are however very
interesting from their perfect agreement with the
manners of the ancient Egyptians as represe n ted
on their monuments. Joseph, when he told the
chief of the cup-bearers of his coming restoration
to favor, prayed him to speak to Pharaoh for him ;
but he did not remember him.
" After two years," ■ Joseph's deliverance came.
Pharaoh dreamed two prophetic dreams. " Hs
stood by the river " ["lty, the Nile].* And, be-
hold, coming up out of the river seven kine [at
1 heifers '], beautiful in appearance and fat-nesbed ,
and they fed in the marsh-grass [ ! h*"I^J]./ And,
behold, seven other kine coming up after them out
trash anssnasnted juice of the grape ; but the nature
of the dream, which smbracss a long period, and
merely Indleataa the various stapes of the growth of
the tree and fruit as though immediately following
one another, would allow the omission of the process
of preparing the wine. The evidence of the monu-
ments makes It very Improbable that unformed tod
wine was drank by the ancient inhabitants, so that It
seems Impossible that It should aver have taken the
place of fermented or true wine, which wss the national
beverage of the higher cl asses at least.
<l 1st. - at the end of two yean of days ; " but we
may wad aianr " for •' at the end ; " and the wort
" days '' appaan merely to Indicate that the year was
a period of time, or possibly is usnd to distinguish the
ordinary year from a greater period, the year of days
tram toe year of years.
• lost word Is probably of Egyptian origin. (lSTRj
IHta
/ Then aan be no doubt that thla Is an Bgyprtai.
word. The LXX. doss not translate It (Sen. xli. %
18; la. xlx. 7); and Jesus the sen of ranch, an
Digitized by
Google
1466
JOSEPH
of the river, evil in appearance, and lean-fleahed "
(xli. 1-3). These, afterwards described still more
strongly, ate up the firat amen, and jet, aa U said
in the second account, when the; had eaten them
remained aa lean u before (xli. 1-4, 17-91). Then
Pharaoh had a second dream — " Behold, seven
ears of corn coming up on one stalk, fat [or ' full,'
ver. 22] and good. And, behold, seven ears, thin
and blasted with the east wind," sprouting forth
after them " (ver. 5, 6). These, also described more
strongly in the second account, devoured the first
■even ears (ver. 6-7, 22-24). In the morning
Pharaoh sent for the « scribes," (CtSCnn), and
the "wise men," and they were unable to give him
an interpretation. Then the chief of the cupbearers
remembered Joseph, and told Pharaoh how a young
Hebrew, " servant to the captain of the execution-
era," had interpreted his and his fellow-prisoner's
dreams. " Then Pharaoh sent and called Joseph,
and they made him hasten out of the prison : and
he shaved [himself], and changed his raiment, and
came unto Pharaoh " (ver. 14). The king then
related his dreams, and Joseph, when he had dis-
claimed human wisdom, declared to him that they
were sent of God to forewarn Pharaoh. There was
essentially but one dream. Both kine and ears
symbolized years. There were to be seven years
of great plenty in Egypt, and after them seven years
of consuming and "very heavy famine.*' The
doubling of the dream denoted that the events it
foreshadowed were certain and imminent. On the
interpretation it may be remarked, that it seems
evident that the kine represented the animal prod-
ucts, and the ears of corn the vegetable products,
the moat important object in each class representing
the whole class. Any reference to Egyptian super-
stitions, such aa some commentators have imagined,
Is both derogatory to revelation and, on purely crit-
ical grounds, unreasonable. The perfectly Egyptian
color of the whole narrative is very noticeable, and
nowhere more so than in the particulars of the first
dream. The cattle coming up from the river and
feeding on the bank may be seen even now, though
among them the lean kine predominate; and the
use of one Egyptian word, if not of two, in the
narrative, probably shows that the writer knew the
Egyptian language. The com with many ears on
one stalk must be wheat, one kind of which now
JOSEPH
grown in Egypt has this peculiarity. Another
point to be remarked is, that Joseph shaved besots
he went into Pharaoh's presence, and we find from
the monument* that the Egyptians, except when
engaged in war, shaved both the head and face, the
small beard that was worn on the chin being prob-
ably artificial. Having interpreted the dream, Jo-
seph counselled Pharaoh to choose a wise man and
set him over the country, in order that he should
take the fifth part of the produce of the seven years
of plenty against the years of famine. To this high
post the king appointed Joseph. Thus, when he
was thirty years of age, was he at last released from
his state of suffering, and placed in a position of
the greatest honor. About thirteen years' proba-
tion had prepared him for this trust; some part
passed aa Potiphar's slave, some part, probably the
greater,' in the prison. If our views of Hebrew
and Egyptian chronology be correct, the Pharaoh
here mentioned was Asaa, Manetho's Assis or Asses,
whose reign we suppose to have about occupied the
first half of the nineteenth century B. c.
Pharaoh, seeing the wisdom of giving Joseph,
whom he perceived to be under God's guidance,
greater powers than he had advised should be given
to the officer set over the country, made him not
only governor of Egypt, but second only to the
sovereign. We read : " And Pharaoh took off his
signet c from his hand, and put it upon Joseph's
hand, and arrayed him in vestures of fine linen
(DTK?, ountu), and put a collar of gold about his
neck; and he made him to ride in the second
chariot which he had; and they cried before him,
Abrech (TT"^"5S), even to set him over all the land
of Egypt" (xli. 42, 43). The monuments show
that on the investiture of a high official in Egypt,
one of the chief ceremonies was the putting on him
a collar of gold (see Ancient Egyptians, pi. 80) ;
the other particulars, the vestures of fine linen and
the riding in the second chariot, are equally in ac-
cordance with the manners of the country. The
meaning of what was cried before him has not been
satisfactorily determined.* We are told that Pharaoh
named Joseph Zaphnath-paaneah (xli. 48) (i"QP^
nD"p"3, Yorfape>art)x)> ""* •ignification of which
Egyptian Jew, uses It untranslated (Kcclus. xl. 16) : It
Is written in these places agt, ax«. Jerome remarks
that when he aikad the learned Egyptians what this
vord meant, they said that In their language this
name was given to every hind of marsh-plant (" oiiuk
juod in palude vireni fuueilar," Com. in Js. 1. a).
rhe change of the ancient Egyptian rowel as to 1 is
mite consistent with the laws of permutation which
we discover by a comparison of Egyptian and Hebrew
At. Brit. 8th ed. " Hieroglyphics "). This word oc-
•us with HQb In Job vlii. 11. The Utter we have
•opposed to be there used generloally, as « the reed "
iBotpt] ; but from the occurrence of an Egyptian word
with It, ft may be inferred to have its special significa-
tion, " the papyrus." The former word, however,
seems to be always generic [Fua, Amer. el.)
• Bunsen remarks upon this word : n Der Ostwind,
ier wegen seiner fdnfiigtoglgen Bauer Jstat In jEgypten
Ohamstn half st, 1st sehr trocken und hat Verwandsciiaft
lit dem Samum (d. h. der Qiftige), dem erstickenden
Mormwind dea wastes Arabian, der im April und Trial
herrtrb/. » (Bibeimrrk, ad loc). But It should be ob-
serves : L The east wind does not blow torlng the
2. The spring hot winds are southerly.
8. They do not last fifty days. 4. They are not called
Chanuun (Hhsmseen) or Khamiseen. 5. They prevail,
usually for three days at a time, during the seven
weeks (49 days) following Easter, vulgarly called In
Egypt Knamaseen, which la a plural of Khamseen, a
term applied in the singular to neither winds nor
period, though they are not strictly confined to this
fluctuating period. 8. They have no relation to the
Samoam, which occurs in any hot weather, and seldom
lasts more than a quarter of an hour. 7- The Bemnom
Is not peculiar to Arabia.
b We only know that Joseph was two years In prison
after the liberation of the chief of the cupbearers. The
preponderance of evidence, however, seems in favor of
supposing that he was longer In prison than m Poti-
phar's boose.
c The signet was of so much Importance with the
ancient Egyptian kings that their names (except
perhaps In the earliest period) were always I ncl oss*?
In an oval which represented an elongated signet.
d We do not here except Buasen's etymology (J a sa f
wrrk, ed Inc.), for we doubt that the root bear* lbs
signification he gives it, and think tw wastrenska
Digitized by
Google
JOSEPH
ta daebtruL [See Zaphnatii-paaxkaii.] He
■ho u gave him to wife Asenath daughter of Poti-
pharah, priest [or 'prince,' )Tr3] of On" (ver.
15). Whether Joseph's father-in-law were priest or
prince cannot, we think, be determined, 1 * although
the former seems more likely, since On wa»a very
priestly city, and there ii no good reason to think
that a priest would have been more exclusive than
an; other Egyptian functionary. His name, im-
plying devotion to K», the principal object of
worship at On, though, as already noticed, appro-
priate to any citizen of that place, would be espe-
cially so to a priest. [Potiphar.] It is worthy
of remark that On appears to have been the capital,
and seems to hare been certainly the religious
capital, as containing the great temple, of Apepee,
a shepherd-king, probably of the same line as
Joseph's Pharaoh. (Select Papyri; Brugsch,
Zcitichrijl d. DtuUch. Aforgtnland. GeuBiekafU)
Toe name of Joseph's wife we are disposed to con-
sider to be Hebrew.' [Asbhath.]
Joseph's history, as governor of Egypt, shows
him in two relations, which may be here separately
considered. We shall first speak of his adminis-
tration of the country, an- then of his conduct to
his brethren. In one respect, as bearing upon
Joseph's moral character, the two subjects are
closely connected, but their details may be best
treated apart, if we keep this important aspect con-
stantly in view.
Joseph's first act was to go " throughout all the
hud of Egypt " (ver. 46). During " the seven
plenteous years " there was a very abundant produce,
an! he gathered the fifth part, as he had advised
Pharaoh, and laid it up. The narrative, according
to Semitic usage, speaks as though he had taken
the whole produce of the country, or the whole
surplus produce (ver. 48) ; but a comparison with
a parallel passage shows that our explanation must
be correct (ver. 34, 35). The abundance of this
■tore is evident from the statement that " Joseph
gathered com as the sand of the sea, very much,
until he left numbering ; for [it was] without num-
ber" (ver. 49). The representations of the monu-
ments, which show that the contents of the gran-
aries were accurately noted by the scribes when
•hey were filled, well illustrate this passage.
Before the years of famine Asenath bare Joseph
two sons, of whom we read that he named " the
firstborn Hanasseh [a forgetter]: For God [said
he] hath made me forget all my toil, and all my
father' a house. And the name of the second called
ke Ephraim [fruitful ?] ; * For God hath caused
j» to be fruitful iu the land of my affliction " (50-
52). Though, as was natural, the birth of a son
made Joseph feel that he had at last found a home,
that his father's bouse was no longer his home, yet
it was not in utter forgetfulnesa of bis country that
he gave this and the other, both born of his Egyptian
JOSKPfl
1461
a The 'wry old opinion that ]TT2 means prince
as weU a* priest has been contradicted by Qtesnlus,
but not diffnvTSd.
» It may be remarked, as Indicating that Joseph'*
■wily did not maintain an Egyptian mode of lite, that
Hiwh took an Aramltus as a concubine (1 Chr.
rU. 14). This happened la his fkther'a lifetime: lee
lossah lived to ess the children of Maehb the son of
hto eonenbine f'Jeo, 1. 38).
e- The derivation of Kphrehn can ■sanely be
althouch then Is disunity in determlnuut
wife, Hebrew names, still lees, names signifying ha
devotion to the God of his fathers.
When toe seven good years had [«ssed, the fam
ine began. We read that '< the dearth was in al
lands; but in all the land of Egypt there was bread.
And when all the land of Egypt was famished, Um
people cried to Pharaoh for bread : and Pharaoh
said unto all the Egyptians, Go unto Joseph, what
he saith to you, do. And the famine was over all
the face of the earth. And Joseph opened all the
storehouses [lit. 'all wherein ' was], and sold unto
the Egyptians; and the famine waxed sore in the
land of Egypt. And all countries came into Egypt
to Joseph for to buy [com] ; because that the fam-
ine was [so] sore in all lands " (ver. 54-67). The
expressions here used do not require us to suppose
that the famine extended beyond the countries
around Egypt, such as Palestine, Syria, and Arabia,
as well as some part of Africa, although of course
it may have been more widely experienced. It may
be observed, that although famines in Egypt depend
immediately upon the failure of the inundation,
and In other countries upon the failure of rain, yet
that, as the rise of the Nile is caused by heavy
rains in Ethiopia, an extremely dry season there
and i#Paleatine would produce the result described
in the sacred narrative. It must also be recollected
that Egypt was anciently the granary of neighbor-
ing countries, and that a famine there would cause
first scarcity, and then famine, around. Famine*
are not very unfrequent in the history of Egypt;
but the famous seven years' famine in the reign of
the Fatimee Khaleefeh El-Mustansir-b-Ulah is the
only known parallel to that of Joseph : of this an
account is given under Famine. Early in the
time of famine, Joseph's brethren came to buy
com, a part of the history which we mention hen
only as indicating the liberal policy of the governor
of Egypt, by which the storehouses were opened to
all buyers of whatever nation they were.
After the famine bad lasted for a time, apparently
two years, there was " no bread hi all the land ;
for the famine [was] very sore, so that the land of
Egypt and [all] the land of Canaan fainted by
reason of the famine. And Joseph gathered up
all the money that was found in the land of Egypt,
and in the land of Canaan, for the com which they
bought : and Joseph brought the money into Pha-
raoh's bouse "<* (xlvii. 13, 14). When all the
money of Egypt and Canaan was exhausted, barter
became necessary. Joseph then obtained all the
oattle of Egypt,' and in the next year, all the land,
except that of the priests, and apparently, as a con-
sequence, the Egyptians themselves. He demanded,
however, only a fifth part of the produce as Pha-
raoh's right. It hat been attempted to trace this
enactment of Joseph in the fragments of Egyptian
history preserved by profane writers, but the result
has not been satisfactory. Even were the latter
sources trustworthy as to the early period of Egyp-
It. This dlBeulty we may perhaps partly attribute ts
the pointing.
d It appears from this narrative that puroiuse by
money was, In Joseph's time, the general practice In
Kgypt* The n pr ewntockms of toe monuments show
that in early times money was abundant, not coined,
but, n the form of rings of gold and silver, vntgbed
out wnea purchases wen made.
• It dow not appear whether, after the money of
Oanaen was exhausted, Joseph made eonditloos with
the Oamaaltta like these he had wads with the fcyp-
Digitized by
Google
1468
JOSEPH
nan hktory, it would be difficult to data-mine the
tge referred to, m the actions of at least two kings
an ascribed by the Greeks to Seaostris, the king
particularized. Herodotus says that, acoording to
the Egyptians, Sesoatris " made a division of the
soil of Egypt among the inhabitants, ssrigning
square plots of ground of equal size to all, and ob-
taining his chief revenue from the rent which the
holders were required to pay him every year " (ii.
109). Elsewhere he speaks of the priests as hav-
ing no expenses, being supported by the property
of the temples (37), but he does not assign to Se-
soatris, aa has been rashly supposed, the exemption
from taxation that we may reasonably infer. Dio-
dorus Siculus ascribes the division of Egypt into
nomas to S a sostris, whom he calls Sesoosis. Tak-
ing into consideration the general character of the
information given by Herodotus, respecting the
history of Egypt at periods remote from his own
time, we are not justified in supposing anything
more than that some tradition of an ancient allot-
ment of the soil by the crown among the popula-
tion was current when be visited the country. The
testimony of Diodorus is of far less weight.
The evidence of the narrative in Genesis seems
favorable to the theory we support that Toaeph
ruled Egypt under a shepherd-king. It appears to
have been his policy to give Pharaoh absolute power
over the Egyptians, sod the expression of their
gratitude — u Thou hast saved our lives: let us find
grace in the sight of my Lord, and we wiU be
Pharaoh's servants" (xlvii. 26) — seems as though
they had been heretofore unwilling subjects. The
removing the people to cities probably means that
In that time of suffering the scattered population
was collected into the cities for the more convenient
distribution of the corn.
There is a notice, in an ancient Egyptian inscrip-
tion, of a famine which has been supposed to be
that of Joseph. The inscription is in a tomb at
Benee-Hasati, sod records of Amenee, a governor
of a district of Upper Egypt, that when there were
years of famine, his district was supplied with food.
This was in the time of Sesertesen I., of the Xllth
Dynasty. It has been supposed by Baron Bunsen
(Egypt' $ Place, iii. 834) that this must be Joseph's
famine, but not only are the particulars of the
record inapplicable to that instance," but the ca-
amity it relates was never unusual In Egypt, aa its
ancient inscriptions and modern history equally
testify.'
Joseph's policy towards the subjects of Pharaoh
la important in reference to the forming an esti
mate of his character. It displays the resolution
and breadth of view that mark his whole career.
lie p ercei v ed a great advantage to be gained, and
he lost no part of H. He put all Egypt under
Pharaoh. First the money, then the cattle, last
a Baron Bnneen's quotation, " Wan, in the time
of Seeortosis I., the great Amine prevailed in all the
other districts of Egypt, there was com In mine
(Egypt's Place, I. c), Is nowhere In the original. Bee
Btrco In TmnmtHmu R. Doc. lit. 2d 8er. v. Pt 11
282, 288 ; Brngsch, HiUoin d'tfypte, 1. 66.
ft Dr. Brngsch remarks on this Inscription: "La
iemlere partie de cette onrlente Inscription oq Amenj
<« nportant i una famine qui avait lien pendant lee
ftnnees de son gonvernement, aa frit on panegyrlqne
s'avotr Steven u las malbeun de la dinette sans se par-
Hallaer, a atari b> pins grands attention de ceux qui
f rolebt, et none i^outoos tres a propos, nn pendant
to llustolre de Joseph en ■gypte, et dee sept anneeri
JOSEPH
of all the land, and the Egyptians themselves b»
ant the property of the sovereign, and that tat
by the voluntary act of the people, without any
pressure. This being effected, he exercised a great
aot of generosity, and required only a fifth of the
produce aa a recognition of the rights of the crown.
Of the wisdom of this policy there can be no doubt.
Its justice can hardly be questioned when it is
borne in mind that the Egyptians were not forcibly
deprived of their liberties, and that when they had
been given up, they were at once restored. We
do not know all the circumstances, but if, as wa
may reasonably suppose, the people were warned
of the famine and yet made no preparation during
the years of overflowing abundance, the govern-
ment had a dear claim upon its subjects for having
taken precautions they had neglected. In any case
it may have been desirable to make a new allotment
of bud, and to reduce an unequal system of taxa-
tion to a simple claim to a fifth of the produce.
We have no evidence whether Joseph were in this
matter divinely aided, but we cannot doubt that, if
not, be acted hi accord with a judgment of great
clearness in distinguishing good and evil.
We have now to consider the conduct of Joseph
at this time towards his brethren and his father.
Early in the time of famine, which prevailed equally
in Canaan and Egypt, Jacob reproved his helpless
sons and sent them to Egypt, where be knew there
waa corn to be bought. Benjamin alone he kept
with him. Joseph was now governor, an Egypthir
in habits and speech, for like all men of large mind
be had suffered no scruples of prejudice to make
him a stranger to the people he ruled. In Ids
exalted station he labored with the seal that he
showed in all his various charges, presiding himself
st the sale of corn. We read: "And the sons
of Israel came to buy [corn] among those that
came; for the famine was in the land of Canaan
And Joseph, the governor over the land, he [it watj
that sold to all the people of the land ; and Joseph's
brethren came, and bowed down themselves before
him [with] their faces to the earth " (xlii. 6, 6).
His brethren did not know Joseph, grown from the
boy tbey had sold into a man, and to their eyes an
Egyptian, while they must have been scarcely
changed, except from the effect of time, which
would have been at their ages Jar less marked.
Joseph remembered his dreams, and behaved to
them as a stranger, using, as we afterwards learn,
an interpreter, and spoke hard words to them, and
accused them of being spies. In defending them-
selves they thus spoke of their household. » Thy
servants [are] twelve brethren, the sons of one man
in the land of Canaan, and, behold, the youngest
[is] this day with our father, and one [is] not "
(13). Thus to Joseph himself they maintained
the old deceit of his disappearance. He at once
de famine de oe pays. Dependant II ne nmt pas cram,
qua le roi OnaerteSen I., sons Is regno duqoal ana
famine ent lien an agypte, salt le Pharaoa de Joseph,
oe qoi n'ast guars admissible, par suite de raisona
chronologiqtiea. Da rests oe n'est pas la wale lnscnir
tton qui these mention de la famine ; II en exists 1'su*
tree, qui datant de rota tont-A-6dt different*, partont
do memo fleau et dee memeo precautions prises pom
Is preventr." — Hutoirt iTtkyp", t. 66. We are
glad to learn from this new work that Dr. Brngsch
thoegh differing from as ss to ton Bxedos, Is itiapcaM
to hold Joseph to have governed Hgypt trader a boss
<PP ™>»).
Digitized by
Google
JOSEPH
sarins to see his brother, fait refusing that they
should return without sending tor and bringing
Benjamin, then putting them in prison three days,
but at last releasing them that they might take
back com, on the condition that one should be left
as a hostage. They were then stricken with re-
morse, and saw that the punishment of their great
crime was come upon them. " And they said one
to another, We [are] rerily guilty concerning our
brother, in that we saw the anguish of his soul,
when he besought us, and we would not hear;
therefore is this distress come upon us. And Reu-
ben answered them, saying, Spake I not unto you,
saying, Do not sin against the child, and ye would
not hear? therefore, behold, also his blood is re-
quired. And they knew not that Joseph under-
stood [them]; for an interpreter [was] between
them. And be tamed himself about from them,
and wept; and returned to them again, and com-
muned with them, and took from them Simeon,
and bound him before their eyes " (91-24). Thus
he separated one of them from the rest, as they
had separated him from his father. Yet he restored
their money in their sacks, and gave them provision
br the way, besides the corn they had purchased.
The discovery of the money terrified them and
their father, who refused to let them take Benja-
min. Yet when the famine continued, and they
had eaten the supply, Jacob desired his sons to go
again to Egypt. But they could not go without
Benjamin. At the persuasion of Judah, who here
appears as the spokesman of his brethren, Jacob
was at last prevailed on to let them take him,
Judah offering to be surety. It may be remarked
that Reuben had made the same offer, apparently,
at once after the return, when Jacob had withheld
his consent, telling his father that he might sky
bis two sons if he did not bring back Benjamin
(87, 38). Judah seems to have been put forward
by his brethren as the most able, and certainly his
after-conduct in Egypt would have justified their
choice, and his father's trusting him rather than
the rest Jacob, anxious for Benjamin, and not
unmindful of Simeon, touchingly sent to the gov-
ernor out of his scanty stock a little present of the
best products of Palestine, ss well as double money
that his sons might repay what had been returned
to them.
When they had come into Egypt, Joseph's
brethren, as before, found him presiding at the
sals of corn. Now that Benjamin was with them
he told his steward to slay and make ready, for
they should dine with him at noon. So the man
brought them into Joseph's house. They feared,
not knowing, as it seems, why they were taken to
the house (xliii. 86), and perhaps thinking they
night be imprisoned there. Joseph no doubt gave
.lis command in Egyptian, and apparently did not
cause it to be interpreted to them. They were,
however, encouraged by the steward, and Simeon
was brought ont to them. When Joseph earns
they brought him the present, again fulfilling bis
Teams, as twice they bowed before him. At the
sight of Benjamin he was greatly affected. " And
be lifted up his eyes and saw hb brother Benjamin,
Sis mother's son, and said, [Is] this your younger
brother, of whom ye spake unto me ' And he said,
ood be gracious unto thee, my son. And Jowpb
ejade haste, for his bowels did yearn upon his
hrother, and he sought [where] to weep, and he
■stared into [his] chamber, and wept there. And
M washed his face, and want out, and refrained
JOSEPH
116*.
himself" (39-31). The description of Joseph's
dinner is in accordance with the representations of
the monuments. The governor and each of his
guests were served separately, and the hiethren
were placed according to their age. But though
the youngest thus had the lowest place, yet when
Joseph sent messes from before him to bis brethren,
he showed his favor to Benjamin by a mess five
times as large as that of any of them. '• And they
drank, and were merry with him " (33-84). It U
mentioned that the Egyptians and Hebrews eat
apart from each other, as to eat bread with the
Hebrews was " an abomination unto the Egyp-
tians " (33). The scenes of the Egyptian tombs
show us that it was the custom for each person to
eat singly, particularly among the great, that guerts
were placed according to their right of precedent e,
and that it was usual to drink freely, men and evev
women being represented as overpowered with wine,
probably as an evidence of the liberality of the en-
tertainer. These points of agreement in matters
of detail are well worthy of attention. There is no
evidence as to the entertaining foreigners, but the
general exchisiveness of the Egyptians is in har-
mony with the statement that they did not eat
with the Hebrews.
The next morning, when it was light, they left
the city (for here we learn that Joseph's house was
in a city), having bad their money replaced in their
sacks, and Joseph's silver cup put in Benjamin's
sack. His steward was ordered to follow them, and
say (claiming the cup), " Wherefore have ye re-
warded evil for good ? [Is] not this [it] in which
my lord drinketh, and whereby indeed be divineth ?
Ye have done evil in so doing " (xliv. 4, 6). When
they were thus accused, they declared that the
guilty person should die, and that the rest should
be bondmen. So the steward searched the sacks,
and the cup was found in Benjamin's ssck ; where-
upon they rent their clothes, and returned to the
city, and went to Joseph's bouse, and '• fell before
bim on the ground. And Joseph said unto them,
What deed [is] this that ye have done? wot ye
not that such a man as I can certainly divine?"
Judah then, instead of protesting innocence, ad-
mitted the alleged crime, and declared that he and
his brethren were the governor's servants. But
Joseph replied that be would aloue keep him in
whose hand the cup was found. Judah, not un-
mindful of the trust he held, then laid the whole
matter before Joseph, showing him that he could
uot leave Benjamin without causing the old man's
death, and as surety nobly offered himself ss a
bondman in bis brother's stead. Then, at the
touching relation of his father's love and anxiety,
and, perhaps, moved by Judah's generosity, the
strong will of Joseph gave way to the tenda m ess
he had so long felt, but restrained, and be made
himself known to his brethren. If hitherto he had
dealt severely, now be showed his generosity. He
sent forth every one but his brethren. "And
be wept aloud. . . . And Joseph said unto his
brethren, I [am] Joseph; doth my father yet live?
And his brethren could not answer him ; for they
were troubled at his presence. And Joseph said
unto his brethren, Come near to me, I pray you.
And they came near. And he said, I [am] Joseph
your brother, whom ye sold into Egypt Now there-
fore be not grieved, nor angry with yourselves, that
ye sold me hither: for God did send me before yon
to pre se rve life For these two years [hath] tfct
famine [bean] in the land: and yet [there are] fin
Digitized by
Google
1470
JOSEPH
years In the which [there dull] neither [be] eating
nor harvest- And Gud sent me before you to pre-
serve you a posterity in the earth, and to save your
Uvea by a great deliverance. So now [it was] not
Su [that] sent me hither, but God " (dr. 3-8).
e then desired them to bring his father, that he
and all his offspring and flocks and herds might be
preserved in the famine, and charged them to tell
his father of bis greatness and glory. " And he
fell upon his brother Benjamin's neck, and wept;
and Benjamin wept upon his neck. Moreover he
kissed all his brethren, and wept upon them " (14,
16). Pharaoh and his servants were well pleased
that Joseph's brethren were come, and the king
commanded him to send for his father according
to his desire, and to take wagons for the women
and children. He said, "Also let not your eye
spare your stuff; for the good of all the land of
Egypt [is] yours " (20). From all this we see how
highly Joseph was regarded by Pharaoh and his
court. Joseph then gave presents to his brethren,
distinguishing Benjamin as before, and sent by
them a present snd provisions to his father, dis-
missing them with this charge, " See that ye fall
not out by the way " ■ (24). He feared that even
now their trials had taught them nothing.
Joseph's conduct towards his brethren and his
father, at this period, must be well examined before
we can form a Judgment of his character. We
have no evidence that he was then acting under the
Divine directions: we know indeed that he held
that his being brought to Egypt was providentially
ordered for the saving of his father's house : from
some points in the narrative, especially the matter
of the cup, which he said that he used for divina-
tion, he seems to hare acted on his own Judgment.
Supposing that this inference is true, we have to
ask whether his policy towards his brethren were
founded on a resolution to punish them from resent-
ment or a sense of Justice, as well as his desire to
secure his union with his father, or again, whether
the latter were his sole object Joseph had suffered
the most grievous wrong. According to all but the
highest principles of self-denial he would have been
justified in punishing his brethren as an injured
person : according to these principles he would have
been bound to punish them for the'sake of justice,
if only be could put aside a sense of personal injury
in executing judgment. This would require the
strongest self-command, united witi the deepest
feeling, self-command that could keep feeling under,
ind feeling that could subdue resentment, so that
'ustice would be done impartially. These are the
wo qualities that shine out most strongly in the
noble character of Joseph. We believe therefore
that he punished his brethren, but did so simply
ss the instrument of justice, feeling all the while a
brother's tenderness. It must be remembered what
they were. Reuben and Judah, both at his selling
and in the journeys into Egypt, seem better than
the rest of the elder brethren. But Reuben was
guilty of a crime that was lightly punished by the
toss of his birthright, and Judah was profligate and
cruel Even at the time of reconciliation Joseph
taw, or thought, as bis parting charge shows, that
they woe either not less wicked or not wiser than
of old. After his father's death, with the sus-
picion of ungenerous and deceitful men, they feared
Joseph's vengeance, and he again tenderly assured
•farm of his love for them. Joseph's conduct to
* IMa la tberaaat arafeeM* nodarlnf.
JOSEPH
Jacob at this time can, we think, be only explained
by the supposition that he felt it was his duty tc
treat his brethren severely : otherwise his delay and
his causing distress to his father are inconsistent
with bis deep affection. The sending for Benjamir
seems hard to understand, except we suppose that
Joseph felt he wsa the surest link with his father,
and perhaps that Jacob would more readily recerr*
his testimony as to the lost son.
There is no need here to speak largely of the
rest of Joseph's history: full as it is of interest, U
throws no new light upon his character. Jacob's
spirit reiived when he saw the wagons Joseph bad
sent. Encouraged on the way by a Divine vision,
he journeyed into Egypt with bis whole house.
" And Joseph made ready his chariot, and went up
to meet Israel his father, to Goshen, and presented
himself unto him; and he fell on his neck, and
wept on his neck a good while. And Israel said
unto Joseph, Now let me die, since I have seen thy
face, because thou [art] yet alive " (xlvi. 29, 30).
Then Jacob and his house abode In the land of
Goshen, Joseph still ruling the country. Hera
Jacob, when near his end, gave Joseph a portion
above his brethren, doubtless including the " parcel
of ground " at Shechem, his future burying-plaee
(comp. John iv. 5). Then he blessed his sons,
Joseph most earnestly of all, and died in Egypt
" And Joseph fell upon his father's face, and wept
upon him, and kissed him " (1. 1). When he bad
caused him to be embalmed by "his servants the
physicians" he carried him to Canaan, and laid
him in the cave of Machpelah, the burying-plaee
of his fathers. Then it was that his brethren feared
that, their father being dead, Joseph would punish
them, and that he strove to remove their fears.
Krom his being able to make the journey into
Canaan with ■' a very great company " (9), as well
as from his living apart from his brethren and their
fear of him, Joseph seems to have been still gov-
ernor of Egypt We know no more than that he
lived " a hundred and ten years " (22, 26), having
been more than ninety in Egypt ; that he " saw
Ephraim'a children of tie third " [generation], and
that " the children also of Machir the son of Manas-
seh were borne upon Joseph's knees" (23); and
that dying he took an oath of his brethren that
they should carry up his bones to the land of
promise : thus showing in his latest action the faith
(Heb. xi. 22) which bad guided his whole life.
Like his father he was embalmed, " and he was
put in a coffin in Egypt " (1. 26). His trust Moses
kept, and laid the bones of Joseph in his inherit-
ance in Shechem, in the territory of Ephraim his
offspring.
The character of Joseph is wholly composed of
great materials, and therefore needs not to be ml -
nutely portrayed. We trace in it very little of that
balance of good and evil, of strength and weakness,
that marks most things human, and do not any-
where distinctly discover the results of the conflict
of motives that generally occasions such great dif-
ficulty in Judging men'a actions. We have as fuB
an account of Joseph as of Abraham and .lacob. a
fuller one than of Isaac; and if we compare their
histories, Joseph's character is the least marked by
wrong or indecision. His first quality seems to
have been the greatest resolution. He not only
believed faithfully, but could endure patiently, ant
could command equally his good and evil passions
Hence his strong sense of duty, his zealous wort
his strict justice, his clear discriminatiuo of foaa
Digitized by
Google
JOSEPH
ad nil. Like iH men of vigorous character, he
loved power, but when he had gained it he used it
with the greatest generosity. He seems to have
striven to get men unconditional!.* in his power
that he might confer benefits upor them. Gen-
jroeity in conferring benefit*, as well as in forgiving
injuries, is one of his distinguishing characteristics.
With this strength was united the deepest tender-
ness. He was easily moved to tears, even weeping
at the first sight of his brethren after they had
•old him. His love for his father and Benjamin
was not enfeebled by years of separation, nor by his
great station. The wise man-was still the same as
the true youth. These great qualities explain his
power of governing and administering, and his ex-
traordinary flexibility, which enabled him to suit
himself to each new position in life. The last
characteristic to make up this great character was
modesty, the natural result of the others.
In the history of the chosen nee Joseph occupies
a very high place as an instrument of Providence.
He was " sent before " his people, as he himself
knew, to preserve them in the terrible famine, and
to settle them where they could multiply and prosper
In the interval before the iniquity of the Canaanites
was full. In the latter days of Joseph's life, he is
the leading character among the Hebrews. He
makes his father come into Egypt, and directs the
settlement. He protects his kinsmen. Dying, he
reminds them of the promise, charging them to
take his bones with them. Blessed with many
revelations, he is throughout a God-taught leader
of his people. In the N. T. Joseph is only men-
tioned : yet the striking particulars of the persecu-
tion and sale by his brethren, his resisting tempta-
tion, his great degradation and yet greater exalta-
tion, the saving of his people by his hand, and the
confounding of his enemies, seem to indicate that
he was a type of our Lord. He also connects the
Patriarchal with the Gospel dispensation, as an
instance of the exercise of some of the highest
Christian virtues under the less distinct manifesta-
tion of the Divine will granted to the fathers.
Tiie history of Joseph's posterity is given in tho
articles devoted to the tribes of Ephkaim and
Manasskh. Sometimes these tribes are spoken
of under the name of Joseph, which is even given
to the whole Israelite nation. Ephraim is, how-
ever, the common name of his descendants, for the
division of Manasseh gave almost the whole political
weight to the brother-tribe. That great people
seems to have inherited all Joseph's ability with
none of his goodness, and the very knowledge of
his power in Egypt, instead of stimulating his off-
spring to follow in his steps, appears only to have
constantly drawn them into a hankering after that
forbidden land which began when Jeroboam intro-
duced the calves, and ended only when a treasonable
alliance laid Samaria in ruins and sent the ten
tribes into captivity. R. S. P.
* " Joseph's conduct towards his brethren and
his father," prior to the disclosure in Egypt, is
nisoeptlble of a somewhat different interpretation
from that which is offered in a preceding paragraph.
The mental distress which the brothers vAznd,
■vas both a deserved punishment and a needful dis-
cipline, and It was a fitting retribution of Divine
Providence that the injured brother should be the
•gent in inflicting it- Its evident justice, if cot
■be motive for its infliction, may have well recon-
ciled him to it, and his conviction of its necessity
srast ban bean snob as to overcome his great
JOSEPH
14 fl
reluctance to cause his honored father tn adJitkmat
pang, even though his sorrow would soon be turned
into joy. The assumed part which he acted, and
the harsh tone which he adopted, were foreign to
every sentiment of his heart, and it cost a violent
struggle with his noble nature, to bear this alien
attitude to a point essential to the end which he
had in view. And what was this end ? Was it,
as suggested above, to punish his brethren ? — not
indeed to gratify an unfratemal vindictiveness, but
aa a calm instrument of God's justice, and for their
good. This effect was, doubtless, secured, but it
seems to us that he had an object, apart from this,
which dictated hie policy, while he neither sought,
nor desired, their punishment — willingly leaving
that to the Being who had been his Protector.
Before revealing himself to them, it was neces-
sary for him to know whether they still cherished
the feelings which had prompted their wicked treat-
ment of him. Had he sought their punishment,
or a mere personal triumph, be could have had it
at an earlier period. This he did not seek, but
waited for the day, which he must have anticipated
from the time of his elevation, when he could put
them to the test, and ascertain if the way were
open for the resumption of the lost relation — which
he did desire with the longings of a filial and
fraternal soul, intensified by the experience of an
exile from home. The hour has come, and be
must now know whether they have repented of
their wickedness towards him — whether the old
rancor has been changed to contrition and tender-
ness. Their relation to his own brother Benjamin,
will furnish a decisive test. The partiality which
the doting father had felt for himself, and which
had cost him so dearly, would hare inevitably
passed over to the surviving son of the lamented
Kachel, the eon of his old age. Joseph cannot be
certain that Benjamin is alive, or if living, that he
is not persecuted — that, having the same pretext
for it, their treatment of him has not been as
treacherous and cruel as it was of himself. He
must see them together and judge for himself, and
learn whether their dispositions are changed. Their
brief imprisonment and the detention of Simeon
(the eldest next to Reuben, who was comparatively
guiltless) were severe, but necessary, expedients to
induce them to bring Benjamin, or rather, to deter
them from coming without him, on their second
visit, which would be equally a necessity with the
first.
The plan succeeds, and Benjamin arrives with his
brothers. Joseph bestows special attentions upon
him, and has the opportunity of observing whether
their former envy survives. He finally causes him
to be arrested as a thief, and proposing to retain
him as a prisoner, bids the others return in peace
to their father. Will they do it ! They not merely
abandoned Joseph — they sold him as a slave, and
only not murdered him. Will they now simply
desert Benjamin, and leave him to his fate? They
did not scruple to shock their father with the
tidings of Joseph's death. Are they still so callous
as to consent to return and tell him that Benjamin
is gone also? They committed an enormous crime
to rid themselves of the other favorite. Are they
willing to be freed from this, without any culpable
agency of tneir own ? The result shows that theb
hearts are softened. The recollection of their in-
justice to Joseph, has made them even tender of
Benjamin. The sight of the suffering which they
hart brought upon their father, baa made tbaw.
Digitized by
Google
1472 Joseph
jareful uf bis feelings and sympathetically derated
to hii happiness. Toe arrest of the youngest brings
them all, with rent garments, into Joseph's presence,
when Judith, the orator of the company, draws near
and addresses his unknown brother in a strain
which stands onequaled, perhaps, among recorded
speeches, as an exhibition of pathetic eloquence.
With entire artlessness he tells the whole story,
and with the generous devotion of a true son and
brother, asks leave to abide as a bondman " instead
of the lad," " lest, peradventure, I see the evil that
shall come on my father."
Joseph, under Divine guidance, has refrained from
a premature disclosure, and the fit time has fully
come. He has no disposition to injure or reproach
his brothers, or punish them in any way. He has
put them to the test, as it was his duty to do, and
satisfied that their feelings are now right, the strug-
gling emotions of his nature, long pent up, find an
irrepressible vent Troubled by the disclosure and
unable to speak, he calms their agitation and seeks
to soothe their self-upbraiding, thrice reminding
them of the wisdom of God's plan, which had been
broader than theirs. This is followed by affectionate
embraces, and the charge to hasten homeward with
a reviving mes s a ge to their aged father — sitting
In his loneliness, day after day, in the door of his
tent at Hebron, and anxiously waiting for tidings
from Egypt. And years after, when on the decease
of their father they humbly asked the forgiveness
of their brother, he still comforted them with the
reflection that God had overruled their conduct for
good. From first to last, the narrative appears to
us to countenance the view, which also seems to us
most consonant with the eminent magnanimity of
this noble Hebrew, that the leading design of his
harsh policy was to subject them to a needful test,
which the Lord used as a means of deepening their
penitence, and that be gladly desisted, and with a
brother's sympathy sought to assuage their bitter
regrets, as soon as he was convinced that they were
no longer false brothers, but true.
We would further suggest that the charge to
them to " fall not out by the way " on their return,
does not necessarily indicate that he thought them
" not less wicked or not wiser than of old." Now
that their associated guilt had been brought home
to them, nothing was more natural than that
they should seek to throw off individual responsi-
bility. Reuben bad already put in his exculpating
plea, and the design of the charge was to turn
them from unprofitable mutual criminations, and
lead them to a devout recognition of the divine
sovereignty and goodness.
It is intimated above, that Joseph was not wholly
acting under Divine direction. The divining cup
may not be fully explicable ; it plainly reveals an
Egyptian superstition, but does not n ecessa rily im-
ply Joseph's participation In it, and the allusion
must be construed by what is known of his life. If
consummate wisdom in plan and skill in execution,
if a spirit beautiful in every relation, if the fruits
of a manly and lovely piety, if a character as nearly
faultless as has been delineated in human biography,
be marks of Divine guidance, we must accord it to
aim, whose bow abode in strength and whose arms
were made strong by the hands of the mighty God
of Jacob.
It is obvious to add, that the wisdom of the
providential dealings, as related to the family in
Hebron, was not less marked as related to Joseph
m Egypt. The course of discipline through which
JOSEPH
he passed was an indispensable qualification for tot
high service in reserve for him — enabling him Is
learn the most difficult lesson, and be prepared U
bear without injury one extreme of foitune, by
having properly endured the other. S. W.
• Ewald, in his GnchichUs da KOn /sraef
comments upon the statesmanship of Joseph in
taking advantage of the pressure of famine to reduce
the entire population to a tenantry of the crown,
thus accomplishing without violence a great soda)
revolution ; — a statesmanship '• careful at once of
the weal of populous nations, and for toe consolida-
tion and increase of the royal authority, and win-
ning its best victories through the combination of
these seemingly opposite aims. By providently
storing up in his garners supplies of com sufficient
for many years of possible scarcity, Joseph was
enabled not only to secure to the people the present
means of existence and the possibility of better
times In future, but to establish a more solid organ-
ization of government, such as a nation is very
loath to accede to except in a time of ov erm as ter in g
necessity." (Hartineau's translation, p. 413.)
The presen t state of Egyptian chronology will
hardly warrant the positive conclusions of Mr.
Poole concerning the epoch of Joseph ; and, there-
fore, while his views are retained in the text, the
data are here appended for a more comprehensive
view of the subject. The problem concerning the
Israelites in Egypt is mixed with the question of
the Hyksos whose date is still unsettled. Bunsen
makes Joseph the Grand-visir of Sesortosis, second
king of the 12th Dynasty, about 2180 n. c, and
200 years before the usurpation of the Hyksos; as
the Hyksos were Semitic tribes, the Hebrews were
undisturbed during their supremacy; but after then-
expulsion, the Israelites were reduced to forced
labor as a means of consolidating the Phareonie
power. But this theory, which makes the sojourn
in Egypt outlast the coming and going of the
Hyksos, prolongs the stay of the Israelites beyond
the utmost stretch of our Biblical chronology.
(EgypCt Pttice, vol. v. p. 68.) Brugsch regards
the Hyksos as Ishmaelitish Arabs, who invaded
Egypt about 2115 B. c. and ruled over the Delta
for 511 years. Taking the second Meneptah of the
19th Dynasty, 1341-1321 B. c. for the Pharaoh
of the Exodus, and computing backward 430 years,
he places Joseph in office under one of the Shep-
herd kings, (ffiitoirt (tEgypte, i. 79.) Mr. Poole
also makes the Pharaoh of Joseph one of the
Shepherd kings in the first half of the nineteenth
century, b. 0. But if the Hebrews were in Egypt
under the Hyksos — though this may account for
the favorable reception of Jacob, and the undis-
turbed growth of his posterity in Goshen — it is
not easy to imagine how so large a foreign popula-
tion, of a kindred race with the Hyksos, was suf-
fered to remain in the Delta when the Shepherds
were expelled by the reviving native empire; and
the notion that the Exodus of the Israelites and
the expulsion of the Hyksos were the same event,
has no foundation either in Egyptian or in Hebrew
history. To meet this difficulty, Lepsius place*
the migration of Jacob into Egypt after the expul-
sion of the Hyksos, with an interval sufficient for
the fear of another Arab invasion to have died out
though the prejudice of the Egyptians against the
nomadic " shepherds " remained. His dates ere
for the expulsion of the Hyksos about 1591 B. C
the arrival of Jacob 1414, the Exodus 1814. (it*
mgttmck.) But this brings the Exodus down V>
Digitized by
Google
JOSEPH
<sry late period, and raduee* the sojourn in Egypt
to one hundred jean. Ewald. with hi* usual bold-
Deal in inventing an hypothesis to solve a difficulty,
conjectures that at the first, only a imall portion
of the Iaraelitiah family followed Joeeph into Egypt,
— then under the rule of the Hykaoa : that, at the
expulsion of the latter, the Israelites took aides
with the Egyptians, and that Joseph then " sum-
moned Israel in a body out of Canaan, and estab-
lished them in Goshen as a frontier-guard of the
kingdom against any new attacks of the Hyksos."
In the date of the Hyksos invasion and the dura-
tion of the Shepherd dynasties in Egypt, all these
writers are substantially, agreed. They agree also
In the main nets oonceming Joseph as an historical
person, and the residence of the Israelites in Egypt
until the exodus under Moses. Even Ewald con-
cedes that the "Blessing of Jacob" (Gen. xlix.
23-36), from the complexion of the language and
poetry, must be referred to pro-Mosaic times. The
order of the historical events is not strictly depend-
ent upon chronology. J. P. T.
2. Father of Igsl who represented the tribe of
fesaiihsi among the spies (Num. xiii. 7).
3. A lay Israelite of the family of Bani, who was
compelled by Ezra to put away his foreign wife
(Ear. x. 43). In 1 Esdr. it is given as Joskphus.
4. [Vat Alex. FA. 1 omit] Representative of
the priestly family of Shebaniah, in the next gen-
eration after the return from Captivity (Neh. xii.
14).
6- ('IitoTHfWf ; [in ver. M, 'Iawvjc); is ver. 18,
Sin. Imvriwot; in ver. 60, Sin. Imrnfas or Imrn«>
aw, Sin». Iawmrot: Joapkw]). A Jewish officer
defeated by Gorglas c 164 B. c. (1 Mace. v. 18,
56,60).
6. [Alex. Ieteiprat: Jottphtu.] In S Mace.
riii. S3, x. 19, Joseph la named among the breth-
ren of Judas Maocabanu apparently in place of
John (Ewald, Guch. tv. 884, ante; Grimm ad 3
Mace viii. 23). The confusion of 'IokIwtjj, 'I«-
e-ft}a>, 'Iawr/t is well seen in the various readings in
Matt xiii. 66.
7. ['I«e-ft>: Josen*.] An ancestor of Judith
(Jnd. viiL 1). a F. W.
8. One of the ancestors of Christ (Luke iii. 30),
son of Jonan, and the eighth generation from David
Inclusive, about contemporary therefore with long
JOSEPH
1478
». ['IsKr*>; but Tlsch. Treg. and
marg. 'ImHix'- J <*<pk-] Another ancestor of
Christ, son of Judah or Abiud, and grandson of
Joanna or Hananiah the son of Zerubbabel, Luke
iii. 36. Alford adopts the reading Josek, a mis-
lake which seems to originate with the common
•infusion in Heb. MSS. between *) and "J.
10. Another, [Luke UL 34,] son of Mattathlas,
hi the seventh generation before Joseph the hus-
band of (ha Virgin.
11. Son of Hell [Luke iii. 33], and reputed
father of Jeans Christ The recurrence of this
same in the three above Instances, once before, and
twice after Zerubbabel, whereas it does not occur
ones in St Matthew's genealogy, is a strong evi-
dence of the paternal descent of Joseph the son of
Hdi, as traced by St Luke to Nathan the son of
David.
All that is told us of Joseph in the N. T. may
be summed up in a few words. He was a just
man, and of the bouse and lineage if David, and
was known as such by h*. oontemporariaa, who
called Jesus the son of David, uid were disposed
to own Him as Messiah, ss being Joseph's sou.
The public registers also contained his name under
the reckoning of the house of David (John i. 46 ;
Luke iU. 33; Matt 1. 20; Luke ii. 4). He lived
at Nazareth in Galilee, and ii is probable that his
family had been settled there for at least two pre-
ceding generations, possibly from the time of
Mstthat the common grandfather of Joseph and
Mary, since Mary lived there too (Luke i. 26, 27).
He espoused Mary, the daughter and heir of his
uncle Jacob, and before he took her home as his
wife received the angelic communication recorded
in Matt i. 20. It must have been within a very
short time of his taking her to his home, that the
decree went forth from Augustus Ctesar which
obliged him to leave Nazareth with his wife and
go to Bethlehem. He was there with Mary and
his first-born, when the shepherds came to see the
babe in the manger, and he went with them to
the Temple to present the infant according to the
law, and there heard the prophetic words of Sim
eon, as he held him in his arms. When the wise
men from the East came to Bethlehem to worship
Christ, Joseph was there; and he went down to
Egypt with them by night, when warned by an
angel of the danger which threatened them; and
on a second menage he returned with them to the
land of Israel, intending to reside at Bethlehem the
city of David ; but being afraid of Archelaus he
took up his abode, as before his marriage, at Naz-
areth, where he carried on his trade as a carpenter.
When Jesus was 12 years old, Joseph and Mary
took him with them to keep the Passover at Jeru-
salem, and when they returned to Nazareth he
continued to act as a father to the child Jesus, and
was reputed to be so indeed. But here our knowl-
edge of Joseph ends. That he died before our
Lord's crucifixion is indeed tolerably certain by
what is related John xix. 27, and perhaps Mark
vi. 3 may imply that he was then dead. But where,
when, or how he died, we know not What was
his age when he married, what children he had,
and who was their mother, are questions on which
tradition has been very busy, and very contradic-
tory, and on which it affords no available informa-
tion whatever. In fact the different accounts given
are not traditions, but the attempts of different
ages of the early Church to reconcile the narrative
of the Gospels with their own opinions, and to give
support, as they thought, to the miraculous concep-
tion. It is not necessary to detail' or examine these
accounts here, as they threw light rather upon the
history of those opinions during four or five centu-
ries, than upon the history of Joseph. But it may
be well to add that the origin of all the earliest
stories and assertions of the tubers concerning
Joseph, as e. g., his extreme old age, his having
sons by a former wife, his having the custody of
Mary given to him by lot, and so on, is to be found
in the apocryphal Gospels, of which the earliest is
the Protevangellum of 8t James, apparently the
work of a Christian Jew of the second century,
quoted by Origen, and referred to by Clement of
Alexandria and Justin Martyr (Tisohendorf, Pnieg.
xiii.). The same stories are repeated in the other
apocryphal Gospels. TTie monophysite Coptic
Christians an said to have first assigned a festival
to St Joseph in the Calendar, namely, on the 30th
July, which la thus inscribed in a Coptic almanac -
« Requles sancti suit jttstl Joseph! fabri Hgnartt,
Deipera Virginis Maria snood, qui pater Chris*)
Digitized by
Google
1474 JOSEPH OF ABIMATHSA
roeari promeruit." The apocryphal ITUloria Jo-
tephi fabri UgnarU, which now exiiU in Arabic,
b thought by Tischendorf to have been originally
written in Coptic, end the festival of Joseph ia
supposed to have been transferred to the Western
Churches from the East as late as the year 1399."
The above-named history is acknowledged to be
quite fabulous, though it belongs probably to the
4th century. It professes to be an account given
by our Lord himself to the Apostles on the Mount
of Olives, and placed by them in the library of
Jerusalem. It ascribes 111 years to Joseph's life,
and makes him old and the father of 4 sons and 3
daughters before he espoused Mary. It is headed
with this sentence: " Benedictionec ejus et preces
servant nos omnes, fratres. Amen." The reader
who wishes to know the opinion of the ancients on
the obscure subject of Joseph's marriage, may con-
sult Jerome's acrimonious tract Contra ffeiadium.
He will see that Jerome highly disapproves the
common opinion (derived from the apocryphal
Gospels) of Joseph being twice married, and that
he claims the authority of Ignatius, Polycarp, Ire-
nteus, Justin Martyr, and " many other apostolical
men," in favor of bis own view, that our Lord's
brethren were his cousins only, or at all events
against the opinion of Helvidius, which had been
held by Ebion, Theodotua of Byxantium, and Val-
entine, that they were the children of Joseph and
Mary. Those who held this opinion were called
AntitBoomarianita, as enemies of the Virgin.
(Epiphanius, Adv. Hara. 1. iii. t. ii. Bar. lxxviii.,
also liar. Ii. See also Pearson on the Creed, Art.
Virgin Mary; Mill, on (Ac Bretitren of the Lord;
Calmet, de 8. Joteph. 8. Mar. Virg. conjuge;
and for an able statement of the opposite view,
Alfbrd's «o<e on Matt. xiii. 65; Winer, Rtahob.
a, w. Jem and Joteph.) A. C. H.
* 12. Joseph is the reading of the oldest MSS.
(adopted by Lacbmann, Teschendorf, and Tregelles,
instead of Josea of the received text) in Matt xiii.
66, as the name of one of the brethren of our
Lord. [Joses, 3.] A.
* 13. Joseph (instead of Joses) is the proper
name of Barnabas (Acts iv. 36) according to the
oldest MSS. and the best critical editions. [Joses,
*.] A.
JOSEPH OF ARIMATH^S'A [A. V.
AriniatheV] ('lmrh<p 6 iarb ' Aptua6aias), a rich
and pious Israelite who had the privilege of per-
forming the last offices of duty and affection to the
body of our Lord. He ia distinguished from other
persons of the same name by the addition of his
birth-place Arhnatluea, a city supposed by Robin-
son to be situated somewhere between Lydda and
Kobe, now Beit Nuba, a mile northeast of Yah
(BibL Be: ii. 838-41, iii. 149).
Joseph is denominated by St. Mark (xv. 48) so
honorable councillor, by which we are probably to
understand that be was a member of the Great
Council, or Sanhedrim. He is further character-
ized as "a good man anda just" (Luke xxiii. 60),
one of those who, bearing in their hearts the words
of their old prophets, was waiting for the kingdom
of God (Mark xr. 43; Luke ii. 96, 38, xxiii. 51).
We are expressly told that he did not "consent to
too counsel and deed " of fab eoUeagues in conspir-
■ CWsMt, howtvsr, pauat the aamtsnOB et Joseph
Into the calendar et the Western Chase* ss early as
sas m s tea Tsar 8M. tm Itaehenastt, as tup.
JOSEPH, CALLED BAR3A11AS
ing to bring about the death of Jesus; but hi
seems to have lacked the courage to protest agaii «l
their judgment. At all events we know that b*
shrank, through fear of his countrymen, from pro-
fessing himself openly a disciple of our Lord.
The awful event, however, which crushed th«
hopes while it excited the fears of the chosen dis-
ciples, had the effect of inspiring him with a bold-
ness and confidence to which he had before been a
stranger. The crucifixion seems to hare wrought
in him the same clear conviction that it wrought
in the centurion who stood by the cross; for on
the very evening of that dreadful day, when the
triumph of the chief priests and rulers seemed
complete, Joseph " went in boldly unto Pilate and
craved the body of Jesus." The tact is mentioned
by all four Evangelists. Pilate, baring as s ured
himself that the Divine Sufferer was dead, con-
sented to the request of Joseph, who was thus
rewarded for his faith and courage by the blessed
privilege of consigning to his own new tomb the
body of his crucified Lord. In this sacred office
he was assisted by Nicodemus, who, like himself,
had hitherto been afraid to make open profession
of bis faith, but now dismissing his fears brought
an abundant store of myrrh and aloes for the em-
balming of the body of hb Lord according to the
Jewish custom.
These two masters in Israel then having enfolded
the sacred body in the linen shroud which Joseph
had bought, consigned it to a tomb hewn in a rock
— a tomb where no human corpse had ever yet
been bid.
It b specially recorded that the tomb was in •
garden belonging to Joseph, and dose to the place
of crucifixion.
The minuteness of the narrative seems purposely
designed to take away all ground or pretext for any
rumor that might be spread, after the Re sur re cti on,
that it was some other, not Jesus himself, that had
risen from the grave. But the burial of Jesus in
the new private sepulchre of the rich man of Ari-
mathea must also be regarded as the fulfillment
of the prophecy of Isaiah (liii. 9): according to the
literal rendering of Bishop Lowth, " with the rich
man was hb tomb." Nothing, bat of the merest
legendary character, b recorded of Joseph, beyond
what we read in Scripture. There b a tradition,
surely a very improbable one, that be was of the
number of the seventy disciples. Another, whether
authentic or not, deserves to be mentioned as gen-
erally current, namely — that Joseph, being sent
to Great Britain by the Apostle St. Philip, about
the year 83, settled with his brother disciples at
Glastonbury, in Somersetshire; and there erected
of wicker-twigs the first Christian oratory in Eng-
land, the parent of the majestic abbey which was
afterwards founded on the same site. The local
guides to thb day show the miraculous thorn (said
to bud and blossom every Christmas-day) that
sprang from the staff which Joseph stuck hi the
ground as he stopped to rest himself on the hill-
top. (See Dugdale's Monattieon, 1. 1 ; and Heama,
HisL and Ant. of Glattmburf ; Assemann, Biol
Orient, iii. 819.) Winer refers to a monograph
on Joseph — BroemeL Diu. de Jmtpho Arimatk.
Viteb. 1688, 4to. E. H. . . . a.
JCSEPH, called BAR'S A BAB [or East-
sab'bas, Lechm. Tbch. Treg.], and aumamsd
Justus; one of the two persons chosen by the as-
sembled church (Acta 1. S3) as worthy to fill the
place In the Apostolic company from nbicfa itkt
Digitized by
Google
JOSEPHUS
tad fallen. He, therefore, had been a companion
ef the diaciples all the time that the; followed
/earn, from big baptiazn to hia ascension.
Papias (ap. Euaeb. II. E. Ui. 39) calb him Jus-
tua Barsabaa, and relates that baring drunk some
eeadlv poison be, through the grace of the Lord,
sustained no harm. Kusebius (//. £. i. 12) states
that he waa one of the seventy diaciples. He is to
be disti ng u i s h ed from Joses Barnabas (Acts iv. 38)
and from Judaa Barsabaa (Acts xr. 23). The sig-
nification of Barsabaa is quite uncertain. Light-
fact {Bar. Heir. Acts L 23) gives five possible
interpretations of it, namely, the son of conversion,
ef quiet, of an oath, of wisdom, of the old man.
Ha prefers the last two; and suggest* that Joseph
Ikraabaa may be the same as Joses the son of Al-
abama, and that Judas Barsabaa may be his brother
the Apostle." VV. T. B.
JOSWPHTJS ('IsVmtMi; [Vat votnrre,:
/o*e>huJ), 1 Esdr. U. 34. [Joseph, 8.]
JCSKS Vlmrts [or Imrrj,; Laehra. Tiseh.
Treg.] Aaord •inaoit; 'law*, [or 'laoi}] U the
genitive eaae: \Jtta*\). 1. Son of Eliezer, in the
genealogy of Christ (Luke iii. 29), loth generation
from David, i. e. about the reign of Manaaseh.
* The A. V. gives the name as Josic, which is
merely the form of the genitive case. A.
2. [In Matt xiii. 56, Lachm. Tiach. Treg.
Wvff; and so Sin. in Mark vi. 3; Tiach. reads
'lawrie) also in Matt xxvii. 66: Joseph.] One
ef the Lord's brethren (Matt. xiii. 66; Mark vi.
3). Hia name connects him with the preceding.
For the inquiry who these brethren of the Lord
were, see Jambs. All that appears with certainty
from Scripture is that his mother's name was Mary,
and hia brother's James (Matt xxvii. 66; [Mark
if. 40, 47]).
3. [Lachm. Tiseh. Treg. 'lew** : Joseph.]
Joan [or Joseph] Bab/sabas (Acts iv. 3$).
[Bajutabas.] A. C. H.
JCKBHAH (rn{7> [perh. Jehovah lets duett,
Gee.]: 'lawfa; (Tat Iwn>;] Alex, lamias:
Jon), a prince of tlie house of Simeon, son of
Amaziah, and connected with the more prosperous
branch of the tribe, who, in the days of Hezekiah,
he a ded a marauding expedition against the peace-
able Haruite shepherds dwelling in Gedor, exter-
minated them, and occupied their pasturage (1 Chr.
iv. 34, 38-41).
JOSH'APHAT (B^BTP [Jthooakjwlgt*] :
'Ionroextr; KA.i lenracpaj: Josaphat), the Mith-
nite, one of David's guard, apparently selected from
among the warriors from the east of Jordan (1
Chr. xi. 43). Buxtorf (Lex. Tulm. col 1284)
givea Hathnan as the Chaldee equivalent of Ba-
shan. by which the latter is always represented in
the Targ. Onk. ; and if this were the place which
gave Joahaphat his surname, he was probably a
Gadite. In the Syriac, Joahaphat and Uaxiah (ver.
44) are interchanged, and the latter appears as
"AmofAnathoth."
JOSHUA
1475
■ •Barasbas, aevs Meyer, Is a patronymic (ma of
Wsli and Justus a Roman surname such as Jews
I adopted at that tune (ApotMgath 1. 28). B.
JOSHAVI'AH (rr^rgV [Jehovah make, «
daett, Ges.] : Wfo; [v"at FA. ] Who: Jo-
saia), the son of Klnaam, and one of David's
guards (1 Chr. xi. 46). The LXX. make him the
son of Jeribai, by reading 135 for \J5. The
name appears in eight, and probably nine,' different
forma in the MSS. collated by Kennicott
JOSHBKK'ASHAH (n^9t^j: •i« r B -
rtutii [Vat Io/Joo-oko, Boxara;] Alex. XtBcr
itoiTor, [l*r0aK*Tay] Jesbacassn), head of the
16th course of musicians. [Jeshahelah.] llr
belonged to the house of Hewan (1 Cbr. xxv. i
«)• [A. C. H.J
JOSHTJA (y^lrTJ: Tao-eC,: Jam ,
i. e. whose help is Jehovah, Gee., or rather " Uod
the Saviour," Pearson, On the Creed, Art II., p.
89, ed. 1843 : on the import of his name, and the
change of it from Oahea or Hoshea, Num. xiii.
16 = » welfare " or •' salvation," see Pearson, L c. :
it appears In the various forms of Hosiika, Oshea,
Jkhoshua, Jkshca, and Jesus). 1. The son of
Nun, of the tribe of Ephraim (1 Chr. vii. 27).
The future captain of invading hosts grew up a
slave in the brick-fields of Egypt. Bora about the
time when Moses fled into Midian, he was a man of
nearly forty years when be saw the ten plagues, and
shared in the hurried triumph of the Exodus.
The keen eye of the aged Lawgiver soon discerned in
Hoshea those qualities which might be required in
a colleague or successor to himself. He is men ■
tioned first in connection with the fight against
Amalek at Rephidim, when he was chosen (Ex.
xvii. 9) by Moses to lead the Israelites. When
Moses ascended Mount Sinai to receive for the first
time (compare Ex. xxiv. 13, and xxxiii. 11) the two
Tables, Joshua, who is called his minister or ser-
vant, accompanied him part of the way, and was
the first to accost him in his descent (Ex. xxxii. 17).
Soon afterwards he was one of the twelve chiefs
who were sent (Num. xiii. 17) to explore the land
of Canaan, and one of the two (xir. 6) who gave
an encouraging report of their journey. The 40
years of wandering were almost passed, and Joshua
was one of the few survivors, when Moses, shortly
before his death, waa directed (Num. xxvii. 18) to
invest Joshua solemnly and publicly with definite
authority, in connection with Eleazar the priest, over
the people. And after this was done, Uod Himself
gave Joshua a charge by the mouth of the dying
Lawgiver (Deut xxxi. 14, 23).
Under the direction of God again renewed (Josh
i. 1 ), Joshua, now in his 85th rear (Joseph. Ant. v
1, $ 29), assumed the command of the people at
Shittim, sent spies into Jericho, crossed the Jordan,
fortified a camp at Gilgal, circumcised the people.
kept the passover, and was visited by the Captain »
of the Lord's Host. A miracle made the fall of
Jericho more terrible to the Canaanitea. A mirac-
ulous repulse in the first assault on Ai impressed
upon the invaders the warning that they were the
instruments of a holy and jealous God. Ai fell.
tsraafre (On the Historical diameter of St. isaWt
First Chapter, Oamb. 1841, p. 92). But 1. O. AMeht
(De Date EzrreUus, $•«., ap. Nov. Thee. TKiotogieo-
» II has been questioned whether the Captain of -kilobit. I. 608) Is of opinion that He was toe ua
kJS lord's Boat was a created beta* or not. Dr. W , seated Ansel, the Bon of God. '^onpueauc PMflar
B MOI iHnus sss this point at full length and with jiff. Serial. Lev. o. 17*.
■east Isaraluc and decades la favor of the former at- 1
Digitized by
Google
1476
JOSHUA
and the law ni inscribed an Mount EbaL and read
by theii leader in the pretence of til Israel
The treaty which the fear-itricken Gibeonites
sbtelned deceitfully waa generously reepectcd by
Joanna. It stimulated and brought to a point the
hostile movements of the Are confederate chiefs of
the Amorites. Joshua, aided by an unprecedented
hailstorm, and a miraculous prolongation of the
day, obtained a derisive victory over them at Mak-
kedah, and proceeded at once to subjugate the
south country as far as Kadeeh-barnca and Gaza.
He returned to the camp at GilgaL matter of half
of Palestine.
In another campaign he marched to the waters
of Merom, where he met and overthrew a confed-
eracy of the Canaanitish chiefs in the north, under
Jabin king of Hasor ; and in the course of a pro-
tracted war he led his victorious soldiers to the gates
of Zidon and into the Valley of Lebanon under Her-
mon. In six years, six nations with thirty-one
kings swell the roll of his conquests; and amongst
others the Anakim — the old terror of Israel — are
specially recorded as destroyed everywhere except in
Philiatia. It must be borne in mind that the ex-
tensive conquests of Joshua were not intended to
achieve and did not achieve the complete extirpa-
tion of the Canaanites, many of whom continued
to occupy isolated strongholds throughout the
land.
Joshua, now stricken in years, proceeded in con-
junction with Eleazar and the heads of the tribes
to complete the division of the conquered land ; and
when all was allotted, Timnath-eerah in Mount
Ephraim waa assigned by the people at Joshua's
peculiar inheritance. The Tabernacle of the con-
gregation waa established at Shiloh, six cities of
refuge were appointed, forty-eight cities assigned to
the Levitee, and the warriors of the trans-Jordanic
tribes dismissed in peace to their homes.
After an interval of rest, Joshua convoked an as-
sembly from all Israel. He delivered two solemn
addresses reminding them of the marvelous fulfill-
ment of God's promises to their fathers, and warn-
ing them of the conditions on which their prosperity
depended; and lastly, he caused them to renew
their covenant with God, at Shecbem, a place al-
ready famous in connection with Jacob (Gen. xxxr.
4), and Joseph (Josh. xxiv. 32).
He died at the age of 110 years, and waa buried
in his own city, Timnath-eerah.
Joshua's life has been noted as one of the very
few which are recorded in history with some fullness
of detail, yet without any stain upon them. In
bis character have been traced, under an oriental
garb, such features as chiefly kindled the imagina-
tion of western chroniclers and poets in the Mid-
dle Ages : the character of a devout warrior, blame-
less and fearless, who has been taught by serving
as a youth how to command as a man ; who earns
by manly vigor a quiet honored old age; who
combines strength with gentleness, ever looking up
for and obeying the Divine Impulse with the sim-
plicity of a child, while he wields great power and
directs it calmly, and without swerving, to the
wxomplishment of a high unselfish purpose.
All that part of the book of Joshua which re-
bates hit personal history teems to be written with
the unconscious, vivid power of an eye-witness.
Pfe are not merely taught to look with a distant
reverence upon the first man who bears the name
which is above every name. We stand by the side
* on* who is admitted to hear the words of God,
JOSHUA
and aee the vision of the Almighty. The iawgt
of the armed warrior is before us as when in the
sight of two armies he lifted up his spear over un-
guarded Al. We aee the majestic pretence which
inspired all Israel (iv. 14) with awe; the mild
father who remonstrated with Achan; the calm,
dignified judge who pronounced his sentence; the
devout worshipper prostrating himself before the
Captain of the Lord's host. We aee the lonely
man in the height of his power, sepa r ate from
those about him, the last survivor, save one, of a
famous generation ; the honored old man of many
deeds and many sufferings, gathering his dying
energy for an a'tempt to bind his people more
closely to toe service of God whom he had so long
served and worshipped, and whom he was ever
learning to know more and more.
The great work of Joshua's life waa more ex-
citing but lets hopeful than that of Moses. He
gathered the first fruits of the autumn harvest
where his predecessor had aown the seed in spring.
It was a high and hopeful task to watch beside the
cradle of a mighty nation, and to train its early
footsteps in laws which should last lor centuries-
And it waa a fit end to a life of expectation to gue
with longing eyes from Pisgah upon the Land of
Promise. But no such brightness gleamed uj«i
the calm close of Joshua's life. Solemn words, and
dark with foreboding, fell from him as he sat " un-
der the oak that was by the sanctuary of the Lord
in Shecbem." The excitement of his battles was
past ; and there had grown np in the mind of the
pious leader a consciousness that it is the tendency
of prosperity and success to make a people wanton
and worldly-minded, idolaters in spirit U not in
act, and to alienate them from God.
Holy Scripture itself suggests (Heb. hr. 8) the
consideration of Joshua as a type of Christ. Many
of the Christian Fathers have enlarged upon this
view ; and Bishop Pearson, who baa collected their
opinions ( On (he Crttd, Art. ii. pp. 87-90, and
94-96, ed. 1843), points out the following and
many other typical resemblances: (1) the nsms
common to both ; (3) Joshua brings the people of
God into the land of promise, and divides the land
among the tribes; Jesus brings his people into the
presence of God, and assigns to them their man-
sions; (3) as Joshua succeeded Motes and com-
pleted his work, so the Gospel of Christ succeeding
the Law, announced One by wbom all that belie*
are justified from ail things from which we could
not be justified by the Law of Moses (Acts xiii.
39) ; (4) as Joshua the minister of Moses renewed
the rite of circumcision, so Jesus the minister of
the circumcision brought in the circumcision of the
heart (Rom. XT. 8, ii. 29).
The treatment of the Canaanites by their Jewish
conquerors is fully discussed by Dean Graves (Ot
the Pentnltuch, pt. 3, led. I.). He ooncludei that
the extermination of the Canaanites waa Justified by
their crimes, and that the employment of the Jews
in such extermination was quite consistent with
God's method of governing the world. Prof. Fair-
bairn ( Typology of Scriphtrt, bk. I'd. ch. 4, § Led.
1854) argues with great force and candor in fine*
of the complete agreement of the principles on
which the war was carried on by Joshua with the
principles of the Christian dispensation.
Among the supernatural o cc ur re n ces in the Ed
of Joshua, none baa led to so much discission m
the prolongation of the day of the battle of Mak-
kedah (x. 18-14). No great difficulty la found. ■
Digitized by
Google
JOSHUA
leading, m PfWffer has done (Diff. Script. I c. p.
175), between the lengths of ttiii day and that of
Hezekiah (9 K. zx. 11 ) ; and in connecting both
days with the Egyptian tradition mentioned by He-
rodotus, ii. 142. But unee modern science re-
fealed the stupendous character of this miracle,
modern criticism has mads several attempts to ex-
plain it away. It is regarded by Le Clerc, Dathe,
and others, as no miracle but an optical illusion ;
by Kosenniuller, following Ugen, as a mistake of the
time of day ; by Winer and many recent German
critics, with whom Dr. Davidson (Introd. to 0. T.
p. 644) seems to agree, as a mistake of the mean-
ing or the authority of a poetical contributor to the
book of Jaaher. So Ewald (0'e»cA. Isr. ii. 896)
traces in the latter part of verse IS an interpolation
by the hand of that anonymous Jew whom be sup-
poses to have written the book of Deuteronomy,
and here to have misunderstood the vivid concep-
tion of an old poet : and be cites numerous similar
conceptions from the old poetry of Greece, Home,
Arabia, and Peru. Bnt the literal and natural
Interpretation of the text as intended to describe a
miracle is sufficiently vindicated by Deyling, 06-
serc. Sacr. i. § 19, p. 100; and J. G. Abicht, Dt
nation* Sobs ap. Not. Tkes. TheoL-PkiloL i.
616; and is forcibly stated by Bishop Watson in
the 4th letter in his Apology for the Bible. — [For
the view of Hengstenberg on the " Standing still of
the Sun and Moon," see Kvang. Kirchemtitung,
1833, No. 88: and the same translated in the BibL
Repository, iii. 731-739.— U.]
Procopius, who flourished in the 6th century,
relates ( Vandal, ii. 10) that an inscription existed
at Tingin in Mauritania, set up by Phoenician refu-
gees from Canaan, and declaring in the Phoenician
language, " We are they who fled from the bee of
Joshua the robber the son of Nun." Ewald
(Vetch. Isr. ii. 397, 398) gives sound reasons for
forbearing to use this story ss authentic history.
It is, however, accepted by Kawlinson (Bampton
Lectures, tor 1859, iii. 91).
Ligbtfoot (Hot. Heb. in Matt. L 6, and Chorogr.
Luca promts, iv. § 3) quotes Jewish traditions
(o the eflect that Bahab became a proselyte, and
the wife of Joshua, and the ancestress of nine
prophets and priests; also that the sepulchre of
Joshua was adorned with an image of the Sun in
memory of the miracle of Ajalon. The LXX. and
the Arab. Ver. add to Josh. xxiv. 30 the state-
ment that in his sepulchre were deposited the flint-
knives which were used for the circumcision at Gil-
gal (Josh. v. 8).
The principal occurrences in the life of Joshua
an reviewed by Bishop Hall in his Contemplations
on the 0. T. bks. 7, 8, and 9. W. T. B.
• Joshua, the son of Nun, is meant, Heb. iv. 8,
where the A. V. employs Jesus for 'IijcoDj, though
the translators add in the margin "that is,
Joshua." The object may have been to represent
the Greek name in a uniform manner in the N. T.
Most of the preceding English versions avoid this
confusion. See Trench, Authorized Version, p. 76 f.
(3d ed. 1859). [Jiuus, 3.] H.
2. ["n«V; Alex. Iijo-ovt : Jonte * An inhabi-
tant of Uelh-sheinesb, iu whose land was the stone
at which the milch-kine stopped, when tney drew
the ark of God with the offerings of tho Philistines
torn Ekron to rMh-shemesh (1 Sam. vl 14, 18).
3. ['IiproCf : Jotue.] A governor of the city
• V> gave his name to a gate of Jerusalem (3 K.
-^U.8).
JOSHUA, BOOK OF 1177
4. ['Iqo-ovx: Jesus.] Called Joshua In Ears
ana Nehemiah ; a high priest, who returned from
the Captivity with Zerubbabel. [See Hag. i. 1, '2.
14, ii. 2, 4 ; Zech. iii. 1, 3, 6, 8, 9, vi. 11. ] >'«
details, see Joshua, No. 4. W. T. B.
JOSHTJA, BOOK OF. 1. Authority. -
The claim of the book of Joshua to a place in the
Canon of the O. T. has never been disputed. [See
Canon.] (Bp. Cosin's Schokutical History of the
Canon ; Dr. Wordsworth's Discourses on the Can-
on.) Its authority is confirmed by the references,
In other books of Holy Scripture, to the events
which are related in it; as Ps. lxxviii. 53-65; Is.
xxviii. 91; Hab. iii. 11-13; Acta vii. 45; Heb. iv.
8, xi. 30-39; James ii. 35. The miracles which it
relates, and particularly that of the prolongation of
the day of the battle of Makkedah, have led some
critics to entertain a suspicion of the credibility of
the book as a history. But such an objection does
not touch the book of Joshua only. It must stand
or fell with nearly every historical book of the
Bible. Some Christians may be more or less die
posed by excess of candor, or a desire to conciliate
opposition, to regard as the eflect of natural and
ordinary causes, occurrences which have always
been and still are commonly regarded as miracu-
lous ; and such persons cannot be blamed so long
as their views are consistent with a fair interpreta-
tion of the Bible. But it cannot be allowed that
any canonical book is the less entitled to our roll
belief because it relates miracles.
The treatment of the Canaanites which is sanc-
tioned in this book has been denounced for its
severity by Eichhorn and earlier writers. But then
is nothing in it inconsistent with the divine at-
tribute of Justice, or with God's ordinary way of
governing the world. Therefore the sanction which
is given to it does not impair the authority of this
book. Critical ingenuity has searched it in vain
for any incident or sentiment inconsistent with what
we know of the character of the age, or irrecon-
cilable with other parts of canonical Scripture.
Some discrepancies sre alleged by De Wette and
HaufF to exist within the book itself, and have been
described as material differences and contradictions.
But they disappear when the words of the text are
accurately stated and weighed, and they do not
affect the general credibility of the book. Thus, it
cannot be allowed that there is any real disagree-
ment between the statement xi. 16 and xii. 7, that
Joshua took all the land and gave it to Israel, and
the subsequent statement xviii. 3 and xvii. 1, 16,
that the people were slack to possess the land which
was given to them, and that the Canaanites were
not entirely extirpated ; of course it was intended
(Ex. xxiii. 28, 30) that the people should occupy
the land by little and little. It cannot be allowed
that there is any irreconcilable contradiction be-
tween the statement xii. 10-12, that the kings of
Jerusalem and Gezer were smitten and their country
divided, and the statement, xv. 63, xvi. 10, that
their people were not extirpated for some time
afterward. It cannot be allowed that the general
statement, xi. 23, that Joshua gave the land unto
all Israel according to their divisions by tbeir tribes,
is inconsistent with the fact (xviii. 1, xix. 51), that
many subsequent years passed before the process
of division was completed, and the allotments finally
adjusted. Other d'wrepancics have been alleged
by Dr. Davidson, with the view not of disparaging
the credibility of the book, but of supporting the
Digitized by
Google
1478 JOSHUA, BOOK OF
theory that it is a compilation from two distinct
document*. The boundaries of the different tribes,
H is said, an stated sometimes with greater, some-
times with less exactness. Mow, this may be a
fault of the surveyors employed by Joshua; but it
is scarcely an inconsistency to be charged on the
writer of the book who transcribed their descrip-
tions. Again, the Divine promise that the coast
of Israel shall extend to the Euphrates (i. 4) is not
inconsistent with the feet that the country which
Joshua was commanded to divide (xiii. 18) does not
extend so far Again, the statement (xiii. 3) that
Ekron, etc., remained yet to be possessed is not
inconsistent with the subsequent statement (xv. 46)
that it was assigned to Judah. Dr. Davidson gives
no proof either of his assertion that the former text
is in feet subsequent to the latter, or of his sup-
position that Ekron was in the possession of Judah
at the time of its assignment. Again, it would
seem that Dr. Davidson pushes a theory too far
when he assumes (Jntrod. to 0. T. 637, 638) that one
and the same writer would hardly denote a " tribe "
by one Hebrew word in some passages, and by a
synonymous Hebrew word in others; or thst he
would not in some passages designate Moses ss the
servant of the Lord, and in others mention Moses
without so designating him ; or that he would not
describe the same class of persons in one place as
" priests," and in another as " sons of Aaron."
Such alleged discrepancies are not sufficient either
to impair the authority of the book, or to prove
that it was not substantially the composition of one
author.
9. Scope and content*. — The book of Joshua
is a distinct whole in itself. Although to later
generations it became a standing witness of the
faithfulness of God in fulfilling his promises to
Israel, yet the immediate aim of the inspired writer
was probably of a more simple character. He
records, for the information of the nation to which
he belonged, the acts of Joshua so far as they pos-
sessed a national interest. The book was not in-
tended to be a mere ascription of praise to God,
nor a mere biography, nor a mere collection of
documents. While it serves as a link between that
which precedes, and that which follows it, it has a
distinct purpose, which it fulfills completely. There
is not sufficient ground for treating it as a part of
the Pentateuch, or a compilation from the same
documents as formed the groundwork of the Pen-
tateuch. The fact that its first sentence begins
with a conjunction does not show any closer con-
nection between it and the Pentateuch than exists
between Judges and it The references in i. 8, viii.
81, xxiii. 6, xxiv. 96, to the "book of the law "
rather show that that book was distinct from
Joshua. Other references to events recorded in the
Pentateuch tend in the same direction. No quota-
tion (in the strict modern sense of the word) from
the Pentateuch can be found in Joshua. The
author quotes from memory, like the writers of the
N. T., if he quotes at all (comp. xiii. 7 with Num.
uxiv. 13; xiii. 17 with Num. xxxii. 87; xiii. 91,
92 with Num. xxxi. 8; xiii. 14, 38, and xW. 4 with
Deut. xviii- 1, 9; and Num. xviii. SO, xxi. with
Num. xxxv.).
Perhaps no part of Holy Scripture is more in-
lured than the first half of this book by being
printed in chapters and verses. The first twelve
shapters form a continuous narrative, which seems
never to halt or flag. And the description is fre-
racoUy so minute ss to show the hand not merely
JOSHUA, BOOK OF
of a contemporary, but of an eye-witness. Am
awful sense of the Divine Presence reigns through*
out. We are called out from the din and tumult
of each battle-field to listen to the still, small Voice
The progress of events is dearly foreshadowed in
the first chapter (w. 5, 6). Step by step we arc
led on through the solemn preparation, the arduous
struggle, the crowning triumph. Moving everything
around, yet himself moved by an unseen Power, the)
Jewish leader rises high and calm amid all.
The second part of the book (ch. xiii.-xxi.) has
been aptly compared to the Domesday-book of thai
Norman conquerors of England. The documents
of which it consists were doubtless the abstract of
such reports as were supplied by the men whom
Joshua sent out (xviii. 8) to describe the land, fas
the course of time it is probable that changes wet»
introduced into their reports — whether kept sep-
arately among the national archives, or embodied
in the contents of a book — by transcribers adapting
them to the actual state of the country in later
times when political divisions were modified, new
towns sprung up, and old ones disappeared (comp.
the two lists of Levitieal towns. Josh, xxi and 1
Chr. vi. 54, *c.).
The book may be regarded as consisting of three
parts: (<t) the conquest of Canaan, (4) the partition
of Canaan, (c) Joshua's farewell.
a. The preparations for the war, and the passaga
of the Jordan, ch. 1-6; the capture of Jericho, 6;
the conquest of the south, 7-10; the conquest of
the north, 11; recapitulation, 19.
b. Territory assigned to Reuben, Gad, and half
Manasseh, 13 ; the lot of Caleb and of the tribe of
Judah, 14, 15; Ephraim and half Manasseh, 16,
17 ; Benjamin, 18 ; Simeon, Zebuhin, Issachar,
Asher, Naphtall, and Dan, 19 ; the appointment of
six cities of refuge, 90; the assignment of forty-
eight cities to I-evi, 91 : the departure of the trans-
Jordanic tribes to their homes, 92.
c. Joshua's convocation of the people and first
address, 93 ; his second address at Sbecbem, and
his death, 94.
The events related in this book extend over a
period of about 25 years, from B. c. 1451 to 1496.
The declaration of Caleb, xir. 10, is useful in de-
termining the chronology of tbe book.
3. Author. — Nothing is really known ss to the
authorship of the book. Joshua himself is generally
named as the author by the Jewish writers and the
Christian Fathers ; and a great number of critics
acquiesce more or less entirely in that belief. But
no contemporary assertion or sufficient historical
proof of the fact exists, and it cannot be maintained
without qualification. Other authors have been
conjectured, as Phinehas by Lightfoot; FJeazar by
Calvin; Samuel by Van Til; Jeremiah by Henry;
one of the elders who survived Joshua, by KeU-
Von Lengerke thinks it was written by some one
in the time of Josiah ; Davidson by some one is
the time of Ssul, or somewhat later; Masius, Le
Clero, Maurer, and others by some one who lived
after the Babylonish Captivity. The lata date is
now advocated for the most part in connection with
a theory, which may perhaps help to explain the
composition of the Pentateuch; but which, when
applied to a book so uniform in its style as Joshua,
seems to introduce more difficulties than it removes.
It has been supposed that the book at it now stands
is a compilation from two earlier documents; one
the original, called Etohistic, the other supplemen-
tary, called Jehovistis; they are distinguished ht
Digitized by
Google
JOSHUA, BOOK Or
lie names given In them to God, and by aome other
lharacteristic difference! on which the supporter!
if the hypothesis are not perfectly agreed. Ewald's
theory ia that the Pentateuch and the book of
Joshua form one complete work : that it ia mainly
sompiled from contemporary and ancient docu-
ments, and that it has grown into its present form
under the bands of five successive writers or editors ;
the fiat of whom composed his book in the time
of the judges, and the last (to whom the book of
Deuteronomy is assigned) in the time of Manasseh.
Hie account of these authors or compilers may be
seen in Gtteh. It. i. 81-174, and his method of
apportioning various porta of the book of Joshua to
the several writers in Gach. Itr. i. 84 and it- 299-
800. The theory of this able critic, so conjectural,
complicated, and arbitrary, has met with many
opponents, and few, if any, supporters even in his
own country.
No one would deny that some additions to the
book might be made after the death of Joshua
without detracting from the possible fact that the
book was substantially his composition. The last
verses (zziv. 39-83) were obviously added by some
later hand. If, as is possible, though not certain,
some subordinate events, ss the capture of Hebron,
of Debir (Josh. xv. 13-19, and Judg. I. 10-15),
and of Leshem (Josh. six. 47, and Judg. xviii. 7),
and the joint occupation of Jerusalem (Josh. zv.
83, and Judg. i. SI) did not occur till after Joshua's
death, they may have been inserted in the book of
Joshua by a late transcriber. The passages ziii.
8-6, xvi. 10, xvii. 11, which also are subsequently
repeated in the book of Judges, may doubtless
describe accurately the same state of things existing
at two distinct periods.
The arguments which, though insufficient to
prove that Joshua was the author, yet seem to give
a preponderance in favor of him when compared
with any other person who hss been named, may
be thus briefly stated: (<i) It is evident (xxiv. 26)
that Joshua could and did write some account of
at least one transaction which is related in this
book; (o) the numerous accounts of Joshua's inter-
course with God (i. 1, Ui. 7, iv. 2, v. 2, 9, vi. 2,
vtt. 10, via. 1, i. 8, xi. 6, xiit. 1, 3, xx. 1, xxiv. 2),
and with the Captain of the Lord's Host (v. 13),
must have emanated from himself; (c) no one is
more likely than the speaker himself to have com-
mitted to writing the two addresses which were
Joshua's legacy to his people (xriii. and xxiv.);
(d) no one was so well qualified by his position to
describe the events related, and to collect the docu-
ments contained in the book; (<) the example of
his predecessor and master, Moses, would have sug-
gested to him such a record of his acts; (f) one
verse (vi. 26) must have been written by aome
person who lived in the time of Joshua; and two
other verses, r. 1 and 6 — assuming the oommon
reading of the former to be correct — are most
fairly interpreted as written by actors in the scene.
H&vernick't assertion that some grammatical
forms used in Joshua are leu ancient than the cor-
responding forms in Judges, may be set against
Kelt's list of expressions and forms which are
peculiar to this book and the "snrateuch ; and
flaVerniek is not supported by facts when oe sup-
Maes that no expedition of any separate tribe against
the Oanaanites oould have occurred in the lifetime
sf Joshua, and that the book was therefore written
•me time afterwards. It has been said that the
'to this day," which Is found fourteen
JOSHUA, BOOK OF 1479
times in the book, presupposes so considerable an
interval of time between the occurrence of the event
and the composition of the history, that Joshua
could not have lived long enough to write in such
language. But a careful examination of the pas-
sages will scarcely bear out that observation. For
instance, in three places (xxii. 3, xxiii. 8, 9) the
phrase denotes a period unquestionably included
within the twenty-five years which Joshua lived in
Canaan ; in xxii. 17 it goes but a little farther back;
in iv. 9, vii. 26, viii. 29, and x. 27 it describes
certain piles of stones which he raised as still re-
maining — a remark which does not necessarily
imply that more than twenty years had elapsed
since they were raised ; and in vi. 25 it defines a
period within the lifetime of a contemporary of
Joshua, and therefore probably within his own. In
the remaining passages (viii. 28, xiii. 13, xiv. 14,
xv. 63, xvi. 10) there is nothing which would make
it impossible that Joshua should have used this
4. There is extant a Samaritan book of Joshua
in the Arabic language. It was printed for the
first time at Leyden in 1848, with the title " Liber
Josuaa; Chronicon Samaritanum, edidit, Latins
vertit, etc., T. G. J. JuynboU." Its contents were
known previously from the accounts given of it by
Hottinger and others. It was written in the 13th
century. It recounts the late acts of Hoses ampli-
fied from the book of Numbers, a history of Joshua
interspersed with various legends, portions of toe
Jewish law, and several unconnected historical pas-
sages more or less falsified, «wton<ling down to the
time of Hadrian.
6. Literature. — The best Commentary which is
accessible to the English reader is the translation
of Keil's Commentary on Joshua (Clark, Edin-
burgh, [1857.]) A complete list of commentaries
may be found in Rosenmiiller's Scholia. Among
the Fathers, Ephrem Syrus has written an expla-
nation, and Augustine and Theodore* have discussed
questions connected with the book. The following
commentaries may be selected as most useful: —
That of Jnrchi or Baski (Solomon ben Isaac),
translated into Latin by Breithaupt, Goths, 1710;
the commentary of Hasius, Antwerp, 1574, inserted
in the CriUci Sacri; those of Le Clerc, Amster-
dam, 1708; Rosenmuller, Ldpsic, 1833; and KeiL
Erlangen, 1847. W. T. &
* Other commentators who should be mentioned
are Haurer, Comm. in Vet. Test. i. 97-126 (1836);
KnobeL Die Bicker ffumeri, Deulerou. a. Joeua
erkldrt, Leipz. 1861 (Lief. xiii. of the Kungef.
exegeL Handb. mm A. T.)\ Keil and Delitzsch,
Bibl Comm. Ob. d. A.T., Theil ii. Bd. i. (./onto,
Richttr a. Ruth, von Keil), Leipz. 1863, English
transL Edin. 1865; Chr. Wordsworth, Holv Bibie
with Note*, eta., ii. pt. i. 1-74 (Load. 1865); and
in our own country, George Bush, Note* Criticid
ami Practical, on the Book* of Joshua and Judges,
N. Y. 1838. See also Baumgarten'a art. Jama,
in Herzogs Real-Kncyk. vii. 38-44; J. L. Konig,
AlUtttamentliche StuoHen, Heft 1 (Meurs, 1836);
Bertheau, on Joshua's wars and conquest of Canaan
Zur Getch. der ItrastUen, pp. 266-278 (Got*.
1842); Kurtz, Getch. del A. Bundes, vol. ii., Eng-
lish trend, by Edersheim, Edin. 1859; EwaU,
Gssch. da Volktt Israel, 3* Ausg. ii. 823 ft*., English
tranal. by Martineau, Lond. 1868; Bleek, Einl is
ds\s A. Test pp. 311-333: Keil's EM. is das A.
Test pp. 143-153; Palfrey's Lectures <n the Jew-
ish Benptures, ii. 134-183; Davidson's lutni •
Digitized by
Google
1480
JOSHUA, BOOK OV
Ik* OUT,*. 1. 409-448; ud Rawllnson's Kutori-
enl h'cileneet, etc., Led. iii. See also the litera-
ture under Pentateuch.
We bare ran words from Hitter respecting the
geographical and historical accuracy of the book of
Joshua, which deserve attention, The subject of
the book being the subjugation and conquest of the
land of Canaan, its predominant character, as he
remarks, must from the nature of the cue be geo-
graphical. But beyond this it is true also that the
entire political and religious life of the Hebrews
was interwoven in the closest manner, like a piece
of network, with the geography of the oountry ; far
more so than is true of modem European nations;
so that, especially at this time when we know so
much of the topography of Palestine, we are able
to subject the history to a rigorous scrutiny. The
teat ha* been applied, and the result has been to es-
tablish the accuracy of the book even in minute
details, and comparatively unimportant and trivial
local relations. Its notices, not only of distinct
regions, but of valleys, fountains, mountains, vil-
lages, have been confirmed, often with surprising
certainty and particularity. The great geographer
refers as an example of this to the account of
Joshua's second campaign in the south of Palestine
(Josh. zi. 16 ff. xv. 21, ff.). He shows that the
division of the country there into five parts, the
scene of that expedition, rests upon a basis in na-
ture, upon a diversity of geographical position
which none but an eye-witness could have remarked,
and which modem travellers find to be entirely
characteristic of the region still. He shows, in
addition to this general accuracy in the outline,
that the specialities are equally true; that many
of the cities and towns which are mentioned have
remained under their ancient names to the present
day, and also occur together in groups, precisely
in the manner that the sacred writers represent
them as having been arranged of old. This agree-
ment between the Old Testament records in general
and the geography of the land as now more and more
fully illustrated, furnishes an Important evidence
of their authenticity, (fin BHck auf J'alaitina
mad seine Chrutlicht BevtUkerung, Berlin, 1869.)
On no side perhaps has this book been so vio-
lently assailed as that of its morality involved in the
mission of Joshua to subdue and extirpate the abo-
riginal Canaanites. The reader will find some very
pertinent remark* on this subject, in Dean Stanley's
Buloryofihe Jewiik Church, i. 378 8°. (Amer. ed.).
We quote, after his example, a few sentences from
one of Dr. Arnold's Sermons on the Wars of the
Israelites (vi. 36 ff. ) : " It is better that the wicked
should be destroyed a hundred times over than that
they should tempt those who are as yet Innocent to
join their company. Let us but think what might
have been our fate, and the fete of every other na-
tion under heaven at this hour, had the sword of
She Israelites done its work more sparingly. Even
u it was, the small portions of the Canaanites who
■ere left, and the nations around them, so tempted
the Israelites by their Idolatrous practices, that we
read continually of the whole people of God turn-
ing away from his service. But had the heathen
ived in the land in equal numbers, and, still more,
aad they intermarried largely with the Israelites,
how was it possible, humanly speaking, that any
■parks of the light of God's truth should have
survived to the coming of Christ? ....
*> They seem of very small importance to us now,
—those perpetual contests with the Canaanites and
JOSIAH
the Hidianltes and the Ammonites and the Pfcfns-
tines, with which the books of Joshua and Judges
and Samuel are almost filled. We may haif wonder
that God should have interfered in such quarrels,
or have changed the course of nature, in order to
give one of the nations of Palestine the victory over
another. But in these contests, on the fete of one
of these nations of Palestine, the happiness of the
human race depended. The Israelites fought not for
themselves only, but for us. ... They did God's
work; they preserved unhurt the seed of eternal
life, and were the ministers of blessing to all other
nations, even though they themselves failed to en-
joy it" H.
JOSI'AH CirPVtf [Jthocak htab or
«ree*:1 'Icttrtasi [Vat. almost everywhere Itwtiot;
Sin. 1 in Zeph. i. 1, Iouo-uu:] Joaat). L The son
of Amon and Jedidah, succeeded his father B. c.
641, in the eighth year of his age, and reigned 81
years. His history is contained in 3 K. xxii.-xxiii.
30; 3 Chr. xxxlv., xxxv.; and the first twelve
chapters of Jeremiah throw much light upon the
general character of the Jews in his days.
He began in the eighth year of his reign to seek
the Lord; and in his twelfth year, and for six yean
afterwards, in a personal progress throughout all
the land of Judah and Israel, be destroyed every-
where high places, groves, images, and all outward
signs and relics of idolatry. Those which Solomon
and Ahaz had built, and even Hesekiah had spared,
and those which Monasseh had set op more re-
cently, now ceased to pollute the land of Judah;
and hi Israel the purification began with Jeroboam's
chapel at Bethel, in accordance with the remarka-
ble prediction of the disobedient prophet, by whom
Josiah was called by name three centuries before
his birth (1 K. xiii. 9). The Temple was restored
under a special commission ; and in the course of
the repairs Hilkiah the priest [Hilklah] found
that book of the Law of the Lord which quickened
so remarkably the ardent seal of the king. Thj
question as to the content* of that book has been
discussed elsewhere; in forming an opinion on it
we should bear in mind that it is very difficult for
us in this age and country to estimate the scanti-
ness of the opportunities which were then open to
laymen of acquiring literary knowledge connected
with religion. The special commission sent forth
by Jehoshaphat (9 Chr. xvii. 7 ) is a proof that even
under such kings as Asa and his son, the Levites
were insufficient for the religious instruction of the
people. What then must have been the amount
of information accessible to a generation which had
grown up in the reigns of Manasseh end Amon ?
We do not know that the Law was read as a stated
part of any ordinary public service in the Temple
of Solomon (unless the injunction, Deut. xxxi. 10,
was obeyed once in seven years), though God was
worshipped there with daily sacrifice, psalmody,
and prayer. The son of Amon began only when
he was sixteen years old to seek the God of David,
and for ten years he devoted all his active energies
to destroying the gross external memorials of idola-
try throughout his dominions, and to strengthen-
ing and multiplying the visible signs of true religion.
It is not surprising that in the 96th year of his age
he should find the most awful words in which God
denounces sin come home to his heart on a partic-
ular occasion with a new and strange power, and
that he should send to a prophetess to inquire hi
what degree of do—n e w those words wen to hi
Digitized by
Google
JOSIAH
applied to himself and hi* generation. That he
bad never read the words u probable But hi*
conduct ii no eufflcient proof that he had never
heard them before, or that be vu not aware of the
axistence of a " Book of the law of the Lord."
The great day of Josiah's life was that m which
be and his people, in the eighteenth year of hia
reign, entered into a special covenant to keep the
law of the Lord, and celebrated the feast- of the
Passover at Jerusalem with more munificent offer-
ings, letter arranged services, and a larger con-
course of worshippers than had been seen on any
previous occasion.
After this, his endeavors to abolish every trace
of idolatry and superstition were still carried on.
Bat the time drew near which had been Indicated
by Huldah (3 K. xxii. 30). When Pharaoh-
Necho went from Egypt to Carchemiah to carry on
his war against Assyria (comp. Herodotus, U. 159),
Josiah, possibly in a spirit of loyalty to the Assyr-
ian king, to whom he may have been bound," op-
posed his march along the sea-coast Necho reluc-
tantly paused and gave him battle in the Valley of
Eadraelon ; and the last good king of Judah was
tarried wounded from Hadadrimmon, to die before
he could arrive at Jerusalem.
He was buried with extraordinary honors; and
a funeral dirge, in part composed by Jeremiah,
which the affection of his subjects sought to per-
petuate as an annual solemnity, was chanted prob-
ably at Hadadrimmon. Compare the narrative in
9 Cbx. xxxv. 35 with the allusions in Jer. xxii. 10,
18, and Zech. xii. 11, and with Jackson, On the
Creed, bk. viii. ch. 83, p. 878. The prediction of
Huldah, that he should "be gathered into the
grave in peace," must be interpreted in accordance
with the explanation of that phrase given in Jer.
xxxiv. 5. Some excellent remarks on it may be
•rand in Jackson, On the Cretd, bk. xi. ch. 36, p.
664. Josiah's reformation and his death are com-
mented on by Bishop Hall, Contemplation! on the
0. r.bk. xx.
It was in the reign of Josiah that a nomadic
horde of Scythians overran Asia (Herodotus, i.
104-106). A detachment of them went towards
Egypt by the way of Philistia: somewhere south-
ward of Ascakui they were met by messengers from
Psammetichus and induced to turn back. They
are not mentioned in the historical accounts of
Josiah's reign. But Ewald (Die Ptalmen, 165)
conjectures that the 59th Psalm was composed by
king Josiah during a siege of Jerusalem by these
Scythians. The towu Beth-shan is said to derive
its Greek name, Scythopolis (Reland, Pal 993;
Lightfoot, Chor. Mare. vii. § 3), from these inva-
ders. The facility with which Josiah appears to
have extended his authority in the land of Israel is
adduced as an indication that the Assyrian con-
querors of that land were themselves at this time
under the restraining bar of some enemy. The
prophecy of Zephaniah is considered to have been
written amid the terror caused by their approach.
The same people are described at a later period by
Erekiel (xxviiL). See Ewald, Geteh. Itr. iii. 689.
a gueh Is at l«ast the oonjectare of Prideaax (Con-
vxton, anno 610),sndof MUman(4Ka<t>ryf>/iAe /mm,
.818). Bat the Bible ascribes no such chivalrous
votive to Josiah : and It doss not occur to Josephus,
•ho attributes (Ant. x. 6, f 1) Josiah's raelsteaes
manly to Fate urging him to destruction ; nor to the
Minor of 1 aadr. i. 28, who dasonoes bin, as acting
sSttsOj' against Jnrsmkh's advise ; nor to jtwald, who
JOTAPATA 1481
Abarbanel (ap. Eisenmenger, EnU Jvd. 1. 858)
records an oral tradition of the Jews to the effect
that the Ark of the Covenant, which Solomon de-
posited in the Temple (1 K. vi. 19), was removed
and hidden by Josiah, in expectation of the de-
struction of the Temple; and that it will not be
brought again to light until the coming of Mes-
siah. W. T. B.
2. The son of Zephaniah, at whose house the
prophet Zechariah was oommanded to assemble the
chief men of the Captivity, to witness the solemn
and symbolical crowning of Joshua the high-priest
(Zech. vi. 9). It has been conjectured that Josiah
was either a goldsmith, or treasurer of the Temple,
or one of the keepers of the Temple, who received
the money offered by the worshippers, but nothing
is known of him. Possibly he was a descendant
of Zephaniah, the priest mentioned in Jer. xxi. 1,
xxxvii. 3, and if Hen in Zech. vi. 14 be a proper
name, which is doubtful, it probably refers to the
same person, elsewhere called Josiah. W. A. W.
JOSI'AS. 1. flaxriaf; [Vat, Imrcuu; so
Sin. in Ecclus. and Matt, and Lachm. Tiach.
Treg. in Matt:] Jotiot.) Josiah, king of Judah
(1 Esdr. L 1, 7, 18, 91-33, 35, 28, 39, 33-34 ; Ecclus
xlix. 1, 4; Bar. 1. 8; Matt i. 10, 11).
8. ('It trios; [Vat with preceding word Asutes-
lot;] Alex. Iftrtrias: Moannt.) Jeshaiah the
son of Athaliah (1 Esdr. viii. 33; oomp. Ear.
viii. 7).
JOSIBI'AH (njJJjfV, i. «. Joshlblah [Je-
hovah motet to owelty. 'AffoBfo; [Vat] Alex.
Ica&ta: Jotnbiat), the father of Jehu, a Simeon-
ite, descended from that branch of the tribe of
which Shimei was the founder, and which after-
wards became most numerous (1 Chr. iv. 35).
JOSIPHI'AH (^DV {**om Jehovah
aide = Joseph] : 'Iow«f>(a [Vat -Seta] : Jotphiat\
the father or ancestor of Shelomith, who returned
with Ezra (Ear. viii. 10). A word is evidently
omitted in the first part of the verse, and is sup-
plied both by the LXX. and the Syr., as well as by
the compiler of 1 Esdr. viii. 36. The LXX. supply
Baarl, i. e. V®, which, from its resemblance to
the preceding word VI?, might easily have been
omitted by a transcriber. The verse would then
read, " of the tons of Bani, Shelomith the son of
Josiphiah." In the Syriao Shelomith is repeated,
but this is not likely to have been correct. Josi
phiah is called in Esdrss JoaAPHiAS.
• JOTAP'ATA OltareWo), a famous for
tress in Galilee, which figured largely in the early
post-Biblical Jewish history. Josephus, who com
manded the forces in it, and was captured there, has
given a full description of the place, which he had
fortified, and of the siege by Vespasian, in which
40,000 persons perished before it was reduced. (B.
J. iii. 7 ff.) The site, which had been searched for
by modern travelers, was discovered by Schulta hi
1847, and identified with the modern Jefat—tm
(Qttch. Itr. ill. 707) conjectural that It may have bum
the constant aim of Josiah to restore not only the rit-
ual, but also the kingdom of David In Its fall extent
and Independence, and that he attacked Necho as an In-
vader of what he considered as his northern dominions
This conjecture, n* equally probable with the fanner,
Is equally wtthoot adequate suppavt In the Bible, ass*
Is somewhat derogatory totha character of Jnslali
Digitized by
Google
1482
JOTBAH
uninhabited Tctt, about fifteen miles southeast from
Akka. The spot ra visited and described by Dr.
Robinson in 1853 (Later BM. Ret. p. 106 ff.),
who also identifies it with the Jifklhah-el of
Joshua. [JlTHTHAH-BL.] S. W.
JOTTBAH (H^; [goodnem]: 'I«ra79a;
[Vat If<rt/3aA;] Alex. IeraxaA; Jos. 'Ia/3drn:
Jeteba), the native plaoeof Mesbulkmeth, the queen
of Manaatsh, and mother of Amon king of Judah
(2 K. xxi. 19). The place is not elsewhen-named
as a town of Palestine, and is generally identified
with Jotbatb, or Jotbathah, mentioned below. This
there is nothing either to prove or disprove. [G>]
JOTTBATH or JOT'BATHAH (nnjptp;
[goodntu,pUavmtntu): 'Erc/9a0SS [VatinDeut
TatffaBa, in Num. Tat.i 2<r<£o0a;] Alex.
IrrtPaBar, [or -Jo: Jelebatha], Dent i. 7; Num.
xxxiii. 33), a desert station of the Israelites: it is
described as " a land of torrents of waters; " there
are several confluences of wadies on toe W. of the
Arabah, an; one of which might in the rainy sea-
son answer the description, and would agree with
the general locality. H. H.
JOTHAM (DnV< [Jthank k tprigU]:
'foatap; [Vat luaBm; Alex, in rer. 6, Iaffafi,
rer. 21, fofap:] Joatkam). 1. The youngest son
of Gideon (Judg. ix. 5, [7, 21, 67]), who escaped
when his brethren, to the number of 60 persons,
were slain at Ophrah by their half-brother Abime-
lech. When this bloody act of Abimelech had
secured his election as king, Jotham, ascending
Mount Gerizim, boldly uttered, in the hearing of
the men of Shechem, his well-known warning para-
ble of the reign of the bramble. Nothing is known
of him afterwards, except that he dwelt at Beer.
8. ['Ia&op, 'IsHxfar; Vat. 2 K. xv. 6, 7, 32,
tarotfov, and so Alex. 2 K. xv. 30, 1 Chr. iii.
12, 2 Chr. xxvi. 23; Alex. 1 Chr. v. 17, foeVu>:
Jonthan, Joai/iam.] The son of king Uxziah or
AzarUh and Jerushah. After administering the
kingdom for some years during his father's lep-
rosy, he succeeded to the throne n. o. 758, when
he was 25 years old, and reigned 16 years in Je-
rusalem. He was contemporary with Pekah and
with the prophet Isaiah. His history is contained
in 2 K. xv. and 2 Chr. xxrii. He did right in the
sight of the Load, and his reign was prosperous,
although the high-places were not removed. He
built the high gate of the Temple, made some ad-
ditions to the wail of Jerusalem, and raised forti-
fications in various parts of Judah. After a war
with the Ammonites be compelled them to pay him
Ihe tribute they bad been accustomed to pay his
father. Towards the end of his reign Resin king
of Damascus, and Pekah, began to assume a
threatening attitude towards Judah. W. T. B.
3. A descendant of Judah, son of Jahdai (1 Chr.
B. 47).
•JOURNEY, Day's. [Day'b Jocrhey,
Am*, ed.]
•JOURNEY, Sabbath-day's. [Sabbath.]
JOZ'ABAD. L nnt'Vr^yio/JfAouo*]:
1«fa0<<6; [Vat. FA. TaCa$ae;] Alex. ImCafiat:
/atabad.) A captain of the thousands of Manas-
seb, who deserted to David before the battle of
Gilboa, and assisted him in his pursuit of the ma-
rauding band of Amalektee (1 Chr. xii. 20). One
•f KJetnicotrs MSS. reads 13IT, i. «. Jochabar.
JOZACHAB
8. OWojSai*; [FA. foe-alt*;] Am. tof*
jEtst.) A hero of Minsssrh, like the preceding
(1 Chr. xii. 20).
3. ('fofa/Satt; [Vat E(a/3«8;] Alex. I«fo0a».
in 2 Chr. xxxi. 13.) A Levite in the reign oi
Hezekiah, who was one of the overseers of ofieringi
and dedicated things in the Temple, under Conoojah
and Shimei, after the restoration of the true
worship.
4. (Jatabad.) One of the princes of the Levitts,
who held the same office as the preceding, and took
part in the great Passover kept at Jerusalem in the
reign of Josiah (2 Chr. xxxv. 9).
6. [Jocnoed.] A Levite, son of Jeshna, who
assisted Meremoth and FJeazar in registering the
number and weight of the vessels of gold ard silver
belonging to the Temple, which they brought with
them from Babylon (Ear. viii. S3). He is called
Jobabad in the parallel narrative of 1 Esdr. vlli.
63, and is probably identical with 7.
6. ('fofa/9d3 in Ezra; 'OkMuKos in 1 Esdr.
ix. 22: Jozabtd.) A priest of the sons of Pashur,
who had married a foreigner on the return from
the Captivity (Ezr. x. 22). He appears as OciDixua
in the A. V. of 1 Esdr.
7. ('tetodfet [Vat fofrSSoi] in 1 Esdr. ix
23: Jambtd, Ear. x. 22; Jorabdu*, 1 Esdr. ix. 83.)
A Levite among those wbo returned with Ezra and
bad married foreign wives. He is probably iden-
tical with Jozabad the Levite, who assisted when
the law was read by Ezra (Neh. viii. 7); and with
Jozabad, one of the heads of the Levites who pre-
sided over the outer work of the Temple (Neh. xL
16). W. A. W.
JOZ'ACHAR ("9JT" [te»om Jekomh re-
mtmbtrt] : 'itfaxip ; [Vat Itfsiyop ;] Alex.
lufaxap"- Jotachnr), the son of Shimeath the
Ammonitess, and one of the murderers of Josah
king of Judah (2 K. xii. 21). The writer of the
Chronicles (2 Chr. xxiv. 26) calls him Zabad,
which is nothing more than a clerical error for
Jozachar: the first syllable being omitted in con-
sequence of the final letters of the preceding word
Vb2. In 18 MSS. of Kennicott's collation the
name in the Kings is "T3tT\ i. e. Jozabad, and
the same is the reading of 32 MSS. collated by De
Rossi. Another MS. in De Rossi's possession had
"T3tY\ ». e. Joxachad, and one collated by Ken-
nieott "CrtV, or Jozabar, which is the reading of
the Peshito-Syriac Burrington concludes that the
original form of the word was "13TV, or Jozabad;
but for this there does not seem sufficient reason,
as the name would then be all but identical with
that of the Moabite Jehozabad, who was the ae-'
complice of Jozachar in the murder. It is uncer-
tain whether their conspiracy was prompted by a
personal feeling of revenge for the death of Zecba-
riah, as Josephus intimates (Ant. ix. 8, § 4), or
whether they were urged to it by the family of
Jehoiada. The care of the chronicler to show that
they were of foreign descent seems almost Intended
to disarm a suspicion that the king's assassination
was an act of priestly vengeance. But it is mora
likely that the conspiracy had a dinerrnt origin
altogether, and that the king's murder was regarded
by the chronicler as an instance of Divine retribu-
tion. On the accession of Amaziah the eonspinten
were execu'ed. W. A. W-
Digitized by
Google
JOZADAK
JOZ'ADAK (P7?V [Jehovan right*™]:
leanls*; [Vat in Neh., E««r«8« :] .fowfcc),
En. iii. 2, 8, v. 2, x. 18; Neh. xii. 26. The same
is a contraction of Jebozadak.
JU'BAL (b3T> [sowno*, Mo* o/ - trwmpett] :
'Isv/hU: Jvbal), a am of Lantech by Adah, and
the inventor of the '• harp and organ " (Gen. ir.
II ; Idnndr veigab, probably general ternu for
stringed and wind instrument*), ilia name appear!
to be connected with this subject, ipringing from
the same root as yobtl, "jubilee." That the in-
ventor of musical instruments should be the brother
Of him who introduced the nomad life, is strictly
In accordance with the experience of the world.
The connection between music and the pastoral life
is indicated in the traditions of the Greeks, which
ascribed the invention of the pipe to Pan and of
the lyre to Apollo, each of them being also derated
to pastoral pursuits. W. L. B.
JTJBILBE, THB TEAS OF (njl|#
VgVn, and simply b;?V : fr„ tjj, k^iatut,
tyiatcn <n\pi«M, and Aperm: ammijabibm, and
jubilant), the fiftieth year after the succession of
seven sabbatical years, in which all the land which
had been alienated returned to the families of those
to whom it had been allotted in the original dis-
tribution, and all bondmen of Hebrew blood were
liberated. The relation in which it stood to the
« Kwald observes that tt. 17-22 in this chapter
should be read Immediately after ver. 7, since they
carry on the account of the sabbatical year, and have
no reference to toe year of Jubilee.
e It does not seem likely that the rites of solemn
humiliation which marked the gnat &st of the year
wen disturbed. The joyful sound probably burst
forth in the afternoon, when the high-priest had
Drought the services of Atonement to a conclusion.
The contrast between the quiet of the day and the
lond blast of the trumpets at Its close, must have ren-
dered deeply Impressive the hallowing of the year of
nlease from poverty and bondage. But Hupfeld Is so
oflVnded with the Incongruity of this arrangement,
that he would fain npair what he thinks must be a
defect In the Hebrew text, in order that he may put
back the commencement of the year of Jubilee from
the Day of Atonement, on the 10th, to the Feast of
Trumpets, on the 1st of Tisrl. " Hie (t. *. In ver. 8)
vetns mendum latere snspicor, forte In diet numero,
"lltDy 5) Prlmltns pceitum (pro "IITM?) cut deinde
glosea sccesslt ' die exptationls ' " ( Comment, it vera
frit. rat. pt. in. p 20). In the same vein of criticism,
considering that the rest of the soil Is sllen to the Idea
of the Jubilee, he would expunge ver. 11 as an Inter-
polation. He Is disposed to deal still more freely with
that part of the chapter which relates to the sabbatical
'war.
e The trumpets used in the proclamation of the
Jubilee appear to have been curved horns, not the
long, straight trumpets represented on the arch of
Titus, and which, according to Hengstenberg (Egypt
end the Boolct of Motet, p. 131, Bng. trans ;, are the
only ones rep r es ente d in Egyptian sculptures and
whitings. The straight trumpet was called n?Sn,
me other, "1B1B7 and }3p # . The Jubilee horns
seed In the siege of Jbrloho aie ek.ad iTPQlB?
pbyrVI (Josh. fi. 4); and, collectively. In the
Wlowhir versa, bj'Vil W, (Sm Kail on josh.
JUBILEE, THB YEAR OF 1482
sabbatical year and the general directions for its
observance are given Lev. xxv. 8-16 and 23-65."
Its bearing on lands dedicated to Jehovah is stated
Lev. xxvii. 18-26. There is no mention of the
Jubilee in the book of Deuteronomy, and the only
other reference to it in the Pentateuch it in the
appeal of the tribe of Manaaseh, on account of the
daughters of Zelophehad (Num. xxxvi. 4 : see be-
low, § TI. note d).
II. The year was inaugurated on the Day of
Atonement 6 with the blowing of trumpets c through-
out the land, and by a proclamation of universal
liberty.
1. The soil was kept under the same condition
of rest as had existed during the preceding sab-
batical year. There was to be neither ploughing,
sowing, nor reaping; but the chance produce was
to be left for the use of all comers. [Sabbatical
Year.]
S. Every Israelite returned to "his possession
and to his family; " that is, he recovered his right
in the land originally allotted to the family of which
he was a member, if he, or his ancestor, had parted
with it.
(a.) A strict rule to prevent fraud and injustice
in such transactions is laid down: if a Hebrew,
urged by poverty,'' had to dispose of a field, the
price was determined according to the time of the
sale in reference to the approach of the next Jubilee
The transfer was thus, not of the land itself, but
of the usufruct for a limited time. Deduction was
vi. 4.) It Is not quite certain whether they wen the
horns of oxen or formed of metal (Kranold, p. 60), but
the latter seems by far more probable. Connected with
the mistake as to the origin of the word /3V (which
will be noticed below), was the notion that they were
rams* horns. B. Jehuda, In the Mlahna, says that the
horns of rams (D V 13T) wen used at the Feast of
Trumpets, and those of wild goats (D^?7^) at the
Jubilee. But Halmonldes and Bartenora say that
rains' horns wen used on both occasions (Rosh Ha.
skana, p. 842, edit Sunn.). Bochart and others have
Justly objected that the horns of rams, or those of
wild goats, would form but sorry trumpets. [Cobjcxt.J
It is probable that on this, ss on other occasions
of public proclamation, the trumpets wen blown by
the priests. In accordance with Num. x. 8. (See
Kranold, Comment. d» Jubileeo, p. 60 ; with whom
agree Swald, Bahr, and most modern writers.) Biihi
supposes that, at the proclamation of the Jubilee, the
trumpets wen blown in all the priests' cities and
wherever a priest might be living ; while, on the Feast
of Trumpets, they were blown only In the Temple.
Maimonldes says that every Hebrew at the Jubilee
blew nine blasts, so as to make the trumpet literally
R sound throughout the land " (Lev. xxv. 91. Such a
usage may have existed, ss a mere popular expression
of rejoicing, but it could have been no essential part
of the ceremony.
i It would seem that the Israelites never parted
with their land except from the pressure of poverty.
The objection of Naboth to accept the offer of Ahab
(1 K. xxl. 1), appears to exemplify the sturdy feeling
of a substantial Hebrew, who would bare felt it to be
a shame and a sin to give np any part of his patri-
mony — " The Lord forbid It me that I should give
the inheritance of my fathers to thee." If Hlchaeln
had felt as most Englishmen do In such matters, hr
would hare had mora respect for the conduct of Na-
both. (See Comment, on the Motaie Law, art 78.)
But the conduct of Naboth has been questioned on
different ground in a dissertation by S. Andiees, in thl
Oitiei Saeri, vol. xHI. p. 608.
Digitized by
Google
1484 JUBILEE, THE YEAB OF
tyste m ati c ally made on account of the nnmber of
■abbatical yean, which would deprive the purchaser
al certain crops within that period."
(6.) The poss ess ion of the field could, at any time,
be recovered by the original proprietor, if his cir-
cumstance* improved, or by his next of kin * (7^3,
t. e> one who rtdttmt). The price to be paid for
its redemption was to be fixed according to the
same equitable rule as the price at which it had
been purchased (ver. 16).
(c. ) Houses in walled cities c were not subject to
the law of Jubilee, but a man who sold his house
could redeem it ait any time within a full year of
the time of its sale. After that year, it became the
absolute property of the purchaser.
(<£) Houses and buildings in villages, or In the
country, being regarded as essentially connected
with the cultivation of the land, were not excepted,
but returned in the Jubilee with the land on which
they stood.
(e.) The Leviticsl cities were not, in respect to
this law, reckoned with walled towns. If a Levite
sold the use of hia house, it reverted to him in the
Jubilee, and he might redeem it at any previous
time. The lands in the suburbs of the Levites'
cities could not be parted with under any condition,
and were not therefore affected by the law of Jubilee
(ver. 34).
(/.) If a man had sanctified a field of his patri-
mony unto the Lord, it could be redeemed at any
time before the next year of Jubilee, on his paying
one fifth in addition to the worth of the crops,
rated at a stated valuation (Lev. xxvii. 19). If not
so redeemed, it became, at the Jubilee, devoted for
ever. If the man had previously sold the usufruct
of the field to another, he lost all right to redeem
it (w. 90, 91).
(g.) If he who had purchased the usufruct of a
field sanctified it, he could redeem it till the next
Jubilee, that is, as long as his claim lasted; but it
then, as justice required, returned to the original
proprietor (ver. 22-24).
3. All Israelites who had become bondmen, either
to their countrymen, or to resident foreigners, were
set free in the Jubilee (Lev. xxv. 40, 41), when it
happened to occur before their seventh year of servi-
tude, hi which they became free by the operation
of another law (Ex. xxi. 2). Those who were bound
to resident foreigners might redeem themselves, if
they obtained the means, at any time; or they
might be redeemed by a relation. Even the bond-
man who bad submitted to the ceremony of having
his ears bored (Ex. xxi. 6) had his freedom at the
Jubilee.''
Such was the law of the year of Jubilee, as it is
given in the Pentateuch. It was, of course, like
the law of the sabbatical year, and that of those
rites of the great festivals which pertain to agricul-
o This must be the meaning of the price being cal-
culated on « the yean of fruits," nV*Orp2#
(Lev. xxv. 16, 16), the yean of tillage, exolnsrre* of the
rears of rest.
> Kraoold observes (p. 64) that then Is no record
of the gott ever exercising hii right till after the death
•f kirn who had sold the Held. But the inference
that the goei could not previously exercise his power
mini to bs hardly warranted, and la opposed to what
<* perhaps the simplest interpretation of Both tv. 8, 4.
ies note », | V.
• A Jewish tradition, preserved by MshnonMss and
JUBILEE, THE TEAR OF
ture, delivered proleptically. The same formula k
used — •• When ye be oome into the land which
I give unto you " — both in Lev. xxv. 2, and Lev
xxiii. 10.
III. Josephus (Ant. IH. 19, f 3) states that aL
debts were remitted in the year of Jubilee, while
the Scripture speaks of the remission of debts only
in connection with the sabbatical year (Dent. xt.
1, 2). [Sabbatical Teak.] He also describes
the terms on which the bolder of a piece of land
resigned it in the Jubilee to the original proprietor.
The former (be says) produced a statement of the
value of the crops, and of the money which he had
laid out in tillage. If the expenses proved to be
more than the worth of the produce, the balance
was paid by the proprietor before the field was re-
stored. But if the balance was on the other aide,
the proprietor simply took back the field, and. al-
lowed him who had held it to retain the profit.
Philo (De Stptenario, cc 18, 14, vol. v. p. 37,
edit. Tauch.) gives an account of the Jubilee agree-
ing with that in Leviticus, and says nothing of the
remission of debts.*
IV. There are several very difficult question*
connected with the Jubilee, of which we now pro-
ceed to give a brief view: —
1. Origin of the word JubiUe. — The doubt on
this point appears to be a very old one. The He-
brew word is treated by the LXX. in different
modes. They have retained it untranslated in Josh,
vi. 8, 13 (where we find xtparinu rti 'IoJS^X, and
o-dA*rry{ rov 'Iu/J^A). In Lev. xxv. they generally
render it by a^ccrir, or seWo'catr irn/AdVta; but
where the context suits it, by «>atn) o-dAsryyos.
In Ex. xix. 13 they have tu awral (to) al e-cUwrv-
7». The Vulgate retains the original word in
Lev. xxv., as well as in Josh. vi. ('• buccinae quarum
usus est in Jubilaw "), and [renders it] by bucdna
in Ex. xix. 13. It seems, therefore, beyond doubt
that uncertainty respecting the word must have
been felt when the most ancient versions of the
0. T. were made.
Nearly all of the many conjectures which have
been hazarded on the subject are directed to explain
the word exclusively in its bearing on the year of
Jubilee. This course has been taken by Josephus
— IXfvBtptoy Si trtifialrti Totira/ia; and by St.
Jerome — Jobtl ett demittent mil mi/lrm. Many
modern writers have exercised their ingenuity in
the same track. Now in all such attempts at ex-
planation there must be an anachronism, as the
word is used in Ex. xix. 13, before the Institution
of the Law, where it can have nothing to do with
the year of Jubilee, or its observances. The ex-
pression there used is 73"l*n TJtP??3 ; similar
to that in Josh. vi. 6, bgVPI \lltfjb "i|k'Ba.
The question seems to be, can J^V here mean
other*, slates that no dttae were thus reckoned, s*
regards the Jubilee, but such as were walled In the
time of Joshua. According to this, Jerusalem was
excluded.
d MalmonMea says that the Interval b etween the
Feast of Trumpets and ths Day of Atonement, In the
year of Jubilee, was a time of riotous rejoicing to al]
servants. If there Is any truth In the tradition that
he records (which Is In itself probable enough), the
eight days must have been a sort ot Saturnalia.
e The Mlshna contains nothing on the Jubilee bar
unimportant scattered notices, though It has a ess)
sHarable treatise on the sabbatical year (f fcsnU).
Digitized by
Google
JUBILEE, THE TEAR OF
t*> pesuliar sound, or the instrument Sue prodaeing
lie sound? Ewald favors the latter notion, and
•o don Ueeenius ( The*, sub 7[P ^), following the
aid versions (with which our own agrees), though
under 73^ he erplains /DV as clangor. De
Wette Inclines the same way, rendering the words
in Ex. xix. 13 — "beim Bbuen des Jobelhorns."
Luther translates the same words — <• aenn es wird
aber lange tiinen" (though he is not oonsistent
with himself in rendering Josh. vi. 5); — BShr ren-
ders them, " cum trahetur sonus," and most recent
critics agree with him. It would follow from this
view that what is meant in Joshua, when the
trumpet is expressly mentioned, Is, "When the
sound called Jubilee (whatever that may be) is
prolonged on the bom." «
As regards the derivation of the word, it is now
very generally ascribed to the root v3*, " undavit,
eopioae et cum quodam impetu fluxit" Hence
Kranold explains /3^\ " id quod magno strepitu
Quit"; and he adds, " duplex igitur in ea radios vis
distinguitor, fluendi et sonandi altera in v'Qip
(dUuvium), Gen. vL 17, altera in b^V (artis
musicaj inventor), Gen. lv. SI, oonspicua." Hie
meaning of Jubilee would thus seem to be, a ru»A-
mo, penetrating $otmL b But in the uncertainty,
which, it must be allowed, exists, our translators
have taken a safer course by retaining the original
word in Lev. xxv. and xxvii., than that which was
taken by Luther, who has rendered it by Haiy'uhr.
9. Wat the Jubilee every 49tn or 60th year t —
If the plain words of Lev. xxv. 10 are to be fol-
lowed, this question need not be asked. The state-
ment that the Jubilee was the 60th year, after the
succession of seven weeks of years, and that it was
distinguished from, not identical with, the seventh
sabbatical year, is as evident as language can make
it. But the difficulty of justifying the wisdom of
• The grounds on which the opposite view nsts an
Mated elMwhsn. [Sea Contra )
o Oarpaov (App. p. 449) appears to have been the
fast who put forth this view of the origin and mean-
ing of the word. The figure of the pouring along of
the "rich stream of music" Is ajmnimy enough in
most languages to recommend It as probable. But
Qessnlns prefers to make a sacond root, v2 N , jutilare,
which he ascribes to onomatopoea, like the Latin
jubitart, and the Greek aAoAufur.
The BumUuI notion that V J V signifies a ram has
some Interest, from Its being held by the Jews so
generally and by the Chaldee Paraphrast ; and from
tts hiring influenced our translators In Josh. ri. to
eall the boms on which the Jubilee was sounded,
trumpttt of rami' kerne. It appears to come from the
strange nonsense which some of the Rabbis in early
times began to talk rtepeettng the ram which was
sacrificed in the place of Isaac. They said (B. Bechal
In Kx. six. ap. Kranold) that after the ram was burnt,
God miraculously restored the body. His muscles
were deposited In the golden alter ; from wis viscera
were made the strings of David's harp ; his akin be-
came the mantle of Elijah; his left horn was the
trumpet of Slnal ; and his right horn was to sound
when Messiah comes (Is. xxvil. 13). B AHba, to eon-
eect this with the Jubilee, affirms that bjV is the
limbic for a ram, though the best Arabic scholars aay
bare la no rash word In the language.
JUBILEE, THE TEAR OF 1486
allowing the land to have two yean of rest In sue-
cession has been felt by some, and deemed sufficient
to prove that the Jubilee could only have been the
49th year, that is, one with the seventh Sabbatical
year. But in such a case, a mere a priori argu-
ment cannot justly be deemed sufficient to over-
throw a clear unequivocal statement, involving no
inconsistency, or physical impossibility .'
Hug baa suggested that the sabbatical year
might have begun in Nisan and the Jubilee Year
in Tier! (Winer, tub voce). In this way the labors
of the husbandmen would only have been inter-
mitted for a year and a half. But it is surely a
very harsh supposition to imagine that Moaee would
have spoken of the institution of the two years, and
of the relation in which they stand to each other,
without noticing such a distinction, had it existed.
It is most probable that the sabbatical year and
the year of Jubilee both began in Tisri, as is stated
in the Hiahna {Seek Baihana, p. 800, edit. Sum.).
[Sabbatical Year.]
The simplest view, and the only one which ac-
cords with the sacred text, is, that the year which
followed the seventh sabbatical year was the Jubilee,
which was intercalated between two aeries of sab-
batical years, so that the next year was the first of
a new half century, and the seventh year after that
was the first sabbatical year of the other series.
Thus the Jubilee was strictly a Pentecost year,
holding the same relation to the preceding seven
sabbatical years, as the day of Pentecost did to
the seven Sabbath days. Substantially the same
formula, in reference to this point, is used in each
case" (cf. Lev. xxui. 15, 16, xxv. 8-10).
3. Were Debt* remitted in the JtMUtt — XoL a
word is said of this in the O. T., or in Philo. The
affirmative rests entirely on the authority of Joee-
phus. Haimooides says expressly that the remis-
sion of debts ' was a point of distinction between
the sabbatical year and the Jubilee. The Hiahna
is to the same effort (Shebiith, cap. x. p. 194, edit.
Suren.)./ It seems that Joeephus must either have
The other notions respeotiiif the wosd may be found
in Fuller (Misc. Sac. p. 1026 f. ; Critui Sum, vol.
lx.), in Cerpsov (p. 448 t.\ and, most completely given,
in Kranold (p. 11 f.).
c The only distinguished Jewish teacher who advo-
cated the claims of the 49th year was B. Jehuda. Be
was followed by the Gaonlm, certain doctors who took
up the exposition of the Talmud after the work was
completed, from the seventh to the eleventh oentury
(Winer, tub now). The principal Christian writers on
the same side are, Seeliger, Petevius, Uasher, Cunasue,
and Sehroeder.
a- Swald (Alurtklkntr, p. 419) and others, hare es-
forred the words of Is. xxxvil. 80 to the Jubilee year
succeeding the sabbath year. But Geeenlus adopts
another view of the passage, which accords better with
the context. He regards it as merely referring to the
continuance of the desolation osoasioned by the was
for two years.
The language of Joeephus and of Philo, and of every
eminent Jewish and Christian writer, exoept those that
hare been mentioned, are in favor of the fiftieth year.
Ideler has taken up the matter very satisfactorily
(Hunts, der Om 1. p. 606).
• Whether this was an absolute remission of debts,
or merely a jutitium for the year, will be considered
under Subaxuul YsxS-
/ • Ginaburg, In his art. on the year of Jubilee ha
Kltto's Ouct. of BiU. Lit., 3d ed., smys that this ref-
erence to the Kb'ina la erroneous, the passage la
I question not speaking of lbs JnhUM at all. A.
Digitized by
Google
1486 JUBILEE, THE YEAB OF
■holly made a mistake, or that be ha* drawn too
(ride an inference from the general character of the
rear. Of course to thcee who ware in bondage for
their debts, the freedom conferred by the Jubilee
muit have amounted to a remission; aa did, not
leas, their freedom at the end of their seran yean
of servitude.
The first Jubilee year must hare fallen ia due
course after the first seran sabbatical years. For
the commencement of the series on which the
succession of sabbatical years was reckoned, see
Chbonolooy, vol L p. 437, and Sabbatical
Ykah.
V. Maimonides, and the Jewish writers in gen-
eral, consider that the Jubilee was obserred till the
destruction of the first Templet But there is no
direct historical notice of its observance on any one
occasion, either in the books of the 0. T., or in any
other records. The only passages in the Prophets
which can be regarded with much confidence, as
referring to the Jubilee in any way, are Is. ». 7, 8,
8, 10; Is. hi. 1, 2; Ki. vii. 18, 18; Es. rivi. 16,
17,18. Regarding Is. xxxril. 30, see noted, p. 1486.
Some bare doubted whether the law of Jubilee ever
came into actual operation (Michaefts, Lata of
Mates, art. buvi., and Winer, tub voce), others
hare confidently denied it (Kranoid, p. 80; Hup-
feld, pt Hi. p. 90). But Ewald contends that the
institution is eminently practical in the character
of its details, and that the accidental circumstance
of no particular instance of its observance baring
been recorded in the Jewish history proves nothing.
Besides the passages to which reference has been
made, be applies several others to the Jubilee. He
conceives that " the year of visitation " mentioned
in Jer. xi. 23, zziii. 12, ilviii. 44, denotes the pun-
ishment of those who, in the Jubilee, withheld by
tyranny or fraud the po ss essions or the Hberty of
the poor." From Jer. xzzii. 6-12 he infers that
the Law was restored to operation in the reign of
JosiahO (AUerthOmtr, p. 424, note 1).
VI. The Jubilee is to be regarded as the outer
circle of that great sabbatical system which com-
prises within it the sabbatical year, the sabbatical
month, and the Sabbath day. [Fkabts.] The rest
and restoration of each member of the state, in his
spiritual relation, belongs to the weekly Sabbath
and the sabbatical month, while the land had its
rest and relief in the sabbatical year. But the
o The words of Isaiah (v. 7-10) may, It would Ban
with mors distinctness, be understood to the asms
effect, ss denouncing woe against tboss who had un-
righteously hindered the Jubilee ftvm effecting Its
object
» Is then not a difficulty m considering this pas-
sage to have any bearing on the Jubilee, from Its
relating, apparently, to a priest's Held ? (See f n.
t («)-) At all events, the transaction was merely the
transfer of land from one member of a family to
mother, with a recognition of a preference allowed
o a near relation to purchase. The case mentioned
_toth Iv. 8 f. appears to go further in Illustrating the
Jubilee principle. — Naomi Is about to sell a field of
KHmelech's property. Boaa proposes to the next of
kin to purchase It of her, In order to prevent It from
eolng out of the family, and, on his refusal, takes It
tllinseh*, aa having the nest right.
c The foundation of the law of JuMlee appears to
be so essentially connected with the children of Israel,
that It seems strange that Mlchaelia should have con-
Idently stunned Its Hgyptlan origin, while yet he
•cknoe ledges that be can produce no spectne evidence
JUBILEE, THE TEAR OF
Jubilee is more immediately connected with the
body politic; and it was only as a member of the
state that each person concerned could particulate
in its provisions. It has less of a formally religious
aspect than either of the other sabbatical institu-
tions, and Us details were of a more immediately
practical character. It was not distinguished by
any prescribed religious observance peculiar to itself,
like the rites of the Sabbath day and of the sab-
batical month; nor even by anything like the read-
ing of the Law in the sabbatical year. But in the
Hebrew state, polity and religion were never sep-
arated, nor was their essential connection ever
dropped out of sight. Hence the year was hal-
lowed, in the strict sense of the word, by the solemn
blast of the Jubilee trumpets, on the same day on
which the sins of the people bed been acknowledged
in the general fast, and in which they had been
symbolically expiated by the entrance of the high-
priest into the holy of holies with the blood of the
appointed victims. Hence also the deeper ground
of the provisions of the institution is stated with
marked emphasis ia the Law itself. — The land was
to be restored to the families to which it had been
at first allotted by divine direction (Josh. xiv. 2),
because it was the Lord's. " The land shall not
be sold for ever: for the land is mine; for ye are
strangers and sojourners with me " (Lev. xxv. 23).
" I am the Lord your God which brought you forth
out of the land of Egypt, to give you the land of
Canaan, and to be your God " (ver. 38). — The
Hebrew bondman was to have the privilege of
claiming his liberty as a right, because be could
never become the property of any one but Jehovah,
" For they are my servants which I brought forth
out of the land of Egypt; they shall not be sold ssj
bondmen " (ver. 42). " For unto me the children
of Israel are servants, whom I brought forth out of
the land of Egypt" • (ver. 55).
If regarded from an ordinary point of view, the
Jubilee was calculated to meet and remedy those
incidents which are inevitable in the course of
human society; to prevent the accumulation of
inordinate wealth in the hands of a few ; and to
relieve those whom misfortune or fault had reduced
to poverty. As far as legislation could go, its pro-
visions tended to restore thai equality in outward
circumstances which was instituted in the first
settlement of the land by Joshua^ But if we look
on the subject {Mot. Late, art. 78). The only well-
proved instance of anything like It In other nations
appears to be that of the Dalmatiana, mentioned by
Strata), lib. vU. (p. 816, edit. Oeaeub.). Be says that
thay redistributed their land every eight yean. Ewald
following the statement of Plutarch, refers to the
institution of Lyeurgus ; but Mr. Orote has gives
another view of the matter (Hit. of Qruct, voL U.
p. 580).
i A collateral result of the working of the Jubilee
must have been the preservation of the genealogical
tables, and the maintenance of the distinction of the
tribes. Bwald and Mtehaeus suppose that the tables
were systematically corrected and filled up at eaen
Jubilee.* This seems reasonable enough. In order that
the fresh names might be ailed In, that irregularities
arising from the dying out of fkmlUas might be recti,
fled, and that disputed claims might be, aa far aa po»
slble, authoritatively met.
Its effect In maintaining the distinction of the tribal
k Illustrated In the appeal made by the tribe of Man
aassh In regard to the daughters of Zelophehad (Nun
xxxri. 4). The sense of the passage Is, 1
Digitized by
Google
JXTOAL
soon It in it* more special character, at a part of
the divine law appointed for the chosen people, ita
practical bearing waa to vindicate the right of each
Iaraelite to his part in the covenant which Jehovah
had made with bia father* respecting the land of
promise. The loud note* of the Jubilee horn*
symbolized the voioe of the Lord proclaiming the
reatoration of political older, a* (according to Jew-
ish tradition) the blast in the Feast of Trumpet*
had, ten days before, commemorated the creation
of the world and the eompl eU on of the material
JUDJSA
1487
In the incurable uncertainty respectin g the fact
ef the observance of the Jubilee, It is important
that we should keep in mind that the record of the
Law, whether it was obeyed or not, was, and is, a
constant witness far the truth of those great social
principles on which the theocracy was established."
Moreover, from the allusions which are made to it
by the prophet*, it must have become a standing
prophecy in the hearts of the devout Hebrews.
They who waited in faith for the salvation of Israel
were kept in mind of that spiritual Jubilee which
waa to come (Luke iv. 19), in which every one of
the spiritual seed of Abraham was to have, in the
eight of God, an equality which no accident could
ever disturb; and a glorious freedom, in that lib-
arty with which He that waa to come waa to make
him free, and which no force or fraud oould ever
take from him.
There are several monograph* on the Jubilee, of
which Kranold baa given a catalogue. There ia a
treatise by Maimonides, dt Anno Sabbatiao et Jo-
Woo. Of more recent works, the most important
an that of J. O. C. Kranold himself, QmmentaHo
a* anno Hebrmorum Jubilao, Gottingen, 1887, 4to,
end that of Carpaov, first published in 1730, but
afterwards incorporated in the Apparatus Hutorioo-
Criacut, p. 447 ff.; Ewsld (Alter Aimer, p. 415,
ft) and Bahr (Sumbolik, vol. U. p. 672 ff.), but
especially the latter, have treated the subject in a
very instructive manner. Hupfeld (Commenlatio
dt Bebrmorum Fettit, pt ill. 1868) ha* lately dealt
with it in a willful and reckless style of criticism.
Of other writers, those who appear to have done
most to illustrate the Jubilee, are Cunasus (dt Hep.
Heir. c. ii. § iv., in the Critici Sacri, vol. ix. p.
878 ff ), and Michaelia ( Commentaries on the Law*
»f Motet, vol 1. p. 376 ff, English translation).
Vitringa notices the prophetical bearing of the
Jubilee in lib. iv. c. 4 of the Obtervatimet Sacra.
Lightfoot (Harm. Kvang. m Luc. iv. 19) pursues
the subject in a fanciful manner, and makes out
that Christ suffered in a Jubilee year. For this he
is well rebuked by Carpaov (App. Hut. Crit. p.
488). Schubert (SymboHk det Traumt) baa fal-
lowed in nearly the same track, and has been
answered by Bahr. 8. C.
JU'CAL (b^P [prob- Jehovah it mighty,
Dietr.]: 'WxaA> Juchal), son of Sbelemish
(Jer. xxxviil. 1). Elsewhere called Jkhucaju
JU'DA Clettu, i. 4. Judas; 'lofts being
mly the genitive ease).
•rand in most versions. It Is, " And even when to*
Jubilee comes, their Inheritance will be In another
tribe." The rendering the parade DK by ttiamui
■ seutfiutorU j vindicated by Kranold, p! 88.
As regards the reason of the exception of houses
■ towns from the law of Jubilee, Bahr has observed
east as they war* etueny Inhabited by artaVaa and
L [Juda.] Son of Joseph in the genealogy of
Christ (Luke iii. 30), in the ninth generation from
David, about the time of King Joaah.
S. [Judo.] Son of Joanna [Joanna*] or Hana-
niah [Hamaniah, 8] (Luke iii. 96). He seem*
to be certainly the same person a* Abiud in Matt.
i, 18. His name, JTTliT, is identical with thai
of Tfi"P3& only that 3H ia prefixed; and when
Rhesa is discarded from Luke's line, and allowanei
Is made for St. Matthew's omission of generationi
in his genealogy, their times will agree perfectly
Both may be the same a* Hodaiah of 1 Cfar. iii
34. See Harvey's Gtntalogiet, p. 118 ff
3. [Judat.] One of the Lord's brethren, enu-
merated In Hark vi. 8. [Josksj Joseph.] On
the question of his identity with Jude the brothel
of James, one of the twelve Apostles (Luke vi. 16;
Acta i. 18), and with the author of the general
Epistle, see art. Jude. In Matt. xiii. 66 his nam*
is given in the A. V. as Jdtja* [and should be so
given, Mark vi. 3].
4. [Judat.] The patriarch Jddar (Sus. 66;
Luke iii. 33; Heb. vii. 14; Rev. v. 5, vii. 6) [or
in the last three passages, the name of the tribe.]
A. C. H.
• JUDA, a orrr of (A. V.), for wi\a lotto
in Luke i. 39, where Zacharias and Elisabeth lived,
and where probably John the Baptist waa born.
But whether a town so named is meant, or the ter-
ritory of Juda (= 'UuSaia) is disputed. In the
latter case the city ia spoken of merely as one " in
the hill country (opeirr/r, Luke) " of Judaea, the
name of which may have been unknown to Luke.
Some suppose that the nameless city may have been
Hebron, as that waa both among the hills and be-
longed to the priest* (Josh. xxvi. 11). So Lightfoot
(Bur. Htbr. ii. 493, Rotterd. 1686), Sepp (Lebcm
Chriiti, ii. 8), and Andrews (Life of our Lord, p.
66). The Franciscans have a Convent of St. John
at 'Ain Kdrim, a little west of Jerusalem, when
they place the house of Zacharias and the nativity
of the Forerunner (Thomson's Land and Book, il.
636 ff ). Others regard this Juda a* toe name of
the town itself, and identical with the modern
Jitla, found in the neighborhood of Hebron. Dr.
Robinson, after Reland (Palasana, p. 870), adopt*
thin view (BibL Ret. ii. 906, and Greek Harmu,
Notes, { 4). That this Jttta and Juttah in Josh,
xxi. 18, are the same, no one can doubt; but it
does not follow from this that Jttln and Juda an
the same. Meyer (on Luke i. 39) calls it an arbi-
trary supposition. Bteek also objects (Synopt. Er-
ktarung, i. 63) that if Luke had been acquainted with
the name, be would naturally have introduced it in
ver. S3. If Juda answers to Juttah ( = l"«tta).
it can be only a* a very mutilated form; for oth-
erwise Juda and Juttah (nB^) have no ety-
mologise! relation to each other. H.
JUDJB'A or JTJDE'A ('Uveais), a territo-
rial division which succeeded to the overthrow of
the anient landmarks of the tribes of Israel and
tradesmen, whose wealth did not consist In lands, it
ww reasonable that they should retain them In abso-
lute posses s ion. It hss been conjectured that many
of these tradesmen were foreign proselytes, who eould
not hold property In the land which was subject Is
the law of Jubilee,
a Thk view to powerfully set forth by Ban?.
Digitized by
Google
1488 JUDJEA
Judah in their respective esptivities. The word
fnt ocean Dm. v. 13 (A. V. " Jewry"), and the
arrt mention of the " province of Judasa " i» in
the book of Etta (r. 8); it is alluded to in Neb. xi.
8 (Hebr. and A V. "Judah"), and was the remit
of the division of the Persian empire mentioned
by Herodotus (ill. 89-87), under Darius (oomp.
Esth. viu. 9; Dan. ri. 1). In the Apocryphal
Books the word "prorinoe" is dropped, and
throughout the books of Eedras, Tobit, Judith,
and Maccabees, the expressions are the " land of
Judasa," "Judasa" (A V. frequently "Jewry"),
and throughout the N. T. In the words of Jo-
sephus, " lie Jews made preparations for the work
(of rebuilding the walla under Nehemiah) — a
name which they received forthwith on their re-
turn from Babylon, from the tribe of Judah, which
being the first to arrive in those parts, gave name
both to the inhabitants and the territory" (Ant.
**• 5, $ 7). But other tribes also returned from
Babylon, such as the tribes of Benjamin and Levi
(Ear. i. fi, and x. 6-9; Neh. xi. 4-36), scattered
remnants of the " children of Ephraim and Man-
asseh " (1 Chr. ix. 3), or " Israel," as they are
elsewhere called (Ear. ii. 70, iil. 1, and x. fi; Neh.
vii. 73), and others whose pedigree was not ascer-
tainable (Ear. ii 69). In fact so many returned
that in the case of the sin-offering the number of
he-goats offered was twelve, according to the origi-
nal number of the tribes (ibid. vi. 17, an also viii.
86). There had indeed been more or less of an
amalgamation from the days of Hesekiah (8 Chr.
xxx--xxxi.), which continued ever afterwards, down
to the very days of our Lord. Anna, wife of
Phanuel, for instance, was of the tribe of Asber
(St Luke ii 36), St Paul of the tribe of Benja-
min (Rom. xi. 1), St Barnabas, a Levite, and so
forth (Acts It. 86; eomp. Acts xxvi 7; and Pri-
deaux, Connection, vol. i. p. 138-130, ed. HcCaul).
On the other hand the aohismattaal temple upon
Mount Geririm drew many of the disaffected Jews
from their own proper country (Joseph. Ant, xi. 8);
Nazareth, a city of Galilee, was the residence of
our Lord's own parents; Bethaalda, that of three
of his Apostles; the borders of the sea of Galilee
generally, that of most of them. The scene of
his preaching — intended as it was, during his
earthly ministry, for the lost sheep of the house
of Israel — was, with the exception of the last part
of it, confined to Galilee. His disciples an ad-
dressed by the two angels subsequently to his
Ascension, as "men of Galilee " (Acts i 11), and
it was asked by the multitude that came together
in wonder on the day of Pentecost, " Are not all
these who speak, Galileans? " (Acts ii. 7). Thus,
neither did all who were Jews inhabit that limited
territory called Judasa; nor again was Judasa in-
habited solely by that tribe which gave name to it,
or even in sole conjunction with Benjamin and
Levi.
Once more as regards the territory. In a wide
and more improper arose, the term Judasa was
sometimes extended to the whole country of the
Canaanitea, its anoient inhabitants (Joseph. Ant. 1.
5 3); and even in the Gospels we seem to read
f the coasts of Judasa beyond Jordan (St Matt
six. 1; St Mark x. 1), a phrase perhaps counte-
oaneed by Josephus no leu (Ant xii. 4, § 11; eomp.
Josh. xlx. 84), if the usual rendering of these pas-
sages is to be followed (see Reland, Palatum, i
(V "Ha sUrreth up the people, teaching through-
Ten all Jewry Graf t\n riji 'IouSoiai ) ttgtmmg
JTJTXKA, WILDERNESS OF
from GaUkt, unto this place," said the chief
priests of our Lord (St Luke xxiii. 6). With
Ptolemy, moreover (see Reland, ibid.), and with
Dion Caserns (xxxrili. 16), Judssa is synonymous
with Palestine-Syria; the latter adding that tha
term Palestine had given place to it With Strabc
(xri p. 760 ff.) it is the common denomination for
the whole inland country between Gasa and Anti-
Libanus, thus including Galilee and Samaria.
Similarly, the Jews, according to Tacitus (But. v
6), occupied the country between Arabia on the E.
Egypt on the 8., Phosnida and the sea on the W.
and Syria on the N.; and by the same writer beta
Pompey and Titus are said to have conquered
Judasa, the other and less important divisions of
course included.
Still, notwithstanding all these large significa-
tions which have been affixed to it, Judasa was, in
strict language, the name of the third district, west
of the Jordan, and south of Samaria. Its north-
em boundary, according to Josephus (B. J. iii. 8,
$ 6) waa a village called Anuath, its southern
another village named Jardaa. Its general breadth
was from the Jordan to Joppa, though its coast
did not end there, and it was latterly subdivided
Into eleven lots or portions, with Jerusalem for
their centre (Joseph, total). In a word it embodied
" the original territories of the tribes of Judah and
Benjamin, together with Dan and Simeon ; being
almost the same with the old kingdom of Judah,
and about 100 miles in length and 60 in breadth"
(Lewis, /Tei. Rgmbl. I. 3).
It was made a portion of the Roman province
of Syria upon the deposition of Arohelaus, the etb-
narch of Judasa in A. D. 6, and was governed by a
procurator, who was subject to the governor of
Syria. The procurator resided at Ca s sare a on tha
coast, and not at Jerusalem (Joseph. Ant. rrii 18,
§6; xriii. 1, f 1;9,§ 1; 8, { 1). Its history aa a
Roman province is related under Jerusalem (p.
1301 ff.), and the physical features of the country an
described in the article Palebtinb. E. S. Ft
* JUDJB'A, The Laud or (A, 'lovSaia x*V>a,
Mark i 6; or ij 'lavSala yij, John iii. 29), the
country of Judasa aa distinguished from the capital
or Jerusalem. H.
* JtTDjJS'A, The Wildebsxbb or (A, tn/im
Tift 'lo violas • dettrtum Jndaa), designates the re-
gion in which John the Baptist made his first appear-
ance aa the herald of the Messiah (Matt iii 1).
It is the same, no doubt, as the " wilderness of
Judah" (rrplT 15"ip) in Judg. i 18. It
lay along the eastern border of Judasa towards
the Dead Sea, in which were the " six cities with
their villages " mentioned in Josh. XT. 61 t U
waa the scene of many of David's perils and escapes
during the days of his persecution by Saul [Aduu-
LAM; En-oedi; Tekoa]. It was a desert, of
course, not in our own, but the oriental sense; ». e,
fit for cultivation at intervals, thinly inhabited, and
resorted to mainly as pasture-ground. As such
terms must be more or lees fluctuating, it may have
Included also the western shore of the Jordan north
of the Dead Sea, which Josephus also designates
as tomios (B. J. 01. 10, < 7, and iv. 8, §j 2, 8).
(See Bleak's Bynopt. ErU&nmg dm- drw crates
Etangtlitn, i 141.)
Msrk (1. *> and Luke (iii 9) refer to the earns
desert simply ss tpn/un. Luke's f) wvptvayc i
rev 'IopoaVov (iii. 3) includes the wider drank
of John's labors at a later period, aa in tha eooaa
Digitized by
Google
JXjDAH
»f hit ministry ha preached now on thii tide of
Ihe Jordan and now on that It ia unnecessary, aa
cell aa incorrect, to auppose that any part of thia
Judcan desert lay on the eaat of the river. It
xrt-unly ia not juat to regard fi tp^un tt}» lov-
talas (Matt. iii. 1), aa equivalent to A wtplx»pos
rov 'lopSdrov (Matt. iii. 5); for the latter (the
Ghor, or Jordan Valley) denotes the general region
bom which, and not that to which, the people came
for baptism. (See also BibL Sacra, xxtil. B30.)
Hence, if the desert of the Saviour's temptation
(Matt. iv. 1 ff.) was in Pern (Stanley, Ellicott),
it was a different one from that in Judea. To
urge no other reason, the proximity of Matt iii. 1
to iv. 1 is adverse to that opinion. Probably the
Saviour went to be tempted to a remoter part of
the desert previously mentioned ; but on returning to
John after the lapse of forty days, he found him at
Bethahars, or Bethany, beyond the Jordan (John
I. 38). The actual place of the temptation may
have been K&runtil (a corruption of guadraginla,
40 days), a part of the desert back of Jericho to-
wards Jerusalem. It is a high mountain cut off
from the plain by a wall of rook 1,900 or 1,500 feet
high, ia frightfully desolate, is infested with wild
beasts and reptiles, and thus answers fully to Mark's
significant intimation (i. 13) respecting the wildness
of the scene (prra t£j> Bripimr). H.
JUTDAH (iTJVT\ i. e. Yehuda [praue,
Aonor]: 'loiSar in Gen. zxix. 85; Alex, lovta;
elsewhere 'lottos in both MSS. and in N. T.; and
so also Josephus : Jvda), the fourth son of Jacob
and the fourth of Leah, the last before the tempo-
rary cessation in the births of her children. His
whole brothers were Reuben, Simeon, and Levi,
elder than himself — issachar and Zebulun younger
(see xxxv. 33). The name ia explained aa having
originated in Leah's exclamation of " praise " at
thia fresh gift of Jehovah — " She said, > now will
I praise (ni'lM, 6deh) Jehovah,' and she called
his name Yehudah " (Gen. xxix. 36). The same
play is preserved in the blessing of Jacob — "Ju-
dah, thou whom thy brethren shall praise! " (xlix.
8). The name ia not of frequent occurrence in
the O. T. In the Apocrypha, however, it appears
in the great hero Judas Maocabaaua; in the N. T.
in Jude, Judas Iscariot, and others. [Juda;
Judas.]
Of the individual Judah more traits are pre-
served than of any other of the patriarchs with
the exception of Joseph. In the matter of the sale
of Joseph, he and Reuben stand out in favorable
contrast to the rest of the brothers. But for their
interference he, who was " their brother and their
flesh," would have been certainly put to death.
Though not the firstborn, he " prevailed above his
brethren " (1 Chr. v. 3), and we find him subse-
quently taking a decided lead in all the affaire of the
family. When a second visit to Egypt for corn
had become inevitable, it was Judah who, as the
mouthpiece of the rest, beaded the remonstrance
against the detention of Benjamin by Jacob, and
finally undertook to be responsible for the safety of
*e bid (xliii. 8-10). And when, through Joseph's
urtifice, the brothers were bmight back to the
palace, he ia again the leader and spokesman of
the band. In that thoroughly Oriental scene it is
Judah «ho unhesitatingly acknowledges the guilt
which had never been committed, throws himself
on the mercy of the supposed Egyptian prince, ot-
34
JUDAH
1489
fere himself aa a slave, and makes that wcnderrol
appeal to the feelings of their disguised brother
which renders it impossible for Joseph any longer
to conceal his secret (xliv. 14, 10-34). So too it is
Judah who is sent before Jacob to smooth the way
for him in the land of Goshen (xlvi. 88). This
ascendency over hit brethren is reflected in the last
words addressed to him by his father — " Thou
whom thy brethren shall praise I thy father's sons
shall bow down before thee! unto him shall be
the gathering of the people" (Gen. xlix. 8-10)."
In the interesting traditions of the Koran and
the Hidraah his figure stands out in the same
prominence. Before Joseph his wrath ia mightier
and his recognition heartier than the rest It is
be who hastens in advance to bear to Jacob the
fragrant robe of Joseph (Weil's Bibhcal Legmmk,
pp. 88-00).
His sons were five. Of these three were by his
Canaanite wife Bath-ehua; they an all insignificant,
two died early, and the third, Shelah, does not
come prominently forward, either in his person, or
his family. The other two, Pharkz and Zebah
— twins — were illegitimate sons by the widow of
Er, the eldest of the former family. As is not un-
frequently the case, the illegitimate sons surpassed
the legitimate, and from Pharex, the elder, were
descended the royal, and other illustrious families
of Judah. These sons were born to Judah while
he waa living in the same district of Palestine,
which, centuries after, waa repossessed by his de-
scendanta — amongst villages which retain their
names unaltered in the catalogues of the time of
the conquest. The three sons went with their
father into Egypt at the time of the final removal
thither (Gen. xlvi. 13; Ex. i. 3).
When we again meet with the families of Judah
they occupy a position among the tribes similar to
that which their progenitor had taken amongst the
patriarchs. The numbers of the tribe at the cen-
sus at Sinai were 74,000 (Num. 1. 36, 37), consid-
erably in advance of any of the others, the largest
of which — Dan — numbered 63,700. On the
borders of the Promised Land they were 76,500
(xxvi. 33), Dan being still the nearest The chief
of the tribe at the former census was Nahshoh,
the son of Ammlnadab (Num. i. 7, ii. 3, vii. IS, x.
14), an ancestor of David (Ruth iv. 80). Its rep-
resentative amongst the spies, and also among those
appointed to partition the land, waa the great Ca-
leb the son of Jephunneb (Num. xiii. 6; xxxir.)
During the march through the desert Judah 's place
was in the van of the host, on the eaat aide of the
Tabernacle, with his kinsmen Issachar and Zebu-
lun (ii. 3-0; x. 14). The traditional standard of
the tribe waa a lion's whelp, with the words. Rise
up, Lord, and let thine enemies be scattered ! (Targ.
Pseudojon. on Num. ii. 8).
During the conquest of the country the only in-
cidents specially affecting the tribe of Judah are
— (1) the misbehavior of Achan, who waa of the
great house of Zerah (Josh. vii. 1, 16-18); and (3;
the conquest of the mountain-district of Hel ron
by Caleb, and of the strong city Debir, in the
same locality, by his nephew and son-in-law Oth-
niel (Josh. xiv. 6-15, XT. 13-19). It is the only
instance given of a portion of the country being
expressly reserved for the person or persona who
<• The obsnm and much disputed pasaags *n vans
10 wUl b* bast srammen' under tns bead Samoa
Digitized by
Google
1490
J0DAH
conquered it In general the eonqueit Menu to
h»e been made by the whole community, and the
territory allotted afterwards, without reference to
the original conqueror! of each locality. In Uua
eaae the high character and position of Caleb, and
perhaps a claim established by him at the time of
the visit of the spies to " the land whereon his feet
had trodden " (Josh. xiv. 9; comp. Num. xiv. 3/1),
may have led to the exception.
The boundaries and contents of the territory
allotted to Judah are narrated at great length, and
with greater minuteness than the others, in Josh.
xt. 20-08. This may be due either to the fact that
the lists were reduced to their present form at a
later period, when the monarchy resided with
Judah, and when more care would naturally be be-
stowed on them than on those of any other bribe;
or to the fact that the territory was more impor-
tant and more thickly covered with towns and vil-
lages than any other part of Palestine. The greater
prominence given to the genealogies of Judah in
1 Chr. ii., iii., iv. no doubt arises from the former
reason. However this may be, we have in the
records of Joshua a very full and systematic de-
scription of the allotment to this tribe. The north
boundary — for the most part coincident with the
south boundary of Benjamin — began at the em-
bouchure of the Jordan, entered the hilb apparently
at or about the present road from Jericho, ran
westward to En-ehemesh — probably the present
Ain-Hmui, below Bethany — thence over the Mount
of Olives to En-rogel, in the valley beneath Jerusa-
lem; went along the ravine of Ilinnom, under the
precipices of the city, climbed the hill in a N. W.
direction to the Water of Nephtoah (probably
lifln), and thence by Klrjath-Jearim (probably
Kuriet tt-Knab), Beth-ehemeah (Ain-Shemt), Tim-
nath, and Ekron,to Jabneel on the sea-coast. On
the east the Dead Sea, and on the west the
Mediterranean formed the boundaries. The south-
ern line is hard to determine, since it is denoted
by places many of which have not been identified.
It left the Dead Sea at its extreme south end, and
joined the Mediterranean at the Wai/y et-Arith ;
but between these two points it passed through
Maaleh Aerabbim, the Wilderness of Zin, Hezron,
Adar, Karkaa, and Azmon ; the Wilderness of Zin
the extreme south of all (Josh. xv. 1-12). This
territory — in average length about 45 miles, and
in average breadth about 60 — was from a very
early date divided into four main regions. (1.)
The Sooth — the undulating pasture country,
which intervened between the hills, the proper
possession of the tribe, and the deserts which en-
compass the lower part of Palestine (Josh. xv. 21 ;
Stanley, & <f P.), It is this which is designated
u the wilderness (midtxir) of Judah (Judg. i. 16).
It contained thirty-seven cities, with their dependent
villages (Josh. xv. 20-32), of which eighteen of
hose farthest south were ceded to Simeon (xix.
.-9). Amongst these southern cities the most
familiar name is Beer-sheba.
(2.) The Lowland (xv. 33; A. V. "valley")
— or, to give it its own proper and constant appella-
tion, the Shekblah — the broad belt or strip
ying between the central highlands — " the moun-
tain " — and the Mediterranean Sea; the lower
portion of (hat maritime plain, which extends
through the whole of the sea-board of Palestine,
from Sidon in the north, to Khinoeolura at the
south. This tract was the garden and the granary
sf the tribe. In it, long before the conquest of the
JUDAH •
country by Israel, the Philistines had settled Hun,
selves, never to be completely dislodged (Neh. xiiL
23, 24). There, planted at equal intervale along
the level coast, were their five chief cities, each with
its circle of smaller dependents, overlooking, bom
the natural undulations of the ground, the " stand-
ing corn," " shocks," « vineyards and olives,"
which excited the ingenuity of Samson, and an
still remarked by modern travellers. '■ They an
all remarkable for the beauty and profusion of the
gardens which surround them — the scarlet bkw-
soms of the pomegranates, the enormous oranges
which gild the green foliage of their famous groves'*
(Stanley, 8. f P. 267). From the edge of the
sandy tract, which fringes the immediate shore
right up to the very wall of the hills of Judah,
stretches the immense plain of corn-fields. In then
rich harvests lies the explanation of the constant
contests between Israel and the Philistines (S. d- P.
258). From them were gathered the enormous
cargoes of wheat, which were transmitted to Phoe-
nicia by Solomon in exchange for the arts of Hiram,
and which in the time of the Herods still '■ nour-
ished " the country of Tyre and Sidon (Acts xii.
20). There were the olive-trees, the sycamore-treea,
sod the treasures of oil, the care of which waa
sufficient to task the energies of two of David's
special officers (1 Chr. xxvii. 28). The nature of
this locality would seem to be reflected in the names
of many of its towns if interpreted ss Hebrew
words: Dilbam= cucumbers; Gkderah, Ged-
bboth, Gkdkrothaih, sbeepfolds; Zoreah,
wasps; Ek-oanxim, spring of gardens, etc, etc
But we have yet to learn how far these names are
Hebrew ; and whether at best they are but mere
Hebrew accommodations of earlier originals, and
therefore not to be depended on for their significa-
tions. The number of cities in this district, with-
out counting the smaller villages connected with
them, waa forty-two. Of these, however, many
which belonged to the Philistines can only have
been allotted to the tribe, and if taken p o s sessi on
of by Judah were only held for a time.
What were the exact boundaries of the Bheftlah
we do not know. We are at present Ignorant of
the principles on which the ancient Jews drew
their boundaries between one territory and another.
One thing only is almost certain, that they were not
determined by the natural features of the ground, or
else we should not find cities enumerated as in the
lowland plain, whose modern representatives are
found deep in the mountains. [Jarmuth; Jiph-
tah, etc.] (The latest information regarding this
district is contained in Tobler's Zte Wandcnmg,
1869.)
(8.) The third region of the tribe — the Moun-
tain, the " hill-country ol Judah" — though not
the richest, was at once the largest and the moat
important of the four. Beginning a few miles br-
low Hebron, where it attains its highest level, it
stretches eastward to the Dead Sea and westward
to the Sliefelnh, and forms an elevated district or
plateau, which, though thrown into considerable
undulations, yet preserves a general level in bod
directions. It is the southern portion of that ele-
vated hilly district of Palestine which stretches
north until intersected by the plain of Esdraelon.
and on which Hebron, Jerusalem, and Shecbcm are
the chief spots. The surface of this region, which
is of limestone, is monotonous enough — round
swelling hills and hollows, of somewhat liolder pro-
portions than those immediately north of Ja
Digitized by
Google
JUDAH
ton, which, though in early times probably covered
irith forests [Hakktii], hare now, where uotculti-
rated, no growth larger than a brushwood of dwarf-
oak, arbutus, and other bushes. In many places
there is a good soft turf, discoverable even in the au-
tumn, and in spring the hills are covered with flowers.
The number of towns enumerated (Josh. xv. 48-
80) sa belonging to this district is 38; but, if we may
judge from the ruins which meet the eye on every
side, this must have been very far below the real
number. Hardly a hill which is not crowned by
some fragments of stone buildings, more or leas
considerable, — those which are still inhabited sur-
rounded by groves of olive-trees, and inclosures of
stone walls protecting the vineyards Streams
there are none, but wells and springs are frequent
— in the neighborhood of " Solomon's Fools " at
Ortnt most abundant.
(4.) The fourth district is TH» Wujdkkhkss
(Si'uUxir), which here and here only appears to be
synonymous with Arabah, and to signify the sunk-
en district immediately adjoining the Dead Sea.
It contained only six cities, which must have been
either, like Engedi, on the slopes of the cliUs over-
banging the Sea, or else on the lower level of the
shore. The " city of Salt " may have been on the
salt plains, between the sea and the cliffs which
form the southern termination to the Gkvr."
Nine of the cities of Judah were allotted to the
priests (Josh. xxl. 9-19). The Levites had no*
cities in the tribe, and the priests had none out of
it
In the partition of the territory by Joshua and
Eleazar (Josh. xix. 51), Judah hud the first allot-
ment (xv. 1). Joshua had on his first entrance
Into the country overrun the Shtfdak, destroyed
some of the principal towns and killed the kings
(x. 38-35), sad had even penetrated thence into
the mountains as far as Hebron and Debir (36-39);
but the task of really subjugating the interior was
yet to be done. After his death it was undertaken
by Judah and Simeon (Judg. i. 30). In the arti-
ficial contrivances of war they were surpassed by
the Canaanites, and in some places,' where the
ground admitted of their iron chariots being em-
ployed, the latter remained matters of the field.
But wherever force and vigor were In question,
there the Israelites succeeded, and they obtained
entire possession of the mountain district and the
great corn-growing tract of Philistia (Judg. i. 18,
19). The latter was constantly changing hands as
one or the other side got stronger (1 Sam. iv., v., vii.
14, etc.); but in the natural fortresses of the moun-
tains Judah dwelt undisturbed throughout the
troubled period of the Judges. Otiumkl was
partly a member of the tribe (Judg. iii. 9), and
« On the words K Judah on Jordan," used in de-
«:rlbtng the eastern termination of the boundary of
Japhtall (Josh. xix. 84), critics havs strained their in-
genuity to prove that Judah had some p osse s sions In
that remote locality either by allotment or inheritance.
*se the elaborate attempt of Ton Raumer (Pal. pp.
K6-410) to show that the villages of Jair are Intended.
But the difficulty — mtaimut atqiu itwtfubitia n&lu& %
lei phtrimos interprets tonSl — has defied every at-
Vmip* ; and the suggestion of Kwald ( Qucn. 11. 880,
sole) is the most feasible — that the passage is cor-
rupt, and that Cinneroth or some other w-rd origi-
aally occupied the place of « at Judah " [ to " Judah,"
a. v.].
• Ketl adopt* this view of Raumer (see SU. Cbmm.
■ tm.) the district of the 00 villages on the ew* of
JUDAH 1491
the Bethlehem of which Ibzab was a native (xtt.
8, 9) may have been Bethlehem-Judah. But even
if these two judges belonged to Judah, the tribe
itself was not molested, and with the one exception
mentioned in Judg. xx. 19, when they were called
by the divine oracle to make the attack on Gibeah
they bad nothing to do during the whole of that
period but settle themselves in their home. Not
only did they take no part against Sisera, bat they
are not even rebuked for it by Deborah.
Nor were they disturbed by the incursions of the
Philistines during the rule of Samuel and of Saul,
which were made through the territory of Dan and
of Benjamin ; or if we place the Valley of Elah at
the Wady a-Swat, only on the outskirts of the
mountains of Judah. On the last-named occasion,
however, we know that at least one town of Judah
— Bethlehem — furnished men to Saul's host. The
incidents of David's flight from Saul will be found
examined under the heads of David, Saul, Maoh,
Hachilah, etc.
The main inference deducible from these consid-
erations is the determined manner in which the
tribe keeps aloof from the rest — neither offering
its aid nor asking that of others. The same inde-
pendent mode of action characterizes the foundation
of the monarchy after the death of Saul. There
was no attempt to set up a rival power to Ish»
bosheth. The tribe had had full experience of the
man who had been driven from the court to take
shelter in the eaves, woods, and fastnesses of tbeir
wild hills, and when the opportunity offered, » the
men of Judah came and anointed David king over
the house of Judah in Hebron " (3 Sam. ii. 4, 11).
The further step by which David was invested with
the sovereignty of the whole nation was taken by
the other tribes, Judah having no special part
therein; and though willing enough, if occasion
rendered it necessary, to act with others, their eon-
duet later, when brought Into collision with Ephraim
on the matter of the restoration of David, shows
that the men of Judah bad preserved their inde-
pendent mode of action. The king was near of kin
to them ; and therefore they, and they alone, set
about bringing him back. , It had been their own
affair, to be accomplished by themselves alone, and
they had gone about it in that independent manner,
which looked like " despising " those who believed
their share in David to be a far larger one (8 Sam.
xix. 41-13).
The same independent temper will be found to
characterize the tribe throughout its existence as
a kingdom, which is considered In the following
article.
3. A Levito whose descendants, Kadmiel and
his sons, were very active in the work of rebuildins
the Jordan, he says, is counted as Judah 1 !, or In Ju-
dah — because Jair, to whom It belonged, was de-
scended on the father's side from Jndnh through
Hexron (1 Utar. 11. 6, T l), while In Josh. xlil. 80 and
Num. xxxil- 41 he Is mentioned contra ffiorrai, t. e.
against the rule (Num. xxzrl. 7), as on the mother's
side a descendant of Msnasseh See Jroua nron Joa-
I oak in the text (Amer. ed.). H.
b But Bethlehem appears to have been closely con-
nected with them (J-dg. xrlL 7, 9 ; xix. 1).
| c The word hen v ludg. 1. 19) Is Emtk, entirely a
different word from Slufelah, and rightly rendered
•» valley." It Is difficult, however, to fix upon any
u valley " in this region sufficiently Important to be
alluded to. Oan it be the Valley of Kua, where cob
tests with the Philistines took place lasts I
Digitized by
Google
1492 JTTDAII, KINGDOM OF
She Temple titer the return from Captit.ty (Est.
Hi. 9). Lord Hervey has shown ante for believing
(Genealogiei, tie., 119) that the name ia the nine
u Hodaviah and Hodevah. In 1 Eadr. t. 68,
It appean to be given as Joua.
8. ([In En-.,] 'IoeSat, [Vat. ioSou, FA. I.Jo M ;
in Nch. xii. 8,'J 'lattU, [vat. FA.' lovSa, Alex.
IotoSt ?; in xii. »6, Tat Alex. FAi omit: Jmaa,
Jtulni.] ) A Levite who was obliged by Ears to
put away his foreign wife (Ext. x. 33). Probably
the eanw person is intended in Neh. xii. 8, 86. In
1 Eadr. his name is given as Jcdas.
*• plofta; Vat. Alex, lovtaf- •/«*»».] A Ben-
jimite, son of Senuah (Neh. xi. 9). It ia worth
notice, in connection with the suggestion of Lord
Hervey mentioned above, that in the lists of 1 Chr.
tx., in many points so curiously parallel to those
of this chapter, a Benjamite, Hodaviah, son of Has-
senuab, is given (rer. 7). 6.
JUDAH, KINGDOM OF. 1. When the
disruption of Solomon's kingdom took place at
Shechem, only the tribe of Judah followed the house
of David. But almost immediately afterwards,
when Rehoboam conceived the design of establish-
ing his authority over Israel by force of arms, the
tribe of Benjamin also is recorded as obeying his
summons, and contributing its warriors to make
up hia army. Jerusalem, situate within the borders
of Benjamin (Josh, xviii. 28, 4c.), yet won from
the heathen by a prince of Judah, connected the
frontiers of the two tribes by an indissoluble polit-
ical bond. By the erection of the city of David,
Benjamin's former adherence to Israel (2 Sam. ii.
9) was canceled; though at least two Benjamite
towns, Bethel and Jericho, were included in the
northern kingdom. A part, if not all, of the ter-
ritory of Simeon (1 Sam. xxvii. 6; 1 K. xix. 3; of.
Josh. xix. 1) and of Dan (2 Chr. xi. 10; cf. Josh,
six. 41, 42) was recognized as belonging to Judah ;
and in the reigns of Abtfah and Asa, the southern
kingdom was enlarged by some additions taken out
of the territory of Ephraim (2 Chr. xiii. 19, xv. 8,
xvii. 2). After the conquest and deportation of
Israel by Assyria, the influence, and perhaps the
delegated jurisdiction of the king of Judah some-
times extended over the territory which formerly
belonged to Israel.
2. In Edom a vassal-king probably retained his
fidelity to the son of Solomon, and guarded for
Jewish enterprise the road to the maritime trade
with Ophlr. Philistia maintained for the most
Mrt a quiet independence. Syria, in the height
of her brief power, pushed her conquests along the
KHthem and eastern frontiers of Judah and threat-
ened Jerusalem ; but the interposition of the terri-
tory of Israel generally relieved Judah from any
immediate contact with that dangerous neighbor.
The southern border of Judah, resting on the un-
inhabited Desert, was not agitated by any turbulent
stream of commercial activity like that which flowed
by the rear of Israel, from Damascus to Tyre.
And though some of the Egyptian kings were
ambitious, that ancient kingdom was far less ag-
gressive as a neighbor to Judah than Assyria was
to Israel.
3. A singular gauge of the growth of the kiiig-
kun of Judah is supplied by the progressive aug-
mentation of the army under successive kings. In
David's time (2 Sam. xxiv. 9, and 1 Chr. xxi. 5)
the warriors of Judah numbered at least 500,000.
Dot Rehoboam bright into the field (1 K. xii. 21)
JXTDAH, KINGDOM OF -
only 180,000 men: Ab(jah, eighteen years an*
wards, 400,000 (2 Chr. xbi. 3): Asa (3 Chr. xh
8), his successor, 680,000, exactly equal to the suss
of the armies of his two predecessors: Jeboshapbai
(2 Chr. xvii. 14-19), the next king, numbered hk
warriors in five armies, the aggregate of which ia
1,160,000, exactly double the army of hia father,
and exactly equal to the sum of the armies of hia
three predecessors. After four inglorious reigns
the energetic Amariah could muster only 300,000
men when he set out to recover Edom. His son
Uzziah bad a standing (2 Chr. xxvi. 11) force of
307,500 fighting men. It would be out of place
here to discuss the question which haa been raised
as to the accuracy of these numbers. So far as
they are authentic it may be safely reckoned that
the population subject to each king was about four
times the number of the fighting men in hia
dominions. [Israel.]
4. Unless Judah had some other means beside
pasture and tillage, of acquiring wealth ; as by mari-
time commerce from the Bed Sea porta, or (leas
probably) from Joppa, or by keeping up the old
trade (1 K. x. 28) witb Egypt— it seems difficult
to account for that ability to accumulate wealth,
which supplied the Temple treasury with sufficient
store to invite so frequently the hand of the spoiler.
Egypt, Damascus, Samaria, Nineveh, and Babylon,
bad each in succession a share of the pillage. The)
treasury was emptied by Shisbak (1 K. xiv. 26),
again by Asa (1 K. xv. 18), by Jebossh of Judah
(2 K. xii. 18), by Jeboash of Israel (2 K. xiv. 14),
by Ahaz (2 R. xvi. 8), by Hezekiah (2 K. xviiL
15), and by Nebuchadnezzar (2 K. xxiv. 13).
5- The kingdom of Judah possessed many ad-
vantages which secured for it a longer continuance
than that of Israel. A frontier less exposed to
powerful enemies, a soil lees fertile, a population
hardier and more united, a fixed and venerated
centre of administration and religion, an hereditary
aristocracy in the sacerdotal caste, an army always .
subordinate, a succession of kings which no revolu-
tion interrupted, many of whom were wise and
good, and strove successfully to promote the moral
and spiritual as well as the material prosperity of
their people; still more than these, the devotion
of the people to the One True God, which, if not
always a pure and elevated sentiment, was yet a
contrast to such devotion ss could be inspired by
the worship of the calves or of Baal ; and lastly the
popular reverence for and obedience to the Divine
law so far as they learned it from their teachers: —
to these and other secondary causes is to be attrib-
uted the fact that Judah survived her more populous
and more powerful sister kingdom by 135 years;
and lasted from B. c. 975 to B. c. 68?.
6. Tbe chronological succession of the kings of
Judah Is given in the article Israel. A few diffi-
culties of no great importance have been discovered
in tbe atatemenU of the ages of some of tbe kings.
Tney are explained in the works cited in that article
and in Keil's Commentary on tie Boot of King*
A detailed history of each king will be found under
his name.
Judah acted upon three different lines of puucj
in succession, first, animosity against Israel: sec-
ondly, resistance, generally In alliance with Israel,
to Damascus : thirdly, deference, prrhaps vaesalaga
to the Assyrian king.
(«.) The nrst three kings of Judah seem to hav*
cherished tbe hope of reestablishing their authority
over the Ten Tribal for sixty years there was was
Digitized by
Google
JtJDAH, KINGDOM OF
ntween them and the kings of Israel. Neither the
disbanding of Renoboam's forces by the authority
of Shemaiah, nor the pillage of Jerusalem by the
Irresistible Shishak, served to put an end to the
fraternal hostility. The victory achieved by the
daring Abyah brought to Judah a temporary acces-
sion of territory. Asa appears to have enlarged
it still further; and to have given so powerful a
stimulus to the migration of religious Israelites
to Jerusalem, that Baasha was Induced to fortify
Raman with the view of checking the movement.
Asa provided for the safety of bis subjects from
invaders by building, like Rehoboam, several fenced
cities: he repelled an alarming irruption of an
Kthiopiau horde; he hired the armed intervention
of Uenhadad I., king of Damascus, against Baasha;
and he discouraged Idolatry and enforced the worship
of the true God by severe penal laws.
(6.) Hanani'a remonstrance (2 Chr. xvi. 7) pre-
pares us for the reversal by Jehoshapbat of the
policy which Asa pursued towards Israel and Da-
mascus. A close alliance sprang up with strange
rapidity between Judah and Israel. For eighty
years, till the time of Amariah, there was no open
war between them, and Damascus appears as their
chief and common enemy; though it rose after-
wards from its overthrow to become under Rezin
the ally of Pekah against Ahaz. Jehosbaphat,
active and prosperous, repelled nomad invaders from
the desert, curbed the aggressive spirit of his nearer
neighbors, and made his influence felt even among
the Philistines and Arabians. A still more lasting
benefit was conferred on his kingdom by his perse-
vering efforts for the religious instruction of the
people, and the regular administration of justice.
The reign of Jehoram, the husband of Athaliah, a
time of bloodshed, idolatry, and disaster, was cut
short by disease. Ahaziah was slain by Jehu.
Athaliah, the grand-daughter of a Tyrian king,
usurped the blood-stained throne of David, till the
followers of the ancient religion put her to death,
and crowned Jehoash the surviving scion of the
royal house. His preserver, the high-priest, ac-
quired prominent personal influence for a time; but
the king fell into idolatry, and failing to withstand
the power of Syria, was murdered by his own
officers. The vigorous Amaziah, flushed with the
recovery of Edom, provoked a war with his more
powerful contemporary Jehoash the conqueror of
the Syrians; and Jerusalem was entered and plun-
dered by the Israelites. But their energies were
sufficiently occupied in the task of completing the
subjugation of Damascus. Under Uzziah and
Jotham, Judah long enjoyed political and religious
prosperity, till the wanton Ahaz, surrounded by
united enemies, with whom he wss unable to cope,
became in an evil hour the tributary and vassal of
Tlglath-Pileser.
(e.) Already in the fatal grasp of Assyria, Judah
was yet spared for a checkered existence of almost
.mother century and a half after the termination
of the kingdom of Israel. The effect of the repulse
of Sennacherib, of the signal religious revival under
Ilezekiah and under Josiah, and of the extension
of their salutary influence over the long-severed
territory of Israel, was apparently done away by the
Ignominious reign of the impious Manaaseh, and
the lingering decay of the whole people under the
four feeble descendants of Josiah. Provoked oy
heir treachery and imbecility, their Assyrian master
trained in successive deportations al> the strength
of the kingdom The (ymsiimmatiiw of the rain
aTJDAH, KINGDOM OF 1499
came upon them in the destruction of the Temple
by the hand of Nebuzaradan, amid the waitings of
prophets, and the taunts of heathen tribes nksatrl
at length from the yoke of David.
7. The national life of the Hebrews seemed now
extinct: but there was still, ss there had been aL'
along, a spiritual life hidden within the body.
It was a time of hopeless darkness to all but
those Jews who had strong faith in God, with a
clear and steady insight into the ways of Providence
na interpreted by prophecy. The time of the divis-
ion of the kingdoms wss the golden age of proph-
esy. In each kingdom the prophetical office was
subject to peculiar modifications which were re-
quired in Judah by the circumstances of the priest-
hood, in Israel by the existence of the House of
Baal and the Altar in Bethel. If, under the shadow
of the Temple, there was a depth and a grasp else-
where unequaled, in the views of Isaiah and the
prophets of Judah, If their writings touched and
elevated the hearts of thinUng men in studious
retirement in the silent night-watches; there was
also, in the few burning words and energetic deeds
of the prophets of Israel, a power to tame a law-
less multitude and to check the high-handed ty-
ranny and idolatry of kings. The organization
and moral influence of the priesthood were matured
in the time of David ; from about that time to the
building of the second Temple the influence of the
prophets rose and became predominant Soma
historians bare suspected that after the reign of
Athaliah the priesthood gradually acquired and
retained excessive and unconstitutional power in
Judah. The recorded bets scarcely sustain the
conjecture. Had it been so, the effect of such
power would have been manifest in the exorbitant
wealth and luxury of the priests, and in the constant
and cruel enforcement of penal laws, like those of
Asa, against irreligion. But the peculiar offences
of the priesthood, as witnessed in the prophetic
writings, were of another kind. Ignorance of God's
Word, neglect of the instruction of the laity, un-
truthfulness, and partial judgments, are the offenses
specially imputed to them, just such as might be
looked for where the priesthood is an hereditary
caste and irresponsible, but neither ambitious nor
powerful. When the priest either, ss was the case
in Israel, abandoned the land, or, as in Judah,
ceased to be really a teacher, ceased from spiritual
communion with God, ceased from living sympathy
with man, and became the mere image of an in-
tercessor, a mechanical performer of ceremonial
duties little understood or heeded by himself, then
the prophet was raised up to supply some of his
deficiencies, and to exercise his functions so far as
was necessary. Whilst the priests sink into ob-
scurity and almost disappear, except from the
genealogical tables, the prophets come forward ap-
pealing everywhere to the conscience of individual?,
in Israel ss wonder-workers, calling together God's
chosen few out of an idolatrous nation, and in
Judah as teachers and sears, supporting and puri-
fying all that remained of ancient piety, explaining
each mysterious dispensation of God as it was
unfolded, and promulgating his gracious spiritual
promises in all their extent. The part which
Isaiah, Jeremiah, and other prophets took in pte-
parinc, the Jews for their Captivity, cannot Inderal
be fully appreciated without reviewing the succeed-
ing efforts of Ezakiel and Daniel. But the influ-
ence which they exercised on the national mind
was too important to be overlooked in a sketek
Digitized by
Google
1494 JTJDAH UPON JORDAN
however laief, of the history of the kingdom of
Judah. W. T. B.
• JTJDAH urox Jokdak (A V.), a border
town of Naphtali (Josh. xii. 84). See note a,
p. 1491. The Hebrew is more strictly Judah-Jor-
ilan, without a preposition. Though the tribe of
Judah was in the south and Naphtali in the
north, it is very conceivable that there may have
been a town named after one tribe in the territory of
another. Dr. Thomson's discovery gives support
to this supposition. He found a place near Bamas
and the Wadi ^Rahiek (j^pf l5«>'$.)
or Valley of Rebohoth, marked by ruins and a tomb
with a dome, revered as the tomb of a prophet
by the Arabs, and called «di YtMda (^jj <X*m
" My Lord Judah." Be is very oonfl-
'<>>*»)
dent that this is the site of the ancient Judah
with its name perpetuated. (See Land and Boot, i.
889 if.) A conterminous border of Judah and
Naphtali at any point Is of course out of the ques-
tion. H.
* JUDAISM ('lovSaZo-pJC Vulg. Jndait-
fflw), only in Gal. L 13, 14 in the N. T. ( "Jews'
religion," A. V.), and 2 Mace. ii. 31 (rendered "Ju-
daism ") and xiv. 38 twice (" Judaism " and " re-
ligion of the Jews"). It denotes the system of
Jewish faith and worship in its perverted form as
one of blind attachment to rites and traditions, and
of bigotry, self-righteousness, and national exclu-
siveness. To what extent the religion of the Jews
partook of this character in the time of our Lord,
appears not only from his constant exposure of
their formalism and self-aiwuniption, but especially
in the fact, that in John's Gospel " the Jews " («J
louiaioi) occurs more frequently than otherwise as
synonymous with opposers of Christ and of his teach-
ings. A similar usage is found in the Acta. Yet
Paul recognises the idea of a true Judaism as
distinguished from its counterfeit, when he says:
" He is a Jew who is one inwardly ; and circum-
cision it that of the heart, in the spirit, ana* not in
the letter; whose praise is not of men, but of
God (Rom. ii. 29).
Of the spirit of Judaism the Apostle himself be-
fore his conversion was a signal example. He as-
tribes to himself that character in various passages.
le declares in Gal. i. 13, 14 that his persecution
of the church was a fruit and evidence of this spirit,
and that in the violence of his zeal he outstripped
(xpofKam-av) all his associates or comrades (erwij-
AwiaVrai) as a zealot (foXwr^v) for the traditions
of the fathers. (See also Acts ix. Iff.; xxvi. 9; 1
Tim. i. 13, Ac) Such Judaism possessed in the
eyes of a Jew the merit of both patriotism and
piety, and hence is portrayed as such in the heroes
of tie Jewish apocryphal books. H.
JUT) AS ('loolai [Judat]), the Greek form of
the Hebrew name Judah, occurring in the LXX.
and N. T. [Judah.]
1. [Vat. Alex. (Umbos: Ooluat.] 1 Esdr. ix.
23. [Judah.]
2. The third son of Mattathias, " called Maeca-
issus " (1 Mace. ii. 4). [Maccabees.]
3. The son of Calphi (Alphseus), a Jewish gen-
nl under Jonathan (1 Mace. xi. 70).
4. A Jew occupying a conspicuous position at
i at toe time of the mission to Ariatobo-
JUDA8 8URMAMED BAKSABAS
Ins [Aristobclus] and the Egyptian Jew* (8
Mace. i. 10). He has been identified with an K*
aene, conspicuous for his prophetic gifts (Jos. Ant
xiil. 11, § 2 ; B. J. i. 3, $ 5) ; and with Judas Macca-
beus (Grimm ad be.). Some again suppose that
he is a person otherwise unknown.
6. A son of Simon, and brother of Joanne*
Hyrcanus (1 Mace. xvi. 2), murdered by Ptols-
niseus the usurper, either at the same time (c 186
B. c.) with his father (1 Mace. xvi. 16 ff.), or shortly
afterwards (Jos. Ant. xUL 8, J 1: cf. Grimm, aaf
Mace. 1. a).
0. The patriarch Judah (Matt-i. 2, 3).
B. F. V7.
7. A man residing at Damascus, in " the street
which is called Straight," in whose bouse Saul of
Tarsus lodged after his miraculous conversion
(Acta ix. 11). The " Straight Street " maybe
with little question identified with the " Street of
Bazaars," a long, wide thoroughfare, penetrating
from the southern gate into the heart of the city,
which, as in all the Syro-Greek and Syro-Roman
towns, it intersects in a straight line. The so-
called " House of Judas " is still shown in an open
space called " the Sbeykh's Place," a few steps out
of the " Street of Bazaars : " it contains a square
room with a stone floor, partly walled off for a tomb,
shown to Maundrell (L'arlg Trav. Bohn, p. 494)
as the " tomb of Ananias." The house is an object
of religious respect to Mussulmans as well as Christ-
ians (Stanley, 8. 4 P. p. 412; Conyb. and Hows.
1. 102; Maundrell, /. c. ; Pococke, ii. 119). E. V.
* It is not certain, nor probable, that this Judas
(of whom nothing further is known) was at that
time a Christian. None of Saul's company wen
Christians, nor did they know that be had be-
come one. Neither they, nor he, would probably
know of a Christian family to which they could
conduct him, nor would such a family have then re-
ceived him. He was probably led by his compan-
ions to his intended stopping-place — possibly, i
public bouse. It is a fair inference from the nar-
rative, that the host and the guest were both per-
sonally strangers to Ananias. S. W.
JU'DAS, sukhamed Bar'babas Qlottta
6 triKaXoi/itrot Bapaafjas [Lachm. Tisch.
Treg. Bapvaffflas] '• Judat out cognommabatur
Barmbat, [Cod. Amiat. Bartabbnt]), a leading
member of toe Apostolic church at Jerusalem
(iwijp tiyoifityos iv rots a$t AaWr), Acts xv. 23,
and " perhaps a member of the Presbytery " (Ne-
ander, Pi # TV. i. 123), endued with the gift of
prophecy (ver. 32), chosen with Silas to accompany
St. Paul and St. Barnabas as delegates to this
church at Antioch, to make known the decree con-
cerning the terms of admission of the Gentile con-
verts, and to accredit their commission and charac-
ter by personal communications (ver. 27). After
employing their prophetical gifts for the confirma-
tion of the Syrian Christians in the faith, Judas
went back to Jerusalem, while Silas either remained
at Antioch (for the reading Acts xv. 34 is uncer-
tain; and while some MSS., followed by the Vui.
gate, add pint 'XotZai t< itaptlSii, the best
omit the verse altogether), or speedily returnee
thither. Nothing further is recorded of Judas.
The form of the name Barnabas [or Baraabbea,
see above] = Son of Sabas, has led to several con
jectures: Wolf and Grotius, probably enough
suppose him to have been a brother of Joseph Bans
baa (Acts i. 83); while SchoU (Itaoog. { 103, s
Digitized by
Google
JUDAS OF GALILEE
Ml) takes Sabes or Zabas to be an abbreviated
farm of Zebedee, regards Judas u an «Jer brother
rf James and John, and attributes to him the
H Epistle of Jade." Augusti, on the other hand
(Me Katko&Kh. Brtefe, Lemgo, 1801-4, ii. 86),
advances the opinion, though with considerable
hesitation, that be may be identical with the Apos-
tle 'lottos *Ioit40ev. & V.
JUDA8 OF GALILEE ('Io«oj t r«Ai-
Xatot- Judni GaKlam), toe leader of a popular
remit " in the days of the taxing " (i. e. tbeeeiitus,
under the prefecture of P. Sulp. Quirinus, A. D. 8, A.
D. c. 769), referred to by Gamaliel in his speech
before the Sanhedrim (Acts t. 37). According
to Joeephus (Ant. zriiL 1, § 1), Judas was a Gaulon-
ite of the city of Gamala, probably taking his name
of Galilean from his insurrection having had its
rise in Galilee. His revolt had a theocratic charac-
ter, the watchword of which was " We have no
Lord nor master but God," and he boldly de-
nounced the payment of tribute to Cesar, and
all acknowledgment of any foreign authority, aa
treason against the principles of the Mosaic con-
stitution, and signifying nothing short of downright
slavery. His fiery eloquence and the popularity of
his doctrines drew vast numbers to his standard,
by many of whom he was regarded as the Messiah
(Orig. UomiL m Luc. xxv.), and the country was
for a time entirely given over to the lawless depre-
dations of the fierce and licentious throng who had
Joined themselves to him ; but the might of Rome
proved irresistible: Judas himself perished, and his
followers were •■dispersed," though not entirely
destroyed till the final overthrow of the city and
nation.
With bis fellow insurgent Sadoc, a Pharisee,
Judas is represented by Joeephus as the bunder of
a fourth sect, in addition to the Pharisees, Sad-
d'leees, and Easenes (Ant. xviii. 1. § 1, 6; B. J. il.
8, 5 1). The only point which appears to have
distinguished his followers from the Pharisees was
their stubborn love of freedom, leading them to de-
spise torments or death for themselves or then-
friends, rather than call any man master.
The Gaulonites, as his followers were called, may
be regarded as the doctrinal ancestors of the Zealots
and Siearii of later days, and to the influence of
his tenets Josephus attributes all subsequent insur-
rections of the Jews, and the final destruction of
the City and Temple. James and John, the sons
of Judas, headed an unsuccessful insurrection in
the procuratorship of Tiberius Alexander, A. D. 47,
by whom they were taken prisoners and crucified.
Twenty years later, A. D. 66, their younger brother
Menabem, following his father's example, took the
lead of a band of desperadoes, who, after pillaging
ths armory of Herod in the fortress of Masada,
Dear the " gardens of Engaddi," marched to Je-
rusalem, occupied the city, and after a desperate
siege took the palace, where he immediately as-
sumed the state of a king, and committed great
enormities. As he was going up to the Temple to
•roiship, with great pomp, Menshem was taken
)g the partisans of Eleazar the high-priest, by
whom he was tortured to death Au;. 16, A. D. 66
(Milman, llitl. of Jem, 11. 169, 331; Joseph. Ic;
Orig. in Mitt. T. xvli. § 26). E. V.
JOT) AS ISOABIOT ('iotast 'Io-Kasutrtir
In Mark and Luke, Lachm. Then. Treg. V-
Tm— *$]'• Judat Iteariota). He is sometimes
sjM " ths eon of Simon " (John vi. 71, sill. 8,
JUDAS ISOABIOT
1(95
86), bat more commonly (the three Synoptic Gos-
pels give no other name), Iscariotes (Matt x. 4i
Mark iii. 19; Luke vi. 16, et aL). In the three
lists of the Twelve there is added in each ease tot
fact that he was the betrayer.
The name Iscariot has received many interpreta-
tions more or less conjectural.
(1.) From Kjirioth (Josh. xv. 86), in the tribe ot
Judah, the Heb. ni»"1.i7BJ ,, M l In K'rioth, pas-
sing into 'Imcosisimt in the same way as tCtJ
3*113— Ish Tob, a man of Tob— appears in Jose-
phus (Ant. viL 6, { 1) as, 'larmfiot (Winer, Jteahcb.
s. v.). In connection with this explanation may be
noticed the reading of some MSS. in John vi. 71,
iwi KsyMrrev, and that received by Lachmann and
Teschendorf, which makes the name Iscariot belong
to Simon, and not, as elsewhere, to Judas only.
On this hypothesis his position among the Twelve,
the rest of whom belonged to Galilee (Acts ii. 7),
would be exceptional; and this has led to
(3.) From Kartha in Galilee (Kartan, A. V.,
Josh. xxi. 33; Ewald, Guek. /tratls, v. 321).
(3.) As equivalent to 'lo-axaoufrnii (Grotias on
Matt. x. 4; Heuinann, MuceU. Grvmng. iii. 698,
In Winer, Staiwb.).
(4.) From the date-trees (KaeiarrOu) in the
neighborhood of Jerusalem or Jericho (BartoloosL
BibL Rabbin, iii. 10, in Winer, I c; Gill, Comm.
m Matt. x. 4).
(6.) From rT'TfllipDM (=soortea, Gill, f. c),
a leathern apron, the name being applied to him at
tbe bearer of the bag, and = Judas with the apron
(Ligntfoot, Hor. Heb. m Matt. x. 4).
(6.) From WODH, atcara = strangling (an-
gina), as given after his death, and commemora-
ting it (Ligntfoot, /. c), or indicating that he had
been subject to a disease tending to suffocation pre-
viously (Heinsius in Suieer. Thet. s. v. 'lou&ai)-
This is mentioned also as a meaning of the name
by Origen, Tract, in Matt. xxxv.
Of the life of Judas, before the appearance of
his name in the lists of the Apostles, we know ab-
solutely nothing. It must be left to the sad vision
of a poet (Keble, Lyra Jmuxenlium, ii. 13), or the
fantastic fables of an apocryphal Gospel (Thilo,
Cod. Apoc. N. T. Kvana. Infant, a. 86) to por-
tray the infancy and youth of the traitor. What
that appearance implies, however, is that he had
previously declared himself a disciple. He was
drawn, as the others were, by the preaching of the
Baptist, or his own Messianic hopes, or the " gra-
cious words" of the new teacher, to leave his
former life, and to obey tbe call of the Prophet of
Nazareth. What baser and more selfish motives
may have mingled even then with his faith and
seal, we can only judge by reasoning backward from
the sequel. Gifts of some kind there must have
been, rendering the choice of such a man not
strange to others, not unfit in itself, and the func-
tion which he exercised afterwards among the
Twelve may Indicate what they were. The posi-
tion of his name, uniformly the last in the lists of
the Apostles in the Synoptic Gospels, is due, it
may be imagined, to the infamy which afterwards
rested on his name, but, prior to that guilt, ii
would seem that he took bis place in the group of
four which always stand last In order, as if posses-
sing neither the love, nor the faith, nor the devo-
tion whisk marked the sons of Zebedee and Jonah
Digitized by
Google
1496
JUDAS 1SCABIOT
The choice ni not made, we muit remember,
without a prevision of its issue. "Jesus knew
from the beginning .... who should betray
Him" (John vi. 64); and the diitinctueu with
which that Evangelist records the successive stages
of the guilt of Judas, and his Master's discernment
of it (John xii. 4, xiii. 2, 87), leaves with us the
impression that he too shrank instinctively (Bengel
describes it as " singula™ antipathia," Gnomon
tf. T. on John vi. 64) from a nature so opposite
to his own. We can hardly expect to solve the
question why such a man was chosen for such an
office. Either we must assume absolute fore-
knowledge, and then content ourselves with saying
with Calviu that the judgments of God are as a
great deep, and with Ullmann (SUndlotiyk. Jem,
p. 97) that he was chosen that the Divine purpose
might be accomplished through him ; or else with
Neander (Libtn Jau, § 77) that there was a dis-
cernment of the latent germs of evil, such as be-
longed to the Son of Man, in his insight into the
hearts of men (John ii. 26; Matt. ix. 4; Mark
xii. 15), yet not such as to exclude emotions of
sudden sorrow or anger (Mark lii. 5), or astonish-
ment (Mark vi. 6; Luke vii. 9), admitting the
thought "with men this is impossible, but not
with God." Did He in the depth of that insight,
and in the fullness of his compassion, seek to over-
come the evil which, if not conquered, would be
so fatal ? It gives, at any rate, a new meaning
and force to many parts of our Lord's teaching, to
remember that they must have been spoken in the
hearing of Judas, and may have been designed to
make him conscious of his danger. The warnings
as to the impossibility of a service divided between
God and Mammon (Matt. vi. 19-34), and the de-
structive power of the "cares of this world, and
the deceitfulness of riches " (Matt. xiii. 22, 23),
the pointed words that spoke of the guilt of un-
faithfulness in the " unrighteous Mammon " (Luke
xvi. 11), the proverb of the camel passing through
the needle's eye (Mark x. 25), must have fallen on
his heart as meant specially for him. He was
among those who asked the question, Who then
can be saved? (Mark x. 26). Of him, too, we may
may, that, when he sinned, he was " kicking against
the pricks,'' letting slip his " calling and election,"
frustrating the purpose of his Master in giving him
so high a work, and educating him for it (comp.
Chrysost. Horn, on Matt. xxvi. xxvii., John vi.).
The germs (see Stier's Worth of Jam, infra)
of the evil, in all likelihood, unfolded themselves
gradually. The roles to which the Twelve were
subject in their first journey (Matt. x. 9, 10) shel-
tered him from the temptation that would have
Men most dangerous to him. The new form of
life, of which we find the first traces in Luke viii.
8, brought that temptation with it. As soon as
the Twelve were reoognused as- a body, travelling
hither and thither with their Master, receiving
money and other offerings, and redistributing what
they received to the poor, it became necessary that
some one should act as the steward and almoner
of the small society, and this fell to Judas (John
xii. 6, xiii. 29), either as having the gifts that
Qualified him for it, or, as we may conjecture, from
his character, because he sought it, or, as some
nave imagined, in rotation from time to time. The
Gaiihean or Judsean peasant (we have no reason
(or thinking that his station differed from that of
die other Apostles) found himself entrusted with
•row sums of money than before (the three htm-
JTJDAS ISCABIOT
died denarii of John xii. 5, are spoken of as a sua
which he might reasonably have expected), and
with this there came covetousness, unfaithfulness,
embezzlement. It was impossible after this that
he could feel at ease with One who asserted ss
clearly and sharply the laws of faithfulness, duty
unselfishness; and the words of Jesus, " Have I
not chosen you Twelve, and one of you is a devil ? "
(John vi. 70), indicate that even then," though
the greed of immediate, or the hope of larger gam,
kept him from "going back," as others did (John
vi. 66), hatred was taking the place of love, and
leading him on to a fiendish malignity.
In what way that evil was rebuked, what disci-
pline was applied to counteract it, has been hinted
at above. The scene at Bethany (John xii. 1-9 ;
Matt. xxvi. 6-18; Mark xiv. 3-9) showed bow
deeply the canker had eaten into bis soul. The
warm outpouring of love calls forth no sympathy.
He utters himself, and suggests to others, the com-
plaint that it is a waste. Under the plea of caring
for the poor he covers his own miserable theft.
The narrative of Matt, xxvi., Mark xiv. places
this history in dose connection (apparently in order
of time) with the fact of the betrayal. It leaves
the motives of the betrayer to conjecture (comp.
Neander, Ltben Jetu, § 264). The mere lore of
money may have been strong enough to make him
clutch at the bribe offered him. He came, it may
be, expecting more (Matt. xxvi. 15); he will take
that. He has lost the chance of dealing with the
three hundred denarii ; it will be something to get
the thirty shekels as his own. It may have been
that be felt that his Master saw through his bidden
guilt, and that be hastened on a crisis to avoid the
shame of open detection. Mingled with this there
may have been some feeling of vindictiveness, a
vague, confused desire to show that he had power
to stop the career of the teacher who had reproved
him. Had the words that spoke of " the burial"
of Jesus, and the lukewarmness of the people, and
the conspiracies of the priests led him at last to
see that the Messianic kingdom was not as the
kingdoms of this world, and that his dream of
power and wealth to be enjoyed in it was a delu-
sion? (Ewald, Getch. Jtraelt, v. 441-46.) There
may have been the thought that, after all, the be-
trayal could do no harm, that his Master would
prove his innocence, or by some supernatural mani-
festation effect his escape (Lightfoot, /for. Beb.
p. 886, in Winer, and Whitby on Matt, xxvii. 4).
Another motive has been suggested (comp. Nean-
der, Ltben Jetu, L c. ; and Whately, Jittayt on
Dungert to Christian Fnish, Discourse Hi.) of an
entirely different kind, altering altogether the char-
acter of the act. Not the love of money, nor
revenge, nor fear, nor disappointment, but policy,
a subtle plan to fores on the hour of the triumph
of the Messianic kingdom, the belief that for this
service he would receive ss high a place as Peter,
or James, or John ; this it was that made him the
traitor. If he could place his Master in a position,
from which retreat would be impossible, where he
would be compelled to throw himself on the people,
ant* be raised by them to the throne of his fatfaat
David, then he might look forward to being fore-
most and highest in that kingdom, with all hit
desires for wealth and power gratified to the full
Awful as the words ware, however, we ma
iat like- words ware spoken of sad to
(Matt, xvt 38).
Digitized by
Google
JUDAS ISCARIOT
w this hypothesis is, It bib for that
*ry reason." It attributes to the Galilean peasant
i subtlety in forecasting political combinations, and
planning stratagems accordingly, which is hardly
sompatible *ith his character and learning, hardly
«c anient either with the pettiness of the faults
hv_o which he had hitherto fitllen. Of the other
mjlives that have been assigned we need not care
lotion any one, as that which singly led him on.
Crime is for the most part the result of a hundred
motives rushing with bewildering fury through the
mind of the criminal.
During the days that intervened between the
upper at Bethany and the Paschal or quasi-Pas-
coal gathering, he appeared to have concealed his
treachery. He went with the other disciples to
ind fro from Bethany to Jerusalem, and looked on
the acted parable of the barren and condemned
Ires (Mark ri. 90-34), and shared the vigils in
Uethaemane (John xriii. 9). At the Last Supper
be is present, looking forward to the consummation
of bis guilt as drawing nearer every hour. All is
at first as if ha were still faithful. He is admitted
to the feast. His feet are washed, and for him
there are the fearful words, " Ye are clean, but not
all." He, it may be, receives the bread and the
wine which were the pledges of the new covenant. 6
Then come the sorrowful words which showed him
that his design was known. " One of you shall
btray me." Others ask, in their sorrow and con-
fusion, "Is it I?" He too must ask the same
question, lest he should seem guilty (Matt. zivi.
93). He alone hears the answer. John only, and
through him Peter, and the traitor himself, under-
stand the meaning of the act which pointed out
that be was the guilty one (John ziii. 96)." After
this there comes on him that paroxysm and insanity
of guilt as of one whose human soul was possessed
by the Spirit of Evil — " Satan entered into him "
(John xiii. 27). The words, " What thou doest,
do quickly," come as a spur to drive him on. The
other disciples see in them only a command which
they interpret as connected with the work he had
hitherto undertaken. Then he completes the sin
from which even those words might have drawn
him back. He knows that garden in which his
Master and his companions had so often rested
after the weary work of the day. He comes, rc-
eooipanied by a band of officers and servants (John
iviiL 3). with the kiss which was probably the
salutation of the disciples. The words of
• Oomp. lb* remarks on this hypothesis, In which
■Jnesaly followed (uneonnlously perhaps) in tha
outs te ps of Pnulus, in Erseh u. Orator's Ailgem. En-
:«ci. art. "Judas."
t The question whether Judas was a partaker of
Cm lord's Sapper is encompassed with many difflcul-
■», both dogmatic and hannoolstic. Ths general
&.nesneua of patristic commentator* gives an afflrm-
adva, that of modern critics a negative, answer. (Com p.
Mayer, Comm. m John xtil. 36.)
- Ths combination of the narratives of tbe four
Qo*pels Is not without grave dimculties, for which
harmonists and commentators may be consulted. We
save given that which seems the most probable result.
rf This passage has often been appealed to, as Illus-
trating ths diflerenee between pcrajuAa a and /itravoia.
it y questionable, howevar, how fcr tha N. T. writers
^w^prift that distinction (eomp. Orotius m toe.
■till more questionable is ths notion above referred to,
■*«U St Matthew describee his dlaaopointment at a
await so different (mm that which as had reckoner
JUDAS ISCARIOT 1497
Jesus, calm and gentle as they were, showed thai
this was what embittered the treachery, and mad*
the suffering it inflicted more acute (Luke ndi
48).
What followed in the confusion of that night
the Gospels do not record. Not many students
of the N. T. will follow Heumann and Archbp.
Whately (£**ie» on Dangen, L c.) in tbe hypoth-
esis that Judas was " the other disciple" that
was known to the high-priest, and brought Peter
in (oomp. Meyer on John xviii. 15). It is proba-
ble enough, indeed, that he who had gone out with
the high priest's officers should return with them
to wait the issue of the trial. Then, when it was
over, came the reaction. Tbe fever of the crime
passed away. There came back on him tbe recol-
lection of the sinless righteousness of the Master
be had wronged (Matt, xxvii. 3). He repented,
and his guilt and all that had fmpted bun to It
became hateful. 1 ' He will get rid of the accursed
thing, will transfer it back again to those who wi».u
it had lured him on to destruction. They mock
and sneer at the tool whom they have used, and
then there oomes over him the horror of great
darkness that precedes self-murder. He has owned
his sin with "an exceeding bitter cry," but he
dares not turn, with any hope of pardon, to the
Master whom he has betrayed. He hurls the
money, which the priests refused to take, into the
sanctuary (mis) where they were assembled. For
him there is no longer sacrifice or propitiation. *
He is " the son of perdition " (John xvii. 19).
" He departed and went and hanged himself"
(Matt xxvii. 5). He went " unto his own place "/
(Acts i. 96).
We have in Acts i. another account of the cir-
cumstances of his death, which it is not easy to
harmonize with that given by St. Matthew. There,
in words which may have been spoken by St. Peter
(Meyer, following the general consensus of inter-
preters), or may have been a parenthetical notice
inserted by St. Luke (Calvin, Olshausen, and oth-
ers), it is stated —
(1.) That, instead of throwing the money into
the Temple, be bought (sWr/owo) a field with it
(2.) That, instead of hanging himself, '• felling
headlong, he burst asunder in the midst, and all
his bowels gushed out"
(3.) That for this reason, and not because the
priests had bought it with the price of blood, tha
field was called Aceldama.
« It is characteristic of the wide, Sir-reaching sym
pithy of Origan, that he suggests another motive for
the suicide of Judas. Despairing of pardon In this
lift, he would rush on into the world of the dead, and
there (yvnrjj tj} +vxD> me * t his Lord, and confess his
guilt and aak for pardon ( Tract, in Matt. xxxv. :
oomp. also Theophanes, Horn, xxvii., in Sutosr, Tha.
s. v. 'Iovtoc).
/ The words Utoc rem in St. Peter's speech con-
vey to our minds, probably were meant to convey to
these who heard them, the impression of some dare:
region In Gehenna. Llghtfoot and 0111 (in toe.) quota
passages from rabbinical writers who find that mean-
ing in ths phrase, even in Oen. xxxi. 66, and Num.
xxtv. 85. On the other hand it should be remem-
bered that many Interpreters reject that explanation
(crnnj Meyer, in lot.),* and that one great Anglican
dinne (Hammond, Comment, on N- T. in loo.) (
a distinct protest against it
a BLeyer mention* wmi who rvjeet the shove I
tlon raipectliic UuK rant, though he (Wee alt own avss>
UvntuU. <*
Digitized by
Google
1498
JUDAS I8CARIOT
It U, of course, easy to cut the knot, as Strauss
md De Wette hate done, by assuming one or both
lecounu to be spurious and legendary. Receiving
both aa authentic, we are yet led to the conclusion
that the explanation U to be found in some un-
known aeriea of facta, of which we have but two
fragmentary narratives. The solution* that have
been suggested by commentators and harmonist*
are nothing more than exercises of ingenuity seeking
to dovetail into each other portions of a dissected
map which, for want of missing pieces, do not fit.
Such as they are, it may be worth while to state
the chief of them.
As to (1) it has been said that there is a kind
of irony in St Peter's words, " This was all be
got." That which was bought with his money is
spoken of as bought by him (Meyer in loc).
As to (2) we hare the explanations —
(a.) That as^yfaro, in Matt xxvii. 5, includes
death by some sudden spasm of suffocation (angina
pectoris f ), such as might be caused by the over-
powering misery of his remorse, and that then came
the fall described in the Acts (Suicer, Thts. s. v.
InriyX" i Grotius, Hammond, Lightfoot, and
others). By some this hss even been connected
with the name Iscariot, as implying a constitutional
tendency to this disease (Gill).
(A. ) That the work of suicide was but half ac-
complished, and that, the halter breaking, he fell
(from a fig-tree, in one tradition) across the road,
and was mangled and crushed by the carts and
wagons that passed over him. This explanation
appears, with strange and horrible exaggerations,
in the narrative of Papias, quoted by (Ecunienius
on Acts i., and in Tneophylact on Matt xxvii.
As to (3) we have to choose between the alterna-
tives —
(a.) That there were two Aceldama*. [ACEL-
DAMA.]
(A.) That the potter's field which the priests had
bought was the same as that in which the traitor
met so terrible a death.
The life of Judas ha* been represented here in
the only light in which it is possible for us to look
on it, as a human life, and therefore as one of
temptation, struggle, freedom, responsibility. If
another mode of speaking of it appears in the If. T. ;
if words are used which imply that all happened as
it hid been decreed j that the guilt and the misery
wen part* of a Divine plan (John vi. 64, xiii. 18 ;
Acti i. 16), we must yet remember that this is no
single, exceptional instance. All human actions are
dealt with in the same way. They appear at one
noment separate, free, uncontrolled ; at another
they are links in a long chain of causes and effects,
the beginning and the end of which are in the
" thick darkness where God is," or determined by
an Inexorable necessity. No adherence to a philo-
sophical system frees men altogether from incon-
sistency in their language. In proportion as the»r
minds are religious, and not philosophical, the
transitions from one to the other will be frequent,
abrupt, and startling.
With the exception of the stories already men-
tioned, there are but few traditions that gather
round the name of Judas. It appears, however, in
a strange, hardly intelligible way in the history of
the wilder heresies of the second century. Tne
sect of Cainitea, consistent in their inversion of all
that Christians in general believed, was reported to
Save honored him as the only Apostle that was in
of the true aaosis, to hare made him
JUDAS ISCARIOT
the object of their worship, and to have had a
Gospel bearing his name (comp. Neander, Own*
History, ii. 153, Eng. tranal; Iren. ads. Bar. i
35; TertulL dt Prate, c. 47).» For the general
literature connected with this subject, especially fa
monographs on the motive of Judas and tie nminur
of his death, see Winer, Rtahcb. For a full treat-
ment of the questions of the relation in which his
guilt stood to the life of Christ, comp. Stier's Wards
of the Lord Jesus, on the passages where Judas is
mentioned, and in particular vol vii. pp. 40-67,
Eng. trans. E. II. P.
•Question I. What was the character of Judas
Iscariot?
A. What was hi* intellectual character?
(a.) There are more signs in the Gospela that
Judas had a strong and sturdy intellect than that
some of the other disciples bad. It may be sur-
mised from John xji. 4-8 as compared with Mat-
thew xxvi. 8-11 and Mark xiv. 4-7, that especially
in financial affairs be had a marked influence upon
his fellow apostles. He was appointed to superin-
tend the funds, and disburse the charities of the
retinue which accompanied the Messiah. At on*
time (Luke viii. 1-3) this retinue needed a careful,
exact, and sharp-sighted treasurer. We may pre-
sume that Judas's intellectual fitness for this office
was one reason for his appointment to it Some
(aa Rodatz) have supposed that each of the disci-
ples in his turn had the oversight of the money
belonging to the retinue of Christ But this mere
conjecture is adverse to the Biblical impression.
(6.) Although the Gospels give us more intima-
tions of shrewdness as characteristic of Jndas than
as characteristic of the other disciples, they do not
imply that he bad so extensive a reach of mind aa
some German theorists ascribe to him. According
to these theorists he was so sharp-sighted aa to
reason in a manner like the following : —
" It may be inferred from cerUin words of the
Master [Matthew xix. 28] that be will assume a
temporal throne, and exalt his twelve apostles to be
his twelve princes; it may be inferred from certain
exhibitions of popular feeling [John xii. 12-19] that
the mnasfs of the Jews are now ready, and need
only an impulse and occasion to enthrone him ; the
betrayal will put the Messiah into such a position
that he must declare himself; the Jewish rulers
will at ones resist his pretensions, but the people
will at once stand up for him, and under his leader-
ship will overcome the rulers ; the betrayal will thus
be the means of introducing a new administration
highly advantageous to the state, of expediting the
royal glory of the Master, and the princely honors
of the disciples ; of pleasing by exalting the king,
rather than of displeasing by degrading him."
We do not know enough to deny outright that
such a plan, or at least some parts of it, may have
momentarily occurred to Judas; but the Gosprls
do not make upon us the impression of his having
that kind of intellect which remains steadfast in
such a comprehensive plan.
B. What was the moral character of Judas?
(a.) Some writers regard him as possessing a
merely cold and calculating spirit unsusceptible to
thn influences Bowing from the virtues of the Mes-
siah; ss having full confidence in the superiority
a * Mr. Norton gives reason* far do jbttnf the on
ixtence of such a sect (Omuinsnsss of the ffcsfsls. Sfe
sd., m. 281 ft), a.
Digitized by
Google
JUDAS I8CAKIOT
if Jesus to hit enemies and In bis ability to extri-
saie himself from their stratagem*; therefore as
ievising the traitorous scbeux without malice as
well as without love toward his Matter, and with
a frigid plan of making game of the Jewish rulers,
getting hi. thirty pieces of silver by the trick of the
betrayal which be believed would be harmless to
others while profitable to himself. But the intima-
tions of the Gospels are that Judas eombhwri a
rude strength of feeling with his financial sagacity.
Ills keenness of remorse, his bitter regrets, the
powerful emotions terminating in his fearful death
are signs that he was impressible to the motives of
goodness ; that he alternated suddenly from an ex-
citement of avarice to an excitement of a sense of
shame and from both to an excitement of the sense
tf right and the fear of retribution.
(o.) Another class of writers represent Iscariot as
a man of benevolence and probity : see Question
It a.
(c) Still another class (represented by Daub) re-
gard the traitor as a man who even before his
entrance upon the apostleship " had fallen irrevo-
cably a prey to evil," had become " a hopelessly
bad man," " a devil in the flesh," an impersonation
of "the evil which has utterly cast off all humanity,"
etc., etc. This supposition is refuted by toe (act
that Jesus, ever mindful of the fitnesses of things,
entrusted to Iscariot so responsible an office as that
of the bursar; also by the bet that Judas, so far
from being regarded by his fellow disciples as a
fiend, was for a long time not suspected of any
misdemeanor ; that the Apostles were surprised when
his future treason was announced at tie Paschal
Supper (Matt. xxvi. SI if.; Mark xiv. 18 ff.; Luke
xxiL 31 ft'.; John xiil. 11, 18, 23 ff.), and, even when
he was expelled from their company, thought that
he was sent forth on a religious or benevolent
errand (John xiii. 27-30), to gather provisions for
the feast-week, or to distribute charities among the
poor, perhaps to provide some indigent families with
money sufficient for enabling them to offer the fes-
tival sacrifices.
(<i ) Another class of writers adopt an Intermediate
. id more probable theory, that, although Judas had
a strength, tact, and carefulness of spirit which
fitted him to oonduct the secular nifiurs of the
Lord's retinue, he had no largeness of mind nor
.oftiness of aim which fitted him for great exploits;
he had a firmness of soul which qualified him to
endure persecution, but led him to his terrible
suicide; he was mean, sordid, miserly, but still not
insensible to the attractions of the opposite charac-
ter; although engrossed with selfish aims which
made him at times frigid and relentless, he had
yet a passionate nature which made him at other
times violent in self-reproach; he had enough of
moral sentiment to know the right and put on the
semblance of it; he could not have enjoyed for so
long a time the confidence of the disciples unless
he had counterfeited their virtues, and he is im-
plicitly accused by John (xii. 6) of hypocritical
pretensions; although his powers and sensibilities
were in a singular degree disproportioned to each
other, yet they did not place him beyond the reach
of hope for his improvement, nor leave him (as he
'* so often represented) an altogether exceptional
sate of humanity. The sins of Judas were tnose
H deliberate Intent; the sins of Peter were those of
ndden lapse. Christ says to Peter (Matt. xvi. 33) :
1 Get thou behind me, Satan"; he says, with more
, of Judas (John vi. TO) • " Han
JUDAS ISCARIOT
149ft
I not chosen you twelve, and one of you is a devil?"
still the sins of both Peter and Judas were Annua
and therefore when Peter speaks in Acts i. 16-39
of the traitor's suicide he maintains a reticence,
which indicates that the author of the denial did
not think it seemly to hurl any violent epithets
against the author of the betrayal. Even if (as
Meyer, Alford) we suppose that the 18th and 19th
verses of Acts i. belong to the speech of Peter, they
«tand in significant contrast with his open denun-
ciations of other bad men ; as for instance in the
second chapter of his Second Epistle. Bat the
internal evidence is (see Dr. Gill on Acts i. 16-20)
that those two verses were intercalated by Luke,
whose medical education would prompt him to such
a statement, and who with a mixture of severity
and derision suggests Ideas like the following:
" This man so eager in his pursuit of wealth ended
his pursuit in acquiring a piece of land, the very
name of which is infamous. What shall it profit
a man if he should gain the whole world and lose
bis own soul? This man gained a contemptible
part of the world, and amid disgusting bruises of
his body, lost his soul."
Because our Lord addressed the loyal disciples in
a strain of rebuke similar to that which he applied
to Judas (compare Matt. xvi. 23 with John vi. 70 ;
also Matt. xxvi. 10, Mark xiv. 6-9 with John xii.
7, 8), some writers have inferred that Iscariot was
not eminently selfish. Some (as Goldhorn) have
denied that the Evangelists accuse him of cherishing
an avaricious temper, or of practicing erabenlement
for his own personal advantage. He has been
thought to be a kind of prototype of St- Crispin,
who is the tutelary saint of shoemakers, and who
with his brother Crispianus was martyred in A. D
287, after having his hands and feet plunged into
molten lead. This saint, like Iscariot, was called a
" thief." for in his benevolent zeal he had been in
the habit of purloining leather from the compara-
tively rich in order that he might make shoes of it
for the comparatively poor. But the supposition
that Judas Iscariot was absorbed in suoh a Cris-
pinade is as idle as the mediaeval legend that the
twenty pieces of silver for which Joseph was sold
by his brethren found their way at last into the
Jewish Temple, were paid to Judas for his treason,
aud were finally returned by him into the temple
treasury.
Question II. What were the motives inducing
Judas to betray his Lord?
In his Essay on Judas Iscariot, Mr. De Quince/
says: "Everything connected with our ordinary
conceptions of this man, of his real purposes, and
of his ultimate fate, apparently is erroneous." " It
must always be important to recall within the fold
of Christian forgiveness any one who has long bee*
sequestered from human charity, and bat tenanted
s Pariah grave. In the greatest and most mem-
orable of earthly tragedies Judas Is a prominent
figure. So long as the earth revolves, he cannot
be forgotten. If, therefore, there is a doubt affect-
ing his case, he is entitled to the benefit of that
doubt." We are indeed apt to err in supposing
that the entire character of Judas, and especially
I his signal crimes, were essentially different from the
I coaracter and crimes of other bad men. We are
also apt to err in supposing that be had a clear and
definite view of the exact evils which would befall
the Messiah, and that be did not endeavor, Ilk*
other bad men, to palliate his crime by imagining
that its «vil results would in some way ot other hi
Digitized by
Google
1500
JUDAS I8CARIOT
prevented. (See Neander'e Ltben Jau, p. ?W t.
it Aufl.) We in farther apt to err in supposing
that Judas moat have had a tingle solitary motive,
or else a self-consistent system of motive* for hi*
treason. He seems to hare had a (pint which was
driven hither and thither by a tumult of emotions,
some of which were at variance with othera; to
have been like a merchant on the ere of bankruptcy
distracted with conflicting impulses ; to have been
bewildered by the words and acts of Jesus; not to
have known exactly what to expect; to hare been
at last surprised (Meyer on Matt. xxvi. 14-16)
■hat Jesus did not foil his adversaries and eseape
•he crucifixion.
(a.) It baa been supposed that Judas was animated,
In a greater or less degree, by Jewish patriotism.
He has been called by some " Ein braver Mann " ;
he has been thought by others to hare combined
certain selfish impulses with his patriotism and
benevolence. Jesus could not have made a mistake
in selecting him as a disciple sod bursar; therefore
Judas must hare been worthy of the selection. Mr.
De Quinoey, wbo thinks that Judas as the purse-
bearer for the disciples had " the most of worldly
wisdom, and was best acquainted with the temper
of the times," and could not "have made any
gross blunder as to the wishes and secret designs
of the populace in Jerusalem," (for " his official
duty must have brought him every day into minute
and circumstantial communication with an im-
portant order of men, namely, petty shop-keepers,"
who " in all countries alike fulfill a great political
function,") supposes that Iscariot had reason to
hope not only for the rising of the Jewish populace
in behalf of the Messiah, but also perhaps for the
ultimate aid of the Romans in defending him
against the Jewish rulers. (See Theol. Euayt, I.
H7-177; see also above, Quest I. A. (a.).) But as
the intellect of Judss fitted him for small though
dexterous manoeuvres rather than for adhering stead-
fastly to any great political scheme, so his heart
was more ready to grasp some petty contracted
stratagem of selfishness, than to persevere in any
large plan of patriotism. Besides, if he had en-
gaged in the betrayal under the influence of this
wide-reaching plan, he probably would not at last
have summed up the history of it by the words
which excluded tie semblance of an apology: " I
have sinned in that I hare betrayed the innocent
blood," Matt, xxvii. 4; nor probably would the
considerate Jesus have uttered against the " lost"
nun, "the son of perdition," those significant
words, " Good were it for that man if he had never
been born," John xvii. 11; Matt. xxvi. 24; Mark
xiv. 21 ; nor probably would Luke have character-
ized the thirty pieces of silver as " the reward of
iniquity," Acts i. 18, like Balaam's " wages of un-
righteousness," 2 Peter ii. 16; nor probably would
Peter have applied to Judas those fearful predic-
tions of the Psalms, Acts i. 16, 20, as Matthew
applied the solemn words of Zechariah, Matt xxvii.
0, 10 ; nor would the beloved disciple have exhibited
such an involuntary outflow of indignation against
the traitor as appears in his Gospel xii. 6, xiii. 27-
30, xiv. 22 (see Meyer), vi. 70, 71; nor perhaps
would the syooptists, in giving their catalogue of
the Apostles, have uniformly placed at the foot of the
bst the name of " Judss Iscariot who also betrayed
him," Matt x. 4; Mark iii. 19; I.ute vi. 16.
(A.) It u a more plausible theory that Iscariot was
au|ieued to his crime by a desire to avoid the shame
af being sr frequently and pointedly rebuked by
JUDAS ISCARIOT
th» Messiah. Although he was willing to set Mi
kiss for thirty pieces of silver, yet he was a mam,
and must have had some wish to avoid the repri-
mands which were becoming more and more i
and pointed.
(c.) Connected with the preceding was his <
to avert from himself the persecutions and ethet
evils which were to come on the disciple*. Even
If, in his calculation of chances, he did solace him-
self with the possibility of driving the Messiah op
to the temporal throne, still he must have had a
prevailing fear that the new kingdom was not tc
be speedily established. It appears for more prob-
able that he was influenced by an aim to earn the
gratitude of the Jews by delivering the Sarionr to
tbeir custody, than by an aim to earn the gratitude
of the Saviour and the disciples by hastening then-
elevation to thrones. Especially does it appear so,
when we reflect that during the hours of the day
preceding his formation of the traitorous purpose,
he had probably beard, or heard of, those fearful
words of Christ which portended violent changes
in the Jewish state, and the troublous times of the
Apostle* (see Matt xxiv. and xxv.j Mark xiii.;
Luke xxi.; see also (e.) below).
(at) One of the motives which strengthened aD
the others for the treason was probably the traitor's
dissatisfaction with the principles of the new king-
dom (Neander's Ltben Jem, p. 679 t ). He saw
more and more distinctly, and the scene recorded
in John xii. 1-9 confirmed him in the belief, that
the spiritual kingdom would yield him but a meagre
living. It was to require a habit of lowly self-denial,
and was to be characterised by services to the poor.
For these services he had no taste.
(e.) Mingled with his aversion to spiritual duty,
was his vindictive spirit impelling him to work
some undefined sort of injury to the Messiah. Ac-
cording to the most plausible hypothesis, be had
been chagrined by the fact that, although the
almoner of the disciples, be yet had a lower pbes
than Peter, James, and especially John in the
esteem of his Master; his revenge, having been
repeatedly inflamed by slights and censures, was
set all on fire when he vras reprima n ded, and the
generous woman applauded, at the feast of the
unction on the evening after Tuesday; stung by
that disgrace, he formed hi* plan of the betrayal;
he may not have determined the exact time of
executing that plan, but having been still further
irritated at the Paschal supper on the evening fol-
lowing Thursday, and having been goaded on by
the mandate " what thou doest do quickly," be did
not sleep as the other disciples did on Thursday
night, but then precipitated himself into his crime
(Meyer and others suppose that he lien formed hi*
purpose of the crime). On Tuesday, during the
Saviour's last visit to the Temple, the Jewish rulers
had been violently incensed against him bv toe
speeches recorded in Matt xxii. and xxiii., Mark
xii., and Luke xx. On the evening after that day,
when Judas was irritated by the reprimand of his
Master, he would naturally think of the Jews cut
to the heart by the same reprover, and would be
tempted to conspire with them against the author
of these reprimands. This wss the critical period
for him to turn " State's Evidence," and to join
hands with the Sanhedrim as Pilate Joined hands
with Herod.
(/.) Another of the motive* working in the
traitor's mind was avarice. Three hundred denari
had been kept out af his purse two days before thi
Digitized by
Google
JUDAS ISCAMOT
setrayal (Johu xi. 1-9), and this needleu Ion inten-
lifled his miserly u well as retaliatory spirit It ha*
been objected (evan by Neander) that he could not
have been influenced by ao email a reward aa
eighteen dollars. It is true that the words " eighteen
dollars" in American coinage represent the value
of thirty shekels of silver at the time of Joseph in;
but it must be remembered that eighteen dollars
according to the American standard represent a far
smaller amount of purchasing power than was rep-
resented by the thirty silrerhngs of Josephus. For
obtaining this sum Judas did not regard one kiss
as a very great work. Besides, an avaricious man
is often more affected by a email gain than a large
One. A little in the hand also is mora attractive
to him than much in the prospect. Even if he
had endeavored to encourage or excuse himself by
sudden gleams of hope that he would acquire wealth
by expediting the Messianic reign, these fitful
gleams could not relieve his prevailing expectation
that tho new reign would leave him poor; and
thirty shekels of silver paid down were a surer good
than the spiritual honors of the uncertain kingdom.
That in the tumultuous rush of his evil thoughts
the traitor was under the special power of avarice,
revenge, and distaste for the spiritualities of the
Messiah's kingdom is intimated in Scriptures like
the following: Luke xxii. 3; John vi. 12 and 70,
xii. 6, xiii. 2, 10, 11, 87.
Question III. Why did Christ select and retain
Judas as one of the Apostles ?
We may consider the call of Judas aa made by
nua, and as made by God.
A, Regarding it as made merely by the man
Jesus, theologians have maintained, with more or
lees distinctness, the following theories : —
(a.) At the first Christ understood the financial
abilities, but not the thievish or treacherous ten-
dencies of [acariot These were not discovered
until they were developed in the passion week, or
at least not until it was too late to eject him from
the Saviour's family. The reasons for retaining
were different from those for originally appointing
him. The traitor would have been irritated bj the
expulsion, and would have precipitated the delivery
of Jesus to his enemies before the full aceornplisb-
ment of the Messianic work. " That Jesus knew
from the beginning that Judas wsa a thoroughly
bad man, and yet received him among the twelve
Is altogether impossible." Schenkel'e Character
of Jam portrayed, vol. ii. p. 218; see also Ull-
mann's SUndlorigttit Jen, Sect. 8; Winer's Reai-
worterb. art. Judat.
(o. ) From the first Christ was perfectly certain of
the traitor's miserly and dishonest aims ; but he
knew the necessity of being delivered up to be cruci-
fied ; he must hare some instrument for being given
over to the power of his enemies; he singled out
Judas as that instrument, and the discipleship as
a convenience for that work.
(e.) A more plausible account than either of the
preceding is : The Messiah perceived Iscariot's
business talents, economical habits and other to us
unknown qualifications for the discipleship; he per-
•eived also the disqualifications which were leas
prominent in Iscariot's earlier than In hi* later me.
for tney became more and more aggravated as the
iisciple hardened his heart in resisting the influence
*f the Master; when the appointment was rnaur
she other Apostles do not appear to have dittp-
sroved of it or wondered at It, many to us unknown
fluiiiiiielaiines oonsptring to justify It; white the
JUDAS ISCABIOT
1501
Saviour knew the evil tendencies of Judas and ex-
pected that these germs of iniquity would unfold
themselves in embezzlement and treason (John ii.
25, vi. 64, 70; Matt ix. 4; Mark ii. 8), still he
encouraged in himself a hope that he might coun-
teract those wrong proclivities, and that the sordid
spirit would be refined and elevated by the apostol-
ical office — by the honors of it (Matt xix. 28;
Luke xxii. 30), by the powers belonging to it (Luke
xi. 19), by the personal instructions given to the
occupants of it (especially such instructions ss Matt
vi. 19-34, xiii. 22, 23; Mark riii. 36, x. 25; Luke
xvi. 11), by the indefinable endearments of being
" with Jesus " (Mark iii. 14 compared with Act*
i. 17; Acta iv. 13; Phil i. 23; Col. iii. 3, 4; 1
Thess. iv. 17; see Dr. N. E. Burt's //our* aax<.j
the Gospels, xxviii.); while the Saviour could it
fully believe that his efforts would be successful in
reforming the traitor, still he could not doubt that
they would be successful in improving the character
of other men — that the patience, forbearance, forti-
tude, caution, gentleness, persevering love mani-
fested in his treatment of the purse-bearer (a* in
washing the traitor's feet, and in giving him the
sweetened bread) would be a useful example to the
church, that his own character would be set off
with more distinctness by its contrast with that of
Judas — good contrasted with evil moral strength
amid physical weakness illustrated by moral weak-
ness amid physical strength — and that such a con-
fession as " I have betrayed the innocent blood "
would retain through all time a marked historical
importance, and would be a symbol of the triumph
of virtue over vice. Could the Redeemer have
cherished any degree of anticipation that he might
win Iacariot to a life of virtue, and at the same
time have believed that he should not succeed?
The human mind often cherishes a feeble expecta-
tion of favorable results, and at the same time
believes on the whole that the results will be un-
favorable; makes untiring efforts for a good, and
in one view of it faintly expects to succeed, but in
another view of it fully anticipates a failure. Amid
this conflict of hopes and bars, called by the Latins
ipet intperatti, one man " against hope believed in
hope," Rom. iv. 18, and other men " against hope "
hare disbelieved and labored " in hope."
B. Regarding the call of Judas to the apostle-
ship, as made by God, theologians have used it for
a test of their speculations on the nature of moral
government, ete. In reality there is no other kind
of objection to the met that the Most High in his
providence allowed Judas to be one of \}\<s first
preachers of the Gospel, than to the fact that he
has in his providence allowed other unfit men to be
eminent preachers of it, or that he has allowed un- .
worthy men to sit on the bench of justice, or to
reign on the throne which, even although they were
"ordained of God," they have tarnished. The
mystery here is the old mystery of moral evil: set
OJshausen on Matthew xxvii. 3-10. As men differ
in their speculations in regard to the general sub-
ject of sin and moral government, they diner, of
course, in regard to the sin of Judas aa related to
that government
(a.) Some maintain that Iseariot waa called to his
office on the ground of his constitutional fitness
and without any prevision of his treason, sin being
" altogether arbitrary and inconsequential," and
thus incapable of being foreknown by any mind.
(b. > Others maintain, that his treason was for*
known, bat was not inemded in the divine plan
Digitized by
Google
1502
JTJDAS ISOABIOT
just u ill other sin b said to be foreseen, bat not
predetermined ; and just as many vile men are prov-
identially called to occupy offices which it is fore-
seen they will disgrace.
(c.) Others maintain that his treason was com-
prehended in the divine plan (as may be inferred
from John xiii. 18-36, Acta i. 16-30, Acts iv. 88;
«ee Meyer on Matt xxvi. 14-37, John vi. 70); but
still the sin was included in this plan not directly,
but incidentally ; the plan was adopted not in any
degree on account of the sin, but in detpitt of it,
and Judas himself was appointed to his office not
because the appointment was directly a good or a
means of good, but because it was incidental to
those means of good which were directly predeter-
mined.
(<£) Others maintain, that the appointment and
conduct of Judas were parts of the plan of God,
just as directly as the movements of matter are
parts of that plan. Of these divines, one class
assign various uses for which the appointment was
designed, and these are all the uses which in fact
result from it; another class regard the reasons for
the appointment as shrouded in a mystery which
does not admit an investigation.
Question IV. — How can we reconcile the ap-
parent discrepancies in the Biblical narratives of
Judas?
A. One of these discrepancies relates to the
manner of the betrayal. According to Matthew
xxvi. 48-60, Mark xiv. 44-46, Luke xxii. 47, 48,
the Saviour was pointed out to his captors by Judas
tenderly embracing hiin. According to John xviii.
4-8 the Saviour came forward and voluntarily made
himself known to the captors while Judas was
standing with them. One of the various methods
in which the two accounts may be harmonized, is
the following: Judas had stipulated to designate
the Messiah by a kiss ; the Messiah, as soon as he
saw his captors approaching, advanced to meet
them; they, noticing his approach, halted (per-
haps in amazement); Judas went forward, gave
the significant embrace, returned, and stood with
the captors ; Jesus continued his walk toward them,
and when sufficiently near, addressed them in the
words cited by John. The fact of the kiss had
been mentioned by the Synoptists, and had thus
become generally known before John wrote; there-
fore he did not allude to it. The fact of Christ's
own subsequent announcement of himself may not
have been so generally known, therefore John made
it prominent. (See Tholuck and Meyer on John
xviii. 4-7.)
A less probable version is, that Judas, In order
to fulfill his engagement, gave the promised sign
after Jesus had announced himself. Another is,
that the sign was given twice ; at first was not ob-
served (for it was night) by the captors, and was
therefore given the second time.
B. The most important of the alleged discrepan-
cies relate to the last developments of Judas.
It is said in Matthew xxvii. 6, 7, that the chief
priest* bought the Potter's Field ; but it is said in
Acts i. IE, that Judas bought it with the thirty
silverlings. Among the various allowable methods
of reconciling these passages, the following is
adopted by the majority of the best interpreters:
the word itrrtiaaro may denote not only "pur-
shased," bnt also "caused to be purchased,"
•• rove Dccanion for the purchase," and thus we
glean from the two accounts the connected narra-
tes that in consequence of Judas's treachery and
JUDAS ISCARIOT
the eighteen dollars obtained by it, the ehkf |
some time after his death purchased the Field of
Blood. This field is sometimes thought to be the
identical field on which Judas died. But we an
not so informed by the Evangelists. The field which
was purchased may have been on the Hill of Evil
Council over the Valley of Hinnom, and it may
have been called the Field of Blood for two reasons;
first, it was purchased with " the price of blood; "
secondly, with the money obtained from him
" whose bloody end was so notorious " (Hackett'i
Comm. on Act* 1. 19).
It is said in Matthew xxvii. 5, that Judas hanged
himself: and in Acta i. 18 that " falling headlong
he burst asunder (cracked open) in the midst, and
all his bowels gushed out." Several of the terrible
legends in regard to Judas have been suggested by
these narratives: see Hofftnann, LtbtnJetu naek
den Apohryphtn, § 77. We cannot affirm that
there is a contradiction between the statements
when there la a plausible hypothesis on which the
two can be reconciled. There are several hypotheses
on which these two statements can be harmonized.
One of these hypotheses which is in striking uni-
formity with an old tradition, and is in itself so
credible that some of the most decided rationalists
(as Fritzsche) have adopted it in the main, is that
Matthew describes the beginning, and Lake the
end of the death-scene ; that the traitor suspended
himself on a bough which hung over a precipice,
and the rope broke, or the bough broke, or some
one, unwilling to hare such a spectacle exhibited
during the holy week, cut the rope or the bough,
and the traitor fell with such physical results as
Luke describes. Travellers in Palestine exploring
the Valley of Hinnom have been impressed with
the probability of this hypothesis; see especially
Hackett's JUtutratiom of Scrip/we, pp. 384-368.
No jury in the world would hesitate to adopt an
hypothesis similar to the preceding for the recon-
ciliation of two apparently conflicting testimonies
given in court.
Partly on account of these imagined discrepan-
cies, it hsa been supposed (without any external
evidence, however), not only by such critics as
Strauss and Kenan, but also by more conse rva tive
scholars, that either Matthew xxvii. 3-10, or else
that Acts i. 18, 19, must be spurious. Prof. Nor-
ton (in his Genuineness of the O'otpete, abridged
edition, pp. 438-441) gives the following among
other reasons for rejecting Matthew xxvii. 8- 10.
(1.) •• At first view this account of Jndas has
the aspect of an interpolation. It is inserted so as
to disjoin a narrative, the different parts of which,
when it is removed, come together as if they had
been originally united." But the same may be
said of numerous passages not only in the Gospels,
but also in the Epistles, and in the Old Testament.
(9.) " Whether it be or be not an interpolation, it
is clearly not in a proper place." " As the account
is now placed, it is said that in the morning Judaa
was affected with bitter remorse, because be sew
that ' Jesus was condemned; ' but no condemna-
tion had yet been passed upon him by the Roman
governor," etc. Some commentators (as Fritzsche'.
would here reply that the " condemnation " spoken
of in Matt, xxvii. 8, is the condemnation by the
Sanhedrim, and this bad taken place before Jesus
was sent to Pilate, and before Judas repented ; bat
the more plausible reply is that Matthew's narra-
tive of the traitor's death la oat of the Httmictr
order, and instead of being inserted between tk>
Digitized by
Google
JUDAS ISCARIOT
H and the 11th verses, should, for preserving the
sequence of time, be inserted between the 30th
■od the 3Ut Term of hie xxviith chapter; as
John'a narrative of the supper at Bethany is out
of the hittorical order, and instead of being in-
serted between the 2d and 9th Term, should, for
preserving the sequence of time, be inserted at the
end of his 12th chapter. Deviations from the exact
order of time are so frequent in the Biblical narra-
tives as to warrant no suspicion that a paragraph
thus deviating is spurious. Sometimes the; are
designed not for " trajections " but for historical
explanations, as John's narrative of the unction
(xii. 3-10) may have been designed to explain the
motive of Judas's treason, and prepare the reader
for the otherwise unaccountable assertion in John
liti. 12 (see Question II. (*.) above).
(3.) The account of Matthew "represents Judas
as having had an interview with the chief priests
and the elders (that is, with the Sanhedrim) in
the Temple," but Matthew " could not have de-
scribed the Sanhedrim as holding a council in the
bouse of Caiaphas, and proceeding thence to the
house of Pilate, and also as being in the Temple,
where Judas returned them their money," etc. To
this some writers would reply, that the Sanhedrim
condemned Jesus in the Temple which " was the
tegular place for holding the assemblies of the
council " ; and they condemned him early in the
morning, '* soon after fire, a time which St. John
would naturally describe by rpwta, because earlier
than sunrise, lcptet, though much later than the
dawn of the day, and therefore coincident with the
time when preparations usually began for the morn-
ing sacrifice," and when the priests must neces-
sarily be at the Temple (Ureswell's 42d Dissertation).
But the more plausible reply is that after Jesus had
been condemned by the Roman governor, some,
perhaps many, of the priests returned to the " inner
court " or " holy place " of the Temple; and Judas
not being allowed to step within the " court of the
priests,'' came to the entrance of it, and threw his
jilverlings into it, perhaps upon the floor.
(4.) u In the conclusion of the account found in
Matthew's Gospel there is an extraordinary misuse
of a passage of Zechariah, which the writer proles
to quote horn Jeremiah," and the words of which
are altogether inapplicable to the purpose for which
they are used in Matthew xxvii. 9, 10.
In regard to the word Jeremiah used instead of
Zechariah, some critics have supposed that it was
an error not of Matthew bnt of the copyist There
is no important external evidence for this supposi
tion, and it may appear a singular attempt to save
the genuineness of an entire paragraph by giving
up the genuineness of one word in it. But where
a mere date or proper name is obviously wrong,
there is more reason for questioning its genuineness
than there would be if the doubtful word were
suggestive of a moral idea or religious sentiment
An accidental error is the more easily committed and
overlooked where the copyist is not guided by any
Impression on his heart Dr. Henderson says:
' Augustine mentions, that in his time some M3S,
■■mitted the name of 'Uptfdov- It is also omitted in
the MSS. 33, 157 ; in the Syriac, which is the most
ancient of all the Tersions; in the Polyglott Persic,
sod in a Persic MS. in my poss ess ion, bearing date
.. D. 10S7 ; in the modern Greek ; in the Verona
• sod Vercelli Latin MSS., and in a Latin MS. of
Lac Brug. The Greek MS. 22 reads Zaxaplou,
a* alto do thr Philoxcnian Syriac in the margin,
JUDB, OB JUDAS
1503
and an Arabic MS. quoted by BengeL Origan and
Eusebiua were in favor of this reading." Profc
Henderson mentions the conjecture that 'Ipum was
written by some early copyist instead of Zpiov, and
thus the mistake of " Jeremiah "for " Zechariah ™
was easily transmitted. See Henderson's Com-
mentary on Zechariah, xl. 12, 13 ; also Robinson's
Harmony, p. 227.
In regard to the propriety of the citation of
Matthew from Zechariah we may remark, that the
entire book from which the citation was made la
one of the obscurest in the Bible, and our difficulties
in determining its precise import should make us
modest in a s ser ting that the Evangelist has mad*
a wrong use of it It is not true, however, that
we can discover no propriety in the quotation.
Among the various methods of explaining it, on*
is the following: The prophet is speaking <if him-
self as a type of Christ, and of his opposers as types
of Christ's opposers. In this typical style he pre-
dicts the sufferings of Christ, and also the malice
of Christ's opposers. As the chief priests and
Judas were among the most conspicuous enemies
of Christ, the prophet may be considered as typi-
cally referring in the most conspicuous manner to
them. He describes himself as appraised by his
foes at a "splendid " (». e. despicable) price, thirty
pieces of silver (the sum paid for a common slave,
Exodus xxi. 32), and this money was given to the
potter for his field. The Evangelist, fixing his eye
upon the salient points of the prophecy and quoting
<ui seiuum rather than ad literam, says that Jesus
was appraised at the same contemptible price, and
this was given to the potter for his field. The
events described by Zechariah are thus typical and
in this sense prophetical of the events described by
Matthew. There is no more reason for regarding
Matthew's quotation as spurious than for regarding
many other quotations in the New Testament as
such. This is a common style of the New Testa-
ment writers. Even De Wette in his old age con-
ceded: "The entire Old Testament is a great
prophecy, a great type of Him who was to coma,
and has come." — " The typological comparison,
also, of the Old Testament with the New was by
no means a mere play of fancy; nor can it be
regarded as altogether the result of accident, that
the evangelical history, in the most important
particulars, runs parallel with the Mosaic." (Ssa
the passage cited in Fairbaim's Typology, i. 34,
See also pp. 342, 334.)
Another and kindred explanation of the passage
is this: As Psalms lxix. 25 and eix. 8 contain
prophecies of the generic or ideal righteous man
of whom Christ is the antitype, so they contain
prophecies of the generic or ideal unrighteous man
of whom according to Acts i. 16-20 Judas is as
antitype, and this prophecy of Zechai iah may ti
interpreted as thus generic or ideal in its refem M
to the Messiah and his persecutors.
E. A. P.
JUDE, or JUDAS, LEBBETTS and
THADDETJS {'loitas 'laniifiov: Judat Ja-
cobi: A. V. "Judas the brother of James"), one
of the Twelve Apostles; a member, together with
his namesake " Iscariot,'' James the son of Al-
phieus, and Simon Zelotes, of the last of the three
sections of the apostolic body. The name Judas
only, without any distinguishing mark, occurs in
the lists given by St Luke Ti. 18; Acts I. 13; and
In John xiv. 22 (where we find "Judas not Iscariot "
Digitized by
Google
1504
JUDE, OB JTJDA8
among the Apostles), but the Apostle has been
genet ally identified with « Lebbeua whose surname
was Thaddeus " (A«ft8a«oj i <*-t«Ai|8<lr BaStatot),
Matt. x. 3; Mark iii. 18, though Schleiermacher
(Crit. Euay on SL Luke, p. 93) treats with scorn
any such attempt to reconcile the lists. In both
the last quoted places there is considerable variety
of reading; some MSS. hsving both in St- Matt,
and St Mark AfjB/9auo>, or eoootuor alone; others
Introducing the name 'laiSai or Judas Zelottt in
jSt Matt., where the Vulgate reads Tkaddmu alone,
which is adopted by Lachmann in his Berlin edition
of 1833. This confusion is still further increased
by the tradition preserved by Eusebius (H. E. 1.
13) that the true name of Thomas (the twin) was
Judas ('loiSas i xal 8e>/uis), and that Thaddeus
was one of tbe " Seventy," identified by Jerome in
Malt. x. with "Judas Jacobi" [Thaddeus]; as
well as by the theories of modern scholars, who
regard the " Levi " (Anils i toC 'AA^xrfou) of
Mark ii. 14, Luke v. 27, who is called " Lebes "
(A«/tyi) by Origen {Cant Celt. 1. i. § 63), as the
same with Lebbeua. The safest way out of these
acknowledged difficulties is to hold fast to the
srdinarily received opinion that Jude, Lebbaeus, and
Thaddeus, were three names for the same Apostle,
who is therefore said by Jerome (in Matt. x. to
have been " trionymus," rather than introduce con-
fusion into the apostolic catalogues, and render
them erroneous either in excess or defect.
Tbe interpretation of the names Lebbaeus and
Thaddeus is a question beset with almost equal
difficulty. The former is interpreted by Jerome
» hearty," corculum, as from 2 v, cor, and Thad-
dasus has been erroneously supposed to have a cog-
nate signification, homo pectorona, as from the
Syrlao 113, pectue (Lightfoot, Hot. Jltb. p. 936,
Beugel; Matt. x. 8), tbe true signification of tPl
being mamma (Angl. tent), Buxtorf, Lex. Tabu.
366S. Winer (Realwb. s. v.) would combine the
two and Interpret them as meaning Hertentb'nd.
Another interpretation of Lebbaeus is the young lion
(leuncuba) as from WO^, leo (Schleusner, s. v.),
while Lightfoot and Baumg.-Crusiua would derive
It from Lebba, a maritime town of Galilee men-
tioned by Pliny (Hut. Nat. v. 19), where, however,
the ordinary reading is Jebha. Thaddeus appears
in Syriac under the form Adai, and Michaelis ad-
mits the idea that Adai, Thaddeus, and Judas,
may be different representations of the same word
(iv. 370), and Wordsworth (Or. Test, in Matt,
x. 3) identifies Thaddeus with Judas, as both from
rrjSn, to " praise." Chrysostom, De Prod. Jvd.
L i. c. 3, says that there was a ■' Judas Zelotes "
among the disciples of our Lord, whom he identifies
vith the Apostle. In the midst of these uncer-
tainties no decision can be arrived at, and all must
rest on conjecture.
Much difference of opinion has also existed from
the earliest times as to the right interpretation of
tbe woHs 'IovSoi 'I<ucc£)9ou. The generally re-
ceived opinion is that there is an ellipse of the word
UcAAos, and that the A. V. is right in translating
» Judas the brother of James." This is defended
by Winer (Realuib. s. v.; Gramm. of N. T. Diet.,
Clark's edition, 1. 203), Arnaud (Reciter. Crit. mar
\SJ>. de Jude), and accepted by Burton, Alford,
Iregelles, Miohaeus, etc. This view has received
strength from the belief that the " Epistle of Jude,"
JUDAS, THE LOKD'S BROTHEB
the author of which expressly calls himself '• brother
of James," was the work of this Apostle. But if,
as will be seen hereafter, the arguments in favor
of a non-apostolic origin for this epistle are such
as to lead us to assign it to another author, tot
mode of supplying the ellipse may be considered
independently: and since the dependent genitive
almost universally implies the filial relation, and is
so interpreted in every other case in the apostolic
catalogues, we may bu allowed to follow the Feshito
and Arabic versions, the Benedictine editor of
Chrysostom, Horn. XXXI 1., in Mstt. x. 2, and
the translation of Luther, as well as nearly all the
moat eminent critical authorities, and render the
words " Judas the eon of James," that is, either
" James the son of Alpheus," with whom he is
coupled, Matt x. 3, or some otherwise unknown
person.
The name of Jude only occurs once in the Gospel
narrative (John xiv. 22), where we find him taking
part in the last conversation with our Lord, and
sharing the low temporal views of their Master's
kingdom, entertained by bis brother Apostles-
Nothing is certainly known of the later history
of the Apostle. There may be some truth in the
tradition which connects him with the foundation
of the church at Kdesaa ; though here again there
is much confusion, and doubt is thrown over the
account by its connection with the worthless fiction
of " Abgarus king of Edessa" (Euaeb. H.- K. i.
13; Jerome, Comment, in Matt, x.) [Thaddjccb.]
Nicepborus (II. E. ii. 40) makes Jude die s natural
death in that city after preaching in Palestine,
Syria, and Arabia. The Syrian tradition speaks of
his abode at Edessa, but adds that he went thence
to Assyria, and was martyred in Phoenicia on his
return; while that of the west makes Persia the
field of his labors and the scene of his martyrdom.
The tradition preserved by Hegesippus, which
appears in Eusebius, relative to the descendants of
Jude, has reference, in our opinion, to a different
Jude. See next article. E. V.
JTJ'DAS, THE LORD'S BROTHER.
Among the brethren of our Lord mentioned by the
people of Nazareth (Matt. xiii. 55; Mark vi. 3)
occurs a •' Judas," who has been sometimes identi-
fied with the Apostle of tbe same name; a theory
which rests on the double assumption that 'loitas
'IcurcijSoii (Luke vi. 16) is to be rendered " Jndaa
the brother of James," and that " the sons of
Alpheus " were " the brethren of our Lord," and
is sufficiently refuted by the statement of St John
vil. 5, that " not even his brethren believed on
Him." It has been considered with more prob-
ability that be was the writer of the epistle which
bears the name of " Jude the brother of James,"
to which the Syriac version incorporated with the
later editions of the Peshito adds " and of Joaes "
(Origen in Matt. xiii. 65: Clem. Alex. Adumb, 6{
Alford, GL rest, Matt xiii. 65). [Judb, Epistls
or; James.]
Eusebius gives os an Interesting tradition of
Hegesippus (H. £. iii. 20, 32) that two grandsons
of Jude, " who according to the flesh was called the
Lord's brother" (cf. 1 Cor. ix. 5), were seized and
carried to Rome by orders of Domitian, whose ap-
prehensions had been excited by what he bad heard
of the mighty power of the kingdom of Christ
but that the Emperor having discovered by theb
answers to his inquiries, and the appearance of tint-
hands, that they were poor men, supporting these
Digitized by
Google
JT7DE, BPISTLB OF
salves by their labor, and having learnt the spiritual
nature of Christ's kingdom, dismissed them in con-
tempt, and ceased from his persecution of the
church, whereupon they returned to Palestine and
took a leading place in the churches, " as being at
the same time confessors and of the Lord's family "
(At tw Hi ftaprvpas o/ioS koi euro firms trras
t»S Kvplou), and lived till the time of Trajan.
Kwephorus (L 33) tells us that Jude's wife was
named Mary. E. T.
JTTDE, BPISTLE OF. I. ft* Avthonhip.—
The writer of this epistle styles himself, ver. 1,
- Jude the brother of James " (tot/upbt 'Iok4$ou),
and has been usually identified with the Apostle
Judas Lebbaras or Thaddams, called by St. Luke,
<L 16, 'IooSot 'lax£$ov, A. V. " Judas the brother
of James." It has been seen above [Judas Leb-
b.«jb] that this mode of supplying the ellipse,
though not directly contrary to the tutu loquendi,
is, to say the least, questionable, and that there are
strong reasons for rendering the words "Judas the
•m of James: '' and inasmuch as the author ap-
pears, ver. 17, to distinguish himself from the
Apostles, and bases his warning rather on their
tuthority than on his own, we may agree with
sminent critics in attributing the epistle to another
author. Jerome, Tertullian, and Origen, among
he ancients, and Calmet, Calvin, Hammond, Han-
lein, Lange, Vatablus, Arnaud, and Tregelles, among
the moderns, agree in assigning it to the Apostle.
Whether it were the work of an Apostle or not, it
has from very early times been attributed to " the
Lord's brother" of that name (Matt. ziii. 55; Mark
vi. 3): a view in which Origen, Jerome, and (if
indeed the Adtunbrationtt be rightly assigned to
him) Clemens Alexaodrinus agree; which is im-
plied in the words of Chrysostom {Bom. 48 in
Joan-), confirmed by the epigraph of the Syriac
versions, and is accepted by most modern com-
mentators, Arnaud, Bengd, Burton, Hug, Jessien,
Obhauaen, Tregelles, etc. The objection that has
been felt by Neander (PL and Tr. i. 899), and
ethers, that if he had been '• the Lord's brother "
he would have directly styled himself so, and not
merely "the brother of James," has been antici-
pated by the author of the " Adumbrationes "
(Bunsen, Amalect Ante-ffican. I 330), who says,
" Jade, who wrote the Catholic Epistle, brother of
the sons of Joseph, an extremely religious man,
though he was aware of his relationship to the
Lord, did not call himself His brother; but what
said he? ' Jude the servant of Jesus Christ' as his
Lord, but 'brother of James.' " We may easily
believe that it was through humility, and a true
sense of the altered relations between them and
Him who had been " declared to be the Son of
God with power .... by the resurrection from
the dead" (cf.aCor.v. 1«), that both St Jude and
St- James forbore to call themselves the brethren
of Jesus. The arguments concerning the author-
ship of the epistle are ably summed up by Jessien
(de AnthenL Ep. Jnd. Ups. 1831), and Arnaud
(Becker. Critiq. mr ftp. de Jade, Strasb. 1851,
translated Brit, and For. Et>. Rev. Jul 1869);
and though it u oy no means dear of difficulty,
the most probable conclusion is that the author was
Jude, one of the brethren of Jesus, and brother of
James, not the Apostle the son of Alolueus, but
the Bishop of Jerusalem, of whose dignity and au-
thority in the church lie avails himself to introduce
Us spittle to Ins readers.
JUDE, EPISTLE OF 1505
II. Genuineness ana* Cnnomcity. — Although the
Epistle of Jude is one of the so-called Antitego-
mena, and its canonicity was questioned in the
earliest ages of the church, there never was any
doui.t of its genuineness among those by whom il
was known. It was too unimportant to be a for-
gery ; few portions of Holy Scripture could, with
reverence be it spoken, nave been more easily
spared; and the question was never whether it was
the work of an impostor, but whether its author
was of sufficient weight to warrant its admission
into the Canon.
This question was gradually decided in its favor
and the more widely it was known the more gen
erally was it received as canonical, until it took its
place without further dispute as a portion of the
volume of Holy Scripture.
The state of the case as regards its reception by
the church is briefly as follows: —
It is wanting in the Peshito (which of itself
proves that the supposed Evangelist of Edeasa could
not have been its author), nor is there any trace of
its use by the Asiatic churches up to the com-
mencement of the 4th century; but it is quoted ss
apostolic by Ephrem Syrus ( Opp. Syr. i. p. 136).
The earliest notice of the epistle is in the famous
Muratorian Fragment (circa A. D. 170) where we
read " Epistola sane Judas et superscripti Johannis
dues in Catholics, " (Bunsen, AnalecL Ante-Nic
i. 153, reads " Catholicis ") " habentur."
Clement of Alexandria is the first father of the
church by whom it is recognized (Pmdag. L iii.
c 8, p. 239, ed. Sylburg.; Stromal. 1. iii. c. 2, p.
431, Adumbr. 1. c). Eusebius also informs us
(U. E. vi. 14) that it was among the books of Ca-
nonical Scripture, of which explanations were given
in the Hypotypotet of Clement; and Cassiodoms
(Bunsen, AnalecL Ante-Nic i. 330-333) gives some
notes on this epistle drawn from the same source.
Origen refers to it expressly as the work of the
Lord's brother ( Comment, in Matt. xiii. 56, 56, t>
x. § 17): "Jude wrote so epistle of but few verses,
yet filled with vigorous words of heavenly grace."
He quotes it several times {HomiL m Gen. xiii.;
in Jot. vil. ; M Etech. iv. ; Comment, in Matt, t
xiii. 87, xv. 37, xvii. 30; in Joann. t xiii. §37; m
Horn. L iii. §6, t. $ 1; De Prineip. L iii. c. 2,51),
though he implies in one place the existence of
doubts as to its canonicity, " if indeed the Epistle
of Jude be received " ( Comment, in Matt. xiii. 33,
t XTii. $30).
Eusebius (H. E. iii. 35) distinctly classes it with
the Antilegomena, which were nevertheless recog-
nized by the majority of Christiana; and as-
serts (ii. 33) that, in common with the Epistle of
James, it was "deemed spurious" (roesorriu),
though together with the other Catholic Epistles
publicly read in most churches.
Of the Latin Fathers, Tertullian once expressly
cites this epistle as the work of an Apostle (de Hob,
Mulieb. i. 3), as does Jerome, " from whom (Enoch)
the Apostle Jude in his epistle has- given a quota-
tion " (in Tit. c L p. 708), thoughon the other hand
he informs us that in consequence of the quota-
tion from this apocryphal book of Enoch it is re-
jected by most, adding, that " it has obtained such
authority from antiquity and use, that it is now
reckoned among Holy Scripture " ( CaUil Scrip-
tor. EccUm.). He refers to- it as the work of an
Apostle (EpitL ad PauUn. iii).
The epistle is also quoted by Malcbjon, a. pres-
byter of Antiooh, in a- letter, to- the bishops of Alsa-
Digitized by
Google
1506 JUDE, EPISTLE OF
, and Borne (Euseb. B. E. vii. 30), nod by
PsDadius, the friend of Chrysostom (Chrys. Opp.
t nil., Dial. oc. 18, 30), and is contained in the
Laodleene (a. d. 368), Carthaginian (897), and ao-
ealled Apostolic Catalogues, aa well as in those
emanating from the churches of the East and West,
with the exception of the Synopsis of Chrysostom,
and those of Casatodorna and Ebed Jean.
Various reasons might be assigned for delay in
receiving this epistle, and the doubts long preva-
lent respecting it The uncertainty as to its author,
and his standing in the church , the unimportant
nature of its contents, and their almost absolute
identity with 3 Pet. ii., and the supposed quota-
tion of apocryphal books, would all tend to create
a prejudice against it, which could be only over-
come by time, and the gradual recognition by the
leading churches of its genuineness and eanonicity.
At the Reformation the doubts on the canonical
authority of this epistle were revived, and hare
been shared in by modern commentators. They
were more or leas entertained by Grotius, Luther,
Calvin, Berger, Bolten, Dahl, Michaelis, and the
Magdeburg Centuriators. It has been ably defended
by Jessien, de Authentia Ep. Judae, Lips. 1821.
III. Time and Place of Writing Here all is
conjecture. The author being not absolutely cer-
tain, there are no external grounds for deciding the
point ; and the internal evidence is but small. The
question of its date is connected with that of its
relation to 2 Peter (see below, § vi.), and an earlier
or later period has been assigned to it according as
it has been considered to have been anterior or pos-
terior to that epistle. From the character of the
errors sgainst which it is directed, It cannot be
placed very early; though there is no sufficient
ground for Schleiermacher's opinion that " in the
list time" (<V i<rx&T<f XP<W. Ter - 18; ef. 1
John ii. 18, Iox&tti ipa tori) forbids our pla-
cing it in the apostolic age at all. Lardner places
it between A. D. 64 and 66, Davidson before A. D.
70, Credner A. D. 80, Calmet, Estius, Witaius, and
Neander, after the death of all the Apostles but
John, and perhaps after the fall of Jerusalem;
although considerable weight is to be given to the
argument of DeWette (Emleit. in tf. T. p. 300),
that if the destruction of Jerusalem bad already
taken place, some warning would have been drawn
from so signal an instance of God's vengeance on
the "ungodly."
There are no data from which to determine the
place of writing. Burton however, Is of opin-
ion that inasmuch as the descendants of " Judas
the brother of the Lord," if we identify him with
the author of the epistle, were found in Palestine,
he probably " did not absent himself long from his
native country," and that the epistle wss published
there, since he styles himself "the brother of
James," "an expression most likely to be used in
a country where James was well known " (Eecles.
Hit*, i. 331).
:V. For uhai Readert detigntd.— The readers
an nowhere expressly defined. The address (ver.
1) is applicable to Christians generally, and there
is nothing in the body of the episne to limit its
reference; and though it is not improbable that the
author had a particular portion of the church in
view, and that the Christians ef Palestine were the
Immediate objects of his warning, the dangers de-
scribed were such as the whole Christian world was
exposed to, and the adverssrieslhe same which had
everywhere to he guarded against.
jtjde, epistle or
V. It* Object, Contentt, and Sfefe.— He objset
of the Epistle is plainly enough announced, ver. I;
" it was needful for me to write unto you and ex-
hort yon that ye should earnestly contend far tht
faith that was once delivered unto the saints:" ths
reason for this exhortation is given ver. 4, m tbs
stealthy introduction of certain "ungodly men,
taming the grace of our God into hachnousness,
and denying the only Lord God and our Lord
Jesus Christ." The remainder of the epistle is
almost entirely occupied by a minute depiction of
these adversaries of the faith — not heretical teesek-
ert (as has been sometimes supposed), which con-
stitutes a marked distinction between this epistle
and that of St Peter — whom in a torrent of impas-
sioned invective he describes as stained with unnat-
ural lusts, like " the angels that kept not their first
estate" (whom he evidently identifies with tbs
sons of God," Gen. vi. 2), and the inhabitants of
Sodom and Gomorrah — aa despisers of all legiti-
mate authority (ver. 8) — murderers like Cain —
covetous like Balsam — rebellions like Korah (ver.
11 ) — destined from of old to be signal monuments
of the Divine vengeance, which he confirms by
reference to a prophecy current among the Jews,
and traditionally assigned to Enoch (w. 14, IB).
The epistle closes by briefly reminding the read-
ers of the oft-repeated prediction of the Apostles
— among whom the writer seems not to rank him-
self—that the faith would be mailed by such
enemies ss he has depicted (w. 17-19), exhorting
them to maintain their own steadfastness in the
faith (w. 30, 31), while they earnestly sought to
rescue others from the corrupt example of those
licentious livers (w. 22, 23), and commending
them to the power of God in language which forci-
bly recalls the closing benediction of the epistle to
the Romans (w. 24, 25; cC Rom. xvi. 35, 37).
This epistle presents one peculiarity, which, as
we learn from St Jerome, caused its authority to
be impugned in very early times — the supposed
citation of apocryphal writings (w. 9, 14, 15).
The former of these passages, containing the
reference to the contest of the archangel Michael
and the Devil " about the body of Moses," was
supposed by Origen to have been founded on a
Jewish work called the " Assumption of Moses "
('AvdAtnl'U McmVsm), quoted also by (Ecumrains
(ii. 629). Origen's words are express, " which
little work the Apostle Jude has made mention of
in his epistle " (de Princip. iii. 2, i. p. 138); and
some have sought to identify the book with tbs
nt£& /TVeS), « 7%* death 0/ Motet," which
is, however, proved by Michaelis (W. 388) to be a
modern composition. Attempts have also been
made by Lardner, Macknight, VHringa, and others,
to interpret the passage in a mystical sense, by
reference to Zech. ill. 1, 3; but t!ie similarity is to*
distant to afford any weight to the idea. Then
is, on the whole, little question that the writer Is
here making use of a Jewish tradition, based on
Deut xxxiv. 6, just aa facts unrecorded in Scrip-
ture are referred to by St Paul (3 Tim. iii. 8;
Gal. iii. 19); by the writer of the Epistle to the
Hebrews (il.8, si 34); by St James (v. 17), and
St Stephen (Acts vii. 93, 93, 30).
As regards the supposed quotation from tht
Book of Enoch, the question is not so clear whether
St Jude is making a citation from a work already
In the bands of his readers — which is the oplnios
of Jerome (I c.) and Tertuman (who was is eons*
Digitized by
Google
JTJDE. EPISTLE OF
soenee inclined to receive the Book of Enoch w
canonical Scripture), and has been held by many
nodern critics — or ia employing a traditionary
prophecy not at that time committed to writing (a
theory which the words used, ■< Enoch prophesied
Mjrwy " hrpe^revm • ■ • 'Kr&x *-tyo"i »eem
rather to favor), but aiterwards embodied in the
apocryphal work already named [Enoch, thb
Book of]. This is maintained by Tregelles
(Home's Introd. 10th ed., ir. 621), and has been
held by Care, Hoftnann (Schriftbewds, i. 430),
Lightfoot (it 117), Witsius, and Calvin (cf. Jerom.
Comment, ir. Eph. c. T. p. 647, 618; in TU. c 1,
p.708i
The main body of the epistle is well character-
ised by Alford (tfr. 7V»fc ir. 117) as an impassioned
Invective, in the impetuous whirlwind of which the
writer is hurried along, collecting example after ex-
ample of Dirine vengeance on the ungodly ; heap-
ing epithet upon epithet, and piling image upon
image, and as it were laboring for words and images
strong enough to depict the polluted character of
the licentious apostates against whom he ia warning
the church ; returning again and again to the sub-
ject, as though all language was insufficient to give
an adequate idea of their profligacy, and to express
his burning hatred of their perversion of the doc-
trines of the Gospel.
The epistle is said by DeWette (EMeit. in Jv*. T.
p. 300) to be tolerably good Greek, though there
are some peculiarities of diction which have led
Schmidt (EinUU. i. 814) and Bertholdt (vi. 3194)
to imagine an Aramaic original.
VL Rdilion bttuxm the EpUtks of Jude nnd
I Peter. — It is familiar to all that the larger por-
tion of this epistle (ver. 3-16) ia almost identical
in language and subject with a part of the Second
Epistle of Peter (3 Pet ii. 1-19). In both, the
heretical enemies of the Gospel are described in
terms so similar as to preclude all idea of entire
Independence. This question is examined in the
article Peter, Second Epistle of.
As might be expected from the comparatively
unimportant character of the epistle, critical and
exegetical editions of it have not been numerous.
We may specify Amaud, Recherche* Crit. tur
f EpUre de Jade, Strasb. and Par. 1851; Laur-
mann, Wot. Crit. et Commentar. in Ep. Jud.,
Uroningas, 1818; Schaiiing, Jacob, et Jud. Ep.
CathoL comment., Havnue, 1841; Stier, On the
Eputla of Jama and Jude ; Herder, Briefe
tweener Brider Jetu, Umgo, 1775; Augusti,
Weleker, Benson, and Macknight, on the Catholic
Epistles. E. V.
• It is impossible in a limited space to discuss
the relations between this epistle and the Second
of St- Peter: but it may be assumed that an at-
tentive consideration of tbein will show that the
two epistles could not have been written independ-
ently. Less certain, and yet probable, is the con-
ehuion that the Epistle of St. Jude was the earlier
of the two. If this be accepted, then the date
of the death of St Peter in A. r>. 68 becomes a
txed point in determining the date of the Epistle
•f St Jude, and the question of date is thus
trooght within narrow limits, as the whole contents
af the epistle prove it to have been comparatively
ate.
It is extremely unlikely that two epistles to nm-
lar and so nearly of the same date should hare been
addressed primarily to the same readers. It may
■■sfim be argued negatively that the Epistle of
JTJDE, EPISTLE OP 1507
St. Jude was not first sent to the Christians of Asia
Minor. As the earliest testimony to the epistle
comes from Alexandria, it has been suggested that
Egypt may have been the original destination of
the 'jpistle.
The expression in the first paragraph of section
V., in the preceding article, " these adversaries of
the faith — not heretical teachert (as has been
sometimes supposed) which constitutes a marked dis-
tinction between this epistle and that of St. Peter "
— is not easily understood in connection with the
statement in VI., " In both the heretical enemies of
the Gospel are described in terms so similar as to
preclude all idea of entire independence." Certainly
the terms in both epistles are quite similar, and must
refer to the same class of persons. It is plain enough
that they were persona within the church; "men
crept in unawares " (Jude 4), " spots in your feasts
of charity, when they least with you" (12). St
Peter expressly calls them teachert (11. 1) ; St Jud*
describes their teaching and its effect*.
The analysis of the epistle may be given some-
what more fully, since notwithstanding its warmth
and glow, it is most thoroughly planned and care-
fully arranged. Alter the salutation (1, 3), and the
reason for writing (3, 4), follows an argument for
the certain punishment of the ungodly from a series
of historical examples (5, 6, 7). The application
of this is made in the following verse, and then, in
contrast an example ia given of godly conduct (9)
and a further application (10). After this follows
a denunciation of the ungodly by a series of ex-
amples (11), and by five comparisons (12, 13).
The certain punishment of the- ungodly is then
further shown by prophecy; first, the prophecy of
Enoch, as the most ancient possible, and its appli-
cation (14-16), then as the most recent, thus show-
ing perfect accord in all time, tbe prophecy of the
Apostles, with its application (17-19). This con-
cludes the argumentative part of the epistle, and
then follows an exhortation to the faithful, (a.) in
regard to their own spiritual welfare (30, 31), and
(o.) in regard to those corrupted by the ungodly
(22, 23). The epistle closes with a benediction
(24) and doxology (25).
There is nothing in the epistle to indicate that
the author identified " the angels that kept not
their first estate " (6) with the " sons of God "
mentioned in Gen. vi. 2. This was an interpreta-
tion current In the church of the second century;
but the sin of the angels here mentioned must have
occurred before man was placed upon the earth.
In regard to the quotation from Enoch, the re-
mark above made, that it does not appear that St
Jude quoted from any book, is very just It is
certain that he could not have made use of onr
present " book of Enoch," as that work bears de-
cisive internal evidence of not having been written
before the middle of the second century. In the
article Enoch, the book of, a great variety of
opinions will be found given on this matter. The
only ground however, on which it seems possible
to assign an earlier date to this volume than to the
writings of the New Testament, is that of Its having
been subsequently largely altered and interpolated
— a supposition which makes it to have been orig-
inally a different book from that which we now
have. Without denying the possibility of then
having been another more ancient " book of Enoch "
from which the present one has been formed, it b
sufficient to say that such a supposition deprives it
of all interest in the p re se nt connection, and h
Digitized by
Google
1£08 JUDB, EFISTLE OF
i thmt St Jude could not have quoted from
the book as we now hare it. Such suppositions
however, are always cumbrous, useless, and unsatis-
factory, in the absence of anj proof, and it is far
more agreeable to the ordinary laws of evidence to
consider the whole book as a forgery of the second
century — a period when works of this character
abounded. F. 6.
* Literature. — For references to the more im-
portant general commentaries which Include the
Epistle of Jude, see the addition to Johk, First
Epistlb or. The following special works may also
be noted: H. Witsius, Comm. m EpitL Juda,
Lugd. Bat 1703, 4to, reprinted in his MeltUmata
Leidcntia, Basil. 1789. C. F. Sehmid, Obterva-
tkmet super Ep. colli. S. Judo, lips. 1768. Sank*,
Paraphratit in EpitL ii. Petri, et EpitL Judo,
cum VtL LaL Trandalionit Varietate, NotU, tie.
Hate, 1784. H. C. A. Hanlein, Ep. Juda, Grace,
Comm. critico et AtmoL perpeL Ulattrata, 3d ed.
Erlang. 1799, 8d ed. 1804. Schneckenburger,
SchoUen, u. s. w. in his Beitrige ear EM. int
N. T., Stuttg. 1832, p. 214 ff. De Wette, Kurte
Erld&rung d. Brief e d. Petrut Judat u. jakobut,
Laps. 1847, 3* Ausg. bearb. von B. Briickner,
1865 (Bd. iii. Th. L of his Kurtgef. exegeL Handb.).
Huther, KriL exegeL Handbook ib. d. 1. Brief d.
Petrvt, d. Brief d. Judat u.d.2. Brief d. Petrut,
Gotk 1862, 8« Aufl. 1867 (Abth. xii. of Meyer's
Kommentar). M. F. Kampf, Der Brief Juda,
hut. IcriL exegeL betrachtet, Sulzb. 18M. Fron-
mUller, Die Brief e Petri u. d. Brief Juda theoi.-
komilet. bcarbdlet, Bielefeld, 1859, 2« Aufl. 1862
(Theil xiv. of Luge's Bibehcerk); translated, with
additions, by J. I. Mombert, New York, 1867 (part
of vol. ix. of Lange's Comm.). Wiesinger, Der
•wette Brief det ApotL Petrut u. d. Brief d. Judat
erklart, Kiinigsb. 1862 (Bd. vi. Abth. iii. of Olsbau-
tan's Bibl Comm.). Theod. Scbott, Der zweite
Brief Petri u. d. Brief Juda erklart, Erlang. 1863.
Holtzmann, German transl. and brief notes, in
Bunsen's Bibehcerk, vol. iv. (1864), p. 630 ff., comp.
vol. viii. p. 690. In English, some of the old Puritan
divines expatiated at great length on this epistle,
as W. Perkins (66 sermons), W. Jenkyn, and T.
Hanton (Lond. 1658). Jenkyn's Expatition, 2
parts, Lond. 1652-54, 4to, has been several times
reprinted (Lond. 1656; Glasgow, 1783 ; Lond. 1839;
Edinb. 1863). Practical expositions hare also been
given by W. Muir (1822), E. Bickersteth (1846),
and W. Macgillivray (1846); see Darling's Cyclop.
Btbhographica, (Subjects), col. 1728. In our own
country we bare Barnes's Notet (Epittlet of Janet,
Peter, John, and Jude, New York, 1847); The
8camd Epiitle of Peter, the Epittlet of John and
Judat, anil the Revelation, trantlated from tie
Greek, with notet (by the Rev. John Lillie), New
York, 1864, 4to (Amer. Bible Union); and the
Rer. Frederic Gardiner's The Latt of the Epittlet ;
a Commentary on the Epittie of St. Jude, Boston,
1866, with Excursus, and an Appendix on the
similarity between this epistle and the Second of
St. Peter (abridged from his art in the BibL Sacra
far January, 1854).
On the critical questions relating to the epistle
one may consult, in addition to the Introductions
to the New Testament by De Wette, Reus*, Bksek,
Davidson, and others, J. C. G. Dahl, De avdirrla
BfdttL Petnna potteriorit et Juda, Rost 1807;
JTJDUKS
L. A. Amaud, Ettai criL tar t,tuthenticUt dt
tipUre de Jude, Strasb. 1836; F. Bran, lntrod,
criL a tepttre de Jude, Strasb. 1849; and A
Kitsch! Veber die im Briefe dtt Judat charab-
ttritirUn Antinomitten, in the Thiol Stud. u. KriL
1861, pp. 103-118. See also, especially on the
relation of the 2d Epistle of Peter to that of Jude,
the literature under Peter, Skookd Eputlb or.
A.
• JUDE'A. [JvomaJ]
• JU'DBTH. [Judith, 8.]
JUDGES- The administration of Justice in afl
early eastern nations, as amongst the Arabs of the
desert to this day, rests with the patriarchal
seniors; " the judges being the beads of tribes, at
of chief houses in a tribe. Such from their derated
position would have the requisite leisure, would be
able to make their decisions respected, and through
the wider intercourse of superior station would
decide with fuller experience and riper reflection.
Thus in the book of Job (xxix. 7, 8, 9) the patri-
archal magnate is represented as going forth " to
the gate " amidst the respectful silence of elder*,
princes, and nobles (comp. xxxii. 9). The actual
chiefi) of individual tribes are mentioned on various
occasions, one as late as the time of David, as pre-
serving importance in the commonwealth (Num.
vii. 2, 10, 11, xvii. 6, or 17 in Heb. text; xxxiv.
18; Josh. xxii. 14, soperh. Num. xri. 2, xxi. 18).
Whether the princes of the biles mentioned in 1
Chr. xxvii. 16, xxriii. 1, are patriarchal beads, or
merely chief men appointed by the king to govern,
is not strictly certain ; but it would be foreign to
all ancient eastern analogy to suppose that they
forfeited the judicial prerogative, until reduced and
overshadowed by the monarchy, which in David's
time is contrary to the tenor of history. During
the oppression of Egypt the nascent people would
necessarily hare few questions at law to plead ; and
the Egyptian magistrate would take cognisance of
theft, violence, and other matters of police. Yet
the question put to Moses shows that '• a prince "
and " a judge " were connected even then in the
popular idea (Ex. ii. 14; comp. Num. xvi. 13).
When they emerged from this o ppre s sio n into
national existence, the want of a machinery of judi-
cature began to press. The patriarchal seniors did
not instantly assume the function, having probably
been depressed by bondage till rendered unfit for it,
not having become experienced in such matters,
nor having secured the confidence of their tribes-
men. Perhaps for these reasons Hoses at first took
the whole burden of judicature upon himself, then
at the suggestion of Jethro (Ex. xviii. 14-24) in-
stituted judges over numerically graduated sections
of the people. These were chosen for their moral
fitness, but from Deut i. 16, 16, we may infer that
they were taken from amongst those to whom
primogeniture would have assigned it Save in
offenses of public magnitude, criminal eases do not
appear to hare been distinguished from civiL The
duty of teaching the people the knowledge of the
law which pertained to the Levites, doubtless in-
cluded such instruction as would assist the judg-
ment of those who were thus to decide according
to it The Levites were thus the ultimate s o urc es
of ordinary jurisprudence, and perhaps the "teach-
ing " aforesaid may merely mean the expounding
the law as applicable to difficult cases srbang at
lbs expression 3£W5 rFDTJ (Hum. xxv. 14) ..ofa, rf » lubavata of the tribe
■d ssssai to mean "the patriarchal W, Judg. v. 8, It).
;<mmp. 1 Oac It
Digitized by
Google
JUDGES
taction Beyond this, it il not po*s*b.e to indicate
any division of the provinces of deciding on point*
rf la* u distinct from point* of bet. The judge*
mentioned a* standing before Joshua in the gnat
assemblies of the people must be understood as the
successors to those chosen by Moses, sad had doubt-
less been elected with Joshua's sanction from among
the same general class of patriarchal seniors (Josh.
It. 8, 4, xxii. 14, xxiv. 1).
The judge was reckoned a sacred person, and
secured eren from verbal injuries. Seeking a de-
cision at law is called "enquiring of God" (Ex.
xviii. 15). The term " gods " is actually applied
to judges (Ex. xxL 8; comp. Pa. lxxxii. 1, 8). The
Judge was told, " thou shalt not be afraid of the
■we of men, for the judgment is God's; " and thus,
whilst human instrumentality was indispensable,
the source of justice was upheld as divine, and the
purity of its administration only sank with the
decline of religious feeling. In this spirit speaks
Ps. lxxxii., — a lofty charge addressed to all who
judge; comp. the qualities regarded as essential at
the institution of the office, Ex. xviii. 31, and the
strict admonition of Deut xvi. 18-30. But besides
the sacred dignity thus given to the only royal
function, which, under the Theocracy, lay in human
hands, it was made popular by being vested in those
who led public feeling, and it* importance in the
public eye appear* from such passages as Ps. box.
19 (comp. cxix. 38), lxxxii., cxlviii. 11; Prov. viii.
IS, xxxi. 4, 6, 33. There could have been no con-
siderable need for the legal studies and expositions
af the Levites during the wanderings in the wilder-
ness while Hoses was alive to solve all questions,
sod while the law which they were to expound
was not wholly delivered. The Levites, too, bad a
charge of cattle to look after in that wilderness like
the rest, and seem to have acted also, being Hoses'
awn tribe, as supports to bis executive authority.
But then few of the greater entanglements of prop-
erty oould arise before the people were settled in
their possession of Canaan. Thus they were dis-
ciplined in smaller matters, and under Hoses' own
eye, for greater ones. When, however, the com-
mandment, "judges and officers ahalt thou make
thee in all thy gates" (Deut. xvi. 18), came to be
fulfilled in Canaan, there were the following sources
from which those official* might be supplied : 1st,
the es officio judges, or their successors, as chosen
by Hoses; Sdly, any surplus left of patriarchal
seniors when they were taken out (as has been
shown from Deut. i. 15, 10) from that class; and
Idly, the Levites. On what principle toe non-
Levitieai judges were chosen after Divine superin-
JTJDGES
1509
tendance was interrupted at Joshua'* death is not
clear. A simple way would have been for the
exiiting judges in every x>wn, etc., to choose their
own colleagues, as vacancies fell, from among the
limited number of persons who, being heads of
families, were competent Generally speaking, the
reputation for superior wealth, as some guarantee
against facilities of corruption, would determine the
choice of a judge, and, taken in connection with
personal qualities, would tend to limit the choice
to probably a very few persons in practice. The
supposition that judicature will always be provided
for is carried through all the books of the Law (see
Ex. xxi. 6, xxii. pau. ; Lev. xix. 16; Num. xxxv.
34; Deut i. 16, xvi. 18, xxv. 1). And all that
we know of the fact* of later history confirms the
supposition. The Hebrews were sensitive as regards
the administration of justice; nor is the free spirit
of their early commonwealth in anything more
manifest than in the resentment which followed the
venal or partial judge. The fact that justice re-
posed on a popular basis of administration largely
contributed to keep up this spirit of independence,
which is the ultimate check on all perversions of
the tribunal. The popular aristocracy' of head*
of tribes, sections of tribes, or families, is found to
fall into two main orders of varying nomenclature,
and rose from the eapiU eenai, or mem citizens,
upwards. The more common name for the higher
order is •• princes," and for the lower, " elders "
(Judg. viii. 14; Ex. ii. 14; Job xxix. 7, 8, 9; Err.
X. 8). These orders were the popular element of
judicature. On the other hand the I>evitical body
was imbued with a keen sense of allegiance to God
as the Author of Law, and to the Covenant as his
embodiment of it, and soon gained whatever forensic
experience and erudition those simple times could
yield ; heme they brought to the judicial task the
legal acumen and sense of general principles which
complemented the ruder lay element Thus the
Hebrews really enjoyed much of the virtue of a
system which allots separate provinces to judge and
jury, although we cannot trace any such line of
separation in their functions, save in so far as has
been indicated above. To return to the tint or
popular branch, there is reason to think, from the
general concurrence of phraseology amidst much
diversity, that in every city these two ranks of
" princes " and " elders " * had their analogies, and
that a variable number of beads of families and
group* of families, in two ranks, were popularly
recognised, whether with or without any form of
election, as charged with the duty of administering
justice. Succoth « (Judg. viii. 14) may be taken
a Thai term Is uaad tor want of a batter ; but as
regards privileges of rue, the tribe of Levi and house
af Aaron were the only aristooracr, and th ese, by thatr
privation as regards holding land, wen an aristocracy
wry unlike what has usually gone bj that nam*.
» A number of words — «. f. K'lpJ, 1B7, TM,
end (especially In the book of Job) 3^1} — are some-
■mas rendered " pHnoe " In the A V. : in* first most
ftsarly uniformly so, which seems derlgoadve of the
saealve eminence of high birth or naelojon ; the next,
^07, expresses active and ofldal authority. Yet es
*a* r^tPJ was most likely, nay, in the earner annals,
wrieln, to be the "1H7, we must be earefal a> ex-
tsdrng from the person eellsd by the on* title the
qualities denoted by the other. Of the two i
terms, ^"73, expressing princely qualities, approaches
most nearly to K*Q73, and T33, expressing prom-
inence of station, to "lfe.
e The prions and elders here were togethas 77.
The suboidlnation in numbers, of which Ten Is the
has* of Ex. xvttl. and Deut 1. 16, strongly suggests
that 70 + 7 were the actual components ; although
they are spoken of rather as regards flioeuons of ruling
gonerallv than of Judging specially, yet we need not
separata the two, es Is dear from Deut. i. 18. Much
division of labor assuredly found little place In petasl
ttve tunes. No doubt there men presided "In the
■ate." The number of Jacob's Ojmily (with wbmh
Succoth was tradMonallT connected, den. szjdN 17)
Digitized by
Google
1510 JUDGES
M an example. Evidently the ex officio judges of
Motes' choice would here left their nicceaeora wheu
the tribe of Gad, to which Succoth pertained (Josh,
liii. 87), settled in it* territory and town*: and
what would be more simple than that the whole
number of judges in that tribe should be allotted
to its towns in proportion to their size? As such
judges were mostly the headmen by genealogy,
they would fall into their natural places, and sym-
metry would be preserved. The Levitt* also were
apportioned on the whole equally among the tribes;
and if they preserved their limits, there were prob-
ably lew parts of Palestine beyond a day's journey
from a Levitical city.
One great hold which the priesthood had, in
their jurisdiction, upon men's ordinary life was the
custody in the Sanctuary of the standard weights
and measures, to which, in cases of dispute, reference
was doubtless made. It is, however, reasonable to
suppose that in most towns sufficiently exact models
of them for all ordinary questions would be kept,
since to refer to the Sanctuary at Shiioh, Jerusalem,
etc., in every case of dispute between dealers would
be uugatory (Ex. xxx. 18; Num. iii. 47; Ex. xlr.
13). Above all these, the high-priest in the ante-
regal period was the resort in difficult cases (Deut.
xvii. 12), as the chief jurist of the nation, and who
would in case of need be perhaps oracularly directed ;
yet we hear of none acting as judge save Eli: " nor
is any judicial act recorded of him ; though perhaps
his not restraining his sons is meant to be noticed
as a failure in his judicial duties. Now the judicial
authority of any such supreme tribunal must have
wholly lapsed at the time of the events recorded in
Judg. xix. 6 It is also a fact of some weight,
negatively, that none of the special deliverers called
judges was of priestly lineage, or even became as
much noted as Deborah, a woman. This seems to
show that any central action of the high-priest on
national unity was null, and of this supremacy, had
it existed in force, the judicial prerogative was the
main element. Difficult cases would include cases
of appeal, and we may presume that, save so far as
the authority of those special deliverers made itself
felt, there was no Judge in the last resort from
Joshua to Samuel. Indeed the current phrase of
those deliverers that they "judged " Israel during
their term, shows which branch of their authority
was most in request, and the demand of the people
for a king was, in the first instance, that he might
" Judge them," rather than that he might " fight
their battles" (1 Sam. viii. 5, 30).
These judges were IS in number: 1. Othniel;
I. Ehud; 3. Shamgar; 4. Deborah and Barak;
5. Gideon ; 6. Abimelech ; 7. Tola ; 8. Jair ; 9.
Jephthah; 10. Ibzan; 11. Eton; 13. Abdon; 18.
Samson; 14. Eli; 15. Samuel. Their history is
related under their separate names, and some re-
having been 70 on their doming down Into Egypt (Gen.
xlvL 2>), may have been the cam* of this number
■Ming that of the "elders" of that place, besides the
eaered character of the factor 7. See also Ex. xxir. 9.
On the other hand, at Bamah about 80 persons occu-
pied a similar place In popular esteem (1 Sam. Ix. 22 :
see also var. 18, and vii. 17).
« The remark In the margin of the A. V. on 1 Sam.
,T. 18, seems Improper. It is as follow* : R He seems
to have been a Judge to do Justice only, and that in
southwest Israel." When It was Inserted, the fune-
Hoa of the high-priest, sa mentioned above, would
smw to bars been overlooked. That function was
MnauUy designed to be general, net partial; though
JUDGES
■■lis upon the first thirteen, contained in the
book of Judges, are made in the following article.
The chronology of this period is discussed nudes
Chkokolooy (voL i. p. 444).
This function of the priesthood, being, it may
be presumed, in abeyance during the period of tin
judges, seems to have merged in the monarchy.
The kingdom of Saul suffered too severely from
external foes to allow civil matters much promi-
nence. Hence of his only two recorded judicia,
acts, the one (1 Sam. xi. 13) was the mere remis-
sion of a penalty popularly demanded; the other)
the pronouncing of a sentence (ibid, xiv. 44, 46)
which, if it was sincerely intended, was overruled
in turn by the right sense of the people. In Da>
vid's reign it was evidently the rule for the king
to hear causes in person, and not merely be pas-
sively, or even by deputy (though this might also
be included), the " fountain of justice " to hie
people. For this purpose, perhaps, it was prospec-
tively ordained that the king should " write bin a
copy of the Law," and u read therein all the daya
of his life " (Deut. xvii. 18, 19). The same class
of oases which were reserved for Moses would prob-
ably fall to his lot; and the high-priest was of
course ready to assist the monarch. This is far-
ther presumable from the fact that no officer anal-
ogous to a chief justice ever appears under the
kings. It has been supposed that the subjection
of all Israel to David's sway caused an influx of
such cases, and that advantage was artfully taken
of this by Absalom (2 Sam. xv. 1-4); but the rata
at which cases were disposed of can hardly have
been slower among the ten tribes after David had
become their king, than it was during the previooa
anarchy. It is more probable that during David's
uniformly successful wars wealth and population
increased rapidly, and civil cases multiplied faster
ihan the king, occupied with war, could attend to
them, especially when the summary process cus-
tomary in the East is considered. Perhaps the
arrangements, mentioned in 1 Chr. xxiii. 4, xxvi.
29 (camp. v. 32, "rulers" probably including
judges), of the 6000 I.evites acting as "officers
and judges," and amongst them specially " Chena-
niah and his sons; " with others, for the trans-
Jordanic tribes, may have been made to meet the
need of suitors. In Solomon's character, whose
reign of peace would surely be fertile in civil ques-
tions, the " wisdom to judge " was the fitting first
quality (1 K. iii. 9; eomp. Ps. hxil. 1-4). As a
judge Solomon shines " in all his glory " (1 K. HI.
16, Ac.). No criminal was too powerful for his
justice, as some had been for his father's (3 Sam.
iii. 89; 1 K. ii. 5, 6, 88, 34). The examples of
direct royal exercise of judicial authority are 3 Sam.
i. 15, iv. 9-12, where sentence is summarily exe-
cuted, 1 ' and the supposed esse of 3 Sam. xiv. 1-91.
probably, as hinted above, its execution was ta-
adequate.
» It ought not to be forgotten that in some cases
of " blood " the « congregation " thauwelvee were to
"Judge " (Num. xxxv. 24), and that the appeal of
Judg. xx. 4-7 was thus la the regular course of eon-
stitntional law.
• 8m 2 Bam. xv. 8, when the text gives probably
a better rendering than the margin.
d The eases of Amnon and Absalom, In which no
notice was taken of either crime, though set down by
MichaaUs (Laics o/ Mutts, bk. I. art. x.) as inataneas
of Justice forborne through politic con s ideration of tire
i ssSjatnalw power, seam tether to be exampl es or sm
Digitized by
Google
JUDGES
fne denunciation of 2 Sam. zU- 5. 6, is, though
sot formally judicial, yet in the same •pint. Sol-
anion similarly proceeded in the eua of Joab and
Shimei (1 K. ii. 34, 46; comp. 2 K. xiv. 6, 6).
It is likely that royalty in Israel wai ultimately
unfavorable to the local independence connected
with the judicature of the " prince) " and " elden "
!n the territory and cities of each tribe. The ten-
dency of the monarchy was doubtless to centralize,
sod we read of large numbers of king's officers ap-
pointed to this and cognate duties (1 Car. xxiii. 4,
xxvi. 29-32). If the general machinery of justice
had been, as is reasonable to think, deranged or
retarded during a period of anarchy, the Levites
afforded the fittest materials for its reoonstitution.o
Being to some extent detached, both locally, and
by special duties, exemptions, etc., from the mass
af the population, they were more easily brought to
the steady routine which justice requires, and, what
is no leu important, were, in case of neglect of
duty, more at the mercy of the king (as shown in
the ease of the priests at Nob, 1 Sam. xxii. 17).
Hence it is probable that the Lerites generally
superseded the local elders in the administration
of justice. But subsequently, when the Levites
withdrew from the kingdom of the ten tribes, judi-
cial elders probably again filled the gap. Thus
they conducted the mock trial of Naboth (1 K.
xxi. 8-13). There it in 9 Chr. xix. 6, Ac, a spe-
cial notice of a reappointment of judges by Jahosh-
sphat and of a distinct court, of appeal perhaps, at
Jerusalem, composed of Identical and of lay de-
ments. In the same place (as also in a previous
sue, 1 Chr. xxvi. 32) occurs a mention of " the
king's matters " as a branch of jurisprudence. The
rights of the prerogative having a constant ten-
dency to encroach, and needing continual regulation,
these may have grown probably into a department,
somewhat like our exchequer.
One more change is noticeable in the pre-Baby-
lonian period. The " princes " constantly appear
as a powerful political body, increasing in influence
and privileges, and having a fixed centre of action
at Jerusalem ; till, in the reign of Zedekiah, they
seem to exercise some of the duties of a privy
council; and especially a collective jurisdiction (2
Chr. xxviU. 21; Jer. xxvi. 10, 16). These
" princes " are probably the heads of great houses*
in Judah and Benjamin, whose fathers had once
been the pillars of local jurisdiction; but who,
through the attractions of a court, and probably
also under the constant alarm of hostile invasion,
became gradually residents in the capital, and
formed an oligarchy, which drew to itself, amidst
the growing weakness of the latter monarchy, what-
ever vigor was left in the state, and encroached on
the sovereign attribute of justice. The employ-
ment In offices of trust and emolument would tend
•Mesnese, either of government or of personal chanc-
ier, In David. His own criminality with Battuheba
It is superfluous to argue, since the matter was by
Divine interference removed from the cognisance of
Mman law.
a From Mum. Iv. 8, 28, 80, It would Mem that after
10 years of age the Levites were excused from the
service of the tabernacle. This was perhaps a pro-
vision meant to favor their usefulness In deciding on
points of law, since the maturity of a Judge has hardly
tegun at that age, and before it they would have been
.untor to their lay coadjutors.
• Thai some of the heads of such hoses, h owev e r,
"SHIiied Ibstr proper sphere,
JUDGES 1511
also in the same way, and such chief families would
probably monopolize such employment. Heiiot
the constant burden of the prophetic strain, de-
nouncing the neglect, the perversion, the corrup-
tion, of judicial functionaries (Is. i. 17, 21, v. 7, x.
2, xxviii. 7, lvi. 1, lix. 4; Jer. ii. 8, v. 1, vii. 5,
xxi 12; Ex. xxii. 27, xlv. 8, 9; Hoe. v. 10, vii. 5,
7; Amos v. 7, 16, 24, vi. 12; Hab. L 4, 4c>. Still,
although far changed from its broad and simple
basis in the earlier period, the administration of
justice had little resembling the set and rigid sys-
tem of the Sanhedrim of later times. 11 [See
Sanhedrim.] This but change arose from the
fact that the patriarchal seniority, degenerate and
corrupted as it became before the Captivity, was by
that event broken up, and a new basis of judica-
ture had to be sought for.
With regard to the forms of procedure little
more is known than may be gathered from the
two examples, Ruth iv. 2, of a civil, and 1 K. xxL
8-14, of a criminal character; * to which, as a
specimen of royal summary jurisdiction, may be
added the well-known "judgment" of Solomon.
Boas apparently empanels as it were the first ten
"elders" whom he meets "in the gate," the well-
known site of the oriental court, and cites the
other party by " Ho, such an one; " and the people
appear to be invoked as attesting the legality of
the proceeding. The whole affair bears an extem-
poraneous aspect, which may, however, be merely
the result of the terseness of the narrative. In
Job ix. 19, we have a wish expressed that a " time
to plead" might be "set" (comp. the phrase of
Roman law, Hem dieere). In the case of the in-
voluntary homicide seeking the city of refuge, be
was to make out his case to the satisfaction of its
elder* (Josh. xx. 4), and this failing, or the con-
gregation deciding against his claim to sanctuary
there (though how its sense was to be taken does
not appear), he was not put to death by act of
public justice, but left to the " avenger of blood "
(Deuf. xix. 12). The expressions between " blood
and blood," between " plea and plea " (Deut, xviL
8), indicate a presumption of legal intricacy arising,
the latter expression seeming to imply something
like what we call a "cross-suit" We may infer
from the scantiness, or rather almost entire absence
of direction as regards forms of procedure, that the
legislator was content to leave them to be provided
for as the necessity for them arose, it being impos-
sible by any jurisprudential devices to anticipate
chicane. It is an interesting question bow far
judges were allowed to receive fees of suitors; Hi-
chaelis reasonably presumes that none were allowed
or customary, and it seems, from the words of 1
Sam. xii. 3, that such transactions would have been
regarded as corrupt. There is another question
how far advocates were usual. There is no reason
xxvi.
17, where "elders of the land'
ably of the people." Still, the occasion is not
e The 8anhedrim Is, by a school of Judaism once
more prevalent than now, attempted to be band on
the 70 elders of If run. si. 16, and to be traced through
the 0. T. history. Those 70 were chosen when Judl-
estui* had been already provided for (Ex. xvtli. 25),
and their offlos was to sasist Mores In the duty of
governing. But no Influence of any such body Is
traceable In later tunes at any crisis of history. The*
stem In tact to have left no successors.
* The example of Susannah ami the elden) I* (sp-
an authority to he cited.
Digitized by
Google
1512 JUDGES, BOOK OF
to think that until the period of Greek
when we meet with words based on ovrtryopot end
TapdxXirros, any profaned clam of pleaders ex-
isted. Yet passages abound in which the pleading
af the cause of those who are unable to plead their
own, is spoken of as, what it indeed was, a noble
act of charity; and the expression has era (which
shows the popularity of the practice) become a
basis of figurative allusion (Job zri. SI;' Pror.
xzli. 28, xxlii. 11, xxxi. 9; Is. 1. 17; Jer. xxx. IS,
1. 34, li. 88). The blessedness of such aeU is
forcibly dwelt upon, Job xzix. 13, 13.
There is no mention of any distinctive dress or
badge as pertaining to the judicial officer. A staff
or sceptre was the common badge of a ruler or
prince, and this perhaps they bore (Is. xir. 5;
Am. i. 6, 8). They would, perhaps, when officia-
ting, be more than usually careful to eomply with
the regulations about dress bud down in Num. xt.
38, 39; Deut xxiL 12. The use of the "white
•Me" (Judg. t. 10), by those who "sit in judg-
ment,'' was perhaps a convenient distinctive mark
tor them when journeying where they would not
usually be personally known.
For other matters relating to some of the forms
of law, see Oaths, Officxbs, Witkshkb.
H. H.
JUDGES, BOOK OF (D't^O?: Spi-
ral: liter Judicum). I. Tkie.— The period of
history contained in this book reaches from Joshua
to Eli, and is thus more extensive than the time
of the Judges. A large portion of it also makes
no mention of them, though belonging to their
time. But because the history of the Judges oc-
cupies by far the greater part of the narrative, and
la at the tame time the history of the people, the
title of the whole book is derived from that por-
tion. The book of Ruth was originally a part of
this book. But about the middle of the fifth cen-
tury after Christ it was placed in the Hebrew copies
immediately after the Song of Solomon. In the
LXX. it has preserved its original position, but as
a separate book.
II. Arrangement. — The book at first sight may
be divided into two parte — i.-xvL,and xvii.-xxi.
A. i.-xvi. — The subdivisions are: (a.) I.-U. 5,
which may be considered ss a first introduction,
giving a summary of the results of the war carried
en against the Canaanites by the several tribes on
the west of Jordan after Joshua's death, and form-
tag a continuation of Josh. xii. It is placed first,
ss in the most natural position. It tolls us that
the people did not obey the command to expel the
people of the land, and contains the reproof of them
by a prophet (b.) ii. 6-iii. 6. This is a second
introduction, standing in nearer relation to the fol-
lowing history. It informs us that the people fell
into idolatry after the death of Joshua and his
generation, and that they were punished for it by
being unable to drive out the remnant of the in-
habitants of the land, and by falling under the
hand of oppressors. A parenthesis occurs (ii. 16-
19) of the highest importance at giving a key to
(Be following portion. It is a summary view of
the history: the people fall into idolatry; they are
then oppressed by a foreign power; upon their
'epentance they are delivered by a judge, after
whose death they relapse into idolatry, (c) ill. 7-
cvt The words, " and the children of Israel did
aril in the sight of the Lord," which had been
already used in ii. 11. are employed to introduce
JUDGES, BOOK OF
the history of the 13 judges comprised In ton,
book. An account of six of these 13 is given at
greater or less length. The account of the re-
maining seven is very short, and merely attaches
to the longer narratives. These narratives are as
follows: (1.) The deliverance of Israel by Oth-
nieL 111. 7-11. (2.) The history of Ehud, and (in
31) that of Shamgar, iii. 12-31. (8.) The demr-
eranee by Deborah and Barak, iv.-v. (4.) The
whole passage is vi.-x. 5. The history of Gideon
and his son Abimelech is contained in vi-ix., and
followed by the notice of Tola, x. 1, 2, and Jair,
x. 3-5. This b the only ease in which the history
of a judge is continued by that of his children.
But the exception is one which illustrates the les-
son taught by the whole book. Gideon's sin in
making the epbod is punished by the destruction
of his family by Abimelech, with the help of the
men of Shechem, who in their turn become the
instruments of each other's punishment. In addi-
tion to this, the short reign of Abimelech would
seem to be recorded as being an unauthorized an-
ticipation of the kingly government of later times.
(5.) x. 6-xii. The history of Jephthah, x. 6-xli.
7 ; to which is added the mention of Ibsan, riL 8-
10; Elon, 11, 12; Abdon, 13-15. (6.) The history
of Samson, consisting of twelve exploits, and form-
ing three groups connected with his love of three
Philistine women, xiil.-xvi. We may o b s erve in
general on this portion of the book, that it is
almost entirely a history of the wars of defiver-
«; there are no sacerdotal allusions in it; the
tribe of Judah is not alluded to after the time of
Othniel; and the greater part of the judges belong
to the northern half of the kingdom.
B. xvii.-xxi. — This part has no formal connec-
tion with the preceding, and is often called an ap-
pendix. No mention of the judges occurs in it.
It contains allusions to » the house of God," the
ark, and the high-priest- The period to which the
narrative relates is simply marked by the expression.
" when there was no king in Israel " (xix. 1 ; of
xviii. 1). It records (a) the conquest of Laish by
a portion of the tribe of Dan, and the establish-
ment there of the idolatrous worship of Jehovah
already instituted by Hicsh in Mount Ephraim.
The date of this occurrence is not marked, but it
has been thought to be subsequent to the time of
Deborah, as her song contains no allusion to any
northern settlements of the tribe of Dan. (6) The
almost total extinction of the tribe of Benjamin by
the whole people of Israel, in consequence of their
supporting the cause of the wicked men of Gibeah.
and the means afterwards adopted for preventing its
becoming complete. The date is in some degree
marked by the mention of Hhlnehas, the grandson
of Aaron (xx. 28), and by the proof of the unanim-
ity still prevailing among the people.
III. Design.— We have already seen that there
is an unity of plan in i.-xvi., the clew to which is
stated in ii. 16-19. There can be little doubt of
the design to enforce the view there expressed. But
the words of that passage must not be pressed too
closely. It is a general view, to which the facta of
the history correspond in different degrees. Thai
the people is contemplated as a whole; the judges
are spoken of with the reverence due to God's
instruments, and the deliverances appear complete.
But it would seem that the people were in no in-
stance under exactly the same circumstances, and
the judges in some points fall short of the idea!
Thus Gideon, who in tome respects is the moa
Digitized by
Google
JUDGES, BOOK OF
aainent of them, is only the head of hit own tribc^
and hat to appease the men of Ephraim by concilia-
tory language in the moment of hit victory over
the Midianitea; and he hunwlf if the means of
leading away the people from the pure worship of
God. In Jephthah we find the chief of the land
of Gilead only, affected to some extent by personal
reasons (xi. 9); his war against the Ammonites
is confined to the east side of Jordan, though its
issue probably also freed the western side from their
presence, and it is followed by a bloody conflict
with Ephraim. Again, Samson's task was simply
•' to begin to deliver Israel " (xiii. 5) ; and the oc-
casions which called forth his hostility to the Phil-
istines are of a kind which place him on a different
level from Deborah or Gideon. This shows that
the passage in question is a general review of the
collective history of Israel during the time of the
judges, the details of which, in their varying aspects,
are given faithfully as the narrative proceeds.
The existence of this design may lead us to expect
that we have not a complete history of the times —
a fact which is clear from the book itself. We have
only accounts of parts of the nation at any one time.
We may easily suppose that there were other inci-
dents of a similar nature to those recorded In xviL-
xxi. And in the history itself there are points
which are obscure from want of fuller information,
e. g. the reason for the silence about the tribe of
Judah (see also viii. 18, ix. 36). Some suppose
even that the number of the judges is not complete ;
but there is no reason for this opinion. Redan (1
Sam. xil. 11) is possibly the same as Abdon.
Ewald (Getch. ii. 177) rejects the common explan-
ation that the word is a contracted form «f Ben-
Dan, i. e. Samson. And Jael (v. 6) need not be
Jie name of an unknown judge, or a corruption of
Jair, as Ewald thinks, but is probably the wife of
Heber. " The days of Jael " would carry the
misery of Israel up to the time of the victory over
Sisera, and such an expression could hardly be
thought too great an honor at that time (aee v.
24). [Jam.]
IV. Maleriali. — The author must have found
Britain parts of his book in a definite shape: e. g.
the words of the prophet (ii. 1-6), the song of
Deborah (v.), Jotham's parable (ix. 7-20 ; see also
dv. 14, 18, xv. 7, 16). How far these and the rest
of his materials came to him already written is a
matter of doubt. Stahelin (Krit. Unlereuch. p.
106) thinks that ill- 7-xvi. present the same man-
ia- and diction throughout, and that then is no
need to suppose written sources. So Havernick
{Einldlimg, i. 1, pp. 68 ft, 107) only recognizes
the use of documents in the appendix. Other
critics, however, trace them throughout. Brrtheou
(On Jvdijet, pp. xxviii.-xxxii.) says that the differ-
ence of the diction in the principal narratives,
coupled with the fact that they are united in one
plan, points to the incorporation of parts of previous
histories. Thus, according to him, the author found
the tubstanoe of iv. 2-24 already accompanying the
long of Deborah ; in vi.-ix. two distinct authorities
are used — a life of Gideon, and a history of
Shechem and its usurper; in the account of Jeph-
thah a history of the tribes on the east of Jordan
k employed, which meets us again in different parte
af the Pentateuch and Joshua; and the history of
jamooo is taken from a longer work on the Philis-
tine wan. Ewald's view 1* similar (Getch. i. 184
r. U. 486 ff.).
V. Relation to other Bad**- (A.) To Joshua. —
JUDGES, BOOK OF
1513
Josh. xv.-xxL must be compared with Judg. i. ho
order to understand fully how far the several tribes
failed in expelling the people of Canaan. Nothing
is said in ch. i. about the tribes on the east ol Jor-
dan, which had been already mentioned (Josh, xiii
13), nor about Levi (see Josh. xiii. 33, xxi. 1-42).
The.carrying on of the war by the tribes singly is
explained by Josh. xxiv. 28. The book begins with
a reference to Joshua's death, and ii. 6-9 resumes
the narrative, suspended by L-ii. 6, with the same
words as are used in concluding the history of
Joshua (xxiv. 28-31). In addition to this the fol-
lowing passages appear to be common to the two
books: compare Judg. L 10-16, 20, 21, 27, 29,
with Josh. xv. 14-19, 13, £3, xvii. 12, xvi. 10. A
reference to the conquest of Laith (Judg. xviii.)
occurs in Josh. xix. 47.
(B.) .To the books of Samuel and King*. — Wc
find in i. 28, 80, 33, 36, a number of towns upon
which, " when Israel was strong," a tribute of bond-
service was levied ; this is supposed by some to
refer to the time of Solomon (1 K. ix. 13-22).
The conduct of Saul towards the Kenltes (1 Sam.
xv. 6), and that of David (1 Sam. xxx. 29), is ex-
plained by i. 16. A reference to the eontinuanot
of the Philistine wars it implied in xiii. 6. The
allusion to Abimelech (2 Sam. xi. 21) it explained
by ch. ix. Chapters xvii.-xxi. and the book of Ruth
are more independent, but they have a general
reference to the subsequent history.
The question now ariat* whether this book
forma one link in an historical aeries, or whether it
has a closer connection either with those that pre-
cede or follow it. We cannot infer anything from
the agreement of its view and spirit with those of
the other books. But its form would lead to the
conclusion that it was not an independent book
originally. The history ceases with Samson,
excluding Eli and Samuel; and then at this point
two historical pieces are added — xvii.-xxi. and the
book of Ruth,— independent of the general plan and
of each other. This it sufficiently explained by
Ewald's supposition that the books from Judges to
2 Kings form one work. In this case the histories
of Eli and Samuel, so closely united between them-
selves, are only deferred on account of their dost
connection with the rite of the monarchy. And
Judg. xvii.-ixi. it inserted both at an illustration of
the tin of Israel during the time of the Judges, in
which respect it agrees with i.-xvi., and at present-
ing a contrast with the better order prevailing in
the time of the kings. Ruth follows next, at
touching on the time of the judges, and contain-
ing information about David's family history which
does not occur elsewhere. The connection of these
books, however, it denied by DeWette (Kinleit.
§ 186) and Theniut (Kwzgtf. extg. Handb., Sam.
p. xv. j KDidge, p. 1. ). Bertheau, on the other hand,
thinks that one editor may be traced from Genesis
to 2 Kings, whom he believes to be Ezra, in agree-
ment with Jewish tradition.
VI. Date. — The only guide to the date of this
book which we find in U. 6-xvi. is the expression
•< unto this day," the last occurrence of which (xv.
19) implies tome distance from the time of Samson.
But L 91, according to the most natural explana-
tion, would indicate a date, for/ this chapter at
least, previous to the taking of Jebua by David (2
Sam. v. 6-9). Again, we should at first tight rip-
pote 1. 28, 30, 38, 36, to- belong to the time of
the Judges; but these passages an taken by most
modern critics at pointing to- the- time of Solomo-
Digitized by
Google
1514
JUDGES, BOOK OF
(efc 1 K. lx. SI). L-xvl. may therefore hire been
caiginally, u Ewald think. (6'escA. 1. 202, 203), the
commencement of a larger work reaching down to
above a century after Solomon (ne al*o Davidton,
Introduction, 649, 660). Again, the writer of tin
appendix lived when Sbiloh wai no longer a relig-
ious centre (rvill. 81) ; he wai acquainted with the
regal form of government (xvii. 8, xvlii. 1). There
la tome doubt ai to xvlii. 30. It to thought by
some to refer to the Philistine oppression. But it
seems more probable that the Assyrian captivity to
intended, In which can the writer must have lived
after 721 b. c. The whole book therefore must
have taken its present shape after that date. And
if we adopt Ewald's view, that Judges to 2 Kings
form one book, the final arrangement of the whole
must have been after the thirty-seventh year of
Jehoiachin's captivity, or B. c. 662 (9 K. xxv. 27).
Bertbeau's suggestion with respect to Ezra brings
it still lower. But we may add, with reference to
the subject of this and the two preceding sections,
that, however interesting such inquiries may be,
they are only of secondary importance. Few par-
sons are fully competent to conduct them, or even
to pass judgment on their discordant results. And
whatever obscurity may rest upon the whole mat-
ter, there remains the one important fact that we
have, through God's providence, a continuous his-
tory of the Jewish people, united throughout by
the conviction of their dependence upon God and
government by Him. This conviction finds its
highest expression in parts of the Pentateuch, the
Psalms, and the Prophets; but it was confirmed by
the events of the history — although, at times, in
a manner which gave room to Faith to use its power
of perception, and allowed men in those days, as
well as in these, to refuse to recognize it.
VII. Chronology. — The time commonly as-
signed to the period contained in this book to 299
years. But this number is not derived directly
from it. The length of the interval between Josh-
ua's death and the invasion of Cushan-rishatbabn,
and of the time during which Shamgar was judge,
to not stated. The dates which are given amount
to 410 years when reckoned consecutively; and
Acts xiii. 20 would show that this was the compu-
tation commonly adopted, as the 450 years seem to
result from adding 40 years for Eli to the 410 of
this book." But a difficulty is created by xi. 26, and
In a still greater degree by 1 K. vi. 1, where the
whole period from the Exodus to the building of
the Temple is stated at 480 years (440, LXX.).
One solution questions the genuineness of the date
in 1 Kings. Kennicott pronounces against it
(Din. Gen. 80, §3), because it is omitted by Ori-
gin when quoting the rest of the verse. And it to
urged that Josephus would not have reckoned
592 years for the same period, if the present read-
ing had existed in his time. But it to defended
JUDGES, BOOK OF
by Thenius (ad for.), and to generally adopted
partly on account of its agreement with Egyptian
chronology. Host of tie systems therefore ehortea
the time of the judges by reckoning the dates si
Inclusive or contemporary. But all these combina-
tions are arbitrary. And this may be said of Keil's
scheme, which to one of those toast open to objec-
tion. He reckons the dates successively as far as
Jair, but makes Jephthah and the three following
judges contemporary with the 40 years of the Phil-
istine oppression (cf. x. 6-xiii. 1) ; and by com pre s s
ing the period between the division of the bod
and Cushan-rtohathaim into 10 years, and the
Philistine wars to the death of Saul into 39, be
arrives ultimately at the 480 yean. Ewald and
Bertheau have proposed ingenious but unsatisfactory
explanations — differing in details, but both built
upon the supposition that the whole period from
the Exodus to Solomon was divided into 12 gen-
erations of 40 years; and that, for the period of the
judges, this system has become blended with the
dates of another more precise reckoning. On the
whole, it seems safer to give up the attempt to as-
certain the chronology exactly. The successive
narratives give us the history of only parts of the
country, and tome of the occurrences may have
been contemporary (x. 7). Round numbers seem
to have been used — the number 40 occurs four
times; and two of the periods are without any
date. On this difficult subject see also Chbokol-
oot, vol. L p. 444 f.
VIII. Commentaries. — The following list to
taken from Bertheau (Kurxgef. extg. Handb. a. A.
T. [Lief, vi.], Dot Buck der Richttr «. But [Leipz.
1845] ), to whom this article to principally indebted.
(1.) Rabbinical : In addition to the well-known
commentaries, see R. Tanchumi HierosoL ad librae
Vet. TttL commentarii Arabia ipecimen una em
annotationibut ad aliquot boa tibri Jndd., ed. Ch.
Fr. Schnurrer, Tubing. 1791, 4to; B. Tanchumi
Hierosol. Comment, m propheiat Arab. ipeeimen
(on Judg. xiii.-xxi.), ed. Th. Haarbriicker, Halia,
1842, 8vo. (2.) Christian. Victor. Strigei, Scholia
in libr. Jndd., Lips. 1586 ; Serrarius, Comment, m
horot Jot. Judd., etc., 1609; Critici Sacri, torn. H.
Lond. 1660; Sebast. Schmidt, In libr. Jndd., Ar-
gentor. 1706, 4to; Ctorici V. T. tibri historic*,
Amstelod. 1708, fol.; J. D. Michaelis, Denude
Uebert. del A. T. Gottingen, 1772; Dathe, Ubri
hitt. Lot. vert. 1784; AxegeL Handb. d. A. T.
[St. 2, 3] ; Maurer, Comment, gramm. criL [vol. i.]
pp. 126-153; RosenmuUeri Scholia [pars xL], vol
ii. Lipsite, 1836; GotU. Ludw. Studer, Dot Buck
der Richttr grammat. und hist or. ertiart, 1836.
There axe many separate treatises on eh. v., a list
of which to found in Bertheau, p. 80.
E. R. O.
* Other reference!. — Among the older com-
mentators (see above) are also J. Drusiue, Ad he*
■> • It should bs stated thit the order of the Greek
ut the oldest manuscripts (ABC and the Sinaitic MS.)
assigns the 460 years In Acta xiil. 19, 20 to the period
of the quasi possession of the promised land before the
conquest, and not to that of the adminlstzatlon of the
judges. This order places col psra ravva after mv-
nfxwTa and before Kmxe. The translation then Is :
'• He gave them their land as a possession about four
hundred and fifty rears ; and, after that, he gave [to
ItaaniJ Judges until Samuel the prophet" Laehmann,
rregeues, Luthardt (Renter's Repertorimt, 1856, p. 206),
Brora (Oourte of Developed Griticum, p. 109), Words-
rath (<n lot.) and others adopt tads raiding. In this
case, adding together the years from the btrth ef
Isaac (regarded as the pledge of the po sse ssi on de jwe
of Canaan) to that of Jacob (80), the age of Jacob oa
going into Egypt (180), the sojourn In Cgypt (216, as
required by Ual til. 17), and the time of the wander.
ing In the wilderness (47), we have as the remit 4ea
years between lasso and the judges. Meyer says eoav
noently that this form of the text Is corrupt (JpestaV
grteh. p. 281, ed. 1864) j but It Is singular that so many
of the best authorities agne In tola variation, let
fuller details on this question see the wntsra Caws
mmtosy en lie AeU, pp. 127 f and 214 1 ■
Digitized by
Google
JUDGMENT, DAT OF
UfficiSora Jeeum Jud. et 8am. Commentaru*,
Franek. 1618; J. Bonfrere, Joan, Judiea et Ruth
Commentario illuttrati, Pur. 1631; J. A. divider,
Comm. m Judicet, Tubing. 1688. For a (taller
Hat, ace Winer, Handb. d. theoL Lit. L 80S t;
Darling, Cyclop. Bibliogrophica (Subjects), eoL
180 f. Later writera: T. 8. UanJmnL, Liori Judicum
et Ruth secundum vertionem Syriaco-Htaa p lar tm ,
ex CocUc* Muni Britaimid mate p ri mum editi,
(to. 8 fasc. Havnlat, 1869-61, accompanied by a
translation and notes. O. F. Fritxache, L&er
Judiatm secundum LXX. Interprttet — TripUeem
TtxtuM Conformationem recensuit, Leetionis Va-
rietates enotavit. Interpret. Vet. Lot Fragment*
addidit, Turicl, 1867, valuable as a contribution to
toe textual criticism of the Septnagint version.
Wahl, Uebtr den Verfasser da Bucket der Rich-
ter, EUwaugen, 1869. Eamphauaen, Bidder, in
Bunsen's Bibebeerh, toL ii. (1869), a new ver-
sion with brief notes ; and on the chronology
(which Bunsen attempts, to very little purpose,
to illustrate from Egyptian history), Bibeheerk, i.
pp. cexxxiii.-ocliii. C. F. Keil, Joeua, Richter u.
Ruth, in the Bibl Comm. of Keil and DeiiUsch,
Ui. 176-356 (1863), tnnsL by J. Martin in Clark's
For. TkeoL Libr. (Edin. 1865). Paulue Cased,
Richter u. Ruth (TheU v. of Lange'a Bibeheerk,
1865, pp. 1-197). He enumerates and charac-
terises the most important Jewish expositors of
the book. Chr. Wordsworth, Holy Bible with
Note*, vol. ii. pt i. pp. 75-167 (1866). This
author adheres very strictly to the typical principle
of interpretation as applied both to the persons and
the events mentioned in Judges. Job. Bachmann,
Der Bach der Richter, mit besonderer Ricksicht
aufdie Gesch. seiner Auslegung u. s. w. (1868),
i. 1-848. This volume contains only the first three
chapters. It promises in its spirit, comprehensive-
ness, and scholarship to be a work of the first order.
Nagelebach, Richter, Bach der, in Hersog'e Real-
Encyk. xiii. 89-38, a valuable article. See the
EinleUungen in dnt A. T. by Bleek (pp. 341-355)
and Keil (pp. 153-163, 3» Aufl.) for outlines of the
course of criticism on this book, and for their own
views as representatives of somewhat different Bibli-
cal schools. Hengstenberg, Die Zeit der Richter,
in his Authentie dee Pent. ii. 116-148. J. N. Tiele,
Ckronol. dee A. T. pp. 39-58 (1839). Stahelin,
Vntermchungen ib. den Pentateuch, die Bicker
Joeua, Richter, etc. (1843). Milman, History of
the Jem, new ed., i. 888-318 (N. Y. 1864).
Stanley, Jewish Church, i. 315-186 (Amar. ed.).
His recapitulation of the contents of the hnok is
vividly sketched and suggestive. He assigns to the
period of the Judges a position in Hebrew history
similar to that of the Middle Ages in Christian
history as to the prevalent moral degeneracy com-
mon to the two epochs, though relieved in both
oases by many single examples of heroism in behalf
of religion and of the public welfare. 6. Rawlinson,
Historical Evidences (Bampton Lectures for 1859),
pp. 81 f., 395 f. (Aroer. ed.). Kitto, Daily Bible
JUuttrationt, Morning Series, vol U. (Porter's ed.).
The principal monographs on eh. v. ('be Song of
Deborah) have been mentioned under Barak
(Amer. ed.). For practical and bomiletic uses, see
•specially Bishop Hall, Contemplations m the Old
Test., bks. Ix., x., xi. H.
• JUDGMENT, DAT OF. [Ri
CBOTtOH.]
JUDGMENT-HALL. The word Pratorimn
JUDGMENT HALL 1515
'tTI/xuratpier) is so translated five times In the A. V
of the N. T.; and in those five passages it denotes
two different places.
1. In John xviiL 38, 83, xix. 9, it is the residence
which Pilate occupied when he visited Jerusalem
tv which the Jews brought Jesus from the house
of Caiaphas, and within which He was «~™<~»l
by Pilate, and scourged and mocked by the soldiers,
while the Jews were waiting without in the neigh-
borhood of the judgment-seat (erected on the Pave-
ment in front of the Pnetorium), on which Pilate
sat when he pronounced the final sentence. The
Latin word prmtorium originally signified (nee
Smith's Diet, of Ant.) the general'a tent in a
Roman camp (Lir. xxviii. 27, Ac.); and after sards
it had, among other significations, that of the palace
in which a governor of a province lived and admin-
istered justice (Cic Verr. ii. 4, § 28, Ac.). The
site of Pilate's pnetorium in Jerusalem has given
rise to much dispute, some supposing it to be the
palace of king Herod, others the tower of Antonia;
but it has been shown elsewhere that the latter was
probably the Pnetorium, which was then and long
afterwards the citadel of Jerusalem. [Jerusalem,
p. 1336 a.] This is supported by the fact that, at
the time of the trial of Christ, Herod was in Jeru-
salem, doubtless inhabiting the palace of his father
(Luke xxiii. 7). It appears, however, from a pas-
sage of Josephus (B. J. ii. 14, § 8), that the Roman
governor sometimes resided in the palace, and set
up his judgment-seat in front of it Pilate cer-
tainly lived there at one time (Philo, Leg. in
Caium, 38, 39). Winer conjectures that the pro-
curator, when in Jerusalem, resided with a body-
guard in the palace of Herod (Josh. B. J. ii. 16,
§ 5), while the Roman garrison occupied Antonia.
Just in like manner, a former palace of Hiero be-
came the pnetorium, in which Verres lived in
Syracuse (Cic. Verr. ii. 6, § 13).
2. In Acts xxiii. 36 Herod's judgment-hall or
pnetorium in Ccsarea was doubtless a part of that
magnificent range of buildings, the erection of
which by king Herod is described in Josephus (Ant.
xv. 9, §6; see also B. J.i. 83, §§5-8).
8. The word " palace," or " Caesar's court," in
the A V. of Phil. i. 13, is a translation of the
same word pnetorium. The statement in a later
part of the same epistle (iv. 33) would seem to
connect this pnetorium with the imperial palace at
Rome; but no classical authority is found for so -
designating the palace itself. The pnetoriau camp,
outside the northern wall of Rome, was far from the
palace, and therefore unlikely to be the pnetorium
here mentioned. An opinion well deserving con-
sideration has been advocated by Wieseler, and by
Conybeare and Howson {Life of St. Paul, ch. 86),
to the effect that the pnetorium here mentioned
was the quarter of that detachment of the Pres-
torian Guards which was in immediate attendance
upon the emperor, and had barracks in Mount
Palatine. It will be remembered that St. Paul, on
hie arrival at Rome (Acta xxviii. 16), wss delivered
by the centurion into the custody of the praetorian
prefect."
• Prof. Llghtfoot at present ( Epistle to the Pki-
Uppiam, pp. 86, 97 ff, Lond. 1868) understands
reaiTVftis) (PhlL l. 13) in the sense of "prae-
torians," and not » praetorian camp " as formerly
(Joum. of Class, and Sacr. PhiloL iv. 58 ffi).
o • On the ts unlnep sss of that pssssajs, sss vol I
p. 886, not* a (aasr. «aU aV
Digitized by
Google
1516
JUDGMENT-SEAT
With this direct peroral sense we might expect
the dative without h, as In the other clause (comp.
•bo Acta W. 16, Tii. 18; 1 Tim. Iv. IS). Bnt with
the local tense ai the direct one and the personal
as indirect (ai in Ewald'i " im gmuen Prmtorimn
rater den kriegern," aw hie Scndtchriben da Ap.
Pauius, p. 441), the variation of construction is
natural. See Meyer's note on thia passage; oho
the art. Cesar's Household (Amer. ed.).
H.
4. The word p rator hm ocean elan in Matt,
xxvii. 87, where it ia translated " common hall "
[A. V. marg. " governor's house "], and in Mark
tr. 18. In both placet it denotes Pilate's residence
In Jerusalem. W. T. &
• JUDGMENT-SEAT, the translation (A.
V.) in various passages of 0rj/ta, and once of
itprrfipiov. [Gabbatha ; Jcdgmemt-haix ;
pksTURTOif .] Some critics adopt this sense of
Kperbpuw in 1 Cor. vi. 3, 4 (see Meyer m loc., and
eomp. James ii. 6, A. V.). H.
JUT>ITH. 1. (FVyrf [see below]: «I»»8rt;
[Alex, lout*: /watt]). «Tne daughter of Been
the Hitttte," and wife of Esau (Gen. xxri. 84).
[Aholibamah.]
2. ['Iou8f«; Vat Sin. Alex. Iov8«i0; Aid.
'ImMiS, 'lavttli-] The heroine of the apocryphal
book which bears her name, who appears as an
ideal type of piety (Jud. viii. 6), beauty (xi. 21),
courage, and chastity (xvi. 23 ff.). Her supposed
descent from Simeon (Ix. 2) and the manner in
which she refers to bis cruel deed (Gen. xxxiv. 96 ff". ),
mark the conception of the character, which evi-
dently belongs to a period of stem and perilous
conflict. The most unscrupulous daring (xiii.) is
combined with zealous ritualism (xii. 1 ff.), and
faith is turned to action rather than to supplication
(viii. 31 ff.). Clement of Rome ( Ep. i. 66) assigns
to Judith the epithet given to Jael ('Iov8<10 q
paKapia) ; and Jerome sees in her exploit the image
of tiie victory of the Church over the power of evil
(Ep. lxxix. 11, p. 608; "Judith ... in typo Ec-
deiis diabolum capite truncavit; " ef. Ep. xxil. 91,
p. 10S).
The name is properly the feminine form of
"HVP, Judau* (cf. Jer. xxxvi. 14, 21). In the
passage of Genesis it is generally taken as the cor-
relative of Judah, i. e. "praited." B. F. W.
• In the A. V. ed. 1611 and other early editions
the name of the heroine of this book is uniformly
spelt Judeth, as in the Genevan version. This
orthography was doubtless derived from the Aldine
edition, which reads 'lovHit in the heading, and
often, though not uniformly, in the text of the
book. A.
JUDITH, THE BOOK OF, like that of
Tobit, belongs to the earliest specimens of historical
fiction. The narrative of the reign of " Nebuchad-
nezzar king of Nmeteh " (i. 1), of the campaign
uf Holofernes, and the deliverance of Bethulia,
through the stratagem and courage of the Jewish
heroine, contains too many and too serious difficul-
ties, both historical and geographical, to allow of
the supposition that it is either literally true, or
even carefully moulded on truth. The
« The theory of Yolkmar (Au vitru Buck Sm, p.
; TW. Jahi. 1868, 1867) that the book of Judith
■axes to the period of the Parthian war of Trajan, natd
JUDITH, THE BOOK OF
of a kingdom of Nineveh and the reign of a Nab*
chadnezzar are in themselves inconsistent with ■
date after the return ; and an earlier date ia ex-
cluded equally by internal evidence and by tba
impossibility of placing the events in harmonkma
connection with the course of Jewish history. Tba
latter fact Is seen most clearly in the extreme
varieties of opinion among those critics who have
endeavored to m«int»in the veracity of the story.
Nebuchadnezzar has been identified with Cambysea,
Xerxes, Esarhaddon, Kiniladan, Merodach w ilr l nn.
etc., without the slightest show of probability. Bnt
apart from this, the text evidently alludes to too
position of the Jews after the exile, wben the Tempi*
was rebuilt (v. 18. 19, iv. 8) and the hierarchical
government established in place of the kingdom
(xr. 8, 4i ytpovola r«r view lopafik; cf. iv. 4,
Samaria; viii. 6, vpoetitfiuror, xpovpririor); and
after the Return the course of authentic history
absolutely excludes the possibility of the occurrence
of such events as the book relates. This funda-
mental contradiction of facta, which underlies tba
whole narrative, renders it superfluous to «""!■»
in detail the other objections which may be urged
against it (e. g. iv. 6, Joacim; cf. 1 Chr. vi.;
Joseph. ML x. 8, $ 6, Joacim).
2. The value of the book is not, however, les-
sened by its fictitious character. On the contrary
it becomes even more valuable as exhibiting an ideal
type of heroism, which was outwardly embodied in
the wars of independence. The self-sacrificing faith
and unscrupulous bravery of Judith were the qual-
ities by which the champions of Jewish freedom
were then enabled to overcome the power of Syria,
which seemed at the time scarcely less formidable
than the imaginary hosts of Holofernes. Tba
peculiar character of the book, which is exhibited
in these traits, affords the best indication of its
date; for it cannot be wrong to refer its origin to
the Maccabcan period, which it reflects not only
in its general spirit but even in smaller traits. Tba
impious design of Nebuchadnezzar finds a parallel
in the prophetic description of Antwchus (Dan. xi.
81 ff.), and the triumphant issue of Judith's courage
must be compared not with the immediate results
of the invasion of ApoUonius (as Bertholdt, JCM.
2668 ff.), but with the victory which the author
pictured to himself as the reward of faith. Bat
while it seems certain that the book is to be referred
to the second century b. c. (176-100 b. a), the
attempts which have been made to fix its data
within narrower limits, either to the time of the
war of Alexander Jannanis (106-4 B. c, Movers)
or of Demetrius U. (129 b. c., Ewald), rest on very
inaccurate data. It might seem more natural (as
a mere conjecture) to refer it to an earlier time, a
170 b. c, when Antiochus Epiphanes made hit
first assault upon the Temple. 8
8. In accordance with the view which hat been
given of the character and date of the book, it is
probable that the several parts may have a distinct
symbolic meaning. Some of the names can scarcely
have been chosen without regard to their deriva-
tion (e. g. Acbior= Brother of Light; Judiths
Jaetu ; Bethulia = rpbli"!3, the virgin of Je-
hovah), and the historical difficulties of the person
of Nebuchadnezzar disappear wben he it regarded
om> be nottoed In patsmg, as it emamm ft
nets of the Ibst spittle of Ohsmi (| 6).
Digitized by
Google
JUDITH, THB BOOK OF
at the Scriptorml type M worldly power. Bot it
h, perhaps, a men play of fancy to allegorise the
whole narrative, aa Grotiui has done (Prol in
Jud.), who interprets Judith of the Jewiah nation
widowed of ontward help, Bethulia (rP"bKVP3)
of the Temple, Nebuchadnezzar of the Devil, and
Holofernea (IDTO "TSbn, ketor ttrptnHt) of An-
tlochus, hii emissary; while Joacim, the high-
priest, oonTeyi, aa he thinks, by his name the
aaauranoe that " God will rise np " to deliver this
people.
4- Two conflicting atatementa have been pre-
served aa to the original language of the book.
Origen apeaka of it together with Toblt aa « not
existing in Hebrew even among the Apocrypha "
in the Hebrew collection (Ep. ad Afrie. § 18,
otJs 700 (x ou<r " «" T ^ [•' 'ififSot] koI ir
' Kmtoi<poti 'E&poiurrl, its Ax' ainmv umB6ms
iyv&Katuv), by which atatement he aeema to im-
ply that the book was originally written in Greek.
Jerome, on the other hand, says that " among the
Hebrews the book of Judith is read among the
Hagiographa [Apocrypha] . . . and being written
In the Chaldee language is reckoned among the
histories" (Prof, ad Jud.). The words of Origen
are, however, aomewbat ambiguous, and there can
be little doubt that the book was written in Pales-
tine in the national dialect (Syro-Chaldaic), though
Jahn (EM ii. § 3) and Eichhorn (End. n d.
Apokr. 387) maintain the originality of the present
Greek text, on the authority of gome phrases which
may be assigned very naturally to the translator or
reviser."
6. The text exists at present in two distinct
recensions, the Greek (followed by the Syriao) and
the Latin. The former evidently Is the truer rep-
resentative of the original, and it seems certain
that the Latin was derived in the main from the
Greek by a series of successive alterations. Jerome
con fe sses that his own translation was free (" magis
aansum e eensu quam verbum e verbo transferers ' ' ) ;
and peculiarities of the language (Fritzsche, p. 123)
prove that he took the old Latin aa the basis of his
work, though he compared it with the Chaldee
text, whioh was in his possession (" sola ea quia in-
teOigentia Integra in verbis Chaldaeia invenire potui
Latinis express!"). The Latin text contains many
curious errors, which seem to have arisen in the
first instance from falsa hearing (Bertholdt, EM.
3674 f. j «. g. x. 5, xol Aprvy naBap&p, Vulg. et
panes et cateum, i. e. col nwov; xvi. 8, 0V1 sit
raptuBokas alrrov, Vulg. qui potuit castra sua,
«". «. e Sttti xvi. 17, col xXauaorreu tv ahrHutti,
Vulg. ut urantur et aentiant) ; and Jerome remarks
that it had been variously corrupted and interpolated
before his time. At present it is impossible to
determine the authentic text. In many instances
the Latin is more full than the Greek (iv. 8-15, v.
11-80, v. 33-34, vi. It ff., ix, 6 ff.), which however
contains peculiar passagea (i. 13-16, vi. 1, Ac.).
Even where the two texts do not differ in the details
of the narrative, aa is often the case (e. g. 1, 8 ff,
II. 9, v. 9, vi. 13, vii. 3 ff, x. 12 ff, xv. 11, xvi.
M), they yet differ in language (e. g. c. xv., etc),
and in names (e. g. viii. 1) and numbers (e. g. 1.8);
a The presen t Gnak text oners Instance! of nds-
■nelitlnn which claailv point to an Aianals orhjtnal :
*. BL 9, xv. 8, L g; et v. 16, 18 (Talhinflar, u
JUDITH, THB BOOK OF 161"l
and these variations can only be explained by going
back to some still more remote source (of. Bertholdt,
EM 3568 ff), which was probably an earlier Greek
oopy.»
6. The existence of these various recensions of
the book is a proof of its popularity and wide cir-
culation, but the external evidence of its use it
very scanty. Josephns was not acquainted with it,
or it is likely that he would have made some use
of its contents, as he did of the apocryphal addi-
tions to Esther (Jot. Ant. xi. 6, § 1 ff). The first
reference to its contents occurs in Clem. Rom. (Ep
i. 56), and it is quoted with marked respect by
Origen (Set. an Jerem. 83:cf. Horn. ix. m Jud. l\
Hilary (t* Pud. exxv. 6), and Lucifer (Dt won
pare. p. 955). Jerome speaks of it at •• reckoned
among the Sacred Scriptures by the Synod of Nice,"
by which he probably means that it was quoted in
the records of the Council, unless the text be cor-
rupt It has been wrongly inserted in the cata-
logue at the dote of the Apostolic Canons, against
the beet authority (cf. Hody, D* BM. Text HA a\ '
but it obtained a place in the Latin Canon at an
early time (cf. Hilar. ProL m Pi. 15), which it
commonly maintained afterwards. [Canon.]
7. The Commentary of FriUsche (Kurzgefatt-
ta Exeg. Hondtmch, Leipzig, 1863) is by far the
best which has appeared ; within a narrow compass
it contains a good critical apparatus and scbolsriike
notes. & F. W.
* Literature. — Besides the Introductions and
other general works r etailed to under the art APOO-
rttha, the following essays and treatises may be
noted : Reuse, art. Judith in Erseh and Gruber's
AUgem. EneykL, Sect ii. Theil xxviii. pp. 98-103.
Vaihinger, in Herzog's Jtcal-Encykl. vii. 136-143.
Ginsbnrg, in Kitto's CyeL of BM Lit., 3d ed., ii.
693-696. u G. B." in the Journ. of Saer. Lit. for
July, 1866, pp. 843-363, and B. H. Cowper, Th*
Book of Judith and ill Geography, ibid. Jan. 1861,
pp. 431-440. O. Wolff (Cath.), Oat Buch Judith
ait gttchichtiieht Urkunde vertheidigt u. erkidri,
Ldpz. 1861, of little or no value. The most elabo-
rate and remarkable among the recent publications
relating to the book is that of Volkmar, Hondo, d.
EM. in dUApokryphen, 1" Theil, V Abth. Judith,
Tub. 1860. He maintains that the book was com-
posed in the first year of the reign of Hadrian, near
the end of a. d. 117 or the beginning of 118, and
that it describes, under the disguise of fictitious
names, the war of Trajan against the Parthiana
and Jews, and the triumph of the latter in the
death of Lusius Quietus, the general of Trajan
and governor of Judaea. Nebuchadnezzar stands
for Trajan; Nineveh is Antioch " the great," at the
chief city under the Roman sway in the East; and
Assyria accordingly stands for Syria as the repre-
sentative of the power which oppressed the Jews,
the region where that power was concentrated.
" Arphaxad the king of the Medes " represents the
Parthian Arsacidn; Ecbatana la Nisibis, Holo-
femea Lucius Quietus, and the beautiful widow
Judith symbolizes Judas in her desolation, but
still faithful to Jehovah, and destined to triumph
over her enemies. This explanation la carried out
into detail with great learning and ingenuity. It
Bersogt Bk»*>- s. v. ; frltasohe, BM. ) 3; Da Watte,
SM. | 808, 0.).
s Of modem ventons the BngOsh MJcws the Ones
and that of Lather the Latm text
Digitized by
Google
1513
JTTEti
m Unit proposed by Volkmar In Zetkr's rAeot
Jakrb. for 1856, p. 368 ff., and more fully set forth
In id article in the nine periodical, 1857, pp. 441-
498; oomp. hie article! on the Psrthian-Jewish war
rf Trajan, in the lihtmischa Museum f. Phiki.
and the Zdfchr.f. AUerthtmukundetor 1858. Hia
view baa bean accepted bj Baur, Hitng (Hilgen-
fcld's Zeiltchr. f. wit*. TheoL 1860, pp. 340-860),
and Schenkel. Strong objectiona to it have been
urged by HUgenfeld, Zeitschr.f. wiu. TheoL 1858,
i. 870-281, and 1861, iv. 336-386; B. A. Lipalua,
ibid. 1869, ii. 89-181, and in the Literarischts
CentraMatt J. DeutscklamL 1861, coll 606-610;
Ewald, Jakrb./. BibL wit*. xL 886-831, and GM.
OtlthrU Aneeigm, 1861, ii. 693-710; and L. Dies-
teL Jakrb. f. aeufckt TheoL IMS, pp. 781-784.
See alao Ewald's Guck. d. Volte* Israel, 8* Auag.
It. 618-625 (541 ff , 2* Ami). Ou the different
forma of the Judith-legend in Jewish tradition, aw
Jettmek's Bet ha-Midratek, vols. L, ii. (1863 I),
and Lipslus, Jidueke Quelle* ear JudUksagt, In
*Hilgenfold'a Zeifckr.f. wit*. TheoL 1867, x. 887-
866. A.
JTJTEL ("iot^A; [Tat Ioura, but joined with
the following word:] Joktt). 1. 1 Eadr. iz. 84.
[U«u]
9. ([Tat. OvnA, but joined with the preeeding
word:] Je-eL) 1 Eadr. iz. 35. [Jon, 18.]
JTJXIA ClevXta: [Juliam, ace]), a Chriatian
woman at Rome, probably the wife, or perhaps the
titter of Philologus, in connection with whom she
it saluted by St Paul (Rom. zri. 18). Origen sup-
poses that they were master and mistress of a
Christian household which included the other per-
sons mentioned in the same verse. Some modern
critics have conjectured that the name may be that
of a man, Julias. W. T. B.
JU'LITJS ClovAias: [Juliu*]), the eourteooa
oenturion of " Augustus' band," to whose charge
St Paul was delivered when he was sent prisoner
from CsBsarea to Rome (Acta xzviL 1, 3). [Czm-
TUBIOB.]
Augustus' band has been identified by some
commentators with the Italian band (Acta x. 1);
by others, less probably, with the body of cavalry
denominated Sebasteni by Josephus (Ant. xix. 9,
J 8, 4c.). Conybeare and Howaon (Life of St.
Paul, oh. Si ) adopt in the main Wieaeler's opinion,
that the Augustan cohort was a detachment of the
Praatorian Guards attached to the person of the
Roman governor at Casaarea; and that this Julius
may be the same aa Julius Prisons (Tacit ffisL ii.
98, iv. 11), sometime centurion, afterwards prefect
jf the Pnetoriana. [Itauak Band, Amur, ed.]
W. T. B.
JtFNIA Clovrltu, »'. e. Jem as: [Juniam,
aoc-]),a Christian at Rome, mentioned by St Pant
as one of his kinsfolk and fellow-prisoners, of note
among the Apostles, and in Christ before St Paul
(Rom. xvi. 7). Origen conjectures that he waa
possibly one of the seventy disciples. Hammond
also takes the name to be that of a man. Juntas,
rhich would be a contraction (as Winer observes)
of Juniliubor Junlanus. [Axdbomcus.] Chrya-
oatom, holding the more common, but perhaps less
probabie, hypothesis that the name is that of a
aoman, Junta, remarks on it, " How great la the
devotion of this woman, that she should be counted
worthy of the name of Apostle!" Nothing is
tnown of the imprisonment to which St Paul
JTJPTTBB
refers: Origan su p poses that i* is that
from which Christ makes Christiana free.
W. T. B.
JUNIPER (DCh, from Crn, "bmd,"
Geaen. p. 1317: ia9/ii>>, *>vriv, IK. xix. 4, 6-
jumper**). It has been already stated [Ckdajs]
that the oxycedrus or Phoenician juniper was the
tree whose wood, called " cedar-wood," was orderad
by the law to be used in ceremonial purification
(Lev. xiv. 4; Num. xix. 6). The word, however,
which is rendered in A. T. juniper, is beyond
doubt a sort of broom, Genista monoeperma, Ge-
nista ratam of ForskU, answering to the Arabia
Rethem, which is aha found in the desert of Sinai
in the neighborhood of the true juniper (Robinson,
ii 184). It is mentioned as affording shade to
Elijah in his flight to Hon* (1 K. xix. 4, 5), and
as affording material for fuel, and also, in extreme
cases, for human food (Pa. exx. 4; Job xxx. 4). It
is very abundant in the desert of Sinai, and affords
shade and protection, both in heat and storm, to
travellers (Tirg. Georg. 11. 484, 436). Its root*
are very bitter, and would thus serve as food only
in extreme cases; but it may be doubted w h ether
EHB7 (Job xxx. 4) is to be restricted to roots only;
or to be taken in a wider sense of product, and
thus include the fruit which ia much liked by
sheep, and may thus have sometimes served for.
human food (Gas. p. 1484). The roots are much
valued by the Arabs for charcoal for the Cairo
market Thus the tree which afforded shade to
Eujah may hare furnished also the "coals" as
ashes for baking the cake which satisfied his hunges
(1 K. xix. 6; see also Pa. exx. 4, "coals of juni-
per "). The Xotkem b a leguminous plant and
bears a white flower. It is found also in Spain,
Portugal, and Palestine. Its abundance in the
Sinai desert gave a name toa station of the Israel-
ites, Rithmah (Num. xxxiii. 18,19; Burckhardt,
Syria, pp. 483, 687; Robinson, i. 303, 805; Lord
Lindsay, Letter*, p. 183; Pliny, H. N. xxiv. 9, 66;
Balfour, Plants of the Bible, p. 60; Stanley, & d>
P. pp. 30, 79, 691 ; [Thomson, Land and Book,
ii. 436 ff; and especially Tristram, Nat Bit. of
Ike Bible, p. 339 f. (Lond. 1867). — H.]).
H. W. P.
JTmTER (Zeit, LXX. [andN.T.: Jap*.
ter] ). Among the chief measures which Antiocbua
Epiphanee took for the entire subversion of the
Jewish faith waa that of dedicating the Temple at
Jerusalem to the service of Zens Olympius (2 Mace,
vi. 2), and at the same time the rival Temple on
Gerizim was dedicated to Zeus Xenius (Jupiter
Bospitalis, Vulg.). The choice of the first epithet
ia easily intelligible. The Olympian Zeus waa the
national god of the Hellenic race (Thucyd. ill. 14),
as well as the supreme ruler of the heathen world,
and as such formed the true opposite to Jehovah,
who had revealed Himself as the God of Abraham.
The application of the second epithet, " the God
of hospitality" (cf. Grimm, on 2 Mace. L c), ia
more obscure. In 9 Mace. vi. 2 It is explained by
the clause, "aa waa the character of those who
dwelt in the place," which may, however, be an
ironical comment of the writer (of. Q. Curt. iv. 6
8), and not a sincere eulogy of the hospitality of
the Samaritans (as Ewald, Guck. iv. 339 n.).
Jupiter or Zeus is mentioned in one pa s s ag e of
the N. T., on the occasion of St Paul's visit Is
Lystra (Acts xiv. 18, 18), where the expresiiM
Digitized by
Google
jrUBHAB-HESBO
» Jupiter, which m before their city," means that
bis temple was outside the city. B. F. W.
* The Lystriaus on that oocaiion called Bar-
nabas Jupiter (ver. IS), becauea Paul being "the
chief speaker " and therefore Mercury, the god of
eloquence, they luppoaed the other visitor muat be
Jupiter, whom they specially worshipped. They had a
tradition alao that theee two godt bad once travelled
in disguise among them (an Ovid, MtL viii.611).
It baeTeen suggested too that Bamabaa may ham
been the older man of the two, and mora im-
poauig than Paul in hk pnraonal appearance (comp.
9 Cor. x. 1, 10). H.
JU'SHAB-HE'SBD ("TDrJ 2&P : 'Ao-o-
$t»; [Vat Aocfloo-oiti] Ala. Ao-o/bWS; [Comp.
'ItxraffwiS'] Jotnbkati), son of Zerubbabel (1
Chr. iii. 20). It doea not appear why the five chil-
dren in thia Terse are asperated from the three in
fer. 19. fiertbeau iuggeata that they might be by
a different mother, or possibly born in Judaea after
the retoru, whereat the three others were born at
Babylon. The name of Juabab-hesed, i. e. " Lov-
ing-kindoeM la returned," taken in conjunction
with that of hit father and brothers, it a striking
expression of the feelings of pious Jews at the re-
turn from Captirity, and at the same time a good
Illustration of the nature of Jewish names.
A. C.H.
JUSTUS ('towrroi ! [./usbm."]!**"]). Sehoett-
C[Bor. Htbr. in Act Ap.) shows by quotations
rabbinical writers that this, name was not
unusual among the Jews, 1. A surname of Joseph
called Baraabas (Acta i. 38). [Joskth Babsa-
bas.]
S. A Christian at Corinth, with whom St
Paul lodged (Acta xviii. 7). The Syr. and Arab,
ham Titus, while the Vulg. combines both names
Titus Justus.
• Paul did not lodge with Justus at thia time,
but baring left the synagogue preached at the house
af Justus, which being near the synagogue was so
much the mora convenient for that purpose (ver. 8).
For aught that appears, he abode still with Aquila
(ver. 3) after this separation from the Jews. Nor is
Justus spoken of as a Christian, but as a Jewish
rielyte (o-t/Sousrov rev Btir), though evidently
had more sympathy with Paul than with the
Jaws, and no doubt soon became a believer. H.
3. A surname of Jesus, a friend of St. Paul
(CoL iv. 11). [Jesus, p. 1347.]
JUTTAH (npSf>, i «. Jutah;* alao
mjV and in xxt 16, H^ [aiemltd,mcBmtd\ :
'IraV, Aha. Irrra; Tari, Alex, omits: Join, Jtta),
a city in the mountain region of Judah, in the
neighborhood of Maon and Camel (Josh. xv. 65).
It was allotted to the priests (xxi. 16), but in the
catalogue of 1 Chr. vi. 67-59, the name baa es-
caped. In the time of Eusebins it waa a large
village (ctiuw ury'oni), 18 miles southward of
Qeutberopolis ( Onom/irt'eon, " Jettan " ). A vil-
*jge called Ywlla was visited by Robinson, close tc
Von and Kurmul (BibL Rt: let ed. 11. 196, 638),
which doubtless represents the ancient town.
KADESH, KAJDESH BABNEA 1519
Reland (PaL p. 870) conjectures that Jutta la
the s-iAu 'Io&Jo (A. V. " a city of Juda ") in the
hill eountry, in which Zaeharias, the father of John
the Baptist, resided (Luke i. 39). But this, though
feasible, is not at present confirmed by any positive
evidence. [Jdoa, Citt or, Amer. ed.] Q.
K.
KAB'ZEEL (bM?3i2 [•" below] i f>
Josh.,] BoursAc^A, Alex. KarvtnA, [Comp. Ko£-
(rtiA, Aid. Koflcr^Ai in 8 Sam.,] KoJWt^A,
[Vat. KaTo4«r#t|A, Comp. Aid. Ka/9aoxr4A; in 1
Chr.,] Ka$aaa*iK-- Cabttt), one of the "cities"
of the tribe of Judsh; the first named in the enu-
meration of those next Edom, and apparently the
farthest south (Josh. xv. 91). Taken aa Hebrew,
the word signifies " collected by God," and may ha
compared with Jokthkkl, the name bestowed by
the Jews on an Edomite dty. Kabseel is memo-
rable aa the native place of the great hero Bkhaiah-
ben-Jehoiada, in connection with whom it ia twice
mentioned (S Sam. xxiii. 90; 1 Chr. xL 92). After
the Captivity it waa reiubabited by the Jewa, and
appears aa Jkkabzeel.
It ia twice mentioned in the Onomaatioon — aa
KaftrrrfjA and Capuel ; the first time by Eusebius
only, and apparently confounded with Carmei, un-
less the conjecture of Le Clero in his notes on the
paasage be accepted, whioh would identify it with
the aite of Elijah's sleep and vision, between Beer-
aheba and Horeb. No trace of it appears to have
been discovered in modern times. G.
• KAT>BS (KiiSni: Vulg. omits), Jud. L 9,
perhaps the same as Kadksh (tee below), or
Kedesh, Josh. xv. 93. A.
KA/DESH, KADESH BAB/NEA [HA.
Bame'a] (tt?T(7, V7H9 &7ii [see in the ait.
and notes] : KiSni [&• xlvii. 19, Bom. Vat Kst-
Mi/i], KiSr/t Baprfi, KdXi/r rov Bapyl) [Num.
xxxiv. 4; tVides, Cadubarnt]). This place, the
scene of Miriam's death, was the farthest point to
which the Israelites reached in their direct road to
Canaan; it was also that whence the spies were
tent, and where, on their return, the people broke
out into murmuring, upon which their strictly penal
term of wandering began (Num. xtil. 3, 96, xiv.
99-33, xx. 1 ; Deut ii. 14). It ia probable that
the term " Kadesh," though applied to signify a
" dty," yet had also a wider application to a region,
in which Kadeeh-Meribah certainly, and Kadeah-
Barnea probably, indicates a precise spot Thus
Kadesh appears as a limit eastward of the same
tract which was limited westward by Shur (Gen.
xx. 1). Shur ia possibly the same as Sihor, « which
ia before Egypt" (xxv. 18; Josh. xili. 8; Jer. B.
18), and was the first portion of the wilderness on
which the people emerged from the paasage of the
Red Sea. [Shub.] "Between Kadesh and Bend"
is another indication of the site of Kadesh aa an
eastern limit (Gen. xvi. 14), for the point so fixed
ia "the fountain on the way to Shur" (v. 7), and
• a Xhe name Jupiter also occurs In tus A. T. tn
acts xlx. 86, when « the Image [of the goddess Art*,
sua] which Ml down from Jupitar " Is the translation
af t*5 Jteamvt . A
» This— with met— is the farm (Ivan mHahn<a
text of xv. 66 ; MIohaelia and Walton Insert ad
but It was apparently unknown to any or the ok}
translators, In whose verskms (with the sxeeptton of
the Alex. IXX), whatsvar shape the word ssinmss, It
rssslnt a Mnt> t
Digitized by
Google
1520
KADESH
she range of limit* it narrowed by sefecttsg the
waetnrn one not to far to the west, while the eastern
toe, Kadesh, b unchanged. Again, we tune Ka-
deah at the point to which the foray of Cbedor-
hVomer " returned " — a word which dot* not im-
ply that they had previously Tinted it, but that it
by in the direction, as viewed from Mount Seir
and Faran meutioned next before it, which wai
that of the point from which Chedorlaomtr had
come, namely, the North. Chedorlaomer, it seem*,
coming down by the eastern shore of the Dead Sea,
smote the Zudma (Ammon, Gen. xiv. 6; Dent. ii.
BO), and the Emlms (Moab, Deut. ii 11), and the
Horites in Mount Seir, to the south of that sea,
unto " El-Parau that i» by the wildernesi." He
drove then Horites over the Arabah into the tt-
TSk region. Then « returned," i. e. went north
ward to Kadesh and Hazazon Tamar, or Engedi
(oomp. Gen. xiv. 7; S Chr. xx. 8). In Gen. xiv. 7
Kadesh is identified with En-Hishpat, the "foun-
tain of judgment," and is connected with Tamar,
or Hasazon Tamar, just a* we find these two in the
comparatively late book of Ezekiel, as designed to
mark the southern border of Judah, drawn through
them and terminating seaward at the " River to
(or toward) the Great Sea." Precisely thus stands
Kadesh>Barnea in the books of Numbers and Joshua
(oomp. Es. xlvii. 19, xlviii. 38; Num. xxxiv. 4;
Josh. xv. 8). Unless then we are prepared to make
a double Kadesh for the book of Genesis, it seem*
idle with Reland (Paltutiua, p. 114-17) to distin-
guish the " En-Miahpat, which i* Kadesh," from
that to which the spies returned. For there is an
identity about all the connections of the two, which,
if not conclusive, will compel us to abandon all
possible inquiries. This holds especially as regards
Faran and Tamar, and in respect of it* being the
eastern limit of a region, and also of being the first
point of importance found by Chedorlaomer on
passing round the southern extremity of the Dead
Sea. In a strikingly similar manner we have the
limits of a route, apparently a well-known one at
the time, indicated by three points, Horeb, Mount
Seir, Kadesh-Barnea, in Deut. i. 2, the distance
between the extremes being fixed at " 11 days'
journey," or about 165 miles, allowing 16 miles to
sn average day's journey. This is one element for
determining the site of Kadesh, assuming of course
the position of Horeb ascertained. The name of
the place to which the spies returned is " Kadesh "
simply, in Num. xlii. 86, and is there closely con-
nected with the "wilderness of Paran;" yet the
■' wilderness of Zin " stands in near conjunction,
as the point whence the " search " of the spies
commenced (ver. 21). Again, in Num. xxxii. 8,
we find that it was from Kadesh-Barnea that the
mission of the spies commenced, and in the re-
hearsed narrative of the same event in Dent. 1. 19,
and ix. 23, the name "Barnes" is also added.
a Another short arttola of Jsromsto, apparently
■stored to by Stanley (& f P. 98 nots), as relating
likewise to Kn-mlshpat, should seem to mean aome-
thmg wholly ^liferent, namely, the well of Isaae and
a til i n i l ii b In Gerar: tpfap xpfamf ilihtrir ten
oifu| Bifpew {putau jwtidi) KmXntiUn) ir tj Ttpa.-
runj.
* There Is a remarkable Interpolation In the LXX-,
sr (as seems leas probable) omission In the praasat
Bab. text of Nom. xxxttL 88, when, In fcUkrwing the
various stapes of the marsh, w» find napsetively as
WkJws.—
KADKHH
I bus far there seems no reasonable doubt of the
identity of this Kadesh with that of Genesis. Again,
in Num. xx., we find the people encamped in Ka-
desh after reaching the wilderness of Zin. For the
question whether this wss a second visit (supposing
the Kadesh identical with that of the spies), or a
continued occupancy, tee Wilderness or Wax-
debug. The mention of the » wilderness of Zin"
is in fsvor of the identity of this place with that of
Num. xBL The reason* which seem to have fostered
a contrary opinion are the absence of water (ver. 9)
and the position assigned — « in the uttermost of "
the « border " of Edom. Yet the murmuring
seems to have arisen, or to have been more intone*
on account of their having encamped there in the
expectation of finding water; which affords again a
presumption of identity. Further, " the wilderness
of Zin along by the coast of Edom " (Num. xxxiv.
8; Josh, xv.) destroys any presumption to the con-
trary arising from that position. Jerome clearly
knows of but one and the same Kadesh — "where
Moses smote the rock," where " Miriam's monu-
ment," he says, " was still shown, and where Chedor-
laomer smote the rulers of Amalek." It is trot
Jerome give* a distinct article on KalSSiji, frffe 4
rtrm ryt Kplcats, t. e. En-mishpat,* but only
perhaps in order to record the fountain a* a distinct
local met The apparent ambiguity of the position,
first, in the wilderness of Paran, or in Paran ; and
secondly iu that of Zin, is no real increase to the
difficulty. For whether these tracts were contigu-
ous, and Kadesh on their common border, or ran
into each other, and embraced a common territory,
to which the name "Kadesh," in an extended
sense, might be given, is comparatively unimportant.
It may, however, be observed, that the wilderness
of Paran commences, Num. x. 12, where that of
Sinai ends, and that it extends to the point, whence
in ch. xiii. the spies set out, though the only posi-
tive identification of Kadesh with it is that in xlii.
26, when on their return to rejoin Moses they come
" to the wilderness of Paran, to Kadesh." Pajla.ii
then was evidently the general name of the great
tract south of Palestine, commencing soon after
Sinai, as the people advanced northwards — that
perhaps now known ss the desert at- T\h. Hence,
when the spies are returning soutAmmni they return
to Kadesh, viewed ss in the wilderness of Paran;
though, in the same chapter, when starting north-
wards on their journey, they commence from that
of Zin. It seems almost to follow that the wilder-
ness of Zin must have overlapped that of Paran on
the north side; or must, if they were parallel and
lay respectively east and west, have had a further
extension northwards than this latter. In the
designation of the southern border of the Israelites
also, it is observable that the wilderness of Zin is
mentioned as a limit, hot nowhere that of Paran *
(Num. xxxiv. 8, Josh. xv. 1), unless the dwelling
kUl iripar as IWar Vifitp nu ««ai»tfu»» eV vf
*>TP¥ 3UV, sol hrijpar as rip fojpev 2u>, cat wmfmrt-
0aAov tic rip' foqpov ♦a'pay adrf am K4Am.
The LXX. would make them approach the wilderness
of Sin drat, and that of Paran secondly, thus r
the effect of th* above observations.
Digitized by
Google
KADBSH
af IsLmael '• in the wilderness of Parian " (Gen.
xxi. SI) indicates that, on the western portion of
the southern border, which the story of Hagar indi-
zale* as hia dwelling-place, the Paran nomenclature
prevailed.
If it be allowed, in the dearth of poaitiTa testi-
mony, to fellow great natural boundaries In sug-
gesting an answer to the question of the situation
of these adjacent or perhaps overlapping wilder-
nesses, it will be seen, on reference to Kiepert'a map
,'!n Robinson, toI. i. ; aee also Kuaaegger's map of
the same region), that the Arabah itself and the
plateau westward of it are, when we leave out the
commonly so-called Sinaltic peninsula (here con-
sidered as corresponding in its wider or northerly
portion to "the wilderness of Sinai"), the two
parts of the whole region most strongly partitioned
off from and contrasted with one another. On this
western plateau is indeed superimposed another, no
hat clearly marked out, to Judge from the map, as
distinct from the former as this from the Arabah;
out this higher ground, it will be farther seen,
probably corresponds with " the mountain of the
Amorites." The Arabah, and its limiting barrier
of high ground • on the western side, differ by about
400 or 500 feet in deration at the part where Rob-
inson, advancing from Petra towards Hebron,
ascended that barrier by the pass d-Kh&r&r. At
'iie N. W. angle of the Arabah the regularity of
this barrier is much broken by the great wadies
which converge thither; but from its edge at ei-
Kk&rar the great floor stretches westward, with no
great interruption of elevation, if we omit the super-
imposed plateau, to the Egyptian frontier, and
northward to Rhinooolura and Gaza. Speaking of
it apparently from the point of view at tt-Khirir,
Robinson (ii. 688, 687 ) says it is " not exactly a table-
land, but a higher tract of country, forming the
first of the several steps or offsets into which the
ascent of the mountains in this part is divided."
It is now known as the wilderness <(- 7U. A general
description of it occurs in Robinson (i. 281, 883),
together with a mention of the several travellers
who hsd then previously visited it: its configura-
tion is given, ii. 294. If this tt- Tth region rep-
resent the wilderness of Paran, then the Arabah
itself, including all the low ground at the southern
and southwestern extremity of the Dead Sea, may
stand for the wilderness of Zin. The superimposed
plateau has an eastern border converging, towards
the north, with that of the general elevated tract
M which it stands, i. e. with the western barrier
aforesaid of the Arabah, but losing towards its
higher or northern extremity its elevation and pre-
ciseness, in proportion ss the general tract on which
it standi appears to rise, till, near the S. W. curve
at the Dead Sea, the higher plateau and the general
tract appear to blend. The convergency in question
arises from the general tract having, on its eastern
tide, •. e. where it is to the Arabah a western limit,
a harrier running more nearly N. and S. than that
■if the superimposed plateau, which runs about
B. K. E. and W. S. W. This highest of the two
steps on which this terrace stands is described by
Williams [Boh/ Oily, i. 488, 484), who approached it
KADBSH
1521
a Caned, at least throughout a portion rf Its course,
Mel tt-Btytrnth.
• Than an throe nearly parallel puses leading to
■» same level : this Is the middle one of the three.
BBhubert (Aw, U. 441-8) appears to have •aken Uu
sane path; Bertou that on the Tf. aid*, tt- ttmm.
96
from Hebron — the opposite direction (o that in
which Robinson, mounting towards Hebron by the
higher pass n-Stfik,* came upon it — at "a
gigantic natural rampart of lofty mountains, which
we could distinctly trace for many miles ■ E. and
W. of the spot on which we stood, whoso precipitous
promontories of naked rock, forming as it wen
bastions of Cyclopean architecture, jutted forth in
irregular massrs from the mountain-barrier into the
southern wilderness, a confused chaos of chalk." <*
Below the traveller lay the Wady Mumh, running
into that called d-FUerth, identifying the spot with
that described by Robinson (ii. 687) as " a formid-
able barrier supporting a third plateau " (reckoning
apparently the Arabah as one), rising on the other,
i. e. northern tide of the Wady d-Fihrth. But
the southern bee of this highest plateau is a still
more strongly defined wall of mountains. The
Israelites mutt probably have faced it, or wandered
along it, at some period of their advance from the
wild e r n ess of Sinai to the more northern desert of
Paran. There is no such boldly-marked line of
cliffs north of the et-Tih and tl-Odjmth ranges,
except perhaps Mount Sdr, the eastern limit of the
Arabah. There is a strongly marked expression in
Deut i. 7, 19, 20, " the mountain of tht Amorites,"
which, besides those of Seir and Hor, is the only
one mentioned by name after Sinai, and which is
there closely connected with Kadesh Bamea. The
wilderness (that of Paran) "great and terrible,"
which they pasted through after quitting Horeb
(w. 6, 7, 19), was " by the way of" this " moun-
tain of the Amorites." '■ We came," says Hoses,
"to Kadesh Bamea; and I said unto you, yean
come unto the mountain of the Amorites." Also
in ver. 7, the adjacent territories of this mountain-
region seem not obscurely intimated ; we have the
Shtfilah ("plain") and the Arabah ("vale"),
with the "hills" ("hill-country of Judah") be-
tween them; and " the South " is added as that
debatable outlying region, in which the wilde rn ess
strives with the inroads of HA and culture. Then
it no natural feature to correspond so weQ to this
mountain of the Amoritea as this smaller higher
plateau superimposed on et-Tlk, forming the water-
shed of the two great systems of wadiee, those north-
westward towards the great Wady ti-Arith, and
those northeastward towards the Wady Jertfeh
and the great Wady tt-Jrib. Indeed, in these con-
verging wady-systems on either tide of the " moun-
tain," we have a desert-continuation of the same
configuration of country, which the Shtftlak and
Arabah with their interposed water-shedding high-
lands present further north. And even as the name
Arabah it plainly continued from the Jordan
Valley, so as to mean the great arid trough between
the Dead Sea and Elath; to perhaps the Skifelak
(" vale ") might naturally be viewed as col tinned
to the " river of Egypt." And thus the " mountain
of the Amorites " would merely continue the moun
tain-mast of Judah and Ephraim, as forming part
of the land " which the Lord our God doth gin
unto us." The southwestern angle of this higher
plateau, is well defined by the bluff peak of Jebel
'Ara\f, standing In about 30° 22' N., by 34° 30*
• This Is only the direction, or apparent dlnetka,
of the range at the spot, Us general one bang as shove
state? See the maps.
d Bo Robinson, baton ascending, remarks (H. 6W
that the blue constated of chalky stone end ens
Digitized by
Google
1522
KADESH
E. Assuming the region from Wai% Feiran to
the Jtbtt Mouta as a general basis for the position
of Horcb, nothing farther tooth than this Jebel
'Ardif appears t gen the nccicsssry distance from
It for Kadesh, nor would an; point on the west
side of (he western face of this mountain region
suit, until we get quite high up towards Beer-sheba.
Nor, if any site in this direction is to be chosen, is
It easy to account for " the way of Mount Seir "
being mentioned as it is, Deut i. 2, apparently aa
the customary route " from Horeb " thither. But
if, as further reasons will suggest, Kadesh lay prob-
ably near the S. W. curve of the Dead Sea, then
"Mount Seir" will be within sight on the E.
during all the latter put of the journey "from
Horeb" thither. This mountain region is in
Kiepert's map laid down as the territory of the
.AiAamtk, but is said to be so wild and rugged
that the Bedouins of all other tribes avoid it, nor
has any road ever traversed it (Kobinsoo, L 186).
Across this tlien there was no past; the choice of
routes Uy between the road which, leading from
Hath to Gaza and the Shefetah, passes to the
west of it, and that which ascends from the northern
extremity of the Arabah by the Ma'aleh Akrabbim
towards Hebron. The reasons for thinking that
the Israelites took this latter course are, that if they
had taken the western, Beer-sheba would seem to
have been the most natural route of their first at-
tempted attack (Kobinson, i. 187). It would also
have brought them too near to the land of the
Philistines, which it seems to have been the Divine
purpose that they should avoid. But above all, the
features of the country, scantily as tbey are noticed
in Num., are in favor of the eastern route from the
Arabah and Dead See,
One site fixed on for Kadesh is the 'AinoSJuy-
ibek on the south side of this " mountain of the
Amorites," and therefore too near Horeb to fulfill
the conditions of Deut. i. 3. Messrs. Rowlands and
Williams (.Holy City, L 463-68) argue strongly in
favor of a site for Kadesh on the west side of this
whole mountain region, towards Jebel HelcU, where
they found " a large single muss or small hill of
solid rock, a spur of the mountain to the north of
it, immediately rising shove it, the only visible
naked rock in the whole district." They found
salient water rushing from this rock into a basin,
but soon losing itself in the sand, and a grand
space for the encampment of a host on the S. W.
side of it. In favor of it they allege, (1) the name
KdiL't at Kick*, pronounced in English Kiddau
sr Kidddte, aa being exactly the form of the He-
brew name Kadesh; (2) the position, in the line of
•J» southern boundary of Judah; (8) the corre-
spondence with the order of the places mentioned,
especially the places Adar and Azmon, which these
revellers recognize in Adarat and Aeeimeh, other-
vise (aa in Kiepert's map) Kadarai and Kaiei-
mtk i (4) its position with regard to Jebel el-Hcv-
lal, or Jebel llekl; (6) its position with regard to
the mountain of the Amorites (which they seem to
identify with the wetter* face of the plateau): (6)
« What to more disputable than the S. boundary
Ids ? Jtbtt tttlol derives Its sole significance from a
jr-ffTfii not specified in Jeremiah. The '< mountain of
the Amorites," as shown above, need not be that west-
ern the*. Ms. Hoc Is es accessible tram elsewhere.
* Beetssnl last map shows a Wady Kiduu eerre-
spendwg In position nearly with Jtbtt tl-Kudtt* given
In Kiepert's. on the authority of Abakan. Ztanmer-
srat. x., gives tt-Caatttak ss another
KADESH
its situation with regard to the grand S. \V.
to Palestine by Beer-lahai-roi from Egypt; (7) its
distance from Sinai, and the goodness of the way
thither; (8) the accessibility of Mount Hor from
this region. Of these, 2, 4, 5, and 8, seem of bo
weight; • 1 is a good deal weakened by the fiat*
that some such name seems to have a wide range *
in this region ; 3 is of considerable force, but swims
overbalanced by the fact that the whole position
seems too far west; arguments 6 and 7 rather tend
against thsn for the view in question, any western
route being unlikely (see text above), and the
" goodness " of the road not being discoverable,
but rather the reverse, from the Mosaic record-
But, above all, how would this accord with " the)
way of Mount Seir" being that from Sinai to
Kadesh Bsmea? (Deut. i. 3).
In the map to Robinson's last edition, a Jebel
el-Kudeit is given on the authority of Abakan.
But this spot would be too far to the west for the
fixed point intended in Deut. i. 9 as Kadesh Bar-
nes. Still, taken in connection with the region en-
deavored to be identified with the " mountain of
the Amorites," it may be a general testimony to
the prevalence of the name Kadesh within certain
limits; which is further supported by the names
given below.*
The indications of locality strongly point to a
site near where the mountain of the Amorites de-
scends to the low region of the Arabah and Dead
Sea. Tell Arod is perhaps as clear a local monu-
ment of the event of Num. xxi. 1, as we can ex-
pect to find. [Akad.] " The Canaanitiah king
of And " found that Israel was coming "by the
way of the spies," and " fought against " and
"took some of them prisoners." The subsequent
defeat of this king is clearly connected with the
pass et-Sifa, between which and the Tell Arad a
line drawn ought to give us the direction of route
intended by "by the way of the spies i" accordingly,
within a day's journey on either side of this fine
produced towards the Arabah, Kadesb-Baroea
should be sought for. [Hormah.1 Nearly the
same ground appears to have been the scene of the
previous discomfiture of the Israelites rebeUioualy
attempting to force their way by this psas to occupy
toe " mountain " where " the Amalekitee and Am-
orites " were " before them " (Num. xiv. 46; Judg.
i. 17): further, however, this defeat is said to have
been "in Seir" (Deut i. 44). Now, whether we
admit or not with Stanley (S. tfP.M note) that
Edom had at this period no territory west of the
Arabah, which is perhaps doubtful, yet there can
be no room for doubt that " the mountain of the
Amorites " must at any rate be taken aa their
western limit. Hence tie overthrow in Seir must
be east of that mountain, or, at furthest, on its
eastern edge. The " Seir " alluded to may be the
western edge of the Arabah below the tM-Sifa pass-
When thus driven back, they " abode in Kadesh
many days " (Deut. i. 46). The city, whether we
prefer Kadesh simply, or Kadesh-Barnea, as it.
designation, cannot have belonged to the Amorites,
name tor the well-known hill Madura*, or Modem*.
lying within view of the point described above, from
Williams's Holy City, 1. 488, 464. This Is towards the
east, a good deal nearer the Dead Sea, and ee tat
mora suitable. Further, Bobertr ou's map In Steward
Tat leal and tat Khan places an 'Am Ktmdn neat
the junction of the Wady Abyad with the Wad* 4
Aria* ; but In this map an tokens of some eunromt
in the drawing.
Digitized by
Google
KADBSB
br these after their victory would probably h»e
disputed possession of it; nor could it if plain. j
Amoritish, have been "in the uttermost of the
border " of Kdom. It may be conjectured that it
lay in the debatable ground between the Amoritea
and Edom, which the Israelites in a menage of
courtesy to Edom might naturally assign to the
latter, and that it was possibly then occupied in (act
by neither, but by a remnant of those Horites
whom Edom (Deut. ii. 13) dislodged from the
>• mount " Seir, but who remained as refugees iu
that arid and unenviable region, which perhaps was
the sole remnant of their previous possessions, and
which they still called by the name of " Seir," their
patriarch. This would not be inconsistent with " the
edge of the land of Edom " still being at Mount
Hot (Num. xxxiii. 37), nor with the Israelites re-
garding this debatable ground, after dispossessing
the Amorites from '• their mountain," as pertain-
ing to their own " south quarter." If this view be
admissible, we might regard >< Barnea " as a He-
braized remnant of the Horite language, or of
some Uorite name.*
The nearest approximation, then, which can be
given to a site for the city of Kadesh, may be prob-
ably attained by drawing a circle, from the pass es-
Sifa, at the radius of about a day's journey; its
southwestern quadrant will intersect tbe " wilder-
ness of Panui," or et-Tth, which is there overhung
by tbe superimposed plateau of the mountain of the
Amorites; while its southeastern one will cross
what has been designated as the " wilderness of
Zin." This seems to satisfy all the conditions of the
passages of Genesis, Numbers, and Deuteronomy,
which refer to it. The nearest site in harmony
with this view, which ha* yet been suggested (Rob-
inson, ii. 175), is undoubtedly the 'Ain tl-rVeibeh.
To this, however, is opposed the remark of a trav-
eller (Stanley, B. if P. p. 96) who went probably with
a deliberate intention of testing the local features
in reference to this suggestion, that it does not
afford among its " stony shelves of three or four
feet high" any proper "cliff" (VvD), such as
is the word specially describing that " rock " (A.
V.) from which the water gushed. It is however
nearly opposite the Wady Ghuweir, the great
opening into the steep eastern wall of the Arabah,
and therefore the most probable " highway " by
which to " pass through the border " of Edom.
But until further examination of local features has
been made, which owing to the frightfully desolate
character of the region seems very difficult, it
would be unwise to push identification further.
Notice is due to the attempt to discover Kadesh
KADESH
1528
a Wist has suggested ^D™ 1J, son of wander-
at, m Bedouin ; but "IJl dose not occur as " son "
In the writings of Hoses. The reading of the LXJC.
In Mum. xxxiv. 4, Ko&re ni Baprij, asams to favor
the notion that lfi was regarded by them as a man's
tame. The name "Msribah" Is accounted for in
Hum. xx. 18. [MxxouH.] [Slmonis as cited by
3e*enlus regards 53""?5 as from "12, asm country,
lad 3?2i wandering, r. yi3. — A.J
» It may be perhaps a Horite word, corrupted so as
to bear a slgnlflcatloa In the Hebrew and Arable ; but,
seesanliig It to be from the root meaning " holiness,"
wadsh exists In various forms in the Heb. and Arab.,
Atn may be some connection between that name,
In Pefaa, the metropolis of the Nabathxans (Stan-
ley, 8. <* P. p. 94), embedded in the mountains te
which the name of Mount Seir is admitted by al
authorities to apply, and almost overhung by Mount
Hot. No doubt the word Stld, " cliff," is used as
a proper name occasionally, and may probably in 2
K. xiv. 7; Is. xvi. 1, be identified with a city or
spot of territory belonging to Edom. But the two
sites of Petra and Mount Hot are surely far too
close for each to be a distinct camping station, as
in Num. xxxiii. 36. 37. The camp of Israel would
hare probably covered the site of the city, the
mountain, and several adjacent valleys. But, further,
the site of Petra must have been as thoroughly
Edomitiah territory as was that of Bozkah, the
then capital, and could not be described as being
" in the uttermost " of their border. " Mount Seir "'
was "given to Ksau for a possession," in which he
was to be unmolested, and not a " foot's breadth "
of his land was to be taken. This seems irrecon-
cilable with tbe quiet encampment of the whole of
Israel and permanency there for " many days," as
also with their subsequent territorial possession of
it, for Kadesh is always reckoned as a town in the
southern border belonging to Israel. Neither does
a friendly request to be allowed to pass through the
land of Edom come suitably from an invader who
had seised, and was occupying one of its most dif-
ficult passes; nor, again, is the evident temper of
the Edomites and their precautions, if they con-
templated, as they certainly did, armed resistance
to the violation of their territory, consistent with
that invader being allowed to settle himself by
anticipation in such a position without a stand
being made against him. But, lsstly, the conjunc-
tion of the city Kadesh with " the mountain of the
Amorites," and its connection with the assault
repulsed by the Amalekites and Canaanites (Deut.
i. 44; Num. xiv. 43), points to a site wholly away
from Mount Seir.
A paper in the Journal of Sacred Literature,
April, 1860, entitled A Critical Enquiry into (As
Rout* of the Exodus, discards all the received sites
for Sinai, even that of Mount Hot, and fixes on
Erase, (el-Kaletah) as that of Kadesh. The argu-
ments of this writer will be considered, aa a whole,
under Wilderness op Wandering.
Kadesh appears to have maintained itself, at
least at a name, to tbe days of the prophet Kzekiel
(L c) and those of tbe writer of the apocryphal
book of Judith (i. 9 [A. V. Kades] ). Tbe " wilder-
ness of Kadesh " occurs only in Ps. xxix. 8, and is
probably undistinguiahable from that of Zin. Al
regards the name " Kadesh," there seems some
doubt whether it be originally Hebrew.'
supposed to indicate a shrine, and the En-Mlshpat m
Fountain of Judgment. The connection of the priestly
and Judicial function, having for its root the regarding
as sacred whatever is authoritative, or the deducing
all subordinate authority from the Highest, would sup-
port this view. Compare also the dooble functions
united in Sheikh and Cadi. Further, on this suppo-
sition, a mors forcible sense accrues to the name Kadesh
Miribah -m " strife " or « contention," being aa it were
a perversion of Mishpat » judgment — a taking it in
partem dttenortm. For the Heb. and Arab, derivatives
from thai same root ass Oes. La. s. v. ttf'jjj, vary-
ing h. senses of *» be holy, or (pari) to sanctify, as a
priest, or to keep holy, as the Sabbath, and (pnal) its
passive; also OolH La. Arab. Lot. I jgd. Bat, 166ft,
s. e. [mi Jo. The derived sense, Brjl2t * m *' ,
Digitized by
Google
1524
KADMIEL
Almost an j probable situation for Kadesh on tbn
pounds of the Scriptural narrative ii equally op-
poaed to the impression derived from the acpect of
the region thereabouts. No (pot perhaps in the
locality above indicated, could now be an eligible
site for the boat of the Israelite* " for many days."
Jerome speaks of it aa a "desert" in his day, and
makes no allusion to any city there, although the
tomb of Miriam, of which no modem traveller baa
found any vestige, had there its traditional site.
It is poarilile that the great volume of water which
in the rainy season sweeps by the great tl-Jdb ant
other wadies into the S. W. corner of the Gbor,
might, if duly husbanded, have once created an
artificial oasis, of which, with the neglect of such
industry, every trace has since been lost. But, as
no attempt is made here to fix on a definite site
for Kadesh as a city, it is enough to observe that
the objection applia in nearly equal force to nearly
all solutions of the question of which the Scriptural
narrative admits. H. H.
KAD'MIEL (b^fBlQ {who Hand, befort
God, i. e. his servant] : KaipWjA; [in Neh. vii. 43,
Vat. KoflJiT)*.:] Ctdmihtl), one of the Levitt* who
with bis family returned from Babylon with Zerub-
babel, and apparently a representative of the de-
scendants of Hodaviah, or, as be is elsewhere called,
Hodevah or Judah (Ear. ii 40; Neh. vii. 43). In
the first attempt which was made to rebuild the
Temple, Kadmiel and Jeahua, probably an elder
member of the same house, were, together with
their families, appointed by Zerubbabel to superin-
tend the workmen, and officiated in the thanks-
giving-service by which the laying of the foundation
was solemnized (Ear. ill. 9). His bouse took a
prominent part in the confession of the people on
the day of humiliation (Neh. ix. 4, 5), and with
the other Levites joined the princes and priests in
a solemn compact to separate themselves to walk
in God's law (Neb. X. 9). In the parallel lists of
1 Eadr. he is called Cadmibl.
XAiraoNiTES, the Oab-ijwi, t t.
" the Kadmonite " [dwttter in the tint] : robs
Kttfucyaiousi Alex, omits: Cedmonans), a people
named in Gen. xv. 19 only ; one of the nations who
it that time occupied the land promised to the
descendants of Abram. The name is from a root
Kedtm, signifying " eastern," and also " ancient "
(Gee. Thet. p. 1195).
Bochart (Chan. i. 19; Phal iv. 36) derives the
Kadmonitea from Cadmus, and further identifies
them with the Writes (whose place they fill in the
above list of nations), on the ground that the
Hivites occupied Mount Harmon, " the most east-
erly part of Canaan." But Hennon cannot be said
to be on the east of Canaan, nor, if it were, did the
Hivites live there so exclusively as to entitle them
M an appellation derived from that circumstance
(see vol. ii. p. 1082). It is more probable that the
name Kadmonite in its one occurrence is a synonym
for the Beme-Kzdkh — the •'children [sous] of
the East," the general name which in the Bible
tppears to be given to the tribes which roved in the
pnstttuta, fan. HttJ'.lf?, a harlot, doss not appear
to occur In the AiabT: It 'is to be referred to ths notion
at prostitution In honor of aa tool, as the Syrians In
that or Aatarte, the Babylonians in Out of Kytttta
literal I. US), and U conveyed in the Greek i<petovAoc.
'spouts*, vol U p. 1138 a.] Ibis repulsive custom
KAJJAH
gnat watte tracts on the east and annthaaat of
Palestine. Q.
* The Kadmonitet even at Hennon might be
said to be on the east at compared e. g. with tat
Zldoniani on the west. " This name,'' says Thom-
son, " is still pic se iwd among the Nusairiyeh north
of Tripoli, and they have a tradition that their
ancestors were expelled from Palestine by Joshua.
It is curious also that a fragment of this strange
people still cling to then- original home at '^ita-
t\ Zaora, and Ghijar, near the foot of Hennon.
I have repeatedly travelled among than in their
own mountains, and many things in their physi-
ognomy and manners gave me the idea that they
were a remnant of the most ancient inhabitants of
this country " (Aono* c* Book, i. 248). H.
KAXXAI [2 ayl.] (*0 [perh. twifi one cf
God, his messenger, Gee.] : KoAAoi; [Vat. Alex.
FA.1 omit; FA.' SoAAaC] Ctlal), % priest in the
days of Joiakim the son of Jeahua. He was one
of the chiefs of the fathers, and represented the
fiunUy of Sallai (Neh. xii. 80).
KA/NAH (njj7 [reed or nine* of reads]:
KareoVi Alex. Kara: Cana), one of the places
which formed the landmarks of the boundary of
Asber; apparently next to Zidon-nbbah, or " great
Zidon " (Josh. xix. 28 only). If this inference is
correct, then Kanah can hardly be identified in the
modem village Kina, six miles inland, not from
Zidon, but from Tyre, nearly 20 miles south thereof.
The identification, first proposed by Robinson (B&L
Rtt. ii. 456), has been generally accepted by travel-
lers (Wilson, Land$, ii. 230; Porter, Handbook,
395; Schwarx, 192; Van de Velde, i. 180). Van
de Velde (i. 209) also treats it as the native place
of the " woman of Cannon " (yvr)i XamvuTa) who
cried after our Lord. But the former identification,
not to apeak of the latter — in which a connection
is assumed between two words radically distinct —
seems untenable. An 'Ain-Kana is marked hi the
map of Van de Velde, about 8 miles S. E. of Saida
(Zidon), close to the conspicuous village Jwjia, at
which latter place Zidon lies full in view (Van da
Velde, ii. 437). This at least answers more nearly
the requirements of the text. But it is put forward
aa a mere conjecture, and must abide further in-
vestigation. G.
• That the village of til* mentioned by Rob-
inson (BM. Bt$. ii. 456) and generally accepted by
travellers, is the one referred to in Josh. xix. 28
seems probable for various reasons. Assuming
Beteh (which see) to have been, as Eusebius
claims, eight miles east of Ptoiemaia. we must take
our point of departure in giving the boundaries of
Asher (Josh. xix. 25) a little south of Acbxib, or
Ecdippa, the situation of which may be laid down
with certainty. Passing by Helkath and Hali, the
sits of which is lost, we come to Beten on the road
southward toward Carmd. That Beten lay inland
might be imagined, inasmuch as the Aaberitea did
not drive out the inhabitants of the aea-coast from
Achzib to Aocho (Akka). The border then |
seems more suited to those populous and luxurious
regions than to the hard, bare llfc of the desert. As aa
example of eastern nomenclature travelUnf nor west
at an early period, Osdls rosy perhaps be sii ajr ate d as
based upon Kadesh, and carried to Spain by ta»
Pbomlelios.
Digitized by
Google
KANAH, THE RIVEB
swthward to Achahaph, which if probably Bhodfa,
UU»i of the present day (mo Aobbrapr). Paw-
ing by Alammalck (of. Wady ei-Meiik north of
Carmel) and Amad and Mienes!, two unknown
rites, we come to Carmel. Thia Sin the direction
of the route by which the border la designated.
From thia point the border turns eastward, and at
its junction with the lot of Zebulun its direction
plainly turns northward, and passing places identi-
fied with a degree of probability, it reaches Kana,
and the border of the great Zidon. Now it is
sbjected that Tyre is much nearer this Kana than
Zidon. But it must be remembered that at this
early period Zidon was probably greater than Tyre,
and that the inhabitants of Tyre are themselves
railed Zidonians. It may have been, that at that
period the territory of Zidon extended nearer to
kanah than it did in later times when Tynan
power had interposed between it and Zidon. In
any case, the eastern border is simply said to have
extended from Kanah even unto great Zidon.
This does not make it necessary that the city
walls should be understood, which supposition
would be forbidden by the historical fact that the
territory of Zidon remained unconquered ; and
whether we suppose that the territory of Asher
stretched to the northward of the parallel of Tyre,
toward Zidon, or not, in either case it is inadmis-
sible to extend it to the city gates, just as it if
inadmissible to extend it (ver. 29) to the gates of
Tyre itself. The existence of the name Kanah,
unchanged by centuries, in a spot having so many
claims for recognition as the one intended (Josh,
xix. 38), must fix the identification with a reason-
able degree of certainty, and forestall the attempt
to establish the site at the obscure 'Am Kana near
Jajun, S. E. of Soldo.
Van de Velde's attempt (i. 909) to establish this
site as the place of birth of the '• woman of Canaan "
is to be rejected on philological grounds. Xayama
is derivable from XoraaV, not from Kami. Further-
more, for Xararata (Matt. xv. 33), Hark (vii. 36)
baa IvpoQolytaaa, designating race and nation-
ality, not place of birth or residence. It would
have been possible for a Jewess to have resided in
Kana or be born there, but the Evangelist wishes
to designate this woman as not a Jewtu, but a
foreigner, a CanaaniUu. G. E. P.
KA/NAH, THE RIVER (njjjbnjrsthe
torrent or wady K-: XtXxtwA, fdparyt Kapavi;
Alex, y*tuo/)Aoi Kara and ipapayt Karat: Valtit
arwtdmeti), a stream falling into the Mediterranean,
which formed the division between the territories
of Ephraim and Manasmh, the former on the south,
the latter on the north (Josh. xvi. 8, xvii. 9). No
light appears to be thrown on its situation by the
Ancient Versions or the Onomasticon. Dr. Robin-
son (iii. 135) identifies it " without doubt " with a
wsdy, which taking its rise in the, central momi-
■ins of Ephraim, near Akrabth, some 7 miles 8. E.
of ffablut, Lipases the country and enters tbt «ea
just above Jaffa as Tfahr tl-Aigth ; bearing during
part of its course the name of Wady Kanah. But
thia, though perhaps sufficiently important to serve
as a boundary between two tribes, and though to*
ttention of the name is in its favor, is surely too
tar south to have bean the boundary between
Eohraim ant Mnnsaawh. The conjecture of Sebware
(61) b more plausible — that it is a wady which
I— ■ || if nil iilim In n* if fin, at ' Ifn if
KARKuR
1525
Khauab, and falls into the sea as Xamr Falaik,
and which bears also the name of Wady ai-Kkauai
— the reedy stream. This lias its more northerly
position in its favor, and also the agreement hi
signification of the names (Kanah meaning also
reedy). Bnt it should not be forgotten that the
name Khauab is borne by a large tract of the
maritime plain at this part (Stanley, 8. 4 P. 360)
Porter pronounces for JV. Akkdar, dose below
Cessans. G.
• KAPER or CAPER (from xdWopit ar.d
in Lai. capparu). Many suppose this fruit or plant
to be meant in Eccles. xii. 6 by ■"TVP^Kn, « the
caper," instead of "desire" (A. V.). The word
occurs only in that passage. The meaning then is
that, as one of the signs and effects of old age, the
caper (accustomed to be eaten for its stimulating
properties) shall at length lose its power to excits
the appetite of the aged or restore to them their
lost vigor. The article in the Hebrew (as shore)
and the verb's semi-figurative sense PSrt, " shall
break " sc. its compact or promise) favor this ex-
planation. Celsius {Hitrob. i. 209 IT.) mentions
some of the authorities in support of this view.
Prof. Stuart adopts it ( Commentary on Acc/estnstet,
p. 827 t); also Hitzig, Havdb. sum A. T. vii. p.
213. It is the translation of the Sept., Syr., and
Vulg. See Winer, Rtalw. i. 660. The caper
(written also kapptr) is very abundant in Palestine.
It " is always pendant or trailing on the ground.
The stems have short recurved spines below the
junction of each leaf. The leaves are oval, of a
glossy green, and in the wanner situations are ever-
green. The blossom is very open, loose, and white,
with many long lilac anthers. The fruit is a large
pod, about the size and shape of a walnut. It is
the bud of the flower that is pickled and exported
as a sauce." (Tristram, Nat. Bit. of the EMe,
p. 468.) H.
KARE'AH (mD [baiUuad]: Kdpnt :
Caret), the father of Johanan and Jonathan, who
supported Gedaliah's authority and avenged his
murder (Jer. xl. 8, 18, 16, 16, ill. 11, 13, 14, 16,
xlii. 1, 8, xliii. 3, 4, 6). He is elsewhere called
Carkah.
KARKA'A (with the def. article, VTT&J
[bottom, foundation] : KoJiji, in both MS8. ;
Symm. translating, ttwpof- Careaa), one of the
landmarks on the south boundary of the tribe of
Judah (Josh. xv. 9), and therefore of the Holy
Land itself. It lay between Addar and Azmon,
Azroon being the next point to the Mediterranean
( Wady et-Arith). Karkaa, however, is not found
in the specification of the boundary in Num. xxxiv.,
and it is worth notice that while in Joshua the lies
is said to make a detour (HDD) to Karkaa, in
Numbers it runs to Azmon. Nor does the name
occur in the subsequent lists of the southern cities
in Josh. xv. 31-32, or xix. 2-8, or in Neh. xl. 28,
ate. Eusebius ( Onomattiem, 'Axaprni) perhaps
speaks of it as then existing (*aVij iorlr), but at
any rate no subsequent traveller or geographer ap-
pears to have mentioned it. G.
KAR'KOR (with the def. article, " ~lfr"|j?n
[foundation, Ges.; or perh. fiat and toft ground,
DieK.j: Kopmlo; Alex. Kapna: Vulg. translating,
rtqm't*r*oant), the place in which the remnant of
the host of Zebah and Zalmnnna which had escapes'
Digitized by
Google
1526 KARTAH
the rout of the Jordan Valley wen encamped, when
Gideon bant upon and again dispelled them (Judg.
nil. 10). It must have been on the east of the
Ionian, beyond the district of the towns, in the
■pen wastes inhabited bj the nomad tribes —
" them that dwelt in tents on the east of Nobah
and Jogbehah " (ver. 11). But it is difficult to
believe that it can have been so far to the south as
it is placed by Eusebius and Jerome (OnomatL
KcuMtd and " Carcar "), namely one day's journey
(about 15 miles) north of Petra, where in their
time stood the fortress of Carcaria, as in ours the
castle of Kertk tlShobak (Burckbardt, 19 Aug.
1812). The name is somewhat similar to that of
•'haraca, or Cbarax, a place on the east of the
Jordan, mentioned once in the Haccahean history ;
but there is nothing to be said either for or against
the identification of the two.
If Kmawat be Kehath, on which Nobah be-
stowed his own name (with the usual fate of such
innovations in Palestine), then we should look for
Karkor in the desert to the east of that place;
which is quite far enough from the Jordan Valley,
the scene of the first encounter, to justify both
Josephus's expression, rd^st woAe (Ant. vii. 6,
| 5), and the careless " security " of the Hidianites.
But no traces of such a name have yet been dis-
covered in thst direction, or any other than that
above mentioned. G.
KARTAH (r?£Hi2 [<%]: i, Ko8t,j; Alex.
Kopfto: Cnrtha), a town of Zcbulun, which with
Its "suburbs " was allotted to the Merarite Levites
(Josh. xxi. 84). It is not mentioned either in the
general list of the towns of this tribe (xix. 10-16),
or in the parallel catalogue of Levitical cities in
1 Chr. vi., nor does it appear to have been recog-
nised since. G.
• Van de Velde inserts a Tttt KOrd&ny on his
Hap of Palestine, in the plain a little inland from
Khaifa. He speaks of this as probably the Kartah
of Josh. xxi. 34. '• An ancient mill and numerous
old building stones " mark the site. (Syr- <f Pal.
i. 289.) H.
KARTAN (7£Hi? [< fouofe «'y] '• B*w*r;
Alex. tlotupa>v; [Comp. Aid. KapSiv:] Carthan),
a city of Naphtali, allotted with its " suburbs " to
the Gersbonite Levites (Josh. xxi. 32). In the
parallel list of 1 Chr. vi. the name appears in the
more expanded form of Kih.tath.uk (ver. 76), of
which Kartan may be either a provincialism or a
contraction. A similar change is observable in
Dot han and Dothaim. The LXX. evidently bad a
different Hebrew text from the present. G.
KATTATH (H^i2 [matt or youno] : Ko-
rayiS: Alex. KarroS: Catheth), one of the cities
of the tribe of Zebulun (Josh. xix. 15). It is not
mentioned in the Onomasticon. Schwars (172)
reports that 'n the JmuaUm Mtgillah, Kattath
" is said to be the modern Katunith," which he
seeks to identify with Kana d-JtSl, — most probably
the Cana op Galii.ee of the N. T., — 5 miles
north of SrffurUh, partly on the ground that Cana
h gives in the Syriac as Katun, and partly for
ether but not very palpable reasons. G.
KB'DAR (7JJ5, ««* •*»• Hade-Omned
■mm, Gas.: fiijMp: Cedar), the second in order
a D , ~?n. Comp. usafs of Arable,
V
K.BOAR
of the sons of bbmael (Gen. xxv. 13; 1 Chr. 1
29), and the name of a great bribe of the Arabs
settled on the northwest of the peninsula and the
confines of Palestine. This tribe seems to have
been, with Tenia, the chief representative of Ish-
mael's sons in the western portion of the land they
originally peopled. The " glory of Kedar " is ra
corded by the prophet Isaiah (xxi. 13-17) in the
burden upon Arabia; and its importance may also
be inferred from the " princes of Kedar," mentioned
by Ez. (xxvii. 21 ), as well ss the pastoral character
of the tribe : " Arabia, and all the princes of Kedar,
they occupied with thee in lamlis, snd rams, and
goats; In these [were they] thy merchants." But
this characteristic is maintained in several other
remarkable passages. In Cant i. 5, the black tents
of Kedar, black like the goat's or camel's-hair tents
of the modern Bedawee, are forcibly mentioned,
" I [am] black, but comely, O ye daughters of Jeru-
salem, as the tents of Kedsr, ss the curtains of Solo-
mon." In Is. lx. 7, we find the " flocks of Kedar,"
together with the rams of Nebaioth ; and in Jer. xlix.
28, " concerning Kedar, and concerning the king-
doms of Hazor," it is written, " Arise ye, go up to
Kedar, and spoil the men of the Fast [the Bekk-Ke-
hem]. Their tents and their flocks shall they tain
away ; they shall take to themselves their tent-cur-
tains, and all their vessels, and their camels" (28, 29).
They appear also to hare been, like the wandering
tribes of the present day, " archers " and " mighty
men " (Is. xxi. 17; comp. Ps. cxx. 5). That they
also settled in villages or towns, we find from that
magnificent passage of Isaiah (xlii. 11), " Let the
wilderness and the cities thereof lift up [their voice],
the villages [that] Kedar doth inhabit; let the
inhabitants of the rock sing, let them shout from
the top of the mountains; " — unless encampments
ore here intended. " But dwelling in more perma-
nent habitations than tents is just what we should
expect froii a far-stretching tribe such ss Kedar
certainly was, covering in their pasture-lands and
watering places the western desert, settling on the
borders of Palestine, and penetrating into the
Arabian peninsula, where they were to be the fath-
ers of a great nation. The archers and warriors
of this tribe were probably engaged in many of the
wars which the " men of (he East " (of whom
Kedar most likely formed a part) waged, in alli-
ance with Midianites and others of the Bene-Ke-
deni, with Israel (see H. Caussin de Perceval's
Euni, i. 180, 181, on the war of Gideon, etc.). The
tribe seems to have been one of the most conspic-
uous of all the Ishmaelite tribes, snd hence the
Rabbins call the Arabians universally by this name. 1
In Is. xxi. 17, the descendants of Kedar are
called the Bene-Kedar.
As a link between Bible history and Hohsm-
madan traditions, the tribe of Kedar is probably
found in the people called the Cedrei by lliny, on
the confines of Arabia Petra* to the south f^. //.
v. 11); but they have, since classical times, become
merged into the Arab nation, of which so great a
part must have sprung from them. In the Mo-
hammedan traditions, Kedar c is the ancestor of
Mohammad ; and through Mm, although the gen-
ealogy is broken for many generations, the i
t> Banes lip \W\ BabUn. use of the
language (8«s. La. ad. TngsUss).
Digitized by
Google
KEPEMAH
ttf of the fatter from Ishmael U curled. (See
Ceuaain, Knot, l. 176 ff.) The descent of the
oulk of the Arabs from Ishmael we hare elsewhere
ibown to rest on indisputable grounds. [Isb-
■uil] E. S. P.
KEDT3MAH (JTZJTi?., i. e. tattvmrd: K«8-
liA [Alex, in 1 Chr. KtSeut] : Cedma), the youngest
ef the sons of Ishmael (Gen. xxr. 15; 1 Chr. i. 31).
KEDTSMOTH (in Dent, and Chron. mnT|? ;
In Josh. riO'JiJ [oeomawot, origin) : KtSo^fl,
BaittSfuie, ri AtKfuir, *, KuS/^fl; [Tat in Josh,
xiii. Baxttme, in 1 Chr. KaSafutt;] Alex. Kct-
awv, KtBvpmB, Tttmr, K<y»ijlla>«: Cadrmoth,
Ctdimoth {Jethton,}), one of the towns in the dis-
trict east of the Dead Sea allotted to the tribe of
Beubeo (Josh. xiii. 18); given with its "suburbs "
to the Merarite Lerites (Josb. xxi. 37; 1 Chr. vi.
79; in the former of these passages the name, with
the rest of the rerses St) and 37, is omitted from
the Rec. Hebrew Text, and from the Vulg.). It
possibly conferred Its name on the " wilderness,
or uncultivated pasture land (Midbar), of Kede-
moth," in which Israel was encamped when Moses
asked permission of Sihon to pass through the
country of the Amorites; although, if Kedemoth
be treated as a Hebrew word, and translated " East-
ern," the same circumstance may have given its
name both to the city and the district And this
is more probably the case, since " Aroer on the
brink of the torrent Anion " is mentioned as the
extreme (south) limit of Slhon's kingdom and of
the territory of Reuben, and the north limit of
Hoab, Kedemoth, Jabatah, Heshbon, and other
towns, being apparently north of it (Josh. xiii. IB,
Ac.), while the wilderness of Kedemoth was cer-
tainly outside the territory of Sihon (Deut. ii. 26,
97, Ac.), and therefore south of the Arnon- This
is supported by the terms of Num. xxi. 23, from
which it would appear as if Sihon had come out of
his territory into the wilderness; although on the
other hand, from the fact of Jabez (or Jabatah)
being said to be "in the wilderness" (Num. xxi.
23), it seems doubtful whether the towns named in
Josh. xiii. 16-21 were all north of Arnon. As in
other cases we must await further investigation on
the east of the Dead Sea. The place is but cas-
ually mentioned in the Ommaiticon ("Cade-
moth"), but yet so as to imply a distinction be-
tween the town and the wilderness. No other
traveller appears to have noticed It (See Ewald,
ffe*cA.ii.271.) [Jahaz.]
KETDESH (B7T!|T): the name borne by three
titles in Palestine.
1- (KdSvji; Alex. K«8«>: Coda) in the ex-
KEDKSH
1527
a Some of the variations In the IXX. an remark-
able. In Judg. It. 9, 10, Tat has U4qt, and Alex.
KiOtf ; but in ver. 11, Land 1 Chr. vi. 76 J they both
have Meet- In 2 K. it. 29 both have K«Wf. In
Judg. lv. and elsewhere, the Pwhlto Venlon has Beeem-
Naphtall for Kedesh, Rooom being the name which In
tbeTargvms Is commonly used for the Southern Ka-
esah, K. Barnee. (Set Stanley, S. f P. 91 »«. .
» TlpOf B i »»m»b w&Ut Tift TaAiAauM Tiit trm, KM-
rtcev w6p^m. J. D. Mle haal l s (Orient, und Saga.
BiUiatJuk, 1778, Mo. 84) argues strenuously for the
IsoUty of Beroth and Kedes m this passage with
Barytas (BnrBi)and Kedesh, near Tnmss (see above) ;
jut Interesting and Ingenlone as la the attempt, the
treme south of Judah (Josh. xr. 23). Whether
this is identical with Kadesh-Barnea, which was
actually one of the points on the south boundary of
the tribe (xr. 8; Num. xxxiv. 4), it is impossible to
say. Against the identification is the difference of
the name, — hardly likely to be altered If the
famous Kadesh was intended, and the occurrence
of the name elsewhere showing that it was of com-
mon use.
2. (Kftu; Alex. KfSet : Cedet), a city of Issa-
char, which according to the catalogue of 1 Chr.
vi. was allotted to the Qershonite Lerites (ver. 72).
In the parallel list (Josh. xxi. 28) the name is
Kisiiok, one of the variations met with in these
lists, for which it is impossible satisfactorily to ac-
count. The Kedesh mentioned among the cities
whose kings were slain by Joshua (Josh. xii. 22),
in company with Hegiddo and Jokneam of CarmeL
would seem to have been this city of Issachar, and
not, as is commonly accepted, the northern place
of the same name in Naphtali, the position of
which in the catalogue would naturally have been
with Hazor and Shimron-Meron. But this, though
probable, is not conclusive.
3. KKDKSR (KetSff, KttJni, Kills," KeWft
Alex, also KeiSes: Cedes): also Kkdksh in Gali-
lee (b ,l 7^?'p, i. e. « K. In theGalil: " t) Kcttnr,
[etc.] ir rf TakiXala [Vat -Ast-] : Ce*» in Gal-
tlaa): and once, Judg. ir. 6, Kkdesh-Nafhtau
( , b^l93'p.: Ksttwt N*a*a\i [Vat. -a.«ua, Alex
-Aei]:' Ctdtt Ntphtkali). One of the fortified
cities of the tribe of Naphtali, named between Ha-
zar and Kdrei (Josh. xix. 37); appointed as a city
of refuge, and allotted with its " suburbs " to the
Gershonite Lerites (xx. 7, xxi. 32; 1 Chr. vi. 78).
In Joaephua's account of the northern wars of
Joshua (AM. t. 1, J 18), he apparently refers to it
as marking the site of the battle of Herom, if
Merom be intended under the form Beroth. 6 It
was the residence of Barak (Judg. iv. 6), and there
he and Deborah assembled the tribes of Zebulun
and Naphtali before the conflict (9, 10). Near it
was the tree of Zaanannim, where was pitched the
tent of the Kenitea lleber and JaeL in which Sis-
era met his death (ver. 11). It was probably, aa
it* name implies, a " holy c place " of great an-
tiquity, which would explain its selection as one of
the cities of refuge, and its I ring chosen by the
prophetess as the spot at which to meet the war-
riors of the tribes before the commencement of the
struggle "for Jehovah against the mighty." It
was one of the places taken by Tightth-Pileser in
the reign of Pekah (Jot. .4*1. ix. 11, § 1, Kitun;
2 K. xr. 29); and bam again it is mentioned in
immediate connection with Haaor. Its next and
ooncroakn cannot be tenable. (Bee also a rabsscraant
paper In 1774, No. 116.)
e From the root uTJD, common to the BamMe
languages (Qasanlus, TV*. 1195, 8). Whether there
was any difference of signification between Kadesh
and Kadesh, dose not seem at all clear. Qemnlus
places the former In oonnectlon with a similar word
whloh wouV «*em to mean a person or thing devoted
to the innuoous rites of ancient heathen wor*ulp —
" Beortum sacrum, Idqua masoulum ; " " but he doss
not absolutely say that the bad force resided la the
name of the place Kadesh." To Kedesh he gives a
favorable Interpretation — "Sacrarlum." The older
Int erp reters, as Blllar and Bunctds do not reeognts*
Digitized by
Google
1528
KEDESH
kit appearance in the Bible U as the scene of a
battle between Jonathan Maccabeus and the forces
of Demetrius (1 Mace. jd. 83, 78, A. V. Cades;
Joe. Ant. xiii. 6, § 6, 7). After this time it b
spoken of by Josephui (B. J.]L 18, J 1 ; It. 9,
{ 8, irpot Kuivaaots) a* in the possession of the
Tynans — "a strong inland « village," well forti-
fied, and with a great number of inhabitants: and
he mentions that, during the siege of Giscala,
Titus removed his camp thither — a distance of
about 7 miles, if the two places are correctly iden-
tified — a movement which allowed John to make
his escape.
By Eusebius and Jerome ( Onomatt. " Cedes ")
it is described as lying near Paneaa, and SO miles
(Eusebius says 8 — jj — but this must be wrong)
from Tyre, and as called Kudossos or Cidissus.
Brocardus (Deter, ch. iv.) describes it, evidently
from personal knowledge, as 4 leagues north of
Bafet, and as abounding in ruins. It was visited by
the Jewish travellers, Benjamin of Tudela (A. D.
1170) and ha-Parchi (a. d. 1318). The former
places it one day's, and the latter half-a-day's,
journey from Banias (Benj. of Tudela by Asher, i.
82, ii. 109, 420). Making allowances for imper-
fect knowledge and errors in transcription, there is
a tolerable agreement between the above accounts,
recognizable now that Dr. Robinson has with
great probability identified the spot This be has
done at Kadet, a village situated on the western
edge of the basin of the Ard el-Huleh, the great
d epres s ed basin or tract through which the Jordan
makes its way into the Sea of Merom. Kadet
lies 10 English miles N. of Sa/ed, 4 to the N. W.
of the upper psrt of the Sea of Merom, and 19 or 18
S. of Banias. The village itself '• ii situated on
a rather high ridge, jutting out from the western
hills, and overlooking a small green vale or basin.
. . . Its site is a splendid one, well watered
and surrounded by fertile plains." There are
numerous sarcophagi, and other ancient remains
(Bob. Hi- 366-88; see also Van de VeWe, ii. 417;
Stanley, 866, 890).*
In the Greek (Ku»f«>f) and Syriac (Keduh de
NaphtaU) texts of Tob. i. 9, — though not in the
Vulgate or A. V., — Kedesh is introduced as the
birthplace of Tobias. The text is exceedingly cor-
rupt, but some little support is lent to this reading
by the Vulgate, which, although omitting Kedesh,
mentions Sated — " poet viara que ducit ad Occi-
dantsm, hi sinistra habens civitatetn Saphst"
The name Kedesh exists much farther north than
the possessions of NaphtaU would appear to have
extended, attached to a lake of considerable size on
the Orontes, a few miles south of Humt, the ancient
Emessa (Rob. iii. 649 ; Thomson, in Ritter, Damat-
ews, 1009, 1004). The lake was well known under
that name to the Arabic geographers (see, besides
a Thomson (Land and Back, ch. xlx.) has soma
strange comments on tots passage. H* baa taken
Whtston's translation of ficooynef — « Mediterran-
ean" — as referring to the Mediterranean Sea! and has
drawn his inferences accordingly.
» • We have an interesting description of the site
and ruins of this Kadesh in Porter's Giant dtiei, etc.
p. 270 IT. He regards the sculptures on the sarcophagi
as Grecian or Roman ; whereas Tristram (Land of It-
fuel, U ed., p. 682) thinks they were probably Jewish.
they " were covered with wreaths," says the latter,
••art we could not make oat any figures." II.
• tae aaaes may possibly be derived tress 71^71^,
KB TXAH
the authorities quoted by Robinson, AbuHeda ir.
Sehultans' Index Geoor., " Fluvius Orontes " and
"Kudsum"), and they connect it in part with
Alexander the Great But this and the origin of
the name are alike uncertain. At the lower end
of the lake is an island which, as already remarked,
is possibly the site of Ketesh, the capture of which
by Sethee I. is preserved in the records of that
Egyptian king. [Jerusalem, voL ii. p. 1981,
note c] G.
KEHEXATHAH (rXTlbnr) [ossemcVy, or
congregation] : MunAAoK ; [Alex'. Moa-fAae*:]
Ceelatha), a desert encampment of the Iaraetitea
(Num. Mxlii. 22, 23), of which nothing is known.'
H. H.
KETLAH [8 syl.] (nb^H, but in 1 Sun.
xxiii. 6, nb9ft [citadel, fortrett, Sim. Gee.]:
K«IXd>, t) Kf'iAa"; [Vat] Alex. KetiXa [Vat once
K« e lAofi] ; Joseph. K(AAo, and the people o» KiA-
\arol and ol KiaaTtcu: Ctila: Luth. Kcgila), a
city of the Sheftlnh or lowland district of Jodah,
named, in company with Nezib and Makesiiah,
in the next group to the Philistine cities (Josh. xv.
44). Its main interest consists in its connection
with David. He rescued it from an attack of the
Philistines, who had fallen upon the town at the
beginning of the harvest (Josh. Ant. vi. 13, J 1),
plundered the corn from its threshing-floor, and
driven off the cattle (1 Sam. xxiii. 1). The prey
was recovered by David (2-6), who then remained in
the city till the completion of the in-gathering. It
was then a fortified place,* with walls, gates, and
bars (1 Sam. xxiii. 7, and Joseph.). During this
time the massacre of Nob was perpetrated, and
Keilah became the repository of the sacred Ephod,
which Abiathar the priest, the sols survivor, had
carried off with him (ver. 6). But it was not
destined long to enjoy the presence of these brave
and hallowed inmates, nor indeed was it worthy of
such good fortune, for the inhabitants soon plotted
David's betrayal to Saul, then on his road to besiege
the place. Of this intention David was warned by
Divine intimation. He therefore left (1 Sam. xxiii.
7-13).
It will be observed that the word Banh" is weed
by David to denote the inhabitants of Keilah, in
this passage (w. 11, 12; A. V. " men "); possibly
pointing to the existence of Canaanites in the place
[Baal, vol. i. p. 207 »].
We catch only one more glimpse of the town, in
the times after the Captivity, when Haababiab, the
ruler of one half the district of Keilah (or whatever
the word Pelec, A. V., '• pert," may mean), and
Bavai ben-Henadad, ruler of the other half, assisted
Nehemiah in the repair of the wall of Jerusalem
(Neh. iii. 17, 18). Keilah appears to have been
a congregation, with the local snflx 71, which rosary
of these names carry. Compare the name of another
place of encampment, fl vnplp, which appears to
be from the same root.
d This is said by Oasenlus sad others to be the alp.
nlOcatton of the name "Keilah." If this be so, than
would almost appear to be a rW a rsnc e to this and ths
contemporary dreumeouiees of David's lite. In Ps
xxxl. ; not only In the e xpr aa d ou (ver. H), " marvel
ous kindness in a strong etry" OTSD "I*?), *■
also m ver. 8, and m the g en i a l tenor at ths Pasha
Digitized by
Google
KELAIAH
aiawn to Easeblus and Jerome. They describe it
In the Onomattia a as existing under the name
KnAif , or Ceila, oi. the reed from Eleutheropolis to
Hebron, at 8 • mike distance froc the former. Id
the map of Lieut Van de Telde (1868), the name
Rila ocean attached to a site with ruin*, on the
lower road from Beit Jibrm to Hebron, at very
nearly the right distance from B. Jibrm (almost
certainly Eleutheropolis), and in the neighborhood
of Beit Ntsit (Nezib) and Maraa (Hareshah).
The name was only reported to Lieut. V. (see his
Memoir, p. 828), but it has been since visited by
the indefatigable Tobkr, who completely confirms
the identification, merely remarking that KUa is
placed a little too far south on the map. Thus
tnotber is added to the list of places which, though
ipscified as in the " lowland," are yet actually found
in the mountains : a puzzling fact in our present
ignorance of the principles of the ancient boundaries.
[JlPHTAH ; JUDAH, p. 1490 6.]
In the 4th century a tradition existed that the
prophet Habbakuk was buried at Keilah ( Oncmuit-
Heon, "Ceila;" Nicephonis, H. E. zii. 48; Cas-
siodorus, in Sozomen, B. E. Til. 29); but another
radition gires that honor to Hokkok.
In 1 Chr. ir. 19, " Keilah thb Garmitb" is
\ entioned, apparently — though it is impossible to
ny with certainty — as a descendant of the great
liJeb (ver. 15). But the passage is extremely
obscure, and there is no apparent connection with
the town Keilah. G.
KELA1AH [8 syl.] (H^ [dwarf] :
KmUlai Alex. KuAoa; [Vat.] FA. K«A«a: Celnfa)
= Kelita (Est. x. S3). In the parallel list of 1
Esdr. his name appears as Colius.
KELITA (Vt&^Q [moor/]: K*.Xirai,
Tat FA.1 KmKuv, FA.* KwXrra;] KaWv in
Neh. x. 10 [Vat FA. 1 omit] : Celita ; Calila in
Ezr. x. 23), one of the Levitee who returned from
the Captivity with Ezra, and had intermarried with
the people of the land (Ezr. x. 23). In company
with the other Lerites he assisted Ezra in expound-
ing the law (Neh. viii. 7), and entered into a solemn
league and covenant to follow the law of God, and
rp» h from admixture with foreign nations (Neh.
x. 10). He is also called Kelaiah, and in the
parallel list of 1 Esdr. his name appears as
Calitas.
KEMUTBL (br*IDf? [oaemo/y of God] :
KfuteiW)*: Camuel). 1. The son of Nahor by
Bliicah, and father of Aram, whom Ewald (Gttch.
L 414, note) identifies with Ram of Job xxxii. i, to
whose family Elihu belonged (Gen. xxli. 91).
2. The son of Shiphtan, and prinoe of the tribe
of Epbraim ; one of the twelve men appointed by
Hoses to divide the land of Canaan among the
tribes (Num. xxxiv. 34).
3. [Vat 2cuioun\.] A Levite, father of Hssh-
sbiah, prinoe of the tribe iu the reign of David
(1 Chr. xxvil. 17).
KHTfAN (lyi? [posse-ion]: Ko&oV:
Calmm) = Caihan the son of Enos (1 Chr. 1. 9),
whose name is slso correctly given in this form in
•he margin of Gen. v. 9.
KENEZTTE
1529
KbVNATH (np [pouaaai] : ), YJxAB, Alex.
n KtuwaB; in Chron. both HSS. [rather, Horn
Alex.] Karie, [Vat KayaaB-} Chaitath, Canatk),
one of the cities on the east of Jordan, with its
■•daughter-towns" (A. V. "villages") taken pos-
session of by a certain Nobah, who then called it
by his own name (Num. xxxii. 43). At a later
period these towns, with those of Jair, were recap-
tured by Geshur and Aram (1 Chr. ii. 33 »). In
the days of Eusebius {Omm. "Canath") it was
still called Kanatha, and be speaks of it as "a
village of Arabia .... near Bozra." Its site hat
been recovered with tolerable certainty in our own
times at Kenaicit, a ruined town at the southern
extremity of the Lejnh, about 20 miles N. of
Btixrah, which was first visited by Burckhardt in
1810 (Syria, 83-86), and more recently by Porter
( Damtucut, ii. 87-115; Haadbk. 513-14), the latter
of whom gives a lengthened description and identi-
fication of the place. The suggestion that Kenam&t
was Kenath seems, however, to have been first made
by Geaenius in his notes to Burckhardt (a. d. 1833,
p. 506). Another Kenawat is marked on Van da
Velde's map, about 10 miles farther to the west
The name furnishes an interesting example of
the permanence of an original appellation. Nobah,
though conferred by the conqueror, and apparently
at one time the received name of the spot (Judg.
viii. 11), has long since given way to the older
title. Compare Acoho, Kibjath-akba, eta
G.
KETJAZ (T3r? [«*«**. hmtmg] : KtWf ; [Alex.
in Judg. 1. 18, Kerry: ™ 1 Chr. i. 36, Kt(eO]
Cenet). 1. Son of Eliphaz, the son of Esau. He
was one of the dukes of Edom, according to both
lists, that in Gen. xxxri. 15, 42, and that in 1 Chr.
L 53, and the founder of a tribe or family, who
were called from him Kenezites (Josh. xiv. 14, Ac).
Caleb, the son of Jephunneh, and OthnieL were
the two moat remarkable of his descendants.
[Caleb.]
3. [Ksrefl (Vat Xw«f«i), Ktrt (.] One of the
same family, a grandson of Caleb, according to 1
Chr. ir. [13,] 15, where, however, the Hebrew text
is corrupt. Another name has possibly fallen out
before Kenaz. A. C. H.
KJENTSZITB (written KBN1ZZITB, A V.
Gen. xt. 19: ^ttp: Ktrefouoi; [Alex, in Josh,
xiv. 14, Ktvt(toi :]" Cenetamt), an Edomitish tribe
(Num. xxxii. 13; Josh. xiv. 8, 14). [Kenaz.]
It is difficult to account for the Kenezites existing
as a tribe so early as before the birth of Isaac, as
they appear to have done from Gen. xv. 19. If
this tribe really existed then, and the enumeration
of tribes in ver. 19-21 formed a part of what the
Lord said to Abram, it can only be said, with
Bochart (Pkaleg, ir. 86), that these Kenezites are
mentioned bare only, that they had ceased to
exist in the time of Hoses and Joshua, and that
nothing whatever is known of their origin or place
of abode. But it is worth consideration whether
the enumeration may not be a later explanatory
addition by Hoses or some later editor, and so thess
Kenezites be descendants of Kenaz, whose adoption
■ This is Jerome's jorreetlon of ataaeMua, who given , I' srr>uld be, " And Oeabur and Aram took Um Hav>
iJ — manifestly wront , as the whole distance between J -otb-Jair, with Keoath and her daurhten, sixty etttsa.'
I and Beit-Jiirn is not mom than 16 Romaa jftee Bertheau, Ouvnilc; Buna's ration ; Taisjsm ef
I Joseph, etc., ate.
* This passage is erroneously ovulated In Ike A V. I
Digitized by
Google
1530
KENITE. THE
Into Israel took place in the time of Caleb, which
wss the reason of their insertion in thig place.
A. C. H.
KBTCITE, THE, and KETNITES, THE
Cyjjn and "OJUJ, i. e. " the Kenite; " in Chron.
C^fl^l ; but in Num. xzir. 23, and in Judg. if.
U *. T!il> Kain: l Ksmum, [* Ksrcubs,] t
Ktmuar, el Kmwmi [Vat. Kfi-, and so commonly
Alex.] ; [1 Sam. axil 10, xxx. 39, i Kswtf , Vat.
-<f«; Alex, a Kqrci, o Kcivaioi: Cent, elsewhere]
Cmmu), m a tribe or nation whose history is
strangely Interwoven with that of the chosen people.
In the genealogical table of Gen. x. they do not
appear. The first mention of them is in oompany
with tiie Kenizzitee and Kadmonites, in the list of
the nations who then occupied the Promised Land
(Gen. xv. 19). Their origin, therefore, like that
of the two tribes just named, and of the Awim
(Avitej)), is hidden from us. But we may fairly
infer that they were a branch of the larger nation
of Midian — from the fact that Jethro, the father
of Moses's wife, who in the records of Exodus (see
U. 15, 16, iv. 19, Ac.) is represented as dwelling in
the land of Midian, and as priest or prince of that
nation, is in the narrative of Judges (i. 16, iv. 11 »)
as distinctly said to have been a Kenite. As
Mldianites. they were therefore descended imme-
diately from Abraham by his wife Keturah, and In
this relationship and their connection with Moses
we find the key to their continued alliance with
Israel. The important services rendered by the
sheikh of the Kenites to Moses during a time of
great pressure and difficulty were rewarded by the
Utter with a promise of firm friendship between the
two peoples — " what goodness Jehovah shall do
unto us, the same will we do to thee." And this
promise was gratefully remembered long after to
the advantage of the Kenites (1 Sam. xv. 6). The
oonnectiou then commenced lasted as firmly as a
connection could last between a settled people like
Israel and one whose tendencies were so ineradieably
nomadic as the Kenites. They seem to have ac-
companied the Hebrews during their wanderings.
At any rate they were with them at the time of
their entrance on the Promised Land. Their en-
campment — separate and distinct from the rest
of the people — was within Balaam's view when he
delivered his prophecy « (Num. xxiv. 21, 22), and
we may infer that they assisted in the capture of
Jericho,*' the "city of palm-trees" (Judg. 1. 16;
eomp. 3 Chr. xsviii. 15). But the wanderings of
'srael over, they forsook the neighborhood of the
a Josephus gives the name KcvrrCto (Ant. v. 5, 6
t); but Id his notice of Saul's expedition (vi. 7, { 8)
be has to m Suti'iurav Mroc — the form In which
be elsewhere gives that of the Bheohemltas. No ex-
planation of this presents Itself to the writer. The
Targums of Onkelos, Jonathan, and Pseudojon. uni-
formly render the Kenite by ITM? 7$ = Balmalte,
possibly beuuEa in the genealogy at Judah (1 Chr. U.
16) a branch of the Kenites come under Salma, son
ef Caleb. The same name is Introduced in the Samarf t.
Tars, before " the Kenite " in Gen. xv. 19 only.
o This peerage is incorrectly rendered in the A, V.
It should be, " And Heber the Kenite had severed
Umself from Kaio of the children of Hobab, the rsther-
m-law of Moms, and pitched," etc.
« If it be necessary to look for a literal « fulnll-
aent " of this sentence of Balaam's, we shall best find
St In tbe aaoounts of the latter days of Jerusalem under
KEBCHTEFH
towns, and betook themselves to freer air — to "It*
wilderness of Judah, which is to the south of And "
(Judg. i. 16 ), where " they dwelt among the people "
of the district' — the Amalekites who wandered
in that dry region, and among whom they wen
living centuries later when Saul made his expe-
dition there (1 Sam. xv. 6). Their alliance with
Israel at this later date is shown no less by Saul's
friendly warning than by David's feigned attack
(xxvii. 10, and see xxx. 39).
But one of the sheikhs of the tribe, Heber by
name, had wandered north instead of south, and at
the time of the great struggle between the north-
ern tribes and Jabin king of Hazor, bis tents were
pitched under the tree of Zaanaim, near Kedeeh
(Judg. iv. 11). Heber was in alliance with both
the contending parties, but in the hour of extrem-
ity the ties of blood-relationship and ancient
companionship proved strongest, and Sisera fall a
victim to the hammer and the nail of JaeL
The most remarkable development of this peo-
ple, exemplifying most completely their character-
istics — their Bedouin hatred of the restraints of
civilization, their fierce determination, their attach-
ment to Israel, together with a peculiar semi-mo-
nastic austerity not observable in their earlier pro-
ceedings — is to be found in the sect or family of the
Rkchabitks, founded by Rechab, or Jonadab his
son, who come prominently forward on more than
one occasion In the later history. [Jkhokajdab ,
Uechaditbs.]
The founder of the family appears to hare been
a certain Ham math (A. V. Hkmath), and a sin-
gular testimony is furnished to the connection
which existed between this tribe of Midianite wan-
derers and the nation of Israel, by the fact that
their name and descent are actually included in the
genealogies of the great house of Judah (1 Chr
li. 55).
No further notices would seem to be extant of
this interesting people. The name of Ba-Kain
(abbreviated from Bene d-Kain), is mentioned by
Ewald ( Gach. i. 337, note), as borne in compara-
tively modern days by one of the tribes of the des-
ert; but little or no inference can be drawn from
such similarity in names. G.
KEN1ZZITE [Kersfotbi: Cenamu], Gen.
xv. 19. [Kuiezitb.]
• KERCHIEFS, Exek. xiii. 18,21 (nVltapD •
Tf/u/JoAoia: ceroeaAVi)= coverings for the head,
from the French comreehef. The word appears
in Chaucer as kteerchrf (Eastwood and Wright's
BMeWord-Book, 9 . 281). [Hbad-Drebs.] H.
Jehotaklm, when the Kenite Heehabitas wara so tar
" wasted " by the invading army of Assyria as to be
driven to take refuge within the walls of the city, s
step to which we may be sure nothing short of actual
extremity could have forced these Children of the
Desert. Whether " Asshur carried them away captive "
with the other inhabitants we are not told, but It U
at Isest probable.
<* It has bean pointed out under Hobab that one of
the wadles opposite Jericho, the same by which, ac-
cording to the local tradition, the Beoe-Israel deeceodee*
to the Jordan, retains the name of 5*o'«o, the M useul
man version of Hobab.
s A place named Kdus, possibly derived from ths
same root as the Kenites, is mentioned in the lists of
the oitUs of "toe south" of Judah. But then b
nothing to imply any connection bet reen the twe
[Knua.]
Digitized by
Google
KKREN-HAPPTJCH
KE'BEN-HAP'PTJOH CrpSrrrn^ [<»«
taint-hoi-n) : '\fm\6alas [Vat. -eW, Sin. C -eV,
Alex. MaA0«uJ «-#>a»: Cunuutibu), the young-
Mt of the daughters of Job, born to him during
the period of hie reviving prosperity (Job xlii.
14), and so called probably from her great beauty.
The Vulgate hat correctly rendered her name " horn
of antimony," the pigment uaed by eastern ladies
to color their eyelashes; but the LXX, unless
they had a different reading, adopted a current ex-
presriou of their own age, without regard to strict
accuracy, in representing Keren-happuch by " the
horu of Amalthaa," or " horn of plenty."
KE'RIOTH (rn»"l|?, ». e. Keriyoth [ctnVe]).
1- (alr6\nti Alex, woaij: Cariolh.) A name
which occurs among the lists of the towns in the
southern district of Judah (Josh. xv. 25). Ac-
cording to the A. V. (" Kerioth, and Hezron "),
it denotes a distinct place from the name which
follows it; but this separation is not in accordance
with the accentuation of the Kec. Hebrew text, and
is now generally abandoned (see Keil, Josaa, ad
loc., and Belaud, Pahulina, pp. 700, 708, the ver-
sions of Zunz, Cahen, etc.), and the name taken as
" Keriyoth-Hezron, which is Hazor," ». e. its name
before the conquest was Hazor, for which was after-
wards substituted Keriyoth-Hezron — the " cities
of H."
Dr. Robinson (SW. Ra. ii. 101), and Lieut. Van
de Velde (ii. 83) propose to identify it with Kw-
yettin ("the two cities"), a ruined site which
Hands about 10 miles S. from Hebron, and 3 from
Main (Maon).'
Kerioth furnishes one, and that perhaps the
oldest and most usual, of the explanations pro-
posed for the title "lacariot," and which are
enumerated under Judas Iscariot, voL ii. p.
1496. But if Kerioth is to be read in conjunc-
tion with Hezron, as stated above, another difficulty
is thrown in the way of this explanation.
2. (Kaputf: Cariotk.) A city of Hoab, named
In the denunciations of Jeremiah — and there only
— in company with Diboti, Beth-dibiathaini, lieth-
nieon, Bozrah, and other places "far and near "
(Jer. xlviii. 24). None of the ancient interpreters
appear to give any clew to the position of this
plaice. By Mr. Porter, however, it is unhesi-
tatingly identified with Kureiyeh, a ruined town
tf some extent lying between Bmrah and Sulkhad,
In the southern part of the Hnwdn (Five Ycart
sto. ii. 191-98; Handbook, pp. 623, 524). The chief
srgument in favor of this is the proximity of
Kurdi/eA to Bmrah, which Mr. Porter accepts as
identical with the Bozrah of the same passage
"f Jeremiah. But there are some considerations
•hioh stand very much in the way of these identi-
fications. Jeremiah is speaking (xlviii. 91) ex-
pressly of the cities of the "Mishor" (A. V.
"plain-country"), that is, the district of level
downs east of the Jordan and the Dead Sea, which
probably answered in whole or in part to the Btlkn
sf the modern Arabs. In this region were situated
KETTJRAH
1531
a In the A. V. of 1611 the punctuation was still
more marked — " and Kerioth : and Hecron, which is
Hasor." This agrees with the version of Junius and
iremelllus — «et KerljothaB (Obstsroo ea est Chat.
jorV' and with that of Luther. Castelllo, on the
ether hand, baa " Oarlothecron, quas alias Hasor."
a • This is a different place from the ruins and caw
•€ JUsWitan, near Tekca (which set), about 2 hours
mrtlHsil of Bethlehem. The names are somewhat
Heshbon, Dibon, Elealeh, Beth-meon, Kir-heree— ■
the only places named in the passage in question, the
positions of which are known with certainty. 11m
moat northern of these (Heshbon) is not further
north than the upper end of the Dead Sea; the
moat southern (Kir) lay near its lower extremity
Nor is there anything in the parallel denunciation
of Moab by Isaiah (ch. xvi.) to indicate that the
limits of Moab extended further to the north. But
Bmrah and Kuriiyeh are uo less than 60 miles to
the N. N. E. of Heshbon itself, beyond the limits
even of the modern Belka (see Kiepert's map to
Wetxstein's Hauran und die Tradumen, 1860),
and in a country of an entirely opposite character
from the " flat downs, of smooth and even turf"
which characterize that district — "a savage and
forbidding aspect . . . nothing but stones and
jagged black rocks . ■ . the whole country around
Kureiyth covered with heaps of loose stones," etc.
(Porter, ii. 189, 193). A more plausible identifi-
cation would be Kureiyat, at the western foot of
Jebtl AUarut, and but a short distance from either
Dibon, Betb-meou, or Heshbon.
But on the other hand it should not be over-
looked that Jeremiah uses the expression " far and
near" (ver. 24), and also that if Bmrah and
Kweiyeh are not Bozrah and Kerioth, those im-
portant places have apparently flourished without
any notice from the sacred writers. This is one
of the poiuts which further investigation by com-
petent persons, east of the Jordan, may probably
set at rest
Kerioth occurs in the A. V., also in ver. 41.
Here however it bears the definite article
(rnnj?H: Alex. AjcKapmS; [Vat FA. Aasxt-
pa>v\ Giriotk), and would appear to signify not
any one definite place, but " the cities <= of Moab "
as may also be the case with the same word in
Amos ii. 2. [Kibioth.] O.
KE'ROS (D"-)|2 [teearer's oomo]: Kd4>» ;
Alex. Knpaor in Ezr. ii. 44; D^,"?: Kipaji [Vat
Ketpa, FA.] Alex. Ktipas in Neh. vii. 47: Ceres),
one of the Nethiisfci, whose descendants returned
with ZerubbabeL
KETTLE (TH: \i&n S : ealdaria), a vos-
sel for culinary or sacrificial purposes (1 Sam. ii.
14). The Hebrew word is also rendered " basket "
in Jer. xxiv 2. "caldron " in 9 Chr. xxxv. 13, and
<> pot " in Job xli. 90. [Caldros.] H. W. P
KJSTU'KAH (!TTIB|?, incense, Ges.: Xer-
ro&pa.' Cetura), the " wife " whom Abraham " add-
ed and took" (A. V. "again took") besides, or
after the death of, Sarah (Gen. xxv. 1; 1 Chr. L
32). Gesenius and others adopt the theory that
Abraham took Keturah after Sarah's death; but
probability seems against it (compare Gen. xriL
17, xrlii. 11; Rom. iv. 19; and Heb. si. 12), and
we incline to the belief that the passage commen-
cing with xxv. 1, and comprising perhaps the whole
chapter, or at least as far as ver. 10, is placed out
alike, but that is accidental KhOnitbn la to called
from a celebrated monk Charlton, who a. ». 840-860
occupied the cave as a taunt or monastery , which It
continued to be for ages. The name is given also te
•he aujaiwat HWy, and' to a fountain and a little vil-
lage. Dee Tobler's DnUoblmter aw JtnuaUm, p. 681
m$t*:p'lJmuaUmunddatluiI.Ijind,i.W. II
• e* Kwsld, Bnplutn, "Dte Btadte Moabs."
Digitized by
Google
1532
kktukah
if its chronological wqonee in order not to break
the main narrative; and that Abraham took Ketu-
rah during Sarah't lifetime. That the ma, strictly
•peaking, hit wife, ia alao very uncertain. The He-
brew word to translated in this place in the A. V.,
and by many scholars, ia Ithih," of which the
fint meaning given by Geaeniua ia " o woman, of
every age and condition, whether married or not; "
and although it ia oommonly used with the signifi-
eation of " wife," at opposed to handmaid, in Gen.
xxx. 4, it occurs with the signification of concu-
bine, " and she gave him Bilhah her handmaid to
wife." In the record in 1 Chr. i. 38, Ketnrah ia
called a " concubine," and it ia alao said, in the
two verses immediately following the genealogy of
Keturah, that " Abraham gave all that be had
unto Isaac. But unto the sons of the concubines,
which Abraham had, Abraham gave gifts, and sent
them away from Isaac hia son, while he yet lived,
eastward, unto the east country " (Gen. xxv. 5, 6).
Except Hagar, Keturah ia the only person men-
tioned to whom this passage can relate; and in
confirmation of this supposition we find strong
evidence of a wide spread of the tribes sprung from
Keturah, bearing the names of her sons, as we have
mentioned in other articles. These sons were
" Zimran, and Jokshan, and Hedan, and Hidian,
and Iahbak, and Shuah " (ver. 2); besides the sons
and grandsons of Jokshan, and the sons of Midian.
They evidently crossed the desert to the Persian
Golf and occupied the whole intermediate country,
where traces of their names are frequent, while
Hidian extended south into the peninsula of Ara-
bia Proper. The elder branch of the " sons of the
concubines," however, was that of Iahmiel. He
has ever stood sa the representative of the bond-
woman's sons; and as such his name has become
generally applied by the Arabs to all the Abra-
hamic settlers north of the Peninsula — besides
the great Ishmaelite element of the nation.
In searching the works of Arab writers for any
information respecting these tribes, we must be
contented to find them named as Abraliamic, or
even Ishmaelite, for under the latter appellation
dmost all the former are confounded by their de-
scendants. Keturah * herself is by them men-
doned very rarely and vaguely, and evidently only
in quoting from a rabbinical writer. (In the
Kdmoot the name is said to be that of the Turks,
and that of a young girl (or slave) of Abraham;
and, it is added, her descendants are the Turks ! )
M. Caussin de Perceval (Earn, i. 179) has en-
deavored to identify her with the name of a tribe
of the Amalekites (the 1st Amalek) called Kotom-af
but hia arguments are not of any weight. They
rest on a weak etymology, and are contradicted by
h» statement* of Arab authors aa well as by the
Jut that the early tribes of Arabia (of which is
Katoork) have not, with the single exception of
Amalek, been identified with any historical names ;
while the exception of Amalek ia that of an ap-
parently aboriginal people whose name la recorded
in the Bible; and there are reasons for supposing
'.hat these early tribes were aboriginal.
K.S.P.
• nafH.
> •-
I * Dr. Thomson
the look sod ksy la i
KEZIZ, THE VALLEY OF
KEY (n£lpQ, from nflS, "to open,"
Ges. p. 1188: «A«fc: davit). The key of a na-
tive oriental lock ia a piece of wood, from 7 inches
to 9 feet in length, fitted with wires or short nails
which, being inserted laterally into the hollow boh
which serves ss a lock, raises other pins within the
staple so aa to allow the bolt to be drawn back.
But it ia not difficult to open a lock of this kind
even without a key, namely, with the finger dipped
in paste or other adhesive substance. The passage,
Cant. v. 4, 6, ia thus probably explained (Harmer
Ob*. Ul. 81; vol. 1. 894, ed. Clarke; Reawolff, ap
Ray, 7>a«>. H. IT). [Luck.] The key, ao ob-
vious a symbol of authority, both in ancient and
modern times, is named more than once in the
Bible, especially Ia. xxii. 88, a passage to which
allusion is probably made in Rev. iii. 7. The ex-
pression " bearing the key on the shoulder " is
thus a phrase used, sometimes perhaps in the lit-
eral sense, to denote possession of office; but there
seems no reason to suppose, with Grotiua, any
figure of a key embroidered on the garment of the
office-bearer (see Is. ix. 6). rf In Talmudlc phrase-
ology the Almighty was represented as "holding
tbe keys " of various operations of nature, e. g.
rain, death, etc., i. e. exercising dominion over
tbem. The delivery of the key is therefore an act
expressive of authority conferred, and the posses-
sion of it implies authority of some kind held by
tbe receiver. The term " chamberlain," an officer
whose mark of office is sometimes in modern times
an actual key, ia explained under Euxdch (Grotius,
Calmet, Knobel, on Is. xxii. 28; Hammond;
Lightfoot, Hor. Btbr.; De Wette on Matt. xri.
19 ; I'arpzov on Goodwin, Moott mud Aaron, pp.
141, 632; Diet, of Ankq. art. " Hatrimoninm ; "
Ovid, FatL i. 99, 118, 125, 139; Hofinann, Lex.
-'Camerarius; " Chambers, Did. " Chamberlain ; "
Reland, Ant. Btbr. ft 8, 6). H. W. P.
Iron Kay. (Tram Testa.)
KEZI'A (nysp [eattia]: Kmrfa; Alts
Kcunria: Castia), tbe second of tbe daughters of
Job, born to him after hia recovery (Job xSi. 14).
KE'ZIZ, THE YAXLEY OF (TOS
V^-.P : kiumais [Vat. -©-««] ; Alex. Ape awxureu :
ViiIUm Casit), one of the " cities " of Benjamin
(Josh, xviii. 81). That it was the eastern border
of tbe tribe is evident from its mention in com-
pany with Bkth-hoolah and Beth-ha-Ababah.
The name does not reappear in the 0. T., but it
ia possibly intended under the corrupted form
Beth-basi, in 1 Msec. ix. 62, 64. The name, if
Hebrew, is derivable from a root meaning to cut off
(Ges. Thtt. 1829; Slmonis, (hum. 70). Ia it pos-
sible that it can bare any connection with tbe gen-
among the modern Syrians (.Land and Book, i. 498 f.)
The ksy Is often " large enough for a stout club," u-
the lock and key together are " almosta load to carry.
Many of the locks are on *ho iiurid* of the doors. TV.
unlock thorn, the owner thnuti his arm tlinaBjli s
hoU tor that purpose, and thus Inserts the key. lea
•Huston In Cant lv. 4, 6, may be Is such a look. H.
Digitized by
Google
KIBROTH-HATTAAVAH KIDRON, THE BROOK 1538
ml circumcision which look p!»oe it Gilgil, cer- 1 by no means extinct in Palestine at the pratrmt day
tainly in the nine neighborhood, after the Jordan
was crowed (Josh. t. 3-9)? G.
KIB'ROTH-HATTA'AVAH (Tiller?
nj^H: pu+futra vijt eVitvauos: ttpulehra
eoncupitetntiai), Num. xi. 84; marg. "the graTes
of lust " (eomp. xxxiii. 17). From there being no
change of spot mentioned between it and Tsberah
In xi. 3, it is probably, like the latter, about three
dajs' journey from Sinai (z. 33); and from the sea
being twice mentioned in the course of the narra-
tive (xi. 33, SI), a maritime proximity may perhaps
be inferred. Here it seems they abode a whole month,
during which they went on eating quails, and per-
haps suffering from the plague which followed. If
the conjecture of HSdherA (Burckhardt, p. 496;
Kobinson, i. 151) ss a site for Haxerotb [see Hax-
eroth] be adopted, then "the grams of lust"
may be perhaps within a day's journey theuce in
the direction of Sinai, and would lie within 16
miles of the Gulf of Akabah; bnt no traces of
any graTes have ever been detected in the region."
Both Schubert, between Sinai and the Wady Mur-
rah (Reucn, 360), and Stanley (S. f P. 82), just
before reaching HidherA, encountered nights of
birds — the latter says of "red-legged cranes."
Hitter * speaks of such flights as a constant phe-
nomenon, both in this peninsula and in the Eu-
phrates region. Burckhardt, Travel* in Syria,
406, 8 Aug.. quotes Russell's Aleppo, ii. 194, and
says the bird Katta is found in great numbers in
the neighborhood of T&ftlth. [Topheu] He calls
It a species of partridge, or " not improbably the
Selouu or quail.'' Boys not uncommonly kill three
•r four of them at one throw with a stick."
H. H.
KIBZA1M (DT?3r? [see below]: Vat. omits;
Alex, n Ko/fcratiu: CWitm), a city of Mount
Ephraim, not named in the meagre, and probably
imperfect, lists of the towns of that great tribe
(see Josh, xvi.), but mentioned elsewhere as baring
been given up with its " suburbs " to the Kohath-
ite Levites (xxi. 33). In the parallel list of 1
Chr. vi., Jokmbam Is substituted fbrKibzaim (ver.
88), an exchange which, ss already pointed out
under the former name, may hare arisen from the
similarity between the two in the original. Jot
meam would appear to hare been situated at the
eastern quarter of Ephraim. But this is merely
inference, no trace having been hitherto discovered
sf either name.
Interpreted as a Hebrew word, Kibzaim signi-
Ses " two heaps." G.
• KID. For some of the facta pertinent here,
see Goat. It may be added that the wild goat is
<" Save on of a Mohammedan saint (Stanley, S. 4* P.
78), which does not assist the question.
> Hs marks on the coottnaaooa of the law of na-
ture in animal habits through a eonrss of thousands
•a* years (xlr. 381).
« I'llny (Wot. Hut. x. 88) says quails asttls on the
■till uf ships by night, so as to sink sometraus the
■hips In the neighboring ess. Bo Mod. 8k>. I. p. 88
Ws *4ew t»W « P" I)« m ArotoOrro, i+ipomi n orrot
**f* eyrfAae ju£$ovf tic rofl wmJJtyovt (Lspdus, TVOM to
Hntai, 28). Oorap. Joseph. Ami. IB. 1, | 6 , and Itey-
tag, La. Arai.%.1. LjaJ ; slsr> KalMnh on Ix. xvl.
8, where an incidental mention of the btrd occurs.
As Unnean name appears to be JUrao Akhata.
" In the neighborhood of En-gedi," says Tristram,
(Nat. HUt. of the Bible, p. 96), "while encamped
by the Dead Sea shore, we obtained several fine
specimens, and very interesting it wss to find this
graceful creature by the very fountain to which it
gave name, and in the spot where it roamed of old
while David wandered to escape the persecutions of
Saul (1 Sam. xxiv. 3^" [En-obdi.] Thomson
also speaks of them as found in the ravines near
this fountain (Land and Book, ii. 420).
Among the pastoral inhabitants of Palestine a
kid forms the ordinary dish at a feast or entertain-
ment. " The lambs," says Tristram, "are mora
generally kept till they reach maturity, for the sakt
of their wool, and a calf is too large and too valua-
ble to be slain except on some very special occasbtiH.
Whenever in the wilder parts of Palestine the trav-
eller halts at an Arab camp, or pays his visit to s
village sheikh, he is pressed to stay until the kid
can be killed and made ready, and he has an
opportunity of seeing in front of the tent the kid
caught and prepared for the cooking " (Nat. Illtl.
of the Bible, p. 90 1.). This usage explains the terms
of the elder brother's complaint in the parable of
the prodigal : " Thou never gavest me a kid that
I might make merry with my friends, but ss soon
as this thy son was come .... thou bast
killed for him the fotted calf" (Luke xv. 39, 30).
Comp. also Gen. xxvii. 9 ; and Judg. vi. 19 and
xiii. 16.
The custom of "seething a kid in its mother's
milk " (which was forbidden to the Hebrews, see
Ex. xxiii. 19, xxxrr. 36, and Deut. xiv. 31) is
common among the Arabs of toe present day.
"They select," says Thomson, "a young kid,
fat and tender, dress it carefully, and then stew it
in milk, generally sour, mixed with onions and hot
spices such as they relish. Tbey call it Lebn
immi— kid, 'in its mother's milk.' " The Jews
however, refuse such food with abhorrence, not only
as being interdicted by the Mosaic law, but unnat-
ural and barbarous (Land and Book, i. 136).
H.
KnrBOir, the brook (fvrp. brTjf-
t Xffpcutyor KlSpwand raw K&ptw; in Jer. only
NdxoA Kit amy, and Alex, ytipappor Nax«A K. :
torrent Cearon, [eonmlut Cedrm] ), a torrent or
valley — not a "brook," as in the A. V. — in imme-
diate proximity to Jerusalem. It is not named in
the earlier records of the country, or in the speci-
fication of the boundaries of Benjamin or Judah,
bnt comes forward in connection with some remark-
able events of the history. It lay between the
city and the Mount of Olives, and was crossed ly
David in his flight (3 Sam. xv. 33, eomp. 30), mi
& The name Is derived by Gemini and others from
TJlL " to be Mack ; " dtbar, seeordlng to Babh»on,
from the tarMdnees of Hs sti ss ui (eomp. Job vi. 16 ;
though the words of Job Imply that this was a condition
of all brooks when from) ; or mors a ppro p ri ately, with
Stan)**, from the depth and obscurity of the ravins
(0. « r. 172); possibly also— though this Is proposed
wttl» hesitation — from the Impurity which seems to
have attached to it from a very early date.
Wa cannot, however, too often Insist on the great
uncertainty which attends the derivations of then
ancient names ; and in treating Kldron as a Hebrew
word, we may be making a mistake almost as ensure 1
ss that of the copyist who altered it Into n> Helper
believing that it ansa from the p re sen ce of oedare.
Digitized by
Google
1534 KIDBOX, THE BBOOK.
by our Lord on hii way to Gethsemane (John xviii.
1 ; ■ coup. Mark xiv. 26 ; Luke xxii. 39). IU con-
nection with these two occurrences is alone sufficient
to leave no doubt that the Nachal-Kidron U the
deep ravine on the east of Jerusalem, now com-
monly known as the " Valley of Jehoabaphat."
But it would seem as if the name were formerly
applied also to the ravines surrounding other por-
tions of Jerusalem — the south or the west; since
Solomon's prohibition to Shimei to " pass over the
torrent Kidron" (1 K. ii. 87; Jos. Ant. riii. 1,
{ 5) is said to have been broken by the latter when
he went in the direction of Gath to seek his fugi-
tive slaves (41, 13). Mow a person going to Gath
would certainly not go by the way of the Mount
of Olives, or approach the eastern side of the city
at all. The route — whether Goth were at Btit-
Jibrtn or at Tdl a-Safith — would be by the
Bethlehem -gate, and then nearly due west. Per-
haps the prohibition may have been a more general
one than is implied in ver. 87 (oomp. the king's
reiteration of it in ver. 43), the Kidron being in
that case specially mentioned because it was on the
road to Bahurim, Shimei's home, and the scene of
his crime. At any rate, beyond the passage in
question, there is no evidence of the name Kidron
having been applied to the southern or western ra-
vines of the city.
The distinguishing peculiarity of the Kidron
Valley — that in respect to which it is most fre-
i^ientiy mentioned in the 0. T. — is the impurity
which appears to have been ascribed to it. Ex-
cepting the two casual notices already quoted, we
first meet with it as the place sin wbieh King Asa
demolished and burnt the obscene phallic idol (vol
U> p. 1118) of his mother (1 K. xv. 13 ; 8 Chr. zv. 16).
Kelt we find the wicked Athaliah hurried thither
to execution (Jos. Ant. ix. 7, § 8; 3 K. xi. 16).
It then becomes the regular receptacle for the im-
purities and abominations of the idol-worship, when
removed from the Temple and destroyed by the ad-
herents of Jehovah » (3 Chr. xxix. 16, xxx. 14; 3
K. xxiii. 4, 6, 13). In the course of these narra-
tives, the statement of Josephus just quoted as to
the death of Athaliah is supported by the fact that
in the time of Joeiah it was the common cemetery
of the city (3 K. xxiii. 6; comp. Jer. xxvi. 33,
"graves of the common people"), perhaps the
<* valley of dead bodies " mentioned by Jeremiah
fxxxi. 40) in close connection with the " fields " of
Kidron; and the restoration of which to sanctity
was to be one of the miracles of future times
How long the valley continued to be used for a
burying-place it is very hard to ascertain. After
the capture of Jerusalem in 1099, the bodies of the
tlain were buried outride the Golden Gateway
(Millin, U. 487 ; Tobler, Umgebmgtn, p. 218) ; but
vhit had been the practice in the interval the
writ*.- has not succeeded in tracing. To the date
A tne monuments at the foot of Olivet we have at
present no clew ; but even if they are of pre-Chris-
tian times there is no proof that they are tombs.
a Here, and hen only, the form used In the A. V
I* CmaoH. The variation* in the Greek tut are
very curious. Oodei A has tov icttpaiv ; B, m xA>n>;
D (and Sin], tov kMoov, and In some cundve MSS. [one
MS.) quoted by Tiachendorf we oven find rw SMpmv.
A The Targam appears to understand the obscure
riasage Zeph. 1. 11, as referring to the destruction of
As Idolatrous worship in Kidron, for it renders it,
•ttawi all T « that dwell In the Naebal Kidron, for ell
KIDBON, THE BBOOK
From the date just mentioned, however, the burials
appear to have been constant, and at present it
is the favorite resting-place of Modems and Jews,
the former on the west, the latter on the east of the
valley. The Moslems are mostly confined to the
narrow level spot between the foot of the wall and
the commencement of the precipitous slupe; while
the Jews have possession of the lower part of the
slopes of Olivet, where their scanty tombstones are
crowded so thick together as literally to cover the
surface like a pavement.
The term Nuchal' is in the O. T., with one
single exception (8 K. xxiii. 4), attached to the
name of Kidron, and apparently to that akme of
the valleys or ravines of Jerusalem. Hinnom is
always the tie. This enables us to infer with great
probability that the Kidron is intended in 8 Chr.
xxxii. 4, by the " brook (Nachal) which ran through
the midst of the land " ; and that Hetekiah's
preparations for the siege consisted in sealing the
source of the Kidron — " the upper springhead
(not 'watercourse,' as A. V.) of Gihon," where it
buret out in the wady some distance north of the
city, and leading it by a subterranean channel to
the interior of the city. If this is to, there is no
difficulty in accounting for the fact of the subse-
quent want of water in the ancient bed of the Kid-
ron. In accordance with this also is the specifica-
tion of Gihon as " Gihon-in-the-Nachal " — that is,
in the Kidron Valley — though this was probably the
lower of two outlets of the same name. [Gjhob.]
By Jerome, in the Onomastieon, it is mentioned as
" close to Jerusalem on the eastern side, and spoken
of by John the Evangelist." But the favorite
name of this valley at the time of Jerome, and for
several centuries after, was " the Valley of Jehoaba-
phat," and the name Kidron, or, in accordance
with the orthography of the Vulgate, Cedroti, is
not invariably found in the travellers (see Arculf,
Karl Trim. 1; Seewulf, 41; Benjamin of Tndela;
Maundeville, Earl Trav. 176 ; Thietmar, 27 ; tut
not the Bordeaux Pilgrim, the Citez de Jherusa-
lem, WilBbald, etc.).
The following description of the Valley of KiJrcn
in its modern state — at once the earliest and the
most accurate which we possess — is taken from
Dr. Robinson {BibL Ret. i. 269): —
• " In approaching Jerusalem from the high mosk
of Neby Smmeil in the N. W., the traveller first
descends and crosses the bed of the great Wadj
Beit Hantna already described. He then ascends
again towards the S. E. by a small side wady and
along a rocky slope for twenty-fin minutes, when
he reaches the Tombs of the Judges, lying in a
small gap or depression of the ridge, still half an
hour distant from the northern gate of the city.
A few steps further he reaches the water-abed be-
tween the great wady behind him and the tract
before him ; and here is the head of the Valley of
Jehoabaphat From this point the dome of the
Holy Sepulchre bears S. by E. Toe tract around
this spot is very rocky ; and the rocks have been
much cut away, partly in quarrying building-stone.
the people are broken whose works were like the worn
of the people of the land of Canaan." [Mums.]
e Nadutf Is untranslatable In English unless by
« Wady," to which It answers exactly, and which bids
lair to become shortly an English word. It does net
signify the stream, or the valley which contained la*
bed of the stream, and was Its receptacle when tweUrt
by winter-reins — bwt both. (Krrea )
Digitized by
Google
KXDRON, TAB BROOK
Bid filly in the formation of sepulchre*. The
region u full of excavated tombs; and then eon-
tinue with more or lev frequency on both sides of
the valley, all the way down to Jerusalem. The
laDej rune far 16 minutes directlj towards the
ally; " it is here shallow and broad, and in some
parts tilled, though very atony. The road follows
along its bottom to the same point The valley
now turns nearly east, almost at a right angle, and
paasea to the northward of the Tombs of the Kings
and the Miulim Wily before mentioned. Here it
le about 800 rods distant from the city; and the
tract between is tolerably level ground, planted
with olive-trees. The Nibuhu road crosses it in
this part, and ascends the hill on the north. The
valley is here still shallow, and runs in the same direc-
tion for about 10 minutes. It then bends again to
the south, and, following this general course, passes
between the city and the Mount of Olives.
" Before reaching the city, and also opposite it*
northern part, the valley spreads out Into a basin
of some breadth, which is tilled, and contains
plantations of olive and other fruit-tree*. In this
part it is crossed obliquely by a road leading from
the N. E. corner of Jerusalem across the northern
part of the Mount of Olives to 'Anita. Its sides
are still full of excavated tombs. As the valley
inrmiin, the steep side upon tbe right becomes
more and more elevated above it; until, at tbe gate
of St. Stephen, the height of this brow is about
100 feet. Here a path winds down from the gate
on a course S. E. by E., and crosses the valley by
a bridge; beyond which are the church with the
Tomb of the Virgin, Gethaemane, and other plan-
tations of olive-trees, already described. The path
and bridge are on a causeway, or rather terrace,
built up across the valley, perpendicular on the
south side; the earth being filled in on the northern
side up to the level of the bridge. Tbe bridge
itself consists of an arch, open on tbe south side,
and 17 feet high from the bed of the channel be-
low; but the north side is built up, with two sub-
terranean drains entering it from above; one
of which comes from the sunken court of the Vir-
gin's Tomb, and tbe other from the fields farther
in the northwest. Tbe breadth of the valley at
this point will appear from the measurement* which
I took from St. Stephen's Gate to Gethaemane,
along the path, namely —
Bag. feet
1. From St. Stephen's Oats to the brow of
the descent, level .... US
X Bottom of the slope, lbs angle of tbe
descent being 161° ... 416
«. Bridge, level 140
4. N. W. earner of Oath—nans, slight itss 145
6. N. X. eomer of do. do. . 160
The hut three numbers give tbe breadth of the
proper bottom of the vaQey at this spot, namely,
436 feet, or 146 yards. Further north it is some-
what broader.
" Below the bridge the valley contracts gradually,
and sinks more rapidly. The first continuous traces
af a water-course or torrent-bed commence at the
•ridge, though they occur likewise at intervals
higher up. The western hill becomes steeper and
more elevated; while on the east the Mount of
OBvea rises much higher, but is not so steep. At
Jae distance of 1000 feet from the bridge on a
Re* a aught umm B uu of this by Teste, Dtowe-
*Ul»RON, THK BROOK 1585
course 8. 10° W. the bottom of the valley hi* be
come merely a deep gully, tbe narrow bed of a
torrent, from which tbe hills rise directly on each
side. Hera another bridge' is thrown across it on
an arch; and just by on the left are tbe alleged
tombs of Jehoahapbat, Absalom, and others; as
also the Jewish cemetery. The valley now con-
tinues of the same character, and follows the same
course (S. 10° W.) for 550 feet further; where it
makes a sharp turn for a moment towards the right.
This portion is the narrowest of all ; It is here a
mere ravine between high mountains. The S. F-
corner of the area of the mosque overhangs this part,
the comer of the wall standing upon the very brink
of the declivity. From it to the bottom, on a couras
S. E. the angle of depression is 37°, and the dis-
tance 450 feet, giving an elevation of 138 feet at
that point; to which may be added 30 feet or mors
for the rise of ground just north along tbe wall;
making in all an elevation of about 150 feet This,
however, is the highest point above the valley ; for
further south the narrow ridge of Ophel slopes
down ss rapidly as the valley itself. In this part
of the valley one would expect to find, if anywhere,
traces of ruins thrown down from above, and the
ground raised by the rubbish thus accumulated.
Occasional blocks of stone are indeed seen; but
neither the surface of the ground, nor the bed of
the torrent, exhibits any special appearance of having
been raised or interrupted by masses of ruins.
" Below the short turn above mentioned, a line
of 1035 feet on a course S. W. brings us to the
Fountain of the Virgin, lying deep under the
western hill. The valley has now opened a little;
but it* bottom is still occupied only by tbe bed of
tbe torrent From here a course S. 30° W. carried
us along the village of Siloam (Kefr Selwdn) on
the eastern side, and ut 1170 feet we were opposite
the mouth of the Tyropoeon and the Pool of Siloam,
which lies 255 feet within it Tbe mouth of this
valley is still 40 or 50 feet higher than the bed of
the Kidron. The steep descent between tbe two
has been already described as built up in terraces,
which, as well as the strip of level ground below,
are occupied with gardens belonging to the village
of Siloam. These are irrigated by the waters of
the Pool of Siloam, which at this time were lost in
them. In these gardens the stones have been re-
moved, and the soil is a fine mould. Tbey an
planted with fig and other fruit-trees, and furnish
aho vegetables for the city. Elsewhere the bottom
of the valley is thickly strewed with small stones.
"Further down, the valley opens more and is
tilled. A line of 686 feet on the same course (S.
30° W.) brought us to a rocky point of the eastern
hill, here called tbe Mount of Offense, over against
the entrance of the Valley of Hinnom. Thence to
the well of Job or Nehemiah is 875 feet due south.
At the junction of the two valleys the bottom forma
an oblong plat, extending from the gardens above
mentioned nearly to tbe well of Job, and being 160
yards or more in breadth. The western and north-
western part* of this plat are in like manner oc-
cupied or gardens; many of which are also on
terraces, and receive a portion of the waters of
SiloatL,
" Be-m the well of Nehemiah the Valley of
Jehoehaphat continue* to run S. S. W. between
tbe Mount of Offense and the HOI of Evil Counsel.
» tor a ramuto account of to* two bridges, aw
State, Omgtbumgtm, pp. K-eB.
Digitized by
Google
1586 KIDRON, THE BROOK
■o called. At 130 feet is a small cavity or outlet
by which the water of the well sometimes rune off.
At about 1800 feet, or 400 yards, from the well is
a place under the western hill, where in the rainy
season water flows out as from a fountain. At
about 1500 feet or 600 yards below the well the
valley bends off S. 76° E. for half a mile or more,
and then turns again more to the south, and pur-
sues its way to the Dead Sea. At the angle where
it thus bends eastward a small wady comes in from
the west, from behind the Hill of Evil Counsel.
The width of the main valley below the well, as for
as to the turn, varies from 60 to 100 yards; it is
fall of olive and fig-trees, and is in most parts
ploughed and sown with grain. Further down it
lakes the name among the Arabs of Wady er-Bihii,
•Monks' Valley,' from the convent of St Saba
situated on it; and still nearer to the Dead Sea it
is also called Wady en-Nir, < Fire Valley.' ">
>• The channel of the Valley of Jehoshaphat, the
Brook Kidron of the Scriptures, is nothing more
than the dry bed of a wintry torrent, bearing marks
of being occasionally swept over by a large volume
of water. No stream flows here now except during
the heavy rains of winter, when the waters descend
into it from the neighboring bills. Yet even in
winter there is no constant flow ; and our friends,
who had resided several years in the city, had never
seen a stream running through the valley. Nor
Is there any evidence that there was anciently more
water in it than at present. Like the wndies of
the desert, the valley probably served of old, as
now, only to drain off the waters of the rainy
season."
One point is unnoticed in Dr. Robinson's de-
scription, sufficiently curious and well-attested to
merit further careful investigation — the possibility
that the Kidron flows below the present surface of
the ground. Dr. Barclay ( City, etc. 303) mentions
u g fountain that bursts forth during the winter in
a valley entering the Kidron from the north, and
flows several hundred yards before it sinks; " and
again he testifies that at a point in the valley about
two miles below the city the murmurings of a
stream deep below the ground may be distinctly
heard, which stream, on excavation, he actually dis-
severed (ibid.). His inference is that between the
two points the brook is flowing in a subterraneous
channel, as is " not at all (infrequent in Palestine "
(p. 303). Nor is this a modern discovery, for it is
spoken of by William of Tyre ; by Brocardus (Doer.
cap. viii.), u audible near the " Tomb of the
Virgin;" and also by Fabrt (i. 870), Marinus
Sanutus (8, 14, 9), and others.
That which Dr. Robinson complains that neither
be uor his friends were fortunate enough to witness
has since taken place. In the winter of 1853-54 so
heavy were the rains, that not only did the lower
part of the Kidron, below the so-called well of
Nehcmiah or Joab, run with a considerable stream
for the whole of the month of March (Barclay, 516),
but also the upper part, " in the middle section of
the Valley of Jehoshaphat, flowed for a day or two "
(Stewart, Tent f Khan, 316). The Well of Joab
U probably one of the outlets of the mysterious
a A list at soms of the plants found in this valley
Is |lv«n by Miilio (ill. 209) ; and some scraps of in
tarnation about the valley Itself at p. 199.
• " During the latter rains of February and March
the well 'Aim Ayub Is a subject of mush speculation
sad Interest to all dwellers In the ssty. Ultoi
KIDRON, THE BROOK
spring which flows below the city of Jerusalem, and
its overflow is comparatively common; * but tin
flowing of a stream in the upper part of the valley
would seem not to have taken place for many yean
before the occasion in question, although it u c cuiie d
also in the following winter (Jewish InltlUytneer
May 1868, p. 137 note), and, as toe writer is in-
formed, has since become almost periodical 6.
• The language of Dr. Barclay (see above) hardly
implies so much as the actual discovery of the sub-
terranean stream spoken of. His words are that
" about two miles southeast of the city " where a
noise as of running water beneath the ground was
said to have been beard, " on removing the rocks
to the depth of about ten or twelve feet, water was
found, though in small quantity, in midsummer "
(City of the Great King, pp. 302, 803).
Lieut. Warren avows his belief in the existence
of this subterranean current. At the latest dates,
be was directing his attention to this point, but
had not solved the question. About 600 yards
below the Bir fiyui [En-Rogel] he discovered a
flight of steps leading down to an ancient aqueduct,
now choked with silt, which he cleared about 100
feet northward, and believes to have been connected
with that well and the ancient system of water
supply. Whatever may be the truth however in
this instance, it appears that some of the rumors
of this nature are traceable to a very different
origin. Capt Wilson, of the Royal Engineers,
relates an example of this which is worthy of
notice. "A few words" (Ordnance Survey of
Jerusalem, p. 87, Loud. 1865) "may be said
here on the sound of running water which has
been heard by travellers near the Damascus Gate,
and at the head of the Kidron Valley. On one
occasion, when returning to the city after a heavy
storm of rain, the same sound was noticed, and after
some little trouble found to arise from the running
of water into a cistern near the north road. The
surface drainage passing through small earthen wan
pipes, and frilling some distance onto toe water
below, made a •plashing sound, which, softened by
the vaulted roof, might easily be mistaken for run-
ning water. The same thing was noticed after-
wards on several occasions, especially at the two
cisterns near the Damascus Gate."
It is undoubtedly a correct opinion that the
Kidron was never more than a winter torrent
formed by the water which flowed into the valley
from the hills north and east of Jerusalem. It is
not however a just inference from this character of
the stream that the amount of water there must
always have been the same, nor is this consistent
with the testimony of competent observers. Mr.
Tristram (Land of Israel, p. 3S6, 3d ed.), speaking
of a bluff about two miles south of Ain f'eshkhah,
on the west shore of the Dead Sea, says: •• Just
beyond it, the Kedron in the days of its abundance
has worked out a tremendous chasm, a few feet wide,
through which it winds to the sea." The present
stream could not have done this. But the evidence
is more positive, that formerly rain was more
abundant in Palestine than at present, and banes
that the Kidron was a larger stream. Dr. Olio
flows and discharge* Its warns down the Hfefjrnv
Nor, the lower part of the Kidron, than they ant es»
nun that they will have abundance of water darmff
the summer ; If there la no overflew, their meads aw
filled with fcrabodlngs." (Stewart, OS.)
Digitized by
Google
KIN AH
says: " The entire destruction of the woods which
once covered the mountain!, and the utter neglect
of the terracei which supported the toil on steep
declivities, have given full range to the nun*, which
have left many traces of bare rock, where formerly
were vineyards and cornfields." With this agrees
also Dean Stanley's representation: "It is prob-
able that, as in Europe generally, since the disap-
pearance of the German forests, and in Greece, since
the fall of the plane-trees, which once shaded the
bare landscape of Attica, the gradual cessation of
rain produced by this loss of vegetation lias exposed
the country in a greater degree than in early times
to the evils of drought This at least is the effect
of the testimony of residents at Jerusalem within
whose experience the Kidron has recently for the
first time flowed with a copious torrent, evidently
in consequence of the numerous enclosures of mul-
berry and olive groves, made within the but few
years by the Greek Convent, and in themselves a
sample of the different aspect which such cultiva-
tion more widely extended would give to the whole
soontry." (& d> P. pp. 121 and 133.) H.
KI*NAH (nyi7 [lamema&M, dSroe]: 'Ld>;
Alex. Kira: Cina), a city of Judah, one of those
which lay oi the extreme south boundary of the
tribe, next to Edom (Josh. xv. 32). It is men-
tioned in the Onomatticon of Eusebius and Jerome,
but not so ss to imply that they had any actual
knowledge of it. With the sole exception of
Sehwan (99), it appears to be unmentioned by any
traveller, and the " town Cinah. situated near the
wilderness of Zin " with which be would identify
.t, is not to be found in his own or any other map.
Professor Stanley {8. fP.p. 180) very ingeniously
connects Kinah with the Kenites (^T?.), who
settled in this district (Judg. i. 16). But it should
not be overlooked that the list in Josh. xr. purports
to record the towns as they were at the conquest,
while the settlement of the Kenites probably
(though not certainly) did not take place till after
0. G.
■ 1. (a.) "VXP, "flesh;" elector; care. (».)
rnjStt/, « kinswoman," also " kindred," omul, can,
tan "lHttf, " tr swell," also " to remain," i. ». « be
superfluous." Wheoos eomes "IMtf/, n remainder,"
Be,. lsi»-60. Hence, In lev. xvuf. 6, A T. has In
margin " remainder."
J. "ItP^, "flesh," rift, «"i *» ~Wy, "be
rml," i. «. eonvevmr the notion of beauty, Qes. p.
I4S.
8. nripijfjp, "famUy," fwfcf, Jtmilia, applied
tath to reoas'and single families of mankind, and also
ej animals.
«■ (••/ - 71D, YJB, end in Karl YflQ, from
VT\ "see," "know." p.) Also, from same root,
Tiy^HO, " kindred ;" and hence "kinsman," or
"kinswoman," used, like " acquainta nc e," In both
senses, Qes. p. 674. But Buxtorf limits (») tr the
abstnot sense, (a) to the armrests, y pi^e t , b*oww-
ewe*.
6. TTfcfe, "brotherhood," tuitfa, prmamiuu,
«*•. p. 68.'
Nearly allied with the foregoing In sens* are the
fallowing general tanas: —
07
KINDRED 1537
KINDRED." I. Of the special name* de-
noting relation by cousanguiuity, the principal wul
be found explained under their proper beads,
Father, Brother, etc. It will be there seen
that the words which denote near relation in the
direct line are used also for the other superior or
interior degrees in that line, as grandfather, grand-
son, etc
On the meaning of the expression Bh'tr batar
(see below 1 and 2) much controversy has arisen.
SA'ir, as shown below, is in Lev. xviii. 6, in marg.
of A. V., " remainder." The rendering, however,
of SA'eY batar in text of A. V., " near of kin," may
be taken a* correct, but, as Mirhaelii shows, with-
out determining the precise extent to which the
expression itself is applicable (Mich. Lam of Mom,
ii. 48, ed. Smith; Knobel on Ltmiicm; Me also
Lev. xxr. 49; Num. xxvii. 11).
II. The words which express collateral consan-
guinity are— (1) uncle; 11 (2) aunt; " (3) nephew;*
(4) niece (not in A. V.); (S) cousin.*
III. The terms of affinity are— 1. (a) father-in
law/ (4) mother-in-law; » 2. (a) son-in-law,* (e)
daughter-in-law; < 3. (a) brother-in-law,* (4) sister-
in-law. -
The relations of kindred, expressed by few words,
and imperfectly defined in the earliest ages, acquired
in oourse of time greater significance and wider
influence. The full list of relatives either by con-
sanguinity, t. e. as arising from a common ancestor,
or by affinity, i. e. as created by marriage, may be
seen detailed in the Qorput Jurit Civ. Digest, lib.
xxxviii. tit 10, dt Grajtbut; see also Corp. Jmr.
Canon. Deer. U. c xxxv. 9, 5.
The domestic and economical question* arising
out of kindred may be classed under the three heads
of Marriage, Inheritance, and Blood-Bs-
VEHGK, and the reader it referred to the articles on
those subjects for information thereon. It is clear
that the tendency of the Mosaic Law was to in-
crease the restrictions on marriage, by defining
more precisely the relations created by it, as is shewn
by .the eases of Abraham and Moses. [Iscah ;
«• a 1 "!");?, "near," hence "a relative," »«Yr*t,
propitupna, Ges. p. 1284,
7. byS, from brjl|, « redeem," Qes. p. 3SS, 4
iyxumvmr, " a kinsman," i. t. the nlattoa to whose
belonged the right of redemption or of vengeance
* TTT, i&dubbt toO irarpoc, oixnoc ; fxKrwu.
• rTj'lfl, or TTt^T, ^ evyyonft, «a»r patrm.
* 1""3, In connection with 1"p"J, "oflkprlng;"
but ss* JoaDBSS. It I* rendered n nephew " in A. V.,
but Indicates a descendant In general, and Is usually
so rendered by LXX. and Tulg. See Gee. p. 864.
• Zvyycriff , cognatiu, Luke I. 86, 68.
/ DJJ radioes, see*
» niOri, mrttpd, *■•**.
» 7^-rj, r*****! «*». *•» 70I}, ■»*•»■
marriage," whence come past, ha KaL ]ril t nu, sad
ran^l, £, father-in-law and) mother-m-law, «. *
parent* who give a daughter ha marriage.
1 n^?, MfK+e, nwm.
« ttZfo efcltSferoi «»*>«* he*.
* tiqy.1 !«•*•* **•»+••• ■"•m****
Digitized by
Google
1588
KINB
Jochxbed.] For information on the general sub-
ject of kindred and it* obligation!, tee Selden, de
J we Natnrali, lib. T. ; MlchaeBs, Lame of Motet,
ed. Smith, U. 36; Knobel on Lot. xviil., Philo, de
Spec. Leg. iil. 3, 4, 6, voL ii. pp. 801-804, ed. Man-
gey; Burekhardt, Arab Tribet, i. 150; KeiL Bibl
Arc*. II. p. 60, §§ 106, 107. [KlXBEO.]
H. W. P.
XINE. [Cow.]
KINO OfjO, meleh: fimrAtit : re»), the
name of the nipreme ruler of the Hebrew! daring
• period of about 600° jean prerious to the
destruction of Jerusalem, B. o. 686. It wu
borne first by the ruler of the 19 Tribes united,
and then by the rulers of Judah and Israel sepa-
rately.
lie immediate occasion of the substitution of a
regal form of government for that of the judges
seems to hare been the siege of Jabesh-Gilead by
Nahaah, king of the Ammonites (1 Sam. xi. 1, xii.
19), and the refusal to allow the inhabitants of that
dty to capitulate, except on humiliating and cruel
conditions (1 8am. xi. 9, 4-4). The conviction
seems to have forced itself on the Israelites that
they could not resist their formidable neighbor
union they placed themselves under the sway of a
king, like surrounding nations. Concurrently with
this conviction, disgust bad been excited by the
corrupt administration of Justice under the sons of
Samuel, and a radical change was desired by them
in this respect also (1 Sam. viii. 3-6). Accord-
ingly the original idea of a Hebrew king was two-
fold: first, that he should lead the people to battle
in timu of war; and, secondly, that he should ex-
ecute judgment and justice to them in war and in
peace (1 Sam. viii. SO). In both respects the
desired end was attained. The righteous wrath
and military capacity of Saul were immediately
triumphant over the Ammonites ; and though ulti-
mately he was defeated and slain in battle with the
Philistines, be put even them to flight on more
than one occasion (1 Sam. xir. 93, xvii. 59), and
generally waged successful war against the sur-
rounding nations (1 Sam. xiv. 47). His successor,
David, entered on a series of brilliant conquests
over the Philistines, Moabites, Syrians, Edomites,
and Ammonites |«ee David, vol. i. p. 661]; and
the Israelites, no lunger confined within the narrow
bounds of Palestine, had an empire extending from
the river Euphrates to Gaza, and from the entering
in of Hamath to the river of Egypt (1 K. iv. 91).
In the mean while complaints cease of the corrup-
tion of justice; and Solomon not only consolidated
and maintained in peace the empire of his lather,
David, but left an enduring reputation for his wis-
dom as a judge. Under this expression, however,
we must regard him, not merely as pronouncing
decision*, primarily, or in the last resort, in civil
and criminal cases, but likewise as holding public
levees and transacting public business "at the
• The precise period depends on the length of the
ntfn of Saul, for estimating which then are no ear-
tain data. In the O. T. the exact length is nowhere
mentioned. In Acts xffl. SI forty years an specified ;
but this Is in a speech, and statistical accuracy may
have been foreign to the speaker's Ideas on that occa-
sion. And there an dUBcnltics In admitting that he
reigned so long as forty yean. Sat Winer jav esc,
and toe article Sim. In this Dictionary. It Is only In
lbs rttgn of David that mention Is first mads ot the
<nenrJn "or" chronicler "«f the sing Sam. viii.
KIHO
gala," when he would receive petitions, beat xanv
plaints, and give summary decisions on various
points, which in a modern European kingdom would
come under the cognizance of numerous distinct
public departments.
To form a correct idea of a Hebrew king, wa
must abstract ourselves from the notions of modern
Europe, and realise the position of oriental sove-
reigns. It would be a mistake to regard the
Hebrew government as a limited monarchy, in the
English sense of the expression. It is stated in
1 Sam. x. 96, that Samuel " told the people tha
manner 6 of the kingdom, and wrote it in the book
and laid it before the Lord," and it is barely pos-
sible that this may refer to some statement respect-
ing the boundaries of the kingly power. Bat do
such document has come down to us; and if it ever
existed, and contained restrictions of any moment
on the kingly power, it was probably disregarded
in practice. The following passage of Sir John
Malcolm respecting the Shahs of Persia may, with
some slight modifications, be regarded as Burly
applicable to the Hebrew monarchy under David
and Solomou : " The monarch of Persia has been
pronounced to be one of the most absolute in tha
world. His word has ever been deemed a law:
and he has probably never had any further restraint
upon the free exercise of his vast authority than
has arisen from nil regard for religion, his respect
for established usages, his desire of reputation, and
his fear of exciting an opposition that might be
dangerous to his power, or to his life " (Malcolm's
Perna, vol. ii. 303; compare Elphinstone's India,
or Ike Indian Mahometan £mpire, book viii. e. 8).
It must not, however, be supposed to have been
either the understanding, or the practice, that the
sovereign might seize at his discretion the private
property of individuals. Ahab did not venture to
seize the vineyard of Naboth till, through the testi-
mony of false witnesses, Naboth bad been convicted
of blasphemy; and possibly his vineyard may have
been seized as a confiscation, without flagrantly
outraging public sentiment in those who did not
know the truth (1 K. xxi. 6). But no monarchy
perhaps ever existed in which it would not be
regarded as an outrage, that the monarch should
from covetousnesa seize the private property of an
innocent subject in no ways dangerous to the state.
And generally, when Sir John Malcolm proceeds as
follows, in reference to " one of the most absolute "
monarch! In the world, It will be understood that
the Hebrew king, whose power might be described
in the same way, is not, on account of certain
restraints which exist in the nature of things, to be
regarded as "a limited monarch " in the European
use of the words. "We may assume that tha
power of the king of Persia is by usage abeobte
over the property and lives of his conquered ene-
mies, hit rebelMmt nbjectt, kit own f**Bf, Ms
muutttn, over pnbUe officer* not and tmittrn,
and all the numertmt train qf domettta; ami tkmt
16). Perhaps the contempt rary notation of dates easy
have commenced In DavWf reign.
ft The word tS^tTD, translated « Dwaaer •> In the
A. V , is translated to toe LXX. turafapa, i. t. statues
or ordinance (saa Basins, tv. 17, Bar. II. 19, r». IS)
Bat Joaephus seams to have retarded the document as
a prophetical statement, read baton the king, of the
calamities which wen to arise from the kingly p ena l
as a kind of pi cite s t reevdei foe sueeasdtag asm* (aw
int. il 4, 1 6).
Digitized by
Google
KING
teuMjrjMKuA angperxr. •f iht»t c&ute*, witiout
txaimnatum or formal procedure of any kind:
in all other cam that an capital, the forma pre-
•eribed by law and custom an observed ; the mon-
arch only commands, when the evidence has been
examined and the law declared, that the sentence
•hall be put in execution, or that the condemned
culprit shall be pardoned " (vol. ii. p. 806). In ac-
cordance with such usages, David ordered Uriah to
be treacherously exposed to death in the forefront
of the hottest battle (3 Sam. xi. 15); he caused
Recbab and Baanah to be slain instantly, when
they brought him the head of Ishbaheth (2 Sam.
Iv. 12): and he is represen ted as haviug on his
death-bed recommended Solomon to put Joab and
Shimei to death (1 K. ii. 5-9). In like manner,
Solomon caused to be killed, without trial, not only
hi* elder brother Adomjah, and Joab, whose execu-
tion might he regarded as the exceptional acts of a
dismal state policy in the beginning of his reign,
but likewise Shimei, after having been seated on
the throne three years. And King Saul, in resent-
ment at their connivance with David's escape, put
to death 85 priests, and caused a massacre of the
inhabitants of Nob, including women, children, and
sucklings (1 Sam. xxii. 18, 19).
Besides being commander-in-chief of the army,
supreme judge, and absolute master, as it were, of
the lives of his subjects, the king exercised the
power of imposing taxes on them, and of exacting
from them personal service and labor. Both these
points seem clear from the account given (1 Sam.
viii. 11-17) of the evils which would arise from the
kingly power; and are confirmed in various ways.
Whatever mention may be made of consulting
"old men," or "elders of Israel," we never read
of their deciding such points as these. When
PuL the king of Assyria, imposed a tribute on the
kingdom of Israel, " Meuabem, the king," exacted
the money of all the mighty men of wealth, of each
man 50 shekels of silver (3 K. xv. 19). And when
Jeboiakim, king of Judah, gave his tribute of silver
and gold to Pharaoh, he taxed the land to give the
money ; he exacted the silver and gold of the people
of every one according to his taxation (3 K. xxili.
36). And the degree to which the exaction of per-
sonal labor might be carried on a special occasion
is illustrated by King Solomon's requirements for
buildmg the Temple. He raised a levy of 30,000
men, and sent them to Lebanon by courses of ten
thousand a month; aud he had 70,000 that bare
burdens, and 80,000 hewers in the mountains (1 K.
r. 13-15). Judged by the oriental standard, there
is nothing improbable in these numbers. In our
own days, for the purpose of constructing the Mah-
m iode) eh Canal in Egypt, Mehemet Ali, by orders
given to the various sheikha of the provinces of
Saksrah, Uhizeh, Mensourah, Sharkieh, Henouf,
Bahyreh, and some others, caused 800,000 men,
women, and children, to be assembled along the site
KING
1589
• hlh AigtisAmmaM in Egypt, by His. Pod*,
vol. II. p. 219. Owing to ImaBJcleot provisions, bad
treatment, and negleet of proper anugemento, 80,000
of this number perished in seven months (p. 220). In
•ompulaory levies of labor, It Is probably difficult to
prevent gross instances it oppression. At the rebel-
Bon of the ten tribes, Alooimm, called auv Adoram,
who was over the lev] of 80,000 men foi Lebanon,
sas stoned to death (1 K. xll. 18 ; 1 K. v. 1* ; 3 Sam.
IX. 84).
s It Is supposed both by Jann (Arelutol. B». { 222)
" "" r (In his /fro. MtatkUmrr, | 90), that a king
of the intended canal « This was 130,000 more
than the levy of Solomon.
In addition to these earthly powers, the King of
jrael had a more awful claim to respect and obe-
dience. He was the vicegerent of Jehovah (1 Sam.
x. 1, xvi. 18), and as it were His son, if just and
holy (3 Sam. vii. 14; Ps. lxxxix. 26, 27, U. 6, 7).
He had been set apart as a consecrated ruler. Upon
his head had been poured the holy anointing oil,
composed of olive-oil, myrrh, cinnamon, sweet cal-
amus, and cassia, which had hitherto been reserved
exclusively for the priests of Jehovah, especially
the high-priest, or had been solely used to anoint
the Tabernacle of the Congregation, the Ark of the
Testimony, and the vessels of the Tabernacle (Ex.
xxx. 83-38, xl. 9; Lev. xxi. 10; 1 K. i. 39). Ha
had become, in fact, emphatically "the Lord's
Anointed." At the coronation of sovereigns in
modern Europe, holy oil has been frequently used,
as a symbol of divine right; but this has been
mainly regarded as a mere form ; and the use of It
was undoubtedly introduced in imitation of the
Hebrew custom. But, from the beginning to the
end of the Hebrew monsrchy, a living real signifi-
cance was attached to consecration by this holy
anointing oil. From well-known anecdotes related
of David, — and perhaps, from words in his lamen-
tation over Saul and Jonathan (3 Sam. i. 21) — it
results that a certain sacreduess invested the person
of Saul, the Jirtt king, as the Lord's anointed ; and
that, on this account, it was deemed sacrilegious to
kill him, even at his own request (1 Sam. xxiv. 6,
10, xxvi. 9, 16; 8 Sam. i. 14). And, after the
destruction of the first Temple, in the Book of La-
mentations over the calamities of the Hebrew peo-
ple, it is by the name of " the Lord's Anointed "
that Zedekiah, the Intt king of Judah, is bewailed
(Lam. iv. SO). Again, more than 600 years after
the capture of Zedekiah, the name of the Anointed,
though never so used in the Old Testament — yet
suggested probably by Ps. 11. 8, Dan. ix. 36 — had
become appropriated to the expected king, who was
to restore the kingdom of David, and inaugurate a
period when Edom, Moab, the Ammonites, and the
Philistines, would again be incorporated with the
Hebrew monarchy, which would extend from the
Euphrates to the Mediterranean Sea and to the ends
of the earth (Acts i. 6; John i. 41, iv. 35; Is. xi.
12-14; Ps. lxxii. 8). And thus the identical He-
brew word which signifies anointed,* through its
Aramaic form adopted into Greek and Latin, is still
preserved to us in the English word Mtuink. (Set
Gesenius's Thuaurut, p. 825.)
A ruler in whom so much authority, human and
divine, was embodied, was naturally distinguished
by outward honors and luxuries. He had a court
of oriental magnificence. When the power of the
kingdom was at its height, he sat on a throne of
ivory, covered with pure gold, at the feet of which
were two figures of lions. The throne was ap-
was only anointed when a new Dually came to the
throne, or when the right to the crown was disputed.
It is usually on inch occasions only that the anointing
is specified ; as In 1 8am. x. 1, 2 8am. H. 4, 1 K. 1. 8»,
t K. Ix. 8, 2 K. xl. 12 : but this Is not nworiaafy toe
cess (see 2 K. xxllL 80), and there dose not seem suflV
dent reason to doubt that each individual king was
anointed. Then can be little doubt, likewise, that
the kings of Israel were anointed, though this Is not
specified by the writers of Kings and Chronicles, site
would deem such anointing Invalid.
Digitized by
Google
1540
KING
preached by 6 steps, guarded by IS figures of Bans,
two on each step. The Mng was stressed in royal
robe* (1 K. xxii. 10; 9 Chr. xviii. »); bis insignia
were, a crown or diadem of pore gold, or perhaps
radiant with precious gems (S Sam. i. 10, xii. 80;
2K.zi. 13; Pa. xxi. 3), and a royal sceptre (£s.
xix. 11; Is. xiv. 6; Pa. xlv. 6; Am. i. 5, 8). Those
who approached him did him obeisance, bowing
down and touching the ground with their foreheads
(1 Sam. xxiv. 8; 3 Sam. six. 18); and this was
done even by a king's wife, the mother of Solomon
(1 K. i. 16). Their officers and subjects called
themselves his servants or slaves, though they do
not seem habitually to have given way to such ex-
travagant salutations as in the Chaldean and Per-
sian courts (1 Sam. xvii. 83, 84, 86, xx. 8; 3 Sam.
vi. SO; Dan. ii. 4). As in the East at present, a
kiss was a sign of respect and homage (1 Sam. x.
1, perhaps Ps. Ii. 12). He lived in a splendid
palace, with porches and columns (1 K. vii. 3-7).
All his drinking-resKls were of gold (1 K. x. 91).
He had a large baron, which in the time of Solomon
must have been the source of enormous expense, if
we accept as statistically accurate the round num-
ber of 700 wives and 300 concubines, in all 1000,
attributed to him in the Book of Kings (IK. xi. 8).
As is invariably the case in the great eastern mon-
archies at present, his harem was guarded by
eunuchs; translated " officers " in the A. T. for
the most part (1 Sam. viii. 16; 3 K. xxhr. 13, 16;
1 K. xxii. 9; S K. viii. 6, ix. 38, 83, xx. 18, xxiii.
11; Jer. xxxviii. 7).
The main practical restraints on the kings seem
to have arisen from the prophets and the prophetical
order, though in this respect, as in many others, a
distinction must be made between different periods
and different reigns. Indeed, under all circum-
stances, much would depend on the individual
character of the king or the prophet. No transac-
tion of importance, however, wss entered on with-
out consulting the will of Jehovah, either by Urim
and Thnmmim or by the prophets; and it was the
general persuasion that the prophet was in an
especial sense the servant and messenger of Jehovah,
to whom Jehovah had declared his will (Is. xliv. 36;
Am. iii. 7 ; 1 Sam. xxviii. 6, ix. 6 ; see Prophets).
The prophets not only rebuked the king with bold-
ness for individual acts of wickedness, ss after the
murders of Uriah and of Naboth ; but also, by in-
terposing their denunciations or exhortations at
critical periods of history, they swayed permanently
the destinies of the state. When, after the revolt
of the ten tribes, Reboboam had under him at
Jerusalem an army stated to consist of 180,000
men, Shemaiah, as interpreter of the divine will,
caused the army to separate without attempting to
put down the rebellion (1 K. xii. 91-24). When
Judah and Jerusalem were in imminent peril from
the invasion of Sennacherib, the prophetical utter-
ance of Isaiah encouraged Hezekiah to a successful
resistance (Is. xxxrii. 22-36). On the other hand,
at the invasion of Judasa by the Chaldees, Jeremiah
prophetically announced impending woe and calam-
ities in a strain which tended to paralyze patriotic
resistance to the power of Nebuchadneeaar (Jer.
xxxviii. 4, 8). And Jeremiah evidently produced
an impression on the king's mind contrary to the
aounsels of the princes, or what might be called the
war-party in Jerusalem (Jer. xxxviii. 14-87).
The law of succession to the throne is somewhat
ahseure, but it seems most probable that the king
•Bring his lifetime named his successor. This was
KXSQ
certainly the ease with David, who passed over Us
elder son Adonijah, the son of Haggith, in (star
of Solomon, the son of Beth-sheba (1 K. L 80, ii
93); and with Reboboam, of whom it b said tint
he loved Maachah the daughter of Absalom above
all hit wives and concubines, and that be mad*
Abijah her son to be ruler among his brethren, to
make him king (3 Chr. xl. 81, 99). The succession
of the first-born has been inferred from 'a passage in
9 Chr. xxi. 8, 4, in which Jehoshapnat fa) said to
have given the kingdom to Jehoram " because be
was the first-born." But this very passage tends
to show that Jehoshaphat had the oncer of naming
his successor; and It fa) worthy of note that Je-
horam, on his coming to the throne, put to death
all his brothers, which he would scarcely, prrhtipt
have done if the succession of the first-born bad
been the law of the land. From the eond a s ma s
of the narratives in the books of Kings no inference
either way can be drawn from the ordinary formula
in which the death of the father and succession of
his son fat recorded (1 K. xv. 8). At the same
time, if no partiality for a favorite wife or eon inter-
vened, there would always be a natural bias of
affection in favor of the eldest son. There appears
to have been some prominence given to the mother
of the king (9 K. xxir. 19, 16; 1 K. ii. 19), and
it is possible that the mother may have been regent
during the minority of a son. Indeed some sneh
custom best explains the possibility of the audacious
usurpation of Athaliah on the death of her son
Ahadah : an usurpation which lasted six years after
the destruction of all the seed-royal except the
young Jeboash (3 K. xi. 1, 8).
The following fa) a list of some of the officers of
the king: —
1. The Recorder or Chronicler, who was perhaps
analogous to the Historiographer whom Sir John
Malcolm mentions as an officer of the Persian court,
whose duty it is to write the annals of the king's
reign {Hutory of Ptrria, c 93). Certain it is that
there is no regular series of minute dates in Hebrew
history until we read of this recorder, or reuses*.
braneer, as the word mtuktr fa) translated in a
marginal note of the English version. He signifies
one who keeps the memory of events alive, in ac-
cordance with a motive assigned by Herodotus for
writing bis history, namely, that the acta of men
might not become extinct by time (Herod, i. 1;
9 Sam. viii. 16; 1 K. iv. 8; 9 K. zviii. 18; Is.
xxxvi. 3, 92).
8. The Scribe or Secretary, whose doty would
be to answer letters or petitions in the name of the
king, to write despatches, and to draw up edicts
(3 Sam. viii. 17, xx. 26; 9 K. xii. 10, xix. 9,
xxii. 8).
8. The officer who was our Ike fens (If. xxii.
16, xxxvi. 8). His duties would be those of chief
steward of the household, and would embrace all
the mternal economical arrangements of the palace,
the superintendence of the king's servant*, and the
custody of his costly vessels of gold and silver. He
seems to have worn a distinctive robe of office and
girdle. It was against Sbebna, who held this office,
that Isaiah uttered his personal prophesy (xxii. 16-
96), the only instance of the kind in his writings
(see Ges. Com. on l$aiak, p. 694).
4. The king's friend (1 K. iv. 6), called Ukewfae
the king's companion. It is evident from the name
that this officer must have stood in eonfidentia
relation to the king, but his duties are nowbsn
Digitized by
Google
KING
5. The kjeper of the vestry or wardrobe (3 K.
1.88).
6. The captain of the body-guard (9 Sam. xx.
13). The importaoee of this officer require! no
jomment. It m be who obeyed Solomon in putting
to death AdonUah, Joab, end Shimei (1 K. IL 36,
34,48).
7. Diatioet offleara over the king'* treasures —
Ui storehouses, laborer*, vineyard*, olive-trees, and
sycamore-trees, herd*, camel*, and flock* (1 Chr.
xxvU. 86-81).
8. The officer over all tie boat or army of Israel,
the oonunander-in-ehief of the arm;, who com-
manded it in person during the king'* absence
(8 Sam. xx. 88; 1 Chr. xxvii. 34; 8 Sam. xL 1).
A* an inatance of the formidable power which a
general might acquire in thia office, age the narra-
tive in 8 Sam. Ui. 80-87, when David deemed bini-
adf obliged to tolerate the murder of Abner by
Joaband Abishai.
9. The royal counsellors (1 Chr. xxvii. 88; I*.
Ui. 8, xix. 11, 18). Ahithophel i* a specimen of
bow much nich an officer might effect for evil or
for good ; but whether there existed under Hebrew
king* any body corresponding, even distantly, to
the English Privy Council, in former time*, doe*
not appear (8 Sam. xvi. 80-83, xvU. 1-14).
The following is a statement of the source* of
the royal revenue* : —
1. The royal demesnes, cornfields, vineyards,
and olive-gardens. Some at least of these asem
to have been taken from private individuals, but
whether as the punishment of rebellion, or on any
other plausible pretext, is not specified (1 Sam. viU.
14; 1 Chr. xxvii. 86-88). 3. The produce of the
royal Book* (1 Sam. xxi. 7; 3 Sam. xiii. 33; 3 Chr.
xxvi. 10; 1 Chr. xxvU. 35). 8. A nominal tenth
of the produce of corn-land and vineyards and of
sheep (1 Sam. viii. 16, 17). 4. A tribute from
merchants who passed through the Hebrew territory
(1 K. x. IS). 6. Presents made by his subjects
(1 Sam. xvi. 90; 1 Sam. x. 37; 1 K. x. 36; Pa.
Ixxii. 10). There ia perhaps no greater distinction
in the usage* of eastern and western nations than
on what relate* to the giving and reoeiving of
presents. When made regularly they do in fact
amount to a regular tax. Thus, in the paaaage
last referred to in the book of King*, it ia stated
that they brought to Solomon "every man hi*
present, vessels of silver and vessels of gold, and
garments, and armor, and apices, horses and mules,
a rate year by year." 6. In the time of Solomon,
the king had trading-vessels of his own at sea,
which, starting from Exiongeber, brought back once
in three years gold and ailrer, ivory, ape*, and
eeaeocke (1 K. x. 88). It is probable that Solomon
•ud some other kinga may have derived some
revenue from commercial ventures (1 K. ix. 38).
7- The spoils of war taken from conquered nations
and the tribute paid by them (3 Sam. viii. 8, 7, 8,
10; 1 K. iv. 31; 3 Chr. xxvii. 6). 8. Lastly, an
undefined power of exacting compulsory labor, to
which reference has been already made (1 Sam. viU.
13,13,16). As far as this power was exercised it
was equivalent to so much income. There ia nothing
m 1 Sam. x. 36, or in 8 Sam. v 3, to justify the
statement that the Hebrews denned in expres* terms,
jr in any terms, by a particular agreement or eove-
auit for that purpose, what services should be ren-
ewed to the king, or what he oould legally require.
{Bee Jahn, Archmkjia Biilicn ; Bauer, LehHmck
for Htbriuchen AUaihBmer ; Winer, ». t Konjg.)
KINGDOM OF HEAVEN lf>41
.1 only remain* to add, that hi Deuteronomy
xviL 14-30 there is a document containing soma
directions as to what any king who might be ap-
pointed by the Hebrews was to do and not to do
The proper appreciation of this document would
mainly depend on its date. It is the opinion of
many modern writer* — Gesenius, De Wette, Winet
Ewald, and other* — that the book which contain
the document was composed long after the time
of Hoeea. See, however, Deuteronomy in the 1st
voL of this work; and compare Geaeniua, GttckickU
dtr NebrmtcJten Spracht und Schri/i, p. 88 ; Ds
Wette, Emlahmg m die Bibtl, " Deuteronomium ' ' ;
Winer, $. v. Kordgi Ewald, GescAicAte da Volktt
Itratl, Ui. 381. E. T.
• KING'S GARDEN, 9 K. xxv. 4, etc.
[Gabdeh, vol. i. p. 870 a,]
• KING'S MOWINGS, Am. vU. 1. [Mow.
are.]
• KING'S POOL, Neb.. 11. 14. [Siu>ah.]
• KINGDOM OF HEAVEN-alwsye with
the article, 4, PairtKtla riv olioarmv-
1. Thia expression occurs thirty-three times in
the first Gospel, but nowhere eke in the Scriptures.
In one passage (Ui. 9} it ia attributed by Matthew
to John the Baptist, in another (xviii. 1) to the
disciples of Christ, and in all the rest to Christ
himself. An abbreviated form of it ia found in
such phrases at, "the gospel of the kingdom"
(iv. 93), " the word of the kingdom " (xUi. 19),
" the aona of the kingdom " (vui. 13, xui. 38), and
" the kingdom prepared for you " (xxv. 84). In a
single inatance (3 Tim. iv. 18) Paul apeak* of the
Lord's " heavenly kingdom," — rfcr &turi\tlar
oirrov r))r twovpajnor, — an expression which Is
equivalent to " the kingdom of heaven," a* this
phrase was sometimes used by Christ. (See Matt
vui. 11, 13.) — It will be observed that the Apostle
not only describes the kingdom as "heavenly,"
but also as the Lord's, " hit heavenly kingdom."
In a few passages of the first Gospel (xiii. 41, xvi.
98, cf. xx.. 91) it is likewise referred to as the
Messiah's kingdom. With these may properly be
connected the language of Christ in the Gospel of
John (xvui. 86), the words of the Angel to Mary
as preserved by Luke (i. 83), those of Christ as
recorded by the same Evangelist (xix. 13, 16, xxii.
99, 80), and the teaching of the Apostles in their
letters (1 Cor. xv. 34, 36; Eph. v. 6; Col. i. 18;
3 Tim. iv. 1; Heb. i. 8; 3 Pet. 1. 11). The king,
dom of heaven ia therefore frequently represented
as the kingdom of Christ. But it is atiU more
frequently called the kingdom of God. Matthew
attributes this expression in several instances to
Chriat (vi. 10, 83, xU. 38, xiii. 43, xxi. 31, 48,
xxvi. 39), and when, In reporting the Saviour's
teaching, his Uoepel give* the words " kingdom of
heaven," the other synoptical Gospels have, as a
rule, the words " kingdom of God " (e. g. cf. Matt.
v. 3, xi. 11, xUL 81, 83, with Luke vi. 80, vU. 98,
xiii. 18, 90). In all the other book* of the New
Testament the latter designation ia regularly em-
ployed. While therefore the two expressions de-
note the same object, and may be regarded as
substantially equivalent, the latter appears for some
reason to have dispbred the former in the language
of the Apostles. Keuaa (Butoirt de la ThiohgU
Chretien** cat BUele Apottotique, L 181) supposes
that it had the advantage of being nwoe compre-
hensive, not "seaming to restrict the notion to a
future enoch, a particular locality, or a stats of
Digitized by
Google
1642 KINGDOM UK HlsAVBH
thing! different from that in which humanity now
exists," and was therefore preferred to the other
by the Apostle*.
2. But the idea of a divine or heavenly kingdom
was not proposed for the first time by John the
Baptist and then adopted by Christ. It may be
traced in many parts of the O. T., from the Pen-
tateuch to the prophets of the exile. The Israelites
as a people belonged especially to Jehovah, and
were already in the law described as a nation of
kings and priests unto Him (Ex. xix. 6, et 1 Pet.
ii. 9). Yet even in their best estate, under David
their greatest king, they were but a type of the
true people of God, and their sovereign but a shadow
of his greater Son. And this they were clearly
taught; for a Messiah was foretold by the prophets,
who should spring from the family of David, should
subdue all bis foes, and should reign forever in
righteousuess and peace (Ps. ii., ex. ; Is. xL ; ef. Ps.
hxii.; Jer. xxiii. 5 ff., xxxi. 81 ff., xxxii. 87 ff.,
xxxiii. 7 ff. ; Ex. xxxiv. 38 ff , xxxvii. 24 ff. ; We.
iv. 1 ff.). At length in the prophecies of Daniel it
was distinctly revealed that the " God of heaven "
was to set up a kingdom (ii. 44), which was to be
composed of his saints (vii. 27), was to be admin-
istered by One like a son of man (vii. 18, 14), and
was to be universal and everlasting (vii. 14, 97).
The very expression, " kingdom of God," occurs
in the Apocrypha ( Wisd. of Sol x. 10). Accord-
ingly, when Christ appeared among the Jews, they
were expecting this kingdom of "the God of
heaven " which was to be set up by the agency
of their long anticipated Messiah; and, however
erroneous their views of its nature had become, they
were prepared to understand in some measure the
language of Jesus and his disciples concerning it.
A few indeed of the more devout and spiritual, like
Simeon and Anna, appear to have had a tolerably
just conception of its nature.
8. This kingdom, in its ultimate and perfect
form, is said to bare been prepared for the saints
(ram the foundation of the world. (Matt. xxv. 84.)
It was therefore included in the wise purpose of
God which antedates creation, and in this sense it
b eternal. But the various representations of the
N. T. have given rise to some differences of opinion
unong Biblical scholars as to the terminus a quo
if its actual establishment on earth. The writers
of the 0. T. speak of it distinctly as future and
not present; sod many passages of the N. T. refer
to it in connection with the second coming of
Christ. It is therefore maintained by some inter-
preters, that this kingdom has not yet been estab-
lished, and will not be until the Lord returns in
glory. Others have made the preaching of John
the Baptist the date of its commencement, appeal-
ing to the words of Christ (see Matt. xi. 12, xvii.
11; Luke xvi. 16) in support of their position.
But it has been objected to this, that one who was
spoken of, by way of contrast, as less than the
least of those in the kingdom of heaven (Matt- xi.
11) could not haw been an agent in setting up
that kingdom, by introducing men into it, and that
the kingdom itself must take Its date from the
personal appearance and recognition of its king,
that is, from the time of Christ's entrance on his
wblic ministry. Others still, identifying the king-
dun 'J God with the Christian church, have fixed
ipon the day of Pentecost, when the Spirit was
poured out marvelously, as the date of its estab-
lishment. Perhaps the view which connects it most
alosaly with the person of Christ, affirming that it
KINGDOM 07 HEAVEN
began, properly speaking, with his public ministry,
is entitled to the preference. For in the course of
his teaching he spoke of it dearly as already coma.
At one time he said to the Pharisees, " If I cast
out demons by the Spirit of God, then the king-
dom of God is come unto you — f*)«W«r Itfbuai
(Matt xii. 28); and at another time he said to the
same class of man, according to a natural interpre-
tation of his words, " Behold, the kingdom of God
is in the midst of you " (Luke xvii. 21). « The
kingdom of God " (Reuss, Hist, de la Thiol Ckr.
i. 190) •> which Jesus wished to realize began with
his personal appearance on the world's theatre; hi*
advent, and the advent of the kingdom, are ona
and the same thing, for he is the source and cans*
of it, and the cause may not exist without the
effect. .... He went so far even as to assign an
exact date to the advent of the kingdom, and this
date was no other than the moment when John
Baptist, the last and greatest of the prophets, opened
the door, so to speak, by announcing to the world
Him who would realize its cherished hopes. At
that moment the movement towards the kingdom
began, and men pressed on with ardor to enter
into it."
4. But if the kingdom of heaven was established
at the first coming of Christ, it is not to be con-
summated until his second appearing; and then,
at length, it will be transferred by the Son, as Medi-
ator, to the Father (1 Cor. xv. 24-28). In the
mean time its progress among men will be silent
and gradual, like the influence of leaven upon the
meal in which it is placed, or like the growth of a
mustard-plant from its diminutive seed (Matt. xiii.
81 ff., 33 ff.). The petition, " Thy kingdom come,"
introduced by Christ into the prayer which he
taught his disciples, may naturally be re f erie d to
this gradual extension of the divine authority over
the hearts of men, making them the true subjects
of God. To be a member of this kingdom in its per-
fect form Is to be a possessor of eternal blessedness
(Matt. via. 11, xxv. 34; Mark ix. 47; Lake xiii.
28, 29; 1 Cor. vi. 9, 10, xv. 60; Gal. v. 21; Eph.
v. S; 2 These, i. 5; 2 Tim. iv. 18); but connection
with it in its present form gives only a foretaste
of celestial good.
6. The nature of this kingdom may lie i rprcaned
in a word by calling it spiritual It embraces those,
and only those, who are poor in spirit, who have
been bom of the Spirit, who have the Spirit of
Christ, and who worship God in spirit and in truth
(Matt v. 3; John Hi. 8, 5, iv. 24; Rom. riii. 9).
» The kingdom of God is not eating and drinking,
but righteousness and peace and joy in the Holy
Ghost" (Rom. xiv. 17). It Is not of this world
(John xviii. 36). It is related to heaven rather
than to earth in Its principle* and spirit, and it*
consummation ben would make the society of earth
as loyal to God and as blessed in bis service, a*
that of heaven (Matt vi. 10). Tholuek (Espomtim
of the Sermon on the Mount, i. 108, Eng. tranaL)
remarks in his note ou Matt v. 8 : " We lay down
as the fundamental notion of the kingdom of God:
A co mm u ni ty in which God reigns, and which, as
the nature of a right gov ernm ent invoke*, oteat
Him not by constraint, but from fret witt and agio-
Hon ; of which U folium at a necatary consequence
that the parties are intimately bound to each other
fa the mutual interchange of offices of lore." Bat
the spirituality of this kingdom involves Ha univar
sality. It is limited to no tribe or people, bat ii
intended to comprise all in every nation who okay
Digitized by
Google
KINGS, FIRST AND SECOND BOOKS OF
1543
Som the heart the will of God. Jew and Greek,
bond and free, are alike welcomed to the dutiea,
the honors, and the eternal blessedness of the Mes-
siah's reign. And there are a few passages of the
N. T. which seem to ascribe to holy angels a con-
nection with it both in service and glory. (Matt.
xvi. 97, xiii. 41, xriii. 10; Luke xv. 10; Heb. i.
14; Eph. L 10, SO, 22, iii. 15; 1 Pet i. 12, iii.
22-)
6. Yet this kingdom, though in its nature
spiritual, was to have while on earth a visible form
in Christian churches, and the simple rites belong-
ing to church life were to be observed by every
loyal subject (Matt, ixviii. 18 ff. ; John iii. 5; Acts
ii. 38; Luke xxii. 17 ff.; 1 Cor. xi. 24 ff.). It
cannot however be said that the X. T. makes the
spiritual kingdom of Christ exactly ouextenaive with
the visible church. There are many in the latter
who do not belong to the former (1 John ii. 9), and
some doubtless in the former who do not take their
place in the latter.
literature. — E. Reuse, Hittoirt de la Tkiologie
Chretiemu au Stick Apostolique, i. 180 ff. C. F.
Schmid, Biblueke Theologie detlf.T.p. 266 ff.
A. Tholuck, Expotitum of the Sermon on the
Mount, at Matt v. 3. Heemakerk, Notio ttji 0ao-
lAffat raw oipayiy ex mente Jen Christi, Amst
1839. Bourguet, Recherche* $ur la rignification
au mot: Roynume de Ditu, Mont 1838. Sar-
torius, Ueber den Zaeck Jem bei Stxftung emet
Gottet-Reiches. Baumgarten-Crixniia, Bibtische
Theologie, pp. 149-157. A. H.
• KINGDOM OF ISRAEL. [Israkl,
Kuigdom or.]
• KINGDOM OF JTTDAH. [Jtoah,
KmODOM OF.]
KINGS, FIRST and SECOND BOOKS
OF, originally only one book in the Hebrew Canon,
and Brit edited in Hebrew as two by Bomberg,
after the model of the LXX. and the Vulgate (De
Wette and 0. Thenius, Einleuung). They are
called by the LXX, Origen, etc., BtunXtiar rptrn
and Ttripn\, third and fourth of the Kingdom*
(the books of Samuel being the first and second),
but by the Latins, with few exceptions, tertiua et
quartus Regum liber. Jerome, though in the head-
ing of his translation of the Scriptures he follows
the Hebrew name, and calls them Liber Malachim
Primus and Secundua, yet elsewhere usually follows
the common usage of the church in his day. In
his Prologus Galeatus be places them as the fourth
of the second order of the sacred books, i. e. of the
Prophets: " Quartus, Malachim, i. e. Regum, qui
tertio at quarto Kegum volumine oontiuetur. Me-
liusque multo eat Malachim, i. e. Regum, quam
Mainelachoth, i. e. Xegnorum, dicers. Non enim
Dultarum gentium describit regua; sed unius Is-
raelitici populi, qui tribubus duodecim oontinetur."
In his epistle to Paulinus he thus describes the
contents of these two books: " Malachim, »'. e. ter-
im et quartus Regum liber, a Salomons usque ad
Sethoniara, et a Jeroboam filio Nabat usque ad
Osee qui ductus est in Assyrios, regnum Juda et
regnum describit Israel. Si historiara respioias,
« Da Wetted reasons for reckoning Kings as a asp-
rate work stein to ths writer quite looonolustve. On
ae oOuir hand, the book of Joshua seems to be an
SMSfpenilent book. Bwald els tie thaws books together
aaetly as Is done above ( Ouch. 1. 176), and eajs them
» the great Book of the Kings."
verba simplieia sunt: si in Uteris senium la t e nt—
inspexeris, Ecclesia) pancitas, et heretioorum oontra
ecclesiam bells, narrantur." The division into twa
books, being purely artificial and as it were me-
chanical, may be overlooked in speaking of them;
and it must also be remembered that the division
between the books of Kings and Samuel is equally
artificial, and that in point of fact the historical
books commencing with Judges and ending with
2 Kings present the appearanoe of one work, 8
giving a continuous history of Israel from the times
of Joshua to the death of Jehoiachin. It must
suffice here to mention, in support of this assertion,
the frequent allusion in the book of Judges to the
times of the kings of Israel (xvii. 6, xviii. 1, xix. 1,
xxi 25); the concurrent evidenoe of ch. ii. that
the writer lived in an age when he could take a
retrospect of the whole time during which the
judges ruled (ver. 16-19), t. e. that he lived after
the monarchy had been established ; the occurrence
in the hook of Judges, for the first time, of the
phrase •< the Spirit of Jehovah " (iii. 10), which la
repeated often in the book (vi. 34, xi. 29, xiii. 26,
xiv. 6, Ac), and Is of frequent use in Samuel and
Kings, (e. g. 1 Sara. x. 6, xvi. 13, 14, xix. 9; 2
Sam. xxtti. 2; 1 K. xxU. 24; 2 K. ii. 16, Ac);
the allusion in 1. 21 to the capture of Jehus, and
the continuance of a Jebusite population (aee 2 Sam.
xxiv. 16); the reference in xx. 27 to the removal
of the ark of the covenant from Shiloh to Jerusalem,
and the expression " in those days," pointing, as
in xvii. 6, Ac., to remote times; the distinct refer-
ence in xviii. 80 to the Captivity of Israel by Shal-
maneser; with the fact that the books of Judges,
Ruth, Samuel, Kings, form one unbroken narrative,
similar in general character, which has no beginning
except at Judg. i., while, it may be added, the book
of Judges is not a continuation of Joshua, but
opens with a repetition of the same events with
which Joshua closes. In like manner the book of
Ruth clearly forms part of those of Samuel, sup-
plying as it does the essential point of David's
genealogy and early family history, and ia no less
clearly connected with the book of Judges by its
opening verse, and the epoch to which the whole
book relates.* Other links eonnecting the books
of Kings with the presiding may be found in the
comparison, suggested by De Wette, of 1 K. ii. 26
with 1 Sam. ii. 35; ii. 11 with 2 Sao. v. 5; 1 K.
ii 3, 4, r. 17, 18, viil. 18, 19, 26, with 2 Sam. vii.
12-16; and 1 K. iv. 1-6 with 2 Sam. viii. 15-18.
Also 9 K. xvii. 41 may be compared with Judg. ii.
19; 1 Sam. ii. 27 with Judg. xiii. 6; 2 Sam. xiv.
17, 20, xix. 27, with Judg. xiii. 6; 1 Sam. ix. 21
with Judg. vi. 15, and xx.; 1 K. viii. 1 with 2
Sam. vi. 17, and v. 7, 9; 1 Sam. xvii. 12 with
Ruth iv. 17; Rath i. 1 with Judg. xvii. 7, 8, 9,
xix. L, 2 (Bethlehem-Judah); the use in Judg. xiii.
6, 8, of the phrase "the man of God" (in the
earlier books applied to Moses only, and that only
in Deut xxxiii. 1 and Josh. xiv. 6), may be com-
pared with the very frequent use of it in the books
of Samuel and Kings as the common designation
of a prophet, whereas only Jeremiah besides (xxxv. 4)
so uses it before the Captivity.' The phrase, " God
» Bkhhorr attributes Bath to the author of the
books of Samuel (Th. Pwker's Ds Wette, fl. 820).
<• m chronWaa, tun, and Nebonuah, It tisislialT
Digitized by
Google
1544
KINGS, FIRST AND SECOND BOOKS 07
fc n to me, ind mora slso," it common to Rath,
BsnueL and King*, and "till the; were ashamed,"
to Judge, and Kings (Jodg. 111. 96; 8 K. fl. 17,
riii. 11). And generally the style of the narrative,
ordinarily quiet and simple, but riling to great
rigor and cpirit when stirring deeds are described
(as in Judg. iv., rii., xi., 4c ; 1 Sam. iv., xvii.,
xzzL Ac. ; 1 K. viii., xviii., xix., Ac.), and the in-
troduction of poetry or poetic style in the midst
of the narrative (as in Judg. t., 1 Sam. it, 9 Sam.
i. 17, Ac., 1 K. xxii. 17, Ac.), constitute such strong
features of resemblance as lead to the conclusion
that these several books form but one work. In-
deed the very names of the books sufficiently indi-
cate that they were all imposed by the same au-
thority for the convenience of division, and with
reference to the subject treated of in each division,
and not that thay were original titles of Independent
works.
Bat to confine ourselves to the books of Kings.
We shall consider —
L Their historical and chronological range;
11. Their peculiarities of diction, and other
features in their literary aspect;
III. Their authorship, and the sources of the
authc's information ;
IV. Their relation to the books of Chronicles ;
V. Their place in the canon, and the references
to them in the New Testament.
I. The books of Kings range from David's death
and Solomon's accession to the throne of Israel,
commonly reckoned as B. o. 1015, but according
to Lepsius B. c. 993 (Kdnigib. d. jEgypt. p. 102),
to the destruction of the kingdom of Judah and
the desolation of Jerusalem, and the burning of the
Temple, according to the same reckoning b. c.
588 (b. c. 586, Lepsius, p. 107), — a period of 427
(or 405) years: with a supplemental notice of an
event that occurred after an interval of 96 years,
namely, the liberation of Jeboiachin from his prison
at Babylon, and a still further extension to Jehoia-
chin's death, the time of which is not known, but
which was probably not long after his liberation.
The history therefore comprehends the whole time
of the Israelitish monarchy, exclusive of the reigns
of Saul and David, whether existing as one king-
dom as under Solomon and the eight last kings, or
divided into the two kingdoms of Israel and Judah.
It exhibits the Israelites in the two extremes of
power and weakness; under Solomon extending
their dominion over tributary kingdoms from the
Euphrates to the Mediterranean and the border of
Egypt (1 K. iv. 21 ) ; under the last kings reduced
to a miserable remnant, subject alternately to
Egypt and Assyria, till at length they were rooted
jp from their own land. As the cause of this
decadence it points out the division of Solomon's
monarchy into two parts, followed by the religious
schism and idolatrous worship brought about from
political motives by Jeroboam. How the conse-
quent wars between the two kingdoms necessarily
weakened both; how they led to calling in the
stranger to their aid whenever their power was
squally balanced, of which the result was the de-
traction first of one kingdom and then of the other ;
jow a further evil of these foreign alliances was the
adoption of the idolatrous superstitions of the
heathen nations whose friendship and protection
they sought, by which they forfeited the Divine
protection — all this is with great clearness and
simplicity set forth in these books, which treat
squally of the two kingdoms while they lasted.
The doctrine of the Itaoeraoy is also eicarrj
brought out (see e. c. 1 K. xhr. 7-11, xv. 99, 80. xvi
1-7), and the temporal prosperity of the pious king*.
as Asa, Jehoshaphat, HezekUh, and Josiah, stand*
in contrast with the calamitous reigns of Bebobosas,
Ahaziah, Ahax, Manmsfh, Jeboiachin, and Zeds*
kiah. At the same time the continuance of tha
kingdom of Judah, and the permanence of tha
dynasty of David, are contrasted with the frequent
changes of dynasty, and the far shorter duration of
the kingdom of Israel, though the latter was the
more populous and powerful kingdom of the two
(9 Sam. xxiv. 9). As regards the affairs of foreign
nations, and the relation of Israel to them, the his-
torical notices in these books, though in the earlier
times scanty, are most valuable, and as has been
lately fully shown (Rawlinson's Bampion Lectures,
1859), in striking accordance with the latest addi-
tions to our knowledge of contemporary profana
history. Thus the patronage extended to Hadad
the Edomlte by Psinaches king of Egypt (1 K. xL
19, 30); the alliance of Solomon with his sn oc t e s o c
Psusennes, who reigned 85 years; the accession of
Shishak, or Sesonchis I., towards the close of Sol-
omon's reign (1 K. xi. 40), and his invasion and
conquest of Judiea in the reign of Reboboam, of
which a monument still exists on the wslls of Kar-
nac (KSnigtb. p. 114); the time of the ^Ethiopian
kings So (Sabak) and Tirhakah, of the 25th dy-
nasty; the rise and speedy fall of the power of
Syria ; the rapid growth of the Assyrian monarch y
which overshadowed it; Assyria's struggles with
Egypt, and the sudden ascendency of the Baby-
lonian empire under Nebuchadnezzar, to the de-
struction both of Assyria and Egypt, as we find
these events in the books of Kings, fit in exactly
with what we now know of Egyptian, Syrian,
Assyrian, and Babylonian history. The names of
Oniri, Jehu, Henshem, Hashes, Hetekiah, etc.,
are believed to have been deciphered in the cunei-
form inscriptions, which also contain pretty full ac-
counts of the campaigns of Tlglath-PUeser, Sargon,
Sennacherib, and Esarhaddon: Shalmaneser's
name has not yet been discovered, though two in-
scriptions in the British Museum are thought to
refer to his reign. These valuable additions to our
knowledge of profane history, which we may hops
will shortly be increased both in number and in
certainty, together with the fragments of ancient
historians, which sre now becoming better under-
stood, are of great assistance in explaining the brief
allusions in these books, while they afford an irre-
fragable testimony to their historical truth.
Another most important aid to a right under-
standing of the history in these books, and to the
filling up of its outline, is to be fourd in the
prophets, and especially in Isaiah and Jeremiah.
In the former the reigns of Ahax and Hezekiah,
and of the contemporary Israelitish and foreign po-
tentates, receive especial illustration; in the Utter,
and to a still greater extent, the reigns of Jehoiakia
and Zedekiah, and those of their heathen contem-
poraries. An intimate acquaintance with these
prophets is of the utmost moment for elucidating
the concise narrative of the books of Kings. The
two together give us a really full view of the events
of the times at home and abroad.
It must, however, be admitted that the chrono-
logical details expressly given in the books of Kings
form a remarkable contrast with their striking hkv
torical accuracy. These details are inexplicable
and frequently entirely conradiotory. Tha vary
Digitized by
Google
KINGS, FIRST AND SECOND BOOKS OK
1545
Ant date of a decided!} ehrouologieal character
which it given, that of the foundation of Solomon's
Temple (1 K. vi. 1), is manifestly erroneous, as
being irreconcilable with any jiew of the chronolo-
gy of the timea of the judges, or with St Paul's
saloulation, Acts xili. 30." It is in fact abandoned
by almost all ehronologists, whatever school they
belong to, whether ancient or modern, and is ut-
terly ignored by Josephus- [Chronology, toL 1.
pp. 4+t-47-] Moreover, when the text is examined,
it immediately appears that this date of 480 years
ia both unnecessary and quite out of place. The
reference to the Exodus is gratuitous, and alien to
all the other notes of time, which refer merely to
Solomon's accession. If it is left out, the text will
be quite perfect without it,* and will agree exactly
with the raumd in v. 37, 38, and also with the
parallel passage in 8 Chr. iii. 8. The evidence
therefore of its being an interpolation is wonder-
fully strong. But if so, it must hare been inserted
by a p ro fe ssed chronologist, whose object was to re-
duce the Scripture history to an exact system of
chronology. It is likely therefore that we shall find
traces of the same hand in other parts of the books.
Now Do Wette (A'mfci*. p. 235), among the evi-
dences which he puts forward as marking the books
of Kings as in his opinion a separate work from
those of Samuel, mentions, though erroneously, as
8 Sam. v. 4, 5 shows, the sudden introduction of
" a chronological system " (die genautr* Zettrteh-
mmg). When therefore we find that the very first
date introduced is erroneous, and that numerous
other dates are also certainly wrong, because con-
tradictory, it seems a not unfair conclusion that
such dates are the work of an interpolator, trying
to bring the history within his own chronological
system : a conclusion somewhat confirmed by the
alterations and omissions of these dates in the
LXX.c As regard*, however, these chronological
difficulties, it must be observed they are of two es-
sentially different kinds. One kind is merely the
want of the data necessary for chronological exact-
ness. Such is the absence, apparently, of any
uniform rule for dealing with the fragments of
years at the beginning and end of the reigns.
Such might sen be a deficiency in the sum of the
regnal years of Israel as compared with the syn-
chronistic years of Judah, caused by unnoticed in-
terregna, if any such really occurred. And this
class of difficulties may probably have belonged to
these books in their original state, in which exact
scientific chronology was not aimed at. But the
other kind of difficulty is of a totally different
character, and embraces dates which are very exact
in their mode of expression, but are erroneous and
contradictory. Some of these are pointed out be-
low; and it Is such which It seems reasonable to
ascribe to the interpolation of later profe s se d chro-
nologitts. But it ia necessary to give specimens of
each of these kinds of difficulty, both with a view to
approximating to a true chronology, and also to show
the actual condition of the books under consideration.
(1.) When we sum up the years of all the reigns
of the kings of Israel its given in the books of Kings.
and then all the years of the reigns of the kings i
af Judah from the 1st of Rehoboam to the 6th of
Hesekith, we find that, instead of the two sums
• The MBS A Bf) havs, however, a dlflamnl rsad-
ne, whujh a adopts! by Ifhraaim [SrsfsUas, and
>»nsa».. . m the fourth year
»«i
agreeing, there is an excess of 19 or SO yean m
Judah — the reigns of the latter amounting to 981
years, while the former make up only 242. Bat
we are able to get somewhat nearer to the seat of
this disagreement, because it so happens that the
parallel histories of Israel and Judah touch in four
or fire points where the synchronisms are precisely
marked. These points are (1) at the simultaneous
accessions of Jeroboam and Rehoboam ; (2) at the
simultaneous deaths of Jeboram and AWi«h, or,
which is the same thing, the simultaneous acces-
sions of Jehu and Athauah: (3) at the 16th year
of Amaziah, which was the 1st of Jeroboam IL
(8 K. xiv. 17); (4) in the reign of Ahaa, which was
contemporary with tome part of Pekah's, namely,
according to the text of 2 K. xvi. 1, the three first
years of Ahaa with the three last of Pekah; and
(5) at the 6th of Heaekiah, which was the 9th of
Hoshea; the two last points, however, being lets
certain than the others, at least aa to the precision
of the synchronisms, depending as this does on the
correctness of the numerals in the text.
Hence, instead of lumping the whole periods of
261 years sod 842 years together, and comparing
their difference, it is clearly expedient to compare
the different sub-periods, which are defined by com-
mon termini. Beginning, therefore, with the sub-
period which commences with the double accession
of Rehoboam and Jeroboam, and closes with the
double death of Ahaxiah and Jchoram, and summing
up the number of years assigned to the different
reigns in each kingdom, we find that the six reigns
in Judah make up 95 years, and the eight reigns in
Israel make up 98 years. Here there is an excess
of 3 years in the kingdom of Israel, which may,
however, be readily accounted for by the frequent
changes of dynasty there, and the probability of
fragments of years being reckoned aa whole years,
thus causing the same year to be reckoned twice
over. The 95 years of Judah, or even a less num-
ber, will hence appear to be the true number of
whole years (see too Clinton, F. H. ii. 314, Ac.).
Beginning, again, at the double accession of Aoha-
liah and Jehu, we have in Judah 7+40+14 first
years of Amaziah = 61, to correspond with 28+17
+16 = 61, ending with the last yew of Jeoeash
in Israel. Starting again with the 15th of Amasiah
= 1 Jeroboam H., we have 15 + 62 + 16 + 3 =
86 (to the 3d year of Ahaa), to correspond with
41 + 1 + 10 +8 + 20 = 74 (to the close of Pekah's
reign), where we at once detect a deficiency on the
part of Israel of (86— 74 =) 18 years, if at least the
3d of Abas really corresponded with the 20th of
Pekah. And lastly, starting with the year follow-
ing that last named, we have 13 last years of Ahaa
+ 7 first of Hezekiah = 20, to correspond with the
9 years of Hoshea, where we find another deficiency
in Israel of 11 years.
The two first of the above periods may then be
said to agree together, and to give 96+ 61 = 166
years from the accession of Rehoboam and Jeroboam
to the 15th of Amasiah in Judah, and the death
of Jehoasb in Israel, and we observe that the dis-
crepance of 18 years first occurs in the third period,
in which the breaking up of the kingdom of Israel
began at the close of Jehu's dynasty. Putting add*
the synchronistic arrangement of the years at ws
of Solomon's nam over Israel* In the
Is the second month, that he began k
of the Lord."
c 8t.lK.xvi. 8, 14. 2% * 1.
month Bf, •Mek
Digitized by
Google
1546
KINGS, PlfiST AND SbuOHD BOOKS OF
now And them in 3 K. zv. ff., there would be no
difficulty whatever in supposing that the reigns of
the kings of Israel at this time were not continuous,
and that for several years after the death of Zach-
ariah, or Shallum, or both, the government may
either hare been in the hands of the king of Syria,
or broken up amongst contending parties, till at
length Henahem was able to establish himself on
the throne by the help of Pul, king of Assyria, and
transmit his tributary throne to his son Prkahiah.
But there is another mode of bringing this third
period into harmony, which violates no historical
probability, and is in tact strongly indicated by the
fluctuations of the text. We are told in 2 K. zr. 8,
that Zachariah began to reign in the 38th of Uzziah,
and (ziv. 33) that his father Jeroboam began to
reign in the 16th of Amaziah. Jeroboam must
therefore have reigned 53 or 68 years, not 11 : for
the idea of an interregnum of 11 or 13 years
between Jeroboam and his son Zachariah is absurd.
But the addition of these 12 years to Jeroboam's
reign exactly equalizes the period in the two king-
doms, which would thus contain 86 years, and
makes up 242 years from the accession of Rehoboam
and Jeroboam to the 3d of Ahaz and 20th of Pekab,
supposing always that these last-named years really
synchronize.
As regards the discrepance of 11 years in the
last period, nothing can in itself be more probable
than that either during some part of Pekah 's life-
time, or after his death, a period, not included in
the regnal years of either Pekah or Hoshea, should
have elapsed, when there was either a state of
anarchy, or the government was administered by an
Assyrian officer. There are also several passages in
the contemporary prophets Isaiah and Hosea, which
would fall in with this view, as Hoe. x. 3, 7; Is. ix.
9-19. But it is impossible to assert peremptorily
that such was the case. The decision must await
some more accurate knowledge of the chronology
of the times from heathen sources. The addition
of these last 20 years makes up for the whole dura-
tion of the kingdom of Israel, 261 or 262 years,
more or less. Now the interval, according to Lep-
lius's tables, from the accession of Sesonchis, or
Shishak, to that of Sabacon, or So (2 K. xvii. 4),
Is 346 years. Allowing Sesonchis to have reigned
7 yean contemporaneously with Solomon, and
Sabaeo, who reigned 12 years," to have reigned
9 before Shalmaneser came up the second time
against Samaria (246 + 7+9 = 261), the chro-
nology of Egypt would exactly tally with that here
given. It may, however, turn out that the time
thus allowed for the duration of the Iaroelitish
monarchy is somewhat too long, and that the time
indicated by the years of the Israelii iah kings,
without any interregnum, is nearer the truth. If
so, a ready way of reducing the sum of the reigns
of the kings of Judah would be to assign 41 years
to that of Uzziah, instead of 62 (as if the numbers
of Uzziah and Jeroboam had been accidentally in-
terchanged): an arrangement which interferes with
no known historical truth, though it would disturb
Jie doubtful synchronism of the 3d of Ahaz with
Ju> 80th of Pekah, and make the 3d of Ahaz cor-
respond with about the 9th or 10th of Pekah.
Indeed it is somewhat remarkable that if we neglect
ibis synchronism, and consider as one the period
• Lepatos, KUnufib. p. 87.
• Lspsfus suggests that
asawbly b* different and -J
i and TJaalah may
■,the
from the accession of Athaliah and Jehn to tin) 711
of Hezekiah and 9th of Hoshea, the sums of the
reigns in the two kingdoms agree exactly, when n
reckon 41 years for Uzziah, and 53 for Jeroboam,
namely, 165 years, or 260 for the whole t-me of the
Israelitish monarchy. Another advantage of this
arrangement would be to reduce the age of Uzziah
at the hirth of his son and heir Jotham from the
improbable age of 49 or 43 to 31 or 83. It may
be added that the date in 2 K. xv. 1, which assigns
the 1st of Uzziah to the 87th of Jeroboam, secma
to indicate that the author of it only reckoned 41
years for Uzziah's reign, since from the 87th of
Jeroboam to the 1st of Pekah is just 41 years (sea
Lepsius's table, KOnigtb. p. 103 »). Also that 2 K.
xvii. 1, which makes the 18th of Anas = 1st of
Hoshea, implies that the 1st of Ahaa = 9th of
Pekah.
(8.) Turning next to the other class of difficulties
mentioned above, the following instances will per-
haps be thought to justify the opinion that the
dates in these books which are intended to establish
a precise chronology are the work of a much hear
hand or hands than the books themselves.
The date in 1 K. vi. 1 is one which is obviously
intended for strictly chronological purposes. If
correct, it would, taken in conjunction with the
subsequent notes of time in the books of Kings,
supposing them to be correct also, give, to a year,
the length of the time from the Exodus to the Baby-
lonian Captivity, and establish a perfect connection
between sacred and profane history. But so little
is this the case, that this date is quit* irreconcilable
with Egyptian history, and is, as stated above, by
almost universal consent rejected by chronoiogists,
even on purely Scriptural grounds. This date is
followed by precise synchronistic definitions of the
parallel reigns of Israel and Judah, the etfeet of
which wouM be, and must have been designed to
be, to supply the want of accuracy in stating the
length of the reigns without reference to the odd
months. But these synchronistic definitions are in
continual discord with the statement of the length
of reigns. According to 1 K. xxii. 51 A i— us,
succeeded Ahab in the 17th year of Jehcahaphat.
But according to the statement of the length of
Ahab's reign in xvi. 29, Ahab died in the 18th of
jehcahaphat; while according to 2 K. i. 17, Jebo-
ram, the son of Ahaziah, succeeded his brother
(after his 2 years' reign) in the second year of
Jehoram the son of Jehoshaphat, though, accord-
ing to the length of the reigns, be most have sac-
seeded in the 18th or 19th of Jehoshaphat (see 8
K. iii. 1), who reigned, in ail, 36 years (1 K. xxii
42). [Jehoram.] As regards jeboram the son
of Jehoshaphat, the statements sre so contradictory
that Archbishop Usher actually makes three distinct
beginnings to his regnal era: the first when he
was made prorex, to meet 2 K. i. 17 ; the second
when he was associated with his father, 6 years
later, to meet 8 K. viii. 16 ; the third when his sole
reign commenced, to meet 1 K. xxii. 60, compared
with 42. Bit as the only purpose of these syn-
chronisms is to give an accurate measure of time,
nothing can be more absurd than to suppose sneh
variations in the time from which the eoaunenes-
ment of the regnal year is dated. It may also her*
be remarked that the whole notim of these joinf
of whom reigned 11 years, and the lanes- aX
beyond the confusion of the t-tuaf than Is
so support suss)
Digitized by
Google
KINGS, FIRST AND SECOND BOOKS OF
1647
tagns has not the smallest foundation in feet, and
mluskily does not come into play in the only cues
■here there might be an; historical probability of
their having occuned, at in the case of Asa's illness
sad Uniah'a leprosy. From the length if Ama-
siah's reign, as given 8 K. xiv. 8, 17, 23, it is
manifest that Jeroboam II. began to reign in the
15th year of Amaziah, and that Uzziah began to
reign in the 16th of Jeroboam. But i K. xv. 1
peaces the commencement of Utziah's reign in the
17th of Jeroboam, and the accession of Zachariah
«= the dose of Jeroboam's reign, in the 88th of
Uzziah — statements utterly contradictory and
hreconeilable.
Other grave chronological difficulties seem to
bare Iheir source in the same erroneous calculations
on the part of the Jewish chronologist. For ex-
ample, one of the cuneiform inscriptions tells us
that Menahem paid tribute to Assyria in the 8th
year of Tigiath-Pileser (RawL Herod, i. 469), and
the same inscription passes on directly to speak of
the overthrow of Kezin, who we know was Pekah's
ally. Now this Is scarcely compatible with the
supposition that the remainder of Menahem's reign,
the 3 years of Pekahiah, and 18 or 19 years of
Pekah's reign intervened, as must have been the
ease according to 2 K. xvi. 1, xv. 32. But if the
invasion of Judaa was one of the early acts of
Pekah's reign, and the destruction of Kezin fol-
lowed soon after, then we should have a very intel-
ligible course of events as follows. Menahem paid
bis last tribute to Assyria in the 8th of Tigiath-
Pileser, his suzerain (2 K, xv. 19), which, as he
reigned for some time under Pul, and only reigned
10 years in all, we may assume to hare been his
•wn last year. On the accession of his son Peka-
hiah, Pekah, one of his captains, rebelled against
him, made an alliance with Kezin king of Syria to
throw off the yoke of Assyria, in the course of a
few months dethroned and killed Pekahiah, and
reigned in his stead, and rapidly followed up his
success by a joint expedition against Judah, the
object of which was to set up a king who should
strengthen his hands in his rebellion against
Assyria. The king of Assyria, on learning this,
and receiving Abaz's message for help, immediately
marches to Syria, takes Damascus, conquers and
kills Kezin, invades Israel, and carries away a large
body of captives (2 K. xv. 29), and leaves Pekah to
reign as tributary king over the enfeebled remnant,
till a conspiracy deprived him of his life. Such a
course of events would be consistent with the
cuneiform inscription, and with everything in the
Scripture narrative, except the synchronistic ar-
rangement of the reigns. Bat of course it is
impossible to affirm that the above was the true
state of the esse. Only at present the text and
the Cuneiform inscription do not agree, and few
people will be satisfied with the explanation sug-
gested by Mr. Rawllnson, that "the official who
vmposed, or the workman who engraved, the
.Assyrian document, made a mistake in the name,"
and pot Menahem when be should have put Pekah
{Ansa*. Led. pp. 188, 409; Herod i. 468-471).
Again: "Scripture peaces only 8 years between
Ike fall of Samaria and the first invasion of Judaje
■J) Sennaeberib " (i. e. from the 6th to the 14th of
Hezekiah). " The inscriptions (cuneiform) assign-
ing the fall of Samaria to the first year of Sargon
giving Sargon a reign of at itatl 15 years, and
assigning the first attack on Hezekiah to Sennach-
erib's third year, put an interval of at least 18
years between the two events" (RawL Herod, i.
479). This interval is further shown by reference
to the canon of Ptolemy to have amounted in fact
to 22 years. Again, Lepsius (KSnigtk. p. 95-97)
shows with remarkable force of argument that the
14th of Hezekiah could not by possibility fall
earlier than n. c 692, with reference to Tirhakah's
accession ; but that the additional date of the 3d
of Sennacherib furnished by the cuneiform inscrip-
tions, coupled with the fact given by Berosus, that
the year b. c. 693 was the year of Sennacherib's
accession, fixes the year B. c. 691 as that of Sennach-
erib's invasion, and consequently as the 14th of
Hezekiah. But from B. o. 691 to H. o. 686, when
Jerusalem was destroyed by Nebuchadnezzar, is an
interval of only 106 years ; whereas the sum of the
regnal years of Judah for the same interval amounts
to 125 years.' From which calculations it neces-
sarily follows, both that there is an error in those
figures in the book of Kings which assign the
relative positions of the destruction of Samaria and
Sennacherib's invasion, and also in those which meas-
ure the distance between the invasion of Sennach-
erib and the destruction of Jerusalem. It should,
however, be noted that there is nothing to fix the
fall of Samaria to the reign of Hezekiah but the
statement of the synchronism ; and 2 Chr. xxx. 6,
18, (to., seems rather to indicate that the kingdom
of Israel had quite ceased in the 1st of Hezekiah.
Many other numbers have the same stamp of incor-
rectness. Rehoboam's age is given as 41 at his
accession, 1 K. xiv. 21, and yet we read at 2 Chr.
xiii. 7, that he was " young and tender-hearted "
when he came to the throne. Moreover, if 41 when
he became king, he must have been born before
Solomon came to the throne, which seems improb-
able, especially in connection with his Ammonitish
mother. In the apocryphal passage moreover in
the Cod. Vat. of the LXX., which follows 1 K.
xii. 24, his age is said to hare been 16 at his
accession, which is much more probable. Accord-
ing to the statement in 2 K. xv. 33, compared with
ver. 2, Uzziah's son and heir Jotham was not born
till his father was 42 years old ; and according to
2 K. xxi. 1, oompared with ver. 19, Manasseh'a
son and heir Amon was not born till his father was
in his 45th year. Still more improbable is the
statement in 2 K. xviii. 2, compared with xvi. 2,
which makes Hezekiah to have been born when his
father was 11 years old : a statement which Bocbart
has endeavored to defend with his usual vast erudi-
tion, but with little success (Opera, I. 921). But
not only does the incorrectness of the numbers
testify against their genuineness, but in some pas-
sages the structure of the sentence seems to betray
the fact of a later insertion of the chronological
element. We have seen one instance in 1 K. vi. 1.
In like manner at 1 K. xiv. 31, xv. 1, 2, we can
see that at some time or other xv. 1 has been
inverted between the two other verses. So again
ver. 9 has been inserted between 8 and 10; and XT
24 must have once stood next to xxii. 42, as xxH
• lans tns propas ss rsdnanf the reign of Himih o» his father ' s life. Mr. Besanqnet would tower the
• 16 years. He ob s erve s with truth the improve- j date of the dsstrueBon of Jsrosahm to the year a. o,
assy taT Amoa bavins bean bora In the 46th year 660.
Digitized by
Google
1648 KINGS,
W did to 2 K. viii. 17, at which time the corrupt
ler. 16 had no existence. Yet more manifestly
viii. 24, 26, were once consecutive Tenet, though
the; ere now parted by 25, which Is repeated, with
a variation in the numeral, at ix. 29. So aha xri.
1 has been interposed between xt. 88 and xri. 2.
xviii. 2 is consecutive with xvi. 20. But the plain-
art instance of all is 2 K. xl. 21, xii. 1 (xii. 1 ff.,
Tleb.), where the words •• In the seventh year of
Jehu, Jeboash began to reign," could not possibly
have formed part of the original sentence, which
nay be seen in its integrity 2 Cbr. xxiv. 1. The
disturbance caused in 2 K. xii. by the intrusion of
this clause is somewhat disguised in the LXX. and
the A. V. by the division of Heb. xii. 1 into two
verses, and separate chapters, but is still palpable.
A similar instance is pointed out by Hovers in 9
gam. v., where ver. 8 and 6 are parted by the
introduction of ver. 4, 6 (p. 190). But the diffi-
culty remains of deciding in which of the above
eases the insertion was by the hand of the original
compiler, and in which by a later chronologist
Now when to all this we add that the pages of
Josephus are full, in like manner, of a multitude
of inconsistent chronological schemes, which prevent
his being of any use, in spite of Hales's praises, in
clearing up chronological difficulties, the proper in-
ference seems to be, that no authoritative, correct,
systematic chronology was originally contained in
the books of Kings, and that the attempt to supply
such afterwards led to the introduction of many
erroneous dates, and probably to the corruption of
some true ones which were originally there. Cer-
tainly the present text contains what are either
conflicting calculations of antagonistic chronokgists,
or errors of careless copyists, which no learning or
ingenuity has ever been able to reduce to the con-
sistency of truth.
II. The peculiarities of diction In them, and other
features in their literary history, may be briefly dis-
posed of. The words noticed by De Wette, § 185,
as indicating their modern date, are the following:
V)K for fJN, 1 K. xiv. 2. (But this form is also
fcund in Jiidg. xvii. 2, Jer. iv. 30, Ez. xxxvi. 18,
and not once in the later books. ) VT1N for VIS,
jli. 15. (But this form of riH is found in Lev,
xr. 18, 24; Josh. xiv. 12; 2 Sam. xxiv. 24; Is. lix.
11; Jer. x. 6, xii. 1, xix. 10, xx. 11, xxxv. 2; Ex,
xiv. 4, xxvii. 26.) DW^ for Dttfy 1 K. ix. 8
(But Jer. xix. 8, xlix. 17, are identical in phrase
and orthography.) H^ for D" 1 ??, 9 K. xl. 18.
(But everywhere else in Kings, e. g. 3 K. xi. 6, Ac,
D^S^, which is also universal in Chronicles, an
avowedly later book; and ben, as In l" 1 ?^?, 1 K.
xi. 83, there la every appearance of the J being a
clerical error for the copulative 1 ; see Thenius, I e.)
niyit?, 1 K. xx. 14. (But this word occurs
Lam. i. l,and there is every appearance of its being
a technical word in 1 K. xx. 14, and therefore as
aid as the reign of Ahab.) ~6 for "l^h, 1 K.
tv.22. (But "13isusedbyE».xlv.l4,andiomer
FIK8T AND 8BOONP BOOKS OF
• Bee Kodlgsr's Seam. flee. Bnmun. ang. tr. a. 6 ;
tall, tftroa. p. 40.
srems to have been then already obsolete.) L/" iT
1 K. xxl. 8, 11. (Occurs in Is. and Jer.) 2H,
2 K. xxv. 8. (But as the term evidently came hi
with the Chaldees, as seen in Rab-shskeh, Bab-saris
Rab-mag, its application to the Chaldee general is
no evidence of a time later than the person to whom
the title is given.) Dbtl?, 1 K. viii. 61, Ac. (But
there is not a shadow of proof that this expression
belongs to late Hebr. It is found, among other
places, in Is. xxxviii. 3; a passage against the au-
thenticity of which there is also not a shadow of
proof, except upon the presumption that prophetic
intimations and supernatural interventions on the
part of God are impossible.) Vstpn, 3 K. xvffi.
7. (On what grounds this word is' adduced it is
impossible to guess, since it occurs in this sense in
Josh., Is., Sam., and Jer. : vid. Gesen.) j'TTTOa,
SK.xvUi.19. (fc.xxxvi.4,EccMx.4.) /T"piT t
2 K. xviii. 26. (But why should not a Jtm, la.
Hezekiah's reign, as well as in the time of Nehe-
miah, have called his mother-tongue " the Jaaf
language," in opposition to the Aramann t There
was nothing in the Babylonish Captivity to give it
the name, if it had it not before ; nor is there a single
earlier instance — Is. xix. 18 might have furnished
one — of any name given to the language spoken
by all the Israelites, and which in later times was
called Hebrew: 'E$pa2<rrl, Prolog. Ecclus.; Lnka
xxiii. 38; John v. 2, Ac.)« ng tt^tpD ->§"*,
2 K. xxv. 6. (Frequent in Jer. iv. 12, xxxix. 6,
Ac.) Tbeod. Parker adds Ting (see,too, Thenina,
EinL i 6), 1 K. x. 16, xx. 24;' 2 K. xviii. 84, on
the presumption probably of its being of Persian
derivation ; bnt the etymology and origin of the
word are quite uncertain, and it is repeatedly used
in Jer. II., as well as Is. xxxvi. 9. With better
reason might rTTJl have been adduced, 1 K. xii
83. The expression "ingn T^J, In 1 K. tr. 94
is also a difficult one to form an impartial opinion
about It is doubtful, ss De Wette admits, whether
the phrase necessarily implies its being used by one
to the east of the Euphrates, because the use varies
in Num. xxxii. 19, xxxv. 14; Josh. i. 14 ff, v. 1,
xii. 1, 7, xxil. 7; 1 Chr. xxvl. 80; Dent. i. 1, 6,
Ac. It is also conceivable that the phrase might
be used as a mere geographical designation by those
who belonged to one of " the provinces beyond the
river " subject to Babylon : and at the time of the
destruction of Jerusalem, Judasa had been such a
province for at least 23 years, and probably longer.
We may safely affirm therefore, that on the whole
the peculiarities of diction in these books do not
indicate a time after the Captivity, or towards the
close of it, but on the contrary point pretty dis-
tinctly to the age of Jeremiah. And it may be
added, that the marked and systematic di ffia encss
between the language of Chronicles and that of
Kings, taken with the fact that all attempts to prove
the Chronicles later than Ears have utterly failed,
lead to the same conclusion. (See many examples
in Hovers, p. 900 ff.) Other peculiar or rare ex-
pressions in these books are the proverbial ones.
~PP$ rftt??Qi fowl °ory In them and In
Sam.'xxv. 22, 84, "slept with Us fathers," 'U>
that dieth in the city, the dogs shall eat,' eta.
Digitized by
Google
KINGS, FIRST AND SECOND BOOKS OF
4. JtJOV*, "a pular," 16.
bj* nfyyi nb, ik.il as, 4c; «i» rrnij,
1 K. i. 41, 46; elsewhere only in poetry, and in the
wmposition of proper names, except Deut ii. 36.
nbbv,L9. on^3, «fcwi,"iT.28. nVnr*,
» stalls," t. 6 ; a Chr. ix. 86. DO H^H, t. 18,
ix. 15, XL SBO, "a itone-qoerrj " (Geeen.),
H.7. ">3?b, tL 17. WnV.lS- D-'S^and
riVBflB, " wild cucumbers," vi. 18, vH. 84, 8 K.
It. 89. nj|7D, x. 88; the namea of the month*
D'OijH, Tui a, it, bra, ri. 87, 88. rrja,
"to invent," xU. 88, Neb, vi 8, in both eases
Joked with aba. fl^bpB, « an idol," it. 18.
-1^3 and "TO3T, followed by ^q& » to de-
itrey," xiv. 10, xri. 8, xxL 81. O^yj, -joinU
at the armor," xxtL 84. TW, " a pursuit," xviii.
87. *1iT| " to bead one's aelf," xviii 48, 3 K. iv.
84, 36. DJOJ, "to gird up," xviiL 46. "lgfe?,
••a bead-band," xx. 38, 41. p3J&, « to 10006,"
xx. 10. B^n, Incert signil xx. 33. n$y
nyib», "to reign," xxL 7. HTTb?, "a dish,"
a k. a. ao. ob}, «to fold up," ». 8. n^b,
>i herdsman," liL 4, Am. i. 1. TpDr*, "an
siWonp," It. 8. b^ "OJ!, » to baTe a care for,"
18; TlV, '« to sneeae," 36; flbi??, " a bag," 43.
CHT^, "» money-bag," t. 83. TIJOO. "an
encamping" (?) ri. 8; JTJS, "a feast," 88;
niTfy "deaeending," 9; aj?, «» cab," 85; 'HQ
D V>\ » dove's dung," a. "^PO, P»*ap« " *
ay-net," via. 15. EQ% (In sense of « aelf," aa in
Chald. and Samar.), ix. 13. "I'd?, "a heap,"
t. 8; nrlJJI 1 ?©, "a Teatry," 23; n^Tiqfl, «a
draught-house," 87. *HS» " Cherethitee," xL 4,
19, and 8 Sam. xx. 83, Cethib. n^O, " a keeping
off," xL 6. ISO, "an aequaintanoe," xU. 6.
The form "f\\ from TTP, « to shoot," xfll. 17.
n'Ta^BJEin ""SS, "hostages," xIt. 14, 8 Chr.
«T. 84 JTlf^rin /T3, "aiek houae," xt.
I, 8 Chr. xxvi. 81. baij, "before," xr. 10.
ptpPVl, "Damaaene," xvi. 10 (perhapa only a
false reading). n^S^Q, " a pavement," xri. 17.
;I5-1D, or TI5 , & " a oorered way," xri. 18.
M^inPIh. «todoeeeretly,"xvil. 9. n^tfg,
vlth \ 16, only besides Deut. vii. 6, MJe. v. 14.
H73, i. q. H75, xvii 81 (Cethib). DO^Ofr',
m," 86. IW^n?, " Namahtan," xviiL
1519
ttfTJQ
"to make peace," 31, la. xxxri. 16.
" that which growa up the third year," xix. 29, la
xxxviL 30. /lbj fTa, "treeaure-houee," xx.
18, la. xxxix. 8. iTJlJJI?, part of Jerusalem as
called, xxiL 14, Zeph. I. 10, Neb, xL 9. n'lbjO,
"signs of the Zodiac," xxiiL 5. "Y|"1§, » a aub-
urb," xxiiL 11. B^aSl, "ploughmen," xxt. 18
(Cethib). N|ttf, for HJQ7, " to change," xxt. 80.
To which may be added the architectural terms in
1 K. vi., vii., and the names of foreign idols in 8
K. xvii. The general character of the language ia,
most distinctly, that of the time before the Baby-
lonish Captivity. But it ia worth consideration
whether some traces of dialectic varieties in Judah
and Israel, and of an earlier admixture of Syriasma
in the language of Israel, may not be discovered in
those portions of these books which refer to the
kingdom of Israel. Aa regards the text, it is far
from being perfect Besides the errors in numerals,
some of which are probably to be traced to this
source, such passages as 1 K. xv. 6, v. 10, com-
pared with v. 3; 2 K. xv. 30, viii. 16, xvii. 84, are
manifest corruptions of transcribers. In some in-
stances (he parallel passage in Chronicles corrects
the error, as 1 K. iv. 26 is corrected by 2 Chr. ix.
25; 2 K. xiv. 81, 4c., by 8 Chr. xxvi. 1, Ac. So
the probable misplacement of the section 2 K. xxiiL
4-20 ia corrected by 2 Chr. xxxiv. 3-7. The sub-
stitution of Axariah for TJzziah in 2 K. xiv. 21,
and throughout 2 K. xv. 1-30, except rer. 13, fol-
lowed by the use of the right name, Uzziah, in w.
30, 82, 34, is a very curious circumstance. In
Isaiah, in Zechariah (xiv. 6), and in the Chronicles
(except 1 Chr. iiL 18), it ia uniformly Czdah.
Perhaps no other cause ia to be sought than the
dose resemblance betweem TV*fS and n ,_ lT5,
and the fact that the latter name, Atariah, might
suggest itself more readily to a Levities! scribe.
There can be little doubt that Uzziah was the
king's true name, Azariah that of the high-priest.
(But see Thenius on 1 K. xiv. 31.)
In connection with these literary peculiarities
may be mentioned also some remarkable variations
in the version of the LXX. These consist of (r ow s
potitiont, omtanoiu, and some considerable adai-
tioiu, of all which Thenius gives some useful notices
in his Introduction to the books of Kings.
The most important tratupotitiont are the hie-
tory of Shtmei's deuth, 1 K, ii. 36-46, which in
the LXX. (Cod. Vat) comes after Hi. 1, and
divers scraps from chaps, iv. , v., and ix., accompanied
by one or two remarks of the translators.
The sections 1 K. iv. 20-25, 8-6, 26, 31, 1, are
strung together and precede 1 K. Hi. 2-28, but are
many of them repeated again in their proper
places.
The eectiona 1 K. Hi. 1, ix. 16, 17, are strung
together, and placed between It. 84 and t. 1.
The section 1 K. vii. 1-12 is placed after vU. U.
Section viU. 18, 18, is placed after 53.
Section ix. 15-22 is placed after x. 22.
Section xi. 48, xu. 1, 2, 8, is much transposed
and confused in LXX. xi. 43, 44, xU. 1-3.
Section xiv. 1-21 ia placed in the midst of the
bug; addition to Chr. xU. mentioned below.
Digitized by
Google
1550
KINGS, FIBST AND SECOND BOOKS OF
Section nil. 43-50 U placed after xvi. 98. Chap*.
n. and xzi. are transposed.
Section a K. iii. 1-3 is placed after 2 K. i. 18.
The omittumi are few.
Section 1 K. vi. 11-14 is entirely omitted, and
37, 38, are only slightly alluded to at the opening
of ch. iii. The erroneous clause 1 K. xv. 6 is
omitted; and so are the datea of Asa'a reign in
xvi. 8 and 15; and there are a few verbal omissions
of no consequence.
'lie chief interest Iks in the euiditiotu, of which
the principal are the following. The supposed
mention of a fountain as among Solomon's works
b the Temple in the passage after 1 K. ii. 85 ; of
a pared causeway on Lebanon, iii. 46 ; of Solomon
pointing to the sun at the dedication of the Temple,
before he uttered the prayer, " The Lord said he
would dwell in the thick darkness," etc., viii. 12,
13 (after 53 I AX.), with a reference to the
8l0Kwr T7js »Sq;, a passage on which Tbanius
relies as proving that the Alexandrian had access
to original documents now lost; the information
that "Joram his brother" perished with Tibui,
ivi. 22; an additional date, "in the 24th year
of Jeroboam," xr. 8; numerous verbal additions,
as xi. 29, xvii. 1, Ac. ; and lastly the long pas-
sage concerning Jeroboam the son of Nebat, in-
serted between xii. 24 and 25. There are also
many glosses of the translator, explanatory, or
necessary in consequence of transpositions, as e. g.
1 K. ii. 35, viii. 1, xi. 43, xvii. 20, xix. 2, Ac. Of
the above, from the recapitulatory character of the
passage after 1 K. ii. 36, containing in brief the
sum of the things detailed in ch. vii. 21-23, it seems
far more probable that KPHNHN THS ATAH2 is
only a corruption of KPINON TOT AIAAM, there
mentioned. The obscure passage about Lebanon
after ii. 48, seems no less certainly to represent
what in the Heb. is ix. 18, 19, as appears by the
triple concurrence of Tadmor, Lebanon, and Suva-
ffTfVfMra, representing IFl/E^p. The strange
mention of the sun seems to be introduced by the
translator to give significance to Solomon's mention
of the House which he had built for God, who had
said He would dwell in the thick darkneu ; not
therefore under the unveiled light of the sun ; and
the reference to " the book of song " can surely
mean nothing else than to point out that the pas-
sage to which Solomon referred was Pa. xcvii. 9.
Of the other additions the mention of Tibni's
brother Joram is the one which has most the sem-
blance of an historical feet, or makes the existence
of any other source of history probable. See too
1 K. xx. 19, 2 K. xv. 25. There remains only the
long passage about Jeroboam. That this account
Is only an apocryphal version made up of the exist-
bg materials in the Hebrew Scriptures, after the
Banner of 1 Esdras, Bel and the Dragon, the apocry-
phal Esther, the Targums, etc., may be inferred on
the following grounds. The framework of the story
I given in the very words of the Hebrew narrative,
and that very copiously, and the new matter is only
worked in here and there. Demonstrably therefore
the Hebrew account existed when the Greek one was
framed, and was the original one. The principal
■ew facts introduced, the marriage of Jeroboam to
the sister of Shishak's wife, and his request to be
prrmitled to return, is a manifest imitation of the
« 1 later tale of Solomon's wisdom, to Imitation of
Be judgment of the two women, told in the Talmud,
story of Hadad. The misplacement of the share
of Abgah's sickness, and the visit of Jeroboam's
wife to Ahyah the Shikmite, makes the whole
history out of keeping — the '"■g"'— of the queen,
the rebuke of Jeroboam's idolatry (which b ao»
oordingly left out from Ahyah'i prophecy, as b
the mention at v. 2 of his having told Jeroboam ha
should be king), and the king's anxiety about the
recovery of his son and heir. The embellishments
of the story, Jeroboam's chariots, the amplifica-
tion of Abgah's address to Ano, the request asked
of Pharaoh, the new garment not toothed m water,
are precisely such as an embroiderer would add, asj
we may see by the apocryphal books above cited.
Then the fusing down the three Hebrew naraen
iTjn?, nyn?, and rrSTT), into oafiapip*,
thus giving the same name to the mother of Jero-
boam, and to the city where she dwelt, shows how
comparatively modern the story ia, and bow com-
pletely of Greek growth. A yet plainer indication
is the confounding Shemaiah of 1 K. xii. 22, with
Sbemaiah the Nebelamite of Jer. xxix. 24, 31, and
putting Ahgah's prophecy into his mouth. For
beyond all question 'ZvXapi, 1 K. xii., is only
another form of AiAcui/twi (Jer. xxxvi. 21, LXX.).
Then again the story is self-contradictory. For if
Jeroboam's child Abijam was not born till a year
or so after Solomon's death, how could " any good
thing toward the Lord God of Israel " have been
found in him before Jeroboam became king? The
one thing in the story that is non like truth than
the H^rew narrative ia the age given to Reboboam,
16 yean, which may have been pre s erved in the
MS. which the writer of this romance had before
him. The calling Jeroboam's mother yvrb wiprq
Instead of yvvij xbpa, was probably accidental.
On the whole then it appears that the great va-
riations in the LXX. contribute little or nothing to
the elucidation of the history contained in then
books, nor much even to the text The Hebrew
text and arrangement b not in the least shaken ia
its main points, nor is there the slightest cloud cast
on the accuracy of the history, or the truthfulness
of the prophecies contained in it. But these varia-
tions illustrate a characteristic tendency of the
Jewish mind to make interesting portions of the
Scriptures the groundwork of separate religious
tales, which they altered or added to according to
their fancy, without any regard to history or chro-
nology, and in which they exercised a peculiar kind
of ingenuity in working up the Scripture materials,
or in inventing circumstances calculated as they
thought to make the main history more probable.
The story of Zenibbabel's answer in 1 Eadr. about
truth, to prepare the way for his mission by Darius ;
of the discovery of the imposture of Bel's priests
by Daniel, in Bel and the Dragon; of Hordecai's
dream in the Apocr. Esther; sod the paragraph in
the Talmud inserted to connect 1 K. xvi. 34, with
xvii. 1 (Smith's Saer. Aim., vol. ii. p. 421), are
instances of this. And the reign of Solomon, "
and the remarkable rise of Jeroboam were not un-
likely to exercise this propensity of the Hellenistic
Jews. It is to the existence of such works that
the variations in the LXX. account of Solomon
and Jeroboam may most probably be attributed.
Another feature in the literary condition of on
books must just be noticed, namely that the t^t
may be sen In Owintitia qfl&ttattn, L28S
Talmud nonadna many more.
Digitized by
Google
KINGS, FIRST AND SECOND BOOKS OF
1551
II arranging hi* materials, and adopting the very
nurd* of the documents used by him, has not always
been careful to avoid the appearance of contradic-
tion. Thua the mention of the stavea of the ark
remaining in their place " unto this day," 1 K.
viii. 8, does not accord with the account of the de-
struction of the Temple 3 K. xxv. 0. The mention
of Elijah as the only prophet of the Lord left, 1 K.
xviit 83, zix. 10, hi* an appearance of disagree-
ntent with xx. 13, 38, 36, Ac, though xviii. 4,
zix. 18, supply, it is brae, a ready answer. In
1 K. xxi. 13, only Naboth ia mentioned, while in
8 K. ix. 26, his sons are added. The prediction
in 1 hi. xix. 16-17 baa no perfect fulfillment in the
following chapters. 1 K. xxii. 38 does not seem
to be a fulfillment of xxi. 19." The declaration in
1 K. ix. 22 does not seem in harmony with xi. 38.
There are also some singular repetitions, u IK.
xiv. 31 compared with 31 ; 3 K. ix. 29 with viii.
36; xir 16, 16 with xiii. 19, 13. But it is enough
just to hare pointed these out, as no real difficulty
can be found in them.
III. As regards the authorship of these books,
but little difficulty presents itself. The Jewish
tradition which ascribes them to Jeremiah, ia borne
out by the strongest internal evidence, in addition
to that of the language. The last chapter, espe-
cially as compared with the last chapter of the
Chronicles, bears distinct traces of owing been
written by one who did not go into captivity, but
remained in Judaea, after the destruction of the
Temple. This suits Jeremiah. 6 The events singled
out for mention in the concise narrative, are pre-
cisely those of which he had personal knowledge,
and in which he took special interest. The famine
in 3 K. xxv. 3 was one which had nearly coat Jere-
miah his life (Jer. xxxviii. 9). The capture of the
city, the flight and capture of Zedekiah, the judg
ment and punishment of Zedekiah and his sous at
Biblah, are related in 3 K. xiv. 1-7, in almost the
Identical words which we read in Jer. xxxix. 1-7.
So are the breaking down and burning of the Tem-
ple, the king's palace, and the houses of the great
men, the deportation to Babylon of the fugitives
and the surviving inhabitants of Jerusalem and
Judaea. The intimate knowledge of what Nebuzar-
adau did, both in respect to those selected for capi-
tal punishment, and those carried away captive, and
loose poor whom he left in the land, displayed by
the writer of 3 K. xxr. 11, 13, 18-31, is fully ex-
lained by Jer. xxxix. 10-14, it 1-5, where we
« For a discussion of this dUBcnlty hi Naboth, Jts-
us> The simplest explanation is that Naboth was
stoned at Samaria, since we find the alders of Jesrael at
Bamarla, 2 K. x. 1. Thus both the spot when
Naboth's blood flowed, and his vineyard at Jesrael,
vers the scene of righteous retribution.
• De Wette cites from Havarnkk and Movers, 1 K.
I. 8, 9, oomp. with Jer. xxU. 8 ; 3 K. xvil. 18, 14,
eomp. with Jer. vU. 13, 24 ; 3 K. xxi. 12, amp. with
Jer. xix. 8 ; and the Identity of Jer. lit with 2 K. xxlv.
18 ft"., xxv., as the strongest passages in favor of
Jeremiah's authorship, which, however, he repudiates,
on the ground that 2 K. xxv. 27-80 couk. not have
*esn written by hiin. A weaker ground ean scarcely
he Imagined. Jer. xv. 1 may also be cited as oon
eeettns: the compilation of the books of Samoa 1 with
Jeremiah. Compare further 1 K. viii. 61 witr Jer.
xt4.
c Thr last four verses, relative to Jeholaohin, an
eaoally a supplement whether added by the author ur
by arms later hand. There is nothing Impossible In
the supposition of Jeremiah having survived till the
read that Jeremiah was actually one of the captives
who followed Nebuzar-adan as far as Ramah, and
was very kindly treated by him. The careful enu-
meration of the pillars and of the sacred vessels of
the Temple which were plundered by the Chal
(beans, tallies exactly with the prediction of Jere-
miah concerning them, xxvii. 19-32. The paragraph
concerning the appointment of Gedaliah as governor
of the remnant, and his murder by Ishmael, aid
the flight of the Jews into Egypt, is merely an
abridged account of what Jeremiah tells us more
fully, xl.-xliii. 7, and are events in which he wan
personally deeply concerned. The writer in King*
has nothing more to tell us concerning the Jews o*
Chaldees in the land of Judah, which exactly
agrees with the hypothesis that he is Jeremiah,
who we know was carried down to Egypt with the
fugitives. In fact, the date of the writing and the
position of the writer seem as clearly marked by
the termination of the narrative at v. 28, as in the
ease of the Acts of the Apostles.' It may be
added, though the argument is of less weight,
that the annexation of this chapter to the writings
of Jeremiah so as to form Jer. lit (with the addi-
tional clause contained 38-30), is an evidence of a
very ancient, if not a contemporary belief, that
Jeremiah was the author of it. Again, the special
mention of Seraiah the high-priest, and Zephan-
iah, the second priest, as slain by Nebuzar-
adan (v. 18), together with three other priests,* is
very significant when taken in connection with Jer.
xxi. 1, xxix. 25-39, passages which show that Zeph-
aniah belonged to the faction which opposed the
prophet, a faction which was headed by priests and
false prophets (Jer. xxvi. 7, 8, 11, 18). Going
back to the xxivth chapter, we find in ver. 14 aa
enumeration of the captives taken with Jehoiachin
identical with that in Jer. xxiv. 1 ; in ver. 13, •
reference to the vessels of the Temple precisely
similar to that in Jer. xxvii. 18-30, xxviii. 8, 8,
and in w. 3, 4, a reference to the idolatries and
bloodshed of Manaaseh very similar to those in Jer.
ii. 34, xix. 4-8, Ac., a reference which also con-
nects ch. xxiv. with xxt 6, 13-16. In ver. 3 the
enumeration of the hostile nations, and the refer-
ence to the prophets of God, point directly to
Jer. xxv. 9, 30, 21, and the reference to Pharaoh
Necho in ver. 7 points to ver. 19, and to xlvi.
1-12. Brief as the narrative is, it brings out
all the chief points in the political events of the
time which we know were much in Jeremiah's
87th of Jehoiaebln's captivity, though he would have
bean between 80 and 90. Then is something touch
log in the Idea of this gleam of Joy having reached
the prophet in his old sge, and of his having added
these frw words to his long-finished history of his
d These priests, of very high rank, called 'HOB/
F)97Ji « asepsis of the door," i. s. of the three prin-
cipal entrances to the Temple, an not to be con-
founded with the porters, who wen Levitee. We an
expressly told la 2 K. xU. 10 (9, A. T.) that these
« keepers " wen priests. 2 K. xxii. 4, xxlii. 4, with
sit 10 and xxv. 18, dearly point out the rank of
these oaken as next In dignity to the second priest, or
sagan. [Hies-PansT, vol. II. p. 1089.] Joeephns calk
them row ^vXunrorrac t* itpor irfixiw. The ex-
pression *)§n V T£}&7\ •» however also applied Is
the Levites In 2 OhrTxzxlT. 9, 1 (tor. ix. 19 [Eets
Digitized by
Google
1552
KINGS, FIBST AND SECOND BOOKS OF
mind; and yet, which ii exceedingly remarkable,
Jeremiah ia never once named (as he ia in 3 Chr.
ixxvi. 12, 21), although the manner of the writer
■ frequently to connect the Bufferings of Judah
with their sins and their neglect of the Word of
God, S K. xvii. IS K, sir. 8, 8, Ac And this
leads to another striking coincidence between that
portion of the history which belongs to Jeremiah's
times, and the writings of Jeremiah himself. De
Wette speaks of the superficial character of the
history of Jeremiah's times as hostile to the theory
of Jeremiah's authorship. Now, considering the
nature of these annaln, and their conciseness, this
criticism seems very unfounded as regards the reigns
of Josiah, Jehoahax, Jehoiachin, and Zedekiah. It
must, however, be acknowledged that as regards
Jehoiakim's reign, and especially the latter part of
it, and the way in which be came by his death, the
narrative is much more meagre than one would
have expected from a contemporary writer, living
on the spot. But exactly the same paucity of infor-
mation ia found in those otherwise copious notices of
contemporary events with which Jeremiah's proph-
ecies are interspersed. Let any one open, e. g,
Townsend's " Arrangement," or Geueste's « Par-
allel llittoriet," and he will see at a glance how
remarkably little light Jeremiah's narrative or
prophecies throw upon the latter part of Jehoiakim's
reign. The cause of this silence may be difficult
to assign, but whatever it was, whether absence
from Jerusalem, possibly on the mission described,
Jer. xiii.,' or imprisonment, or any other impedi-
ment, it operated equally on Jeremiah and on the
writer of 2 K. xxiv. When it is borne in mind
that the writer of 2 K. was a contemporary writer,
and, if not Jeremiah, most Lave had independent
means of information, this coincidence will have
great weight.
Going back to the reign of Josiah, in the niii.
and xxii. chapters, the connection of the destruction
of Jerusalem with Manasseh's transgressions, and
the comparison of it to the destruction of Samaria,
vv. 28, 27, lead us back to xxi. 10-13, and that
passage leads us to Jer. vii. 15, xv. 4, xix. 8, 4, Ac.
The particular account of Josiah's passover, and
his other good works, the reference in w. 21, 2fi
to the law of Hoses, and the finding of the Book
by Hilkiah the priest, with the fuller account of
that discovery in ch. xxii., exactly suit Jeremiah,
who began his prophetio office in the 13th of
Josiah ; whose xith chap, refers repeatedly to the
book thus found ; and who showed his attachment
to Josiah by writing a lamentation on his death
(2 Chr. xxxv. 25), and whose writings show how
nuch he made use of the copy of Deuteronomy so
found. [Jeremiah, Hilkiah.] With Josiah's
reign (although we may even in earlier times hit
apon occasional resemblances, such for instance as
be silence concerning Manasseh's repentance in
ooth), necessarily cease all strongly marked char-
acters cf Jeremiah's authorship. For though the
general unity and continuity of plan (which, as
already observed, pervades not only the books of
Kings, but those of Samuel, Rath, and Judges
likewise,) lead us to assign the whole history In a
certain sense to one author, and enable us to carry
<» The prophet does not tell us that he returned to
•ernaalem after hiding his girdle in the Knphntes.
fbe n many days " spoken of in ver. 6 may have been
•pent among the Captivity at Babylon. (Jnnou. p.
Ub7.] B» may have returned Jus* after Jehoiakim's
to the account of the whole book the proofs derives)
from the dosing chapters, yet it must be borne hi
mind that the authorship of those parts of the his-
tory of which Jeremiah was not an aye-witness, thai
is, of all before the reign of Josiah, would have
consisted merely in selecting, arranging, inserting
the connecting phrases, snd, when necessary, slightly
modernising (see Thenius, KinleiL J 2) the old hhv-
tories which had been drawn up by contemporary
prophets through the whole period of time. Sat
e. g . 1 K. xiiL 32. For, as regards the mmreet of
information, it may truly be said that we have the
narrative of contemporary writers throughout. IA
hot already been observed [Cheokicles] that
there was a regular series of stale-annals both for
the kingdom of Judah and for that of Israel, which
embraced the whole time comprehended in the)
books of Kings, or at least to the end of the reign
of Jehoiakim, 2 K. xxiv. 5. These annals an
constantly cited by name as " the Book of tie Acts
of Solomon," 1 K. xL 41; and, after Solomon,
"the Book of the Chronicles of the Kings of
Judah, or Israel," e. g. 1 K. xiv. 29, it. 7, xvi. 5,
14, 20; 2 K. x. 84, xxiv. 5, Ac., and it ia manifest
that the author of Kings had them both before
him, while he drew up his history, in which
the reigns of the two kingdoms are harmonized,
and these annals constantly appealed to. But far
addition to these national annals, there were also
extant, at the time that the books of Kings were
compiled, separate works of the several prophets
who had lived in Judah and Israel, and which
probably bore the same relation to the """»'i.
which the historical parts of Isaiah and Jeremiah
bear to those portions of the annals preserved in the
books of Kings, i. e. were, in some instances at
least, fuller snd more copious accounts of the car-
rent events, by the same hands which drew up the
more concise narrative of the annals, though in
others perhaps mere duplicates. Thus the acts of
Uzziah, written by Isaiah, were very likely identical
with the history of his reign in the national chron-
icles; and part of the history of Hezekiah we know
was identical in the chronicles and in the prophet.
The chapter in Jeremiah relating to the destruction
of the Temple (lii.) is identical with that in 2 K.
xxiv., xxv. In later times we have supposed that
a chapter in the prophecies of Daniel was used for
the national chronicles, and appears as Ear. eh. L
[Ezra, Book or J Compare also 2 K xvi. 5,
with Is. vil. 1; 2 K. xviii. 8, with Is. xiv. 28-82.
As an instance of verbal agreement, coupled with
greater fullness in the prophetic account, tee 2 K.
xx. compared with Is. xxxviii., in which latter aloos)
is Hezekiah's writing given.
These other works, then, ss far as the memory of
them has been preserved to us, were as follows (sea
Kail's Apolog. VerB.). For the time of David, the
book of Samuel the seer, the book of Nathan the
prophet, and the book of Gad the seer (2 Sam.
xxi.-xxiv. with 1 K. 1, being probably extracted
from Nathan's book), which seem to have been
collected — at least that portion of them relating
to David — into one work called "the Acta of
David the King," 1 Chr. xxix. 29. For the that
of Solomon, "the Book of the Aets of Sotamon,"
death ; and " the king and the queen," In ver. It
may mean Jahnlaohln and his mother. Oump. 2 K
xxiv. 12, 15, which would be toe raJffllmsnt at Is*
xrU.18.lS.
Digitized by
Google
KINGS, FIBST AND SECOND BOOKS OF
1558
I ft xi. 41, consisting probably of puts of tha
" book of Nathan the prophet, the prophecy of
Anijah the Shilonita, and the visions of Iddo the
leer," 8 Chr. ix. 29. For the time of Rehoboam,
" the Horde of Shemaiah the prophet, and of Iddo
the eser conoeming genealogist," 9 Chr. xii. 15.
For the time of Abijah, "the story (ttH"JD) • of
the prophet Iddo," 8 Chr. ziiL 83. For the time
of Jehoahaphat '• the words of Jehu the son of
Hanani," 8 Chr. zx. 31. For the time of Uzziah,
" tha writings of Isaiah the prophet," 8 Chr. xxri.
88. For the time of Hezekiah, " the vision of
Isaiah the prophet, the son of Amoz," 3 Chr. xxxii.
32. For the time of Manasseh, a book called " the
sayings of the seers," as the A. V., following the
LXX-, Vulg., Kinichi, etc., rightly renders the
; aasage, in accordance with rer. 18, 3 Chr. xxxiii.
19, though others, following the grammar too
servilely, make Cho&ii a proper name, because of
the absence of the article. [Chronicles, vol. i.
p. 431.] For the time of Jeroboam II., a prophecy
of "Jonah, the son of Amittai the prophet, of
Gath-hepher," is cited, 8 K. xir. 35; and it seems
likely that there were books containing special his-
tories of the acts of Elijah and Eliaha, seeing that
the times of these prophets are described with such
copiousness. Of the latter Uehazi might well have
been the author, to judge from 8 K. riii. 4, 5, as
Rtisha himself might hare been of the former.
Possibly too the prophecies of Azariah the son of
Oded, in Asa's reign, 8 Chr. xv. 1, and of Hanani
(3 Chr. xvi. 7 ) (unless this latter is the same as
Jehu son of Hanani, as Oded is put for Azariah in
xt. 8) and Micaiah the son of Imlah, in Ahab's
reign ; and Eliezer the son of Dodavah, in Jehosha-
pbat's; and Zechariah the son of Jeuoiada, in
Jehoosh's; and Oded, in Pekah's; and Zechariah,
in Uzxiah't reign; of the prophetess Huldah, in
Jonah's, and others, may hare been preserved in
writing, some or all of them. These works, or at
hast many of them, must have been extant at the
time when the books of Kings were compiled, as
they certainly were much later when the books of
Chronicles were put together by Ezra. But
a-hether the author used them all, or only those
duplicate portions of them which were embodied
in the national chronicles, it is impossible to say,
seeing he quotes none of them by name except the
Acts of Solomon, and the prophecy of Jonah. On
the other hand, we cannot infer from his silence
that these books were unused by him, seeing that
neither does he quote by name the Vision of Isaiah
as the Chronicler does, though he must, from its
recent date, have been familiar with it, and that so
many parts of his narrative hare every appearance
of being extracted from these books of the prophets,
and contain narratives which it is not likely would
tne found a place in the chronicles of the kings.
,8a 1 K. xir. 4, 4c., xvi. 1, Ac., xi.; 3 K.
xrii., *c.)
With regard to the work so often cited In the
C hro n i cles as " tbe Book of the Kings of Israel sod
Judah," 1 Chr. ix. 1; 3 Chr. xvi. 11, xxvii. 7,
xxviii. 38, xxxii. 33, xxxr. 37, xxxri. 8, it has been
thought by some that it was a separate collection
•outlining the joint histories of the two kingdoms)
• Morers thinks tbe term W J JO 'mpUss trans-
Warn from older works.
6 Tbenius comas to the same eonelnsiou (Sfrita't.
9*
by others that it is our books of Kings which ■
to this description; but by Eichhorn, that it is the
same as the Chronicles of the Kings of Judah so
constantly cited in the books of Kings; and this
last opinion seems the beet founded. For in 3 Chr.
xvi. 11, the same book is called "the Book of the
Kings of Judah and Israel," which in the parallel
passage, 1 K. xv. 83, is called "the Book of the
Chronicles of the Kings of Judah." So again, 3
Chr. xxvii. 7, eomp. with 8 K. xt. 38; 3 Chr.
xxviii. 36, eomp. with 8 K. xvi. 19; 3 Chr. xxxii.
33, eomp. with 9 K. xx. 20; 3 Chr. xxxv. 37. with
3 K. xxiii. 28; 3 Chr. xxxri. 8, with 3 K. xxir. 6.
Moreover the book so quoted refers exclusively to
the affairs of Judah; and even in the one passage
where reference is made to it as "the Book of the
Kings of Israel," 3 Chr. xx. 34, it is for the reign
of Jehoahaphat that it is cited. Obviously, there-
fore, it is tbe same work which is elsewhere
described as the Chr. of Itrutl and Judah, and of
Judah and JtratL b Nor is this an unreasonable
title to gire to these chronicles. Saul, David, Solo-
mon, and in some sense Hezekiah, 3 Chr. xxx. 1,
5, 6, and all his successors were lungs of Israel as
well as of Judah, and therefore it is very eon-
curable that in Ezra's time the chronicles of Judah
should hare acquired the name of the Book of tbe
Kings of Israel and Judah. Even with regard to
a portion of Israel in tbe days of ltehoboam, the
Chronicler remarks, apparently as a matter of
gratulation, that " Kehoboam reigned orer them,"
2 Chr. x. 17; he notices Abyah's authority in
portions of the Israelitish territory, 2 Chr. xiii.
18, 19, xv. 8, 9; he not (infrequently speaks of
Israel, when the kingdom of Judah is the matter
in hand, as 2 Chr. xii. 1, zxi. 4, xxiii. 3, Ac., and
even calls Jehoahaphat " King of Israel." 2 Chr.
xxi. 2, and distinguishes " Israel and Judah," from
" Ephraim and Manasseh," xxx. 1; he notices
Hesekiah'a authority from Dan to Beer-sheba, 2
Chr. xxx. 5, and Josiah's destruction of idols
throughout all the land of Israel, xxxir. 6-9, and
his passover for all Israel, xxxr. 17, 18, and seems
to parade the title " King of Itratl " in connection
with David and Solomon, xxxv. 3, 4, and the
relation of the Lerites to "all Israel," rer. 8;
and therefore it is only in accordance with the
feeling displayed in such passages that tbe name,
"the Book of the Kings of Israel and Judah"
should be given to tbe chronicles of tha Jewish
kingdom. The use of this term in speaking of the
"Kings of Israel and Judah who were carried
away to Babylon for their transgression," 1 Chr.
ix. 1, would be conclusive, if the construction of
the sentence were certain. But though it is absurd
to separate the words " and Judah " from Israel,
as Bertheau does (Kurtgef. Kxtg. Handb.), follow-
ing the Masoretie punctuation, seeing that tbe
" Book of the Kinyi if Israel and Judah" is
cited in at least six other places in Chr., still it is
possible that Israel and Judah might be the
antecedent to the pronoun understood before ^??%t
It seems, however, much more likely that the ante-
cedent to -HP*! is "m 'uT "'P 1 ?!}. On the
whole, therefore, there is no evidence of the exist-
ence in the time of tbe Chronicler of a history,
|S> M is eltrd m 20hr. xxiT.OTes "the story"
— theMldruh— BHTO of lb* book af 'Jm Khsjs
Jomp 2 K. ill. 19.
Digitized by
Google
1551
KINGS, FIRST AND SECOND BOOKS OF
dnee bit, of the two kingdom!, nor are the book*
if Kingi the work to quoted by the Chronicler,
•reing he often refers to it for " the rat of the act* "
of Kings, when he hu already given all that it
contained in our books of Kings. He refers there-
fore to the chronicles of Judah. From the above
authentic sources then was compiled the history in
the books under consideration. Judging from the
facts that we hare in 2 K. zviii., xiz., xx., the his-
tory of Heiekiah in the very words of Isaiah,
xxxvi.-xxxix. ; that, as stated above, we have
suveral passages from Jeremiah in duplicate in S K.,
and the whole of Jer. lii. in 2 K. xxir. 18, etc.,
xxr. ; that so large a portion of the books of Kings
is repeated in the books of Chronicles, though the
writer of Chronicles had the original chronicles
also before him, as well ss from the whole internal
character of the narrative, and even some of the
blemishes referred to under the 2d head ; we may
conclude with certainty that we have in the books
of Kings, not only in the main the history faith-
fully preserved to us from the ancient chronicles,
but most frequently whole passages transferred
verbatim into them. Occasionally, no doubt, we
hare the compiler's own comments or reflections
thrown in, as at 2 K. xxi. 10-16, xvii. 10-15, xiii.
23, xrii. 7-41 Ac. We connect the insertion of
the prophecy In 1 K. xiii. with the fact that the
compiler himself was an eye-witness of the fulfill-
ment of it, and can even see how the koto's ascribed
to the old prophet are of the age of the compiler.''
We can perhaps see his hand in the frequent
repetition on the review of each reign of the
remark, "the high places were not taken away,
the people still sacrificed and burnt incense on the
high places," 1 K. xxii. 43; 2 K. xii. 3, xir. 4, xv.
4, 35 ; ef. 1 K. ill. 3, and in the repeated observa-
tion that such and such things, ss the stares by
which the ark was borne, the revolt of the 10
tribes, the rebellion of Edom, etc., continue " unto
this day," though it may be perhaps doubted in
some cases whether these words were not in the old
chronicle (2 Chr. r. 9). See 1 K. viii. 8, ix. 13,
91, x. 12, xii. 19; 2 K. ii. 22, viii. 22, x. 27, xiii.
23, xiv. 7, xvi. 6, xvii. 23, 34, 41, xxiii. 25. It is,
however, remarkable that in no instance does the
lse of this phrase lead us to suppose that it was
penned after the destruction of the Temple: in
several of the alxne instances the phrase necessarily
supposes that the Temple and the kingdom of
udah were still standing. If the phrase then is
oe compiler's, it proves him to hare written before
le Babylonish Captivity; if it was a part of the
jhronicle he was quoting, it shows how exactly he
transferred its contents to his own pages.
IV. As regards the relation of the books of
Songs to those of Chronicles, it is manifest, and is
universally admitted, that the former is by far
the older work. The language, which is quite free
from the Fersicisms of the Chronicles and their
late orthography, and is not at all more Aramaic
than the language of Jeremiah, as has been shown
above (II.), clearly points out its relative superiority
in regard to age. Us subject also, embracing the
kingdom of Israel ss well ss Judah, is another
Indication of its composition before the kingdom
of Israel was forgotten, and before the Jewish
enmity to Samaria, which is apparent in such
passages as 2 Chr. xx. 37, xxv., and in those
V 82 The phials " the etnas of Samaria" of
rts cannot batons: su the ass of Jeroboam.
chapters of Ears (i.-ri.) which belong to Ihnm
dee, was brought to maturity. While the boob
of Chronicles therefore ware written especially for
the Jews after their return from Babylon, tht
book of Kings was written for the whole of Israel,
before their common national rrMfnfe was hope-
lessly quenched.
Another comparison of considerable interest be-
tween the two histories may be drawn in respect to
the main design, that design having a marked
relation both to the individual station of the sup-
posed writers, and the peculiar circumstances of
their country at the times of their writing.
Jeremiah was himself a prophet. He lived while
the propbetio office was in full vigor, in his own
person, in Ezekiel, and Daniel, and many others,
both true and false. In his eyes, as in truth, the
main cause of the fearful calamities of his country-
men was their rejection and contempt of the Ward
of God in his mouth and that of the other proph-
ets; and the one hope of deliverance lay in their
hearkening to the prophets who still continued to
speak to Uiem in the name of the Lord. Accord-
ingly, we find in the books of Kings great promi-
nence given to the prophetic office. Not only are
some fourteen chapters devoted more or leas to the
history of Elijah and Elisha, the former of whom
is but once named, and the latter not once in the
Chronicles; but besides the many passages in which
the names and sayings of prophets are recorded
alike in both histories, the following may be cited
as instances in which the compiler of Kings has
notices of the prophets which are peculiar to him-
self. The history of the prophet who went from
Judah to Bethel in the reign of Jeroboam, and of
the old prophet and his sons who dwelt st Bethel,
1 K. xiii.; the story of Abbott the prophet and
Jeroboam's wife in 1 K. xiv. ; the prophecy of Jehu
the son of Hanani concerning the bouse of Baasba,
1 K. xvi.; the reference to the fulfillment of the
Word of God in the termination of Jehu's dynasty,
in 2 K. xv. 12; the reflections in 2 K xrii. 7-23;
and above all, as relating entirely to Judah, the
narrative of Hezekiah's sickness and recovery in 9
K. xx. as contrasted with that in 2 Chr. xxxii.,
may be cited as instances of that prominence given
to prophecy and prophets by the compiler of the
book of Kings, which is also especially noticed by
De Wette, § 183, and Parker, tranal. p. 233.
This view is further confirmed if we take into
account the lengthened history of Samuel the
prophet, In 1 Sam. (while he is but barely named
two or three times in the Chronicles), a circum-
stance, by tbe way, strongly connecting the boob
of Samuel with those of Kings.
Ezra, on the contrary, was only a priest. In hit
days the prophetic office had wholly fallen into
abeyance. That evidence of the Jews being the
people of God, which consisted in tbe presence oT
prophets among them, was no more. But to the
men of his generation, the distinctive msrk of the
continuance of God's favor to their race was the
rebuilding of the Temple at Jerusalem, tbe restora-
tion of the daily sacrifice and tbe Levitical worship,
and the wonderful and providential renewal of the
Mosaic Institutions. The chief instrument, too, for
preserving tbe Jewish remnant from absorption into
the mass of heathenism, and fot maintaining their
national life till the coming of Messiah, was the
maintenance of tbe Temple, ita ministers, and its
services. Hence we see at once that tbe chief oars
of a good and enlightened Jew of the (ft of J
Digitized by
Google
KINGS, FIRST AND BKOOND BOOKS OF
1555
tad all tne mote if he wen hiiLself a priest, would
laterally be to enhance the value of the Levitical
titual, and the dignity of the Levitical caste. And
In compiling a history of the past glories of his
nee, he would as naturally select such passages
as especially bore upon the sanctity of the priestly
office, and showed the deep concern taken by their
ancestors in all that related to the honor of God's
House, and the support of his ministering servants.
Hence the Levitical character of the books of
Chronicles, and the presence of several detailed
narratives not found in the books of Kings, and
the more frequent reference to the Mosaic institu-
tions, may most naturally and simply be accounted
for, without resorting to the absurd hypothesis that
the ceremonial law was an invention subsequent to
the Captivity. 2 Chr. xxii., ixx., xxxi. compared
with 9 K. xviii. is perhaps as good a specimen as
tan be selected of the distinctive spirit of the
Chronicles. See also 3 Chr. ixvi. 16-31, comp.
with 2 K. xv. 5; 3 Chr. xL 13-17, xiii. 9-30, zv.
1-15, xxiii 3-8, comp. with 9 K. xi. 5-9, and w.
18, 19, comp. with ver. 18, and many other pas-
sages. Moreover, upon the principle that the
sacred writers wen influenced by natural feelings
In their selection of their materials, it seems most
appropriate that while the prophetical writer in
Kings deals very fully with the kingdom of Israel,
in which the prophets were much more illustrious
than in Judah, the Levitical writer, on the contrary,
should concentrate all bis thoughts round Jerusalem
where alone the Levitical caste had all its power
and functions, and should dwell upon all the
instances preserved in existing muniments of the
deeds and even the miuutest ministrations of the
priests and Levitee, as well as of their faithfulness
and sufferings in the cause of truth. This pro-
fessional bias is so true to nature, that it is
surprising that any one should be found to raise
an objection from it- Its subserviency in this
instance to the Divine purposes and the instruction
ef the Church, is an interesting example of the
providential government of God. It may be
further mentioned as tending to account simply
and naturally for the difference in some of the nar-
ratives in the books of Kings and Chronicles
respectively, that whereas the compiler of Kings
usually quotes the Book of the Chronicles of the
Kings of Judah, the writer of Chronicles very fre-
quently refers to those books of the contemporary
prophets which we presume to have contained more
sopious accounts of the same reigns. This appean
remarkably in the parallel passages in 1 K. xi. 41 ;
3 Chr. ix. 33, where the writer of Kings refers for
u the rest of Solomon's acts " to the " book of the
seta of Solomon," while the writer of Chronicles
refers to " the book of Nathan the prophet " and
"the prophecy of Alnjah the Shilonite," and "the
visions of Iddo the seer against Jeroboam the son
of NeUt j " and in 1 K. xir. 89, and 3 Chr. xii. 15,
where the writer of Kings sums up his history of
Behoboaui with the words, - Now the rest of the
lets of Kehoboam and all that he did, are they not
written in the Btxik of the Chrmicltt of Ike Kini/t
of Judah f " whereas the chronicler substitutes " m
Vie Buoi of Shtmaiah the prophet, and of Iddo
Ike leer concerning genadogiet;" and in 1 K.
utii. 45, where " the Book of the Chronicles of the
Kings of Judah " standi instead of " the Book of
Jehu the son of Hamuli," in 9 Chr. xx. 34.
Resides which, the very formula so frequently
nod, •• the rest of the acts of so and to, and all
that be did," etc., necessarily supposes that than
were in the chronicles of each reign, and in the
other works cited, many things recorded which the
compiler did not transcribe, and which of course
it was open to any other compiler to insert in his
narrative if he pleased. If then the chronicler,
writing with a different motive and different pre-
dilections, and in a different age, had access to the
same original documents from which the author of
Kings drew his matfrisls, it is only what was to
be expected, that he should omit or abridge some
things given in detail in the books of Kings, and
should insert, or give in detail, some things which
the author of Kings had omitted, or given very
briefly. The following passages which are placed
side by side are examples of these opposite methods
of treating the same subject on the part of the two
writers: —
Full in Kings.
1 K. 1., il. give In detail
the circumstances of Solo-
mon's accession, the con-
spiracy of AdonU&h, Joab,
Abiathar, etc., and sub-
stitution or Zadok In the
priest's office la room of
Abiathar, the submission
of AdonUah and all his
party, Joab's death, ete.
1 K. ill. 6-14.
Ver. 6. " And Solomon
said, Thou hast showed
unto thy servant David my
rather great mercy, ac-
cording as he walked be-
fore Thee In truth, and In
righteousness, and In up-
rightness of heart with
Thee ; and Thou hast kept
for him this great kind-
ness, that Thou hast given
him a son to alt on his
throne, as It it this day."
7, 8, 9, 10. "And the
speech pleased the Lord,
that Solomon had asked
this thing."
11. « And God said unto
kuVeto.
U. «... like unto thee
all thy days."
14. "And if thou wilt
walk in my ways, sad
keep my statutes and my
commandments as thy
father David did walk,
then I will lengthen thy
days."
16. "And Solomon a-
woka, and behold it was
a dream. And he earns
to Jerusalem, and stood
before the aril of the cov-
enant of the Lord, and
offered up burnt-offer*
lngs, and offered pesos
offerings, and mads a last
toaUhisi
Short in ChronicUt
IChr ixix. 22-24.
K And they made Solo*
mon the son of David king
the second tune, and
anointed him unto the
Lord to be the chief gov-
ernor, and Zadok to be
priest. Then Solomon sat
on the throne of the Lord
as king Instead of David
his father, and prospered,
and all Israel obeyed him.
And all the princes and
the mighty men, and all
the sons likewise of king
David, submitted them-
selves unto Solomon the
king."
2 Chr. I. 7-12.
Ver. 8. "And
said unto Ood, Thou
shewed great many
David my father,
reign In ok. stead."
11. "And God sail to
12. «.. .anyi
have the Ilka."
IS. "Then
eame from his Journey to
the high place that was at
Gibson to Jerusalem, Aran
before the tabernaele of
the oong -sganon,
Digitized by
Google
J
1556
KINGS, F1BST AND SECOND BOOKS OF
MSfa (Tings.
16-28. Solomon's Judg-
ment,
It. 1. "So stag Solo-
non na king over all
IbmL"
2-19. Containing a list
of Solomon s officers.
xl. 1-10. Containing his-
ttry of Solomon's Idolatry,
and the enmity of iladad,
and Reson, and Jeroboam
against him.
all. 2. "Who was yet in
■gypt." The omission of
the word " yet " In Chron.
hi of eoone accounted for
by his flight to ifcypt not
baring lieen narrated by
lb* chronicler.
1 K. xIt. 22-24.
A detailed aoeonnt of
the Idolatries of Judah la
the reign of Bahoboam.
1 K. xr. 18.
"Then Asa took all the
surer and the gold that
wen left In the treasons
of the house of the Lord,
and the treasons of the
king's house, and deliv-
ered them Into the hand
of his serranta ; and king
Asa sent them to Benha-
dad the son of Tabrimon,
the son of Heslon, king of
Syria, that dwelt at Da-
mascus, saying, There is
» league," etc.
2 K. »rt. 10-16.
A detailed account of
Ahas's Tlslt to Damascus,
and Betting up an altar In
the temple at Jerusalem
after the pattern of one at
Damascus. Urijah's sub-
IrrTiency, ete.
1-M.
prayer, and recovery, with.
Isaiah's prophecy, and the
tign i-f the shadow on the
dial j lb* Taut of the Baby-
lonish ambassadors ; lleas-
klah's pride, Isaiah's re-
buke, and Ueseklah's snb-
9urtin OrmUm.
and reigned over Israel."
Omitted In Chronicles.
Wholly omitted In
Chronicles, except the al-
lusion In 2 Chr. x. 2, « It
came to psas, when Jero-
boam the son of Nebat,
who was In Egypt, whith-
er he had fled from the
presence of Solomon thai
king," ate.
2 Chr. xB. 1.
" And it came to pass
when Bahoboam bad es-
tablished toe kingdom,
and had strengthened
himself, he forsook the
law of the Lord, and all
Israel with htm."
2 Chr. xtL 2.
" Then Asa brought
out silver and gold out of
the treasures of the house
of the Lord, and of the
king's house, and
sent to
king of Syria, that dwelt
at Damascus, saying,
There Is a league," eto.
2 Chr. xxtUI. 22, 28.
" And In the time of his
distress did he trespass
yet more against the Lord :
this Is that king Abas.
lor he sacrificed unto the
gods of Damascus which
smote him. And he said,
Because the gods of Syria
help them, therefore will
I sacrifice to them, that
they may help me."
xxxii. 24-26.
"In those days Hese-
klah was sick to the death,
and prayed unto the Lord,
and lie spake unto him
and gave him a sign. But
Uesekiah rendered not
again according to the
benefit done unto him;
" The annexed list of kings' mothers shows which
ire named la Kings and Chronicles, which to Kings
alone: —
Solomon son of Bathahaba, K. and Chr. <1. ilL 5).
Naamah, K. and Chr.
M-^-h.h or Hlchalah, K. and Chr.
Haachah, da. of Absalom, K. and Chr.
Aenhah, K. and Chr.
Alhauah, K. and Chr.
Bbtah, K. and Chr.
Hehoboam
AhUah
Asa «
Jahosbarhat"
Jehoram "
AhaskM "
IWItSAMfl.
Throughout the tar his heart was ttrtad ess
f Beer Irish the therefore there was win*
narrative in 2 K. and upon turn, and upon Ja-
laeiahlsmueh fuller than dab and Jerusalem. Not.
in Chronklae. withstanding, Heanktah
humbled himself tar the
pride of his heart, both no
and the Inhabitants of Jo
rusalsm, so that the wrath
of the Lord came not upon
them In the days of Heso-
kiah." Var.U. "HowVaat
in the business of the asa-
bassadorsof the prinoasef
Babylon, who sent ua*a
him to enquire of oat
wonder done to the land,
Ood left him to try Use,
that he might know aB
that was In his heart."
xxL 10-16.
from Ood to
Mtnasnin by His prophets.
2 Chr. xxxtH. 10.
"And the Lord
to Msnssssh and his peo-
ple: but they would not
2 K. rxm. 4-36.
Detailed acoount of the
destruction of Baal-wor-
ship and other idolatrous
rites and places In Judah
and Israel, by Joslab,
" that he might perform
the words of lbs law
which were written In the
book that Hilklah the
priest found In the house
of the Lord."
2 Chr. xxxtr. 82, St.
"And the Inhabitants
of Jerusalem did aosoreV
ing to the corenant of
God, the God of their fath-
ers. And Joalah took
away all the abomination*
out of all the countries
that pertained to the
children of Israel, and
made all that were present
in Israel to serve, eren ta
asm the Lord their Ood."
In like manner* comparison of the history of the
reigns of Jeboshax, Jehoiakim, Jehoiachui, and
Zedekiah, will show, that, except in the matter of
Jeboialdm't capture in the 4th jeer of his reign,
and deportation to (or towards) Babylon, in which
the author of Chronicles follows Daniel and Exekiel
(Dan. i. 1, 2; Ee. xix. 9), the narrative in Chron-
icles it chiefly an abridgment of that in King*.
Compare 2 K. xxiii. 30-37, with 2 Chr. xxxvL l-»t
2 K. rxlr. 1-7, with 2 Chr. xxxri. 6-8; 2 K. xxfar.
10-17, with 3 Chr. xxxri. 10. From a Chr. xxxri
13, however, to the end of the chapter, is rather a
comment upon the history in 2 K. xxr. 1-21, than
an abridgment of it.
Under this bead should be noticed also what may
be called systematic abridgments; as when the stat e-
meats in Kings concerning high-place worship in the
several reigns (2 K. xii. 2, 3, dr. 3, 4, xv. 3, 4, 35)
are either wholly omitted, or more earsonly glanced
at, as at 2 Chr. xxr. 2, xxvil. 2; or when thenanieof
the queen-mother it omitted, win the case of the
seven last kings from Manajeeh downwards, wheat
mothers are given by the author of Kings, but itraat
out by the author of Chronicles. • Then to eoanak
Amasiah son of Jehoaddan, K. and Chr.
Danah " Jeooliah, K. and Chr.
Jotham " Jerueba, K. and Chr-
Hesekiah "
Abl, K and Chr.
Minsssnh "
Rephsl-bah, K.
Amon "
Meshnllemeth, a.
Joalah "
Jedldah,K.
Jeboahaa "
Hamutel, K.
Jehoiakim «
Zebudah, K.
Jehorachla «
Nehushta, K.
aMekiah «
Hamutel. K.
Digitized by
Google
KINGS, FIBST AND SECOND BOOKS OF
1557
thing systematic alio in the omitted or abbreviated
eooounta of the idolatries in the reign* of Solomon,
Behoboam, and Ahaz. It may not always be easy
to assign the exact motives which influence a
•niter, who ia abbreriating, in Ms selection of pas-
sages to be shortened or left out ; but an obrious
motive in the case of these idolatries, as well as the
high-placet, may be found in the circumstance that
the idolatrous tendencies of the Jews had wholly
ceased during the Captivity, and that the details
and repetition of the same remarks relating to them
were therefore less suited to the requirements of the
age. To see a design on the put of the Chronicler
to deceive and mislead, is to draw a conclusion not
from the facts before us, but from one's own prej-
udices- It is not criticism, but invention.
On the other hand, the subjoined passages pre-
sent some instances in which the books of Kings
give the shortaooount, and the books of Chronicle*
the full one.
Start to Kings.
IK. vtH.
Tar. 10. « And tt earns
> past whan tha priests
wm com* out of ton holy
Mat the cloud AIM the
eaves of the lord,
11. "80 that the priests
scald not stand to minis-
ter bene b ob of the cloud :
ft* tha glory of the Lord
sari Sited the house -.1 the
Urd
13. "Then arid 80I0-
Mi> OnnicUt.
2 Ohr. v.
Ter. 11. " And It
to pass when the priests
wore oome out of tha holy
plan : (for all the priests
that were pr es en t were
sanctified, and did not
then wait by course :
12. "Also the Levites
which were the singers,
all of them of Asaph, of
Hassan, ct Jsduthun, with
their sous and their breth-
ren, being arrayed In
whits linen, having cym-
bals and psalteries and
harps, stood at the east
end of toe altar, and with
them 120 priests, sound-
ing with trumpets:)
18. "It came even to
pass, as the trumpeters
and singers were as one, to
make one sound to be
heard In praising and
thanking the Lord; and
when they lilted up their
voice with the trumpets
and cymbals and instru-
ments of music, « and
praised tbe Lord, saying,
tor He is good, for His
mercy endureth for ever ;
that then the house wss
filled with a cloud, even
the house of the Lord.
14. « 80 that the priests
could not stand to minis-
ter by reason of the cloud:
for the gloiy of the Lord
had filled the house of
God. Then said Solo-
• A curious mcMental confirmation of tha fact of
wds copious use of musical Instrum ents in Solomon's
(awe may be found In 1 K. x. 11, 12, where we read
tea Solomon nude of the " great plenty of ahnug-
*sss " which came from Ophlr " harps and psalteries
Several able erltles (as Sweld) have In-
Short in Kuars.
FuU in Osmewfrs.
IK. Till.
2 Ohr Yl., vU.
Ter. 62 oorrasponds
Ter. 41. "Now than
with 2 Chr. tL 40. Ter.
fbn arise, Lord God
68 ■ omitted in Car.
Into thy nstlng-pnet,
thou, and the ark of thy
strength: let thy priests,
Lord Ood, be clothed
with salvation, and thy
saints njolee in goodness.
42. "0 Lord Ood, turn
not away the face of thine
anointed; remember tbe
mercies of David thy ser
rant.
64. "And It was so that
1. "Wow warn Sett
when Solomon had mad*
man had made an tnd vf
an tnd 0/ praying all this
praying, tbe fin cams
prayer and supplication
down from heaven, and
onto the Lord, he arose
consumed the burntoHsr-
from before the altar of
ing and the sacrifices, and
the Lord, from kneeling
the glory of the Lord
on his knees with hie
filled the house, and tha
hands spread up to
priests could not enter
heaven."
Into the house of tbe Lord,
because the glory of the
Lord had filled the Lord's
house. A And when all
tbe children of Israel
saw how tbe fin came
down, and the glory of the
Lord npon the house, they
bowed themselves with
their faces to the ground,
npon the pavement, and
worshipped and praised
66-41. "And he stood
tbe Lord, saying. For Us
and blessed all the con-
Is good, for ills mercy en-
gregation," etc.
dunth for ever.
62 "And the king, and
4. "Then tbe king and
all Israel with him, offered
all the people offend sac-
sacrifices before the Lord."
rifice before the Lord "
1 K. all. 24 corresponds
with 2 Ohr. xl. 4.
2 Chr. xl. 6-38.
Wholly omitted ia
Containing particulars
Kings, when from ail. 26
of tbe raign of Rehoboam,
to xiv. 20 Is occupied with
and tbe gathering of
the kingdom of Israel, and
priests and Levites to Je-
seems to be not improba-
rusalem, during bis three
bly taken from the book
first yean, very likely
of AhiJah the Shilonlta.
from the book of Iddo, as
this passage has a genea-
logical form.
xtv. 26,26.
xB. 2-9.
A very brief mendon of
A mon detailed account
Shlsbakv Invasion, sod
of Bhisbak's Invasion, of
plunder of the sacred and
tbe number and natnn of
royal treasons.
his troops, the capture of
the fenced cities of Judah,
and the prophesying of
Shemalah on the oocaslon ;
evidently extracted (rose
the book oT Shemalah.
IK. xv.
2 Ohr. xM.
Ter. 7. "And there was
Ter. 2. '< And then was
war between Abijam and
war between Ahbah and
Jeroboam."
Jeroboam."
8-21 contains a ■casual
account of the war be-
fcrrod from the frequent
mention of tbe Lsvitkal
musical services, that the author of Chronicles was one
of the alngen of the tribe of Levi himself.
» This is obviously repeated hen, bscauss at this
moment the priests ought
to have entered Into the
house, bat could not beset
ise of the glory.
Digitized by
Google
1568
KINGS, FIBST AND SECOND BOOKS OF
caWrtfcBfaax.
I. "And the rest of the
lea of Abtyun, and all
Ihat he did, an they not
written In the book of the
Chronicles of the Kings of
Judah," etc
8. " And Atrijam slept
with his lathers," ess.
1 K. XT.
13. (Asa) "took away
the sodomites oat of the
land, and removed all the
Idols that his father, had
Knorely omitted.
1S-28 His war with
38. " Nevertheless In
the time of bis old age he
was diseased In his feet."
AD fit
tween the two kings ; of
AMJah's speech to the Is-
raelites, upbraiding them
with forsaking the LeviuV
eal worship, and glorying
In the retention of the
same by Judah ; ha vte-
tories, and bis family.
22. •' And the rest of
the acts of Abljah, and bis
ways and bis sayings, are
written In the story (mtd-
rash ) of the prophet Iddo."
28. " And Abljah slept
with his fathers," ens.
(zIt. 1, A. V.)
xlv. 8 16, XT. 1-18.
A detailed account of
the removal of the Idols ;
the fortifying the cities of
Judah ; of Ash's army; the
Invasion of Borah the
Ethiopian ; A>a's victory ;
Asarlah the son of Oded's
prophecy ; Afa's further
reforms In the 16th year
of his reign.
xvi. 7-14.
Hanaui'a prophecy
against Asa, for calling in
the aid of Tabrimon king
of Syria ; Asa's wrath,
34. "And Asa slept
with his fathers."
1 K. xxH. 41-60.
"Jehoshaphat was 86
yean old when he began
to reign," etc. These lew
verses are all the account
of Jehoshaphat's reign, ex-
sept what Is contained In
the history of Israel.
All omitted in Kings.
1 X- xxtt. (from history
40 omttM In Kings.
a\U oa«t*sd m Kufi.
and burial.
"And Asa slept with
his fathers, and died In
the 41st year of his reign."
3 Chr xvfl.
1. "And Jehoshaphat
his son reigned in his
stead."
2-19 describes how the
king strengthened himself
against Israel by patting
garrisons In the fortified
towns of Judah, and some
In Kphralm ; his wealth ;
his seal In destroying Idol-
atry ; hb measures for in-
structing the people In the
law of the Lord by means
of priests and Levites ; his
captains, and thenumben
of his troops,
of Israel) -2 Chr. xvtil.
3 Chr. xtx.
Jehoshaphat's reproof
by Jehu the son of Hananl.
His renewed seal against
idolatry. His appointment
of judges, and his charge
to them. Priests and Le-
vites appointed as judges
at Jerusalem under Am-
arlah the high-priest.
3 Chr. xx. 1-80.
Invasion of Hoabitee
and Ammonites. Jehosh-
aphat's fast ; his prayer to
Ood for aid. The prophecy
•rjahaxtel. Wntstratkm
of »e Levites with the
«rmy. Discomfiture and
plunder of the enemy
IsTHsttsI
Smttm Stags. A3
1 K. xxll. 48, 49, 60 - 3 Chr. xx. 86, 88, xxt 1.
3 Chr. xx. 87.
Omitted in Kings. The Prophecy of KUsssar.
refusal of Jehoshaphat
was nfltr the prophecy of
Omitted In
Omitted In
2 K. lx. 37.
" And when Ahastah the
king of Judah saw this, he
fled by the way of the
gardeo-house. And John
followed after him, and
said, Smite him also in the
chariot. And they did so
at the going up to Our,
which Is by Ibleam. And
he fled to Megiddo, and
died then. And his ser-
vants carried him in a
chariot to Jerusalem, and
burled him In his sepul-
ehn with his flatten in
the city rf Devil."
2 Chr. xxt 3-4.
Additional history at
Jehoshaphat^ family.
3 Chr. xxL 11-19, xxH. 1
Idolatries of Tollnoasn
Writing of Knjeh. Inve>
slon of Judah by Poioev
tines and Arabian*
Slaughter of the kbaf>
sons. Miserable slit noes
and death of Jehoram.
3 Chr. xxiL 7-8.
"And the do s t iucUum
of Ahssleh was of Ood by
coming to Joram : fbt
when he was come, be
went out with Jahomsn
against Jehu the eon of
Ntmsht, whom the Lord
had anointed to out off the
house of Ahab. And It
came to pass that when
Jehu was executing Judg-
ment upon the house of
Ahab, and found the
princes of Judah and the
sons of the brethren of
Ahaslah. that ministered
to Abaxtah, he slew them.
And he sought Ahaslah
and they caught him (tar
he was hid in Samaria),
and they brought him to
Jehu ; and when they had
slain him they burled him,
becauer,aald they, be la the
son of Jehoshaphat, who
•ought the Lord with all
his heart. So the boose
of Ahastah had no power
still to keep the kingdom."
With reference to the above two accounts of the
death of Ahsxlah, which have been thought irre-
concilable (Ewald, iii. 539; Parkers De Wette,
370; Thenius, etc.), it may be here remarked, that
the order of the events is sufficiently intelligible if
we take the account in Chronicles, where the king-
dom of -Tudah is the main subject, as explanatory
of the brief notice in Kings, where it is only inci-
dentally mentioned in the history of Israel. The
order is clearly as follows : Ahaziah was with
Jehoram at Jezreel when Jehu attacked and killed
bim. Ahaslah escaped and fled by the Beth-gan
road to Samaria, where the partisans of the boons
of Ahab were strongest, and where his own brethren
were, and there concealed himself. Bnt when the
sons of Ahab were all put to death in Samaria, and
the house of Ahab had hopelessly lost the kingdom,
he determined to make his submission to Jehu, and
sent his brethren to salute the children of Jehu «
(3 K. x. 13), In token of his acknowledgment of
him as king of Israel. Jehu, instead of <
this submission, had them all put to death, ■
hastened on to Samaria to take Ahaxtah also, wfae
he had probably learnt from some of the i
■ Mot, as Thenius and others, the children of J«
bonan, and of Jess bsl the sjiisii anther
Digitized by
Google
KINGS. FIRST AND SECOND BOOKS O*
1559
luht already knew, was at Samaria. Ahaziah
again took to flight northwards, towards Megiddo,
perhaps in hope of reaching the dominions of the
king of the Sidonians, his kinsman, or more prob-
iMy to reach the coast, where the direct road from
Tyre to Egypt would bring him to Judah.
[C/88AHEA.] He was hotly pursued by Jehu and
his followers, and overtaken near lbleam, and mor-
tally wounded, but managed to get as far ss
Megiddo, where it should seem Jehu followed in
pursuit of him, and where he was brought to him
as his prisoner. There he died of his wounds. In
consideration of his descent from Jrhoshaphat,
" who sought Jehorah with all his heart," Jehu,
who was at this time very forward in displaying
his zeal for Jehorah, handed over the corpse to his
followers, with permission to carry it to Jerusalem,
which they did, and buried him in the city of
David. The whole difficulty arises from the ac-
count in Kings being abridged, and so bringing
together two incidents which were not consecutive
in the original account. But if 3 K. ix. 87 had
been even divided into two verses, toe first ending
at " garden-house," and the next beginning " and
Jehu followed after him," the difficulty would
almost disappear. Jehu's pursuit of Ahaziah would
only be interrupted by a day or two, and there
would be nothing the least unusual in the omission
to notice this interval of time in the concise abridged
narrative. We should then understand that the
word aUo in the originni narrative referred not to
Jehoram, but to the brethren of Ahaziah, who had
just before been smitten, and the death of Ahaziah
would foil under 3 ft. x. 17. If Beth-gan (A. V.
'* garden-house ") be the same as En-gannim, now
Jenin, it lay directly on the road from Jerroel to
Samaria, and is also the place at which the road
to Megiddo and the coast, where Caaarea afterwards
stood, turns off from the road between Jezreel and
Samaria." In this case the mention of Beth-gan
In Kings as the direction of Ahasiah's flight is a
confirmation of the statement in Chronicles that
he concealed himself in Samaria. This is also sub.
stantially Keil's explanation (p. 388, 389). Movers
proposes an alteration of the text (p. 93, note), but
not very successfully (TrWr 1 ? NPB1 N2J3 in-
stead of VTfbS VT$ja» J).
The other principal additions in the books of
Chronicles to the beta stated in Kings are the
following. In 3 Chr. xxir. 17-34 there is an ac-
count of Joaah's relapse into idolatry after the death
if Jehoiada, of Zechariah's prophetic rebuke of
aim, and of the stoning of Zechariah by the king's
command in the very court of the Temple; and the
Syrian invasion, and the consequent calamities of
the close of Joaah's reign are stated to have been
the consequence of this iniquity. The book of
Kings gives the history of the Syrian invasion at
the close of Joaah's reign, but omits all mention
of Zechariah's death. In the account of the Syrian
Invasion also some details are given of a battle in
vhich Jehoash was defeated, which are not men-
tioned In Kings, and repeated reference is made to
the sin of the king and people as having drawn
town this judgment upon them. But though the
apostasy of Jehoash is not mentioned in the book
i Kings, yet it is dearly implied in the expression
;s K. xii. 3), » Jehoash did that which was right
•> See Tan da Tilde's map of the Holy Land, and
Stanley, 8. » P. p. 812.
in the eyes of Jehovah all his days, wherein Jehoiada
the priest instructed him." The silence of Kings
is perhaps to be accounted for by the author fol-
lowing here the Chronicle of the Kings, in which
Zechariah's death was not given. And the truth
of the narrative in the book of Chronicles is eon-
firmed by the distinct reference to the death of
Zechariah, Luke xi. 49-61.
3 Chr. xxr. 6-16 contains a statement of a ge-
nealogical character, 6 and in connection with it an
account of the hiring of 100,000 mercenaries out
of Israel, and their dismissal by Amaziah on the
bidding of a man of God. This Is followed by on
account (in greater detail than that in Kings) of
Amaziah's victory over the Edomites, the plunder
of certain cities in Judah by the rejected mercenaries
of Israel, the idolatry of Amaziah with the idols of
Edom, and his rebuke by a prophet.
3 Chr. xxvi. 6-30 contains particulars of the
reign of Uzziah, his wars with the Philistines, his
towers and walla which he built in Jerusalem and
Jejdah, and other statistics concerning his kingdom,
somewhat of a genealogical character; and lastly,
of his invasion of the priestly office, the resistance
of Azariah the priest, and the leprosy of the king.
Of all this nothing is mentioned in Kings except
the fact of Uzziah's leprosy in the latter part of
his reign; a fact which confirms the history in
Chronicles. The silence of the book of Kings may
most probably be explained here on the mere prin-
ciple of abridgment.
3 Chr. xxvli. 8-6 contains some particulars of
the reign of Jotham, especially of the building done
by bin), and the tribute paid by the Ammonites,
which are not contained in Kings.
3 Chr. xxviii. 17-19 gives details of invasions by
Edomites and Philistines, and of cities of Judah
taken by them in the reign of Ahaz, which are not
recorded In Kings. 8 K. xvi. 6 speaks only of the
hostile attacks of Resin and Pekah. But 3 Chr.
xxix.-xxxi. contains by far the longest and most
important addition to the narrative in the book of
Kings. It is a detailed and circumstantial account
of the purification of the Temple by Hezekiah's
orders in the first year of his reign, with the names
of all the principal Levites who took part in it, and
the solemn sacrifices and musical services with
which the Temple was reopened, and the worship
of God reinstated, after the desuetude and idolatries
of Ahaz's reign. It then gives a full account of
the celebration of a great Passover at Jerusalem in
the second month, kept by all the tribes, telling us
that " since the time of Solomon the son of David
king of Israel there was not the like in Jerusalem; "
and goes on to describe the destruction of idols
both in Judah and Israel; the revival of the courses
of priests and Levites, with the order fur their
proper maintenance, and the due supply of the
daily, weekly, and monthly sacrifices; the prepara-
tion of chambers in the Temple for the reception
of the tithes and dedicated things, with the names
of the various Levites appointed to different charges
connected with them. Of this there is no mention
in Kings: only the high religious character and
zeal, and the attachment to the law of Mates,
ascribed to him in 3 K. xriil. 4-6, is in exact ee-
oorda n ce with these details.
3 Chr. xxxii. 3-8 suprlies some interesting facta
» lYoni : Chr. Ix. 1, It appears that « The Book of
the Chronicles of the Kings of Judah » eonkslnrt s
aoplons eoUaetioo of sanaaloatss.
Digitized by
Google
1560
KINGS, FIRST AND SECOND BOOKS OF
gonnected with the defense of Jerusalem, and Ha
supplies of water, in Hezekiah's reign, which an
not mentioned in 8 K. xviii.
9 Chr. xxziii. 11-19 contain! the history of
Manasseh's captivity, deportation to Babylon, re-
pentance and restoration to hia throne, and an
account of his buildings in Jerusalem after his
return. The omission of this remarkable passage
of history in the book of Kings is perhaps one of
the most difficult to account for. But since the
circumstances are, in the main, in harmony with
the narrative in Kings, and with what we know
of the profane history of the times (as Keil has
thiwn, p. 427), and since we have seen numerous
other omissions of important events in the books
of Kings, to disbelieve or reject it on that account,
or to make it a ground of discrediting the book
of Chronicles, is entirely contrary to the spirit of
sound criticism. Indeed all the soberer German
critics accept it as truth, and place Hanasseh's
captivity under Esarhaddon (Bertheau, in toe.)."
Bertheau suggests that some support to the account
may perhaps be found in 2 K. xx. 17 ft". Hovers,
while he defends the truth of Manaaseh's exile to
Babylon, seems to give up the story of his repent-
lace, and reduces it to the level of a moral romance,
•uch as the books of Tobit and Judith. But such
a mode of explaining away plain historical state-
ments of a trustworthy historian, who cites contem-
porary documents as bis authority (let alone the
peculiar character of the Bible histories as •• given
by inspiration of God " ), cannot reasonably be ac-
cepted. There is doubtless some reason why the
repentance of Manasseh for his dreadful and heinous
wickedness was not recorded in the book of Kings,
and why it was recorded in Chronicles; just as
there is some reason why the repentance of the
thief on the cross is only recorded by one evangelist,
and why the raising of Lazarus is passed over in
silence in the three first Gospels. It may be a
moral reason : it may have been that Manaaseh's
guilt being permanent in its fatal effects upon his
country, he was to be handed down to posterity in
the national record as the sikful kino, though,
having obtained mercy as a penitent man, his re-
pentance and pardon were to have a record in the
more private chronicle of the church of Israel. But,
whatever the cause of this silence in the book of
Kings may be, there is nothing to justify the rejec-
tion as non-historical of any part of this narrative
h the book of Chronicles.
Passing over several other minor additions, such
as 2 Chr. xxxiv. 12-14, xxxv. 26, xxxvi. 6, 7, 13,
17, it may suffice to notice in the last place the
circumstantial account of Josuii'a Passovkr in
8 Chr. xxxv. 1-19, as compared with 2 K. xxiii.
31-23. This addition has the same strong Levitical
character that appears in some of the other addi-
Jons: contains the names of many Levitts, and
especially, as in so many other passages of Chron-
icles, the names of singers ; but is in every respect,
except as to the time,* confirmatory of the brief
accourt in Kings. It refers, curiously enough, to
a great Passover held in the days of Samuel (thus
a In like manner the Book of Sings is silent eon-
nmlng Jebolakim's being carried to Babylon ; and
yet Dan. L 3, Ss. xli. 9, both upnealy mention It,
U. accordance with 2 Chr. xxxvi. 6.
* 8m above, under n.
« This appears by comparing the parallel passages,
•ad ssnsnally noticing how the formula, " Now lbs
defining the looser expressions in 2 K. xxiii. It
" the days of the judges " ), of which the memorial
like that of Joab's terrible campaign in Edom (1 K.
xi. IB, 16), has not been preserved in the books of
Samuel, and enables us to reconcile one of thoas
little verbal apparent discrepancies which are jumped
at by hostile and unscrupulous criticism, lor the
detailed account of the two Passovers in the i
of Hezekiah and Joaiah enables ns to see,
while Hezekiah's was most remarkable for the ex-
tensive feasting and joy with which it was celebrated,
Josiah's was more to be praised for the exact order
in which everything was done, and the fuller onion
of all the tribes in the celebration of it (2 Chr. m.
26, xxxv. 18; 2 K. xxiii. 22). As regards dis-
crepancies which have been imagined to exist be-
tween the narratives in Kings and Chronicles,
besides those already noticed, and besides those
which sre too trifling to require notice, the account
of the repair of the Temple by King Joash, and
that of the invasion of Judah by Hazael in the)
same reign may bo noticed. For the latter, sea
Joash. As regards the former, the only real dif-
ficulty is the position of the chest for receiving the)
contributions. The writer of 2 K. xii. 9 seems to
place it in the inner court, close to the brazen altar,
and says that the priests who kept the door pot
therein all the money that was brought into the)
house of Jehovah. The writer of 2 Chr. xxiv. 8,
places it apparently in the outer court, at the en-
trance into the inner court, and makes the princes
and people cast the money into it themselves.
Bertheau thinks there were two cheats. IJghtfoot,
that it was first placed by the altar, and afterwards
removed outside at the gate (ix. 374, 375), bnt
whether, either, of these be the true explanation, or
whether rather the same spot be not intended by
the two descriptions, the point is too unimportant
to require further consideration in this place.
From tbe above comparison of parallel narrative*
in the two books, which, if given at all, it was
necessary to give somewhat fully, in order to give
them fairly, it appears that the results are precisely
what would naturally arise from the circumstances
of the case. The writer of Chronicles, having the
books of Kings before him,' and to a great extent
making those books tbe basis of his own, but also
having his own personal views, predilections, and
motives in writing, writing for a different age, and
for people under very different circumstances; and
moreover, having before him the original authorities
from which the books of Kings were compiled, aa
well as some others, naturally rearranged the older
narrative as suited his purpose, and his tastes ; gave
in full passages which the other had abridged, in-
serted what had been wholly omitted, omitted some
things which the other had inserted, including
everything relating to the kingdom of Israel, and
showed the color of his own mind, not only in the
nature of the passages which he selected from the
ancient documents, but in the reflections which ha
frequently adds upon the events which he relates,
and possibly also in the turn given to some of the
speeches which he records. But to say, as has bete
rest of tbe acta," etc., comas in In both books. Sss
t.g. 1 K. xv. 28, 24, and 2 Chr. xvL 11, 12. Of the
1 K. xtv. 81, xv. 1, compared with 2 Chr. xtt. 16, xxa
1, 2, Is another striking proof. Bo Is the npeonof
of ran wordj 'bund In K. by the Chronicler. Coup
2 K. xlv. 11 with 2 Chr. xxv. 24, 2 K. xv. 5 wttb.
Chr. xxvi. 30, 1 K. iv. 23 with 2 Chr. Ix. 25.
Digitized by
Google
KINGS, FIRST AND SEOOKD BOOKS OF
1561
•id or Insinuated, that a different view of super-
natural agency and Divine interposition, or of the
Mosaic institutions and the Levities] worship, is
given in the two books, or that a less historical
character belongs to one thai, to the other, is to
say what has not the least foundation In fact.
Supernatural agency, as in the cloud which filled
the Temple of Solomon, 1 K. viii. 10, 11; the ap-
pearance of the I>ord to Solomon, iii. 5, 11, ix. 9 ff. ;
the withering of Jeroboam's hand, xiii. 3-6 ; the
lire from heaven which consumed Elijah's sacrifice,
iviii. 36, and numerous other incidents in the lives
of Klijah and Elisha; the smiting of Sennacherib's
army, 2 K. xix. 35; the going back of the shadow
on the dial of Abas, xx. 11; and in the very frequent
prophecies uttered and fulfilled, is really more often
adduced in these books than in the Chronicles.
The selection therefore of one or two instances of
miraculous agency which happen to be mentioned
in Chronicles and not in Kings, as indications of
the superstitious credulous disposition of the Jews
after the Captivity, can have no effect but to mis-
lead. The same may be said of a selection of pas-
sages in Chronicles in which the mention of Jewish
idolatry is omitted. It conveys a false inference,
because the truth is that the Chronicler does expose
the idolatry of Judab as severely as the author of
Kings, and traces the destruction of Judah to such
idolatry quite as clearly and forcibly (2 Chr. xxxvi.
14 If.). The author of Kings again is quite as
explicit in his references to the law of Hoses, and
has many allusions to the Levities! ritual, though
he does not dweU so copiously upon the details.
See e. >j. 1 K. ii. 3, iii. 14, viii. 2, 4, 9, 53, 56, ix.
9, 90, x. 12, xl. 2, xil. 31, 32; 2 K. xi. 5-7, 12,
xii. 5, 11, 13, 16, xiv. 6, xvi. 13, 15, xvii. 7-12,
13-16, 34-39, xviil. 4, 6, xxii. 4, 5, 8 ff., xxiii. 21,
Ac., besides the constant references to the Temple,
and to the illegality of high-place worship. So that
remarks on the Levitical tone of Chronicles, when
made for the purpose of supporting the notion that
the law of Hoses was a late invention, and that the
Levitical worship was of post-Babylonian growth,
are made in the teeth of the testimony of the books
of Kings, as well as those of Joshua, Judges, and
Samuel The opinion that these hooks were com-
piled " towards the end of the Babylonian exile,"
is doubtless also adopted in order to weaken as
much as possible the force of this testimony (De
Wette, ii. p. 248; Tb. Parker's transl.). As re-
gards the weight to be given to the judgment of
critics "of the liberal school," on such questions,
It may be observed by the way that they commence
tvery such investigation with this axiom as a start-
ing point, "Nothing supernatural can be true."
All prophecy is of course comprehended under this
uiom. Kvery writing therefore containing any
reference to the Captivity of the Jews, a* 1 K. viii.
46. 47, ix. 7, 8, mutt have been written after the
■vents referred to. No events of a supernatural
kind could be attested in contemporary historical
documents. All the narratives therefore in which
such events are narrated do not belong to the
ancient annals, but mtut be of later grovth, and so
an. How far the mind of a critic, who has such
Ml axiom to start with, is free to appreciate the
Jtbcr and more delicaie kinds of evidence by which
the date c* documraiu. is decided it is easy to per-
ceive. However, these remarks are made hu* solely
to assist the reader in coming to a right decision
on questions connected with the criticism of tin
books of Kings.
V. The last point for our consideration is the
place of these books in the Canon, and the references
to them in the N. T. Their canonical authority
having never bean disputed, it is needless to bring
forward the testimonies to their authenticity which
may be found in Josephus, Euseblus, Jerome, Au-
gustine, etc., or in Bp. Cosin, or any other modern
work on the Canon of Scripture. [Camoh.] They
are reckoned, as has been already noticed, among
the Prophets [Bible, vol. i. p. 304 n], in the three-
fold division of the Holy Scriptures ; a position In
accordance with the supposition that they wen
compiled by Jeremiah, and contain the narratives
of the different prophets in succession. They are
frequently cited by our Lord and by the Apostles.
Thus the allusions to Solomon 'a glory (Halt. vi.
99); to toe queen of Sheba's visit to Solomon to
hear his wisdom (xii. 42); to the Temple (Acts vU.
47, 48); to the great drought in the days of Elijah,
and the widow of Sarepta (Luke iv. 25, 28); to the
cleansing of Naaman the Syrian (ver. 27); to the
charge of Elisha to Gehari (2 K. ir. 29, oomp. with
Luke x. 4) ; to the dress of EUjafa (Hark i. 6, comp
with 2 K. i. 8) ; to the complaint of Elijah, and
God's answer to him (Rom. xi. 3, 4); to the raising
of the Shunammite's son from the dead (Heb. xi.
35) ; to the giving and withholding the rain in answer
to EUjah's prayer (Jain. v. 17, 18; Rev. xi. 6); to
Jezebel (Rev. ii. 20); are all derived from the books
of Kings, and, with the statement of Elijah's pres-
ence at the Transfiguration, are a striking testimony
to their value for the purpose of religious teaching,
and to their authenticity as a portion of the Word
of God.*
On the whole then, in this portion of the history
of the Israelitish people to which the name of the
Boob of Kingt has been given, we have (if wa
except those errors in numbers, which an either
later additions to the original work, or accidental
corruptions of the text) a most important and
accurate account of that people during upwards of
four hundred years of their national existence, de-
livered for the most part by contemporary writers,
and guaranteed by the authority of one of the most
eminent of the Jewish pruphets. Considering the
conciseness of the narrative, and the simplicity at
the style, the amount of knowledge which these
books convey of the characters, conduct, and man-
ners of kings and people during so long a period is
truly wonderful The insight they give us into the
aspect of Judah and Jerusalem, both natural and
artificial, into the religious, military, and civil in-
stitutions of the people, their arts and manufactures,
the state of education and learning among them,
their resources, commerce, exploits, alliances, the
causes of their decadence, and finally of their ruin,
is most clear, interesting, and instructire. In a
few brief sentences we acquire more accurate knowl-
edge of the affairs of Egypt, Tyre, Syria, Assyria,
Babylon, and other neighboring nations, than had
been preserved to us in all the other remains of
antiquity up to the recent discoveries in hieroglyph-
ical and cuneiform monuments. If we seek in
them a system of scientific chronology, we nut)
• Ttao miracle of Fs xmvw and ashes (Lake Ix. 18,
t K- Ir. <2; John vl. ..2 K. Iv. 48) and the eateblng
war tt Philip, Acts vat. 89, 40, ar wmpared »ltn 1
g xvtU. 12. 2 K. U. 16. an also, In a
N. T. references to the books of KiofS.
Digitized by
Google
Ib02 KINGS
Indeed he disappointed; but if we are onatant to
■cad accurate and truthful history, ready to fit into
ita proper place whenever the exact chronology of
the timet shall have been settled from other sources,
then we shall assuredly find they will abundantly
repay the roust laborious study which we can be-
stow upon them.
But it is for their deep religious teaching, and
fur the insight which they give us Into God's provi-
dential and moral government of the world, that
they are above all valuable. The books which
descril« the wisdom and the glory of Solomon, and
yet record his fall ; which make us acquainted with
the painful ministry of Elyah, and his translation
into heaven ; and which tell us how the most mag-
niuonnt temple ever built ' for God's glory, and of
which He vouchsafed to take possession by a visible
symbol of his presence, was consigned to the flames
and to desolation, for the sins of those who wor-
shipped in it, read us such lessons concerning both
God and man, as are the best evidence of their
divine origin, and make them the richest treasure
to every Christian man.
On the points discussed in the preceding article
see L'ssber's Chronologia Sncra; Hales' Annlysit;
Clinton's Fast Hellen. vol i. ; Lepsius, Kumyebuch
d. JSyypL; Bertheau's Bich. 1 Chivnik; Keil,
Chrmitj Hovers, KriL Vntersueh. 86. d. BibL
Chivnik; Ue Wette, Einleilung; Ewald's 6'es-
chichte des Volk. In: ; Bunsen, Egypt' $ Place m
Hist; Geneste's Parallel Histories; Rawlinson's
Herodotus, and Bampton Led. ; J. W. Bosanquet,
Chronology of Times of Ezra, Transact, of
Chronolog. Instil. No. iii.; Maurice, Kings and
Prophets. A. C. H.
* Other commentaries and helps. — Among the
older writers may be mentioned Theodoret, Quas-
tionts in boras in. et h. Regnorum ( Opp. vol. i.
ed. Schnitee et Ncatdt, 1769); Seb. Schmid, Ad-
notaU. in libra* Regum (1697); Calmet, Commen-
toire literal, etc. vol. ii. (1784); Jo. Clertcus (Le
Clerc), Vet. Test tibri historici, etc. (1733); Bp.
Patrick, Comm. on the Hist. Books of the 0. T.,
5th ed., vol. ii. (1786) ; and the commentators in
the Critic* Saeri, torn. II. pp. 636-678 (1700).
The principal later writers are Haurer, Comm. Crit.
I. 198-231 (1836); Thenlus, Die Bicher dtr Ki-
mige rnrkUrt (lief. ii. of the Kurzgef. exeg.
Hondo., 1849); K. F. Keil, Bicher der KSnige
(1848), Engl. tram. Edin. 1867; and also Comm.
Ob. die Bicher der Kfnige (Theil ii. Bd. iii. of the
Biol. Comm. to. das A. TesL by Keil and Delitasch);
Vaihinger, KSnige, Bicher der, in Herzog's Reat-
Encyk. viii. 3-8 (1867); Wordsworth, Books of
Kings, etc., in his Holy Bible, with Notts and In-
troductions, vol. iii. (1866); and Dr. Bahr in
Lnnge's Bibebcerk (in preparation, 1868). For a
long list of wriUm on single difficult paasages in
Kings, see Dana's Universal- Wiiierbuch, p. 566 f.
De Wette'i German translation of these books (in
his Heilige Bchrift, 4* Aufl., 1868) and the French
translation of H. A. Perret-Gentil, publ. by the
Societi Biblique ProUstante (Paris, 1866), embody
in rmmlts of the best modern scholarship. The
latter is sometimes paraphrastic. Other translations
vf eonsiderabie value, accompanied with notes, an
those of Rathe, Libri hisU Vet. Test. (Hals, 1784);
I. D. Hiehaeiis, Deutsche Uebers. d. A. Test
TWC xii. (1786); and S. Ceheu, La Bible, trad.
earn, torn viii. (Paris, 1838).
For historical sketches derived to a great extent
KIR
from these books, see Jahn'a Hebrex Cummum
wealth, pp. 82-183 (Andover, 1828); llilnan't
History of Ike Jem, I. 819-461 (Amer. ed.); Pal-
frey, Lectures on the Jewish Scriptures, ii. 44-14*
(Boston, 1863); Stanley's Lectures on the Jewish
Church, voL ii. Led. xxrL-xL; Bertbeau, Zmr
Geschichte der Isradittn, pp. 804-367; Ewald,
Gesch. des Volkes Israel, Bd. iii., S< Ausg. (1866);
and Oihler's article Kcnige in Hersog'a Real.
Encyk. viii. 8-16. Of a kindred character is the
valuable chapter on " Ktinige " in Sssrarhiiti's Das
Mosaische Reeht, L 72-89. Newman's Hist, of the
Hebrew Monarchy (2d ed. Loud. 1863) is written
from a purely naturalistic stand-point. For the con-
nection of the Hebrews with Nineveh and Babylon
during this period of the Hebrew monarchy, wc
have M. von Niebuhr's Gesch. Assur's und Babel's
pp. 61, 86 t, 164, 171, 214, Ac; Oppert and
Mlnant's Lis Fastes de S'lrgon (Paris, 1888);
Oppert 'a Inscriptions des Sargauides (V
18U3); Kawlinson's Monarchies of the
Eastern World, especially vols. ii. and iii. (Load.
1804, 1866) ; and Urard's Discoecnts in the
limits of Nineveh ami B ibykm, especially ah. in.
I .owl. ioV.3). G. Kawllnauu louche* iu una but
upic in hit Bampton Lectures (already referred to!
.or 1869, eh. v. See further, on the chronology of
these books, the work of Wolff and others referred
to under the art Chbohologt, vol. L p. 461. and
Riehm, Bargon u. Salmanassar, in the TheoL
Stud. a. JCrtL 1888, pp. 688-698.
Of the Introductions to the O. T., those in per-
tleular of Havemick (iL 148-226) and Bleak (pp.
866-401) furnish a good outline of the ques-
tions relating to the authorship, sources, and his-
torical nWmrf«r of the Books of Kings. See also
Davidson's Introd. to the Old Test. ii. 1-46 (1862).
and Kuenen, Hist. crit. des Worts de tAncien TesL,
trad, par Pierson, L 400-441 (Paris, 1866).
' It will be borne in mind that the interest of
these chronicles centres largely in the personal
character and history of those who are mentioned
in them. The reader therefore will find important
aid for the study of these books in the articles
on the names in the Dictionary (Solomon, Jeroboam,
Jehu, Elyah, Etisha, Ahab, Jehoram, Hexekiah,
Manaaaeh, Isaiah, and others), which represent Uus
period of Hebrew history. The copious articles an
Judaii, Kingdom op, and Israel, Kingdom
or, may be consulted for the same purpose. H.
• KINBED is the reading of the original edi-
tion of the A. V. (A. o. 1611) in all the passages
in which " kindred " now stands in later editions.
This substitution is one of the changes which illus-
trate the " large amount of tacit and unacknowl-
edged revision " which the English Scriptures have
gradually undergone. Sea Trench, Authorized
Version, p. 66 (2d ed.). H.
• KINREDS in the A. V. ed. 1611 has sits
(see above) given place in later editions to " kin-
dreds," in the sense of families or tribes. The
original terms an in the O. T. nVtgtTD (lCbr
rvi. 28; Ps. vxii. 97, Ae.), and In the N. T
rarpud (Acts ill. 26) and fvXai (Bar. L 7, vH
9, *o.). H.
KIB Cl"l} [«*»% «"IW tlaci\: [Am. L 8,;
Xo#«V; [k. 7, /Mfoot; U., LXX. omit; I K
rvi. 9, Rom. Vat omit, Alex. Kvpvrn:} Cyans
is mentioned by Amos (ix. 7) as the land frost
which the Syrians (Aranueans) ware oc
Digitized by
Google
K1RHARASETH
so;" i. e. apparently, u the ecuntry where tbey
kid dwell oefore migrating to Hie regno north of
Fihaliim It was also, curiously enough, the land
to which the eaptire Syrian* of Damascus wen
■emoted by TIglath-Pileeer on hie oonqueet of that
aty (9 K. xvl. 9; eoinp. Am. i. 5). Iatlah joini
it with Ehuii in a passage where Jerusalem U
threatened with an attack from a foreign army
(xxii. 6). These notices, and the word itself, are
all the data we possess for determining the site.
A variety of conjectures hare been offered on this
point, grounded on some similarity of name. Ren-
ndl suggested ATvrdistan ( Geography of Herodottu,
p. 891); Vitringa, Corine, a town of Media;
Boehart (Phaicg, iv. 32, p. 293). Curmn or Ctama,
likewise in Media. But the common opinion among
recant commentators has been that a tract on the
river Kttr or Cyrus (Kvpos) is intended. This is
the view of RosenmUIler, Michaelis, and Geeeniua.
Winer sensibly remarks that the tract to which
these writers refer "never belonged to Assyria,"
and so cannot possibly have been the country
whereto Tiglatb-Pileser transported his captives
(ffeoMrteroucA, I. 698). He might have added,
that all we know of the Semites and their migra-
tions is repugnant to a theory which would make
Northern Armenia one of their original settlements.
The Semites, whether Aranueana, Assyrians, Phoe-
nicians, or Jews, seem to have come originally from
lower Mesopotamia — the country about the mouths
•f the Euphrates and Tigris rivers. Here exactly
was Elam or Elymais, with which Kir is so closely
connected by Isaiah. May not Air then be a
variant for Kith or Kuth (Cush), and represent
the eastern Ethiopia, the Ciaaia (Kurala) of He-
todotus? 6. B.
KIKr-HAKA'SETH (POnfi "PjyTJ : voir
iMovt tov rolxov KaBypftfiiyovs S Alex. ....
raeVMurov*: mm fidilet), 2 K. ill. 29. [KlB-
]
KIR-HARE'SETH 'H^nq '{5: TO fc
tarourowri S< lie usArrf)<r*i>: «hw«s eoeH late-
nt). Is. xvL 7. [Kib-hebks.]
KIR-HATU5SH (Bnrj 'ft L e. KMtartts
rtixn IvtKtiruras • Alex. t<x<» o mtctrurat :
ief antrum oocti latent), Is. xvi. H. [KlB-
IEKES.J
KIR-HETRE8 (tt^rj I? ■ Ktiptitt aixjtou,
[ate.]: aww Jictilit), Jer. xlviii. 31, 36. This
name and the three preceding, all alight variations
af it. are all applied to one place, probably Kir-
Mo a B. Whether Chens refers to a worship of the
son carried on there is uncertain; we are withoat
dew to the meaning of the name.
KIR1AH (nj*1p), apparently an ancient or
archaic word, meaning a city or town. The
grounds for considering it a more ancient word
than In (~TO) or An (iy) an — (1.) Its mora
frequent occurrence in the names of places existiLg
in the country at the time of the conquest. There
will be found below. (2.) I to ran occurrence as a
ja» appellative, except in poetry, where old words
sod forms are often preserved after they become
obsolete in ordinary language. Out of the *6 times
tint it is found in the O. T. (hota in its original
and its Chaldee form) 4 only an Id the narrative
4 the earlier books (Deut ii. 86, 111. 4; 1 K. 1.
II. 49), 24 are in poetical passages (Num. xxi. 28;
KIBJATH 1568
Pa. xhul. 2; Is. L 26, 4e. 4c), and 8 in the book
jf Ens, either in speaking of Samaria (iv. 10), of
in the letter of the Samaritans (iv. 12-21),
implying that it had become a provincialism. In
this it U unlike Ir, which is the ordinary term for
a city in narrative or chronicle, while it enters into
the composition of early names in a far smaller
proportion of cases. For illustration — though for
that only — Kirrah may perhaps be compared to the
word * burg," or " bury," in our own language.
Closely related to Klryah is Kereth (H^i?),
apparently a Phoenician form, which occurs occa-
sionally (Jab xxix. 7; Prov. viil. 8). This it
familiar to us in the Latin garb of CorfAago, and
in the Parthian and Armenian names Crrta,
Tigrano-Cerfn (Boehart, Chanaan, it cap. x.|
Geeeniua, Thet. 1236-37).
As a proper name it appears in the Bible under
the forma of Kerioth, Kartell, Kartan ; besides
those immediately following. O.
KIBIATH A'lM (0;^!^, but in the Ctlha
of Ez. xxv. 9, D.T"lp [too eines] : KnpwM/i, in
Vat. [rather, Rom.] of Jer. xlviii. 1; [Vat hen
and] elsewhere with Alex. KapiaBcu/i ; [FA. to
Jer. xlviii. 23, KapiaStp-] Cariathaim), one of the
towns of Moab which wen the "glory of the
country;" named amongst the denunciations of
Jeremiah (xlviii. 1, 23) and Ezekiel (xxv. 9). It if
the same place as Kikjathaim, in which form the
name elsewhere occurs in the A. V. Taken as
a Hebrew word this would mean "double city;"
but the original reading of the text of Ez. xxv. 9,
Kiriatham, taken with that of the Vat. LXX. at
Num. xxxii. 37, prompts the suspicion that that
may be nearer its original form, and that the aim
— the Hebrew dual — is a later accommodation, in
obedience to the ever-existing tendency in the
names of places to adopt an intelligible shape. In
the original edition (A. d. 1611) of the A. V. the
name Kirjath, with its compounds, is given aa
Kiriath, the yod being there, aa elsewhere in that
edition, represented by i. Kiriathaim is one of
the few of these names which in the subsequent
editions have escaped the alteration of i to j.
O.
KIRIATHIA-RIUS (KoptooW ; [Vat Kay-
Totft lapsus ; Aid.] Alex. KaotaBiiptot •• Crtar-
point), 1 Esdr. v. 19. [Kuuathvsajuu, and
K, Arm.]
KIRTOTH (nS»"Tpn, with the definite artt
cle, i. a. hak-Kertyoth '[III* citiet]: al wi\ta
ovrqf : Carioth), a place in Moab tin palaces of
which were denounced by Amos with destructloc
by fin (Am. 11. 2); unless indeed it be safer It
treat the word aa meaning simply " the cities " —
which is probably the case also in Jer. xlviii. 41,
where the word is in the original exactly similar
to the above, though given in the A. V. "Kerioth."
[Kkrioth.] G.
KIR'JATH (rTffl? [«*»•]! laplpl [▼•*•
looftp;] Alex, toAij tuptp,: Carioth), the last
of the cities enumerated aa belonging to the tribe
of Benjamin (Josh. xviL. 98), one of the group
whioh contains both Gibson and Jerusalem. It is
named with Gibsath, but without any copulative —
" Gibsath, Kirjath," a circumstance which, In the
absence of any further mention of the place, has
I given rise to several explanations. (1.) That of
Digitized by
Google
1564 KIRJATHAIM
Entebius in the Onomasticon (KapiiS), that it an
ander the protection of Gibeah (fore unrpowiKir
ta$aSi). This, however, teems to be » men
lupputiUon. (S.J That of Schwara and other*,
that the two names form the title of one place,
" Gibeath-Kirjath " (the hill-town). Against this
Is the fact that the towns in this group are summed
up as 14; but the objection has not much force,
and there are several considerations in favor of the
view. [See Gibeath, p. 914 a.] But whether
there is any connection between these two names or
not, there seems a strong probability that Kirjath
is identical with the better known place Kikjath-
Jeai:u, and that the latter part of the name has
been omitted by copyists at some very early period.
Such an omission would be very likely to arise from
the fact that the word for "cities," which in He-
brew follows Kirjath, is almost identical with
Jearim ; <■ and that it has arisen we have the testi-
mony of the LXX. in both HSS. (the Alex, most
complete), as well as of some Hebrew HSS. still
existing (Davidson, Heir. Text, ad loc.). In addi-
tion, it may be asked why Kirjath should be in
the " construct state " if no word follows it to be
in construction with? In that case it would be
Kiriah. True, Kirjath-jearim is enumerated as a
eity of Judah b (Josh. xv. 9, 60, xviii. 14), but so
are several towns which were Simeon's sod Dan's,
and it to not to be supposed that these places never
ehanged hands. G.
KIRJATHAIM (DVPnf?) [too cities], the
name of two cities of ancient Palestine.
1- (KayuatfaV* [Tat. Kopoiflou]. (in Num.),
KapiaBalii ; [Alex. KapiaSaift'-] CnrintAaim.) On
the cast of the Jordan, one of the places which
were taken possession of and rebuilt by the Reu-
benites, and had fresh names conferred on them
(Num. xxxii. 37, and aee 38). Here it is men-
tioned between Elealeh, Nebo, and Baal-meon, the
first and hut of which are known with some tolera-
ble degree of certainty. But on its next occurrence
(Josh. xiii. 19 ) the same order of mention is not
maintained, and it appears in company with
Mephaath and Sibmah, of which at present
nothing is known. It is possibly the same place
as that which gave its name to the ancient Shaveh-
Kiriathaim, though this is mere conjecture. It
rxtited in the time of Jeremiah (xlviii. 1, 23) and
Xzekiel (xxr. 9 — in these three passages the A. V.
gives the name Kiriathaih). Both these prophets
Include it in their denunciations against Moab,
In whose hands it then was, prominent among the
sities which were "the glory of the country"
J«5x. xxv. 9).
By Eusebius it appears to have been well known.
o The text now stands 0*13? fTHp ; In the
above view It originally stood D^S D'HS* mp,
' It is as wall to observe, thongh ws may not be
*le yet to draw any Inference from the fact, that on
both occasions of Its being attributed to Judah. It Is
failed by another name, — K Kxsjatbmaal, which Is
Klija'h jnrlm.'
■' This readiug ot the LXX. suggests that the dual
termination " aim n may have been a later accommo-
5vlon of the name to Hebrew forms, as was possibly
the ease with Jemshalalm (vol. II. p. 1272). It Is
supported by the Hebrew text : cf. b. xxv. 9, and the
fat. (Bom.) I XX. of Jer. xlvtil. 1. [Kiaunum.]
* There Is torm uncertainty about Borckhardt's
Bate at this pan. In order to sss AfaoVoo, which Is
KIRJATH- ABBA
Ha describes it (Onoa. KaptaSulfi) as a /ihsgi
entirely of Christiana, 10 miles wast of Madeba,
" oloae to the Baria " (eVl to* Baair). Burekbardt
(p. 867, July 13) when at Madeba (Medeba) was
told by his guide * of a place, ef- Ttgm, about half
an hour (lj mile English, or barely 2 miles Borneo)
therefrom, which he suggests was identical with
Kirjathaim. This is supported by Gesenius (pet
hit notes on Burekbardt in the Germ. tranaL p.
1063), who pastes by the discrepancy in the dis-
tance by saying that Eusebius's measurements an
seldom accurate. Seetatu also names half an horn
at the distance (Rdttn, i. 408).
But it must be admitted that the evidence »7
the identity of the two is not very convincing, and
appears to rest entirely on the similarity in sobdJ
between the termination of Kirjathaim and tit)
name of tt-Teym. In the time of Eusebius tbt
name was Katiat — having retained, as would be
expected, the first and chief part of the word.
Porter (Handbook, p. 300) pronounces confidently far
Kurnj/ai, under the southern side of Jtbet Atlarmt,
as being identical both with Kirjathaim and Kirjaih-
Huiotb ; but he adduces no arguments in support
of his conclusion, which is entirely at variance with
Eusebius; while the name, or a similar one. (tea
Kerioth, Kirioth, in addition to those named
already), having been a common one east of the
Jordan, as it still is (witness Kurett/ek, KwdftUix,
etc.), Kiatiyui may be the representative of soma
other place.
What was the " Barit " which Eusebius placet
to close to Kirjathaim ? Was it a phot or fortress
(PPI^S, Bdpii), or is it merely the corruption of a
name? If the latter, then it is slightly in accord-
ance with Beresha, the reading of the Targnm
Pseudqjon. at Num. xxxii. 87.' But where to find
Beresha we do not at present know. A village
named Buratin it marked in the maps of Robinaon
(1S56) and Van de Velde, but about 9 miles eaat
of Hetbia, and therefore not in a suitable posi-
tion.
2. (A. KopiocWu.) A town in NaphtoJi not
mentioned in the original lists of the [iiifsiiw
allotted to the tribe (tee Josh. xix. 32-39), but
inserted in the list of cities given to the Gersbonite
Levites, in 1 Chr. (vi. 76), in place of Kartak in
the parallel catalogue, Kartan being probably only
a contraction thereof. G.
KIB/JATH-AB/BA (S?"|W 'p, and once,
Neh. xi. 25, VjTJ 'p # [tee in the art.] : w&u
'Ap/B<fic, w. 'Aoy6P; Alex. [Ae/fcw, Apfltir,] AeBe
and Ap/Joo; */ KapiaSapPiK [Vat. Kapatapfioic] i
Ka0M0af>/9o*»'ea)c0, but Mai Kapioe/9o( EaVtp;
shown on the maps as nearly S. of Habtn, he left
the great road at the latter place, and went through
Djtboul, tt-Samth, and other places which are shown
as on the road eastward, In an entirety dlnarent
direction from Madeba, and than altar 8 hours, with-
out noting any change of direction, he arrives at
Madeba, which appears from the maps to be only
about 1 j hour from Hetb&n.
« The following is the full synonym of this Targnia
for Kirjathaim : » And the d>» of two s tr ee ts raves'
with marble, the tame Is Beresha" (HtP^S)
This Is almost Identical with the rendering given la
the tame Targum on Num. xxiL 89, tar Kirjath
Huaoth. Can Beresha contain an all-srion to O
the modem /cms* T
Digitized by
Google
KIRJATH-ARBA
41st KapmpSoK <re<fitp; [in Nek.., KapiaSap-
B6k, Vat b'A> , Kawioftu, Ajbx. KapiatapjSo:]
Cirilit Arbte, Carwth-Arbt,), an early name of
the city which after the conquest is generally known
as Hebron (Josh. xiv. 15 ; Judg. i. 10). Possi-
bly, however, not Kirjath-airba, bnt Mamrb, was
its earliest appellation (Gen. xxxv. 97), though the
latter name may hare been that of the sacred
grove near the town, which would occasionally
transfer its title to tie whole spot [Mamri.]
The identity of Kirjath-Arba will Hebron is
constantly asserted (Gen. xxiii. 2, xxxv. 97 ; Josh.
xir. 15, xt. 13, 64, xx. 7, xxi. 11),« the only men-
tion of it without that qualification being, as is
somewhat remarkable, after the return from the
Captivity (Neh. xi. 95), a date so late that we
might naturally have supposed the aboriginal name
would have become extinct But it lasted far
longer than that, for when Sir John Maundeville
visited the place (dr. 1332) he found that " the
Saracens call the place in their language Karicarba,
but the Jews call it Arbotha" (Early Trar. p.
161). Thus too in Jerome's time would Debir
seem to have been still called by its original title,
Kirjath-Sepher. So impossible does it appear to
extinguish the name originally bestowed on a
place!*
The signification of Kirjath-Arba is. to say the
least, doubtful. In favor of its being derived
from some ancient hero is the statement that " Arba
wss the great man among the Anakim " (Josh. xiv.
IS) — the •• father of Anak " (xxi. 11). Against it
are (a.) the peculiarity of the expression in the
first of these two passages, where the term Adam
( /"OH OTOT1) — usually employed for the spe-
cies, the human race — is used instead of M, which
commonly denotes an individual, (o.) The con-
sideration that the term " father " is a metaphor
frequently employed in the Bible — as in other
oriental writings — for an originator or author,
whether of a town or a quality, quite as often as
of an individual. The LXX. certainly so under-
stood both the passages in Joshua, since they have
in each firrrpiroXti, "mother-city." (e.) The
constant tendency to personification so familiar to
students of the topographical philology of other
countries than Palestine, and which in the present
case must have had some centuries in which to ex-
ercise its influence. In the lists of 1 Chron. He-
bron itself is personified (ii. 42) as the son of
Haresbah, a neighboring town, and the father of
r appaah and other places in the same locality ; and
J» same thing occurs with Beth-zur (ver. 45),
Ziph (42), Madmannah and Gibea (49), etc. etc.
(a*.) On more than one occasion (Gen. xxxv. 97;
Josh. xv. 13; Neb. xi. 25) the name Arba has the
fefijiite article prefixed to it This is very rarely,
if ever, the case with the name of a man (see Ro-
land, PnL p. 724). (e.) With the exception of the
KIKJATH-AR1M 166&
Tr-Dand — the city of David, Zion — the writer
does not recall any city of Palestine named after i
man. Neither Joshua, Caleb, Solomon, nor acy
other of the heroes or kings of Israel, conferred
their names on places; neither did Og, Jabin, or
other Canaanlte leaders. The " city of Sihon,"
for Heshbon (Num. xxi. 27), is hardly an exception,
for it occurs in a very fervid burst of poetry, differ-
ing entirely from the matter-of-fact documents ws
are now considering, (f.) The general consent of
the Jewish writers in a different interpretation is
itself a strong argument against the personality of
Arba, however absurd (according to our ideas) may
be their ways of accounting for that interpretation.
They take Arba to be the Hebrew word for " four,"
and Kirjath-Arba therefore to be the "city of four;"
and this they explain as referring to four great
saints who were buried there — Abraham, Isaac,
Jacob, and Adam — whose burial there they prove
by the words already quoted from Josh. xiv. 16
(Bertsh. rabba, quoted by Beer, Leben Abrahams,
189, and by Keil, ad foe.; Bochart, Pkaleg, iv. 84,
Ac.). In this explanation Jerome constantly con-
curs, not only in commentaries (as Quoit, in Gen-
aim, xxiii. 2 ; Oman, in MntU xxvii. ; Epil. Paula,
§11; Onomast. " Arboch " and «' Cariatharbe,"
etc.), but also in the text of the Vulgate at this
passage — Adam maximut tin inter Enacim $itm
est. With this too agrees the Veneto-Greek ver-
sion, w6\iitoiv rrrripav (Gen. xxiii. 2, xxxv. 27).
It is also adopted by Bochart (Chanaan, i. 1), in
whose opinion the "four" are Anak, Ahiman,
Sbeshal, and Talmai.
The fact at the bottom of the whole matter
probably is, that Arba was neither a man nor a
numeral, but that (as we have so often had occa-
sion to remark in similar cases) it was an archaic
Canaanlte name, most likely referring to the situa-
tion or nature of the place, which the Hebrews
adopted, and then explained in their own fashion.
[See JeOAB-SAHADOTHA, etc]
In Gen. xxiii. 2, the LXX (both MSS. [rather,
Rom. and Alex.] ) insert fj tarar iv Te> koiA^/ioti;
and in xxxv. 27 they render K. Arba by sit t6\iw
rov wttltv- In the former of these the addition
may be an explanation of the subsequent words, " in
the land of Canaan," the explanation having
slipped into the text in its wrong place. Its occur-
rence in both MSS. shows its great antiquity.* It
is found also in the Samaritan Codex anil Version.
In xxxv. 27 wMoy may have arisen from the trans-
lators reading H^J for 5S1M. °'
KIR'JATH-ATUM(Dny-'(7: Kaputku-
pip.; [Vat KaputS lopoui] Alex. Kapiatiaptiu.'-
Cariathiarim), an abbreviated form of the name
KiKjATH-jRAKlM, which occurs only in Est. U.
25. In the parallel passage of Nehemiah the nam*
is in its usual form, and in Esdras it is KrruA-
THIARIUB. G.
' In 0*0. xxxv. 27, the A, T. has « the dry of Ar-
»ah;"ta Josh. xv. 13. and xxi. 11, » the dry of
arba " [bnt « Arba*," ed. loll, Is xxi. 11).
» A curious parallel to this tenacity Is found m our
iarn coun try , when many a village is still kLjwn to
lk» rustle Inhabitant* by the Identical name bj which
t Is inscribed In Domesday Book, while they are ae-
aally unaware of the later nam* by which the place
sat ban currently known In mans and docnnxc.'.a,
and In the genual language of all but their cwn class
na- centuries. If this Is the eats with Krrjath-Arbe
the occ ur r a w of the
math, nottosd above, Is easily imderstood. It was
simply the eoort of the original mm* to assert Its
rights and assume Its position, as soon as the tempo-
rary absence of the Israelites at Babylon bad left the
Qanaanlte rustles to themselves.
e • The Vatican MS. utanU Gen. !.-sM. 9. Here,
aa generally In the KngUsb edition of this Dictionary,
the Roman edition of 1697 Is confounded with It
The elans* In question appears to be found In all MSB
of the LXX.. bnt Is marked with an obelus m she
Digitized by
Google
1666
KIRJATH-BAAL
KITiJATH-BA'AL 'VjS-'iJ «= torn of
Baal: KtyiAS BooA : Carinttbaal), an alternative
Dime of the place usually called Kirjath-jearlm
(Josh, tr. 60, xviil. 14), but also Baai.au, and
once BAALt-oH-JunAH. These names doubtless
point to the existence of a sanctuary of Baal at this
spot before the conquest They were still attached
to it considerably later, for they alone are used, to
the sxclusion of the (probably) newly bestowed
name of Klrjath-jearitn, in the description of the
removal of the ark thence (8 Sam. vi.). G.
KIR'JATH-HU'ZOTH (."fen '|? [see in
the art] : srrfXeu «Vu4a«m> : «r*» qua m extremis
rtgni tjutfinibm trot), a place to which Balak ac-
eompanled Balaam immediately after his arrival In
Moab (Num. xxii. 39), and which is nowhere else
mentioned. It appears to have lain between the
Ahnon ( Wndy Mojtb) and Bamotr-baal (comp.
w. 36 and 41 ), probably north of the former, since
there is some, though only slight, ground for sup-
posing that Bamoth-Baal lay between Dibon and
Betlibaal-meon (see Josh. jdii. 17). The passage
(Num. xxii. 39) is obscure In every way. It is not
obvious why sacrifices should have been offered
there, or how, when Balaam accompanied Balak
thither, Balak could have >< sent " thence to him
and to the princes who were with him (40).
No trace of the name has been discovered in
later times. It is usually interpreted to mean
"city of streets," from the Hebrew word YV1,
chute, which has sometimes this meaning (Gesenius,
Tht$. 456 a; margin of A. V.; and so Luther, die
Onuenttadt; so also the Veneto-fireek): but Je-
rome, in the Vulgate, has adopted another signi-
fication of the root The LXX. seem to have read
rmsn, " villages," the word which they usually
render by iwai\ns, and which is also the reading
of the Prshito. The Samaritan Codex and Ver-
sion, the former by its reading H V T, " visions,"
and the latter, ''fl, " mysteries," seem to ravor
the idea — which Is perhaps the explanation of the
sacrifices there — that Kirjath-Chutzoth was a
place of sacred or oracular reputation. The Tar-
gum Pseudqjon, gives it as " the streets of the
great city, the city of Sihon. the same is Birosa,"
apparently identifying it with Kirjathaim (see note
to p. 1664.) G.
KIR'JATH-JE'AMM (O* - ^. '% : »<x«
'lap^t *<id 'laptr, Kapiatiiaptu [citg of foruti),
and once r<JAu KaptaSiaplp.; Alex, the same, ex-
cepting [in some esses] the termination «{p; [Vat.
'ttH, -«i»i there are other variations not here no-
'Jced;l Joseph. Kapiaf>idV>iua: CariatJiiarim), a
city which played a not unimportant part in the
history of the Chosen People. We first enooun-
.er it as one of the four cities of the Gibeonites
(Josh. ix. 17): it next occurs as one of the land-
marks of the northern boundary of Judah (xv. 9),
and as toe point at which the western and south-
ern boundaries of Benjamin coincided (xviii. 14,
IS); okI in the two last passages we find that it
<« In 1 Ohr. xffl. 6, the Vulgate has CoUis {svmmA-
mim for the Bsalah of the Hebrew text
» Kicjatb -Jearim is not staled to have bssn allottsd
k> the Uvltou, but It Is dlfflcolt to suppoas that Abtn-
Otb and BIsaaw were not Levhas. This
KIRJATH-JEARIM
bore another, perhaps earlier, name — that sf At
great Canaanite deity Baal, namely Baalah*
and Kirjath-Baal. It is included among the
towns of Judah (xv. 60), and there is some reasoa
for believing that under the shortened form of
Kikjath it is also named among those of Benja-
min, ss might almost be expected from the position
it occupied on the confines of each. Some consid-
erations bearing on this will be found under Kik-
jath and Gibbah. It is included in the genealo-
gies of Judah (1 Chr. ii. 60, 88) as founded by, or
descended from, Shobal, the son of Calebben-Hor,
and as having in its turn sent out the colonies of
the Ithritea, Puhites, Shumathites, and Miahraitei,
snd those of Zorah and Eshtaol. " Behind Kirjath-
jearim " the band of Danites pitched their camp be-
fore their expedition to Mount Ephrsim and Laiah.
leaving their name attached to the spot for long after
(Judg. xviii. 12). [Mahankh-dam.] Hitherto,
beyond the early sanctity implied in its bearing the
name of Baal, there is nothing remarkable in
Kirjath-Jearim. It was no doubt this reputation
for sanctity which made the people of Beth-shemeah
appeal to its inhabitants to relieve them of the Ark
of Jehovah, which was bringing such calamities on
their untutored Inexperience. From their place in
the valley they looked anxiously for some eminence,
which, according to the belief of those days, should
be the appropriate seat for so powerful a Deity —
" Who is able to stand before the race of Jehovah,
this holy God, and to whom shall He (or LXX.,
the ark of Jehovah) go up from us? " "And they
sent to the inhabitants of Kirjath-jearim, saving,
the Philistines have brought back the ark of Je-
hovah, come ye down and fetch it up to yon "
(1 Sain. vi. 30, 91). In this high-place— •• the
hill " (nyjSn) — under the charge of Ekazar,
son of Abinadab,* the ark remained for twenty years
(vii. 3), during which period the spot became the
resort of pilgrims from all parts, anxious to offer
sacrifices and perform vows to Jehovah (Joseph.
Ant. vi. 2, § 1). At the close of that time Kirjath-
Jearim lost its sacred treasure, on its removal by
David to the house of Obed-edom the Gittito
(1 Chr. xiii. 6, 6; 3 Chr. i. 4; 3 Sam. vi. 8,
Ac). It is very remarkable and suggestive that in
the account of this transaction the ancient and
heathen name Baal is retained. In fact, in 3 Sam.
vi. 8 — probably the original statement — the name
Baale is used without any explanation, and to the
exclusion of that of Kirjath-jearim. In the altaaion
to this transaction in Ps. exxxii. 6, the name is
obscurely indicated as the "wood" — yarn-, the
root of Kirjativ/enrim. We are further told that
its people, with those of Chephirah and Beeroth,
743 in number, returned from captivity (Neb. vii.
29; and see Earn ii. 36, where the name is
K.-arim, and 1 Esdr. v. 19, Kiriathiariob).
We also bear of a prophet UmjAH-ben-Sbemaiah,
a native of the place, who enforced the warnings
of Jeremiah, and was cruelly murdered by Jeboia-
kim (Jer. xxvi. 30, tec.), but of the place we know
nothing beyond what has been already said. A
tradition is mentioned by Adricbomius (Dntr. i
& Dan. § 17), though without stating his author*
ty, that it was the native place of " Zecbariah, see
and the fsree of the word rendered " suKtttsd " (v»
1), will bt noticed under UfrKS. On the etbsr has*
It Is renwrksMs that aVju-ahemeeh, than watsh ss*
ask was ssnt away, was a err/ of the |
Digitized by
Google
KIKJATH-8ANNAH
sf Jehoiada, who wu slain between the alter and
the Temple." •
To Eusebius and Jerome ( Onom. " Cariatbiarim ")
it appears to hare been well known. They describe
|t at a village at the ninth (or, «. v. " Baal," tenth)
mile between Jerusalem and Diospolii (Lydda).
With this description, and the former of these two
distances agrees i'rocopiua toe Reland, p. 60S). It
was reserved for Dr. Kobinson (BibL Ret. li. 11) to
discover that these requirements are exactly ful-
filled in the modern village of Kuritt el-Knab —
now usually known as Abu Goth, from the robber-
chief whose head-quarters it was — at the eastern
end of the Wndy Aly, on the road from Jaffa to
Jerusalem. And, indeed, if the statement of Euse-
bius contained the only conditions to be met, the
identification would be certain. It does not, how-
ever, so well agree with the requirements of 1 Sam.
ri. The distance from Beth-ehemeah (Am Shemt)
k considerable — not less than 10 miles — through
KIBJATH-8ANNAH
1567
a very uneven country, with no appearance of any
road ever having existed (Rob. iii. 157). Neithet
is it at all in proximity to Bethlehem (Ephratuh),
which would seem to be implied in Ps. exxxii. 6 1
though this latter passage is very obscure. Wil-
liams (Holy City) endeavors to identify Kirjatb-
jcarim with Dor et-Boaa, east of Am Shenu. Bat
this, though sufficiently near the latter place, does
not answer to the other conditions. We may
therefore, for the present, consider Kuritt tLEnab
as the representative of Kiijath-jearim.
The modern name, differing from the ancient
only in its latter portion, signifies the " city of
grapes; " the ancient name, if interpreted as He-
brew, the " city of forests." Such interpretations
of these very antique names must be reorired with
great caution on account of the tendency whlea
exists universally to alter the names of plaices and
persons so that they shall contain a meaning in tht
language of the country. In the pr esent east w»
Urjstti-jaerbn.
U»e the play on the name in Ps. exxxii. 6, already
noticed, the authority of Jerome (Comm. in It.
sxix. 1), who renders it villa tilvnrum, and the
testimony of a recent traveller (Tobler, Drill* Wnn-
dtrung, 178, 187), who in the immediate neisfhlwr-
taoad, on the ridge probably answering to Mount
Jiarim, states thai, "for real genuine (echta)
woods, so thick and so solitary, he had seen nothing
like them since he left Germany."
It remains yet to be seen if any separate or
definite eminence answering to the hifl or high-
place on which the ark was deposited is recognirable
at Kuritt d-Enab. G.
• An old Gothic church at Kuritt tl-Enab built
by the Crusaders is an object of mournful interest
to the traveller. It is one of the most perfect
Christian ruins of this description in Palestine.
The eiterior walls are well preserved, and the aisles,
pillars, and some old frescoes still remain. The
Moslems often make mosques of such churches, but
this one they hare turned into a stable or cow-pen.
H.
KIR'JATH-SAITNAH [H^/Q 'fl [dtu of
•rjtnutwn at writing, Fiirst ; of palm-branch,
a The mention of Kapia$tafi*(r (Alex. Kapta6toptf«)
la ike LXX. of Jnsh. UL 16, pasdbty proceeds Don a
■arrattkm of U« tWbraw Kirjtth-Adam, « the otty
Ges.]: *6\is ypa^fjArmr: Cariathtemvi), a name
which occurs once only (Josh. xv. 49), as another,
and probably an earlier, appellation for Deuir, an
important place in the mountains of Judah. not far
from Hebron, and which also bore the name of
Kijuath-Skphkr. Whence the name is derived
we bare no clew, and its meaning has given rise to
a variety of conjectures (see Keil, Jotua, on x. 40-,
Ewald, G'escA. i 334, rule). That of Geseuiut
( Thtt. 962) is, thai t-umuA is a contraction of tan-
tamah — a palni-branch, and thus that Kujath-
sannah is the " city of palms." But this, though
adopted by Stanley (S. d P. 101, 634), is ope to
the objection that palms were not trees of the
mountain district, where Kirjath-sannah was sit-
uated, but of the valleys (S. tf P. 146).
It will be observed that the LXX. interpret loth
this name and Kirjath-sepher alike. G.
• TW etymology of the name at pre s en t seems
alm-5t hopelessly obscure, and any explanation
founded on that basis must be uncertain. It hat
bea. suggested that HjO may mean the pabn-
brauch or leaf as used for writing purposes, as It
the ease to extensively in Asia at the present day.
Adas*," sa has btsn pointed oat ante A»am, rel. I
p. tin.
Digitized by
Google
1568
KIRJATH-8KPHBR
If this were so, Kiijath-aannah and Kirjath-eepher
would differ onljr M referring the oue to the books
written or preserved in the place and Uie other to
the material out of which the; were made. If the
palm trees themselves did not grow there (though
several are found now even at Jerusalem), the laavee
could have been procured elsewhere and brought
thither. If the later name Debir (which tee) sig-
nifies "sacred recess," " sanctuary " (Jerome,
oraadum), it then simply points back by a less
definite designation to the ancient character of the
town (shadowed forth in the other names) as the
seat of some religious cultus among the old Canaan-
Itos. H.
KIR'JATH-SE'PHER HgD '^ [at* c/
Ike book or writing]: In Judg. 1. 11, KapiaBatipep
[Vat. Kapiaoaapap] ri\ti ypapitAruv; in rer.
18, and In Josh, the first word u omitted : Cariath-
tepner), the early name of the city Debir, which
further had the name — doubtless also an early one
— of Kirjath-saxxah. Kirjath-eepher occurs
only in the account of the capture of the place by
Othniel, who gained thereby the hand of his wife
Achsah, Caleb's daughter (Josh. xv. 16, 16; and
In the exact repetition of the narrative, Judg. 1. 11,
12). In this narrative, a document of unmistak-
ably early character (Ewald, Uetck. ii. 37S, 874),
It is stated that " the name of Debir before was
Kiijath-sepher." Ewald conjectures that the new
name was given it by the conquerors on account
of its retired position on the back « — the south or
southwestern slopes — of the mountains, possibly at
or about the modern el- Bury, a few miles VV. of
ed-Dhoheriyh (Getch. ii. 373, note). But what-
ever the interpretation of the Hebrew name of the
place may be, that of the Canaanite name must
certainly be more obscure. It is generally assumed
to mean " city of book " (from the Hebrew word
Sepher = book), and it bat been made the founda-
tion for theories of the amount of literary culture
possessed by the Canaanites (Keil, Jutua, x. 39;
Ewald, i. 324). But such theories are, to say the
least, premature during the extreme uncertainty as
to the meaning of these very ancient names.'
The old name would appear to have been still in
existence in Jerome's time, If we may understand
his allusion in the epitaph of Paula (§ 11), where
he translates it vinculum tiOerarum. [Corap. K.IR-
JATH-ARBA.]
KIR OF MOAB (3M10 T,7 [wad or for-
ttfcation of Moab] : t* ntrot ri)» M«a0fnS*>
[Vat. Sin. -£«-]: murut Moab), one of the two
chief strongholds of Moab, the other being Ar op
Hoab. The name occurs only in Is. xv. 1, though
the place is probably referred to under (be names
of KiK-HEiiKS, Kik-haraskth, etc. The clew to
its identification is given us by the Targum on
Isaiah and Jeremiah, which for the above names
has Hf3?, Cracca, ITT 1 ?! Orac, almost identical
with the name Kerak, by which the site of an im-
portant city in a high and verv strong position at
the S. E. of the Dead Sea is known at this day.
The chain of evidence for the identification of Kerak
with Kir-Moab Is very satisfactory. Under the
• Taking Debir to m
sseass, as It does in
1 K.
i adytum, or Innermost
tL 6, 10, Jba. (A. T.
b the Tarrum it Is rendsrau by '3~lfj p,
KIR OF MOAB
name of XupaituABo. it is mentioned in je Aet
of the Council of Jerusalem, a. d. 636 (Roland, Pat
p. 633), by the geographers Ptolemy and Stephanas
of Byzantium (Keland, pp. 463, 70S). In A. D. 1131
under King Kulco, a castle was built there which
liecame an important station for the Crusaders
Here, in A. D. 1183, they sustained a fruitless
attack from Saladin and bis brother (Bohaeddin,
VU. Sal. ch. 25), the place being as impregnable
as it had been in the days of Eliaha (2 K. iii 26).
It was then the chief city of Arabia Secundn or
Petracenne ; it is specified as in the Belka, and is
distinguished from " Hoab " or " Rabbet," the
ancient Ar-Moab, and from the Jfout regalii
(Schultens, Index Oeogr. " Caracha " ; see also the
remarks of Gesenius, Jetain, 617, and his notes to
the German tranal. of Burckhardt c ). The Crusa-
ders in error believed it to be Petri, and that name
is frequently attached to it in the writings of Wil-
liam of Tyre and Jacob de Vitry (see quotations in
Kob. Bibl. Re$. ii. 167). This error is perpetuated
in the Greek Church to the present day; and the
bishop of Petra, whose office, as representative of
the Patriarch, it is to produce the holy fire at
Easter in the " Church of the Sepulchre " at Jeru-
salem (Stanley, S. <f P. 467), is in reality biahop
of Kerak (Seetzen, Reuen, ii. 368; Burckh. 387).
. The modern Kerak is known to us through the
descriptions of Burckhardt (379-390), Irby (eh.
vii.), Seetzen (Reiun, i. 412, 413), and De Saulcy
(La Mer Stortt, I 355, Ac); and these fully beer
out the interpretation given above to the name —
the " fortress," as contradistinguished from the
" metropolis" (Ar) of the country, i. e. Kabbath-
Moab, the modem Rnlba. It lies about 6 miles
S. of the last-named place, and some ten miles
from the Dead Sea, upon the plateau of highlands
which forms this part of the country, not far from
the western edge of the plateau. Its situation is
truly remarkable. It is built upon the top of a
steep hill, surrounded on all sides by a deep and
narrow valley, which again is completely inclosed
by mountains rising higher than the town, and
overlooking it on all sides. It must hare been from
these surrounding heights that the Israelite alingere
hurled their vollie* of stones after the capture of
the place had proved impossible (2 K. iii. 25). The
town itself is encompassed by a wall, to which,
when perfect, there were but two entrances, one to
the south and the other to the north, cut or tun-
nelled through the ridge of the natural rock below
the wall for a length of 100 to 120 feet. The wall
is defended by several large towers, and the western
extremity of the town is occupied by an enormous
mass of buildings — on the south the castle or keep,
on the north the seraglio of El-Melek edh-Dbahir.
Between these two buildings is apparently a third
exit, leading to the Dead Sea. (A map of the site
and a view of part of the keep will be found in the
Atlas to De Saulcy, La Mer Marie, etc, bulks
8, 20). The latter shows well the way in which
the town is inclosed. The walls, the keep, am!
seraglio are mentioned by Lynch (Report, Hay 2,
pp. 19, 20), whose account, though interesting, eon-
tains nothing new. The elevation of the town on
" city of princes " (apxot). Set Buxtorf, La. Ihhs.
217.
c tasnlns expresses K as fallows: « Ar-Mosn, Sssss
Moaha gMchsant Im odar we* jB T iiai ifm . .
uiKldl*BuiidetUi>oaKJMsoab"(BuR*as*«,ves
Oesanlus, 1064).
Digitized by
Google
KISH
hardly be lea tban 8000 fat above the sea (Porter,
Bdbk. 60). From the height* immediately outside
it, near a rained mosque, a view ia obtained of the
Dead Sea, and in clear weather of Bethlehem and
Jerusalem (Seetxen, Stuen, L 418; Schwarz, 317).
G.
KffiH(U7 s n ^erh. ton, Qea.]:Kb; [Vat. Alex,
bit, and so Laehm. Tlsch. Tree, in Acta:] Cu.
Vakj. and A. V.,AcU xiii. 91V "X. A man of the
tribe of Benjamin and the family of Matri, aceord-
ing to 1 Sam. x. 91, though descended from Becher
according to 1 Chr. vtt. 8, compared with 1 Sam.
ix. 1. [Bechbr.] He was son of Ner, brother
•o Abner, and mther to King Saul Gibeah or
GOnon eeems to have been the teat of the family
torn the time of Jehlel, otherwise called Abiel
(1 Sam. xir. Bl), Eish'a grandfather (1 Chr. ix.
*)•
X. Son of Jetdet, and nncle to the preceding
(1 Chr. [vttl. 80,] ix. 88).
3. [Kiovibt; Vat. Alex. Ksurotot.] A Benja-
mite, great grandfather of Hordecai, who was taken
captive at the time that Jeooniah was carried to
Babylon (Esth. ii. B)
4. A Herarite, of the house of Hahli, of the
tribe of Levi. His sons married the daughters of
his brother Eleazar (1 Chr. xxiii. 91, 22, xxiv. 98,
99), apparently about the time of King Saul, or
early in the reign of David, since Jeduthun the
singer was the son of Kiah (1 Chr. vi. 44, A. V.,
compared with 9 Chr. xxix. 19). In the last cited
place, " Kish the son of Abdi," in the reign of
HeaeUah, must denote the Levitical house or divis-
ion, under its chief, rather than an individual,
f Jkbhua.] The genealogy in 1 Chr. vi. shows
that, though Kish is called <> the son of Habli"
(1 Chr. xxiii. 91), yet eight generations intervened
bet we en him and Hahli. In the corrupt text of
1 Chr. xv. the name is written Kuthaiah at ver. 17,
and for Jeduthun Is written Ethan. [Jeduthcn.]
At 1 Chr. vi. 99 (44, A. V.) it is written Kuhi.
It is not improbable that the name Kish may have
passed into the tribe of Levi from that of Benjamin,
owing to the residence of the latter in the imme-
diate neighborhood of Jerusalem, which might lead
to intermarriages (1 Chr. Till. 28, 39).
a. a H.
KISH1 0V?V. [perh. Jehovah; boa, Gee.] :
Konf ; [Vat. Kturai ;] Alex. Kturar : Qui), a
Herarite, and father or ancestor of Ethan the
minstrel (1 Chr. vi. 44). The form in which his
It nan 3?1p, to be bent, or tortuous ;
Kkhlon from n87jT, to be hard (1V>. 1211, 1248).
» By some this was — with the usual craving to
" I the name of a plan mean something — developed
> ». vfir KtewSv, " the torrent of the Ivy boshes "
*. e. 'lejUv), just as the name of Kldron
Qfttani) was made t«V KUpmr, " of the esdars."
[Qasaoa; Krsaos.)
' The term eoupM with the Klshon la Judg. v. 21,
D*WTj9n, In A. T. « that meant river," has bean
eery variously raodend by the old Inte r p r eters. L It
ts taken as a proper name, and thus apparently that
•fa distinct stream — in some M88. of the IJUC,
Ki*ayafr (ess Bahrdt<s Hrxapta) j by Jerane, in the
Tailgate, urrtnt Oadrnmtm ; In the Pcahltb end AreMo
venBona, Carmin. This view is also taken by tfen-
1 — *-i of Tudela, who speaks of the river close to
thereb* the Bales) as the
99
KISHON, THE RIVER 1589
name appears in the Vulg. is supported by 39 of
Kennieotfs HSS. In 1 Chr. xv. 17 he is called
Koshaiah, and Kish in 1 Chr. xxiii. 91, xah
39.
KISmONO'^nrn [Aaremee.]: KurdV; [Vat
Kciow;] Alex. Keo-uvr: Cesfon), one of the town
on the boundary of the tribe of Issacbar (Josh, xix-
90), which with its suburbs was allotted to the
Gershonite Levites (xxi. 38; though in this peace
the name — identical in the original — is incor-
rectly given In the A- V. Kishon). If the Judg-
ment of Gesenlus may be accepted, there is no con-
nection between the name Kishion and that of the
river Kishon, since as Hebrew words they are de-
rivable from distinct roots." But it would seem
very questionable how far so archaio a name as that
of the Kishon, mentioned, as it is, in one of the
earliest records we possess (Judg. v.), can be treated
as Hebrew. No trace of the situation of Kishion
however exists, nor can it be inferred so as to enable
us to ascertain whether any connection was likely
to have existed between the town and the river.
KTSHON (jVl$? [aes above] : 4, K,<raV,
[Vat. Know;] Alex, n Kurwv: C'enbn), an in-
accurate mode of representing (.loah. xxi. 98) the
name which on Us other occurrence is correctly
given as Kishios. In the list of Levitical cities
in 1 Chr. vi. its place is occupied by Kkdesh
(ver. 79).
K.I'SHON, THE RIVER (Jlttfy? blTJ
[torrent, K., 1. e. bending itself, terpentine, Ges.}
6 ^ei/tiibovs KktSk, K.i<r<ruv, b and Ktiaur; [Vat
uniformly, and] Alex, usually Ktitrvr: tort-em
Citon), a torrent or winter stream of central Pales
tine, the scene of two of the grandest achievements
of Israelite history — the defeat of Sisera, and the
destruction of the prophets of Baal by Elijah.
Unless it be alluded to in Josh. xix. 11 as "the
torrent facing Jokneam " — and if Kaim&n be Jek-
neam, the description is very accurate — the Kjahoo
is not mentioned in describing the possessions of
the tribes. Indeed its name occurs only ia con-
nection with the two great events just referred to
(Judg. iv. 7, 13, v. 21;= Ps. lxxxiii. 9 — hare in-
accurately '< Kiaon; " and 1 K. xviil. 40).
The Nahr Muktltin, the modern representative
of the Kishon, is the drain by which the waters of
the plain of Esdraelon, and of the mountains which
inclose that plain, namely, Carmel and the Samaria
range on the south, the mountains of Galilee on
D'CHp bri3. 2. As an epithet of the Kishon
Itself: LXX-, x«f&ap£ow ipx*U*v\ Aqnlla, sami iiww.
perhaps Intending to Imply a scorching wind or simoom
as accompanying the rising of the waters ; Symmsehus,
atyun> or elyaV, perhaps alluding to the swift spring-
ing of the torrent (alyrc Is used fcr high waves by
Arternldorui). The Targum, adhering to the significa-
tion " ancient," expands the amteoaa — " the torrent
In which were shown signs and wanders to Israel of
old ; " and this miraculous torrent a later Jewish tra-
dition (preserved In the Commentariiu in Cnntuum
Debbora, ascribed to Jerome) would identity with the
Red sea, the scene of the greatest marvels in Israeli
history. The rendering ol the A. T. to s up ported by
Mendelssohn, GeeenJos, KwaM, and other eminent mod-
era scholars. But Is It not poanato that the term may
~*r to an ancient tribe of Konwmrrn — wanderers from
the eastern deserts — who had In remote antt a u h w
settled on the Kishon os ens eC its tributary wadtoe*
Digitized by
Google
1570 KESHOK, THE RIVER
the north, and Gilboa, " Little Hermon " (ao called),
and Tabor on the east, find their way to the Medi-
terranean. Its oonrae is in a direction nearly due
K. W. along the lower part of the plain nearest the
foot of the Samarian hills, and close beneath the
wry cliffs of Carmel (Thomson, Land and Book, 2d
ed. p. 486 ), breaking through the hills which separate
the plain of Esdraelon from the maritime plain of
Acre, by a very narrow pass, beneath the eminence
of Hantldek or Bard, which is believed still to
retain a trace of the name of Haroeheth of the
Gentiles (Thomson, p. 437). It has two principal
feeders: the first from Deburith (Daberath), on
Mount Tabor, the N. E. angle of the plain ; and
secondly, from Jttb&n (Gilboa) and J mm (Engan-
nim) on the S. E. The very large perennial spring
of the last-named place may be said to be the origin
of the remote part of the Kishon (Thomson, p. 436).
It is also fed by the copious spring of Lejjun, the
stream from which is probably the "waters of
Megiddo " (Van de Velde, 353; Porter, Handbook,
p. 386). During the winter and spring, and after
sadden storms of rain, the upper part of the Kishon
flows with a rery strong torrent; so strong, that
in the battle of Mount Tabor, April 16, 1799, some
of the circumstances of the defeat of Sisera were
reproduced, many of the fugitive Turks being
drowned in the wady from Deburieh, which then
inundated a part of the plain (Burckhardt, p. 339).
At the same seasons the ground about Lejjun
(Megiddo) where the principal encounter with Sisera
would seem to have taken place, becomes a morass,
impassable for even single travellers, and truly de-
structive ■ for a huge horde like his army (Prokesch,
in Rob. ii. 364; Thomson, p. 436).
But like most of the so-called " rivers " of Pales-
tine, the perennial stream forms but a small part of
the Kishon. Daring the greater part of the year
its upper portion is dry, and the stream confined to
a few miles next the sea. The sources of this
perennial portion proceed from the roots of Carmel
— the "vast fountains called Sa'adlt/eli, about
three miles east of Chaifa " (Thomson, p. 436), and
those, apparently still more copious, described by
8haw (Rob. ii. 365), 6 as bursting forth from be-
neath the eastern brow of Carmel, and discharging
of themselves "a river half as big as the Isis."
It enters the sea at the lower part of the bay of
Akka, about two miles east of Chaifa, " in a deep
tortuous bed between banks of loamy soil some 15
feet high, and 15 to 80 yards apart" (Porter,
Handbook, pp. 383, 384). Between the mouth and
the town the shore is lined by an extensive grove
of date-palms, one of the finest in Palestine (Van
de Velde, p. 289).
The part of the Kishon at which the prophets of
Baal were slaughtered by Elijah was doubtless close
below the spot on Carmel where the sacrifice had
taken place. This spot is now fixed with all but
JarUinty, as at the extreme east end of the moun
a » TfiJ Kishon, considered, on account of Its quick
sands, the i no " dangerous river in the land " (Tan de
Velde, i. 289}
6 The repot* <* Shaw that this spring is called by
he people of^° e pi** Has el-KMum, though dis-
iilmnil with coDtt m P t by Robinson In his note, on the
(round that the #**"* K - *» nnt known to the Arabs,
has been confirmed" toe "r 1 ** by the Rev. W. Us,
who recently visited •»• "P *-
• The English reader should be on his guard not
t> rely on the trans)** 00 of Benjamin contained in
Has «dMon of Aaber (Berlin, 1849). In the part of
KiflS
tain, to which the name is still attached sf N
itahrakah, " the burning." [Carhei.] No-
where does the Kishon run so close to the mountan
as just beneath this spot (Van de Velde, i. 334V
It is about 1000 feet above the river, and a, pre-
cipitous ravine leads directly down, by which the
victims were perhaps hurried Vim the sacred pre-
cincts of the altar of Jehoral to their doom in the
torrent bed below, at the foot rf the mound, which
from this circumstance may be called Tell fasts,
the hill of the priests. Wh ther the Kishon con-
tained any water at this time we are not told; that
required for Elijah's sacrifice was in all probability
obtained from the spring on the mountain aids
below the plateau of tl-Mahrakah. [ClKMii,
vol. i. p. 890 a.]
Of the identity of the Kishon with the present
Nahr Mut&tta there can be no question. The
existence of the sites of Taanach and Megiddo
along its course, and the complete agreement of
the circumstances just named with the require-
ments of the story of EUjah, are sufficient to
satisfy as that the two are one and the same. Bat
it is very remarkable what an absence there is of
any continuous or traditional evidence on the point-
By Josephus the Kishon is never named, neither
does the name occur in the early Itineraries of
Antoninus Augustus, or the Bordeaux Pilgrim.
Eusebius and Jerome dismiss it in a few words,
and note only its origin in Tabor ( Onom. " Cison "),
or such part of it as can be seen thence (AJ«. ad
Euttockium, § 13), passing by entirely its con-
nection with Carmel. Benjamin of Tudda visited
Akka and Carmel. He mentions the river by
name as " Nachal Kishon; " c but only in the most
cursory manner. Brocardus (dr. 1500) describes
the western portion of the stream with a littls
more fullness, but enlarges most on its upper or
eastern part, which, with the victory of Bank, he
places on the east of Tabor and Hermon, as dis-
charging the water of those mountains into the Sea
of Galilee (Deter. Terra 8. cap. 6, 7). This has
been shown by Dr. Robinson (Bibl. Ret. ii. 864) to
allude to the Wady ei-Bireh, which runs down to
the Jordan a few miles above Scythopolis. For
the descriptions of modern travellers, see MaundreD
(A'oWy Trav. 430); Robinson (ii. 862, 4c., iii.
116,117); Van de Velde (324, Ac); Stanley (386,
339, 355), and Thomson (Land and Book, chap.
xxix.). G.
KI'SON (PE^I? [see above]: KcuroV; Alex.
Kurow: CVson), an inaccurate mode of represent-
ing the name elsewhere oorrecty given in the A. V.
Kishok (Ps. lxxxiii. 9 only). An additional in-
consistency is the expression " the brook of Kison ''
— the word "of" being redundant both here and
in Judg. iv. 13, and v. 81. G.
KISS.* Kissing the lips by way of afiectionasa
salutation was not only permitted, but customary,
the work above referred to two anions errors iPifSl
(1.) D^DTTfJ bnj is rendered " Nahr el-Kelb ; "
most erroneously, Jbr the If. el-Kelb (Lyons) Is men
than 80 miles farther north. (2.) 7*)G7 N [7 bfTJ ■
rendered " the river Mukattna." Other' ■ -■ ■^■■-sr
no has Inexact occur elsewhere, which mad not ta
noted hers.
<* L Fern. pJ#J : LJTX. and N. T. fiAaa, asm
8. Aw. ni^BJ} aw.
Digitized by
Google
KISS
I inongst near relatives of both tarn, both in patri-
irchal and in later times (Gen. xxix. 11; Cant,
riii. 1). Between individuals of the tame sex, and
in a limited degree between tboee of different sexes,
the kiaa on the cheek aa a mark of respect or an
act of talntation baa at all times been customary
in the East, and can hardly be said to be extinct
even in Europe. Mention Is made of it (1) be-
parenta and children (Gen. xxvii. 86, 97,
SB, 65, xlriiL 10, 1. 1; Ex. xvili. 7; Both i.
8, 14; 9 Sam. xiv. 33; 1 K. xix. 90; Lake xt. 90;
Tab. vii. 6, x. 19): (9) between brothers or near
male relatives or ultimate friends (Gen. xxix. 13,
gxxiil. 4, xhj. 16; Ex. It. 97; 1 Sam. xx. 41):
(I) the same mode of salutation between persons
not related, bat of equal rank, whether friendly or
deomtrai, is mentioned (S Sam. xx. 9; Ps. Ixxxt.
10; Pror. xxvii. 6; Luke vii. 45 (1st clause), xxii.
48; Acts xx. 37): (4) as a mark of real or affected
condescension (9 Sain. xr. 5, xix. 39): (6) respect
from an inferior (Luke ill. 38, 46, and perhaps viii.
44).
In the Chiistian Church the kiss of charity was
practiced not only as a friendly salutation, but as
an act symbolical of lore and Christian brotherhood
(Rom. xvi. 16; 1 Cor. xri. 90; 9 Cor. xiii. 19;
1 These, t. 96; 1 Pet. i. 14). It was embodied
hi the early Christian offices, and has been eon-
tinned in some of those now in use {Apott. ConttU.
li. 67, nil. 11; Just. Hart. ApoL i. 66; Palmer,
On Lit. ii. 103, and note from Du Cange; Bing-
ham, Chrut. Antuj. b. xii. e. It. J 6, vol. It. p. 49,
b. u. c xi. § 10, vol. 1. p. 161, b. ii. c. xix. § 17, ml.
Lp. 979, b.Iv.e.vi. § 14, roL L p. 696, b. xxii.c. Hi.
$ 6, vol. nl. p. 316; see also Cod. Jut V. Tit. IB.
16, da Don. ante NupL; Brands, Pop. Antia. ii.
17).
Between persons of unequal rank, the kiss, as a
mark either of condescension on the one hand, or
•f respect on the other, can hardly be said to sur-
vive in Europe except in the case of royal per-
sonages. In the East it has been continued with
little diminution to the present day. The ancient
Persian custom among relatives is mentioned by
Xenophon (Cyrop. i. 4, § 27), and among inferiors
towarls superiors, wbose feet and hands they kissed
lib. vii. 6, $ 39; Dion Cass. lix. 97). Among the
Arabs the women and children kiss the beards of
ueh* husbands or fathers. The superior returns
the salute by a kiss on the forehead. In Egypt
an bferior kisses the hand of a superior, generally
on the back, but sometimes, aa a special favor, on
the palm also. To testify abject submission, and
In asking favors, the feet are often kissed instead
af the hand. " The son kisses the hand of his
.mther, the wife that of her husband, the slave,
and often the free servant, that of the master.
Hie slaves and servants of a grandee kiss their
lord's sleeve or the skirt of his clothing " (Lane,
Mod. Kg. ii. 9; Arvieux, 7Vnc. p. 151; Burck-
hardt, Trne. i. 369; Niebuhr, Vog. i.329, ii. 93;
Layard, Kin. I. 174; Wellsted, Arabia, 1. 341;
Malcolm, Sktlthu of Pertin, p. 971; see abce
(6))-
tottm being of extension, or possibly from the sound,
lasso, p. 924 : LXX. and N. T. tWAipwi : atculum.
« In the parallel passage of Lev. x\ the fUdt
vVW"l) Is emitted; but the Hebrew word has In all
ajobebUltr crept into toe text by an error of some
■mmeriber. (See Oasen. < o., and (Juror)
• In oralthotogtcal •aaguafs " kit. " _ " gtode "
KITE
1671
The written decrees of a sovereign are kissed •
token of respect; even the ground is eometimas
kissed by Orientals in the fullness of their sub-
mission (Gen. ill. 40; 1 Sam. xxlv. 8; Pa. Ixxii. 9.
Is. xllx. 23; Hie vii. 17; Mattxxvui. 9; Wilkin-
son, Ane. Eg. li 908; Layard, Nin. i. 974; Harmer,
06*. 1. 336).
Friends saluting each other Join the right hand,
then each kisses his own hand, and puts it to bis
lips and forehead, or breast; after a long absence
they embrace each other, kissing first on the right
side of the face or neck, and then on the left, or on
both sides of the beard (Lane, II. 9, 10; Irby and
Mangles, p. 116; Cbardin, Yog. 111. 491; Arvieux,
L &; Burckhardt, f/otet, L 369; Russell, Altppo,
1.840).
Kissing Is spoken of in Scripture aa a mark of
respect or adoration to idols (1 K. xix. 18; Hos.
xiii. 9; comp. Cic. Ferr. iv. 43; Tsdtus, speaking
of an eastern custom, /fist iii. 84, and the Mo-
hammedan custom of kissing the Kanba at Mecca;
Burckhardt, Trav. i. 250, 898, 323; Crichton,
Arabia, li. 215). H. \V. P.
KITB(njS,o.vjK»: Urrtns, yty : «•*•»
miimt t). The Hebrew word thus rendered occurs
in three passages, Lev. xi. 14, Deut. xiv. 13, and
Job xxviii. 7: in the two former it is translated
" kite " in the A. V., in the latter " vulture." it
is enumerated among the twenty names of birds
mentioned in Deut xiv." (belonging for the most
part to the order Raptort*), which were considered
unclean by the Mosaic Law, and forbidden to be
used aa food by the Israelites. The allusion in Job
akme affords a clew to its identification. The deep
mines in the recesses of the mountains from which
the labor of man extracts the treasures of the
earth are there described as "a track which the
bird of prey hath not known, nor hath the eye of
the ayyak looked upon it." Among all birds
of prey, which are proverbially clear-sighted, the
agyah is thus distinguished ss possessed of peculiar
keenness of vision, and by this attribute alone is
it marked. Translators have been singularly at
variance with regard to this bird. In the LXX.
of l.ev. and Deut. agyah ta rendered "kite,"*
while in Job it is " vulture," which the A. V. has
followed. The Vulg. gives u vulture " in all three
passages, unless, aa Drusius suggests (on Lev. xL
14), the order of the words in Lev. and Deut
is changed; but even in this case there remains
the rendering " vulture " in Job, and the reason
advanced by Drusius for the transposition is not
conclusive. The Targ. Onkeios vaguely renders it
" Mrd of prey;" Targ. Pseudo-Jonathan, "black
vui.ure; " Targ. Jerus. by a word which Buxtorf
translates " a pie," in which he is supported by the
authority of Kimchi, but which Bochart considers
to be identical in meaning with the preceding, and
which is employed in Targ. Onkeios ss toe equiva-
lent of the word rendered " heron " in A. V. of Lev.
xi. 19. It is impossible to my whst the rendering
of the Peshito Syriac in Lev. and Deut may be, in
consequence of an evident confusion in the text; in
(MUnu vulgaris); but "glads" ta appUad by the
common people In Ireland to the common bnaaeri
(htUto mlgarit), the " site " not being Indigenous ts
that country. So, too, the translators of the A. T.
oonsidsnd the terms " kite " and "gtsae*" as distinct
lor they hjik't T"HJH gleds," sod JTJiJJ " site."
" and the glide and the kite » (Omt at?. 18).
Digitized by
Google
1572 KITB
lob aggak Is translated by duitho," " a kite " or
• vulture " aa aome have It, which is the repre-
sentative of " vulture " in the A. V. of la. xxxiv.
16. lie Arable versions of Saadiaa and Abnhralid
give "the night-owl; " and Aben Ezra, deriving it
bom a root' signifying "an island," explains it
aa " the island bird," without however identifying
It with any individual of the feathered tribes.
Robertson ( Oavit Pentaleuclti) derives at/yah from
the Heb. IT'S, an obsolete root, which be connects
with an Arabic word,' the primary meaning of
which, according to Schultens, is " to turn." If
this derivation be the true one, it is not improbable
that " kite " Is the correct rendering. The habit
which birds of this genus bare of "sailing in
circles, with the rudder-like tail by its inclination
governing the curve," as Yarrell says, accords with
the Arabic derivation.''
Bochart, regarding the etymology of the word,
connected it with the Arabic al yuyu, a kind of
hawk so called from its cry ydyd, described by
Damir aa a small bird with a short tail, used in
hunting, and remarkable for its great courage, the
swiftness of its flight, and the keenness of its vision,
which is made the subject of praise in an Arabic
stanza quoted by Damir. Krora these considerations
Bochart identifies it with the merlin, or Falco
mtalm of Limueus, which is the same as the Greek
o&raA&V and Latin cunlo. It must be confessed,
however, that the grounds for identifying the ayyah
with any individual species are too slight to enable
ns to regard with confidence any conclusions which
may be based upon them ; and from the expression
which follows in Lev. and Lieut., " after its kind,"
it is evident that the term is generic The Talmud
pea so far as to assert that the four Hebrew words
rendered In A. V. " vulture," " gfede," and •' kite,"
itsnote one and the same bird (Lewysohn, Zotlogie
ass Tahmek, J 190). Seetan (L 810) mentions
species of falcon used in Syria for hunting gazelles
and hares, and a smaller kind for hunting bares in
the des ert . Russell {Aleppo, ii. 196) enumerates
* DimillM traces the word to the unused' root
ft* . Arab
l5>».
' to bowl Hke a eof or wont"
DjttFE
different kinds employed by the
the same purpose.
Two persons are mentioned in the O. T. i
names are derived from this bird. [Ajar.] Fttrst
(Htmdte. a. v.) compares the parallel instances of
Skahm, a kind of falcon, need as a proper name by
the Peruana and Turks, and the Latin Afihau
To these we may add Falco and Falamia among
the Romans, and the names of ffatctt, Falcon,
Falamtr, Kile, etc., etc., in our own language (see
Lower's Butorical £ssnys o» Jinglish Sttntamm).
W. A. W.
* The common black kite, which is seen 1
ing in circles over the cities of Egypt, with the
small vulture ( Vultm- ptrmopierm) is called by the
natives Jul<X». This species is found also k
Syria, though like all the raptorial birds, has
numerously than in Egypt. From its proximity
to the cities it would appear to prefer what it csa
pick up of ofikl and dead birds to the more preca-
rious hunting of its living prey. The pigeons of
Egypt, which are exceedingly numerous in the
neighborhood of the towns, seem to fly about in
perfect indifference to the presence of this powerful
raptor, and I never saw a kite make a descent on
a flock of pigeons, though they might do so at all
times. They are exceedingly wary and' difficult to
approach, or shoot on the wing. O. E. P.
KITHTiISH (tP^H?, i. «. CSthBah:
Maax4s; Alex. XotfAur; [Comp. Aid. Ka«W>:]
Cellilii), one of the towns of Judah, in the Shtfelak
or lowland (Josh. xv. 40), named in the same group
with Kglon, Gederoth, and Hakkedah. It is not
named by Eusebius or Jerome, nor does it I
to have been either sought or found by any I
traveller. G.
K1TRON CiT"lt?P [perh. calk, fortrem,
Dletr.]: K4Sp»v, Alex., with unusual departure
from the Heb. text, Xtfiawv- [Aid. XtSp&r; Coop.
Krrpip-] Cetrott), a town which, though not men-
tioned in the specification of the possessions of
Zebulun in Josh, xix., is catalogued in Judg. i. 30
aa one of the towns from which Zebulun did not
expel the Canaanites. It is here named next to
NahaloL a position occupied in Josh. xix. 15, by
Kattath. Kitron may be a corruption of this, or
it may be an independent place omitted for soma
reason from the other list In the Talmud (AftgH-
lah, aa quoted by Schwarz, 173) it is identified with
11 Zippori," i. e. Sepphoris, now Srfmek. G.
KITTIM (OVJS : IMrrioi, Gen. x. 4; (Time*.
[Alex.i Kijwioi? Comp. Xrrrfp, Aid. Xerrieisi,}
1 Chr. i. 7: [Cetihlm,] Cetliim). Twice written
in the A. T. for Chittim.
KNEADING-TROT7GHS. [Bbrad.]
KNIFE.* 1. The knives of the Egyptians, sod
of other nations in early times, were probably only
of hard stone, and the use of the flint or stone knife
was sometimes retained for sacred purposes after
the introduction of iron and steel (Pun. B. tt
* *■ PTJOi O * "" - P- 818! iiix—fn:
«*» i nb»|9, iron, b?y, «-*,"«
Digitized by
Google
KNIFE
rxxr. 19, f 166). Herodotm (U. 88) mentions
knives both of iron and of •tone" in different stages
if the aame proem of embalming. The aoa ma;
aerbape be said to aome extent of the Hebrew*. 6
8. In their meats the Jew*, like other Oriental*,
nade little uaa of knives, but they were required
both far slaughtering animals either fcr food or
■aermoe, a* well aa cutting up the caroaee (Ler. vtt.
*», 84, viii. 16, 90, 95, ix. 13; Num. xriii. 18; 1
Sam. ix.94;EcxxW.4;Esr. L 9; Matt, xxvi.93;
RaaaelL Aleppo, i. 179; WUkineon, L 169; Uisehn.
T-amid, it. 8).
8. 8njaHer knive* were in uaa for paring fruit
(Joseph. Ant. xvii. 7; B. J. 1. 83, } 7) and for
sharpening pens* (Jar. xxxvi. 93).
KNOP
1573
1,3. Bgrptfen Flint Knives m Museum at Berim.
S. Bfcrptlaa Knife npieeentad In Hiarof lvphke.
4 The razor* was often used for Naaritic pur-
poses, for which a apecial chamber was reserved in
the Temple (Num. vi. 6, 8, 19; E*. v. 1; la. vii.
90; Jer. xxxvi. 93; Acta xriU. 18, xxl. 24; Hiaeho
afiaU.ii.5).
Bgrptsan Knife. (British MuMom.)
5. The prunlng-hooka of I*. xviiL 5 • were prob-
ttr/eumd knives.
6. The laoceta/ of the priests of Baal were doubt-
ana pointed knives (1 K. xviii. 98). [Lancet.]
Aafatiee usually carry about with them a knife
ar dagger, often with a highly ornamented handle,
which stay be need when required for eating pur-
• Al$* Aiftmnaet.
* "& (lx.lv. SB) lalnLXX f^, to which 8jrr.
lad ether wes s on* agree ; aa al*» D^ rVO"ip,
let. p. 1160 ; p*x*tp» nrpivas i* wtrpat ixponifMVt,
•ah. v. 9. Baa Wilkinson, Anc. Kr n. 16t ; Prsaeost,
(Judg. ill. 91; Uyard, Jfm. tl. Us, 999,
'Wilkinaon, 1. 868, 360; Chardin, Voj. a. 18 1
Niebuhr, Vof. i. 340, pi. 71). H. W. P.
• Inatead of "sharp knirea" in Joan. ?. 9
(A. V.) tha margin reada « knirea of flint," whisk
la more exact for Q % ~S rP2"?n, lit hatns of
rod* or stones. The account of Joahua'a burial
(Joan. xxIt. 30) contain* in the Septuagiut Ihia n-
Aaayrlan Knives. (From OrifhuJa in BtMan
Hnwum.)
markable addition. •< Then they placed with hint
in the tomb in which they buried him there the flint
knirea (rat fxax"lp"< rat xtrptrat) with which he
circumcised the children of Israel in GilgaL when he
led them forth out of Egypt, aa the Lord com-
manded them ; and there they are unto this day."
It thin appeal* that the Alexandrian translator
(even supposing that he has not followed here a dis-
tinct tradition respecting the great Hebrew leader)
waa at all events familiar with tin feet that it wa* not
uncommon to bury euch relics with distinguished
persons when they died. It is well known that In
the Sinaitic peninsula atone or flint knirea hare
often been discovered on opening ancient places of
sepulture. The Abyssinian tribes at the present
day use flint knives in performing drcumcudon
(KnoW, Kxodut, p. 40). See Stonks, 3. H.
KNOP, that is Knob (A. S. cnap). A word
employed in the A. V. to translate two term*, of
the real meaning of which all that we can say with
certainty is that they refer to some architectural or
ornamental object, and that they hare nothing in
common.
1. Caphtor ("HP??). This occurs in the de-
scription of the candlestick of the sacred tent in
Ex. xxv. 31-36, and xxxvii. 17-22, the two paaaagea
being identical. The knops are here distinguished
from the shaft, branches, bowls, and flower* of thf
candlestick ; but the knop and the flower go together,
and mm intended to imitate the produce of aa
almond-tree. In another part of the work they
appear to form a boss, from which the branches an
to spring out from the main stem. In Am. Ix. '
« ~lg03 "IJC1, " the knife of a aartta."
Digitized by
Google
1674
KNOP
i wad 1» rendered, with doubtful accuracy,
' The Mme rendering is used in Zeph. il.
14, when the reference is to eoaie part of the palace*
of Nineveh, to be eipoeed when the wooden upper
story — the " cedar work " — was destroyed. The
Hebrew word seems to contain the atnte of " eov-
ering" and "crowning" (Gesenins, The*. 709).
Josephus's description (AM. iH. 6, § 7) names both
balls (afaipla) and pomegranates (Aotonoi), either
of which may be the eapkior. The Targum " agrees
with the latter, the LXX. (f^uparrijpts) with the
farmer. [Listbx.]
8. The second term, PeJca'im (D , S|19), is found
«nlj in 1 K. vi. 18 and rii. 34. It refers in the
farmer to carvings executed in the cedar wainscot of
the interior of the Temple, and, as in the preceding
word, Is associated with flowers. In the latter case
it denotes sn ornament cast round the great reeer-
rolr or " sea " of Solomon's Temple below the brim :
there was a double row of them, ten to a cubit, or
about 2 inches from centre to centre.
The word no doubt algnifW some globular thing
resembling a small gourd," or an egg,' though as
to the character of the ornament we are quite in
the dark. The following woodcut of a portion of a
Border of a Slab from Kouyunjlk. (
Architecture.)
richly ornamented door-etep or slab from Kouyunjfk,
probably represents something approximating to
• "Wn, an apple, or ether fruit of a round form,
at th in Onkelcs and Petudqjoo.
» Compart the similar word H^jTS, flsUrnOii,
"fonrds," la 2 K. It. 89. ' "
e Hue Is the nnderhuj of the Targuas.
KOHATH
the "knop and the flower" of Solomons 1km
ph. But as the building from which this ■ takea
was the work of a king at least as late as the so*
of Esarhaddon, contemporary with the latter part
of the reign of Maaaaseh, it is only natural to sup-
pose that the character of the ornament would hare
undergone considerable modification from what it
was in the time of Solomon. We most await some
future happy discovery in Assyrian or Egyptian
art, to throw clearer light on the meaning of these
and a hundred other terms of detail in the descrip-
tions of the buildings and lib of the Israelite*.
G.
• KNOWEN. This -da form of the past
participle ia used throughout the original edition 'A
the A. V. instead of Anon. A similar remark
applies, to Movea, orcmst, move*, tottm, O u n a s i,
and htwtn. Thia was the common orthography at
the time when the translation was made. A.
KO'A (yp : Tx*"^''; I* 3 **- Aoi*; Cetop.
Kovtt; Aid. KoiS: ptmc ip a}) is a word which oe-
eurs only in Kb, xxiii. 23: "The Babylonians
and all the Chaldeans, Pekod, and Shoe, and Koa,
and all the Assyrians with them." It is uncer-
tain if the word ia a proper name or no. It may
perhaps detiipiate a place otherwise unknown, which
we must suppose to have been a city or district of
Babylonia. Or it may be a common noun, signi-
fying " prince " or " nobleman," as the Vulgate
takes it, and some of the Jewish interpreters.
G. B.
KOTHATH « (iTPjJ, and Num. xvi. 1, Ac,
rVlpj auembty: Koch? and [Alex, once] Ko0: Co-
Aatt), second of the three sons of Levi (Gersbon, Ko-
bath, Merari), from whom the three principal drris-
ions of the Lerites derived tbeir origin snd their nasB*
(Gen. xlvi. 11; Exod. vii 16, 18; Num. Hi. 17;
d The conjunction being taken as part of the asaae
« It is not apparent why the fens Kohath, which
occurs but occasionally, should have been chosen a
the A. V. in preference to the mora usual one of Ke>
hath, auctioned both by LXX. and VuUj. [The A. T.
seems to have derived this form tram the Qonevaa ear
don. The Bishops' Brbla has (Wort and 0»0,-A.,
UTL
I
Xoun.
Adaashter.Ji n h rt as
Isaac.
I
atoMi — Slppon*.
(1 [Chr. xxlv. JBi
M avfL wo
SasLomTW.
»■■» of David, In tlnw of David
•ofin.ton.of qi car. xxvi. at,
Aasraai- Q at> Bufto-
Q Chr. xxtti. Mi
KetaLuas.
aChr.lz.ia.)
•Una..
**HI. Mi
awJv.an,
hibl.h ■
chief of UMMni
of EUtsor In the
■nxLoatra. Hnu. Inui.
Of th« wm of Sou of Ucmsa (1 Car. xxtO. 1*1 (1 Chr. _.
Ishar N (lChr. flChr. vL xztv.taj aatv.S4>
... j^ . ^ ..,.,..,
a Chr. it. a.) 5 Car av.li.»
xxlll. 1*, In
tfmaofDavM
(and xxlv. Sx).
aari of David, meeordlnjrto 1 Chr.
xxllL lf| and Shofamofli ni ehke*
ITi and
of Oka mm of lahar (xxlv. tt).
Digitized by
Google
KOHATH
Chr. xmxiv. 18, Ac). Kohath wu the father of
Annam, and he of Hoses and Aaron. From biin,
aerelore, were desoanded all the priests; sod hence
those of the Kohathitea who were notpriesta were
of the highest rank of the Lsvites, though not the
sons of Levi's first-born. Korah, the son of Iahar,
was a Kohathita, and hence, perhaps, his impa-
tience of the superiority of his relatives, Hoses and
iaron. In the Jonmejings of the Tabernacle the
tons of Kohath had charge of the moat holy por-
tion of the fetalis, to carry them by staves, as
•In vail, the ark, the tables of show-bread, the
faloac-eitar, etc (Num. It.); but they were not
Is touch them or look upon them •' lest they die."
These ware all previously covered by the priests,
tee sons of Aaron. In the reign of Hetekiah the
Knhathitc* are mentioned first (3 Chr. xxix. 12),
as they are also 1 Chr. xv. 6-7, 11, when Uriel
their chief assisted, with 120 of his brethren, in
bringing up the ark to Jerusalem in the time of
David. It is abo remarkable that in this last list
of those whom David calls "chief of the nObers of
the Levitea," and couples with '• Zadok snd Abia-
thar the priests," of sue who are mentioned by
name four are descendants of Kohath; namely, be-
sides Uriel, Sheniaiah the son of Elzaphan, with
900 of his brethren; Eliel, the son of Hebron,
with 80 of his brethren; and Amtuinadab, the son
of Uxziel, with 112 of his brethren. For it appears
asm Ex. vi. 18-22, compared with 1 Chr. zziii. 12,
ixvi. 23-32, that there were four famines of sons of
Kohath — Amramites, Ixhsrites, Hebronites, and
UaneUtes; and of the above names Elzaphan and
Ammiaadab were both Uzzielites (Ex. vi. 22), aud
Eliel a Hebronite. The verses already cited from
1 Chr. xxvi.; Num. iii. 19, 27; 1 Chr. xxiii. 12,
also disclose the wealth and importance of the Ko-
hathitea, and the important offices filled by them as
keepers of the dedicat e d treasures, as judges, offi-
cers, and rulers, both secular and sacred. In 2
Chr. xx. 19, they appear as singers, with the Kor-
KOKA11
157a
The number of the eons of Kohath between the
ages of 30 and SO, at the first census in the wilder-
ness, was 2,750, and the whole number of males
fauna month old was 8,600 (Num. iii. 28, iv. 36)
Their number is not given at the second numbering
Num. xxvi. 57), but the whole number of Levitea
Lad increased by 1,300, namely, from 22,000 to
23^00 (Num. iii. 39, xxvi. 62). The place of the
son* of Kohath in marching and encampment was
south of the Tabernacle (Num. iii. 2d), which was
also the situation of the Reubenites. Samuel was
a "HiV"-, and ao of course were his descend ante,
Heman the singer and the third division of the
singers which was under him. [Heman; Asaph;
Jbdothujc.] The inheritance of those sons of
Kohath who ware not priests lay in the half tribe
af Mannssnh, in Ephraim (1 Chr. vi. 61-70), and
ka Dan (Josh. xxi. 5, 20-26). Of the personal
history of Kohath we know nothing, except that be
same down to Egypt with Levi and Jacob (Gen,
xM. 11), that his sister was Jochebed (Ex. vi. 20),
sad thai he lived to the age jf 133 years (Ex.
A. 18). lie lived about 80 or 90 year* in Egypt
■wring Joseph's lifetime, and about 30 inor* after
kjs death. He may have been some 20 years
<> The iivwnlng of Korea's name (bakuuas) baa
upattsd a tMtdjr band]* to some members of the
Oaurea of Boas to bsotar Calvin (Calviaus, Cairns),
i with his praoaossaar In seaiam ;
younger than Joseph his uncle. The table on tat
preceding page shows the principal descents from
Kohath ; a fuller table may be seen in Burrington't
Gemadogia, Tab. X. No. L [Licvma.]
A.C.H.
• KO'HATHITES On? 1 ?.! 8 times, and
Yinj?, 7 times: KaaV, exe. Num. xxvi. 57, 1
Chr. vi.*54, Kaa*( (Tat -««), and I Chr. Ix. 32,
Kaaelrm (Vat Sin. -»««-): CaathMm, Caath),
descendants of Kohath. A
• KOHE'LETH. IEocubmastks.]
KOLATAH [8 syL] (mVip [ixnose/
Jekomh]: KaAvta; [Tat Kotia; Alex. KvXcia;]
FA. KoAcia: Oofala). L A Benjsmite wooes
descendants settled in Jerusalem after the return
from the Captivity (Neh. xL 7).
2. [LXX. omit: CWta or OoUat.] The father
of Ahab the false prophet, who was burnt by the
king of Babylon (Jar. xxix. 21).
KO"RAH (rnp, bald***-. Kopi: Cor*).
1. Third son of Esau by Ahollbamah (Gen. xxxvi. 6,
14, 18; 1 Chr. i. 86). He was born in Canaan
before Esau migrated to Mount Seir (Gen. xxxvi.
6-9), and was one of the " dukes " of Edom.
2. Another Edomitiah duke of this name, sprung
from Eliphaz, Esau's son by Adah (Gen. xxxvi.
16); but this is not confirmed by ver. 11, nor by
the list in 1 Chr. L 86, nor la it probable in
itself.
3. [Vat Kop«t.] One of the " sons of Hebron "
in 1 Chr. ii. 43; but whether, in this obscure pas-
sage, Hebron is the name of a man or of a city,
and whether, in the latter case, Korah is the sun*
as the son of Iahar (No. 4), whose children may
have been located at Hebron among those Kohath-
ites who were priests, is difficult to determine.
4. Son of Iahar, the son of Kohath, the son of
Levi. He was leader of the famous rebellion against
his cousins Hoses snd Aaron in the wilderness, for
which he paid the penalty of perishing with hia
followers by an earthquake and flames of fire (Num.
xvi., xxvi. 9-11). The details of this rebellion an
too well known to need repetition here, but it may
be well to remark, that the particular grievance
which rankled in the mind of Korah and his oom-
pany was their exclusion from the office of the
priesthood, and their being confined — those among
them who were Lsvites — to the inferior service of
the Tabernacle, as appears clearly, both from the
words of Moses in ver. 9, and from the test resorted
to with regard to the censers and the offering of
Incense. The same thing also appears from the
subsequent confirmation of the priesthood to Aaron
(ch. xvii.). The appointment of Elizaphan to be
chief of the Kohathites (Num. iii. 30) may have
further inflamed his jealousy. Koran's position a*
leader in this rebellion was evidently the result of
his personal character, which was that of a bold,
haughty, and ambitious man. This appears from
his address to Hoses in Num. xvi. 3, snd especial-
ly from his conduct in ver. 19, where both his
daring and his influwire over the congregation an
very apparent. Were it not for this, oca would
have expected the Gersbonites — as the eldst
and it has bean retorted that Koran's bsMnsas ha* a
mm* sutta.j snarrps la th* touson af to* 1
priests (Sunmu*. (IMS, a. ».j.
Digitized by
Google
1576
KOBAHITE
I of the Levitea — to bare supplied a leader
b ooojnnction with the •am of Reuben, lather
than the family of Ixhar, who was Anuam'a younger
brother. From tome cause which does not dearly
appear, the children of Korah were not invoked in
the destruction of their father, as we are expressly
told in Num. xxvi. 11, and aa appears from the
continuance of the family of the Korahites to the
reign, at least of Jeboshaphat (2 Chr. xz. 19), and
probably till the return from the Captivity (1 Chr.
ix. 19, 31). [Korahitk.] Perhaps the fissure
of the ground which swallowed up the tents of
Dathan and Abiram did not extend beyond those
of the Reubenites. From Num. xvl. 97 it seems
dear that Korah himself was not with Dathan and
Abiram at the moment His tent may have been
one pitched for himself, in contempt of the orders
of Hoses, by the side of his fellow-rebels, while his
family continued to reside in their proper camp
nearer the tabernacle; or it most hare been sepa-
rated by a considerable space from those of Dathan
and Abiram. Or, even if Korah'e family resided
amongst the Reubenites, they may have fled, at
Moses's warning, to take refuge in the Kohathite
camp, instead of remaining, as the wives and chil-
dren of Dathan and Abiram did (ver. 37). Ko-
rah himself was doubtless with the 260 men who
ban censers nearer the tabernacle (ver. 19), and
perished with them by the " fire from Jehovah "
which accompanied the earthquake. It is nowhere
•aid that he was one of those who " went down
quick into the pit" (comp. Pa. cvi. 17, 18), and it
ia natural that he should have been with the cen-
ser-bearers. That he waa so is indeed clearly im-
plied by Num. xvi. 16-19, 36, 40, compared with
xxvi. 9, 10. In the N. T. (Jude ver. 11 ) Korah is
eonpled with Cain and Balaam, and seems to be
bald out aa a warning to those who "despise domin-
ion and apeak evil of dignities," of whom it is said
that they " perished in the gainsaying of Core." "
Nothing more ia known of Koran's personal
character or career previous to his rebellion.
A.C.H.
KCRAHITB (1 Chr. fat. 19, 31), KOB'-
HITE, or KCTOATHITE (in Hebrew always
MT)i?, or in plur. O^rHJJ [patr. from Korah] :
never expressed at all by the LXX., but paraphrased
wUi, Sfinot, or 7wV.it ICaps 1 [error, see note']:
Coma, [Con, C'areAim]), that portion of the
Kohathites who were descended from Korah, and
are frequently styled by the synonymous phrase
Sons of Korah. [Kohath.] It would appear, at
first sight, from Ex. vi. 24, that Korah had three
■one — Aasir, Elkanah, and Abiaaapb — aa Winer,
• 'ArrJkoyta, " contradiction," alluding to his speech
m Num. xvi. 8, and accompanying rebellion. Com-
pare ton use of the same word in lieb. xil. 8, Ps. cvi.
81, and of the verb, John xix. 12, and Is. xxli. 22, lxv.
t (LXX.), in which latter passage, as quoted Bom. x.
81, the A. T. has the same expression of " gainsaying "
ss In Jude. The Son of Siraeh, following Ps. cvi. 16,
rrr^n^
SWJjy., etc. (otherwise rendered however
by LXX., Ps.' evV 16, npupyiew), describes Korah
sod bis companions as envious or Jealous of Moses,
where the English « — 'jf*—' " Is hardly an equiva-
lent for ^>mw.
* * There is but ens instance in which the word is
kaiaphmeed by the LXX., namely, 1 Chr. xxvi. 1, viol
bests, (Tat. -«p), Alex, wow Kept, for DTnj? 1 ?;
at lbs other eases, Bx. vi. 24 Num. xxvi. 68, '(i Chr.
KOBAHITE
Rosenmiiller, etc, also understand U; bat at *t
learn from 1 Chr. vi. 22, 25 37, that Aasir, H
kanab, and Abiasaph, were respectively the amv
grandson, and great-grandson of Korah, it seams
obvious that Ex. vi. 24 gives us the chief houses
sprung from Korah, and not his actual sons, ana)
therefore that Elkanah and Abiasaph were not the
sons, but later descendants of Korah. If, however;
Abiaaapb was the grandson of Aasir his name most
hare been added to this genealogy In Exodus later
aa be could not hare been born at that time
Elkanah might, being of the same generation aa
Phinehas (Ex. vi. 25).
The offices filled by the sons of Korah, aa fin aa
we are informed, are the following. They were aa
important branch of the lingers in the KohathiU
division, Heman himself being a Korabite (1 Chr.
vi. 83), and the Korahites being among thou who,
in Jehasbaphat's reign, " stood up to praise the
Lord God of Israel with a loud voice on high "
(2 Chr. xx. 19). [Hzhah.] Hence we find eleven
Psalms (or twelve, if Ps. 43 is included under the
same title as Pa 42) dedicated or assigned to the
sons of Korah, namely, Pa. 43, 44-49, 84, 85, 8T,
88. Winer describes them aa some of the most
beautiful in the collection, from their high lyric
tone. Origen says it waa a remark of the old in-
terpreters that all the Psalms inscribed with the
name of the sons of Korah are full of pleasant and
cheerful subjects, and free from anything sad or
harsh (HvmiL on 1 King*, I. e. 1 Sam.), and on
Matt, xviii. 20, he ascribes the authorship of these
Psalms to " the three sons of Korah," who, " be-
cause they agreed together had the Word of God
in the midst of them " (HomiL xiv.).' Of modems,
Rosenmiiller thinks that the sons of Korah, espe-
cially Heman, were the authors of these Psalms,
which, he ssys, rise to greater sublimity and breathe
more vehement feelings than the Psalms of David,
snd quotes Hensler and Eichborn aa agreeing. De
Wette also considers the sons of Korah as the
authors of them ( k'M. 386-839), and so does Just.
Olshausen on the Psalms (Kxtg. Handb. EM. p.
22). As, however, the language of several of these
Psalms — as the 42d, 84th, Ac. — is manifestly
meant to apply to Darid, It seems mnch simpler
to explain the title " for the sons of Korah," to
mean that they were given to them to aing in the
Temple-services. If their style of music, vocal and
instrumental, was of a more sublime and lyrk
character than that of the sons of Merari or Gerahon,
and Heman had more fire In his execution thar
Asaph and Jeduthun, it is perfectly natural that
David should have given his more poetic and de-
rated strains to Heman and his choir, and the
,*«-«,
xxvi. 19,) 2 Chr. xx. 19, ytviant, Kitivt, and viol
resent distinct Hebrew words, and Kopf is used '
of the patronymic ; while in 1 Chr. ix. IB, 81,
the LXX. have KoptTwt or Keplrat (Vat, -p«-)-
c St. Augustine has a still more fonclful
which he thinks It necessary to repeat in almost
homily on the eleven psalms Inscribed to the so)
Kore. Adverting to the Interpretation of K-rah,
cities, he finds in it a great mystery. Under Ms
is sat forth Christ, who is entitled Oalvus, because
was crucified on Calvary, and was mocked by Use
standere, ss Kliaha had been by the children, who erM
after him " Calvr, «/«.'" snd who, when they asM
" Go up, thou bald pate," had preflgur?d the cruet
flxion. The sons of Korah are therefore me f I
of Christ the bridegroom (Bomil ea Aornsl.
Cm*
an
■a
by-
Digitized by
Google
KOBATHITKS, THIS
simpler and quieter psalms to the other choirs. J,
ran Iperen (ap. Rosenin.) assigns Unas psaims to
the timea of Jehoahaphat; others to those of the
Maccabees; Ewsld attributes the 42d Psalm to
Jeremiah. The purpose of many of the German
eritiea seems to be to reduce the antiquity of the
Scriptures aa low aa possible.
Others, again, of the sons of Korah were " por-
ters," ». e. doorkeepers, in the Temple, an office of
considerable dignity. In 1 Chr. iz. 17-19, we learn
that Shallum, a Korahite of the line of Eblaaaph,
was chief of the doorkeepers, and that he and his
brethren were over the work of the service, keepers
of the gates of the tabernacle (oomp. 3 K. xxv. 18),
apparently after the return from the Babylonish
Captivity. [Kixos.] See also 1 Chr. ix. 23-29;
Jar. xxxv. 4; and Ear. ii. 42. But in 1 Chr. xxvi.
we find that this official station of the Korahites
dated from the time of David, and that their chief
was then Shelemiah or Meshelemiah, the son of
(Abi)asapb, to whose custody the east gate fell by
lot, being the principal entrance. Shelemiah is
doubtless the same name as Shallum in 1 Chr. ii.
17, and, perhaps, Meshullam, 2 Chr. xxxiv. 12,
Neh. xii. 36, where, as in so many other places, it
designates, not the individuals, but the house or
Gunily. In 2 Chr. zxxi. 14, Kore, the son of Imnah
the Levite, the doorkeeper towards the east, who
was over the free-will offerings of God to distribute
the oblations of the Lord and the most holy things,
was probably a Korahite, aa we find the name Kore
.in the family of Korah in 1 Chr. ix. 19. In 1 Chr.
ix. 31, we find that Hattithiah, the first-born of
Shallum the Korahite, had the set office over the
things that were made in the pans. (Burlington's
Gtmtabgia ; Patrick, Comment, on Num. ; LyelTs
Prutc of Geoi, ch. 33, 34, 35, on Earthquakes;
Kosenmuller and Olshauaen, On Ptalm ; De Wette,
EinL) A. G. H.
KC/RATHITES, THE prnj?n), Num.
XXVl. 68. [KoBAHITK.]
* This form, for which there ia no justification,
seems to have been derived from the reading of the
Bishop's Bible in the passage referred to, " Co-
rathitee," probably a mere misprint. A.
KOR'HITES, THE (TTTiWI), Ex.ri.84;
1 Chr. xii. 8, xxvi. 1 ; 2 Chr. xx. i9. [Korahite.]
KOTRK (trip [oiJter] : Kapi; [Vat Ka^mA]
Alex. Xupn in 1 Chr. ix. 19; Alex. Kopij*. 1 Chr.
xxvi. 1 : Cort). 1. A Korahite, ancestor of Shal-
lum and Meshelemiah, chief porters in the reign
rf David.
2. (Kafrff. Alex. K»m.) Son of Imnah, a
Levite in the reign of Hezekiah, appointed over
the free-will offerings and most holy things, and
m gatekeeper on the eastern side of the Temple
altar the reform of worship in Judah (2 Chr. xxxi.
14).
3. In the A. V. of 1 Chr. xxvi. 19, "the sons
of Kors" (following the Vulg. Core), should
properly be " the sons of the Korhite."
KOZ (VP [tforn]: 'Aavroox [Vat A«ovj]
k Ear. ii. «l; 'A««<»», Neh. ill. 4, 21; [in Neh.
B. 4, Vat FA. A*»»; ver. 91, Vat Am>i8, FA.
•a*e»/IO Aceoe in Ear., Accut in Neh. iiL 4, ffae-
ssura Neh. Ill 21) = Acooz = Cox -= H akjcox.
KTTSHA1AH [8 syl.] (UTT^n [Jehotak'i
•"•Ji EieWai [Vat FA. K«-]: CokOoi). The
LABAN 1577
same aa Kish or Kism, the father of Ethan the
Merarite (1 Chr. xv. 17).
L.
LA' AD AH (n^ry^? [order, arranging]
AaaXi; [Vat MaSoS:] Laadn), the son of Shelah,
and grandson of Judah. He is described as tin
" father," or founder, of Markskah in the low-
lands of Judah (1 Chr. It. 21).
LA'ADAN (VVSfc [put in order]: UoSaV:
Alex- roAaota and AoaJa: Laadan). i. An
Ephralmite, ancestor of Joshua the son of Nun
(1 Chr. vii. 26).
8. (*E8dV; Alex. AtaSar: Leedan, 1 Chr. xxttt
7, 8, 9; AaSdV Alex. AcoVv and AaoSu: ieoVm,
1 Chr. xxvi. 21.) The eon of Gerahom, elsewhere
called I.ibni. His descendants in the reign of
David were among the chief fathers of his tribe,
and formed part of the Temple-choir.
LATBAN 02b [white]: Aifrw; Joseph. Ai-
fku/os'- Laban), son of Bethuel, grandson of Nahor
and Milcah, grand-nephew of Abraham, brother of
Kebekah, and father of \jeah and Rachel ; by whom
and their handmaids Bilhah and Zilpah he was th»
natural progenitor of three fourths of the nation of
the Jews, and of our Blessed Lord, and the legal
ancestor of the whole.
The elder branch of the family remained at Haran
when Abraham removed to the land of Canaan, and
it ia there that we first meet with Laban, as taking
the leading part in the betrothal of his sister Be-
bekah to her cousin Isaac (Gen. xxiv. 10, 39-60,
xxvii. 43, xxix. 4). Bethuel, his father, plays so
insignificant a part in the whole transaction, being
in fact only mentioned once, and that after his son
(xxiv. 60), that various conjectures have been formed
to explain it Josephns asserts that Bethuel was
dead, and that taban was the head of the horns
and his sister's natural guardian (AnL i. 16, § 2);
in which case " Bethuel " must have crept into the
text inadvertently, or be supposed, with some (Adas*
Clarke, »b inc.), to be the name of another brother
ofRebekah. LeClere (in Pent.) mentions the con-
jecture that Bethuel was absent at first but re-
turned in time to give his consent to the marriage.
The mode adopted by Prof. Blunt [Undetigtiea
Coincidences, p. 36) to explain what he terms " the
consistent insignificance of Bethuel," namely, that
he was incapacitated from taking the management
of his family by age or imbecility, is moat ingenious;
but the prominence of Laban may be sifficiently
explained by the custom of the country, which then,
as now (see Niebuhr, quoted by Rosenmiiller in foe.),
gave the brothers the main share in the arrange-
ment of their sister's marriage, and the defenre of
her honor (comp. Gen. xxxiv. 13; Juda;. xxi. 92;
3 Sam. xiii. 20-29). [Bethuel.]
The next time Laban appears in the sacred nar-
rative it is as the host of his nephew Jaeeb at Haran
(Gen. xxix. 18, 14). The subsequent transactions
by which he secured the valuable services of his
r-pbew for fourteen years in return, for his- two
daughters, and for six yean as the pries of Ins-
cattle, together with the disgracefuiavtifiee by which
he palmed off his elder and less attractive daughter
on the unsnsnecting Jacob, are-familiar to asWjOaa
Digitized by
Google
1678 LABAff
Laban was absent shearing hit sheep, when Jacob,
taring gathered together all hia possessions, atarted
with his wives and children for hia native land ; and
It was not till the third day that he heard of their
stealthy departure. In hot haste he seta off in pur-
suit of the fugitives, his indignation at the prospect
of losing a servant, the value of whose services he
had proved by experience (xxx. 37), and a family
who he hoped would have increased the power of
hia tribe, being increased by the discovery of the
loss of hia teraphitn, or household gods, which
Rachel had carried off, probably with the view of
securing a prosperous journey. Jacob and his
family had crossed the Euphrates, and were already
some days' march In advance of their pursuers; but
so large a caravan, encumbered with women and
children, and cattle, would travel but slowly (comp.
Gen. xxxiii. 13), and Laban and hia kinsmen came
np with the retreating party on the east side of the
Jordan, among the mountains of Gilead. The
collision with his irritated father-in-law might hare
proved dangerous for Jacob but for a divine intima-
tion to Laban, who, with characteristic hypocrisy,
passes over in silence the real ground of his dis-
pleasure at Jacob's departure, urging onlj its clan-
destine character, which had prevented bis sending
him away with marks of affection and honor, and
the theft of his gods. After some sharp mutual
recrimination, and an unsuccessful search for the
teraphim, which Rachel, with the cunning which
characterized the whole family, knew well how to
hide, a covenant of peace was entered into between
the two parties, and a cairn raised about a pillar-
stone set up by Jacob, both as a memorial of the
covenant, and a boundary which the contracting
parties pledged themselves not to pass with hostile
intentions. After this, in the simple and beautiful
words of Scripture, " Laban rose up and kissed his
sons and his daughters, and blessed them, and de-
parted, and returned to hia place; " and be thence-
forward disappears from the Biblical narrative.
Few Scriptural characters appear in more repul-
sive colors than Laban, who seems to have concen-
trated all the duplicity and acquisitiveness which
masked the family of Haran. The leading principle
of hia oonduct was evidently self-interest, and he
was little scrupulous as to the means whereby hia
ends were assured. Nothing can excuse the abom-
inable trick by which he deceived Jacob in the
matter of his wife, and there is much of harshness
and mean — IMin— in hia other relations with
him. At the same time it is impossible, on an
unbiased view of the whole transactions, to acquit
Jacob of blame, or to assign him any very decided
superiority over his uncle in fair and generous
dealing. In the matter of the flocks each was
evidently seeking to outwit the other; and though
the whole was divinely overruled to work out im-
portant issues in securing Jacob's return to Canaan
in wealth and dignity, our moral sense revolts from
what Chalmers (Daily Scr. Readings, i. 60) does
not shrink from designating the " sneaking artifices
tor the promotion of his own selfishness," adopted
lor his own enrichment and the Impoverishment of
Die uncle; while we can well excuse Laban's morti-
a The ordinary editions of tb* Vatican UTX,
ftahendorfs Included, five Aagw, and tb* Alw.
tmxtlti but the edition of taw former by Cardinal
Mai has the Aajpfc throughout In Josh. xv. 88, "
trace of Ltehlsh has disappeared In the eommm
s; but In Mai's, Majcft is Inserted between
LACHISB
•cation at seeing himself outdone by hia naplatw
in cunning, and the best of his flocks chang ing
hands. In their mistaken seal to defend Jacob
Christian writers hare unduly depreciated Laban
and even the ready hospitality shown by him to
Abraham's servant, and the affectionate reception
of his nephew (Gen. xxiv. SO, 81, xxix. 13, 14)
have been misconstrued into the acts of a selfier
man, eager to embrace an opportunity of a lucrative
connection. No man, however, is wholly selfish ;
and even Laban was capable of generous impulses,
however mean and unprincipled hia general oon-
duct E V.
LA-BAIf (]2^ [inkite] : Ao$ir: Laban), one
of the landmarks named in the obscure and dis-
puted passage, Deut. 1. 1 : " Paran, and TopheL and
Laban, and Hazeroth, and I H-zahab." The mention
of Hazeroth has perhaps ted to the only conjecture
regarding Laban of which the writer is aware,
namely, that it is identical with LlBHAH (Num.
"till. 90), which was the second station from
Hazeroth.
The Syrian Peshito understands the name as
Lebanon. The Targums, from Oiikelos downward,
play upon the five names in this passage, connecting
them with the main eventa of the wanderings.
Laban in this way suggests the manna, because of
its white color, that being tbe force of the word in
Hebrew. G.
LAB'ANA (AojWd : Labana), 1 Esdr. v. 99.
[Lkbaha.j
* LACE (0. Eng. las, Ft. lacs, Span. lose,
" lasso," It laccio, from the Lat laquetu) is used
in the sense of cord or band in Ex. xxviii- 88, 37
xxxix. 31, 81. The corresponding Hebrew word,
b\n9, p&thU, from a verb signifying "to twist,"
is translated thread in Judg. xvi. 9, Kite in Ex. xl
8, tare (of gold) in Ex. xxxix. 3, ribband in Nam.
xr. 88, and very improperly bracelets in Gen
xxxviii. 18, 3b, where it denotes the cord or string
by which the signet-ring was suspended from the
neck. A.
LACEDEMCNIANS (Sraprurnu; ones
Aaxcoai/idVioi, 3 Mace. v. 9: Sparttnta, Bpartiami,
Lactdamonn), the inhabitants of Sparta or Laos-
demon, with whom the Jews claimed kindred
(1 Mace. xU. 3, 5, 6, SO, 81; xiv. 90, 33; xv. 93,
9 Maco. v. 9). [Sparta.]
LA'OHISH (K* , ? 1 7 [perh. obstinate, amnd.
bit. Diet?.] : [Bom. Aaxu, exe- b- oaA. 9,
Aarnr, Hie. 1. 13, AavWi; Vat Alex., FA. in
Neb. and Jer., Sin. in Is. xxxvi. 9,] Aax«si [in
Is. xxxvii. 8, Alex. Sin. omit;] but in Tat. of
Josh. xv. KaxV'" Joseph. Adxewa: Lathis), a
city of the Amorites, the king of which joined with
four others, at the invitation of Adonizedek king
of Jerusalem, to chastise the Gibeonites for their
league with Israel (Josh. x. 3, »). They were,
however, routed by Joshua at Beth-boron, and tb*
king of Lacbish fell a victim with the others under
tnetreetatMakkedah(ver.96). The destruction of
the town seems to have shortly followed the death
lent*** and niBaairfcM. [In this note, as throagk.
oat the original edition of tha Dictionary, the edtass)
of tha LZX. printed at Borne In 1687 Is erroneously
supposed to represent the Vatican manuscript No. HOB
though It dinars from it. In proper names alma, a
thousands of plaess. — A.)
Digitized by
Google
LACHISH
tf the king: It m attacked in its turn, immediately
after the fall of Ubnah, and notwithstanding an
(Art to relieve it by llor/nn king of Genr, waa
taken, and every soul put to the sword (vv. 31-33).
In the special statement that the attack lasted two
days, in contradistinction to the other cities which
wen taken in one (see ver. 38), we gain our first
glimpse of that strength of position for which
Larhish waa afterwards remarkable. In the cata-
logue of the kings slain by Joshua (xii. 10-13),
Lachish occurs in the same place with regard to the
others as in the narrative just quoted ; but in Josh.
it., where the towns are separated into groups, it
Is placed in the Shtfelah, or lowland district, and
in the same group with Kglon and Makkedah (ver.
39), apart from its former companions. It should
not he overlooked that, though included in the low-
land district, Lachish was a town of the Amorites,
who appear to have been essentially mountaineers,
its king is expressly named as oue of the •' kings of
the Amorites who dwell in the mountains " (Joan.
x. 8). A similar remark has already been made of
Jakmuth, Kkilam, and others; and see Juuaii,
vol IL p. 1*80 b. Its proximity to Ubnah is im-
LACHISH
1579
plied many centuries later (2 K. xix. 8). Ischial
was one of the cities fortified and garrisoned by
Rehoboam after the revolt of the northern king-
dom (2 Chr. xi. 9). What was its fate during the
invasion of Shishak — who no doubt advanced by
the usual route through the maritime lowland,
which would bring him under its very walls — we
are not told. But it is probable that it did not
materially suffer, for it was evidently a place of
security later, when it was chosen as a refuge by
Amaxiah king of Judah from the conspirators who
threatened him in Jerusalem, and to whom he at
last fell a victim at Lachish (2 K. xiv. 19, 2 Chr.
xxt. 27). Later still, in the reign of Hezekiah, it
was one of the cities taken by Sennacherib when
on his way from Phoenicia to Egypt (Kawlinson't
[lei-od. 1. 477). It is specially mentioned that he
laid aiege to it " with all his power " (2 Chr. xxxii.
9). and here " the great king" himself remained,
while his officers only were dispatched to Jerusalem
(2 Chr. xxxii. 9; 2 K. xviii. 17).
This aiege is considered by Lavard and Hindu
to be depicted on the slabs found by the former in
one of the chambers of the palace at Kouyunjik,
which bear the inscription "Sennacherib, the
mighty king, king of the country of Assyria,
sitting on the throne of judgment before (or at the
entrance of) the city of I-achish (Lakhisha). I
give permission for its slaughter" (Layard, tf. <f
B. pp. 149-62, and 163, note). These slabs con-
tain a view of a city which, if the Inscription is
correctly integrated, must be Lachish itself.
Another slab seems to show the ground-plan of
the same city after its occupation by the conquerors
— the Assyrian tents pitched within the walls, and
the foreign worship going on. The features of the
town appear to be accurately given. At any rate
there is considerable agreement between the two
views in the character of the walls and towers, and
both are unlike those represented on other slabs.
Both support in a remarkable manner the con-
clusions above drawn from the statement of the
Bible as to the position of Lavish. The eleva-
tion of the town (fig. 1 ) shows that it was on hilly
(round, one part higher than the other This j
• Ool. KawHnson stems to read the name as Lubes*,
«. Ubnah (Uvard. N. ) B. log, note).
» This is also Ma opinion of Bawrnm Ana I.
fflg. 1. The city of Lachish repelling the
attack of Sennacherib. From L&yard's Mon-
uments of Nineveh, 2d Series, plate 21.
| also testified to by the background of the seen* hi
fig. 2, which is too remote to be included in the
limits of the woodcut, but which in the original
shows a very billy country covered with vineyards
and fig-trees. On the other hand the palms round
the town in fig. 2 point to the proximity of the
maritime plain, in which palms flourished — and
still flourish — more than in any other region of
Palestine. But though the Assyrian records (hue.
appear " to assert the capture of I jwhinh, no state-
ment is to be found either in the Bible or Josephua
that it was taken. Indeed, some expressions in the
former would almost seem to imply the reverse (sea
"thought to win them," 2 Chr. xxxii. 1; "de-
parted » from Lachish," 2 K. xix. 8; and especially
Jer. xxxlv. 7).
The warning of Micah (i. 13)' was perhaps de-
livered at this time. Obscure ss the passage is, it
plainly Implies that from Lachish some form of
idolatry, possibly belonging to the northern king-
dom, had been imported into Jerusalem.
e The play of the words Is between Lsdsh an4
Bseasb (073?., A. V. "swift beast"), ana the «•
bortaUon is to flight
Digitized by
Google
1680
LACTJNTJS
After the return from Captivity, Lachish with its
unrounding "fields" ni reoccupied by the Jews
(Neb. xi. 30). It is not, however, named in the
hooks of the Maccabees, nor indeed does its name
reappear in the Bible.
By Euaebius and Jerome, in the Onomtuticm,
lachish is mentioned as •' 7 miles from Kleuthe-
ropolia, towards Daroma," i. e. towards the south.
Mo trace of the name has yet been found in any
position at all corresponding to this. A site called
Um-L&kit, situated on a " low round swell or
knoll," and displaying a few columns and other
fragments of ancient buildings, is found between
LADDER OF TfRUS. THE
Gaza and Beit-Jibrin, probably the ancient Elaav
theropolis, at the distance of 11 miles (14 Roman
miles), and in a direction not S-, bnt about W. 8.
W. from the latter. Two miles east of Um-LiUi
is a site of similar character, called 'Ajttm (Bob. ii.
46, 47). Among modern travellers, these sites
appear to hare been first discorered by Dr. Robin-
son. While admitting the identity of 'Ajtan with
Egloh, he disputes that of Um-LSJdt, on the
ground that it is at Tariance with the statement of
Eusebius, as above quoted ; and further that the
remains are not those of a fortified city able to
bran an Assyrian army (47). On the other 1
Pig. 2. Plan of laehlsn (?) altar Its captor*. Prom the same work, plats 24.
h ft>Tor of the identification are the proximity of
Eglon (if 'AjUn he it), and the situation of Um-
lAkit In the middle of the plain, right in the road
from Egypt. By " Daroma " also Eusebius may
have intended, not the southern district, but a
place of that name, which is mentioned in the
Talmud, and is placed by the accurate old traveller
bap-Parchi as two hours south of Gaza (Zunx in
Btnf. of Ttutth, by Asher, ii. 442). With regard
to the weakness of Um-IMit, Mr. Porter has a
good comparison between it and Ashdod (ffandbt.
p. 881). G.
LACTJ'NTJS (AaKKowot : C"Uvt), one of the
tons of Addi, who returned with Ezra, and had
married a foreign wife (1 Esdr. ix. 31). The name
does not occur in this form in the parallel lists of
bar. i., but it apparently occupies the place of
Chiul (ver. 30), ss is indicated by the Calem of
IbeVulg.
LA/DAN ([Aid. AoooV;] AaAdV, Tiseh.
1 «. Rom.], but hour in Mai's ed. [«. e. Vat.] :
Dalana), 1 Esdr. t. 37. [Delaiar.S.]
■ This name Is found In the Talmud, HB^D
IIST Bee Zum (Benj. of Tad. 402).
» aUundnll, oramarlly so exact (March 17), pis us
LADDER OF TYRUS, THE (4 *A^s«
Tipov- « terminit Tyri, possibly reading xXl/ta)
one of the extremities (the northern) of the district
over which Simon Maccabeus wss made captain
{(rrpaTrryM by Autiochus VI. (or Theos), very
shortly after his coming to the throne; the other
being "the borders of Egypt" (1 Mace. xi. 69).
The I-adder of Tyre," or of the Tynans, was the
local name for a high mountain, the highest in that
neighborhood, a hundred stadia north of Ptoletnaia,
the modem Akkn or Acre (Joseph. B. J. ii. 10,
§ 2). The position of the Rn$ tn-Ifatiuroi agree*
very nearly with this, as it lies 10 miles, or about
120 stadia, from Attn, and is characterized by
travellers from Parchi downwards as very high and
steep. Both the Rat en-Nakhttrah and the Rat
d-Abyad, i. e. the White Cape, sometimes called
Cape Blanco, a headland 6 miles still farther north,
are surmounted by a path cut in zigzags; that
over the latter is attributed to Alexander the Great
It is possibly from this circumstance that the Rat
d-Abyad o is by some travellers (frby, Van de
Velde, etc.) treated as the ladder of the Tynan*.
" the mountain climax " at an boor and a qoartar
south of the JVaAr Ibrahim Bono (Adonis Rtvsr)
meaning thentcm the headland which enckxa on tea
north the bay of Jonah abovs Atrst .' On t
Digitized by
Google
LABL
■Ha by Use early ind accurate Jewish traveller,
i»p-Parchl « (Zona, 409), and in oar own timea by
Robinson (HI. 89), Mlslin (£es Saint Utme, ii.
I), Porter (ffmdbk. p. 189), Sehwsn (76), SUnley
(8. <f P. p. 984), the Bern en-Vakhurah is identified
with the adder; the bet-named traveller pointing
•at well that the reaeon lor the name la the fact of
tU "dlflering from Oarmel In that It leaves no
beaeh betwee n itself and the Ma, and thui, by cut-
ting off all communication round Hi ban, acta as
the natural barrier between the Bay of Acre and
the maritime plain to the north — in other words,
Setween Palestine and Phoenicia " (comp. p. 968).
G.
LA/BL (^N^ [to Ood, i. e. eauterattd to
kirn, Furstl: Acn)X: Loll), the lather of Hiaaaph,
prince of the Gershonitea at the time of the Exo-
dus (Num. UL 94).
LA/HAD ("inb : a*18; [Vat Ash*;] Alex.
Hat: Load), ion of jahath, one of the descendant*
if Judah, from whom sprung the Zorathitea, a
<«raneh of the tribe who settled at Zorah, accord-
ing to the Targ. of R. Joseph (1 Chr. iv. 9).
IiAHAI'-BOl, THE WELL OH 1 ? "SMS
, *V 1 : rh «V*op t?» eedVreeif : Date**, ag'ta no-
wen at [xxr. 11, nomine] Vhxntit el Vtdtntu). In
this form is given in the A. V.of Gen. xriv. 62, and
(XT. 11, the name of the famous well of Hagar'a
relief, in the oasis of verdure round which Isaac
afterward* resided. In zvi. 14 — the only other
j e uuii c u ce of the name — it ia represented in the
fall Hebrew form of Beeb-lahai-roi. In the
Mussulman traditions the well Zemztm in the Btit-
attah of Mecca is identical with it. [Low.] G.
LAHIIAM (BTjrj^: M«x«tital Maa X <s»i
Ales. Aapai : Leheman, Leenuu), a town in the
knriand district of Judah (Josh. xv. 40) named be-
Cabboh and Kithush, and in the same
i with Lachish. It is not mentioned in the
Onomastuxm, nor does it appear that any traveller
has sought for or discovered ita site.
In many MSS. and editions of the Hebrew Bible,
amongst them the Kee. Text of Van der Hooght,
the name la given with a final < — Lachmss. 6
Corrupt aa the LXX. text is here, it will be ob-
served that both MSS. exhibit the *. This is the
ease also in the Targum and the other oriental
versions. The ordinary copies of the Vulgate have
Lehema*, but the text published in the Benedic-
tine edition of Jerome Leemat. G.
LAIT'MI FQtf? [BtthkhemUet Rom. to*
Airuf; Vat.] ror EXepse; Alex, ror Attptv-
.Bett-lehem-itei), the brother of Goliah the Glttite,
■lain by Klhanan the son of Jair, or Jaor (1 Chr.
xx. 5). In the parallel narrative (3 Sam. xxi. 19),
amongst other differences, Lahrai disappears in the
word Beth haUachmi, i. e. the Bethlebemite. This
LAISH
1581
hand, Irby and Mangles (Oct. 21), with equally unu-
sual Inaccuracy, give the name of Cape Blanco to the
Bat Nakunk — an hour's ride from u-Zib, the an-
■Mnt lodippa. Wilson also (0. 282) has Bdlen Into a
rations oonroakn between the two.
• Be gives the name as al-NacaUr, probably •
mm smsjllua of m-Jvatare,
• DSP 1 ? »r DanV, by mtenhsaae of D
■» a
reading Is imported into the Vulgate of the Chroou
(see above). What was the original form of the
passage has been the subject of much debate; the
writer baa not however seen cause to alter the conclu-
sion to which he came under Elhanam — that the
text of Chronicles is the more correct of the two.
In addition to the LXX., the Peahito and the Tar-
gum both agree with the Hebrew in reading LachmL
The latter contains a tradition that be was slain on
the same day with his brother. G.
LAISH (tt?;b [/«*»] ; in Isaiah, TVffi : Aau-
o-d; Judg. xviii. 99, ObXafudf,' Alex. jUeis; [in
Is. x. 80, Vat Alex. wXa, Sin. omits:] Lai$,
[Lain in Is.]), the city which was taken by the
Danites, and under its new name of Dak became
famous aa the northern limit of the nation, and as
the depository, first of the graven Image of Micah
(Judg. xviii. 7, 14, 37, 29), and subsequently of
one of the calves of Jeroboam. In another ac-
count of the conquest the name Is given, with a
variation in the form, as Leshem (Josh. xlx. 47)
It is natural to presume that Laish was an ancient
sanctuary, before ita appropriation for that purpose
by the Danites, and we should look for some ex-
planation of the mention of Dan instead of Laish
in Gen. xiv.; but nothing is aa yet forthcoming on
these points. There is no reason to doubt that the
situation of the place was at or very near that of
the modern Baniat. [Dak.]
In the A. V. Laish ia again mentioned in the
graphic account by Isaiah of Sennacherib's march
on Jerusalem (Is. x. 30): "Lift up thy voice, O
daughter of GaUim! cause it to be beard unto
Laish, oh poor Anatnothl " — that is, cry so load
that your shrieks shall be heard to the very eon-
fines of the land. This translation — in which our
translators followed the version of Junius and
Tremeilius, and the comment of Grotius — is adopt-
ed because the last syllable of the name which ap-
pears here as Laishah ia taken to be the Hebrew
particle of motion, " to Laish," aa is undoubtedly
the case in Judg. xviii. 7. But such a rendering
is found neither in any of the ancient versions, nor
in those of modern scholars, as Ueeenius, Ewald,
Zuius, etc. ; nor is the Hebrew word * here rendered
" cause it to be beard," found elsewhere In thai
voice, but always absolute — " hearken," or " at-
tend." There is a certain viokwoe in the sudden
introduction amongst these little Benjamite vil-
lages of the frontier town so very for remote, and
not less in the use of its ancient name, elsewhere
so constantly superseded by Dan. (See Jer. viiL
16.) On the whole it seems more consonant with
the tenor of the whole passage to take Laishah aa
the name of a small village lying between Gallia
and Anathoth, and of which hitherto, as is still the
case with the former, and until 1881 was the case
with the latter, no traces have been found.
In 1 Macc.ix.fi a village named Alasa (Mai, and
Alex. AAoe-a; A. V. Eleasa) is mentioned aa the
e The LXX. bar* here transferred Usually the 1
brew words t&^} t^TtV), '• and indeed Iadso." 1
aettv the same thing is done in the ease of I,
Oca xxvU.19.
* yS^fl\ alpha hap., ftom 2&Q.
Digitized by
Google
1682 LAISH
mna of the tattle in which Judas m killed. In
the Vulgate it is given as Laita. It the Bene at
which Demetrius wss encamped on the tune occa-
lion m Beeroth — and from the Peahito reading
this aeemi likely — then Alasa or Laisha m aome-
where on the northern road, 10 or IS miles from
Jerusalem, about the spot at which a village named
Adasa existed in the time of Euseblua and Jerome.
D (A) and I. (A) are so often interchanged in
Greek manuscripts, that the two names ma; indi-
cate oue and the same place, and that the Tainhsh
ef Isaiah. Such an Identification would be to a
•attain extent consistent with the requirements of
Is. I. SO, while it would throw some light on the
xnoartain topography of the last struggle of Judas
Maccabeus. But it must be admitted that at
present it is but conjectural; and that the neigh-
borhood of Beerulh Is at the best somewhat far
•amoved from the narrow circle of the Tillages
enumerated by Isaiah G.
LAISH (tT^J [Bon]; in 9 Sam. the orig.
Kit, Cethib, baa tfV? : [Kom. 'A/tls, Tat.] AjU«»,
a«XXif>; Alex. AoT», Aa*i»: /•««), father of Phal-
tieL to whom Saul had given Michal, David's wife
(1 Sam. iit. 44; 2 Sam. Hi. 16). He was a native
of Gaixim. It is very remarkable that the names
of Laiah (Laishah) and Gallim should be found in
conjunction at a much later date (Is. x. 80). G.
L AKES . [Paustdib.]
LATCUM (Wpb, i. e. Lakkum [awy-ofr-
strocter = castle, defense]: AmIcE/i; Alex. — un-
nrually wide of the Hebrew — tan Knpov. [Comp.
tuuticoiu'-] Ltatm), one of the places which formed
the landmarks of the boundary of Naplitali (Josh,
xix. 83), named next to Jabneel, and apparently
between it and the Jordan ; but the whole state-
ment is exceedingly obscure, and few. if any, of
the names have yet been recognized. l.akkuin is hut
essuaUy named in the Onomatlicvtt, and no one
since has discovered its situation. The rendering
ef the Alex. LXX. is worth remark. G.
LAMB. 1. IQHi immar, is the Chaldee
equivalent of the Hebrew ctbtM. See below, No.
8 (Ear. ri. 9, 17, vii. 17).
2. n^, lalih (1 Sam. vii. 0; Is. lxv. 86), a
young sucking Iamb ; originally the young of any
animal. The noun from the same root in Arabic
signifies "a fawn," in Ethiopic "a kid," in Samar-
itan "a boy;" while in Syriac it denotes "a
boy," and in the fcni. " a girl." Hence •' TaUtha
kumi," "Damsel, arise!'' (Mark v. 41). The
pfasral of a cognate form occurs in Is. xL 11.
8. B7?5i ctbu, 3?.'^, cent, and the feml-
TW22, etosdA, or ntP3?, cased*, and
9, citbAh, respectively denote a male and
j lamb from the first to the third year. The
former perhaps more nearly coincide with the pro-
vincial term hog or hoggit, which is applied to a
young ram before be is shorn. The corresponding
word in Arabic, according to Gesenlus, denotes a
<am st that period when he has lost his Ant two
teeth and four others make their appearance, which
happens in the second or third year. Young rams
ef this age formed an important part of almost
every sacrifice. They were offered at the daily
Homing and evening sacrifice (Ex. xxix 38-41),
n$tp?,
LAMEOH
en the Sabbath day (Num. xxrili. 9), at the fcasl
of the new moon (Num. xxrili. 11), of trnnpets
(Num. xxix. S), of tabernacles (Norn. xxix. 18-40),
of Pentecost (Lev. xxiii. 18-80), and of the Pass-
over (Ex. xii. 6). They were brought by th
princes of the congregation as bumt-ofierings a.
the dedication of the tabernacle (Num. vii.), and
were offered on solemn occasions like the consecra-
tion of Aaron (Lev. ix. 8), the coronation at* Solo-
mon (1 Chr. xxix. 81). the purification of the Tem-
ple under Heseklah (8 Chr. xxix. 81), and the
great psasover held in the reign of Josiah (8 Chr.
xxxv. 7). They formed part of the sacrifice offered
at the purification of women after childbirth (Lev.
xii. 6), and at the cleansing of a leper (Lev. -dr.
10-86). They accompanied the presentation of
first-fruits (Lev. xxiii. 18). When the Naasritss
commenced their period of separation they offend
a he lamb for a trespass-onTering (Num. vi. 18);
and at its conclusion a he-lamb was sacrificed ae a
burntroffering, and an ewe-lamb as a sin-oflering
(v. 14). An ewe-lamb was also the offering for lbs
sin of ignorance (Lev. iv. 88).
4. " J, ear, a fitt ram, or mere probably " weth-
er," as the word is generally employed in opposi-
tion to ayil, which strictly denotes a " ram " (Dent,
xxxii. 14; 8 K. iii. 4; Lb xxxir. 6), Heaha king
of Hoab sent tribute to the king of Israel 100,-
000 fat wethers; and this circumstance ia made uas
of by R. Joseph Ktmchi to explain la. xri. 1,
which he regards as an exhortation to the Moebites
to renew their tribute. The Tyrians obtained
their supply from Arabia and Kedar (Ex. xxvii. 81),
and the pastures of Bashan were famous as grazing
grounds (Ex. xxxix. 18). [Basham, Amer. ed.]
6. lr&, isdn, rendered "lamb" in Ex. xii. 91,
is properly a collective term denoting a " flock "
of small cattle, sheep and goaia, in distinction from
herds of the larger animals (Eecl. ii. 7 ; Fa. xhr.
16). In opposition to this collective term the word
6. ntT, sek, is applied to denote the individV
uals of a flock, whether sheep or goats; and hence,
though " lamb " is in many passages the rendering
of the A. V., the marginal reading gives " kid "
(Gen. xxU. 7, 8 ; Ex. xii. 8, xxii. I, Ac. ). [Snxxcp.]
On the Paschal Lamb see Passover.
W. A W.
LA'MECH (TTO^: [perh. jonrt.one in bis
strength, Ges.] : Aan^x : £""«<■*), properly Lemeen,
the name of two persons in antediluvian history.
X. The fifth lineal descendant from Cain (Gen- ir.
18-84). He is the only one except Enoch, of the
posterity of Cain, whose history is related with
some detail. He is the first polygamist on recorj.
His two wives, Adah and Zillah, and his daughter
Naamah, are, with Eve, the only antediluvian
women whose names are mentioned by Moses.
His three eons — Jabal, Jubal, and Tobait
caw, are celebrated In Scripture as authors of
useful inventions. Ths Tsrgum of Jonathan adds,
that his daughter was " the mistress of sounds and
songs," i. e. the first poetess. Josephus (Ant. '
8, § 2) relates that the number of his sons was
seventy-seven, and Jerome records the same tradi-
tion, adding that they were all cut oft* by the De»
uge, and that this wss the seventy-end sin afoot
vengeance which Lantech imprecated.
The remarkable poem whieh Lamecb uttered hat
not yet been explained q-Ute satisfactorily. It hi
Digitized by
Google
LAMBOH
LAMENTATIONS
1588
Ae nlject of a dissertation by Hunger In
Thamtnu Theotoaieo-PkiloL 1. 141, and is dis-
■iissoil at length by the vsrious commentators jd
GeneiU. The history of the descendants of Cain
tloses with a aong, which at least threaten! blood-
ihed. DeUtach observes, that aa the arte which
were afterwarda consecrated by pious men to a
heavenly nse had their origin in the family of Cain,
so this early eflbrt of poetry is oompoeed in honor,
not of God, but of some deadly weapon. It ia the
only extant ipeeimen of antediluvian poetry; it
same down, perhaps as a popular aong, to the
generation for whom Moses wrote, and be inaerta it
m ita proper place in hia history. Delitssch tracea
In it all the peculiar features of later Semitic
poetry — rhythm, assonance, parallelism, strophe,
and poetle diction. It may be rendered : —
Adah aad Zlllah ! hear my role*,
Ye wives of lameon ! give ear onto my apeech ;
For a man had I alaln for smiting me,
And a youth for wounding me :
Surely amnfold shall Gain be avenged.
But I
The A. T. makes Lantech declare himself a
murd ere r, " I hare alaln a man to my wounding,"
ate. Tola is the view taken in the LXX. and the
Vulgate. Chryeostom (Horn. ax. in Gen.) regards
Lantech as a murderer stung by remorse, driven to
make public confession of his guilt solely to ease
bis conscience, and afterwards (Hon. in Pi. si.)
obtaining mercy. Tbeodoret (Qwest, in Gen.
xliv.) seta him down aa a murderer. Basil (Ep.
HO [817], { S) interprets Lamech'a words to mean
that be had committed two murders, and that he
deserved a much severer punishment than Cain, as
having sinned after plainer warning; Basil adds,
that some persons interpret the last lines of the
poem aa meaning, that whereas Cain's sin increased,
and was followed after seven generation by the
punishment of the Deluge washing out the foulness
ef the world, so Lantech's sin shall be followed in
the seventy-seventh (see 8t. Luke iii. 83-38)
generation by the coming of Him who taketh
away the sin of the world. Jerome (Ep. zxxvi.
ad Damoewn, t L p. 161) relates aa a tradition of
hia predecessors and of the Jews, that Cain was
accidentally slain by Lantech in the seventh genera-
tion from Adam. This legend is told with fuller
details by Jarchi. According to him, the occasion
of the poem was the refusal of Lantech's wives to
associate with him in consequence of his having
killed Cain and Tubal-eain; Lantech, it is said,
was blind, and was led about by Tubal-eain ; when
the latter saw in the thicket what he supposed to
be a wild-beast, Lantech, by his eon's direction,
shot an arrow at it, and thus slew Cain; in alarm
and indignation at the deed, be killed hia son;
hence his wires refused to associate with him; and
no excuses himself aa having acted without a
vengeful or murderous purpose. Lather considers
she occasion of the poem to be the deliberate
murder of Cain by Lantech. Ugbtfoot (Dean
Chorogr. Mnrc. pram. § iv.) considers Lantech as
expressing remorse for having, as the first poljg-
emlat, introduced more destruction and murder
than Cain was the author of into the world.
**inV (Diff. Scrip, hoe. p. 26) collects different
.pinions with his usual diligence, and concludes
that the poem is Lantech's vindication of himself to
Ml wives, vho were in terror for the possible eonse-
i of Us having akin two of the posterity of
Setk. Lowth (De S. Poai Htb. ir. ) and UlcoaeUs
think that Lantech is excusing himself for some
murder which he had committed in self-defense
" for a wound inflicted on me."
A rather milder interpretation has been given to
the poem by some, whose opinions are perhaps o
greater weight than the preceding hi a question at
Hebrew criticism. Onkdos, followed by Pseudo-
jonathan, paraphrases it, " I have not slain a man
that I should bear sin on his account." The Arab.
Ver. (Saadia) puts it in an interrogative form,
" Have I slain a man ? " etc. These two versions,
which are substantially the same, are adopted by
De Dieu and Bishop Patrick. Aben-Em, Calvin,
Drusius, and Cartwright, interpret it in the future
tense as a threat, "I will slay any man wbe
wounds me." This version is adopted by Herder;
whose hypothesis as to the occasion of the poem
was partly anticipated by Hess, and has been
received by RosenmUIler, Ewald, and Delitxsch.
Herder regards it ss Lantech's song of exultation
on the invention of the sword by his son Tubsl-
eain, in the possession of which he foresaw a great
advantage to himself and his family over any
enemies. This interpretation appears, on the whole,
to be the best that has been suggested. But
whatever interpretation be preferred, all persons
will agree in the remark of Bp. Kidder that the
occasion of the poem not being revealed, no man
can be expected to determine the full sense of it;
thus much ia plain, that they are vaunting words
in which Lantech seems, from Cain's indemnity, to
encourage himself in violence and wickedness.
w. t. b.
* The sacred writer inserts the lines, says Dr.
Conant, " as an illustration of the spirit of the
period of violence and blood, which culminated in the
state of society described in Gen. vi. 5 and 11-13,
when 'the earth was filled with violence.' They
celebrate the prowess of an ancient hero, who boasts
that he had signally avenged his wrong upon bis
adversary, and that the vengeance promised to Cain
was light, compared with what he had inflicted "
(Genesis, with a rented Vernon and Notet, p. 96:
N. Y. 1868). H.
3. The father of Noah (Gen. v. 35-31; 1 Chr. i.
3). Chrysostom (Serm. ix. in Gen. and Horn, xxl
m Gen.), perhaps thinking of the character of the
other Lantech, speaks of this as an unrighteous
man, though moved by a divine impulse to give a
prophetic name to hia son. Buttmann and others,
observing that the names of Lantech and Enoch
are found in tbe list of Seth's, as well as in the
list of Cain's family, infer that the two lists an
merely different versions or recensions of one origi-
nal list. — traces of two conflicting histories of tie
first human family. This theory is deservedly
repudiated by Delitiach on Gen. v. W. T. B.
LAMENTATIONS. Tbe Hebrew title of
this book, Eekak (nj'M), is taken, like those of
the fire books of Moses, from the Hebrew word
with which it opens, and which appears to hare
been almost a received formula for the commence-
ment of a song of wailing (eomp. 9 Sam. ij 19-97).
Tbe Septuagint translators found themsd'^s obliged,
as in the other cases referred to, to substitute soma
title more significant, and adopted epyvot 'Upt/jUm
ss the equivalent of Kinoth (PUffi, "lamenta-
tions "), which they found in Jar. vU. 99, ix. 10,
90; 9 Chr. xxxr. 96, and which had probably bast
Digitized by
Google
1584
LAMENTATIONS
inpBed familiarly, aa it ma afterwards by Jewish
sommentatora, to the book itself. The Vulgate
givee the Greek word and explains it {Threni, id at,
Lamentaiiona Jerem&t Prophcta). Luther and
the A. V. hare given the translation only, in
Klaijlitder and Lamentations respectively.
The poems included in this collection appear in
the Hebrew canon with no name attached to them,
and there is no direct external eridenoa that they
were written by the prophet Jeremiah earlier than
the date given in the prefatory Terse which appears
in the Septuagint." This represen ts, however, the
established belief of the Jews after the completion
of the canon. Josephus (Ant x. 5, § 1) follows,
as far aa the question of authorship is concerned,
in the same track, and the absence of any tradition
or probable conjecture to the contrary, leaves the
consensus of critics and commentators almost un-
disturbed.' An agreement so striking rests, as
might be expected, on strong internal evidence.
Tie poems belong unmistakably to the last days
ot the kingdom, or the commencement of the exile.
They are written by one who speaks, with the
vividness and intensity of an eye-witness, of the
misery which he bewails. It might almost be
enough to ask who else then living could have
written with that union of strong passionate feeling
and entire submission to Jehovah which charac-
terizes both the Lamentations and the Prophecy of
Jeremiah. The evidences of identity are, however,
stranger and more minute. In both we meet, once
and again, with the picture of the "Virgin-
daughter of Zion," sitting down in her shame and
misery (Lam. i. 15, ii. 13; Jer. xiv. 17). In both
there is the same vehement outpouring of sorrow.
The prophet's eyes flow down with tears (Lam. 1.
16, ii. 11, ill. 48, 49; Jer. ix. 1, xiii. IT, xiv. 17).
There is the same haunting feeling of being tur-
rotmded with fears and terrors on every side (Lam.
IL 22; Jer. vi. 25, xlvi. 5). c In both the worst of
all the evils is the iniquity of the prophets and the
priests (Lam. ii. 14, iv. 13; Jer. v. 30, 31, xiv. 18,
14). The sufferer appeals for rengeanoe to the
righteous Judge (Lam. iii. 64-66; Jer. xi. 20).
He bids the rival nation that exulted in the fall of
Jerusalem prepare for a like desolation (Lam. iv.
21; Jer. xlix. 12). We can well understand, with
all these instances before us, how the scribes who
compiled the Canon after the return from Babylon
should hare been led, even in the absence of external
testimony, to assign to Jeremiah the authorship of
the Lamentations.
Assuming this as sufficiently established, there
some the questions — (1.) When, and on what
waslon did he write it? (2.) In what relation
lid it stand to his other writings? (8.) What
light does it throw on his personal history, or on
that of the time in which he lived?
I. The earliest statement on this point is that
of Josephus (Ant x. 5, § 1} He finds among the
hooks which were extant in his own time the
lamentations on the death of Josiah, which are
mentioned in 2 Chr. xxxt. 25. As there are no
a "And It earns to pass that after Israel was lad
saatrre and Jerusalem was laid waste, Jeramlah sat
wssnuig, and lamented with this lsmantatinn over
Vrusalsm, and said."
ft Tat question whether all the live poems were by
am same writer, has however been rated by Thsolus,
Jai Bafh'uUr trUan : fnemunt^ quoted in DavU-
■OB'l bund. $» O. T., p. 888.
LAMENTATIONS
traces of any other poem of this kind in the lab*
Jewish literature, it has been inferred, nstoreltj
enough, that he speaks of this. This opinion ansa
maintained also by Jerome, and has been defended
by some modern writers (Dasher, Datbe, Michsana,*
Nota to Loath, Pral xxii.; Calorics, ProUatmm.
ad Thren. ; De Wette, £inl in dot A. T., KlagLy.
It does not appear, however, to rest on any better
grounds than a hasty conjecture, arising from the
reluctance of men to admit that any work by sal
inspired writer can have perished, or the arbitrary
assumption (De Wette, L e.) that the same loan
could not, twice in his life, have been the spokes-
man of a great national sorrow.* And against a)
we have to act (1) the tradition on the titer shaa
embodied in the preface of the Septuagint, (9) the)
contents of the book itaelf. Admitting that boom
of the calamities described in it may have been
common to the invasions of Necho and Necnchad
nezzar, we yet look in vain for a single word dis-
tinctive of a funeral dirge over a devout and rrehrnsj
reformer like Josiah, while we find, step by step,
the closest possible likeness between the pictures of
misery in the Lamentations and the events of the
closing yean of the reign of Zedekish. lie long
dege had brought on the famine in which thai
young children fainted for hunger (Lam. ii. 11, 12,
20, iv. 4, 9; 2 K. xxv. 8). The city was taken by
storm (Lam. II. 7, iv. 12; 2 Chr. xxxvi 17). The
Temple itself waa polluted with the massacre of that
priests who defended it (Lam. ii. 20, 21; 2 Chr.
xxxri. 17), and then destroyed (Lam. ii. 6; 2 Chr.
xxxvi. 19). The for t re s ses and strongholds of
Judah were thrown down. The anointed of that
Lord, under whose shadow the remnant of the
people might have hoped to live in safety, was
taken prisoner (Lam. iv. 20; Jer. xxxix. 6). Taw
chief of the people were carried into exile (Lam. L
6, it 9; 2 K. xxv. 11). The bitterest grief waa
found in the malignant exultation of the FAnnina
(Lam. iv. 21; Pa. exxxvii. 7). Under the rule of
the stranger the Sabbaths and solemn feasts were
forgotten (Lam. L 4, ii. 6), aa they could hardly
have been during the short period in which Jerusa-
lem was in the bands of the Egyptians. Unless
we adopt the strained hypothesis that the whole
poem is prophetic in the sense of being predictive,
the writer seeing the future aa if it were actually
present, or the still wilder conjecture of Jarchi, that
this was the roll which Jehoiachin destroyed, and
which waa re-written by Baroch or Jeremiah
(Corpzov, Introd. ad Kb. V. T. iii. a. iv.), we ere
compelled to come to the conclusion that the coin-
cidence is not accidental, and to adopt the later,
not toe earlier of the dates. At what period after
the capture of the city the prophet gave this utter-
ance to his sorrow we can only conjecture, and the
materials for doing so with any probability are but
scanty. The local tradition, which pointed out a
cavern in the neighborhood of Jerusalem as the
refuge to which Jeremiah withdrew that ha might
write this book (Del Rio, Proleg. m TkroL,
quoted by Carpsov, Introd. L c), is as t r ust worthy
« Hon detailed coincidences of words aoa phrasal
are given by KeU (quoting from Psrsau\ In us Sat
hi dot A. T. i 129.
d Mlchaalai and Hatha, honmr, sftsnrsrds ahaav
dosed this hypothesis, sod adopted that of the least
dale.
« the argmnsnt that Hi. 27 hnpUss the yoawa af Gat
writer, hardly needs to be oonfutsd.
Digitized by
Google
LAMENTATIONS
h must of the other legends of the time of Helen*
The ingenuity which aims at attaching each indi-
vidual poem to some definite event k the prophet'!
lift, is for the moat part limply watted.' He may
have written it immediately after the attack wat
over, or when he waa with Gedaliah at ttixpeh, or
when he waa with hit countrymen at Tahpanhea.
II. It ia well, however, to be reminded by then
eonjectarea that we hare before us, est a book in
fire chapter*, but fire separate poems, each com-
plete in itself, each having a distinct subject, yet
brought at the same time under a plan which in-
cludes them alL It is clear, before entering on
any other characteristics, that we find, in full pre-
dominance, that strong personal emotion which
mingled itself, in greater or less measure, with the
whole prophetic work of Jeremiah. There is here
bo " word of Jehovah," no direct message to a sin-
ful people. The man speaks out of the fullness of
his heart, and though a higher Spirit than his own
helps him to give utterance to his sorrows, it is yet
the language of a sufferer rather than of a teacher.
There is this measure of truth in the technical
classification which placed the Lamentation! among
the Hagiographa of the Hebrew Canon, in the
feeling which led the rabbinic writers (Kimchi,
Pre/, m Ptaln.) to say that they and the other
books of that group, were written indeed by the
help of the Holy Spirit, but not with the special
gift of prophecy.
Other differences between the two books that
bear the prophet's name grew out of this. Here
there is more attention to form, more elaboration.
The rhythm is more uniform than in the prophecies.
A complicated alphabetic structure pervades nearly
the whole book. It will be remembered that this
scrostic form of writing waa not peculiar to Jere-
miah. Whatever its origin, whether it had been
adopted as a help to the memory, and so fitted
especially for didactic poems, or for such as were
to be sung by great bodies of people (Lowth, PraL
nii.),* it had been a received, and it would seem
popular, framework for poems of very different
characters, and extending probably over a consid-
erable period of time. The 119th Psalm is the
great monument which forces itself upon our notice ;
but it is found also in the 26th, 34th, 37th, 111th,
113th, 148th — and in the singularly beautiful frag-
ment appended to the book of Proverbs (Prov. xxxl.
10-31). Traces of it, as if the work had been left
half-finished (De Wette, Putfmm, ad loc.) appear
In the 9th and 10th. In the Lamentations (con-
fining ourselves for the present to the structure) we
meet Kith some remarkable peculiarities.
• Patau (quoted by De Watte, I. «.) connects the
prams is the lift as follows: —
C. I. During the slag* (Jar. xxxril. by.
0. n. After the destruction of the Temple.
0. TH. At tbs tuns of Jeremiah's imprisonment in
the dungeon (Jar. xxxrill. 8, with Lam. Ui. 55).
a IV. After tbs capture of Zedeklah.
0. T. After the destruction, later than e. 1
» De Watts maintains {Oommnu. titer di' Ptalm
p. 66) that this acrostic form of writing was the out-
growth of a feeble and degenerate age dwelling on th*
outer itructur* of poetry wbsn th* soul had departed.
Bis Judgment as to the origin and character of th*
alphabetic form la shared by Ewald (ftsl. Bitch. I. p.
MO). It Is hard, however, to moneil* this estimate
with the Impression made on us by such Psalms aa
she 16th and 84th ; and Bwald himself; In his *mnsla-
tsan *• Mm Alphabetic Psalms and th* lsunaa'attoos,
100
LAMENTATIONS 1586
(1.) Oh. i., il., and ir. contain 23 verses each,
arranged in alphabetic order, each verse Calling bat*
three nearly balanced clauses (Ewald, Poet. Sink.
p. 147); ii. 19 forms an exception as having a
fourth clause, the result of an interpolation, as if
the writer had shaken off for a moment the restraint
of his self-imposed law. Possibly the inversion of
the usual order of V and S in eh. ii., iii., ir., may
have arisen from a like fbrgetfulness Grotius, ad
loc., explains it on the assumption that here Jere-
miah followed the order of the Ulialdieau alphabet.'
|2.) Ch. iii. contains three short verses under
each letter of the alphabet, the initial letter being
three times repeated.
(3.) Ch. v. contains the same number of verses
oh. i., ii., iv., but without tiie alphabetic order.
The thought suggests itself that the earnestness
of the prayer with which the book closes may have
carried the writer beyond the limits within which
he had previously confined himself; but the con-
jecture (of Ewald) that we have here, as in Ps. lx.
and x., the rough draught of what was intended to
have been finished afterwards in the same manner
aa the others, is at least a probable one.
III. The power of entering into the spirit and
"»— "i"g of poems such ss these depends on two
distinct conditions. We must seek to see, as with
our own eyes, the desolation, -nisery, confusion,
which came before those of the ijrophet. We mast
endeavor also to feel as he felt when he looked on
them. And the last is the more difficult of the two.
Jeremiah was not merely a patriot-poet, weeping
over the ruin of his country. He waa a prophet
who had seen all this coming, and had foretold it
as inevitable. He had urged submission to the
Chaldeans aa the only mode of diminishing the
terrors of that " day of the Lord." And now
the Chaldanns were come, irritated by the perfidy
and rebellion of the king and princes of Judah ; and
the actual horrors that he saw, surpassed, though
he had predicted them, all that be had been able
to imagine. All feeling of exultation in which, at
mere prophet of evil, he might have indulged at
the fulfillment of his forebodings, was swallowed up
in deep overwhelming sorrow. Yet sorrow, not less
than other emotions, works on men according to
their characters, and a man with Jeremiah's gifts
of utterance could not sit down in the mere silence
and stupor of a hopeless grief. He was compelled
to give expression to that which was devouring his
heart and the heart of his people. The act itself
was a relief to him. It led him on (as will be seen
hereafter) to a calmer and serener state. It revived
has shown bow compatible such a structure Is wita
ths highest energy and beauty. With some of these,
too, It must be added, the assignment of a later date
than th* time of David rests on th* foregone conclusion
that the acrostic structure Is Itself a proof of It
(Camp. Dslltssch, Cormuniar Hbtr dtn Pmlttr, on Ps
lx., x.). De Wette however allows, oondnseeoduiEly
that the Lamentations, In spite of their degenerate
test*, " have some merit In thdr way " (" slnd swar
In Ihrer Art von elnlgen Werthe ")-
e Similar anomalies occur In Pa. xxxvil., and have
received a like explanation (De Wette, ft. p. 67). It
It however a men hypothesis that ths Chaldaau
alphabet differed In this respect from th* Hebrew;
nor I* It easy to set why Jeremiah should have ehossa
th* Hebrew order for one posm, sod th* I
the other three.
Digitized by
Google
1586
LAMENTATIOH8
the faith and hope which bad been nearly crashed
•a*.
It baa to be remembered too, that in thua •peak-
lug ha waj doing that which many muat have
looked for from him, and to meeting at once their
expectation! and their want*. Other prophet* and
poet* had made themselves the spokesmen of the
nation'! feelings on the death of king* and heroes.
The part/ that continued faithful to the policy and
principle* of Josiah remembered how the prophet
bad lamented over hi* death. The lamentation*
of that period (though the; are lo*t to ua) had
been accepted a* a great national dirge. W*» be
to be silent now that a more terrible calamity had
fallen upon the people? Did not the exile* in
Babylon need thia form of consolation ? Doe* not
the appearance of this book in their Canon of
Sacred writing*, after their return from exile, indi-
cate that during their captivity they had found that
consolation in it'/
The choice of a structure so artificial aa that
which ha* been described above, may at first sight
appear inconsistent with the deep intense sorrow of
which it claims to be the utterance. Some wilder
lea* measured rhythm would seem to us to have
been a fitter form of expression. It would belong,
however, to a very shallow and hasty criticism to
pass this judgment. A man true to the gift be
has received will welcome the discipline of self-
Imposed rule* for deep sorrow as well aa for other
strong emotion*. In proportion as he is afraid of
being carried away by the strong current of feeling,
will be be anxious to make the laws more difficult,
the discipline more effectual. Something of this
kind i* traceable in tbe fact that so many of the
master-minds of European literature have chosen,
at the fit vehicle for their deepest, tenderest, must
impassioned thoughts, the complicated structure
of the sonnet; in Dante's selection of the Una
rim for his vision of the unseen world. What the
sonnet was to Petrarch and to Hilton, that the
alphabetic verse-system was to the writers of Jere-
miah's time, the most difficult smong the recognized
forms of poetry, and yet one in which (assuming
the earlier date of some of the Psalms above referred
to) some of the noblest thoughts of that poetry had
"leen uttered. We need not wonder that he should
nave employed it as fitter than any other for the
purpose for which he used it. If these Lamenta-
tions were intended to assuage the bitterness of the
Babylonian exile, there was, beside* thia, tbe sub-
sidiary advantage that it supplied the memory with
an artificial help. Hymns and poems of thia kind,
once learnt, are not easily forgotten, and the cir-
cumstances of the captives made it then, more than
ever, necessary that they should have this help
afforded them.'
An examination of the five poem* will enable us
to judge how for each stands by itself, how for they
are connected as parts forming a whole. We must
deal with them aa tbey are, not forcing our own
meanings into them ; looking on them not as
prophetic, or didactic, or historical, but simply sa
lamentations, exhibiting, like other elegies, the dif-
ferent jphaaee of a pervading sorrow.
I. The opening verse strikes the key-note of the
LAMENTATIONS
whole poem. That which haunts the pro) bet's
mind is the solitude in which he finds hiiuaest
She that was "princess among the nationa" (1)
aits (like the jud.ka caita of the Koman medals)
"solitary," "as a widow." Her '• lovers" (the
nations with whom she bad been allied ) hold aloof
from her (2). The heathen are entered into tbs
sanctuary, and mock at her Sabbethe (7, 10).
After the manner so characteristic of Hebrew poetry,
tbe personality of the writer now recedes and now
advances, and blends by hardly perceptible transi-
tions with that of the city which he personifies, and
with which be, as it were, identifies t»in»»»lf. At
one time, it is the daughter of Zion that asks " la
it nothing to you, all ye that pass by?" (13). At
another, it is the prophet who looks on her, and
portrays her as '* spreading forth her bands, and
there i* none to comfort her" (17). Mingling with
this outburst of sorrow there are two thoughts
characteristic both of tbe man and the time. The)
calamities which the nation suffers are the conse-
quence* of it* sins. There must be tbe confession
of those sins : " The Lord is righteous, for I ban
rebelled against His commandment " (18). There
is also, st any rate, this gleam of consolation, that
Judah is not alone in her sufferings. Those who
have exulted in her destruction shall drink of the
same cup. They shall be like unto her in the day
that the Lord shsll call (21).
II. As the solitude of the city was tbe subject
of the first lamentation, so tbe destruction that
had laid it waste is that which is most conspicuous
in the second. Jehovah had thrown down in hit
wrath the strongholds of tbe daughter of Judah
(2). Tbe rampart and tbe wall lament together
(8). The walla of the palace are given up into the
hand of the enemy (7). The breach la great as if
made by the inrushing of the sea (IS). With thia
there had been united all the horrors of the famine
and the assault: young children fainting for hunger
in the top of every street (19) ; women eating tbeir
own children, and so fulfilling the curse of Dent,
xxviii. 63 (20); the priest and the prophet slain in
the sanctuary of the Lord (ibid, ). Added to all this,
there was the remembrance of that which had been
all along the great trial of Jeremiah's life, against
which be bad to wage continual war. The prophets
of Jerusalem had seen vain and foolish things, falsa
burdens, and causes of banishment (14). A righteous
judgment had fallen on them. The prophets found
no vision of Jehovah (9). Tbe king and the prtneea
who bad listened to them were captive among the
Gentiles.
III. The difference in the structure of this poem
which has been already noticed, indicates a corre-
sponding difference in its snbstanoe. In the twe
preceding poems, Jeremiah had spoken of the misery
and destruction of Jerusalem. In the third hi
speaks chiefly, though not exclusively, of his cam.
He himself is the man that haa seen affliction (1 ),
who baa been brought into darkness and not bate
light (2). He looks back upon the long fife of
suffering which be has been called on to endura,
the acorn and derision of the people, tbe bitterness
as of one drunken with wormwood (14, 16). But
that experience was not one which had ended in
a lbs raeppeeraac* of this •troctun in the kvtar
ttsratun of the Hwt Is not without tnursst. Alpha-
bstle Beams are found among the hymns of Iphraam
{tyros (sasMimit, Bibl. Orina. ill. p. 68) and other
i; somsttmes, as in fie case of JCbud-jean*, with
a much more compneetad plan than anv ef the O. T
poems of this type (tti'rf. 111. p. 8M), and these ehlsfly
In hymns to be sung by boys at solemn farlrfals, cs
In confessions of faith which wen meant for that
Digitized by
Google
LAMENTATIONS
iarkneaa tod despair. Hen, as in the prophecies,
*e fad » Gospel for the weary end heavy-laden, a
traat not to be shaken, in the mercy end righteous-
MM of Jehovah. The mercies of the Lord are new
srery morning (23, S3). He is good tc them that
wait for Him (35). And the retroepect of that
■harp **Y—lir<r* showed him that it all formed
part of the discipline which was intended to lead
him on to a higher blessedness. It was good for a
man to bear the joke in his youth, good that he
should both hope and quietly wait (28, 27). With
this, equally characteristic of the prophet's indi-
viduality, there is the protest against the wrong
which had been or might hereafter be committed
by rulers and princes (34-36), the confession that
aU that had come on him and his people was but
a righteous retribution, to be accepted humbly,
with searchings of heart, and repentance (89-12).
The closing verses may refer to that special epoch
in the prophet's life when his own sufferings had
been sharpest (53-56), and the cruelties of his
enemies most triumphant. If so, we can enter
more fully, remembering this, into the thanksgiving
with which he acknowledges the help, deliverance,
redemption, which he had received from God (57,
58). And feeling sure that, at some time or other,
there would be for him a yet higher lesson, we can
enter with some measure of sympathy, even into
the terrible earnestness of his appeal from the un-
just judgment of earth to the righteous Judge, into
his cry for a retribution without which it seemed
to him that the Eternal Righteousness would fail
(64-66).
IV. It might seem, at first, as if the fourth poem
did but reproduce the pictures and the thoughts
of the first and second. There come before us, once
again, the famine, the miser}', the desolation, that
had fallen on the holy city, making all faces gather
blackness. One new element in the picture is found
In the contrast between the past glory of the con-
secrated families of the kingly and priestly stocks
(Nazarites in A. V.) and their later misery and
shame. Some changes there are, however, not with
sot interest in their relation to the poet's own life
md to the history of his time. All the facts gain
t new significance by being seen in the light of the
personal experience of the third poem. The decla-
ration that all this had come " for the sins of the
prophets and the iniquities of the priests," is clearer
and sharper than before (13). There is the giving
op of the last hope which Jeremiah had cherished,
whan he urged on Zedekiah the wisdom of submis-
sion to the Chaldeans (20). The closing words
Indicate the strength of that feeling against the
rUomites which lasted all through the Captivity °
(31, 82). She, the daughter of Etlom, bad rejoiced
b the fall of her rival, and had pressed on the
work of destruction. But for her too there was the
tern of being drunken with the cup of the lord's
■rath For the daughter of Zion there was hope
•f pardon, when discipline should have done its
week and the punishment of her iniquity should be
accomplished.
T. One great difference in the fifth and last
ssstion of the poem has been already pointed out.
LAMENTATIONS
1587
■ (Jams, with this Obsd. ver. 10, and Pi exzxrli. 7.
» Toe Tulfate imports Into this verse also the
jMraght of a ahannfol infamy. It mur* be rnnem-
Mrad, tunrevsc, that the literal maeulnf "onwjed to
its mind of an Israelite one of the lowest onees of
s »v a l abor (earns. Jndf . nL 2U
It obviously indicates either a deliberate abandon-
ment of the alphabetic structure, or the unfinished
character of the concluding elegy. The title pre-
fixed in the Vulgate, " Oratio Jeremia Propketa,"
points to one marked characteristic which may have
occasioned this difference. There are signs also of
• later date than that of the preceding poems
Though the horrors of the famine are ineffaceable,
yet that which he has before him is rather the con-
tinued protracted suffering of the rule of the Chal-
deans. The mountain of Zion is desola t e, and the
foxes walk on it (18). Slaves have ruled over the
people of Jehovah (8). Women hare been sub-
jected to intolerable outrages (11). The young
men have been taken to grind,' and the children
have fallen under the wood (13). But in this also,
deep as might be the humiliation, there was hope,
even as there had been in the dark noun of the
prophet's own life. He and his people are sustained
by the old thought which had been so fruitful of
comfort to other prophets and psalmists. The
periods of suffering and struggle which seemed so
long, were but as moments in the lifetime of the
Eternal (19); and the thought of that eternity
brought with it the hope that the purposes of love
which had been declared so dearly should one day
be fulfilled. The last words of this lamentation
are those which have risen so often from broken
and contrite hearts, " Turn thou us, O Lord, and
we shall be turned. Renew our daya as of old'
(21). That which had begun with wailing and
weeping ends (following Ewatd's and Michaelis's
translation) with the question of hops, " Wilt thou
utterly reject us? Wilt thou be very wroth against
us?"
There are perhaps few portions of the O. T.
which appear to hare done the work they were
meant to do more effectually than this. It has
presented but scanty materials for the systems and
controversies of theology. It has supplied thousands
with the fullest utterance for their sorrows in the
critical periods of national or individual suffering.
We may well believe that it soothed the weary years
of the Babylonian exile (comp. Zeoh. i. 6, with
Lam. ii. 17). When they returned to their cwn
land, and the desolation of Jerusalem was remem-
bered as belonging only to the past, this was the
book of remembrance. On the ninth day of the
month of Ab (July), the Lamentations of Jeremiah
were read, year by year, with fasting and weeping,
to commemorate the misery out of which the people
had been delivered. It has come to be connected
with the thoughts of a later devastation, and its
words enter, sometimes at least, into the prayers
ui the pilgrim Jewa who meet at the " place of
wailing " to mourn over the departed glory of their
city." It enters largely Into the nobly- constructed
order of the Latin Church for the services of Pas-
sion weak (Brniar. /torn. Feria Quints. "In
Ccena Domini "). If it has been comparatively in
the background in times when the study of Scrip-
ture bad passed into casuistry and speculation, it
has come forward, once and again, in times of
danger and suffering, as a messenger of peace, com-
forting men, not after the fashion of the friends of
e Is then any uniform practice to these devotions 1
The writer bean tram soma Jaws that the inly prayers
mm are those that would have beau said, as the
prayer of the day, elsewhere; tram others, that tot
Umsntaoons of Jeremiah are frequently aasptavad.
Digitized by
Google
1588 LAMENTATIONS
Job, with formal moralixinge, bat by »»«m"g (hem
to express themselves, lading them to fed that
they might give utterance to the deepest and sad-
deot feelings by which they wen overwhelmed. It
le striking, as we cut our eye over the Hat of writers
who have treated specially of the book, to notice
how many must have named through scenes of trial
not unlike In kind to that of which the Lamenta-
tioni apeak. The book remain to do it* work tor
any future generation that may be exposed to anal-
ogue calamities.
A few facta connected with the external hiatory
of the book remain to be stated. The poaition
which It haa occupied in the canon of the O. T. baa
varied from time to time. In the received Hebrew
arrangement it U placed among the Ketkubim or
Hagiogranha, between Kuth and Kobeletk (Eecle-
siastes). In that adopted for synagogue use, and
reproduced in some editions, as in the Bomberg
Bible of 1681, it stands among the five MegiUeth
efler the books of Moss*. The LXX. group the
writings connected with the name of Jeremiah
together, but the Book of Bench comes between the
prophecy and the lamentation. On the hypothesis
of some writers that Jer. lii. was originally the
introduction to the poem, and not the conclusion
of the prophecy, and that the preface of the LXX.
(which is not found either in the Hebrew, or in
the Targum of Jonathan) was inserted to diminish
the abruptness occasioned by this separation of the
book from that with which it had been originally
connected, it would follow that the arrangement
of the Vulg. and the A. V. corresponds more closely
than any other to that which we most look oc as
the original one.
Literature— Theodoret, Opp. ii. p. 286; Jerome,
Opp. v. 166. Special Commentariee by Calvin
(ProL in Thren.); BuUinger (Tigur. 1676); Peter
Martyr (Tigur. 1698); (Eoolampadius (Argent.
1668); Zutaglius (Tigur. 1644) ; Haldonatua ;
Pareau (Threni Jeremue, Lugd. Bat. 1790); Tar-
novius (1694); Kalkar [Lamentatitma erU. at
extytU illuetrata] (1836); Neumann {Jeremiat u.
KlageSeder, 1668). Translated by Ewald, in Pott.
Buck, pan 1. [Mailer da Alien Bunda, 1. 821-
848, 3« Aueg. Got*. 1866]. E. H. P.
* Some find a referen ce to Lamentations in 2
Ohr.xxxv.26: "And Jeremiah lamented for Jossah;
and all the singing men and the singing women
make of Joeiah in their lamentations to this day,
•nd made them an ordinance in Israel; and heboid,
■hey an written in the Lamentation*." Jerome
[Oamm. ad Sack. xil. 11) went so far as to main-
tain that the death of Joeiah forms the proper sub-
ject of the entire book. See also Jos. Ant. x. 6,
§ 1. Bui the eontenta of Lamentations utterly for-
bid this supposition. It is evident from the above
pierage that a collection of elegies on the death of
tins king existed at the time when Chronicles was
written ; and among them it no doubt contained
some composed by Jeremiah. But it is impossible
so identify them with any part of our present
Lamentations. They belonged in all probability to
songs of Jeremiah, which like various other books
Jted in Chronicles, were not received into the Jew-
am Canon, and have perished. See Bleek, Ami in
dot A. Ttet. p. 604.
Some critics, as already stated, assign a low rank
to the poetry of this book in comparison with other
Hebrew poetry. It has been decried as artificial,
tverwrought, without vigor of imagination or style,
against this view we may oppose the authority of so
LAMENTATIONS
eminent a critic and scholar as the late Dean m%
man. " Never," he says (ffitton/ of the Jen, 1
446), " was rained dty lamented in language at
exquisitely pathetic. Jerusalem is, as it were, per
sonified, and bewailed with the passionate sorrow of
private and domestic attachment; while the mors
general pictures of the famine, common misery of
every rank and age and sex, all the d e s ol at i o n, the
carnage, the violation, the dragging away into
captivity, the remembrance of former glories of
the gorgeous ceremonies, and of the glad festhale,
the awful sense of the Divine wrath, beightiiung
the present calamity, are successively drawn with
all the life and reality of an eye-witness." In
illustration of this statement he presents in English
several extracts from these elegies, which as an ex-
pression of the thoughts and spirit of the original are
remarkably faithful We cannot forbear citing hen
oneof these translations for the gratification of the
reader. It is taken from the last chapter (v. 1 ft):
" Bemember, Lord, what hath befallen,
hook down on our reproach :
Our heritage is given to strangers,
Our home to foreigners.
Our water have we drank for money,
Our foal hath Its price.
" We stretch our hands to Egypt,
To Assyria for our bread,
At our life's risk we gain our food,
From the sword of desert robbers.
Our skins an like an oven, parched
By the fierce heat of famine.
Matrons In Hon have they ravished,
Virgin. In Jonah's dues.
n Princes wen hung up by the hand,
And age had no respect.
Young men an grinding at the mill,
Boys taint 'math loads of wood.
The elders from the gate have ess sal,
The young men from their music.
* The crown b fallen from our head,
Woe ! woe ! that we have stoned.
Til therefore that our hearts are faint,
Thenfon our eyes ere dhn,
For Son's mountain dem i sts ;
The foxes walk on It" BL
• Literature. — In addition to the works re-
ferred to above, the following may be noted: C. B.
Michaelia, notes, in the Uberioret Admit, fsj
llngiagr. V. T. Mm* by J. H. MicbaeUs and
others, vol. ii. (1780). J. O. Leasing, Obm. m
Trintia Jtrem., Lips. 1770. J. O. Beimel, Kbg-
gtednge aben. mit Anmerkungen, a. nit enter
Vorrede ton Herder, Weimar, 1781. J. F. Schhca-
ner, Cams crt'C et exeg. in Throne Jerem., in
Eichhorn's ReperL (1783), xii. 1-67. G. A Hor-
rer, Ifeut BearbeUung d. KlaggttOngt, Halle,
1784. Benj. Blayney, Jerem. and Lam., Nem
TraniL with Nota, Oxf., 1784, 8d ed. Land. 1886.
A. Wolfssohn sod J. Lowe, Die KLigeUeder sail
deuUcktr Otbtr ieum n g a. aefrr. Comm., Bad.
1788 (the introd. sod comm. by Lowe). J. Hamon,
Comm. tur fee Lam. dt Jtremie, Paris, 1790. J.
D. Michaelia, Obm.philoL et criL in Jerem. Kirov
cinin et ("Arenas. Jididit et auxit J. F. Sckleutner
(kitting. 1798. J. K. Volborth, Kuiggaange aej/i
Ntue aben., Cells, 1796. T. A. Denser, Die
KiagtSeder u. Barmen, am d. Htbr. w. Grieck
seen. * eri^eVt, Frankt a. M. 1809. J.kf.Hara,
mann, KlagUeder mentttt, in Juati's Bhunrt
amebr.Dicktiunn\Gkmm,ltO»,a.tl7B. C. A
Digitized by
Google
LANGUAGE
1589
fljura, Tkrtmm Jertm. et Valid* Wakumi metric*
tdSdU, Ifatityut Wmtravit, Haunin, 1814. Geo.
Biegler, Klageticder metruch fliers., Erlang. 1814.
0. P. Cons, Die Klngelieder, in E. G. Hengel'a
Arehit f. d. TkeoL (1831), it. 148-66, 374-428.
E- F. C. Rosenmuller, Lat trans, and notes, in hi*
-'otoOi in V. T., pars viii. vol it. (1827). F. \V.
OoWwitaej, Die klngelieder abort., mit d. I.XX.
*. d. Vidgota teryiicben, nebtt krii. Anmerkk.,
Subb. 1828. K. \V. Wiedenfeld, Klngelieder, neu
ibtr*. u. erldiUert, Elberf. 1830. Maurer, note*,
in his Comm. grata, cril. in V. T. (1835), i. 61)1-
708. G. R. Noyes, tranal. and notes, in his Hebrew
Prophett, toL ii. Boston, 1837, 3d ed. 18S6. E.
Henderson, Jeren. and Lam. trmuiated, with a
Comm., \jaad. 1851, reprinted Andover, 1868. A.
Battel, Die KhgeHedtt in teuttcJte Liedtr/nrm
aoertrnoea, not erld. Anmm., 1854. O. Thenioa,
Die Klngelieder trlddii (with a tranal.), Leipz.
1855 (Lief. xri. of the Kurzgef. exes, llnndb. torn
A. Tal.). J. (}. Vajhinger, Sprucbe u. Klnglieder,
aster, mbert. u. eiUirt, Stuttg. 1857 (Bd. hi. of his
Die dichl. Sckrifirn del A. Buiuki). \V. Kngel-
hardt, Die Kbtgelieder Jerem. Mere, u. amgelegl,
Lainx. 1867. U. \V. B. Nagelshach, Dei- Proph.
Jtremn u. die Klngelieder, Bielefeld, 1868 (Theil
it. of Lange's Bibtltoerlc). Other translations
which deserve mention here, but which embrace
either the poetical books or the whole of the Old
Testament, are those of Dathe, De Wette, Caben,
Meier, and H. A. Perret-Gentil (La SainU Bible,
Paris, 1866, pub), by the Societe bibiupte proUMante
it Pane).
The article Lamentations In Kitto's CycL of
Bibl Lit., 3d ed., by Einaiiuel Deutsch of the
British Museum, is particularly good. A.
LAMP." 1. That part of the golden candle-
stick belonging to the Tabernacle which bore the
light; also of each of the ten candlesticks placed by
Solomon in the Temple before the Holv of Holies
(Ex. xxt. 37; IK. Til. 49; 2 Chr. it, 20, xiii. 11;
Zecb. It. 2). The lamps were lighted every evening,
sad cleansed every morning (Ex. xxx. 7, 8 ; Reland,
AM. Ilebr. i. r. U, and vii. 8). The primary sense
af light (Gen. xv. 17) gives rise to frequent meta-
pboncal usages, indicating life, welfare, guidance,
as e. o. 2 Sam. xxi. 17; Pi. cxix. 105; Pror. vi.
23, xiii. 9.
2. A torch or flambeau, such as was carried by
the soldiers of Gideon (Judg. vii. 18, 20; comp.
xt. 4). See vol. i. p. 695, note.
3. Id N. T. Aau*<(*«> is in A. V., Acts xx. 8,
"light*;" in John xviii. 3, "torches;" in Matt
xxt. 1, Rev. It. 5, " lamps."
Herodotus, speaking of Egyptian lamps used at
■ festival, describes them as vessels filled with salt
and olive oil with
floating wicks, but
does not mention the
material of the vet-
sels (Herod, ii. 62;
Wilkinson, Anc. Eq.
Abridg. i. 2U8, ii.
71).
The use of lamps
fed with oil a.* rtr-
dage processions is alluded to in the parablr ->f 'he
an virgins (Matt. xxt. 1).
Modern Egyptian lamps consist oi assail glass
vessels with a tube at the bottom containing a
cotton-wick twisted round a piece of straw. Some
water is poured in first, and then oil. [The cl
graving also illustrates the conical wooden receptacle,
which serves to protect the flame from the wind.]
For night-travelling,
a lantern composed of
waxed cloth strained
over a sort of cylinder
of wire-rings, and a
top and bottom of per-
forated copper. This
would, in form at least,
answer to the lamps
within pitchers of
Gideon. [It may also,
possibly, correspond
with the lamps re- Hgrnrian Lamp,
ferredtoin the parable
of the ten virgins.] On occasions of marriage the
street or quarter where the bridegroom lives v
■sTptlea Lawn.
• "13, one* TJ (2 8am. xxB. »), turn TSJ,
t» *M*»," Oca. p. 087 : A*x*«t
Lanterns,
illuminated with lamps suspended from cords drawn
across. Sometimes the bridegroom is accompanied
to a mosque by men bearing flambeaux, consisting
of frames of iron fixed on staves, and filled with burn-
ing wood; and on his return, by others bearirg
frames with many lamps suspended from then
(Lone, Mod. Eg. i. 202, 215, 224, 223, 230; Mm
Poole, Entjluliw. in Eg. iii. 131). II. W. P
LANCET. This word is found in 1 K. xrilL
28 only. The Hebrew term is Humach, which is
elsewhere rendered, and appears to mean a javelin,
or light spear. [See Ahms, vol. i. 160 a.] In the
original edition of the A. V. (1611) this men log
is preserved, the word bang •' lancers."
• LAND-MARK. [r°2tx.]
• LANES. The Greek word (pip,*) *o ren-
dered occurs in Luke xiv. 21, Matt vi. 12, and
Act* ix. 11, and xii. 10. It originally meant "a
rushing," and then a " line of direction," or " ear-
rent," and occasionally in later Greek anil the N.
T., a place where the current of people Bowl
along, i. e. a " street." It denoted especially a
" naww street " (see I/>beck, ad Phryn. p. 404),
where, v in Luke xiv. 21. the jioorer class of peoarl
would ue found. K U. C. It
LANGUAGE [ToMuuna, Coxruaiun cwr.J
Digitized by
Google
1590
LANGUAGE OF THB NEW TESTAMENT
• LANGUAGE OF THB NEW TES-
TAMENT. The mbjeot of thii artiest ia not
the language need by the tcritert of the New Testa-
ment (see New Testament/IV.), but the lan-
guage of its tpeakert, the actual language of the
discourses and conversations which stand reported
In the Greek of the New Testament.
On the question, What wn$ the prevailing lan-
guage of I'nUtiint in the Urn* of our Saviour t
there has been great difference of opinion and much
earnest controversy. Some have maintained that
tl e mass of the people spoke Aramaic only : others
tl at they spoke Greek only ; and yet others that
tl ey were acquainted with both languages, snd
could use this or that at pleasure. To understand
the merits of the case, the simplest way will be to
lake up each of the two languages in question, and
trace the indications of its use among the Palestine-
Jews of the first century.
We begin then with thb Aramaic (the Jturith-
Aramaic or Chnldee, in distinction from the
Christisn-Arsmalc or Syriac, dialect). It ia not
unlikely that the long intercourse, friendly and
hostile, between the Kingdom of Israel and its
Aranuean neighbors on the north, especially the
Syrians of Damascus, may have produced some
effect on the language of the northern Israelites.
But the effect must have been much greater when
the Kingdom of Israel was overthrown by the
Assyrians, the higher classes carried into other
lands, and their places filled by importations from
tribes of Aramaean speech. In the siege of Jeru-
salem by the Assyrians, a few years later, it appears
frcm the proposal of the Jewish chiefs to Kababa-
kth (2 K. xviii. 26) that the Aramaean language
was understood by the leading men of the city,
though unintelligible to the people at large. The
course of events during the next century must
hare added to the influence of the Aranaic in
southern Palestine, until at length the conquest by
Nebuchadnezzar and the Babylonian Captivity gave
it a decided preponderance. Surrounded for two
generations by speakers of Aramaic, the Judssan
exiles could not fail to acquire that language. It
may be presumed that many, perhaps most of them,
•till kept up the use of Hebrew in their intercourse
with one another; but some, doubtless, forgot it
altogether. After the return to their own land,
the Aramaio was still required for communication
with many brethren out of Palestine or in it, and
with the officers or agenta of the Persian govern-
ment, which seems to have made this the official
language for the provinces between the Tigris and
the Mediterranean (comp. Ezra iv. 7, 8). The prog-
ress of the change which made the Hebrew a dead
language, and put tbe Aramaic in its place as a
living one, cannot be distinctly traced for want of
literary monuments. But the result is certain : it
was complete at the Christian era, and may have
been so two or three centuries earlier. It ia true
that the New Testament in several passages speaks
of the Hebrew as if still in use; but in some of
these (John r. 2, xix. 13, 17) it is evident from the
form of a word described as Hebrew (BnOnrtot,
ra0Jf)a0a, roVyoBo), that the Aramaic is meant,
the current language of the Hebrew people. In
many other cases, where words of the popular idiom
are given in the, N. T.. but without being called
Hebrew, they can only be explained from the
Aramaic: thus Matt. r. 22, paxdi vi. 84 (Luke
iri. 9, 13), juuuwSt; xvi. 17, /8ip 'Iwi; Mark r.
U. TwAtM suuiu; vii. 34 t<p<pa6i\ (iv. 36, 'A0ft~>
John 1. 48, KiKf>a»; Acts 1. 19, 'AxtASauJ; 1 Cor
xvi. 22, itapiw Mi;— to which add the worot
laf}0l, pafiPavrl, luvvtas, riaxa, and propel
names beginning with Bar- (son). By Josephus
too, the name Hebrew ia often used to denote tin
rpular Aramaic; thus ftw/ia "red" (Ant. ii. 1,
1), xunUa "priests" (iii. 7, § 1), 'Arspfe
« Pentecost " (iii. 10, J 6), iptcv " priest's girdle "
(lii. 7, $ 8), all of which he designates as Hebrew,
an evidently Aramaic
That this Jewish- Aramaic was not confined to a
fraction of the people, but was in general and
familiar use among the Jews of Palestine in th*
first century, is proved by a variety of evidence
outside of the N. T. as well aa in it. Joaephui
speaks of it repeatedly (B. J. pr. § 1, v. 6, § 3, v
9, § 2) as ij wax-put yMova, the tongue of the
fathers and fatherland, or, as we should say, the
mother-tongue, tbe native, vernacular idiom. As
such he contrasts it with the Greek, which he
describes (Ant. pr. § 2) as aAAooorV i)u2y mi
Urns StaAsVrou omvtfieuu), " a mode (of expres-
sion) alien to us and belonging to a foreign
language." From Josephus we learn (B. J. v. 6, §
3) that in the siege of Jerusalem, when the watch-
man on the towers saw a heavy stone launched
from the Roman catapults, he cried in tbe native
tongue, "the missile is coming;" he would, of
course, give warning in tbe language best under-
stood by the citizens at large. Josephus himself,
when sent by Titus to communicate with the Jews
and persuade them to surrender, addressed tbe
multitude in Hebrew (5. J. v. 9, § 2), which be
would not have done, if the language had not been
generally intelligible and acceptable. For further
proof we might appeal to the Targums or Chaldee
paraphrases of parts of the Old Testament, of
which the oldest, that of the Pentateuch by
Onkelos, was probably written not far from tbe
time of Christ; but it is possible that these Tar-
gums may have been composed, not for the Jews
of Palestine, but for those of Babylonia and tbe
adjacent countries; as Josephus states (8. J. pr.
$ 1) that the first edition of his own History was
composed in the native tongue (tQ warpfai) for the
barbarians of the interior (reit aW kop&dpois)-
Of more weight as proof of a vernacular Aramaic
in Palestine is the early existence of a Hebrew
gospel («. e. an Aramaic, or, as Jerome calls it,
Syro-Chaldaic gospel, " Chaldakx) Syroque sennoue
conscriptum "), commonly ascribed to the Apostle
Matthew. Papiaa, bishop of Hierapolia, who
flourished in the first half of the second century,
speaks of such a book, and holds it for the compo-
sition of the Apostle. He may have been mis-
taken as to the authorship ; but as to the existence
of an Aramaic gospel at a very early period, there
is no sufficient ground to discredit his testimony.
It appears then that there waa a body of people in
Palestine during the first century to whom it
seemed desirable to have the gospel hi Aramaic,
perhaps not solely aa being more intelligible, but as
recommended also by patriotic or sectarian feel-
ing.
Turning to the New Testament, we find it
stated (Acts i. 19) that when the catastrophe of
Judas became known to the inhabitants of Jeru-
salem, the place where it occurred was ealW
'AnASopst, " field of blood," a name clearly An
maic ; and that it was called thus tv ilfsiBtsAfV
t«> alrrir *'in their own dialect-' This doa
not imp'.' that tbe Aramaic belonged to Um
Digitized by
Google
LANGUAGE OF THE HEW TESTAMENT
1591
inhabitants of Jerusalem exclusively, so as to he
ipoken by no other population; nor that it be-
longed to them aa their only language, so that no
other tongue was spoken in the city; but that it
belonged to them more properly than any other
tongue which might be spoken there, which could
only be true of the native vernacular, ij rdVpioi
y\w<r<ra. A strong light is thrown on this whole
(abject by the account of Paul's address to the
people of the city (Acts zzL 37 ff.). The Apostle,
baring been rescued by the chief captain from a
mob who sought to kill him, was about to be taken
to the castle; but was allowed at his own request
to address the multitude. " And when there was
made a great silence, he spake unto them in the
Hebrew tongue." " And when they beard that he
spake in the Hebrew tongue to them, they kept the
more silence." (Acts zzi. 40, xxii. 3.) It is plain
that he took them by surprise. If they did not
know him for a native of the Greek city Tarsus,
they had heard him charged with bringing Greeks
into the Temple; and they expected him to use the
Greek. When they found him speaking Aramaic,
they showed by their greater attentiveneas that they
were not only surprised but gratified ; not that a
Greek address would have been unintelligible, and
perhaps not on account of any prejudice against the
language, but because the speaker, by adopting an
idiom which was peculiarly their own, evinced his
respect for their nationality, his sympathy with
their feelings, and, as it were, made himself one
of their number.
Of our Lord himself it is expressly stated that
on three occasions he made use of the Aramaic:
when with the words TaAiSi koviu he raised the
daughter of Jairua (Mark v. 41); when with i<M>aBi
be opened the ears of the deaf man (Hark vii. 34);
and when upon the cross, paraphrasing the first
words of Ps. xxii., he cried, iKtit, i\mt, Aaywi
o-alaxtfaW (Mark xv. 84; in Matt, xxvii. 46, f)A(,
f)Af, Anpa <ra0axOcwl)- It is hardly supposable
(hat among all his utterances recorded in the Gospels
these three were the only ones for which he used
the native idiom of the country. Yet it is not easy
to say why out of a larger series these alone should
be given in the original form. In the last cose it
seems probable that the Aramaic words actually
uttered by our Lord were given by the writer to
explain how it was that some of the bystanders
conceived him to be calling on Elks. As to the
other two, it is noteworthy that they appear in only
one of the Evangelists. The miracle wrought with
the word I<p<pa6i ia found in Mark atone: the
miracle wrought with raAieVk koviu Is found in
Luke also, bnt the words ascribed to our Lord (viii.
54) are Greek, ff wait, iytlpov, — showing how un-
safe it is- in other cases to conclude that he spoke
Greek because he ia not said to have spoken Ara-
maic. It is not an unlikely supposition that in
these two instances the narrative of Mark reflects
the impressions of an individual, whose mind was
peculiarly struck by the stupendous effect Instantly
following, and seemingly produced by, the utterance
*f one or two words, so that the very sound of the
words became indelibly fixed in his memory. That
the same subjective impression was not made in
ether cases of the same kind, or that being made
K did not find ita way with uniformity into the
narrative, are both easily conceivable. There is
towever, yet another instance in which our Lord is
■xpeaaly stated to have apoken Hebrew (Aramaic):
a his eppearanoe to Paul when oumeying to
Damascus. Of this event there are threo narratives
(Acts is., xxii., xxvi.); and here agiiin it is worth
noticing that among the parallel accounts only one
(xxvi. 14) alludes to the fact that the language used
was Hebrew. An able writer, who holds that
Christ seldom spoke Hebrew, suggests that he used
it on this occasion to keep his words from being
understood by Paul'a companions. But if these
companions failed to hear or to understand the
voice (Acta ix. 7, xxii. 9), it is not safe in an event
of this nature to infer their Ignorance of the lan-
guage. And it ia quite supposable that the use
of Hebrew here belonged to the verisimilitude of
the manifestation, Jesus appearing to this new
apostle not only with the form in which he was
known to the Twelve, but with the language in
which he was accustomed to converse with them.
The influence of the Greek in Palestine began
with the conquest by Alexander. The country fell
under the power of Macedonian rulers, the Ptolemies
of Egypt, and afterwards the Seleucidse of Syria, with
whom Greek was the language of court and govern-
ment. It was used for the official correspondence
of the state; for laws and proclamations; for peti-
tions addressed to the sovereign, and charters, rights,
or patents granted by him. The administration
of justice was conducted in it, at least so far as the
higher tribunals were concerned. At the same
time commercial intercourse between the countries
under Macedonian rule came into the hiuids of men
who either spoke Greek as their native tongue or
adopted it as the means of easiest and widest com-
munication. Partly for purposes of trade and partly
aa supports for Macedonian domination, colonial
cities were planted In these regions, and settled by
people who, if not all of Hellenic birth, had the
Greek language and civilization and bore the name
of Greeks. Such influences were common to the
countries about the eastern Mediterranean; anu
their effect in all was to establish the Greek aa the
general language of public life, of law, of trade, of
literature, and of communication between men of
different lands and races. It did not in general
supplant the native Idioms, as the Lathi afterwards
supplanted those of Gaul and Spain: it subsisted
along with them, contracting but not swallowing
up the sphere of their use. Its position and influ-
ence may be compared with those possessed, though
in a much inferior degree, by the French language
in modern Europe. The sway of the Greek ex-
tended to lands never conquered by Alnandct. To
■ language so capable, so highly cultivated, to
widely diffused, so rich in literature and science,
the Romans could not remain indifferent, especially
when the regions where it prevailed became part cf
their empire. Long before the Christian era a
knowledge of Greek wru an indispensable element
in the training of an educated Roman. In the
reign of the emperor Tiberius, under whom our
Lord suffered, we are told (Val. Max. ii. 3, 3) thai
speeches in the Roman Senate were often made in
Greek. - The emperor himself, acting as judge, fre-
quently heard pleadings and made examinations in
it (Dion. Cass. Ivii. 15). Of the emperor Claudius,
a few ytjars later, it is said (Sueton. CUmd. 43)
that he cave audience to Greek ambassadors speak-
<ig in their own tongue and made replies in tot
same language.
The people of Palestine were subjected to Hel-
lenudng influences of a special character. Their
Seleucid rulers, not content with the natural opera-
tion of circumstances, made strenuous •fibril to
Digitized by
Google
1692
LANGUAGE OF THIS HOT TESTAMENT
■quae npon them the Greek culture and religion.
IW great nstinnsi reaction under the Maccabees,
U f u v uked bj tbeae efforts, wat of do long duration,
lie Roman* became masters of the country; and
moat have given new force to the Greek inflnranwi
to which they had themselves yielded. It cannot
be doubted that the Roman adminiatraticri of state
and Justice in Palestine was conducted in the Greek,
not the Latin, language. The first Herod, who
reigned for many years under Roman supremacy,
was manifestly partial to the Greeks. Casarea,
which he founded, and made, after Jerusalem, the
greatest city in the land, was chiefly occupied by
Greek inhabitants. Of many other cities in or near
the Holy Land, we learn, mostly from incidental
notices, that the population was wholly or partly
Greek. Thus Gaza, Ascalon, Joppa, Ptokmais,
Dora, as well as Cessna, on the western sea-coast;
Tiberias and Sebaste in the interior; and on the
cast and northeast, Hippos, Gadara, Scythopolis
(or Bethshan), PHh, Gerasa, Philadelphia, and
perhaps the remaining cities of the Decapohs. It
la obvious that the Jews must bare been powerfully
affected by so many Greek communities established
near tbem and connected with them by manifold
political relations, — and especially) the Jews of
Galilee, surrounded as they were and pressed upon
by such communities.
While many Greeks were becoming settled in
Palestine, Jews in yet larger numbers were leaving
it to establish tbemsebee in all the important places
of the Grecian world. Without losing their nation-
ality and religion, they gave up their Aramaic
mother-tongue for the general language of the
people round them. Had the Jews of Kgypt re-
tained the nsiire idiom, the first translation of the
Scriptures would probably have been made in
Aramaic and not in Greek. Even Philo of Alex-
andria, an older contemporary of our Lord, gives
no evidence in his voluminous and learned writings
of an acquaintance with either Hebrew or Aramaic.
But these Jews of the dispersion frequently returned
to their fatherland; tbey gathered in crowds to the
great national festivals ; and in personal communi-
cation with their Palestinian kindred, did much to
extend the use of their adopted language. In many
ases they continued to reside in Palestine. Thus
we hear (Acts vi. 9) of one or more synagogues of
Libertines (Jewish freedmen from Italv), Crrenians,
Alexandrians, Cilicians, snd peoples from ue st e m
Asia Minor. That many would content themselves
with their familiar Greek, as being sufficient for
the ordinary purposes of communication, without
taking the trouble to learn Aramaic, is a fact which
can hardly be doubted. It is generally believed
that the Hellenists, mentioned in Acts ix. 99 and
(as converts to Christianity) in Acts vi. 1, were
persons of this sort, — separated from those around
them not by speaking Greek (for most others could
do so), but by speaking only Greek. The satisfac-
tion which Paul gave by his use of Aramaic (Acta
xxii. 2), makes it easy to understand how such
persons, who being settled in Palestine disdained
to acquire the native idiom, might be looked upon
with coldness or disfavor as a class by themselves,
es p e c ia l ly if they showed, as may often have been
the case, a weakened attachment to other features
of the national life. [Hellenists.]
The Greek version of the LXX. did much to
Osaka the Greek known and familiar to the Jews
aff Psl—tiim The original Hebrew was an object
if ssasiaatte study; a learned acquaintance with it
was highly valued in popular estimation (Jos. Ant
xx. 11, § 2) ; and the number of scribes, lawyer*,
etc, who possessed such knowledge was probate)
not inconsiderable; but to the mass of the people
the Hebrew Se riptar cs were a sealed book. Nor wat
there, so for as we know, prior to the Christian era,
any Ai snails •anion. To the common man — the
man of common education — if be had any knowl-
edge of Greek, the most natural and easy way to gain
a knowledge of the Sc riptur es was by reading the
Greek translation. That such use was made of it
by great numbers of the people cannot well be
doubted. Of the quotations from the Old Testa-
ment made by the writers of the New, the greater
part are in the words of the LXX. C u ui paisti vely
few give any dear evidence that the writer had in
mind the Hebrew original. This familiarity with
the Greek version makes it probable that it was
used not only for private reading, but in the public
services of toe synagogue. In many places there
may have been no one sufficiently acquainted with
the ancient Hebrew to read and translate it for the
congiegation; but in every community, we may
presume, there were persons who could both read
the Greek and add whatever paraphrase or explana-
tion may have been needed in Aramaic It is ap-
parent in the case of Joaepbus, that even men of
learning who had studied the Hebrew were famiH»v
with the version of the LXX. ; in his Antiqiatitt
Joeephus makes more use of the latter than of the
former. To the influence of the LXX. must be
added that of a considerable Jewish-Greek literature,
composed mainly in the last two centuries before
Christ, the so-called Apocrypha of the Old Testa-
ment. It is true that one of these books, the Wis-
dom of Jesus the son of Siraeh, is declared in Ha
preface to be the translation of a work c ompo se d in
Hebrew (i. «., not improbably, in Aramaic) by the
grandfather of the translator. There is much reason
for believing also that the First Book of Maccabees
was written in Hebrew ; and the same may perhaps
be true of some other apocryphal books. The fact,
however, that no one of them is extant in that
language seems to show that in general use (except
perhaps in countries east of the Syrian desert ) the
Hebrew (or Aramaic) original was early superseded
by the Greek version. A case nearly parallel is
seen in Josephus'* Hittorj of Ike Jewuk War. It
was composed (according to the statement of the
preface) in the native tongue for the barbarians of
the interior, i. e. beyond the Syrian -desert, the
limit of the Roman power. But for those under
the Roman gov e rnm e n t he translated it into Greek
(tw Kara H)» *Pwpaia»r i/ytiuriar rn 'EAAsii
yh&aey pmifiaXAr)- And this translation has
so thoroughly superseded the original work that,
but for the statement of its author, we should not
have known, or perhaps even suspected, its exist-
ence
That Greek was generally understood by tfaa
people of Jerusalem, is evident from the eireum-
stsnees of Paul's address in Acts xxii. The multi-
tude, who listened with hushed sttention when be
spoke to tbem in Aramaic, were already attentive
while e xp ec tin g to bear hhn in Greek. It does not
follow that all understood him in the former lan-
guage, or that alt would bare understood him is
the latter. To gain attention, H would be emmet
that a large majority could understand the lnm,eas.i
of the speaker; those who could not, might stV
get some notion of the speech, its drift and sab
stance, by occasional renderings ef their s uV te.
Digitized by
Google
LANGUAGE OF THE NEW TESTAMENT
1598
The Greek New Testament Is itself the strongest
proof of the extent to which ite language had be-
wme naturalized among the Jews of Palestine.
Moat of its writer*, though not belonging to the
lowest class, to the very poor or the quite unedu-
cated, were men in humble life, in whom one could
hardly expect to find any learning or accomplish-
ment beyond what was commoc to the great body
of their countrymen. We an not speaking of Saul
or Luke or the unknown writer of the Epistle to
the Hebrews ; but of Peter, Jude, James, John, and
Matthew, if (as is must probable) we hare his Gospel
in its original language. Yet we find them not
only writing in Greek, but writing in a way which
rives that tbey were familiar with it and at home
it. They do not write it with elegance or with
strict grammatical correctness; but they show a
facility, a confidence, an abundance of apt and
forcible expression, which men seldom attain in a
language not acquired during early life. Some
have (bund in the Hebrew idioms which color their
*yie an Indication that they thought in Hebrew
or Aramaic), and had to translate their thoughts
rhen they expressed them in Greek. But similar
dioms occur ir the compositions of Paul, who as
the native of a Greek city must have been all his
life familiar with the Greek language. When Greek
began to be spoken by Hebrews, learning it in adult
years, they had to go through a process of mental
translation ; and the natural result was the forma-
tion of a Hellenistic dialect, largely intermixed with
Semitic idioms, which they handed down to their
descendants. The latter, as they did not cease
to speak an Aramaic idiom, were little likely to
correct the Aramaic peculiarities in the Greek re-
ceived from their fathers. Josephus speaks with
emphasis of the difficulty which even a well-educated
Jew found in writing Greek with idiomatic accuracy.
The Greek style of a Jew, especially when writing
on religious subjects, was naturally affected by his
familiarity with the LXX., which copied from the
original many Hebrew forms of expression, and
kept them alive in the memory and use of the
people.
In view of these proofs, the conclusion seems
unavoidable that, as a general fact, the Palestine
Jews of the first century were acquainted with both
languages, Greek and Aramaic. It is probable,
Indeed, as already stated, that some were not ac-
quainted with the Aramaic; and it is by no means
improbable, though the proof is less distinct, that
some were not acquainted with the Greek. Of both
these classes the absolute number may have been
considerable. But apparently they were the excep-
tions, the majority of the people having a knowl-
edge more or less extended of both languages.
Other instances of bilingual communities, of popu-
lations able for the most part to express themselves
In two different tongues, are by no means wanting.
One of the most striking at the present day is to
be found in a people of Aranueau origin with
a firmly held Aramaic vernacular, the Nestorian
Syrians or Chaldee Christians. " In Persia most of
she Neetorians are able to speak fluently the rude
Tatar (Turkish) dialect used by the Mohammedans
a? this province, and those of the mountains are
squally familiar with the language of the Koorda.
Still they have a strong preference for their own
tongue, and make it the constant and only medium
A Intercourse with each other." (Stoddard, Preface
ft Modern Sgiiae Gr ■• wnar *n Journal of Amur.
Oritntti Soc. vol -O
It is a common opinion that by the penteoostal
gift of tongues (Acts ii.) the Apostles were miraco
busty endowed with a knowledge of many languages
and the power of using them at pleasure. But
this gift would seem from the tenor of the accounts
tj have been a kind of inspiration under which the
speaker gave utterance to a succession of sounds,
without himself willing, or perhaps even under-
standing, the sounds which he uttered. It does
not appear from the subsequent history that the
Apostles in their teaching made use of any other
languages than Greek and Aramaic. It is mt
n e c essa ry to suppose that Paul spoke latin si
Rome, or Maltese In Melita (Acts xxviii.) or Lyoao-
nian at Lyatra (Acta xiv.). In the transactions at
Lystra it is pretty clearly implied that Paul and
Barnabas did nor understand the speech of Lycaonia,
and therefore railed to perceive and oppose the idol-
atrous intentions of the people until they had broken
out into open act. In choosing between the two
languages which they undoubtedly possessed, the
Apostles were of course guided by the circumstances.
Outside of the Holy Land, tbey would generally,
if not always, make use of the Greek. In Syria,
indeed, a considerable part of the people — the
same for which the Peshito version was made in
the next century — would probably have understood
an address in the Aramaic of Palestine; but in
Antioch, the capital, where the disciples were first
called Christians, Greek must have been the preva-
lent language. Even iu Palestine, Paul's addressee
to the Roman governors Felix and Festus would
naturally be made in Greek. This is not so clear
of the address to Agrippa, who bad enjoyed a
Jewish education. In the meeting of apostles and
elders at Jerusalem (Acts xv.), occasioned by events
in Antioch and attended by delegates from that
city, the proceedings were probably in Greek, as
also the circular letter which announced its re-
sult to "the brethren which are of the Gentiles in
Antioch and Syria and Cilicia." When Peter on
the day of Pentecost addressed the multitude of
Jews gathered from many different countries, he
would naturally use the language which was most -
widely understood. It is true that the " Parthiana
and Medes and Elamites — and Arabians," if no
others, would have been most accessible to an
Aramaic address : so we judge from the fact that
Josephus, writing for readers in these very lands,
composed his history in the native tongue. Still,
when we consider tue " dwellers in Cappadocia, in
Pontus and Asia, Phrygia and Pamphylia, Ic
Egypt, and in the parts of Libya abont Cyrene, and
strangers of Home," it is probable that more would
have understood Greek than Aramaic ; so that If
there was only one address in one languge (which
perhaps the terms of the narrative do not require
us to suppose), it was probably made in Greek.
The difficulty of determining the language urrd
for each particular discourse is even greater in the
Gospels than in the Acta. It seems reasonable to
suppose that conversations between kindred and
friends, and the familiar utterances of Christ to his
disciples, were in Aramaic; the native idiom of the
country, if not wholly given up, would naturally
be employed for occasions like these. Yet as long
as speakers and hearers had another language at
command, there always remains, in the absence of
express statements, a possibility that this, and not
Aramaic, may hare been used for any given coo-
vvruthn And if, on the other hand it seems
reescnable to suppose that our Lord is his mots
Digitized by
Google
1594 LANGUAGE OF THE N. T.
public discourses spoke Greek, there is a similar
difficulty about being euro in particular eases that
las did not use the other language which was
{■miliar to him and to the mass of his hearers. A
recent writer assumes that every discourse which,
as reported to us, contains quotations from the O.
T. in the word* of the LXX., must hare been pro-
nounced in Greek; snd this criterion, were it trust-
worthy, would decide many cases. But if sn
Aramaic speech containing Scripture quotations
wen to be reported in Greek by a writer familiar
with the LXX., who seldom (if ever) read the
Scriptures in any other form, is it not probable that
be would give the quotations for the most part
according to the LXX. ? Sometimes, it is likely,
be would depart from it, because, he did not cor-
rectly remember its phraseology; and sometimes,
because be remembered that the Aramaic speaker
gave the passage a sense varying from that given
by the LXX. As the writers of the Gospels were
probably in this condition — of persons familiar
with the LXX., who seldom (if ever) read the
Scriptures in any other form — it is unsafe from
the way in which they give the Scripture quota-
tions to infer anything as to the language used by
the speakers who quoted them. There are in-
stances, however, in which the circumstances of the
ease afford some indications on this point. Thus
in communicating with the people of Gadara, which
Josephus calls a Greek city, our Lord would use
the Greek language. Among the crowds who fol-
lowed him before the Sermon on the Mount and
who seem to have stood abjut the mountain while
he was speaking, were some from Uecapolis (Matt.
iv. 85). As already stated, the ten cities of that
region were (most, if ujt all, of them) Greek. As
our Lord had thus in the surrounding multitude of
his auditors some who probably were unacquainted
with Aramaic, there is plausible ground for believ-
ing that on this important occasion he made use
of the Greek language. In the closing scenes of
his life, when he was brought before the Koman
governor for judgment and execution, it is nearly
certain that Greek was used by Pilate himself and
by the various speakers about his tribunal.
It is stated in the Muhnah (SoUih, c. 9, n. 14),
that when the war of Titus broke out, an order was
Issued in which fathers were forbidden to have their
sons instructed in Greek. Whether this is true or
not, it would be only natural that the excited
patriotism of sueh a time should cause the Jews to
set a higher value on their national tongue. Per-
haps those who spoke Greek and Aramaic were now
Inclined as far as possible to discard the use of
Greek; the Targuma, which seem to hare made
tfcebr list appearance or to have assumed a pernia-
•snt shape about this time, would be a help in
Mug so. At all events there is reason for believing
J>st after this period there was a considerable pop-
■latlon in Palestine who did not understand Greek.
Hie general opinion of the Fathers (from Clement
4 Alexandria down) that the Epistle to the Hebrews
vas composed in Aramaic, had probalily no other
foundation than tne l-elief that it would otherwise
have been unintelligible to the Jews of Palestine
for whom it was designed. This belief is of little
weight as regards the original language of the epis-
tle; bu> as regards the prevailing language of Pal-
estine in later times it may not be without value.
Eusebius of Caaarea, a native and lifelong resi-
dent of Palestine, declares (Dem. Evnng. lib. iii.)
thai lbs Apusdes before the death of their Master
LAODICEA
understood l t language but thai of the Syrian
this he would hardly have done if Greek had ban
generally spoken by the Galiueans of hi* own day
The discussion as to the language of Palestine
in our Saviour's time has been quite generally eon
nected with the question whether Matthew wrote
his Gospel in Hebrew or in Greek. Most defenders
of the Hebrew original (as Du Pin, Mill Michaelis
Marsh, Weber, Kuinoel, etc.) hare maintained that
this was the only language then understood by the
body of the people. And many champions of the
Greek original (as Cappell, Basnage, Match, Lard-
ner, Waueus, etc.) have made a like claim for the
Greek. For a full list of the older writers, see
Kuinoel in Fahriciue, BibL Oraea ed. Harlea. iv.
760. We add the names of some writers who hare
treated the subject more at large. Isaac Voasius
(De Oracuiu SibytlinU, Oxon. 1680), though a
staunch believer in the Hebrew original, held Cat
Greek was almost universal in the towns of Pales-
tine, and that the Syriac still spoken in the country
and in villages had become so corrupted as to be a
kind of mongrel Greek. He found an opponent in
Simon (I list. Crit. du Ttxte du N. T., Kotterd.
1689), who allowed that Greek was the common
language (lanyut culyaire) of the country, but
contended that the Jews, beside the Greek, had
preserved the Chaldee which they brought with
them from Babylon, and which they called the
national language. Diodati of Naples (De Ckrulo
Grace loqutnte, 1767; reprinted London, 1843)
went further than Vossius, asserting mat Greek in
the days of our Lord had entirely supplanted the
old Palestinian dialect. Keplies to this work were
put forth by Ernesti (in Neuetta ThroL BibL,
1771) and De Hossi (Delia Lingua propria
di Crulo, Parma, 1773). De Rossi's work was
adopted by Pfiuinkuche as the basis of his essay
on the Aranuean language in Palestine (in Eich-
born's AUyem. BibL, 1797), translated by E. Rob-
inson (in Am. BibL &;>»., 1831) with an intro-
duction on the literature of the subject. Another
translation (by T. G. Repp) is given in Clark's
Biblical Citbimt, vol. ii. Against PfannkucLe.
who is one-sided in his advocacy of the Aramaic,
Hug (Hint, m d. N. T., 4th ed., 1847; 3d ed.
transl- by Fosdick, Andover, 1836) uiaintainul the
concurrent use of Greek. His position — which
is nearly the same with that of Simon — is held
substantially by most later writers, as Credner
(KM. in d. jV. T., Halle, 1836) and Bleek (EM. in
d. JV. 7\, Berlin, 1869). A somewhat mom ad-
vanced position is taken by Dr. Aha. Roberta
(Ducuuimu on the Gwpelt, 3d ed., London, 1863),
who, while admitting that both languages were in
general use, contends that our Lord spoke for the
most part in Greek, and only now and then in
Hebrew (Aramaic). J. H.
LANGUAGES, SEMITIC. [Shem.]
LANTERN (eWi) occurs only in John xviii.
3. See Did. of AhL art. Lulerna, [Lamp, p.
1589.]
LAODICE'A (AoeoMfia: [/ytxftVwi]). The
two passages in the N. T. where this city is men
turned, defl is its geographical position in harmony
with other authorities. In Rev. L 11, iii. 14, it is
spoken of as belonging to the general district waist
contained Epbesus, Smyrna, Tbyatira, Perganiar
Sardis, and Philadelphia. In Col. iv. 13, IS it
appears in still closer association with Colossal ant
Hierapolia. And this was exactly its position. It
Digitized by
Google
LAOD1CEA
was a town of some consequence in the Roman
■twins* of Asia ; and it ra situated iu the valley
of the Meander, on a small river called toe Lycus,
with Coloss.b and Hikkai-olis a few miles dis-
tant to the west.
Built, or rather rebuilt, by one of the Seleucid
monarch*, and named in honor of hia wUe, Laodieea
became under the Roman government a place of
some importance. Its trade was considerable; it
lav on the line of a great road ; and it was the seat
of a eomtnttui. From Rev. in. 17 we should gather
't was a place of great wealth. The damage which
■a caused bj an earthquake in the reign of Tiberius
Tee. Ann. xiv. 27) was promptly repaired by the
soergy of the inhabitants. It was soon after this
occurrence that Christianity was introduced into
l^aodicea, not however, its it would seem, through
the direct agency of St. Paul. We have good reason
fcr believing that when, in writing from Rome to
LA.ODICEA
1596
the Christians of Cologne, he sent a greeting fa)
those of Laodieea, he had not personally visited
either place. But the preaching of the Gospel at
Epheaus (Acta iviii. lV-iix. 41) must iuevitably
have resulted in the formation of churches in the
neighboring cities, especially where Jews were
settled ; and there were Jews in Laodieea (Joseph.
Ant. xii. 8, § 4; xiv. 10, § SO). In subsequent
times it became a Christian city of eminence, the
see of a bishop, and a meeting-place of councils. It
is often mentioned by the Byzantine writers. The
Mohammedan invaders destroyed it; and it is now
a scene of utter desolation ; but the extensive mint
near Denitlu justify ail that we read of I-aodicea
in Greek and Roman writers. Many travellers
(Pococke, Chandler, Leake, Arundell, Fellows) have
visited and described the place, but the most elabo-
rate and interesting account is that of Hamilton.
One Biblical subject of interest is connected with
.Aodieee. From Col. iv. 10 it appears that St.
Paul wrote a letter to this place (ij {« AooSiircfat)
when be wrote the letter to Colog&ie. '11m question
arises whether we can give any account of this
Laodicean epistle. Wieseler » theory (Apntt. Ztit-
e*er, p. 450) is that the Epistle to Philemon is
meant ; and the tradition in the A/mttolicnl Cm-
aarnnViTU that he was bishop of this see is adduced
in confirmation. Another view, maintained by
Palsy and others, and suggested by a manuscript
variation in Kph. i., is that the Epistle to the
RnnesiiUH is intended. [EphesiansJ Ussher's
new is, that this last epistle was a circular letter
sent to Laodieea among other places (see L'.ft and
EpUlUt of St. Piutt, ii. 488, with Altera i Pro-
kgjmema, G. T. v. iii. 13-18). None of these
opinions can be maintained with much confidence
ft may however be said, without hesitation, that
the apocryphal Epiitola ad Laodkentei is a late
and clumsy forgery. It exists only in Latin MSS.,
and is evidently a cento from the ( inlatians and
Kphesians. A full account of it is given by Jocss
{On the Gmon, ii. 31-4d>
The subscription at the end of the First Epistle
to Timothy (*ypd'a») iwe Aaatuttlmt, v/ru «'«fi
/tr/rpoVoAif ♦ywyfaj rqr llajtmrmnii) in of no
authority; but it is worth mentioning, as showing
the importance of Laodieea. J. S. H.
* The reasons for regarding Paul's letter to
Philemon as the letter to the I iaodieeans are Tory
inconclusive. The letter to Philemon was of a
private nature, and in the salutation (w. 1, 3) re-
stricts itself to a private circle, and could not there-
fore l>e a letter to the entire Laodicean church
(omnp. Col. i. 1 f.). Further as Onesimus certainly
be'-nged to Colossal (Col. iv. 9), Philemon also
must have belonged there, and the letter have been
written to him at that place. Wieseler argues
{Chnmologie du Apott. JStitalUrt, p. 454) that
Philemon lived at Laodieea because Archipp-ia
Digitized by
Google
1596
LAODI0EAN8
(Phtt. tot. S snd CoL lv. 17) Uved than; and be
ergots that Archipput Uved then because Paul
Modi a menage to him just after speaking of the
church in Laodicea. But Paul directs these same
Colossisns to whom he writes to deliver this mes-
sage as by word of mouth to Arcbippu* (riirart
'Afx'"'?)' ""d hence Archippus must haw been
at Colrase as well aa the Colossisns. It ma; be
said inieed that tfro-re denotes an intermediate
act like aariacurOt in ver. 16; that is possible,
we must admit, but altogether against the natural
impression ot~ tlie passage. The tradition that an
Archippus was liujiop at I-aodicea (Apott. Const.
sit. 44) may or ma; not have some weight as an
argument. It is an inadvertence in the article
above that Wiaeler is said to connect that tradition
with I'hilenion.
The lent edition of this I .at In f/nttola ad
ijiotiHtiuur is Anger's, appended to his treatise
C'tber den JsialirmrrbrirJ' (l-eipr.. 1843). He
agrees wiili tliose wlio regard the Epistle to the
Ephesians as encyclical, and beuce the one from
Laoduea (Col. iv. lti) to which l'aul refers. I'rof.
Llgbtfoot {tjttAlte ti> Hit I'liili/i/Hitu, p. 137 f.)
maintains alio this opinion. lie ban a valuable
note there on this question of lust Apostolic epistles.
Hutter's Greek translation of this epistle will be
found in Anger as above (p. 172), and in Kabricius,
Cod. Apocr. X. T. i. 873 f. Dr. Eadie has given
an English version of this (jreek copy iu his Com-
mentary oh Oit Kpittte to the, Cvluttium. H.
LAODICE'ANS (AooSiiku : J^odtcentet),
the inhabitants of Uudicea (( ol. iv. 10 ; Kev.iii.14).
LAP1DOTH (niTBb, .. e. Uppldoth:
Uioni. Alex AeupitM: Vat. Aid.] Amps.ScW:
Lapidotii ). the husband of 1 leborah the prophetess
(Judg. iv. 4 only). The word rendered " wife " in
the expression " wife of I jptdoth," has simply the
force of "woman ; " and thus lupjMxh (" torches ")
has been by some understood ss descriptive of
Deborah's disposition, and even of her occupations.
[Dkuokah.] But there is no real ground for
supposing it to mean anything but wife, or for
doubting the existence of her husband. True, the
termination of the name is feminine: but this is
the case in other names undoubtedly borne by men,
as Mkiiehotii, Mahaziotii, etc. U.
LAPWING (nS" , 3W, duUphalh: (wo*.:
upupa) occurs only in Lev. xi. 19, and in the paral-
lel passage of Deut- xiv. 18, amongst the list of
those birds which were forbidden by the law of
Hoses to be eaten by the Israelites. Commentutors
generally agree with the LXX. and Vulg. that the
soopoe is the bird intended, and with this interpre-
tation the Arabic versions « coincide : all these three
renirns give one word, hoopoe, as the meaning of
LAPWING
cktiiphatk; but one cannot definitely cay i
the Syrlao reading, 6 the Targums of Jri
Onkdos, and Jonathan,' and the Jewish doctors,
indicate any particular bird or not, for they merely
appear to resolve the Hebrew word into its com-
ponent parts, duUphath being by them understood
at the " mountain-cock," or " woodland-cock."
This translation baa, as may be supposed, produced
considerable discussion as to the kind of bird rep-
resented by these terms — expressions which would,
before the date of acknowledged scientific nomen-
clature, have a very wide meaning. According to
Bochart, these four different interpretations bare
been assigned to dtMphath : 1. The Sadducees
supposed the bird intended to be the common lien,
which they therefore refused to eat 2. Another
interpretation understands the cock of the wood*
(Tetrao urogalha). 3. Other inter pr e t ers think
the attagen is meant. 4. The last interpretation
is that which gives the hoopoe at the rendering of
the Hebrew word.'
s f_\ OS t V n 1 1 alhitdhud, from root (\jD(Jc£D
" to moao an a dove.'* Umlhmt in the modern Arabic
name for lbs hoopoe. At Cairo the name of this bird
Is hidhid (vid. Fonut&l, Doer. Animal, p. vii.).
» )i-2> ^Ct^Jvl. (Syriae), voodlmuUeth.
« ►S'TTO "IJJ (Chaldee), artifix mantu
Btremtuier (then, •nUia monlanvi): from the rab-
juical story of the Hoopoe and the Shlmir. (Sea
eMJumr, and Buxtorf, Ltx. Caald. Mm. a v.
m)
Th» Hoopoe (Vpnp*
As to the value of 1. nothing can be urged in its
favor except that the first part of the word owl or
M does in Arabic mean a cock.' 2. With almost
as little reason can the cock of the mode, or caper-
cailzie, be considered to hate any claim to be the
bird indicated : for this bird is an inhabitant of the
northern parts of Europe and Asia, and a lth ough
it lias been occasionally found, according to M.
Temminck, at far south as the Ionian Islands, yet
such occurrences are rare indeed, and we have no
record of its ever having been seen in Syria or
Egypt. The ciipercmUic is therefore a bird not at
all likely to come within the sphere of the observa-
tion of the Jews. 3. As to the third theory, It ia
certainly at least as much a question what it signi-
fied by nltnyrn, as by duliphath.f
Many, and curious in some instances, are the
derivations proposed for the Helirew word, but the
most probsble one is that which was alluded to
d There can be no doubt that the hoopoe Is the
Mid Intended by dukipluuk; toe the Coptic kakmphm,
the Syriae ttirapaa, which stand for the Ufrnfa tpee»
are almost certainly allied to ths Hebrew n?" 1 ?**
dtMphath.
• iit^j A Jbt>: fttina, fib*.
/ By auagtn Is here of course ntat the sss» | ie
of ths Greeks, and the auaitm of the Rosses*; eel
that Dams as sometimes aepllad totally a> ore aasw
mifaa,ori
Digitized by
Google
LAPWING
there, manly, th* sass mfta tl c o ck . JSmAjlat speaks
of the hoopoe by name, and expressly calk it the
tori e/tts roots (JVoom. 291, quoted by Ariat.
H.A.bu 49). jEIian (A. A. Hi. 86) says that
than birds build their nests in k/ig rock*. Aris-
totle'a word* an to the aame effect, for be writes,
" Now same anlmah) are found in the mountains,
at the hoopoe for instance " (H.A.I. 1). When
the two lawsuit-wearied citizens of Athens, Euel-
pides and Pistbetssms, in the comedy of the Birth
of Aristophanes (20, 54), are on their search for
the home of Epopa, king of birds, their oituthotug-
icnX conductors lead them through a wild desert
tract terminated by mountain* and rocks, in which
is situated the royal aviary of Epopa.
It must, however, be remarked that the observa-
tions of the habits of the hoopoe recorded by modem
zoologists do not appear to warrant the assertion
that it it to preeminently a mountain-bird as bus
been implied above." Marshy ground, ploughed
land, wooded districts, such at are near to water,
an more especially its favorite haunts : but perhaps
more extended observation on its habits may here-
after confirm the accuracy of the statements of the
ancients.
The hoopoe was accounted an unclean bird by
the Mosaic law, nor is it now eaten 6 except occa-
sionally in those countries where it is ahundaiitlr
found — Egypt, France, Spain, etc. etc Many and
strange are the stories which are told of the hoopoe
in aneient oriental table, and some of these stories
are by no means to its credit. It seems to have
been always regarded, both by Arabians and Greeks,
with a superstitious reverence' — a circumstance
which it owes no doubt partly tolts crest (Aristnph.
Bird*, 94; eomp. Ov. Met. vi. 672), which certainly
gives it a most imposing appearance; partly to the
length of its beak, and partly also to its habits
"If any one anointed himself with its blood, and
then foil asleep, be would see demons suffocating
him " — " If its liver were eaten with rue, the
eater's wits would be sharpened, and pleasing mem-
ories be excited " — are superstitions held respect-
ing this bird. One more fable narrated of the
hoopoe is given, because its origin can be traced to
a peculiar habit of the bird. The Arabs say that
the hoopoe is a betrayer of secrets; that it is able
moreover to point out bidden wells and fountains
under ground. Now the hoopoe, on settling upon
the ground, has a strange and portentous-looking
habit of bending the bead downwards till the oobit
of the beak touches the ground, raising and de-
pressing its crest at the same time.<< Hence with
much probability arose the Arabic fable.
These stories, absurd at they are, are here men-
tioned because it was perhaps in a great measure
owing, not only to the uncleanly habit* of the bird,
but alto to the superstitious feeling with which the
hoopoe was regarded by the Egyptians and heathen
generally, that it was forbidden at food to the
Israelites, whose affections Jehovah wished to wean
• 8ss MaegUHvrav's British Bkdi, vol. HI. 43; Tar-
tan, Brit. B. n. 178, 2d edit ; I*-»d's Scandinavian
JaWtara, B. 821 ; Tristram is Rim, vol. I. The
soar (round* for all th* filthy babus wbleb ban bra
is li lt i t to this trnMbrtaaUgnsd bird am to b* *»und
la Uw tut that It resorts to dunghills, sts.. la March
trtha worms sad hunts which II nods than.
« A writer in Am, vol. L p. 48, says, « W» found
sat hoops* s vary good bbd to eat,"
» Vwoh Is ins aaas evan to this day- ThsUr. H.
LABMA
159.
torn the land of their bondage, to. which, as ws
know, they fondly olung.
The word hoopoe it evidently onomstopoetie,
being derived from the voice of the bird, which re-
sembles the words •• bo<p, hoop," softly but rapidly
uttered. The UennaiM call the lird Aim Houp,
the French La liuppr, which is particularly ap-
propriate, as it refers both to the crest and note of
the bird. In Sweden it is known by the name oi
ffir-Fogel, the army-bird, because from its omi-
nous cry, frequently heard in tbe wilds of the forest,
while the bird itself moves off as any one approaches,
the common people hare supposed that seasons of
scarcity and war are impending (IJoyd't Stand.
Advent, ii. 331).
The hoopoe is an occasional visitor to this coun-
try, arriving for the most put in tbe autumn, bat
instances are on record of its having been seen in
the spring. Col. Hamilton Smith has supposed
that there are two Egyptian species of tbe genua
Upupa, from the fact that some birds remain
permanently resident about human habitations in
Egypt, while others migrate : he says that tbe
migratory species is eaten in Egypt, but that tbe
stationary species is considered inedible (Kitto's
Cycl. art Ln/iwmg). There it, however, but one
species of Egyptian hoopoe known to ornithologists,
namely, Vpupt epop*. Some of these birds migrate
northwards from Egypt, but a large number remain
all tlie year round; all, however, belong to the same
species The hoopoe is about the size of the missel-
thrutli (Tardus riscienrus). Its crest is very elegant,
the lone feathers forming it are each of them tipped
with black. It belongs to the family Upmpidm,
sub-order Tenummtres, and order Pa—ere*.
W. H.
* I have eaten tbe hoopoe, and found It very
palatable. At for filthy habits, it hat no more of
them than all birds that live in the neighborhood
of human habitations, and make the dunghill one
of their localities for seeking their food. In clean-
liness of plumage, as in contrast of coloring, it re-
sembles the barnyard cock. Other reasons than
its filthiness must be assumed for the prohibition
of the Mosaic law, if this be the bird intended.
G. E. P.
LASiCA (Aao-ula: [Thnlatsn]). Four or five
years ago it would have been impossible to give any
information regarding this Cretan city, except in-
deed that it might be presumed (Conybean and
Howson, St Paul, ii. 394, 2d ed.) to be Identical
with the - Lisia " mentioned in the Pcuhmger
Table as 16 miles to the east of Gorttsa. TUa
corresponds sufficiently with what it said in Act*
xxvii. 8 of its proximity to Fair Havkxo. The
whole matter, however, has been recently cleared
up. In tbe month of January, 1850, a yachting
party made inquiries at Fair Havens, and were told
that tbe name Lasssa was still given to tome mint
a few miles to the eastward. A short search sufficed
to discover these ruins, and Independent testimony
B. Tristram, who visited Palestra* in th* spring of
1868, says of th* hoopoe (lbit, I. 27); "Th* Arabs
ban a sapsratltlous wvs ee n eo lor thai bird, wbleb
they bsUen to possess marvelous i u* u1d is»l quaHnes,
and call It ' th* Doctor.' Its bead Is aa mdlspansabls
Inandkmt fa all eharma, and in tbs praetks of wttakt
craft."
d This habit of Aupstttag probably first ■
th* Srsak wstd M
Digitized by
Google
1598
LASHA
eaonrmed the name. A ftdl account of the dis-
covery, with a plan, is given in the 3d ed. of Smith's
Fogagt and ijhipiereck of St. Paul, App. iii. pp.
863, 86S.O Captain Spratt, R. N., had previously
observed some remains, which probably represent
the harbor of Lastea (see pp. 80, 89, 245). And
it joght to be noticed that in toe Dacrixione delC
Itola di Candia, a Veuetian MS. of the 16th cen-
tury, as published by Hr. E. Falkener in the
Museum of domical Antiquities, Sept. 1852 (p.
887), a place called Lapses, with a " temple in
ruins," and " other vestiges near the harbor," is
mentioned as being close to fair Havens. His
■in is undoubtedly St. Luke's Laasea; and we see
how needless it is (with Cramer, Ancient Greece,
BL 474, and the Edinburgh Review, No. civ. 176)
to resort to Ijichmann's reading, " Alassa," or to
Ha « TLaUusa " J the Vulgate. [Ciietk.]
J. S. H.
LA'SHA (SIJ?^, t.e.Lesha: Aao-d: Uea), a
place noticed in Gen. x. 19 only, as marking the limit
of the country of the Canaanites. From the order in
which the names occur, combined with the expres-
sion " even unto I juha," we should infer that it by
somewhere in the southeast of Palestine. Its exact
position cannot, in the absence of any subsequent
notice of it, be satisfactorily ascertained, and hence
we can neither absolutely accept or reject the opin-
ion of Jerome and other writers, who identify it
with Callirhoe, a spot famous lor hot springs near
the eastern shore of the Dead Sea. It may indeed
be observed, in corroboration of Jerome's view,
that the name Laaha, which signifies, according to
Qesenius (The*, p. 764), "a fissure, ' is strikingly
appropriate to the deep chasm of the Zerlai Main,
through which the waters of Callirhoe find an out-
lea to the sea (Lynch 'a Expeil. p. 370). No town,
however, is known to have existed in the neighbor-
hood of the springs, unless we place there Machas-
rua, which is described by Josephua (0. J. vii. 6,
$ 3) as having hot springs near it. That there was
tome soit of a settlement at Callirhoe may perhaps
be inferred from the fact that the springs were
visited by Herod during his last illness (Joseph.
Ant. xvii. 6, § 5); and this probability is supported
by the discovery of tiles, pottery, and coins on the
spot. But do traces of buildings hare as yet been
disoovcred ; and the valley is so narrow as not to
offer a site for anything like s town (Irby and
Mangles, eh. viii. June 8). W. L. B.
LASHATtON (rn»b, i.«. Lassharon:
IXX. emits; [hut Oomp. Atvap&r, AM. Xfu-
p*V0 <S«ron; but in the Benedictine text Ln*$anm\
one of the Canaanite towns whose kings were killed
by Joshua (Josh. xii. 18). Some difference of
«jj : .:>inn has been expressed as to whether the first
tillable is an integral part of the name or the He-
brew possessive particle. (See Keil, Jotua, ad loc)
But there seems to he no warrant for supposing the
Jxiateuce of a particle before this one name, which
iertatnly does not exist before either of the other
hirty names in the list. Such at least is the eon-
LATIN
elusion of Boehart (ffiertw. i. eh. 31), Belaud (Pol
871), and others, a conclusion supported by tht
reading of the Targum,' and the Arable veraka,
and also by Jerome, if the Benedictine text can U
relied on. The opposite conclusion of the Vulgatt
given above, is adopted by Gesenius ( 7"*ee. p. 6481
but not on very dear grounds, his chief argument
being apparently that, as the name of a town,
Sharon would not require the article affixed, which,
as that of a district, it always bears. But thai
appears to be begging the question. The name has
vanished from both MSS. of the LXX., unless a
trace exists in the Ofnrf a <v> m % °f t" 6 Vat.
LASTHENK8 (AmtrHrn,; ef. Aaryiax*"
[Latthenet]), an officer who stood high in ths
favor of Demetrius II. Ntaator. He is described
aa "oousin" (trvyytrfis, 1 Mace. xi. 31) and
« father " (1 Mace. xi. 33; Jos. Ant. xiii. 3, § t)
of the king. Both words may be taken aa titles of
high nobility (comp. Grimm on 1 Mace. x. 88;
DM. xvii. 59; Gee. The*. $. v. 3^, J 4). It ap-
pears from Josephua (Ant. xiii. 4, § 3) thai be was
a Cretan, to whom Demetrius was indebted for a
large body of mercenaries (cf. 1 Mace. x. 67), when
he asserted his claim to the Syrian throne. Ths
service which be thus rendered makes it likely (Vales.
ltd Lie.) that he was the powerful favorite whose
evil counsels afterwards issued in the ruin of his
master (l)iod. Etc xxxii. p. 592). But there is
not the slightest ground for identifying him with
the nameless Cnilinn to whose charge Demetrius
I. committed his sons (Just. xxxv. 3).
B. F. W.
LATCHKT, the thong or fastening by which
the sandal was attached to the foot. The English
word is apparently derived from the Anglo-Saxon
Uieccun, " to catch " or " fasten " (OM Eng. "to
latch "), as " hatchet " from Anecna, "to hack;"
whence " latch,'' the fastening of a door, " lock,"
and others. The Fr. hcet approaches most nearly
in form to the' present word. The Hebrew
?| VHp, $ertc, is derived from a root which signifies
" to twist." It occurs in the proverbial expression
in Gen. xiv. 23, and is there used to denote some-
thing trivial or worthless. Gesenius (The*. s.v.
C-in) compares the Lai. hilum =fhm, and
quotes two Arabic proverbs from the Hamaaa and
the Kamus, in which a corresponding word is sim-
ilarly employed. In the poetical figure in la. v.
37 the " latebet " occupies the same position with
regard to the shoes as the girdle to the long flow-
ing oriental dress, and was aa essential to the com-
fort and expedition of the traveller. Another
semi-proverbial expression in Ijike iii. 16 points to
the fact that the office of bearing and unfastening
the shoes of great personages feD to the meanest
staves. [Shoe.] W. A. W.
LATIN, the language spoken by the Roman*,
la mentioned only la John xix. 90, and Luke xxfli.
M; the former passage being a t rans l ation o*
a ■ See Voyage, ate., pp. 81,3»f. 8d ed. (1886). The
traveller* were not only directed to the place for wbtsh
they Inquired, but on aaktag the peasants on the spot
what the plan- was called wen told " Lesea." It la
Jw»t cant of Pair Havens, and shows trues of an mt-
snrfant town. Two while pillars, masses of masons*
sad rains of vtasptes are found then. Bangs has (ft
•BAfcfvuti, «L 571) speaks of lavas as ■ e ntlcnaa k
Aets, but not of the name aa rtUl current. That* b
• 't rf fy\ »|Hl5««a*sfofl
Digitized by
Google "
LATTICE
Tmuntrrl. "fa the Roman tongue," i. e. Latin ;
and tlw latter of the adjective 'PautaZk-oti (ypifr
• Bat though the Latin language is hardly
recognized by name in the N. T., it is represented
there by various Latin words under Greek forms.
This is especially true of terms which designate
Soman objects or ideas for which no suitable ex-
pression existed in Greek. They are found, as we
should expect, chiefly in the Gospels and the Acta;
for the narrative there brings us into contact with
Koman life more than in the other books of the
N. T. They are such as the following : xtrrvplay,
nXmrta, Kovo-rutla, KoSpArrnt, Kqro-or, \rytdy,
\«Wior, *ijB«priro>, /liXio*, pdntWov, /loSiot,
aauiifiov, tn/tutMrnr, <ntKou\irap, rlrkot,
wpwrApiw, ^fVftKKuw, fittn, trtnjr, «>d
others.
Latin terminations of adjectives occur instead of
the proper Greek endings, as 'HevSioret (Matt.
xxti. 18; Mark iii. 6) and Xpumarit (ActsxL 36),
instead of forms like 'iToAwitf (Acts x. 1), Nafat-
ssuo* (Acts ii. 23). Latin proper names are numer-
ous, borne not only by Komana, but Greeks and
Jews. The lexical effect of the Latin is very limited.
The law-phrase, Aa<9oVr«t to haurtr, "haying
taaen bail or surety," Acts xrii. 9, probably stands
for "satis aceipere." In Mark t. 33 iax&ran tx*"
and in xr. 15 t# oxty to titcwbr woirjacu corre-
spond to " populo satisfaeere " and " in extremis
ease " Similar phrases are ovuBovMov Xa&tiv,
(Matt. xii. 14, 4c.), Sodrai ipyaalay (Luke xii. 38),
lx« It* Tapgrri^mv (Luke xiv. 18).
It will be found that the Latinisms are relatively
mora frequent in Mark than in the other Evange-
lists. Hence those who maintain that Mark wrote
Us Gospel at Rome and for Roman readers find in
that peculiarity an indication of this origin and des-
tination of his Gospel. The presence of this Latin
dement in the N. T. Greek is a proof of some value
that our Christian books belong to the age to which
we are accustomed to refer them.
The fulkr treatises ou this subject are toose of
Jo. Erh. Kapp, TH X. '-'■ LniinUmil mtrilo ae
fain nuptctU (Lips. 1736), and C. S. Georgi, De
LatimmU JV. T. (VVitteb. 1733). For briefer
notices see Credner's KinUitung in dat N. T. p. 104 ;
De Wette's Eirdatutig in dtu iV. T. p. 7; Schirlitz,
Oryndtuge d. NtvltsL GrSeittU, pp. 14, 37 f. ; Tre-
geOes in Home's ItUrocL, 10th ed., It. 14 fc; and
Westcott's Introduction to the Suidy of the Got-
pais, p. 369 (Amer. ed.). H.
• LATIN VERSIONS OF THE BI-
BLE. [VuLGATK.]
LAVEB
1599
LATTICE.
Hebrew words.
The rendering in A. V. of three
1. 3JtPft eihnAo, which occurs hut twice,
Judg. t. 28,'and Prov. rii. 6, and in the latter pas-
sage is translated " casement " In the A. V. In
both Instances it stands in parallelism with " win-
low." Qesenlns, following Schultens, connects it
with an Arab root, which signifies "to be eoai,"
esp. of the day, and thus attaches to tthr.&b the
signification of a " latticed window," through which
the cool breezes enter the house, such as is seen in
the illustrations to the' article House (vol. ii. p.
1103 (.). But Kuerat and Meier attach to the root
the idea of twisting, twining, and in this ease the
word will be synonymous with the two following,
which are rendered by the same English term,
" lattice," in the A. V. The LXX. in Judg. t.
28 render ahn&b by to{ikoV, which is explained
by Jerome (ad £*. xL 16) to mean a small arrow-
shaped aperture, narrow on the outside, hut widen-
ing inwards, by which light is admitted. Others
conjecture that it denoted a narrow window, like
those in the castles of the Middle Ages, from which
the archers could discbarge their arrows in safety.
It would then correspond with the "shot-window"
of Chaucer ("Miller's Tale"), according to the
interpretation which some give to that obscure
phrase.
2. D'CnC], kh&racctm (Cant ii. 9), is ap-
parently synonymous with the preceding, though
a word of later date. The Targum gives it, in the
Chaklee form, as the equivalent of tshnab iu Prov.
vii. 6. Fuerst (Cone. s. v.) and Michaelia before
him assign to the root the same notion of twisting
or weaving, so that Wi&raaAm denotes a network
or jalousie before a window.
3. "I^tp. tbaeih, is simply «a network"
placed before a window or balcony. Perhaps the
network through which Ahazlah fell and received
his mortal injury was on the parapet of his palace
(3 K. 1. 2). [House, vol. ii. pp. 1105 o, 1106 a.]
The root involves the same idea of weaving or
twisting as in the case of the two preceding words.
StbAc&h is used for " a net " in Job xviii. 8, as
well ss for the network ornaments on the capitals
of the columns in the Temple. [Window.]
W. A. W.
LAVER." 1. In the Tabernacle, a vessel of
brass containing water for the priests to wash their
hands and feet before offering sacrifice. It stood
in the court between the altar and the door of the
Tabernacle, and, according to Jewish tradition, a
little to the south (Ex. xxx. 19, 21; Reland, Ant
tltbr. pt. i. ch. ir. 9; Clemens, ois Lnbro jEneo,
iii. 9 ; ap. Ugolini, Thn. vol. xix.). It rested on a
basis, 6 «. a. a foot, though by some explained to be
a cover (Clemens, ibid. ch. iii. 5), of copper or brass,
which, ss well as the laver itself, was made from
the mirrors c of the women who assembled d at tbs
door of the Tabernacle-court (Ex. xxxviii. 8). Toe
notion held by some Jewish writers, and reproduced
by Franzius, Biihr (Symb. i. 484), and others,
founded on the omission of the word " women,"
that the brazen vessel, being polished, served aa s
mirror to the Levites, is untensble.*
The form of the laver is not specified, but iray
be assumed to have been circular. Like the other
vessels belonging to the Tabernacle, it was, together
a nS»3 sad *1»S, from "TO, "to sol Osi
S.8T1: Aoimfp: labmm.
• \S, Hm, bant; and so also A. T
• fTlrn.9, *imrrpa, specula.
Si UX. *£r wHTTtwoffii*.
• Has Hie nsraual passage, 1 Sam . B, whars
O'fifc, yminv, Is Insetted ; Oesenius on ths prop
31, p. 172; Koil, BM. Arth. pt. I. e. 1. ) 19; CHasstas,
Phil. Sacr. I. p. 690, ed. Bathe; Ughttoot, Umr
Tempt, eh. 87. 1; Jennings, Jew. Anaq. a. M
Knobsl, Km*, at*. Hmvn>. Bxod. xxxvlil.; Phils
fu Has. In. 16, U. 168, "d Manser
Digitized by
Google
1600
LAVKR
wKh 1U « foot," consecrated with oil (Lev. vii 10,
11). No mention it found in the Hebrew text of
the mode of transporting It, but in Num. It. 14a
passage U added in the LXX., agreeing with the
Samaritan Pent, and the Samaritan version, which
prescribe! the method of packing it, namely, in a
purple cloth, protected by a skin covering. As no
mention is made of any vend for washing the flash
of the sacrificial victims, It Is possible that the laver
may have been used for this purpose also (Reland,
AhL Htbr. i. iv. 9).
8. In Solomon's Temple, besides the great mol-
ten sea, there were ten lavers « of bran, raised on
bases » (1 K. vii. 27, 38), Ave on the N. and S.
sides respectively of the court of the priests. Each
laver contained 40 of the measures called " bath "
(goaf, LXX. and Joeephus). They were used for
washing the anim-iU to be offered in burnt-offerings
(9 Chr. iv. ; Joseph. Ant. viii. 3, § 6 ). The bases
were mutilated by Ahai, and carried away as plun-
der, or at least what remained of them, by Nebu-
sar-adan, after the capture of Jerusalem (8 K. xvi.
IT, m. 13). No mention is made in Scripture
i the existence of the lavers in the second Temple,
nor by Joeephus in his account of Herod's restora-
tion (Joseph. B. J. v. 8). [Moltes Ska.]
The dimensions of the bases with the lavers, as
given in the Hebrew text, are 4 cubits in length
and breadth, and 3 in height The LXX. gives
4 | 4 I 8 in height. Josephus, who appears to have
followed a var. reading of the LXX., makes them
fi in length, 4 in width, and G in height (1 K. vii.
88; Thenius, gd be.; Joseph. Aid. viii. 3, $ 3).
There were to each 4 wheels of 1 J cubit in diame-
ter, with spokes, etc., all cast in one piece. The
principal parts requiring explanation may be thus
enumerated: (a.) " Borders," ' probably panels.
Gesenius (That. p. 938) supposes these to bare
been ornaments like square shields with engraved
work. (A.) " Ledges," a joiuts in corners of ba
or fillets covering joints.' (c.) '• Additions,"/
probably festoons; Lightfoot translates " margines
oblique descendentes." (it.) Plates,' probably
axles, cast in the same piece a* the wheels. («.)
Undersetters,* either the naves of the wheels, or a
sort of handles for moving the whole machine;
Lightfoot renders " column* fulcientes lavacrum."
(/.) Naves.' (c.) Spokes.* (A.) Felloes.' (i.)
Chapiter," 1 perhaps the rim of the circular opening
("mouth," ver. 31) in the convex top. (*.) A
round compass," perhaps the convex roof of the
base. To these parte Joeephus adds chains, which
may probably be the festoons above mentioned
(Ant. viii. 3, § 6).
LAVES
Thenius, with whom Keil in the man.
both of them differing from Ewald, in a minus*
examination of the whole passage, but not without
some transposition, chiefly of the greater part of
ver. 31 to ver. 36, deduces a construction of the
bases and lavers, which seems fairly to reconcile the
very great difficulties of the subject. Following
chiefly his description, we may suppose the base to
have been a quadrangular hollow frame, connected
at its corners by pilasters (ledges), and moved by
4 wheels or high castors, one at each comer, with
handles (plates) for drawing the machine. The
sides of this frame were divided into 3 vertical
panels or compartments (borders), ornamented with
bas-reliefs of lions, oxen, and cherubim. The top
of the ban was convex, with a circular opening
• rh^D?, pt of njbp or nj'oip, ttom
|!|S, "stand upright". Oes. pp. 685, 870 : iuxmmi» :
<iuu
<» D* 1 ?*?^, 'f«x«>«"i Jmctxrm, tram S 1 ?!^,
>i cut In notches," Oes. p. 1411.
c Josephus says : noWo-cm rcrpdyMrot, rd wtovpA
nrt fiirmtt If s»r*>o» fUpovt e> avmt Ixorrtt ifip-
/nVb, ftom HlS, ..twine," On. p. T4»
■apu: tore; whence Thenius sngfssts kmtM or Afiea
pledges; «, additions ; if, plats* ; e, ate
denwttns ; /, naves ; r, spokes ; a, feUoas ; i, chap-
iter ; «, rtuod eo mp sss
i D , 3"ID, »p o <i (ori», taut, Oes. 978 ; UghUM
massa vrta tttrngcnff-.
» n'lDn?, ivii,kmntruli, Gm. 734
< D'H'tte'n, mo**,- and
* □* , |7®n, radii; the two words ecmbtned to
LXX. 4 wacyparets, Oes. p. £88 ; Schleuener, Lm*
T.T., wpcya.
■ D^J, rwrst, eaalat, Oes. p. 2HL
m m^lb, «•*•**, sawrniilsj, Oes. p. TV.
" 3^9 Sty, 9m.m,m»:w,, hv » \w l 1 *
ntmditmt.
Digitized by
Google
LAW
af H cubit diameter. The top Itaelf ni covered
with engraved cherubim, lions, and palm-tnts or
branches. The height of the convex top from the
appar plane of the hue wai i cubit, and the space
be tween thii top and the lower surfaoe of the laver
I eabit more. The law retted on nipporta (under-
ssttsrs) rising from the 4 corners of the bate. Each
laver eontained 40 « baths," or about 800 gallons.
Its dimensions therefore, to be in proportion to 7
bat (4 cubits, ver. 88) in diameter, must have been
about 80 inches in depth. The great height of the
whole machine was doubtless in order to bring it
•tar the height of the altar (8 Chr. ir. 1; -arias
Montanns, de TempU f'ahrica. Oft. Sacr. vii.
CM; Lightfbot, Paer. TempU, eh. xxxvil. 8, vol
Lpw6M;Tbsuiua J ln.BTarso. emg. Beat*, on 1 K.
vii, sod App. p. 41; Ewald, Qetekidde, Ul. 818;
UL Btm*. oV Bibl Arch. § 34, pp. 128, 139;
Winer, a. v. Bandfau). H. W. P.
LAW (rTTin : Nojis*). The word is properly
need, in Scripture as elsewhere, to express a definite
oommandment laid down by any recognised author-
ity. The oommandment may be general, or (as
in Lev. vi 9, 14, Ac, » the law of the burnt-offer-
ing," etc) particular in its bearing; the author-
ity either human or divine. But when the word
is need with the article, and without any words of
(mutation, it refers to the expressed will of God,
and, In nine cases out of ten, to the Mosaic Law,
or to the Pentateuch, of which it forms the chief
portion.
The Hebrew word (derived from the root ITT,
"to point out," and so "to direct and lead") lays
mors steam on its moral authority, as teaching the
troth, and guiding in the right way; the Greek
Neper (from riym, "to assign or appoint "), on
its eotistrainlng power, as imposed and enforced by
a recognised authority. But in either esse it is a
oommandment proceeding from without, and dis-
tinguished from the free action of its subjects, al-
though not necessarily opposed thereto.
The sense of the word, however, extends its scope,
and assumes a more abstract character In the
writings of St. Paul. tUftot, when used by him
with the article, still refers in general to the Law
of Moses; but when used without the article, so as
to embrace any manifestation of " I,aw," it includes
all powers which act on the will of man by com-
pulsion, or by the pressure of external motives,
whether their commands be or be not expressed in
definite forms. This is seen in the constant oppo-
sition of laya rifiav (" works done under the con-
straint of law") to faith, or '• works of faith," that
is, works done freely by the Internal influence of
frith. A still more remarkable use of the word
Is found in Rom. vii. 33, where the power of evil
aver the win, arising from the corruption of man,
a) spoken of as a " law of sin," that is, an un-
natural tyranny prooeaomg from an evil power
LAW OF MOSES
1601
The occasional use of the word "law" (at In
Bom. Ul. 37, "law of faith ; " In vU. S3, "law of
my mind," too roe's; In Till. 2, "law of the spirit
ef lift; " and in Jam. L 36, U. 13, "a perfect law,
the law of liberty ") to denote an inlenij principle
ef action does not really militate against the gen-
eral rule. For in each case It will be seen, that
such principle Is spoken of in contrast with some
fcrmal law, and the word " law " la consequently
to it " improperly," ha order to stark this
Itt
opposition, the qualifying words which follow guard-
ing against any danger of misapprehension of Us
real chvactcr.
It should also be noticed that the title " the
Law ' ' is occaskonaU j used loosely to refer to the whols
of the Old Testament (as in John x. 34, referring to
Ps. lxxxii. 6 ; In John xr. 36, referring to Ps. xxxv.
19; and 'n 1 Cor. xiv. 31, referring to Is. xxviii. 11,
13). This usage is probably due, not only to de-
sire ot brevity and to the natural prominence of
th* Pentateuch, but also to the predominance in
the older Covenant (when considered separately
from the New, for which it was the preparation) of
an external and legal character. A. B.
LAW OF MOSB8. It will be the object of
this article, not to enter into the history of the
giving of the Law (for which see Moses, ths
Exodus, etc.), nor to examine the authorship of
the books in which it Is eontained (for which see
Pkhtatbdoh, Exodus, etc), nor to dwell on par-
ticular ordinances, which are treated of under their
respective beads; but to give a brief analysis of its
substanoe, to point out its main principles, and to
explain the position which it occupies in the prog-
ress of Divine Revelation. In order to do this
the more clearly, it seems best to speak of the Law,
1st, in relation to the pest; Sdly, in its own In-
trinsic character; and, 8dly, in its relation to the
future.
(I.) (a.) In reference to the past, it is all-Im-
portant, for the proper understanding of the Law,
to remember its entire dependence on the Abra-
hamic Covenant, and its adaptation thereto (see
Gal. ill. 17-94). That covenant had a twofold
character. It contained the " spiritual promise "
of the Messiah, which was given to the Jews as
repre s en tatives of the whole human race, and as
guardians of a treasure in which " all families of
the earth should be blessed." This would prepare
the Jewish nation to be the centre of the unity of
all mankind. But it eontained also the tostporri
promises subsidiary to the former, and needed In
order to preserve intact the nation, through which
the race of man should be educated and prepared
for tin coming of the redeemer. These promises
were special, given distinctively to the Jews as a
nation, and, so far as they were oonsidesed in them-
selves, calculated to separate them fromother nations
of the earth. It follows that there should be m
the Law a corresponding duality of nature There
would be much In it of the latter character, much
(that is) peculiar to the Jews, heal special, and
transitory; but the fundamental principles on
which it was based must be universal, because ex-
pressing the will of an unchanging God, and
springing from relations to Him, inherent in hu-
man nature, and therefore perpetual and universal
In their application.
(4.) The nature of this relation of the Lam terns
promise is clearly pointed out. The belief In
God as the Redeemer of man, and the hope of his
manifestation as such in the person of the Messiah,
Involved the belief that the Spiritual Power must
be superior to all oamal obstructions, and that
there was in man a spiritual element which could
rule his life by communion with a Spirit from
above. But it involved also the idea of an antago-
nistic Power of Evil, from which man was to be
redeemed, existing In each individual, and existing
also in the world at large. The promise was Iba
witness of the ens wrath, she Law was the daelsta-
Digitized by
Google
1602
LAW OF MOSES
Boo of the other. It was "added
tranagrajnons." In the fodiridusl. It stood between
his better and bis woner self ; in the world, between
the Jewish nation, at the witness of the spiritual
promise, and the heathendom, which groaned under
the power of the flesh. It was Intended, by the
gift of guidance and the ple a sure of motives, to
strengthen the weakness of good, while it curbed
directly the power of evil. It followed inevitably,
that, in the individual, it aammed somewhat of a
coercive, and, as between Israel and the world,
somewhat of an antagonistic and isolating character;
and hence that, viewed without reference to the
promise (ss it was viewed by the later Jews), it
might actually become • hindrance to the true
revelation of God, and tn the missuin for which the
aatiOB had been made a <• ebosen people."
(e.) Nor is it less rsssntisl to remark iitt period
eftke history at which it was given. It marked
and determined the transition of Israel from the
condition of a tribe to that of • nation, and its
detnite assumption of a distinct position sad office
hi the history of the world. It is on no unreal
m e ta phor that we bass the well-known analogy
h a t s ut ii the stages of individual life and those of
national or universal existence- In Israel the pa-
triarchal time was that of ehOdbood, ruled chiefly
through the affections and the power of natural
relationship, with rules few, simple, and unsys-
tematic. The national period was that of youth,
in which this indirect trarhing and influence gives
piece to definite aasertiens of right and responsi-
bility, and to a system of distinct commandments,
needed to control its vigorous and impulsive action.
The fifty days of their wandering alone with God
in the silence of the wilderness represent that
awakening to the difficulty, the responsibility, and
the nobleness of Hie, which marks the " putting
away of childish things." The Law is the sign
and the seal of such sa awakening.
(d.) Yet, though new in its general conception,
it was probably not Knotty new m ilt material*.
Neither in his material nor bis spiritual providence
does God proceed per soAnm. There must neces-
sarily have been, before the Law, commandments
and revelations of a fragmentary character, under
which Israel had hitherto grown up. Indications
ef such are easily found, both of a ceremonial and
moral nature; as, for example, in the penalties
against murder, adultery, and fornication (Gen. is.
8, xxxviii. 24), in the existence of the Levirate law
(Gen. xxxviii. 8), in the distinction of clean and
unclean animals (Gen. viii. 80), sad probably in
the observance of the Sabbath (Ex. xvi. S3, 87-39).
But, even without such indications, our knowledge
of the existence of Israel as a distinct community
in Egypt would necessitate the conclusion, that it
must have been guided by some laws of its own,
growing out of the old patriarchal customs, which
would be p res erved with oriental tenacity, and
gradually becoming methodised by the progress of
ci r c umsta nces. Nor would it be possible for the
LneBtes to be in contact with an elaborate system
ef ritual and law, such ss that which existed in
Egypt, without being Influenced by its general
principles, and, In 'less degree, by its minuter
■etsili As they approached nearer to the condi-
tion of a uation they would be more and mors
■kely to modify their patriarchal customs by the
adoption from Egypt of laws which were fitted for
national existence. This being so, it is hardly con-
aavabls that the Hectic legislation should have
LAW OF MOSMs
embodied none of these earner materia It k
dear, even to human wisdom, that the only eav
stitntion, which can be efficient and permanent, is
one which has grown up slowly, and so been assim-
ilated to the character of a people. It is the
peculiar mark of legislative genius to mould by
fundamental principles, and animate by a higher
inspiration, m-s— j-l» p rev iousl y — <-*i"g in a cruder
state. The necessity for this lies in the nature,
not of the legislator, but of the subjects; snd She
argument therefore is but strengthened by tas
acknowledgment in the case of Hoses of a <L«tns
snd special inspiration. So far therefore as tLsy
were consistent with the objects of the Jewish law,
the customs of Palestine and the laws of Egypt
would doubtless be traceable to the Mosaic ays-
tern. .
(e.) In dose connection with and almost in eon-
sequence of this reference to antiquity we And an
accommodatiom of tie Law to the temper aad cir-
cumstances of the Israelites, to which our Lord
refers. in the esse of divorce (Matt- xix. 7, 8) ss
necessarily interfering with its absolute pwrfcetjen.
In many easts it rather should be said to guide and
modify existing usages than actually to annexion
them; and the ignorance of their existence may
lead to a conception of its ordinances not only -
erroneous, but actually the reverse of the truth.
Thus the punishment of filial disobedience appears
severe (Deut. xxi. 18-81); yet when we refer to
the extent of parental authority in a patriarchal
system, or (as at Rome) in the earner periods of
national existence, it appears merelike a limitation
of absolute parental authority by an appeal to the
judgment of the community. The Lsvirwte Law
again appears (see Mich. Jfos. Mtekt, bk.iii.ch.
6, art M) to have existed in a far more general
form in the early Asiatic peoples, and to have bean
rather limited than fevered by Moses. Thehtw of
the Avenger of Blood is a similar instsnre of merci-
ful limitation and distinction in the exercise of an
immemorial usage, probably not without its vales
snd meaning, and certainly too deaf seated to admit
of any but gradual extinction. Nor la it lea
noticeable that the degree of prominence, given to
each part of the Mosaic system, baa a similar ref-
erence to the period at which the nation bad ar-
rived. The ceremonial portion ia marked oat
distinctly and with elaboration; the morel and
criminal law is clearly and sternly decisive; even
the civil law, so far as it relates to individuals, is
systematic! because all these were eafled for by the
past growth of the nation, and needed in order to
settle and develops its resources. But the political
and constitutional law is comparatively imperfect ;
a few leading principles are hud down, to be devel-
oped hereafter; bat the law h directed rather to
sanction the various powers of the state, than to
define and balance their operations. That the
rrvt'lg authorities of a patriarchal nature hi each
tribe and family are recognised ; while ride by aide
with them ia established the priestly and Levities]
power, which was to sup ersede them entirely in
s ac er do ta l, and partly aim in judicial ftaejjons.
The supreme dvll power of a "judge," or (here-
after) a king, ia recognised distinctly, although
only in general terms, indicating a s u ve ietgn aid
summary jurisdiction (Dent. xvfl. 14-10); and the
prophetic office, In He political as well as Its mors,
aspect, is spoken of still more vaguely at futon
(Dent, xrifi. 16-88). These powers, being reeoa
nixed, are left, within das amito, to work out tat
Digitized by
Google
LAW OF MOSES
political system of Israel, and to ascertain by expe-
rience their proper spheres of exercise. On a care-
hi understanding of this adaptation of the Law
to the national growth and ohaiaeter of the Jews
(and of a somewhat similar adaptation to their
climate and physical circumstances) depends the
correct appreciation of its nature, and the power of
distinguishing in it what is local and temporary
from that which is universal.
(/.) In close connection with this subject we
ob se rve also the gradual proem by which the Law
■bus rawtkd to the Israelites. In Ex. xx.-xxiii.,
in direst wnnection with the revelation from Mount
Sinai, that which may be called the rough outline
of the Mosaic Law is given by God, solemnly
neorded by Moses, and accepted by the people.
In Ex. xxv.-xxxi. there is a similar outline of the
Mosaic ceremonial. On the basis of these it may
be conceived that the fabric of the Mosaic system
gradually grew up under the requirements of the
time. In certain cases indeed (as «. g. in Lev. x.
I, 9, compared with 8-11; Lev. xxiv. 11-16: Num.
ix. 6-19; xv. 32-41; xxvii. 1-11 compared with
xxxvi. 1-19) we actually see how general rules,
civil, criminal, and ceremonial, originated in special
circumstances; and the unconnected nature of the
records of law* in the earlier books suggests the
Idea that this method of legislation extended to
many other cases.
The first revelation of the Law in anything like
a perfect form is found in the book of Deuteronomy,
at a period when the people, educated to freedom
and national responsibility, were prepared to receive
It, and carry it with them to the land which was
now prepared for them. It is distinguished by
Us systematic character and its reference to first
principles; for probably even by Moses himself,
certainly by the people, the Law had not before this
been recognized in all its essential characteristics;
and to it we naturally refer in attempting to ana-
lyze its various parts. [Deuteronomy.] Yet
even then the revelation was not final; it was the
duty of the prophets to amend and explain it in
special points (as in the well-known example in Ex.
xviii.), and to bring out more clearly its great
principles, as distinguished from the external rules
in which they were embodied ; for in this way, as
in others, they prepared the way of Htm, who
"came to fulfill" (a-AnotMroi) the Law of old
LAW OF MOSE8
1606
The relation, then, of the Law to the Covenant,
Its accommodation to the time and circumstances
of its promulgation, its adaptation of old materials,
and its gradual development, are the chief points to
be noticed under the fast head.
(It.) In examining the nature of the Law In
Itself; it is customary to divide it Into the Moral,
Political, and Ceremonial. But this division,
although valuable, if considered as s distinction
t»ere!y subjective (as enabling us, that is. to con-
serve the objects of Law, dealing as It does with
man la his social, political, and religious capacity),
Is wholly imaginary, if regarded as sn objective
separation of various classes of Laws. Any jingle
wdlnance might have at once a moral, a cere-
sjoaJeL sad a political bearing; and in fact,
although in particular cases one or other of these
nph of the authority of the "rattan,
(lean. xx. 89 ("my brother, he hath commended
I to to than").
aspects predominated, yet the whole principal of
the Mosaic institutions is to obliterate any inch
supposed separation of laws, and refer all to first
principles, depending on the Will of God and tbi
nature of man.
In giving an analysts of the substance of the Law
it will probably be better to treat it, as any other
system of laws Is usually treated, by dividing it
into — (1) Laws aril; (9) Laws Criminal; (8,
Laws Judicial and Constitutional; (4) Laws Eccle-
siastical and Ceremonial.
(I.) Laws Crvn.
(A.) Oi- Pbbsoiib.
(a.) Father, and Sou.
The power of a Father to be held sacred,
cursing, or smiting (Ex. xxi. IB, 17; Lev. xx. 9),
or stubborn and willful disobedience to be con-
sidered capital crimes. But uncontrolled power of
life and death was apparently refused to the father,
and vested only in the congregation (Dent, xxt.
18-91).
Sightof the first-born to a double portion of the
inheritance not to be let aside by partiality (Dent
xxi 16-17).«
Inheritance be Daughter* to be allowed in
default of sons, provided (Num. xxvii. 6-8, comp.
xxxvi.) that heiresses married in their own tribe.
Daughter* unmarried to be entirely dependent
on their father (Num. xxx. 8-6).
(4.) HOSBAirD ABD WlPK.
The power of a Husband to be so great that s
wife could never be sui juris, or enter independently
into any engagement, even before God (Num. xxx.
6-15). A widow or divorced wife became inde-
pendent, and did not again fell under her father's
power (ver. 9).
Divorce (for unchanness) allowed, but to he
formal and irrevocable (Deut. xxiv. 1-4).
Marriage within certain degrees forbidden (Lav.
xviii. etc.).
A Sim Wife, whether bought or captive, not
to be actual property, nor to be sold ; if ill-treated,
to be ipso facto free (Ex. xxi. 7-9; Dent. xxt.
10-14).
Blander against a wife's virginity to be punished
by fine, and by deprival of power of divorce; on
the other band, anto-connnbial uncleanness in her
to be punished by death (Deut. xxii. 13-91).
The raising up of teed (Levirato law), a formal
right to be claimed by the widow, under pain of
infamy, with a view to pre s erva tion of families
(Deut xxv. 6-10).
(c.) Master Aim Slave.
Power of Master so far limited, that death
under actual chastisement was punishable (Ex. xxi.
90); and maiming was to give liberty ipso facto
(vr. 91), 97).
The Hebrew Slave to be freed at the sabbatteal
year,* and provided with necessaries (his wife and
children to go with him only if they came to hie
master witia him), unless by bis own formal act hi
consented to be a perpetual slave (Ex. xxL 1-6;
Dent. xv. 19-18). In any case (it would sesm> to
be freed at the jubilee (Lev. xxv. 10), with hh
» The dUBflulry of entmlng this
xxmlv. 8-16.
law Is I
IB Ja
Digitized by
Google
1604 LAW OF MOSES
Aftho. If told to * resident alien, to be always
Iwseemable, at a price proportional to toe distance
*f the Jubilee (Ler. or. 47-M).
Foreign Slaves to be held and inherited ae prop-
erly for ever (Ler. or. 45, 46); and fugitive slaves
from foreign nation* not to be given np (Deut
ufaX 16).
* The condition of aerranta under the Mosaic
code i* discussed at length in the article Slavs.
In the view of some of the ablest expounders of
that code, both Jewiah and Christian, the servant
was not regarded as a chattel or as property in the
intent of the law, but alwajs at a person. " The
Hebrew language has no word for stigmatizing by
a degrading appellation one part of those who owe
service, and distinguishing them from the rest as
'staves,' but only one term for all who are under
obligation to render service to others. For make,
this is Ebtd, 'servant,' ' man serv a nt,' properly
'laborer; ' for females Shifchah, Ama, < maid-
servant,' 'maid.' The laws respecting servants
protect in every regard their dignity and their
feelings as men. They by no means surrendered
these to the arbitrary will of the master, as in other
ancient and modern states in which slavery and
thraldom have prevailed." SaalschOts, Dot Moea-
iehe Reeht, Kap. 101. Dr. Mleklner, of Copen-
hagen, in his Sklaven bei den Heir., defines tied
at " a common name far all who stood in a depen-
dent or subordinate relation. It had not the
degrading sense which we connect with the words
•bee or bondman ; but it often had the mild sig-
nhVancy which we associate, in oertain relations,
with the word eervnnt." Salvador, in his Bitoin
da IntHtution$ tie Molte, treats of Hebrew serrl-
tude under the title of « Domesticity, or the con-
dition of servants improperly called slave*." He
does not find in the laws of Hoses any trace of
enatMlsm. While the Hebrew servant was released
at the end of seven years, or sooner if the Jubilee
Intervened, the foreign servant could be held for
the whole jubilee lease, and if, at the death of the
matter, the term of service had not expired, the
natural heirs of the matter eould enforce it until
the Jubilee; this, and not service in perpetuity,
was the meaning of " for ever," in Lev. xxv. 46,
46. In this sense, also, as owing unfulfilled service,
the servant was " money " to his master, but never
a salable chattel. Han-stealing and man-eelling
were punished with death. Ewald has shown that
hi all the spiritual blessings of life the servant was
on a par with the free man ; and that important
etvil light* were secured to him as a protection
against his master. Die Alterthmmer da Volhet
/erne/, pp. 341-849. Cochin, L'AboH&M dt
tSoelmogo. J. P. T.
(<£) Stbaxqsbs.
They eeem never to have been est /wis, or able
to protect themselves, and accordingly p ro t ec ti on
end kindness towards them tre enjoined an a seared
duty (Ex. xxii. 91; Lev. xix. 88, 64).
(B.) Law op Thukm.
(a.) Laws or Lakd (akd
(L) All Land to be the pr c p e rt f of Ood alone,
tad He bolder* to be deemed bit tenant* (Lev.
ur.88).
(9.) All mid Land therefore to near* to He
trigmal owner* at the jubilee, and the price of sale
to be calculated according!/; and redemption on
LAW OF MOSK8
equitable trim* to be allowed at all tina (xxv
86-*7).
A Abuse mid to be redeemable within ■ year
and, If not redeemed, to pat* away altogether (nr
89,80).
Bet lie Bouses of the Levitt*, or those in mt-
walled villages, to be redeemable at all times, in the
tame way as land ; and toe Levities! sabots to be
inalienable (xxv. 81-34).
(8.) Land or Bomet eantmjhd, or tithes, or un-
clean firstlings to be capable of being redeemed, at
4 value (calculated according to the distance from
the Jubilee-year by the priest); if devoted by the
owner and un r edee m ed, to be hallowed at the JtnxV
he for ever, and given to the priests; if inly by a
poatantor, to return to the owner at the tootles
(Lev. xxvii. 14-84).
(4.) Inheritance.
d)
I I I
Bone.
[»■) Dnu m i tm eM
(S.) Bntktn.
(4.) VntUe en Ik* Watlmr'tekU.
(6.) Mart .
(i.) Law* or Dbbt.
(1.) AU Debt* (to an Israelite) to be Harness at
the 7th (sabbatical) year; a blearing promised to
obed i ence, and a curse on wine* I to lend (Best, zr.
1-11).
(8.) Psery (from Israelite*) not to be tahen QU.
xxii. 86-87; Dent. xxiiL IB, 80).
(8.) Pledgee not to be ineosently or rufnonah;
exacted (Dent. xxiv. 6, 10-18, 17, 18).
(e.) Tazatkw.
(1.) Center-money, a poU-tox (of a half-shekel), to
be paid for the tervieeofthe tabernacle (Ex.
m. 18-18).
AD apoil in war to be halved; of tbn com-
batant's half, ^h, of the people's, ^th, to
be paid for a " beave-oftring " to Jehovah.
(8.) Ttthf.
(*>) Tithet of alt produce to be given far
maintenance of the Levitat (Hem. jcvui.
80-84).
(Of thfa «Uh to be paid at a iiesvo-oAr-
ing (far mafctonanee of the priests) ....
94-88.)
(fi.) Beamd Tithe to be bestowed in rehgieo*
feasting and charity, either at the Holy
Place, or every 8d year at home (?) (Dees,
xhr. 88-88).
(y.) Firtt-Frmti at eon, wine, and oil (at
least ^jth, generally Xth, for the priest.)
to be oflered at Jerusalem, with a solemn
deckrstlcfle/ dependence on God the King
of Israel (Dent. xxvi. 1-16; Nona. xvifl.
M, !»)•
fn-ttSngt of clean beast*; the iwiema-
tlsn-money (6 shekel*) of man, and ( t she-
kel, or 1 shekel) of andean besets, to be
given to the priest* after eaerifiee (Nun
xvttL 16-18).
(8.) Poor-Lam.
(*>) G leamngo fln Sold or vineyard) to be
legal right of the poor (Lev. xhu 8, 10
Dent. xxiv. 19-83).
to isaaWiy in tWr own
ssctH* 9-6| xxxvi.).
><■*»
Digitized by
Google
liAW OF MOSEtf
(J.) Sy** Trespass (eating on the apt* 1 toi
to allowed aa legal '.Deut ntt. 84, 86). '
(y.) Second Tilac (aw 8 0) to to given in
eharlty.
(t.) Wagf to be paid dag bg dam (Dent.
xxiv. 18).
HO Maimlmanee of Priests (Num. xvilL 8-89).
(at.) rearto/Z^rter" fit**. (8c* »«•)
(0.) fee tease and wapt-o ft rinee (br e ast an d
right shoulde r of all pesce-onerings).
(y.) r*« moat and tin-offerings to to eaten
solemnly, and only In the holy place.
(8.) First-FruUs and redemption money. (See
(ft.) Pruts of all dented things, anlaaa spe-
cially given for a aasrad service. A man'a
service, or that of hit honaehold, to to re-
deemed at 50 abekela for man, 80 for woman,
80 *v boy. and 10 for gut
QL) Laws Cnmiwai.
(A.) Omxan aqambt God (of the
nature of treaaon).
1st Command. Acknowledgment of false godi
(Ex. xxtt. 80), m e. o. Moloch (Lev. xx. 1-4), and
generally all idolatry (Deut xlii., xvii. 8-6).
8d Command. Witchcraft and fake prophecy
(Ex. xxii. 18; Deut. xvitt. 0-33; Lev. xix. 81).
(d Command. Blasphemy (Lev. xxiv. 16, 16).
4th Command. Sabbath-breaking (Nam. xv.
)•
Punishment in aU case*,death by suxsmg. Idokv-
eitiee to to utterly destroyed.
LAW OF MOSES
1606
(B.) Ovraran AOAiwrr Max.
6th Command. Disobedience to or euraing or
sauting of parents (Ex. xxi 16, 17; Lev. xx. •;
Dent. xxi. 18-31) to to puniatod by death by
atoning, poblioly adjudged and inflicted; to alao of
diaotodienee to the prieate (ai judges) or Supreme
Judge. Comp. 1 K. xxi. 10-14 (Naboth); 8 Chr.
xxiv. 81 (Zechariah).
8th Command. (1.) Murder to to puniatod by
death without sanctuary or reprieve, or satisfaction
(Ex. xxt 13, 14; Deut. xix. 11-13). Death of a
slave actually under the rod, to to p~faji.il (Ex.
xxt 90, 21).
(8.) Death by negligence to to puniatod by
death (Ex. xxi. 38-30).
(3.) Accidental Homicide; the avenger of blend
to to escaped by flight to the cities of refuge till
the death of the high-priest (Num. xxxv. 8-88;
Dent. iv. 41-43, xix. 4-10).
J 4.) Uncertain Murder to to expiated by fer-
i disavowal and sacrifice by the elders of the
Merest city (Deut xxi. 1-0).
(6.) Assault to to punished by lex taUonis, or
damages (Ex. xxt 18, 18, 38-86; Lev. xxiv. 18,
90).
7th Command. (1.) Adulters to to puniatod
by death of both offenders; the rape of a married
ar betrothed woman, by death of the offender (Deut
dU. 13-37).
(9.) Bapeor Seduction at sa unbetrotbed virgin,
to to co mpens ated by marriage, with dowry (60
A a fc s ls ), and without power of divorce; or, if she
be refused, by payment of full dowry (Ex. xxii. 18,
T; Dent. xxii. 88, 38).
(8.) Unlawful Marriages (incestuous, etc.) as
to aandsbod, some by death, some by childieesnese
(Lev. xx.).
8th Command. (1.) Thefi to -e punished by
fourfold or double restitution; a nontumal robber
might to slain as an outlaw (Ex. xxtt. 1-4).
(3.) Trespass and injury of things lent to to
compensated (Ex. xxtt. 6-16).
(8.) Perversion of Justice (by bribes, threats,
etc.), and especially oppression of strangers, strictly
forbidden (Ex. xxiii. 9, Ac).
(4.) Kidnapping to be punished by death (Dent
xxiv. 7).
8th Command. False Witness to to punished
by lex taUonis (Ex. xxiii. 1-8; Deut xix. 10-31).
Slander of a wife's chastity, by fine and loss of
power of divorce (Deut xxii. 18, 19).
A fuller consideration of the tables of the Ten
Command mente is given elsewhere. [Tax Com-
MASDKKVT8.]
(III.) Laws Judicial axd CoaaTmrrioajai.
(A) JtnuaDicTKui.
(a.) Local Judges (generally Levitaa, ae man
skilled in the Law) appointed, for ordinary matters,
probably by the people with approbation of the
supreme authority (aa of Moses in the wilderness,
Ex. xviii. 25; Deut i. 16-18), through all the
land (Deut xvL 18).
(4.) Appeal (owe Priests (at the holy place), or
to the judge ; their sentence final, and to be ac-
cepted under pain of death. See Deut xvii. 8-18
(comp. appeal to Moses, Ex. xviii. 36).
(c.) Two witnesses (at least) required in capital
matters (Nam. xxxv. 30; Deut xvii. «, 7).
(<fc) Punishment (except by special command) to
to personal, and not to extend to the family (Deo.
xxiv. 16).
Stripes allowed and limited (Deut xxv. 1-8), so
aa to avoid outrage on the human frame.
All this would to to a great extent eat aside —
1st By the summary jurisdiction of the king,
aee 1 Sam. xxii. 11-19 (Saul); 3 Sam. xii. 1-6,
xiv. 4-11; 1 K. iii. 18-28; which extended even to
the deposition of the high-priest (1 Sam. xxtt. 17,
18; 1 K. U. 86, 37).
The practical difficulty of its being carried out is
seen in 2 Sam. xv. 3-6, and would lead of course
to a certain delegation of his power.
3d. By the appointment of the Seventy (Nuxe.
xi. 34-30) with a solemn religious sanction. In
later times there was a local Sanhedrim of 38 in
each city, and two such in Jerusalem, aa well aa the
Great Sanhedrim, consisting of 70 members, besides
the president, who waa to to the high-priest if duly
qualified, and controlling even the king and high-
priest The members were prieate, scribes (Levites),
and elders (of other tribes). A court of exactly
thia nature is noticed, as appointed to supreme
power by Jeboahaphat (See 3 Chr. xix. 8-11.)
(B.) Botal Power.
The King's Power limited by the Law, as writ-
ten and formally accepted by the king: and directly
forbidden to to despotic" (Deut xvii. 14-80;
oomj. 1 Sam. x. 36). Yet be bad power of I
tion (to M^)i and. ot compulsory service (1 1
via. 10-18); the declaration of war (1 Sam. xL),
a Military conquest dtscoaneed by the prohibition
X Dm use ot nonet. (See Josh. xL 6.) Vox an ex-
ample of obedience to this law, see t
of disobedience to It In 1 K- v. 2*-».
8am vffl.4,aa*
Digitized by
Google
1606
LAW OF MOSES
LAW OV MOSES
lie. There are distinct traces of a"n;.itual con-
tact" (8 Saa. v. 8 (David); a " league " (Jonah),
I K. xi. IT); the remoDit n uw with
being dearly not extraordinary (1 K. xfi. 1-8).
The Prime— of the Congregation. The
of the tribes (ate Jeeh. ix. IS) nam to hum had
authority under Joahua to act for the people (eomp.
1 Chr. xxrii. 16-33); and in the later times « the
priuoia of Judah " seem to have had power to con-
trol both the king and the prieata (aee Jar. xxvi.
10-Si, xxxviii. *, 6, Ac.).
(C) Botai. Betbhtjb. (SselUah. b. H.
c 7, art. 69.)
(1.) Tenth of produce
(3.) /Jroion* land (1 Chr. zzrU. 36-39). Note
eonnaoation of erlminal'i land (1 K. zzL 15).
(8.) Bond sortie* (1 K. ♦. 17, IB) oniony on
taeignen (1 K. iz. 30-33; 8 C2ir. iL 1«, 17).
(*.) Flocks and herds (1 Chr. xxrii. 30-11).
(5.) Tributes (giiU) from foreign kings.
(6.) Commerce ; especially in Solomon's time
(1 K. x. 22, 89, Ac).
(IV.) Ecclesiastical abtj Cbbbmohial Law.
(A.) Law of Saokuicb (oonaidered as the sign
and the appointed means of the onion with
God, on which the holiness of the people
depended).
(1 ) Obdmabt Sacbihobs.
(a.) The whole Burnt-Offering (Lot. L) of
the herd or the flock; to be offered contin-
ually (Ex. xxlx. 88-48); and the Ore on the
altar never to be extinguished (Lot. tL
8-13).
(fi.) The Meat- Offering (Lot. IL, tL 14-33)
of floor, oil, and frankincense, unleavened,
and seasoned with salt.
( r ) The Peace-Offering (Lot. Hi., vii. 11-81)
of the herd or the flock ; either a thank-
offering, or a row, or freewill offering.
(8.) The Sin- Offering, or Treepatt- Offering
(Lot. It., t m tL).
(a.) For sins committed in ignorance
(Lot. far.).
(4.) For tows unwittingly made and
broken, or nncleanneei unwittingly
contracted (Lot. v.).
(e.) For ami wittingly committed (Lot.
tL 1-7).
(t.) EXTBAORDIHABT SAOBmOBS.
in.) At the Consecration of Prieete (Lot.
TiB., fat).
(J.) Jl tMePuriJbatUM of Women (Lsn.wQ.).
(y.) At the Cha n ti n g of Lepers (Lot. xtt.,
xhr.).
((.) On the Great Dag of Atonement (Lot.
xri).
(«.) On the Great Fettkfab (Lot. xxUL).
IB.) Law or Houaxaa (arising from the union
with God through sacrifice).
(L) Houbxss or Pbbbobb,
(a>) Hokness of lie whole people as " children
of God " (Ex. xix. 5, 6; Lev. xi.-xr., xril.,
xriii.; Dent. xlr. 1-81) shown in
(«.) lie Dedication of the first-born (Ex.
xiii. 8, 18, 18, xxiL 39, 80, Ac); and
the offering of all flrsthngt and ftrst-
fruiti (Deu- zxtL, etc).
(a.) DiatiaeUon of c
(Lot. xL; Dent. xiv.).
(«.) Previaioa for purification (Lair, xii,
xiii., xfar., xr. ; Dent, xxiii. 1-14).
(A) Laws against disfigurement (law
xix. 87; Deut. xir. 1; comp. Daws
xxt. 8, against exosadTe scourging),
(a.) Laws against unnatural marriages
and hats (Lot. xriii., xx.).
(6") Bounces of ike Priests (and Leeitee)
(o.) Their oonsecration (Lot. viiL, ix.
Ex. xxix.).
(4.) Their special qualifications sad sa-
striotions (Lot. xxL, xxii. 1-9).
(c) Their rights (Deut. xriL 1-6; Nasa.
xriii) and authority (Dent, xtb.
8-13).
(3.) Houxxss o» Places abd Taoraa.
(a.) The Tabernacle with the ark, the anfl,
tbe altars, thelarer, the priestly robes, ate
(Ex. xzv.-xxviii., xxx.).
(fl.) The Bokj Place chosen for the perma-
nent erection of tbe tabernacle (Deut. xiL,
xir. 88-89), where only all sacrifices were as
be oflered, and all tithes, first-omits, tows,
etc., to be given or eaten.
(3.) HoLixxsa or Times.
(a.) The Baitatk (Ex. xx. 9-11, xxuX 18,
etc).
(/J.) The Sabbatical Tear (Ex. xsjil. 10, 11
Lot. xxt. 1-7, Ac),
(•v.) The Tear of Jubilee (Lot. xxt. 8-16,
Ac).
(8.) The Pamootr (Ex. xH. 8-87; Lot. xxfiL
4-14).
(c.) The Feat of Weak* (Pentecost) (Lit.
xxiii. 15, Ac).
((.) The Feast of Tabsrnactm (Lot. xxfaa.
88-48).
(n.) The Feat of Tru m pet s (Lot. xxfiL
88-85).
(a.) TAe Aajr «/ Jawaaseat (Lot. xxBL 96-
88, Ac).
On this part of tbe subject, aee FxsnTAxa,
FBOtam, Tabbbbaous, Sacbipicb, etc
Such is the substance of the Mosaic Law; Hi
details must be studied under their several hearts;
and their full comprehension requires a constant
reference to the circumstances, physical and moral,
of the nation, and a comparison with the corre-
sponding ordinances of other ancient codes.
The leading principle of the whole is its Thed-
cbatio Character, ha reference (that is) of aO
action and thoughts of men dhreetsg and na
ately to the will of God. AH law, indeed, i
ultimately make this r efe ren ce If it bases
on the eaeredness of human authority, ft moat
finally trace that authority to God's appointment;
if on the rights of the individual and the need of
protecting them, it must consider these rights aa
inherent and sacred, because implanted by the hand
of the Creator. But it is characteristic of the
Mosaic Law, as also of all Biblical history and
prophecy, that It passes over all tbe intennedJate
steps, and refers at once to God's commandment as
tbe foundation of all human dnty. The key to it
is found in the ever-recurring formula, "YeT
observe all these statutes; I am the Lord."
It follows from this, that it k to be
not merely aa a law, that is, a rule of
Digitized by
Google
IiAW Or MOSBS
1 on known truth aud acknowledged authority
tot also aa a Revelation of Utxtt nature and hi*
iianfiintinns In tola Titw of it, mora particu-
ferly, Ike ka connection with the rat of tba Old
Testament. As a law, it J* definite and (generally
■peaking) final; aa a niialaUnn, it it the beginning
af tba gnat ayatem of prophecy, and indee d bean
within itaeif the mark* of gradual development,
from the 6nt aimple deolantion (" I aa the Lord
thj God") in Exodus to the full and aoiemn decla-
ration of hia natoie and wiU in Deuteronomy.
With tbia peculiar character of revelation stamper!
anon it, it naturally ssoends from rule to principle,
and regards all goodness In man aa the ahadowof
the Dhine attributes, "Ye ahaU be holy: for I the
Lcfd your God am holy " (Lev. six. 8, Ac ; oomp.
Mart. t. 48).
Bat thia theocratic eharaotcr of the Law depends
oaoeanrily on the belief a* God, aa not only the
Creator and Suatainer of the world, but aa, by
special oovenant, the head of Ike Jewish nation.
It as not indeed doubted that He J 'he king of aU
the earth, and that all earthly authority ia derived
nam Him; but here again, in the cate of the
uraaUtae, the intermediate (tape are all but ignored,
and the people at onea brought lace to nee with
Him aa their ruler. It ia to be especially noticed,
that Qod'i claim (so to ipeak) on their allegiance
ia baaed not on hit power or wisdom, but on hia
especial mercy in being their Saviour from Egyp-
tian bondage. Because they were made free by
Hha, t h e refore they became hia wrranta (cotnp.
Rom.fi. 19-22); and the declaration, which stands
at the opening of the lew is " I am the Lord thy
God, wrka brought thee out of the land of Egypt."
(Oomp. also the reason given fur the observation
of the Sabbath in Dent v. IB; and the historical
usance! of the delivery of the saoond law (Dent.
L-ttL); of the renewal of the covenant by Joshua
(Josh. xxhr. 1-13); and of the rebuke of Samuel at
the iwtaMiihmrnt of the kingdom (1 Sam. xil.
9-U).
Tbia immediate reference to God aa their king
m dearly seen aa the groundwork of their whole
polity. The foundation of the whole law of land,
and of its remarkable provisions against alienation,
bee in the declaration, •' The land is mine, and ye
are strangers and sojourner! with me" (Ler. xxv.
St). As in ancient Rome, aU land belonged prop-
erly to the state, and under the feudal system in
l e adi e w a l Europe to the king; so in the Jewish
law the true ownership lay in Jehovah alone. The
vary system of tithes embodied only a peculiar form
sf a tribute to their king, such as they were familiar
vita in Egypt (an Gen. xlriL 33-96); and the
wearing of the first-fruits, with the remarkable
toleration by which it waa accompanied (set Dent.
ml 6-10), ia a direst acknowledgment of God's
■usmliihi sovereignty. And, aa the land, as also
the parsons of the Israelites are declared to be the
absolute property of the Lord, by the dedication
end ransom of the first-born (Ex. liii. 9-13, Ac),
by the payment of the half-shekel at the numbering
3f the people, " as a ransom for their souls to the
Lord " (Ex. zu. 11-16); and by the limitation of
sower over Hebrew slaves, aa contrasted with the
absolute mastership permitted over the heathen
and the sojourner (Ler. xxt. 3»-t6).
from this theocratic nature of tba law follow
awnortoo* deductions with regard to (a) the view
which it takes of political aooisty ; (b, ±* extent
at the scope of the law; (e) the penalties by which
LAW OF MOSBS
1007
it is enforced; sod (a!) the character which H esse]
to impress on the people.
(a.) The bade of human society is onlinartjy
sought, by law or philosophy, either in the rights
of the individual, and the partial delegation of them
to pd't"— ' authorities; or in the mutual needs of
men, and the relations which spring from them;
or in the actual existence of power of man over
man, whether arising from natural relationship, or
from benefits conferred, or from, physical or intel-
lectual ascendency. The maintenance of society is
supposed to depend on a" social oompact" between
go v ernor s and subjects; a oompact, true aa an ab-
stract idea, but untrue if supposed to have been a
historical reality. The Mosaic Law seeks the basis
of its polity, first, in ths absolute sovereignty of
God, next in the relationship of each individual to
God, and through God to hia countrymen. It ia
clear that such a doctrine, while it contradicts none
of the common theories, yet lies beneath them all,
and shows why each of them, being only a secondary
deduction from an ultimate truth, cannot be in
itself sufficient; and, if it claim to be the whole
truth, will become an absurdity. It is the doctrine
which is inalatsd upon and developed in the whole
series of prophecy; and which is brought to its
perfection only when applied to that universal and
spiritual kingdom for which the Mosaic system waa
a preparation.
(A) The Law, aa proceeding directly from God,
aud referring directly to Him, is necessarily abso-
lute us its supremacy and tmiimited in us scope.
It ia supreme over the governors, aa being only
the delegates of the Lord, and therefore it is incom-
patible with any despotic authority in them. Tbia
ia seen iu its limitation of the power of the master
over the slave, in the restrictions laid on the priest-
hood, and the ordination of the " manner of the
kingdom" (Deut. xvii. 14-20; oomp. 1 Sam. x.
85). By Us establishment of the hereditary priest-
hood side by side with the authuity of the beads
of tribes ("the princes"), and the subsequent
sovereignty of the king, it provides a balance of
powers, aU of which are regarded as subordinate.
The absolute sovereignty of Jehovah is assarted in
the earlier timet in the dictatorship of the judge;
but much more dearly under the kingdom by the
spiritual commission of the prophet. By his re-
bukes of priests, princes, and kings, for abuse of
their power, he waa not only defending religiou
and morality, but also maintaining the dUvinery-
appointed constitution of Israel. On the other
hand, it is supreme over the governed, recognising
no inherent rights in the individual, as prevailing
against, or limiting the law. It is therefore un-
limited in its scope. There is in it no recognition,
each as is familiar to us, that there Is one class of
actions directly subject to the ooersive power of law,
while other dieses of actions and the whole realm
of thought are to be indirectly guided by moral
and spiritual influence. Nor is there any distinc-
tion of the temporal authority which wields the
former power, from the spiritual authority to which
belongs the other. In fact these distinctions would
have been incompatible with the character and ob-
jects of the law. They depend pertly on the want
of aeaight and power in the lawgiver; they could
base jo place in • system traced directly to God:
they depend also partly on the freedom which be-
longs to the manhood of our race; they oould no*
therefore be ep p r ep rla te to the -non imaarfeet
period of Its youth.
Digitized by
Google
1608
LAW OF MOSES
Thus the Law regulated the whole lift of an
larulite. His house, hi* dress, and hi* (bod, his
iomestic arrangements and the distribution of his
property, all were determined. In the laws of the
taken of debts, and the prohibition of usury, the
dictates of self-interest and the natural eoone of
sommercial transactions are sternly checked. Hie
actions were rewarded and punished with gnat
minuteness and strictness; and that according to
the standard, not of their consequences, but of
their intrinsic morality; so that, for Trample, forni-
cation and adultery were as severely Tisited as theft
or murder. Hit religious worship was denned and
e n forced in an elaborate and unceasing ceremonial
In all things it is clear, that, if men submitted to
It merely as a law, imposed under penalties by an
irresistible authority, and did not regard it as a
means to the knowledge and lore of God, and a
preparation for his redemption, it would well de-
aarra from Israelites the description giren of it by
81 Peter (Acta xv. 10), as "a yoke which neither
they nor their fathers were able to bear."
(c.) The penaltirt and rewards by which the
lew Is enforced are such aa depend on the direct
theocracy. With regard to Individual actions, it
snay be noticed that, as generally some penalties are
inflicted by the subordinate, and some only by the
supreme authority, so among the Israelites some
penalties came from the hand of man, some directly
from the providence of God. So much is this the
case, that it often seems doubtful whether the threat
that a >< soul shall be cut off from Israel " refers
to outlawry and excommunication, or to such mi-
raculous punishments ss those of Nadab and Abihu,
or Koran, Dathan, and Abiram. In dealing with
the nation at large, Moses, regularly and as a mat-
ter of course, refers for punishments and rewards
to the providence of God. This is seen, not only
in the great blessing and curse which enforces the
law ss a whole, but also in special instances, aa, for
example, in the promise of unusual fertility to com-
pensate for the sabbatical year, and of safety of the
country from attack when left undefended at the
three great festivals. Whether these were to come
from natural causes, i. e. laws of his providence,
which we can understand and foresee, or from causes
supernatural, »'. e. incomprehensible and Inscrutable
to us, is not in any case laid down, nor indeed does
't affect this principle of the Law.
The bearing of this principle on the Inquiry aa
to the revelation of a future &ft in ihe Pentateuch
is easily seen. So far as the Law deals with the
nation as a whole, it is obvious that lis penalties
>nd rewards could only refer to this life, in which
slone the nation exists. So far as it relates to smh
individual acts as sre generally cognisable by human
law, and capable of temporal punishments, no one
would expect that its divine origin should neces-
sitate any reference to the world to come. But the
sphere of moral and religious action and thought
to which It extends is beyond the cognizance of
human laws, and the scope of their ordinary penal-
ties, and Is therefore left by them to the retribution
sf God's Inscrutable Justice, which, being but Im-
perfectly seen here, Is contemplated especially ss
exercised in a future state. Hence arises the ex-
pectation of a direct revelation of this future state
in the Mosaic Law. Such a revelation is certainly
sot given. Warburton (in his /Kerne Legation of
Mote*) even builds on It* non-existence an argu-
aasnt for the supernatural power and commission
•f the law-giver, who could promise and threaten
LAW OF MOSES
retribution from the providence of God in this tab
and submit his predictions to the tost of aatasC
exp erience. The truth seems to be that, In a km
which a p peal s directly to God himself for its au-
thority and It* sanction, there cannot bo that brass]
Hoe of demarcation between this life and the neat,
which is drawn for those whose power is limited by
the grave. Our Lord baa taught us (Matt. xxH
81, 88) that in the. very revelation of God as the
"God of Abraham and Isaac and Jacob," the
promise of Immortality and future retribution waa
impKdtly contained. We may apply this declara-
tion even more strongly to a law to which God waa
revealed aa entering into covenant with IsraeL and
in them drawing mankind directly under hi* inv-
mediate government HI* blessings and curses, by
the very fact that they came from Him, would be
fort to be unlimited by time; and the pldn and
immediate fulfillment, which they found in If is lv*>,
would be accepted as an earnest of a deeper, though
more mysterious completion in the world to coma
But the time for the clear revelation of this truth
was not yet come, and therefore, while the future
life and its retribution is implied, yet the rewards
and penalties of the present life are those which saw
plainly held out and practically dwelt upon.
• Moses waa of course acquainted with the
doctrine of a future state of rewards and punish-
ment", sa held by the Egyptians. This embraced
the following particulars. (1.) The rontioued exist-
ence of the soul after death. (3.) Thr irmmfirtt
descent of every oouL at death, into Hades, or the
under-world. (3.) The inspection of the soul ha
Hades by judges and tests, with a view to determine
its moral character. (4.) The remanding of the
wicked from Hades to a degraded form of existence)
in this world, aa for instance, in the body of a pip;
(6.) The progress of the justified, through various
experiences, sometimes purgatorial, up to the Ely-
sium of the gods. (6.) A final judgment and the
condemnation of the incorrigibly wicked. (7.) Tha
reunion of the justified soul with its mummified
body. (See Bibl Sacra, January 1868, p. 69.) Ac-
cording to Egyptian theology the future conditio*
of the soul was determined by its conduct in tha
present life. The Israelites must have been mroiliar
with the same principle; sod the absence of aa
explicit sta t ement of it in their Law may be ac-
counted for by the fact that it belonged to tha
sphere of theology rather than of legislation, and
waa assumed throughout as the basis of the gov-
ernment of the spiritual, holy, and eternal Jehovah
J. P. T.
(A) But perhaps the most Important co ns e q uence
of the theocratic nature of theLawwasthe/wcafior
character of goodnem which U sought to ssepreas
on Of people. Goodness b ha relation to man
takes the forms of righteousness and love; to It*
independence of all relation, the form of purity, and
in its relation to God, that of piety. Laws, which
contemplate men chiefly in their mutual relations,
endeavor to enforce <r protect in them the first two
qualities; the Mosaic Law, beginning with piety,
as its first object, nforees most emphatically the
purity essential to hose who, by then* union wtta
God, have re c over e d the hope of intrinsic goodneaa.
while it views righteousness and love rather as da
dnetfone from these than ss independent o b ja u tm
Not that it neglects these qualities ; on the con-
trary it is full of precepts which draw a hiifb eon
ception and tender care of our relative duties U
Digitized by
Google
LAW OF MOSES
mo;< bat than «B hwdlj bacalkrf its dlstin-
garishing features. It ia most instructive to refer
k> the religion preface of the Lew in Dent Ti.-xi.
(especially to vi. 4-13), when all ia baaed on the
ftrat great commandment, and to observe the aub-
ardinate and dependent character of " the aecond
that ia like onto it, - ' — "Thou ahalt lore thy
neighbor aa thyself; lam Ik* Lord" (Lev. zix. 18).
On the contrary, the care for the purity of the
people etanda out remarkably, not only in the en-
forcement of ceremonial " cleanness," and the mul-
titude of precaution* or remedies against any breach
of it, but alio in the aevaity of the laws against
sensuality and eelf-poll'ition, a aererity which dia-
Mngni.h.. the Mosaic oode before all others ancient
and modem. In punishing these sins, as committed
■ a man's own self, without reference to their
t on others, and in recognizing purity as baring
a substantive value and glory, it sets up a standard
of individual morality, such as, even in Greece and
Some, philosophy reserved for its most esoteric
teaching.
Now in sH this it is to be noticed that the appeal
hi not to any dignity of human nature, but to the
obligations of communion with a Holy God. The
subordination, therefore, of this idea also to the
religious idea is enforced ; and so long as the due
s uprema cy of the latter was preserved, all other
duties would find their places in proper harmony.
But the usurpation of that supremacy in practice
by the idea of personal and national sanctity in
that which gave its peculiar color to the Jewish
character. In that character there was intense
religions devotion and self-sacrifice; there was a
high standard of personal holiness, and connected
with then an ardent feeling of nationality, based
an a great idea, and, therefore, finding its vent in
their proverbial spirit of proselytism. But there
ten alio a spirit of contempt for all unbelievers,
and a forgetfulnen of the existence of any duties
towards them, which gave even to their religion an
ditagonistic spirit, and degraded it in after-times
j> a ground of national self-glorification. It is to
je traced to a natural, though not justifiable per-
rerston of the law, by those who nude it their all ;
•<nd both in its strength and its weaknesses it has
reappeared remarkably among those Christiana who
have dwelt on the 0. T. to the neglect of the New.
It ia evident that this characteristic of the
Israelites would tend to preserve Iht $ecluaon
which, under God's providence, was Intended for
them, and would in its turn be fostered by it. We
may notice, in connection with this part of the
subject, many subordinate provisions tending to the
same direction. Such are the establishment of an
agricultural basis of society and property, and the
provision against its accumulation in a few hands;
the discouragement of commerce by the strict laws
n to usury, and of foreign conquest by the laws
against the maintenance of horses and chariots ; as
well aa the direst prohibition of intermarriage with
idolaters, and the indirect prevention of all familiar
intercourse with them by the laws as to meats — all
then things tended to impress on the Isradltish
polity a character of permanence, stability, and
eompantlve isolation. Like the nature and posi-
tion of the country to whicn it was in great
pa—aw adapted, it wn intended to pi una i d in
purity the witnan borne by Israel for God in the
• its, aw example, fc. sod. 7-11, 28-98, xxfil 1-9;
we*, nn.1-4, saw. KMB, fee., fee.
liAW OF HOSES 1609
darkness of heathenism, until the time should eomt
for the gathering in of all nations to enjoy the
blearing promised to Abraham.
III. In considering the relation of the Law to
the future, it is important to be guided by the
general principle laid down in Heb. vii. 19, " The
Law made nothing perfect " (OiiSlv trtXtlwrtr 4
N(J/ioi). This principle will be applied in different
degrees to its bearing (a) on the alter history of
the Jewish commonwealth before tbe coining of
Christ; (») on the ooming of our Lord Himself;
and (c) on the dispensation of the Gospel.
(a.) To that after-history the Law was, to a
great extent, the key; for in ceremonial and crim-
inal law it wn oompkste and fiual; while, even in
civil and constitutional law, it laid down clearly
the general principlm to be afterwards more fully
developed. It wn indeed often neglected, and even
forgotten. Its fundamental assertion of the The-
ocracy wn violated by tbe constant lapses into
idolatry, and its provisions for the good of man
overwhelmed by the natural course of human
selfishness (Jar. xxxiv. 13-17); till at last, in tbe
reign of Josiah, its very existence was unknown,
and its discovery m to tbe king and the people n
a second publication ; yet still it formed the stan-
dard from which they knowingly departed, and to
which they constantly returned ; and to it there-
fore all which m peculiar in their national and
individual character wn due. Its direct influence
was probably greatest in the periods before the
establishment of the kingdom, and after the Baby-
lonish Captivity. The last act of Joshua was to
bind the Israelites to it as the charter of their
occupation of the conquered land (Josh. xxiv.
24-27); and, in the semi-anarchical period of the
judges, the Law and the Tabernacle were the only
centres of anything like national unity. The
establishment of the kingdom an due to an impa-
tience of this position, and a desire for a visible
and personal centre of authority, much the same in
nature as that which plunged them so often in,
idolatry. The people were warned (1 Sam. xii
6-25) that it involved much danger of their for-
getting and rejecting the main principle of the
Law — that "Jehovah their God was their King."
The truth of the prediction was soon shown. Etas
under Solomon, h soon n the monarchy brinsn
one of great splendor and power, it assumed a
heathenish and polytheistic character, breaking the
Law, both by its dishonor towards God, and Its
forbidden tyranny over man. Indeed if the Law
wn looked upon as a collection of abstract ruin,
and not M a means of knowledge of a Persons!
God, it wn inevitable that it should be over-
borne by the presence of a visible and personal
authority.
Therefore it was, that from the time of the sstab ■
liahment of the kingdom began the prophetic office.
Its object wn to enforce and to perfect the Law, by
bearing witness to the great truths on which it was
built, namely, tbe truth of God's government over
all, kings, priests, and people alike, and tbe con-
sequent certainty of a righteous retribution. It is
plain that at the same time this witness went far
beyond the Law n a definite code of Institutions.
It dwelt rather on its great principles, which wen
to transcend the special forms in which they were
embodied. It frequently contrasted (as in Is. L,
etc.) the external observance- of form with tbt
spiritual homage of the bean. It tended there-
fore, at least indirectly, to the time when, sniritirsj
Digitized by
Google
1610
LAW OF MOSES
K the well-known contrast drawn by Jeremiah, the
Law written on the tablet of atone ahould give
place to a new Covenant, depending on a law
written on the heart, and therefore coercive no
longer (Jer. xxxi. 31-34). In this they did but
sarry out the prediction of the Law itself (Oeut
xviii. 9-83), and prepare the way for "the Prophet"
who waa to come.
Still the Law remained a> the distinctive ttandard
of the people. In the kingdom of Israel, after the
separation, the deliberate rejection of it* leading
principles by Jeroboam and hie sucoeaaori waa the
leginning of a gradual declension into idolatry and
heathenism. But in the kingdom of Judah the rery
dlriaion of the monarchy and consequent dlminu-
tkm of its splendor, and the need of a principle to
assart against the superior material power of Israel,
brought out the Law once more in increased honor
and influence. In the days of Jehoahaphat we
And, for the first time, that it was taken by the
Lerites in their circuits through the land, and the
people taught by it (3 Chr. xvii. 9). We find it
especially spoken of in the oath taken by the king
"at his pillar " in the Temple, and made the stan-
dard of reference in the reformations of Hezekiah
and Josiah (3 K. xi. 14, xrUi. 3 ; 3 Chr. xzx., xxzir.
14-31).
Far more was this the case after the Captivity.
The revival of the existenoe of Israel was hallowed
by the new and solemn publication of the Law by
Ben, and the institution of the synagogues, through
which it became deeply and familiarly known.
[Ezra.] The loss of the independent monarchy,
and the cessation of prophecy, both combined to
throw the Jews back upon the Law alone, as their
only distinctive pledge of nationality, and sure
guide to truth. The more they mingled with the
ether subject-nations under the Persian and Grecian
empires, the more eagerly they clung to it as their
distinction and safeguard ; and opening the knowl-
edge of it to the heathen, by the translation of the
LXX., based on it their proverbial eagerness to
proselytize. This love for the Law, rather than
any abstract patriotism, was the strength of the
Maceabean struggle against the Syrians, 11 and the
auoeets of that struggle, enthroning a Levities!
lower, deepened the feeling from which it sprang.
X so entered into the heart of the people that open
\riatry became impossible. The certainty and
authority of the Law's commandments amidst the
perplexities of paganism, and the spirituality of its
doctrine as contrasted with sensual and carnal
idolatries, were the favorite boast of the Jew, and
the secret of his influence among the heathen. The
Law thus became the moulding influence of the
Jewish character; and, instead of being looked
upon as subsidiary to the promise, and a means to
its fulfillment, was exalted to supreme importance
at at onoe a means and a pledge of national and
individual sanctity.
This feeling laid hold of and satisfied the mass
of the people, harmonizing as it did with their
ever-increasing spirit of an almost fanatic nation-
ality, until the destruction of the city. The Phari-
asas, truly representing the chief strength of the
people, systematized this feeling; they gave H fresh
food, and assumed a predominant leadership over
It by the floating mats of tradition which they
■ lusts htn the question as to the lawfulness of war
m Its tttttath In this war a *we. ■• M-tH
LAW OF MOSES
gradually accumulated around the Law as a i u jsnst
The popular use of the word " lawless" (aVsyies
sa a term of contempt (Acts li. 33; 1 Cor. ix- U
for the heathen, and even for the uneducated mast
of their followers (John vU. 49), marked and i
typed their principle.
Against thj idolatry of the Law (which \
imported into the Christian Church is described awl
vehemently denounced by St. Paul), there were tat)
reactions. The first waa that of the Saddccsm,
one which had its basis, according to common tra-
dition, in the Idea of a higher love and service of
God, independent of the Law and its sanctions ; but
which degenerated into a speculative infidelity, and
an anti-national system of politics, and which
probably bad but little hold of the people. The
other, that of the Eaaxnaa, was an attempt to
burst the bonds of the formal law, and assert its
ideas in all fullness, freedom, and purity. In Its
practical form it assumed the character of high and
ascetic devotion to God; it* speculative guise k
seen in the school of Philo. as a tendency not
merely to treat the commands and history of the
Law on a symbolical principle, but actually to
allegorize them h.to mere abstractions. In neither
form could it be permanent, because it had no
sufficient relation to the needs and realities of
humu nature, or to the persontl Subject of all the
Jewish promises; but it was still a declaration of
the insufficiency of the Law in itself, and a prepara-
tion for its absorption into a higher principle of
unity. Such was the history of the Law before the
coming of Christ It waa full of effect and bleating,
when used as a means; it became hollow and in-
sufficient, when made an end.
(6.) The relation of the Law to the advent of
Christ is abo laid down dearly by St. Paul. •' The
Law was the vaiStntryht tit Xpuxriy, the servant
(that is), whose task it was to guide the child to
the true teacher (Gal. HI. 34); and Christ was "the
end " or object "of the Law" (Rom. x. 4). Aa
being subsidiary to the promise, it bad accom-
plished its purpose when the promise waa fulfilled.
In its national aspect it had existed to guard the
faith in the theocracy. The chief hindrance to that
faith had been the difficulty of realizing the invisi-
ble presence of God, and of conceiving a com-
munion with the infinite Godhead which should not
crush or absorb the finite creature (comp. Dent. v.
34-37; Num. xvii. 13, 13; Job ix. 33-35, xui. 31,
33; la. xlv. 16, hriv. 1, Ac). From that had come
in earlier times open idolatry, and a half-idolatrous
kinging for and trust in the kingdom; in after-
times the substitution of the Law for the promise.
This difficulty was now to pats away forever, in
the Incarnation of the Godhead in One truly and
visibly man. The guardianship of the Law waa
no longer needed, for the visible and p— f""«'
presence of the Messiah required no further witness.
Moreover, in the Law itself there had always been
a tendency of the fundamental idea to burst the
formal bonds which confined it In looking to God
as especially their King, the Israelites were inherit,
ing a privilege, belonging originally to all mmMnd
and destined to revert to them. Yet that dement
of the Law which was local and national, now most
prised of all by the Jews, tended to limit this gtt
to them, and plan them in a position antagonist]*
to the rest of the world. It needed therefore tt
peas away, before all men could be brought into
kingdom, where there was to be " neither Jaw saw
Gentile, barbarian, Scythian, bond or nw» '
Digitized by
Google
LAW OK MOSES
In Ita Individual, or what U usually called ita
•moral" aspect, the Law bore equally the stamp
af transitoriness and insufficiency. It had, ai we
bar* aeen, declared the authority of truth and good-
Dew over man's will, and talun for granted in man
the existence of a spirit which could recognise that
authority; but it had done no more. Ita presence
had therefore detected the existence and the sinful-
ness of sin, as alien alike to God's will and man's
true nature; but it had also brought out with more
Tenement and desperate antagonism the power of
sin dwelling in man as fallen (Rom. vii. 7-95). It
only showed therefore the need of a Saviour from
sin, and of an indwelling power which should
enable the spirit of man to conquer the u law " of
evil. Heuee it bore witness of its own insufficiency,
and led men to Christ. Already the prophets,
speaking by a living and indwelling spirit, ever
fresh and powerful, had been passing beyond the
dead letter of the law, and indirectly condemning
it of insufficiency. But there was need of "die
Prophet " who should not only have the fullness of
the spirit dwelling in Himself, but should have the
power to give it to others, and so open the new
dispensation already foretold. When He had come,
and by the gift of the Spirit implanted in man a
free internal power of action tending to God, the
restraints of the Law, needful to train the childhood
of the world, became unnecessary and even injurious
to the free development of its manhood.
The relation of the Law to Christ in its sacrificial
and ceremonial aspect, will be more fully considered
elsewhere. [Sacrifice.] It is here only neces-
sary to remark on the evidently typical character
of the whole system of sacrifices, on which alone
their virtue depended ; and on the imperfect em-
bodiment, in any body of mere men, of the great
truth which was represented in the priesthood.
By the former declaring the need of Atonement,
by the latter the possibility of Mediation, and yet
in itself doing nothing adequately to realize either,
the Law again led men to Him, who was at once
the only Mediator aud the true Sacrifice.
Thus the Law had trained and guided man to
the acceptance of the Messiah in his threefold
character of King, Prophet, and Priest; and then,
its work being done, it became, in the minds of
■hose who trusted in it, not only an encumbrance
but a snare. To resist its claim to allegiance was
therefore a matter of life and death in the days of
St Paul, and, in a less degree, in after-ages of the
Church.
(e.) It remains to consider how far it baa any
sbligation or existence under the dispensation of
the Gospel. As a means of justification or salva-
tion, it ought never to have been regarded, even
before Christ; it needs no proof to show that still
lass can this be so since He has come. But yet
the question remains whether it is binding on
Christians, even vhen they do not depend on it
for salvation.
It seems dear enough, that ita formal coercive
authority as a whole ended with the close of the
Jewish dispensation. It is impossible to separate,
though we may distinguish, its various elements:
». must be regarded as a whole, for he who offended
"In one point against it was guilty of all " (James
IL 10). Yet it referred throughout to the Jewish
■ovanant, and in many points to the constitution
the customs, and even the local oircumstanees af
tas people. That covenant was preparatory to the
Tllbllaii, hi which it is now absorbed; than «us
LAW OF MOSES
1611
toms and onserranoes have passed away. It follows,
by the very nature of the case, that the formal obli-
gation to the Law must have ceased with the basis
on which it is grounded. This conclusion u
stamped most unequivocally with the authority
of St. Paul through the whole argument of the
Epistles to the Romans and to the Galatians. Thai
we are " not under law " (Rom. vi. H, IS; GaL v
18); "that we are dead to law" (Rom. vii. 4-8,
Gal 11. It), " redeemed from under law " (Gal. It.
5), etc, etei, is not only stated without any limita-
tion or exception, but in many places is made the
prominent feature of the contrast between the ear-
ner and later covenants. It is impossible, therefore,
to make distinctions in this respect between the
various parts of the Law, or to avoid the conclusion
that the formal code, promulgated by Moses and
sealed with the prediction of the blessing and the
curse, cannot, at a law, be binding on the Chris-
tian.
But what then becomes of the declaration of our
Lord, that He came " not to destroy the Law, but
to perfect it," and that "not one jot or one tittle
of it shall pass away?" what of the fact conse-
quent upon it, that the Law has been reverenced in
all Christian churches, and had an important
influence on much Christian legislation ? The ,
explanation of the apparent contradiction lies in the
difference between positive and moral obligation.
The potilive obligation of the Law, as such, has
passed away; but every revelation of God's Will,
and of the righteousness and lore which are ita ele-
ments, imposes a moral obligation, by the very
fact of its being known, even on those to whom it
is not primarily addressed. So far as the Law of
Moses is such a revelation of the will of God to
mankind at large, occupying a certain place in the
education of the world as a whole, so far its declara-
tions remain for our guidance, though their coer-
cion and their penalties may be no longer needed.
It is in their general principle, of course, that they
remain, not in their outward form ; and our Lord
has taught us, in the Sermon on the Mount, that
these principles should be accepted by us in a more
extended and spiritual development than they could
receive in the time of Moses.
To apply this principle practically there is need
of mucb study and discretion, in order to distin-
guish what is local and temporary from what is
universal, and what is mere external form from
what is the essence of an ordinance. The moral
law undoubtedly must be most permanent in its
influence, because it is based on the nature of man
generally, although at the same time it is modified
by the greater prominence of lore in the Christian
system. Yet the political law, in the main prin-
ciples which it lays down as to the sacredness aud
responsibility of all authorities, and the righto
which belong to each individual, and which neither
slavery nor even guilt can quite eradicate, has its
permanent value. Even the ceremonial law, by its
enforcement of the purity and perfection needed in
any service offered, and in ita disregard of mere
costliness on such service, and limitation of it
strictly to the prescribed will of God, is still in
jnanv respects our best guide. In special cases
v «s for example that of the sabbatical law and the
prohibition of marriage within the degrees) the
question of Its authority must depend on the furthel
Inquiry, wi ether the basis of such laws is one com-
mon to al- human nature yt one peculiar to til
Jewish people. This inquiry will be difficult, *tp»
Digitized by
Google
1612
LAWYER
sully in the distinction of the essence from the
form ; but by it alone can the original question be
thoroughly and satisfactorily snswered.
For the chief suthorities, see Winer, Realm.
"Gesetz." Hichaelia (Mot. Gerecht) is valuable
Cor facts and antiquities, not much so for theory.
Ewald, Gitch. da VoUcu /tract, rol. U. pp.
134-205, is most instructive and suggestive a* to
the main ideas of the Law. But after all, the most
Important parts of the subject need little else than
a careful study of the Law itself, and the references
to it contained in the N. T. A. B.
* The moral law does not derive its obligation
from the preceptive form of the ten commandment*.
Every duty there enjoined, with the exception per-
haps of keeping the Sabbath, lies in the moral
■store of man, and was in force from the beginning.
And even the Sabbath was observed upon moral
grounds before the decalogue gave it such promi-
nence as a positive institution. If then the deca-
logue as a national code passed away with the
Jewish polity, as some interpret 9 Cor. iii. 7, the
moral force of its precepts remains unimpaired for
all mankind.
Ewald, who regards the institution of the Sab-
bath as purely Mosaic, yet says concerning it, " the
Sabbath, though the simplest and most spiritual,
is at the same time the wisest and most fruitful of
institutions. Nothing could be devised which
would require so few outward signs or equipments,
nor which would so directly lead man both to sup-
ply what is lost in the tumult of life, and effectually
to turn his thoughts again to the higher and the
eternal Thus it becomes the true symbol of the
higher religion which now entered into the world,
and the most eloquent witness to the greatness of
the human soul which fir»l grasped the idea of it."
Hence the Sabbath rests upon the indestructible
grounds of the moral law.
It has been fitly said that '• the legislation of the
Pentateuch is impregnated with Egyptian memo-
ries." The diet, the dress, and the ablutions of
the priests, the details of the sacrifice, the scape-
goat and the red-heifer, the Urim and Thummim,
the waters of jealoiuy, and various purifying cer-
emonies, show a correspondence more or less marked
with Egyptian customs. The same is true of some
of the more humane and delicate provisions of the
Law concerning widows and orphans, the poor and
slaves, the rights of private property, etc. But such
incidental correspondences, while confirming its
author's acquaintance with Egypt, by no means
detract from that superiority which marks the Law
of Moses as an ethical and spiritual code. In ad-
dition to authorities above named, an Saalschiitz,
slot Mot. Recht; J. Salvador, Hiituire da Jnttitu-
aont dt Moite ; Rev. W. Smith, The Pentateuch ;
Ebera, jEgyptm and die Bicher Motet. J. P. T.
LAWYER (rouucei). The title "lawyer"
b generally supposed to be equivalent to the title
"scribe," both on account of Its etymological
g, and also because the man, who is called a
a By most commentator* (Trench, Almrd, Tboluck,
(Asks) the distinction which Qnswell insists on Is re-
acted as utterly untenable. It may be urged, how-
ever, (1) 'hat It Is tba distinction drawn by a scholar
Ik* Hermann (" Ponitur autem ini nonnbl as origin*
■Mania, euxn In origin* prima usurpetnr ex," quoted
•* Waal, davit !t. T.) ; (J) that though both might
Mom to tnoMd apart with hardly a*7 shads of dinar-
LAZABU8
"lawyer" in Matt. xxli. 8ft and Luke r. St a
called « one of the scribes "In Mark xii. 88. If
the common reading in Luke si. 44, 46, 46, be cor
rect, it will be decisive against tba; for there, alta
our Lord's denunciation of the " scribes and Phari-
sees," we find that a lawyer said, « Master, thai
saying, thou reproacbest us alto. And Jesus sold.
Woe onto you alto ye lawyers." But it is likely
that the true reading refers the passage to the
Pharisees alone. By the use of the word nyuittt
(in Tit iii. 9) as a simple adjective, it seems more
probable that the title "scribe" was a legal and
official designation, but that the name roiua-or war
properly a mere epithet signifying one " learned in
the law " (somewhat like the oi ix wiuov in Rob.
iv. 14), and only used as a tide in common par-
lance (comp. the use of it in Tit. iii. 18, " Zanes
the lawyer "). This would account for the eoov-
parativa unfrequency of the word, and the feet that
it is always used in connection with " Pharisees,"
never, as the word " scribe " so often is, In con-
nection with " chief priests " and " elders."
[Scribes.] A. B.
LATINO OK OF HANDS. [See Supple-
ment to Baptism, vol. I. p. 848 ft".]
LAZ'ARUS (Adfopor: Latanu). In this
name, which meets us as belonging to two charac-
ter! in the N. T., we may recognize an abbreviated
form of the old Hebrew Eleazar (TertulL Dt /dot,
Grotius, et aL). The corresponding "1*3? 7 appears
in the Talmud (Winer, ReuUeb. a." v.). la
Josephus, and in the historical books of the Apoc-
rypha (i Mace. via. 17; 8 Mace. vi. 18), the
frequent form is "EXcdtfuHu; but Adfwwr
also (B. J. v. 18, $ 7).
1. Lazarus of Bethany, the brother of Martha
and Mary (John xi. 1). All that we know of him
is derived from the Gospel of St. John, and that
records little more than the facta of his death and
resurrection. We are able, however, without doing
violence to the principles of a true historical orhV
icisni, to arrive at some conclusions helping ua,
with at least some measure of probability, to fill up
these scanty outlines. In proportion as we brine;
the scattered notices together, we find them com-
bining to form a picture far more distinct and
interesting than at first seemed possible; and the
distinctness in this case, though it is not to be mis-
taken for certainty, is yet less misleading than that
which, in other cases, seems to arise from the strong
statement* of apocryphal traditions. (1.) The lan-
guage of John xi. 1 implies that the sisters were
the better known. Lazarus is " of [iw6) Bethany,
of the village («*« tv)* **>«») of Mu 7 * na ' °"
sister Martha." No stress can be hud on the
difference of the prepositions (Meyer and Lamps,
in toe.), but it suggests as possible the inferenoe
that while Lazarus was, at the time of St John's
narrative, of Bethany, he was yet described mfrom
the itdfii) Ttj of Luke x. 88, already known as the
dwelling-place of the two sisters (Greswell, Oh tte
Village of Martha and Man), Dissert. V. ii. 645) «
•no*, their use in close Juxtaposition aught still be
antithetical, and that this was mm Ukaly to b* wttb
on* who, though writing In Or —I t, was not using H
as his natlv* tongue ; (8) that John 1. 46 Is open to to*
same doubt as this passage; (4) that oar Lord Is
always said to be ir6, never In Nafaatr.
In connection with this vans may d* noMesdasjs
awTolg. translation, « ds eeetauo Martha*," and Ma
Digitized by
Google
LAZARUS
rrom this, and from the order of the three name
in John xi. 6, we niay reasonably infer that Lazarus
wai the youngest of the family. The absence of
the name from the narrative of Luke x. 38-42, and
Ilia eubordinate position (ifi rfir arajcsiyssVwr) in
the feast of John xii. 3, lead to the same eoneluaion.
(9.) The home in which the feast la held appears,
from John xii. 2, to be that of the sisters. Martha
"eerves," as in Luke x. 40. Mary takes upon her-
telf that which wae the ipecial duty of a hosten
towards an honored guest (oomp. Luke viL 46).
The impression left on our minds by this account,
if it stood alone, would be that they were the givers
of the bast In Matt, art 6, Mark xiv. 8, the
same fast ■ appears ss occurring in " the bouse of
Simon the Leper: " but a leper, as such, would
have been compelled to lead a separate life, and
eartainly could not have given a feast and received
a multitude of guests. Among the conjectural ex-
planations which have been given of this difference, *
the hypothesis that this Simon was the father of
the two sisters and of Lazarus, that be had been
smitten with leprosy, and that actual death, or the
eivil death that followed on his disease, had left his
ohildren free to act for themselves, is at least as
probable as any other, and has some support in
early ecclesiastical traditions (Nieeph. H. K. i. 27;
Theophyl. in be.; oomp. Ewald, Geschichle, v.
167). Why, if this were so, the house should be
described by St Matthew and St. Mark as it is;
why the name of the sister of Lazarus should be
altogether passed over, will be questions that will
meet us further on. (8.) All the circumstances
sf John xi. and xii., — the feast for so many guests,
the number of friends who oome from Jerusalem
to condole with the sisters, left with female rela-
tions, but without a brother or near kinsman (John
xi. 19), the alabaster-box, the ointment of spike-
nard very oostly, the funeral vault of their own, —
point to wealth and social position above the average
(oomp. Trench, Miracle; 29). The peculiar sense
which attache* to St John's use of of 'Uvtcuoi
(oomp. Meyer on John xi. 19), as the leaders of the
apposition to the teaching of Christ, in other words,
as equivalent to Scribes and Elders and Pharisees,
suggests the further inference that these visitors or
friends belonged to that class, and that previous re-
lations must have connected them with the family
of Bethany. (4.) A comparison of Matt xxvi. 6,
Mark xiv. 3, with Luke vii. 38, 44, suggests another
conjecture that harmonizes with and in part explains
the foregoing. To assume the identity of the anoint-
ing of the latter narrative with that of the former (so
Grotius), of the woman that was a sinner with Mary
the sister of Lazarus, and of one or both of these
with Mary Magdalene (Lightfbot, Harm. § 83, vol.
U. 76), fa indeed (in spite of the authorities, critical
and patristic, which may be arrayed on either side)
altogether arbitrary and uncritical. It would be
LAZARUS
1618
sonssquent traditions of a Castle of Lazarus, pointed
sot to madueval pilgrims among ths ruins of the vil-
■afjs, which had bseoms lunoas by a church anetsd
in hfa honor, and had taken its Arab name (Idaarieh,
or Haauieh) from him. [Bzmurt vol. L 186 *.]
■ The identity has been questioned by some bar
•rants ; Out it will be di sc ussed under anew.
» Msysr assumes (on Mat* xxvi. 6) that St. John,
as an aye-witness, gits the true aooount, St Matthew
sod St. Mark an erroneous one. Peulua and Oreswell
i that Simon was the husband, ttvlnf or ds-
hardly less eo to infer, from the mere recurrence
of so oommon a name as Simon, the identity of ths
leper of the one narrative with the Pharisee of ths
other; nor would the case be much strengthened
by an appeal to the interpreters who have main-
tained that opinion (oomp. Chrysost. Horn, is
Matt lxxx. ; Urotius, in Matt, xxri.8; lightfbot,
L e.,- Winer, Reaheb. s. v. Simon). [Comp. Makt
MAQDiuonc snd Siuon.] There are howeva
some other facts which fall in with this hypothesis,
and to that extent confirm it If Simon the leper
were also a Pharisee, it would explain the fact
just noticed of the friendship between the sisters
of Lazarus and the members of that party in Jeru-
salem. It would aooount also for the ready utter-
ance by Martha of the chief article of the creed oi
the Pharisees (John xi. 24). Mary's lavish act of
love would gain a fresh interest for us if we thought
of it (as this conjectura would lead us to think) as
growing out of the recollection of that which had
been offered by the woman that was a sinner. The
disease which gave occasion to the later name may
have supervened after the incident which St. Luke
records. The difference between the localities of the
two histories (that of Luke vii. being apparently in
Galilee near Nain, that of Matt xxvi. and Mark
xiv. in Bethany) is not greater than that which
meets us on comparing Luke x. 38 with John xi. 1
(comp. Oreswell, Dot. L a). It would follow on
this assumption that the Pharisee, whom we thus
far identify with the father of Lazarus, was prob-
ably one of the members of that sect, sent down
from Jerusalem to watch the new teacher (oomp.
EUicott's Bulsean Lectures, p. 169) ; that he looked
on him partly with reverence, partly with suspicion;
that in his dwelling there was a manifestation of
the sympathy and love of Christ, which could not
but leave on those who witnessed or beard of it,
and had not hardened themselves in formal ism, a
deep and permanent impression. (A.) One other
conjecture, bolder perhaps than the others, may yet
be hazarded. Admitting, as must be admitted, the
absence at once of all direct evidence and of tra-
ditional authority, there are yet some coincidences,
at least remarkable enough to deserve attention,
and which suggest the identification of Lazarus
with the young ruler that had great possessions,
of Matt xlx., Mark x., Luke xviii.° The age
(ywlas, Matt xix. 20, 22) agrees with what has
been before Inferred (see above, 1), as does the fsot
of wealth above the average with what we know of
the condition of the family at Bethany (see 2).
If the father were an influential Pharisee, if there
were ties of some kind uniting the family with that
body, it would be natural enough that the eon,
even in comparative youth, should occupy the posi-
tion of an tpx*r- The character of the young
ruler, the reverence of his salutation (SiooVkoAs
iyatt, Mark x. 17) and of his attitude (yonnrsrtr
esssed, of Martha ; Grottos sod Kuiaul, that he was a
kinsman, or a friend who gave ths tiast lor them.
e The arrangement of Qnswsll, Tbobendorf, and
other harmonists, which places ths inquiry of the rich
ruler attar the death and nsurcecuon of lasaras, fa at
wnrss IsstructtTC of this hypothesis. It should os
rsmembend, however, that Onswell ssslgns ths same
posnion to ths incident of Luke x. 88-42. Ths onset
bars followed Is that given in the pr es ent work by Dr.
Thomson under Oospzm and Jzsos Cauusr, by light
loot, and t; AiTrd.
Digitized by
Google
1614 LAZAKUB
ni, Wd.),bhi eager yearning after eternal Bfe, the
strict training of hi* youth in the commandments
ef God, the blameless probity of his outward life,
atl theea would agree with what we might expect
fa the eon of a Pharisee, in the brother of one who
had ehoeen '• the good part." It Bay be noticed
farther, that as his spiritual condition is easentiaBy
that which we find about the same period in
Martha, so the answer returned to him, " One thing
thou tsckest," and that given to her, " On* thing
is needful," are substantially identical • But fur-
ther, it is of this rich young man that 8t Mark
uses the emphatic word ("Jems, beholding him,
steed Mm," Irjiwnrtv) which is need of no others
bl tin Uospel-bistory, snre of the befered Apostle
and of Lazarus and his sisters (John xi. 6). We
can hardly dare to believe that that tore, with all
the yearning pity and the fervent prayer which it
banned, would be altogether fruitless. Then might
be for a time the hesitation of a divided will, but
ttw half-prophetic words," with God aO things are
possible," " tliere are last that shall be first," for-
bid our busty condemnation, as they forbade that
ef the disciples, and prepare ns to hope that some
discipline would yet be found to overcome the evQ
which wss eating into and would otherwise destroy
so noble and beautiful a soul. However strongly
the absence of the name of Lazarus, or of the locality
to which he belonged, may seem to militate against
this hypothesis, it must be remembered thai there
is Just the same singular and perplexing omission
b the narrative of the anointing in Matt. xxri. and
Markxiv.
Caanbfalag these inferences then, we get, with
some measure of likelihood, an insight into one
aspect of the life of the Divine Teacher and Friend,
fafl of the most living interest The village of
Bethany and its neighborhood were — probably from
the first, certainly at % later period of our Lord's
ministry — a frequent retreat from the controver-
sies and tumults of Jerusalem (John xviii. 8; Luke
xxi. 87, xxii. 39). At some tun* or other one
household, wealthy, honorable, belonging to the
better or Nieodemus section of the Pharisees (see
above, 1, 2, 3), learns to know and reverence him.
There may have been within their knowledge or in
their presence, one of the most signal proofs of his
love and compassion for the outcast (tup. 4). Dis-
ease or death removes the father from the scene,
and the two sisters ore left with their younger
brother to do ss they think right They appear at
Bethany, or in some other tillage, where also they
had a horn* (Luke x. 38, and Greswell, I. c), as
moving and reverential disciples, each according to
her character. In them and in the brother over
whom they watch, He finds that which is worthy
ai his lore, the craving for truth and holiness, the
hungering and thirsting after righteousness which
shall assuredly be filled. But two at least need an
education in the spiritual life. Martha tends to
rest In outward activity and Pharisaic dogmatism,
and does not rise to the thought of on eternal life
as actually present Lazarus (ss* S) oscillates be-
tween the attractions of the higher life and those
<• The rssembsuM* Is drawn cat In a striking sad
sos u t tni l passage by Clement of Alexandria (Qua
frees, J 10).
» By some Interpreter* the word was taksa as •■
It was the reserved rabbtme custom for
as kan she scow of the sehalar whose
LAZAKTJB
ef the wealth and honor which surround tie path-
way of his Hfe, and does not aee how deep and wide
were the commandments which, as he thought, he
had "kept from his youth up." The inn Tiins,
words, the bring look and act,* fail to undo the
evO which has been corroding Ms inner fife. The
discipline which could provide a remedy for it wa»
among the things that were " impossible with
men," and "possible with God only." A few
weeks pass away, and then comes the sfekneas ef
John xi. One of the sharp malignant fevers of Pal-
estine' eute off the life that wss so precious. The
sisters know bow truly the Divine Friend has loved
him on whom their love and their hopes centered.
They send to Him fa the belief that the tiding* of
the sickness wfll at once draw Him to them (John
xi. 8). Skwry, and b words which (though after-
wards understood otherwise) must at the time bar*
seemed to the disciple* those of one upon whom
the truth came not at once but by degrees, he pre-
pares them for the worst " This sick ness is not
unto death " — « Our friend Lazarus ahepeth " —
" Lazarus is dead." The work which He was doing
as a teacher or a healer (John x. 41, 49} fa Betb-
aboro, or the other Bethany (John x. 46, and L 9B\
wo* not interrupted, and con tinu es for two days
after the message reaches him. Then come* the
journey, occupying two day* more. When He and
Ma disciples eonie, three days have paased since the
burial. The friends from Jerusalem, chiefly of the
Pharisee snd ruler chat, are there with their con-
solations. The sisters receive the Prophet, each
according to her character, Martha t *i* J " i -r. on to
meet Him, Mary sitting still in the house, both
giving utterance to the sorrowful, hslf-reproeehful
thought, " Lord, if thou hsdst been here my brother
had not died " (John xi. 91-33). Ills sympathy
with their sorrow leads Him ekse to weep aa if He
feh it to ol the power of its hnpi harness, though
H* came with the purpose and the power to remove
it Men wonder at what they look en aa a sign of
the intensity of Ms affection for him who had been
rat off (John xi. 88, 88). They do not p erh a p s see
that with this emotion there mingles indignation
(cM/)piu4aUTO, John d. 88, 88) at their want of
faith. Then comes the work of might ss the answer
of the prayer which the Son offers to the Father
(John xi. 41, 49). The stone is rolled away from
the mouth of the rock-chamber b which the body
had been placed. The Evangelist write* a* if he
were once again living through every light and
sound of that boor. He records what could never
fade from hi* memory any more than could the
recollection of his glance into that other sepulchre
(eomp. John xi. 44, with xx. 7). " He that wu
deed came forth, bound hand and foot with greve-
dotbes; and Ms face was bound about wish a
napkin."
It Is weB not to break b upon the sBenee which
hangs over the interval of that " four days' sleep "
(eomp. Trench, MWada, I c). In nothing doss
the Gospel narrative contrast men strongly with
the mythical histories which men have imagined
of thee* who have returned from the unseen world,-
efwtseameadl
Oomp. Orotres, ad tec
e The ehoreessr of the duets* M taaWred treat He
rapid uiu g n ta, sod from the fear asts ssss fl by Marat*
(John xl. »). Oomp. lamps, ad let.
4 Tbs resent of Br so* Ansesuaa (Has*, Jtas. «.
and Qunntnghatt of Metros* (Bed*. JM. Ks.i.B
Digitized by
Google
L>ZABTJ8
Mi with the legend! which In a Sate age hate
gathered round the name of Lateral (Wright's St.
Patrick's Purgatory, p. 167), than in tint absence
of d attempt' to describe the exparienoca of the
human eool that had paand from the life of iense
to the land of the shadow of death. But thus much
at least must be borne in mind in order that we
assy understand what has jet to come, that the
map who was thus recalled as on eagle's wings from
las kingdom of the grave (comp. the language of
she complaint of Hades in the Apocryphal Gospel
of Nicodemus, Tiacbendorf, Etang. Apoe. p. 805)
must hate learnt " what it is to die " (comp. a pas-
sage of great beauty in Tennyson's In Ifemoriam,
xxxL, xxxii.). The soul that had looked with open
gaze upon the things behind the veil had passed
through a discipline sufficient to burn out all selfish
lose of the accidents of his outward life.* There
may hare been an inward resurrection parallel with
the outward (comp. Olshausen. ad be.). What
men had given over as impossible had been shown
in a twofold sense to be possible with God.
One seene more meets us, and then the life of
the family which has eonw before us with such day-
light clearness lapses again into obscurity. The
feme of the wonder spreads rapidly, as it was likely
te do, among the ruling class, some of whom bad
witnessed it. It becomes one of toe proximate
occ asion s of the plots of the Sanhedrim against our
lord's life (John at 47-63). It brings Lazarus no
las than Jesus within the range of their enmity
(John xU. 10), and leads perhaps to his withdrawing
hr a time from Bethany (Greewell). They persuade
themselves apparently that they see in him one who
baa bean a sharer in a great imposture, or who has
been restored to life through some demoniac agency. 6
But others gather round to wonder and congratulate.
b the house which, though it still bore the lather's
name (sop. 1), was the dwelling of the sisters and
the brother, there is a supper, and Lazarus is there,
sod Martha serves, no longer Jealously, and Mary
pours out her love in the costly offering of the
spikenard ointment, and finds herself once again
misjudged and hastily condemned. The conjecture
which has been ventured on above connects itself
with this feet also. The indignant question of
Judas and the other disciples implies the exptcta-
Am of a lavish distribution among the poor. They
look on the feast as like that which they bad seen
In the house of Matthew the publican, the farewell
banquet given to large numbers (comp. John xii.
9, 18) by one who was renouncing the habits of his
former life. If they had in their minds the recol-
lection of the words, " Sell that thou hast, and give
to the poor," we can understand with what a sharp-
ened edge their reproach would come as they con-
trasted the command which their Lord had given
with the " waste " which He thus approved. After
this all direct knowledge of Lazarus ceases. We
saay think of him, however, as sharing in or wtt-
{ the kingly march from Bethany to Jerusalem
■my be taken as two typical instances, appearing under
atoeumetencee the moat contrasted poislbla, yet having
act a few features In common.
• A tradition of mora than average interval, bearing
an this point, la mentioned (though without an au-
thority) by Trench (AKraetes, 1. c.). The mat question
■aewa by lasarus, on his return to lire, was whether
as sawoM see again. He heard that he was still sub-
last so toe common doom of all men, and was never
LAZARUS 1616
(Mark xi. 1), " enduring life again that Paesuil
to keep " (Keble, Christian Tear, Advent Sunday).
The sisters and the brother must have watched
eagerly, during those days of rapid change and
wonderful expectation, for the evening's return to
Bethany and the hours during which " He lodged
them" (Matt. xxi. 17). It would be as plausible
an explanation of the strange fact roe: rded by St.
Mark alone (xiv. 51) as any other, if we were to
suppose that Lazarus, whose home was near, who
must have known the place to which the Lord
" oftentimes resorted," was drawn to the garden
of Uethaemane by the approach of the officers " with
their torches and lanterns and weapons" (John
xviii. 8), and in the haste of the nlgmValarm, rushed
eagerly, " with the linen cloth cast about bis naked
body," to are whether be was in time to rendo
any help. Whoever it may have been, it was not
one of the company of professed disciples. It was
one who was drawn by some strong impulse to
follow Jesus when they, all of them, " forsook him
and fled." It was one whom the high-priest's
servants were eager to seise, as if destined for a
second victim (comp. John xii- 10), when they made
no effort to detain any other. The linen-cloth
{atvt&r), forming, as it did, one of the "soft
raiment " of Matt. xL 8, used in the dress and in
the funerals of the rich (Mark xv. 46 1 Matt, xxvii.
59), points to a form of life like that which we have
seen reason to assign to Lazarus (comp. also the
use of the word in the LXX. of Judg. xiv. 12, and
Prov. xxxi. 94). Uncertain as all inferences of this
kind must be, this is perhaps at least as plausible
as those which identify the form that appeared so
startlingly with St. John (Ambrose, Chrysost. Greg.
Mas;. ) ; or St. Mark (Olshausen, Lange, Isaac
Williams, On tht Pauhn, p. 30); or James the
brother of the Lord (Epiphan. flier, p. 87, 18;
comp. Meyer, ad loc.); and, on this hypothesis,
the omission of the name is in harmony with the
noticeable reticence of the first three Gospels
throughout as to the members of the family at
Bethany. We can hardly help believing that to
them, as to others ('■ the five hundred brethren at
once," 1 Cor. xv. 6), was manifested the presence
of their risen Lord; that they must have been
sharers in the Pentecostal gifts, and have takea
their place among the members of the infant Church
at Jerusalem in the first days of its overflowing
love; that then, if not before, the command, " Seal
that thou hast and give to the poor," was obeyed
by the heir of Bethany, as it was by other possessors
of lands or houses (Acta ii. 44, 45). But they had
chosen now, it would seem, the better part of a
humble and a holy life, and their names appear no
more in the history of the N. T. Apocryphal tra-
ditions even are singularly scanty and jejune, as if
the silence which "sealed the lips of the Evan-
gelists" had restrained others also. We almost
wonder, looking at the wild luxuriance with which
they gather round other names, that they have
* The explanation, " Ho eastern out devils by Best
avbub " (Matt lx. 84, x. 25 ; Mark 111. 22, fco.), which
originated with the scribal of Jerusalem, would nat-
urally be applied to such a case as this. That it was
so apptted vi may infer from the statement in the
Stpier Totdoth JetDu (the rabbinic anticipation of
another Ltben Jim), that tela and other Ilka miracles
wars wrought by the mystic power af the iiabliilaeae
Bhomharaphoraah. or other magical formula (li
O u mm. m Jtam. xl. 44>
Digitized by
Google
1616
LAZARUS
MthiDg more to tell of Laura than the meagre
tale that follows: He lived for thirty jean after
hia resurrection, and died at the age of sixty
(Epiphan. Har. i. 652). When he came forth
from the tomb, it mi with the bloom and fragrance
M of a bridegroom ('Kraipopa IIiAaVov, Thilo, Cod.
Jpoc N. T. p. 807). He and hie sisters, with
alary the wife of Claophas, and other diaciplei, were
sent out to tea by the Jewi in a leaky boat, but
miraculously escaped destruction, and were brought
safely to Marseilles. There he preached the Gospel,
and founded a church, and became its bishop-
After many years, he raftered martyrdom, and was
buried, some said, there; others, at Citium in
Cyprus. Finally his bones and those of Mary Mag-
dalene were brought from Cyprus to Constantinople
by the Emperor Leo the Philosopher, and a church
erected to his honor. Some apocryphal books were
extant bearing bis name (comp. Thilo, Coo'cx Apoe.
N. T. p. 711 ; Baronius, ad Uortyroi Bom. Dec.
irii) and for some wild Provencal legends as to
the later adventures of Martha, Migne, Diet, de la
Bible, s. v. « Marine"). These traditions hare
no personal or historical interest for us. In one
instance only do tbey connect themselves with any
met of importance in the later history of Christen-
dom. The Canons of St. Victor at Paris occupied
a Priory dedicated (as one of the chief churches at
Marseilles had been) to St Lazarus. This was
assigned, in 1638, to the fraternity of the Congre-
gation founded by Su Vincent de Paul and the
mission-priests sent forth by it consequently became
conspicuous as the Lasaristi (Butler's Live* of the
Bamtt, July xiz.).
The question why the first three Gospels omit
all mention of so wonderful a fact as the resurrection
of Lasarus, has from a comparatively early period
forced itself upon interpreters and apologists. Bar
tionaHst critics have made it one of their chief
points of attack, directly on the trustworthiness of
Si. John, indirectly on the credibility of the Gospel
history aa a whole. Spinoza professed to make this
the crucial instance by which, if he had but proof
of it, he would be determined to embrace the
common faith of Christians (Bayle, Diet. s. v.
"Spinoza"). Woolston, the maltdtcentunmut of
English Deists, asserts that the story is " brimfull
of absurdities," " a contexture of folly and fraud "
(Dill, on Miracle*, v. ; comp. N. Lardner's Vindi-
cation*, Works, ii. 1-54). Strauss (Leben Jem, pt
U. eh. ix. § 100) scatters with triumphant scorn the
subterfuges of Paulus and the naturalist interpreters
(such, for example, as the hypothesis of suspended
animation), and pronounces the narrative to have
all the characteristics of a mythus. Evald (Gesch.
». p. 404), on the other hand, in marked contrast
to Strauss, recognizes, not only the tenderness and
beauty of St. John's narrative, and its value as a
representation of the quickening power of Christ,
but also its distinct historical character. The
explanations given of the perplexing phenomenon
are briefly these: (1.) That fear of drawing down
persecution on one already singled out for it kept
the three Evangelists, writing during the lifetime
of Lazarus, from all mention of him ; and that, this
reason for silence being removed by his death, St.
John could write freely. By some (Grotius, ad be. )
'Jtit has perhaps been urged too exclusively. By
•than (Alford, ad foe. ; Trench, On Miracle*, 1. e.)
a) baa perhaps been too hastily rejected as extrava-
gant. (8.) That the writers of the first three
Qoapeb) confine themselves, as by a deliberate olan.
LAZARUS
to the miracles wrought in GalUee (that of the Ubi
man at Jericho being the only exception), and that
they therefore abstained from all mention of any
met, however interesting, that lay outside that limit
(Meyer, ad foe). This too has its weight, as
showing that, in this omission, the three Evangelists
are at least consistent with themselves, but it leaves
the question, "what led to that consistency ? " un-
answered. (3.) That the narrative, in its beauty
and simplicity, its human sympathies and marvel-
ous transparency, carries with it the evidence of its
own truthfulness, and is aa for removed as possible
from the embellishments and rhetoric of a writer of
myths, bent upon the invention of a miuAi which
should outdo all others (Meyer, L c). In this
there is no doubt great truth. To invent and teQ
any story si this is told would require a powes
equal to that of the highest artistic skill of in
later age, and that skill we should hardly expect to
find combined at once with the deepest yearnings
after truth and a deliberate perversion of it. There
would seem, to any but a rationalist critic, an im-
probability quite infinite, in the union, in any single
writer, of the characteristics of a Goethe, an Ire-
land, and an a Kempis. (4.) Another explanation,
suggested by the attempt to represent to one's-edf
what must have been the sequel of such a fact as
that now in question upon the life of him who had
been affected by it, may perhaps be added. The
history of monastic orders, of sudden conversions
after great critical deliverances from disease or
danger, offers an analogy which may help to guide
us. In such cases it hss happened, in a thousand
instances, that the man has felt ss if the thread of
his life was broken, the past buried forever, old
things vanished away. He retires from the world,
changes his name, speaks to no one, or speaks only
in hints, of all that belongs to his former life, shrinks
above all from making his conversion, his resurrec-
tion from the death of ain, the subject of common
talk. The instance already referred to in Bade
offers a very striking illustration of this. Cunning-
ham, in that history, gives up all to his wife, his
children, and the poor, retires to the monastery of
Melrose, takes the new name of Drithdm, and
11 would not relate these and other things which ha
had seen to slothful persons and such aa lived
negligently." Assume only that the laws of the
spiritual life worked in some such way on Lazarus;
that the feeling would he strong in proportion to
the greatness of the wonder to which it owed its
birth ; that there was the recollection, in him and
in others, that, in the nearest parallel instance,
silence and secrecy had been solemnly enjoined
(Mark v. 43), and it will seem hardly wonderful
that such a man should shrink from publicity, and
should wish to take his place as the last and lo w es t
in the company of believers, b it strange that it
should come to be tacitly recognized among the
members of the Church of Jerusalem that, so long
ss he and those dear to him survived, the great
wonder of their lives was a thing to be remembered
with awe by those who knew it, not to be talked or
written about to those who knew it not?
The facts of the case are, at any rate, singularly
in harmony with this hut explanation. St Matthew
and St. Mark, who (the one writing for the He-
brews, the other under, the guidance of St. Pater,
re p res e nt what may be described ss the feeling of
the Jerusalem Church, omit equally.all mention oi
the three names. They use words which ma}
indeed have been fmySim svmnVv. but tfcaj
Digitized by
Google
LAZARUS
seaM the nam**. Mary's costly offering 1» that of
'a woman" (Matt xxvi. 7; Mark xiv. 8). The
house in which the least ni made is described so
ss to indicate it sufficiently to thoseewho knew (ha
place, and yet to keep the name of Lazarus out of
sight. The hypothesis stated above would add two
more instances of the same reticence- St. Luke,
coming later (probably after St. Matthew and St
Mark had left the Church of Jerusalem with the
materials afterwards shaped into their Gospels),
i^iu^ing from all informants all the facts they will
communicate, comes across one in which the two
sisters are mentioned by name, and records it, sup-
pressing, or not baring learnt, that of the locality.
St. John, writing long afterwards, when all three
had " fallen asleep," feels that the restraint is no
longer necessary, and puts on record, as the Spirit
brings all things to his remembrance, the whole of
the wonderful history. The circumstances of his
me, too, his residence in or near Jerusalem as the
protector of the bereaved mother of his Lord (John
xii- 87), his retirement from prominent activity for
so long a period [Johm thk Apostle], the insight
we find be had into the thoughts and feelings of
those who would be the natural companions and
friends of the sisters of Lazarus (John xz. 1, 11-18) ;
all these indicate that he more than any other Evan-
gelist was likely to have lived in that inmost circle
of disciples, where these things would be most
lovingly and reverently remembered. Thus much
of truth there is, as usual, in the idealism of some
interpreters, that what to most other disciples would
seem simply a miracle (repot), a work of power
(tintfuth 1U™ other works, and therefore one which
they could without much reluctance omit, would be
to him a nyn (o*i)/u ier) manifesting the glory of
(Sod, witnessing that Jesus was " the resurrection
sod the life," which he could in no wise pass over,
but must when the right time came record in its
fullness. (Comp. for this significance of the mira-
cle, and for its probable use in the spiritual educa-
tion of Lazarus, Olshausen, ad be.) It is of course
obvious, that if this supposition accounts for the
smiasioo In the three Gospels of the name and
history of Lazarus, it accounts also for the chron-
ological dislocation and harmonistio difficulties
which were its inevitable consequences.*
2. The name Lazarus occurs also in the well-
known parable of Lake xvi. 19-31. What is there
chiefly remarkable is, that while in all other cases
persons are introduced as in certain stations, be-
longing to certain classes, here, and here only, we
meet with a proper name. Is this exceptional fact
to be looked on as simply one of the accessories of
the parable, giving as it were a dramatic semblance
of reality to what was, like other parables, only an
fflustrition ? Were the thoughts of men called to
the etymology of the name, as signifying that he
•ho bore it had in his poverty no help but God
(comp. Germ. " Uotthilf "), or as meaning, in the
shortened form, one who had become altogether
"helpless " ? (So Theophyl. ad foe., who explains it
as = &[k (jfhrroir, recognizing possibly the deriva-
tion which has been suggested by later critic; from
LAZABUS
1617
"I* £ rV?, '• there is no help." Comp. Smear, a. a. |
Lamps, ad be.) Or was it again not a parable,
but, hi its starting-point at least, a history, so that
Lazarus was some actual beggar, like him who lay
at the Beautiful Gate of the Temple, familiar there-
fore both to the disciples and the Pharisees? (So
Theophyl. ad be.; Chrysost, Maldon.; Suicer,
t. v. \i(apos.) Whatever the merit of either of
these suggestions, no one of them can be accepted
as quite satisfactory, and it adds something to the
force of the hypothesis ventured on above, to find
that it connects itself with this question also. The
key which has served to open other doors fits into
the wards here. If we assume the identity sug-
gested in (5), or if, leaving that as unproved, we
remember only that the histoiic Lazarus belonged
by birth to the class of the wealthy and influential
Pharisees, as in (3), then, though we may not think
of him as among those who were " covetous," and
who therefore derided by scornful look and gesture
(sfowirHisifoi', Luke xvi. 14) Him who taught
that they could not serve God and Mammon, we
may yet look on him as one of the same class, known
to them, associating with them, only too liable, in
spite of all the promise of bis youth, to be drawn
away by that which had corrupted them. Could
anything be more significant, if this were so, than
the introduction of this name into such a parable ?
Not Eleazar the Pharisee, rich, honored, blameless
among men, but Eleazar the beggar, full of leprous
sores, lying at the rich man's gate, was the true
heir of blessedness, for whom was reserved the glory
of being in Abraham's bosom. Very striking too,
it must be added, is the coincidence between the
teaching of the parable and of the history in
another point The Lazarus of the one remains
in Abraham's bosom because "if men hear not
Moses and the prophets, neither will they be per-
suaded, though one rose from the dead." The
Lazarus of the other returned from it, and yet
bears no witness to the unbelieving Jews of the
wonders or the terrors of Hades.
In this Instance also the name of Lazarus has
been perpetuated in an institution of the Christian
Church. The parable did its work, even in the
dark days of her life, in leading men to dread
simply selfish luxury, and to help even the most
loathsome forms of suffering. The leper of the
Middle Ages appears as a Lazzaro. 6 Among the
orders, half-military and half-monastic, of the 13th
century, was one which bore the title of the Knights
of St Lazarus (a. d. 1119), whose special work it
was to minister to. the lepers, first of Syria, and
afterwards of Europe. The use of lazaretto and
hxur-hoate for the leper-hospitalr then founded in
all parts of Western Christendom, no less than
that of lazznrone for the mendicants of Italian
towns, are indications of the effect of the parable
upon the mind of Europe in the Middle Ages, and
thence upon its later speech. In some cases there
seems to have been a singular transfer of the attri-
bute of the one Lazarus to the other. Thus in
Paris the prison of St Lazare (the Cios S. Lazare,
a • On the resurrection of Lm»-u then Is an essay
by Ooniikh, Dit Bdihul d. Enveckimg Lazarus, to
■as Vfot. Stud. u. Krii. 1802, pp. 65-110, 2*4-88*.
In the Internal evidence of the truth of the narrative,
sat turoMS, IV Uncoiutimu Truth of (Ac Four Qot-
sab, Phlla. 1868. pp. 48-76. A.
101
• It Is Interesting, as connected with the tradition*
given above under (1), to find that the first oceurrenee
of the name with this generic meaning Is In the oli
Provencal dialect, nnder the form Ladrs. (Comp. Dtaa,
Roman. WDrttroucA, ». V. Lazzaro, [aid Scholar,
Diet. rf'JIvaint. ./rancour, e. r. Lain.))
Digitized by
Google
1618 LAZARUS
10 fsmous in 1848) had been originally a hosnitall
for lepers. In the 17th century it wu assigned to
the Society of Ijuarists, who took their name, aa
baa been suid, from Lazarus of Bethany, and St.
Vincent de Paul died there in 1660. In the imme-
diate neighliorhood of the prison, however, are two
streets, the Hue d'Knfer and Kue de Paradia, the
names of which indicate the earlier associations
with the Lazarus of the parable.
It may be mentioned incidentally, as there hss
been no article under the head of Divks, that the
occurrence of this word, used ss a quasi-proper
name, in our early English literature, is another
proof of the impression which was made on the
minds of men, either by the | arable itself, or by
dramatic representations of it in the mediaeval
mysteries. The writer does not know where it is
found for the first time in this sense, but it sppears
as early as Chaucer (" ljuar and Dives," Somp-
nonre'a Tale) and Piers Ploughn an (" Dives in the
dtyntees lyvede," 1. 9158), and in later theological
literature its use has lieen all but universal. In no
other instance has a descriptive adjective passed in
this way into the received name of an individual.
The name Nimeusis, which Euthymius gives as
that of the rich man (Trench, Parnbkt, 1. a),
■earns never to have come into any general use.
E. H. P.
* The view proposed above (5) that Lazarus
of Bethany and the rich ruler were the same person,
deserves a brief consideration. It is not only a
eonjecture incapable of proof, but is open to mani-
fold objections. In the tint place, it requires us to
reverse the probable order of events in the Evangelic
history. Christ's interview with the young ruler
is recorded by each of the first three Evangelists,
and in all three is preceded and followed by the
lame incidents. Its connection with these inci-
dents, since not obviously logical, may be presumed
to be chronological. But Mstt. (xix. 1, 8; xx. 17,
89) and Mark (x. 1, 32, 40) both represent these
transactions ss occurring when our Lord wss ap-
proaching Jerusalem by the way of Jericho. As
respects this passage through Jericho, Luke (xviii.
85; xix. 1) agrees with them; and all three then
coincide with John (xii. 1) in the arrival at Bethany.
This arrival occurred after the resurrection of
Lazarus. And it seems fair to infer, therefore, that
the inquiry of the rich ruler, which three Evangelists
concur in connecting with the journey, and ap-
parently with its close, actually belongs where it
stands. This hannonistic result is corroborated by
the circumstance, that of the various visits Christ
made to Jerusalem during his ministry, Matthew,
Mark, and Luke record only the last; so that what
they connect with that visit may be presumed to
pertain to it. Further, the journeys thither shortly
antecedent (John vii., x.), seem both to have been
characterized by privacy ; but the progress to which
the interview with the ruler belongs was marked by
publicity. We may conclude, therefore, with oon-
dderable confidence, that the interview with the
rich man took place after the resurrection of
Lazarus.
While thus, on the one hand, we find no reason
to detach that interview and its attendant events
torn their more obvious connection, then are ob-
• * The arrangsment of occurrences by which the
hypothesis under consideration becomes possible, Is
■at only at variance with the tnomaaons of the sacred
ant tat Is rejected bv the majority of erlties. (I
LAZARTJB
stacks, on the other hand, in the way of soak ■
separation. In order to make the interview precede
the resurrection, it is generally transferred to the
period of ourtLord's stay "where John at first
baptized " (John x. 40). But, according to the con-
current representation of the Synoptists, it occurred
while Jesus was on a journey towards Jerusalem.
So that this representation does not harmonic*
easily either' with the fourth Evangelist's phrase
tiutvtv tin? (x. 40; cf. rer. 42, xi. 7); or with the
fact that John (xi. 8) represents our Lord as re-
called by the sisters' message to a locality he had
recently left, rather than as hastened in his progr ess
towards one be was already approaching: or further,
with the circumstance that the afflicted family seta
to have known at once where to send for him."
Moreover, the hypothesis considered by itself is
unsatisfactory in several respects. That Lazarua
was too young to be mentioned, is. Indeed, a pre-
carious inference to draw from the silence of Luke
(x. 88 ff.) when relating an incident in which he
was not concerned. And with still greater improb-
ability is confirmation for this extreme opinion
respecting his youth derived from the circumstance
mentioned in John xii. 2. (On this view, too, how
does it happen that Bethany is at the same time
described ss the place " wl-ere Lazarus was " ?)
Still, admitting him to be as young ss r epres e n ted,
be is too young to be identified with the rich ruler.
If even after his resurrection be held a " subordinate
position " in his own home, be can hardly have)
been a man of such distinction abroad as the ruler
clearly was. Nor would his youth be compatible
with this official rank. The term apgwr, indeed,
may be taken in the general sense of " a leading
man." But such preeminence even, would require
in its possessor something more than a vacillating
character and a large inheritance. While if the
word is understood to designate him as a ruler of
the synagogue, be must have been of foil age.
[Synagogue.] In fact the common impression
respecting the youthfulness of the ruler also, har-
monizes neither with his title, nor with the more
natural suggestion of his words Ik rtirrp-ti ium<
and, according to usage, rcaWo-iroi employed of
him by Matthew, appears to have been applicable
to men quite up to middle life. Again, Mark
makes the impression that the "love" of Jena
for the rich "young man," had its origin aa
he looked upon him in their first intenriew with
each other, and not in a prior intimacy either with
him or with the family to which he belonged.
Once more, the reference given to the words " with
God all things are possible," is not only at variance
with Christ's apparent design in uttering then,
but, when we consider the miraculous method in
which their verification was secured, reduces them
from n lofty and abiding encouragement very nearly
to the level of a truism.
The supposed identity, if established, would give
good ground for the perplexity that hss been feel
at the entire absence of sn allusion to the resur-
rection of Lazarus in the narratives of the synoptic
Evangelists. That all three should introduce ec
interesting a personage and not only make no men-
tion of his name, but omit also what, according tr
the above hypothesis, was the sequel of the story
pars sspadslly Boblnsoo's Orttk Harmony, part vi
Introductory Note, and ZUioott oa the Ufi */ ear
Lord, Lacs. vi. 1 H. V
Digitized by
Google
LEAD
the IDnstratioa of God's power he fulfillment of
their Masters "half-prophetic words," is an im-
probability which requires better support than con-
jecture. J. U. T.
LEAD (rnp'TO: pitu&ot, /ufAi/Moj), one
of the most common of metals, found general]/ in
vein* of rocks, though seldom in a metallio state,
and most commonly in combination with sulphur.
It was early known to the ancients, and the allusions
to it ill Scripture indicate that the Hebrews were
well acquainted with its uses. The rocks in the
neighborhood of Sinai yielded it in large quantities,
and it was louud in Egypt. That it was common
ia Palestine is shown by tbe expression in Kcclus-
xlvii. 18, where it it said, in apostrophizing Soto-
bmo, " Thou didst multiply silver as lead ; " the
writer having in view the hyperbolical description
of Solomon's wealth in 1 K. x. 27 : " the king made
the silver to be in Jerusalem as tUmtt." It was
among the spoils of the Midianites which the chil-
dren of Israel brought with them to the plains of
Moab, after their return from the slaughter of the
tribe (Num. xxxi. ±2). The ships of Tarehish sup-
plied the market of Tyre with lead, as with other
metals (Ex. xxrii. 12). Its heaviness, to which
aOution is made in Ex. xv. 10 and Fxelus. xxii. 14,
caused it to be used for weights, which were either
m the form of a round flat cake (Zech. v. 7), or a
rough unfashioned lump or " stone " (ver. 8) ;
stones having in ancient times served tbe purpose
of weights (conip. Prov. xvi. It). This fact may
perhaps explain the substitution of " lead " for
"stones" in tlie passage of Erclesiasticus above
quoted ; the commonest use of the commonest metal
being present to tbe mind of tbe writer. If Gese-
nros is eorrect in rendering TJ3N, drtic, by " lead,"
In Am. vii. 7, 8, we hare another instance of the
purposes to which this metal was applied in form-
ing the ball or bob of the plumb-line. [Pmjmb-
UXE.] Its use for weighting fishi.ng-Unes was
known in the time of Homer (//. xxiv. 80). But
Boebart and others identify inde with tin, and
derive from it the etymology of " Britain."
In modern metallurgy lead is used with tin in
the composition of solder for fastening metals to-
gether. That the ancient Hebrews were acquainted
with the use of solder is evident from the descrip-
tion given by the prophet Isaiah of the processes
which accompanied the formation of an image for
Idolatrous worship. The method by which two
pieces of metal were joined together was identical
with that employed in modern times; the substances
to be united being first clamped before being sol-
dered. No hint is given as to the composition of
the solder, but in all probability lead was one of tbe
materials employed, its usage for such a purpose
being of great antiquity. The ancient Egyptians
need it for fastening stones together in the rough
parts of a building, and it »as found by Mr. Ijtvaird
among the ruins at Nimroud (Nin. and Bab. p.
•87). Mr. Napier (.lr></itfur<7yo/rte Bible, p. 130)
conjectures that " the solder used in early times
x lend, and termed lead, was the same as is now
■sad — a mixture of lead and tin "
But, in addition to these more obvious m of.
this metal, the Hebrews were acquaint*' with an-
ather method of employing it, which indicates some
advance in the arts at an early period. Job (xix.
14) otters a wish that his words, " with a pen of
wo and lead, were graven in the rock for ever."
LEAF, LEAVES
1619
Tbe allnsion Is supposed to be to the practise of
earring inscriptions upon stone, and pouring molten
lead into the cavities of the letters, to render them
legible, and at the same time preserve them from
the action of the air. Frequent references to the
use of leaden tablets for inscriptions are found in
ancient writers. Pausaniae (ix. 31) saw Hesiod's
Works and Days graven on lead, but almost illegible
with age. Public proclamations, according to Pliny
(xiii. 21), were written on lead, and the name of
Germanicus was carved on leaden tablets (Tac. Ann.
ii. 69). Eutychius (/inn. Alex. p. 390) relates that
the history of the Seven Sleepers was engraved on
lead by tbe Cadi.
Oxide of lead ia employed largely in modern
pottery for the formation of glazes, and its presence)
has been discovered in analyzing the articles of
earthenware found in Egypt and Nineveh, proving
that the ancients were acquainted with its use for
the same purpose. The A. V. of Kcclus. xxxriil.
30 assumes that the usage was known to the He-
brews, though the original is not explicit npon the
point Speaking of the potter's art in finishing off
his work, " he applieth himself to lend it over," is
the rendering of what in the Greek is simply " be
giveth his heart to complete the smearing," the
material employed for the purpose not being indi-
cated.
In modern metallurgy lead is employed for the
purpose of purifying silver from other mineral
products. Tbe alloy is mixed with lead, exposed
to fusion upon an earthen vessel, and submitted to
a blast of air. By this means tbe dross is con-
sumed. This process is called the cupelling opera-
tion, with* which the description in Ex. xxii. 18-99,
in the opinion of Mr. Napier (Met. of Bible, pp.
20-94), accurately coincides. " The vessel contain
ing the alloy is surrounded by the fire, or placed
in the midst of it, and tbe blowing ia not applied
to the fire, but to the fused metals. . . . And when
this is done, nothing but the perfect metals, gold
and silver, can resist the scorifying influence.
And in support of his conclusion he quotes Jer. vi.
28-30, adding, " This description ia perfect. If we
take silver having the impurities in it described in
the text, namely, iron, copper, and tin, and mix It
with lead, and place it in the fire upon a cupel]. It
soon melts; the lead will oxidise and form a thick
coarse crust upon the surface, and thus consume
away, but effecting no purifying influence. The
alloy remains, if anything, worse than before. . . .
The silver is not refined, because • the bellows went
bumed ' — there existed nothing to blow upon ft.
I>ad is the purifier, but only so in connection with
a "last blowing upon the precious metals." An
aUu»lon to this use of lead is to be found in Tbeognli
(Gnan. 1127, 28; ed. Welcker), and it is mentioned
by Puny (xxxiil. 31) as indispensable to the purifi-
cation of silver from alloy. W. A. W.
LEB'ANA (tttsS: A «3o«t; FA. AojSor:
Lebana), one of the Nethinim whose descendants
returned from Babylon with Zerubbabel (Neb. vii
48). He is called Labama in the parallel list of
1 Esdras, and
LEB'ANAH C^?? % - Asu3om(: Ltbam) in
Ear 1146.
LEAF, LEAVES. The word ocean in the
A. Y. either in the singular or plural number la
three different senses— ( 1. ) Leaf at learn of trees.
Digitized by
Google
1620
LEAH
ft.) l*uu of the o.-^* of the Taup* (3 ) Leaves
sf the roll of » book.
L Lka» (nb^, ' iUh i rrfttterqihf , S^, e
*>»i. - dnsAAojr, r-<A«xoj, eW&uroj : folium,
/rum, cortex), fne olive-leaf U mentioned in Gen.
•iil. 11. Fig-leave* formed the finit covering of our
parent* in FJIen. The larren fig-tree (Matt. xzi.
19; Mark xi. 13) on the road between Bethany and
Jerusalem " hunt on it nothing but leavet." The
fig-leaf is alluded to by our Lord (Matt xxiv. 83;
Mark xiii. 28): •• \\ lien lii» branch is yet tender,
and putteth fnrtli Imien. ye ki.ow that summer U
nigb." The oak-leaf is ineutioiitd in la. 1. 80, and
vi. 18. The righteoua are often compared to green
leave* (Jer. ivii. 8), -Iter leaf shall be green" —
to leaves that fode not (l's. i. 3), " hi* leaf also
shall not wither." The ungodly on the other hand
are as "an uuk wlan* leal ladet'b " (Is. i. 30); as a
tree which -shall wither in all the leaves of her
spring" (Ez. xvii. Hi; the •■ sound of a shaken leaf
shall chase them " (l*v. xxvi. 80). In Ezekiel's
vision of the holy waters, the Meaning* of the Mes-
siah's kingdom are spoken of under the image of
trees growing on a river's Imuk ; there " shall grow
all trees for food, whose leaf shall not fade " (Ez.
xlvii. 12). In this piumage it is said that "ihe
fruit of these trees shall lie for food, and the leaf
thereof for medicine" (margin, for bruitet and
•orei). With this compare (Rev. xxii. 1, 2) St.
John's vision of the heavenly Jerusalem. «' In the
midst of the street of it, and on either side of the
river, was there the tree of life . . . and the leaves
of the tree were for the healing of the nations."
There is probably here an allusion to some tree
whose leaves were used by the Jews as a medicine
or ointment; indeed, it is very likely that many
plant* and leaves were thus made use of by them,
at by the old English herbalist*.
S. Leaves of doors (D*t>^*-, tala'tm; n^-J,
detail : rrurfi, tipofui: otlium, ostiohan). The
Hebrew word, which occurs very many times in
the Bible, and which in 1 K. vi. 32 (margin) and
84 is translated " leaves " in the A. V., signifies
teams, riot, tide; etc. In K*. xli. 24, " And the
doors had two leaves apiece," the Hebrew word
dtUth Is the representative of both «W» and leavet.
By the expression two-leaved doors, we are no doubt
to understand what we term folding-door*.
8. Leaves of a book or roll (Hb;J, ddeth ;
atKlf- p«geUa) occurs in this sense only in Jer.
xxxvi. 23. The Hebrew word (literally doors)
would perhaps be more correctly translated cohtmnt.
The Latin eolumna, and the Fjiglish column, as
applied to a book, are probably derived from re-
semblance to a column of a building. W. H.
LK'AH (TWh [wearied]: Asia, A/a: Lia),
the elder daughter of Lahan (Gen. xxix. 16). The
dullness or weakness of her eyes was so notable, that
it is mentioned as a contrast to the beautiful form
and appearance of her younger sister Rachel. Her
father took advantage of the opportunity which the
• from n v37, to aarend or grow up. Precisely
•dentlcal 1* avdfiaatt. from avafiatwiv. to as c e n d.
* Strictly, " a green and trader leaf," « one easily
paused off;" from *l?t3, "to tear, or pluck off,"
rasas* «*« 'ha leaves of her spring " (a*. aril. »).
LEATHER
focal marriage-rite afforded to pass ber off io hat
slater's stead on the unconscious bridegroom, sad
excused himself to Jacob by alleging that the irm -
tom of the country forbade the younger sister to be
given first in marriage. Roseiiniuller cite* instances
of these customs prevailing to this day in some
part* of the East Jacob's preference of Rachel
grew into hatred of Leah, after be had married both
sisters. Leah, however, bore to him in quick suc-
cession Reuben, Simeon, Levi, Judah, then Iaeaehar,
Zebulun, and Dinah, before Rachel had a child.
Leah was conscious and resentful (ch. xxx.) of the
smaller share she possessed in ber husband's afiee
tiona; yet in Jacob's difference* with hi* father-ht-
law, hi* two wive* appear to be attached to him
with equal fidelity. In the critical moment when
he expected an attack from Fjau, hi* discriminate
regard for the several members of his family wss
shown by hi* placing Rachel and ber child hinder-
most, in the least exposed situation, Leah and her
children next, and the two handmaids with their
children in the front. Leah probably lived to wit-
ness the dishonor of ber daughter (ch. xxxiv.), ae
cruelly avenged by two of her eons ; and the sob-
sequent deaths of Deborah at Bethel, and of Rachel
near Bethlehem. She died some time after Jacob
reached the south country in which hi* lather lease
lived. Her name i* not mentioned in the list of
Jacob'* family (ch. xlvi. 6) when they went down
into Egypt. She wa* buried in the family grave
in Machpelah (ch. xlix. 31). W", f. B.
LEASING, "falsehood." This word is re-
tained in the A. V. of Ps. iv. 2, v. 8, from the older
English versions; but the Hebrew word of which
it is the rendering is elsewhere almost uniformly
translated "lie*" (Pa. xl. 4, lviii. 3, 4c). It i*
derived from the Anglo-Saxon lent, « false," whence
leatmg, " leasing," " falsehood," and is of frequent
occurrence in old English writers. So in Pier*
Ploughman's Vision, 2113:
"Tel me no tales,
Ns tesj/ngt to laugben of."
And in WlcklinVa New Testament, John vi&. 44,
" Whanne he spekith a letinge, he spekith of hi*
owne thingis, for he is a lyiere, and fadir of it"
It 1* used both by Spenser and Shakespeare.
W. A. W.
LEATHER C^T, 'or). The notice* of leather
in the Bible are singularly few: indeed the word
occurs but twice in the A. V., and in each '"vtwit*
in reference to the same object, a girdle (2 K. i. 8;
Matt iii. 4). There are, however, other instances
in which the word "leather" might with propriety
be substituted for "skin," as in the passage* io
which vessels (Lev. xi. 82; Num. xxxi. 20) or rai-
ment (Lev. xiii. 48) are spoken of; for in these
case* the skins must hare been prepared. Though
the material itself is seldom noticed, yet we cannot
doubt that it was extensively used by the Jew*;
shoes, bottles, thongs, garments, kneading-trough*,
ropes, and other articles, were made of it For tbf
mode of preparing it see Taxnek [Anier. ed.l.
w. l. a
Oomp. the Syr. l&e-£, Jatotm, tram ^i-rj, tr
strike off (Oastsll. Ltx. Sept. s. v.).
' from the unused root nB5, *• now**, Irjr)
J.&A J Arab. Lifft.
Digitized by
Google
LFAVEN
LEAVEN ("I'Wip, $ton f«V,: ftrmtmtttm).
Ins Hebrew word mot has the radical mm of
itfenttcenc* at fermentation, and therefore corre-
sponds in point of etymology to the Greek (tpui
((ram (im), the Latin Jermentum (from ftrvto),
and the Engljh Hansen (from faure). It occurs
orfcj five timet in tiie Bible (Ex. xii. 15, 19, xlii.
7; !*»-, ii. 11: Dent. xvi. 4), end i* translated
•leaven * in the first four of the passages quoted,
and " leavened bread " in the last In connection
with it, we must notice the terms eltdmtW and
mala6th,i> the former signifying "fermented" or
"leavened," literally "sharpened," bread; the latter
" unleavened," the radical force of the word being
variously understood to signify notetneu or purity.
The three words appear in juxtaposition in Ex.
Tilt. 7: " Unleavened bread (maUxith) shall be eaten
■even days; and there shall no leavened bread
(chime*) be seen with thee, neither shall there be
leaven (tear) teen with thee in all thy quarters."
Various substances were known to have fermenting
qualities; but the ordinary leaven consisted of a
lump of old dough in a high state of fermentation,
which was inserted L-to the mass of dough prepared
for baking. [Rbead.] As the process of pro-
ducing the leaven itself, or even of leavening bread
when the substance was at hand, required some
time, unleavened cakes were more usually produced
on sudden emergencies (Gen. xvlii. 6 ; Judg- vi. 19).
The use of leaven was strictly I'orbidden in all
offerings made to the Lord by fire; as in the case
of the meat-ottering (Lev. U. 11), the treapass-
offering, (1-ev. vii. 12), the consecration-offering
(Ex. xxix. 2; I-ev. viii. 3), the Nazarite-offering
(Num. vi. 15), and more particularly in regard
to the feast of the Passover, when the Israel-
ites were not only prohibited on pain of death
from eating leavened bread, but even from having
any leaven in their houses (Ex. xii. 15, 19) or in
their land (Ex. xiii- 7 ; Deut xvi. 4) during seven
days commencing with the 14th of Niean. It is in
reference to these prohibitions that Amos (iv. 6)
ironically bids the Jews of his day to "offer a
sacrifice of thanksgiving with lumen ; " and hence
even honey was prohibited (Lev. ii. 11), on account
of its occasionally producing fermentation. In
other instances, where the offering was to be con-
sumed by the prints, and not on the altar, leaven
night be used, as in the case of the peace-offering
(Lev. vii. 13), and the Pentecostal loaves (Lev.
nlil. 17). Various ideas were associated with the
prohibition of leaven in the instances above quoted ;
in the feast of the Passover it served to remind the
Israelites b ith of the hatta with which they fled out
of Egypt (Ex. xii. 39), and of the sufferings that
they had undergone in that land, the insipidity of
unleavened bread rendering it a not inapt emblem
of affliction (Deut. xvi. 3). But the most promi-
nent idea, and the one which applies equally to all
the eases of prohibition, is connected with the
eorrupHoii which leaven itself had undergone, and
LEBANON
1621
which it communicated to bread in the process of
fermentation. It is to this property of leaven that
our Saviour points when he speaks of the " leaven
(i. a. the corrupt doctrine) of the Pharisees and of
the Saddueees " (Matt. xvi. 6) ; and St Paul, when
he speaks ofthe "old leaven "(1 Cot. v. 7). This
association of Ideas was not peculiar to the Jews,
it was familiar to the Kotnans, who forbade the
priest of Jupiter to touch flour mixed with leaven
(Gell. x. IS, 19), and who occasionally used the
word fermtntum as = " corruption " (Pen. Sat.
i. 24). Plutarch's explanation is very much to the
point: "The leaven itself is born from corruption,
and corrupts the mass with which it is mixed "
( Qwest. Horn. 109). Another quality in leaven is
noticed in the Bible, namely, its teeretly pene-
trating and diffusive power; hence the proverbial
saying, " a little leaven leaveiieth the whole lump"
(1 Cor. v. 6; Gal. v. 9). In this respect it was
emblematic of moral influence generally, whether
good or bad, and hence our Saviour hdopts it as
illustrating the growth of the 1 jngdcni of heaven
in the individual heart and ir. thj world at large
(Matt xiii. 33). W. L. B.
LEB'ANON (in prose with the art 7'l3^v>1,
1 K» v. 6 (Heb. 20); in poetry without the 'art
712^7: Ps. xxix. 6: Ai/9wo>: IMximu), a moun-
tain range in the north of Palestine. The nam*
Lebanon signifies •' white," and was applied eithei
on account of the snow, which, during a great part
of the year, covers its whole summit? or on account
of the white color of its limestone clilft and peaks.
It is the " white mountain " — the itont Blanc of
Palestine ; an appellation which seems to be given,
in one form or another, to the highest mountains
in all the countries of the old world. Lebanon la
represented in Scripture as lying upon the northern
border of the land of Israel (Deut 1. 7, xi. 24;
Josh. i. 4). Two distinct ranges bear this name.
They both begin in 1st 33° 20', and run in parallel
lines from S. W. to N. E. for about 90 geog. miles,
enclosing between them a long fertile valley from
5 to 8 miles wide, anciently called Cole-Syria
The modern name Is eLBvkd'a,<' "the valley,"
corresponding exactly to " the valley of Lebanon "
in Joshua (xi. 17).' It is a northern prolongation
of the Jordan valley, and likewise a southern pro-
longation of that of the Orontea (Porter's Handbook,
p. xvi. )./ The western range is the " Libanus " of
the old geographers, and the (.ebancm of Scripture
where Solomon got timber for the Temple (1 K. v.
9. Ac.), ana where the Hivites and Giblites dwelt
(Judg. ill. 3; Josh. xiii. 5). The eastern range
was called " Anti -Libanus " by geographers, and
"Lebanon toward the sun-rising" by the so/red
writers (Josh. xiii. 6). Strabo describes (xvi. p.
754) the two as commencing near the Mediter-
ranean — the former at Tripolis, and the hitter at
Sidon — and running In parallel lines toward
DanjMcur ana strange to say, this error has, In
a YQn. Another form of the Sams not, aajSMfs
(YQIl), Is applied to sharpened or see wins
.Totes**] : cA4m.li b applied enluarvaly to bna<L
» n'-39.
• Bo ladtoe (Hit. v. 8): "Prsssvpuma ■aoatram
jtaaam erlsjtt, mlrum dicta, tentM Inter aldoses
sjnsssB Aduiauue ulvibvs.* 1
• fa^r* npifl.
< £ UJ,
/ • Bawonson has given a fine description of Ins
popapbJeal natures of this valley, and its blstorleal
Importance as the great high-road ot the Babjkanaa
arm** on tnatr march to Palsstbu ( Mmartsfss e/ «W
WtrU, In. 950). ■
Digitized by
Google
1622
LEBANON
put tt hut, been followed by moat modern writers,
who represent the mountain-range between Tyre
and the lake of Merom as a branch of Anti-Libanus
(Winer, Reahcb., s. v. " Libanon ; " Robinson, 1st
id. iii. 346 ; but see the corrections in ■ the new
edition). The topography of Anti-Libanus <ras
tret clearly described in Porter's Dammau (i. 297,
*c-, ii. 309, Ac.). A deep valley caller' IrWy tl
Ttim separates the southern section of Anti -Libanus
from both Lebanon and the hills of Galilee."
Lebanon — the western range — commences on
the south at the deep ravine of the Litany, the
ancient river Leontes, which drains the valley of
Ooale-Syria, and falls into the Mediterranean fire
miles north of Tyre. It runs X. K. in a straight
line parallel to the coast, to the opening from the
Mediterranean into the plain of Emeu, called in
Scripture the " Kntrance of Haiuath " (Num. xxxiv.
8). Here Nahr el-Ktbir — the ancient river Eleu-
therus — sweeps round its northern end, as the
I^eontes does round its southern. The average ele-
vation'of {he range is from 6000 to 8000 ft. ; but
two peaks rise considerably higher. One of these
U Stmnin, nearly on the parallel of Btyroul, which
Is more than 9,000 feet; the other is Jtbel Mukiimel,
which was measured in September, 1860, by the
hydrographer of the Admiralty, and found to be
very nearly 10,200 feet high (tint. Hut. Rev., No.
V. p. 11). It is the highest mountain lb Syria.
On the summits of both these peaks the snow
remains in patches during the whole summer.
The central ridge or backbone of Lebanon has
smooth, barren sides, and gray rounded summits.
It is entirely destitute of verdure, and is covered
with small fragment] of limestone, from which
white crowns and jagged points of naked rock shoot
up at intervals. Here and there a few stunted
pine-trees or dwarf oaks are met with. The line
of cultivation runs along at the height of about
6,000 ft. ; and beluw this the features of the western
slopes are entirely different. The descent is gradual ;
but is everywhere broken by precipices and tower-
ing rocks which time and the elements have chiseled
into strange, fantastic shapes. Ravines of singular
wildness and grandeur furrow the whole mountain
side, looking in many places like huge rents. Here
and there, too, bold promontories shoot out, and
dip perpendicularly into the bosom of the Mediter-
ranean. The rugged limestone banks are scantily
clothed with the evergreen oak, and the sandstone
with pines ; while every available spot is carefully
jultivated. The cultivation is wonderful and shows
what all Syria might be if under a good govern-
ment. Miniature fields of grain are often seen
where one would suppose the eagles alone, which
hover round them, could have planted the seed.
Fig-trees cling to the naked rock ; vines are trained
along narrow ledges; long ranges of mulberries, on
terraces like steps cf stairs, cover the more gentle
declivities' and dense groves of olives fill up the
bottims of the glens Hundreds of villages are
seen — here built amid labyrinths of rocks; there
•ttngbig like swallows' nests to the aides of cliffs;
« Pllnr was more accurate than Strabo. Be says
re. 20) : "A tergo (Sldonla) mons Ubanua oralis, rattle
aaenfenas atadili Slmyram usqne porrlgUnr, qua
Pa rt s gyrla eotrnomlnstur. Halo par Intoijacente
valla mons adversna nbtendltur, mure conjuuetus."
Ptolemy (v. 15) follows Strabo; but Bnseblus (Onem.
a. « " AatUlbanus ") says, •AmKifam, t* tori* r*»
Ufmm nave a W rea a a, n#br *he«t«si»» y*W"
LEBANON
while convents, no less numerous, are perch** 1 at
the top of every peak. When viened from the aea
on a morning in early spring, Lebanon presents
a picture which, once seen, is never forgotten ; but
deeper still is the impression left on the mind when
one looka down over its terraced alopea clothed in
their gorgeous foliage, and through the vistas of its
magnificent glens, on the broad and bright Medi-
terranean. How beautifully do these noble features
illustrate the words of the prophet: " Israel shall
grow as the lily, and strike forth his roots as Leba-
non" (Hos. xiv. 6). And the fresh mountain
breeses, filled in early summer with the fragrance
of (lie budding vines, and throughout the year with
the rich odors of numerous aromatic shrubs, call to
mind the. words of Solomon — •' The smell of thy
garments is like the smell of tabanon " (Cant, b
11; see also Hos. xiv. 6).* When the plains of
Palestine are burned up with the scorching sun,
and when the air in them ia like the breath of ■
furnace, the anowy top* and ice-cold streams of
Lebanon temper the breezes, and make the moun-
tain-range a pleasant and luxurious retreat, —
" Shall a man leave the snow of Lebanon ... or
shall the cold-flowing waters be forsaken?" (Jer.
xviii. 14). The vine ia "till largely cultivated in
every part of the mountain ; and the wine ia excel-
lent, notwithstanding the clumsy apparatus and
unskillful workmen employed in its manufacture
(Hos. xiv. 7). Lebanon also abounds in olives, figs,
and mulberries ; while some remnants exist of the
forests of pine, oak, and cedar, which formerly
covered it (1 K. v. 6; Pa. xxix- 6; la. xiv. 8; Ear.
iii. 7; Diod. Sic xix. 58). Considerable numbers
of wild beasts still inhabit its retired glens and
higher peaks ; the writer has seen jackals, hyenas,
wolves, bears, and nar. there (2 E. xiv. 9; Cant. iv.
8; Hab. ii. 17).
Some noble streams of classic celebrity have their
sources high up in I^ebanon, and rush down in
sheets of foam through sublime glens, to stain with
their ruddy waters the transparent bosom of the
Mediterranean. The Leontes is on the sooth.
Next comes Ifnhr Auwulg — the " graceful Bos-
trenos " of Di^nysius Periegetes (905). Then fol-
lows the JMmur — the " Tamuras " of Strabo (xri.
p. 726), and the "Daiuuras" of Polybius (v. 68).
Next, just on the north side of Beyrout, Nahr
Btyront, the " Magoras " of Pliny (v. 20). A few
miles beyond it is Nahr ft Ktlb, the " Lycue fin-
men " of the old geographers (Plin. v. 20). At its
mouth is the celebrated paaa where Egyptian, Assy-
rian, and Koman conquerors have left, on tablets of
stone, records of their routes and their victories
(Porter's Unndbonk, p. 407). Nnhr Ibrahim, ths
classic river " Adonis," follows, bursting from a ease
beneath the lofty brow of Snrtnfn, beside the rains
of Apbeca. From it* native rock it runs
« Purple to ths aea, supposed with blond
Of Thalamus, yearly wounded."
(Lucian dt Syr. Den, 6-8; Strab. xvi. 755; PHa
r. 17; Porter's Dnviatau, ii. 295.) Lastly, w*
hare the "sacred river," Knduha — descending
t> • The cedar coma exude a balsam which k vary
fragrant The writer plucked several In the oelebtsM
grove of cedars on Mt. Lebanon, and taking than tr
Beirut, hang them In his apartment. For weeks ant
every on* who entered the room noticed the 4aneaa>
led It — « the saaoll of lebaooe "
• ».
Digitized by
Google
UCB450N
ton the siJtsof the loftiest peak in the whole range,
through a gorge of surpassing grandeur. Upon its
banks, in a notch of a towering cliff, is perched the
great convent of KanoMn, the residence of the
Maronite patriarch.
The situation of the little group of cedars — the
fast remnant of that noble forest, once the glory of
Lebanon — is very remarkable. Round the head
of the sublime Valley of the K»Hi»h« sweep the high-
est summits of Lebanon in the form of a semicircle.
Their sides rise up, bare, smooth, majestic, to the
rounded snow-capped heads. In the centre of this
last rucesa, far removed from all other foliage and
verdure, stand, in strange solitude, the cedars of
Lebanon, as if they scorned to mingle their giant
arms, and graceful fan-like branches, with the
degenerate trees of a later age."
Along the base of Lebanon runs the irregular
plain of Fhnsiiciai nowhere mors than two miles
UEBANOjff 1628
wide, and often interrupted by bold rocky spun,
that dip into the sea.
The eastern slopes of Lebanon are much less Im-
posing and leas fertile than the western. In the
southern half of the range there is an abrupt
descent from the summit into the plain of Coele-
Syria, which has an elevation of about 2,600 ft.
Along the proper base of the northern half runs a
low side ridge partially covered with dwarf oaks.
The northern half of the mountain-range is peo-
pled almost exclusively by Maronite Christiana —
a brave, industrious, and hardy race; but sadly
oppressed by an ignorant set of priests. In the
southern half tho Druses predominate, who, though
they number only some 90,000 fighting men, form
one of the most powerful parties in Syria.
The main ridge of Lebanon is composed of Jura
limestone, and abounds in fossils. Long belts of
more recent sandstone run along the s
which is In places largely impregnated with iron.
Some strata towards the southern end are said to
yield as much as 90 per cent, of pure iron (Deut
viii. 9, xxxiii. 25). Coal is found in the district of
ifetn, east of Btyrout, near the village of KwnAyil.
A mine was opened by Ibrahim Pasha, but soon
abandoned. Cretaceous strata of a very late period lie
along the whole western base of the mountain-range.
Lelnuion was originally inhabited by the Hirites
and Giblites (Judg. iii. 3; Josh. xiii. 5, 6). The
latter either gave their name to, or took their name
from the city of OebaL called by the Greeks Byblus
(LXX. of Es. xxvil. 9; Strabo, xvi. p. 765). The
old dty — now almost in ruins, —and a small
district round it, still bear the ancient name n the
Arabic form Jebail* (Porter's Handbook, p. 586).
« Tht height ef lbs grove Is now aeesrtalnsd to bi
1171 ft. above tbr Mediterranean (Dr. Hooker, In Nat.
f*W fUr. Ho. 1 p. 11). [Bttpsetug other grova, sn
The whole mountain range was assigned to the Is-
raelites, but was never conquered by them (Josk
xiii. 2-6; Judg. iii. 1-3). During the Jewish
monarchy It appears to hare been subject to the
Phoenicians (1 K. v. 2-6; Ezr. iii. 7). From the
Greek conquest until modern times Lebanon had no
separate history.
Anti-lAbantu. — The main chain of Anti-I Jbanua
commences in the plateau of Basban, near the par-
allel of Csesarea-Philippi, runs north to Hermon,
and then northeast in a straight line till it sinks
down ixto the great plain of Emesa, not far fro"
the site )f Riblah. Hekho.i is the loftiest peas,
and has already been described ; the next highest
is a few miles north of the site of Aula, beside
the village of BludAn, and bvan deration of abort
Cum*, vol. 1. p. f". (addition) and the rapplssMat M
this article. — A.)
I
Digitized by
Google
1624
LEBANON
7,000 ft. The rat of the ridge averages about
5,000 ft.; it U in general bleak and barren, with
shelving gray declirities, gray clifft, and gray
rounded summits. Here and there we meet with
thin forests of dwarf oak and juniper. The western
slopes descend abruptly into the Buk&'a ; but the
features of the eastern are entirely different. Three
side-ridges here radiate from Hermon, like the ribs
of an open fan, and form the supporting walls of
three great terraces. The last and lowest of these
ridges takes a course nearly due east, bounding the
plain of Damascus, and running out into the desert
as far as Palmyra. The greater part of the ter-
races thus formed are parched flir.ty deserts, though
here and there are sections with a rich soil. Anti-
Libanus can only boast of two streams — the Phar-
C, now Nahr tU'Amy, which rises high up on
side of Hermon ; and the Abana, now called
BarSda. The fountain of the latter is in the
beautiful little plain of Zebtlany, on the western
side of the main chain, through which it cuts in a
sublime gorge, and then divides successively each
of the side-ridges in its course to Damascus. A
small streamlet flows down the Valley of Helbon
parallel to the Abana.
Anti-Lihanus is more thinly peopled than its
sister range; and it is more abundantly stocked
with wild beasts. Eagles, vultures, and other birds
of prey, may be seen day after day sweeping in cir-
cles round the beetling cliffs. Wild swine are
numerous; and vast herds of gazelles roam over the
bleak eastern steppes.
Anti-Libanus is only once distinctly mentioned
in Scripture, where it is accurately descril>ed as
« Lebanon toward the sun-rising " ■ (Josh. xiii. 6) ;
but the southern section of the chain is frequently
referred to under other names. [See Hkrmun.]
The words of Solomon in Cant. iv. 8 are very
striking — ■• Look from the top of Amana, from the
top of Sbenir and Hermon, from the lions' den,
from the mountains of the leopards." 4 The refer-
ence is, in all probability, to the two highest peaks
of Anti-Libanus, — Hermon, and that near the
fountain of the Abana ; and in both places panthers '
still exist. '• The tower of Lebanon which looketh
toward Damascus" (Cant. vii. 4) is doubtless Her-
mon, which forms the most striking feature in the
whole panorama round that city. Josephus men-
tions Lebanon as lying near Dan and the fountains
of the Jordan {Ant. r. 3, J 1), and as bounding the
province of Gaulanitia on the north (B. J. iii. 3,
\ 6) ; he of course means Anti-Libanus. * The
old city of Abila stood in one of the wildest glens
of Anti-Libanus, on the banks of the Abana, and
its territory embraced a large section of the range.
[Abilehk.] Damascus owes its existence to a
stream from these mountains ; so did the once great
and splendid city of Heliopolis; and the chief
sources of both the Leontes and Orontes lie along
their western base (Porter's Handbook, pp. xviii.,
tit.). J. L. P.
* For a long time it was contended that the
a Amana and Abana seem to be Identical, for in 2
I V. U the Karl reading is Ft^t*'
e IheHeb. "lgl Is Identical with the Arable
y^J, "a panther."
LEBANON
cedar was not found in any part of 1 ebanon except
the famous grove near BahrrreJi. and that any
trees resembling it in other localities were only cog-
nate species, but not the true Larix etdria. 1
have, however, settled this point by a laborious
search and botanical examination. There are cer-
tainly in existence the following groves:
(l.).An extensive one near tUUadtt, described
by previous authors, consisting of many thousand
small trees.
(2.) A small grove was in existence ap to Octo-
ber 1866, east of 'Am Zehnha, on the crest of the
ridge overlooking the Bsti'n. I visited the same
grove in company with Kev. H. H. Jessup, D. D.
in October 1866, end at that time we counted about
twenty trees, some of them of considerable sice.
One isolated from the grove, distant a mile, would
have measured twenty feet in circumference. This
grove waa felled when I visited it in 1866, and the
last timbers were being sawn for roofing purpose*.
(3.) A large grove of very young trees east of
'Am Zthnlta, in the valleys and on the weeten
slopes of Lebanon. I estimated the number at
10,000 trees. Ihis grove a few years since consisted
of very large trees, many of them from 6 to 1 1 feet
in diameter. But a few years ago they were sold
to a company of pitch burners from Beirut foi the
paltry sum of 30,000 piastres, and all cut down,
and consumed in making rosin and tar. The new
sprouts are now beginning to re-clothe the hill-sides
and valleys, and in a couple of centuries may claim
the name of a forest.
(4.) A grove beginning above Barik and stretch-
ing southward two or three miles, terminating in
a cluster of noble trees overhanging the village et-
Mtam; vying with the grove at Btiherrth in mag-
nitude and beauty. The northernmost end of this
grove above Barik has a few score of large trees,
one or two of which are gigantic The central
portion, clothing the western slope of the mountain,
consists of large trees, but so miserably hacked and
hewed and burnt by the wood-cutters, that most of
its trees are dead or dying. They may number
30,000 to 80,000 in all, small and huge.
The southernmost portion is a grand collection
of about two hundred and fifty trees. One meas-
ures 87 feet In circumference, another 83, and many
from 16 to 80. Some of them spread widely then
horizontal branches, and bear numerous cones.
Toe grandeur of their situation on the declivity of
a deep gorge enhances the interest which* always
attends the sight of this venerable tree.
It will be seen by these remarks, that, were the
groves mentioned protected from spoliation, and
allowed to increase, Mount l«banon might be
again covered with mighty forests of its royal tree.
A word on the value of the cedar for building
purposes. In Syria, where the worms so soon de-
stroy the softer woods, and where the long soaking
to which roof timbers are subjected, owing to th»
oozing of water from the earth-roofs during the
rainy season, causes the timbers to rot, a resinous,
4 Strata says (xvt. p. 766), "O Haovifec Ixwr m*A
ml oseutf, fV off 4 Xaant fiewta axaenfec voi
Uamrvat. 'ApjrH ** »*n>9 Aaofuma 4 irpOS Ai#«°M.
From this it appears that the province of Maasyas s
his day embraced the whole of Anti-Libanus; fcs
Laodlcea ad Libanum Has at the northern end of tan
range (Porter's Damamu, B. 889), and the atas af
Ohalcls is at If western bass, twenty miles snath of
BaUbakCM 1.141.
Digitized by
Google
LEBAOTH
aaasstrtuUble wood likotfae cedar la invaluable for
lor ratten which are universally used ji rapport*
far the roofi throughout the Lebanon. It la true
that the timber at now found cancit he worked into
Terr long straight columns, as it is gnarled and
twisted like the oak, bnt for most of the uuipuans
far which timber is used here it would be invalu-
able. What might be iu character, wen the ones
allowed to grow, naturally, without being lopped
and mutilated, cannot be positively asserted. I am
of opinion, however, from the symmetry of some of
the older trees, that muob of the disparagement
which has been used in speaking of this wood is due
to ths deformity aud disease inflicted on the tree by
the careless hand of man, and I can readily believe
that Solomon found all that be desired for the
stately oolumns and beams and rafters of his
temple aud p alace in the uninjured primeval
fore st s of which we see a faint typo near Bukmrtk
and ei-ifentir.
Since the massacres of 1860, Lebanon has
constituted a separate government, tributary to the
Turkish Sultan, but in many important respects
independent. Its governor, Daoud Pasha, Is a
Christian, of the American Catholic sect. Ha was
nominated by the Porte, subject to the ratification
of the Fire Powers. He governs the mountains
with the aid of a police force enrolled by volunteer
enlistments from among the various populations of
the mountains — Druze, Maronite, Greek, and Greek
Catholic. No Turkish troops are stationed in his
district, which includes all of both slopes of Lebanon,
and a part of the Buti'n. He is a man of enlight-
ened Judgment and views, and has succeeded in
establishing a government which is an honor to
himself and the great powers to which he is respon-
sible, and an unspeakable relief to the country after
the centuries of misrule sod anarchy which havs
, dseolsted it- He has even introduced the franchise,
and has organized local governments, elective by
the people. He is not under the Jurisdiction of the
rovernor-general of Syria, but is answerable direct-
y to the Sublime Porte, and the representatives of
England, France, Austria, Prussia, and Russia.
Jnder his benign administration the fruitful moun-
tain grows visibly every year in cultivation and
beauty, and the thrifty aspect of its villages bears
testimony to the sense of security which is so sadly
wanting in the neighboring plains and mountains.
G. E.P.
UBB'AOTHCiSH^ 1 ? [&»«]: Ao»,;Alex.
Aa/Satf: Ltbnoth), a town which forms one of the
fast group of the cities of " the South " in the enu-
meration of the possessions of Jndah (Josh. xv. 33).
It is named between Sansannah and Shilhim ; and
is very probably identical with Beth-lkbaoth,
elsewhere called Bkth-birki. No trace of any
names answering to then appears to have been ye*.
discovered. If we may adopt the Hebrew signifi-
cation of the name ('•lionesses"), it furnishes an
Indication of the existence of wild animals in the
south of Palestine. G.
LEBBjE'US (Aflftuot). This name os-
3urs in Matt. x. 3, according to Codex I> (Bens
Cantabrigiensis) of the sixth cento. } [and roost
jther MSS], and in the Received Text. In Mark
BL 18 it is substituted in a few unimportant MSS.
far Thaddaws. 'Hie words " I.ehha-us who is called
(Matt. x. 3) are not found in the Vatican M». (k\
'aor the Sinaitic], and l<achmann rejects then ss,
a his opinion, n. t received by the most ancient
LEEKS 1626
Eastern churches. [So also Tregtues.] TheVs*.
gate omits them; but Jerome (Comm. in Matt.)
says that Thaddeus, or Judas tkt brother of James,
is elsewhere called Lebbaus; and be concludes that
this Apostle had three names. It is much easier
to suppose that a strange name has been omitted
than that it has been inserted by later transcribers.
[Lebbaras is retained in Tiaebendorfs 8th criti-
cal edition of the Greek Testament, but he omits
• rrurXwvels »a!8cuot —A.] It is admitted into
the ancient versions of the N. T, and into all the
English versions (except the Khemiah) since Tyn-
dale's in 1834. For the signification of the name,
and for the ufe of the Apostle, see Jodb, p 1504.
W. T. &
LEBCNAH (n^'a'? [/rmsl»M-ease,andb
that sense also njh^]: ttjj As/Jm-o; Afar, rot
M&arov rr)t At&an- Ltbonn), a place named in
Judg. xxi. 18 only; and there but as a landmark
to determine the position of Shiloh, which is stated
to have lain south of it. Lebonah has survived to
our times under the almost identical form of af-
Lvhbrm. It lies to the west of, and close to, the
tfnblit road, about eight miles north of Btitbt
(Bethel), and two from Stilin (Shiloh), in rela-
tion to which it stands, however, nearer W. than
N. The village is on the northern acclivity of the
wady to which it gives its name. Its appearance is
ancient; and In the rooks above it are excavated
sepulchres (Rob. ii. 373). To Eusebius and Je-
rome it does not appear to have been known. The
earliest mention of it yet met with is in the Itin-
erary of the Jewish traveller hap-Parchi (a. t>. air.
1330), who describes it under the name of LM»,
and refers especially to its correspondence with the
passages in Judges (see Asber's Ben/, of Tudda,
Ii. 436). It was visited by Mauudrell (March 34,
35), who mentions the identification with Lebonah,
but in such terms as may imply that he was only
repeating a tradition. Since then it has been pas s ed
and noticed by most travellers to the Holy Land
(Rob. ii. 372: Wilson, ii. 233, 393 ; Bonar, 863;
Mislin, iii. 319, Ac., Ac). G.
LrTOAH (Hjb [walking, otmrus]: [Rom.
Ar/x«l3; Vat.] Atjx« i Alez. AnvoS: Leeka), a
name mentioned in the genealogies o? Judah (1 Chr.
iv. 21 ) only, as one of the descendants of Sbelah,
the third son of Judah by the Canaanitess Bath-
shua. The immediate progenitor of Lecah was En.
Many of the names in this genealogy, especially
when the word "father "is attached, are towns
(oomp. Esbtemoa, Keilah, Mareshah, etc.); but
this, though probably the case with Lecah, is not
certain, because it is not mentioned again, either in
the Bible or the Onoimittkon, nor hare any traces
of it been since discovered. G.
• LEDGES (D > 2*?t??), 1 K. vii. 88 36, 8*.
[Latbb, *.]
LBEOH. [Homw-I^icH.]
LEBKS (T-yiJ, cAdnrlr.- ri woaVra. 0or-
AnixMli xfpT<n< x*«J>^» : «trbn.pomu,fmnwn,
pratvm). The word cfiAutr, whicl in Num. xi. 8
is translated Ueh, occurs twenty times in the He-
brew text In 1 K. xviii. 6: Job xl. 15; Ps. eiv.
14, cxlvil. 8, oxxix 6. xxxvil. 3, xc 6, ciii. 16; la.
xxxvil. 37. xl. 6. 7, 8, xliv. 4, H. 13, it is rendered
jmu ; in Job viii. 13, it is rendered htrb ; in Pro*,
xxvtt. 36, Is. xv. 6, it is erroneously translate/
Digitized by
Google
1626 LEEKS
*•» ; in Is. xxitv. 13, the A. V. has court (see
sate). The word letks occurs in the A. V. only
In Niu». li. 5; it U there mentioned aa one of the
rd things of Kgypt for which the Israelites longed
their journey through the deceit, just before the
terrible plague at Kibroth -hattaarah, " the cucum-
bers, and the melons, and the leaks, and the onions,
and the garlic." The Hebrew term, which prop-
erly denotes grau, is derived from a root signifying
"to be green,"' and may therefore stand in this
passage for any green food, lettuce, endive, etc., as
Ludolf and Maillethave conjectured; it would thus
be applied somewhat in the same manlier as w«
nee the tern: "greens; " yet as the cltauir is men-
tioned togethtr with onions and garlic in the text,
and as the most ancient rations, Onkelos, the
LXX., and the Vulgate, together with the Syrian
and too Arabic of Saadias,* unanimously understand
leeis by the Hebrew word, we may be satisfied with
oar own translation. Moreover, chiisW would ap-
ply to the Irek appropriately enough, both from its
green color and the grass-like form of the leaves.
There is, however, another and a very ingenious
interpretation of chdtsir, first proposed by Hang-
stenberg, and received by Dr. Kitto (Pietor. BMt,
Nam. xi. 5), which adopts a more literal trsnshrfwin
leak (A lli u m pommy.
it the original word, for, says Dr. Kitto, "anioug
the wonders in the natural history of Egypt, it is
mentioned by travellers that the common people
there eat with special relish a kind of gram similar
Id clover." Mayer (Reite nach sEgyptien, p. 836)
says of this plant (whose scientific name is Tiiyo-
neUa Jcemum Oraeum, belonging to the natural
ruder lsgumiiwta), that it is similar to clover, but
its bvsves more pointed, and that great quantities
• "!]?n, •*«*. •• «• **»»• jji&J*. (a*o«7lr).
Seaenha has shown that this word is Identical with
")?n, airtumtxiUit. Ha compares the Cheek *!<m>c,
whtsh primarily meuu a turn (for earns); hence, a
easrare,' banc*. In an txtradad atnaa, rwi or Atroaj*.
•as sat the diflsasot derivation of lUrst [In b.
oratr. 18 ~Wn to to be compared with the araHe
LEEKS
of Hare eaten by the people. Fim (kit mentions the
TrigoneUa as being grown in the gardens at Caiist j
ita native aame is Halbtk (Flur. jEgypL p. 81).
Sonnlul ( Voyage, L 179) says, " In this feft&V
country, the Egyptians themselves eat thefenu-grtt
so hugely, that it may be properly called the food
of man. In the month of November they try
•green halbeh for sale!' in the streets of the
town; it is tied up in large bunches, which thai
inhabitants purchase at a low price, and which
they eat with incredible greediness without any
land of seasoning."
The seeds of this plant, which is also cultivated
in Ureses, are often used; they are eaten boiled at
raw, mixed with honey. Forskal includes it in the
Materia Medics of Egypt (Mat. Med. KaJar. p.
156). However plausible may be this theory of
Hengetenberg, there do ;iot appear sufficient rea-
son for ignoring the old versions, which seam al
agreed that the leek u the plant denoted bycMtsb-,
a vegetable from the earliest times a great favorite
with the Egyptians, as both s nourishing and sa-
vory food. Some have objected that, as the Egyp-
tians held the leek, onion, etc. sacred, they would
abstain from eating these vegetables themselves,
and would not allow the Israelites to use them.*
We have, however, the testimony of Herodotus (U.
lib) to show that onioru were eaten by the Egyp-
tian poor, for he says that on one of the pyramids
is shown an inscription, which was explained to
him by an Interpreter, showing how much money
was spent in providing rnditlies, onions, and garlic,
for toe workmen. The priests were not allowed at
eat these things, and I'lutarch (De Is. et Osir. U.
p. 363) telle us the reasons. The Welshman
reverences his leek, snd wears one on St. David's
Day— he e<Ui6U<eU nevertheless; and doubtless
iyJha*
(asstntf), which to the fold or pan at
• mafcrn
aTdDBSsevD ■— O afL P 1
• The word employed here Is still the ■
for leak (Hasnlquist, S62).
o Juvenal's derision of the Bayptians for Ike rev
erenee they paid to the leek may here be quota*:
M Forrnm at caps nefw vvolsr* sc ft — g ets mono,
O Mactu Rvntts, aulbw h*c DMCVDtar fan *
Namis* I ■-*>■(. st. a.
Cf. Pun. H. JV. six. 6; Ostoll ««**. I
Mmpas4.pt. H.M; Man. H. 4
Digitized by
Google
LEES
Iht Egyptiau wsre not over-scrupukms (Sorj*
Herbal p. 330). The <eei» is toe well knjwx to
need description. It* botanical name ii Allium por-
nm; it belongs to the order LMacta. W. H.
LEES (nnpip : Toiryf*: /<">-)• The He-
blew aaeiaer been the radical sense of prutrea-
(•on, and wu applied to " lees " from the cnetooi
of allowing the wine to stand on the laea in order
that iU color and body might be better preserved.
Hence the expression " wine on the leee," aa mean-
ing a generous, full-bodied liquor (Is. xxt. 8). The
wine in thia state remained, of course, undisturbed
in its cask, and became thick and syrupy; hence
the proverb, ■' to settle upon one's lees," to express
the sloth, indifference, and gross stupidity of the
ungodly (Jer. xlviii. 11 ; Zeph. i. 12). Before the
wine was consumed, it was necessary to strain off
the lees; such wine was than termed " well refined "
(Is. xxt. 6). To drink the lees, or "dregs," was
an expression for the endurance of extreme punish-
ment (Ps. lxxv. 8). W. L. B.
LEGION (Aeyecfr; [Tisch., 8th ed., \tyiiy:]
Leyio), the chief subdivision of the Roman army,
containing about 6,000 infantry, with a contingent
of caralry. The term does not occur in the Bible
in its primary sense, but appears to hare been
adopted in order to express any large number, with
the accessory ideas of order and subordination.
Thus it is applied by our Lord to the angels (Matt,
xxri. 53 ), and in this sense it answers to the " hosts "
of the Old Testament (Gen. xxxil. 2; Ps. cxlviii.
2)> It is again the name which the demoniac as-
sumes, "My name is Legion (Aryu&V); for we are
many" (Mark v. 9), implying the presence of a
spirit of superior power in addition to subordinate
use. W. L.B.
LEHA'BIM (^ ,, ?^ , ? [pe*./ery,Jto»i!io]:
AcuWu; [in 1 Chr., Rom. Vat omit, Alex. Ao-
fl«u>:] LaaUm), occurring only in Gen. x. 13 [and
1 Chr. i. 11], the name of a Mizraite people or
tribe, supposed to be the same as the Lubim, men-
tioned in several places in the Scriptures as merce-
naries or allies of the Egyptians. There can be no
doubt that the Lubim are the same as the ReBU or
LeBU of the Egyptian inscriptions, and that from
.hem Libya and the Libyans derived their name.
These primitive Libyans appear, in the period at
which they are mentioned in these two historical
sources, that is from the time of Menptah, B. c.
sir. 1250, to that of Jeremiah's notice of them late
Id the 6th oentury b c, and probably in the case
a " Leak " la from the Anglo-Saxon Itat, German
» This application of the tann Is illustrated by the
Ybblnfcal usage oi fV^J as -« leader, chief"
(Buxtort, Let. Tutm. p. llfflf.
« It hi unusually fall of plays and pamnrc-aitio
tana. Thai TjV algolnes » >»> »»d Tjb Is the
urn of the plaoe ; ""HOrj Is both a he-e« and a
<* Compare the somewhat parallel cast of Donor urah
end Dunsnioor, which, in the local traditions, derive
lhatr aamss from an exploit of Gov of Warwick.
• NT5 _ Leshi, Is the name of the plaoe In n
J, 14, U, and in Bamath-Lshi, v. 17; whereas 1'ehi,
TJ 7, Is the word lot Jawbone. In ver. IB the words
to the Jaw" should he "In Uhl:"the original la
LEHI 1021
of Daniel's, prophetically to the eariiet part of tot
second oentury b. o., to have inhabited the north-
ern part of Africa to the west of Egypt, though lat-
terly driven from the coast by the Greek .-ulonisU
of the Cyrenaiea, aa ia more fully shoau undat
Lubim. Philologically, the interchange of H M
the middle letter of a root into 1 quiescent, ia fre-
quent, although it 'is important to remark that
Geeenius considers the form with 71 to be mora
common in the later dialects, as the Semitic lan-
guages are now found (.The: art. 71). Inert
seems, however, to be strong reason for considering
many of these later forms to be recurrences to prim-
itive forms. Geographically, the position of ths
Lehabim in the enumeration of the Mizraites im-
mediately before the Naphtuhim, suggests thatthsy
at first settled to the westward of Egypt, and tett-
er to it, or not more distant from it than the tribes
or peoples mentioned before them [MizraimJ.
Historically and ethnologically, the connection of
the KeBC and Libyans with Egypt and its people
suggests their kindred origin with the Egyptians.
[Lubim.] On these grounds there can be no
reasonable doubt of the identity of the Lehabim
and Lubim. R. S. P.
LEHI (with the def. article, Tlv[J7 except in
r. 14 [the/moJone] : in ver. 9, [Rom A«x'> Vat.]
Asimi, Alex. A«u: [inw. 14, 19,] Xiayiiv. Lecki,
id eat maxilla), a place in Judah, probably on the
confines 'f the Philistines' country, between it and
the cliff Etau.; the scene of Samson's well-known
exploit with the jawbone (Judg. xv. 9, 14, 19).
It contained an eminence — Kamath-lehi, and a
spring of great and lasting repute — En hak-kore.
Whether the name existed before the exploit
or the exploit originated the name cannot now be
determined from the narrative.' On the one hand,
in w. 9 and 19, Lehi is named as if existing before
this occurrence, while an the other the play of the
story and the statement of the bestowal of the
name Kamath-lehi look as if the reverse were in-
tended. The analogy of similar names in othet
countries * is in favor of its having existed previous-
ly. Even taken as a Hebrew word, " Lechi " has
another meaning besides a Jawbone; and after all
there is throughout a difference between the two
words, which, though slight to our ears, would
be much more marked to those of a Hebrew, and
which so far betrays the accommodation.'
A similar discrepancy in the ease of Beer Lahal-
*riv?9. exactly aa in 9 ; not YT^S, as in 16. See
afllton, flams. Ag., line 6fB
• The above distinction between Tib as the nana
of the plana, and Tib as Jawbone, Is not valid; ta
the difference arises from the panes which Aula en Use
Initial eooaonant In one case and not in the other.
Thus the form In Ps. 111. 9 Is NT?, and yet certainly
means "Jawbone." Hence whether we should read
« Uht" or "Jawbone "In ver. 19, dapsnds not on the
fnu-stuatton, but the view taken at tne nature of the
Kail understands Judg. xv. 19 as meaning that Ood
ceosetf water to spring forth not from the mortar or
socket of the Jawbone, but from the cavity (lit. tool*.
holtom, of a reck well known at Labi wnen the record
was written. He aastjrns good reasons lor regarding
this as the tans sense U the paaaags (Ckmai.. Now
Digitized by
Google
1628 LEMUEL
Mi, and « gnat similarity between die two hum
m the original (Gee. The*. 175 »), baa lad to the
•opposition thai that place was the same aa Labi.
But the situatiuus do not suit. Tha well Lahai-roi
waa below Kadeab, very far from the locality to
which Samaon'a adventures teem to haw been con-
fined. The tame consideration would also appear
fatal to the identification proposed by H. Tan de
Velde (Memoir, p. 343) at Teli ti-LtUuftA, in the
extreme south of Palestine, only four miles above
Bser-abeba, a distance to which we have no authority
for believing that either Samson's achievements or
the possessions of the Philistines (at least in those
days) extended. As far aa the name goes, a more
feasible suggestion would be BeU-lMgeh, a village
W the northern slopes of the great Wady 9tUa-
avm, about two miles below the npper Beth-horou
(see Tobler, 31e Wanderung) Here is a position
at once on the borders of both Judah and the
Philistines, and within reasonable proximity to
Zorafa, EshtaoL Timnath, and other places familiar
to the history of the great Danito hero. On this,
however, we must await further investigation; and
in the mean time it should not be overlooked
that there are reasons for placing the cliff Etam
— which seems to have been near Lehi — in
the neighborhood of Bethlehem. [Etam, tpe
bock.]
The spring of En hak-kore la mentioned by
Jerome (rjjitaph. Paula, § 14) in such terms as to
imply that it was then known, and that it was
near Morasthi, the native place of the prophet
Micah, which he elsewhere ((Mom. s. v.; Prof, nd
Midi.) mentions as east of Eleutheropolts (Beit
Jibrln).
Lehi is possibly mentioned in 2 Sam. xxiii. 11 —
the relation of another encounter with the Philis-
tines hardly less disastrous than that of Samson.
The word " rendered in the A. V. " into a troop,"
by alteration of the vowel-points becomes "to
Lehi," which gives a new and certainly an appro-
priate sense. This reading first appears in Joae-
phus (Ant. vii. 12, § 4), who gives it "a place
tailed Siagona " — the jaw — the word which he
employs in the story of Samson (Ant. v. 8, § 9).
It is also given in the Complutensian * LXX., and
among modern interpreters by Bocbart (Uieroz.
I. S, ch. 13), Kennioott (DiutrL 140), J. D.
HichaelU (Bibel fir Ungekkrt.), Ewsld (Gu-
aUcAfc, iii. 180, note). 6.
LEATUEL (bwn 1 ? and brTO 1 ? : Lamuet),
the name of an unknown king to whom his mother
tddrrased the prudential maxims contained in Prov.
xxxi.1-8. The version of this chapter in the LXX.
m so obscure that it is difficult to discover what
text they could have had before them. In the
tendering of Lemuel by trwh Stov, in Prov. xxxi. 1,
some t -aces of the original are discernible, but in
nr. 4 it is entirely lost. Tha rabbinical corn-
ea Judget, p. 410 f., Bog. cranel.). Bet also Btoder,
Sicafrr, p. 889. The version of the SoatU MMieiu
muttmnu it Font (18S6)lbUows this Interpretation.
H.
° ri*fT^?t •» V n*Il| *"■ the root V} (Oes.
Tha. p. 470). In this mom the word vary rarely
•eeun (sm A. V. of Ps. IxrlH. 10, 89, Ixxlv. IB). It
ttwwhira hM the ssnss of « Uvtag," and thence of
wild animal*, wbteh is adopted by the LXX. la this
*!■■> aa rernaiksd above. In var. 13 It is
LENTILBB
mentators Identify Lemuel with Solomon, and Ul
a strange tale how that when he married tha
daughter of Pharaoh, on tha day of the ^fmi'fra
of the Temple, ha sssrmhlrrl musicians of all lands,
and passed the night awake. On the morrow be
slept till the fourth hoar, with the keys of the
Temple beneath his pillow, whan hia mother entered
and upbraided him in the words of Prov. xxxi. 2-8.
Grotios, adopting a fanciful etyn.ology from the
Arabic, makes Lemuel the same aa Herakkh.
Hitaig and others regard him as king or chief of
aa Arab tribe dwelling on the borders of Palestine,
and elder brother of Agur, whose name stands at tha
head of Prov. xxx. [See Jakbh.] According to
this view mtuti (A. V. "the prophesy") ia V
in Arabia; a region mentioned twice in dose <
neetion with Dumah, and peopled by the i "
danta of Ishmaal In the reign of Ilaiakish a
roving hand of Simeonites drove out the Arnalsldtas
tram Mount Seir and settled in their stead (1 Or.
iv. 88-43), and bom these exiles of Iaraelitiak
origin Hitdg conjectures that Lemuel and Agur
were descended, the former having been bom in
the land of Israel; and that tVe name Lemuel ia
an older form of NemueL the first-born of Simeon
(Die SpricAe Salomon, pp. 310-314). But it is
more probable, aa Eichhorn and Ewald suggest,
that Lemuel is a poetical appellation, selected by
the author of these maxims for the guidance of a
king, for the purpose of putting in a striking form
the lessons which tbey conveyed. Signifying aa it
does " to God," i. e. dedicated or devoted to God,
like the similar word LaeL it is in keeping with
the whole sense of the passage, which contains ths
portraiture of a virtuous and righteous king, and
belongs to the latest period of the proverbial litera-
ture of the Hebrews. W. A. W.
• LEND, LENDER. [Loa*.]
LENTILES (CTtr^S. *£SaMm: evrW,:
lent). There cannot be the least doubt that the
A. V. Is correct in its translation of the Hebrew
word which occurs In the four following pasasgee:
Gen. xxr. 84, 2 Sam. xvii. 28, 2 Sam xxiii. 11,
and Es. iv. 9; from which last we learn that in
times of scarcity lentiles were sometimes used in
making bread. There are three or four kinds of
lentiles, all of which are still much entwined in
those oountxies where they are grown, namely, the
South of Europe, Asia, and North Africa: the red
ientile is still a favorite article of food in the East;
it Is a small kind, the seeds of which after being
decorticated, are commonly sold in the bazaars
of India. The modern Arabic name of this plant
is identical with the Hebrew; it is known in Egypt
and Arabia, Syria, etc., by the name 'Ada*, as we
learn from the testimony of several travellers.'
When Dr. Robinson was staying at the castle of
'Abnbah, he partook of lentiles, which he says ha
" found very palatable, and could well conceive that
leadarad "troop." In tha parallel nanaave af 1
Chronicles (at 18), the word rOPO, a « eaasm, 9 w
substituted.
• The Vatican and Alex! MSB. read sit •esse (Tl ■
aa tf the Pbiutttnas had come en a hunttag ssjiH
tton.
' 8m also Gataftge* AraHc Iktfmmy, "UmMm
U"
<Xfe, odes.
Digitized by
Google
LENTflLKB
to « weary tranter, Aunt with hunger, they would
be quite a dainty " (BiU. Re*. I U9). Dr. Kitto
also says that ha has often partaken of red pottage,
prepared by seething the kmtiles in water, and
then adding a little (net, to give them a flavor;
end that be bond H better food tbar a stranger
would imagine; "the mess," be adds, -bad the
redness which gained for H the name of adorn"
iJPkL BO., Gen. m. JO, M). From Boantoi we
LHOPARD
1629
isns).
warn that lsntOe bread is still eaten by the poor of
Egypt, even as It wu in the time of EseUal;
Indeed, that towards the cataracts of the Nile there
la ecaree any other bread in use, because com Is
very rare; the people generally add a little barley
in making their bread of lentiie*, which "la by
no means bad, though beery" (Soanmi'c 7V — eh,
Hunter's traneL hi Sew). Shaw and KusssD bear
eeokhnjUntllss (WIDdasoo.)
The Arabs bare a tradition that Hebron is the
■pot where Esau sold bis birthright, end In memory
ef this erent the dervisee distribute from the kitchen
ef a mosque there a daily supply of lentiie soup to
a The word "I^J means " ssottsd " (ess the dsn-
laatona ef fttnt and Oteanloa). The same word tir
» ,
^(s*r),wMh
travellers and poor Inhabitants (D'\irfeux. Mem.
ii. 837).
The lentiie, Emm Urn, is much used with
other pulse in Roman Catholic countries during
Lent; and some say that from hence the —son
derives its name. It is occasionally cultivated in
England, but only as fodder for cattls; it is also
imported from Alexandria. From the quantity of
gluten the ripe seeds contain they must be highly
nutritions, though they hare the c hamcter of being
heating if taken in huge quantities In Egypt the
haulm is need for packing. The lentil* belongs to
the natural order Leouminott*. W. H.
* Esau's pottage may be supposed to have bear,
the original of the dish, so common at this day
- a -^
among the Arabs, called o\lXaP (mqfaddarak).
It is composed of kmtiles boiled with onions and
lies, with the addition of oil, and seasoned to the
taste. It is one of the commonest dishes of the
laboring classes in Syria, and is used more par-
tieulariy during the season of fasting, when H
takes the place of rice cooked with butter, and
mast stews. It is very palatable to those who like
oil in osokery. 0. E. P.
LEOPARD ("TCtt, ndWr: »d>3oAu :par<km)
is invariably given by the A. V. as the translation
of the Hebrew word," which occurs in the seven
following pa ssa g es, — la. xi. 6; Jer. v. 6, xiii. S3;
Dan. vii. 6; Hoe. xiii. 7; Cant. iv. 8; Hab. i. 8.
Leopard occurs also in Ecclus. xxviii. 33, and in
Rev. xiii. 3. The swiftness of this animal to
which Habakkuk compares the Chaldean horses,
and to which Daniel alludes in the winged leopard,
the emblem in his vision of Alexander's rapid
conquests, is well known : so great is the flexibility
of its body, that it is able to take surprising leaps,
to climb trees, or to crawl snake-like upon the
ground. Jeremiah and Hoses allude to the insid-
ious habit of this animal, which is abundantly
confirmed by the observations of travellers; the
leopard will take up its position in some spot near
a village, and watch for some favoralle opportonUi
Leopard (Itfardtu sssBM ).
From the passage of Centieles, qnotoi
above, we lean that the billy ranges of Lebanon
were in ancient times frequented by these animals,
and it is now not uncommonly seen hi and about
Lebanon, and the southern maritime mountains of
Syria* (Kltto, nets on Cant. iv. 8). Bnrckhardt
sndsrn As se ss Is MsbBmI, though this asms Is alas
applied to the thnr; but perhaps « ttsjer " and « *ms>
aid " are srnonymoas In these eouaMss whets ma
former annua) Is not found.
» less Danish, htssrah, the waters of innate, pes
i sjbty derive their names from Mmtr (Beeaart, Auras
1 B. 107. ad. BoMoatttU.
Digitized by
Google
1630
LEPER, LEPROSY
■stations that leopard* have sometimes ban killed
hi "the low and rocky chain of the Kichel moun-
tain," but he calk them otmcee (Bank. Syria, p.
138). In another passage (p. 885) he says, " in
the wooded parts of Mount Tabor are wild boars
and ounces." Mariti says that the "grottoes at
Kedron cannot be entered at all seasons without
danger, for In the middle of summer it is fre-
quented by timers, who retire hither to shun the
heat" (Hariti, 7V>m>. (translated), Ul. 88). By
tiger* he undoubtedly means leopard*, for the tiger
does not occur in Palestine. Under the name
ntmer," which means u spotted," it is not improb-
able that another animal, namely, the cheetah
(Guepardn jubnla), may be Included; which ia
tamed by the Mohammedans of Syria, who employ
It in hunting the gazelle. These animals are
represented on the Egyptian monuments; they
were chased as an amusement for the sake of their
fkins, which were worn by the priests during their
xremonics, or they were hunted as enemies of the
farmyard (Wilkinson, Anc. Egypt, ch. riil. 90).
Sir G. Wilkinson also draws attention to the fact
that there is no appearance of the leopard (cheetah)
having been employed for the purpose of the chase,
on the monuments of Egypt ; • nor is it now used
by any of the African races for hunting. The
natives of Africa seem in some way to connect the
leopard skin with the idea of royalty, and to look
upon it as part of the insignia of majesty (Wood's
Nat. Bi*t. 1. 160). The leopard (Leopard** ennui)
belongs to the family Fetbk*, sub-order Digiti-
gradm, order Carnitora. The panther is now
considered to be only a variety of the same animal.
W. H.
* The leopard is still found in Syria. I have seen
a fine specimen from near Jezzln. One was killed
near Abeih during the whiter of 1866-67, after it
had killed about 60 noaU. A young one was taken
near Bano in Akkar the same winter. They are
not rare in the neighborhood of the castle of esh-
Shukeef, opposite Deir Mimas. They work much
mischief by their sanguinary attacks on the herds
of goats and sheep which pasture in that vicinity.
The shepherds invariably keep up a bud shouting
to drive them off, when their flocks are ascending
the mountain aide from the Valley of the Litany
toward evening, returning from the water. Native
authorities profess to find a difference between the
Cand the f V ff * the former standing for the
d, and the latter for the panther. It is more
probable that the trifling difference in color, and
the arrangement of the spots, are only such as mark
varieties, not distinct species. U. E. P.
LEPER, LEPROSY. The Egyptian and Syr-
ian climates, but especially the rainless atmosphere
of the former, are very prolific in skin-diseases; in-
eluding, in an exaggerated form, some wnich are
common in the cooler regions of western Europe.
r h» heal and drought acting for long periods upon
the akin, and the exposure of a large surface of the
latter to their Influence, combine to predispose it
to such affections. Even the modified forma known
a The leopard la ealM by the natives of Indkt
rntmJmg, " tree-tiger." In Africa also « tiger" si
tpplM to the " leopard," the former animal not exfst-
* The lion was always employed by the a\rrpdana
» the purpose of the rhass. See Dtedor. 1. 48 ; and
, .inc. Knr- «h. vili. 17.
LEPER, LEPROSY
to our western hospitals show a perplexing variety
and at times a wide departure from the best-knows
and recorded types; much more then may we ex-
pect departure from any routine of symptoms
amidst the fatal fecundity of the Levant in this
class of disorders (Goods Study of MeaHemf, voL
iv. p. 448, 4c., 4th ed.). It seems likely that dis-
eases also tend to exhaust their old types, and ts
reappear under new modifications. [MKDicm.]
This special region, however, exhibiting in wide
variety that class of maladies which disfigures the
person and makes the presence horrible to the be-
holder, it ia no wonder that notice was early drawn
to their more popular symptoms, lie Greek im-
agination dwelt on them as the proper scourge of
an offended deity, and perhaps foreign forma of dis-
ease may be implied by the express ions used (At-
chyl. Choipk. 871, 4c.), or such as an intercourse
with Persia and Egypt would introduce to the
Greeks. But, whatever the variety of form, that*
seems strong general testimony to the cause of all
alike, as being to be sought in hard labor in a
heated atmosphere, amongst dry or powdery tab-
stances, rendering the proper care of the skin dif-
ficult or impossible. This would be aggravated by
unwholesome or innutriUous diet, want of p e rs o n al
cleanliness, of clean garment*, etc. Thus a " ba-
ker's " and a " bricklayer's itch," are recorded by
the faculty (Bateman, On Stm Diteate*, Ptoriam* ;
Good's Study of Med., ib. pp. 459 and 484).-
Tin predominant and characteristic form of lep-
rosy in Scripture is a white variety, covering either
the entire body or a large tract of its surface,
which has obtained the name of lepra Motnicn
Such were the oases of Moses, Miriam, Naaman,
and Gehaxi (Ex. iv. 6; Num. xii. 10; IK. v. 1,
87; comp. Lev. iclii. 13). But, remarkably enough,
in the Mosaic ritual-diagnosis of the disease (Lev.
xiii., xiv.), this kind, when overspreading the whole
surface, appears to be regarded as " ckaii " (xiii.
18, 13, 16, 17). The first question which occurs as
we read the entire passage is, have we any right tv
assume one disease as spoken of throughout? or
rather — for the point of view in the whole pasaage
is ceremonial, not medical — U not a register of
certain symptoms, marking the afflicted person as
under a Divine judgment, all that is meant, with-
out raising the question of a plurality of diseases*
But beyond this preliminary question, and suppos-
ing the symptoms sscertaiLed, there are arenas-
stances which, duly weighed, will prevent our ex.
pecting the identity of these with modern symp-
toms in the same class of maladies. The Egyptian
bondage, with its studied degradations and priva-
tions, and especially the work of the kiln under an
Egyptian sun, must have had a frightful tendency
to generate this class of disorders; hence Manetho
(Joseph. ctmL Ap. 1. 86) asserts that the Egyptians
drove out the Israelite* as infected with leprosy —
a strange reflex, perhaps, of the Mosaic narrative
of the " plagues " of Egypt, yet probably aha con-
taining a germ of truth. The sudden and total
change of food, air, dwelling, and mode of life,
caused by the Exodus, to this nation of newly*
• The oas of toe word "Ml m sa so u l sU op wits
she proper tana, ."Yjn'V, marks the outward ap.
as the abler last of the malady. Jar B3J
a " blow » or « touah," and Is i ' - - -
atsd by plmga, our "placus."
Digitized by
Google
LKPKH, U5PK0ST
•eoaooipated slaves, may possibly hare had a further
tendency to ssin-diaordera, and ujvel and severe
l aurt e si i a measures may hare beer, required in the
desert-moving camp to secure the public health, or
to aBay the panic of infection. Hence it ia possible
that many, perhaps moat, of thii repertory of aymp-
toma may hare disappeared with the period of the
Exodus, and the snow-white form, which had pre-
ndated, may alone hare ordinarily continned in a
later age. But it ia observable that, amongst these
Levities! symptoms, the scaling, or peeling off of
the surface, ia nowhere mentioned, nor ia there any
expression in the Hebrew text which points to ex-
foliation of the cuticle." The principal morbid fea-
tures are a rising or swelling,' a scab or baldnesa, c
and a bright or white d spot (xiii. 3). [Bald-
sjkss.] But especially a white swelling in the skin,
with a change of the hair of the part from the nat-
ural black to white or yellow (3, 10, 4, SO, 25, 30),
or an appearance of a taint going " deeper than the
akin," or again. " raw flesh " appearing In the swell-
ing (10, 14. IS), were critical signs of pollution.
The mere swelling, or scab, or bright apet, was re-
manded for a week as doubtful (4, 21, 2a, 31), and
for a second such period, if it had not yet pro-
nounced (5). If it then spread (7, 22, 27, 35), it
was decided as polluting. But if after the second
period of quarantine the trace died away « and
■bowed no symptom of spreading, it was a mere
■cab, and he was adjudged clean (6, 21, 34). This
tendency to spread seems especially to have been
relied on. A spot most innocent in all other re-
spects, if it " spread much abroad," was unclean ;
whereas, as before remarked, the man so wholly
o ve r sp r ea d with the evil that it could find no far-
ther range, was on the contrary "clean " (12, 13).
These two opposite criteria seem to show, that
whilst the disease manifested activity, the Mosaic
law imputed pollution to and imposed segregation
on the sufferer, but that the point at which It
might be viewed as having run its course was the
signal for his readmission to communion. The ques-
tion then arises, supposing contagion were dreaded,
and the sufferer on that account suspended from
human society, would not one who offered the whole
area of his body as a means of propagating the pest
be more shunned than the partially afflicted ? This
leads us to regard the disease in its sacred charac-
ter. The Hebrew was reminded on trery side, even
on that of disease, that he was of God's peculiar
people. His time, his food and raiment, his hair
and beard, his field and fruit-tree, all were touched
by the finger of ceremonial; nor waa his bodily
condition exempt. Disease itself had its sacred re-
lations arbitrarily Imposed. Certainly contagion
need not be the basis of our views in tracing these
relations. In the contact of a dead body there was
no notion of contagion, for the body the moment
life was extinct waa as much ceremonially unclean as
• The raw flash of xttt 10 might be discovered la
■his way, or by the skin merely cracking, an abscess
terming, or the Ilka. Or — what Is more probable —
R raw flesh " means gnoulattoiie forming on patches
where the surfivm bad become excoriated. Thest
(ranulattons would form Into a rongoaa ■eat nhier
•right be aptly called x nT flwb."
• filT^S, nn^Qti. eeaentus, a. * . says,
•sntetly a bald plee* on 'the head u mil ail by the
LKPER LEPROSY 1681
in a state of decay. Many of the unclean of beasts,
etc., are as wholesome as the clean. Why then hi
leprosy must we have recourse to a theory of con
tagion? To cherish an undefined horror in the
mind was perhaps the primary object ; such horror,
however, always tends to some definite dread, ia
this case most naturally to the dread of contagion.
Thus religious awe would ally itself with and rest
upon a lower motive, and there would thus be a
motive to weigh with carnal and spiritual natures
alike. It would perhaps be nearer the truth to ssy,
that uncleannesa was imputed, rather to inspire the
dread of contagion, than in order to check contam-
ination as an actual process. Thus this disease was
a living plague set in the man by the finger of God
whilst it showed its life by activity — by " spread-
ing; " but when no more showing signs of life, it
lost its character as a curse from Him. Such as
dreaded contagion — and the immense majority in
every country have an exaggerated alarm of it —
would feel on the safe side through the Levities!
ordinance; if any did not fear, the loathsomeness
of the aspect of the malady would prevent them
from wishing to Infringe the ordinance.
It is not our purpose to enter into the question
whether the contagion existed, nor is there perhaps
any more vexed question in pathology than how to
fix a rule of contagiousness; but whatever was cur-
rently believed, unless opposed to morals or human-
ity, would have been a sufficient basis for the law-
giver on this subject. The panic of infection ia
often us distressing, or rather far more so, in pro-
portion as it is far more widely diffused, than actual
disease. Nor need we exclude popular notions, so
far as they do not conflict with higher views of the
Mosaic economy. A degree of deference to them
ia perhaps apparent in the special refereuce to the
" head " and " beard " as the seat of some form
of polluting disorder. The sanctity and honor at-
taching to the bead and beard (1 Cor. xi. 3, 4, 6,
see also Bkakd) made a scab thereon seem a hei-
nous disfigurement, and even baldness, though not
unclean, yet was unusual and provoked reproach (2
K. ii. 23), and when a diseased appearance arose
"out of a baldness," even without "spreading
abroad," it was at once adjudged " unclean." On
the whole, though we decline to rest leprous de-
filement merely on popular notions of abhorrence,
dread of contagion, and the like, yet a deference to
them may be admitted to have been shown, espe
dally at the time when the people were, from pre-
vious habit and associations, up to the moment of
the actual Exodus, most strongly imbued with the
scrupulous purity and refined ceremonial example
of the Egyptians on these subjects.
To trace the symptoms, so far as they ere re-
corded, la a simple task, if we keep merely to the
text of Leviticus, and do not insist on finding rjcs
definitions in the bread and simple language of an
* fPnj, The root appears to bs ""171^, « Mb
In ChalJ. and Arab, means "to be white, orshlniig^
(G«seo. I. v.y.
« The weed ts the Beb. Is TTTIJ, which mesne k.
languish or fkds away ; henee the A. V. hardly con-
veys the sense adequately by "be aomawbat dark."
Perhaps the expressions of Hippocrates, who speaks oJ
a fUAav form of leprosy, and of Oelsua, who mentioos
one wmbra timilii, may have led our translators n
endeavor to And eootvalenta for than la the B»
Digitized by
Google
1682
LEPER, LEPROSY
rerly period. It appears that not only the before-
mentioned appearance*, but an; open tore which
expoted raw flesh was to be judged by its effect on
the hair, by ita being in eight lower than the akin,
by ita tendency to spread ; and that any one of
these symptoms would argue uncleanness. It seems
also that from a boil and from the effects of a bum
a similar disease might be developed. Nor does
modern pathology lead us to doubt that, given a
constitutional tendency, such causes of infuunma -
tion may result in various disorders of the skin or
tissues. Cicatrices after bums are known some-
times to assume a peculiar tuberculated appear-
ance, thickened and raised above the level of the
surrounding skin — the keloid tumor, which, how-
aver, may also appear Independently of a bum.
lie language into which the LXX. has ren-
dered the simple phrases of the Hebrew text shows
traces of a later school of medicine, and suggests
an acquaintance with the terminology of Hippoc-
rates. This has given a hint, on which, apparently
wishing to reconcile early Biblical notioes with the
results of later observation, Or. Mason Good and
some other professional expounders of leprosy ban
drawn out a comparative table of parallel terms."
It is clear then that the leprosy of Lev. xiii., xiv.
means any severe disease spreading on the surface
of the body in the way described, and so shocking
of aspect, or so generally suspected of infection,
that public feeling called for separation. No doubt
such diseases ss syphilis, elephantiasis, cancer, and
all others which not merely have their seat in the
akin, but which invade and disorganize the under-
lying and deeper sea te d tissues, would have been
elected levitically as " leprosy," bad they been so
generally prevalent as to require notice.
It is now undoubted that the " leprosy " of mod-
ern Syria, and which has a wide range in Spain,
Greece, and Norway, is the EltphantiiitU Craoa-
The Arabian physicians perhaps caused the
of terms, who, when they translated the
* Thus we nave In Kitto's Cyclopaedia of Bb&eal
Literature the following table, based apparently on a
More extensive one la Dr. Mason (food (uA. tup. pp.
MB, 463), which ia chiefly characterised by an attempt
LEPER, LKPROSV
Greek of Hippocrates, rendered his elephantiasis hi
leprosy, there being another disease to which the)
gave a name derived from the elephant, and which
is now known as KUphantiaiU Aruinm, — the
" Barbadoea leg," Boucntmia Tropici. The Ale-
pkantiatu (iracorum is said to have been brought
home by the crusaders into the various countries of
Western and Northern Europe. Thus an article on
11 Leprosy," in the Proceedings of the Koyal Med-
ical and Chirurgical Society of London, Jan. 1860,
vol. iii. 8, pi 164, Ac., by Dr. Webster, describes
what ia evidently this disease. Thus MichaeUe
(Smith's translation, vol. iii. p. 283, Art. cex.)
speaks of what be calls lepra Aralmm, the symp-
toms of which are plainly elrphantisiar For a
discussion of the question whether this disease waa
known in the early Biblical period, are Medicuk.
It certainly was not that distinctive white leprosy
of which we are now speaking, nor do any of the
described symptoms iu Lev. xiii- point to elephan-
tiasis. « White as snow" (2 K. v. 87) would be
as inapplicable to elephantiasis as to small-pox.
Further, the most striking and fearful results of
this modern so-called " leprosy " are wanting in
the Mosaic description — the transformation of the
features to a leonine expression, and the corrosion
of the joints, so that the fingers drop pie c e m eal,
from which the Arabic name, r»'cVa» JudUm,
i. e. mutilation, seems derived.* Yet before arc
dismiss the question of the affinity of this dis-
ease with Mosaic leprosy, a description of Haver's
( Traite Theoriqve, etc., aVs Muliditt de In Pen*,
s. v. KUphantiatit) is worth quoting. He men-
tions two characteristic species, the one tubercu-
lated, probably the commoner kind at present (to
judge from the concurrence of modern authorities
in describing this type), the other " characterised
par des plaques faures, Urges, t'teuduea, Hetties, ri-
deea, insensibles, accompsgut'es d'une legere desqua-
mation et d'une deformation particuliure des pieda et
to fix modern specific meanings on the general asms
of Lsv. xUl. : e. g. fTNtp, **pa, or tetter; S£,
ietui, « blow " or " bruise,^' ste.
rnna, Lev.
oompnbeoding
(8) rip? rvirn. J
■{
A«Va«, Hipp.
comprehending
(1) oAauh, \
(2) Xtvcw, V «
(8) siewj
vitiligo, Celt.
comprehending
' (1) albida,
(2) Candida,
(8) msresoeiu, or
But the Hebrew of (1) Is m Lev. xiii. 89 predicated of
a subject compounded of the phraseology of (2) and
(8), whereas the (I), (J), and (8) of Hipp, and of Oelans
are respectively distinct and mutually exclusive of one
another. Further, the word HPTJ appears mistrans-
lated by "black " or " dark ; " meaning lather « Ian-
luld," " dim," as sa old man's eyes, an expiring and
• feeble flame, etc. Mow It Is remarkable that the Hlp-
pocretlc terms iA^et and Xntaa. are found In the LXX.
The phraseology of tt* la'ter la also more speeiflo than
» tut the «* |n sa ena , "HPJ "V^P P^S,
afcae tea sen of ttn M' Is esadered la ver. * by numfrn.
sorb rat S**umt, In «0 bjr eprMAsrtpa rw Waswrsv,
la N •faoOtaaweve.t.
will adequately represent the Hebrew,
shades of meaning • where this baa a wide general
word, or substituting a word denoting one symptom
ss *sav«|ut^ " crust," formed probably by humor ocav
Ing, for pHi, " expUatlou."
b This Is clearly and forcibly pointed out m an ar-
ticle by Dr. Bobert Bun In the UntiaU Tbmu, Aprt.
14, 1880, whoss long hospital experience in Jer usal e m
entitles his remarks to great night.
• So Dr. It. Oood, who Improve! on th* Ipaawsiei by m
•wbsm, " saapnniuoB," wUhlnf to mbtfrtott aMSat 10011 a>
ess - dry seen * of the A. V, which leejw Is aa aoas* near*
the mark,
Digitized by
Google
LEPER. LEPROSY
iea nnuin, ' and which he deems identical with the
"lepre du moyen age." Thii certainly appears to
be at least a link between the tuberculated ele-
phantiasis and the Mosaic leprosy." Celsus, after
distinguishing the three Hippocratio varieties of
MUgo = leprosy, separately describes elephantiasis.
Avicenna (Dr. Head, Median Sacra, " the lepro-
sy ") speaks of leprosy as a sort of universal cancer
of the whole body. But amidst the evidence of a
redundant variety of diseases of the skin and adja-
cent tissues, and of the probable rapid production
and evanewence of some forms of them, it would
be rash to insert the identity of any from such re-
semblance as this.
Nor ought we in the question of Identity of symp-
toms to omit from view, that not only does obser-
vation become more precise with accumulated expe-
rience; but, that diseases also, in proportion as they
Ax their abiding seat in a climate, region, or race
of men, tend probably to diversity of type, and that
In the course of centuries, as with the fauna and
torn, varieties originate in the modifying influence
of circumstances, so that Hippocrates might find
three kinds of leprosy, where one variety only had
existed before. Whether, therefore, we regard Lev.
xiii. as speaking of a group of diseases having mu-
tually a mere superficial resemblance, or a real affin-
ity, it need not perplex us that they do not corre-
spond with the threefold leprosy of Hippocrates (the
&A<t>4f, KtiiCTi, and (iJXat), which are said by Bate-
man (Skin Diseases, Plates vii. and viii.) to pre-
vail still respectively as lepra alphoides, lepra vul-
garis, and lepra nigricans. The first has more mi-
nute and whiter scales, and the circular patches in
which they form are smaller than those of the vul-
garis, which appears In scaly discs of different sizes,
having nearly always a circular form, first present-
ing small distinct red shining elevations of the cu-
ticle, then white scales which accumulate sometimes
into a thick crust; or, as Dr. Mason Good describes
its appearance (vol. iv. p. 461), as having a spread-
ing scale upon an elevated base; the elevations de-
pressed in the middle, but without a change of color ;
the black hair on the patches, which is the prevail-
ing color of the hair in Palestine, participating in.
the whiteness, and the patches themselves perpet-
ually widening in their outline. A phosphate of lime
■ probably what gives their bright glossy color to the
scaly patches, and this in the kindred disease of
icthyosis Is deposited in great abundance on the
surface. The third, nigricans, or rather svbfutcaf
is rarer, in form and distribution, resembling the
second, but differing in the dark livid color of the
patches. The scaly incrustations of the first species
infest the flat of the fore-arm, knee, and elbow
joints, but on the bee seldom extend beyond the
forehead and temples; comp. 2 Chr. xxvi. 19 : " the
leprosy rose up in his forehead." The cure of this
is not difficult ; the second scarcely ever heals (Celsus,
Dt tied. v. 28, § 19). The third is always accom-
panied by a cachectic condition of body. Further,
a On the question how far elephantiasis may prob-
ttay have been mixed up with the lepra*} it the Jews,
tee Paul, jBgln. vol.U. pp. 6 and 82, S3, ed. Syd. Soe.
» Still it Is known that black secretions, sometimes
carried to the extent of negro blackness, have been
produced under the skin, as in the rite mucosum of <
the African. See Mrdtco-Oiirurgicat Htv., New Series,
vol. v. p. 216, January, 1847.
• neb. pHS! Arab, iS fl«
LEPER, LEPROSY 1688
elephantiasis itself has also pasted current under
the name of the "black leprosy." It is possible
that the » freckled spot " of the A. V. Lev. xiii. 89 •
may correspond with the harmless I. alphoides, srnce
it is noted as "clean." The ed. of Paulus Mpa.
by the Sydenham Society (vol. ii. p. 17 ff.) gives
the following summary of the opinions of classical
medicine on this subject: " Galen is very deficient
on the subject of lepra, having nowhere given a
complete description of it, though he notices it in-
cidentally in many parte of his works. In one
place he calls elephas, leuce, and alphas cognate af-
fections. Alphos, he says, is much more superficial
than leuce. Psora is said to partake more of the
nature of ulceration. According to Oribasius, lepra
affects mostly the deep-seated parts, and psora the
superficial. Aetiua on the other hand, copying Ar-
chigines, represents lepra as affecting onlv the skin.
Actuarius states that lepra is next to elephantia in
malignity, and that it is distinguished from psora
by spreading deeper and having scales of a circular
shape like those of fishes. Leuce holds the same
place to alphos that lepra does to psora; that is to
say, leuce is more deep-seated and affects the color
of the hair, while alphos is more superficial, and
the hair in general is unchanged. . . . Alexander
Aphrodisiensis mentions psora among the contagious
diseases, but says that lepra and leuce are not con-
tagious. Chrysostom alludes to the common opinion
that psora was among the contagions diseases. . .
Celsus describes alphos, melas, and leuce, very in-
telligibly, connecting them together by the generis
term of vitiligo."
There Is a remarkable concurrence between the
JSschylean description of the disease which, was
to produce " lichens coursing over the flesh, eroding
with fierce voracity the former natural structure,
and white hairs shooting up over the part di»-
eaaed," * and some of the Mosaic symptoms; the
spreading energy of the evil is dwelt upon both by
Moses and by iGechylus, ss vindicating its oharectof
as a scourge of God. But the symptoms of " while
hairs "tea curious and exact confirmation of the
genuineness of the detail in the Mosaic account, es-
pecially as the poet's language would rather imply
that the disease spoken of was no* then domesti-
cated in Greece, but the strange horror of some
other land. Still, nothing very remote from our
own experience is implied in the mere changed
color of the hair; it is common to see horses with
galled backs, etc., in whioh the hair hat turned
white through the destruction of those follicles
which secrete the coloring matter.
There remains a curious question, before we quit
Leviticus, at regards the leprosy of garments and
nouses. Some have thought garments worn by lep-
rous patients intended. The discharges of the dis-
eased skin absorbed into the apparel would, if in-
fection were possible, probably convey disease; and
it is kn^wn to be highly dangerous in tome cases to
allow clothes which have so imbibed the discharges
of an ulcer to be worn again.* And the words of
d ZopKMV cVa^Sarqpac «yp6uc yv&toit
Atxqtvs i(4o0omvs aoxaiar tyvur
Acvcec 6f mpe-ac rgf twarriixtiv roaY
OwepA. 271-374.
• BaSurenhuslus (Mbhna, Ntgvim) says, " Macula)
aUquando sabvuides, allquando subrubkta, euja*
modi vtderl a-ant In ■egrotorum lnduslls, et prsKipae
at in parte vJ vis morbi •ntdjabta ralcruVnt » ear
aojntsiesriuaBfoaierU>>'
Digitized by
Google
|(J84 LEPER. LKPEOSY
/wit 11 may Ham to countenance this," « hating
••an the garment (potted by the fleah." But let,
no mention of infection occuri ; Sdly, no connection
of the lepraua garment with a leprous human wearer
k hinted at; 3dly, this would not help us to account
fcr a leprosy of atone -walls and plaster. Thus Dr.
Mead (ut $up.) speaks at any rate plausibly of the
leprosy of garments, but becomes unreasonable when
he extends his explanation to that of walls. Mt-
ahaelis thought that wool from sheep which had died
of a particular disease might fret into holes, and
exhibit an appearance like that described, Ler. xiii.
47-59 (Michaelis, art cexl. lii. 390-91). But woolen
cloth is far from being the only material mentioned;
nay, there is even some reason to think that the
words rendered in the A. V. " warp " and « woof,"
are not those distinct parts of the texture, but dis-
tinct material*. linen, however, and leather are
distinctly particularised, and the latter not only
as regards garments, but " any thing (lit Teasel)
made of skin," for instance, bottles. This classing
of garments and house-walls with the human epi-
dermis, as leprous, has moved the mirth of some,
and the wonder of others. Yet modern science has
established what goes far to vindicate the Mosaic
classification as more philosophical than such cavils.
It is now known that there are some skin-diseases
which originate in an acarus, and others which pro-
ceed from a fungus. In these we may probably find
the solution of the paradox. The analogy between
the insect which fret* the human skin and that
which frets the garment that covers it, between the
fungous growth that lines the crevices of the epider-
mis and that which creeps within the interstices of
masonry,* Is dose enough for the purposes of a
ceremonial law, to which it is essential that there
should be an arbitrary element intermingled with
provisions manifestly reasonable. Michaelis (to.
art ccxi. iii. 293-99) has suggested a nitrous efflo-
rescence on the surface of the stone, produced by
saltpetre, or rather an acid containing it, and issu-
ing in red spots, and cited the example of a house
m Lubeck ; he mentions also exfoliation of the atone
from other causes; but probably these appearances
world not be developed without a greater degree
of damp than is common in Palestine and Arabia.
It is manifest also that a disease in the human sub-
ject caused by an acarus or by a fungus would be
certainly contagious, since the propagative causes
could be transferred from person to person. Some
physicians indeed assert that only such akin dis-
eases are contagious. Henee perhaps arose a fur-
thar reason for marking, even in their analogues
among lifeless substances, the strictness with which
forms of disease so arising were to be shunned.
The sacrificial law attending the purgation of the
leper will be more conveniently treated of under
I'SCUAKUKSS.
The lepers of the New Testament do not seem to
offer occasion for special remark, save that by the
N. T. period the disease, as known in Palestine,
LBTU8H1M
probably did not differ materially fro t the lOfsjt-
oratie record of it, and that when St Luke at amy
nte uses the words ArVpa, Ars-oor, he dees as
iieir strict medical supriato-
with a recognition of their i
tion.
From Snrenhusiua (Mishna, Jfegaim), we find
that some rabbinical commentators enumerate 16,
38, or 73 diverse species of leprosy, but they Ao so
by including all the phases which each paasss
through, reckoning a red and a green variety in
garments, the same in a house, etc-, and coonting
calritium, recahatio, aduetio, and. even atau, aa at
many distinct forms of leprosy.
For further illustrations of this subject see Schil-
ling, de Lepra; Keinhard, BibtlkranikeUen ;
Schmidt, BiUucher MeJecin ; Bayer, ut aim., who
refers to Rouasille-Chamaern, Rtekerchtt ear U ee-
ritabU Curadere de In Lipre da Hebreta, and
Relation Ckirurgicale de tArmee de I Orient, Pane,
1804; Cazenave and SchedeL Abrigi Prutiqms da
Maladies de la Pea* ; Dr. Mead, et tup., who rears
to Aretsjus,< Afore. Chro*. ii. IS; rraeaatoriua,
de Morbit Contagime; Johannes Manardna,
EpitL Medic vii 3, and to iv. 3, 8, } 1 ; Avieenna,
de Medtdna, v. 38, { 19; also Dr. Sim in (ftc
North American Chirur. Bev. Sept 1869, p. 876.
The ancient authorities are Hippocrates, Prorrke-
Hca, lib. xii. ap. Jin. ; Galen, ExpKcatio Lmgua-
rton HtppoeratU, and de art OmraL lib. ii- ; Cet-
sus, de Medic, v. 38, § 19. H. H.
LE-SHEM (Ot?^? [etrtmg, fortrtu. Font]:
Leiem), a variation in the form of the name of
I.aish, afterwards Dait, occurring only in Josh,
xix. 47 (twice). The Vat LXX. is very corrupt,
having Aaxeu »" d Aao-errJex [Bom. Aax'i and
Aatrtrtdr], (see Mai's ed.) ; but the Alex., as usual,
is in the second case much closer to the Hebrew,
Aco"(/i and \iaivtar-
The commentators and lexicographers afford na
clew to the reason of this variation in form. G.
• LET is osed in a few passages of the A. V.
(Ex. v. 4; Num. xxii. 16, marg.; Is. xliii. IS;
Bom. i. 13; 8 These, ii. 7; Wisd. vii. 23) in the
sense of to hinder, being derived from the Anglo-
Saxon leUnn, connected with lot. " late." " Let "
in the sense of " permit " is a word of different
origin. A.
LETTTJS (AeTTofei [Vat omits;] Ah*.
Arrows: Acckue), the same as Hattusji (1 Esdr.
viil, 89). The Alex. MS. has evidently the correct
reading, of which the name as it appears in the
Vat MS. [Roman ed.] is an easy corruption, from
the similarity of the uncial A and A-
LETU'SHIMCCtncV [have graind,ekarp.
tntd] : Aarevo-icfp: Latuim, Latwim), the OSCM)
of the second of the sons of Dedan, son of Jokaban,
Gen. xxv. 3 (and 1 Chr. i. 33, Vulg.). Frame!
{Joum. AtinL iii« eerie, vol. vi. pp. 217, 218) identi-
fies it with Ta*m, d one of the ancient and extinct
■ Ses, however, Lev. XT. ft, 4, which snggesta an-
etber possible meaning of the words of St. Jude.
b Ihs word x..^* (ths "lichen " of botany), the
Jachjlean word to express the dreaded seonrfe in
CmmeplioT. 271-274 (comp ftmm. 786, sssp lD 336), te
also the technical tarn for a d isss a s akin to leprosy.
The ed. of Paulua Agin. Sjtenh. 8oe., vol. B. p. 19,
says that the post here means to describe leprosy. In
sae tetcoge, fro*™"* ascribed to Qt ton (ft. p. 26), two
" ■ an ilanilawl. the Ktkm mi'tu and taw Mcata
afriui, In both of which aoatoa are fbnmed npoa the
akin. Oalen remarks on the tenancy of this oavesst
to pass Into lepra and scabies.
e Dr. Head's referenc e Is etc Jbteu OmtagtoiU, fl
cap. 9. There Is no such title extant to anr poraoaet
Antaeus' work ; see, however, the S yd e nh a m I
sdltton of that writer, p. 870.
|» " ■ ■*> ■
Digitized by
Google
LKUMMIM
Slbai of Arabia, like u he compares Leummhn
■1th Cmeiyira. The names may perhaps be re-
garded as commencing with the Hehrew article.
Nevertheless, the identification in •aeh case seems
to be quite untenable. (Respecting these tribes,
sea Leommim and Arabia.) It it noteworthy
that the three sons of the Keturahite Dedan an
named in the plural form, evidently as tribes de-
ssended from him. E. S. P.
LKTTM'MIM (CTWfr, from tifob [pea-
■*w]i Aaat«\tf/t; [Alex, tiomiuut, and in 1 Chr.
Aa-aywr:] Loamim, JLaomitn), the name of the
third of the descendants of Dedan, son of Jokshan,
Geo. xxv. 3 (1 Chr. L 32, Vulg.), being in the
eltnal form like his brethren, Asshurim and Let-
ashim. It eridenUy refers to a tribe or people
sprang from Dedan, and indeed in its present form
RtaraUy signifies "peoples," "nations;" but it
ha* been observed in art. Letcshim, that these
names perhaps commence with the Hebrew article.
Leommim has been identified with the 'AAAav
aarrarrai of Ptolemy (vi. 7, § 24; aee JKcL of
Otogr.), and by Fresnel (in the Jowm. Anai. iii*
•trie, toL vi, p. 217) with an Arab tribe called
Umayim.* Of the former, the writer knows no
M**— *H trace: the latter was one of the very
ancient tribes of Arabia of which no genealogy is
given by the Arabs, and who appear to have been
ante-Abrahamie, and possibly aboriginal inhabi-
tants of the country. [Arabia.] E. 8. P.
LBTI. X. 01 7 [perh. crown, wreath, ties.] :
Aevef : Levi.) The name of the third son of Jacob
by his wife Leah. This, like most other names in
the patriarchal history, was connected with the
thoughts and feelings that gathered round the
child's birth. As derived from nib, «to ad.
here," it gave utterance to the hope of the mother
that the affections of her husband, which had hith-
erto rested on the favored Rachel, would at hut be
drawn to ber. "This time will my husband be
foined onto me, because I have borne him three
sons " (Gen. xxix. 34). The new-born child was
to be a mmnu fr/humrfis (Jos. Ant. i. 19, § 8),
a new link binding the parents to each other more
closely than before. 6 But one fact is recorded in
which he appears prominent. The sons of Jacob
have come from Padan-Aram to Canaan with their
father, and are with him " at Shalem, a city of
Shechem." Their sister Dinah goes out "to see
the daughters of the land " ((Jen. xxxiv. 1), i. e. as
the words probably indicate, and as Josephus dis-
tinctly states (Ant. i. 21), to he present at one of their
great annual gathering' for some festival of nature-
worship, analogous ta that which we meet with
lAcrwarda among the Midianites (Num. xxv. 2).
Hie license of the time or the absence of her nat-
snl guardians exposes her, though yet in earliest
youth, to lust and outrage. A stain is left, not
only on her, but on the honor of ber kindred, which,
■Boarding to the rough Justice of the time, nothing
bat blood could wash out. The duty of extorting
(at revenge feu, as in the ease of Amnon and
lamer (8 Sam. xiii. 82), and Li moat other states
LEVI
168ft
.si
Be Sams stymotosjv Is isnoumssil,
f ssrnlftmiKW, in Nam. xvHI. X
of society In which polygamy baa prevailed (coma,
for the customs of modern Arabs, J. D. MichaeUa,
quoted by Kurt*, Hut. of Old Covenant, i. J 82, pi
340), on the brothers rather than the lather, just as
in the ease of Rebekah, it belonged to the brother
to conduct the negotiations for tbe marriage. We)
are left to conjecture why Reuben, as tbe first-born,
was not foremost in the work, bat the sin of which
he was afterwards guilty, makes it possible that his
seal for his sister's purity was not so sensitive a*
theirs. The same explanation may perhaps apply
to the non-appearance of Judah in the history.
Simeon and Levi, as the next in succession to the
first-horn, take the task upon themselves. Though
not named in the Hebrew text of the 0. T. till
xxxiv. 25, there can be little doubt that they were
" tbe sons of Jacob " who hard from their father
the wrong over which he had brooded in silence,
and who planned their revenge accordingly. 11m
LXX. version does introduce their names in ver
14. The history that follows is that of a cowardly
and repulsive crime. The two brothers exhibit, in
its broadest contrasts, that union of tbe noble and
the base, of characteristics above and below the
level of the heathen tribes around them, which
marks the whole history of Israel. They hare
learned to loathe and scorn the impurity in the
midst of which they lived, to regard themselves ss a
peculiar people, to glory in the sign of the covenant.
They have learnt only too well from Jacob and
from Laban the lessons of treachery and falsehood.
They lie to the men of Shechem as tbe Druses and
the Maronites lie to each other in the prosecution
of their blood-feuds. For the offense of one man,
they destroy and plunder a whole city. They
cover their murderous schemes with fair words and
professions of friendship. They make the rery
token of their religion the instrument of their per-
fidy and revenge. Their father, timid and anxious
as ever, utters a feeble lamentation (Blunt's Sxipt
Coincidence*, Part i. § 8), " Ye have made me to
stink among the inhabitants of the land ... I
being few in number, they shall gather themselves
against me." With a real that, though mixed
with baser elements, foreshadows the seal of Phine-
has, they glory in their deed, and meet all remon
strance with the question, " Should he (leal with
our sister as with a harlot ? " Of other facts in the
life of Ijevi, there art: none in which he takes, as la
this, a prominent and distinct part. He shares in
the hatred which his brothers bear to Joseph, and
Ijoins in the plots against him (Gen. xxxvii. 4).
Reuben and Judah interfere severally to prevent tbe
consummation of the crime (Gen. xxxvii. 21, 26).
SI:neon appears, as being made afterwards tbe sub-
ject of a sharper discipline than the others, to have
been foremost — as his position among the sons of
Leah made it likely that he would be — in this
attack on the favored son of Rachel ; and it is at
least probable that in this, as in their former guilt,
Simeon and Levi were brethren. The rivalry of
the mothers was perpetuated in the jealousies of
their children ; and the two who had shown them-
selves so keenly sensitive when their sister had been
wronged, make themselves the instrument* and ae-
e Josephus (Ant. 1. c.) characteristically gloans eves
an that ecraMBU the attack with the dnumeanea nt
the BOMhsaltss, and represents It as made in a lane or
•fcasOnaj and rsloMof.
Digitized by
Google
1686 levi
aoenpHces of the hatred which originated, we an
told, with the baser-born tons of the concubine!
(Gen. xxxvii. 3). Then cornea for him, u for the
others, the discipline of suffering and danger, the
special education by which the brother whom they
had wronged leads them back to faithfulness and
natural affection. The detention of Simeon in
Egypt may luve been desigued at once to be the
punishment for the large share which he had taken
In the common crime, and to separate the two broth-
ers who had hitherto been such close companions
in evil. The discipline does its work. Those who
had been relentless to Joseph become self-sacrificing
far Benjamin.
After this we trace Levi as joining in the migra-
tion of the tribe that owned Jacob as its patriarch.
He, with his three sons, Gershon, Kobath, Merari,
went down into Egypt (Gen. xlri. 11). As one of
the four eldest sons we may think of him as among
the five (Gen. xlvii. 2) that were specially presented
before Pharaoh." Then comes the last scene in
which his name appears. When his father's death
draws near, and the sons are gathered round him,
be hears the old crime brought up again to receive
it* sentence from the lips that are no longer feeble
and hesitating. They, no less than the incestuous
first-born, had forfeited the privileges of their birth-
right. "In their anger they slew men, and in
their wantonness they maimed oxen " (marg. read-
ing of A. V. ; comp. LXX. lvfvpoK&n\aav ravpoy)-
And therefore the sentence on those who bad been
united for evil was, that they were to be " divided
in Jacob and scattered in Israel." How that con-
demnation was at once fulfilled and turned into a
benediction, how the zeal of the patriarch reap-
peared purified and strengthened in bis descendants;
how the very name came to have anew significance,
will be found elsewhere. [Levitks.]
The history of Levi has been dealt with here in
what seems the only true and natural way of treat-
ing it, as a history of an individual person. Of
the theory that sees in the sons of Jacob the myth-
ical Eponymi of the tribes that claimed descent
from them — which finds in the crimes and chances
of their lives the outlines of a national or tribal
chronicle — which refuses to recognize that Jacob
had twelve sons, and insists that the history of
Dinah records an attempt on the part of the Cana-
inites to enslave and degrade a Hebrew tribe
(Ewald, Gachichte, i. 466-496) — of this one may
M content to say, as the author says of other hy-
potheses hardly more extravagant, " die Wissen-
schaft verscheucht alle solche Gespenster" (ibid.
. 466). The book of Genesis tells us of the lives
uf men and women, not of ethnological phantoms.
A yet wilder conjecture has been hazarded by
another German critic. P. Redslob (Die altlttla-
mmlL Namen, Hamb. 1846, pp. 24, 25), recognizing
the meaning of the name of Levi as given above,
finds in it evidence of the existence of a confederacy
•r synod of the priests that had been connected with
the several local worships of Canaan, and who, in
the time of Samuel and David, were gathered to-
gether, joined, " round the Central Pantheon in
Jerusalem." Here also we may borrow the terms
sf our judgment from the language of the writer
a The Jewtab tradition (Taj*. Fs»rf<>/<m.)statss the
It* to bare barn Zsbulnn, Dan, Naphtall, dad, and
LEVTATHAX
himself. If there are " abgeschmackten etysajes-
gischen Mahrchen" (Redslob, p. 82) con n ected
with the name of Levi, they are hardly those we
meet with in the narrative of Genesis. E. H. P.
2- (Ami; Bee Text, A«vf: Levi-) Son ei
Mekhi, one of the near ancestors of our Lord, in
tact the great-grandfather of Joseph (Luke iii 84).
This name is omitted in the list given by Afri-
canns.
3. A more remote ancestor of Christ, son of
Simeon (Luke iii. 29). Lord A. Hervey considers
that the name of Levi reappears in his descendant
Lebbeus (Gental of Christ, p. 188, and at* 89,
46).
4. (Ann's; R. T. A*vt».) Hark B. 14; Lata
v. 87, 39. [Matthew.]
IiBVT'ATHAN O^f?, tiffHM*: t» ulya
Kffi-ot, Soixar ; Complul.' Job ii. 8, \t$ui0ar:
leviathan, draco) occurs five times in the teat of
the A. V., and once in the margin of Job iii. 8,
where the text has " mourning." In the Hebrew
Bible the word fcV galhanj> which is, with the
foregoing exception, always left untranslated in the
A. V., is found only in the following paasagea:
Job iii. 8, xl. 26 (xli. 1, A. V.); Ps. lxxiv. 14,
civ. 26; Is. xxvii. 1. In the margin of Job iii. 8,
and text of Job xli. 1,« the crocodile is most clearly
the animal denoted by the Hebrew word. Pa.
lxxiv. 14 also clearly points to this same saurian.
The context of Ps. civ. 26, "There go the ships:
then it that leviathan, teAom thou hast made to
play therein," seems to show that in this passage
the name represents some animal of the whale
tribe; but it is somewhat uncertain what animal
is denoted in Is. xxvii. 1. It would be out of place
here to attempt any detailed explanation of the
passages quoted above, but the following remarks
are offered. The passage in Job iii. 8 is beset with
difficulties, and it is evident from the two widely
different readings of the text and margin that our
translators were st a loss. There can however be
little doubt that the margin is the correct render-
ing, and this is supported by the LXX., Aquila,
Theodotion, Symmachus, the Vulgate and the
Syriac. There appears to be some reference to
those who practiced enchantments. Job is lament-
ing the day on which he was born, and he says,
" Let them curse it that curse the day, who are
ready to raise up a leviathan :"«.«." Let those be
hired to imprecate evil on my natal day who say
they are able by their incantations to render days
propitious or unpropitious, yea, let such as are
skillful enough to raise up even leviathan (the
crocodile) from his watery bed, be summoned to
curse that day; " or, as Mason Good has translated
the passage, "0! that night! let it be a barren
rock! let no sprightliness enter into it! let the
sorcerers of the day curse it ! the expertest among
them that can conjure up leviathan!"
The detailed description of leviathan given in
Job xli indisputably belongs to the crocodile, and
it is astonishing that it should ever have been un-
derstood to apply to a whale or a dolphin ; but Lea
(Comm. on Job xli.), following Hastens (Ditq. d*
Lev. Join et Ceto Jones," Brem. 1783), baa labored
hard, though unsu cc es sfu lly, to prove that the levi
• 7/yi 1 ?, *■» njlY an antral «rsa«M.
e Whirlpool, 1. *. sobm a aa mrntlw : tka. ""
Digitized by
Google
LEVIATHAN
than of thU passage It una specks of whale,
probably, be says, the Delphimu orco., v common
grampus. That it can be said to be Use prid* of
any cetacean that his " scales shut up together as
with a close seal," is an assertion that no one can
accept, since every member of this group has •
bod; almost bald and smooth.
LKVITES
1637
of the Mis (C tmlfrU).
The Egyptian crocodile also is certainly the ani-
mal denoted by leviathan in Ps. lxxlv. H:« "Thou,
O God, didst destroy the princes of Pharaoh, the
great crocodile or 'dragon that lieth in the midst
of his rivers' (Er~ xxix. 3) in the Red Sea, and
didst give their bodies to be food for the wild beasts
of the desert."' The leviathan of Ps. civ. 26
seems clearly enough to allude to some great ceta-
cean. The " great and wide sea " must surely be
the Mediterranean, " the great sea," as it is usually
called in Scripture; it would certainly he stretch-
ing the point too far to understand the expression
to rep res en t any part of the Nile. The crocodile,
as is well known, is a fresh-water, not a marine
animal:' it is very probable therefore that some
whale is signified by the term Uriathan in this
passage, and it Is quits an error to assert, as Dr.
Harm (Did. Nat. Bitt. Bib.), Mason Good (Book
of Job translated), Mkbaelis (Supp. 1297), and
Rosenm tiller (quoting Miehaelis in not. ad Boehnrli
Hieroe. hi. 738) have done, that the whale is not
bund in toe Mediterranean. The Oren gladiator
(Gray* — the grampus mentioned above by Lee —
the Phi/tabu antiqtiorum (Gray), or the Rorqual
de la Mediterrnnee (Cuvier), are not uncommon
in the Mediterranean (Fischer, Synops. Mam. 625,
and Laoepede, H. N. da Otoe. 115), and in
ancient times the species may hare been more
Thau is some uncertainty about the leviathan
of Is. xzvil. 1. RosenmUUer (Schol. mle.) thinks
that the word nachath, here rendered serpent, is to
be taken in a wide sense as applicable to any great
monster; and that the prophet, under the term
"leviathan that crooked serpent," is speaking of
Egypt, typified by the crocodile, the usual emblem
of the prince of that kingdom. The Chaldee para-
phrase understands the "leviathan that piercing
serpent " to refer to Pharaoh, and " leviathan that
crooked serpent " to refer to Sennacherib.
As the term leviathan is evidently tued in no
limited sense, it is not improbable that the "levi
athan the piercing serpent,'' or "leviathan the
crooked serpent," uiay denote some species of the
great rock-snakes (Boida) which are cciumon in
South and West Africa, perhaps the ffortulia
Sebas, which Schneider (jtrwpA. ii. 286), under the
synonym Boa hierogh/phica, appears to identify
with the huge serpent represented on the Egyptian
monuments. This python, as well as the crocodile,
was worshipped by the Egyptians, and may well
therefore be understood in this passage to typify
the Egyptian power. Perhaps the English word
mumler may be considered to be as good a transla-
tion of Uv'yalhan as any other that can be found;
and though the crocodile seems to be the animal
more particularly denoted by the Hebrew term,
yet, as has been shown, the whale, and perhaps the
rock-mate also, may be signified under this name.*
[Whale.] Bochart (iii. 769, ed. Rosenm iUler)
says that the Talmudists use the word Uv'ydthan
to denote the crocodile; this however is denied by
Lewysohn (ZodL da Talm. pp. 155, 355), who says
that in the Talmud it always denotes a whale, and
never a crocodile. tor the Talmudical fables about
the leviathan, see Lewysohn (ZoSL da Talm.), in
passages referred to above, and Buxtorf, Lex. Choi.
Talm. s. v. imV W. H.
LETTS (Aeufi; [Vat. Aei««:] Levi*), im-
properly given as a proper name in 1 Esdr. hi. 14.
It is simply a corruption of " the Levite " in Ear
x. 15.
LETTTES (Q»V?n : a, v J„i [Vat. -«-]:
Lenta: also v j^ " , 33: viol Aeuf [Vat. Asusi]:
fHi Levi). The analogy of the names of the other
tribes of Israel would lead us to include under
these titles the whole tribe that traced its descent
from Levi. The existence of another division,
however, within the tribe itself, in the higher office
of the priesthood as limited to the "sons of Aaron,'*
'gave to the common form, in this instance, a
I peculiar meaning. Most frequently the Levitea
a Tb> modem Arable same of crocodile Is timtik.
the wcrd Is derived from the Coptic, emtah, ammh.
whom with ths aspirate gap^u (Herod. U. 69).
WBklns, however (de L. Copt. p. 101), contends that
the word Is of Amble origin. Bes Jahloosk. Optra t.
•37, 287, ad. T* Water, 1804.
» " Ths people Inhabiting the wilderness " — a
poetical expression to denote ths wild beasts ; comp.
* the ants an a people not strong," " the eonlos are
bat a feeble folk " (Prov. zxx. 25, 26). It- other
Interpretations of this passage sss EosenmuU Sekot.,
sad Boehart Males;, p. 818.
• According to Warburton (.Crete, t O. 86), the
sjeeodue Is never now awn br'nw Minyeh, bat It
be stated that Puny (N. H. vill. 25), not He-
, as Mr. Warburton asserts, speaks of croo>
I bring attacked oy dolphins at Cm month of Hie
(fiat. Qiuut. Iv. 2) gives so account
of a contest between these animals. Cuvier thinks
that a species of dog-flih Is meant (Aeanthias vuf-
gnrii), on account of the dorsal spines of which Pliny
speaks, and which no species of dolphin possesses.
d The Hsb. word WIT*} occurs about thirty times
la the 0. T., and It seems clear enough that la every
esse Its nss Is limited to the urptnt trite. If the
LXX. Interpretation of l"T"*i*2 be taken, ths /kting
ail not piercing serpent Is the rendering: the Hab.
"J*u™\ vj?y . tortwmi. Is mors applicable to a serpent
than to any other animal. The expression, " He sbal
■lay the dragon that Is in the sea," reikis also to ths
Kfotisn powe* and Is merely expletive — the <
betes, the eroooMe, which Is In this rait of the -
an unblem of Pharaoh, as lbs ssrpsnt Is In the fa
part of the verm
Digitized by
Google
1638
LEVITES
are distingulsaed, a* such, from the priests (1 K.
rlH. 4; Ezr. U. 70; John L 19, Ao.). and this U the
meaning which has perpetuated itself. Sometimes
the word extends to the whole tribe, the priest
Deluded (Num. xxxr. 2; Josh. xxi. 3, 41; Ex. vi.
95; Lev. xxv. 39, 4c.). Sometimes again it is
added as an epithet of the smaller portion of the
tribe, and we read of "Ike priests the Levites"
(Josh. iii. 8; Ea. xliv. 15). The history of the
tribe, and of the fractions attached to its several
enters, is obviously essential to any right appre-
hension of the history of Israel as a people. They
are the representatives of its faith, the ministers of
its worship. They play at least as prominent a
part in the growth of its institutions, in fostering
or n-preming the higher fife of the nation, as the
clergy of the Christian Church have played in the
history of any European kingdom. It will be the
abject of this article to trace the outlines of that
history, marking out the functions which at differ-
ent periods were assigned to the tribe, and the
mflnenee which its members exercised. This is, it
is believed, a truer method than that which would
attempt to give a more complete picture by com-
bining into one whole the fragmentary notices
which are separated from each other by wide inter-
vals of time, or treating them as if they represented
the permanent characteristics of the order. In the
history of all priestly or quasi-priestly bodies, fcne-
tkms vary with the changes of time and circum-
stances, and to ignore those changes is a sufficient
■roof of incompetency for dealing with the history.
As a matter of convenience, whatever belongs ex-
ehulveiy to the functions and influence of the priest-
hood, will be found under that head [Pkiibt] ; but
It is proposed to treat here of all that is common to
the priests and Lerites, as being together the sacer-
dotal tribe, the dtrif of Israel. The history will
fall naturally into four great periods
I. The time of the Exodus.
II. The period of the Judges.
IH. That of the Monarchy.
IV. That from the Captivity to the destruction
I. The absence of all reference to the consecrated
character of the Levites in the book of Genesis is
noticeable enough. The prophecy ascribed to Jacob
(Gen. xnx. 5-7) was indeed fulfilled with singular
stesbaon ; but the terms of the prophecy are hardly
such as would hare been framed by a later writer,"
after the tribe had gained its subsequent preemi-
nence; and unless we frame some hypothesis to
saeount for this omission sa deliberate, it takes its
a KweM (Scat*. 1.46a) raters the language of flea.
illx. 7 not to the dlstribatkw of the Levites b> their
48 does, bat to the am* when they had faileo late
dtsrepate, and become, as In Jodg. xvu., a wander-
hat, haltmendieant order. Bat see Kaliseh, Gtnuai,
ad lee.
» The Inter awoealoglss, It should be noticed, repre-
dtue the same order. This was natural enough ; bat
s g e n — l og / originating In a later aga, and reflecting
ts atottngs, would probably have changed the order.
.Ooaa*. Ex. vL 16, Num. in. 17, 1 Chr. VI. M.)
« As the names of the les s e r houses recur, some of
■Mas Bwejaently, H may he wall to give them here.
LEVITES
nmee, so far as it goes, among the evidences of tiki
antiquity of that section of Genesis in which these
prophecies -.re found. Tint only occasion on which
the patriarch of the tribe appears — the massacre of
the Sbechemites — may indeed have contributed to
influence the history of his descendants, by fostering;
in them the same fierce wild seal against all that
threatened to violate the purity of their race; bat
generally what strikes us is the absence of all recog-
nition of the later character. In the genealogy of
Gen. xlvi. 11, in Uke manner, the list does not go
lower down than the three sons of Levi, and they
are given in the order of their rirth, not in that
which would have corresponded to the officii.! supe-
riority of the Kohathitos.* There are no signs,
again, that the tribe of Levi had any special pro-
eminence over the others daring the Egyptian bon-
dage. As tracing its descent from Leah, it would
take its place among the six chief tribes sprung tern
the wives of Jacob, and share with them a recog-
nized superiority over those that bore the names of
the sons of Bilhaa and Zilpah. Within the tribe
itself there are seme slight tokens that the Ko-
hathites are gaining the first place. The classifica-
tion of Ex. vi. 16-38 gives to that section of tha
tribe four cams or houses, while those of Gerahon
and Merari have but two each.' To it belo ng ed
the house of Amram; and "Aaron the Levite"
(Ex. iv. 14) is spoken of sa one to whom the peo-
ple wiB be sure to fisten. He marries the dangbtoa
of the chief of the tribe of Judah (Ex. vi. 83).
The work accomplished by him, and by his yet
greater brother, would tend naturally to give prom-
inence to the family and the tribe to which they
belonged ; but as yet there are no traces of a caste-
eharaeter, no signs of any intention to establish an
hereditary priesthood. Up to this time the Israel-
ites had worshipped the God of their fathers after
their fathers' manner. The first-bom of the peo-
ple were the priests of the people. The eldest sob
of each house inherited the priestly office. Hie
youth made him, in his father's lifetime, the repre-
sentative of the purity which was connected from
the beginning with the thought of worship (EwakL,
Ahertham. p. 973, and eomp. Pkikut). It was
apparently with this as their ancestral worship that
the Israelites came op out of Egypt. The "young
men" of the sons of Israel offer sacrifices 1 ' (Ex.
xxiv. 6). They, we may infer, are the priests who
remain with the people while Moses ascends tha
heights of Sinai (xix. 99-94). They represented
the truth that the whole people were " a kingdom
of priests " (xix. 6). Neither they, nor the " offi-
cers and Judges" appointed to
I Aarea. ,
i Koran
Mepfast
Zithrl
UaxM.
atari.
I Mn*hL
* This Is expressly staled m the Inrg.
ea this vans: " And he sent the first-born
of 1st., tw even to that thne the worship
first bom, because the Tabernacle was not
nor the priesthood given to Aaron," etc
as the Ob
wee by Us
yet mall
Digitized by
Google
LEVTTES
idmhusteiing justice (xviii. 36) an connected in
any special manner with the tjibe of Levi. The
Brit step towuds a change m made in the insti-
tation of an hereditary priesthood in the family of
Aaron, during the Brat withdrawal of Mo— to the
solitude of Sinai (xxriii. 1). This, however, was
ooe thing: it was quite another to est apart a whole
tribe of Israel as a priestly caste. The directions
given for the construction of the tabernacle im-
ply do preeminence of the Levitee. The chief
waken in it are from the tribes of Judas and of
Dan (Ex. xxxi. 9-6). The next extension of the
Uaa of the priesthood grew out of the terrible crisis
of Kx. xxxil. If the Levitea had been sharers in
the sin of the golden calf, they were at any rate the
fbrerooet to rally round their leader when he called
on them to help him in stemming the progress of
the evil. And then came that terrible consecration
of themselves, when every man was against his
son and against his brother, and the offering with
which they filled their hands (D?T V ***?*?.
Ex. xxxii. 89, oomp. Ex. xxviii. il) was the blood
of their Merest of kin. The tribe stood forth,
separata and apart, recognising even in this stern
work the spiritual aa higher than the natural, and
therefore counted worthy to be the representative
of the ideal life of the people, " an Israel within an
Israel" (Ewald, Alterlhim. p. 879), chosen in its
higher representatives to offer incense and burnt-
sacrifice before the Lord (Ueut xxxiii. 9, 10), not
without a share in the glory of the Urim and
Thummim that were worn by the prince and chief-
tain of the tribe. From this time accordingly they
eocupieri a distinct position. Experience bad shown
how easily the people might fall back into idolatry
— how necessary it was that there should be a
body of men, an order, numerically large, and when
the people were in their promised home, equally
diftued throughout the eountry, aa witnesses and
guardians of the truth Without this the indi-
vtdoalitm of the older worship would have been
fruitful in an ever-multiplying idolatry. The tribe
of Levi was therefore to take the place of that
earlier priesthood of the first-bom as rapreoentstires
of the holiness of the people. The minds of the
people were to be drawn to the fact of the substi-
tution by the dose numerical correspondence of the
eoneeerated tribe with that of those whom they
replaced. The first-born males were numbered, and
found to be 32,873; the eensus of the Levitea gave
88,000, reckoning in each case from children of one
aonth upwards 11 (Num. iii.). The fixed price for
■he redemption of a victim vowed in sacrifice (oomp.
U*. xxril. 8; Num. xviii. 16) was to be paid for
each of the odd number by which the first-born
van it excess of the Levitee (Num. iii. 47). In
tfab way the latter obtained a sacrificial aa well aa
• The aaptnea amnbsrs In Ham. IU. (Oarshon, 7.800 ;
Kohath, 8,600 ; Sterari, 6\200) give a total of 38400.
The received solution of the discrepancy la that 800
vara the first-born of the Levites, who as such ware
al r ea d y ooneeoretsd. and therefore could not take the
pises of others. Talinudie traditions (Gpwwr. Boa.
tU. Bududrim, quoted by Patrick) add th» the quae
ttan, which of Che Israelites should be redeemed by a
Urite, or which should pay the five shekels, was
tottled by lot. The number of the nrst-bora appears
UsproportJonstelv small, as compared with the popu-
atton. It most be renu m b er ed, however, that the
wall kins to be ralnUed ware that they should be at
nee (1) the ant child of the father. (ft the Sat child
UBVITHS 1689
a priestly character.* They for the first-born ot
men, and their cattle for the firstlings of beasts,
fulfilled the idea that had been asserted at the time
of the destruction of the first-born of Egypt (Ex.
xiii. 18, 13). The commencement of the march
from Sinai gave a prominence to their new char-
actor. As the Tabernacle was the sign of the
presence among the people of their unseen King
so the Levitea were, among the other tribes of
Israel, as the royal guard that waited exclusively
on Him. The warlike title of •< host " is specially
applied to them (oomp. uaa of H^?, in Num. t*.
8,30; and of rr^qQ, inlChr.lx.19). Assuoh
they were not included in the number of the armies
of Israel (Num. i. 47, 11. 83, xxvi. 63), but reck-
oned separately by themselves. When the people
were at rest they encamped as guardians round the
sacred tent; no one else might come near it under
pain of death (Num. 1. 51, xviii. 88). Tbey were
to occupy a middle position in that ascending scale
of consecration, which, starting from the idea of
the whole nation as a priestly people, reached its
culminating point in the high-print who, alone of
all the people, might enter " within the veil." The
Levitee might come nearer than the other tribes;
but they might not sacrifice, nor bum incense, nor
see the " holy things " of the sanctuary till they
were covered (Num. iv. 16). When on the march,
no hands but theirs might strike the tent at the
commencement of the day's Journey, or carry the
parts of its structure during it, or pitch the tent
once again when they halted (Num. i. Ml. It was
obviously essential for such a work that there should
be a fixed assignment of duties; and now accord-
ingly we meet with the first outlines of the organ-
ization which afterwards became permanent. The
division of the tribe into the three sections that
traced their descent from the sons of Levi, formed
the groundwork of it The work which they al
had to do required a man's full strength, and
therefore, though twenty was the starting-point for
military service (Num. i.) they were not to enter
ou their active service till they were thirty e (Num.
iv. 33, 30, 35). At fifty they were to be free from
all duties but those of superintendence (Num. viii.
35, 86). The result of this limitation gave to the
Kohathitea 3,750 on active service out of 8,600; to
the sons of Gershon 3,630 out of 7,500; to thou
of Henri 3,800 out of 6,200 (Num. iv.). Of these
the Kohathitea, as nearest of kin to the priests,
held from the first the highest office*. They were
to bear all the vessels of the sanctuary, the ark
itself Included " (Num. iii, 31, iv. 15; Ueut. xxxl
35), after the priests had covered them with the
dark-blue cloth which was to hide them from all
profane gase; and thus they became also the guar-
of the mother, (8) males. (Oomp. on this question,
and on that of the dlfl e re o ce of numbers, Knrts, fla>
jtw of (As OU Comma. Ul. 301.)
ft Oomp. the recurrence of the asms thought In aha
vzAswis w a awwrsVaa w of Hob. iii. 28.
c The mention of twenty-five iu Nam. vili. 34, as
the age -f entrance, must be understood either of a
probaUoaary period during wbk-h they were trained
for their aulas, or of the Ugh*, work of keeping She
gates of toe tabernacle.
J On mora solemn occasions the priests uummtrm
aaamr as the beaters of the ark (J ash. UL 8, It, ft ■ ■
IK vW. th
Digitized by
Google
1640
LEVITES
I of all the sacred tnuura which the people
had an freely offered. The Gerahonites, in their
turn, had to carry the teot-hanginga and curtaina
(Num. iv. 39-96). The heavier burden of the
boards, ban, and pillars of the Tabernacle fell ou
the sons of Merari. The two latter companies were
allowed, however, to nee the oxen and the wagons
which were offered by the congregation, Merari, in
consideration of its hearier work, baring two-thirds
of the number (Num. rii. 1-9). The more sacred
Teasels of the Kohathites were to be borne by them
on their own shoulders (Num. rii. 9). The Ko-
hathites in this arrangement were placed under the
command of Eleazar, Gershon and Merari under
Ithamar (Num. iv. 28, 88). Before the march
began, the whole tribe was once again solemnly set
apart. The rites (some of them at least) were such
aa the people might hare witnessed in Egypt, and
all would understand their meaning. Their clothes
were to be washed. They themselves, aa if they
were, prior to their separation, polluted and un-
clean, like the leper, or those that had touched the
dead, were to be sprinkled with " water of purify-
ing" (Num. viii. 7, comp. with xix. 13; Lev. xiv.
8, 9), and to (have all their flesh." The people were
then to lay their hands upon the heads of the con-
secrated tribe and ofler them up as their representa-
tives (Num. viii. 10). Aaron, aa high-priest, waa
then to present them aa a wave-offering (turning
tbem, i. e. this way and that, while they bowed
themselves to the four points of the compass; comp.
Abarbanel on Num. viii. 11, and Kurtz, iii. 208),
In token that all their powers of mind and body
were henceforth to be devoted to that service. 6
They, in their turn, were to lay their hands on the
two bullocks which were to be auin as a sin-offering
and burnt-offering for an atonement ("IS?, Num.
viii. 19). Then they entered on their work ; from
one point of view given by the people to Jehovah,
from another given by Jehovah to Aaron and his
sons (Num. iii. 9, viii. 19, xviii. 6). Their very
name is turned into an omen that they will cleave
to the service of the Lord (oomp. the play on 11 v^
and *£ in Num. xviii. 2, *).
The new institution waa, however, to receive a
severe shock from those who were most interested
xi it. The secCan of the Levites whose position
srought them into contact with the tribe of Reuben c
inspired with it to reassert the old patriarchal
system of a household priesthood. The leader of
jmt revolt may have been impelled by a desire to
gain the same height as that which Aaron had
attuned ; but the ostensible pretext, that the " whole
aongregation were holy " (Num. xvi. 3), was one
aiueh would have cut away all the distinctive priv-
« Oomp. the analogous prutloe (differing, however,
Ut being constantly repeated) of the Egyptian priests
(llsrod. H.87 ; comp. Spencer, Dt leg. HA. b.ia.e. 5).
b Solemn as this dedication Is, it fell short of the
consecration of the priests, and was expressed by a
entrant word. [Pantsr.] The Levites were purified,
aot consecrated (comp. Gesen. s. e. ^HtS and tt^TDj
tad Oehler, ». «. " Levi," in Heme's AeaJ-XarjwW.).
* la the encampment in the wilderness, the sons
1 Aaron occupied the foremost place of honor on the
sssk The Kohathites were at their right, en the south,
•as Osnhonitea on the west, the sods of Merari on the
atria of the tabernacle. On the south were also
ftwfeeo, Simeon, and fled (Mum. U. and Iii.).
LEVITES
ilegee of the tribe of which be was a member
When their self-willed ambition had been punished,
when all danger of the sons of Levi u taking tnr
much upon them" waa for the time "h— t—^ ft
was time also to provide more definitely for than,
and so to give them more reason to be satisfied with
what they actually had: and this involved a perma-
nent organization for the future aa wall a* for the
p r e s en t. If they were to have, like other tribes, i
distinct territory assigned to them, their influence
over the people at large would be diminished,
and they themselves would be likely to forget, fa
labors common to them with others, their own
peculiar calling. Jehovah therefore waa to be their
inheritance (Num. xviii. 30; Deut. x. 9, x»iii- 9).
They were to have no territorial possessions. la
place of them they were to receive from the otbas
the tithes of the produce of the land, from which
they, in their torn, offered a tithe to the priests aa
a recognition of their higher consecration (Num.
xviii. 31, 91, 96; Neh. x. 37). Aa if to provide r «
the contingency of failing crops or the like, and
the consequent inadequacy of the tithes thus assigned
to them, the Levite, not leas than the widow and the
orphan, was commended to the special kindness of
the people (Deut. xii. 19, xiv. 27,29). When the
wanderings of the people should be over and the
tabernacle have a settled place, great part of the
labor that had fallen on them would cone to
an end, and they too would nerd a fixed abode.
Concentration round the Tabernacle would lead
to evils nearly as great, though of a different
kind, as an assignment of special territory. Their
ministerial character might thus be intensified, but
their pervading influence as witnesses and teachers
would be sacrificed to H. Distinctness and diffusion
were both to be secured by the assignment to the
whole tribe (the priests included) of forty-eight
cities, with an outlying "suburb" (OTT^O,
wpoaWeu; Num. xxxv. 9) of meadow-land for the
pasturage of their flocks and herd*.'' The reverence
of the people for them was to be heightened by the
selection of six of these aa eitiea of refuge, in which
the Levites were to present themselves aa the pro-
tectors of the fugitives who, though they had not
incurred the guilt, were yet liable to the punish-
ment of murder.' How rapidly the feeling of
reverence gained strength, we may judge from the
share assigned to them ont of the flocks and herds
and women of the conquered Midianites (Num.
xxd. 27, Ac.). The same victory led to the dedica-
tion of gold and silver vessels of great value, anj
thus increased the importance of the tribe aa guar-
dians of the national treasures (Num. xxxi. 60-64)
The book of Deuteronomy i* interesting as in-
dicating more clearly than had been done before
d BeUopolis (Strabo, xtII. 1), Thebes aud Mempblt
In Egypt, and Benares In Hiodoatan, have been referred
to as parallels. The aggregation of priests round a
great national sanctuary, so as to make It as It were
the centre of a collegiate life, was however different la
Its object and results from that of the polity of Israel
(Oomp. Bwald, Geuh. II. 402.)
• The Importance of giving a sacred character ts
such an asylum b snfllclent to account for the sauga-
ment of the cities of refuge to the Levites. Pane,
however, with his charaetarhrtito love of an Inner mesa
Ing, ssse In it the troth that the Levites themsatte)
wen, according to the idVa of their lives, rogitjm
from the world of sense, who had B> and their place a)
lafOfsinOoa.
Digitized by
Google
LK VITUS
<tj other functions, over and above their nilnlstra-
nona in the Tabernaofc, which wen to be allotted
to the tribe of Left. Through the whole land they
were to take the place of the old hounbold priests
(•abject, of course, to the special right* of the
Aarjnie priesthood), sharing in all festivals and
rejoicings (Dent xii. 19, xiv. 36, 37, xxvi. 11).
Every third veer they were to have an additional
share in the produce of the land (Deut. xiv. 38,
xxvi. 13). The people were charged never to for-
sake tbetn. To '•the priests the Levites"* was
to belong the office of preserving, transcribing, and
Interpreting the Law (Deut. xvii. 9-13; xxxl. 36).
They were solemnly to read it every seventh year at
the Feaatof Tabernacles (Deut. xxxi. 9-13). They
wen to pronounce the curses from Mount Ebai
(Dent, zzvii. 14).
Such, if one may so speak, was the ideal of the
religious organization which was present to the
mind of the lawgiver. Details were left to be de-
veloped as the altered circumstances of the people
might require.' The great principle was, that the
warrior-caste who had guarded the tent of the cap-
tain of the hosts of Israel, should be throughout
the bud as witnesses that the people still owed
aUrghT to Him. It deserves notice that, as yet,
with the exception of the few passages that refer to
the priests, no traces appear of their character as a
learned caste, and of the work which afterwards
lieawund to them as hymn-writers and musicians.
The hymns of this period were probably occasional,
not recurring (oomp. Ex. xv. ; Num. xxi. 17 ; Deut.
xxxiL ). Women bore a Luge share in singing them
(Ex. xv. SO; Ps. lxviii. 25). It is not unlikely
that the wives and daughters of the Levites, who
must have been with them in all their encamp-
nenta, as afterwards in their cities, took the fore-
nost part among the '• damsels playing with their
timbrels,"* or among the "wise-hearted," who
wove hangings for the decoration of the Tabernacle.
There are at any rate signs of their presence there,
in the mention of the "women that assembled " at
its door (Ex. xxxviii. 8, and comp. Ewalcl, AU
Urlkam. p. 897).
II. The successor of Moses, though belonging to
another tribe, did faithfully all that could be done
to convert this idea into a reality. The submission
of the Gibeonites, after they had obtained a promise
that their lives should be spared, enabled him to re-
lieve the tribe-divisions of Gerahon and Merari of
the most burdensome of their duties. The con-
quered Hivites became " hewers of wood and draw-
ers of water " for the house of Jehovah and for the
congregation (Josh. ix. 27).<* As soon as the con-
querors had advanced far enough to proceed to a
partition of the country, the forty-eight cities were
to them. Whether they were to be the
LEVITES
1641
• This phraseology, chemeterlsua of Deuteronomy
and Joshua, appears to Indicate that the functions
spoken of Belonged to them si the chief members of
the sacred tribe, as a elerirv rather than as priests In
ass narrower sense of the word.
s To thai then Is one remarkable exception. Deut.
vUL 6 provides for a permanent dedication as the re-
sult of personal seal going beyond the flx-d period of
service that came In rotation, and entitled accordingly
to Its reward.
e Comp., as Indicating their p r ese nc e and functions
■ a later data, 1 Chr. xxv. \ 6.
d The Nethlnfan (See duti) of 1 Ohr. Ix. 3, to.
«JL were probably sprung from captives taken by
sole occupiers of the cities thus allotted, or whether
— as the rule for the redemption of their houses h
Lev. xxv. 33 might seem to indicate — others were
allowed to reside when they had been provided for,
must remain uncertain. The principle of a widely
diffused influence was maintained by allotting, as a
rule, four cities from the district of each tribe; but
it is Interesting to notice how, In the details of the
distribution, the divisions of the Levites in the order
of their precedence ooincided with the relative im-
portance of the tribes with which they were con-
nected. The following table will help the reader
to form a judgment on this point, and to trace the
influence of the tribe in the subsequent events of
Jewish history.*
L KoBumrss:
A. Priests ..
i Judah and Simeon .... 9
| Benjamin 4
( Uphraim 4
B. Mot Masts i Dan 4
Half afanasseh (West) . . S
Half Hanssaeh (But) . . 2
Issachar 4
Asher .... 4
Naphtall 8
Zebulun 4
Reuben 4
(lad 4
n.
ru. kunusrras
The scanty memorials that are left us in the book
of Judges fail to show how far, for any length of
time, the reality answered to the idea. The ravages
of invasion, and the pressure of an alien rule,
marred the working of the organization which
seemed so perfect. Levitical cities, such as Aijalon
(Josh. xxi. 24; Jndg. i. 35) and Gezer (Josh. xxi.
21; 1 Chr. vi. 67), fall into the hands of then
enemies. Sometimes, as in the case of Nob, others
apparently took their place. The wandering, un-
settled habits of the Levites who are mentioned in
the later chapters of Judges, are probably to ra
traced to this loss of a fixed abode, and the con
sequent necessity of taking refuge in other cities,
even though their tribe as such had no portion in
them. The tendency of the people to fall into the
idolatry of the neighboring nations, showed either
that the Levites foiled to bear their witness to the
truth or had no power to enforce it. Even in the
lifetime of Phinehaa, when the high-priest was still
consulted as an oracle, the reverence which the
people felt for the tribe of Levi becomes the occa-
sion of a rival worship (Judg. xvii.). The old
household priesthood revives/ and there is the risk
of the national worship breaking up into individ-
ualism. Micah first consecrates one of his own
sons, and then tempts a homeless Levite tc dwell
with him as " a father and a priest " for little more
David In later wars, who wen assigned to the sarvtaa
of the Tabernacle, replacing possibly the Olbconltes
who had been slain by Saul (2 Sam. xxi. 1).
« • For the local position of the forty -eight Levities)
dues, ss distributed among the different tribes, see es-
pecially Plate lv. No. 9(p. 27) In Clark's Bible Adas of
Maps and Plant (Load. 1868). For convenience of ref
ennce smalt capitals an employed to distinguish the
Priests' cltlak. to* letter B to distinguish the does of
refuge, and an astern! to denote those which an net
identified. Twenty ow. of the forty-eight belong la
this third class. B
/ Compare, on the extent of this relapse Into esj
earlier syst em, KaUseb. «■) transits, xttx. 7.
Digitized by
Google
1642
LEVITES
flan his food and raiment The Levite, though
probably the grandson of Motes himself, repeat* the
sin of Koran. [Jonathax.] First in the house
of Micah, and then for the emigrant* of Dan, ha
exercises the office of a priest with " an ephod, and
a teraphlm, and a graven image." With this ex-
ception the whole tribe appears to hare fallen into
a condition analogous to that of the clergy in the
darkest period and in the most outlying districts
of the Mediaaval Chuich, going through a ritual
routine, but exercising no influence for good, at once
corrupted and corrupting. The shameless license
of the sons of Eli mar be looked upon as the result
of a long period of decay, affecting the whole order.
When the priests were such as Hophni and Phine-
has, we may fairly assume that the Levites were not
doing much to sustain the moral life of the people.
The work of Samuel was the starting-point of a
batter time. Himself a Lerite, and, though not a
priest, belonging to that section of the Levites which
was nearest to the priesthood (1 Chr. vi. 38),
adopted, as it were, by a special dedication, into the
priestly line and trained for its offices (1 Sam. ii.
18), he appears as infusing a fresh life, the author
of a new organization. There is no reason to think,
indeed, that the companies or schools of the sons of
the prophets which appear in his time (1 Sam. x.
5), and are traditionally said to have been founded
by him, consisted exclusively of Levites; but there
are many signs that the members of that tribe
formed a large element in the new order, and re-
ceived new strength from it. It exhibited, indeed,
the ideal of the Levite life as one of praise, devotion,
teaching, standing in the same relation to the priest*
and Levites generally as the monastic institutions of
the fifth century, or the mendicant orders of the
thirteenth, did to the secular clergy of Western
Europe. The fact that the Levites were thus
brought under the influence of a system which ad-
dressed itself to the mind and heart in a greater de-
gree than the sacrificial functions of the priesthood,
may possibly have led them on to apprehend the
higher truths as to the nature of worship which
begin to be asserted from this period, and which
are nowhere proclaimed more clearly than in the
great hymn that bears the name of Asaph (Vs. 1.
7-18). The man who raises the name of prophet
to a new significance is himself a Levite (1 Sam. ix.
S). It is among them that we find the first signs
of the musical skill which is afterwards so oonspic-
bous in the Levites (1 Sam. x. 5). The order in
which the Temple services were arranged is ascribed
to two of the prophets, Nathan and Gad (3 Chr.
xxix. 28), who must have grown up under Samuel's
superintendence, and In part to Samuel himself (1
Chr. ix. S3). Asaph and Heman, the Psalmists,
bear the same title as Samuel the Seer (1 Chr. xxv.
5; 3 Chr. xxix. 80). The very word >> prophesy-
ing " la applied not only to sudden bursts of song,
bat to the organized psalmody of the Temple (1
Chr. xxv. 3, 8). Even of those who bore the name of
* prophet in a higher sense, a large number are
tneeably of this tribe.*
m. The capture of the Ark by the Philistines
did not entirely interrupt the worship of the Is-
iselites, and the ministrations of the Levites went
* It may be worth whDe to Indicate th* extant of
Us connection. As prophet*, who an also priests,
M have Jeremiah (Jer. I. 1), BaskM (ft. I. 8),
•Mriah the Km or Oded (2 Chr. XT. 1), ZseharUi (S
*». xxtv. 90). Internal evidence tsnds to the ana
LEVITES
on, first at Sbjfoh (1 Sam. xiv. 3), then for attui
at Nob (1 Sam. xxii. 11), afterwards at Gihsoa
(1 K. iii. 4; 1 Chr. xvi 89). The history of the
return of the ark to Beth-ahemeah after it* ns|itsss
by the Philistines, and its subsequent removal to
Kirjath-jearim, point* apparently to some Strang*
complications, rising out of the anomalies of this
period, and affecting, in nine measure, the position
of the tribe of Levi. Seth-shemesh was, by the
original assignment of the conquered country, one
of the cities of the priests (Josh. xxi. IS). They,
however, do not appear In the narrative, unless w*
assume, against all probability, that the men of
Beth-ahemesh who were guilty of the act of pro-
fanation were themselves of the prustiy order.
Levites indeed are mentioned as doing their ap-
pointed work (1 Sam. vi. 16), but the sacrifices
and burnt-offerings are offered by the men of the
city, as though the special function of the priest-
hood bad been usurped by others; and on this sup-
position it is easier to understand bow those who
had set aside the Law of Hoses by one offense
should defy it also by another. The singular read-
ing of the LXX. in 1 Sam. vi. 19 Oral oIik faiii-
rurar of viol 'I«xoriov (V toii fyfpwri TkuBcaftbs
Sri floor Ki/hrror Kvplov), indicates, if we assume
that it rest* upon some corresponding Hebrew text,
a struggle between two opposed parties, one guilty
of the profanation, the other — possibly the Levite*
who had been before mentioned — zealous in their
remonstrances against it Then come*, rther a*
the result of this collision, or by direct supet natural
infliction, the great slaughter of the Beth-sbemitaa,
and they shrink from retaining the ark any longer
among them. The great Eben (stone) becomes, by
a slight paronomastic change In its form, the " great
Abel" (lamentation), and the name remains as a
memorial of the sin and of its punishment [BrrH-
8HEMK8H.] We are left entirely in the dark as to
the reasons which led them, after this, to send tho
ark of Jehovah, not to Hebron or some other priest-
ly city, but to Kirjath jearim, round which, so far
as we know, there gathered legitimately no sacred
associations. It bsa been commonly assumed in-
deed that Ablnadab, under whose guardianship it
remained for twenty years, must necessarily have
been of the tribe of Levi. [Abdiadab.] Of this,
however, there is not the slightest direct evidence,
and against it there is th* language of David in 1
Chr. xv. 3, " None ought to carry the ark of God
but the Levites, for them hath Jehovah chosen,"
which would lose half its force if it were not meant
as a protest against a recent innovation, and tho
ground of a return to the more ancient order. So
far as one can see one's way through these perplex-
ities of a dark period, the most probable explana-
tion — already suggested under KiBJATn-jxABZM
— seems to be the following. The old names of
Baaleh (Josh. xv. 9) and Kirjath-baal (Josh. xv.
60) suggest there had been of old some special
sanctity attached to the place as the centre of a
Canaanite local worship. The fact that the ark
was taken to the house of Abinadab In the kill (1
Sam. Til. 1), the Gibeah of 3 Sam. vi. 3, connect*
itself with that old Canaanitish reverence for Us*
places, which through the whole history of the
eeneludonaatoJoal, aficsb, Babskkuk, Hagfai, I
arlah, and even Isaiah himself. Jahaatel (1 Chr. :
11) appears as at one* a prophet and a Levite. ~~
Is a balance of probability on the same side ss to M»
Hanaoi, th* second Oded, and Ahljah of Sbllob.
Digitized by
Google
LEVITES
Israelites, continued to have inch strong attractions
lor them. Then may hare teemed to the panic-
stricken inhabitants of that district, mingling old
things and new, the worship of Jehovah with tb"
lingering superstitious of the oonqoered people
sufficient grounds to determine their choice of a
locality. The consecration (the word used is the
special sacerdotal term) of Eleazar as the guardian
of the ark is, on this hypothesis, analogous in its
way to the other irregular assumptions which char-
acterize this period, though here the offense was
less flagrant, and did not involve apparently the
performance of any sacrificial acts. While, however,
this aspect of the religious condition of the people
brings the Leritical and priestly orders before us
as having lost the position they had previously oc-
cupied, there were other influences at work tending
to reinstate them.
The rule of Samuel and his sons, and the pro-
phetical character now connected with the tribe,
tended to give them the position of a ruling caste.
In the strong desire of the people for a king, we may
perhaps trace a protest against the assumption by
the Levites of a higher position than that originally
assigned. The reign of Saul, in its later period,
was at any rate the assertion of a self-willed power
against the priestly order. The assumption of the
sacrificial office, the massacre of the priests at Nob,
the slaughter of the Gibeonites who were attached
to their service, were parts of the same policy, and
the narrative of the condemnation of Saul for the
two former sins, no less than of the expiation re-
quired for the Utter (3 Sam. xxi.), shows by what
strong measures the truth, of which that policy was
a subversion, had to be impressed on the minds of
the Israelites. The reign of David, however, brought
the change from persecution to honor. The Levites
were ready to welcome a king who, though not of
their tribe, had been brought up under their train-
ing, was skilled in their arts, prepared to share even
in some of their ministrations, and to array him-
self in their apparel (2 Sam. vi. 14), and 4,600 of
their number with 3,700 priests waited upon David
at Hebron — itself, it should be remembered, one of
the priestly cities — to tender their allegiance (1 Chr.
xu. 98) When his kingdom was established, there
came a fuller organization of the whole tribe. Its
position in relation to the priesthood was once again
definitely recognized. When the ark was carried up
to its new resting-place in Jerusalem, their claim
to be the bearers of it was publicly acknowledged
(1 Chr. xt. 3). When the sin of Uzzah stopped the
procession, it was placed for a time under the care
of Obed-Edom of Oath — probably Gath-rimmon
— as one of the chiefs of the Kohathites (1 Chr.
xtti. 13; Josh. xxf. 34; 1 Chr. xt. 18).
In the procession which attended the ultimate
•onveyauce of the ark to its new resting-place, the
I*rites were conspicuous, wearing their linen eph-
ods, and appearing in their new character as min-
LEVITES
1648
lntl
The
o.
6
There are 24 ootnm of the priests, 24,000 Levites
« general business of the Temple (1 Chr. xxllL 4;
number of singers is 288 — 12 x 24 (1 Chr. xxr
There Is, however, a curious Jewish tradltm« that
schoolmasters of Israel were of the tribe of Sur-
(Solom. Jarehi on Oen. xlix. 7, In Oedwra s JfoMi
Aaron).
In 1 Chr. B. 6 the four names of 1 E. It. 81 as-
r as belonging to the tribe of Jndah, and Is the
4 gene r a ti on after Jacob. On the other hand the
strels (1 Chr. xv. 37, 28). In the worship of tb*
Tabernacle under David, as afterwards in that ot
the Temple, we may trace a development of the
simpler arrangements of the wilderness and of Sbi-
loh. The Levites were the gatekeepers, vergers, sac-
ristans, choristers of the central sanctuary of the
nation. They were, in the language of 1 Chr. pill
34-32, to which we may refer as almost the focus
clauiaa on this subject, " to wait on the sons of
Aaron for the service of the house of Jehovah, in
the courts, and the chambers, and the purifying of
all holy things." This included the duty of pro-
viding « for the shew-bread, and the fine floor for
meat-offering, and for the unleavened bread." They
were, besides this, ■' to stand every morning to thank
and praise Jehovah, and likewise at even." They
were lastly " to offer " — i. e. to assist the priests
in offering — "all burnt-sacrifices to Jehovah in the
sabbaths and on the set feasts." They lived for the
greater part of the year in their own cities, and came
up a( fixed periods to take their turn of work (1
Chr. xxv., xxvi.). How long it lasted we have no
sufficient data for determining. The predominance
of the number twelve as the basis of classification •
might seem to indicate monthly periods, and tht
festivals of the new moon would naturally suggest
such an arrangement. The analogous order in the
civil and military administration (1 Chr. xxvii. 1)
would tend to the same conclusion. It appears, in-
deed, that there was a change of some kind every
week (1 Chr. ix. 25; 2 Chr. xiiii. 4, 8); but this
is of course compatible with a system of rotation,
which would give to each a longer period of resi-
dence, or with the permanent residence of the leader
of each division within the precincts of the sanctu-
ary. Whatever may have been the system, we must
bear in mind that the duties now imposed upon the
Levites were such as to require almost continuous
practice. They would need, when their turn came,
to be able to bear their parts in the great choral
hymns of the Temple, and to take each his ap-
pointed share in the complex structure of a sacri-
ficial liturgy, and for this a special study would be
required. The education which the Levites received
for their peculiar duties, no less than their connec-
tion, more or less intimate, with the schools of the
prophets (see above), would tend to make them, so
for as there was any education at all, the teachers
of others," the transcribers and interpreters of the
Law, the chroniclers of the times in which they
lived. We have some striking instances of their
appearance in this new character. One of them,
Ethan the Ezrahite,* takes his place among the old
Hebrew sages who were worthy to be compared with
Solomon, and (Ps. lxxxix. title) his name appears at
the writer of the 89th 1'salra (1 K. It. 81 j 1 Chr.
xv. 17). One of the first to bear the title d
" Scribe " is a Lerito (1 Chr. xxhr. 6), and this b
mentioned as one of their special offices under Jo-
siah (2 Chr. xxxiv. 13). They are described as
names of Heman and Kthan are prominent among toe
Levites under Solomon {infra) ; and two psalms, one
of which Ulongs manttestlj to a later date, art as-
cribed to them, with this title of Btrafattt attached
(Ps. lxxxvUl. and lxxxix). The difficulty arises proe-
at./ out if tome confusion of the later and the earlier
names. Bwald's oonjectnre, that conspicuous minstrels
of other tribes were received Into the choir of the
Temple, and then reckoned as Levites, would gfve s
new aspect to the influence of the tribe. fConrp
Art. BUth. L US; Ot Wttte, Ptalnun, KMeit f HI
Digitized by
Google
1644
LEVITES
•* officers and judges " under David (1 Chr. xxri.
19), and at aucb are employed " in all the business
of Jehorah, and in the serrice of the king." The;
are the agents of Jehoshaphat and Hezekiah in their
work of reformation, and are sent forth to proclaim
and enforce the law (2 Chr. xvii. 8, xxx. 23). Un-
der Josiah the function has passed into a title, and
the; are " the Levites that taught all Israel " (3
Chr. xxzv. 3). The two books of Chronicles bear
.unmistakable marks of having been written by men
whose interests were all gathered round the services
of the Temple, and who were familiar with its rec-
ords. The materials from which they compiled
their narratives, and to which they refer as the
works of seers and prophets, were written by men
who were probably Levites themselves, or, if not,
were associated with them.
The former subdivisions of the tribe were recog-
nized in the assignment of the new duties, and the
Kohathitea retained their old preeminence. They
have four " princes " (1 Chr. xr. 5-10), while Me-
rari and Gerabon have but one each. They sup-
plied, from the families of the Izharites and He-
bronites, the " officers and judges " of 1 Cbr. xxvi.
80. To them belonged the sons of Korah, with
Heman at their head (1 Chr. ix. 19), playing upon
psalteries and harps. They were " over the work
of the service, keepers of the gates of the taber-
nacle" (I. c). It was their work to prepare the
shew-bread every Sabbath (1 Chr. ix. 32). The
Gershonites were represented in like manner in the
Temple-choir by the sons of Asaph (1 Chr. vi. 39,
XT. 17); Merari by the sons of Ethan or Jeduthun
(1 Chr. vi. 44, xvi. 42, xxv. 17). Now that the
heavier work of conveying the tabernacle and its
equipments from place to place was no longer re-
quired of them, and that psalmody had become the
most prominent of their duties, they were to enter
on their work at the earlier age of twenty (1 Chr.
xxiii. 24-27 ).<"
As in the old days of the Exodus, so in the
organization under David, the Levites were not in-
eluded in the general census of the people (1 Chr.
xxi. 6), and formed accordingly no portion of its
military strength. A separate census, made appar-
ently before the change of age just mentioned (1
Chr. xxiii. 3), gives —
24,000 over the work of the Temple.
6,000 officers and judges.
4,000 porters, i. e. gate-keepers, 6 and, as such,
bearing arms (1 Chr. ix. 19; 3 Chr.
xxxi. 2).
4,000 praising Jehovah with instruments.
The latter number, however, must have included
the full choruses of the Temple. The more skilled
musicians among the sons of Heman, Asaph, and
Jeduthun are numbered at 288, in 24 sections of
13 each. Here again the Kohathites are promi-
nent, having 14 out of the 24 sections; while Ger-
shon has 4 and Merari 8 (1 Chr. xxv. 8-4). To
these 288 were assigned apparently a more perma-
nent residence in the Temple (1 Chr. ix. 33), and
in the villages of the Netophathites near Bethle-
hem (1 Chr. ix. 16), mentioned long afterwards as
kthabited by the " sons of the singers" (Neh. xii. 38).
The revolt of the ten tribes, and the policy pur-
LEVITKS
sued by Jeroboam, led to a great charge in tfat
position of the Levites. They were the witnesses
of an appointed order and of a central worship.
He wished to make the priests the creatures and
instruments of the king, and to establish a provin
eial and divided worship. The natural result was,
that they left the cities assigned to them in the
territory of Israel, and gathered round the metrop-
olis of Judah (2 Chr. xi. 13, 14). Their influence
over the people at large was thus diminished, and
the design of the Mosaic polity so far frustrated ;
but their power as a religious order was probably
increased by this concentration within narrower
limits. In the kingdom of Judah they were, from
this time forward, a powerful body, politically ae
well as ecclesiastically. They brought with them
the prophetic element of influence, in the wider aa
well as in the higher meaning of the word. We ac-
cordingly find them prominent in the war of Abyah
against Jeroboam (2 Chr. xiii. 10-12). They are,
as before noticed, sent out by Jehoshaphat to in-
struct and judge the people (2 Chr. xix. 8-10).
Prophets of their order encourage the king in his
war against Moab and Ammon, and go before his
army with their loud Hallelujahs (2 Chr. xx. 21),
and join afterwards in the triumph of bis return.
The apostasy that followed on the marriage of Jeho-
rara and Athaliah exposed them for a time to the
dominance of a hostile system ; but the services of
the Temple appear to have gone on, and the Levites
were again conspicuous in the counter-revolution
effected by Jehoiada (3 Chr. xxiii.), and in restoring
the Temple to its former stateliness under Joash (3
Chr. xxiv. 5). They shared in the disasters of the
reign of Amaziah (2 Chr. xxv. 24), and in the pros-
perity of Uzziah, and were ready, we may believe,
to support the priests, who, as representing their
order, opposed the sacrilegious usurpation of the
latter king (2 Chr. xxvi. 17). The closing of the
Temple under Ahaz involved the cessation at once
of their work and of their privileges (2 Chr. xxviii.
24). Under Hezekiah they again became promi-
nent, as consecrating themselves to the special work
of cleansing and repairing the Temple (2 Chr. xxix.
12-15); and the hymns of David and of Aaaph were
again renewed. In this instance it was thought
worthy of special record that those who were simply
Levites were more " upright in heart " and zealous
than the priests themselves (2 Chr. xxix. 34) ; and
thus, in that great Passover, they took the place of
the unwilling or unprepared members of the priest-
hood. Tbeir old privileges were restored, they were
put forward aa teachers (2 Chr. xxx. 22), and the
payment of tithes, which had probably been discon-
tinued under Ahaz, was renewed (2 Chr. xxxi. 4).
The genealogies of the tribe were revised (ver. 17),
and the old classification kept its ground. The
reign of Manaaseh was for them, during the greater
part of it, a period of depression. That of Josiah
witnessed a fresh revival and reorganization (8 Chr.
xxxiv.8-13). In the great paasover of his eighteenth
year they took their place as teachers of the people,
as well as leaders of their worship (2 Chr. xxxv. 3, 15).
Then came the Egyptian and Chaldean invasions
and the rule of cowardly and apostate kings. The
sacred tribe itself showed itself unfaithful. The
a The change Is Indicated In what an des cribed a*
Jt» n last words of David." The king: <•*!», In his old
lee, that a time of rest has come for himself and for
fas people, and that the Lrvttrs have » right to share
to It They an now the ministers — not, as beta*
the warrior-host — of the U ns ee n King.
» Ps. cxxxlv. acquires a frarh Interest whan vs>
think of it aa the song of the nlghteantrias st (to
Tetania.
Digitized by
Google
LEVITES
tpcated proteaU of the priest Eeeklel indicate that
they had shared in the idolatry of the people. The
prominence Into which they had been brought in
the reigns of the two reforming kingi had appar-
ently tempted them to Dunk that they might en-
croach permanently on the apeeial Amotions of the
priesthood, and the sin of Koran waa renewed (Ex.
xliv. 10-14, xlviii. 11). They had, a* the penalty
of their ain, to witness the destruction of the Tem-
ple, and to taste the bitterness of exile.
IV. After the Captivity. The position taken
by the Levites in the first movements of the return
bom Babylon indicates that they had cherished the
traditions and maintained the practices of their
tribe. They, we may believe, were those who were
specially called on to sing to their conquerors one
ef the songs of Zion (De Watte, on Ps. cxxxvii.).
It ia noticeable, however, that in the first body of
returning exiles they are present in a dispropor-
tionately small number (Ear. ii. 36-42). Those
who do come take their old parte at the foundation
and dedication of the second Temple (Ear. iii. 10,
vi. 18). In the next movement under Ezra their
reluctance (whatever may have been its origin")
was even more strongly marked. None of them
presented themselves at the first great gathering
(Ear. viii. 15). The special efforts of Ezra did not
succeed in bringing together more than 38, and
their place had to be filled by 220 of the Nethinim
(to. 20).* Those who returned with him resumed
their functions at the Feast of Tabernacles aa
teachers and interpret*™ (Neh. viii. 7), and those
who were most active in that work were foremost
slao in chanting the hymn-like prayer which appears
in Neh. ix. as the last great effort of Jewish psalm-
ody. They are recognized in the great national cove-
nant, and the ofleriugs and tithes which were their
due are once more solemnly secured to them (Neh.
x. 17-39). They take their old places in the Tem-
ple and in the villages near Jerusalem (Neh. xii.
29), and are present in full array at the great feast
of the Dedication of the Wall. The two prophets
who ware active at the time of the Return, Haggai
and Zechariah, if they did not belong to the tribe,
helped it forward in the work of restoration. The
strongest measures are adopted by Nehemiah, aa
before by Ezra, to guard the purity of their blood
from the contamination of mixed marriages (Ezr. x.
93); and they are made the special guardians of
the holiness of the Sabbath (Neh. xiii. 22). The
last prophet of the O. T. sees, aa part of his vision
of the latter days, the time when the Lord '■ shall
purify the sons of Levi " (Mai. iii. 3).
The guidance of the O. T. fails us at this point,
tend the history of the Lerites in relation to the
national life becomes consequently a matter of in-
ference and conjecture. The synagogue worship,
then originated, or receiving a new development,
was organized irrespective!}' of them [Stnaoooue],
and thus throughout the whole of Palestine there
were means of instruction in the Law with which
they were not connected. This would tend nat-
urally to diminish their peculiar claim on the
Tsrerence of the people; but where a prieat or
Levue was present in the synagogue they were still
■ May we conjecture that the language of Ku-lel
sad led to some jealousy between the two orders ?
* There la a Jewish tradition (Surenhuiios, Jftsfou,
•VM, ix. 10) to the effect that, aa a punishment for
foil backwardness, aura deprived them of their tithes,
M trearhrrad the right to the priests.
LEVITES 1645
entitled to some kind of precedence, and special
sections In the lessons for the day were assigned to
them (Lightfoot, Hor. Htb. on Halt ir. 23).
During the period that followed the Captivity they
contributed to the formation of the so-called Great
Synagogue. They, with the prieata, theoretically
constituted and practically formed the majority of
the permanent Sanhedrim (Haimonidea in light-
foot, Hor. Htb. on Halt. xxvi. 3), and aa such had
a large share in the administration of justice even in
capital cases. In the characteristic feature of this
period, aa an age of scribes succeeding to an age
of prophets, they too were likely to be sharers.
The training and previous history of the tribe would
predispose them to attach themselves to the new
system aa they had done to the old. They accord-
ingly may have been among the scribes and elders,
who accumulated traditions. They may have at-
tached themselves to the sects of Pharisees and
Sadduceea.' But in proportion aa they thus ac-
quired fame and reputation Individually, their func-
tions aa Levitea became subordinate, and they were
known simply as the inferior ministers of the
Temple. They take no prominent part in the
Maccabnan struggles, though they must have been
present at the great purification of the Temp*.
They appear but seldom in the history of the
N. T. Where we meet with their names it ia aa
the type of a formal heartless worship, without
sympathy and without love (Luke x. 32).'' The
same parable indicates Jericho sa having become —
what it had not been originally (aee Josh, xxi., 1
Chr. vi.) — one of the great stations at which they
and the prieata resided (Lightfoot, Cent. Choro-
graph. e. 47). In John i. 19 they appear aa dele-
gates of the Jews, that ia of the Sanhedrim, coming
to inquire into the credentials of the Baptist, and
giving utterance to their own Messianic expecta-
tions. The mention of a Levite of Cyprus in Acta
lr. 36 shows that the changes of the previous
century had carried that tribe also into u the dis-
persed among the Gentiles." The conversion of
Barnabas and Mark waa probably no solitary in-
stance of the reception by them of the new faith,
which waa the fulfillment of the old. If '« a gnat
company of the priests were obedient to the faith "
(Acts vi. 7), it ia uot too bold to believe that their
influence may hare led Levitea to follow their exam-
ple; and thus the old psalms, and possibly also the
old chant* of the Temple-service, might be trans-
mitted through the agency of those who had been
specially trained in them, to be the inheritance of
the Christian Church. Later on in the history of
the first century, when the Temple had received its
final completion under the younger Agrippa, w*
find one section of the tribe engaged in a new
movement. With that strange unconsciousness of
a coming doom which so often marks the hut stag*
of a decaying system, the aingera of the Temple
thought it a fitting time to apply for the right of
weiring the same linen garment as the priest*, and
persuaded the king that the concession of thai
privilege would be the glory of his reign (Joseph.
Ant. xx. 8, § 6). The other Levites at the same
time asked for and obtained the privilege of Joining
a The 11* of Joaephus may be taken a* an example
of the education of the higher members of the order
(Jos. Kite, e. i.).
* • Levites, though net named, are referred *o a* s
Temple-police in Luke nil. 62, acts It. 1, en J v. M
[Oafum.] B.
Digitized by
Google
1646
LJSVlTJStt
m tha Temple choruses, from which hitherto they
bad been excluded." The destruction of the Tem-
ple to aoon after the; had attained the object of
their desires came as with a grim irony to sweep
away their occupation, and so to deprive them of
eveiy vestige of that which had distinguished them
from other Israelites. They were merged in the
crowd of captives that were scattered over the
Roman world, and disappear from the stage of
history. The Rabbinic schools, that rose oat of
the ruins of the Jewish polity, fostered a studied
and habitual depreciation of the Levita order as
compared with their own teachers (M'Caul, Old
Path*, p. 436). Individual families, it may be,
cherished the tradition that their fathers, as priests
or Levitas, had taken part in the services of the
Temple. 6 If their claims were recognized, they
received the old marks of reverence in the worship
of the synagogue (comp. the Regulations of the
Great Synagogue of London, in Hargoliouth's
History of Jews in Great Britain, iii. 270), took
precedence in reading the lessons of the day (Light-
mot, flur. Heb. on Matt. iv. 23), and pronounced
the blessing at the close (Basnage, But. dei Jvift,
vi. 790). Their existence was acknowledged in some
of the laws of the Christian emperors (Basnage,
L c). The tenacity with which the exiled race
clung to these recollections is shown in the prev-
alence of the names (Cohen, and Levita or Levy)
which imply that those who bear them are of the
sons of Aaron or the tribe of Levi; and in the
custom which exempts the first-born of priestly or
Levite families from the payments which are still
offered, in the case of others, sa the redemption of
the first-bom (Leo of Modena, in Heart's CM.
monies RcUgittuts, i. 26; Allen's Modern Judaism,
p. 297). In the mean time the old name had ac-
quired a new signification. The early writers of
the Christian Church applied to the later hierarchy
the language of the earlier, and gave to the bishops
and presbyters the title (Uptls) that had belonged
to the sons of Aaron; while the deacons were
habitually spoken of as Levites (Suioer, Tht*. a. v.
*eufnj»)-*
The extinction or absorption of a tribe which had
borne so prominent a part in the history of Israel,
was, like other such changes, an instance of the
order in which the shadow is succeeded by the
substance — that which is decayed, is waxing old,
and ready to vanish away, by a new and more
living organisation. It had done its work, and it
had lost its life. It was bound up with a localised
and exclusive worship, and had no place to occupy
in that which was universal. In the Christian
Church — supposing, by any effort of imagination,
that it had had a recognized existence in it — it
would have been simply an impediment. Looking
at the long history of which the outline has bees
here traced, we find in it the light and darkness,
the good and evil, which mingle in the character
of most corporate or caste societies. On the one
hand, the Levites, as a tribe, tended to (all into a
farraal worship, a narrow and exclusive exaltation
a The tone of Joseph™ Is noticeable as being that
Sf a man who looked on the change as a dangerous
hutovmtton. As a priest, ha saw in this movement of
Jie Levitas aa tntrruioo on the privileges of his
srasr ; and this was, In bis Judgment, one of the sins
Which brought on the destruction of the ettjr and the
LKVITICUH
of themselves and of their country. Ob the othst
hand, we must not forget that they were chosen,
together with the priesthood, to bear witness of
great truths which might otherwise hare r««<«li«4
from remembrance, and that they bore it wet
through a long succession of centuries. To mem-
bers of this tribe we owe many separate books of
the O. T., and probably also in great measure the
preservation of the whole. The hymns which they
sung, in part probably the music of which they
were the originators, have been perpetuated in the
worship of the Christian Church. In the company
of prophets who have left behind them no written
records they appear conspicuous, united by common
work and common interests with the prophetic
order. They did their work as a national ctertsy,
instruments in raising the people to a higher lite,
educating them in the knowledge on which all
order and civilization rest. It is not often, in the
history of the world, that a religious caste or
order has passed away with more claims to the
respect and gratitude of mankind than the tribe of
Levi.
(On the subject generally may be consulted, in
addition to the authorities already quoted, Carpaor,
Afpar. CriU b. 1. c 5, and Avmotat.; SaalschGts,
ArchSoL dtr Htbr. c 78; Michaelis, Oman, en
Lam of Mow, i. art. 52.) E. H. P.
IiEVrriOUS ftnr?»3), the first word in the
book, giving it its name: AtvlruroV: Ltvtikmn
called also by the later Jews D^rJS Hn'Vl,
"Law of the priests;" and rVD^Tj? FHIR,
» Law of offerings."
Cohtxhts. — The book consists of the follow-
ing principal sections:
I. The lews touching sacrifices (oe. i-vii.).
II. An historical section containing, first, the
consecration of Aaron and his sons (ch. viiL);
next, his first offering for himself and the people
(eh. ix.); and lastly, the destruction of Nadab
and Abihu, the sons of Aaron, for their presump-
tuous offense (oh. x.).
m. The laws concerning purity and imparity,
and the appropriate sacrifices and ordinances for
putting away impurity (cc. xi.-xvL).
IV. Laws chiefly intended to mark the separa-
tion between Israel and the heathen nations (ee.
xviL-xx.)
T. Laws concerning the priests (xxi., xxiL); and
certain holy days and festivals (xxiii., xxv.), to-
gether with an episode (xxiv.). The section extends
from ch. xxi. 1 to xxvi 9.
VI. Promises and threats (xxvi. 8-46).
VII. An appendix containing the laws concern-
ing vows (xxvii.)
I. The book of Exodus oondndes with the ac-
count of the completion of the tabernacle. u Sa
Hoses finished the work," we read (xl. 33): and
immediately there rests upon it a cloud, and it is
» Br. Joseph Wolff, to his recent I
taru (p. 8), claims his descent from this tribe.
e In the literature of a later period the tame nans
meets us applied to the same or nearly tha same order
no longer, however, as the language of r e f er en ce, baj
as that of a cynical contempt lor the has worthy pot
Hon of the clergy of the English Church (Macaakw
JSBtf. o/Agaea«,ULax7>.
Digitized by
Google
MSVITIOUS
Pad with the glory of Jehovah. Fron the taber-
lade, thua rendered glorloua by the Divine Pret-
ence, lamee the legislation contained in the book of
Leritica*. At firit God spake to the people out of
the thonder and lightning of Sinai, and gave them
hit holy oonunandmenU by the hand of a mediator.
But henceforth hii Prewnoe ii to dwell not on the
•Beret top of Sinai, but in the midit of hii people,
both in their wandering! through the wilderness, and
afterwards in the Land of Promise. Hence the first
directions which Moses receives after the work ia
finished have reference to the offering! which were
to be brought to the door of the Tabernacle. As
Jehovah draws near to the people in the Tabernacle,
■o the people draw near to Jehovah in the offering.
Without ofieringe none may approach Him. The
regulations respecting the sacrifices fall into three
groups, and each of these groups again consists of
a decalogue of instructions. Bertbeau has observed
that this principle runs through all the laws of
Motes They are all modeled after the pattern of
the ten commandments, so that each distinct subject
of legislation ia always treated of under ten several
enactments or provisions.
Baumgarten in his Commentary on lk» Ptnta-
feue*,bas adopted the arrangement of Bertheau, as
set forth in his Sieben Gruppen da Mot. RtcJits. On
the whole, his principle seems sound. We find Bun-
sen acknowledging it in part, in his division of the
19th chapter (tee below). And though we cannot
always agree with Bertheau, we have thought it
worth while to give his arrangement at tuggettive
at least of the main structure of the book.
I. The first group of regulations (cc. i.-iii.)
deals with three kinds of offering! : the burnt-offer-
ing (TiyXS), the meet^fSring" (iTTIJO), and
the thank-oflering (D^obt? r"QT).
L The bunt-offering (eh. L) in three sections.
Jt — *«■*»+- be either (1) a male without M-miffr from
the htrxk (~)^H ?D), w. 8-9; or (2) a male
without blemish from the flockt, or lesser cattle
OfoSn), w. 10-13; or (3) it might be fowls, an
offering of turtle-doves or young pigeons, w. 14-
17. The subdivisions are here marked clearly
enough, not only by the three khtdt of sacrifice,
but also by the form in which the enactment is
put. Each begins with tmp DM, "If bis
offering," etc., and each ends with ftbw
mrPb mrT3 JT"I na?M. " an offering made
by fire, of a sweet savor unto Jehovah."
The next group (oh. it) presents many more
difficulties. Its parts art not so clearly marked
either by prominent features in the subject-matter,
or by the more technical boundaries of eertsin ini-
tial and final phrases. We hare here —
II. The meat-offering, or bloodless offering in four
tactions: (1) in its uncooked form, consisting of
fine flour with oil and frankincense, vr. 1-3; (9)
in its cooked form, of which three different kinds
an specified — baked in the oven, fried, or boiled
vv. 4-10; (8) the prohibition of leaven, and the
direction to use salt in all the meat-offerings, 11-11 ,
(4) the oblation of first fruits, 14-16. This at lean
LEVITICUS
lt547
■ * Meat" Is used by our translate™ ia the
<i feed <ti any land, whether flesh <
te e ms on the whole to be the best arrangement at
the group, though we offer it with tome hesita-
tion.
(o.) Bertheau's arrangement Is different He
divides (1) w. 1-4, thus including the meat-offer-
ing baked in the oven with the uncooked offering;
(3) w. 6 and 6, the meatoffering when fried in the
pan; (3) w. 7-13, the meatoffering when boiled;
(4) rv. 14-16, the offering of the first-fruits. But
this is obviously open to many objections. For, first,
it is exceedingly arbitrary to connect v. 4 with w.
1-3, rather than with the verses which follow. Why
should the meat-offering baked in the oven be classed
with the uncooked meat-offering rather than with
the other two which were in different ways sup-
posed to be dressed with fire? Next, two of the
divisions of the chapter are clearly marked by the
recurrence of the formula, " It is a thing most holy
of the offerings of Jehovah made by fire," w. 3 and
10. Lastly, the directions in vv. 11-13 apply to
every form of meat-offering, not only to that im-
mediately preceding. The Magnetic arrangement
ia in five sections: w. 1-3; 4; 5, 6; 7-13; 14-16.
iii. The iheinmim — " peace-offering " (A. V.),
or thank-offering" (Ewajd), (cb. iii.) in three
lections. Strictly speaking thit falls under two
heads : first, when it it of the herd ; and secondly,
when it it of the flock. But thit last hat again its
subdivision ; for the offering when of the flock may
be eitber a lamb or a goat. Accordingly the three
sections are, w. X-6; 7-11; 12-16. Ver. 6 it merely
introductory to the second class of sacrifices, and
ver. 17 a general conclusion, as in the case of other
laws. Thit concludes the first decalogue of the
book.
9. Ch. iv., v. The laws concerning the sin-
offering and the trespass- (or guilt-) offering.
The sin-offering (chap, ir.) is treated of under
four specified oases, after a short introduction to the
whole in vv. 1,2: (1) the sin-offering for the priest,
8-12; (2) for the whole congregation, 13-21; (8)
for a ruler, 22-26 ; (4) for one of the common peo-
ple, 37-35.
After these four cases in which the offering ia to
be made for four different classes, there follow pro-
visions respecting three several kinds of transgres-
sion for which atonement mutt be made. It it not
quite clear whether these should be ranked under
the head of the sin-offering or of the trespass-offer-
ing (see Winer, /too.). We may, however, follow
Bertheau, Baumgarten, and KnobeL in regarding
them as special ■"■'*"*■— in which a no-offering
was to be brought. The three cases are: first,
when any one bears a curse and conceals what he
bears (v. 1); secondly, when anyone touches with-
out knowing or intending it, any unclean thing
(vr. 9, 3); lastly, when any one takes an oath in-
considerately (ver. 4). For each of these cases the
tame trespass-offering, '• a female from the flock,
a lamb or kid of the goats," it appointed; but with
that mercifulness which characterizes the Mosaic
law, express provision it made for a lest costly offer-
ing where the offerer is poor.
The decalogue is then completed by the three
regulations respecting the guilt-offering (or tres-
pass-offering): first, when anyone tint "through
ignorance in the holy things of Jehovah " (vv. 14-
16); next, when a person without knowing it
» commit* any of these things which are forbidden
to be done by the commandments of Jehovah "
(17-19); lastly, when a man bet and swears falsely
concerning that which was Intrusted to him, eto
Digitized by
Google
1648
LEVITICUS
(tt. 20-26)." Thii decalogue, like the preceding
•ne, hue its characteristic words and expressions.
The prominent void which introduces so many
of the enactments, is t27£)2, "soul " (see ir. 2, 27,
rr. 1, 2, 4, 18, 17, vi. 2) '; and the phrase, << if a
soul shaU sin " (iv. 2), is, with occasional variations
baring an equivalent meaning, the distinctive phrase
of the section.
As in the former decalogue, the nature of the
offerings, so in this the person and the nature of
the offense are the chief features in the several stat-
utes.
8. Ch. vi., vii. Naturally upon the law of sac-
rifices follows the law of the priests' duties when
they offer the sacrifices. Hence we find Moses di-
rected to addross himself immediately to Aaron and
Us sons (ri. 2, 18 = vi. 9, 25, A. V.).
In this group the different kinds of offerings are
named in nearly the same order as in the two pre-
ceding decalogues, except that the offering at the
consecration of a priest follows, instead of the thank-
offering, immediately after the meet-offering, which
it resembles; and the thank-offering now appears
after the trespass-offering. There are therefore, in
all, six kinds of offering; and in the case of each of
these the priest has his distinct duties. Bertheau
has very ingeniously so distributed the enactments
in which these duties are prescribed as to arrange
them all in five decalogues. We will briefly indi-
cate his arrangement.
3. (a.) " This is the law of the burnt-offering "
(vi. 9; A. V.),in five enactments, each verse (rr.
9-13) containing a separate enactment.
(o.) •' And this is the law of the meat-offering "
(vcr. 14), again in five enactments, each of which is,
as before, contained in a single verse (rr. 4-18).
4. The next decalogue is contained in vv. 19-30.
(a.) Verse 19 is merely introductory; then fol-
low, in five verses, fire distinct directions with re-
gard to the offering at the time of the consecration
of the priests, the first in rer. 20, the next two in
ver. 21, the fourth in the former part of ver. 22,
and the last in the latter part of ver. 22 and ver. 23.
(4.) " This is the law of the sin-offering " (ver.
25). Then the five enactments, each in one verse,
except that two verses (27, 28) are given to the
5. The third decalogae is contained in ch. vii.
1-10, the laws of the trespass-offering. But it is
impossible to avoid a misgiving as to the soundness
of Bertheau's system when we find him making the
words "It is most holy," in ver. 1, the first of the
ten enactments. This he is obliged to do, as w.
8 and 4 evidently form but one.
6. The fourth decalogue, after an introductory
Terse (ver. 11), is contained in ten verses (12-21)
7. The last decalogue consists of certain general
aws about the fat, the blood, the wave-breast, etc.,
and is comprised again in ten verses (23-33), the
verses as oefore marking the divisions.
The chapter closes with a brief historical notice
3f the fact that these several commands were given
to Hoses on Mount Sinai (tt. 85-38).
IL Ch. «iii., ix., x. This section is entirely
historical, «n ch. viii. we have the account of
the consecration of Aaron and his sons by Moses
before the whole congregation. They are washed ;
to is arrayed in the priestly vestments and anointed
• In the English Version this Is ch. vi. 1-7. Thai
■ ear/ out of those instances In which the reader
liBVITIODB
with the holy oil; his sons abo are arrayed In (fksk
garments, and the various offerings appointed an
offered. In eh ix. Aaron offers, eight days after hit
consecration, his first offering for himself and the
people: this comprises for himself a sin- and burnt-
offering (1-14), for the people a sin-offering, a
burnt-offering and a peace- (or thank-) offering. He
blesses the people, and fire comes down from heaven
and consumes the burnt-offering. Ch. x. tells how
Nadab and Abihu, the sons of Aaron, eager to
enjoy the privileges of their new office, and perhaps
too much elated by its dignity, forgot or despised
the restrictions by which it was fenced round (Ex.
xxx., 7, etc.), and daring to "offer strange fire be
fore Jehovah," perished because of their presump
tion.
With the house of Aaron began this wickedness
in the sanctuary; with them therefore began also
the divine punishment. Very touching is the story
which follows. Aaron, though forbidden to mourn
his loss (tt. 6, 7), will not eat the ain-oflering in
the holy place; and when rebuked by Moses, plead*
in his defense, " Such things hare befallen me; aad
if I had eaten the sin-offering to-day, should it hare
been accepted in the sight of Jehovah?" And
Moses, the lawgiver and the judge, admits the plea,
and honors the natural feeling of the father's heart,
even when it leads to a violation of the letter of the
divine commandment.
III. Co. xi.-xri. The first seven decalogues had
reference to the putting away of guilt. By the ap-
pointed sacrifices the separation between man and
God was healed. The next seven concern themselves
with the putting away of impurity. That cc xi.-
xr. hang together so as to form one series of km
there can be no doubt. Besides that they treat
of kindred subjects, they hare their characteristic
words, NDB, JIHDB, "unclean,"
ness," "lintO, inC, "dean," which occur in al-
most every verse. The only question is about ch.
xvi., which by its opening is connected immediately
with the occurrence related in ch. x. Historically
it would seem therefore that ch. xri. ought to hare
followed ch. x. And as this order is neglected,
it would lead us to suspect that some other
principle of arrangement than that of historical
sequence has been adopted. This we find in the
solemn significance of the Great Day of Atonement.
The high-priest on that day made atonement, " be-
cause of the unelemmeu at the children of Israel,
and because of their transgr e s s ions in all their
sins" (xri. 16), and he "reconciled the holy place
and the tabernacle of the congregation, and the
altar" (rer. 20). Delivered from their guilt and
cleansed from their pollutions, from that day for-
ward the children of Israel entered upon a new and
holy life. This was typified both by the ordinance
that the bullock and the goat for the sin-offering 1
were burnt without the camp (ver. 27), and also by
the sending away of the goat laden with tile insani-
ties of the people into tile wilderness. Hence ch.
xri. seems to stand most fitly at the end of this sec-
ond group of seven decalogues.
It has reference, we believe, not only (as Ber-
theau supposes) to the putting away, as by on*
solemn act, of all those uncleannesses mentioned in
cc. xL-xr., and for which the various expiatl osj)
mamls at the p erve r sity displayed m the dlrlaka i
chapters.
Digitized by
Google
UEVITIUUB
sod rlaansings there appointed were temporary and
Bnumeient: but also to the making atonement, in
the sense of biding tin or putting away its guilt.
For not only do we find the idea of cleansing as
bom defilement, tut far more prominently the ides
of roconeiliatiw The often repeated word ~1Q3,
"to oover, to atone," it the great word of the
■action.
1. The first decalogue in thi* group refers to
glean and unclean flesh. Five classes of animals
are pronounced unclean. The first four enactments-
deolare what animals may and may not be eaten,
■aether (1) beasts of the earth (3-8), or (2) fishes
(9-13), or (3) birds (18-90), or (4) creeping things
with wings. The next four are intended to guard
against pollution by contact with the carcase of
any of these animals; (6) vr. 34-36; (6) vt. 37,
38; (7) TV. 89-38; (8) rv. 39, 40. The ninth and
tenth specify the last class of animals which are
unclean for food, (9) w. 41, 43, and forbid any
other kind of pollution by means of them, (10) vr.
43-45. Vv. 46 and 47 are merely a concluding
summary.
3. Ch. xiL Women's purification in childbed.
The whole of this chapter, according to Bertheau,
constitutes the first law of this decalogue. The
remaining nine are to be found in the next chapter,
which treats of the signs of leprosy in man and in
garments. (8) vt. l-« ; (3) vr. 9-17 ; (4) tt. 18-23 ;
(6) rr. 34-38; (6) w. 39-37; (7) w. 38, 89;
(8) tt. 40-41; (9) TV. 43-46; (10) w. 47-69.
This arrangement of the several sections is not alto-
gether free from objection; but it is certainly
supported by the characteristic mode in which each
section opens. Thus, for instance, ch. xii. 2
begins with ^"tfO ■»? ni^W; ch. xlii. 3, with
r^iv *s d^'tw. 9, njrjn >s ny^ 535,
and so on, the same order being always observed,
the suhtt being placed first, then *>, and then the
verb, except only in ver. 43, where the subst. is
placed after the verb.
8. Ch. xiv. 1-33. "The law of the leper in
the day of his cleansing," i e. the law which the
priest is to observe in purifying the leper. The
priest is mentioned in ten verses, each of which
begins one of the ten sections of this law: tt. 3,
4, 6, 11, 13, 14, 15, 16, 19, 30. In each instance
the word ^U^H a preceded by 1 oonsecut. with
the perfect. It is true that in ver. 8, and also in
ver. 14, the word ?rj3n occurs twice; but in both
verses there is MS. authority; as well as that of
the Vulg. and Arab, versions for the absence of the
second. Verses 31-32 may be regarded as a sup-
plemental provision in cases where the leper is too
poor to bring the required offering.
4. Ch. xiv. 33-57. The leprosy in a house,
(t is not so easy here to trace the arrangement no-
ticed in so many other laws. There are no charac-
teristic words or phrases to guide us. Bertheau's
division is ss follows: (1) vr. 34, 85; (3) tt. 36,
87; (3) ver. 88; (4) ver. 89; (5) ver. 40; (6) tt.
41, 49; (7) tt. 43-45. Then is usual follows a
short summary whioh closes the statute toneeming
leprosy, tt. 64-57.
6. Ch. xr. 1-16. 6. Ch. xr. 16-81 The law
of uneleonness by issue, etc., in two decalogues.
The division is dearly marked, as Bertheau ob-
, by the form of cleansing, which is so ext~U'
104
LEVITICUS
1640
similar in the two principal cases, and whioh i
each series, (1) vr. 18-15; (3) vt. 33-30. We
again give his arrangement, though we do not
profess to regard it as in all respects satisfactory.
6. (1) tt. 3, 8; (2). ver. 4; (3) Ter. 6; (4) ver.
6; (6) ver. 7; (6) Ter. 8; (7) ver. 9; (8) vtr. 10;
(9) vv. 11, 12; — these Bertljeau considers as one
enactment, because it is another way of saying that
either the man or iking which the unclean person
touches is unclean ; but on the same principle w
4 and 6 might just as well form one enactment —
(10) tt. 18-15.
7. (1) Ter. 16; (8) Ter. 17; (8) Ter. 18; (4) vtr.
19; (6) ver. 80; (6) Ter. 81; (7) ver. 93; (8) ver.
28; (9) ver. 34; (10) vr. 38-80. In order to
complete this arrangement, he considers verses
25-27 as a kind of supplementary enactment pro-
vided for an irregular uncleanness, leaving it as
quite uncertain however whether this was a Inter
addition or not. Verses 33 and 33 form merely
the same general conclusion which we have had
before in xiv. 64-57.
The last decalogue of the second group of seven
decalogues is to be found in ch. xvi., which treats
of the great Day of Atonement. The Law itself is
contained in vr. 1-28. The remaining versos,
39-34, consist of an exhortation to its careful ob-
servance. In the act of atonement three persons
are concerned. The high-priest — in this instance
Aaron ; the man who leads away the goat for Azazel
into the wilderness; and he who burns the skin,
flesh, and dung of the bullock and goat of the
sin-offering without the camp. The two last have
special purifications assigned than; the first be-
cause he has touched the goat laden with the
guilt of Israel; the last because he has come in
contact with the sin-offering. The 9th and 10th
enactments prescribe what these purifications are,
each of them concluding with the same formula:
distinguished from each other. The duties of Aaron
consequently ought, if the division into decads is
correct, to be comprised in eight enactments. Now
the name of Aaron is repeated eight times, and in
six of these it is preceded by the perfect with 1
oonsecut. as we observed was the case before when
'■ the priest " wss the prominent figure. Accord-
ing to this then the dee.bgue will stand thus : —
(1) ver. 8, Aaron not to enter the Holy Place at
all times ; (3) vv. 3-5, W ith what sacrifices and In
what dress Aaron is to enter the Holy I'bice; (3)
vt. 6, 7, Aaron to offer 'he bullock for himself, and
to set the two goats before Jehovah; (4) [ver. 8,]
Aaron to cast lota on tlto two goats; (5) vr. 9, 10,
Aaron to offer the goat on which the lot falls for
Jehovah, and to send a»»y the goat for Azaxel into
the wilderness; (6) vv. 11-19, Aaron to sprinkle the
blood both of the bullock and of the goat to make
atonement for himself, for his house, and for the
whole congregation, as also to purify the altar of
incense with the blood; (7) vv. 20-32, Aaron to
lay his hands on the living goat, and confess over
it all the sins of the children of Israel ; (8) vr.
23-25, Aaron after this to take off his linen gar-
ments, bathe himself and put on his priestly gar-
ments, and then offer his burnt-offering and that
of the congregation; (9) Ter. 26, The man by
whom the goat is sent into the wilderness to
purify himself; (10) tt. 97, 28, What is to be
done by him who burns the sin-offering without
the camp.
Digitized by
Google
1650
le\ incus
We have now reached the great central point of
the book. All going before was but a preparation
for this. Two great truths hare been established :
lint, that God can only be approached by means of
appointed sacrifices; next, that man in nature and
life is full of pollution, which must be cleansed.
And now a third is taught, namely, that not by
several cleansing! for several sins and pollutions
can guilt be put away. The several acts of sin
are but so many manifestations of the sinful nature.
For this, therefore, also must atonement be made;
one solemn act, which shall cover all transgressions,
and turn away God's righteous displeasure from
Israel.
IV. Co. xvii.-xx. And now Israel is reminded
that it is the holy nation. The great atonement
offered, it is to enter upon a new life. It is a
separate nation, sanctified and set apart for the
service of God. It may not therefore do after
the abominations of the heathen by whom it is
surrounded. Here consequently we find those laws
and ordinances which especially distinguish the
nation of Israel from ail other nations of the
earth.
Here again we may trace, as before, a group of
seven decalogues. But the several decalogues are
not so clearly marked; nor are the characteristic
phrases and the introductions and conclusions so
common. In eb. xviii. there are twenty enact-
ments, and in ch. xix. thirty. In ch. xvii., on
the other hand, there are only six, and in ch. xx.
there are fourteen. As it is quite manifest that the
enactments in ch. xviii. are entirely separated by
a fresh introduction from those in ch. xvii., Ber-
theau, in order to preserve the usual arrangement
of the laws in decalogues, would transpose this
chapter, and place it after ch. xix. He ob-
serves, thai the laws in ch. xvii., and those in
eh. xx. 1-9, are akin to one another, and may
very well constitute a single decalogue; and, what
is of more importance, that the words in xviii. 1-6
form the natural introduction to this whole group
of laws : " And Jehovah spake unto Moses, saying,
Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto
them, I am Jehovah your God. After the doings
of the land of Egypt, wherein ye dwelt, shall ye
not do: and after the doings of the land of Canaan,
whither I bring you, shall ye not do : neither shall
*e walk in their ordinances," etc.
There is, however, a paint of connection be-
tween cc. xvii. and xviii. which must not be over-
looked, and which seems to indicate that their posi-
tion in our present text is the right one. All the
six enactments in ch. xvii. (w. 3-6, w. 6, 7, w.
B, 9, w. 10-13, w. 13, 14, ver. 16) bear upon the
nature and meaning of the sacrifice to Jehovah as
compared with the sacrifices offered to false gods.
It would seem too that it was necessary to guard
■gainst any license to idolatrous practices, which
■ The interpretation or ver. 18 has of late bean the
snhjeot of so much discussion, that we may perhaps
be psrmltted to say a word upon it, even In a work
which excludes all dogmatic controversy. The ren-
dering of the English Version is supported by a whole
catena of authorities of the lint rank, as may be
seen by reference to Dr. H'CauTs pamphlet, The An-
eismt Interpretation of Lnriticvs XVlll. 18, fcc. We
may farther remark, that the whole controversy, so
fhr as the Scriptural question is concerned, might
have bean avoided If the Church had but acted in the
spirit of Luther's golden words : " Ad rem veniamus
St dkaunos Messn asae aaortwun, vixkwa autsm pop-
LBYTTICDS
might possibly be drawn from the aendm& </ feto
goat for Azaasi into the wilderness [Atom* mart,
DAT op], especially perhaps against the Egyptiaa
custom of appeasing the Evil Spirit of the wilder-
ness and averting his malice (Hengstenberg, Horn
u. jEgyptm, p. 178; Hovers. Pk&nmtr, i. 869).
To this there may be an allusion in ver. 7. Per-
haps however it is better and more simple to
regard the enactments in these two chapters (with
Bunsen, Bibtheerk, Ste Abth., lte Th. p. 346) si
directed against two prevalent heathen practices,
the eating of blood and fornication. It is remark-
able, as showing how intimately moral and ritual
observances were blended together in the Jewish
mind, that abstinence "from blood and things
strangled, and fornication," was laid down by the
Apostles as the only condition of communion to be
required of Gentile converts to Christianity. Before
we quit this chapter one observation may be made.
The rendering of the A- V. in ver. 11, "for it is
the blood that maketh an atonement for the soul,"
should be "for it is the blood that maketh an atone-
ment 6y means of tee life." This is important.
It is not blood merely as such, but blood as having
in it the principle of life that God accepts in sacri-
fice. For by thus giving vicariously the life of the
dumb animal, the sinner confesses that his own life
is forfeit.
In ch. xviii., after the introduction to which
we have already alluded, w. 1-6, — and in which
God claims obedience on the double ground that
He is Israel's God, and that to keep his com-
mandments is life (ver. 6), — there follow twenty
enactments concerning unlawful marriages and un-
natural lusts. The first ten are contained one in
each verse, w. 6-15. The next ten range themselves
in like manner with the verses, except thai w. 17
and 23 contain each two." Of the twenty the first
fourteen are alike in form, as well as in the repeated
nVjrj fob rrny.
Ch.xix. Three decalogues, introduced by the
words, •< Ye shall be holy, for I Jehovah your God
am holy," and ending with, " Te shall observe al
my statutes, and all my judgments, and do them.
I am Jehovah." The laws here are of a very
mixed character, and many of them a repetition
merely of previous laws. Of the three decalogues,
the first is comprised in w. 8-13, and may be thai
distributed: (1) ver. 8, to honor father and mother;
(3) ver. 3, to keep the Sabbath; (3) ver. 4, not to
turn to idols; (4) ver. 4, not to make molten gods
(these two enactments being separated on the same
principle as the first and second commandments of
the Great Decalogue or Two Tables); (6) w. 6-8
of thank-offerings; (6) w. 9, 10, of gleaning; (!)
ver. 11, not to steal or lie; (8)ver. 13, not. to sweat
falsely; (9) ver. 13, not to defraud one' s neighbor ;
(10) ver. 13, the wages of him that is hired, etc 4
nlo Judaloo, nee obllgarl nos legions Ullus. lose
quidquid ex Hoes ut legislators nisi idem ex legibas
nostril, t. g. naturallbus at politirls protestor, Don asV
mlttamus, nee oonfundamus totius orbis polities." —
Briefe, Ds Wette's edit. Iv. 805.
° It is not a little remarkable that six of Haw*
enactments should only be repetitions, for the meet
part In a shorter form, of oommandmenta oontafasav
in the Two Tables. This can only be accounted mr
by remembering the great object of this section, wbM
Is to remind Israel thst It Is a separate nation, MB
laws being expressly framed to be a fcnoe and a bees*
•boat it, keeping It from profane eontact with tee
Digitized by
Google
LKvrncuH
The next decalogue, w. 11-25, Bertheau ar-
ranges thui: ver. 14, ver. 15, ver. 15a, ver. ISA,
•er. IT, ver. 18, Ter. 19<i, ver. 194, tt. 30-93.
tr. 23-95. We object, however, to making the
words in 19a, "Ye thxL keep my statutes," a
eaparata enactment. There la no reaaon for this.
A much better plan would be to consider ver. 17
at eonsisting of two enactments, which is manifestly
the case.
The third decalogue may be thus distributed : —
»er. 26a, ver. 964, ver. 37, ver. 38, ver. 99, ver. 80,
ver. 31, ver. 89, ver. 83, ver. 34, w. 85, 36.
We have thus found five decalogues in this
group. Bertheau completes the number seven by
transposing, as we have seen, ch. xvii., and placing
II Immediately before ch. xx. He also transfers
•ar. 97 of eh. xx. to what he considers its proper
place, namely, after ver. 6. It must be confessed
that the enactment in ver. 97 stands very awkwardly
at the end of the chapter, completely isolated as
it is from all other enactments ; for rv. 32-36 are
the natural conclusion to this whole section. But
admitting this, another difficulty remains, that ac-
cording to him the 7th decalogue begins at ver.
10. and another transposition U neeessary, so that
rv. 7, 8, may stand after ver. 9, and so conclude
the preceding series of ten enactments. It is better
perhaps to abandon the search for oomplete sym-
metry than to adopt a method so violent in order
to obtain it.
It should be observed that eh. xviii. 6-33 and
eh. xx. 10-91 stand in this relation to one an-
other; that the latter declares the penalties attached
to the transgression of many of the commandment*
given in the former. But though we may not be
able to trace seven decalogues, in accordance with
the theory of which we have been speaking, in
oo. xvii.-xx. there can be no doubt that they
form a distinct section of themselves, of which xx.
39-96 is the proper conclusion.
Like the other sections it baa some characteristic
expressions: (a.) "Ye shall keep my judgments
and my statutes" (Vlj^n, ^IgStPD), occurs
xviii. 4, 5, 36, xix. 87, xx. 8, 32, but is not met
with either in the preceding or the following chap-
ters. (4.) The constantly recurring phrases, " I
am Jehovah; " " I am Jehovah your Cod; " " Be
ye holy, for I am holy; " "I am Jehovah which
hallow you." In the earlier sections this phrase-
ology is only found in Lev. xi. 44, 45, snd Ex.
xxxi. 13. In the section which follows (xxL-xxv.)
tt is much more common, this section being in a
great measure a continuation of the preceding.
V. We come now to the last group of decalogues
— that contained in cc. xxi.-xxvi. 3. The sub-
|eett comprised in these enactments are — First, the
personal purity of the priests. They may not de-
file themselves for the dead ; their wives and daugh-
ters must he pure, and they themselves must be
free from all personal blemish (ch. xxi.). Next,
she eating of the holy things is permitted only to
priests who are free from all uncleanneas; they and
their household only may eat them (xxii. 1-16).
Thirdly, the offerings of Israel are to be pure and
without blemish (xxii. 17-83). The fourth series
•rovides for the due celebration of the great festi-
LEvrncus
1661
dtvtdas ehaptsr xU. tan two tsblas
ts each, and on* of on (has his
vals when priests and people were to be gathered
together before Jehovah in holy convocation.
Up to this point we trace system and purpose in
the order of the legislation. Thus, for instance,
oc xi.-xvi. treats of external purity; cc. xvii.-xx.,
of moral purity; cc. xxi.-xxiii. of the holiness
of the priests, and their duties with regard tit
holy things; the whole concluding with provis-
ions for the solemn feasts on which all Israel ap-
peared before Jehovah. We will again briefly in-
dicate Bertheau'a groups, and then append some
general observations on the section.
1. Ch. xxi. Ten laws, as follows: (1) ver.
1-8; (3) rer. 4; (3) w. 5,6; (4) vv. 7,8; (5) ver.
9; (6) w. 10, 11; (7) ver. 13; (8) vv. 18, 14, (9)
vv. 17-21; (10) vv. 89, 23. The first five .aw*
concern all the priests, the sixth to* the eighth the
high-priest ; the ninth and tenth the effects of bod-
ily blemish in particular cases.
9. Ch. xxii. 1-16. (1) ver. 3; (3) ver. 8; (»)
tot. 4; (4) tt. 4-7; (5) tt. 8, 9; (6) ver. 10; (T)
ver. 11 ; (8) ver. 12; (9) ver. 13; (10) w. 14-16.
8. Ch. xxii 17-33. (1) vv. 18-30; (3) ver.
21; (3) ver. 33; (4) ver. S3; (5) ver. 24; (6) ver.
26; (7) ver. 37; (8) ver. 28; (9) ver. 39; (10) ver.
30; and a general conclusion in rv. 31-33.
4. Ch. xxiii. (1) ver. 3; (2) rv. 5-7; (3) ver.
8: (4) w. 9-14; (5) TV. 15-21; (6) ver. 23; (7) vv.
24, 25; (8) w. 37-33; (9) vv. 34, 85; (10) ver. 36:
w. 87, 38 contain the conclusion or general sum*
ming up of the decalogue. On the remainder of
the chapter, as well as ch. xxiv., see below.
5. Ch. xxv. 1-33. (1) ver. 2; (2) w. 3, 4;
(3) ver. 6; (4) ver. 6; (5) w. 8-10; (6) w. 11.
12; (7) ver. 13; (8) ver. 14; (9) ver. 15; (10)
ver. 16 : with a concluding formula in w. 18-33.
6. Ch. xxv. 23-38. (1) w. 23, 24; (3) ver.
25; (3) vv. 26, 97; (4) ver. 28; (6) ver. 29; («)
ver. 30; (7) rer. 31; (8) w. 33, 33; (9) ver. 34; (10)
w. 85-37 : tbe conclusion to the whole in ver. 38.
7. Cc. xxv. 89-xxvi. 3. (1) ver. 39; (3) tt.
40-43; (3) rer. 43; (4) vr. 44, 45; (5) ver. 46; (ttj
rv. 47-49; (7) ver. 50; (8) vv. 61, 53; (9) ver. 63;
(10) ver. 54.
It will be observed that the above arrangement
is only completed by omitting the latter part of
oh. xxiii. and tbe whole of ob. xxiv. But it it
clear that ch. xxiii. 89-44 is a later addition,
containing further instructions respecting tbe Feast
of Tabernacle*. Ver. 39, as compared with ver.
34, shows that the same feast is referred to ; whilst
vv. 37, 38, are no less manifestly the original
conclusion of the laws respecting the feasts which
are enumerated in the previous part of the chapter.
Ch xxiv., again, has a peculiar character of it*
own. First, we hsvea command concerning the oil
to be used in the lamps belonging to tbe Taber-
nacle, which is only a repetition of an enactment
already given in Ex. xxvii. 20, 31, which seems to
be its natural place. Then follow directions about
the sbew-bresd. These do not occur previously.
In Ex. the sbew-bresd is spoken of always as a
matter of course, concerning which no regulations
are necesssry (oomp. Ex. xxv. 30, xxxv. 13, xxxix.
36). Lastly, come certain enactments arising out
of an historical occurrence. The son of an Egyp-
tian father by an Israelitiah woman blasphemes tht
name of Jehovah, and Moses is commanded to atone
him in consequence: and this circumstance is tht
weasiok of the following laws being given: (1.)
TMt a blasphemer, whether Israelite or stranger,
■ to be atoned (oomp. Ex. xxii. 38). (i.) That be
Digitized by
Google
1652
LEVITICUS
Mai kflb any man shall rarely be put to death
(eomp. Ex. xxi. 12-27). (3.) That he that kills a
fceaat ahall make it good (not found where we might
bars expected it, in the aeriea of laws Ex. xxi. 28-
txll. 18). (4.) That if a man cause a blemish in
his neighbor he shall be requited in like manner
(comp. Ex. xxi. 22-26). (6.) We have then a repe-
tition in an inverse order of vr. 17, 18; and (6.)
the injunction that there shall be one law for the
stranger and the Israelite Finally, a brief notice
of the infliction of the punishment in the case of
the son of Shekmiith, who blasphemed. Not an-
other instance is to be found in the whole collection
in which any historical circumstance is made the
occasion of enacting a law. Then again the laws
(2), (3), (•»), (S), are mostly repetitions of existing
laws, and seen) here to have no connection with the
event to which they are referred. Either therefore
some other circumstances took place at the same
time with which we are not acquainted, or these
Isolated laws, detached from their proper connection,
were grouped together here, in obedience perhaps
to some traditional association.
VI. The seven decalogues are now fitly closed
by words of promise and threat — promise of larg-
est, richest blessing to those that hearken unto and
do these commandments ; threats of utter destruc-
tion to those that break the covenant of their God.
Thus the second great division of the I.aw closes
like the first, except that the first part, or Book of
the Covenant, ends (Ex. xxiii. 20-33) with promises
of blessing only. There nothing is said of the
judgments which are to follow trangression, because
ss yet the Covenant bad not been made. But when
once the nation had freely entered into that cove-
nant, they bound themselves to accept its sanctions,
Its penalties, ss well ss its rewards. And we cannot
wonder if in these sanctions the punishment of
transgression holds a larger place than the rewards
of obedience. For already was it but too plain that
"Israel would Dot obey." From tie first they
were a stiffbecked and rebellious race, and from the
first the doom of disobedience hung like some fiery
sword above their heads.
VII. The legislation is evidently completed in
the last words of the preceding chapter, " These
are the statutes and judgments and laws which Je-
hovah made between Him and the children of Israel
In Mount Sinai by the band of Moses." Ch.
xxvii. is a later appendix, again however closed by
a similar formula, which at least shows that the
transcriber considered it to be an Integral part of
the original Mosaic legislation, though be might be
at a loss to assign it its place. Bertbeau classes
it with tbe other leas regularly grouped laws at the
beginning of the book of Numliers. He treats the
section Lev. xxvii.-Num. x. 10 as a series of sup-
plements to tbe Sinaitic legislation.
Integrity. — This is very generally admitted.
Those critics even who are in favor of different doc-
uments in the Pentateuch assign nearly the whole
of this book to one writer, the Klchist, or author of
tbe original document. According to Knobel the
silly portions which are not to be referred to tbe
Elohist are — Moses' rebuke of Aaron because tbe
roet of the sin-offering hsd been burnt (x. 16-20);
tbe group of laws in cc. xvii.-xx.; certain addi-
tional enactments respecting the Sabbath and the
leasts of Weeks and of Tabernacles (xxiii., part
rf ver. 2, from nVP "HS'lB, and ver. 8, w. 18,
IS, 22, 3SMW); the punishments ordained for blas-
LEvrnctrs
phemy, murder, etc. (xtiv. 10-23); tbe dlree tluu s
respecting the Sabbatical year (xxv. 18-22), and the
promises and warnings contained in ch. xxvi.
With regard to tbe section cc. xvii.-xx., hs
does not consider the whole of it to hare been bor-
rowed from the same sources. Ch. xvii. be be-
lieves was introduced here by the Jebovist from
some ancient document, whilst he admits neverthe-
less that it contains certain Elohistie forms of ex-
pression, ss ~\P* bi,««H flesh," ver. 14; tT?3,
"soul" (in the sense of "person "),rr. 10-18. 1ft;
r^n, "beast," ver. 18; 7^P?J, "offering," »«r.
4; rTHTJ rtn, « a sweet savor," ver. 6; «•
statute for ever," and " after your generations," ver.
7. But it cannot be from the Elohist, he argues,
because (a) he would nave placed it after ch. viL,
or at least sfter ch. xv. ; (A) be would not have
repeated tbe prohibition of blood, etc., which he
had already given ; (c) be would have taken a more
favorable view of his nation than that implied in
ver. 7 ; and lastly (rf) the phraseology hss some-
thins; of the coloring of cc. xviii.-xx. and xxvi.,
which are certainly not Elohistie. Such reasons
are too transparently unsatisfactory to Deed serious
discussion. He observes further, that the chapter
is not altogether Mosaic. Tbe first enactment (vr.
1-7) does indeed apply only to Israelites, and holds
good therefore for the time of Moses. But tbe re-
maining three contemplate tbe case- of strangers
living amongst the people, and have a reference to
all time.
Cc. xviii.-xx., though it has a Jehovistio color-
ing, cannot bare been originally from the Jebovist.
The following peculiarities of language, which are
worthy of notice, according to Knobel (JCxod. and
Lerilicut erkUrt, in King. txtg. Hrmdb. 1857)
fbrMd such a supposition, the more so as tbe;
occjt nowhere else in tbe O. T.: ^3!?» "lie
down to" and "gender," xviii. 23,xix. 19, xx. 18;
bjHI, "confusion," xviii. 28, xx. 12; K.\fr,
"gather," xix. 9, xxlil. 22; C^, "grape," xix.
W> "fi^f* "nee* kinswomen," xviii. 17;
fri(9a, "scourged," xlx. 20; "Jf?^, "fcee,"
ibid.; M^h? SRSp. "print marks," xix. 28;
K^[?n, " vomit," in tbe metaphorical sense, xviii.
26, 28, xx. 22; f 1 }*^, " undrcumcised," as ap-
plied to fruit-trees, xix. 28 ; and D^^D, " born,"
xviii. 9, 11 , ss well ss the Egyptian word (for such
it probably is) WtjStP, "garment of divers sorts,"
which, however, does occur once beside In Dent
xxii. 11.
According to Bunsen, ch. xix. is a genome
part of the Mosaic legislation, given however in its
originsl form not on Sinai, but on the east side of
the Jordan ; whilst the general arrangement of tbe
Mosaic laws msy perhaps be ss late as the time of
the judges. He regards it as a very ancient docu-
ment, based on the Two Tables, of which, end es-
pecially of the first, it is In fact sn extension, sod
consisting of two decalogues and one pentad of laws
Certain expressions in it he considers imply that
the people were already settled in the land (vr. •
10, 13, 15). while on the other hand ver. 23 sup
poses a future occupation of the land. Hants Is
Digitized by
Google
LK VinOUS
i that the revision of this document by the
transcribers was incomplete: whereas all the pas-
sages may fairly be interpreted as looking forward
to a future settlement in Canaan. The great sim-
plicity and lofty moral character of this section com-
pel us, sajs Bunsen, to refer it at least to the earlier
tiire of the judges, if not to that of Joshua himself.
We must not quit this book without a word on
what may be called its spiritual meaning. That
■o elaborate a ritual looked beyond itself we cannot
doubt. It was a prophecy of things to come ; a
shadow whereof the substance was Christ and his
kingdom. We may not always be able to say what
she exact relation is between the type and the anti-
type. Of many things we may be sure that they
belonged only to the nation to whom they were
pita, containing no prophetic significance, but
•erring as witnesses and signs to them of God's
eorenant of grace. We may hesitate to pronounce
with Jerome that " erery sacrifice, nay almost every
syllable — the garments of Aaron and the whole
(.critical system — breathe of heavenly mysteries." "
Bat we cannot read the Epistle to the Hebrews and
not acknowledge that the Levitical priests " served
the pattern and type of heavenly things " — that
the sacrifices of the Law pointed to and found their
interpretation in the Iamb of God — that the or-
dinances of outward purification signified the true
inner cleansing of the heart and conscience from
dead works to s*rre the living God. One idea
moreover penetrates the whole of this vast and bur-
densome ceremonial, and gives it a real glory even
apart from any prophetic significance. Holiness is
its end. Holiness is its character. The tabernacle
is holy — the vessels are holy — the offerings b are
most holy unto Jehovah — the garments of the
priests are holy." All who approach Him whose
name is "Holy," whether priests'' who minister
unto Him, or people who worship Him, must them-
selves be holy.* It would seem as if, amid the camp
and dwellings of Israel, was ever to be heard an echo
of that solemn strain which fills the courts above,
where the seraphim cry one unto another, Holy,
Holy, Holy./
Other questions connected with this book, such
ss its authorship, its probable age in its present
farm, and the relation of the laws contained in it
to those, either supplementary or apparently con-
tradictory, found in other parts of the Pentateuch,
will best be discussed in another article, where op-
portunity will be given for a comprehensive view of
the Mosaic legislation as a whole. [Pehtatkuch.]
J. J. S. P.
* Recent exegetical commentaries: Cahen, La
Bible, traducL now., etc (vols, i.-iii., Gen., Ex.,
Lee., 1831-32); Baumgarten - Crusius, TheoL
Com. suns Pent,, 1843; Bonar, Com. on the Book
of Lev., 1861; Bush, Note* on Lev., New York,
1883; Knobd, Ex. «. Lev. trklirt, 1857 (Exeget.
Handb. xii.) ; Bunsen, Bibelaerk, Iter Theil, oVi«
Octets, 1858; KeU, Lev., Num., u. Deut., 1863
(Kail n. DeUtisch, Bibl. Com. V" Band) ;
Wogue, Utitvpu, 1864 (Lt Pentateuque, torn.
LEWDNESS
1653
1U.); Chr. Wordsworth, Five Book* of Motet, it
ed. 1865 {Holy Bible with Notet, vol L).
Special treatises on subjects of the book: Hot
tinger, J wit lleb. lege*, 1655; Spencer, De legibm
Heb. rit., 1685; llertheau, Die tieben (Ji-uppen
Mot. lietetxe, 1840. On Sacrifice: Outrun, D*
8acr\ftciit, 1677 ; Saubert, De Sacrijiciit Veltrum,
1699; Sykes, Nature, Detign, and Origin of Sao-
rifcet, 1748; Davison, Inquiry into Utt Origin of
Sticrifiee, 1825; Faber, Origin of Sacrifice*, 1837;
Bahr, Symb. det Mot. Cultut, 1837-39; Scbol],0/>-
feridetn der Allen, intbet. der Juden (in the Stud,
der etang. Geittl Wurtcmb. Bd. i., ii., iv., v.\ ; Tho-
luck, Opfer- u. Prittterbegriff im A. u. ft. TetL
(App. to Com. on Epist. to Heb.); Kurtz, Da* Mot.
Opfer, 1842; Thalhofer, Die unblut. Opfer det
Mot. Cultut, 1848; Hengstenberg, Die Opfer .ler
heiligen 8chrift, 1852; Neumann, Sacra V. T.
taUUaria, 1854; Utber Siindopfern u. Schul lap-
fern, Rlehm, TheoL Stud. u. KrU. 1854, Rinck
{ibid.), 1855; Oehler, OpfcrcuUut det A. T. (Hers-
og's Rtai-EncykL) ; Hofmann, Dot Opfer (Schrift-
beweit, ii. 1, p. 114), Dot geteUlicht Opfer (ibul.,
p. 270), Kurtz, AUtett. OpfcrcuUut, 1862, Eng.
trans., Sacrificial Worthip of the Old Test.,
Edin. 1863; Oehler, Y'ertShnungttag (Herzog's
Real-Encykl Suppl. Bd. iii.). On ceremonial
purity: Liaco, Da* VeremonialgeteU det A, T.,
1842; Sommer, Rein u. Unrein, 1846 {Bibl. Ab-
handL i.); Leyrer, arts. Reinigungen and Speite-
getetze (Herzog's Real-Encykl). On sacred sea-
sons: Wolde, De anno Hebr. jubilato, 1837; Hup-
field, Depi-imil. et vera temp, f tit. etferiat. apud
Heb. ratione, 1852; De anno Sab. el Jobelei ra-
a'tme, 1858; Bachmann, Die Fett getetze de* Pent.,
1858; Oehler, Sabbath «. Jobeljahr (Herzog's Real-
Encykl.). On the scape-goat: Hengstenberg, Die
Bucher Mote* u. Egy/Aen, 1841 (translated by
Robbins); Vaihinger, Azazel (Herzog's Real-En-
cykl.). On tithes: Selden, De Decimi* (Works,
1726); Hottinger, De Decimi* Judatorum, 1713;
Leyrer, Zehnten bei den Hebr. (Herzog's Real-En-
cykl.). On the marriage relation: Selden, Uxor
Hebr. 1646 (Works, 1726) ; Micbaelis, Von den
EhegcteUen Motit, 1755; I > wight, The Hebrew
Wife, Boston, 1836; Riietschi, the bei den Hebr
(Herzog's Real-Encykl.). On slavery : Mielziiier,
Die Verh&Unittt der Sklaven bei den alien Hebr.
1859; Oehler, Sklacerei bei den Hebr. (Herzog's
Real-Encykl.). T. J. C.
* LEWD, as used in Acta xvii. 5, signifies
" wicked, - ' " unprincipled " (tornpoi). The word
is of Anglo-Saxon origin (ledde, people), and was
employed to denote the common people, the laity,
in distinction from the clergy. Though meaning at
first no more than " lay " or " unlearned " (conip.
John vii. 49), it came at length to signify " sin-
ful," " wicked." See Trench's Ulottary of Englita
Wordt,p. 110 f. (Amer. ed.). Its present restricted
meaning is later than the date of the A. V. " Lewd-
ness " (see Acts zviii. 14) has passed in like man-
ner from a wider to a narrower sense. H.
• LEWDNESS. [Lkwd.]
a "In promptu est Lsvitleus liber In quo <**%• .
i m U ti l e , tmmo smgulst pans sjllabe) st Testes Aaron
rt lotus onto LerlBotie spirant cssltstia sacraments "
Vflssren. Sp. ad euultn.).
» st 8, 10; vi. 17, 3t, IB; vu.l, 6; * 12,17; xtv.
• STL4.
.0-8,16.
« vi. 18,27; tU. 21; x. 8,10; xt. 43,45; x». U
v zvUl.)21; xlx. 2; xx. 7, 29.
/ In oo. xvUI -xxv. obrervs the phrase, "Iv
Jehovah," " I am Jehovah your God." Latter part
of xxv. and xxvt. somewhat changed, but rsr, a iri n g
In xxvl. The reason given far this holiness, « I ass
holT,"xl.4e, he., xlx. 2, xx. », 28
Digitized by
Google
1054 MBA1TO8
LEB'ANTTS (t Atfrwos), the Greek form of
Ibe raw Lebanon (1 Etdr. It. 48, r. 66; 2 Kedr.
it. SO; Jnd. i. 7; Ecelu*. xrir. 18, 1. 12). Aim-
ubanub ('ArnAf/Sarot) occurs only in Jud. i. 7.
Q.
LIBERTINES (Ai/Jefmroi: Libertini). This
word occurs once only in the N. T. In Acta vi. 9, we
find the opponent* of Stephen's preaching described
M tImi tsV <7t Tijr oi/roTwyqi r?» Af-yo/i<Vi)S
Ai/Sfprfrar, icol KvpnroW nil 'AAtfarSpfW iral
thi> as-* KiAi«fa> icoJ 'Acr(«j. The question is,
wno were these " Libertines," and in what relation
did they stand to the others who are mentioned
with them ? The structure of the passage leaves
it doubtful how many synagogues are implied in it.
Some (Calrin, Beta, Bengel) hare taken it as if
there were but one synagogue, including men from
all the different cities that are named. Winer (If.
T. Gramm. p. 17fh, on grammatical grounds, takes
the repetition of the article as indicating a fresh
croup, and finds accordingly two synagogues, one
including Libertines, Cyrenians, Alexandrians; the
other those of Cilicla and Asia. Meyer (ad he.)
thinks it unlikely that out of the 480 synagogues
at Jerusalem (the number given by rabbinic writ-
ers, MtgilL f. 73, 4; Kelub. t. 106, 1), there
should hare been one. or even two only, for natives
of cities and districts in which the Jewish popula-
tion was so numerous, " and on that ground assigns
a separate synagogue to each of the proper names.
Of the name itself there have been several expla-
nations.' (1.) The other name being local, this also
has been referred to a town of I ibcrtum in the pro-
consular province of Africa. This, it is said, would
explain the close juxtaposition with Cyrene. Suidas
recognizes tufitprlroi as Srouu ttvovt > »nd in the
Council of Cartnage in 411 (Mansi, vol. iv. p. 365-
274, quoted in W iltach, llandbuch der hirchlich.
Gtogr. $ 96), we find an Episcopus I Jbertinensis
(Simon. Onomcut. N. T. p. 99; and Gerdes. de
Hynag. Libtrl. Groning. 1736, in Winer, fiealub.).
Against this hypothesis it has been urged (1), that
the existence of a town Libertum, in the first cen-
tury, is not established ; and (2) that if it existed,
it can hardly have been important enough either to
have a synagogue at Jerusalem for the Jews be-
longing to it, or to take precedence of Cyrene and
Alexandria in a synagogue common to the three."
(2.) Conjectural readings have been proposed.
tifioarlntr (QScumeu., Beta, Ck*rieus,Valckenarr),
•</3eW rut icarA Kufrhrr/v (Schulthess, de Char.
Sp. S. p. 162, in Meyer, ad Inc.). The difficulty
k thus removed ; but every rule of textual criticism
• against the reception of a reading unsupported by
single MS. or version.
(3.) Taking the word in its received meaning as
c freedmen, Lightfbot finds in it a description of
•atives of Palestine, who, having fallen into slavery,
bad been manumitted by Jewish masters (Eac. on
a In Oyrane one fourth, in Alexandria two fifths
ef (he wnole (Jos. Ant. xlv. 7, f 2, xlv. 10, J 1, xix. 6,
| 2 , B. J. U. 18, § 7| c. Ap. 2, $ 4).
• • W h e eler rajards «u baton Kfmraimr as expli-
sawn (" namely, to wit ''), and benos makes all thosa
smunsnted Ubertlne* (libtrtim) and mambsrs of one
and the aunt synagogue. Ha thus finds evidence hen
that Paul wasafestrft'iuu, or the descendant of one, and
Icqulnd his Hunan olassnahlp in that my. (Sea his
Omnotogit det Apott. Zeitalteri, p. 68.) This constroo-
■cu Is forced and untenable. Toe distribution of the
I ne t lonaU H aa (aa suggested above) has its anal-
LIBNAH
Act* vi. 9). In this case, however, it is hardly
likely that a body of men so circumstanced wonU
have received a Roman name.
(4.) Grotius and Vitringa explain the word aa
describing Italian freedmen who had become con-
verts to Judaism. In this case, however, the word
" proselytes " would most probably have been need ;
and it is at least unlikely that a body of convert*
would have had a synagogue to themselves, or that
proselytes from Italy would have been united with
Jews from Cyrene and Alexandria.
(5.) The earliest explanation of the word (Chrr-
sost) is also that which has been adopted by the)
most recent authorities (Winer, Reitlwb. a. v.;
Meyer, Comm. ad loc.). The IJberimi are Jewa
who, having been taken prisoners by Pompey and
other Roman generals in the Syrian wan, had been
reduced to slavery, and had afterwards been eman-
cipated, and returned, permanently or for a time,
to the country of their fathers. Of the existence of
a large body of Jews in this position at Rome we
have abundant evidence. Under Tiberius, the 8en-
atto-Coniultum for the suppression of Egyptian and
Jewish mysteries led to the banishment of 4,000
" libertini generis " to Sardinia, under the pretense
of military or police duty, but really in the hope
that the malaria of the island might be fatal to
them. Others were to leave Italy unless they aban-
doned their religion (Tacit Annal. il. 86; comp.
Suet. Tiber, c. 36). Josephus (Ant. xviii. 8, § 6),
narrating the same fact, speaks of the 4,000 who
were sent to Sardinia as Jews, and thus identifies
them with the "llbertinum genus" of Tacitus.
Pbilo (Legat. ad Caium, p. 1014, C) in like manner
says, that the greater part of the Jews of Rome
were in the position of freedmen (irt\(vSepa94r-
rsi), and had been allowed by Augustus to settle
In the Trans-Tiberine part of the city, and to fol-
low their own religious customs unmolested (comp
Horace, Sat. 1. 4, 143, i. 9, 70). The expulsion
from Rome took place a. t>. 19; and it is an in-
genious conjecture of Mr. Humphry's ( Comm. on
Act*, ad foe.) that those who were thus banished
from Italy may have found their way to Jerusalem,
and that, as having suffered for the sake of their
religion, they were likely to be foremost in the oppo-
sition to a teacher like Stephen, whom they looked
on as impugning the sacredness of all that they
most revered. E. H. P.
LUVNAH (ITpb [whitmeu, tplendor]:
[Rom.] Ae/W, Asurd, Aourd\ [Aoflwl, Ao£ntV;
Vat. also] An/ira, Sewa ; Alex, [also] Arftun,
[Aafi/wa,'] Ao/kva, AoOcra; [Sin. in la. xxxril.
8,1 Aoura : IMma, Laoana, Lebna, Lobna), a city
which lay in the southwest part of the Holy Land.
It was taken by Joshua immediately after the net
of Beth-horon. That eventful day was ended by
the capture and destruction of Makkkda It (Josh.
ogj in modem Jewish customs in the Bast. At Jete-
alam, for example, the Jews, who an mostly of Amies
origin, an divided into communities man or toes dis-
tinct according to the countries from which they come
and they assemble for worship In dinennt oongraga.
tions or synagogues. At Safid also, In Qalilee, whan
the Jews an somewhat numerous, they appropriats
ftrar of their synagogues to the Spanish and Arabia*
Jews, and four to the German and Polish Jews. H.
Wllteeh gives no Installation beyond the feet Jee
Digitized by
Google
LIBNAH
l. 98); and then the host — « Joshua, and all It-
Mel with him" — moved on to Libnah, which wai
alao totally destroyed, its king and all it* inhabi-
tant* (Joan. x. 89, 80, 33, 88, xiL 16). Tha next
place taken was Lachiah.
Libnah belonged to the district of the Shefelah,
the maritime lowland of Judah, among the cities
of which district it is enumerated (Josh. XT. 43),
not in close connection with either Hakkedah or
Lachiah, but in an independent group of nine
towns, among which an Keilah, Mareshah, and
Nexib. a Libnah was appropriated with its " sub-
urbs " to the priest* (Josh. xxi. 18; 1 Chr. vL 57).
In the reign of Jehoram the son of Jehoehaphat
It " revolted " from Judah at the same time with
Edom (9K. viii. 22; 3 Chr. xxi. 10); but, beyond
the fact of their simultaneous occurrence, there is
no apparent connection between the two events.
On completing or relinquishing the siege of Lachiah
— which of the two is not quite certain — Sen-
nacherib laid siege to Libnah (2 K. xix. 8; Is.
xxxvii. 8). White there he was joined by Kab-
thakeh and the part of the army which had visited
Jerusalem (3 K. xix. 8; Is. xxxvii. 8), and received
the intelligence of Tirhakah's approach; and it
would appear that at Libnah the destruction of the
Assyrian army took place, though the statements
of Herodotus (ii. 141) and of Josephus (Ant. x. 1,
§ 4) place it at Pelusium.* (See Kawlimon, Herod.
1. 480.)
It was the native place of Hamutal, or Hamital
tha queen of Josiah, and mother of Jeboahas (2 K.
xxiii. 81) and Zedekiah (xxiv. 18; Jer. lii. 1). It
Is in this connection that its name appears for the
hst time in the Bible.
Libnah is described b) Eusebins and Jerome in
the Ommuutieon (a. v. Kiera and " Lebna " ) merely
as a village of the district of Eleutheropolia. Its
site has hitherto escaped not only discovery, but,
until lately, even conjecture. Professor Stanley
(8. d> P. 307 note, 368 note), on the ground of the
accordance of the name Libnah (white) with the
" Blanchegarde " of the Crusaders, and of both with
the appearance of the place, would locate it at
Tell et-Safith, " a white-fined bill . . . which forms
a conspicuous object in the eastern part of the
plain," and is situated 6 miles N.W. of Seit-
Jibrtn. But Tell t»-8nfiek has claims to be iden-
tified with Gath, which are considered under that
head in this work. Van de Vdde places it with
confidence at Ardk tt-Menihiyek, a hill about
4 miles W. of Jieit-Jibrbt, on the ground of its
being "the only site between Sumeil (Makkedah)
and Dm Lakhit (Lachiah) showing an ancient for-
tified position" (Memoir, 830; in hit Syria and
Palestine it is not named). But as neither 27m
Lakhit nor Sumeil, especially the latter, are iden-
tified with certainty, the conjecture must be left for
farther exploration. One thing must not be over-
looked, that although Libnah is in the lists of Josh.
tr. specified as being in the lowland, yet 3 of the
8 towns which form its group have been actually
Identified as situated among the mountains to the
LIBYA
165S
a The sites of these have all been discovered, not
is the lowland, as they en specified, but In the moun-
asms Immediately to tha south sod east of Btu-Jidnn.
» The account of Berosus, quoted by Josephus (Ant.
B.1, { 6), Is that the destruction took place when Seu-
weberlb bad reached Jerusalem, after his Egyptian
BBBadltson, on the lint night of the siege. His words
. . tit r* 'Itpoe&vpa ■ ■ . . eerna
Immediate 8. and E. of BtU-Jibrtn. —The must
is also found in SuiHOB-LiBWATir. G.
LXBTfAH (H?3b: Sam. n;sV and «
the LXX. [Vat] Aepova; [Rom.] Alex. .U&cril
Lebna), one of the stations at which the Israelites
encamped, on their journey between the wilderness
of Sinai and Kadesh. It was the fifth in the
series, and lay between Rimmon-parex and Rissah
(Num. xxxiii. 30, 21.) If et-Htdherah be Haze-
roth, then Libnah would be situated somewhere on
the western border of the ^Elanitic arm of the Red
Sea. But no trace of the name has yet been dis-
covered; and the only conjecture which appears to
have been made concerning it is that it was iden-
tical with Laban, mentioned in Deut i. 1. The
word in Hebrew signifies " white," and in that case
may point either to the color of the spot or to the
presence of white poplar (Stanley, S. $ P. App.
f 77). Count Bertou in his recent Etude, le Mont
Hot, etc., 1860, endeavors to identify Libnah with
the city of Judah noticed in the foregoing article.
But there is little in his arguments to support this
theory, while the position assigned to Libnah of
Judah — in the Shefelah or maritime district, not
amongst the towns of " the South," which latter
form a distinct division of the territory of the
tribe, in proximity to Edom — seems of itself to be
fatal to it *
The reading of the Samaritan Codex and Ver-
sion, Lebonah, is supported by the LXX., but not
apparently by any other authority. The Targum
Pseudojonathan on the passage plays with the
name, according to the custom of the later Jewish
writings: >• Libnah, a plaoe, the boundary of which
is a building of brickwork," as if the name were
HJ^Vi Lebtnah, a brick. Q.
LIBTtt CO? 1 ? [white]: AejSsW ( [Vat, M.
-vti, exc. Ex. vi.°17:] Lobni, and once, Num. UL
18, Lebni). L The eldest son of Gershom, the
son of Levi (Ex. vi. 17; Num. IB. 18; 1 Chr. vt.
17, 30), and ancestor of the fiunily of the Lib-
HITES.
3. [Vat Ao0«mi.] The son of Mahli, or Me-
hall, son of Merari (1 Chr. vi. 29), as the text at
present stands. It is probable, ho never, that he ■
the same with the preceding, and that something
has been omitted (comn. w. 39 with 20, 42)
[Mahu,1.]
LTrKNITES, THB (^Vr! D*tr- see
above]: 6 AoBert; [Vat AoBtMiQ Lobni, Ltb-
nitioti, so. famiRn ), the descendants of Ubni, eldest
son of Gershom, who formed one of the chief
branches of the great Levitical fiunily of Gershon-
ites (Num. lii. 21, xxvi. 68).
LIBTfA (AiBiji, Ai/Boo: [Libyi]) occurs only
in Acts li. 10, c in the periphrasis " the parte of
Libya about Cyrene" (to pipr, Tijt Au3ont tt)i
Kara Kvaflrnc), which obviously means the Cyre-
naica. Similar expressions are used by Dion Cas-
aits (JuBfoi 4 wtpl Xvpfjvrfy, liU. 13) and Josephus
»b» vevrsv vit ■eAiseefat nJera fceeVetyemu , eta.
Prosamr Stanley hi the other hand, Inclines to agist
with the Jewish tradition, which places the event m
the pass of Beth-boron, and therefore on the reel be
twesn Libnah and Jerusalem (S.fP.307 noli).
e • ln» A. V. has "Libya" for tMQ u Mr
sxx. 6, and xxxvlll. 6. ML
Digitized by
Google
1656
LIBYANS
(r) »po* Kvrfmv Ai/Sfrn, A*L xvi. «, \ 1), u
noticed In the article Gyrese. The name Libya
ia applied by the Greek and Roman writers to the
African continent, generally however excluding
Egypt The consideration of this and its more
restricted tuea has no place in this work. The
Hebrews, whose geography deals with nations rather
than countries, and, in accordance with the genius
of Shemites, never generalizes, had no names for
continents or other large tracts comprising several
oountries ethnologically or otherwise distinct: the
■ingle mention ia therefore of Greek origin. Some
account of the Lubim, or primitive Libyans, as
well as of the Jews In the Cyrenaies, is given
In other articles. [Lubim; Ctrene.] K. S. P.
• LIBTANS Grab : Alfinf. Lybia), A. V.
Dan. id. 43, should be Lubim. In Jer. xlvi. 8 it
should he Per (1215 : A//3m» : Libya). H.
LICE (033, D"a3, C33, cMwilm, chim&m :
aicrlpft, tritvlrti: tcimphet, cinifet). This word
occurs in the A. V. only in Ex. viii. 16, 17, 18,
and in Ps. cv. 31; both of which passages have
reference to the third great plague of Egypt. In
Exodus the miracle is recorded, while in the Psalm
grateful remembrance of it is made. The Hebrew
word • — which, with some slight variation, occurs
only in Ex. viii. 16, JL7, 18, and in Pa. cv. 31 —has
given occasion to whole pages of discussion ; some
commentators — amongst whom may be cited Mi-
ehaelis (SuppL s. v.), Oedmann (in Vermitch.
Sasnm. I. vi. p. 80\ Roeenmiiller (SchoL in Ex. viii.
13), Harenberg (Obt.Ciit.de C'E, in MitalL
Lips. Nov. voL ii. pt. iv. p. 617). Dr. Geddes ( CriL
Rem. Ex. viii. 17), Dr. Harru (If at Hitt. of
Bible), to which is to be sdded the authority of
Philo (De VU. Mot. ii. 97, ed. Mangey)and Origen
(Horn. TerL in Exad.), and indeed modern writers
generally — suppose that gnats are the animals
intended by the original word ; while, on the other
band, the Jewish Rabbis, Josephus (Ant. ii. 14, $
8), Bochart (Uterot. iii. 467, ed. Rosenm.), Mon-
tana*, Munster (CriL Sac. in Ex. viii. 12), Bryant
(Plague* of Egypt, p. 56), and Dr. Adam Clarke
are in favor of the translation of toe A. V. The
old versions, the Chaldee paraphrase, the Targuma
of Jonathan and Onkelos, the Syriac, the Samari-
tan Pentateuch, die Arabic, are claimed by Bochart
as supporting the opinion that Uce are here in-
tended. Another writer believes he can identify
the ehirmlm with some worm-like creatures (per-
haps some kind of Scoloptndridtt) called tarrentet,
mentioned in Vinisauf 's account of the expedition
LiCE
of Richard I. into the Holy Ijuid, and which by
their bites during the night-time occasioned extmnt
pain (Harmer's Obtervai. Clarke's ed. iii. (49)
With regard to this but theory it may fairly tt
said that, as it has not a word of proof or authority
to support it, it may at once be rejected ss fanciful.
Those who believe that the plague was one of gnatt
or motquitoet appear to ground their opinion solely
on the authority of the LXX., or rather on the
interpretation of the Greek word axrifyti, as given
by Philo (De Vu. Mm. ii. 97) and Origen (Ham.
III. m Exodmrn). The advocates of the other
theory, that lice are the animals meant by eAinntsi,
and not gnatt, base their arguments upon these
facts: (1) because the chimin sprang from the
dust, whereas gnats come from the waters; (3)
because gnatt, though they may greatly irritate men
and beasts, cannot properly be said to he "in"
them; (3) because their name is derived from a
root * which signifies " to establish," or "to fix,"
which cannot be said of gnatt; (4) because if gnatt
are intended, then the fourth plague of flies would
be unduly anticipated; (6) because the Talmudiat*
use the word chinnah in the singular number to
mean a loute ; as it is said in the Treatise on the
Sabbath, " As is the man who slays a camel on
the Sabbath, so is he who slays a loute on ihe
Sabbath." «
Let us examine these arguments as briefly as
possible. First, the LXX. has been quoted as a
direct proof that chinnim means gnatt ; and cer-
tainly in such a matter as the one before us it is
almost impossible to exaggerate the authority of
the translators, who dwelt in Egypt, and therefore
must be considered good authorities on this subject.
But is it quite clear that the Greek word they
made use of has so limited a signification ? Does
the Greek ownf or irrty mean a gnat t <* Let the
reader, however, read carefully the passages quoted
in the foot-notes, snd he will see at once that at
any rate there ia very considerable doubt whether
any one particular animal is denoted by the Greek
word. In the few passages where it occurs in
Greek authors the word seems to point in some
instonoes clearly enough to the well-known pests of
field and garden, the pUml-Hct or aphides. By the
oitrty iv X*Vr> "'* P rover b referred to in the note,
is very likely meant one of those small active
jumping insects, common under leaves and under
the bark of trees, known to entomologists by tb>
name of spring-tails (Poduridos). The Greek lex-
icographers, having the derivation of the word in
view, generally define it to be some small worm-
like creature that eats away wood ; if they used the
a Considerable doubt has been entertained by soma
scholars as to the origin of the word. See the remarks
er Gssenius and Furst.
• TfliS. But ses Gee. Tnet. t. v. ]3.
c De Subb. cap. 14, rol. 107, ft.
d ffwty. fiov x>**p6v re neX mpdmpor' snd
«*(£ (jcvty). (mov wrey6v, Spoto* Jcwrwm.
(Hesych. Lex. s. v.)
avbfr, {aityunr, 4 ytrurij rov jrvtwrff.
Kviwet, QfistATa TA Tepifiefovpeva, iced QmtytaTmv
{MosMym*.
swrty, (hop x*mb6v n leal TrrpdwTf per" ffeov nw>
wmSci * (mop suxpbr (vM+ayov,
(Phavorm. t. v.)
SArUft fr pip*.
Phrjm. (Lob.) p. 400. Plat. 11. BBS, B.
Theophrsstas (Hist. Plant. II. cap. ult.) speaks of
OKyinet, and calls them worms. DIorcortdes (1U. de
Ulmo) speaks of the well-known viscid Mention on the
leaves of plants snd trass, and says that when this
moisture Is dried up, animalcules liks goats appear
(Sipfflia unwmniij). In another place (V. 181) he
colls them ovwAjpHt. No donbt punt-lies are meant
Agnus (U. ») speaks of oj^i, by which word b*
clearly means plant-lice, or aphides. Aristophanes
associates the xWra (aphides) with +im (gall-flls**
and speaks of them ss Injuring Che young shoots of
the vines (Avts, p. 437). Aristotle (MM. An. vill. 8,
| 9) speaks of a bird, woodpecker, which he terms
sMwoMyftt . Gnats ars for the most part taken on the
wing; but the m'm here alluded to are doabttssi
the Tsrioui kinds of ants, tana, aphides, UpitmUm
coccmrn, oniseidet, etc. etc., which are food oa ta»
kerns and under the bark of tress
Digitized by
Google
L10B
tarm winged the winged aphis ie moat likely in-
tended, and perhaps rermiculut may sometimes
refer to the wingless individual. Because, however,
%e lexicons occasionally (ay that the asrrty is uke
s gnat (the u green and four-winged insect " of
Ilesychius), many commeutators hare come to the
jasty conclusion that some species of gnat is de-
noted by the Greek term; but resemblance by no
means constitutes identity, and it will be seen that
this insect/the aphis, even though it be winged, is
far more closely allied to the wingless louse ( oeoSo-
ulut) than it is to the gnat, or to any species of
the family Culicida ; for the term lice, as applied
to the various kinds of aphidei (Phytophtitiria, as
is their appropriate scientific name), is by no means
merely one of analogy. The wingless aphis is in
appearance somewhat similar to the ptdiculut ;
snd indeed a great authority, fiurmeister, arranges
the Anaplwa, the order to which the ptdiculut
belongs, with the Rhgneota, which contain! the
sob-order Bomoptera, to which the aphides belong.
Hence, by an appropriate transfer, the same word
which in Arabic means ptdiculut is applied in one
of its significations to the "thistle black with
plant-lice." Every one who has observed the this-
tles of this country black with the peculiar species
that infests them can see the force of the meaning
assigned to it in the Arabic language."
Again, almost all the passages where the Greek
word occurs speak of the animal, be it what it may,
M being injurious to plants or trees; it cannot
therefore be applied in a restricted sense to any
gnat (cultx or rimuliwu), for the Culicida are emi-
nently blood-suckers, not vegetable-feeders. 6
Oedmann ( Vermitch. Sammlung. i. en. vi.) is of
•pinion that the species of mosquito denoted by
the cAinnim is probably some minute kind allied
to the Cultx replant, t. pulicarit of Iinnania.
That such an insect might have been the instru-
ment God made use of in the third plague with
which He visited the Egyptians is readily granted,
so far as the irritating powers of the creature are
(.unearned, for the members of the genus Simutium
(sand-fly) are a terrible pest in those localities where
they abound. But no proof at all can be brought
forward in support of this theory.
Bryant, in illustrating the propriety of the plague
being one of lice, has the following very just
remarks: "The Egyptians affected great external
purity, and were very nice both in their persons
and clothing. . . . Uncommon care was taken not
to harbor any vermin. They were particularly
solicitous on this bead; thinking it would be a
great profanation of the temple which they entered
if any animalcule of this sort were concealed in
their garments." And we learn from Herodotus
that so scrupulous were the priests on this point
LIEUTENANTS
1657
that they used to shave the hiiir off their heids and
bodies every third day for fear of harboring any
loutt while occupied in their sacred duties (Herod,
ii. 37). " We may hence see what an abhorrence
the Egyptians showed towards this sort of vermin,
and that the judgments inflicted by the hand of
Hoses were adapted to their prejudices " (Bryant's
Observations, etc., p. 66).
The evidence of the old versions, adduced by
Bochart in support of his opinion, has been called
in question by Koseumuller and Geddes, who will
not allow that the words used by the Syriac, the
Chaldee, and the Arabia versions, as the representa-
tives of the Hebrew word cAtnnlm, can properly be
translated ice ; but the interpretations which they
themselves allow to these words apply better to lie*
than to gnatt ; and it is almost certain that the
normal meaning of the words in all these threw
versions, and indisputably in the Arabic, applies to
Oct. It is readily granted that some of the argu-
ments brought forward by Bochart (Hiiro*, iii. 467,
ed. Koaenm. ) and his consentients are unsatisfactory.
As the plague was certainly miraculous, nothing
can be deduced from the assertion made that the
chinnim sprang from the dust; neither is Bochart'a
derivation of the Hebrew word accepted by scholar*
generally. Much force however is contained in the
Talmudical use of the word chinnah, to express ■
luutt, though Gesenius asserts that nothing can be
adduced thence.
On the whole, therefore, this niuob appears oar-
tain, that those commentators who assert that chm-
nlm means gnatt have arrived at this conclusion
without sufficient authority ; they have based their
arguments solely on the evidence of the LXJL,
though it is by no means proved that the Greek
word used by these translators has any reference to
gnatt ; e the Greek word, which probably originally
denoted any small irritating creature, being derived
from a root which means to late, to gnaw, was
used in t>Jj general sense, and selected by the
LXX. translators to express the original word,
which has an origin kindred to that of the Greek
word, but the precise meaning of which they did
not know. They had in view the derivation of the
Hebrew term chtnndh, from ch&n&k, " to gnaw,"
and most appropriately rendered it by the Greek
word m*ty, from jcvdw, "to gnaw." It appears
therefore that, there is not sufficient authority for
departing from the translation of the A. V., which
renders the Hebrew word by Uct ; and as it is sup-
ported by the evidence of many of the old versions,
it is best to rest contented with it. At any rate the
point is still open, snd no hasty conclusion can ha
adopted concerning it W. H.
LIEUTENANTS (O^ 7;TtprT**). The
a Jl*S. "Nigricans at quasi psdiouUs oUttns
eppamlt cardiius " (Qol. Arab. La. a. v.).
b Tbe mosquito and gnat belong to the ftunlly of
Gutiadm. Tbii Shnulium, to wbleh genus toe OiUx
replant (lin.) belongs, la oomprised under tbw nwnily
Tipulidm. This is a northern aperies, and prcaebly
not found !n figypt. Tha Shnuiia, or sand-files, are
awat inveterate bloodsuckers, wboss bites one* e?»e
is* to very painful swellings.
Although origan and Thilo both understand bv tha
JsMk nevty some minu'e winged Insect that stings,
ret their testimony by n< means proves that a similar
use of the term was restricted to it by the LXX.
translators. It has been shown, from the quotations
given above, that the Greek word baa a wide significa-
tion : It is an aphis, a warm, a JUa, or a spring-tail —
In fcet any small insect-like animal that biles ,' and
all therefore that should legitimately be deduced from
the words of these two writers is that they applied in
thle Instance to some irritating winged insect a term
which, from Its dertvatJou. so appropriately describee
Its irritating properties. Their insect seems to rata
to some species o' midge (Utratopagon).
c If the LXX. understood gnau by the Hebrew
term, «Uy tt-l not these translators use tome weft
known Greek name for gnat, as nime) or itnU ?
Digitized by
Google
1658
LION ALOES
Hebrew achashdrapan was tha official title of the
•straps " or viceroys who governed the provineee of
the Persian empire; it is rendered "lieutenant" in
Eath. iii. 12, viii. 9, is. 8; Ezr. viii. 36, and
"prince" in Dan. lii. 9, ri. l,4e. W. L. B.
LIGN ALOES. [Au>bl]
LIGUBE (Dip*?, UAem: kryipwr; Aid.
npyiptori Alex, vjjciriof- ligurUu). A precioua
■tone mentioned ir. Ex. xxviii. 19, xxxix. 18, aa the
first in the third row of the high-priest's breast-
plate. " And the third row, a ligure, an agate, and
an amethyst." It ia impossible to say, with any
certainty, what stone is denoted by the Hebrew
(arm. Tho LXX. version generally, the Vulgate
and Jotephue (B. J. v. 6. § 7), understand the /yn-
curitm or ligurium ; but it is a matter of consid-
erable difficulty to identify the ligurium of the an-
eients with any known precious stone. Dr. Wood-
ward and some old commentators hare supposed that
it was some kind of Utemnite, because, as these fos-
sils contain bituminous particles, they have thought
that they have been able to detect, upon heating or
rubbing pieces of them, the absurd origin which
Theophraatus (Frag. ii. 28, 31, zv. 2, ed. Schnei-
der) and Pliny (H. N. xzxvii. iii.) ascribe to the
luncurium. Others have imagined that amber ia
denoted by this word ; but Theophrastus, in the
passage cited above, has given a detailed descrip-
tion of the stone, and clearly distinguishes it from
electron, or amber. Amber, moreover, ia too soil
far engraving upon; while the It/natrium was a
hard stone, out of which seals were made. Anoth-
er interpretation seeks the origin of the word in the
eoontry of Liguria (Genoa), where the stone was
fond, but makes no attempt at identification.
Others again, without reason, suppose the opal to
be meant (KosenmulL Srh. in Kx. xxviii. 19).
Dr. Watson (Phil Tram. vol. Ii. p. 894) identi-
fies it with the tourmaline. Beckmann (IlitL In-
vent, i. 87, Bohn) believes, with Braun, Epiphanius,
and J. de Laet, that the description of the Igncu-
rtwn agrees well with the hyacinth stone of modern
mineralogists.* With this supposition Hill (Notts
an TlieqphraituMon Stows, § 50, p. 166) and Ros-
enmuller (MineraLof BibU, p. 30, Bib. Cn6.)agree.
It must be confessed, however, that this opinion is
for bom satisfactory, for there ia the following diffi-
culty in the identification of the lyncurium with the
hyacinth. Theophrastus, speaking of the properties
of the lyncurium, says that it attracts not only
tight particles of wood, but fragments of iron and
brass Now there is no peculiar attractive power in
the hyacinth i nor is Ueckmanu'a explanation of
this point sufficient. He says: " If we consider
It* (the lyncuiium's) attracting of small bodies in
'he same light which our hyacinth has in oomr.xm
with all stonesof the glassy species, I cannot see
anything to controvert this opinion, and to indues
■a to behave the lyncunum and the tourmaliiie to
te the same." But surely the lyncurimn, what-
• The LXX. gives aw-p**** , araaTayoc, a
•ha Volamta tairapu and princepi. Both th* Uebrsw
and the Greek wonU an modifications of tha asm*
aaosarlt root : but philologists am not agreed as to the
form or meaning of tha word. Qettnius ( Ikes, p. 74)
adopts the opinion of Von Boh ton that It comes from
*aasJriya-/>afi, meaning " warrior of the host" Pott
(Wtwm. Wench. Pmf. p. 68) suggests other derivations
Bora n onionano* with the position of the Sbtxaps as
•sal nsoar than military mkoa.
LILx"
erer U be, had in a marked Maimer mofntti: sras>
ertiet ; indeed, the term was applied to the stent
on this very account, for the Greek name tigmrkm
appears to be derived item Xelys u>, " to lick," " to
attract; " and doubtless was selected by the LXX
translators for this reason to express the Hebrew
word, which has a similar derivation.' More prob-
able, though still inconclusive, appears the opinion
of those who identify the lyncurium with the feaar-
matine, or more definitely with the red variety
known as rubellite, which ia a hard stone and used
as a gem, and sometimes sold for rtd sapphire.
Tourmaline becomes, as is well known, electrically
polar when heated. Beckmann's objection, that
"had Theophrastus been acquainted with tha
tourmalins, he would have remarked that H did not
acquire its attractive power till it was heated," is
answered by his own admission on the psasafcf,
quoted from the H'utoire de CAcademie for 1717,
p. 7 (tee Beckmann, 1. 91).
Tourmaline is a mineral found in many parte of
the world. The Duke de Noya purchased two of
these stones in Holland, which are there called
aschentrikker. Unnseus, in his preface to th*
Flora Zeytnndion, mentions the stone under tha
name of lapis electricut from Ceylon. The natives
call It tournamal (vid. Phil. Trans, in Ids, eft.).
Many of the precious stones which were in the pos-
session of the Israelites during their wanderings
were no doubt obtained from the Egyptians, who
might have procured from the Tyrian merehanta
specimens from even India and Ceylon, ete. The
fine specimen of rubelliu now in the British Muse-
um belonged formerly to the King of Ava.
The word ligure is unknown in modern mine-
ralogy. Phillips (Mineral 87) mentions Ugurits,
the fragments of which are uneven and transparent,
with a vitreous lustre. It occurs in a tort of taleoss
rock in the banks of a river in the Apennines.
The claim of rubellite to be the leshem of Scrip-
ture is very uncertain, but it ia perhaps better than
that of the other minerals which writers have frost
time to time endeavored to identify with it.
W. H.
LIK'HI (Tir? 1 ?, [Uarued]: AairfstS [▼■*•
Aomsuti] Alex. A««io: Leei), a Manaasite, ton
of Sbemida, the son of Manaaaeh (1 Chr. rii. 19).
• LIKING (A V.), as a noun, means "condi-
tion," Job xxxix. 14 : " Their young ouea are in
good Ucing;" and as a participle (D*E5T).
"conditioned " (Dau. 1. 10): " Why should he tea
your faces worse Wang than the children which an
ofyoursort?" H.
LILY 0T V, shushin, TIWW, shoehorn
nih uplror, alatt. vi. 28, 29). The Hebrew word
is rendered "rose" in the Chaldee Targum, and I;
Maiinonides and other rabbinical writers, with the
exception of Kimehi and Ben Helech, who in 1 K.
rii. 19 translated it by " violet." In the Judaso
» BUaching, p. 842, from Butane, Da Pitnts pr*-
cieusa, p. 61, says, " the hyacinth is not found in tea
east." This is Incorrect, for it occurs In Kgypt, Cay-
Ion, and tha Bast Indies (v. Mineral, and CrystaU.
Orr's Circle of Sciences, p. 616).
e Tkes. s. v. Dtrb. Hirst says of DBJ7, -<e (Jar
nos ftigU orlgo. Targ. vartlt, ^"l s 33)2, h *. Or
mfyxswi da qao Smiris (Shamir) ge n e ra ». fa>
xxxrr.4"
Digitized by
Google
LILY
Spanish Tenion of the Canticles, tMufiin and aW-
mamdli are always translated oy ram ; but in hot.
ut. 5 the latter ia rendered hrio. But npiyo», or
"lily," ia the uniform rendering of the LXX.. and
ia in all probability the true one, at it ia supported
by the analogy of the Arabic and Persian nana,
which has the same meaning to this day, and by
the existence of the same word in Syriac and Cop-
tie. The Spanish aatcena, a " white lily," is
merely a modification of the Arabic.
But although there ia little doubt that the word
denotes some plant of the lily species, it is by no
means certain what individual of this class it espe-
cially designates. Father Souciet (Recueil de diu.
crit. 1715) labored to prove that the lily of Scrip-
luxe is the " crown-imperial," the Persian tutal, the
Kptror /9<uriAi«oVof the Greeks, and the FritiUaria
imperialU of Linnaeus. So common was this plant
In Persia, that it is supposed to have given its name
to Susa, the capital (Athen. xii. 1; Bochart,
Phaleg, ii. 14). But there is no proof that it was
at any time common in Palestine, and " the lily "
par excellence of Persia would not of necessity be
« the lily " of the Holy Land. Dioscorides (i. 69)
bears witness to the beaut/ of the lilies of Syria
and Pisidia, from which the beat perfume was made.
He says (Hi. 106 [116]) of the «pW 0aa-i\iiti*
that the Syrians call it acuta (= muthan), and the
Africans a$i$\a0oy, which Bochart renders in
Hebrew characters pb D^OM, "white shoot"
Kiihn, in his note on the passage, identifies the
slant in question with the Lilium candidum of
Linnaeus. It is probably the same as that called
In the Miahna " king's lily " (Kitiim, v. 8). Pliny
(zxi. S) defines Kpiro* as "rubens lilium;" and
Diosoorides, in another passage, mentions the fact
that there are lilies with purple flowers ; but whether
by this he intended the Lilium Mnrtayon or Chul-
ctdonicum, Kiihn leaves undecided. Now in the
passage of Athenseus above quoted it is said, 2oir
ror -yoo tfrai rg 'EAA^vau" dwea to ttplvov. But
in the Etymologieum Magnum (a. v. lovoa) we
find ra yap \9tp1a vxb riv +oiAkuv aovffa hey-
rrai. As the thuihan is thus identified both with
' upturn, the red or purple lily, and with \ttpiov, the
white lily, it is evidently impossible from the word
itself to ascertain exactly the kind of lily which is
referred to. If the ilimhaii or tkatfommih of the
O. T. and the Kpinov of the Sermon on the Mount
be identical, which there seems no reason to douot,
the plant designated by these terms must have
been a conspicuous object on the shores of the Lake
of Gennesaret (Matt. ri. 38; Luke xii. 37); it must
have flourished in the deep broad valleys of Pales-
tine (Cant. ii. 1), among the thorny shrubs (ibid. ii.
3), and pastures of the deeert (ii. ii. 16, iv. 5, vi.
3), and must have been remarkable for its rapid
aod luxuriant growth (Ho*, xiv. 6; Eeclus- xxxix.
14). That its flowers were brilliant in color would
■earn to be indicated in Matt. vi. 28, where it is
sompared with the gorgeous robes of Solomon; and
that this color was scarlet or purple is implied in
Cant. r. 13." There appears to be no species of lily
LILY
1659
« According to another opinion, the allusion in Uu>
vie is to the fragrance and not the color of the lllj
sod, If so, the passage Is lavorable to the claims o* the
„ candidum, which la highly fragrant, «hile tne L.
'Tkalctdomcttm la almost destitute of odor. The 'Uy of
no N. I. may still be ths latter.
• Bat Strand (Flor. Patau.) mentions It as grown*
taw Jonpa, and Kltso (ilta. Out. o/rV. tU)
which so completely answers all these requirements
as the Lilium Chakedonimm, or Scarlet Martagon,
which grows in profusion in the Iterant But
direct evidence on the point is still to be desire*
from the observation of travellers. We have, bow-
ever, a letter from Dr. Bowring, referred to (Hard.
Chron. ii. 854), in which, under the name of LiUa
Sgriaca, LuMttey identifies with the L. Chaieedam-
icum a flower which la " abundant in the district of
Galilee " in the months of April and May. Sprang*!
(Ant. BoL Spec. I p. 9) identifies the Greek K plrm
with the L. Martagon.
With regard to the other plants which bareboat
identified with the thuihan, the difficulties are many
and great. Geeenius derives the word from a root
signifying " to be white," and it has hence been
inferred that the thuthan is the white lily. But it
is by no means certain that the Lilium candidum
grows wild in Palestine, though a specimen was
found by Forskil at Zambak in Arabia Felix.*
l>r. Royle (Kitto's Cgchp. art. " Sbushan ") iden-
tified the " lily " of the Canticles with the hitut of
Egypt, in spite of the many allusions to " feeding
among the lilies." The purple flowers of the (Woo,
or wild artichoke, which abounds in the plain north
of Tabor and in the Valley of Rsdraelon, have been
thought by some to be the " lilies of the field "
alluded to in Matt. vi. 28 (Wilson, Lnndi of Ik*
Bible, ii. 110). A recent traveller mentions a plant,
with lilac flowers like the hyacinth, and called by
the Arabs uuctih, which he considered to be of the
species denominated lily in Scripture (Honar,
Deteri of Sinai, p. 329). Lynch enumerates tba
" lily " as among the plants seen by him on the
shores of the Dead Sea, but gives no details w.iich
could lead to its identification (fCxped. to Jordan,
p. 286). He had previously olaerred the water-
lily on the Jordan (p. 173), but omits to mention
whether it wsa the yellow (Nuphar lutea) or the
especial mention of the L. cawtulum growing in Pal-
estins, and in connection with the habitat given by
Strain. It la worth observing that the Illy Is mentioned
Ant II. 1) with the rose of Storms. Now let this bs
compared with Jerome's Comment, ad It. xxxliL 9 1
"Saron omnia Juxta Joypm Lyddamqne appellate!
ragto In qua laUssbnl campl ssrtUssqus tewtaatnr »
W.ll
Digitized by
Google
1660
LILY
white (Numpheta alba). « The only « lilies ' which
I wr in Palestine," says Prof. Stanley, "in the
mouths of March and April, were large yellow
water-lilies, in the clear spring of 'Ain MeUahah,
near the Lake of Merom " (S. <f P. p. 429). He
•uggeate that the name " lily " " may include the
numeroui Bowers of the tulip or amaryllis kind,
which appear in the early summer, or the autumn
of Palestine." Ihe following description of the
Huleh-lily by Dr. Thomson (The ljind and the
Book, i. 394), were it more precise, would perhaps
have enabled botanists to identify it : " This HQleh-
lily U very large, and the three inner petals meet
above and form a gorgeous canopy, such as art
nanr approached, and king never sat under, even
In hit utmost glory. We call it Uuleli-
HJy, because It was hen that it was first discovered.
It* botanical name, if It hare one, I am unac-
quainted with Our flower delights most
In the valleys, but is also found on the mountains.
It grows among thorns, and I have sadly lacerated
my hands in extricating it from them. Nothing
an be in higher contrast than the luxuriant vel-
rety softness of this lily, and the crabbed tangled
hedge of thomi about it. Gazelles still delight to
feed among them ; and you can scarcely ride through
die woods north of Tabor, where these lilies abound,
without frightening them from their flowery pas-
ture." If some future traveller would give a de-
scription of the Huleh-lily somewhat less vague than
tho above, the question might be at once resolved.
[Palestine — Bohmy.]
Ihe Phoenician architects of Solomon's temple
decorated the capitals of the columns with •' lily-
work," that is, with leaves and flowers of the lUy
I K. vii. ), corresponding to the lotus-headed capi-
tals of Egyptian architecture. The rim of the
M brazen sea " was possibly wrought in the form of
the recurved margin of a lily flower (1 K. vii. 26).
Whether the slttbhannbn and thuthan mentioned
In the titles of Vs. xlv., lx., lxix., and lxxx. were
musical instrument* in the form of lilies, or wheth-
sr the word denote a musical air, will be discussed
udcr tlie article Shobhaknim. W. A. W.
* T he description in Matt. vL 28-30 implies that
this plant was familiar to Christ's hearers. This
LILY
eotuaaeration would at once exclude Likmm ess**
dum, which, if found at all in Syria and Palestine
must be extremely rare, and probably only aa es-
caped from cultivation.
It is impossible also that any of the water-Win
could be intended, as the lilies mentioned grew ia
the field.
The requirements of the text are. the following
(1.) A plant of the order Liliacta or one of the
allied orders of /ridncea, or Amai-yiUdacta. Any
plant which would be vulgarly called a lily would
suit the case, inasmuch as we are not to imagine
lauguage used here in the accurate style of a
botanist
(2.) It must be a plant growing in the fields,
with a stem of sufficient size and solidity to be an
element of the fuel of the tannoor or oriental oven.
It ia customary in the East to gather out the tares
and various flowering plants from among the wheat,
before the time of harvest, and to bind them i>
bundles, and either to feed them to the cattle,
or bum them in the oven. The lily mentioned
must be of this character, in order to suit the nar-
rative.
(3.) It must be a plant of rich colored flowers,
probably purple, inasmuch as this color would bet-
ter suit the comparison with the colors of royal
garments.
There are several plants which have been sup-
posed to represent the lily, which we can eliminate
by the above tests. Lilium candidum lias been
already excluded. Anemone conmaria, with its twe
varieties of red and purple flowers, has been de-
scribed aa the plant in question. But in the first
place it is the most distant possible from the lilies,
being of the family of the Ranunculactet. In the
second place it is a low herbaceous plant, not occur-
ring so much among wheat as in open grassy places,
by roadsides. It has no stem, and is not gathered
for the ovens. It is common enough, but for the
two reasons mentioned is quite inadmissible.
The remaining hypotheses may all be grouped
into one class. They consist in assuming one of
the plants of the above- named orders to be the
plant here designated. Some have supposed the
Litium Chalcedonicum. Others have supposed the
great Iris of the Hfileh, which Or. Thomson call*
the Haieh lily. Others (till have endeavored tc
prove the claims of others of these natural orders.
My own opinion is, that the term ' lily ' here if
general, and that it does not refer to any specie*
exclusively. There are several fine plant* of then
order* which are found more or less diffused through
Palestine, a* TuMpa ocutis-iotis, Lilium Ckalce-
donicvm, Irit reticulata, and other* of that genua,
and but, but not least likely to have been befort
the eyes and in the minds of the hearers of the ser-
mon on the Mount, Gladiolus Illyricus. Indeed,
if any one species more than another be designated,
I incline to think that this ia the one.
Thi* plant I* a abowy species, growing to m
height of two or three feet, among the wheat and
barley. It has a reedy stem, and a large racem*
of purple flowers, an inch and a half broad when
open, and it is a sufficiently striking and showy
flower to have been the subject of the comparison.
Moreover, it is one of those wild plant* which an
constantly plucked up with the other weeds, and
fed to cattle, or burned in the fire.
Still I incline to think that the Saviour, in t
ing of the lilies, used the term in the same i
way that an inhabitant of the Middle State* wonH
Digitized by
Google
LIMB
peak ol wild Uliea, in allusion to their bright colors,
sot particularly designating, or perhapa not being
tware of the apecifio differences of the individuals of
the genua. He might have aeen a lily, and been
•truck with Ha beauty, and uaed that ouality to illus-
trate hia apeech, without knowing wnether he had
wen IMium Philadelphiaun, or L. Canaderue, or L.
ptperimm. Kay, be might hare aeen an jfc'ryttro-
mm, or a Gladiolus, and called them lilies. Or he
might hare drawn hia illustration from the combined
impression produced on hia mind by all the species
and general names. I conceive the latter to have
bean the case in the Sermon on the Mount.
O. K.P.
LIME (TCP: itorla: calx). This substance
h noticed only three times in the Bible, namely, in
Dsut. xxvii. 3, 4, where it ia ordered to be laid on
the great stones whereon the law was to be written
(A. V. "thou shalt plaiater them with plaiater ");
m la. zxziii. IS, where the " burnings of lime "
are figuratively used to express complete oVsfno-
aow; and in Am. ii. 1, where the prophet de-
scribes the outrage committed on the memory of the
king of Edoin by the Moabites, when they took
hia bones and burned them into time, i. e. calcined
them — an indignity of which we have another in-
stance in a K. xxiii. 16. That the Jews were ac-
quainted with the use of the lime-kiln, has been
already noticed. [FuRNACX.] W. L. B.
* LINE. Several Hebrew words are so ren-
dered, which in some passages admit of a closer
discrimination. In addition to the ordinary appli-
cations it often denotes a line or cord used for meas-
uring purposes, a* 1" and Ip, 1 K. ril. 33; 8 K.
ni. 13, Ac; b^fj, Pa. lzzviii 65 (66); Am. vii.
17; Is. xliv. 18, where the A. V. has "rule"; but
in this last passage ~Q^ is probably "graver,"
"stylus" (not "line "as in A. V.). A peculiar use of
the measuring line occurs in S Sam. viii. 3 (where
the word is /3n). David, after a signal victory
over the Moabites, who appear to hare given him
special provocation, put to death two thirds of his
captives and spared one third. He required them to
|e down on the ground, and then with a line meas-
ured them off after that proportion. The line aa
employed for measuring, by a frequent metonomy
stands often for lot, possession, or inheritance (as
b^t in Joe. xvil. H, xix. 9; Pi. ivi. 6 (6); Esek.
xML 18 ff.). The sense of "their line" (Q-JT),
i. e. of the heavens in Ps. six. 4 (6), is uncertain.
In this highly poetic passage it may well enough
denote the expanse or circuit which the heavens
measure off as they bend over all the earth, through-
mt which ia to be beard the proclamation which
they make of God's existence and attributes. So
Hupfeld (Die Peatmen, 1. 410), who agrees here
with Hengstenberg (Die Pmhnen, i. 440 f.). Paul's
dtation of the passage (Rom. x. 18) follows the
LXX. which has a>«oVr»'> " i sound " (A. V.), as
from the strings of a lyre. By " plumb-line "
^[^St only Am. ril. 7, twice) is usually unisr- 1
stood a line with lead attached to It for determining
!be perpendicularity of objects. Jehovah, aa repre-
onted there by the prophet, stands jn a straight-
onUt wall with a line in hia hand, as a symbol
*T the strict Justice with which He will call bis
tjopls to account for their sins (see Bear, D*r
LIKEN 1G61
Prophet Amos, p. 407, and Keil, Die IS Mesas*
Propheten, p. SSI). The proper renilaing of
bV^, Gen. xxxviU. 18, It line or cord (in ths
A. V. " bracelets "), by which the fignet-ring was
attached to the neck. See Cornint, Ormtu, etc. p.
160. The literal and metaphorical tenses blend
themselves in Paul's exjirewiioii (<V iwcrpiif
jcwoVi), S Cor. x. 16, i. «. another's lii.i or sphere
of labor allotted to hini by God's providence. 11.
LINEN. Five different IJebrew words are
thus rendered, and it ia ditficult to aatign to each
its precise significance. With regard to the Greek
words so translated in the N. T. thene is less am-
biguity.
1. As Egypt was the great centre of the Unci
manufacture of antiquity, it is in connet lion witl
that country that we And the lint allusion to it it
the Bible. Joseph, when promoted to the dignity
of ruler of the land of Egypt, was arrayed "in
vestures of^ne /own" (thjtli," niarg. "silk," Gen.
xli. 43), and among the offerings for the tabcrnacls
of the things which the Israelites had brought out
of Egypt were " blue, and purple, and scarlet, and
fine linen" (Ex. xxv. 4, xxxv. 6). Of twisted
threads of this material were composed the ten
embroidered hangings of the tabernacle (Ex. xxvi.
1), the rail which separated the holy place from
the holy of holies (Ex. xxvi. 31), and the curtain
for the entrance (ver. 36), wrought with needle-
work. The ephod of the high-priest, with its
" curious," or embroidered girdle, and the breast-
plate of judgment, were of "fine twined linen "
(Ex. xxriii. 6, 8, 16). Of fine linen woven in
checker-work were made the high-priest's tunic
and mitre (Ex. xxriii. 39). The tunics, turbans,
and drawers of the interior priests (Ex. xxxix. 37,
38) are simply described a* of woven work of fine
linen.
3. But in Ex. xxriii. 43, and Ler. ri. 10, the
drawers of the priests and their flowing robes art
said to be of linen (bad *>), and the tunic of the
high-priest, his girdle, and mitre, which he wore
on the day of atonement, were made of the same
material (Ler. ivi. 4). Cuncus {De Sep. Htbr.
ii. c. i.) maintained that the robes worn by tbs
high-priest throughout the year, which are called
by the TauuudiaU " the golden vestments," were
thus named because they were made of a more val-
uable kind of linen (tltetk) than that of which " the
white vestments," worn only on the day of atone-
ment, were composed (bad). But in the Minima
(Cool. Joma, iii. 7) it is said that the dress worn
by the high-priest on the morning <>f the day of
atonement was of linen of Pelusium, that is, of ths
finest description. In the evening of the same day
he wore garments of Indian linen, which was lest
costly than the Egyptian. From a comparison of
Ex. xxriii. 48 with xxxix. 88, it seems clear that
bad and iliith were synonymous, or, if there be any
difference between them, ths latter probably de-
notes the spun threads, while the former is ths
linen wnren from them. Maimonidea ( Celt ham
milcdaen, c 8) considered them as identical with
regard to the material of which they weie com-
posed, for be says, " wherever In the Law bad or
theth are mentioned, they signify flax, that is.
essays. * And Abarbanel (on Ex. xxv.) defines
aM*> tt be Egyptian flax, and distinguishes it at
Brtrfi or *X$T0, u In Si. art. 18. » *t^
Digitized by
Google
1662
LXKBM
composed oT rix (Heb. tkitk, «eix") threads
twisted tt getter, from bad, which was single. But
la opposition to this may be quoted Ex. xxxix. 28,
where the drawers of the priests are said to be
Knen (Ami) or Jin* twined linen {faith). Tbe wise-
hearted among the women of the congregation spun
the flax which was used by Beealed and Aboliab for
the hangings of tbe tabernacle (Ex. xxxv. 86), and
the making of linen was one of the occupations of
women, of whose dress it formed a conspicuous put
(Pror. xxxi. 83, A. V. "silk; " Es. xvi. 10, 18i
eomp. Rev. xviiL 16). In Ea. xxvii. 7 (Mat it
•numerated among tbe products of Egypt, which
tbe Tynans imported and used for the sails of their
ships; and the vessel constructed for Ptolemy Philo-
■ator la said by Athenseus to have bad a sail of
bfut (flformr »x«w lorfsr, Deipn. i. 27 F).
Hermjppus (quoted by Atbenteus) describes Egypt
n the great emporium for sails: —
'Bff e" AiyvwTDv t* spqaarre
*I#vfo Mt 0u0Aov*.
Cleopatra's galley at tbe battle of Actium had a
aail of purple canvas (Plin. xix. 5). The ephods
worn by the priests (1 Sam. xxii. 18), by Samuel,
though be was a Levite (1 Sam. U. 18), and by
David when he danced before tbe ark (2 Sam. vi.
14; 1 Chr. xv. 27), were all of linen (bnd). The
man whom Daniel saw in vision by the river Hid-
dekel was clothed in linen (bnd, Dan. x. 6, xii. 6, 7;
eomp. Matt xxviii. 3). In no case is bml used for
other than a dress worn in re%kjus ceremonies,
though tbe other terms rendered " linen " are.ap-
£lied to tbe ordinary dress of women and persons
i high rank.
8. Bit4, ■ always translated "fine linen " ex-
cept 2 Chr. v. 12, is apparently a late word, and
probably the same with the Greek £tWor, by
which it is represented by the LXX. It was used
for the dresses of tbe Levite choir in the temple (2
Chr. v. 13), for the loose upper garment worn by
kings over tbe close-fitting tunic (1 Chr. xv. 97), and
for the vail of the Temple, eniliroidered by the skill
of the Tyrian artificers (2 Chr. iii. U). Mordeeai
was arrayed in robes efjint linen (bite.) and purple
(Esth. viii. 15) when honored by the Persian king,
and the dress of tbe rich man in the parable was
purple and Jine linen (/gfoo-tr, Lukexvi. 19). Tbe
Tynans were celelirated for Uieir skill in linen-em-
broidery (2 Chr. li. 14), and the house of Ashbea,
a family of the descendants of Sbelah the son of
ludah, were workers hi fine linen, probably in the
lowland country (1 Cbr. Iv. 21). Tradition adds
that they wove the robes of the kings and priests
(Targ. Joseph), and, according .to Jarchi, tbe hang-
ings of tbe sanctuary. The cords of the canopy
over tbe garden-court of the palace at Shuahan
were of fine linen (.bill, Esth. i. 6). •' Purple and
broidered work and fine linen " were brought by
the Syrians to tbe market of Tyre (Ee. xxvii. 18),
the btu of Syria being distinguished from the thish
i Egypt, mentioned in ver. 7, as being in all prob-
ability an Aramaic word, while ihlth is referred
o an Egyptian original.' 1 " Fine linen " (j8<W»»),
LINEK
with purple and silk are enumerated in Bar. trim
12 as among tbe merchandise of the mystical Baby-
lon; and to the Lamb's wife (xix. 8) it "was
granted that she should be arrayed in Jin* owe*
(/SoWirer) clean and white: " the symbolical sig-
nificance of this vesture being immediately ex
plained, " for the fine linen is the righteousness of
saints." And probably with the same intent the
armies in heaven, who rode upon white h orses
and followed the " Faithful and True," were dad
in " Jin*, linen, white and dean," as they went forth
to battle with the beast and his army (liev. xix.
14).
4. E(in' occurs but once (Prov. vii. 16), and
there in connection with Egypt. Schultena con-
nects it with tbe Greek iSirn, MoVier, which fas
supposes were derived from it. The Talmodiata
translate it by SvfQy ehebti, a cord or rope, in
consequence of its identity in form with dMay'
which occurs in the Targ. on Josh. ii. 15, and
Esth. i. 6. R. Parchon interprets it "a girdle of
Egyptian work." But in what way these cords
were applied to the decoration of beds is not
dear. Probably itin was a kind of thread mad*
of fine Egyptian flax, and used for ornamenting the
coverings of beds with tapestry-work. In support
of this may be quoted the op6rra'x»< of tbe LXX,
and tbe pidet tnpelet of the Vulgate, which repre-
sent tbe 11EM rrO^q of the Hebrew. Bat
Celsius renders the word" linen," and appeals to
the Greek tOirttv, aOdVs, as decisive upon the
point. 8ee Jabkmaki, Optuc. i. 72, 73.
Schultena (Prov. vii. 16) suggests that the Great
airSdr is derived from the Hebrew sdtan,' which
is used of the thirty linen garments which Samson
promised to his companions (Judg. xiv. 12, IS) at
his wedding, and which be stripped from the bodies
of tbe Philistines whom be slew at Ashkdon (ver.
19). It was made by women (Prov. xxxi. 24), and
used for girdles and under-garnients (Is. iii. tt;
eomp. Mark xiv. 61). Tbe LXX. in Judg. and
Prov. render it airhir, but in Judg. xiv. 18
Mnm. is used synonymously; just as rirsa* in
Matt, xxvii. 69, Mark xv. 46, and Luke xxiii. 88,
is tbe same as Mm in Luke xxiv. 12; John xx. A,
6, xix. 40. In these passages it is seen that Knew
was used for the winding -sheets of the dead by the
Hebrews as well as by the Greeks (Horn. IL xrUi.
363, xxiii. 254; eomp. Eur. Batch. 819). Toweh
were made of it (Almsr, John xiii. 4. 6), sod
napkins (<routetpic John xi. 44), like the dares
linen of tbe Egyptians. The dress of tbe poor
(Koclus. xl. 4) was probably unbleached Sax («uw-
Ktvov ), such as was used for barbers' towels (Prut
De CatruL).
Tbe general term which lndtided all those already
mentioned was pidiUh,f corresponding to the Greek
Klvov, which was employed — like our "cotton " —
to denote not only tbe flax (Judg. xv. 14) or raw
material from which the linen was made, but also
the plant itself (Josh. ii. 6), and tbe manufacture
from it. It is generally opposed to wool, as a vea>
etable product to an animal (Lev. xiii. 47, 48, t\
a In Oen. xli. 42, the Tanrom of Onkelos
' ! S uUissqufvataitofltfB?. See also fc.
I xaxv. 81.
« yjQ. Jabtonski ((%wc. L 297, ie.) ek
the wont an ngypttan origin. The Cos* I s
Un representative of swear In tk* H. I
Digitized by
Google
LINKS
M; Dart. ixli. 11; Prov. xxxi. It; Hoi. Ii. 8, 9),
and in and for neb (Is. xix. 9), girdles (Jer. xiii.
1), sod measuring-lib » (Ex. xl. 3), as well as for
the dress of the priests (Ex. xlir. 17, 18). From a
sompariaon nt the last-quoted pilsners with Ex.
irviii. 48, ar.d Ler. ri. 10 (3), xvi. 4, 38, it is evi-
dent that bad and puhteh denote the same material,
the latter being the more general term. It is
equally apparent, from a comparison of Rev. xv. 6
with xix. 8, 14, that Afror and fiioviror are essen-
tially the same. Mr. Yates ( Textrimm Antxqmy-
rvm, p. 276) contends that Kirov denotes the com-
mon flax, and fliWoi the finer variety, and that in
this sense the terms are osed by Pausanias (ri. 38,
f 4). Till the time of Dr. Forster it was never
doubted that byuut was a kind of flax, but it was
maintained by him to be cotton. That the mummy-
sloths used by the Egyptians were cotton and not
tnsen was first asserted by Kouelle (Mim. it tAcad.
Rof. dt* Scun. 1750), and he was supported in bis
opinion by Dr. Forster and Dr. Solander, after
an examination of the mummies in the British
Museum. But a more careful scrutiny by Mr.
Bauer of about 400 specimens of mummy-cloth has
shown that they were, universally, linen. Dr. Ure
arrived independently at the same conclusion
(Yates, Textr. Ant. b. ii.).
One word remains to be noticed, which our A.
V. has translated "linen yarn" (1 K. x. 38; 3
Chr. i. 18), brought out of Egypt by Solomon's
merchants. The Hebrew mikcihf or milaifi is
variously explained. In the LXX. of 1 Kings it
appears as a proper name, •saws', and in the
Vulgate 0*i, a place in Arabia Felix. By the
Syriae (3 Chr.) and Arabic translators it was also
regarded as the name of a place. Bochart once
referred it to Troglodyte Egypt, anciently called
tiickot, according to Pliny (vi. 34), but afterwards
decided that it signified "a tax" (l/icroz. pt 1,
b. 3, e. 9). To these Michaelia adds a conjecture
of his own, that Ku in the interior of Africa, S.
W. of Egypt, might be the place referred to, as
the country whence Egypt procured its horses
(Laws o/ Mo$a, trans. Smith, ii. 493). In trans-
lating the word '• Unm yam " the A. V. followed
Junius and Tremeilius, who are supported by Se-
bastian Schmid, De Dieu, and Ckricus. Uesenius
has recourse to a very unnatural construction, and
rendering the word " troop," refers it in the first
clause to the king's merchants, and in the second
to the horses which they brought.
From time immemorial Egypt was celebrated Tor
Its linen (Ex. xxvii. 7). It was the dress of the
Egyptian priests (Her. 11. 87, 81), and was worn
by them, according to Plutarch (/«. el Orir. 4),
vecause the color of the flax-blossom resembled
.hat of the circumambient ether (comp. Jut. ri.
W3, of the priests of bis). Panopolia or Chemmia
(the modern Akltmim) was anciently Inhabited by
linen-weavers (Strabo, xvii. 41, p. 813). According
to Herodotus (ii. 88) the mummy-cloths were of
tyssui ; and Josephus (Ant. ill. 6, J 1) mentions
among the contributions of the Israelites for thr
Ubfmacks, "oystnj of flax; " the hangings of the
tabernacle were " sindon of bymu ' \,i 3), of which
material the tunics of the priests were ato made
\AnL lli. 7, § 9), the drawers being of oysm* (J 1).
Phflo also says that the high-priest wore a garment
sf the finest byum. Combining the testimony of
fXHp,
*li?9.
3 Obion,
LINTEL 1663
Herodotus as to the mummy-cloths with the results
of microscopic examination, It seems clear that
byuut was linen, and not cotton; and moreover,
that the dresses of the Jewish priests wen mads
of the same, the purest of all materials. For
further information see Dr. Kalisch's Comm. <m
Kxodut, pp. 487-489 ; also article Woouw.
W. A. W.
LINTEL. The beam which forms the upper
part of the framework of a door. In the A. V.
« lintel " is the rendering of three Hebrew wcrtb.
1. VK, apt (1 K. vi. 31); translated "pest"
throughout Ex. xl., xli. The true meaning c f this
word is extremely doubtful. In the LXX. it b
left untranslated («JA, viKtv, alKifi); and in the
Chaldee version It is represented by a modification
of itself. Throughout the passages of Exekivl in
which it occurs the Vulg. uniformly renders it
by front i which Uesenius quotes as fhvorabb to
his own view, provided that by fnmt be under-
stood the projections in front of the building.
The A. V. of 1 K. n. 31, " lintel," is supported
by the versions of Aquila, Symmachus, and Tbe-
odotion of Ex. xl. 31; while Kiinchi exibins it
generally by "post." The Peshito-Syriac uni-
formly renders the word by a modification of the
Greek mpaordSfi, " pillars." Jurchi understands
by nyU a round column like a large tree; Aquila
(Ex. xl. 14) having in view the meaning " ram,"
which the word elsewhere bears, renders it Kpla/ia,
apparently intending thereby to denote Die volutes
of columns, curved like rams' horns. J. D.
Michaelis {Supp. ad Lac. s. v.) considers it to he
the tympanum or triangular area of the pediment
above a gate, supported by columns. Uesenius
himself, after reviewing the passages in which the
word occurs, arrives at the conclusion that in the
singular it denotes the whole projecting framework
of a door or gateway, including the jambs on either
side, the threshold, and the lintel or architrave,
with frieze and cornice. In the plural it is applied
to denote the projections along the front of an
edifice ornamented with columns or palm trees, and
with recesses or intercolumniations between them
sometimes filled up by windows. Under the former
bead he places 1 K. vi. 31; Ex. xl. 9, 31, 34, 36,
39, 31, 33, 34, 36-38, 48, 49, xli. 8; while to the
latter he refers xL 10, 14, 16, xli. 1. Another
explanation still is that of Boettcber (quoted by
Winer, JUabo. ii. 876), who says that agil is the
projecting entrance ami passage- wall — which might
appropriately be divided bito compartments by
paneling; and this view is adopted by Flint
(Bamda. s. ▼.).
8. "Up??, «nj*«dr (Amos ix. 1; Zeph. U U%
The marginal rendering, " chapiter or knop, ' if
both these passages in undoubtedly tLs mors s r-
rect, and in all other cases where the word occurs
it is translated "knop." [Ksop.]
8. *Ppt??9. mathhiph (Ex. xU. 33, 38); also
rendered "'upper door-post" in Ex. xli. 7. That
this h) the true rendering b admitted by all modern
philologist*, who connect it with a root which In
Arabic and the cognate dialects signifies " to over*
by with beams." The LXX. and Vulgate coin-
cide in assigning to it the same meaning. Kabul
Sol. Jarehl derives it from a Chaldee root signifying
" to beat," because the door in being shot heal*
against H. The signification "tolook" or "peep,"
which was acquired by the Hebrew Kit, :'
Digitized by
Google
1664
UNITS
Alien Erm to translate mathkAph by >' window,"
•neb aa the Arabs have over the doora of their
bonaea; and in assenting to this rendering, Bochart
obaervea " that it was so called on account of the
grates and railings over the tops of the doora,
through which those who desire entrance into the
house could be seen before they were admitted "
(Kalisch, Exodus). An illustration of one of these
windows is given in the art. Houbr, vol. ii. p.
U03. W. A. W.
LI'NTja (Jut-as [Untn, Untn-cloU,]), a Chria-
tiaii at Rome, known to St. Paul and to Timothy
(2 Tim. lv. 31). That the first bishop of Rome
after the Apostles was named Linus is a statement
tn which all ancient writers agree (e. g. Jerome,
Dt Virii [Uustr. c 16; August Ep. Uii. 2). The
early and unequivocal assertion of Ireneeus (lii. 3,
13), corroborated by Euseblus (H. E. iii. 3) and
Theodoret, (in 3 Tim. iv. 31), is sufficient to
prove the Identity of the bishop with St. Paul's
friend.
The date of his appointment, the duration of his
episcopate, and the limits to which his episcopal
authority extended, are points which cannot be
regarded as absolutely settled, although they have
been discussed at great length. Euseblus and
Theodoret, followed by Baronius and Tillemont
{Hut. Ecd. U. 165 and 691), state that he became
bishop of Rome after the death of St. Peter. On
the other hand, the words of Irencrus — "[Peter
and Paul] when tbey founded and built up the
church [of Rome] committed the office of ita epis-
copate to Linus " — certainly admit, or rather
Imply the meaning, that he held that office before
the death of St. Peter: as if the two great Apostles,
having, in the discharge of their own peculiar
office, completed the organization of the church at
Rome, left it under the government of Linus, and
pass e d on to preach and teach in some new region.
This proceeding would be in accordance with the
practice of the Apostles in other places. And the
earlier appointment of Linus is asserted as a fact
by Rufflnus {Prof, in Clem, ftecogn.), and by the
author of eh. zlri. bk. vil. of the Apostolic Con-
stitutions. It is accepted as the true statement of
the case by Bishop Pearson (Dt Strut el Sueett-
tione Priorum Roma Epiteopontm, ii. 6, { 1) and
by Fleury (/fist. ExxL ii. 26). Some persons hare
objected that the undistinguished mention of the
name of Linus between the names of two other
Roman Christians in 3 Tim. lv. 21 is a proof that
he was not at that time bishop of Rome. But
even Tillemont admits that such a way of intro-
ducing the bishop's name is hi accordance with the
simplicity of that early age. No lofty preemi-
nence was attributed to the episcopal office in the
apostolic times.
The arguments by which the exact years of his
episcopate are laid down are too long and minute
to be recited here. Its duration is given by Euse-
blus (whose H. E. ill. 16 and Cliromcon give In-
■ Kufflnua's statement ought, doubtless, to be inter-
seated In accordance with that of his contemporary
Satphanlus {Adv. liar. xxvll. 6, p. 107), to the effort
(hat Unus and Cletus wen bishops of Home in ouc-
sasslon, not contemporaneously. The facta were, how-
ever, differently viewed : (1) by an Interpolator of the
Quia Pomi/kvm Damtui, quoted by J. Toss In his
second epistle to A. Rivet (App. to Pearson's VimUcim
fraatioM) ; (3) by Beds ( Pita 8. Benedicts' f 7, p.
MS, ed. Stevenson) when he was seeking
LION
consistent evidence) as A. D. 68-80; by TiUemeat,
who however reproaches Penrsoi. with departing
from the chronology of Eusebius, as 66-78; by
Baronius as 67-78; and by Pearson aa 55-67
Pearson, in the treatise already quoted (i. 10)
gives weighty reasons for distrusting the chronology
of Eusebius sa regards the years of the early bishops
of Rome; and he derives his own opinion from
certain very ancient (but interpolated ) lists of those
bishops (see i. 13 and ii. 5). This point has been
subsequently considered by Barateriua (De imo-
easiont Antiouissimd Epitc. Horn. 1740), who
gives A. d. 56-67 as the date of the episcopate sf
Linus.
The statement of Ruffinus, that Linus and Cletus
were bishops in Rome whilst St. Peter waa alive,'
has been quoted in support of a theory which
sprang up in the 17th century, received the auc-
tion even of Hammond in his cuuuwersy witu
Blonde! ( Works, ed. 1684, iv. 835: Epucopnlis
Jura, v. 1, § 11), waa held with some alight modi-
fication by Baraterius, and has been recently re-
vived. It is supposed that Linus was bishop in
Rome only of the Christians of Gentile origin,
while at the same time another bishop exercised
the same authority over the Jewish Christians there.
Tertullian's assertion (Dt Pivucr. Ilartt. % 33)
that Clement [the third bishop] of Rome was con-
secrated by St. Peter, has been quoted s_so a*
corroborating this theory. But it does not follow
from the words of Tertullian that Clement's con-
secration took place immediately before he became
bishop of Rome: and the statement of Ruffinus,
so far as it lends any support to the above-named
theory, is shown to be without foundation by Pear-
son (ii. 3, 4). Tillemont 's observations (p. 590) in
reply to Pearson only show that the establishment
of two contemporary bishops in one city was con-
templated in ancient times ss a possible provisional
arrangement to meet certain temporary difficulties.
The actual limitation of the authority of linus
to a section of the church in Rome remains to be
proved.
Unus Is reckoned by Pseudo-Hippolytua, and it
the Greek Aftnaa, among the seventy disciples
Vsrissa days s» stated by different authorities in
the Western Church, and by the Eastern Church,
as the day of his death. A narrative of the mar-
tyrdom of St. Peter and St. Paul, printed in the
Bibliothtca Patrum, and certain pontifical decrees,
are incorrectly ascribed to Linus. He is said to
hare written an account of the dispute between St
Peter and Simon Magus. W. T. B.
LION. Rabbinical writers discover in the O. T.
seven names of the lion, which they assign to the
animal at seven periods of its life. 1. "1-12, gtr,
or TO, gtr, a cub (Gen xlix. 9; Dent xxxUi.23;
Jer. 11. 38 1 Nah. ti. 13). 3. "VE3, eepMr, a young
lion (Judg. xiv. »; Job iv. 10; Re. xk. 8, *o.).
for two contemporaneous abbots presiding In one
monastery ; and (8) by Babanus Mannis (de Oumpism-
pis: Opp. ed. Mlgne, torn. lv.eol.UR7), who Ingenious!}
claims primitive authority for toe Institution of ehor>
pboopl on the supposition that Unus and Cletus wen
never bishops with full powers, but wen -irrrranp
nneous chonptscopl employed by St Peter In hit
absence from Boms, and at bis request, to pedals
clergymen for the church at Soma
Digitized by
Google
LION
* *T& *"*» <* ' \J"^3i TS 18 '*! » full-grown lion
(Geo. xliz. 9; Judg. xir. 5, 8, Ac.). 4- *X7$t
tkachal, a lion more advanced in age and itrength
(Job It. 10; Pa. xd. 13, Ac). 6. \flT#t lAocAaft,
a lion in full vigor (Job xxviil. 8). 6. KO^,
UK, or Hja^, faoiyyd, an old lion (Geo. xlix. 9;
Job it. 11, 4c.). 7. 1&l2t fa«A, * lion decrepit
with age (Job It. 11; Ix.'xxx. 6, Ac.). Well might
fiochart (Bienm. pt i. b. iii. 1) say, « Hie gram-
metid videntur mire sibi indulgere." He differs
from this arrangement in every point but the
eeeand. In the first place, gdr i» applied to the
young of other »nim«l« besides the lion; for in-
stance, the sea-monster* in Lam. iv. 8. Secondly,
cephtr differs from g&r, as juoencut from vituhu.
Art or aryth is a generic term, applied to all lions
without regard to. age. In Judg. xiv. the *• young
lion " (eepAfr drdydrt) of ver. 5 is in ver. 8 called
the "lion" (aryih). fiochart Is palpably wrong
in rendering thachai " a Mack lion " of the kind
which, according to Pliny (viii. 17), was found in
Syria. Tlie word is only used in the poetical books,
and most probably expresses some attribute of the
Bon. It is connected with an Arabic root, which
signifies "to bray" like an ass, and is therefore
simply " the brayar." Shachatt does not denote a
Bon at all. Labi is properly a "lioness," and is
connected with the Coptio labai, which has the
same signification. Luith (eomp. Air, Horn. H.
XT. 875) is another poetic name. So tar from being
applied to a lion weak with age, it denotes one in
full vigor (Job iv. 11; Prov. xxx. 30). It has
been derived from an Arabic root, which signifies
" to be strong," and, if this etymology be true,
the word would be an epithet of the lion, "the
strong one."
At present lions do not exist in Palestine, though
they an said to be found in the desert on the
road to Egypt (Schwarx, Dae. of PaL: see Is.
xxx. 6). They abound on the banks of the Eu-
phrates between Busaorah and Bagdad (Russell,
(From tpsehnen In tooufleel Sarins.)
Aleppo, p. 61), and b the marshes and Jungles
near the rivers of Babylonia (Layard, jVm. f Bab.
p. 860). This species, according to Layard, Is
without the dark and shaggy mane of the Afnam
Bon (id. p 487), though ha adds in a note that be
10S
lion 1666
had seen lions on the river Earoon with a long black
mane.
But, though lions hare now disappeared from
Palestine, they must in ancient times have been
numerous. The names Lebaoth (Josh. xv. 83),
Beth-Lebaoth (Josh. xix. 6), Arieh (3 K, xv. 35),
and Laish (Judg. xviii. 7; 1 Sam. xxv. 44) were
probably derived from the presence of or connection
with lions, snd point to the fact that they were at
one time common. They had their lain in the
forests which have vanished with them (Jer. v. 6,
xii. 8 ; Am. iii. 4), in the tangled brushwood (Jer.
iv. 7, xxv. 38; Job xxxviii. 40), and in the caw
of the mountains (Cant. iv. 8; Ex. xix. 9; Nah.
ii. 13). The cane-brake on the banks of the Jor-
dan, the " pride " of the river, was their favorite
haunt (Jer. xlix. 19, L 44; Zech. xi. 8), and in this
reedy covert (Lam. iii. 10) they were to be found
at a comparatively recent period ; as we learn from
a passage of Johannes Phocas, who travelled in
Palestine towards the end of the 12th century
(Reland, PaL 1. 374). They abounded in toe
jungles which skirt the rivers of Mesopotamia
(Ammian. Hare xviii. 7, $ 6), and in the time of
Xenopbon (de Vtnai. xL) were found in Nysa,
reiilsn Uon. (From specimen m ZoBoglcal Qs r ai— ,
The lion of Palestine was in all probability the
Asiatic variety, described by Aristotle (B. A. ix.
44) and Pliny (viii. 18) as distinguished by its
short curly mane, and by being shorter and rounder
in shape, like the sculptured lion found at Arban
(Layard, Nin. d* Bab. p. 378). It was leas daring
than the longer mailed species, but when driven by
hunger it not only ventured to attack the flocks in
the desert in presence of the shepherd (Is. xxxi. 4;
1 Sam. xvii. 34), but laid waste towns and villages
(3 K. xvii. 35, 36; Prov. xxii. 13, xxvi. 18;, and
devoured men (1 K. xiii. 24, xx. 36 ; 2 K. xvii. 36,
Ex. xix. 8, 6). The shepherds sometimes ventured
to encounter the lion tingle handed (1 Sam. xvii.
84), and the vivid figure employed by Amos (iii.
13), the herdsman of Tekoa, was but the transcript
of a scene which he must have often witnessed.
At other times they pursued the animal in large
bands, raising loud shouts to intimidate him (Is.
xxxi. 4), and drive him into the net or pit they had
prepared to catch him (Ea. xix. 4,8). This method
of capturing wild beasts is described by Xenopbon
(de Ven. xi. 4) and by Shaw, who says, "The
Arabs dig a pit where they are observed to enter;
and, covering it over lightly with reeds or small
branches of trees, they frequently deeoy and catch
them" (Traveli, 3d ed. p. 172). Bsnaiah, one of
David's heroic body-guafdy had distinguished him-
Digitized by
Google
1666
LION
self by slaying a lion in his den (9 Sam. zziii. SO).
The kings of Persia had a menagerie of lions (3a,
fib, Dan. ri. 7, Ac.). When raptured alire they
were pat in a cage (Ei. xix. 9), but it does not
appear that they were tamed. In the hunting
•ernes at Benl-Haann tame lions are represented
at need in hunting (Wilkinson, Ane. Egypt- Ul.
17). On the bes-rehefs at Kouyunjik a'lion ted
by a chain is among the presents brought by the
eoaqnend to their rioters (Layard, Nm. f Bah.
9- mi
Ranting with a lion, which hat sated an Ibex, (hem
Wilkinson's Egyptian!, toL L p. 221.)
The strength (Judg. zrr. 18; Pror. xxx. 80; S
8am. i. 88), courage (9 Sam. xrii. 10; Pror. xxriii.
1; Is. ml 4; Nsh. ii. 11), and ferocity (Gen. xllx.
9; Num. xxir. 9) of the lion were proverbial. The
"Hon-faced" warriors of Gad were among David's
most reliant troops (1 Cbr. xii. 8); and the hero
Judas Maccabeus is described se " like a lion, and
like a lion's whelp roaring for his prey " (1 Mace.
111. 4). The terrible roar of the lion is expressed in
Hebrew by four different words, between which the
following distinction appears to be maintained : —
SHIP, $haag (Judg. xir. 5; Ps. xxil. 18, dr. 91;
Am. iii. 4), also used of the thunder (Job xxxrii. 4),
denotes the roar of the lion while seeking his prey ;
Bnj, nAham (Is. v. 99), expresses the cry which
he utters when he seises his victim; H^H, hAgih
(Is. xxxi. 4), the growl with which he defies any
attempt to snatch the prey from his teeth ; while
I??, nd'ar (Jer. 11. 88), which in Syriao is applied
to the braying of the ass and camel, is descriptive of
the cry of the young lions. If this distinction be
correct, the meaning attached to niham will give
force to Pror. xix. 19. The terms which describe
the movements of the animal are equally distinct: —
?:?1, robot* (Gen. xHx. 9; Ee. xix. 9), is applied
to the crouching of the lion, as well as of any wild
beast, in his lair; TTTJltf, ihichih, 3#J, yaehab
(Job xxxriii. 40), and 2"T$ arai (Ps. x. 9), to his
lying in watt In his den, the two former denoting
the position of the animal, and the latter the
secrecy of the act; t&BJ, rAmat (Ps. dr. 90), is
need of the stealthy creeping of the lion after his
,irey; and pgt, ssantt (Dent, xxxiii. 99) of the
leap with which he hurls himself upon it.
The lion ens the symbol of strength and sor-
ereignty, as in the human-headed figures of the
Nimroud gateway, the symbols of NergaL the
Assyrian Mars, and tutelary god of Babylon. In
Egypt it was worshipped at the dty of Leontopohs,
as typical of Dom, the Egyptian Hercules (Wil-
kinson, Ane. Egypt, r. 169). Plutarch (de /aid.
I 88) says that the Egyptians ornamented their
1 with gaping lions' mouths, because the Nik
1 to ties when the son wss in the coniteuation
LIZABJj
Leo. Among the Hebrews, and thronghout the
O. T., the lion was the achievement of the princely
tribe of Jndah, while in the closing book of tas
canon it received a deeper significance as the em-
blem of him who " prevailed to open the book and
loose the seven seals thereof " (Rev. r. 5). On the
other hand its fi erc e ne ss and cmdty rendered it
an appropriate metaphor for a fierce and malignant
enemy (Ps. rii. 9, xxii. 91, rrii. 4; 9 Tim. W. 17),
and hence for the arch-fiend himself (1 Pet. r. 8).
The figure of the lion was employed as an orna-
ment both in architecture and sculpture. On each
of the six steps leading up to the great ivory throne
of Solomon stood two lions on either side, carved,
by the workmen of Hiram, and two others were
beside the arms of the throne (1 K *, 19, 90).
The great brum larer was in like manner adorned
with cherubim, lions, and palm-trees in graven
work (1 K. viL 99, 86). W. A. W.
• LIQUOR or LIQUORS. This word
occurs three times in the A. V. and in every in-
stance answers to a different Hebrew word. (1.)
VTfiJ, Ht tear, collect, singular in Ex. xxB. 99$
* Thou shah not delay to offer the first of thy ripe
fruits, and of thy liquors." It is a semipoetss
expression for that which flows from the press, name-
ly, wine and oil (as correctly given in the I XX.:
oWopxas Sxmms *al \ipnv o-eB). (8.) J^,
properly wine that is mixed or spiced : " A round
goblet which wanteth not liquor" (Cant. rii. 9).
Tto marginal rendering (A. V.) is "mixture." It is
probably = TTPP, *"»• hnw. 8 (where see Hupfeld,
Die Ptalmen, iii. 828). The Hebrews mixed spices
with their wine for the purpose of giving it strength
and flavor (see De Wette, Archaobgie, § 138).
(8.) rniJTD, only Num. rt 8: « Neither shall
he (the ftaxarite) drink any liquor of grapes."
Some suppose the word to denote " maceration " or
" steeping," and hence a spedes of strong wine ob-
tained from grapes by that particular process. Oth-
ers make the word = " a crashing," "dissolving,"
hence applicable, in itself considered, to wine of
any sort, but here on account of the other connected
specifications in the passage, the juice of grapes
recently broken or crushed, i. e. new wine. See
Knobel, Die BOcker Ifwneri, etc. p. 96. On the
terms relating to wine ess Rodiger in Get. Thetamr.
p. 1410. [Wins.] H.
• LITTERS, Is. lxvi. 90. [W«oox, Amer.
ed.]
• LIVELY, employed for "living" in 1 Pet.
ii. 8: "Ye also as oWy stones (A/foi fSrrsi)
are built up a spiritual house." By the same
figure Christ himself is said in the previous vent
to be " a living stone," i. e. in the spiritual edifies)
of the church or gospel. Hie place is that of the
corner-stone (eotnp. Eph. ii. 90), and believers an
built on him and into him. As the Greek is the
it should be rendered alike in both eases.
Lively" in Ex. i. 19 (for the adj. fYHT, said of
the Hebrew women) comes nearer to the pretext
usage, namely, "full of life," "rigorous" (cony
Acts rii. 88). H.
LIZ' ABB (n^tf?, letUk: Vat and Aim.
XoAoj&sVwi; CompL [with 18 MSS.] sVvaAar
/Mrns; AM. aoAaj&tnp: steOio). The Heart*
word. whtehwith its English rendering oeeen nsdx
Digitized by
Google
LIZARD
I let. xi. 30, appeal* to he correctly translated
I) tbe A. v . Sorce tpeciea of lizard is mentioned
uiinnpat thnee " creeping things that creep upon
•' e ea-to " li'^n were to be considered unclean by
toe I-raz-ltee.
lizards of various kinds abound In Egypt, Pales-
tine, and Arabia; some of these are mentioned in
LIZARD
1661
net of GaofcOa
the Bible under various Hebrew names, notices of
which will be found under other articles. [Feb-
bkt; Snail] All the old versions agree in iden-
tifying the letAih with some tavritm, and some
concur as to the particular genus indicated. The
LXX., the Vulg., the Targ. of Jonathan,' with
tbe Arabic versions, understand a lizard by the
Hebrew word. The Syriac has a word which is
generally translated salamander, but probably this
name was applied also to the Htnrd. The Greek
word, with its slight variations, which the LXX.
use to express the letddh, appears from what may
be gathered from Aristotle,* and perhaps also from
its derivation,' to point to some lizard belonging to
the Geckotida. Many members of this family of
Saura are characterized by a peculiar Iamelkted
structure on the under surface of the toes, by means
of which they are enabled to run over the smooth-
<i even in an inverted position, like
The fan-Foot (JTjporfotfymi Qteko.)
Ass on a oefihig. Mr. Broderlp
• HTPpDlT, " stelno, reptile hnmundum."
» The following an tbe l et eieuu es to the Oraek word
InaXafri/TTft In Arlstot. dt Anim. Hist, (el. Schmf dsr):
Vll, }2; viiLU, fl; Till. 18, *3; viii. 28 $2;
u. 2, $6; lx. 10, } 2. That Aristotle undoretands
how species of gecko by ths Greek word Is clear ; lor
as says of the woodpecker, wopnwni hri nit Uyifxr,
ntt/mt —i ftmov zoMmp oi amAaBwrai (lx. 10, f 2).
He alludes also to aspedas In Italy, perhaps the H^ni-
iartyius txtrveenw, whose bite, he says, Is fktal (?).
c 'AewaAa0wTlK, (moQuyv fotxev vavpq iv rotf rotgoM
i. This seams to Identify It with
that they can remain suspended beneath the large
leaves of the tropical vegetation, and remain fin
hours in positions as extraordinary as the insects
for which tbey watch; the wonderful apparatus
with which their feet are famished enabling then
to overcome gravity. Now the • Hebrew letAih
appears to be derived from a root which, though
not extant in that language, is found in its sister-
tongue the Arable: this root means to adhere to
the ground,* an expression which well agrees with
the peculiar sucker-like properties of the feet of the
geckos. Bochart has successfully argued that the
lizard denoted by the Hebrew word is that kind
which tbe Arabs call vachara, the translation of
which term is thus given by Golius: " An animal
like m lizard, of a red color, and adhering to the
ground, eiho pottrive vetunum mspirat quemetmque
amtigerU. This description will be found to agree
with tbe character of the Fan-Foot Lizard (Ptuo-
dac ty ius Gecko), which is common in Egypt and
in parts of Arabia, and perhaps is also found in
Palestine. It is reddish brown, spotted with white.*
Has s elq uist thus speaks of it: •< The poison of this
animal is very singular, as it exhales from the lobuk
of the toes. At Cairo I bad an opportunity of
observing how acrid the exhalations of the toes of
this animal are. As it ran over the hand of a man
who was endeavoring to catch it, there immediately
rose little red pustules over all those parts which
the animal had touched " ( Voyages, p. 290).
Forakal (Deter. Anim. p. 13) says that the Egyp-
tians call this lizard Abu bun, " father of leprosy,"
in allusion to the leprous sores which contact with
it produces ; and to this day tbe same term is used
by the Arabs to denote a lizard, probably of this
same species./ The geckos live on Insects and
worms, which tbey swallow whole. They derive
their name from the peculiar sound which some of
the species utter. This sound has been described
as being similar to the double click often used in
riding; they make it by some movement of the
tongue against the palate. The Geckotida are
nocturnal in their habits, and frequent bouses,
cracks in rocks, etc. They move very rapidly, and
without making the slightest sound; hence prob-
ably the. derivation of the Greek word for this
lizard. They are found in all parts of the world :
in the greatest abundance in warm climates. It is
no doubt owing to their repulsive appearance that
they have the character of being highly venomous,
just as the unscientific in England attach similar
properties to loads, newts, blind worms, etc. etc.,
although these creatures are perfectly harmless.
At the same time it must be admitted that there
may be species of lizards which do secrete a ven-
omous fluid, the effects of which are no doubt
aggravated by the heat of the climate, the un-
healthy condition of the subject, or other causes.
The geckos belong to the sub-order Pachughsn
one of the Otdcotidm : perhaps the TarnXola was best
known tr the Greeks. The noittUst (^m^w) and, at
times, ./Surd habits of this lizard an referred to below
(See Oalsf. Stym. Mat.)
d See (ni. (Thtt s. v.k A similar not has the
tone of « hiding; " In which ease the word will refet
to the gecko's habit of frequenting holes In walla, ses.
• TIM Or. e>mAa0HT*t, and perhaps Ut. urMe,
Indicate the Renos, the red color the species.
f IJCUyi %j|, •*" burayt, Usard (OareJejfj,
Juab. Ma.V
Digitized by
Google
16158 LO-AMMI
order Bmtra. Tbey an oviparous, producing a
round egg with a hard calcareous obeli' W. H.
LO-AM'MI CEP kV: oi W» pov : ""•
oopulvi metu), i. t. " not my people," the figura-
tive Dane giren by the prophet Horn to hie second
eoo by Gomer, the daughter of Diblaim (Hoe. i. 9),
to denote the rejection of the kingdom of Israel by
Jehovah. Its significance is frr/r' 1 "r' in w. 0, 10.
IX) AN. The law of Hoses did not contemplate
any raising of loans for the purpose of obtaining
capital, a condition perhaps alluded to in the para-
bles of the •• pearl " and " hidden treasure " (Matt,
xili. 44, 46 : Michaelis, Comm. on Lam of Motes,
art. 147, ii. 297, ed. Smith). [Comvebcx.] Such
persons as bankers and sureties, in the commercial
seme (Pror. ail. 26; Neh. t. 8), wen unknown
to the earlier ages of the Hebrew commonwealth.
The law strictly forbade any interest to be taken
for a loan to any poor person, either in the shape
of money or of produce, and at first, ss it seems,
even in the case of a foreigner; but this prohibition
was afterwards limited to Hebrews only, from whom,
of whatever rank, not only was no usury on any
pretense to be exacted, but relief to the poor by way
of loan was enjoined, and excuses for ending this
duty were forbidden (Ex. xxii. 26; Lev. xxv. 86,
37; Deut xv. 8, 7-10, xxiil. 19, 90). The in-
stances of extortionate conduct mentioned with dis-
approbation in the book of Job probably represent
a state of things previous to the Law, and such as
the Law was intended to remedy (Job xxii. 6, xxiv.
8, 7). As commerce increased, the practice of usury,
and so also of suretiship, grew up; but the exaction
of it from a Hebrew appears to have been regarded
to a late period as discreditable (Prov. vi. 1, 4, xi.
16, xvii. 18, xx. 16, xxii. 26; Ps. xr. 6; Jer. xv. 10;
Ee. xviii. 18, xxii. 12). Systematic breach of the
Law in this respect was corrected by Nehemiah after
the return from Captivity (see No. 6) (Neh. v. 1,
13; Michaelis, to. arts. 148, 161). In later times
the practice of borrowing money appears to have
prevailed without limitation of race, and to bare
been carried on on systematic principles, though
the original spirit of the Law was approved by our
Lord (Matt v. 42, xxv. 27; Luke vi. 86, xix. 23).
The money-changers (xtpiutrurral, and (koXXv
$urral), who had seats and tables in the Temple,
were traders whose profits arose chiefly from the
exchange of money with those who came to pay
their annual half-shekel (Pollux, lil. 84, vii. 170;
Schleuaner, Lex. If. T. s. v. ; Lightfoot, Bar. Bebr.;
Matt. xxi. 12). The documents relating to loans of
money appear to have been deposited in public offices
In Jerusalem (Joseph. B. J. ii. 17, 1 6).
In making loans no prohibition is pronounced in
the Law against taking a pledge of the borrower,
but certain limitations are prescribed in favor of
the poor.
1. The outer garment, which formed the poor
man's principal covering by night as well as by day,
if taken in pledge, was to be returned before sun-
set. A bedstead, however, might be token (Ex. xxii.
28, 97; Deut xxiv. 12, 13; comp. Job xxii. 6;
Prov. xxii. 27; Shaw, Trav. 294; Burekhardt,
Note* m Bed. L 47, 231; Nlebuhr, Dae, de tAr.
66; Lane, Mod. Eg. 1. 67, 68; Get. 7>es. 403;
Michaelis, Lam of Motet, arts. 143 and 160).
9. The prohibition was absolute in the eon of
(a) the widow's garment (Dent. xxiv. 17), and (A)
i millstone of either kind (Deut xxiv. 6). M}>
i (art 160, ii. 891) supposes also all India-
LOCK
pensoble animals and utensils of agrieoltun; stt
also Mishna, Maater Sheni, I.
8. A creditor was forbidden to enter • bowse tt
reclaim a pledge, but was to stand outside till the
borrower should come forth to return it (Dent xxhr
10, 11).
4. The original Roman law of debt permitted
the debtor to be enslaved by his creditor until the
debt was discharged ; and he might even be put to
death by him, though this extremity does not ap-
pear to have been ever practiced (Gell. xx. 1, 46,
69; Did. of Antiq. "Bonorum Cessio," "Nex-
um " ). The Jewish low, as it did not forbid tem-
porary bondage in the case of debtors, so it forbadj
a Hebrew debtor to be detained as a Vnn^r-m-
longer than the 7th year, or at farthest the year of
Jubilee (Ex. xxi. 2; Lev. xxv. 39, 42; Dent xv. P).
If a Hebrew was sold in this way to a foreign so-
journer, he might be redeemed at a valuation at any
time previous to the Jubilee year, and in that year
was, under any circumstances, to be released. For-
eign sojourners, however, were not entitled to release
at that time (Lev. xxv. 44, 46, 47, 64; 2 K. It. 2;
Is. 1. 1, lii. 3). Land sold on account of debt was
redeemable either by the seller himself, or by a kins-
man in case of his inability to repurchase. Houses
in walled towns, except such as belonged to Levites,
if not redeemed within one year after sale, were
a liena te d for ever. Michaelis doubts whether sll debt
was extinguished by the Jubilee; but Josephns's
account is very precise (Ant. Lii. 12, § S ; Lev. xxv.
23, 34; Ruth, iv. 4, 10; Michaelis, § 168, ii. 860).
In later times the sabbatical or Jubilee release was
superseded by a law, probably introduced by the
Romans, by which the debtor was liable to be de-
tained in prison until the full discharge of his debt
(Matt v. 26). Michaelis thinks this doubtfuL The
case imagined In the parable of the Unmerciful
Servant belongs rather to despotic oriental than
Jewish manners (Matt xviii. 34; Michaelis, Hid.
art 149; Trench, Parable*, p. 141). Subsequent
Jewish opinions on loons and usury may be seen in
the Mishna, Baba Metdah, o. lii- x. [Jcbtlkk.]
H. W. P.
LOAVES. [Bbsad.]
LOOK.o Where European locks have not been
introduced, the locks of eastern houses are usually
of wood, and consist of a partly hollow bolt from
14 inches to 2 feet long for external doors or gates,
or from 7 to 9 inches for interior doors. The boh
passes through a groove in a piece attached to the
door into a socket In the door-post In the groove-
piece are from 4 to 9 small iron or wooden stiding-
pins or wires, which drop into corresponding hois
in the bolt, and fix it in its place. The key is o
piece of wood furnished with a like number of pica
which, when the key is introduced sideways, rales
the sliding-pins In the look, and allow the bolt to
be drown back. Ancient Egyptian doors were fas-
tened with central bolts, and sometimes with ban
passing from one door-post to the other. They wan
oho sometimes sealed with clay. [Clay.] Keys
wen made of bronze or iron, of a simple c ou s tru e-
tkm. The gates of Jerusalem set np under Nshe-
miah's direction had both bolts and locks. (Judg
fit- 98, 96; Cant v. 6; Neh. hi. 3, ate.; Reuwctt
Trav. in Ray, Ii. 17; Russell, Aleppo, I. 29; Vol
ney, Traveb, ii. 438; Lane, Mod. Eg. i. 49; Chat
1 5W I ft
oss. not. r-sti.
Digitized by
Google
LOCUST
As, Vog. tv. 133: Wilkinson, Ana Eg., abridijm.
L 14, 16). [Kst, Amor, ed.j H W. P.
LOCUST," a well-known insect, WLxh corn-
miU terrible devastation to vegetation in the coun-
tries which it visits. In the Bible there are fre-
quent allusions to locusts; and there are nine or
ten Hebrew word* which are supposed to denote
different varieties or specie) of this destructive fam-
Uy. They belong to that order of insects known
by the term Orthoptera.* This order it divided
into two large groups or divisions, namely, Curtoria
and Sakatoria. The first, as the name imports,
Includes only those families of Orthoptera which
have legs formed for creeping, and which were con-
sidered unclean by the Jewish law. Under the sec-
ond are comprised those whose two posterior legs,
by their peculiar structure, enable them to move
on the ground by leapt. This group contains, ac-
cording to Serville's arrangement, three families,
the GryVidet, Loautaria, and the Acriditet, distin-
guished one from the other by some peculiar mod-
ifications of structure. The common house-cricket
(Grytiut dometticut, Oliv.) may be taken as an illus-
tration of the Gryliidtt ; the green grasshopper
(Loauin viridimma, Fabr. ), which the French call
Bauterdle verte, will represent the family Locutta-
ria; and the AcridUet may be typified by the com-
mon migratory locust ( (Edipoda migratoria, Aud.
Serv.), which is an occasional visitor to this ooun-
(saHpoda migrator!*.
try.» Of the Oryllidtt, 0. cerises has been found
in Egypt, and 0. domtttictii, on the authority of
Dr. Kitto, in Palestine; but doubtless other species
also occur in these countries. Of the Loautatia,
Phaneropterafnlcata, Serv. (O.fatc. Scopoli) has
also, according to Kitto, been found in Palestine,
Bradyponu datypui in Asia Minor, Turkey, etc.,
Saga If aloha near Smyrna. Of the locusts proper,
or AcridUes, four species of the genus TruxaUt are
recorded as having been seen in Egypt, Syria, or
Arabia: namely, T. natutn, T. variatilit, T. pro-
em, and T. mimnta. The following kinds also
occur: Optomnla pita/omit, in Egypt and the oasis
of Harrat; Pakilacerot hieroglyphiau, P. bufoni-
m, P. pmctaentru, P. vulcanw. In the deserts of
Cairo; Dericoryt albidula in Egypt and Mount
Lebanon. Of the genus Aeridium, A. master*, the
aost formidable perhaps of all the AcridUet, A.
LOcUST 1661
Bmeola (=» G. JEgypL linn.), which U a species
commonly sold for food in the markets of Bagdad
(Serv. Orthop. 657), A. temifatdatum, A. pert-
grinum, one of the most destructive of the species,
and A.morbotum, occur either in Egypt or Arabia.
Cnliiptnmtu terapit and Chrotogonut ktyubrit are
found in Egypt, and in the cultivated lands about
Cairo; Eremobia carinala, In the rocky p l aces
about Sinai. £. citli, E. pulchriptmu, (Edipoda
Acrldlun Insole.
oetofaidata, and CE. migratoria (— 0. sstjrras.
Linn.), complete the list of the Baltatorial OrOup-
ttra of the Bible lands. From the above catalogue
It will be seen bow perfectly unavailing, for the
most part, must be any attempt to identify the
Hebrew names with ascertained species, especially
when it is remembered that some of these names
occur but seldom, others (Lev. xi. S3) only once in
the Bible — that the only clew is in many instances
the mere etymology of the Hebrew word — that
such etymology has of necessity, from the fact
of there being but a tint/It word, a very wide mean-
ing — and that the etymology fa) frequently very
uncertain. The LXX. and Vulg. do not contribute
much help, for toe words used there are themselves
of a very uncertain signification, and moreover em-
ployed in a most promiscuous manner. Still,
though the possibility of identifying with certainty
any one of the Hebrew names is a hopeless task,
yet in one or two instances a fair approximation to
identification may be arrived at
From Lev. xi. 21, 23, we learn the Hebrew names
of four different kinds of Saltatorial Orthoptera.
" These may ye eat of every flying creeping thing
that goeth upon all four, 1 ' which have legs above
their feet* to leap withal upon the earth; even
those of them ye may eat, the arbeh after his kind,
« From the I*tla loauca, derived by the old ety-
mologists from loan and ustut, "quod teotu multa
aril, menu van omnia arodat"
• From opeoV and mp6r : ao order of Insects char-
asterand by their anterior wings being en>l-«or[aoeois
and overlapping at the tips. The posterior wing* are
large and membranous, and longitudinally folded warn.
at rest,
• In the year 1748 locusts (tha (Rdipoin mignttria
ftonbtlen) Invaded Burope In Immense moltttajM.
aharles XII. and his army, than In Bessarabia, wan
stopped In their courts. It Is said that the swarms
wars tour hoars passing omr Breskra. Nor did Bng-
laad escape, for a swarm fall near Bristol, sod ravaged
the country In the month of July of the same year.
They did great damage In Shropshire and Staffordshire,
by eating the blossoms of the apple-trees, and especially
the leaves of oaks, which looked ss bare as at Christ-
mas. The rooks did a good service In this ease at
bast See Otniltman't Mauazine, July 1748, pp. ttt
and 414 ; also Tfc. Timu, Oct. 4, 1846.
<t I» Is well known that all inttcu, properly as
called, nave tix rest Bat the Jews considered the
two entr'-v pair only as tms legs In the locust family,
regarding them as additional Instruments for leaping.
« v^b byrpo o^p V? -mfn. n»
rendering of 'the A. V., « which have lags above tbatr
Digitized by
Google
1670
LOCUST
•ad the talam after hie kind, and the ckargM
(wrongly translated beetle by the A. V., an insect
which would be Included amongst the flying creep-
ing things forbidden u &od in tt. 28 and 42) after
hie kind, and the ckigib after his kind." Betide*
the names mentioned in this passage, there occur
five others in the Bible, all of which Boehart (iii.
861, Ac.) considers to represent so many distinct
species of locusts, namely, git, gizam, ckitU, yelek,
and teeldttdL
(1.) Arbek (HJ-TH : iicpls, Ppovxot, arrr-
XfjBoi, 4tt«Axu3o»; in Joel ii. 25, ipvalfa: locusta,
brucliut: "locust," "grasshopper") is the most
common name for locust, the word occurring about
twenty times in the Hebrew Bible, namely, in Ex.
x. 4, 12, 13, 14, 19; Judg. vi. 8, vii. 12; Lev. xi.
22; Deut xxriii. 88; 1 K. TiU. 87; 2 Chr. vi. 38;
Job riiii. 90; Pa. er. 84, dx. 28, lxxriii. 46;
Pror. xxx. 27; Jer. xlvi. 33; Joel I. 4, ii. 25; Nah.
iii. 15, 17. The LXX. generally render arbek by
ixpit, the general Greek name for haul : in two
passages, however, namely, Lev. xi. 22, and 1 K.
viii. 37, they use jlpodxos M the representative of
the original word. In Nah. iii. 17, arbek is ren-
dered by arrcAf/Soi; while the Aldine version, in
Joel ii. 85, has ipwrtfa), mildew. The Vulg. has
iocutta in every instance except in Lev. xL 82,
where it has bruchut. The A. V. in the four fol-
lowing passages has graukoppcr, Judg. vi. 6, vii.
18; Job xxxix. 30; and Jer. xlvi. 83: in all the
other places it has locutU The word arbek," which
is derived from a root signifying " to be numerous,"
is probably sometimes used in a wide sense to ex-
press any of the larger devastating species. It is
the locust of the Egyptian plague. In almost every
passage where arbek occurs reference is made to its
terribly destructive powers. It is one of the flying
creeping creatures that were allowed as food by the
law of Moses (Lev. xi. 91). In this passage it is
dearly the representative of some species of winged
laitaiorial ortkoptera, which must have possessed
Indications of form sufficient to distinguish the
basset from the three other names which belong to
the same division of orthoptera, and are mentioned
hi the same context. The opinion of Mehaetts
(BuppL 667, 910), that the four words mentioned
in Lev. xi. 23 denote the same insect in four dif-
ferent ages or stages of its growth, is quite unten-
able, for, whatever particular species are intended
by these words, it is quite dear from ver. 31 that
LOCUST
they most all be winged ortkoptera. From tea
fact that almost in every inatance when) the word
arbek occurs, reference is made other to the de-
vouring and devastating nature of this insect, ot
else to its multiplying powers (Judg. vi. 6, vii 13
wrongly translated " grasshopper " by the A- V.
Nah. iii. 15, Jer. xlvi. 23), it I* probable that either
the Acridium peregrmum* or the (Edtpoda mi-
gratoria is the insect denoted by the Hebrew word
arbek, for these two species are the most destructive
of the femuy. Of the former species M. Olivier
(Voyage done {Empire Ottoman, ii. 494) thus
writes: "With the burning south winds (of Syria)
there come from the interior of Arabia and from
the most southern parts of Persia clouds of locusts
(Acridium peregrimm), whose ravages to these
countries are as grievous and nearly as sudden as
those of the heaviest hail in Europe. We witnessed
them twice. It is difficult to express the effect pro-
duced on us by the sight of the whole atmosphere
filled on all sides and to a great height by an in-
numerable quantity of these insects, whose flight
was alow and uniform, and whose noise resembled
that of rain: the sky was darkened, and the light
of the sun considerably weakened. In a moment
the terraces of the bouses, the streets, and all the
fields were covered by these insects, and in two
days they had nearly devoured all the leaves of the
plants. Happily they lived but a abort time, and
seemed to have migrated only to reproduce them-
selves and die; in feet, nearly ail those we saw the
next day had paired, and the day following the
fields were covered with their dead bodies." This
species is found in Arabia, Egypt, Mesopotamia,
and Persia. Or perhaps arbek may denote the
(Edipoda migratorin, the SamtereUe de pottage,
concerning which Michaehs inquired of Carsten
Niebuhr, and received the following reply: " Sau-
terelle de peerage est la mesne que les Arabes
mangent et la m&ne qu'on art ai Allemagne"
(Jiecueil, quest 83 in Niebuhr*! Dene de t Arable).
This species appears to be as destructive as the
Acridium peregrinum.
(3.) Chigib (3}n: ixpi,: bcutta: "grass-
hopper," <> locust "), occurs in Lev. xi. 83, Num.
xiii. 33, 2 Chr. vii. 13, Ecd. xii. 6, Is. xi. 33; m
all of which passages it is rendered inli by the
LXX., and Iocutta by the Vulg. In 3 Chr. vii. 13
the A. Y. reads •' locust," in the other passages
"grasshopper." From the use of the word in
Chron., " If I command the locusts to devour the
land," compared with Lev. xi. 22, it would appear
that some species of devastating locust is intended.
In the passage of Numbers, " There we saw the
giants the sons of Anak .... and we were in
our own sight as grasshoppers " (chigab), as weB
as in Eoolesiastes and Isaiah, reference seems to be
made to some small species of locusts; and with
•jet," Is certainly awkward. DTJJH?, "Men occurs
only in the dual number, properly denotes " that part
•f the tag between the sum and ankle " which Is bant in
bowing down, i. t. the tieur. The passage may be thus
translated, " which have their tUria so placed above their
feet [torsi] as to enable them to bap upon the earth."
Dr. Harris, adopting the explanation of the author of
Striptm lUustraUd, underetanda D?"S?~ip to mean
"JOnta," and D^J") "hind lags; "which render-
ing Niebuhr ( Quad, xxx.) gives. Bnt then Is no
•aeson for a departure from the literal and general
slgamtoettrna of the Hebrew terms.
a 71314, locust, so called from its multitude,
nSH. Bee Oeaan. Taw. i. v., who adopts she ex-
planation of WehaeUs that the four names in Lev. xL
22 an not the lepneautatlves of four distinct genera
or species, but denote the dinerent stages of growth.
• The GrySw gregarau of forskU (i>*tr. Anim. 18
to perhaps Uanoeal with the Am* ptngr. tank*
«A»be> uMane meant Diemd (i>fy3k) •
haUtautaa •urns ass* ngirjl *»
Judaa m Ti
Digitized by
Google
LOCUST
del* vtsw Oedmoan (Verm. Bam. IL 90) agrees.
Tjcbtea ( C o mment, de Locust, p. 78) supposes that
shAgib denotes tba GruUus eoronotm, linn.; but
thia U tba Aeanikodis conn, of Aud. Serr., a S.
American species, and probably confined to that
continent. HiobaaUt (Suflp. 668), who derives the
word from an Arabic root signifying " to fail," <*
conceives that cMgtb r epres en ts either a loenat at
the fourth atage of iti growth, "ante quarts*
■xuviaa quod adhuo velata est," or elas at the last
atage of it* growth, » poet quarts* exuviae, quod
Jam vokae tola* eotiumque obeelaL" To the flrat
theory the pemge in Lev. zi. ii opposed. Tbe
eeennd theory is more reasonable, but chigib is
probably derived not from tbe Arabic but tbe He-
brow. From what ha* been stated shore it will
appear better to own our complete inability to say
what species of fccutt chigib denotes, than to
beard conjectures which most be grounded on no
solid foundation. In the Talmud * chigib i* a col-
lective name for many of the locust tribe, no leu
than eight hundred kinds of chagibtm being sup-
posed by the Talmud to exist! (Lewysohn, Zobtog.
dee Tabu. J 384). Some kinds of locusts are beeu-
tifiilly marked, and were sought after by young
Jewish children as playthings, just as butterflies
sod cockchafers are now-e-dayt. M. Lewysohn
says (§ 384), that a regular traffic used to be carried
en with the chagiobn, which were caught in great
numbers, and sold after wine had been sprinkled
over them; he adds that the Israelites were only
allowed to buy them before tbe dealer had thus
prepared them. e
LOCUS!
1071
(I.) ChargH (bViri:
iftoiidxif- ophioma-
dmt i "beetle"). The A. V. Is dearly in error
in translating this word " beetle; " it oceurs only
In Lot. xL 22, but it is clear from the oontext that
it denotes some species of winged takatorial
orlhopteroue insect which the Israelites were allowed
to use as food. The Greek word used by the LXX.
Is one of most uncertain meaning, and the story
about any kind of locust attacking a serpent is an
absurdity which requires no Curier to refute if
As to this word see Bocbart, Hurt*, iii. 264;
Boaenrn. notes; the Lexicons of Suidas, Hesychius,
etc.; Pliny xi. 89; AanotaL ad Ariel. H. A. torn.
It. 47, ed. Schneider. Some attempt* have been
made to identify the chargU, " mere ooojectune 1 "
as Bosenmuller truly remarks. The Rev. J. F.
Dsnham, in Cyclop. Bib. LiL (arte. ChargH and
Locust), endeavors to show that tbe Greek word
ephiomaches denotes some species of TruxaUs,
perhaps T. nasutus. " The word instantly suggest*
a reference to the ichneumon, the oelebrated de-
stroyer of serpents .... if then any species of
locust can be adduced whose habits resemble those
of the ichneumon, may not this resemblance a*
count for the name, quad the Ichneumon (locust),
just as the whole genus (?) (family) of I ns ect*
called Ichneumonidm were so denominated because
of the tufpoeed analogy between their services and
those of the Egyptian Ichneumon ? and might not
this name given to that species (?) of locust at a
very early period have afterwards originated the
erroneous notion referred to by Aristotle and
Pliny?" But is it a tact that the genus TruxaSe
is an exception to tbe rest of the Acriditei, and is
preeminently intcctkorow. ServiHc (OrthopL 579)
believes that in then- manner of living the Truxalidet
resemble the rest of the AcruUtes, but seems to
allow that further investigation is necessary.
Fischer (Orthop. Eurcp. p. 993) says that the
nutriment of this family is plant* of various kinds.
Mr. F. Smith, in a letter to the writer of this
article, says he has no doubt that the TruxaSdte
feed on plants. What is for. Denham's authority
for assarting that they are insectivorous? It Is
granted that there is a quasi resemblance in ex-
ternal form between tbe Truxalides and some of
tbe larger lohneumonidai, but tbe HVtnoss is far
from striking. Four species of the genus Jruwaiie
are inhabitants of tbe Bub lands (as* above).
■Of. i^aXt** (*•«/»), 1* mtmn obunmt, from
v f.^\^-, i n tercm it, ssoUuit.
» IMnt derives 3j|n from T. Inns. 33Pi m
'tmpn, cain, a radio* goo, 33, to thlci root he
«*rs naTM, aHi aoi "gia.
' The tajmudlsts have tbe following law :
to abstain from fas* (1»3n \0) | .'.J^E^T^ **** *** m " U ***"
The Jews, however, interpret chargH to setae)
a species of grasshopper, German S tusck n ck *,
which M. Lewysohn identifies with Locusta cartas*
iinw, adopting tbe etymology of Bocbart and G*»
senius, who refer tbe name to an Arabic origin.*
The Jewish women used to carry tbe eggs of the
chargH in their ears to preserve them from the
ear-ache, (Buxtorf, Lex. Chatd. el Rabbin, a. T.
chargH).
(4.) Sdldm (Q^TO : arriiem, Comp. AttojwV
attaciu: "bald locust") occurs only in Lev. xL
33, as one of tbe four edible kinds of leaping In-
sects. All that can possibly be known of it is that
it is some kind of saltatorial orthoplerous insect,
winged, and good for food. Tychaen, however,
arguing from what is said of tbe sildm in the Tal-
mud (Tract, Cholin), namely, that " this insect has
a smooth head/ and that the female is without tbe
sword-shaped tail," conjectures that the species bets
U forbidden tba Sash of fish and of locusts" (1(93
D'aam enro. «»**. aw*, m. to, *.
1 See Puny, B. JC, Paris, 1838, ed. (traneasme, f
44.. net*.
iosn**f kss weed to to* Amble J^-,fr- {
apsrlaff tbe Oena. Hwuatrars* from warass
Digitized by
Google
1672
LOCUST
httandcri U Grylhu everaor (Am), * 17110117111 that
M it difficult to identify with 107 recorded species.
(5.) Q&tam (DJ|). Sea Pauub-worm.
(«.) M (2Sa :" lucpl,, hriye^i ittfOmp: Aq.
B Am. rii. 1, fiapitmp: loauta; locuita loaata-
nan - ^13 313 in Nah. ill. 17: "gnat grass-
boppers; " "grasshoppers " margin " green worm*,"
inAmoa). This word I* found only In I*, nxiii. 4,
and in the two plaeea cited abort. Here ia nothing
in any of then paaaagea that will help to point out
the •pedes denoted. That aome kind of locust is
Intended seems probable from the passage in Na-
hum, '• thy captains an aa the great gdbai which
camp in the hedges in the cool of tile day, but
when the sun sriseth they flee away, and their place
is not known where they are." Soma writers, led
by this passage, hare believed that the gobai repre-
sent the laira state of some of the large locusts;
the habit of halting at night, however, and encamp-
ing under the hedges, as described by the prophet,
in all probability belongs to the winged locust aa
well as to the larva, see Ex. z. 18, " the Lord
brought an east wind upon the land all that day,
and all that night; and when it was morning, the
asst wind brought the locusts." Mr. Barrow (i.
pp. 287-68), speaking of some species of S. African
locusts, says, that when the lame, which are still
more voracious than the parent insect, are on the
march, it is impossible to mske them turn out of
the way, which is usually that of the wind. At
sunset the troop halts and divides into separate
groups, each occupying in bee-like clusters the
neighboring eminences for the night It ia quite
Locust firing.
possible that the ode may rep res en t the larva or
mymp/ia state of the insect; nor is the passage from
Nahum, " when the sun ariseth they flee away,"
any objection to this supposition, for the last stages
of the larva differ but slightly from the nympha,
both which states may therefore be comprehended
under one name; the gtbai of Nah. iii. 17 may
easily have been the nympha (which in all the Ameta-
tola continue to feed as in their larva condition),
■ 3t3, accordtaf to Gasmroa (law. a. v.), Is from
*
amused root, flj^, thsArab. L*»., to astern
tbaground. Hint rates the word to a Haste*
• 8a* noU, Ansa.
LOCUST
encamping at night under the hedges, and, 1
ing their wings aa the sui arose, are than repre-
sented aa flying away. 6 It certainly is improbable
that the Jews should have had no name for the locust
in its larva or nympha state, for they most have
been quite familiar with the sight of such devour-
ers of every green thing, the larva being even more
destructive than the imago; perhaps some of the
other nine names, all of which Bochart considers to
be the names of so many species, denote the insect
in one or other of these conditions. The A. V.
were evidently at a loss, for the translators read
'■ green worms," in Am. vii. 1. Tychaen (p. 98)
Identifies the gib with the Oryifca migratorim,
Linn., " qua vera rations motus," observes) Rojsav
muller, " non exponit-"
(7.) Ckanimil (^0 ■ aVjrr} infera; Aq. tV
xpitr- hi pruind; ''frost'"). Some writers have
supposed that this word, which occurs only in Pa.
lxxviii. 48, denotes some kind of locust (see Bo-
chart, Hierat. iii. 856, ed. Rosenm.). Mr. J. F.
Denham (in Kitto, s. v. Locust) is of a similar
opinion ; but surely the ooncurrent testimony of the
old versions, which interpret the word ckanimal to
signify kail orfrott, ought to forbid the oonjecture.
We have already more locusts than it is possible to
identify ; let ckanimal, therefore, be understood to
denote kail or frott, as it is rendered by the A. V.,
and all the important old versions.
(8.) Ytltk(p\\l' lucpl,, 0pmxo,: orsvaat;
bruchtu aculeatus, in Jer. U. 27: " canker worm,"
"caterpillar") occurs In Ps. cv. 84; Nah. iii. 16,
16; Joel 1. 4,ii. 26; Jer. li. 14, 27; it it rendered
by the A. V. canker worm in four of these places,
and caterpillar in the two remaining. From the
epithet of " rough," which is applied to the word
hi Jererdah, aome have supposed the yeltk to be
the larva of aome of the destructive Lepidoptero :
the epithet $amar, however (Jer. li. 27), more prop-
erly means kaving tpintt, which agrees with the
Vulgate, acuUalw. Minhadis (Stfj>t p. 1080)
believes the yeltk to be the cockchafer (Maykafar).
Oedmann (il. ri. 126) having in view this tphf
character, identifies the word with the Orvllmcri*-
tatut, Linn., a species, however, which is found
only in S. America, though Linnaeus has erroneously
given Arabia aa a locality. Tychaen, arguing from
the epithet rougk, believes that toe yeltk is repre-
sented by the G. kamataput Linn. (CaUiptamm
kamaU Aud. Serv.), a species found in S. Africa.
How purely conjectural are all these attempts at
Identification ! for the term tpitied may refer not
to any particular species, but to the very spinous
nature of the tibiae in all the locust tribe, snd
■site, the cropping, licking off insect (Num. xxii.
4), may be a synonym of some of the names already
mentioned, or the word may denote the larva or
pupa of the locust, which, from Joel 1. 4, seems not
improbable, " that which the locust (.arbek) hath
left, hath the cankerworm (t/elek) eaten," after the
winged arbek had departed, the young larva of the
same appeared and consumed the residue. The
passage in Nah. iU. 16, " the yeiek spreadeth him-
• Sines the above was written It has been asna**MKl
that Or. Kltto (Pfet. Bale, note on Nah. Iii. l*)ia afa
shatter opinion, that th* roe probably Oases* ts*
nympha.
• P& «-'.»«. P%*-i-PTi^, <—. -*
' (das. Ia**. s. v.).
Digitized by
Google
LOCUST
Mb* (margin) and Death away" 1* no objection to
Ik* opinion that the getek may represent the lam
or nympha, for the nme reason aa waa given In
• farmer part of this article ((Mi).
f». CUM (V?n). See Catskmluul
(10.) 7W*** 0?^$: «>»*>,: r«%o:
"locust"). The derivation of this word aeema to
Imply that eome Und of loooat la indicated by it
It oosun only in thla aenao in Dent xxviil. 48,
"HI thy trees and frntt of thy land ahall the lo-
cust consume." In the other parage* where the
Hebrew word occurs, it repreenta aome Und of
tinkling mueioal instrument, and ia generally trans-
lated egmbalt by the A. V. The word la eridently
onomatopoetic, and ia here perhaps a synonym for
some one of the other names for locust. Michaclis
(Siespi. p. 9094) believes the word is identical with
ekMi, which he says denotes perhaps the mole
•Ticket, Gryllm talpiformis, from the stridnlons
sound it produces. Tychsen (pp. 79, 80) identifies
U with the Grylha stridulus, Linn. (=. (Edipoda
ttridula, Aud. Serf.). The notion conveyed by
the Hebrew word will however apply to almost any
Und of locust, and indeed to many kinds of insects ;
a similar word ttaltaUa, was applied by the Ethio-
pians to a fly which the Arabs called ami, which
appears to be identical with the tsette fly of Dr.
Livingstone and other African travellers. All that
can be positively known respecting the UtldltAl is,
that it is some kind of Insect injurious to trees and
crops. The LXX. and Tulg. understand blight or
mildew by the word.
The most destructive of the locust tribe that oo-
eur in the Bible lands are tbe (Edipoda migraloria,
and the Acridivm peregrmum, and aa both these
species ooour In Syria and Arabia, etc., it is most
probable that one or other is denoted in those pas-
sages which speak of the dreadful devastations com-
mitted by these insects; nor is there any occasion
to believe with Bochart, Tychsen, and others, that
nme or ten distinct species are mentioned in the
Bible. Some of the names may be synonyms;
others may indicate the larva or nympha con-
ditions of the two preeminent devourers already
named.
Locusts occur in great numbers, and sometimes
obscure the sun — Ex. x< 16; Jer. xhri. S3; Judg.
vL 5, vii. 19; Joel ii. 10; Mah. iii. 15; Livy, xltt.
9; iElian, N. A. iii. 13; Pliny, JV. B. xL 99;
Shaw's 7V<irel*,p. 187 (fol. 3d ed.); Ludolf, Hist.
<Ethiop. i. 13, and de LocutUs, i. 4; Volney's
True, in Syria, i. 336.
Their voracity ia alluded to in Ex. x. 19, IS;
Joel i. 4, 7, 19, and ii. 8; Dent xxviii. 38; Ps.
fexvili. 46, cv. 34; la. xxxiU. 4; Shaw's Trot.
187, and travellers in the East, passim.
They are compared to horses — Joel it. 4: Rev. ix.
7. The Italians call the locust «Oavalet«a;" and
Bay says, " Caput obkmgum, equi instar prona
LOCUST
1671
Comp. also the Arab's description te
Niebuhr, Dttcr. de tArabie.
Hey make a fearful noise in their flight — Joel
ii.6; Rev. k. 9.
Forskal, Dttcr. 81, "tnnseuntes grylli super
vertloem nostrum sono magna) cataracts ferve-
bant." Tolney, Trav. 1. 335.
Tbey have no king — Prov. xxr. 37 ; Kirby and
Sp. Int. ii. 17.
Their irresistible p ro gr e ss is referred to in Jo*
ii. 8, 9; Shaw, 7Vo». p. 187.
They enter dwellings, and devour even the wood-
work of bouses — Ex. x. 6; Joel ii. 9, 10; Pliny,
if. B. xi. 89."
They do not fly in the night— Kah. ill. 17)
Niebuhr, Dfcr. de tArabit, p. 173.
Birds devour them — Ruasel, Nat. But. & Alep-
po, 197; Yolney, Trav. I 337; Kltto's Page.
BieLPsKf. 410>>
a « Omnia vsro mocsu orodentss, at fens euoam
» Tbe locust-bird (as* woodout) nawnd to by trav
sflsrs, and which the Arabs call tmumtr, ia no don**,
tan llr. Kltto's dessrlptlon, tba " nee-oolorad st
_ng," Potior roma. TheBev. H. A T ri s tra m saw i
•ps f l m s n In the orangs grovsa at Jafla In the spring
sTlaoS; batmakM no allusion to Its devouring locusts,
•r. Kltto In one place (p. 410) says tba leeaat-bbd is
I the ska of a rtarlinf ; In another place (p. 490),
Bmurmnr. B oss colored Starling. {Patter reams.)
The sea destroys the greater number — Ex. s
19; Joel ii. 30; Pliny, xi. 85; Hasaelq. 7Va». p,
445 (Engl, transl. 1766); cf. also Iliad, xd. 19.
Their dead bodies taint tbe air — Joel 11. 90;
Hasselq. Trav. p. 445.
They are used as food — Lev. xi. 91, 33; Matt
iii. 4; Mark 1. 6: Plin. N. H. vi. 35, xi. 35; Diod
Sic. Iii. 39 (the Acridopkagi) \ Aristoph. Achar.
1116; Ludolf, Hi*. Jitkinp. p. 67 (Gent's trenaL);
Jackson's Morocco, p. 53 ; Niebuhr, Deter, de FAra*
He, p. 150; Sparman'e Trav. i. 367, who says the
Hottentots are glad when tbe locusts come, for
they fatten upon them ; Hasselq. Trav. pp. 333, 419;
Kirby and Spence, Enlom. 1. 306.
There are different ways of preparing locusts for
food ; sometimes they are ground and pounded, and
then mixed with flour and water and made into
cakes, or they are salted and then eaten ; sometimes
smoked; boiled or roasted; stewed, or fried in
butter. Dr. Kltto (Pict. Bit. note on Lev. xL
31), who tasted locusts, says they are more like
shrimps than anything else; and an English clergy-
man, some years ago, cooked some of the green grass-
hoppers, Locutta viridiuimn, boiling them in watai
half an hour, throwing away the head, wings, and
legs, and then sprinkling them with pepper and salt,
be eompans It m alas to a swallow. Tbe bird Is abont
eight taobea and a half In length. Tamil (SHI
Bird; II. 61, 3d ed.) says, « It Is held saend at Aleppo
Means* It fe*la on tba locust ; " and Ool. Sykat bears
testuwiy to tbe Immense flocks In which they fly.
da says (OittilftH of Btrdi of DtMan), " they darksar
•jm ah- by tb*tr numbers fluty or fttty bav*
*een killed a* a shot" But he says, " they asm* s-
— 1 — **y to »*r husband , -- they arses ilasli isilis
sa locusts, sad got mucb lass n um ero us ."
Digitized by
Google
1674
LOCUST
and adding latter; ha found them excellent. How
strange then, nay, " how idle," to quota the wordi
af Kirby and Spence (Enltm. L 806), "was the
sontroversy concerning the loeoita which fcrmed
part of the sustenance of John the Baptist, ....
and how apt eren learned men are to perplex a plain
question from ignorance of the customs of other
soon tries I " "
The following are some of the works which treat
af locusts: Ludolf, Diuertatio dt Locuttu, Fran-
eof. ad Horn. 1694. This author beUeres that the
quails which fed the Israelites in the wilderness
were locusts (rid. his Diatriba qua tententia nova
it Belavis, stoi LocusUs, defenattur). A mora ab-
surd opinion was that held by Norrelius, who main-
tamed that the four names of Lev. xi. 89 wan
tares (see his Schtdiasma dt AvSms merit, Arbth,
Ckagab, Solam, et Chargct, in Bib. Bram. O. iii.
p. 86). Fabar, dt Locustis BibUcU, tt mgiUaUm
dt Avibm Quadrupedibus, ex Lev. xi. SO, Wittenb.
1710-11. Asso's Abkmdlung ton den Htiuchrtcttn,
Rostock, 1787; and Tychsen'e Comment, dt Lo-
autU. Oedmann'a VrrmitchU Sammhmgen, ii. c
sH. Kirby and Spruce's Introd. to Eniomalogu, L
80S, etc. Bochsrt's Bitrtmieon, iii. 351, etc. ed.
Bosenmiiu. Kitto's Pkut. Bistort of Palatine,
pp. 419, 490. Kitto's Pictorial Bible, see Index,
"Locust." Dr. Harris's Natural History of the
Bible, sit. "Locust," 1838. Kitto's Cyclopedia,
arts. •' Locust," "Chesil," etc. Hsrmer's Observa-
tions, London, 1797. The travels of Shaw, Russell,
Hasaelquiat, Volney, eta., etc For a systematic de-
scription of the Orthopttra, see Serville's Mono-
graph in the Suites a Buffon, and Fischer's Ortiap-
ttra Europaa; and for an excellent summary,
see Winer's Realtcm-terbudt, i. 674, art. " Heu-
achrecken." For the locusts of St John, Mr. Den-
ham refers to Suicer's Thesaurus, i. 169, 179, and
Gatherr, dt Victu JoharmU, Franc. 1786 ; and for the
symbolical locusts of Rev. ix., to Newton CM Proph-
ecies, and Woodhouse On tit Apocalypse. 1 '
W.H.
* On the subject of locusts the reader may see
also Tristram, Nat. But. of Ike Bible, pp. 806-818
(Land. 1867); the art. Beutehreeke, by Vsihinger,
in Henog's Beal-Encyi. vi. 68-71; and Rawlin-
ssa's Ancient Monarchies, iii. 68 f., 816, and iv. 79.
This last writer's description of their ravages in
Kurdistan and Southern Media at the present day
reads almost ss if translated from Joel (L and ii.):
" The destructive locust (the Acridium peregri-
rmse, probably) comes suddenly ... in clouds that
o b s cu re the air, moving with a slow and steady
light, snd with a sound like that of heavy rain,
and settUag in myriads on the fields, the gardens,
the trees, the terraces of the houses, and even the
■treats, which they sometimes cover completely.
a Van are people at this day who gravity assart
mat the locusts which tamed put of the fcod of tha
■aaaa l vera not tha Inject of that name, but tha loaf
sweat pods of the IteutMimt {Cmuoma iwVeaa), Jaana
miMmdi, "St. Joan* bread," as the monks of Falsa
Has sail It. for other equally erroneous explanations,
or unaoUiariaat aMarauona, of UtOn, tat Gab*
bStrtb. I. 74.
& for the judgment of laenst a namd to ta the
jtopbet Joel, aas Br. Bossy's « lotredueuua " to that
book. This wrltee matotalns that the prophet, urn'
*s Igurs of the leeast, foretold •• a jndsmsot
sssatar, aa enemy ear aagbuer than the lesust" In.
»). nsssaly, the aasrctaa liw aata u of Palestine, he-
LO-DKBAH
Where they fall, vegetation presently
the leaves and even the stems of the plants an
devoured ; the labors of the husbandman through
many a weary month perish to a day ; and the enrss
of famine is brought upon the land which bat
now enjoyed the prospec t of an abundant harvest.
It is true that the devourers an themselves de-
voured to soma extent by the poorer sort of people,
but the compensation is alight and temporary; in
a few days, when all verdure is gone, either the
swarms move to fresh pastures, or they perish and
cover the fields with their dead bodies, while tha
desolation which they ban i rested cootinoea"
(voL Hi. p. 68 t). r r rllm inrni if liifniiiiitliss
see under Joel (Amer. ed.). H.
LOD Ctb [perh. strife, quarrel: Rom.
AM, AoSaSl, Ae8o8(8;] Vat. Aooapatf, Aaaaosa,
both by Inclusion of the following name; [in 1
Chr., omits;] Alex. [a»8, in Neh. vii AoteSiS,]
in Ears, Aviso* AooottS; [in Neh. xi. 86, Rom.
Vat. Alex. KA.i omit, FA.* Ai-toa:] Lad), a town
of Benjamin, stated to have been founded by Sham r 1
or Shamer '(1 Chr. viii. 18). It is ahntys mentioned
in connection with Oho, and, with the exception
of the passage just quoted, in the post-captivity
records only. It would appear that after the boun-
daries of Benjamin, as given in the book of Joshua,
were settled, that enterprising tribe extended iteeM
further westward, into the rich plain of Sharon,
between the central hills and the sea, and occupied
or founded the towns of Lod, Ono, Hadid, and oth-
ers named only to the later lists. The people be-
longing to the three places just mentioned returned
from Bsbyion to the number of 786 (Ear. ii. 88;
Neh. vii. ?7), and again took possession of their
former habitations (Neh. xi. 86).
Lod has retained its name almost unaltered ta
the present day; it la now called Ltdd ; but is meat
familiar to as from its o c cur re n ce to Its Greek
garb, as Ltdda, to the Acts of the Apostles. G.
LO-DE3AB ("I2*| '"hi but to xvH. 87
'l W*?: f, AaiaMp [?]. Amtafiap: Lodabar), a
place named with Mahanaim, Rogelim, and other
trans-Jordanic towns (8 Sam. xvii. 87), and there-
fore no doubt on the eastern side of the Jordan.
It was the native place of Machir hcn-Ammici, to
whose house Mephibosheth found a home after the
death of his father and the ruin of his grandfather's
bouse (ix. 4, 5). Lo-debar receives a bare mention
to the Onomata'con, nor has any trace of the name
been encountered by sny later traveller. Indeed it
has probably never been sought for. Roland (Pat.
784) ooojeetuns that it is intended to Josh. xffl.
86, where the word rendered in the A. V. " of Da-
Mr " ("**3'T 1 7), is the same to its consonants as
cause Joel calla the seouzgs the "northern araaj,"
which Dr. Pasey svs cannot be said of the laaaaaa,
because almost alwaya by a sort of law of than- betas;
they make their Inroads from their birthplace to tha
aouth. Thla one point, however, may be Wrty qase-
tamed Tha usual direction of the flight of ash
Insist Is from east to west, or from south to north ;
bat the OUipeda angnueris Is bettered to have *»
Mrthpkm In lattery (Saw. Orthtp. p. 788% from
whence It verits Afrfcm, the MaarltJus, aad pert of ens
Booth of Kurops. If this Speetss bs co a aMsnfl at as
the loeuet of Joel, the sxpnanon, nmtkem array, Is ssee
applicable to K. pes, p. 1417, note a.)
Digitized by
Google
LODGE
Lo-debex, though with different vowel-polnta. In
kvor of this conjecture, which ii adopted by J. D.
MIchaelis (.Bib. fir UngtL), lithe bet that such »
ue of the preposition *7 b exceedingly nn (iee
Kail, Jotua id foe.).
If taken «e Hebrew word, the root of the name
k possibly "pasture," the driving out of Books
(Get. Thet.p. 736 6; Stanley, A #/". App. § 9)j
bat this mast be very uncertain. Q.
* LODGE. [Cucumbers, vol. L p. 518.]
LODGE, TO. This word in the A. V.—
with one exception only, to be notioed below — 1*
used to translate the Hebrew verb ]*h or I s ?,
width has, at least in the narrative portions of the
Bible, almost invariably the force at "passing
the night" This is worthy of remark, because the
word lodge — probably only another form of the
Saxon tiggan, " to lie " — does not appear to hare
had exclusively that force in other English litera-
ture at the time the Authorized Version was made.
A few examples of Its occurrence, where the mean-
ing of passing the night would not at first sight
suggest itself to an English reader, may be of ser-
vice: 1 K. xix. 9; 1 Chr. ix. 47; Is. x. 39
(where It marks the halt of the Assyrian army for
bivouac); Neb, iv. S3, xiii. 30, 31; Cant. vii. 11;
Job xxiv. 7, xxxi. 33, Ac., Ac. The same Hebrew
word ia otherwise translated in the A. V. by " lie
all night " (3 Sam. xii. 18; Cant i. 18; Job xxix.
19); " tarry the night " (Gen. xlx. 3; Judg. xix.
10; Jer. xiv. 3); '■remain," i. «. until the morn-
ing (Ex. xxUi. 18).
The force of passing the night is also present in
the words ^OD, "a sfoeping-plaoe," hence an
bra [vol. Ii. p. 1188], and njlbp, " a hut," erect-
ed in vineyards or fruit-gardens for the shelter of a
man who watched all night to protect the fruit
This is rendered " lodge" in Is. i. 8, and " cot-
tage " in xxiv. 30, the only two passage* ■ in which
It is found. [Cottage, Amer. ed.]
3. The one exception above named ooenrs In
Josh. ii. 1, where the word in the original is
SStjj!', a word elsewhere rendered " to lie," gen-
erally in allusion to sexual intercourse. G.
LOFT. [House, vol. ii. p. 1105.]
LOO. [Weights ahd Measures.]
• LOO OF OIL. [On, 6, iii.]
• LOGOS. [Word, Amer. ed.]
LOOS (A«(»), the grandmother (jiippn) of
Timothy, and doubtless the mother of bis mother
EcKicE (3 Tim. I. 6). From the Greek form of
these three names we should naturally infer that the
badly had been Hellenistic for three generations
nt least. It seems likely also that Lois had resided
long at Lystra; and almost certain that from her,
as well as from Eunioe, Timothy obtained his inti-
mate knowledge of the Jewish Scriptures (3 Tim.
Iii. 15). Whether she was surviving at either of
St Paul's visits to Lystra, we cannot say; she is
.wt alluded to in the Acts: nor ia it aosolutely osr-
*in, though St Paul speaks of her " faith," that
Lt became a Christian. The phrase might be
LORD 167*
used of a pious Jewess, who was ready to believe
in the Messiah. Calvin has a good note on this
subject. J. 8. H.
LOOKED (toots 8*W), Acts xxviii. 6,
where we should say at present " expected " or
•• looked for." This sense, if not obsolete, is now
obsolescent Earlier versions (Tyndale, Cranmar,
Geneva) have"wayted" in that passage. Seeake
Eodus. xx. 14. H,
LOOKING-GLASSES- [Mibeoes.]
LORD, as applied to the Deity, is the almost
uniform rendering in the A. V. of the 0. T. of
the Heb. (TOT?, Jthovak, which would be more
properly represented as a proper name. The rev-
erence which the Jews entertained for the sacred
name of God forbade them to pronounce it, and in
reading they substituted for it either AiUnil
"Lord," or EUMm, "God," according '/a the
vowel-points by which it was accompanied [JE-
HOVAH, vol. ii. p. 1388.] This custom is jbeerved
in the version of the LXX., where Jehovah la most
commonly translated by Koptet, as in the N. T.
(Heb. i. 10, Ac.), and in the Vulgate, where Bom-
ituu is the usual equivalent The title AMnAi is
also rendered "Lord" in the A, V., though this,
as applied to God, is of infrequent occurrence in
the historical books. For instance, it is found in
Genesis only in xv. 3, 8, xviii. 8 (where " my Lord "
should be "O Lord"), 37, 80, 31, 83, xx. 4; once in
Num. xiv. 17; twice in Deut. iii. 34, ix. 36 ; twice In
Josh. vii. 7, 8; four times in Judges; and so on. In
other passages of these books " Lord " ia the transla-
tion of ■' Jehovah; " except Ex. xxiii. 17, xxxiv. 33;
Deut x. 17; Josh. iii. 11, 13, where ftVttft is so ren-
dered. But in the poetical and historical books it
is more frequent, excepting Job, where it occurs
only in xxviii. 28, and the Proverbs, Ecclesiastcs, and
Song of Songs, where it is not once found.
The difference between Jthovak and Adonai (or
Adm) is generally marked in the A. V. by printing
the word in small capitals (Lord) when it repre-
sents the former (Gen. xv. 4, Ac.), and with an ini-
tial capital only when it ia the translation of the
latter (Pa. xcvii. 6, Is. i. 34, x. 16); except in Ex.
xxiii. 17, xxxlv. 33, where ■' the Lord God " should
be more consistently "the Lord Jehovah." A
similar distinction prevails between FTJiTJ (the
letters of Jehovah with the vowel-points of Euhim)
and O^TTJp, tlihim; the former being repre-
sented in the'A. V. by " God " in small capitals
(Gen. xv. 3, Ac), while Elohbn is « God " with an
initial capital only. And, generally, when the
name of the Deity is printed in capitals, it indi-
cates that the corresponding Hebrew is nVT\
which is translated Lord or God according to the
vowel-points by which it is accompanied.
In some Instances it is difficult, on account of
the pause accent, to say whether Adonni is the titk
of the Deity, or merely one of respect addressed to
men. These have been noticed by the Mosorites,
who distinguish the former in their notes as "holy,"
and the latter as " profane." (See Gen. xviii. 8,
xix. 3, 18; and compare the Masoretic notes <m
Gen. xx. 13, Is. xix. 4.) W. A. W.
■ What can have led the LXX.SC 'nnalat* ths wort
V*Jf "heaps," In Ps. Ixxh 1, by •sMsofvlirar,
whleb they employ tor naibo in the
pssstgai, the writer Is Enable so eonjectuts.
Digitized by
Google
1676 LOUD'8 DAT, THB
LOBD'S DAY, THB ('H Jtueuuri) rWea;
h pirn ffa&ftirwi')- It has bean questioned, though
out seriously until of late jean, what ia the mean-
ing of the phrase 4) Kvpuvrii 'HpUpa, which ooean
in one paiaage only of the Holy scripture, Bar. 1.
10, and la, in our English Torsion, translated •• the
Lord's Day." The general consent both of Chris-
tian antiquity and of modem divines has referred
It to the weekly festival of our Lord's resurrection,
and identified it with •' the first day of the week,"
en which He rose, with the patristical "eighth
day," or "day which is both the first and the
eighth," In fret, with the 1, T o5 'rUfev 'Hutoo,"
"Soils Dies," or '• Sunday," of every age of the
Church.
Bat the views antagonistic to this general consent
isseneatleasta passing notice. (1.) Some base
supposed St. John to be speaking, In the passage
shore referred to, of the Sabbath, because that
Institution ia called in Isaiah lviii. 18, by the
Almighty Himself, " My holy day." « To this it
Is replied — If St. John had intended to specify the
Sabbath, he would surely have used that word
which was by no means obsolete, or even obso-
lescent, at the time of his composing the book of
the Revelation. And it is added, that if an Apostle
had set the example of confounding the seventh
and the first days of the week, it would have been
strange indeed that every ecclesiastical writer for
the first five centuries should hare avoided any
approach to such confusion. They do avoid it —
far as idfiparoy is never used by them for the
first day, so Kvouutr) is never used by them for
the seventh day. (2.) Another theory Is, that by
« the Lord's day " St. John intended " the day of
joigment," to which a large portion of the book
of Revelation may be conceived to refer. Time
" I was in the spirit on the Lord's day " (tytri-
anr ir xvtipari iv rfi Kvpiwcp 'Hu/pa) would
Imply that he was rapt, in spiritual vision, to the
dale of that " great and terrible day," just ss St.
Paul represents himself sa caught up locally into
Paradise. Now, not to dispute the interpretation
of the passage from which the illustration is drawn
(8 Cor. zii. *), the abettors of this view seem to
have put out of sight the following considerations.
In the preceding sentence, St. John had mentioned
the place in which he was writing, Patnios, and the
causes which had brought him thither. It is but
natural that be should further particularize the
circumstances under which his mysterious work
was composed, by stating the exact day on which
the Revelations were communicated to him, and
the employment, spiritual musing, in which he was
then engaged. To suppose a mixture of the meta-
Kcal and the literal would be strangely out of
ng. And though it be conceded that the day
rf judgment is in the New Testament spoken of as
'H tow Kuptov 'Hplfn, the employment of the
adjectival form constitutes a remarkable difference,
which waa observed and maintained ever after-
wards.' There is also a critical objection to this
LOBD'S DAT, THB
interpretation." This second theory then, whisk h
sanctioned by the name of Augusti, must be abas-
ed. (8.) A third opinion is, that Si. John in-
tended by the •' Lord's Day " that on which the
Lord's resurrection waa antmaOj) celebrated, or, at
we now term it, Easter-day. On this it need only
be observed, that, though it was never Qu e s t io n ed
that the usably celebration of that event should
take place on the first day of the hebdomadal cycle,
it waa for a long time doubted on what day in the
amutal cycle it should be celebrated. Two schools
at least existed on this point until considerably after
the death of St John. It therefore seems unlikely
that, in a book intended for the whole Church, he
would have employed a method of dating which
was far from generally agreed upon. And it ia to
be added that no patristical authority can be quoted,
either for the interpretation contended for in this
opinion, or for the employment of ij Kupuws)
'HfUoa to denote Easter-day.
All other conjectures upon this point may be
permitted to confute themselves; but the following
cavil is too curious to be omitted. In Scripture
the first day of the week ia called jj fda aafifii-
rctr, in post-Scriptural writers it is called rj Kv-
Cuucii 'Huspa as wdl; therefore, the book of Reve-
ition is not to be ascribed to an Apostle ; or in
other words, is not part of Scripture. The logic
of this argument is only to be surpassed by its
boldness. It says, in effect, because post-Scriptural
writers have these two designations for the first
day of the week; thertfore, Scriptural writers nun*
be confined to one of them. It were surely mote
reasonable to suppose that the adoption by post-
Scriptural writers of a phrase so preeminently
Christian as JJ Kvpuur)) 'H/itpa to denote the first
day of the week, and s day to especially marked,
can be traceable to nothing else than an Apostle's
use of that phrase in the same meaning.
Supposing then that f) Kvpuuri) 'Hpcpa of St
John is the Lord's Day, — What do we gather from
Holy Scripture concerning that institution ? How
is it spoken of by early writers up to the time of
Constantino ? What change, if any, was brought
upon it by the celebrated edict of that emperor,
whom some have declared to have been its origi-
nator?
1. Scripture says very little concerning it But
that little seems to indicate that the divinely in-
spired Apostles, by their practice and by their pre-
cepts, marked the first day of the week as a day
for meeting together to break bread, for communi-
cating and receiving instruction, for laying np ofler-
ings in store for charitable purposes, for occupation
in holy thought and prayer. The first day of the
week so devoted seems also to have been the day
of the Lord's Resurrection, and therefore, to bar*
been especially likely to be chosen for such purposes
by those who « preached Jesus and the Rcsnrrec
tion."
The Lord rose on the first day of the weak (vf
ui$ owA&oVair), and appeared, on the very day «f
• 'H 'H/Upa tot Kvsfov occurs In 1 Oor. L 8, and
I Tbess. II. 3, with tin words 4pw 'Ivroii XpurroA at-
toned; in 1 Oor. v. 5, and 2 Oor. 1. 14, with the word
Isowv only attached ; and in 1 Truss, v. 2, and 2 Pet.
U. 10, with the article n> omitted. In one paws,
•hen both toe day of judgment, and, as a fbraabadow-
teg of it-, the day of vengmnce upon Jerusalem, seam
» bo alluded to, the Lord hmmtU says, sffrnt feral
jcol ovior tov avepMwov Jr rg 4HPf «*v«9, Luke acvtl
2i.
« Ttysvday would n m sss r uyhavo to bee
withfr^pf "I was In tho day of Judgment," C *
M was rMsng tin day of judgment sr^tiiauy." Hew
ybwtu a> v)p4pf is never used for dim agnrs. Bus.
on the other hand, toe construction rf ejroapav w*U)
hwrtiium to Justified by a parallel pas s ag e In Bet
rr 2, od tiljm «y»W *» a sem a en .
Digitized by
Google
LORD'S DAT, THE
■fa rising, to Mi followers on five diitinet ceee-
aVajs — to Mary Magdalene, to the other women, to
Ihe two disciples on the road to Kmnrans, to St.
Peter sepsMtely, to ten Apostles eolleeted together.
After eight days {paf foifs herd), that Is, ae-
eording to the ordinary reckoning, on the first daj
af the next week, He appeared to the eleven. He
doe* not seem to ham appeared In the Intern! — It
may be to render that day especially noticeable by
the Apostles, or, it may be for other reasons. But,
however thie question be settled, on the day of
Pentecost, which in that year fell on the firet day
if the week (eee Bramhau, Due. of the Bnbbatk
mi Lard i Dag, m Work*. voL v. p. 51, Oxford
edition), "they were all with one accord in one
place," had spiritual gift* conferred on them, and
In their turn began to communicate tbooe gift", as
asaompanimenteof inetroetloo, to other*. AtTroas
(Acta xx. 7), many yean after the ocenrrenee at
Puteoost, when Christianity had begun to assume
wreathing like a settled form, St Luke records the
fallowing circumstances. St. Paul and his com-
panions arrived there, and "abode sewn days, and
upon the first day of the week, when the disciples
earns together to break bread, Paul preached unto
them." In 1 Cor. xvl. 1, 8, that same St. Paul
writes thus: "Now concerning the collection for
the saints, as I hate given order to the churches in
Galatia, even so do ye. Upon the first day of the
week, let every one of you lay by him in store, as
God hath prospered him, that there be no gather-
ings when I come." In Heb. x. 45, the corre-
spondents of the writer are desired « not to forsake
the assembling of themselves together, as the man-
ner of some is, but to exhort one another," an
injunction which seems to imply that a regular
day for such sasembUng existed, and was well
known; for otherwise no rebuke would lie. And
lastly, in the passage given above, St John de-
scribes himself as being in the Spirit "on the
Lard's day."
Taken separately, perhaps, and even all together,
these paaasns) seem scarcely adequate to prove that
the dedioat jn of the first day of the week to the
purposes above mentioned was a matter of apostolic
institution, or even of apostolic practice. But, it
may be observed, that it is at any rate an extraor-
dinary coincidence, that almost immediately we
emerge from Scripture, we find the same day men-
tioned in a similar manner, and directly associated
with the Lord's Resurrection ; that it is an extraor-
dinary fact that we never find its dedication
questioned or argued about, but accepted as some-
thing equally apostolic with Confirmation, with
Infant Baptism, with Ordination, or at least spoken
a* in the same way. And as to direct support
from Holy Scripture, it is noticeable that those
ether ordinances which are usually considered Scrip-
tural, and in support of which Scripture is usually
sited, are dependent, so far as mere quotation fa
concerned, upon fewer texts than the Lord's Day is.
Stating the ease at the very lowest, the Lord's Day
has at least " probable insinuations in Scripture," <•
end so is superior to any other holy day, whether
of hebdomadal celebration, as Friday in memiry of
the Crucifixion, or of annual celebration, as Easter-
lay fat memory of the Resurrection Itself. "
• TUe saxass Is ensleyai by Bishop Asmlm siss
•"Ayajuv rjfcr feUpw t^» iytttf «it ti^ p oesv y , sV
sai e lavovf erfors as nv«a
LORD'S DAT, TUB 1677
other days may be, and are, defensible on other
grounds; but they do not possess anything like a
Scriptural authority for their observance. And U
we are inclined still to press for more pertinent
Scriptural proof, and more frequent mention of the
institution, for such we suppose it to be, in the
writings of the Apostles, we must recollect how
little is said of Baptism and the Lord's Supper,
and how vast a difference is naturally to be ex-
pected to exist between a sketch of the manners
and habits of their age, which the authors of the
Holy Scriptures did not write, and hints is to life
and conduct, and regulation of known practices,
which they did write.
S. On quitting the canonical writings, we turn
naturally to Clement of Rome. He does not, how-
ever, directly mention " the Lord's Day," but in 1
Cor. i. 40, he says, wdm-a raf «< wokik i<pti\afMr,
and he speaks of i,pia pivot Kcupol col ifxu, si
which the Christian rpocptpai col ktiroupyimi
should be made.
Ignatius, the disciple uf St John (ad Magn. a.
9), contrasts Judaism aud Christianity, and as an
exemplification of the contrast, opposes <raJ3&arl-
feir to living according to the Lard's life Gears,
tV KvpiaxV fs>V fewrts).
The epistle ascribed to St. Barnabas, which,
though oertainly not written by that Apostle, was
in existence in the earlier part of the 2d century,
has (c 15) the following words, "We celebrate the
eighth day with Joy, on which too Jesus rose from
the deed." »
A pagan document now comes Into view. It fa
the well-known letter of Pliny to Trajan, written
while he presided over Pontes snd Bithynia. " The
Christians (says be), affirm the whole of their guilt
or error to be, that tbey were accustomed to most
together on a stated day (tiato die), before it was
light, and to sing hymns to Christ as a God, and
to bind themselves by a Sacramentum, not for any
wicked purpose, but never to commit fraud, theft,
or adultery ; never to break their word, or to refuse,
when called upon, to deliver up sny trust; after
which It was their custom to separate, and to as-
semble again to take a meal, but a general one,
and without guilty purpose."
A thoroughly Christian authority, Justin Martyr,
who flourished a. o. 140, stands next on the list
He writes thus: "On the day called Sunday (r|
roS 1)\lov XryoutVp Woa)> fa an assembly of al
who live either in the cities or in the rural districts,
and the memoirs of the Apostles snd the writings of
the prophets are read.'* Then he goes on to de-
scribe the particulars of the religious acts which art
entered upon at this a sse m bly. Tbey consist of
prayer, of the celebration of the Holy Eucharist,
snd of collection of alms. He afterwards assigns
the reasons which Christiana had for meeting on
Sunday. These are, " because it is the Firtt Dag,
on which God dispelled the darkness (re a-sorst )
and the original state of things (tV !*Aiu<), and
formed the world, and because Jesus Christ our
Saviour rose from the dead upon it " (Apoi. I. o. 67. ).
In another work (Dial. e. Trypk.), he makes cir-
eumeisior furnish a type of Sunday. « The com-
mand to ircumeise Infants on the eighth day was
a type if the true ouwusasfahn by which ws en
circumcised from error snd wickedness thsasxek
our Lord Jesus Christ who rose from the dead on
the first day of the weak frf /uf vafiBirwr);
therefore tt remains the chlet and first of days."
As for fft0$teri(iw, he uses that with exclusive
Digitized by
Google
1678 liOBCS DAT, THE
reference to the Jewish law. Ha carefully dhv
tuiguiahes Saturday (f, itporurti), the day after
which our Lard ni crucified, from Sunday (^
•era tJ)f Npovur))* */ru farv 4 re* 'HAlev
HfUfa), upon which He rote bom the dead. (If
any surprise is felt at Justin's employment of the
heathen designation* for the seventh and fint dayt
of the week, it may be accounted for thus. Before
the death of Hadrian, A. D. 138, the hebdomadal
division (which Dion Castius, writing In the 3d
century, derives, together with its nomenclature,
torn %ypt) had in matten of common Hie ahnott
universally superseded in Greece, and even in Italy,
the national division! of the lunar month. Justin
Martyr, writing to and for heathen, as well aa to
and tor Jews, employs it, therefore, with a certainty
of being understood.)
The strange heretic, Bardesanet, who however
delighted to consider himself a sort of Christian, has
the following words in his book on " Fate," or on
"the Laws of the Countries," which he addressed
so the Emperor M. Aurelius Antoninus: " What
then shall wo say respecting the new race of our-
selves who are Christians, whom in every country
and in every region the Messiah established at his
coming; for, lol wherever we be, all of us are caBed
by the one name of the Messiah, Christians; and
apon one day, which is the first of the week, we
■ tum ble ourselves together, and on the appointed
days we abstain from food " (Cureton's Tromtla-
■on).
Two very short notices stand next on our let,
but they are important from their casual and un-
studied character. Dionysius, bishop of Corinth,
A. D. 170, la a letter to the Church of Rome, a
fragment of which is preserved by Eusebius, says,
tV r^uepor our Kuouurhy hrylav ipipar tnf/iyo-
Mir, if J h/iyrmfur bfiiw tt)» ewieTOAr}*- And
Melito, bishop of Sardis, his contemporary, is stated
to hare composed, among other works, a treatise on
the Lord's Day (o wepl Tjjt KvsMurqr \4yos).
The next writer who may be quoted is Ireaseus,
bishop of Lyons, a. d. 178. He asserts that the
Sabbath is abolished; but his evidence to the ex-
istence of the Lord's Day is clear and distinct. It
is spoken of in one of the best known of his Frag-
ments (tee Beaton's Jrenma, p. 909). But a
record in Euseb. (v. 93, 9), of the part which he
look in the (havtodecunan controversy, shows that
in his lime it was an institution be} ond dispute.
The point in question was this: Should Easter he
celebrated in connection with the Jewish Passover,
so whatever day of the week that might happen to
toll, with the Churches of Asia Minor, Syria, and
Mesopotamia; or on the Lord's Day, with the rest
of the Christian world? The Churches of Gaul,
Jtan under the superintendence of Iretueus, agreed
apon a synodical epistle to Victor, bishop of Borne,
In whieh occurred words somewhat to this effect,
" The mystery of the Lord's Resurrection may not
W celeb rat ed on any other day than the Lord's Day,
ad on this alone should we observe the breaking
off of the Paschal Fast." •> This confirms what
tat said shore, that while, even towards the end
jf the 9d century, tradition varied as to the eaares
at MaaaV a iss' i s a ea i emAam ni Kvpfov »Wrt|ans>,
<■! eewteV vaeva para rfi» swra re «**x> i »■""""
>»*»tioI|i«>ii tA> fejaijw.
Meet, ajwaaeh r «V ^t^t*" wtMi, eV av
LORD'S DAT, THB
celebration of Christ's ffosunsntiiei, the
celebration of it was one upon which at) eaeajajty
existed or was even hinted as.
Clement of Alexandria, a. d. 184, eosoea neat
One does not expect anything very definite from a
writer of to mystical a tendency, but he has scam
things quite to our purpose. In his Siiem. (r».
§ 3), he speaks of tV opxryewr i/iipw, r^» Te>
sW( IwdnvBir jj/»*r, TflK ofr col wMrra* re; tWi
e)error yinmw, avr.A., words whieh Bishop Kays
mterpreUM contrasting the seventh day of the Law
with the eighth day of the GospsL And, at the
tame learned prelate observes, » When ra "« mm it
says that the Gnostic, or transcendental Christian,
does nut pray in any fixed piece, or on any stated
days, but throughout hit whole life, he gives us to
understand that Christians in general did neat
together in fixed places and at appointed tunas tor
the purposes of prayer." Bat we are not left te
mere inference on this important point, tor Caanant
speaks of the Lord's Day as a wehVksowa anal eua-
tomary festinU, and in one place gives a mystical
interpretation of the name. »
Tertullian, wheat date It casignshlo to the etna)
of the SW century, may, in spite of hit conn
to Montankuu, be quoted as a witness to
Ha terms the first day of the week
Sunday (Diet Solit), sometimes Diet
Hespeaksofitstadayofjoy ("DuanSehsaatitiei
indutjtemus," ApoL c. 16), and asserts that it it
wrong to Cut upon it, or to pray knotting during
its continuance (« Die Dotninieo jejunium aatoi
ducimus. vel de genieulis adorare," D* Cor. e. J).
u Even business is to be put off, list we gree place
to the devil" (" Diflerentes etiam iiegotia, a* queen
Diabolo locum demos," D* Oral, c 18).
Origen contends that the Lord's Day had its an-
periority to the Sabbath indi c a t ed by manna haw-
ing been given on it to the Israel i tes, while it wea
withheld on the Sabbath. It it eae of the i
of the perfect Christian to keep the Lord's Day.
Minudus Felix, A. D. 910, makes the heath
interlocutor, in his dialogue called Octaviua, i
that the Christians come together to a repast " on
a solemn day " (solenni die).
Cyprian and his c ou e agu e s, la a synodical hater,
A. D. 863, make the Jewish circumcision on the
eighth day prefigure the newness of hie of the
Christian, to which Christ's resurrection introduces
him, and point to the Lord's Day, whieh is atones
the eighth and the fint.
Commodian, aire. A. D. 970, mentions the Lord's
Day.
Victorious, A. t>. 990, contrasts it, in a rare
remarkable passage, with the Piraseeve and the
Sabbath;
And Peter, Bishop of Alexandria, A. T>. 300, says
of it, »We keep the Lord's Day at a day of Joy,
because of Him who rose thereon." *
The results of our examination of the p r in c ip a l
writers of the two centuries after the death of St.
John are at follows: The Lord's Day (a name
which has now coma out more prominently, and it
connected more explqtly with our Lord's resur-
rection than before) existed during these two caa-
» aaee<Ufc ,e^e> e s V T < « at
Kvpjw Ava>raeir sefs^He (Areas. ▼.).
« TV yip oi««t> >m«>av*Vtt irJrmr t ympm, fro
T«ra>wra>«afr«*Tf,e>i esM )eVs r a stfamrwatm
Digitized by
Google
LOBD'B DAT, THB
scries is » put and parcel of apostoli c al, and w of
Scriptural Christianity. It n Mver defended, far
It m never impugned, or it least only impugned
m other things received from the Apaetlee were.
It wm nerer oonfoanded with the Sabbath, but
sarefully distinguished from it (though we have
not quoted nearly all the pongee by which thii
point might be proved). It was not an institution
of severe Sabbatical character, but a day of joy
vX<WtfffeVn) end cheerfulaeas (esfaoe-mni), rather
encouraging than forbidding relaxation. Belig-
ioualy regarded, it was a day of solemn meeting for
the Holy Eucharist, for united prayer, for instruc-
tion, for almsgiving; and though, being an institu-
tion under the law of liberty, work does not appear
to have been formally Interdicted, or rest formally
enjoined, TertuUian seems to indicate that the char-
acter of the day was opposed to worldly business.
Finally, whatever analogy may be supposed to exist
between the Lords Day and the Sabbath, in no
passage that has come down to us is the Fourth
Commandment appealed to ae the ground of the
obligation to observe the Lord'e Day. Fnnleslsi
tieal writers- r e it e r a t e again and again, in the
strictest sense of the words, "Let no man therefore
>udge you in respect of an holiday, or of the new
moon, or of the sabbath days " (M4j r» 6/iis Kpf
reVnt *> pipti seerr/v, | roeunrlot, f) a-o/3/3dVvv,
CoL ii. 16). Nor, again, is it referred to any
Sabbatical foundation anterior to the promulgation
of the Mosaic economy. On the contrary, those
before the Mosaic era are constantly assumed to
have had neither knowledge nor observance of the
Sabbath. And as little is it anywhere asserted
that the Lord's Day is merely an eedeslastical insti-
tution, dependent on the post-apostolic Church for
Us origin, and by consequence capable of being
done away, should a time ever arrive when it ap-
pears to be no longer neede d .
Our design does not necessarily lead us to do
more than state facte; but if the facts be allowed
to speak for themselves, they Indicate that the
Lord's Day is a purely Christian Institution, sanc-
tioned by apostolic practice, mentioned in apostolic
writings, and so possessed of whatever divine au-
thority all apostolic ordinances snd doctrines (which
were not obviously temporary, or were not abro-
gated by the Apostles themselves) can be supposed
to
8. But on whatever grounds " the Lord's Day "
may be supposed to rest, it is a great and indis-
putable fact that four years before the (Ecumenical
Council of Nicsm, it was recognised by Oonstan-
tine in hie celebrated edict, as " the venerable Day
of the Sun." The terms of the document are
(hots: —
" Impmuur Oemumtmm Aug. HHjiis'ie.
^Ouii— JadlernvvbanasiMptebaiet euneawum or-
«em cessU venarebiU Ski Sails qnlseaut. atari Semen
scatU agroram ouUans ttsere Ikwnssrqas lassrvtaBt
tueolam frequenter eraalt at nen apttas alio die fra-
>l»nr Tie ifitmii* eeenafoesw, 'BUani It r»
Bam) emnMuv.eal rbr ayeifeaysaaat.eVajUsVraw
linwrasi'Mi mml wr ft UeW* wfrnymmrmv exatsj» ifmm
•dm*, *ml «V lirw oi XirmU H Ma OiaaerMw-
trlmm M r\fi «*iainf*. At e> mere vei
T^ttMtmm.it fr aer*
Mwet (80s. Ad. Hut.Le. 8).
rebasrvas very truly, « Nan aMt a Oonsanrtlno
1 avpuuojr asd Jam ants ale voeatam btia-
LORD'S DAT, fHB 1676
mania salsU aut rioaa) aonbibus mandentnr, as oe-
oaaloiM momanti penet oonuno^tMoetkattnvevuaoa*
nanc e—," — flat. Norn. Jfsrt. Oinw ILtt QmMmm
lino II. Cum.
Some have endeavored to explain away this doc-
ument by alleging — 1st, that "Solis Dies" is not
(Ae Christian name of the Lord'e Day, and that
Constantino did not therefore intend to acknowl-
edge it as a Christian institution.
9d. That, before his conversion, Constantino had
professed himself to be especially under the guard-
iauahlp of the sun, and that, at the very beat, be
intended to make a religious compromise between
sun-worshippers, properly so-called, and the wor-
shippers of the " Sun of Bighteouansas," i. a.
Christians.
3d. That Constantine'a edict was purely a kalsn-
darial one, and intended to reduce the number of
public holidays, "Dice Nefasti," or "Feriati,"
which had, so long sgou the date of the" Aotiottas
VerrinjB," become a serious impediment to the
transection of business. And that this was to be
effected by choosing a day which, while it would
be accepted by the Paganism then in fashion, would
of course be agreeable to the Christians.
4th. That Constantino then instituted Sunday
for the first time as a religious day for Christians.
The fourth of these statements is absolutely re-
futed, both by the quotations made above from
writers of the second and third centuries, and by
the terms of the edict itself. It is evident that
Constantine, accepting as facts the existence of
the " Solis Dies," and the reverence paid to it by
some one or other, does nothing more than make
that reverence practically universal. It is « vener-
abilis" already. And it is probable that this most
natural interpretation would never have been dis-
turbed, had not Sozomen asserted, without warrant
from either the Justinian or the Theodosian Code,
that Constantine did for the sixth day of the weak
what the codes assert be did for the first'
The three other statements concern themselves
rather with what Constantine meant than with
what he did. But with such considerations we
have little or nothing to do. He may have pur-
posely soleotsrt an ambiguous appellation. He may
have been only half a Christian, wavering between
allegiance to Christ snd allegiance to Mithras. He
may have aflhntcd a religious syncretism. He may
have wished his people to adopt such syncretism.
He may have feared to offend the Pagans. He may
have h e si tated to avow too openly his inward lean-
ings to Christianity. Hs may have considered that
community of religious days might lead by and by
to community of religious thought and feeling.
And he may have had in view the rectification of
the calendar. But all this is nothing to the pur-
pose. It is s fact, that in the year a. d. 381, in a
public edict, which was to apply to Christians as
well as to Pagans, he put especial honor upon a
day already honored by the former — Judiciously
calling it by a name which Christians had long
Than Is a
bras ( fit. Omu. It. 18), which appears
thlnf of Saturday. It is, however,
corrupt, andean seemly be translated at
by the employment of an ween as Hon ; whl
thus amend It, it will speak of Many, a
doss, ant not of Saturday ; and, what is a
parson, to whichever of those days It doss
Is said in it nnnwulng * opued <nU
10 In mass.
assert the
all, except
Is, U we do
fell
Digitized by
Google
1680 LORD'S DAT, THE
rmployed without scruple, and to which, u H in
in ordinary use, the Pagans oould scaronlv object
What he did for it was to insist that worldly
justness, whether by the functionaries of the lew
or by private citizens, ahould be intermitted during
ite continuance. An exception indeed waa made
in favor of the rural district!, avowedly from the
neeeadty of the case, covertly perhaps to prevent
those districts, where Paganism (ss the word Pagus
would intimate) still prevailed extensively, from
feeling aggrieved by a sudden and stringent change.
It need only be added here, that the readiness with
which Christians acquiesced in the interdiction of
basinets on the Lord's Day aflbrds no small pre-
sumption that they had long considered it to be a
day of rest, and that, so frr as circumstances ad-
mitted, they had made it so long before
Were any other testimony wanting to the exist-
once of Sunday as a day of Christian worship at
this period, it might be supplied by the Council
of Nicsee, A. D. 825. The Fathers there and then
assembled make no doubt of the obligation of that
day — do not ordain it — do, not defend it They
assume it as an existing feet, and only notioe it
incidentally in order to regulate an indifferent
matter, the posture of Christian worshippers upon
hv»
Richard Baxter has weD summed up the history
of the Lord's Day at this point, and his words may
not unaptly be inserted here: "That the first
Christian emperor, finding all Christians unanimous
in the possession of the day, should make a law (as
our kings do) for the due observing of it, end that
the first Christian council should establish uni-
formity in the very gesture of worship on that day,
are strong confirmations of the matter of feet, that
the churches unanimously agreed in the holy use
of it, as a ttparaitd day even from and in At
ApotUa' dayt " (Richard Baxter, On the Divine
Appointment of the horde Day, p. 41, 1671).
Here we conclude our inquiry. If patristical or
ewlraiastiiral ground has been touched upon, it has
been only so far ss appeared necessary for the eluci-
dation of the Scripture phrase, rj Kvouuri) 'HfUpa-
What became of the Sabbath after Christianity was
feirly planted ; what Christ said of it in the Gospels,
and bow his words are to be interpreted; what the
Apostles said of that day, and bow they treated it;
what the early ecclesiastical writers held respeoting
it; and in what sense "There remaineth a tab-
batietmu {aaBfiarturiUt, A. V. "rest") to the
people of God " (Heb. iv. 9) : these are questions
which fell rather under the head of Sabbath than
tnder that of " Lord's Day." And as no debate
arose in apostolic or in primitive times respecting
the relation, by descent, of the Lord's Day to the
Mouio Sabbath, or to any Sabbatical institution
of assumed higher antiquity, none need be raised
here. [See Sabbath.]
The whole subject of the Lord's Day, Including
its "origin, history, and present obligation," is
• °X**i4s; npet Aav tv tJ jcvptejrp >cV» «A6vrm
sal hr tw rsjv IlnTSKooTqv i^Upwt , brio row wim h
wiaf roaoutf* tpoiav iwktTrtatmi, fomrac (tot* rf
■Wf ovmU* ret «vx*t inUew vf «w (.Cent. Nic
Cum. ID).
* ateldonatus {Omm. on Matt. xxvL 36) Is bold
•noagh to danjr that the « Lord's Supper " of 1 Oar.
sl.ll> Is the asm* as the ■ Koehmrlsna " of the later
Ohoreh, and Idsntlfits it with the meal that followed.
LORD'S SUPPER
treated of by the writer of this artida in the
fiampton Lecture for I860. J. A. H-
LORD'S SUPPER (Kuouuror St awow :
Coma Domimca). The words which thus describe
the great central act of the worship of the Christian
Church occur but in one single passage of the K. T.
(1 Cor. xi 20).° Of the feet which lies under the
name we have several notices, and from these, in-
cidental and fragmentary ss they are, it is possible
to form a tolerably distinct picture. To examine
these notices in then- relation to the life of the
Christian society in the first stages of Its growth,
and so to kern what " the Supper of the Lord "
actually was, will be the object of this article. II
would be foreign to its purpose to trace the history
of the stately liturgies which grew up out of it in
the 3d and 3d centuries, except so fer as they
supply or suggest evidence as to the customs of the
earlier period, or to touch upon the many contro-
versies which then, or at a later age, have clustered
round the original institution.
I. The starting-point of this inquiry is found in
the history of that night when Jesus and his dis-
ciples met together to eat the Passover (Matt. rxvL
19; Mark xiv. 18; Luke xxii. 18). The manner
in which the Paschal feast was kept by the Jews
of that period differed in many details from that
originally prescribed by the rules of Ex. xii. The
multitudes that came up to Jerusalem, met, as they
could find accommodation, family by family, or in
groups of friends, with one of their number as the
celebrant, or " proclaimer " of the feast. The
ceremonies of the feast took place in the following
order (Light foot, Temple {Service, xiiL; Meyer,
Comm. m Matt. xxvL 86). (1.) The members of
the company that were joined for this purpose met
in the evening sod reclined on couches, this position
being now ss much a matter of rule as standing
had been originally (comp. Matt. xxvi. 80, aW«crro;
Luke xxii. 14; and John xfJL 88, 85). The head
of the household, or celebrant, began by a form of
blessing "for the day and for the wine," pro-
nounced over a cup, of which he and the others then
drank. The wine was, according to rabbinic tra-
ditions, to be mixed with water; not for any
mysterious reason, but because that was regarded
as the best way of using the best wine (comp. 8
Mace. xv. 89). (8.) AD who were present then
washed their hands; this also having a special
benediction. (8.) The table was then set out with
the paschal Iamb, unleavened bread, bitter herbs,
and the dish known as Cbazoseth (np'TlQ),
a sauce made of dates, figs, raisins, and vinegar,
and designed to commemorate the mortar of their
bondage in Egypt (Buxtorf, Lex. Rabb. 881).
(4.) The eelebrant first, and then the others, dipped
a portion of the bitter herbs into the Charoseth
and ate thorn. (5.) The dishes were then removed,
and a cup of wine again brought. Then followed
an interval which was allowed theoretically for the
lbs phraasolnej to which we are aeenstomed la to ham
only en example of the « rkncola Osivtabeanrm at
Luthemnornm tnaoMa," hmovauag en the received
e of the Church. The keen detector of harear,
r, Is hi thU instance at variance not our/ wab
■MeoanosmoftheohiefadliereortheaocaretObvaMti
(camp. Bwtae, »«. s. v. Umrl, bat with the em
thorttaar* teaohinf of hat own (OumMow zVwJaas
e. If. on. ft
Digitized by
Google
LORD'S SUPPER
locations tint might be uked by children or
proselytes, who were astonished at aneh a strange
beginning of a bast, and the cup wai paand round
and dnink at the close of it. (6.) The diabea being
brought on again, the cdebnuit repeated the com-
memorative words which opened what was strictly
the paschal supper, and pronounced a solemn
thanksgiving, followed by Pa. oxiii. and oxlv. a
(7.) Then came a second washing of the hands,
with a short form of blessing as before, and the
celebrant broke one of the two loaves or cakes of
unleavened bread, and gave thanks over it. All
then took portions of the hread and dipped them,
together with the Utter herbs, into the Uharoseth,
and so ate them. (8.) After this they ate the flesh
of the paschal lamb, with bread, etc., as they liked;
and after another blessing, a third cup, known
especially as toe "cup of blessing," was handed
round. (9.) This was succeeded by a fourth cup,
and the recital of Ps. cxv.-cxviii. followed by a
prayer, and this was accordingly known sa the cup
of the Hallel, or of the Song. (10.) There might
be, in conclusion, a fifth cup, provided that the
"great Hallel" (possibly Psalms cxx.-exxxvii.)
was sung over it.
Comparing the ritual thus gathered from Rab-
binic writers with the N. T., and assuming (1) that
t represents substantially the common practice of
our Lord's time; and (2) that the meal of which
He and his disciples partook, was either the Pass-
over itself, or an anticipation of it," conducted
according to the same rules, we are able to point,
though not with absolute certainty, to the points
of departure which the old practice presented for
the institution of the new. To (1 ) or (S), or even
to (8), we may refer the first words and the first
distribution of the eup (Luke xxii. IT, 18); to (8)
or (7), the dipping of the sop (tyct/itw) of John
ilii. 96; to (7), or to an interval during or after
(8), the distribution of the bread (Matt. xxvi. 96;
Hark xiv. 99; Luke xxii. 18; 1 Cor. ». 93, 94);
to (9) or (10) ('• after supper," Luke xxii. 90), the
thanksgiving, and distribution of the tup, and the
hymn with which the whole was ended. It will be
noticed that, according to this order of succession,
the question whether Judas partook of what, in the
language of a later age, would be called the conse-
crated elements, is most probably to be answered
hi the negative.
The narratives of the Qospds abow how strongly
the disciples were impressed with the words which
bad given a new meaning to the old familiar acta.
They leave unnoticed all the ceremonies of the
Passover, except those which had thus been trans-
ferred to the Christian Church and perpetuated in
it Old things were passing away, and all things
becoming new. They bad looked on the bread and
the wine as memorials of the deliverance from
Egypt They were now told to partake of them
LORD'S SUPPER
1681
"in remembrance" of their Master and Lord.
The festival had been annual. No rule was given
as to the time and frequency U the new feast thai
thus supervened on the old, but the command
Do this as oft as ye drink it " (1 Cor. xi. 86),
suggested the more continual recurrence of that
which was to be their memorial of one whom they
would wish never to forget The words, " This is
my body," gave to the unleavened bread a new
character. They had been prepared for language
that would otherwise hare been so startling, by the
teaching of John (vi. 83-68), and they were thus
taught to see in the bread that was broken the
witness of the closest possible union and incorpora-
tion with their Lord. The cup which was " the
new testament" (JraeVij) "in His blood," would
remind them, in like mannet, of the wonderful
prophecy in which that new covenant had been
foretold (Jer. xxii. 81-34) of which the crowning
glory was in the promise, "I will forgive theit
iniquity, and I will remember their sin no more."
His blood shed, as He told them, " for them and
for many," for that remission of sins which He had
been proclaiming throughout his whole ministry,
was to be to the new covenant what the blood of
sprinkling had been to that of Moses (Ex. xxiv. 8).
It is possible that there may have been yet another
thought connected with these symbolic acts. The
funeral customs of the Jews involved, at or after
the burial, the administration to the mourners of
bread (comp. Jer. xvi. 7, " neither shall they break
bread for them In mourning," in marginal reading
of A. V. ; Ewald and Hitzig, ad he. ; Ex. xxiv. 17 ;
Hos. ix. 4; Tob. ir. 17), and of wine, known, when
thus given, as " the cup of consolation." May not
the bread and the wine of the Last Supper hare
had something of that character, preparing the
minds of Christ's disciples for his departure by
treating it as already accomplished ? They were
to think of bis body as already anointed for the
burial (Matt xxvi. 19; Mark xiv. 8; John xii 7),
of his body as already given up to death, of his
blood as already shed. The paseorer-meal was also,
little as they might dream of it, a funeral-feast
The bread and the wine were to be pledget of con-
solation for their sorrow, analogous to the verbal
promises of John xiv. 1, 87, xvi. 90. The word
SiaSrfin) might even hare the twofold meaning
which is connected with it in the Epistle to the
Hebrews.
May we not conjecture, without leaving the
region of history for that of controversy, that the
thoughts, desires, emotions, of that hour of divine
sorrow and communion would be such as to lead
the disciples to .crave earnestly to renew them?
Would it not be natural that they should seek that
renewal in the way which their Master had pointed
oat to them? From this time, accordingly, the
words " to break bread," appear to have had for
alt may be iotenstinf to givs ths words, as showing
vast kind of Arms may have eerved as types for the
ant worship of the GbHsuan Church.
1. This fa the patten cr, which ws eat because the
Lord paand over the houses of our lathers In Bgypt
3- Thee* are ths Utter herbs, which we «t In re-
membrance that ths Kgrpttaos made the lives of our
•jfbers Utter in Bgrpt.
8. This is ths unleavened bread, which we eat, be-
sauss the dough of our lather* had not the* to be
leavened before the Lord revealed him*.." and rw-amed
these out of hand.
108
4. Therefore are ire bound to give thanks, to prate,
to laud, to glorify, to extol, to honor, to praise, to
magnify him that hath done for our lathers, and tat
as, all these wonders ; who hath brought as nan
bondage to freedom, from sorrow to rq)olclng, from
mourning to a good day, from darknnm to a great
light, from affliction to redemption; therefore must
we say before him, IbUelujsh, praise ye the Lord . . .
•allowed by Ps. exlil. (Ughtfoot, I. c).
» This r es ervatio n Is made as being a possible
alternative lor explaining the difference* between the
three first Gospels and 8t John.
Digitized by
Google
1682
LORDS 8TTPPBE
(be disciples a now aigniftfanm. It may not bare
assumed indeed, u yet, the character of a distinct
liturgical act; but when they met to break bread,
it was with new thought* and hopes, and with the
memories of that evening fresh on them. It would
be natural that the Twelve should -transmit the
command to others who had not been present, and
seek to lead them to the same obedience and the
same blessings. The narrative of the two disciples
to whom their Lord made himself known "in
breaking of bread" at Emmaus (Lukexxiv. 30-36)
would strengthen the belief that this was the way
to an abiding fellowship with Him.'
II. In the account given by the writer of the
Acts of the life of the first disciples at Jerusalem, a
prominent place is given to this act, and to the
phrase which indicated it Writing, we must re-
member, with the definite associations that had
gathered round the words during the thirty years
that followed the event* he records, he describes the
oaptized members of the Church as continuing
steadfast in or to the teaching of the Apostles, in
fellowship with them and with each other, 6 and in
breaking of bread and in prayers (Acta ii. 42). A
fiiw verses further on, their daily life is described
as ranging itself under two heads: (1) that of
public devotion, which still belonged to them as
Jews ("continuing daily with one accord in the
Temple "); (S) that of their distinctive act* of
fellowship " breaking bread from bouse to bouse (or
"privately," Meyer), they did eat their meat in
gladness and singleness of heart, praising God, and
having favor with all the people." Taken in con-
nection with the account given in the preceding
verses of the love which made them live as having
all things common, we can scarcely doubt that this
implies that the chief actual meal of each day was
one in which they met as brothers, and which was
cither preceded or followed by the more solemn
commemorative acts of the breaking of the bread
and the drinking of the cup. It will be oonreniant
to anticipate the language and the thoughts of a
somewhat later data, and to say that, apparently,
they thus united every day the Agape* or feast of
Love with the celebration of the Eucharist. So
far as the former was concerned, they were repro-
ducing in the street* of Jerusalem the simple and
a The general eonssosas of patristic and
Cathotto Interpreter! finds la this also a solemn cele-
bration of the Kucharlst Hers, they say, ar* the
solemn benediction, and tbs technical words for the
distribution of tha elements as In th* original Institu-
tion, and as In th* later notices of tha Acts. It should
be remembered, however, that the- phrase " to break
enad" had been a synonym for the set of any one
sraalduig at a meal (camp. Jar. zvi. 7, lam Iv. 4), and
that the rabbinic rule required a blearing whenever
three persons sat down together at It (Camp. Uel-
doastus and Meyer, ad toe.)
h The meaning of inuwia In this peerage Is prob-
ably explained by the (Igor inm ewe that follow!
(conip. Meyer, ad tee.). The Vulg. rendering, "*t
eommnnicatione fractionls penis," originated probably
at a wish to give to the word Its later liturgical senae.
c The /act la traceable to the earliest daya of the
Church. The origin of the name la obscure. It oeours
o this senae only In two peasegaa of the N. T, 8 Pot
A 18, Jude var. 12 ; and there the muting (though sap-
ported by B and other great MSS.) is not undisputed
The absence of any nakmoa to It In Bt Paul's mem-
arable chapter on 'Ay»*4 (1 Cor. xtU.) makes it fan-
it If. was ithaa and there In ass. In the
LORDS SUPPER
brotherly life which the Essenes were leedh*; k>
their seclusion on the shores of the Dead Sea.* It
would be Datura! that in a society consisting of
many thonssnd members there should be many
places of meeting. These might be rooms hired
for the purpose, or freely given by those members
of the Church who had them to dispose of. Tha
congregation assembling in each place would come
to be known as " the Church " in thai or that
man's house (Rom. xvL 6,-83; 1 Oar. xvi. 19; CoL
iv. IS; Philem. ver. 8). When they met, the place
of honor would naturally be taken by one of the
Apostles, or some elder representing him. It woald
belong to him to pronounce the blessing (ttkaytm)
and thanksgiving (tixapurrla), with winch tint
mena) of devout Jews always began and ended. The)
materia ls for tha meal would be provided out of th*
common funds of the Church, or the liberality of
individual members. The bread (unless the con-
verted Jews were to think of themselves as keeping
a perpetual paasover) would be such as they habit-
ually used. The wine (probably the common red
wine of Palestine, l"rov. xxiii. 81) would, according
to their usual practice, be mixed with water.
Special stress would probably be laid at first on the
office of breaking and distributing the bread, aa
that which represented the fatherly relation of the
pastor to his flock, and his work aa ministering to
men the word of life. But if tbie was to be more
than a common meal after the pattern of the
Fssoncs, it would be necessary to introduce word*)
that would show that what was done was in remem-
brance of their Master. At some time, before or
after « the meal of which they partook as snch, the
bread and the wine would be given with sons
special form of word* or seta, to indicate it* char-
acter. New convert* would need some explanation
of the meaning and origin of the observance.
What would be so fitting and so much in harmony
with the precedents of the Paschal feast as the
narrative of what bsd passed on the night of its
institution (1 Cor. xi. 88-37)? With this then
would naturally be associated (aa in Acts ii 48)
prayers for themselves and others. Their gladness
would show itself in the psalms and hymns with
which they praised God (Acts ii. 46, 47; James
18). The analogy of the Passover, the general
age after the Apostles, however, It la a earreetly ac-
cepted word for the meal her* deserlbed (Ignat. a>.
ad Smsr*. e. 8; Tertull. .Aval. e. 89, aa" Marc «. 2;
Cyprian, Tatim. ad Quirts, lit 8).
d The account given by Josaphus (5VU. Jud. U. S,
deserves to be atodled, both as coming tram an eye-
witness ( fiat, e. 8), and as showing a type of holiness
which could hardly have been unknown to the first
Christian disciples. The description of the meals of
the Eaten*! might almost pass for that of an agape.
" They wash themselves with pur* water, and go to
their refectory as to a holy place |r«mi), and art
down calmly The priest begins with a prayer
over tbs food, sod It Is unlawful for any on* to teste
of it before the prayer." This Is the early meat Thai
fairvor la In the asms order (camp. Pliny, JBe. an)
rray.i.
e Examples of both are found In the history of the
early Church ; 1 Cor. xi. la an simple of the J rapt
oomtng before the Bocharist The order of tha twt
words In Ignat BpiMt. ad Any*, a. 4 fanphr* priori*)
Tha prsctJcs eonttnord In eons parts of Bgypteven t»
the tune of Soaamen (Hi*. Bed. vtt e, 19), ana) the
rale of the Council of Carthage (can. ill ) I
it Implies that it had been customary.
Digitized by
Google
liOBD'S 8UPPEB
hexing of the Jews, and the practice of the Eseeoee
may possibly have suggested ablutions, partial or
entire, aa a preparation far the fait (Heb. i. 88;
John xiii. 1-16; oomp. TertnU. aie Oral. e. zi.;
wd lor the later practiee of the Church, August.
Utrrn. ccxliv.). At some point in the feast those
who wen present, men anil women sitting apart,
would rise to salute each other with the "holy
Um" (1 Cor. xvi. 90; 3 Cor. xiii. 18; Clem. Alex.
Pmlayog. iii. c 11; TertulL as OraL e. 14; Just.
M. ApuL ii.). Uf the stages in the growth of thn
new worship we hare, it is true, no direct evidence,
but these conjectures from antecedent likelihood are
eonnrmed bj the nut that this order appears as the
i~— ~— element of all later liturgies.
The next traces that meet us are in 1 Cor., and
the fact that we find them is in itself significant.
The commemorative feast hss not been confined to
the personal disciples of Christ, or the Jewish con-
verts whom they gathered round them at Jeru-
salem. It has been the law of the Church's expan
linn that this should form part of its life every
where. Wherever the Apostles or their delegates
have gone, they hare taken this with them. The
language of St. Paul, we must remember, is not
that of a man who a setting forth s new truth,
but of one who appeals to thoughts, words, phrases
that are familiar to his readers, and we find seoord-
ingiy evidence of a received liturgical terminology.
The title of the " cup of blessing " (1 Cor. x. IB),
Hebrew in its origin and form (see above), has been
imported into the Greek Church. The synonym
of «' the cup of the Lord " (1 Cor. x. 81) distin-
guishes it from the other oups that belonged to the
Agape. The word -'fellowship" (Kwiwrla) is
patting by degrees into the special signification of
"Commuuion." The Apostle refers to his own office
u breaking the bread and bleating the cup (1 Cor.
x. 16). a The table on which the bread was placed
was the Lord's Table, and that title was to the
i Jew not, ss later controversies have made It, the
antithesis of altar (eve-ioer^eiav), but as nearly
as possible a synonym (Mai. i. 7, 18; Ex. xli. 88).
But the practice of the Agape, as well as the ob-
servance of the commemorative feast, had been
transferred to Corinth, and this called for a special
notice. Evils had sprung up which bad to be
checked at once. The meeting of friends for a
social meal, to which all contributed, was a suffl-
liently familiar practiee in the common lift of
Breaks of this period; and these club-feasts were
■wi"**"* with plans of mutual relief or charity to
the poor (oomp. Smith's Oietionnry of Antiquititi,
a. t. loom). The Agape of the new society
woold seem to them to be such a feast, and henoe
earns a disorder that altogether frustrated the object
of the Church in instituting it. Richer members
bringing their supper with them, or eppro-
JLOBDS 8TJPFEB
1688
priating what belonged to the common stock, and
sat down to eonsume it without waiting till others
were assembled and the presiding elder bad taken
hia place. The poor were put to shame, and de-
frauded of their share in the feast. Each was
thinking of hia own supper, not of that to which
we now find attached the distinguishing title of
" the Lord's Supper." » And when the time for
that came, one was hungry enough to be looking
to it with physical not spiritual craving, another
so overpowered with wine as to be incapable of receiv-
ing it with any reverence. It is quite conceivable
that a life of excess and excitement, of overwrought
emotion and unrestrained indulgence, such ss this
epistle brings before us, may have proved destructive
to toe physical at well as the moral health of than
who were aflected by it, and so the sicknesses and
the deaths of which St. Paul speaks (1 Cor. xi. 80)
as the consequences of this disorder may have been
so, not by supernatural infliction, but by the work-
ing of those general laws of the divine government,
which make the punishment the traceable conse-
quence of the sin. In any case, what the Corin-
thians needed was, to be taught to come to the
Lord's table with greater reverence, to distinguish
(SiokoImu') the Lord's body from their common
food. Unlets they did so, they would bring upon
themselves condemnation. What was to be the
remedy for this terrible and growing evil be does
not state explicitly. He reserves formal regulations
for a later personal visit. In the mean time he gives
a rule which would make the union of the Agape
and the Lord's Supper possible without the risk of
profanation. They were not to come even to the
former with the keen edge of appetite. They were
to wait till all were met, instead of scrambling
tumultuously to help themselves (1 Cor. xL 38,
34). In one point, however, the custom of the
Church of Corinth differed apparently from that
of Jerusalem. The meeting for the Lord's Supper
was no longer daily (1 Cor. xi. 80, 33). Ins
directions given in 1 Cor. xvi. 8, suggest the
constitution of a celebration ou the first day of
the week (oomp. Just. Mart. ApoL i. 67; Pliny,
Ep. ad Traj.). The meeting at Trots is on the
same day (Acts xx. 7).
The tendency of this language, and therefore
probably of the order subsequently esta bl is h ed, was
to separate what had hitherto been united.* We
stand as it were at the dividing point of the history
of the two institutions, and henceforth each takes its
own oourse. One, as belonging to a transient pha se
of the Christian life, and varying in its effects with
changes in national character or forms of dviilse-
tit-n, passes through many stages * — becomes mote
and more a merely local custom — is found to be
productive of evil rather than of good — is dis-
couraged by bishops and forbidden by councils —
■» The plural i >J t — hat been undarttood as lmpl--
fcut that the congregation took part in the act c*
Breaking (Stanley, Uorinthlans ; sod tatius aJ tot. I
It may us questioned, however, whether th>« Is sunV
tient ground for an interpretation (or whlob then is
no support either In the analogous custom of the Jews
w la the tnvtttlons of the Church. The ivAoyevpo-,
which stands parallel to afcafur, can hardly be referred
a> the whets body of partakers. Vhen tb* set h
lawrlbed hietorleally, the lingular Is alwe»« used
Arts xx. 11, xxrli. 86). Tartulllao, In the paaaage to
vhJeb Prat Stanley refers, spaas* of the other practice
(" nee de euornm quam pnetldeottam menlbne," eh
Car. Hit. e. 8) as an old tradition, not as s change.
• The word ircsicali appears to have been coined fee
the purposs of crprcectng the new thought.
e It has been lngerdously contended that the change
from evening to morning wss the dvttt result of 8s.
Paul's Intel poataoa (Ob-iafim Stm u mtramctr, art. ea
« Branlng Commrmtcins," July, 1880).
<* That presented by the Council of Oangra(eeo. xL
it ns H oca h ls ss an attempt to prsssi le the primMvt
custom of an Agape In church against the assaults of
Digitized by
Google
1684 LORD'S SUPPER.
end finally die* out. Trice* of it linger in tome
sf the traditional practice! of the Weatero Church.*'
There haTe been attempt* to revive it among the
Morariana and other religion communities. The
ether alio liat it change*. The morning celebration
takes the plaee of the evening. New namee —
Eucharist, Sacrifice, Altar, Mats, Holy Mysteries —
gather round it New epithets and new ceremonies
express the growing reverence of the people. The
mode of celebration at the high altar of a basilica
in the Mb century differs so widely from the cir-
cumstances of the original institution, that a care-
less eye wo-ild hare found it hard to recognize their
Identity. Speculations, controversies, superstitions
crystallise round this as their nucleus. Great dis-
ruptions and changes threatwi to destroy the life
and unity of the Church. Still, through all the
changes, the Supper of the Lord vindicates it* claim
to universality, aud bears a permanent witness of
the truths with which it was associated.
In Acts xx. 11 we have an example of the way
in which the transition may have been effected.
The disciples at Troas meet together to break bread.
The hour is not definitely stated, but the fact that
St. Paul's discourse was protracted till past mid-
night, and the mention of the many lamps, indicate
a later time than that commonly fixed for the Greek
ttinroy. If we are not to suppose a scene at
variance with St. Paul's rule in 1 Cor. xi. 34, they
must hare had each his own supper before tbey as-
sembled. Then came the teaching and the prayers,
and then, towards early dawn, the breaking of bread,
which constituted the Lord's Supper, and for whieh
they were gathered together. If this midnight
meeting may be taken as indicating a common prac-
tice, originating in reverence for an ordinance which
Christ had enjoined, we can easily understand how
the next step would be (as circumstances rendered
the midnight gatherings unnecessary or inexpedient )
to transfer the oelebration of toe Eucharist perma-
nently to the morning hour, to whieh it had grad-
ually been approximating.^ Here also in later
times there were traces of the original custom.
Even when a later oelebration was looked on ss at
variance with the general custom of the Church
(Sozomen, supra), it was recognized as legitimate
to hold an evening communion, a* a special com-
memoration of the original institution, on the
Thursday before Easter (August. Mp. p. 118; ad
Jan. a. 0-7); and again on Easter-eve, the celebra-
tion in tho latter case probably taking place " very
early in the morning while it was yet dark" (TertnlL
ad Uxor. ii. c. 4).
The recurrence of the same liturgical words in
Act* xxrii. 85 makes it probable, though not cer-
tain, that the food of which St. Paul thus partook
LOT
was intended to have, for himself and bis Chrlstfcm
companions, the character at ones of the Agant
and the Eucharist. The heathen soldiers and
sailors, it may be noticed, are said to have fol i a p u d
his example, not to have partaken of the bread
which he had broken. If we adopt this explana-
tion, we have in this narrative another example of
a oelebration in the early hours between midnight
and dawn (oomp. w. 87, 89), at the same time, i. *-,
as we have met with in the meeting at Troas.
All the distinct references to the Lord's Supper
which occur within the limits of the N. T. hare,
it is believed, been noticed. To find, as a recent
writer has done (Christian JSememiraneer far
April, 1860), quotations from the Liturgy of the
Eastern Church in the Pauline Epistles, imchee
(ingeniously as the hypothesis is supported) assump-
tions too many and too bold to justify our accept-
ance of if Extending the inquiry, however, to
the times a* well as the writings of the N. T., w»
find reason to believe that we can trace in the later
worship of the Church soma fragments of that
which belonged to it from the beginning. The
agreement of the four great families of liturgies
implies the substratum of a common order. To
that order may well have belonged the Hebrew
words Hallelujah, Amen, Hosanna, Lord of Sa-
baoth; the salutations » Peace to all," » Peace to
thee; " the Sursum Corda (if a ax&/ur rat «•*-
Slat), the Trisagion, the Kyrie Efcison. We are
justified in looking at these as baring been portion*
of a liturgy that was really primitive; guarded Cram
change with the tenacity with which the Christians
of the second century clung to the traditions (the
mpatiatit of 2 These, ii. 18, iii. 6) of the first,
forming part of the great deposit {mpwurraHflci))
of faith and worship which they had received from
the Apostles and hare transmitted to later ages
(oomp. Bingham, Ecdu. Anliq. b. xr. c. 7;
August!, ChruU. ArchaoL b. ruL; Stanley on 1
Cor. x. and xL). £. H. p.
LO-BU / HAMAH (H^iTI eft: oi*
^KauUrti'- aSjue miserieortSa), 1. e. "the un-
compsssionated," the name of the daughter of
Hoaea the prophet, given to denote the utterly
ruined and hopeless condition of the kingdom of
Israel, on whom Jehovah would no more bar*
mercy (Ho*. L 6, 8).
LOT (EH 1 ? [a ottering, vtU\: AeV; Joseph.
Astros, and so Yeneto-Graek Yen.: Lot), the son
of Haran, and therefor* the nephew of Abraham
(Gen. xi. 87, 81). His sisters were Hilcah tot
wife of Nahor, and IacutH, by some identified with
Sarah. The following genealogy exhibits the family
« The history of tba Agape), to their connection with
tbe lift of the Church, Ii roll of Interest, but would
be out of place here. An outline of It may be found
in August!, CkrM. Ardtaol. is). 701-711.
t> The practice of distributing bread, whieh has been
b ia sse d but not oonsscrated, to the congregation gen-
erally (childmn founded), at the greater festivals of
the Church, presents a vestige, or at least an analogue,
if tbe old Agape liturgical writers refer It to the
period (A. s. 168 886) when the earlier prectios was
foiling Into disuse, and this taking Its place as the
wprsastnn of the earns feeling. The bread thus dis-
■umtad Is known In the Saltan Church ae liAoyb,
ks the HuoUrn as the pami Ouucfietvi, the « pain
teal " of tho modern French Church The
Is still common in France and other parts of 1
(Comp. Moroni, Dixionar. Ecdaj Pascal, litmg.
OuhoL, in kugne's Hup. HWot, a v. "Zalogle.")
e Oomp. the " antelucanls eeetlbai " of Tertall. (eh
dor. AM. c. 8). The amalgamation in the ritual of the
monastic orders, of the Nocturne, and Matin-Lands,
Into the single office of statins, presents an Instance
of an analogous transition (Palmer, Orig. titurf. L
SOS).
«" 1 Cor. H. 8, eompared with tbe l ou ui n u oa of the
earn* words in the Liturgy with an antecedent ae sat
relative which appeals In the epistle without one, b
the passage on which most street is laid. 1 Pat, H. M
and Boh. r. 14, ant adduced as farther t
Digitized by
Google
LOT
LOT
168A
■ajar • Abeam -I
I -wife Mueah-
area Jacob Bebekah
r n
Ban died Mm the amlgratixi of Terah and his
haaHy from Ur of the CbaUeet (rer. 88), and Lot
was therefore born then. He removed with the
rest of hie kindred to Charan, end (gain subee-
eaently with Abrun ud Sarei to Canaan (zii.
4, 6). With them he took refuge in Egypt from
a lamina, and with them returned, first tn the
*' South " (xiii. 1), and then to their original settle-
ment between Bethel and Ai (tt. 8, 4), where
Abrem had built his first altar (xiii. 4; oomp. xii.
7), and invoked on It the name of Jeborah. But
the pastures of the hiSs of Bethel, which had with
esse contained the two strangers on their first
arrival, were not able any longer to bear them, so
much had their possessions of sheep, goats, and
cattle increased since that time. It was not any
disagreement between Abrun and Lot — their rela-
tione continued good to the last; but between the
slaves who tended their countless herds disputed
arose, and a parting was nueuinry. The exact
equality with which Abrem treats Lot is rery re-
markable. It is as if they were really, according
to the rery ancient Idiom of these records (Evrald
on Gen. xxxi.), " brethren, - ' instead of uncle and
nephew. From some one of the round swelling
hills which surround Bethel — from none more
nkdy than that which stands immediately on its
east [BrrHKL, voL i.] — the two Hebrews looked
over the comparatively empty land, In the direction
of Sodom, Gomorrah, and Zoar (xiii. 10). "The
occasion was to the two lords of Palestine — then
almost ' free before them where to choose ' — what
m Grecian legends la represented under the figure
af the Choice of Hercules; in the tables of Islam
under the story of the Prophet turning hack from
Damascus." And Lot lifted up his eyes towards
the left, and beheld all the precinct of the Jordan
that it was well watered everywh ere; like a garden
af Jehovah ; tike that unutterably green and fertile
land of Egypt he had only lately quitted. Even
from that distance, through the clear air of Paha
tine, can be distinctly discovered the long and thick
passes of vegetation which fringe the numerous
-treatns that descend from the hills on either side,
io meet the central stream in lta tropical depths.
And what it now is immediately opposite Bethel,
■uab U seems then to have been " even to Zoar,"
to toe farthest extremity of the sea which now
soventhe « valley of the fields*" — the fields of
Sodom and Gomorrah. •• No crust of suit, no vol-
aanic convulsions, had as yet blasted its verdure, or
darmed the secure civilisation of the early Phoeni-
cian settlements which had struck root In lta fertik
depths." It was exactly the prospect to tempt a
man who had no fixed purpose of his own, who had
not like Abrem obeyed a stern inward call of duty.
So Lot left his uncle on the barren hills of Bethel,
and he " chose all the precinct of the Jordan, and
journeyed east," down the ravines which give access
to the Jordan Valley; and then when he reached it
turned again southward and advanced as far u
Sodom (11, IS). Here he •• pitched his tent," for
he was still a nomad. But his nomad lift) was
virtually at an end. He was now to relinquish the
freedom and Independence of the simple lira of the
tent — a mode of life destined to be one of the great
methods of educating the descendants of Abrem —
and encounter the corruptions which seem always
to have attended the life of cities in the East —
the men of Sodom were wicked, and sinners be-
fore Jehovah exceedingly."
8. The next occurrence in the life of Lot is hb
capture by the four kings of the East, and his
rescue by Abrem (Gen. xiv.). Whatever may be
the age of this chapter In relation to those before
and after it, there is no doubt that as far as the
history of Lot is concerned, it is In its right posi-
tion in the narrative. The events which It nar-
rates must have occurred after those of eh. xiii.,
and before those of xviii. and xix. Abrem has
moved further south, and is living under the oaks
of Mature the Amorito, where he remained till the
destruction of Sodom. There is little in It which
calls for remark here. The term "brother" is
once used (ver. 16) for Lot's relation to Abrem
(but comp. ver. 12, "brother's son "); and a word
is employed for the possessions of Lot (ver. 11,
A. V. "goods"), which, from its being elsewhere
in these early records (xrrl. 8; Num. xxxv. 3) dis-
tinguished from " cattle," and employed specially
for the spoil of Sodom and Gomorrah, may perhaps
denote- that Lot had exchanged the wealth of his
pastoral condition for other possessions more pecu-
liar to bis new abode. Women are also named
(ver. 16), though these may belong to the people
of Sodom.
8. The last seene preserved to us in the history
of Lot is too well known to need repetition. He is
still living in Sodom (Gen. xix.). Some years hare
passed, for he is a well-known resident in the town,
with wife, sons, and daughters, married and mar-
riageable. But In the midst of the licentious cor-
ruption of Sodom — the eating and drinking, tin
buying and setting, the planting and building (Luke
a Tenth's sons are given above in the order m terms, seem •a show that Haran was the ekken of
*aleh Our oeeur In the rsoord (Oeo. m. 8T-81). Be* I Tenth's three dawsndants, and Abrem the youagast.
Dm facta that Manor and Isaac (and h* bosh b* Sam,
•seam also) married wives not of their own generation,
sat of the next below them, and the Abrem and Lot
sd sehave as af eaarxlr en eaaal
It would be a parallel to the earn of Sham, Ham, sad
Jephet, where Japhet was reaUy the eldest, rhewe>
•nnmeretad last. [Asaasua, vol L p. 18, note eVl
» "Talks; af Mldha •'— ttddtm - Brie*
Digitized by
Google
1686
LOT
tvH. 38), and >t tin darker evils exposed In the
ancient narrative — he still preserves some of the
delightful characteristics of his wandering lift, his
fervent and chivalrous hospitality (xix. 2, 8), the
unleavened bread of the tent of the wilderness (ver.
3), the water for the feet of the wayfarers (ver. 8),
aflbrding his guests a recep t ion identical with that
which they had experienced that very morning in
Abraham's tent on the bright* of Hebron (comp.
xviii. 3, 6). It is this hospitality which receives
the commendation of the author of the Epistle to
the Hebrews in words which have passed into a
familiar proverb, " be not forgetful to entertain
strangers, for thereby some have entertained angels «
unawares " (Heb. xdil. 2). On the other hand, it
Is his deliverance from the guilty and condemned
dty — the one just i man in that mob of sensual
lawless wretches — which points the allusion of St
Peter, to " the godly delivered out of temptations,
the unjust reserved unto the day of judgment to be
punished, an ensample to those that after should
live ungodly " (2 Pet ii. 6-9). Where Zoab was
situated, in which he found a temporary refuge
during the destruction of the other cities of the
plain, we do not know with absolute certainty. If,
as is most probable, it was at the mouth of Wadg
Kerak (Rob. U. 188, 517), then by " the mountain "
is meant the very elevated ground east of the Dead
Sea. If with De Saulcy we place it in u-Zouara,
en the precipitous descent from Hebron, "the
mountain " was the high ground of Judah. Either
would afford caves for his subsequent dwelling.
The former situation — on the eastern side of the
Dead Sea, has in its favor the fact that it is in
accordance with the position subsequently occupied
by the Ammonites and Moabitea. But this will
be best examined under Zoar.
The end of Lot's wife c is commonly treated as
one of the "difficulties" of the Bible. But it
surely need not be so. It cannot be necessary, as
some have done, to create the details of the story
where none are given — to describe " the unhappy
woman struck dead " — "a blackened corpse —
smothered and stiffened as she stood, and fixed for
the time to the soil by saline or bituminous in-
crustations — like a pillar of salt" On these points
the record is silent Its words are simply these:
" His wife looked back from behind him, 1 * and
became a pillar of salt; " — words which neither
In themselves nor in their position in the narrative
afford any warrant for such speculations. In fact,
when taken with what has gone before, they con-
tradict them, for it seems plain, from w. 32, 33,
LOT
that the work of destruction by fire did not seen
mence till after Lot had entered Zoar. But this,
like the rest of her fate, is left in mystery.'
The value and the significance of the story to us
are contained in the allusion of Christ (Luke xvii
82): " In that day be that is in the field let him
not return back: remember Lot's wife," who did.
" Whosoever shall seek to save his lift shall lose it"
It will be observed that there is no attempt in the
narrative to invest the circumstance with perma-
nence; no statement — as in the case of the pillar
erected over Rachel's grave (xxxv. 20) — that it
was to be seen at the time of the compilation of the
history. And in this we surely have a remarkable
instance of that sobriety which characterises Ik*
statements of Scripture, even where the events nar-
rated are most out of the ordinary course.
Later ages have not been satisfied so to leave the
matter, but have insisted on identifying the " rn>
lar " with some one of the fleeting forms which the
perishable rock of the south end of the Dead Sea is
constantly assuming in its process of decom p osition
and liquefaction (Anderson's Off. JVorr. pp. 180,
181). The first allusion of this kind is perhaps that
in Wiad. x. 7, where " a standing pillar of salt, the
monument («riKu!w| of an unbelieving soul," is
mentioned with the " waste land that smoketh,"
and the " plants bearing fruit that never come to
ripeness," as remaining to that day, a testimony to
the wickedness of Sodom. Josephus also (Ant. i.
11, § 4) says that be had seen it, and that It was
then remaining. So too do Clemens Romanus and
Irenseus (quoted by Kitto, Cgd. "Lot")S So
does Benjamin of Tudela, whose account is men
than usually circumstantial (cd. Aaber, i. TOM
And so doubtless have travellers in every age —
they certainly have in our own times. See Maund-
rell, March 30; Lynch, Report, p. 18; and Ander-
son's Off. Mimdict, 181, where an account is
given of a pillar or spur standing; out detached from
the general mass of the Jebtl Utdim, about 40 feet
in height, and which was recognised by the saQori
of the expedition as " Lot's wife."
The story of the origin of the nations of Moab
and Amnion from the incestuous intercourse be-
tween Lot and his two daughters, with which his
history abruptly concludes, has been often treated
as if it were a Hebrew legend which owed its origin
to the bitter hatred existing from the earliest to the
latest times between the "Children of Lot" and
the Children of Israel.* The horrible nature of the
transaction — not the result of impulse or passion,
but a plan calculated and carried out, and that not
« The story of Baucis and Philemon, who unwit-
tingly entertained Jupiter and Mercury (see Diet, of
Bogmpky, etc.), has bean often compared with this.
t> Ainuoc, possibly referring to Gen. xvM. 23-88,
where the LXX employ this word throughout The
rabbinical tradition is that he was actually "Judge"
of Sodom, and late In the gate in that capacity. (Bee
■notations in Otho, Lex. Rait. « both," end " Bod-
unah.")
e In the Jewish traditions her name is Edith —
ITTJ?. One of the daughters was called PluOth —
•YtDV?8. Dee Fabrldns, Cod. Pnmdep. T. T. i. 481.
• LXX., «it ra Maw ; comp. Luke U. 62, Phil. Hi.
It
• • A very rational explawtkm may be that tits wife
3t lot, ea she lingered on the way in her reluctance to
■awe Sodom, was overtaken by the storm, and, like
the victims of many a stmflar catastrophe, was saffc-
cated by the sulphurous smoke or killed by lightning.
The body would He where it Ml, and in such a region
would soon be toerna tsd with salt Blacks of sett
abound there at present and Illustrate this fete of the
unhappy woman. (See Bob. BM. Ma. II. 488, end
Tristram, Land of Imet, p. 884, 2d so.) « It Is not
said," as Or. Conent remarks, « that she was changes
into that substance, but, Incruated with It, she became
' a pillar of salt' » (Soot of Omens, etc, p. ».)
H.
/ See the quotations from the lathers and others la
Hoftnsnu's Uriam (s. v. " Lot "), and to aOalln, Utmx
Bantu (Hi. 224).
r Rabbi Petechia, en the other hand, looked far ■
but " did not see It ; H no longer exists » (H. Bssdsra,
«)•
* SteTueh, (tawrfs, 889. Von Bohlen ascribes VK
to the letter part of the reign of Josh*.
Digitized by
Google
LOT
•nea but twin, would prompt the with that the
legendary theory wen true." But e*en the moot
d es tr uctive critics (ss, for instance, Tach) allow
that the narrative U a continuation without a
break of that which preoedee it, while they foil to
point out any marks of later date in the language
af this portion ; and it cannot be questioned that
the writer records it as an historical bet
Even if the legendary theory were admissible,
there is no doubt of the fact that Amnion and Moab
■prang from Lot. It is affirmed in the statements
of Deut ii 9 and 19, as well as in the later doc-
ument of Pa. lxxxiiL 8, which Ewald ascribes to
the time when Nehemiah and his newly-returned
colony were suffering from the attacks and obstruc-
tions of Tobiah the Ammonite and Sanballat the
lioronite (Ewald, Dithter, Pa. 83).
The Mohammedan traditions of Lot are contained
in the Koran, chiefly in cc. vii sod xi. ; others are
giren by D'Herbelot (*. e. •• Loth "). According
to these s tatemen ts he was sent to the inhabitants
of the fire cities as a preacher, to warn them against
the unnatural and horrible sins which they prac-
ticed — sins which Mohammed is continually de-
nouncing, but with less success than that of
drunkenness, since the former is perhaps the most
common, the latter the rarest rice, of Eastern
cities. From Lot's connection with the inhabitants
of Sodom, his name is now giren not only to the
rice in question (Freytag, Ltzicon, iv. 136a), but
also to the people of the fire cities themselves — the
Lotfi, or Kn&m Loth. The local name of the Dead
Sea is Bohr IM — Sea of Lot. O.
LOT. The custom of deciding doubtful ques-
tions by lot is one of great extent and high antiquity,
recommending itself as a sort of appeal to tbe Al-
mighty, secure from all influence of passion or bias,
and is a sort of dirination employed eren by the
gods themeelvea (Horn. 11 zxii. 309; Cio. it Dw.
i. 34, ii. 41). The word sors is thus used for an
oracular response (Cic fle Die. ii. 60). [Diviba-
non.] Among heathen instances the following
may be cited: 1. Choice of a champion or of
priority in combat (li iil. 318, rii. 171; Her. iii.
108). 2. Decision of fete in battle (JL xx. 209).
3. Appointment of magistrates, jurymen, or other
functionaries (Arist. Pol. iv. 16 ; SchoL On Aru-
topk. Plus. 977; Her. ri. 109; Xen. Cgr. It. 5, AS;
Demosth. c Arutog. i. 778, 1; Diet, of Antiq.
"Dieestes"). 4. Priests (jSsch. m Tim. p. 188,
Bekk.). 5. A German practice of deciding by
marks on twigs, mentioned by Tacitus (Germ. 10).
6. Dirision of conquered or colonized land (Thus,
iii 50; Plut Perid. 84; Boeckb, Pub. Aeon.?/
Alh. ii. 170).
Among the Jews also the use of lots, with a
religious intention, direct or indirect, prevailed ex-
tensively. The religious estimate of them may
be gathered from Prov. xri. 33. The foueVng
historical or ritual instances correspond in moat
■aspects to those of a heathen kind mentioned
bore .• —
1. Choice of men (or an Invading force (Jodg-
8, xx. 9).
9. Partition, («) of the soil of Palestine among
.•a tribes (Num. xxvi. 66; Josh, xriii. t •• Acts
tttl. 19)i (») of Jerusalem; i. «. probably it* spoil
LOT
1087
• forth* trattr lecand of the lepsalanas at uX,
■4 of the trsa which he planted, which, being oaf.
ess for sec In toe building of tbe Tsmpls, was elesr-
or captives among captors (Obad. 11); of the land
itself in a similar way (1 Mace, iii 38). (e.; After
the return from captivity, Jerusalem was populated
by inhabitants drawn by lot in the proportion of
JL of the tribes of Judah and Benjamin (Nth. xi
I, 8; see Ps. xvL 6, 6, Ex. xxiv. 0). (<*.) Appor
tionment of possessions, or spoil, or of prisoners,
to foreigners or captors (Joel iii. 8; Nah. iii. 10,
Matt, xxvii. 36).
8. (a.) Settlement of doubtful questions (Prov.
xvi 33, where " lap " is perhaps =um; xvili. 18).
(A.) A mode of divination among heathens by means
of arrows, two inscribed, and one without mark,
/SsAoporrsfa (Hot. iv. 13; Ex. xxi 81; Mauritius,
de SotHtiont, c 14, $ 4; see also Esth. iii. 7, ix.
84-82; Mishna, Taanlk, ii 10). [Dituatiob)
Pubim.] (c.) Detection of a criminal, as in tbe
case of Achan (Josh. rii. 14, 18). A notion pre-
vailed among the Jews that this detection was per-
formed by observing the shining of the stones hi
tbe high-priest's breastplate (Mauritius, c 21, { 4).
Jonathan was discovered by lot (1 Sam. xiv. 41,
48). (a*.) Appointment of persons to offices or
duties. Soul (1 Sam. x. 80, 21), said to have been
chosen ss above in Aeban's ease. St Matthias, to
replace Judas among the Twelve (Acts i. 24-36).
Distribution of priestly offices in the Temple-service
among the sixteen of tbe family of Eleasar, and the
eight of that of Ithamar (1 Chr. xxiv. 8, 6, 19;
Luke 1. 9). Also of tbe Levites for similar purposes
(1 Chr. xxiii 38, xxiv. 30-41, xxv. 8, xxvi. 13;
Mishna, Tnmid, i. 2, iii. 1, v. 3; Joma, ii. 2, 3, 4;
Shatb. xxiii. 3; Lightfbut, Hot. Btbr. in Luke L
8, 9, vol ii. p. 489).
Election by lot appears to have prevailed in the
Christian Church as late as the 7th century (Bing-
ham, Hccta. Antig. iv. 1, 1, vol. i. p. 436; Brans,
Cone. U. 66).
(r. ) Selection of the scape-goat on tbe Day of
Atonement (Lev. xvi. 8, 10). Tbe two inscribed
tablets of boxwood, afterwards of gold, were put
into an urn, which was shaken, and tbe iota
drawn out (Joma, iii. 9, iv. 1). [Atuhembst,
Dat OP.]
4. The use of words heard or passages chosen at
random from Scripture, Bortt* Bibiiccr, like the
Sorta Viigilumm, prevailed among Jews, as they
have also among Christians, though deno'inced by
several Councils (Diet, of Antiq. " Sortee; " John-
eon, "Life of Cowley," Work*, ix. 8; Bingham,
Ecd. Ant xvi 6, 3, id. vi. 63, Ac.; Brans, Cbac.
ii 146-64, 166; Mauritius, ch. 16; Hermann, Lac.
« Sortee "). 11. W. P.
• In Prov. xvi 88 (see no. 8 (a) above), "lap"
la the true rendering, and then is no reference to
an •' urn." In such a proverbial allneion or ex-
pression, we should expect to And, of course, the
earliest and simplest, as well ss tbe readiest, mode
of using the kit The » lap " (or bosom of tbe
outer garment) was a convenient receptacle, always
at hand, into which the fete could be east, and
thence drawn forth. •• Oast into the lap " was.
*herefore, the most suitable form of expression for
a proverbial saying, the idea of which originated in
the eartieet and rudest stage of society, and was
acted on under all d Tc uiu sta n ccs. In tbe mere
forms! and official use of the lot (as in Lev. xvi 8
wards smplnvf-'l for
r. t., l
CM
Digitized by
Google
1688 LOTAN
Josh, zriii. 6) whan every convenience ni at bind,
• vessel in the shape of an urn waa likely to be
nnd, though there I* no slluiion to this in the
Scripture*.
The Heb. word pTt («l»p," or "bosom," of the
ferment), ii used metaphorically of > similar recep-
tacle in any other object only in connection with the
name of the object itself; u in 1 Kings xxiL 90,
« into the boaom (hollow) of the chariot " (A. T.
« midst of '•), and in En*, xliil. 18, 14, IT, in the
ideal description of the altar.
"To out lota" (Lev. in. 18; Joah. xvili. «)
means to employ them in the decision of any mat-
ter. This was done by easting them into some
oenvenicut receptacle, from which they were drawn
forth. Hence the phrase, " the lot came forth "
(or " ont "), Josh. xix. 1, 17, 94, 88, 40, 1 Chron.
xxir. 7; and also, "toe lot came up," Josh. xiz.
10, the lot being drawn up from the bottom of the
receptacle. In 1 Chron. xxvi. 14 la (band the full
expression, '< they oast lots, and bis lot came out,"
etc.
The phrase, •■ the lot fell upon " (Lot. xvi. 8, 10),
or "fell to" (1 Chron. xxvi. 14), expresses the
result of an appeal to the lot, as coming upon, or
affecting, the person or object concerned. The
full expression occurs in Jonah, i. 7, " they cast
Iota, and the lot Ml upon Jonah."
The suggestion of Ltyrtr (Heraog'a Rcat-En-
cykL art Loom, viii. 489), that the use of the word
"feU " originated from the practice of casting the
lota out of a vessel or the lap, is not consistent with
Frov. xvi. 83, " the lot is cast into the hip."
T. J. C.
LOTAH ()1pV? [cowrnijr]: AardV LoUm\
the eldest son of Seir the Horite, and a "duke"
or chief of his tribe in the land of Edooi (Gen.
nxvU SO, 32, 39; 1 Chr. i. 88, 30).
LOTHASU'BTJS (AatfaVavSor-- Atmrtkat,
Babut), a corruption of Hasiium in Neb. viii. 4,
far which it is not easy to account (1 Esdr. ix. 44).
The Tulg. is a further corruption of the LXX.
LOTS, FEAST OF. [Pram.]
LOVB-FBA8T8 (fryefanu: tpvba, comma:
In this sense used only twice, Jude IS, and 3 Pet.
11. 11, in which Utter place, however, da-oVai is
also read), an entertainment in which the poorer
members of the church partook, furnished from the
contributions of Christiana resorting to the Eucha-
ristic celebration, but whether before or after it
may be doubted. The true account of the matter
is probably that given by Chrysostom, who says
that after the early community of goods had ceased,
the richer members brought to the church contri-
butions of food and drink, of which, after the con-
clusion of the services and the celebration of the
Eucharist, all partook together, by this means help-
ing to promote the principle of love among Chris-
tiana (Horn, in 1 Cor. xt. 19, vol. ill. p. 393, and
Horn, xxvll. in 1 Cor. xl. voL x. p. 881, ed. Gaume).
The Intimate connection, especially in early times,
between the Eucharist itself and the love-feast, has
ad several writers to apeak of them almost as
.dentical. Of those who either take this view, or
•egard the feast as subsequent to the Eucharist,
a n Prouilsenuni at unoxlvm, awed laamn ** (i.
fee entertainment, sorely not the mcrammttm
> desiafs post edfcitum memo " (n>. x. 97).
LTJBIH
may be mentioned Pliny, who snya the Christ lasai
mat and exchanged sacramental pledges againat alt
aorta of immorality; after which they srparatad,
and mat again to partake in an entertainment.*
The same view la taken by Ignatius, ad fiasevm .
ch. 8; TertulL ApoL 89; Clem. Alex. JSrrom. vii.
333 (vol. ii. p. 898), iii. 185 (vol. i. 614), but in
Pad. ii. 61 (voL i. p. 168), be seems to regard
them as distinct; Aptmt. Coast ii. 38. 1: and
besides these, Jerome on 1 Cor. xL ; Theodore* and
(Ecnmenius, quoted by Bingham, who considers
that the Agape was subsequent (Orig. EeeL xr.
6, 7; voL v. p. 884); Hofmann, Lot. "Agapa."
On the other aide may be mentioned Urotina (on
2 Pet. ii. 18, In Crit. Saer.), Suicer (7*«. EeeL
vol. 1. «. «.), Hammond, Whitby, Corn, a Lapkie,
and authorities quoted by Bingham, It* Thai
almost universal custom to receive the Eucharist
fasting proves that in later times the lore-feasts
must have followed, not preceded, the Eucharist
(Soaomen, H. E. vii. 19; Aug. c. FcnuL xx. 80;
Ep. liv. (alias cxvili.); ad Januar. c 6, vol. ii. p.
308, ed. Higne; Cone. Carta, iii. a. d. 897, ch.
39; Brune, Cone. i. p. 137): but the exception of
one day from the general rule (the day called
Coma Domini, or Maunday Thursday), seems to
argue a previously different practice. The low-
feasts were forbidden to be bdd in churches by the
Council of Laodicea, A. o. 330 [863 7], Cone Quin-
isext, A. D. 693, eh. 74, Ab-la-Chapelle, A. d. 816;
but in some form or other they continued to a much
later period. Entertainments at births, deaths, and
marriages were also in use under the names of
agapa nalalilim, nuptialet and/imeroJe*. (Bede,
Hitl. Eccl. Gent. AngL i. 30; Ap. Const, viii. 44.
1; Theodoret, Evang. VeriL viii. pp. 983, 984, ed
Sthulx; Greg. Nat. /jp. 1. 14, and Cam. x- ; Hof-
mann, Lac. I c.) H. W. P.
• LOW COUNTRY <nb5tT), 8 Ckron.
xxvi. 10, Ac [Jodah, p. 1490.] * H.
LO'ZON (Aa(ir: Deden), one of the sons of
Solomon's servants" who returned with Zorobabel
(1 Esdr. v. 83). The name corresponds with Dab-
kojc in the parallel lists of Ear. ii. 66 and Neb.
vii. 68, and the variation may be an error of the
transcriber, which is easily traceable when the
word is written In the uncial character.
LTTBIM (D^V?, 3 Chr. xU. 3, xvi. 8; Nan.
Iii. 9, Q'S^i Dan. xi. 43 (pern, tfirtfj, thence m-
habUnaU of a dry land, Gee.] : AfjSeei: Libya;
except Daniel. Libya [Lybia, Van Ess]), a nation
mentioned as contributing, together with Cuahitea
and Sukkiim, to Shiahak's army (S Chr. iii. 3);
and apparently as forming with Cusbites the bulk
of Zerah's army (xvi. 8), spoken of by Nahnm
(iii. 9) with Put or Phut, as helping No-Amer
(Thebes), of which Cash and Egypt were the
strength; and by Daniel (xi. 43) as paying coot
with the Cnabites to s conqueror of Egypt or the
Egyptians. These particulars indicate an African
nation under tribute to Egypt, if not under Egyp-
tian rule, contributing, in the 10th century B. &.
valuable aid in mercenaries or auxiliaries to the
Egyptian armies, and down to Nahum'a time, ana
a period prophesied of by Daniel, probably tht
s Thsisasjseta akaW
Digitized by
Google
LUBIM
nlgL. of Antioohin Epiphanes [Amtiochm IV.],
assisting, either politically or commercially. *o sus-
tain the Egyptian power, or, in the laU ewe, de-
pendent on it. These indication* do not fix the
ge. graphical poaition of the Lubim, but they favor
thi luppoaition that their territory waa near Egypt,
other to the wett or aouth.
For more precise information we look to the
Egyptian monument*, upon which we find repre-
■citatioua of a people called Rbbu, or Lxbu (K
and L baring no distinction in hieroglyphic*), who
cannot be doubted to correspond to the Lubim.
Theee Rebu were a warlike people, with whom
Menptah (the eon and successor of Barneses II.)
and Kameae* HL, who both ruled in the 18th cen-
tury B. c., waged successful war*. The latter king
routed thein with much slaughter. The Kulpturea
of the great temple he raised at Thebes, now called
that of Medeenet Haboo, give u* repreaentationa of
the Bebu, showing that they were fair, and of what
i* called a Semitic type, like the Berber* and Ka-
byle*. They are distinguished as northern, that is,
m parallel to, or north of, Lower Egypt Of their
being African there can be no reasonable doubt,
and we may assign them to the coast of the Med-
iterranean, commencing not far to the westward of
Egypt We do not find them to have been mer-
cenaries of Egypt from the monuments, but we
know that the kindred Hashawasha-u were so em-
ployed by the Bubastite family, to which Shiahak
and probably Zerah also belonged j and it is not
unlikely that the latter are intended by the Lubim,
used in a more generic sense than Kebu, in the
Biblical mention of the armies of these kings.
(Brugsch, Gtogr. Intchr. ii. 79 ft) We have
already shown that the Lubim are probably the
Mizraite Lxrabik: if so, their so-called Semitic
physical characteristics, as represented on the
Egyptian monuments, afford evidence of great im-
portance for the inquirer into primeval history.
The mention in Manetho's Dynssties that, under
Necherophes, or Necheroohls, the first Memphite
king, and head of the third dynasty (b. c. dr. 9600),
the Libyans revolted from the Egyptians, but re-
turned to their allegiance through fear, on a won-
derful increase of the moon,' may refer to the Lu-
bim, but may as probably relate to some other
African people, perhaps the Naphtuhim, or Phut
(Put).
The historical indication* of the Egyptian monu-
ment* thus lead u* to place the seat of the Lubim,
■x primitive Libyans, on the African coast to the
westward of Egypt, perhaps extending far beyond
the Cyrenaica. From the earliest ages of which
•e have any record, a stream of colonization has
Bowed from the east along the coast of Africa,
aorta of the Great Desert, as far as the Pillars
«f Hercules. The oldest of theee colonists of thi*
region were doubtless the Lubim and kindred
tribes, particularly the Mashawasha-u and Tahen-
nu of the Egyptian monuments, all of which appear
to have ultimately tsken their common name of
Libyans from the Lubim. They seem to have been
fast reduced by the Egyptians about 1860 B. c.,
nd to have been afterward* driven inland by the
* N«x* p M$ q i . . . ty ©J Aifivn AWoraqw Afy**rrim>
• aft TOe^fvavffaaaAeyora<enrst 8tA Wo* savrowt
raastiw (aft. ap. Uorv, Am. *Va» . 2d e*> p. MX.,
liuuiua
168S
Phoenician and Greek colonist*. Now, they stU
remain on the northern oonflnes of the Great Duett,
and even within it, and in the mountains, while
their later Shemite rivals pasture their flock* in the
rich plains. Many as are the Arab tribes of Africa,
oue great tribe, that of the Benee 'Alee, extends
from Egypt to Morocco, illustrating the probable
extent of the territory of the Lubiin and their cog-
nates. It is possible that in Esek. xxx. 5, Lub,
2=lb, should be read for Chub, 30 ; but then it
no other instance of the use of this form: as, how-
ever, TO and D^TI V are used for one people, ap-
parently the Mizraite Ludim, most probably kin-
dred to the Lubim, this objection is not cone lusivt)
[Chub; Ludim]. In Jer. xlvi. 9, the A. V. ren-
ders Phut " the Libyans; " and in Ezek. xxxviii. 6
" Libya." K. S. P.
LTJ'CAS (Aovkoj: Lvau), a friend and com-
panion of St Paul during his imprisonment at
Home (Phileni. 24). He is the same ss Luke, the
beloved physician, who is associated with Demas
in Col. iv. 14, and who remained faithful to the
Apostle when others forsook him (2 Tim. iv. 11), on
his first examination before the emperor. For the
grounds of his identification with the evangelist
St Luke, see article Luke.
LTJ'OIFER (V">'n [see below]: •Zmrftpof.
Lucifer). The name is found in Is. xiv. 12, coupled
with the epithet " son of the morning," and (being
derived from '?'J, "to shine") clearly signifies
a " bright star," and probably what we call the
morning star. 6 In this passage it is a symbolical
representation of the king of Babylon, in his splen -
dor and in his fall; perhaps also it refers to his
glory as paling before the unveiled presence of God.
Its application (from St Jerome downwards) to
Satan in his fall from heaven arises probably from
the fact that the Babylonian Empire is in Scripture
represented a* the type of tyrannical and self-idol-
izing power, and especially connected with the em-
pire of the Evil One in the Apocalypse. The fall
of its material power before the unseen working of
the providence of God is therefore a type of the da-
feat of all manifestations of the tyranny of Satan.
This application of the name " Lucifer " as a proper
name of the Devil, is plainly ungrounded; but the
magnificence of the imagery of the prophet, far
transcending in grandeur the fall of Nebuchadnezzar
to which it immediately refers, has naturally given
a color to the symbolical interpretation of the pas-
sage, and fixed that application in our modern lan-
guage. A.B.
LIT'CIUS (AtiKios, Aoixios •■ {Liucnu\), a
Roman consul (fawroi 'PoyiaW), v>bo is said t>
have written the letter to Ptolemy (Euergetes),
which assured Simon I. of the protection of Rums
(cir. B. o. 139-8; 1 Mace. xr. 10, 16-24). The
whole form of the letter — the mention of one con-
sul only, the description of the consul by the pne-
nomen, the omission of the senate and of the date
(comp- Wemsdorf, Dtfide Mace- % cxix.), — show*
that it cannot be an accurate copy of the original
b Tie other Interpretation, which makes ^^H
an tmpsrslrra of the verb
" wall •' or " lament ' Injun*
awin It ngardsd at untenable.
V?\ ra the ssom of
i the parallelism, aad la
Digitized by
Google
1690
LUCIUS
document; but there is nothing In the substance
of the letter which is open to just suspicion.
The imperfect transcription of the name his led
to the identification of Lucius with three distinct
persona — (1.) [Lucius] Furins Philus (the lists,
Clinton, Fasti l/tll. ii. 118, giro P. Furius Philua),
who was not consul till B. c. 136, and is therefore
at once excluded. (2.) Lucius Cascilius HeteQus
Cairns, who was consul in b. c 142, immediately
after Simon assumed the government. On this
supposition it might seem not unlikely that the
answer which Simon received to an application for
protection, which he made to Rome directly on his
assumption of power (comp- 1 Mace. xiv. 17, 18) in
the consulship of Metellus, has been combined
witi the answer to the later embassy of Numenius
(1 Mace. xiv. 24, xv. 18). (3.) But the third
Idimtifieatfcn with Lucius Calpurnius Piao, who
was consul b. c 139, is most probably correct-
The date exactly corresponds, and, though the
presnomen of Calpurnius it not established beyond
all question, the balance of evidence is decidedly
against the common lists. The Fasti CupUolird
are defective for this year, and only give a fragment
of the name of I'opillius, the fellow-consul of Cal-
purnius. Cassiodorus (CAron.) as edited, gives
Cn. Calpurnius, but the eye of the scribe (if the
reading is correct) was probably misled by the
names in the years immediately before. On the
other hand Valerius Maximus (i. 3) is wrongly
quoted from the printed text as giving the same
prsenomen. The passage in which the name occurs
b in reality no part of Valerius Maximus, but a
piece of the abstract of Julius Paris inserted in
the text Of eleven MSS. of Valerius which the
writer has examined, it occurs only in one (Mue.
Brit. Burn. 209), and there the name is given
Imcuu Calpurnius, as it is given by Mai in his
edition of Julius Paris (Script. Vet. Noea Coii.
iii. 7). Sigonius says rightly (Fasti Cons. p. 207):
" Cassiodorus prodit oonsules Cn. Pisonem ....
epitoma L. Calpumium "... The chance of an
error of transcription in Julius Paris is obviously
less than in the Fasti of Cassiodorus; and even
if the evidence were equal, the authority of 1 Mace,
might rightly be urged as decisive in such a case.
Josephus omits all mention of the letter of
<• Lucius " in his account of Simon, but gives one
very similar in contents (Ant. xiv. 8, § S), as written
on the motion of Lucius Valerius in the ninth
(nineteenth) year of Hyrcanua II.; and unless the
two letters and the two missions which led to them
■an purposely assimilated, which is not wholly
Improbable, it must be supposed that he has been
guilty of a strange oversight in removing the inci-
dent from its proper place. B. F. W.
LU'OIUS (AoAtiet: Intents), a kinsman or
fellow-tribesman of St. Paul (Kom. xv. 21), by
whom he is said by tradition to have been ordained
bishop of the church of Cenchresa, from whence the
Epistle to the Romans was written (Apost. Const.
Hi. 46). He is thought by some to be tie same
with Lucius of Cyrene. (See the following arti-
«*-)
LUCIUS OF CYKETNE (AoiW i Koeir
rtuot )■ Lucius, thus distinguished by the name of
lis city — the capital of a Greek colony in Northern
ifrica, and remarkable for the number of its Jewish
'inhabitants — is first mentioned in the N. T. in
tompany with Barnabas, Simeon called Niger,
ssanaen, awl Saul who are described as prophets
liUD
and teachers of the church at Antjm.li (Acta xih. 1)
These honored disciples having, while engaged ai
the office of common worship, received command-
ment from the Holy Ghost to set apart Barnabas
and Saul for the special service of God, proceeded.
after fasting and prayer, to lay their hands upset
them. This is the first recorded instance of a
formal ordination to the office of Evangelist, but it
cannot be supposed that so solemn a commission
would have been given to any but such as had
themselves been ordained to the ministry of the
Word, and we may therefore assume that Lucius
and his companions were already of that number.
Whether Lucius was one of the seventy rfiiMpl— ,
sa stated by Paeudo-Hippolytus, is quite a matter
of conjecture, but it is highly probable that he
formed one of the congregation to whom St. Peter
preuhed on the day of Pentecost (Acts ii. 10);
and there can hardly be a doubt that he was one
of '< the men of Cyrene " who, being » scattered
abroad upon the persecution that arose about Ste-
phen," went to Antioch preaching the Lord Jesus
(Acts xi. 19, 20).
It is commonly supposed that Lucius is the kins-
man of St. Paul mentioned by that Apostle as join-
ing with him in his salutation to the K*»™m breth-
ren (Rom. xvi. 21). There is certainly no sufficient
reason for regarding him ss identical with St. Lake
the Evangelist, though this opinion was apparently
held by Origen (in loco), and is supported by Cal-
met, as well as by Wetatein, who adduces in con-
firmation of it the fact reported by Herodotus
(iii. 121), that the Cyreniana had throughout
Greece a high reputation as physicians. But it
must be observed that the names are clearly dis-
tinct. The missionary companion of St. Paul was
not Lucius, but Lucas, or Lueanua, "the beloved
physician," who, though named in three different
Epistles (Col. iv. 14; 2 Tim. hr. 11; Philem. 24),
is never referred to ss a relation. Again, it is
hardly probable that St. Luke, who suppresses his
own name as the companion of St. Paid, would
have mentioned himself as one among the more
distinguished prophets and teachers at Antioch.
Olsbauseu, indeed, asserts confidently that the no-
tion of St. Luke and Lucius being the same person
has nothing whatever to support it (Clark's TheoL
Lib. iv. 618). In the Apostolical Co n st i tutions,
vii. 46, it is stated that St. Paul consecrated
Lucius bishop of Cenchree. Different traditions
make Lucius the first bishop of Cyrene and of
Laodicea in Syria. E. H — a.
LUD (yh : AouS; [Esek. xxvii. 10, xxx. 5,
AutoJ:] Lud [Lydin, Lydii, LfxH\\ the fourth
name in the list of the children of Shem (Gen. x.
22; comp. 1 Chr. i. 17), that of a person or tribe,
or both, descended from him. It has been sup-
posed that Lud was the ancestor of the Lydians
(Jos. Ant. i. 6, § 4), and thus represented by the
Lydus of their mythical period (Herod, i. 7). The
Shemite character of their manners, and the strong
orientalism of the art of the Lydian kingdom during
its latest period and after the Persian oonqu*** , but
before the predominance of Greek art in Asia Minor
favor this idea; but, ou the other hand, the Egyp-
tian monuments show us in the 18th, 14th, and
18th oenturies B. c. a powerful people called Rotto
or Lcdkv, probably seated near Mesopotamia, an*'
apparently north of Palestine, whom some, how
ever, make the Assyrians. We may perhaps eon
jectum that the Lydian* first aatabbabed these
Digitized by
Google
LUDIM
tdves near Palatine, and afterward* ipraad Into
An Minor; the occupier* of the old aeat of the
race being destroyed or removed by the Aasyriana.
for the question whether the U.1 [la. fori. 19,
Ksek. xxvii. 10, xxx. 5] or Ludim mentioned by
the prophet* be of thia atock or the Mizraite Ludim
of Gen. x., aee the next article. E. 8. P.
LITDIM (Pjfo, Gen. x. 18, D^-pi 1 ?, 1
Chr. i. 11 [pert. Mtung while, FUrst]: AovSiffu:
Ludim), a Mizraite people or tribe. From their
position at the head of the lie* of the Mizraite*, it
is probable that the Ludim were settled to the west
of Egypt, perhaps farther than any other Mixraite
tribe. Lud and the Ludim are mentioned in four
passage* of the prophets. It is important to ascer-
tain, if possible, whether the Mizraite Ludim or
the Shemite Lud be referred to in each of these
passage*. Isaiah mention* "Tarshish, Pul, and
Lud, that draw the bow (n#|7 "Otpa), Tubal
and Javan, the isles afar off" (lxri. 19)' Here the
expression in the plural, " that draw the bow "
(temlenUt lagiitam, Vulg.), may refer only to Lud,
and therefore not connect it with one or both of the
name* preceding. A comparison with the other
three passages, in all which Phut is mentioned im-
mediately before or after Lud or the Ludim, makes
it almost certain that the LXX. reading, Phut,
toit, for Pul, a word not occurring in any other
passage, i* the true one, extraordinary as ia the
change from N?tpO to Mwrox- [?("-] Jere *
miah, in ipeaklng' of Pharaoh Necho's army, makes
mention of " Cush and Phut that handle the buck-
ler; and the Ludim that handle [and] bend the
bow " " (xlri. 9). Here the Ludim are associated
LUDIM
1601
with African nations, as mercenaries cr auxiliaries
of the king of Egypt, and therefore it would seem
probable, primd facie, that the Mizraite Ludim art
intended. Ezekiel, in the description of Tyre,'
speaks thus of Lud: "Persia and Lud and Phut
were in thine army, thy men of war: buckler (] JtJ)
and helmet hung they up in thee; they aet thine
adorning" (xxvii. 10). In this place Lud might
seem to mean the Shemite Lud, especially if the
latter be connected with Lydia; but the association
with Phut renders it as likely that the nation or
country is that of the African Ludim. In the
prophecy against Gog a similar passage occurs:
"Persia, Cush, and Phut (A. V. "Libya") with
them [the army of Gog] ; all of them [with] buck-
ler (PJO) and helmet" (xxxviiL 5). It seem*
from this that there were Persian mereanaiie* at
this time, the prophet perhaps, if speaking of a
remote future period, using their name and that of
other well-known mercenaries in a general sense.
The association of Persia and Lud in the former
passsge loses therefore somewhat of its weight. In
one of the prophecies against Egypt Lud is thus
mentioned among the supports of that country:
" And the sword shall come upon Mizraim, and
great pain shall be in Cush, at the falling of the
slain in Mizraim, and they shall take away her
multitude (H3'lDn),c and her foundations shall
be broken down. Cush, and Phut, and Lud, and
all the mingled people O^), and Chub, and the
children of the land of the 'covenant, shall foil by
the sword with them " (xxx. 4, 6). Here Lud ia
associated with Cush and Phut, a* though an Afri-
can nation. The Ereb, whom we have called
■ The manner In which than foreign troop to the
Egyptian army are characterised Is perfectly in accord-
ance with the evidence of the monuments, which,
although about six centuries earner than the prophet's
cane, no doubt represent the tame condition of mili-
tary matters. The only people of Africa beyond
Egypt, portrayed on the monuments, whom we can con-
sider as most probably of the tame stock as the Egyp-
tasns, are the RsBO, who are the Lublm of the Bible,
slmost certainly the tame as the Miirait* Lahubim.
[Ubabdi; Loam.] Therefore we may take the KeBU
at probably Illustrating the Ludim, supposing the lat-
ter to be Mlxraltes, in which case they may indeed be
Included under the same nam* as the Lublm, If the
appellation BeBU be wider than the Lublm of the
Bible, and also as illustrating Cush and Phut.
The last two are spoken of as handling the buck-
ler. The Egyptians are generally represented
with email shields, frequently round ; the ReBU
with small round shields, for which the term
here used, ]20, the small shield, and the ex- j
nreeskra "that handle," are perfectly appro-
wtaie. That the Ludim should have been arch-
ers, and apparently armed with a long bow that
was strung with the aid of the foot by treading
(nHJp *?"ft), to not »- worthl > •**» "" Ar "
rlcans T were always famous for their archery.
The BaBD, and one other of the foreign nations
that served In the Egyptian army — the monument*
show the former only as enemies — were bowmen, Being
armed with a bow of moderate length ; the oth»r mer-
woaries — of whom we can only Identify the PhiUstba*
Ghsrethlm, though they probably Include oertsln of
the mercenartee or auxiliaries mentioned in the Bible
_ carrying swords aai Javelins, but not bows. These
points of agreement, founded on our examination of
•m monuments, are of no little weight, a* showing
•s ansxrraey of toe Bible.
t The description or Tyre In this prophecy of B ss kl sl
receives striking illustration from what we believe to .
be Its earliest coins. These coins were held to be most
probably of Tyre, or some other Phoenician city, or
possibly of Babylon, on numismatic evidence alone, by
the writer's lamented colleague at the British Museum,
Mr. tiurgon. They probably date during the 6th cen-
tury B. c; they may possibly be a little older; but It
is most reasonable to consider them ss of the time of,
and Issued by Darius Hystaspl*. The chief coins are
octodrechms of the earlier Phoenician weight [Mokxt],
bearing on the obverse a war-galley beneath the tow-
ered walls of a city, and, on the reverse, a king In a
chariot, with an Incuse goat beneath. This mm ****
tlon of galley and city I* exactly what we mid In the
description of Tyre to Eseklel, which mainly portray*
a state-galley, but also refers to a port, and speaks of
towers and walls.
e There nay perhaps be here a reference by parono-
masia to Art m, the chief divinity of Thebes, the He
brew naux of which, flD^ VO, eontalns his name
[Aim.]
Digitized by
Google
1692 LUDIM
" Mingled people " rather than " strangers," appear
ID have been in Arab population of the Sinaitie
peninsula, perbapi including Arab or half-Arab
tribal of the Egyptian desert to the east of the Nile.
Chub ia a name nowhere else occurring, which per-
bapi should be read Lub, for tbe country or nation
oftheLubim. [Chub ; Lub im.] The "children
of the land of the covenant" may be some league
of tribes, as probably were tbe Nine Bowi of the
Egyptian inscription!; or the expression may mean
nation or tribes allied with Egypt, as though •
general designation for the rest of its supporters
besides those specified. It is noticeable that in this
passage, although Lud ia placed among tbe close
allies or supporters of Egypt, yet it follows African
nations, and is followed by a nation or tribe at least
partly inhabiting Asia, although possibly also partly
inhabiting Africa.
There can be no doubt that but one nation is
intended in these passages, and it seems that thus
Ear the preponderance of evidence is in favor of the
Mizraite Ludim. There are no indications in tbe
Bible known to be positive of mercenary or allied
troops in the Egyptian armies, exoept of Africans,
and perhaps of tribes bordering Egypt on the east.
We hare still to inquire how tbe evidence of the
Egyptian monument* and of profane history may
affect our supposition. From the former we learn
that several foreign nations contributed allies or
mercenaries to tbe Egyptian armies. Among them
we identify the Kebu with the Lubim, and the
Shabyata* A with the Cherethim, who also served
in David's army. The Utter were probably from
the coast of Palestine, although they may have
been drawn in the case of the Egyptian army from
an insular portion of the same people. Tbe rest of
then foreign troops seem to hire been of African
nationi, but this is not certain. Tbe evidence of
the monuments reaches no lower than tbe time of
tbe Bubastito line. There is a single foreign con-
temporary inscribed record on one of tbe colossi of
the temple of Aboo-Simbel in Nubia, recording the
passage of Greek mercenaries of a Psammeticbus,
probably the first (Wilkinson, Modern Eyypi and
Thebes, ii. 329).* From the Greek writers, who
give us information from the tune of Psammeticbus
I. downwards, we learn that Ionian, Carian, and
Jther Greek mercenaries formed an important
element in tbe Egyptian army in all times when the
country was independent, from the reign of that
king until the final conquest by Ocbus. These
mercenaries were even settled in Egypt by Psam-
netiehus. There does not seem to be any mention
. f them in the Bible, excepting they be intended by
Lud and the Ludim in tbe passages that have been
considered . It must be recollected that it is rea-
sonable to connect the Shemite Lud with the Lydi-
sns, and that at the time of the prophets by whom
Ijud and the Ludim are mentioned, the Lydian
kingdom generally or always included the more
western part of Asia Minor, so that the terms Lud
and Ludim might well apply to tbe Ionian and
Carian mercenaries drawn from this territory.'
We must therefore hesitate before absolutely con-
jridiLg tint this important portion of the Egyp-
LUKB
Uan mercenaries h not menUnped in the Bkb
upon tbe primd facia evidence that the only nasna
which could stand for It would seen, to be that of
an African nation. B. 8. P.
LUTUTH, THE ASCENT OF (H^SS
rPrribfl, in Isaiah; and so alar in the Kri or
corrected text of Jeremiah, although there the orig-
inal text has mnVl, ie.hel-Luh6th: i, iraV
Burnt AeutU; in Jeremiah, 'AAafcV Alex. AAurf,
[FA.* AA<0:] aseeasiu Luith), a place in Honb;
apparently the ascent to a sanctuary or holy spot
on an eminence. It occurs only in Is. xv. 5, and
the parallel passage of Jeremiah (xlviii. ft). It is
mentioned with Zoar and Horos aim, but whether
because they were locxlly connected, or because
they were all sanctuaries, is doubtfuL In the days
of Eusebiusand Jerome (Onomcuttcon, "Luith")
it was still known, and stood between Areopobs
(Rabbath-Moab) and Zoar, the latter being prob-
ably at the mouth of tbe Waoy Kerak. M.
de Saulcy (Voyage, tt. 19, and Map, sheet 9)
places it at " Kharbet-Noo&hin; " but this ia north
of Areopolis, and cannot be said to lie b e t we e n it
and Zoar, whether we take Zoar on the east or tha
west side of the sea. Tbe writer is not aware that
any one else hss attempted to identify tbe place.
Tbe signification of tbe name bal-Luhith must
remain doubtful. As a Hebrew word it signifies
"made of boards or posts" (Gee. The: p. 748);
but why assume that a Hoabite spot should have
a Hebrew name? By tbe Syriac interpreters it ia
rendered " paved with flagstones " (Eicbborn, AUg
BtbUathtk, i. 845, 878). In the Tsrgums (Peeydo-
j'on. and Jerus. on Num. xxL 16, and Jonathan n.
Is. xv. 1) Lechaiath is given ss tbe equivalent of
Ar-Moab. This may contain an allusion to Lu-
chitb ; or it may point to the use of a term meaning
"jaw " for certain eminences, not only in the coas
of the Lehi of Samson, but also els ewhere . (See
Michaelis, SuppL No. 1307; but, on tbe other hind,
Buxtorf, Lex. Rabb. 1134.) It is probably, Eke
Akbabbim, tbe name of the ascent, and not of any
town at the summit, as in that ease tbe word
would appear as Luhithab, with the particle of
motion added. G.
LUKE. The name Luke (Aoiwoj: [Lncat]),
is in abbreviated form of Lucianus or of LucOhu)
(Meyer) It is not to be confounded with Lucius
(Acts xiii. 1: Bom. xvi. SI), which lilorgg to a dif-
ferent person. The name Luke occurs three times
in tbe New Testament (CoL iv. 14; 3 Tun. iv. 11;
Philem. 34), and probably in all three, the third
Evangelist is the person spoken of. To the Colos-
sians he is described as " the beloved physician,"
probably because he had been known to them in that
faculty. Timothy needs no additional mark for
identification ; to him the words are, " only Luke is
with me." To Philemon Luke sends his salutation
in common with other " fellow-laborers " of St
Paul. As there is every reason to believe that the
Luke of these passages is the author of tbe Acts of
tbe Apostles as well as of the Gospel which bean his
name, it is natural to seek in the former book lor
■ The tauter of than mercenaries is called la tbe
Inscription " Psammatirhns, son of Theocles ; " which
rlawi, In the adoption of an Egyptian name, the do-
mestication of then Greeks in Egypt.
& Any Indications of an alliance with Lydla under
amana ars Inaufflcient to render It probable that even
then Ljdians fought In On Egyptian army, and three
no light on the earlier relations of th* Egyptians aaf
Lydlens.
c The LXX. fbuow the Cnk» rather than the En
as they frequently do elsewhere and also haded* tea
detail* article of th* Hebrew.
Digitized by
Google
LXTKB
i timed of that oonnecttm with Si. Paul whioh
i passages assume to exist; tnd although the
name of St. Luke does not occur in the Acta, there
la reason to believe that under the pronoun "we"
teveral references to the Evangelist are to be added
to the three plaoes just quoted.
Combining the traditional dement with the
Scriptural, the uncertain with the certain, we are
able to trace the following dim outline of the
Evangelist's life. He was born at Antioch in Syria
(Euaebius, ffisfc iii. 4); in what condition of life
is uncertain. That he was taught the science of
medicine does not prove that he was of higher birth
than the rest of the disciples; medicine in its earlier
and ruder state was sometimes practiced even by a
slave. The well-known tradition that Luke was
also a painter, and of no mean skill, rests on the
authority of Nicephorus (ii. 43), of the Menology
of the Emperor Basil, drawn up in 980, and of
other late writers ; but none of them an of his-
torical authority, and the Acta and Epistles are
wholly silent upon a point so likely to be mentioned.
He was not born a Jew, for he is not reckoned
among them " of the circumcision " by St Paul
(comp. Col. iv. 11 with ver. H). If this be not
thought conclusive, nothing can be argued from
the Greek idioms in his style, for he might be a
Hellenist Jew, nor from the Gentile tendency of his
Gospel, for this it would share with the inspired
writings of St. Paul, a Pharisee brought up at the
feet of Gamaliel. The date of his conversion is
uncertain. He was not indeed "an eye-witness
and minister of the word from the beginning"
(Luke i. 2), or he would have rested his claim as
an Evangelist upon that ground. Still he may have
been converted by the Lord Himself, some time be-
fore his departure; and the statement of Epiphanius
(Coat liar. Ii. 11) and others, that he was one
of the seventy disciples, has nothing very improb-
able in it; whiltt that which Theophylact adopts
(on Luke xxiv. ), that he was one of the two who
Journeyed to Emmaus with the risen Redeemer,
has found modern defenders. Tertullian assumes
that the conversion of Luke is to be ascribed to
Paul — " Lucas non apostolus, sed apostolicus ; non
magister, sed diacipulus, utiqne magistro minor,
carte Unto posterior quanto posterioris Apostoli
sectator, Pauli sine dubio " (Adv. Mnrcion. iv. 2);
and the balance of probability is on this side.
The first ray of historical light fells on the
Evangelist when he joins St Psul at Troas, and
shares his journey into Macedonia. The sudden
transition to the first person plural in Acts xvi. 10
is most naturally explained, after all the objections
that have been urged, by supposing that Luke, the
writer of the Acts, formed one of St Paul's com-
pany from this point His conversion had .taken
nlaoa before, since be silently assumes his place
among the great Apostle's followers without any
uint that this wss his first admission to the knowl-
edge and ministry of Christ He may have found
his way to Troas to preach the Gospel, sent pos-
siWy by St Paul himself. As fer as Philippi the
Evangelist journeyed with the Apostle. The re-
sumption of the third person on Paul's departure
from that place (xvil. 1) would show that Luke was
now left behind. During the rest if St Paul's
second missionary journey we beat of Luke no
more. But on the third journey the same indica-
tion reminds us that Luke is again of the company
,Aets xz. 6), having Joined it apparently at Philippi,
■htm ha had bean left. With the Apostle ha
LUKE
1693
pa s s e d through Miletus, Tyre, and Casssraa to Jeru-
salem (xx. 5, xxi. 18). Between the two visits of
Paul to Philippi seven years had elapsed (A. D. 61
to A. P. (8), which the Evangelist may have spent
in Philippi and its neighborhood, preaching the
Gospel.
There remains one passage, which, if It refers to
St Luke, must belong to this period. " We have
sent with him " (i. e. Titus) " the brother whose
praise is hi the gospel throughout all the churches '*
(2 Cor. viii. 18). The subscription of the epistle
sets out that it was " written from Philippi, a city
of Macedonia, by Titus and Lucat," and it is as
old opinion that Luke was the companion of Titus,
although ha is not named in the body of the epulis.
If this be so, we are to suppose that during the
" three months " of Paul's sojourn at Philipjd
(Acta xx. 8) Luke was sent from that place to
Corinth on this errand ; and the words " whose
praise is in the Gospel throughout all the churches "
enable us to form an estimate of his activity during
the interval in which he has not been otherwise
mentioned. It is needless to sdd that the praise
lay in the activity with which he preached the
Gospel, and not, as Jerome understands the passage,
in his being the author of a written gospel " Lu-
cas .. . scripsit Evangelium de quo idem Paulus
1 Misimus, inquit, cum illo fratrem, cujus bun est in
Evangelio per omnes eccleeias ' " (De first JU.cT).
He again appears in the company of Paul in the
memorable journey to Rome (Acts xxvii. 1). Ha
remained at his side during his first imprisonment
(Col. iv. 14; Philem. 24); and if it is to be sup-
posed that the Second Epistle to Timothy was
written during the second imprisonment, then the
testimony of that epistle (iv. 11) shows that he
continued faithful to the Apostle to the end of bis
afflictions.
After the death of St Paul the acta of bis felth-
ful companion are hopelessly obscure to us. In the
well-known passage of Epiphanius (ami Bar. Ii.
11, vol. ii. 464, in Dindorfs regent edition), we
find that " receiving the commission to preach the
Gospel, [Luke] preaches first in Dalmatla and
Gallia, in Italy and Macedonia, but first in Gallia,
as Paul himself says of some of his companions, in
his epistles, ' Crttcetu in Oallia,' for we are not to
read '«■ Oalatia' aa some mistakenly think, but
• in Oallia.' " But there seems to be aa little
authority for this account of St Luke's ministry
sa there is for the reading Oallia In 2 Tim. iv. 10.
How scanty are the data, and how vague the re-
sults, the reader may find by referring to the Ada
Sanctorum, October, vol. viii., in the recent lirus-
sels edition. It is, sa perhaps the Evangelist wishes
it to be: we only know him whilst he stands by
the side of his beloved Paul; when the master
departs the history of the follower becomes cod-
fusion and (able. As to the age and death of the
Evangelist there is the utmost uncertainty. It
seems probable that he died in advanced life; but
whether he suffered martyrdom or died a natural
death ; whether Bithynia or Acbaia, or asms other
country, witnessed his end, it is impossible to de-
termine amidst contradictory voices. That he died
a martyr, between A. D. 78 and A. D. 100. would
seem to "ave the balance of suffrages hi its favor.
It Is enough for us, so fer as regards the Gospel of
SL Luke, to know that the writer wsa the tried
and constant friend of the Apostle Paul, who shared
his labors, and was not drlian from his sir's bj
w. r.
Digitized by
Google
1694 LUKE. GOSPEL OF
LUKE, GOSPEL OF. The thlid Gospel te
ascribed, by the genera) content of ancient Christen-
dom, to " the beloved physician," Luke, the friend
and companion of the Apostle Paul. In the well-
known Muratorian fragment (see vol. ii. p. MS) we
And " Tertio evangelii librum secundum Lucam.
Lncaa late medicua poet ascenaum Christl cum eum
Paulua, quasi ut juris studiosum secundum ad-
sumsisset, nomine suo ex opinions eonscripsit.
Domlnum tanwn neo ipse vidit in came. Et idem
prout ataequl potult Its et ab nativitate Johannis
indpit dicere." (Hera Credner'a rrstoration of the
•axt is followed; see his Grtchichtt dt$ N. T.
Kamm, p. 168, J 76; oomp. Routh'e Rttiqttm,
rot iv.) The citations of Justin Martyr from the
Gospel narrative show an acquaintance with and
ass of St Luke's account (see Kirchbofer, QutUen-
tammlung, p. 18S, for the passages). Irenieus (eon*.
Hmr. lii. 1) aaya that >• Luke, the follower of Paul,
preserved in a book the Gospel which that Apostle
preached." The aame writer affords (lii. 14) an
account of the contenta of the Gospel, which proves
that in the book preserved to us we possess the
same which he knew. Eusebiua (Hi. 4) speaks
without doubting, of the two books, the Gospel and
the Acts, as the work of St Luke. Both be and
Jerome (Catnl. Script. £cd c. 7) mention the
opinion that when St Paul uses the words » ac-
cording to my Gospel " it is to the work of St.
Luke that he refers; both mention that St Luke
derived bia knowledge of divine things, not from
Paul only, but from the rest of the Apostles, with
whom (says Eusebiua) he had active intercourse.
Although St Paul's words refer In all probability
to no written Gospel at all, but to the substance
of his own inspired preaching, the error is im-
portant, as showing how strong was the opinion in
ancient times that Paul was in some way connected
with the writing of the third Gospel.
It has been shown already [Gospels, vol. ii. p.
949 f.] that the Gospels were In nae as one col-
lection, and were spoken of undoubtingly as the
work of those whose names they bear, towards the
end of the second century. But as regards the
genuineness of St Luke any discussion is entangled
with a somewhat difficult question, namely, what
is the relation of the Gospel we possess to that
which was used by the heretic Mansion ? The ease
may be briefly stated.
The religion of Jesus Christ announced salvation
o Jew and Gentile, through Him who was bom a
ew, of the seed of David. The two sides of this
isct produced very early two opposite tendencies
in the Church. One party thought of Christ as
the Messiah of the Jewa ; the other as the Redeemer
of the human race. The former viewed the Lord
as the Messiah of Jewish prophecy and tradition ;
the other as the revealer of a doctrine wholly new,
b which atonement and salvation and enlighten-
to nit were offered to men for the first time. Mansion
of Sinope, who flourished in the first half of the
second century, expressed strongly the tendency
opposed to Judaism. The scheme of redemption,
so full of divine compassion and love, was adopted
by him, though in a perverted form, with hie whole
heart The aspersions on hia sincerity are thrown
LUKE, GOSPEL OF
out In the loose rhetoric of controversy, and an It
be received with something more than contain
The heathen world, into the discord of which tbt
music of that message had never come, appeared
to him as the kingdom of darkness and of Satan
So far Mansion and his opponents would go to-
gether. But bow does Mansion deal with the
O. T. ? He views it, not as a preparation for the
coming of the Lord, but as something hostile in
apirlt to the GoapeL In God, as revealed in the
0. T., he saw only a being jealous and crueL TTas
heretic Cerdo taught that the just and severe God
of the Law and the Prophets was not the same as
the merciful Father of the Lord Jesus. This
dualism Mansion carried further, and blasphemously
argued that the God of the 0. T. was represented
as doing evil and delighting in strife, as repenting
of hia decrees and inconsistent with Himself.*
This divorcement of the N. T. from the Old was
at the root of Mansion's doctrine. In his strange
ayatem the God of the 0. T. was a lower being, to
whom he gave the name of Anpiovpyor, engaged
in a constant conflict with matter (*Ya»), over
which he did not gain a complete victory. Bat
the holy and eternal God, perfect in goodness and
love, comes not in contact with matter, mid creates
only what is like to and cognate with himself. In
the 0. T. we see the " Demiurgus; " the history
of redemption is the history of the operation of ths
true God. Thus much it is necessary to state as
bearing upon what follows: the life and doctrine
of Mansion have received a much fuller elucidation
from Neander, Kirchrngttdiirhte, vol. ii. ; Anti~
gnctlihu, and Dogmtnyttchichtt ; and from Yolk-
mar, Aia Krnngtl'nm Marriong, p. 25. The data
in older writers are found in the Apology of Justin
Martyr, hi Tertullian against Mansion i.-v. ; in
Ireneus, i. ch. 27 ; and Epipbanius, flier, xlii.
For the present purpose it is to be noticed that
a teacher, determined as Mansion was to sever the
connection between the Ok) and New Testament,
would approach tbe Gospel history with strong
prejudices, and would be unable to accept as it
stands the written narrative of any of the three
Evangelists, so far aa it admitted allusions to tbe
Old Testament aa tbe soil and root of the New. It
is clear, in feet, that he regarded Paul as the only
Apostle who hsd remained faithful to his calling.
He admitted the Epistles of St Paul, and a Gospel
which he regarded aa Pauline, and rejected the rest
of tbe N. T., not from any idea that the books
were not genuine, but because they were, as he
alleged, tbe genuine works of men who were not
faithful teachera of the Gospel they had received.
But what was the Gospel which Mansion used ?
The ancient testimony is very strong on this point;
it was tbe Gospel of St Luke, altered to suit his
peculiar tenets. " Et super baee," aaya Irenams,
" id quod eat secundum Lucsm Evangelium dr-
cumcidens, et omnia qua; sunt de generatione
Domini conscripts auferens, et de doctiins\ ser-
monum Domini multa auferens, in quibus manites-
tissime conditorem hujua universitatis auum Patron
confitena Dominus conscriptus est; semetipsum esse
veraciorem quam sunt hi, qui Evangelium tradi-
derunt apostoli, suasit diacipulia suis; nou Evauge-
" " Cardon antam . docnit sum qui a lege et
propa.etta annunuatui alt Dana, non ease outran Domini
soatri Curias' Jean. Hunc enim eognoscl, Ilium autem
gnoraxi ; et alteram quidem Jastura, alteram autem
la. Saocedaos autem et aUrcton Pootloas
adampllavlt dootrioam, lmpudorste blaspbsniana an
qui a lege et prophetia annuntjatna eat Deus ; melon
jVtorem at bellorum eoocupuMsentem et laeonataasi
quoqw aententla, at oontnuiom etbt Ipeaun aasaaa
(IreasMM,!. 37, H lands, p. 256, Stssseea •*.!.
Digitized by
Google
LTTKB, GOSPEL OF
Hum led psrticulani Evangelii trsdens tit. Similiter
autera et apostoli Pauli Epistola* afawidit. aufarens
quaseumque manifests dicta aunt ab apoatolo de eo
Den, qui mundum fecit, quoniam hie Pater Domini
ooatri Jeau Chriati, et quascumque ex propheticia
memorans apoatolua docuit, pnenuntiantibua ad-
lentom Domini " (eonfc Bar. L xxvii. 9). " Lacam
lidetur Marcion elegisse," aaya Tertallian, " quem
aderet" (cont Marc iv. S; comp. Origan, cont.
Ctltttm, il. 87; Epiphaniua, Bar. zlii. 11; The-
odores, BartU Fab. i. 84). Marcion, howerar, did
not ascribe to Luke by name the Gospel thus cor-
rupted (Tert. cont. Marc. iv. 6), calling it simply
the Gospel of Christ
From these paasagas the opinion that Marcion
formed for himself a Gospel, on the principle of
rejecting all that aaiored of Judaism in an existing
narrative, and that he selected the Gospel of St
Luke as needing the least alteration, seems to have
been hold universally in the Church, until Semler
started a doubt, the proline seed of a large con-
troversy; from the whole result of which, howerar,
the cause of truth has little to regret His opinion
waa that the Gospel of St Luke and that used by
Marcion were drawn from one and the same original
source, neither being altered Brom the other. He
thinks that Tertullian erred from want of historical
knowledge. The charge of Epiphaniua, of omis-
sions in Mansion's Gospel, he meets by the fact of
Tertullian '« silence. Griesbach, about the same
time, cut doubt upon the received opinion. Eich-
horn applied his theory of an " original Gospel "
[see article Gospels, vol. ii. p. 946 f.] to this ques-
tion, and maintained that the Fathers had mistaken
the abort and unadulterated Gospel used by Marcion
for an abridgment of St Luke, whereas it waa
probably more near the "original Gospel" than
St Luke. Hahn has more recently shown, in an
elaborate work, that there were sufficient motives,
of a doctrinal kind, to induce Marcion to wish to
get rid of parts of St Luke's Gospel; and be
refutes Eichhom's reasoning on several passages
which he had misunderstood from neglecting Ter-
tulliau's testimony. He has the merit, admitted on
all hands, of being the first to collect the data for
% restoration of Mansion's text in a satisfactory
manner, and of tracing out in detail the hearing of
his doctrines on particular portions of it Many
were disposed to regard Hahn's work as conclusive;
and certainly most of its results are still undis-
turbed. Ritaehl, however, took the other side, and
held that Marcion only used the Gospel of St Luke
<n an older and more primitive form, and that what
xr» charged against the former as omissions are
sften interpolations in the latter. A controversy,
In which Baur, Hilgenfeld, and Volkmar took
part, has resulted in the confirmation, by an over-
powering weight of argument, of the old opinion
that Marcion corrupted the Gospel of Luke for his
own purposes. Volkmar, whose work contains
the best account of the whole controversy, sweeps
away, it is to be hoped for ever, the opinion of
Ritschl and Baur that Marcion quoted the " origi-
nal Gospel of Luke," as well as the later view of
Baur, for which there is really not a particle of
evidence, that the Gospel had passed through the
hands of two authors or editors, the former with
strong inclinations against Judaism, a zealous fol-
« * Tbs httorr of this im hh iii ii) Is highly lu-
(TMCrrs. for a food account of it, Mt Bleak's Enl.
» alas a. T. f 18. It should be noted that Ban,
liuKE, GOSPEL OP 160ft
lower of St Paul, and the latter with leanings U
Judaism and against the Gnostics ! He consider*
the Gospel of St Luke, as we now possess it to be in
all its general features that which Marcion found
ready to his hand, and which for doctrinal reasons
he abridged and altered. In certain passages, in-
deed, he considers that the Gospel used by Marcion,
as cited by Tertullian and Epiphaniua, may b*
employed to oorrect our present text But this is
only putting the copy used by Marcion on the foot-
ing of an older MS. >Tbe passages which be con-
siders to have certainly suffered alteration sues
Marcion's time are only these: Luke x. 41 (»6xe-
aurrm mil i(o/u>\oyov/iai), S3 (xal otosli tyvm
tIs i<na> t warrjo <i pi) i vi'ds, (tal rls Itrt'r t
uiit tl /til 6 warna «tal $ iiw 0oikrrrui «. r. A.),
xi- 3 (for fjn«r rb iyioy irreOua cot/), xii. J8 (tf
itrrtpiyjj <f>v?uucfi), xvii. 3 (supply <( ur/ JyirrfiO^
r) «. T. A.), xviii. 19 (jrfi ne A*y« a-raOoV eft
iarip 070601 6 rtrrtip i ir rots obpayois). In
all these places the deviations are such as may be
found to exist between different MSS. A new
witness as to the last, which is of the greatest im-
portance, appears in Hippolytus, Rrfutatio Hart-
$ium, p. 354, Oxford edition, where the W n<
Ktyrrt eVyoOoV appears. See, on all these pas-
sages. Tischendorfs (jrttk TtMUiment, ed. vii., and
critical notes. Of four other places Volkmar speaks
more doubtfully, as having been disturbed, but
possibly before Marciou (vi. 17, xii. 83, xvii. 13,
xxiii. 3).
From this controversy we gain the following
result: Marcion was in the height of his activity
about A. D. 138, soon after which Justin Martyr
wrote his Apology; and he had probably given
forth his Gospel some yean before, i. e. about A. u.
130. At tho time when he composed it he found
the Gospel of St Ijike so far diffused and accepted
that he based his own Gospel upon it, altering and
omitting. Therefore we may assume that, about
a. D. 120, the Gospel of St Luke which we possess
was in use, and was familiarly known. The theory
that it was composed about the middle or end of
the 3d century is thus overthrown; and there is
no positive evidence of any kind to set against
the harmonious assertion of all the ancient Church
that this Gospel is the genuine production of St.
Luke.
(On St Luke's Gospel in its relation to Marcion,
see, besides the fathers quoted above, Hahn, Dot
Evnngetium Marcion*, Kbnigsberg, 1833; Ohv
hausen, Echlheit der tier canon. EvangeKen,
Konigsberg, 1833; Ritschl, Dot EvanftGum Mar-
ciont, etc., Tubingen, 1846, with his retractation
in Theol. Jakrb. 1861; Baur, KriL Unlermohn-
gen Bber d. kanon. EvangeKen, Tubingen, 1847)
Hilgenfeld, Krti. UnUriuchungtn, etc., Halle, I860)
Volkmar, Dot Evangelism Mardoiu, I«»p*lfe
1863; Bishop Thlriwall's Introduction to SchMer.
macher on SL Luke; De Wette, Lehrbueh [d
hi*. kriL EM. in] d. If. T., Berlin, 1848 [«•
Auag , von Messner u. Liinamann, 1860; see f
70 ff.]. These are but a part of the writers who
have touched the subject The work of Volkmar
Is the most comprehensive and thorough; and,
though some of his views cannot be adopted, he
has satisfactorily proved that our Gospel of St
Luke existed before the time of Marcion.")
to resist the arguments of Volkmar, m
Marlnuti-anfthum (1861), p. 191 ff, sasseuaUr
•ad his earlier view of the relation a* Mantm's
Digitized by
Google
1696 LUKE, GOSPEL OF
II. Dale of the Goepel of Luke. — We have
MO that this Gospel wat in use before the year
ISO. From internal evidence the date con be more
nearly fixed. From Acts 1. 1, it is clear that it was
written before the Acts of the Apostles. The latest
time actually mentioned in the Acts is the term of
two years during which Paul dwelt at Rome " in
his own hired house, and received all that came in
onto him " (ixviii. 30, 31). The writer, who has
tracked the footsteps of Paul hitherto with such
exactness, leaves him here abruptly, without making
known the result of his appeal to Cesar, or the
works in which he engaged afterwards. No other
motive for this silence can be suggested than that
the writer, at the time when he published the Acts,
had no more to tell; and in that case the book of
the Acts was completed about the and of the second
year of St Paul's imprisonment, that is, about
A. D. 63 (Wiesder, Ohhausen, Alford). How much
earlier the Gospel, described as " the former trea-
tise" (Acts i. 1), may have been written is uncer-
tain. But Dean Alford {Prolegomena) remarks
that the words imply some considerable interval
between the two productions. The opinion of the
younger Thiersch (Chrittian Church, p. 148, Car-
lyle's translation) thus becomes very probable, that
it was written at Cessna during St. Paul's im-
prisonment there, A. D. 58-60. The Gospel of St.
Matthew was probably written about the same
time; and neither Evangelist appears to ban used
the other, although both made use of that form of
ml teaching which the Apostles had gradually como
to employ. [Gospels.] It is painful to remark
how the opinions of many commentators, who re-
fuse to fix the date of this Gospel earlier than the
destruction of Jerusalem, have been influenced by
the determination that nothing like prophecy shall
be found in it- Believing that our I-ord did really
prophesy that event, we have no liifficulty in be-
lieving that an Evangelist reported the prophecy
before it was fulfilled (see Meyer's Commentary,
Introduction).
III. Place where the Goepel vxtt written. — If
the time hss been rightly indicated, the place would
be Cessna. Other suppositions are — that it was
composed in Achala and the region of Bceotla
(Jerome), In Alexandria (Syriac version), in Rome
(Ewald, etc.), in Achala and Macedonia (Hilgen-
foldj, and Asia Minor (Kostlin). It is impossible
to verify these traditions and conjectures.
IV. Origin of the GotpeL — The preface, con-
tained in the four first verses of the Gospel, describes
the object of its writer. " Forasmuch ss many have
taken in hand to set forth in order a declaration
of those things which are most surely believed
among us, even as they delivered them unto us,
which from the beginning were eye-witnesses and
ministers of the word ; it seemed good to me also,
having had perfect understanding of all things from
the very first, to write unto thee in order, most
excellent Theophilus, that thou mightest know the
certainty of those things wherein thou hast been
nstructed." Here are several facta to be observed.
There were many narratives of the life of our Lord
current at the early time when Lnke wrote his
Gospel. The word " many " cannot apply to Mat-
thew and Mark, because it must at any rate include
pal to that of Luke. Caller and Ntsohl soon altar
•ompktaly su r re ndere d their former positions (Tkioi.
/■Are. Idol, pp 887,638 It). The whole question bad
however tone before bean really settled, and the se-
LUKB. GOSPEL OF
more than two, and because it is implied Use*
former laborers leave something still to do. mat
that the writer will supersede or supplement then
either in whole or in part. The ground uf fitness
for the task St. Luke places in his having carefully
followed out the whole course of events from the
beginning. He does not claim the character of an
eye-witness from the first; but possibly ha may
have been a witness of some part of our Lord's
doings (see above Luke, Lira).
The ancient opinion, that Luke wrote his Gospel
under the influence of Paul, rests on the authority
of Ireneus, Tertullian, Origen, and'Euaebius. The
two first assert that we have in Luke the Gospel
preached by Paul (Iren. eont Har. iii. 1; Text.
conk Mare. iv. 6); Origen calls it "the Gospel
quoted by Paul," alluding to Rom. it. 16 (Euseb.
£. HitU vi. SS); and Eusebius refers Paul's words,
'•according to my Gospel" (S Tim. ii. 8), to that
of Lnke (A', //isfc iii. 4), in which Jerome concurs
(De Vir. 11L 7). The language of the preface is
against the notion of any exclusive influence of St
PauL The Evangelist, a man on whom the Spirit
of God was, made the history of the Saviour's life
the subject of research, and with materials so ob-
tained wrote, under the guidance of the Spirit that
was upon him. the history now before us- The
four verses could not have been put at the head of
a history composed under the exclusive guidance
of Paul or of any one Apoetle, and as little could
they have introduced a goepel simply communicated
by another. Yet if we compare St Paul's account
of the institution of the Lord's Supper (1 Cor. id
33-36) with that in St Luke's Gospel (xxfi. 19,
30), none will think the verbal similarity could be
accidental. A less obvious parallel between 1 Cor.
xv. 3 and Luke xxiv. 26, 27, more of thought than
of expression, tends the same way. The truth seems
to be that St. Luke, seeking information from every
quarter, sought it from the preaching of his beloved
master, St Paul ; and the Apostle in his turn em-
ployed the knowledge acquired from other sources
by his disciple. Thus the preaching of the Apostle,
founded on the same body of facts, and the same
arrangement of them as the rest of the Apostles
used, became assimilated especially to that which
St. Luke set forth in his narrative. This does not
detract from the worth of either. The preaching
and the Gospel proceeded each from an inspired
man ; for it is certain that Luke, employed as be
wsa by Paul, could have been no exception in that
plentiful effusion of the Holy Ghost to which Paul
himself bears witness. That the teaching of two
men so linked together (see Line) should have be-
come more and more assimilated is Just what would
be expected. But the influence was mutual, and
not one-sided; and Luke still claims with right
the position of an independent inquirer into his-
toric facts.
Upon the question whether Luke made use of the
Gospels of Matthew and Mark, no opinion given
here oould be conclusive. [Gospels, vol. ii. p.
944.] Each reader should examine it for himself,
with the aid of a Greek Harmony. It is probabW
that Matthew and Luke wrote independently, and
about the same time. Some of their coincidences
arise from their both incorporating the oral teach
toundtnf blundsss of Uehhora in respect to the sob
Jeot exposed, by Mr. Norton, in rds Otuhmtnae efUt
Ootptte, vol. HI. Addlt Hots 0, p. xUx. ft (Bos**
18*4). A
Digitized by
Google
LUKE, GOSPEL OF
tng of the Apostles, and others, It may be, from
their common nae of written documents, such at
an hinted at in Luke 1. 1. Ai ngarda St Hark,
some regard nil Gospel as the oldest New Testa-
ment writing, whilst others inter, from apparent
abbreriations (Hark i. 13, xvi. 18), from insertions
of matter from other places (Hark ir. 10-34, iz
38-48), and from the mode in which additional
information is introduced — now with a seeming
connection with Matthew and now with Luke —
that Mark's Gospel is the last, and has been framed
upon the other two fDe Wette, Einleilung, $ 94).
The result of this controversy should be to inspire
distrust of ail such owning proofs, which conduct
different critics to exactly opposite results.
V. Purpose for which the Gotptl vat written. —
The Evangelist pro fess e s to write that Tbeophilus
" might know the certainty of those things wherein
be had been instructed " (i. 4). Who was this
Tbeophilus? Some hare supposed that it is a sig-
nificant name, applicable not to one nun, but to
any amant Dei ; but the addition of ttpaWtaros. a
term of honor which would be used towards a man
of station, or sometimes (see passages in Kuinol
and Wetstein) towards a personal friend, seems
against this. He was, then, an existing person.
Conjecture has been wildly busy in endeavoring to
identify him with some person known to history.
Some indications are given in the Gospel about
him, and beyond them we do not propose to go-
He was not an inhabitant of Palestine, for the
Evangelist minutely describes the position of places
which to such a one would be well known. It is
so with Capernaum (ir. 31), Nazareth (1. 26),
Arimatbea (xxili. 51), the country of the Gada-
ranes (viil. 36), the distance of Mount Olivet and
Emmana from Jerusalem (Acta i. 13; Luke xxiv.
13). If places in England — say Bristol, and Ox-
ford, and Hampstead — were mentioned in this
careful minute way, it would be a fair Inference
that the writer meant his work for other than
English readers.
By the same test he probably waa not a Mace-
donian (Acta xvi. 13), nor an Athenian (Acta xvii.
21), nor a Cretan (Acts xxvii. 8, 13). But that
W was a native of Italy, and perhaps an inhabitant
jf Rome, is probable from similar data. In tracing
3t Paul's journey to Rome, places which an Italian
might be supposed not to know are described min-
utely (Acts xxvii. 8, 13, 16); but when he comes
to Sicily and Italy this is neglected. Syracuse and
lihegium, even the mora obscure Puteoli, and Appii
Forum and the Three Taverns, are mentioned as to
one likely to know them. (For other theories see
Harsh 'a AfichaeHt, voL iii. part I. p. 336; KuinU'a
Prolegomena, and Winer's RtnUcb. art. TheophUut.)
All that emerges from this argument is, that the
person for whom Luke wrote in the first Instance
was a Gentile reader. We must admit, but with
great caution, on account of the abuses to which
the notion has led, that there are traces in the
Gospel of a leemng towards Gentile rather than
Jewish converts. The genealogy of Jesus is traced
to Adam, not from Abraham; so aa to connect
Him with the whole human race, and no*, merely
with the Jews. Luke describes the mission of the
Seventy, which member has been usually supposed
to be typical of all nations; as twelve, the number
of the Apostles, represents the Jews and then- twelve
tribes. As each Gospel has within certain limits
its own character and mode of treatment, we shall
> with Ouhausan that " St Luke has the
107
LUKE, GOSPEL OP 1697
peculiar power of exhibiting with great clearness
of conception and truth (especially in the long ac-
count of Christ's journey, from ix. 61 to xviii. 34),
not so much the discourses of Jams aa his conver-
sations, with all the incidents that gave rise to
them, with the remarks of those who were present,
and with the final results."
On the supposed " doctrinal tendency "of the
Gospel, however, much has been written which it
is painful to dwell on, but easy to refute. Some
have endeavored to see in this divine book an at-
tempt to engraft the teaching of St Paul on the
Jewish representations of the Messiah, and to elevate
the doctrine of universal salvation, of which Paul
was the most prominent preacher, over the Jndais-
ing tendencies, and to put St. Paul higher than
the twelve Apostles I (See Zeller, Apott. ; Baur,
Kanon. Evtmg. ; and Hilgenfeld.) How two im-
partial historical narratives, the Gospel and the
Acta, could have bean taken for two tracts written
for polemical and personal ends, is to tui English
mind hardly conceivable. Even its supporters found
that the inspired author had carried out his pur-
pose so badly, that they were forced to assume that
a second author or editor had altered the work with
a view tu work up together Jewish and Pauline
elements into harmotij (Baur, Kamm. Evnng. p.
502). Of this editing and re-editing there is no
trace whatever; and the invention of the second
editor is a gross device to cover the failure of the
first hypothesis. By such a machinery, it will be
possible to prove in after ages that Gibbon's His-
tory was originally a plea for Christianity, or any
similar paradox.
The passages which are supposed to bear out
this " Pauline tendency," are brought together by
Hilgenfeld with great care {EvangeUen, p. 330):
but Reuss baa shown, by passages from St Matthew
which have the same " tendency " against the Jews,
how brittle such an argument is, and has left no
room for doubt that the two Evangelists wrote facto
and not theories, and dealt with those facts with
pure historical candor (Reuss, Bittoire de la Thi-
ologit, vol. ii. b. vi. eh. 6.). Writing to a Gentile
convert, and through him addressing other Gentiles,
St Luke has adapted the form of his narrative to
their needs ; but not a trace of a subjective bias,
not a vestige of a personal motive, has been suffered
to sully the inspired page. Had the influence of
Paul been the exclusive or principal source of this
Gospel, we should have found in it more resemblance
to the Epistle to the Ephesians, which contains (s>
to speak) the Gospel of St. Paul.
VI. Language and ttule of the Gotptl. — It has
never been doubted that the Evangelist wrote bis
Gospel in Greek. Whilst Hebraisms are frequent,
classical idioms and Greek compound words abound.
The number of words used by Luke only is un-
usually great, and many of them are compound
words for which there is classical authority (see
Dean Alfords valuable Greek TetL).
Some of the leading peculiarities of style are
here noted: a more minute examination will be
found in Prof. Davidson's Introduction to ff. T.
(Bagster, 1848), [and In his new work, Introd. to
the Study of the N. T. (Lend. 1868), U. 66 ff.,
oomp. p. 13 ff.]
1. The very frequent use of fyeVere la Intro-
ducing a new narrative or a transition, and of
iyivtto ir re? with an infinitive, are t ra ceable tc
the Hebrew.
Digitized by
Google
1698 LUKE, GOSPEL OF
I. The auna may be said of the frequent nee of
taoHa, answering to the Hebrew 22-
8. HofuKol, ueed six timet instead of the usual
yfofifimrtit, and tVioraVnr uaed eix timee for
fmfifit, tddaitaJun, are casus of a preference to
words more Intelligible to Greeks or Gentiles.
4. The neuter participle is uaed frequently for a
substantive, both in the Gospel and the Acta.
6. The infinitive with the genitive of the article,
to indicate design or result, as in L 9, is frequent
in both books.
8. The frequent use of 8* mi, for the sake of
emphasis, as in iii. 9.
7. The frequent use of no! ubris, as in i. 17.
8. The preposition aiv is used about ssventy-
five times in Gospel and Acts: in the other Gospels
rarely.
9. 'Artrfftw l» used eleven times in Gospel and
Acta; elsewhere only twice, by St Paul (3 Cor.).
10. El 81 /iff ye is used five times for the 1 1 Si
nil of Hark and John.
II. Zlrttv rp6t, which is frequent in St. Luke,
a used elsewhere only by St. John : AaXttr woit,
also frequent, is only thrice used by other writers.
19. St Luke very frequently uses the auxiliary
verb with a participle for the verb, as in v. 17, I.
90.
18. Ha makes remarkable use of verbs com-
pounded with Sid and •Vi-
la. Xdpif . very frequent in Luke, is only used
thrice by John, and not at all by Matthew and
Mark. TUrrt)p, vmrwla, v*rrt)ptop, are frequent
with Luke; the two first are used once each by
John, and not by the other Evangelists.
16. The same may be said of tiayyt\l(t<r9ai,
once In Matthew, and not at all in Mark and John;
broarpi$eu>, onoe in Mark, not in other Gospels;
ifurrArat, not used in the other three Gospels;
tUpx'<r9<u, thirty-two times in Luke's Gospel and
the Acts, and only twice each in Matthew, Mark,
and John ; wopax/njua frequent in Luke, and only
twice elsewhere, in Matthew.
16. The words o/u>9u/ta8oV, tiiKafUs, ovr/p, as
a form of address and before substantives, are also
characteristic of Luke.
17. Some Latin words are used by Luke: ArrtaV
(vili. 80), ti),ipiar (x. 85), oovtipioy (xix. 20),
noAmria (Acta xvi. 19).
On comparing the Gospel with the Acta it is
found that the style of the latter is more pure and
free from Hebrew idioms ; and the style of the later
portion of the Acta is more pure than that of the
former. Where Luke used the materials he derived
from others, oral or written, or both, his style
reflects the Hebrew idioms of them; but when he
eomes to scenes of which he wss an eye-witness
and describes entirely in his own words, these dis-
appear.
Til. Quotatiotufrom the Old Testament. — In
the citations from the 0. T., of the principal of
which the following is a list, there are plain marks
af the use of the Septuagint version : —
LTJKE, GOSPEL OF
Lake vB. 27.
Mel. DLL
« Till. 10.
Is.tL».
u x. 37.
TMatrLE; Uv. xix.
u xrtH.90.
Kx.xx.ll
■• xU. 48.
Is. M. 7; Jer.vO.il.
m xx. 17.
Ps. cxviii. 22, 28.
u xx. 28.
Drat xxv. 6.
k xx. 42,48.
Ps. ex. 1.
u xxU. 87.
Is. ml. 12.
u mmU. 46.
Ps. ■■■!. 5.
Luke L 17.
u tt.28.
« li. 24.
« 10 4,6,6.
« tv 4.
ii iv. 8.
a fr. 10,11.
m tv. 12.
■<• It. 18.
sUl.lv. 4,6.
Xx.xul.3.
Lev. xtt.8.
Is. xl. 8, 4, 6.
Drat vm. 8.
Dent vl. IS.
Ps. xd. 11, M.
Drat vt 16.
Ia.udLl,x,
Tin. Integrity of the Gospel— ike fret Iw
Chapters. — The Gospel of Luke is quoted by
Justin Martyr and by the author of the Clementins
Homilies. The silence of the apostolic fathers only
indicates that it was admitted into the Canon some-
what late, which was probably the case. The result
of the Marcion controversy is, as we have seen, that
our Gospel was in use before A. d. 180. A special
question, however, has been raised about the two
first chapters. The critical history of these is beat
drawn out perhaps in Meyer's note. The chief
objection against them is fo mded on the garbled
opening of Marcion 's Gospel, who omits the two
first chapters, and connects iii. 1 immediately with
iv. 81. (So Tertullian, " Anno quintodecimo prin-
clpatus Tiberiani proponit Deum deacendisse in
civitatem Galilaxe Capharnaum," coat Mare. iv.
7.) But any objection founded on this would apply
to the third chapter as well ; and the history of our
Lord's childhood seems to have been known to and
quoted by Justin Martyr (see Apology, i. § 33, and
an allusion, Dial, cum Tryph. 100) about the time
of Marcion. There is therefore no real ground for
distinguishing between the two first chapters and
the rest; and the arguments for the genuineness
of St Luke's Gospel apply to the whole inspired
narrative as we now possess it (see Meyer's note;
also Volkmar, p. 180).
IX. Contents of the Gospel. — This Gospel con-
tains — 1. A preface, i. 1-4. S. An account of
the time preceding the ministry of Jesus, i. 6 to ii.
63. 3. Several accounts of discourses and acta of
our Lord, common to Luke, Matthew, and Mark,
related for the most part in their order, and be-
longing to Capernaum and the neighborhood, iii. 1
to ix. 60. 4. A collection of similar accounts, re-
ferring to a certain journey to Jerusalem, most of
them peculiar to Luke, ix. 61 to xviii. 14. 6. An
account of the sufferings, death, and resurrection
of Jesus, common to Luke with the other Evange-
lists, except as to some of the accounts of what
took place after the resurrection, xviii. 16 to the
end.
Sources. — Works of Ireneus (ed. Stieren);
Justin Martyr (ed. Otto); Tertullian, Origen, and
Epiphanius (ed. Dindorf); Hippolytus (ed. Miller);
and Euaebiua (ed. Valerius); Marsh's MiekaeSt;
De Wette, EMeitung; Meyer, JCommeniar ; the
works of Hahn, RitschI, Baur, and Volkmar, quoted
above; Credner, Kawm ; Dean Alford's Cbatawav
tary; Dictionaries of Winer and Herxog; Com-
mentaries of KuindL Wetstein, and others ; Thiersch,
Church History (Eng. Trans.); Obhauaen, £ce*-
heil ; Hug, Emleitung ; Weisse, JEvangelUn/rage j
Greek Testament, Tischendorf, ed. vii., and notes
there. W. T.
* The moat important works on the Gospel of
Luke will be found referred to in the addition to
the art Gospels, p. 969 £ Others worthy of notice
are the following. Patristlo : Origan, Bomilits
extant in Jerome's Latin translation, with a few
Greek fragments (Mks-e's Patrol Qrmem. vai. rib
Digitized by
Google
LUMP OF FIGS
wU. 1801-1910); Eusebius, Omm. (fragments), in
Migne, Mrf. ixir. 520-606; Cyril of Alexandria,
Omm., in Migne, ibid, lxzii. 475-960, Syriae Ter-
tian of the same, mora complete, edited by R. P.
Smith, Oxford, 1858, 4to, end trans, by him into
English, 9 volt. Ozf. 1859, 8ro; Euthymius Zigm-
benus, Omm. in IV. Evangctia, ed. C. F. Mat-
thssi, 8 wli. Lip*. 1793 (Migne, vol. oxxiz.);
Theophylact, Opp. i. 867-498, Venet 1754 (Migne,
toL exxiii.); Ambrose, Opp. 1. 1261-1544, Per.
1686; Bene, Work*, ed. Giles, Tola, x., xL, Lond.
1843. See also Corderius, Catena texaginta qm'nqut
Graeontm Patrum in 8. Lucam, Antv. 1638, fol. ;
Klcetas, Catena, etc in Malt Scrip"- Vet Nona
CoU. ix. 636-780; Cramer, Catena in S. Luom el
B. Joanrnt Evv., Oxon. 1841.
Peering by the eommentariet of the toholaitie
divines, and others, we further note: C. Segaar,
06m. phiL it theoL in Evang. Luca> Capp. xi.
[not ix. at in Winer and others] priora, Traj. ad
Bhen. 1766; Moras, PraltcU. in Luca Ex., Lips.
1795; Talckenaer, Selecta e Scholia Vakkmarii in
Libb. quotdnm N. T. ed. E. Wauenbergh, 3 torn.
Amst 1815-18 (rol. i. Luke and Acts); C. W.
Stein, Omm. » dem Ev. d. Luca*, Halle, 1830;
F. A. Bornemann. Scholia in Lucm Ev., Lips.
1830, Tamable pbilulogically ; James Smith of Jor-
danhill, Din. on the lift and Writing* of St.
Luke, in hit Voyage and Shipwreck of St. Paul,
3d ed. Lond. 1856, pp. 1-58; [N. N. Whiting,]
The Goepel according to Luke, tram, from the
Greek, on the Brute of the Common Enylith Ver-
non, with Ifotee. New York (Amer. Bible Union),
1860, 4to: H. Jacoby, Vier Beitrage turn Ver-
ttandnit* der JReden dee Herrn im Ev. d. Lucas,
Nordhausen, 1863; J. J. Tan Oosterzee, Dae Ev.
nock Lukat, theoL-homiL iearbeitet, 3* Aufl.
Bielefeld, 1867 (Theil Hi. of Lange's Bibelwerk),
brant, from 3d ed. by Dr. Philip Schaff and Rer.
a C. Starbuek, N. T. 1866 (vol. ii. of Lange't
Comas.).
More popular eommentariet are those of James
Thompson, Expo*. Lecture* en the Goepel of St.
Luke, 3 vol*. Lond. 1849-51; James Ford, The
Gotpcl of St. Luke ilhutrnted from Ancient and
Modem Author*, Lond. 1851 ; James Foote, Lec-
ture* on the Goepel according to St. Luke, 3d ed.
3 vols. Glaag. 1857; James Stark, Comm. on the
Goepel according to Luke, 8 roll. Lond. 1866
(doctrinal); and Van Doren, Suggestive Omm. on
SL Luke, Amer. reprint, 8 Tola. N. Y. 1868.
For the older literature relating to this Gospel,
ene may oonsnlt the well-known bibliographical
works of Lilienthal, Walch, Winer, Dans, and
Darling. A.
• LUMP OP PIGS, 8 K. xx. 7. [Fra-
Tbjoc, c]
L\JR ATlUrj (e-«Anria(o/ifj'oiJ. Tnis wora is
ned twiee in the N. T. In the enumeration of
LUZ
1699
• The ground for this suggestion, besides the n-
maikable agnement or the ancient radons as given
above, Is Josh, xrlll. 13, when the words ^H^'b^
rTWv should, according to ordinary usage, be ren-
sered " to the shoulder of Lmmh ; " the oA, which Is
the particle of motion In Hebrew, not being required
acre, as It Is In the former part of the same rem*.
Other names an found both with and without a similar
n, at Jotbah, Jotbathah; Tunnath, Tim-
Matt. It. 94, the " lunatics " are distinguished frost
the demoniacs ; in Matt xrii. 15, the name is ap-
plied to a boy who is expressly declared to ban
been possessed. It is evident, therefore, that the
word itself refers to some disease, affecting both the
body and the mind, which might, or might not, be a
sign of possession (see on this subject Demoniacs).
By the description of Mark ix. 17-86, it is con-
cluded that this disease was epilepsy (see Winer,
Rtako. "Besessene;" Trench, On the Miracle*,
p. 363). The origin of the name (as of crsAnruK**
and o-cAt/v^At/toi in earlier Greek, " lunaticus "
in Latin, and equivalent words in modem lan-
guages; is to be found in the belief that diseases
of a paroxysmal character were affected by the light,
or by the changes of the moon. A. U.
* LTJ8T, not restricted formerly to one passion,
bat any strong desire or inclination. It occurs in
the A. V. in the narrower and the wider sense. It
is employed to translate ttj.jpj, fin*"]!*?, ni$J(J
and iwiSvpla, rjjorr), tft\u, wiBot. In Ex. xt! 9
tPSJ (in the A. V. •> lost") denotes strictly the
*out at the seat of the desires. The meaning of
" lust" as a verb (found six times in the A. V.)
fluctuates in like manner. H.
* LUSTY, Judg. iii. 89, archaic for "stout,"
" rigorous " ; but in the marg., " fat," as the A. V.
renders JOB? elsewhere, except It. xxx. 83, when
ills "plenteous." H.
LUZ (TV?, and perhaps iTWb," ». e. Lutah
[almond-tree, Ges. : ate below], which is also the
reading of the Samar. Codex and of its two ver-
sions: of the LXX. and Eusebius, Aoufd 1 and
AoufS;* [Vat. once in Josh, xviii. 13 Kovfa:]
and the Vulgate Luza). The uncertainty which
attends the name attaches in a greater degree to
the place itself. It seems impossible to discover
with precision whether Luz and Bethel represent
one and the tame town — the former the Conaanite,
the latter the Hebrew name — or whether they
were distinct places, though in close proximity.
The latter is the natural inference from two of the
passages in which Luz is spoken of. Jacob " called
the name of the place Bethel, but the name of the
city was called Luz in the beginning " (Gen. xxriii.
19): as if the spot — the "certain place" — on
which he had " lighted," where he saw his vision
and erected his pillar, were outside the walls of the
Canaanite town. And with this agree the terms
of the specification of the common boundary of
Ephraim and Benjamin. It ran " from Bethel to
Lux " (Josh. xri. 2), or " from the wilderness of
Betharen ... to Luz, to the shoulder of Luzah
southward, that it Bethel" (xviii. 13); as if Bethel
were on the south side of the hill on which the
other city stood.
Other passages, however, teem to speak of the
* In one case only do the LXX. omit the termination,
namely, In Gen. xxrlil. 19, and hen they give the
name as Ouhunmaona, OvAowioovt (so In many M83.,
but Bom. OvAapAovf, Alex. OvAof^uwv ), Incorporating
with It the preceding Hebrew word Ulim, D^S, at
they have also done in the eass of Lalsh (tee p. 1581,
note «.). The eagerness with which Jerome attacks
this monstrous name at erery passible jpportmtrr Is
Tery curious sod nbarsctarhtte.
Digitized by
Google
1700 MTZ
two u identical — » Lew in the land of Canaan, that
is Bethel " (Gen. xxxv. 6); and in the account of
the capture of Bethel, after the conquest of the
country, it ia said that " the name of the city before
was Luz " (Judg. i. S3). Nor should it be over-
looked that, in the very first notice of Abram'a
arrival in Canaan, Bethel is mentioned without
Luz (Gen. xii. 8, xiil. 8), just as Luz is mentioned
by Jacob without Bethel (xlviii. 3).
Perhaps there never was a point on which the
evidence was so curiously contradictory. In the
passages just quoted we find Bethel mentioned in
the most express manner two generations before the
occurrence of the event which gave it its name;
while the patriarch to whom that event occurred,
and who made there the most solemn vow of his
life, in recurring to that very circumstance, calls
the place by its heathen name. We farther find
the Israelite name attached, before the conquest of
the country by the Israelites, to a city of the build-
ing of which we have no record, and which city is
then in the possession of the Canaanites.
The conclusion of the writer is that the two
places were, during the times preceding the con-
quest, distinct, Luz bring the city and Bethel the
pillar and altar of Jacob : that after the destruction
of Luz by the tribe of Ephraim the town of Bethel
arose: that the close proximity of the two was
sufficient to account for their being taken as iden-
tical in cases where there was no special reason for
discriminating them, and that the great subsequent
reputation of Bethel will account for the occurrence
of its name in Abram'a history in reference to a
date prior to its existence, sa well as in the records
of the conquest.
2. When the original Lux was destroyed, through
the treachery of one of its inhabitants, the man
who had introduced the Israelites into the town
went into the " land of the Hittites " and built a
city, which he named after the former one. This
city was standing at the date of the record (Judg.
L 26). But its situation, as well as that of the
•■ land of the Hittites," has never been discovered
since, and is one of the favorite puzzles of Scripture
geographers. Eusebius (Onom. Aou(i) mentions
a place of the name as standing near Shechem,
nine (Jerome, three) miles from Neapolis (Nablut).
The objection to this is the difficulty of placing in
central Palestine, and at that period, a district ex-
clusively Hittite. Some have imagined it to be in
Cyprus, a> if Chittim were the country of the Hit-
tites ; others in Arabia, as at Lysa, a Roman town
in the desert south of Palestine, on the road to
Akabah (Rob. 1. 187).
The signification of the name is quite uncertain.
It is usually taken as meaning " hazel," and de-
noting the presence of such trees; but the latest
lexicographer (Flint, ffnndwb. 666) has returned
to the opinion of an earlier scholar (Hiller, Onom.
70), that the notion at the root of the word is rather
" bending " or " sinking," as of a valley. G.
* The difficulties suggested in this article and
in that on Bethel as to the use of the two names,
an removed by careful attention to the narrative.
There seems to have been no town in the locality
In the time of Abraham ; but he pitched his tent
and built his attar in a place which Moses can only
a • Luks mentions that the Lystrlans spoke tn their
Mtftr* tongue (Acts xfv. 11), because It explains why
Paul and Barnabas did not at once rabuke the cry of
UM multitude . « The gods an come down to us In
LYCAONIA
describe by means of the names of the places i
thereto at the time of his writing (Gen. xtt. f
xiil. 8). Nor had any town yet been built at the
time of Jacob's first (Gen. xxviii. 11-19), nor of his
second (xxxv. 6) visit, the narrative implying that
it was a solitary place. At his first visit Jacob
named the place Bethel; but he remained then
only a single night, and then was no one with hhn
to hear or give currency to the designation. At
his second visit therefore, with his numerous house-
hold (" he aud all the people that were with him ")
when he apparently sojourned there for some aims,
he repeated it, and it became thenceforward to bis
descendants the rightful name of the locality.
When he removed thence, it again became an un-
inhabited place, and the Canaanites built a town
which they called by their own name of Los, and
which continued quite down to the conquest.
During the interval between the building of the
town and the conquest there were therefore to the
Israelites two names, that it facto of the town,
Luz ; and that de jurt, of the locality (there was
yet no such town), Bethel Either name is used
to describe the place. (Gen. xxxv. 6; Judg. i. 21,
etc.) The Canaanite town was built in the interval
between Jacob's second visit and the time of iris
death — probably before his going down to Egypt.
This second visit having been before the birth of
Benjamin (xxxv. 6, 16),tbere was ample time for
the building. When Jacob speaks of the place at
a later time (xlviii. 8), he naturally calls it by ita
existing name; while in Judges i. 23, after it bad
been destroyed and replaced by an Israelite town,
it is as naturally called by the latter, with paren-
thetical mention of the former name. The sug-
gestion in the above article, that the later town did
not precisely cover the site of the earlier, in expla-
nation of Josh. zvi. 2, seems altogether probable.
F. G.
LYOAOTTIA (At/awla). This is one of
those districts of Asia Minor, which, as mentioned
in the N. T., are to be understood rather in an
ethnological than a strictly political sense. From
what is said in Acta xiv. 11 of " the speech of Ly-
caonia," it is evident that the inhabitants of the
district, in St. Paul's day, spoke something vary
different from ordinary Greek. Whether this lan-
guage was some Syrian dialect [Cappadocia], or
a corrupt form of Greek, has been much debated
(Jablonsky, OpuK. liL 3; Guiding, Dt Lmg. Lf-
coon. 1726).« The fact that the Lyeaouiaus were
familiar with the Greek mythology ia consistent
with either supposition. It is deeply int ere s tin g to
see these rude country people, when Paul and Bar-
nabas worked miracles among them, rushing to the
conclusion that the strangers were Mercury and
Jupiter, whose visit to this very neighborhood forme
the subject of one of Ovid's most charming stories
(Ovid, Mttam. viii. 628). Nor can we fail to no-
tice how admirably St Paul's address on the occa-
sion was adapted to a simple and imperfectly civil-
ized race (xiv. 16-17). This was at Lystra, in
the heart of the country. Further to the east was
Debbe (ver. 6), not fin- from the chief pan which
leads up through Taurus, from CnjciA and the
coast, to the central table-land. At the western
limit of Lycaoniawaa Icokium (ver. 1), in the dine-
the Ukensas of men." They wen Ignorant of me
language In which this was spoken. It doss not »»
pear that the Apostles passis s id any permanent gtr> t
tongues to aid them In p rsae hmg the Os sps l ■.
Digitized by
Google
LYCIA
two of Astioch i> Piarou. A good Roman
road interacted the district along the line thai in-
dicated. On St Paul's first missionary Journej be
traversed Lyoaonia from west to east, and then re-
turned on his stent (v. 91; an 9 Tim. iii. 11). On
the second and third journeys he entered it from
the east; and after leaving it, travelled in the one
case to Troas (Acta xvi. 1-8), in the other to Eph-
eaus (Acta xviii. 93, xix. 1). Lyeaonia is for the
moat part a dreary plain, bare of trees, destitute of
fresh water, and with several salt lakes. It is, how-
stwr, very favorable to sheep-Arming. In the first
ootioes of this district, which occur in connection
with Roman history, we find it under the rule of
robber-chieftains. After the provincial system had
embraced the whole of Asia Minor, the boundaries
of the provinces were variable; and Lyeaonia was,
politically, sometimes in Cappadocia, sometimes in
Galatia. A question has been raised, in connection
with this point, concerning the chronology of parts
of St. Paul's life. This subject is noticed in the
article on Galatia. J. S. H.
LTOIA (Aw(o: [£»<*»]). [Acts xxvii. 5,] is
the name of that southwestern region of the penin-
sula of Asia Minor which is immediately opposite
the island of Rhodes. It is a remarkable district
both physically and historically. The last emi-
nences of the range of Taurus come down here in
Kajestic msssfs to the sea, forming the heights of
Cragus and Anticrsgus, with the river Xanthus
winding between them, and ending in the long
series of promontories called by modem sailors the
" seven capes," among which are deep inlets favor-
able to seafaring and piracy. In this district are
those curious imd very ancient architectural remains,
which have buen so fully illustrated by our English
travellers, Sir a Fellows, and Messrs. Spratt and
Forbes, and many specimens of which are in the
British Museum. Whatever may have been the
political history of the earliest Lrcians, their
sonntry was incorporated in the Persian empire,
and their ships were conspicuous in the great war
against the Greeks (Herod, vii. 91, 99). After the
death of Alexander the Great, Lyeia was Included
In the Greek Seleucid kingdom, and was a part of
the territory which the Romans forced Antiochns
to oede (Llv. xxxvii. 55). It was made in the first
place one of the continental possessions of Rhodes
[Caw a] : but before long it was politically sepa-
rated from that island, and allowed to be an inde-
pendent state. This has been called the golden
period of the history of Lyeia. It is in this period
that we find it mentioned (1 Mace. xv. 23) at one
ef the countries to which the Romans sent de-
spatches in favor of the Jews under Simon Macca-
bteus. It was not till the reign of Claudius that
Lyda became part of the Roman provincial sys-
tem. At first it was combined with Pamphylia,
and the governor bore the title of " Proconsul
Lyciej et Pamphylia)" (Gruter, Tha. p. 458).
Such seems to have been the condition of the dis-
trict when St. Paul visited the Lycian towns of
/ataba (Acta xxi. 1) and Mtba (Acts xxvii. 5).
At a later period of the Roman empire it was a
separate province, with Myra for lt» oapital.
J. S. H.
LYDTJA (Kttia.: Lydda), tne Greek form of
the name which originally appears in the Hebrew
Menrds as Lod. It is familiar to us as the scene
af one of St Peter's acts of healing, on the para-
VfUe iBneas, one of " the saints who dwelt at
LYDDA
1701
Lydda " (Acts ix. 33), the consequence of which
was the conversion of a very large number of the
inhabitants of the town and of the neighboring
plain of Sharon (ver 35). Here Peter was residing
when the disciples of Joppa fetched him to that citj
in their distress at the death of Tabitha (ver. 38).
Quite in accordance with these and the other
scattered indications of Scripture is the situation
of the modern town, which exactly retains its name,
and probably its position. Lidd (Tobler, 3ta Wand.
pp. 69, 456), or Lidd (Robinson, BiU. Ret. li. 944),
stands in the Jferjf, or meadow, of Ton Omeir,
part of the great maritime plain which anciently
bore the name of Shakom, and which, when covered
with its crops of corn, reminds the traveller of ths
rich wheat-fields of our own Lincolnshire (Rob. iii.
145 ; and see Thomson, Land and Book, ch. ixxiv.).
It is 9 miles from Joppa," and is the first town on the
northernmost of the two roads between that place
and Jerusalem. Within a circle of 4 miles still
stand Ono (Ktfr Awm), Hadid (d-BadUheh), and
Neballat {BtU-NtbaUah), three places constantly
associated with Lod in the ancient records. The
watercourse outside the town is said still to beai
the name of Abi Butrtu (Peter), in memory of the
Apostle (Rob. ii. 948; Tobler, 471). Lying so
conspicuously iu this fertile plain, and upon the
main road from the sea to the interior, Lydda
could hardly escape an eventful history. It was in
the time of Josephus a place of considerable size.
which gave it* name to one of the three (or four,
xL 67) " governments " or tonarchies (see Joseph.
B. J. iii. 3, { 5) which Demetrius Soter (b. c.
cir. 158), at the request of Jonathan Maccabaus,
released from tribute, and transferred from Samaria
to the estate of the Temple at Jerusalem (1 Mace,
xi. 34; comp. x. 30, 38; xi. 28, 57); though by
whom these districts were originally defined does
not appear (see Michadis, .BiA./ur DngtL). A cen-
tury biter (b. c. cir. 45) Lydda, with Uophna, Em-
maus, and Thamna, became the prey of the insa-
tiable Casslus, by whom the whole of the inhab-
itants were sold into slavery to raise the exorbitant
taxes imposed (Joseph. Ant. xiv. 11, § 9J. From
this they were, it is true, soon released by Antony;
but a few years only elapsed before their city (a. d
66) was burnt by Cestius Gallus on his way from
Cseearea to Jerusalem. He entered it when all the
people of the place but fifty were absent at the
feast of Tabernacles in Jerusalem (Joseph. B. J.
ii.- 19, § 1). He must have passed the hardly cold
ruins not more than a fortnight after, when flying
for his life before the infuriated Jews of Jerusalem.
Some repair appears to have been immediately
made, for in leas than two years, early in A. D. 68,
it was in a condition to be again taken by Vespa-
sian, then on his way to his campaign in the south
of Judaea. Vespasian introduced fresh inhabitants
from the prisoners lately taken in Galilee (Joseph.
B. J. It. 8, { 1#. But the substantial rebuilding
of the town — lying as it did in the road of every
invader and every countermarch — can hardly have
been effected till the disorders of this unhappy
country were somewhat composed. Hadrian's
reign, after the suppression of the revolt of Bar-
Cocheba (a. o. cir. 136), when Paganism was
triumphant, and Jerusalem rebuilding at JSlis
a • Lydda (as ascertained by leveling) Is somewhat
over 11 miles from Joppa (Orinmct Stintf tf Jims
salon, p. SI). H.
Digitized by
Google
1702
LYDDA
I apitolina, would nut l>e an improbable time for
thia. and for the bestowal on Lydda of the new
lame of Diospolia " — City of Zeus — which ia
stated by Jerome to hare accompanied the rebuild-
ing. (See Quarantine, Peregr. i., lib. 4, cap. 8.)
We have already seen that thia new name, as ia
so often the vaae in Palestine, has disappeared in
favor of the ancient one. [Accho; Kknath, etc.]
When Kiinebius wrote (A. ■>. 320-330) Dios-
polis was a well-known and much-frequented town,
U which he often refers, though the names of
•either it nor I.ydda occur in the actual catalogue
jf his Onomntticon. In Jerome's time (Epitaph.
Paula, § 8)," a. r>. 404, it was an episcopal see.
rendition reports that the first bishop was " Zenas
•Ae lawyer " (Tit. iii. 13), originally one of the
anrenty disciples (Dorotheus, in Keland, 879); but
ie first historical mention of the see is the signa-
ture of " Aitius Lyddensis " to the acts of the
Council of Nice* (a. d. 325; Keland, 878). After
thia the name is found, now Diospolia, now Lydda,
amongst the lists of the Councils down to A. D.
518 (Rob. ii. 245; Mislin, ii. 149). The bishop
M Lydda, originally subject to Ciesarea, became at
a later date suffragan to Jerusalem (see the two
lists in Von Kaumer, 401 ) ; and this is still the
aue- In the latter end of 415 a Council of 14
bishops was held here, before which Pelagiua ap-
peared, and by whom, after much tumultuous
LYDDA
debate, and in the absence of his two
was acquitted of heresy, and received as a Chriai
brother 1 (Milner, Hot. of Ch. of Christ, Cent. V.
oh. iii.). St. George, the patron saint of England,
was a native of I.ydda. After his martyrdom his
remains were buried there (see quotations by Rub
inson, ii. 245), and over them a church was after
wards built and dedicated to bis honor. The erec-
tion of this church is commonly ascribed to Jus-
tinian, but there seems to be no real ground for tha
assertion,*' and at present it is quite uncertain by
whom it was built. When the country was taken
possession of by the Saracens in ii» early part of
the 8th century, the church was destroyed ; and ia
this ruined condition it was found by the Crusader*
in A. D. 1099, who reinstituted the see, and added
to its endowment the neighboring city and lands
of Rmatth. Apparently at the same time tha
church was rebuilt and strongly fortified (Rob. ii.
247). It appears at that time to hare been out-
side the city. Again destroyed by Saladin after tha
battle of Hattln in 1191, it was again rebuilt, if
we are to believe the tradition, which, however, ia
not so consistent or trustworthy as one would de-
sire, by Richard Cosur-de lion (Will. Tyr.j but see
Rob. ii. 245, 246). The remains of the church
still form the most remarkable object in the modern
village. A minute and picturesque account of them
will be found in Robinson (ii. 244), and » view in
Tan Uv . aide's PnyaTItratl (plate 55). The town
a, for a Mohammedan place, busy and prosperous
(see Thomson, Land and Book; Van de Vdde,
8. <f P. i. 244). Buried in palms, and with a
irge well cloce to the entrance, it looks from a
listance inviting enough, but its interior is very
repulsive on account of the extraordinary number
■>f persons, old and young, whom one encounters
at every step, either totally blind or afflicted with
loathsome diseases of the eyes. Indeed it is pro-
a Was thia the Dfoepolls mentioned by Josephus
[AM. XV. 6, } 1, and B. J. 1. J 6)? Rut It la djfflcult
te diicover If two plares are not intended, possibly
neither of them identical with Lydda.
fan there he any connection, etymological or other,
between the two names? In the Dirt, of Q~oxr. I. 778,
a modern Egyptian village la mentioned named Lydda,
as" w**xh the ancient name was also Diospolia.
t> Jerome la wrong hare In placing the raising of
Doreaa it Lydda. So also Bitter (fulditioa, p. 551)!
■arailw* the miracle to St. Ami. ■
verbis! for this; and the writer was told on ens
■pot in 1858, as a common saying, that in IjfU
every man has either but one eye or none at all.
Lydda was, for some time previous to the de-
struction of Jerusalem, the seat of a very famous
Jewish school, scarcely second to that of Jabnek.
About the time of the siege it was presided over by
Rabbi Gamaliel, second of the name (Iigttfoot,
Chor. Cent, xri.). Some curious anecdotes and
short notices from the Talmods concerning t ar>
e « Ilia iniaerabtlls Srnodus DioapoUtanlu " (Je-
rome, Bp. ad Atyp. rt Aue $ 2).
•I The church which Justinian built to St. Qeotgs
waa in Bltana («»■ B>£arot<), somewhere In Armenia
(I'rocoplua, de Sd. Jkst. 8. 4 ; m Rob. p. 346). gee the
remarks of Robinson against toe possibility of Coo
stantlne having built the church at Lydda. Bat wear
there not probably two churchat at Lydda, one dsas
catsd to St. Oeorge, and one to the Virgin! Baa ■»
land, p. 878.
Digitized by
Google
LYDIA
fnand by Lightfoot One at these states that
» Queen Helena celebrated tbe Feast of TebernscIA
than"!
Aa the city of St George, who b one with the
haoaa personage d-Khudr, Lydda b bald in much
honor by tba Muslim*. In their traditions tba gate
of tba city will ha tba aaene of tba final oombat
be t ween Chriat and Antiehriat (Sale's Koran, note
to eh. 48, and PrtL Dins. iv. $ 4; also Jabl ad-
Din, Ttmplt efJenuaitm, p. 484). O.
XiTDTA. (AvS/o: [Lydi]), a maritime province
in the weat of Asia Minor, branded by Myaia on
the N., Phrygia on the E, and Oaria on the S.
The name occurs only in 1 Mace. viii. 8 (the ren-
dering of the A. V. in E*. xxx. 5 being incorrect
tor Ludim) ; It b there enumerated among the dis-
trict* which the Romans took away from Antiochus
the Great after tbe battle of Magnesia in B. a 190,
and transferred to Eomenes II., king of Pergamus.
Some difficulty arises in the passage referred to
from the names "India and Media" found in con-
nection with H: but if we regard these sa incor-
rectly given either by the writer or by a copyist for
u Ionia and Mysia," the agreement with Livy's
account of tbe came transaction (xzzvU. 56) will be
sufficiently established, tbe notice of the maritime
provinces alone in tbe book of Maccabees being
explicable on tbe ground of their being beat known
to tba inhabitants of Palestine. For the connec-
tion between Lydia and the Lud and Ludim of the
O. T-, we LOdim. Lydia is included in the
-Asia" of theN. T. W. L. B.
LYDTA (AuMa: [iy«a]), the first European
convert of St. Paul, and afterwards his Ik
during his first stay at PhiHppi (Act* xvi. 14, 16,
alao 40). She was a Jewish proselyte (rtjBeutri)
rev 9*ir) at the time of the Apostle's coming;
and it was at tbe Jewish Sabbath-worship by the
side of a stream (ver. 18) that the preaching of tbe
Gospel reached her heart. She was probably only
a temporary resident at PhilippL Her native place
was Thtatira, in tbe prolines of Asia (ver. 14;
Rev. 1L 18), and It b interesting to notice that
through her, indirectly, tbe Gospel may have come
Into that very district, where St. Paul himself had
recently been forbidden directly to preach it (Acta
xvi. 6). Tnyatin was famous for its dyeing-works;
and Lydia was connected with thb trade (wopfup6-
msAir), either as a seller of dye, or of dyed goods.
We into that she was a person of considerable
realth, partly from the fact that she gave a home
• St Paul and bis companions, partly from tbe
Motion of the conversion of her "household,"
Loder which term, whether children are included
ar not, slaves are no doubt comprehended. Of
Lydm'a character we are led to form a high esti-
mate, from her candid reception of the Gospel, her
argent hospitality, and her continued friendship
to Paul and Silas when they were persecuted.
Whether she was one of " those women who labored
with Paul in the Gospel " at Philippi, as mentioned
afterward* in the Epistle to that place (Phil. iv.
1), it b impossible to say. As regards her name,
bough it is certainly curious that Thyatira was in
■he district anciently called " Lydia," there seems
.» reason for doubting that It was simply a proper
name, or for supposing with Grotius that she was
ita dieta a solo natali." J. S. II.
liYSAITIAS (Aixrarfas: [Zjfsawaij ), men-
tioned by St. Luke in one of hb ohroDologioal
•aaaages (iii. 1) as being tetnreh of Anruma
LYSIA8
1703
(». e. the district round Abila) in the 15th year of
Tiberius, at the time when Heiod Antipaa was
tstrarch of Galilee, and Herod Philip tetrerch of
Itureea and Trachonltb It happens that Josephus
speaks of a prince named Lysanias who ruled over
a territory In the neighborhood of Lebanon In the
time of Antony and Cleopatra, and that he alao
mentions Abilene as associated with tbe name of a
tetrerch Lysanias, while recounting events of the
reigns of Caligula and Claudius. These circum-
stances hare given to Strauss and others an oppor-
tunity for amusing the Evangelist of confusion and
error: but we shall see that this accusation rests on
a groundless assumption.
What Josephus says of the Lysanias who was
eontemporery with Antony and Cleopatra (t. e. who
lived 60 years before the time referred to by St
Luke) b, that he succeeded hb father Ptolemy, tor
son of Mennaeus, in the government of Chain*,
under Mount Lebanon (B. J. i. 13, § 1; AM. xiv.
7, i 4); and that be was put to death at the in-
stance of Cleopatra (Ant. xv. 4, § 1), who seem* to
have received a good part of his territory. It is to
be observed that AbUa b not specified here at all,
and that Lysanias b not called tetrerch.
What Josephus says of Abila and the tetrarchy
in the reigns of Caligula and Claudius (i. e. about
80 years after the time mentioned in St Luke's
Gospel) is, that the former emperor promised the
"tetrarchy of Lysanias" to Agrippa {Ant. xviii. 6,
{ 10), and that the latter actually gave to him
" Abila of Lysanias " and the territory near Leba-
non (AM. xix. 5, § L. with B. J. ii. 12, $ 8).
Now, assuming Abilene to be included in both
eases, and tbe former Lysanias and tbe latter to be
identical, there b nothing to binder a prince of the
same name and family from having reigned as
tetrsrch over the territory in the intermediate
period. But it b probable that the Lysanias men-
tioned by Josephus in the second instance u actu-
ally the prince referred to by St Luke. Thus,
instead of a contradiction, we obtain from the
Jewish historian a confirmation of the Evangelist;
and the argument becomes very decisive If, as some
think, Abilene is to be excluded from tbe territory
mentioned in the story which has reference to Cleo-
patra.
Fuller details are given in Davidson's Introduc-
tion to tht N. T.l 314-230; and there b a good
brief notice of tbe subject in Kawlinson's Bampton
Lectin* for 1859, p. 203 [p. 200, Amer. ad.],
and note 113. J. 8. H.
LYSIAS (Avo-iar), s nobleman of the blood-
royal (1 Mace. iii. 89; 2 Mace. xL 1), who was
entrusted by Antiochus Epiphanes (dr. B. o. 166)
with tbe government of southern Syria, and the
guardianship of hb son Antiochus Eupator (1 Msec
iii. 82; 2 Msec. x. 11). In the execution of his
office Lysias armed a very considerable force against
Judas Maccabeus. Two detachments of thb army
under Nieanor (2 Msec vilL) and Gorgias wets
defeated by the Jewa near Emmaus (1 Mace, iv.),
and in tbe following year Lysias himself met with
a much more serious reverse at Bethsurs (b. c 165),
which was followed by the purification of the Tem-
ple Shortly after thb, Antiochus Epiphanes died
B. c. 164, and Lysias assumed the government aa
guardian o* hb son, who was yet a child (App.
Syr. 46, /merit wattlon 1 Mace. vi. 17). The
war against the Jewa was renewed, and, after a
arret* straggle, Lysias, who took the young kfcaj
Digitized by
Google
1704
LYBIAS
with him, captureu ltetnsara, and ni besieging
Jerusalem, when he received tidings of the approach
of Philip, to whom Antiochus had transferred the
guardianship of the prince (1 Mace ri. 18 ft ; 8
Mace. xffl.). He defeated Philip (a. c. 168), and
was supported at Rome; but in the next year, to-
gether with bia ward, fell into the handi of Deme-
trius Soter [Demetrius I.], who pot them both
to death (1 Mace vii. 3-4; 8 Mace. x!t. 8; Joe.
AM. ni. 12, §§ 15, 16; App. Sgr. ec 46-»7; Polyb.
xxzL 18, 19).
There are considerable differences between the
first and second books of Maccabees with regard
to the campaigns of Gorgias and the subsequent
one of Lysias: the former places the defeat of
Ljsias in the reign of Antiochus Epiphanes before
the purification of the Temple (1 Mace. iv. 86-36),
the latter in the reign of Antiochus Eupator after
the purification (8 Mace. x. 10, li. 1, Ac.). There
is no sufficient ground for believing that the events
recorded are different (Patricius, Dt Consensu
Mace. {§ xxvii. xxxvii.), for the mistake of date in
8 Maccabees is one which might easily arise (oomp.
Wemsdorf, Dt ,fide Mace. $ lxri. ; Grimm, not 8
Mace. xl. 1). The idea of Grotius that 8 Maoe.
xL and 8 Mace. xiii. are duplicate records of the
same event, in spite of Ewald'a support ( Gackichte,
iv. 865 note), is scared; tenable, and leaves half
the difficulty unexplained. B. F. W.
* LYSIAS (Auo-fos) sumamed Claudius
(KKaMias) was the Roman chiliarch (" chief cap-
tain," A. V.) who commanded the garrison at Jeru-
salem in the procuratorihip of Felix (a. d. 50).
See Wieseler's Chronologic, p. 88. It was he who
rescued Paul from the Jewish mob when they were
about to kill him for alleged profanation of the
Temple (Acts xxi. 32 ff). Of his two names, Lysias
reminds us of his Greek origin, and Claudius of his
assumption of the rights of a Roman citizen,
which (see Acta xxii. 28) he had acquired by pur-
chase. [Citizenship.] We have no knowledge
of this Lysias out of the Acts ; but what we learn
there is not, on the whole, unfavorable to him.
He arrested the scourging of Paul as soon as he
knew that he was a Roman citizen. He allowed
him to apeak to his countrymen in self-defense,
and rescued him from their rage on hearing his
declaration that God had sent him to preach the
Messiah to the heathen. He lodged him for safety
in the castle, took him out of the hands of the
Jewish Council when they were about to tear
him in pieces, and on being informed of a con-
spiracy to kill him, sent him by night, under an
escort of Roman soldiers, to Felix at Cessna.
Luke has preserved to us the letter which Lysias
wrote to Felix on that occasion (Acts xxiii. 86-30).
The letter contains, on one point, a palpable mis-
statement, proceeding of course not from Luke who
copied the letter, but from Lysias by whom it was
written. Lysias states aa his reason for rescuing
Paul with such promptness from the Jews that he
'earned (fiaBkr Sri, etc.) that he was a Roman
"itizen ; whereas, in fact, he knew nothing of Paul's
rank till after he had taken him into custody, and
was even on the point of putting him to torture.
Meyer very properly points out this deceit aa a
of the genuineness of the letter (ApotteL
« • 10 evade this conclusion soma resolve paf <S»
Mo cal t>a*or, as if the chiliarch learned the fact
at the eHtasnship sfter the arrest But there la no
LY8TRA
getckiekU, p. 450). It was natural that the sobst
tern should wish to gain as much credit as rnssihli
with his superior. It might be presumed that the
minute circumstances would be unknown to Febx.
We detect the Inconsistency because we tuna in
our hands Luke's narrative as well as the letter.
It is impossible to say how Luke obtained a copy
of this document. It pertained to a Judicial process
concerning which Felix might have to give account.
It would therefore be preserved. Luke no doubt was
at Cassarea during the two years that Paul wxa eon-
fined there. He would naturally wish to knew how
the Apostle's case bad been represented to the pro-
curator, and may even at that time hare formed hi*
purpose to write the Acts. Considering his inquisi-
tive habits (mentioned at the beginning of bit Gos-
pel) we can easily believe that he would find means,
in some way, to see the letter, or at all events to
learn its purport (Acts xxiii- 35). Luke's express-
ion (erior. xtpUxovffay rb* rvwor rovror) inti-
mates that it u the substance rather than the fast
words of the letter, that he reports to us. An inci-
dental value of the document is that it transmits
to us an official Roman testimony to the integrity
of Paul's character. H.
LYSIM'ACHTJS (Awlfm X os, [«**»• of
strife, ptace-maktr: Lgtimachtu]). L "A son
of Ptolemseua of Jerusalem " (A. TlroXtfialou i
«V "UpowxaXtin), the Greek translator of the book
of Esther (eVioroAt). Comp. Esth. ix. 80), accord-
ing to the subscription of the LXX. There is,
however, no reason to suppose that the translator
was also the autl>~" of the additions made to the
Hebrew text [Esther.]
8. A brother of the high-priest Menelaua, who
was left by him sa his deputy (Siaoexor) during
his absence at the oourt of Antiochus. His tyranny
and sacrilege excited an insurrection, during which
he fell a victim to the fury of the people cir. B. c
170 (2 Mace. iv. 89-42). The Vulgate, by a mis-
translation ("Menelaus amotus eat a aacerdotio,
succedente Lysimacho fratre suo " 3 Mace iv. 89)
makes Lysimachus the successor instead of the
deputy of Menelaua. B. F. W.
LYSTRA (Mar pa [neuter pL Acts xiv. 8 and
2 Tim. iii. 11, but fern, sing., Acts xiv. 6, 8L, and
xvi. 1: Lystrn, also sing, and pi.]) has two points
of extreme interest in connection respectively with
St. Paul's first and second missionary journeys—
(1) as the place where divine honors were offered to
him, and where he was presently stoned; (3) as the
home of bis chosen companion and fellow-missionary
Timotheus.
We are told in the 14th chapter of the Acta, that
Paul and Barnabas, driven by persecution from
IooNiim (ver. 8), proceeded to Lystra and it*
neighborhood, and there preached the Gospel. la
the course of this service a remarkable miracle was
worked in the healing of a lame man (ver. 8). This
occurrence produced such an effect on the minds
of the ignorant and superstitious people of the
place, that they supposed that the two gods, Hn>
cubt and Jupiter, who were said by the poets to
have formerly visited this district in human form
[Lycaohia] bad again bestowed on it the sama
favor, and consequently were proceeding to oflet
sacrifice to the strangers (ver. 13). The Apostles
example of such a use of the parttetpls b the II. ff
(Baa Wiser, if. T. Oram, f 49, 8.) M
Digitized by
Google
LYBTRA
■ejected this worship with honor (ver. 14), and
St Paul addressed a speech to them, taming their
minds to ths true Source of ell the blessings of
Baton. The distinct proclamation of Christian
doctrine is not mentioned, but it is implied, inas-
much as a church was founded at Lystra. The
adoration of the Lystrians was lankily followed by
a change of feeling. The persecuting Jews arrived
from Antioch in Pisidia and Iconium, and had such
influence that Paul was stoned and left for dead
(rer. 19). On his recovery be withdrew, with
Barnabas, to Dbrbs (ver. 20), but before long
retraced his steps through Lystra (ver. SI), encour-
aging the new disciples to be steadfast
It is evident from 8 Tim. iii. 10, 11, that
Timotheus was one of those who witnessed St
Paul's sufferings and courage on this occasion : and
H can hardly be doubted that his conversion to
Christianity resulted partly from these circum-
stances, combined with toe teaching of his Jewish
mother and grandmother, EtmiCK and Lois (2 Tim.
L5). Thus, when the Apostle, accompanied by Silu,
same, on his second missionary journey, to this
place again (and here we should notice how accu-
rately Derbe and Lystra are here mentioned in the
inverse order), Timotheus was already a Christian
(Acts xvi. 1). Here he received circumcision, " be-
cause of the Jaws in those parts" (ver. J); and
from this point began bis connection with St Paul's
travels. We are doubly reminded here of Jewish
residents in and near Lystra. Their first settle-
ment, and the ancestors of Timotheus among them,
may very probably be traced to the establishment
of Babvkmian Jews in Phrygia by Antiochua three
centuries before (Joseph. Ant. xii. 8, § 4). Still
it is evident that there was no influential Jewish
population at Lystra: no mention is made of any
synagogue ; and the whole aspect of the scene
described by St Luke (Acts xiv.) is thoroughly
heathen. With regard to St Paul it is not ab-
solutely stated that he was ever in Lystra again,
nut from the general description of the route of the
third missionary Journey (Acts xviii. 23) it is almost
certain that be was.
Lystra was undoubtedly in the eastern part of
the great plain of Lycaonia; and there are very
strong reasons for identifying its site with the ruins
called Btn-bir-KiHutJi, at the base of a conical
mountain of volcanic structure, named the Kara-
dagh (Hamilton, Set. m A. M. ii. 313). Here are
the remains of a great number of churches : and it
should be noticed that Lystra has its post-apostolic
Christian history, the names of its bishops appear-
ing in the records of early councils.
Pliny (v. 42) places this town in Galatia, and
Ptolemy (v. 4, 12) in Isauria: but these statements
an quite consistent with its being placed in Ly-
caonia by St Luke, as it is by Hierodes (Synttd.
a Oearoius (ZV>. Bll a) suggests that ths name
assy haw bean originally HJ/l}, ths V having
sbangad Into V, mseeordaoee with Phoenician eastern.
(8m also runt, Bdu*. 768 » ; though at derives the
name itself tram a root atgnlrylug depnasloa — low-
land.) It is perhaps some support to this Idea, that
MasoMos In ths Ononuutieen gives the name tU\mci,
and that the LXX. read In one passage « Amalek," as
above. Is It net also poarJbli that in 2 Sam. rill. U
"Annies:" may mors accurately be Maacah? At
fast swesmpalgnassdiistAmaJaklarseoroedln these
««*• —none smee that before the death of Raul
MAACAH 1706
p. 875). As to its condition la heathen times, it
is worth while to notice that ths words in Acts xiv
13 (rov Aisr rev trros wpo tt)i xo'amjj) would
lead us to conclude that it was under the tutelage
of Jupiter. Welch, In bis Spidttgium AntiqrtUatm
Lf/ttrttuium (Ditt. in Acta Apotlolonm, Jens
1786, vol. iii.), thinks that in this passage a statue
not a temple, of the god is intended. J. 3. H.
* The Apostle in his speech to the Lystriam
addressed heathen and idolaters. It is interesting
to compare the line of thought hinted here in regard
to the means of knowledge furnished by the Ught
of nature concerning the existence of God and his
attributes with the fuller reasoning on this subject
in Rom. i. 19 ft The similarity (see also Acts
xvil. 24 ff.) is precisely such as we should expect
on the supposition that be who wrote the epistle
delivered the speech. There is also some diversity,
but of the kind which arises from applying the same
system of truth to different occasions. Luke as-
signs the speech to its proper place in the history.
Among the Lycaonians whose local traditions wen
so peculiar, it is less surprising that the gross
anthropomorphism should show itself, which called
forth tiie Apostle's remonstrance and led him to
correct the error. The reader will find a good
analysis of the argument, with exegetieal remarks,
in Stier's Reden tier Apcittt, U. 1-39. H.
M.
MA'ACAH (il^SQ [pa*, depretthm,
Flint]: Maaxot; Alex. MaavaB: ifaachfl). i.
The mother of Absalom = Maachah 6 (2 Sam.
Hi. 3).
2. Maacah, and (in Chron.) Maachah: Id
Samuel 'AuaAt}*," and so Jcsephus; in Chron.
[Vat. FA.] Mooxa ■nd Mova; Alex. m ****>
[rather, in 2 Sam.] Muga, [in Chron. Maxa.
M«*x a Machati, Sfaacha. A small kingdom in
close proximity to Palestine, which appears to have
Iain outside Argob (Deut iii. 14) and Bashan (Josh,
xii. 5). These districts, probably answering to
the Lrjah and JaulAn of modem Syria, occupied
the space from the Jordan on the west to Salcah
(SuJkhad) on the east and Mount Hermon on the
north. There is therefore no alternative but to
place Maacah somewhere to the east of the Lejah,
in the country that lies between that remarkable
district and the Sufi, namely the stony desert of
et-Jtrd* (see Kiepert's map to Wetzstein's Hanr&n,
etc., 1860), and which is to this day thickly studded
with villages. In these remote eastern regions wss
also probably situated Tibchath, Tebacb, or Betach,
which occurs more than once in connection with
Maacah* (1 Chr. xviii. 8; Gen. xxli. 24; 2 Sam.
(1 Bam. xxx.), which can hardly be referred to to this
oatalogut.
• The reading Hoax* Instead of MaAojr* Is adopted
by Lanow and Parthey In their edition of the Onomat
(km of Sowblus (Berlin, 1862) on the authority of the
Codex Leidsnsls. A.
b This Is probably the origin of the name Ot»
attached to ths great stony plain Berth of Marseilles.
e The ancient versions do sot assist us much hi
W-t *he position of Maacah. The Byrlae PeshHs la
1 Chr. xlx has Okoroft, .ZJa. If this could bt
Identified with aVOfrm. UfdSJw J s t ass* of fl i ttls*
Digitized by
Google
1706
MAACHAH
riU. 8). Maacah ii sometimes aasiminl to bare
been situated about Abkl-bkth-Haacah; but,
if AMI be the modern representative of that town,
tbii la hardly probable, aa it would bring the king-
dom of Maacah wort of tbe Jordan, and within the
actual limita of Israel. It is possible that the town
was a colony of the nation, though even this is
rendered questionable by the conduct of Joab to-
wards it (3 Sam. zx. 22). That implacable aoldier
would hardly hare left it standing and unharmed
had it been the city of those who took so prominent
a part against him in the Ammonite war.
That war was the only occasion on which the
Haacathites came into contact with Israel, when
their king assisted the Bene- Amnion [sons of A.]
against Joab with a force which he led himself
(2 Sam. x. 6, 8; 1 Chr. xix. 7. In the first of
these paasages " of" is inaccurately omitted in the
A. V.). The small extent of the country may be
inferred from a comparison of the number of this
force with that of the people of Zobah, Ishtob, and
Bebob (2 Sam. x. 6), combined with the expression
" bis people " in 1 Chr. xix. 7, which perhaps im-
ply that a thousand men were the whole strength
of his army. [Ma achathi.]
To the connection which is always implied be-
tween Maacah and Geshur we hare no clew. It is
perhaps illustrated by tbe fact of the daughter of
tbe king of Geshur — wife of David and mother
of Absalom — being named Maacah. G.
MA'ACHAH (npJ5 [as above]: tta X <l;
Alex. Maya: Ifaaeha).' 1. The daughter of
Nahor by bis concubine Beumah (Gen. xxii. 34).
Ewald connects her name with the district of Ma-
achah ta the Hermon range (Geteh. i. 414, note 1).
2. (Moax«<; IT at - A/xno-o.]) The father of
Achiah, who was king of Gath at the beginning
«f Solomon's reign (1 K. ii. 39). [Maoch.]
3. [Vat in 1 Chr. xi. 31, Haarav.] The
daughter, or more probably grand-daughter, of
Absalom, named after his mother; the third and
favorite wife of Behoboam, and mother of Abyah
(1 K. xv. 2; 3 Cbr. xi. 20-22). According to
Josephus (Ant. viii. 10, § 1) her mother was Tamar,
Absalom's daughter. But the mother of Atyjah
is elsewhere oiled " Michaiah, the daughter of
Uriel of Gibeah " (2 Chr. xiii. 2). The LXX. and
Syriae, in the latter passage, have Maachah, aa in
xi. 20. If Michaiah were a mere variation of Ma-
achah, aa has been asserted (the resemblance in
English characters being much more close than in
Hebrew), it would be easy to understand that Uriel
of Gibeah married Tamar the daughter of Absalom,
whose grand-daughter therefore Maachah was. But
It is more probable that " Michaiah " is the error
of a tnuiacrilier, and that " Maachah " is the true
'jading in all cases (Capelli CriL Soar. vi. 7, { 8).
Houbigant proposed to alter the text, and to read
" Maachah, the daughter of Abiahalom (or Ab-
salom), the son of Uriel." During the reign of her
grandson Asa she occupied at the court of Judah
and south of the «V* (•*• Wttntatn, and Cyril
Oraham), It would support the view taken In the text,
and would also (111 In with the suggestion of Swald
Quck.W. 197), that the «V» "> oouneetad with Zobah.
ID Josh. xlll. the Pashlto has faros, i£0O>QJ3,
a? which the writer ean mahe nothing. The Targums
of Onkelos, Jonathan, and Jerusalem have Aphikeros,
OVljyD{$ (with some alight vasts Hops In spelling).
MAACHATHI
the high position of " King's Mother" (eoaaa. I
K. ii. 19), which has been compared with that of
tbe StJima VaUde in Turkey. It may be that at
Abtyah's death, after a short reign of three yean.
Aaa was left a minor, and Maachah acted aa regent,
like Athaliah under similar circumstances. If this
conjecture be correct, it would serve to explain the
influence by which she promoted the practice of
idolatrous worship. The idol or " horror " which
abe had made for Aaherah (1 K. xv. 13; 2 Chr.
xv. 16) is supposed to have been the emblem of
Priapna, and was so understood by tbe Vulgate.
[Idol, vol. ii. p. 1118 6.] It was swept away hi
Asa's reformation, and Maachah was removed from
her dignity. Josephus calls Maachah Maxdrj,
perhaps a corruption of Max<t, and makes Asa the
son of Movoio- See Burlington's 6'eneafoswe, L
233-238, where the two Msachaha are considered
distinct.
*• (Ma>xa%) Tbe concubine of Caleb the son
of Hesron (1 Chr. ii. 48).
5. (Mwx<L) The daughter of Talmai, king of
Geshur, and mother of Absalom (1 Chr. iii. %):
also called Maacah in A. V. of 3 Sam. iii. 8.
Josephus gives her name MaxdVr? (AnL vii. 1, f 4).
She is said, according to a Hebrew tradition re-
corded by Jerome ( Qu. JTeftr. t* Reg.), to have
been taken by David in battle and added to the
number of his wives.
6. (»oa X i\ Alex. Mooxo-) The wife of Ma-
chir the Manassite, the father or founder of Gilead,
and sister of Huppim and Shuppim (1 Chr. vii.
16, 16), who were of tbe tribe of Benjamin (1 Chr.
vii. 12). In the Peshito Syriae Maachah is made
the mother of Machir.
7. (Mooyd. [Xoa> x i;] Alex, [in 1 Chr. viii.]
Maaye,) The wife of Jehlel, father or founder
of Gibeon, from whom was descended tbe family
of Saul (1 Chr. viii. 39, ix. 86).
8. (Moarxd; Alex. Max*) The father of
Hanan, one of the heroes of David's body-guard
(1 Chr. xi. 43), who is classed among tbe warriors
selected from the eastern side of the Jordan. It
is not impossible that Maachah in this instance
may be the same aa Syruv-Maachah in 1 Chr. xix.
6,7.
6. (Moox«'; [Vat Maxo-]) A Simeonite, father
of Shepbatiah, prince of his tribe in the reign of
David (1 Chr. xxvii. 16). W. A, W.
• MA'ACHATH (n$3?D : Moxorf (Vat
Tfi) ; Alex. MoxoS i : Mack'atl), Josh. xiii. 18,
probably a variation of Maacah (which aee),
though Ftirst suggests that it may be abbreviated
from ""njJ^J. It occurs only as above, and then
as patronymic (in the A V., «Maach»thites"V
H.
MAACH'ATHI, and MAACH'A-
THITES, THB (VlJS^n [patronymio] :
[Bom. Maxo6(, Max*, Maxvrit etc; Vat]
This Is probably intended for the 'XwUmtp* of
Ptolemy, which he mentions In eamaany with LI ilea,
OsllhThoR, and Jaasr(!) (8» Reland, Pal. p. 463 ; and
compare the expression of Josephus with regard tc
Maehasrus, B. J. vii. «, f 3.) But this would surely
be too nu? south tor ataecah. The Targum P s suda jo u
has Jrtikeras, DTTiyttJri which renal
It will be observed, however, that ever/ one if
nranas contains Jf> or Or.
Digitized by
Google
MAAPAI
Dpaxoffei, if Max", o Mayam, [etc. . ] Alex.
Mayafe, [Moxan, etc.:] Jtfookatti, Maekali,
[Maaekatt\), two word* — the former taking the
"orm of the Hebrew — which denote the inhabitant*
■f the small kingdom of Maachau (Deut. Ui. 14;
Josh. xa. 5, xiii. 11, 13). Individual Hatchathitet
were not unknown among the warriors of Israel.
One, recorded limply aa " too of the Maachathite,"
or possibly " Eliphelet, son of Ahasbai the Maach-
athite " (see Kennieott, Dimtrtation, 305, 206), was
a member of David's guard (3 Sam. zziii. 84).
Another, Jezaniah, was one of the ohieft who rallied
round Gedaliah the superintendent, after the first
destruction of Jerusalem (Jer. xL 8; 3 K. zzv. 33).
Eshtemoa the Maachathite (1 Car. iv. 19) more
probably derives that title from the ooncubine of
Caleb (ii. 48) than from the Syrian kingdom.
[Maacah, J.j G.
MA'ADAJ [3 syl.J 0759 [ornament of
Jthooah, see Get.]: Mootfo;' [Vat Mo8«S«t;]
Alex. Mos8«io; FA. A«8i«: Maaddi), one of the
tone of Bani who returned with Em and had in-
termarried with the people of Uw land (Eir. x. 34).
He is called Momdu in 1 Eedr. ix. 34.
MAADI'AH (n^iy? [as above]: on. in
Tat MS. [and so in Rom. Alex. FA."]; Alex,
[rather FA.'] MaoSiat: Mtu&a), one of the priests,
er families of priests, who returned with Zerubhabel
and Jeshua (Neh. xii. 3); elsewhere (ver. 17) called
klOASlAR.
MA'AI [2 syl.] 059 [p**- compatmmatt,
Get.]: [Tat Alex. FA.» omit; Rom.] 'Atai [FA.t
Moa?:] Moat) one of the Bene-Asaph [sons of A.]
who took part in the solemn musical service by
which the wall of Jerusalem was dedicated after it
'lad been rebuilt by Nehemiah (Neh. xii. 38).
MA'ALEH-AORAB'BIM (nb?Q
D*2ni?5 [aaceirfo/seerjwms]: j, irpaaraUeaait
VUpajBetV [Rom. -$tr; Alex. Ajcpafl&ttn] : ascen-
wt Scorpionu ). The full form of the name which in
Its other occurrences (in the original identical with
the above) is given in the A. V. %t " the ascent of"
[Num. xxxiv. 4], or " the going up to [Judg. i.
36], Akrabbim." It is found only in Josh. xv. 3.
For the probable situation of the pass, see Akrab-
•im. G.
* In Judg. 1. 36 the marginal reading (A. T.)
Is Maale-Akrabbim, with " the going up to Akrab-
bim " in the text The same place is always meant,
and the expression is as muoh a proper name in
one passage as another. H.
MA'ANI (BaoW [Tat. -rei; Aid. Maori:]
»"), 1 Etdr. ix. 34 identical with Bani, 4.
MA'ARATH (•""Pp? \naktd plan, L e.
without trees, etc.]: Vlarapdt'i [Alex. Aid. Mo-
patt; Comp. McuumM:] Afarttk), one of the towns
of Judah, in the district of the mountains, and in
the same group which oontains Halhul, Beth-
nra, and Gkdor (Josh. xv. 59). The places which
oeeur in company with it have been identified at a
few miles to the north of Hebron, but Maarath hat
hitherto eluded o b serv a tion. It dost not teem to
have been known to Eusebius or 'erotue, although
MA ABUT AW
1707
its bame is mentioned by them (Osmit&t*
'•Maroth").
By Gesenius ( The*. 1069 a) the name is derived
from a root signifying openness or bareness,
but may it not with equal accuracy and greater
plausibility be derived from that which has pro
dueed the similar word, mttirok, a cave? K
would thus point to a characteristic feature of the
mountainous districts of Palestine, one of which,
the Mearath-Adullam, or cave of Adullam, was
probably at no great distance from this very lo-
cality. G.
• MA'ASAI (3 syl.) is the correct form of the
word which appears in the A. T. (1 Chr. ix. 13)
at Maaaiai or Maasia. See addition to Maasiai.
A
MAASE1AH [4 syl.] (TVfaVV [work of
Jtiofttk]: Mmurla-- Matuia). 1. '({Vat M«w-
<n;V,] Alex. Maao-nia; FA. Maas-na.) A descend-
ant of Jeahua the priest, who in the time of Ezra
had married a foreign wile, and was divorced from
her (Ear. x. 18). He it called Matthklab in 1
Etdr. ix. 19, but in the margin, Maablas.
3. (MotfwfJA; Alex. Mwttu I [Comp. Moos-fa.])
A priest, of the sons of Harim, who put away hit
foreign wife at Ezra's command (Ear. x. 31). Ma-
asiaii in margin of 1 Esdr. ix. 19.
3. ([Vat.] FA. Mooo-aia.) A priest of the
tout of Pashur, who had married a foreign wife in
the time of Ezra (Ezr. x. 93). He it called Mas-
bias in 1 Esdr. ix. 39.
4. (Alex. Miuurqa; [Tat.] FA. Maim; [Comp.
Maafffat:] Maatuu.) One of the laymen, a de-
scendant of Pahath-Moab, who put away his foreign
wife in the time of Ezra (Ezr. x. 30). Apparently
the same as Moosias in 1 Esdr. ix. 31.
6. (Maoo-for; [Tat.] FA. MaSacnjA.: tfaa.
tint.) The father of Azariah, one of the priests
from the oasis of the Jordan, who assisted Nehe-
miah in rebuilding the wall of Jerusalem (Neh. lit
33).
0. ([Tat M. Mooro-wo.;] FA. Moaraia.) One
of those who stood on the right hand of Ezra when
he read the law to the people (Neh. viii. 4). Ha
was probably a priest, but whether one of those
mentioned in ch. xii. 41, 42, is uncertain. The
corresponding name in 1 Esdr. ix. 43 it Balsa ■
am
7. (Om. in LXX.; [but Comp. Maoe-fof.]) A
Levite who assisted on the same occasion in ex-
pounding the Law to the people (Neh. viii. 7). He
is called Maianeas in 1 Etdr. ix. 48.
8. (Alex. MaaAo-ia; FA. Maaa-wn-) One of
the heads of the people whose descendants signed
the covenant with Nehemiah (Neh. x. 35).
8. ([Tat Mooo-fia; FA>. M«r«ia;] Alex. MaA
<ria>) Son of Baruch and descendant of i'harez, the
ton of Judah. His family dwelt in Jerusalem
after the return from Babylon (Neh. xi. 5). In
the corresponding narrative of 1 Chr. ix. 5 he is
called Asaiah.
10. (Mooo-fof; [FA. Marat)*:] Mann.) A
Benjamite, ancestor of Sallu, who dwelt at Jerusa-
lem after the Captivity (Neh. xi. 7).
1L (Om. In Tat MS.; [also Rom. Alex. FA.1]
Alex, [rather FA."] Moos-tar.) Two priests of thh
LAme are mentioned (Neh. xii. 41, 43) as taking
part is the musical service which accompanied the
dedication of the wall of Jerusalem under Errs
One of the-n it probably the san r as 6.
Digitized by
Google
1708
MAASIAI
IS. (Bacrotof ; (Vat Mayewcra-as, Ales. Moc
rauu, Comp. Maatrauv,] FA. Maffcai in Jar.
xxi. 1; Mocuraias, Alex. Matraias, J v. xxxvii. 8;
[Mtuuraiaj, Alex. Mcuraaias, FA. Mao-«at, Jer.
xxix. 35.]) Father of Zephaniah, who m a
priest In the reign of Zedekiah (Jer. xxix. 26).
13. (Om. in LXX.) The father of Zedekiah the
false prophet, in the reign of Zedekiah long of
Jndah (Jer. rrix. 31).
14. pinjto^n : Maamrfo, [Meuuraiati Vat
Maaacria, MavocuasQ Alex. Mowria, [Maarai;
FA. in ver. 20, Maa-aiaf :] Maanat), one of the
Levites of the eecond rank, appointed by David to
sound "with psalteries on Alamoth." when the
ark wan brought from the house of Obed-edom.
He was also one of the " porters " or gate-keepers
for the ark (1 Chr. it. 18, 30).
15. ([Rom. Mcuunua; Vat Moovoia;] Alex.
Mcuna.) The son of Adaiah, and one of the cap-
tains of hundreds in the reign of Joash king of
Jodah. He assisted Jehoiada in the revolution by
which Joash was placed on the throne (3 Chr.
xxiii.1).
16. (Huerlui [Vat. AiuuratasQ Alex. Motr-
roiot.) An officer of high rank (thAUr) in the
reign of Uiziah (2 Chr. xxvi. 11 ). He was prob-
ably a Levite (comp. 1 Chr. xxiii. 4), and engaged
in • semi-military capacity, corresponding to the
ehric functions of the judges, with whom the ihdter-
(m are frequently coupled.
17. (Jtamrlas; [Vat. Macuratasx] Alex. Ma-
ria t-) The " king's son," killed by Zichri the
Ephraimitiab, hero in the inTasion of Judah by
Pekah king of Israel, during the reign of Ahaz (2
Chr. xxriii. 7). The personage thus designated is
twice mentioned in connection with the " governor
of the city "(IK. xxii. 26 ; 2 Chr. xviii. 26), and
appears to have held an office of importance at the
Jewish court (perhaps acting as viceroy during the
absence of the king), just as the queen dowager
was honored with the title of " king's mother "
(comp. 3 K. xxiv. 13 with Jer. xxix. 3), or gttSrih,
(. e. " mistress," or " powerful lady." [Malchiah,
}.] For the conjecture of Geiger, see Joash, 4.
18. (Maori; [Alex. Maoo-ior-]) The governor
of Jerusalem in the reign of Josiah, appointed by
the king, in conjunction with Shaphan and Joah,
to superintend the restoration of the Temple (2 Chr.
xxxiv. 8).
19. (Mawa/at; Alex. Mao-aiat; [FA. Mao-cat-])
The son of Shallum, a Levite of high rank, and one
of the gate-keepers of the Temple in the reign of
Jehoiakim (Jer. xxxv. 4; comp. 1 Chr. ix. 19).
20. (ITprTO [rtfuge of Jehovah, i. e. which
he affords] : Maa<ro(oi; Alex. Macccuas: Manani,
Jer. xxxii. 12; Alex. Maatraaias: Mono*, Jer. li.
59.) A priest; ancestor of Baruch and Seraiah,
the sons of Neriah. W. A. W.
MAAS1AI [properly Ma'asai, 8 syL]
(N277Q [Jehovah' t work] : Hawaii; Alex. Matrai :
Maa'vti), a priest who after the return from Baby-
lon dwelt in Jerusalem (1 Chr. ix. 12). He is
apparently the same as Ahabhai in Neh. xi. IS.
• The forms Maasiai and Haasia (the latter
being the reading of the A. V. in the original
edition of 1611 and other early editions) are doubt-
lass both misprints for Maaaai. This Is the read-
big of the Genevan version, and corresponds with
the Hebrew % tP5F?i the word being thus pointed
MACCABEES, THE
in four MSS. collated by Miehaelii (aee his AM
Hear, in be), and also by Geseniua and Furst.
A.
MAASI'AS (Mooo-aiai: Maatku). The samt
as Mabmhah, SO, the ancestor of Barneh (Bar.
i.1).
• MA'ATH (Made-- MahaA), an ancestor of
Jesus, according to the genealogy in Luke (iv.
26). A.
MAAZ (VS? [<mgtr\: Nasi: Moo,\ son
of Bam, the firstborn of Jerahmeel (1 Chr. it 37).
MAAZI'AH (nnpn [Jehovah', ammta.
*»]: Maa(la; [Vat NaScia;] FA. Afia: Mao-
aa). 1. One of the priests who signed the cove-
nant with Nehemiah (Neh. x. 8). From the
coincidence between many of the names of the
priests in the lists of the twenty-four courses estab-
lished by David, of those who signed the covenant
with Nehemiah (Neh. x.), and those who returned
with Zerubbabel (Neh. xil.), it would seem either
that these names were hereditary in (amiliw, or
that they were applied to the families themselves.
This is evidently the case with the names of the
" heads of the people " enumerated in Neh. x.
14-27.
2. (VPTyip [see above]: Mooirai; Alex. How
(a\: Maaaai.) A priest in the reign of David,
head of the twenty-fourth coarse (1 Chr. xxiv. 18)
See the preceding.
MABTOAI [2 syL] (Ma/3Saf; [Vat lovro-
mouSoi, by union with the preceding word;] Alex.
Mortal : Bittuat). The same as Bekaiah (1
Eadr. ix. 34; aee Ezr. x. 85).
MAC'ALON (McwaAiv, in both MSS.: Bat-
torn), 1 Esdr. v. 21. This name is the equivalent
of Michmash in the lists of Eara and Nehemiah.
G.
MACCABEES, THE (of MokkoAum:
[Maccabai] ). This title, which was originally the
surname of Judas, one of the sons of Mattathiaa
(infi: $ 2), was afterwards extended to the heroio
family of which be was one of the noblest represen-
tatives, and in a still wider sense to the Palestinian
martyrs in the persecution of Antiochns Epiphanea
[4 Maccabees], and even to the Alexandrine Jews
who suffered for their faith at an earlier time [I
Maccaiieks]. The original term Maccabi (4 Mcur-
Kafiaios) has been variously derived. Some have
maintained that it was formed from the combina-
tion of the initial letters of the Hebrew sentence,
" Who among the gods is like unto thee, Jehovah ? "
(Ex. xv. 11, Hebr. \ 3, 3, Q), which is supposed
to have been inscribed upon the banner of the pa-
triots; or, again, of the initials of the simply de-
scriptive title, " Mattathias, a priest, the son of
Jobanan." But even if the custom of forming
such words was in use among the Jews at this
early time, it is obvious that such a title would not
be an individual title in the first instance, aa Mao-
cabee undoubtedly was (1 Mace ii. 4), and still
remains among the Jews (Raphall, /fist of Jem
i. 249). Moreover the orthography of the word ia
Greek and Syriao (Eweld, Gadtiihtt, iv. 853, nets
pointa to the form ''SOD, and not *23D
Another derivation has been proposeo, which
although direct evidence ia wanting, seems eatiatae
tor/. Aocording to this, the word Is formed frost
Digitized by
Google
MAOOABEES, THE
*1Jli99i " » hammer" (like Maiadu, Evald, 808,
ute), giving a sense not altogether unlike that In
which Chaste* Marttl derived a surname from hii
Vrorite weapon, and atlll mora like the Malleut
Bootontm and Malleut Hmrttkonm of the Middi*
Age*.
Although the name Macoabett has gained the
widest currency, that of Mmonaant, or Batma-
■mu, is the proper name of the family. The
origin of thia name also has been disputed, but the
derivation from Chashmon (XtyVfil,
MAOOABEES, THE 1709
'Ao-ojumubr, eomp. Gea. The*. 684 1\ gnat
grandfather of Mattathias, seems certainly oorreet
How it came to pass that a man, otherwise obscure,
gave hit name to the family, cannot now be dis
covered; but no stress can be laid upon this diffi-
culty, nor upon the fast that in Jewish prayers
(Henfeld,<7e*cA. d, Jud. i. 964) Mattathias himself
is called gaiim—af
The connection of the various members of toe
Maccabasan family will be seen from the i
tag table: —
Tax AsHon^AJi Fault.
"»■-—■— C of the sons of Joaru,' eomp. 1 Cbjroo. xxrr. 7).
Jobaasa f iMbvat).
Simeon Ctvpnir, Bbnon. Oomp. 3 Fss. L IV
Mattathias (Matthias, Jossou. * /. L 1, § 8).
1 1871.0.
Jobs
(Osddls), (Thaasl),
i "tail Maes. vttl. 33), tl86a.a
1 181 s. o. J
(ItMoabsras), (Avaran), (Apphua),
tl81i.o. tl88s.o. 1 1*8 i.o.
Judas,
tl86a.a
iusL Mattathias
1 108 s.0. flBBB. a
_J_
Daughter _ Ptolemaus
(1 Maoo. xvi. 11, 13).
) (ihrranrtra) _ Arlstobulus I. AnUgonus. Jannarus Alexander „ Alexandra. Baa.
tlOBa. a 1 105 a. a t78a.e. I
Hrraanuan.
tSOi. a
J.
Ariitabalas n.
1 48 1. o.
1 88 1.0. I f 40 1.0.
MaiUmiM. Herod the Ones.
t»». a
Arlstobulus.
t«OB.o.
Antigonus.
t 87 1.0.
The original authorities for the history of the
Maccabees are extremely scanty ; but for the course
of the war itself the first book of Maccabees is a
most trustworthy, if an incomplete witness. [Mao-
cabkkb, Books of.] The seound book adds some
important details to the history of the earlier part
of the struggle, and of the events which immediate-
ly preceded it; but all the statements which it con-
tains require close examination, and must be
received with caution. Josephus follows 1 Mace.,
for the period which it embraces, very closely, but
'ight additions of names and minute particulars
.jdicate that he was in possession of other materials,
probably oral traditions, which have not been else-
vbere preserved. On the other hand there are
cases, in which, from haste or careWness, he has
misinterpreted his authority. From other sources
little can be gleaned. Hebrew and rlassifal litera-
ture furnishes nothing more than a few trifling
fragments which illustrate Maccabiean history. So
Vmg an interval elapsed before the Hebrew tra-
iitioos were committed to writing, that facts, when
jot embodied in rites or precepts, became wholly
distorted. Classical writers, again, were little likely
■» cnroniole a conflict which probably they eonld
not have understood. Of the great work of Polyb-
ius — who alone might have been expected to ap-
preciate the importance of the Jewish war — only
fragments remain which refer to this period; but
the omission of all mention of the Maccabsan earn.
paign in the corresponding sections of Livy, who
follows very closely in the track of the Greek his-
torian, seems to prove that Polybius also omitted
them. The account of the Syrian kings in Appian
is too meagre to make his silence remarkable ; but
indifference or contempt must be the explanation
of a general silence which is too wide-spread to be
accidental. Even when the fall of Jerusalem had
directed unusual attention to the past fortunes of
its defenders, Tacitus was able to dismiss the Mae-
caba*an conflict in a sentence remarkable for scorn-
ful carelessness. "During the dominion of the
Assyrians, the Medea, and the Persians, the Jews,"
he says, u were the most abject of their dependent
subjects. After the Macedonians obtained the
supremacy of the East, King Antiochus endeavored
a Hersfhld derives ths name from DDn, "to tasv
(•rsteel; n so that It becomes in mass a sjrsacrsi «f
Digitized by
Google
1710 MACCABEES, THB
n do away with their superstition, and inUodoee
Greek habits, but ni hindered by a Parthian war
from reforming a must repulsive people " (leterr*-
mam gmtem Tao. Hitl. j. 8).«
1. The essential causes of the Maeeabsssn War
have been already pointed oot [Ahtiochub IV.
vol. i. p. lit a). The annate of the Maccabnao
family, " by whose hand deliverance was given unto
Israel" (1 Mace. v. 63), present the record of its
progress. The standard of independence was first
raised by Mattathias, a priest 6 of the course of
Joarib, which was the first of the twenty-four
courses (1 Chr. xxiv. 7), and consequently of the
noblest blood (oomp. Jos. VU. i. ; Grimm, m 1 Mate.
it. 1). The persecutions of Antiochus Epiphanes
had already roused his indignation, when emis-
saries of the king, headed by Apelles (Jos. Ant.
xii. 6, § 9), came to Modik, where be dwelt, and
required the people to offer idolatress sacrifice (1
Mace. ii. 15, etc.). Hattathias rejected the over-
tures which were made to him first, and when
a Jew came to the altar to renounce his faith,
slew him, and afterwards Apelles, " as Phinees —
from whom he was descended — did unto Zambri."
After this he fled with his sons to the mountains
(b. o. 168), whither he was followed by numerous
bands of fugitives. Some of them, not in close
connection with Mattathias, being attacked on the
Sabbath, offered no resistance, and fell to the num-
ber of a thousand. When Mattathias heard of the
disaster he asserted the duty of self-defense, snd
continued the war with signs] success, destroying
the idolatrous altars, and restoring the observance
of the Law. He seems, however, to have bean
already advanced in years when the rising was
Bade, and he did not long survive the fatigues of
active service. He died b. c. 166, and "wai
buried in the sepulchre of his fathers at Modin."
The speech which be is said to have addressed to
his sons before his death is remarkable as contain-
ing the first distinct allusion to the contents of
Daniel, a book which seems to have exercised the
most powerful influence on the Maccabaean conflict
(1 Mace. ii. 60; oomp. Jos. Ant. xii. 6, § 8).
9. Mattathias himself named Judas — appar-
ently his third son — ss his successor in directing
the war of independence (1 Mace. ii. 66). The
energy and skill of "the Maccabee " (i Hsr-
tafiaws ), as Judas is often called in 8 Mace., fully
ustified his father's preference. It appears that he
lad already taken a prominent part in the first
secession to the mountains (2 Mace. v. 97, where
Mattathias is not mentioned); and on receiving
the chief command he devoted himself to the task
of combining for common action those who were
■till faithful to the religion of their fathers (9 Mace,
riii. 1). His first enterprises were night attacks
ud sudden surprises, which wen best suited to the
troops at his disposal (9 Mace. viii. 6, 7) ; and when
his men were encouraged by these means, be ven-
tured on more important operations, and defeated
ApoDonlus (1 Mace. til. 10-19) and Seron (1 Maee.
in. 13-94), who hearing of his success came against
MACOABBK8, THB
Mm with very superior forces at Beth-boron, tan
scene of the most glorious victories of the Jews is
earlier and later times. [Beth-hoboh.] Shortly af-
terwards Antiochus Epiphanes, whose resources baa
been impoverished by the war (1 Mace. iii. 97-31)
left the government of the Palestinian provinces to
Lysias, while he himself undertook an expedibos.
against Persia in the hope of recruiting his treasury.
Lysias organized an expedition against Judas; but
his army, a part of which had been separated from
the main body to effect a surprise, wss defeated by
Judas at Emmaas with great loss (b. c. 166), after
the Jews hsd kept a solemn fast at Mizpeh (1 Mace
iii. 46-63), and in the next year Lysias himself
was routed at Bethsura. After this success Judas
was able to occupy Jerusalem except the " tower "
(1 Mace. vi. 18, 19), and he purified the Temple
(1 Mace. ir. 36, 41-53) on the 95th of Oaleu, ex-
actly three years after its profanation (1 Mace i
59 [Dedication] ; Grimm, on 1 Maee. iv. 69).
The next year was spent in wars with frontier na-
tions (1 Mace, v.); bat in spite of continued tri-
umphs the position of Judas was still precarious.
In B. C. 163 Lysiss, with the young king Anti-
ochus Eupator, took Bethsura, which had been for-
tified by Judas ss the key of the Idnmcsn border
(1 Mace. iv. 61), after having defeated the patriots
who came to its relief; and next laid siege to Jeru-
salem. The city was on the point of surrendering,
when the approach of Philip, who claimed this
guardianship of the king, induced Lysias to guar-
antee to the Jews complete liberty of religion.
The compact thus made wss soon broken, but
shortly afterwards Lysiss fell into the hands of
Demetrius, a new claimant of the throne, and was
put to death. The accession of Demetrius brought
with it fresh troubles to the patriot Jews. A large
party of their countrymen, with Alcimub at their
head, gained the ear of the king, and he sent Ni-
eanor against Judss. Nieanor was defeated, first
at Capharsalama, and again In a decisive battle at
Adasa, near to the glorious field of Beth-boron
(b. a 161, on the 13th Adar; 1 Mace. vii. 49; 9
Maee. xv. 36), where he was shun. This victory
wss the greatest of Jndas's s uccesse s, and practi-
cally decided the question of Jewish independence,
but it was followed by an unexpected reverse. Judas
employed the short interval of peace which followed
in negotiating a favorable league with the Romans.
But in the same year, before the answer of the
senate was returned, a new invasion under Bso-
ehides took place. The Roman alliance seems to
have alienated many of the extreme Jewish party
from Judas (Midr. HhamJca, quoted by RaphaiL
RuL of Jem, 1. 895), and he was able only to
gather a small force to meet the sudden danger.
Of this a large part deserted Mm on the eve of the
Hats]*: tint the anuraoe of Judas was unshaksa)
and he fell at Eleasa, the Jewish Therroopyiss,
fighting at desperate odds against the invaders.
His body wss recovered by his brothers, and buried
at Modin u m the sepulchre sf his fathers " (B. a
161).'
a Ths short nana* of the Jews
(lib. xL, Ed. 1) Is singularly free fkem popular mto-
EspmsntaUona, many of which, howsver, he quotes sa
used by the counsellors of Antiochus to urge the king
to saiirpsts the tuukm (US. xxxlv., Set. 1).
* The later tradition, by a natural exaggeration,
state sum high-priest Oomp. HeraMd, Back. ». 264,
V9.
c Judss (like Mattathias) is represented In tatat
tunes ss high-priest. Kven Janphus (Ant. xlL 11, 1 9)
spsaks of the high-priesthood of Judas, and also says
that ha was slseted by " the people " on ths death of
Alounui (xii. 10, J 8). But It Is svstent tan 1 Maes.
Ix. 18, 56, that Judas died some time before Alcanas
and elsewhere (Ant. xx. 10, f 8) Joseahns hfcnsab* rays
thai tha hlgh-sstsstlimnl was vacant te ssvaa rases
Digitized by
Google
MAOOaBESS, the
8. After the death of Jodie the patriotic party
— i i.i to hen been for a ihort tbiie wholly duv-
xganind, end it wee only by the procure of
■nparallHed sufferings that they were driven to
renew the conflict. For this porpoee they offered
the eommand to Josatha*, sumamed Apphue
(TOSH, the vary), the youngest eon of Matta-
thias. The policy of Jonathan ehowi the greatness
of the Ion involved in hie brother's death. He
cade no attempt to maintain himself in the open
country, but retired to the lowlands of the Jor-
dan (1 Msec ix. 49), where he gained some advan-
tage over Bacchides (a. a 161), who made an
attempt to hem in and destroy his whole force.
Not long afterward! Alcimus died (a. 0. 160), and
Baochides losing, as it appears, the active support
of the Urecbung party, retired from Palestine.
Meanwhile Jonathan made such use of the interval
of rest as to excite the fears of his Jewish enemies;
and after two years Baeohides, at their request,
again took the field against Jonathan (B. c. 158).
This time he seems to ham been but feebly sup-
ported, and after an unsuccessful campaign he
accepted terms which Jonathan proposed; and
after his departure Jonathan "Judged the people
it Hkhmsah" (1 Mace. ix. 73), and gradually
extended his power. The claim of Alexander Balis
to the Syrian crown gave a new importance to Jon-
athan and his adherents. Demetrius I. empowered
him to raise an army, a permission which was fol-
lowed by the evacuation of all the outposts occupied
by the Syrians except Bethsura, but Jonathan es-
poused the cause of Alexander, and refused the lib-
eral often which Demetrius made, when he heard
that the Jews had resolved to join his rival (b. c
168). The success of Alexander led to the eleva-
tion of Jonathan, who assumed the high-priestly
office after the royal nomination » at the Feast of
Tabernacles (1 Mace x. 81), "the greatest and
holiest feast " (Joseph. Ant. viii. 4, $ 1); and not
long after he placed the king under fresh obliga-
tions by the defeat of Apollouius, a general of the
younger Demetrius (1 Mace. x.). [AroLXoxius.]
On the death of Alexander, Demetrius II., in spite
of the reverse which he bad experienced, sought to
gain the support of the Jews (b. c. 145); but after
receiving important assists nee from them he failed
to fulfill his promises, and on the appearanoa of
Antiochus VI., Jonathan attached himself to his
party, and though he fell into a position of great
peril gained an important victory over the generals
of Demetrius. He then strengthened his posi-
tion by alliances with Rome and " the Lacediemo-
sians" [Spartans], and gained several additional
deceases in the field (B. c. 144); but at last fell
x victim to the treachery of Trypbon (b. c. 144),
who feared that he would prove an obstacle to the
design which be had formed of usurping the crown
4fter the murder of the young Antiochus (1 Mace
xi. 8-xii. 4).
4. As soon as Simon,* the last remaining
brother of the Maooabssan family, beard of the
detention of Jonathan in Ptolemais by Tryphon,
he placed himself at the head of the patriot party,
altsr the death of Aletoni, and that Jonathan was
the Hist of the Aimonaam BunUr who held the ooVw.
a It doss not appear that any direct claimant to the
elgn-prtasthood remained. Ontu ths younsar who
hahertted ths claim of his lather Onlas, the last lectt-
haas Ufh-priast, had nrtbed to flayf*
MACOABEBS, THE 1711
who were already beginning to despond, and effec-
tually opposed toe progress of the Syrians. His
skill in war had been proved in the lifetime of
Judas (1 Mace. v. 17-28), and he had taken an
active share in the campaigns of Jonathan, when
he was intrusted with a distinct command (1 Mace.
xi. 59). He was soon enabled to consummate the
object for which his family had fought gloriously,
but in vain. Trypbon, after carrying Jonathan
about ■■ a prisoner for some little time, put him to
death, and then, having murdered Antiochus, seised
the throne. On this Simon made overtures to
Demetrius II. (b. o. 143), which were favorably
received, and the independence of the Jews was at
length formally recognized. The long struggle
was now triumphantly ended, and it remained only
to reap the fruits of victory. This Simon hastened
to do. In theiwxt year he reduoed " the tower" at
Jerusalem, which up to this time had always been
occupied by the Syrian faction; and during the
remainder of his command extended and confirmed
the power of his countrymen on all sides, in spite
of the hostility of Antiochus Sidetee, who after
a time abandoned the policy of Demetrius. [Cmr-
DKB.mis.] The prudence and wisdom for which
he was already distinguished at the time of his
father's death (1 Mace. it. 65) gained for the
Jews the active support of Borne (1 Mace. xv.
16-81), in addition to the confirmation of earlier
treaties. After settling the external relations of
the new state upon a sun basis, Simon regulated
its internal administration. He encouraged trade
and agriculture, and secured all the blessings of
peace (1 Mace. xiv. 4-15). But in the midst of
successes abroad and prosperity at home, he fell a
victim to domestic treachery. Ptolemeus, the
governor of Jericho, his son-in-law, aspired to
usurp the supreme power, and having invited
Simon and two of his sons to a banquet in his
castle at D6k, he murdered them there (B. o. 135,
1 Mace. xvi. 11-16).
5. The Uesaon of Ptolemeus failed in its object.
Johannes Hybcanus, one of the sons of Simon,
escaped from the plot by which his life was threat
ened, and at once assumed the government (b. c.
135). At first he was hard pressed by Antiochus
Sidetes, and only able to preserve Jerusalem on
condition of dismantling the fortifications and sub-
mitting to a tribute, B. c. 133. The foreign and
civil wars of the Seleucidn gave him afterwards
abundant opportunities to retrieve his losses. He
reduced Idunuea (Joseph. Ant. xili. 9, § 1), con-
firmed the alliance with Rome, and at length suc-
ceeded in destroying Samaria, the hated rival of
Jerusalem, B. c. 109. The external splendor of his
government was marred by the growth of internal
divisions (Jos. Ant. xii. 10, §J 5, 6); but John es-
caped the fate of all the older members of his family,
and died in peace B. c. 106-5. His eldest son
Aristobulus I., who succeeded, was the first whe
assumed the kingly title, though Simon had en-
Joyed the fullness of the kingly power.
6. Two of toe first generation of the Macea-
basan family still remain to be mentioned. These,
though they did not attain to the leadership of
• He was sumamed " Thaan " (I
but ths rrr-r-g of ths UOs is unesrtsin.
rOiimm, m 1 Mate IL) thinks that it
).'
Digitized by
Google
1712 MACCABEES, THE
their countrymen like their brothers, shared their
fate — Eleaser [Elkazab, 8] by a noble act of
■elf-devotion, John [John, 2], apparently the eldest
anther, by treachery. The sacrifice of the family
was complete, and probably history offers no parallel
to the undaunted courage with which such a band
dared to face death, one by one, in the maintenance
of a holy cause. The result was worthy of the
sac r i f ice The Maccabees inspired a subject-people
with independence; they found a few personal fol-
lower*, and they left a nation.
T. The great outlines of the Maceabaan contest,
which are somewhat hidden in the annals thus
briefly epitomized, admit of being traced with fair
distinctness, though many points must always re-
main obscure from our ignorance of the numbers
and distribution of the Jewish population, and of
the general condition of the people at the time.
The disputed succession to the Syrian throne (8. c.
153) was the political turning-point of the strug-
gle, which may thus be divided into two great
periods. During the first period (a, c. 168-153)
the patriots maintained their cause with varying
success against the whole strength of Syria : during
the second (a. o. 153-139), they were courted by
rival factions, and their independence was acknowl-
edged from time to time, though pledges given in
times of danger were often broken when the danger
was over. The paramount importance of Jerusalem
is conspicuous throughout the whole war. The
loss of the Hoiy city reduced the patriotic party
at once to the condition of mere guerilla bands,
issuing from "the mountains" or "the wilder-
ness," to make sudden forays on the neighboring
towns. This wss the first aspect of the war (2
Mace. viii. 1-7; comp. 1 Mace. ii. 46); and the
scene of the early exploits of Judas was the hill-
country to the X. E. of Jerusalem, from which he
drove the invading armies at the famous battle-
fields of Beth-hobos and Em mads (Nicopolis).
The occupation of Jerusalem closed the first act of
the war (b. o. 165); and after this Judas made
rapid attacks on every side — in Idumna, Amnion,
Gilead, Galilee — but he made no permanent settle-
ment in the countries which he ravaged. Bethsura
was fortified as a defense of Jerusalem on the S. ;
but the authority of Judas seems to have been
limited to the immediate neighborhood of Jeru-
salem, though the influence of his name extended
more widely (1 Mace vii. 50, jj >yjj 'IooScO- On
the death of Judas the patriots were reduced to ss
great distress as at their first rising; and as Bac-
chides held the keys of the " mountains of Ephraun ' '
(ix. 50) they were forced to find a refuge in the
lowlands near Jericho, and after some slight suc-
cesses Jonathan was allowed to settle at Michmash
undisturbed, though the whole country remained
absolutely under the sovereignty of Syria. So far
it seemed that little had been gained, when the
contest between Alexander Balas and Demetrius I.
opened a new period (a. c. 153). Jonathan was
empowered to raise troops: the Jewish hostages
were restored ; many of the fortresses were aban-
doned; and apparently a definite district was as-
signed to the government of the high-priest. The
former unfruitful conflicts at length produced their
full harvest The defeat at Eleasa, like the Swiss
St. Jacob, had shown the worth of men who could
fare all odds, and no price seemed too great to
secure their aid. When the Jewish leaders had
wee obtained legitimate power they proved able to
ssstmtain it, though their general success was
MACCABEES, THE
checkered by some reverses. The solid
the national party was seen by the slight <
which wss produced by the treacherous murder of
Jonathan. Simon was able at once to occupy his
place, and carry out his plans. The Sytian gar-
rison wss withdrawn from Jerusalem; Joppa was
occupied as a seaport; and " four governments"
{riavoptt ropof, xi. 57, xiii. 37) — probably the
central parts of the old kingdom of Jndah, with
three districts taken from Samaria (x. 88, 89) —
ware subjected to the sovereign authority of the
high priest.
8. The war, thus brought to a noble issue, if has
famous is not less glorious than any of those in
which a few brave men have successfully maintained
the cause of freedom or religion against overpower-
ing might The answer of Judas to those wnw
counseled retreat (1 Mace. ix. 10) wss ss true-
hearted as that of Leonidas; and the exploits of
his followers will bear favorable comparison with
those of the Swiss, or the Dutch, or the Americana.
It would be easy to point out parallels in Maeea-
baasn history to the noblest traits of patriots and
martyrs in other countries; but it may be enough
here to claim for the contest the attention which it
rarely receives. It seems, indeed, as if the indiftsr-
ence of classical writers were perpetuated in our
own days, though there is no struggle — not even
the wars of Joanna or David — which is more pro-
foundly Interesting to the Christian student For
it is not only in their victory over external diffi-
culties that the heroism of the Maccabees la con-
spicuous: their real success wss as much imperilled
by internal divisions as by foreign force. They
had to contend on the one hand against open and
subtle attempts to Introduce Greek customs, and
on the other against sn extreme Pharisaic party,
which is seen from time to time opposing theb
counsels (1 Mace vii 18-18; comp. § % end).
And it was from Judas and those whom he inspired
that the old faith received its last development and
final impress before tbs coming of our Lord.
9. For that view of the Maecabssan war whish
regards it only as a civil and not as a religions
conflict, is essentially one-sided. If there were no
other evidence than the book of Daniel — whatever
opinion be held as to the date of it — that alone
would show how deeply the noblest hopes of thai
theocracy were centred in the success of the strug-
gle. When the feelings of the nation were thus
again turned with fresh power to their ancient faith,
we might expect that there would be a new creative
epoch in the national literature; or, if the form of
Hebrew composition wss already fixed by sacred
types, a prophet or psalmist would express tha
thoughts of the new sge after the models of old
time. Yet in part at least the leaders of Maeea-
baam times felt that they were separated by a real
chasm from the times of the kingdom or of tha
exile. If they looked for a prophet in the future
they acknowledged that the spirit of prophecy wsaj
not among them. The volume of the prophetic
writings wss completed, and, as far as appears, no
one ventured to imitate its contents. But tha
Hagfograpba, though they were already long fixed
as a definite collection [Cauoh], were not equally
far removed from imitation. The apocalyptic vis-
ions of Daniel [Dahiel, § 1] served as a patten
for the visions incorporated in tha book of Enoek
[Enoch, Book of] ; and it has been commonly
supposed that the Psalter contains compositions of
the Macoabsssn date. This supposition, which a
Digitized by
Google
MACCABEES, THE
at variance with the best evidence which en be
. obtained on the history of the Canon, can only be
received upon the clearest internal ■ proof; and it
may well be questioned whetoer the hypothesis is
not as much at variance with sound interpretation
as with the history of the Canon. The extreme
forms of the hypothesis, as that of Hittig, who
represents Pa, 1, 8, 44, 60, and all the last three
books of the Psalms (Ps. 73-160) as Maccahman
(Grimm, 1 Maco. Einl. <j 9, 8), or of Just. Ols-
hauaen (quoted by Ewald, Jahrb. 1853, p. 250 ff.),
who is inclined to bring the whole Psalter, with
very few exceptions, to that date, need only be
mentioned as indicating the kind of conjecture
which finds currency on such a subject. The real
controversy is oonfined to a much narrower field;
and the psalms which have been referred with the
greatest show of reason to the Maccshaaan age are
Ps. 44, 80, 74, 79, 80, 83. It has been argued
that all these speak of the dangers to which the
house and people of God were exposed from heathen
enemies, at a period later than the Captivity ; and
the one ground for referring them to the time of
the Maccabees is the general coincidence which they
present with some features of the Greek oppression.
But if it be admitted that the psalms in question
are of a later date than the Captivity, it by no
means follows that they are Maccaboan. On the
contrary they do not contain toe slightest trace of
those internal divisions of the people which were
the most marked features of the Maccabnan strug-
gle. The dangers then were as much from within
as from without; and party jealousies brought the
divine cause to the greatest peril (Ewald, Pialmen,
p. 356). It is incredible that a series of Macca-
boari psalms should contain no allusion to a system
of enforced idolatry, or to a temporizing priesthood,
or to a faithless multitude. And while the ob-
scurity which hangs over the history of the Persian
snpremaoy from the time of Nehemiah to the inva-
sion of Alexander makes it impossible to fix with
any precision a date to which the psalms can be
referred, the one glimpse which is given of the
state of Jerusalem in the interval (Joseph, Ant. xi.
7) is such as to show that they may well have
found some sufficient occasion in the wars and dis-
srders which attended the decline of the Persian
sower (comp. Ewald ). It may, however, be doubted
whether the arguments for a post- Babylonian date
ire conclusive. There is nothing in the psalms
themselves which may not apply to the circum-
stances which attended the overthrow of the king-
dom; and' it seems incredible that the desolation
of the Temple should have given occasion to no
hymns of pious » sorrow.
10. The collection of the so-called Piabni of
Solomon furnishes a strong confirmation of the
belief that all the canonical psalms are earlier than
the Maccabsean era. This collection, which bears
the dearest traces of unity of authorship, is, almost
<• The historical argument for the completion of the
present collection of the Psalms before the compilation
of Oarookiaa is very well given by Ewald ( Jaare. 1863,
4, pp. 20-321. In 1 Uhr. xvi. 7-36 passages occur which
are derived from Ps. ev., evL, xovl, of which the firs'
two are among Che latest hymns In the Psalter
e It most, however, be noticed that the formula o*
quotation prefixed to the words from Ps. Ixxlx. in 1
Base. vB. 17 Is not that in which Scripture is quoted
m later books, as is commonly said It is not mv
ytyeftvroi, or (ear* to yrypnfLjUvov, bu. xarA to* Aeyar
108
MACCABEES, THE IT IS
beyond question, a true Maocabasan work. There
is every reason to believe (Ewald, Gaeliichtt, tv.
343) that the book was originally composed in
Hebrew; and it presents exactly those character-
istics which are wanting in the other (conjectural)
Maccabasan Psalms. " The holy noes " (of lo-ioi,
D"TOTI [AsalDAAHs] ; of jMPoi/tmt r»r «w-
pior) appear throughout as a distinct class, strug-
gling against hypocrites and inen-pleasers, who
make the observance of the Law subservient to their
own interests (Ps. Sol. iv., xiil.-xv.). The sanc-
tuary is polluted by the abominations of professing
servants of God before it is polluted by the heathen
(Pa. Sol. i. 8, U. 1 ff., viil. 8 ff., xvii. 15 ff.). Na-
tional unfaithfulness is the cause of national pun-
ishment ; and the end of trial is the "justification "
of God (Ps. Sol. li. 16, iii. 8, iv. 9, viii. 7 ff, ir.).
On the other hand there is a holiness of works set
up in some passages which violates the divine mean
of Scripture (Ps. Sol. i. 8, 8, iii. 9): and, while
the language is full of echoes of the Old Testament,
it is impossible not to fttl that it wants something
which we find in all the canonical writings. The
historical allusions in the Psalms of Solomon are as
unequivocal as the description which they give of
the state of the Jewish nation. An enemy « threw
down the strong walls " of Jerusalem, and " Gen-
tiles went up to the altar " (Ps. Sol. ii. 1-3 ; comp.
1 Mace. i. 81). In his pride "he wrought all
things in Jerusalem, as the Gentiles in their cities
do for their gods" (Ps. Sol. xvii. 16). "Those
who loved the assemblies of the saints (o-vroryeryat
May) wandered (lege twAavmrro) in deserts"
(Pa. Sol. xvii. 19; comp. 1 Msec. i. 54, ii. 88); and
there " was no one In the midst of Jerusalem who
did mercy and truth " (Ps. Sol. xvii. 17 ; comp. 1
Msec. i. 88). One psalm (viii.) appears to refer to
a somewhat later period. The people wrought
wickedly, and God sent upon them a spirit of error.
He brought one " from the extremity of the earth "
(viii. 16; comp. 1 Mace vii. 1, — " Demetrius from
Rome "). " The princes of the land met him
with joy " (1 Mace. vii. 5-8); and he entered the
land in safety (1 Mace. vii. 9-12, — Baochides hit
general), "as a father in peace" (1 Mace. vii. 15).
Then " he slew the princes and every one wise in
counsel " (1 Mace. vii. 16) and " poured out the
blood of those who dwelt in Jerusalem " (1 Macs.
vii. 17).° The purport of these evils, as a retribu-
tive and purifying judgment, leads to the most
remarkable feature of the Psalms, the distinct ex-
pression of Messianic hopes. In this respect they
oner a direct contrast to the books of Maccabees (1
Mace. xiv. 41). The sorrow and the triumph are
seen together in their spiritual aspect, and the ex-
pectation of "an anointed Lord" (xpicrbt Krpiot,
Ps. Sol. xvii. 86 (xviii. 8); comp. Luke ii. 11) fol-
lows directly after the description of the impious
assaults of Gentile enemies (Ps. SoL xrii.; comp.
Dan. xi. 46, xii.). " Bleated," it it said, " are they
tv ryporf , which is variously altered by different au-
thorities.
e The prominence given to the slaughter of the
ajaidasans both la 1 Mace, and in the pealm, and the
share which the Jews had directly in the second pol-
lution of Jerusalem, seem to fix the events of the
psalm to the tuna of Demetrius ; but the eloss siml
larlty (with this exception) between the invasions of
Apollonius and Baechides may leave some doubt as to
the IdentLloation. (Compare 1 Mace. L 89-88, with
Ps. Sol. Tilt 18-84.)
Digitized by
Google
J
1714
MACCABEES, THE
who am tot ( in those days, to see the good things
stuch tlie Lotd shall do for the generation to some.
[When men ire brought] beneath the rod of cor-
rection of an anointed Lord {or the Lord's anointed,
fori j>A$Sor muttiat xpvrni Kvplov) in the fear
of hit God, in wisdom of tpirit and of righteous-
neai and of might" . . . then there shall be a
" good generation in the fear of God, in the days
tf mercy" (Pa. 8ol. xviii. 8-10)."
11. Elsewhere there it little which marks the
distinguishing religious character of the era. The
notice of the Msccabaean heroes in the book of
Daniel is much more general and brief than the
corresponding notice of their great adversary; but
it is not on that account less important as illus-
trating the relation of the famous chapter to the
simple history of the period which it embraces.
Nowhere is it more evident that nuts are shadowed
forth by the prophet only in their typical bearing
on the development of God's kingdom. In this
aspect the passage itself (Dan. xi. 29-85) will super-
sede in a great measure the necessity of a detailed
comment. ** At the time appointed [in the spring
of 168 B. a] he [Antiochus Epiph.J shall return
and come towards tlie south [Egypt] ; but it shall
not be at the first time, to alio tie Intt time [though
his first attempts shall be successful, in the end be
shall fail]. For tie ships of Cliittim [the Romans]
thall come against him, and he sltall be catt down,
and return, and be very wroth against the holy
covenant ; and he thall do [his will] ; yen he thall
return, and hate intelligence with them that for-
sake the holy covenant (oomp. Dan. viii. 24, 25).
And force* from him [at his bidding] thall stand
[remain in Judas as garrisons; oomp. 1 Mace. i.
38, 34] ; and they thall pollute the sanctuary, the
stronghold, and shall take away the daily [sacrifice] ;
and they shall set up the abomination that maieth
desolate [1 Msec i. 45-17]. And such as do
wickedly against (or rather such at condemn) the
covenant shall he corrupt [to apostasy] by smooth
words; but the people that know their God shall be
strong and do [exploits]. And they that under-
stand [know God and his law] among the people,
shall instruct many : yet they thall fall by the sword
and by fame, by capimty and by spuil [some] days
(1 Mace, t 60-64). Now when they shad fall,
thty shall be holpen with a little help (1 Mace. i.
28; 2 Msec. v. 27, Judas Mace, with nine others
....); and many shall cleave to them [the faith-
ful followers of the Law] with hypocrisy [dreading
the prowess of Judas, 1 Mace. ii. 48, and yet ready
to fall away at the first opportunity, 1 Mace. vii. 6].
And some of them of understanding shall fall, to
make trial among them, and to purge and to make
them whit*, unto the time of the end; because [the
end ia] yet for a time appointed." From this
point the prophet describes in detail the godleas-
oess of the great oppressor (uer. 36-19), and then
his last fortunes and death (ver. 40-45), but says
nothing of the triumph of the Maccabees or of the
restoration of the Temple, which preceded the last
a • The Psalm* of Solomon wars first published In
Break with a Latin translation by the Jesuit La Cards
at the and of his Adversaria Sacra, Load. 1028, after-
wards by rabridus In his Codex Apotr. Vet. list. i.
•17 If. There Is an English translation In the first
solum of Winston's Authentic Rrcordi (Land 1727).
IflsjSiiMil bss recently published a critical edition of
lbs ant {Die Ptatmrt Salsmo't u. die Hhnmet/akrt da
mutss,miedtitch hrrtttulU *. erfctart) In his 7«'ueer./.
MACCABEES, TUB
event by some months. This omission it seared}
intelligible unless we regard the facta as symboBsv
ing a higher struggle — a truth wrongly held by
those who from early times referred verses 36-41
only to Antichrist, the antitype of Antiochus — ia
which that recovery of the earthly temple bad ns
place. And at any rate it shows the imperfection
of that view of the whole chapter by which it is
regarded as a mere transcription of history.
12. The history of the Maccabees does not eon-
tain much which illustrates in detail the rebgitam
or social progress of the Jews. It is obvious tlast
the period must not only have intensified old la-
lien), but slso have called out dements which wtit
latent in them. One doctrine at least, that of a
resurrection, and even of a material resurreetkn
(2 Mace. riv. 46), was brought out into the most
distinct apprehension by suffering. " It is good to
look for ike hope bom God, to be raised up again
by Him " (wctXiv hjnurHiTtaveu bw* alnov). Was
the substance of the martyr's snswer to his judge;
" as for thee, thou shalt have no resurrection to
life" (order atris tls (snSw, 2 Mace. vii. 14; comp.
vi. 26, riv. 46). " Our brethren," says another,
" have fallen, having endured a short pain leading
to everlasting life, bring under the covenant of God"
(2 Mace. vii. 86, i&vor atrriov (»%s)- And as it
was believed that an interval elapsed between death
and judgment, the dead were sup|iosed to be ia
some measure still capable of profiting by the inter-
cession of the living. Thus much is certainly ex-
pressed in the famous passage, 2 Mace xii. 43-45,
though the secondary notion of a purgatorial state
is in no way implied in it- On the other bandit
ia not very clear how far the future judgment was
supposed to extend. If the punishment of the
wicked heathen in another life had formed a definite
article of belief, it might have been expected to be
put forward more prominently (2 Mace. vii. 17,
19, 85, Ac.), though the pssssges in question may
be understood of sufferings after death, and not
only of earthly sufferings; but for the apostate
Jews there was a certain judgment in reserve (vi.
28). The firm faith in toe righteous providenee
of God shown In the chastening of his people, as
contrasted with his neglect of other nations, is
another proof of the widening view of the spiritual
world, which is characteristic of the epoch (2 Mace,
iv. 16, 17, v. 17-20, vi. 12-16, 4c). The lessons
of the Captivity were reduced to moral teaching;
and in the same way the doctrine of the ministry
of angels assumed an importance which ia without
parallel except in patriarchal timet [2 Maccabkks].
It was perhaps from this cause also thnt the Mes-
sianic hope was limited In it* range. The vivid
perception of spiritual truths hindered the spread
of a hope which had been cherished in a material
form; and a pause, ss it were, was made, in which
men gained new points of sight from khich lo con-
template the old promises.
18. The various glimpses of national life which
can be gained during the period show on the wboU
urits. Vital. 1888, p. 188 ft He supposes the Pasha*
to hsvs been written In Greek, not Hebrew, soon aftse
the death of Pompey (a. o. 48);eomp. Ft. Sot. a. 80 1
Hovers, DeUtatch, Lanpim and Ketm agree with Mm
In referring them to a date subsequent to the capture
of Jerusalem by Pompey (a. 0. 68); on the other head
Kwald, Grimm, and DUbaann (In Henau'a balBepV
ill. 805) sangn than to the tuns of Asttsehns Hatak
ansa. A
Digitized by
Google
MAC0ABBE8, THB
» steady adherence to the Mosaic Law. Probably
the Law was never more rigorously fulfilled. The
Importance of the Anticehian persecution in fixing
the Canon of the Old Testament has been already
noticed. [Canon, vol. i. p. 358.] The books of
the Law were specially sought out for destruction
(1 Mara. i. 56, 57, iii. 48); and their distinctive
value was in consequence proportionately increased.
To use the words of 1 Mace., •' the holy books "
(tA $i0\la t* fi-yio t* Iv X'po-lr hlui*) were felt
to make all other comfort superfluous (1 Mace,
xii. 9). The strict observance of the Sabbath
(1 Mace. U. 32; 3 Mace. vi. 11, viii. 96, Ac.) and
of the Sabbatical year (1 Mace. vi. 63), the law of
the Nazarites (1 Mace. iii. 49), and the exemptions
from military service (1 Mace. iii. 56), the solemn
prayer and fasting (1 Mace. iii. 47; 9 Mace. x. 35,
Ac.), carry us back to early times. The provision
for the maimed, the aged, and the bereaved (3 Mace
viii. 38, 30), was in the spirit of the Law ; and the
new Feast of the Dedication was a homage to the
old rites (2 Mace. i. 9) while it was a proof of in-
dependent life. The interruption of the succession
to the high-priesthood was the most important
innovation which was made, and one which pre-
pared the way for the dissolution of the state. After
various arbitrary changes the office was left vacant
for seven years upon the death of Alcimas. The
last descendant of Jozadak (Onias), in whose family
it had been for nearly four centuries, fled to Egypt,
and established a schismatic worship ; and at last,
when the support of the Jews became important,
the Maocabean leader, Jonathan, of the family of
Joarib, was elected to the dignity by the nomina-
tion of the Syrian king (1 Mace. x. 80), whose will
was confirmed, as it appears, by the voice of the
people (comp. 1 Mace. xiv. 86).
14. Little can be said of the condition of litera-
ture and the arts which has not been already antici-
nated. In common intercourse the Jews used the
Aramaic dialect which was established after the
return: this was " their own language " (3 Mace,
vii. 8, 91, 37, xii. 87); but it is evident from the
narrative quoted that they understood Greek, which
must have spread widely through the influence of
Syrian officers. There is not, however, the slightest
evidence that Greek was employed in Palestinian
literature till a much later date. The description
rf the monument which was erected by Simon at
Modin in memory of his family (1 Mace. xiii. 97-
80) is the only record of the architecture of the
time. The description is obscure, but in some
features the structure appears to have presented a
resemblance to the tumbs of Porsena and the
Curiam (Plin. H. N. xxxvi. 13), and perhaps to
one still found in Idumsea. An oblong basement,
of which the two chief faces were built of polished
white marble (Joseph. AnL xiii. 6, § 6), supported
" seven pyramids in a line ranged one against an-
other," equal in number to the members of the
Maccaboan family, including Simon himself. To
these be added "other works of art (/iifxayfiiurra),
placing round (on the two chief faces?) great
columns (Joaephus adds, each of a single block),
bearing trophies of arms, and sculptured ships,
which might be visible from the aaa below." Th»
anguage of 1 Mace, and Josephus implies thai
hese columns were placed upon the basement,
(thenriM it might be supposed that the oolnmus
Met only to the height of the basement, supporting
the trophies on the same level u the pyramids. So
■man at least is evident, that the characteristics
MAOOABEKS, BOOKS OP 171ft
of this work — and probably of later Jewish
iteeture generally — bore closer affinity to the styles
of Asia Minor and Greece than of Kgypt or the
East, a result which would follow equally from the
Syrian dominion and the commerce which Simor.
opened by the Mediterranean (1 Mace. xiv. 5).
16. The only recognized relics of the time are
the coins which bear the name of " Simon," or
" Simon Prince (Ifati) of Israel " in Samaritan
letters. The privilege of a national coinage was
granted to Simon by Antiochus VII. Sidetes ()
Mace. xv. 6, xi/ifta Itiov po/uoyui rp xcfoa).
and numerous examples occur which have the dates
of the first, second, third, and fourth years of the
liberation of Jerusalem (Israel, Zion); and it is a
remarkable confirmation of their genuineness, that
in the first year the name Zion does not occur, as
the citadel was not recovered till the second year
of Simon's supremacy, while after the second year
Zion alone is found (Bayer, de JVuouuit, 171). The
privilege was first definitely accorded to Simon in
8. o. 140, while the first year of Simon was b. c.
143 (1 Mace. xiii. 49); but this discrepancy causes
little difficulty, as it is not unlikely that the con-
cession of Antiochus was made in favor of a practice
already existing. No date is given later than the
fourth year, but coins of Simon occur without a
date, which may belong to the four last years of
his life. The emblems which the coins bear have
generally a connection with Jewish history — a
vine-leaf, a cluster of grapes, a vase (of manna?),
a trifid flowering rod, a palm branch surrounded
by a wreath of laurel, a lyre (1 Mace. xiii. 61), a
bundle of branches symbolic of the feast of taber-
nacles. The coins issued in the last war of inde-
pendence by Bar-oochba repeat many of these
emblems, and there is considerable difficulty in dis-
tinguishing the two series. The authenticity of all
the Maccaboan coins was impugned by Tyohser,
{Die UnScktheU d. jid. MUnzen . . . bewiett*
. . . 0. G. Tychsen, 1779), but on insufficient
grounds. He was answered by Bayer, whose ad-
mirable essays (De Ifummii JJebr. Samaritanii,
Val. Ed. 1781; VmtHda . . . 1790) give the
most complete account of the coins, though he
reckons some apparently later types as Maccaboan.
Eokhel {Doctr. Ifumm. UL p 465 ff.) has given a
good account of the controversy, and an accurate
description of the chief types of the coins. Comp.
De Sauley, ivwiasia. Judaiqoe ; Ewald, (Sack. vii.
366, 476. [Money.]
The authorities for the Maccaboan history have
been given already. Of modem works, that of
Ewald is by far the best. Herzfeld has collected a
mass of details, ohiefly from late sources, which are
interesting and sometimes valuable; but the student
of the period cannot but feel how difficult it is to
realize it as a whole. Indeed, it seems that the
instinct was true which named it from one chief
hero. In this last stage of the history of Israel, as
in the first, all life came from the leader; and it is
the greatest glory of the Maccabees that, while they
found at first all tnm upon their personal fortunes,
they left a nation strong enough to preserve an in-
dependent faith till the typical kingdom gave plan
to a universal Church. B. F. W.
MAOOABBES, BOOKS OF (Momo/SafcM
a' etc.). Four books whioh bear the common title
of " Maccabees ' an found in some MSS. of the
LXX. Two <f these were included in the early
current Latin "erakm of the Bible, and thanes
Digitized by
Google
1716 MACCABEES, BOOKS OF
MMd into the Vulgate. As forming part of the
Vulgate they wen received as canonical by the
Council of Trent, and retained among the apocrypha
by the reformed churches. The two other books
obtained no such wide circulation, and hare only a
secondary connection with the Maocabaan history.
But all the books, though they diner moat widely
In character and date and worth, possess points of
interest which make them a fruitful field for study.
If the historic order were observed, the so-called
Mrd book would come first, the fourth would be
an appendix to the second, which would retain its
place, and the frit would come last; but it will be
more convenient to examine the books in the order
in which they are found in the MS8., which was
probably decided by some vague tradition of then-
relative antiquity.
The controversy as to the mutual relations and
historic worth of the first two books of Maccabees
has given rise to much very ingenious and partial
criticism. The subject was very nearly exhausted
by a series of essays published in the last century,
which contain in the midst of much unfair reason-
ing the substance of what has been written since.
The discussion was occasioned by E. Frolieh's An-
nab of Byria (Annaltt .... Syria .... mams
vtteri/nu iihulrati. Vindob. 1744). In this great
work the author, a Jesuit, had claimed paramount
authority for the books of Maccabees. This churn
was denied by E. F. Wernsdorf in his Prohmo
dtfotUilmi hutorim Syria in Libra Mace. (Lips.
1746). Frolich replied to this essay in another,
Defontibut hut Syria in Librit Mace, prohuio
. ... in examen vocata (Vindob. 1746): and then
the argument fell into other hands. Wernsdorf s
brother (GIL Wernsdorf) undertook to support his
cause, which he did in a Commenfatio hutorico-
eri&ca de file Librarian Mace. (Wratial. 1747);
and nothing has been written on the same side
which can be compared with his work. By the
vigor and freedom of his style, by his surprising
erudition and unwavering confidence — almost
worthy of Bentlay — he carries his reader often
beyond the bounds of true criticism, and it is only
after reflection that the littleness and sophistry of
many of his arguments are apparent. But in spite
of tbe injustice and arrogance of the book, it con-
tains very much which is of the greatest value, and
no abstract can give an adequate notion of its
power. The reply to Wernsdorf was published
anonymously by another Jesuit: AuctortUu vtri-
ssowe Libri Mace, canmico-hutorica adterta
.... a qmdam Hoc Jetu tactrdat* (Vindob.
1749). The authorship of this was fixed upon J.
Khell(Welte, EM. p. S3, note) ; and while, in many
points Khell is unequal to his adversary, his book
contains some very useful collections for the history
of the canon. In more recent times, F. X. Patri-
Uus (another Jesuit) has made a fresh attempt to
establish the complete harmony of the books, and,
on the whole, his essay (Dt Consensu utriutqve
Libri Mace. Rome, 1856), though far from satis-
factory, is the most able defense of the books which
has been published.
I. The First Book of Maccabees. — 1.
The first book of Maccabees contains a history of
the patriotic struggle, from the first resistance of
Mattathias to the settled sovereignty sud death of
Simon, a period of thirty-three years (b. o. 168-
285 ). rhe opening chapter gives a abort summary
•f toe conquests of Alexander the Great as laying
Isa foundations of the Greek empire in the Fast,
MACCABEES, BOOKS OF
and describes at greater length tbe expression of
Antiochus Epiphaner, culminating in his desperate,
attempt to extirpate Judaism. Tbe great subject
of the book begins with the enumeration of the
Maccsbsaan family (iL 1-5), which is followed by
an account of the part which the aged Mattathias
took in rousing and guiding the spirit of his coun-
trymen (it 6-70). The remainder of the narrative
is occupied with the exploits of his five sons, three
of whom in succession carried on with varying for-
tune the work which he began, till it reached its
triumphant issue. Each of the three divisions,
into which the main portion of tbe book thus nat-
urally falls, is stamped with an individual charaotei
derived from its special hero. First Judas, by •
series of brilliant successes, and scarcely less nobis
reverses, fully roused bis countrymen to their work,
and then fell at a Jewish Thermopylaj (iii. 1-iz.
22, B. c 167-161). Next Jonathan confirmed by
policy the advantages which his brother had gained
by chivalrous daring, and fell not in open field, but
by the treachery of a usurper (ix. 33-xii. 53 ; u. c
161-143). Last of all Simon, by wisdom and
vigor, gave shape and order to the new state, and
was formally Installed in the princely office. He
also fell, but by domestic and not by foreign trea-
son; and his son succeeded to his power (xiii.-xvL
B. c. 143, 136). The history, in this aspect, pre-
sents a kind of epic unity. The passing allusion to
the achievements of after-times (xvL S3, 84) relieves
the impression caused by the murder of Simon.
But at his death the victory was already won —
the life of Judaism had mastered the tyranny of
Greece.
2. While the grandeur and unity of the subject
invests the book with almost an epic beauty, it
never loses the character of history. The earlier
part of the narrative, including the exploits of
Judas, is cast in a more poetic mould than any
other part, except the brief eulogy of Simon (xiv.
4-15); but when the style is most poetical (i. 37-
40, ii. 7-13, 48-«8, iii. 3-9, 18-22, iv. 8-11, 30-
33, 38, vi. 10-13, vii. 87, 38, 41, 42) — and tins
poetical form is chiefly observable in the speeches
— it seems to be true in spirit. The great marks
of trustworthiness are everywhere conspicuous.
Victory and failure and despondency are, on ths
whole, chronicled with the same candor. Then
is no attempt to bring into open display tbe work-
ing of Providence. In speaking of Antiochus
Kpiphaoes (i. 10 ff.) the writer betrays no unjust
violence, while he marks in one expressive phrase
(i. 10, Sl(a ifiafTMkSs) the character of the Syrian
type of Antichrist (cf. Is. xi. 10; Dan. xi. 36);
and if no mention is made of the reckless profligacy
of Alexander Bales, it must be remembered that
his relations to the Jews were honorable and liberal,
and these alone fall within the scope of the history.
So far as the circumstances admit, the general ac-
curacy of the book is established by tbe evidence of
ether authorities; but for a considerable period it
is the single source of our information. And, in-
deed, it has little need of external testimony to its
worth. Its whole character bears adequate witness
to its essential truthfulness; and Luther — no ser-
vile judge — expressed himself as not disinclined,
on internal grounds, to see it " reckoned among ths
books of Holy Scripture" (" Diess Bnch . . .
fast eine gleicbe Weiae halt mil Heden und Wortes.
wie andere heilige BUcher und nicht unwurd%
gewest ware, hfneiiunirechnen, well es ein «ht
oothig und niltxlich Buch 1st xu verstehen asm
Digitized by
Google
MACCABEES, BOOKS OF
Propheten Daniel im 11 KapiteL" Werke, von
W»lch, ziv. 94, ap. Grimm, p. xxli.).
8. There are, however, some points in which the
writer appears to have been imperfectly Informed,
specially in the history of foreign nation! ; and
■one, again, in which he hai been supposed to have
magnified the difficulties and successes of his coun-
trymen. Of the former class of objections two,
which turn upon the description given of the founda-
tion of the Greek kingdoms of the East (1 Mace. i.
6-6), and of the power of Borne (viii. 1-16) deserve
notice from their intrinsic interest. After giving
a rapi I surimary of the exploits of Alexander —
the reading and interpretation of ver. 1 are too
uncertain to allow of objections based upon the
common text — the writer states that the king,
conscious of approaching death, '< divided his king-
dom among his servants who had been brought up
with him from his youth " (1 Mace. 1. 6, titiKtw
•Avoir tV &turi\tlav airov, In firm avrov),
.... "and after his death they all put on
crowns." Various rumors, it is known (Curt. x.
10), prevailed about a will of Alexander, which
decided the distribution of the provinces of his
kingdom, but this narrative is evidently a different
and independent tradition. It may rest upon some
former indication of the king's wishes, but in the
absence of all corroborative evidence it can scarcely
be accepted as a historic fact (Patritlus, Dt Coin.
Mace pref. viii.), though it is a remarkable proof of
the desire which men felt to attribute the constitu-
tion of the Greek power to the immediate counsels
of its great founder. In this instance the author
has probably accepted without inquiry the opinion
of his countrymen ; in the other it is distinctly said
that the account of the greatness of Rome was
brought to Judas by common report (1 Mace. viii.
1> 3, IjitoiKrty .... 8«Tj"y^<ra»To). The state-
ments made give a lively impression of the popular
estimate of the conquerors of the West, whose char-
actor and victories are described chiefly with open or
covert allusion to the Greek powers. The subjuga-
tion of the Galatians, who were the terror of the
neighboring people (Llv. xxxviii. 37), and the con-
quest of Spain, the Tarshish (comp. ver. 3) of
Phoenician merchants, are noticed, as would be
natural from the immediate interest of the events ;
but the wars with Carthage are wholly omitted
(Josephus adds these in his narrative, Ant. xii. 10,
j 6). The errors in detail — as the capture of
Antiochus the Great by the Romans (ver. 7), the
numbers of his armament (ver. G), the constitution
of the Roman Senate (ver. 15), the one supreme
yearly officer at Rome (ver. 16; comp. xv. 16) —
are only such as might be expected in oral accounts ;
and the endurance (ver. 4, /uuipoSvfiia), the good
faith (ver. 12), and the simplicity of the republic
(ver. 14, owe iw49rro oiiith avr&w SiASripa ical
•4 wtpu0d\om-o Ttofxpipoai Sort alpvySrjrat in
mirrf, contrast i. 9), were features likely to arrest
the attention of Orientals. The very imperfection
of the writer's knowledge — for it seems likely
(ver. 11) that he remodels the rumors to suit his
nrn time — is instructive, as affording a glimpse of
the extent and manner in which Came spread the
reputation of the Romans in the scene of their
htore conquests. Nor are the mistakes as to the
tondition of foreign states calculated to weaken the
testimony of the book to national history. They
are perfectly consistent with good faith in the nar-
lator; and even if there are inaccuracies in record-
ail the relative numbers of the Jewish and Syrian
HAOOABEES, BOOKS OF 1717
ft»a» (xi. 45-47, vii. 46), these need cause little
surprise, and may in some degree be due to errors
of transcription. 11
4. Much has been written as to the sources from
which the narrative was derived, but there does not
seem to be evidence sufficient to indicate them with
any certainty. In one passage (ix. S3) the author
implies that written accounts of some of the action!
of Judas were in existence (ret rtpitriri . . . . ot
mrrrypa^n)) ; and the poetical character of the
first section of the book, due in a great measure tr
the introduction of speeches, was probably bor
rowed from the writings on which that part was
based. It appears, again, to be a reasonable con-
clusion from the mention of the official records of
the lift of Hyrcanus (xvi. 24, toOt* yiypawrt
M 0i/3Afai f/ntpwy apyieawevViit ainoi), that
similar records existed at least for toe high-priest-
hood of Simon. There is nothing certainly to
indicate that the writer designed to fill up any gap
in the history; and the notice of the change of
reckoning which attended the elevation of Simon
(xiii. 43) seems to suggest the existence of some
kind of public register. The constant appeal to
official documents is a further proof both of the
preservation of public records and of the sense
entertained of their importance. Many documents
are inserted in the text of the history, but even
when they are described as '• copies " (iyriypaQa),
it is questionable whether the writer designed to
give more than the substance of the originals.
Some bear clear marks of authenticity (viii. 33-28,
xii. 6-18), while others are open to grave difficul-
ties and suspicion ; but it is worthy of notice that
the letters of the Syrian kings generally appear to
be genuine (x. 18-20, 35-46, xi. 80-37, xiii. 86-40,
xv. 2-9). What has been said will show the
extent to which the writer may have used written
authorities, but while the memory of the events
was still recent it is not possible that he should
have confined himself to them. If he wss not
himself engaged in the war of independence, he
must have been familiar with those who were, and
their information would supplement and connect
the narratives which were already current, and
which were probably confined to isolated passages
in the history. But whatever were the sources of
different parts of the book, and in whatever way
written, oral, and personal information was com-
bined in its structure, the writer made the materials
which be used truly his own; and the minute
exactness of the geographical details carries the
conviction that the whole finally rests upon the
evidence of eye-witnesses.
6. The language of the book does not present
any striking peculiarities. Both in diction and
structure it is generally simple and unaffected, with
a marked and yet not harsh Hebraistic character.
The number of peculiar words is not very con-
siderable, especially when compared with those
in 2 Mace. Some of these are late forms, as:
<l>oy4a> (jaytfu), xi. 5, 11; i(ovtiraais, I 39;
oVAoSorto, xiv. 32; atnri8(<T«n), lv. 67; BciAfto/uu
iv. 8, 21, xvi. 6; t/aipa, viii. 7, ix. 63, dm.;
osWoc/ia, xv. 6; TtAnvtloBcu, xiii. 89 ; i(outrii-
(ttrtai, x. 70; or compounds, such as owwrmos-ifw,
xi. 55; hturvcrpiipte, xiv. 44; ttikityvxoi, viii.
16 xvi. 5; (poroKTorU, i. 24. Other words an
» The relation of «t-> history of Josephus to that a
1 Mace. Is carefully dli !>issrd by Grimm, Aat
Bawls. Mint. | 9 (6).
Digitized by
Google
1718 MACCABEES, BOOKS OF
Med in new or strange senses, as iSpira, viiL 14;
mapitrrmrit, xv. 83; tmrroAt), ™. T. Some
phrases clearly express a Semitic idiom (ii. 48
lovrai K€(tos t$ ouaor. vi. 83, z. 68, xii. 28), and
the influeuce of the LXX. is continually per-
ceptible (e. o. i. 64, ft 63, vii. 17, ix. 83, iIt. 8);
but In the main (comp. § 6) the Hebraisms which
exist are such as might have been naturalized in
the Hebrew-Greek of Palestine. Josephus un-
doubtedly made use of the Greek text [Ami. xii. 6
SI); and apart from external evidence, thit might
have been supposed to be the original. But,
6. The testimony of antiquity leaves no doubt
but that the book was first written in Hebrew.
Origen, in his famous catalogue of the books of
Scripture (ap. Euseb. B. E. vi. 86), after enumer-
ating the contents of the 0. T. according to the
Hebrew canon, adds: '• But without (i. t. excluded
from the number of ) these is the Maccabann his-
tory (to. Mamc«^alK((), which is entitled Sarbttk
SnimaUl." " In giving the names of the books
of the 0. T. he had subjoined the Hebrew to the
Greek title in exactly the same manner, and there
can be therefore no question but that be was ac-
quainted with a Hebrew original for the Macca-
oafca, as for the other books. The term Afmcca-
tatca is, however, somewhat vague, though the
analogy of the other parts of the list requires that
it should be limited to one book; but the state-
ment of Jerome is quite explicit: *' The first book
of Maccabees," he says, "I found in Hebrew: the
second is Greek, as can be shown in fact from its
style alone" (Prot. 6'oi ad Libr. Rtq.). Ad-
mitting the evidence of these two fathers, who
were alone able to speak with authority on a sub-
ject of Hebrew literature during- the first four cen-
turies, the fact of the Hebrew original of the book
may be supported by several internal arguments
which would be in themselves insufficient to estab-
lish it. Some of the Hebraisms are such as sug-
gest rather the immediate influence of a Hebrew
text than the free adoption of a Hebrew idiom
(1. 4, iyinrro *b <pipor\ 16, t)roiMaovff r) /Jar-;
89, tie tra iuupmri 36, «.'t Jui/SoW irevWv;
68, <V wasrl «»rl col mrl, etc. ; U. 67, ill 9,
htoKKvitivtm i iv. 2, v. 37, «era <ra tffun-a
ravra, etc.), and difficulties in the Greek text are
removed by a recurrence to the words which may
be supposed to have been used in the original (1.88,
M robs KaTomavyrasfor n , 3$;'?i i. 36, ft.
8, iv. 19, xvi. 3). A question, however, might be
raised whether the book was written in Biblical
Hebrew, or in the later Aramaic (Chaldee); but it
seems almost oertain that the writer took the
lanonical histories as his model; and the use of
the original text of Scripture by the learned class
would preserve the Hebrew ss a literary language
•lien it bad ceased to be the language of common
life. But It is by no means unlikely (Grimm,
Exeg. Bandb. § 4) that the Hebrew was corrupted
by later idioms, as in the most recent books of the
MACCABEES, BOOKS OF
■ Sapft* "Lafiarvitk. This Is undoubtedly lbs tnas
weeing without the i. All the explanations of the
word with which 1 am acquainted start from the tales
jeadtof— Ifasdotf— ''The rod of the renegades"
■vrTOS^D, HerxfoM), « The sceptre of the prince
tf us sons of Ood " (*32 "HD, Bwald), "The hla-
e»fT<< taurine*, fine sons of God »(*:J3 -1»);
0. T. Jt seems almost incredible that any on*
should hare imagined that the worthless Afegillnii
Antiociiut, of which Burtolocci's Latin trauslatios
it printed by Fabricius (Corf. Pteud. V. T. I
1166-74), was the Hebrew original of which
Origen and Jerome spoke.' This tract, which
occurs in some of the Jewish services for the Feast
of Dedication (Fabricius, I c), is a perfectly tm-
historical narrative of some of the incidents of the
Maccabaaan War, in which John the high-priest,
and not Judas, plays by far the most conspicuous
part. The order of events is so entirely disregarded
in it that, after the death of Judas, Mattathias it
represented as leading his other sons to the deci-
sive victory which precedes the purification of tb*
Temple.
7. The whole structure of 1 Mace points to
Palestine as the place of its composition. This fact
itself is a strong proof for a Hebrew original, for
there it no trace of a Greek Palestinian literature
during the Hasmona?an dynasty, though the wide
use of the LXX. towards the close of the period,
prepared the way for the apostolic writings. But
though the country of the writer can be thus fixed
with certainty, there is consUeraUe doubt at to hit
date. At the close of the book he mentions, in
general terms, the acts of Johannes Hyrcanus ss
written " in the chronicles of his priesthood from
the time that be was made high-priest after hit
father '' (xvi. 33, 24). From this it has been con-
cluded that he must hare written after the death
of Hyrcanus, B. c 106 ; and the note in xiii. 80
(&»i TTjt iytifiu TatVnr) implies the lapse of a
considerable time since the accession of Simon (b. c.
143). On the other hand, the omission of all men-
tion of the close of the government of Hyrcanus,
when the note of its commencement is given, may
be urged aa an argument for placing the book late
in his long reign, but before his death. It cannot
certainly have been composed long after his death ;
for it would have been almost impossible to write
a history so full of simple faith and joyous triumph
in the midst of the troubles which, early in the
succeeding reign, threatened too distinctly the
coming dissolution of the state. Combining these
two limits, we may place the date of the original
book between B. c. 130-100. The date and person
of the Greek translator are wholly undetermined;
but it is unlikely that such a book would remain
long unknown or untranslated at Alexandria.
8. In a religious aspect the book is more remark-
able negatively than positively. The historical in-
stinct of the writer confines him to the bare recital
of facts, and were it not for the words of others
which he records, it might seem that the true theo-
cratic aspect of national life had been loit. Not
only does be relate no miracle, such as occur in
2 Mace., but he does not even refer the triumphant
successes of the Jews to divine interposition-" It
Is a characteristic of the same kind that he panel
over without any clear notice the Messianic hopes,
which, it appears from the Psalms of Solomon ant 1
and I cannot proposs say sslHnailwj transcription M
tire tnre reading.
' The book la found ntt only In Hebrew, bat a]a>
In Chaldee (Fabrieius, Cod. Pttmd. V. T. 1. 441 tuts).
e The passage xt. 71, 78, may seem to contradict ttua
sarertlon ; but though boom write™, era from early
times, hare regarded the event as miraculous, the coal
of the writer seems only to be that of oos t
a noble act of mi .—fill valor.
Digitized by
Google
MACCABEES, BOOKS OF
fie Book of Enoch, wow raised to the highest pitch
by the successful struggle for independence. Yet
be preserves faint traces of the national belief. He
mentions the time from which " a prophet was not
■sen among them " (1 Mace. ix. 27, ov« &pOri
wpotfirris) as a marked epoch ; and twice he an-
ticipates the future coming of a prophet as of one
who should make a direct revelation of the will of
God to his people (iv. 46, /t<x»t rev vafaytvTflrr
MU ltfoptm* tov aronpiOqyw w«el auraa>), and
supersede the temporary arrangements of a merely
civil dynasty (xiv. 41, tob tlinu itpara fiyoipurov
col hfx l 'P^ a *' 1 Tor oHm •■* fdi aymrnifau
vpoQirrnr wiotsV). But the hope or belief occu-
pies no prominent place in the book; and, like the
book of Esther, its greatest merit is, that it is
throughout inspired by the faith to which it gives
no definite expression, and shows, in deed rather
than in word, both the action of Providence and
a sustaining trust hi his power.
9. The book does not seem to have been much
used in early times. It offered far less for rhetor-
leal purposes than the second book ; and the history
itself lay beyond the ordinary limits of Christian
study. Tertullian alludes generally to the conduct
of the Maccabaean war (adv. Jwi. 4). Clement of
Alexandria speaks of '■ the book of the Maccabaean
history" (to [£t/9\foy] raw McucKafhuit&ii, Strom.
1. § 123), as elsewhere [Strom, v. § 98) of •' the
epitome " (j rar MoKra/SaiKwr tWo/tv))- Euse-
bius assumes an acquaintance with the two books
(Prop. Ev. viii. 9, i) Stvripa rw Mcutnttfiaitt*):
and scanty notices of the first bnk, but more of
the second, occur in later writers.
10. The books of Maccabees were not included
by Jerome in his translation of the Bible. " The
first book," be says, " I found in Hebrew " (ProL
Gal tn Reg.), but he takes no notice of the Latin
version, and certainly did not revise it. The ver-
sion of the two books which has been incorpo-
rated in the Romish Vulgate was consequently de-
rived from the old Latin, current before Jerome's
time. This version was obviously made from the
Greek, and in the main follows It closely. Besides
the common text, Sabatier has published a version
of a considerable part of the first book (ch. i.-xiv.
1) from a very ancient Paris MS. (3. Germ. 15)
(ntmorum taken nongentorum, in 1751), which
exhibits an earlier form of the text. Grimm,
strangely misquoting Sabatier (Exeg. Bandb.
| 10), inverts the relation of the two versions;
Vut a comparison of the two, even for a few verses,
■an leave no doubt but that the St. Germain MS.
represents the most ancient text, following the
Greek words and idioms with a slavish fidelity
(Sabatier, p. 1014, " Quemadmodum autem etiam-
num inveniri possunt MSS. codices qui Paalmos
ante omnem Hieronyml correctiooem exhibeant,
Ita pariter inventus est a nobis codex qui librl
prlmi Machabaxrum partem continet majorem,
minime quidem correctiun, sed qualis olim in non-
nuIlisMSS. antiquisreperiebatur"). Mai (Spirit.
Rom. ix. App. 80) has published a fragment of
mother Latin translation (ch. ii. 49-64), which
differs widely from both texts. The Syrino version
given in the Polyglotta is, like the Latin, a close
rendering of the Greek. From the rendering of
the proper names, it has been supposed that the
translator lived while the Semitic forms were still
wrent (Grimm, Einl § 10) ; but the arguments
which have been urged to show that the Syriao
*as derived directly from the Hebrew original are
MACCABEES, BOOKS OF 1719
of nb weight against the overwhelming proof of the
influence of the Greek text.
11. Of the early commentators on the first twe
books of Maccabees, the most important are Drusiui
and Grotius, whose notes are reprinted in the
Criiici Saeri. The annotations of Calmet ( Com-
mtnlaire literal, etc., Paris, 1724) and Michaelii
(Utberultmg der 1 Mace. B.'t nut AmnerU
Leipz. 1778), are of permanent interest; but for
practical use the manual of Grimm (Kurtgefasttet
txeg. Bandb. m den Apokryphm, etc., Leipz. 1868
-57) supplies everything which the student can re-
quire.
The Second Book or Maccabees 1.
The history of the Second Book of the Maccabees
begins some years earlier than that of the First
Book, and closes with the victory of Judas Macca-
beus over Nicanor. It thus embraces a period of
twenty years, from b. c. 180 (?) to B. c. 161. For
the few events noticed during the earlier years, it if
the chief authority ; during the remainder of the
time the narrative goes over the same ground as
1 Mace., but with very considerable differences.
The first two chapters are taken up by two letters
supposed to be addressed by the Palestinian to the
Alexandrine Jews, aud by a sketch of the author's
plan, which proceeds without any perceptible break
from the close of the second letter. The main nar-
rative occupies the remainder of the book. This
presents several natural divisions, which appear to
coincide with the "•five books " of Jason on which
it was based. The first (c. iii.) contains the history
of Heliodorus, as illustrating the fortunes of the
Temple before the schism and apostasy of part of
the nation (cir. B. c. 180). The second (iv.-vii.)
gives varied details of the beginning and course of
the great persecution — the murder of Onias, the
crimes of Menelaus, the martyrdom of Eleazar, and
of the mother with her seven sons (b. o. 175-167).
The third (viil.-x. 9) follows the fortunes of Judas
to the triumphant restoration of the Temple service
(B. c. 166, 165). The fourth (x. 10-xiii.) includes
the reign of Antiochus Eupator (b. o. 164-162).
The fifth (xiv., xv.) records the treachery of Alci-
mus, the minion of Nicanor, and the crowning
success of Judas (b. c. 162, 161). Each of these
divisions is closed by a phrase which seems to mark
the end of a definite subject (iii. 40, vii. 42, x. 9,
xiii. 26, xv. 37); and they correspond in fact with
distinct stages in the national struggle.
2. The relation of the letters with which the
book opens to the substance of the book is ex-
tremely obscure. The first (1. 1-9) Is a solemn
invitation to the Egyptian Jews to celebrate " the
feast of tabernacles in the month Casleu " (■'. e.
the Feast of the Dedication, i. 9), as before they
had sympathized with their brethren in Judiea in
" the extremity of their trouble " (i. 7). The sec-
ond (i. 10-ii. 18, according to the received Jivlsion),
which bears a formal salutation fhmi " the council
and Judas " to " Aristobulus . . . and the Jews
In Egypt," is a strange, rambling collection of
legendary stories of the death of "Antiochus," of tbt
preservation of the sacred fire and its recovery by
Kehemiah, of the hiding of the vessels of the sano
tuary by Jeremiah, ending — if Indeed the letter can
be said to hive any end — with the fame exhortation
to observe the Feast of Dedication (ii. 10-18). For
It is impossible to point out any break in the con-
struction or style after ver. 19, so that the writer
passes lnsensiblv from the epistolary form in vet. 16
to that of the epttomator in ver. 29 (8e«i)< For tUi
Digitized by
Google
1720 MACCABEES. BOOKS OF
naann gome critic*, both in ancient and modern timet
'Wemadorf, § 35, 133), bare considered that the
whole book ia intended to be included in the letter."
It seems more natural to suppose that the author
found the letters already in existence when he un-
dertook to abridge the work of Jason, and attached
his own introduction to the second letter for the
convenience of transition, without considering that
this would necessarily make the whole appear to be
a letter. The letters themselves can lav no claims
to authenticity. It is possible that they may rest
upon some real correspondence between Jerusalem
and Alexandria; but the extravagance of the fables
which they contain makes it impossible to accept
them in their present form as the work of the
Jewish Council. Though it may readily be ad-
mitted that the fabulousness of the contents of
a letter ia no absolute proof of its spuriousness,
yet on the other hand the stories may be (as in
this case) so entirely unworthy of what we know
of the position of the alleged writers, as to betray
the work of an impostor or an interpolator. Some
have supposed that the original language of one e
w of both the letters was Hebrew, but this can-
not be made out by any conclusive arguments*
On the other hand there is no ground at all for
believing that they were made up by the author of
the book.
3. Hie writer himself distinctly indicates the
source of his narrative — " tbejfive books of Jason
of Cyrano " (ii- 23), of which he designed to furnish
a short and agreeable epitome for the benefit of
those who would be deterred from studying the
larger work. [Jason.] His own labor, which he
describes in strong terms (ii. 26, 7 ; comp. xv. 38,
39), was entirely confined to condensation and
selection; all investigation of detail he declares to
be the peculiar duty of the original historian. It
is of course impossible to determine how far the
coloring of the events ia due to Jason, but " the
Divine manifestations " in behalf of the Jews are
enumerated among the subjects of which he treated ;
and no sufficient reasons have been alleged to show
that the writer either followed any other authority
in his later chapters, or altered the general char-
acter of the history which he epitomized. Of
Jason himself nothing more is known than may be
gleaned from this mention of him. It baa been
conjectured (Uerzfeld, Uttch. d. Volket Jtr. i. 465)
that he was the same as the son of Eleazer (1 Mace.
viii. 17), who was sent by Judas as envoy to Rome
after the defeat of Nicanor; and the circumstance
of this mission baa been used to explain the limit
to which he extended his history, as being that
which coincided with the extent of his personal ob-
servation. There are certainly many details in she
book which show a close and accurate knowledge
(iv. 21, 29 ff., viii. 1 ff., ix. 29, x. 12, 13, xiv. 1),
and the errors in the order of events may be due
wholly, or in part, to the epitomator. The ques-
tionable interpretation of facts in 3 Mace, is no
objection to the truth of the facts themselves; and
when due allowance is made for the overwrought
rendering ot many scenes, and for the obvious effort
}f the writer to discover everywhere signs of provi-
dential interference, the historic worth of the book
appears to be considerably greater than it is com-
monly esteemed to be. Though Herzfeld's oon-
eeture may be untenable, the original work of
« Tba subscription In Cod. Alex. Is 'Ieiita raS Mam-
tttatm vpattvv hrumMi-
MACCABEES, BOOKS OF
Jason probably extended no farther than the eplt
ome, for the description of its contents (2 Macs
ii. 19-22) does not carry us beyond the close of
2 Mace. The "brethren " of Judas, whose exploits
he related, were already distinguished during the
lifetime of " the Maccabee " (1 Mace v. 17 £, 24 ff.
vi. 43-46; 2 Mace. viii. 22-29).
4. The district of Cyrene was most closely united
with that of Alexandria. In both, the predom-
inance of Greek literature and the Greek language
was absolute. The work of Jason — like the poems
of Callimachus — must therefore have been com-
posed in Greek; and the style of the epitome, as
Jerome remarked, proves beyond doubt that the
Greek text is the original (ProL GaL " Secundus
[Machabteorum] Gnecus est ; quod ex ipsa quoque
e)paVfi pmbsri potest "). It is scarcely less cer-
tain that 2 Mace, was compiled at Alexandria.
The characteristics of the style and language are
essentially Alexandrine; and though the Alexan-
drine style may have prevailed in Cyrenaica, the
form of the allusion to Jason shows clearly that
the compiler was not his fellow-countryman. But
all attempts to determine more exactly who the
compiler was are mere groundless guesses, without
even the semblance of plausibility.
5. The style of the book is extremely uneven.
At times it is elaborately ornate (iii. 15-39, v. 20,
vi. 12-16, 23-28, vii. etc. ) ; and again, it ia so rude
and broken, as to seem more like notes for an epit-
ome than a finished composition (xiii. 19-26); but
it nowhere attains to the simple energy and pathos
of the first book. The vocabulary corresponds to
the style. It abciads in new or unusual words.
Many of these are forms which belong to the decay
of a language, as: iAAoa)v\io7tos, iv. 13, vi. 24;
'EAAijnoT^t. iv. 13 (i/vpariapAs, iii. 9); tra-
aii6s i vii. 37 ; OapaKurpis, v. 3 ; tnr\trfxrurpAt,
vi. 7, 21, vii. 42; or compounds which betray a
false pursuit of emphasis or precision : titpniii-
TKifiu, iv. 40; imu\afitio-tai, xiv. 18; kctsit
Oucrti*, xiv. 43 ; wpoa-am\4yttrBai, viii. 19
rpotrwofiitjiy4ia , Kt* t xv. 9; ffvrtKKtrrfty, V. 26.
Other words are employed in novel senses, as:
StvrtpoKoyur, xiii. 22; cbrKvsAcurOcu, il. 24;
cwurdVrv/ros, xiv. 9 ; ir*$pivwp4ros t xi. 4 ; ta^i-
kws, iv. 87, xiv. 24. Others bear a sense which is
common in late Greek, as: luckr/puy, xiv. 8; onr
iujh, ix. 3, xiii. 20; StdXtritt, iii. 82; inrt-
ptl&a, ix. 4; Qpvdrao/uu, vii. 34; rtpurmOtfa,
vii. 4. Others appear to be peculiar to this book,
as: BiaVraAo-u, xiii. 26; {WrrVnua, v. 20;
wpoowi/povv, xiv. 11; iroKtfiorpoftly, X. 14, 15:
i*\o\oytir, viii. 27, 31; lurtvOararl(tw, vi. 28;
iaiucit, viii. 35; brtpoKoyla, xii. 43. Hebraisms
are very rare (viii. 16, ix. 5, xiv. 34). Idiomatic
Greek phrases are much more common (Iv. 40, xii.
22, xv. 12, Ac.); and the writer evidently had a
considerable command over the Greek language,
though his taste was deformed by a love of rhetori-
cal effect.
6. In the absence of all evidence as to the person
of Jason — for the conjecture of Herxfeld (§ 8) is
wholly unsupported by proof — (here are no data
which fix the time of the composition of his orig-
inal work, or of the epitome given in 2 Mace,
within very narrow limits. The superior limit of
the age of the epitome, though nut of Jason's work
is determined by the year 124 8. a, which Is mec
» r. Bohlunkss, Kputolm cms 3 Mac
optica**, Ooloa.1844.
1-0 if tfts
Digitized by
Google
MACCABEES, BOOKS OF
Jened in one of the introductory letter* (1. 10);
bat there is no ground for assigning so great an
intiquity to the present book. It has, indeed, been
oonclnded from xv. 87, iir" iKtlntm rip Kaip&r
KparvBt'unit rrjt ir<f\««j &wb ray 'EpaaUm —
irblc k is written in the person of the epitomator,
that it most nave been composed before the defeat
and death of Judas ; but the import of the words
appears to be satisfied by the religions supremacy
and the uninterrupted celebration of the Temple
service, which the Jews maintained till the final
ruin of their city; for the destruction of Jerusalem
la the only inferior limit, below which the book
cannot be placed. The supposed reference to the
book in the Epistle to the Hebrews (Ueb. li. 35,
"and others were tortured; " comp. ri. 18-vii. 49)
may perhaps be rather a reference to the current
tradition than to the written text; and Josephus in
bis history shows no acquaintance with its contents.
On the other hand, it is probable that the author
if 4 Moots, used either 2 Mace, or the work of
Jason; but this at most could only determine that
the book was written before the destruction of Jeru-
salem, which Is already clear fan xv. 37. There
is no explicit mention of the book before the time
of Clement of Alexandria (Strom, v. 14, § 98).
Internal evidence is quite insufficient to settle the
date, which is thus left undetermined wilnin the
limits 124 B. C. — 70 a. c. If a conjecture be ad-
missible, I should be inclined to place the original
work of Jason not later than 100 b. c, and the
epitome half a century later. It is quite credible
that a work might have been long current at
Alexandria before it was known to the Jews of
Palestine.
7. In order to estimate the historical worth of
the book it is necessary to consider separately the
two divisions into which it falls. The narrative in
UL-viL is in part anterior (iii.-iv. 6) and in part
(iv. 7-vii.) supplementary to the brief summary in
1 Mace i. 10-64 : that in viii.-xv. is, as a whole,
parallel with 1 Mace. iii.-vii. In the first section
she book itself is, in the main, the sole source of
information: in the second, its contents can he
tested by the trustworthy records of the first book.
It will be best to take the second section first, for
the character of the book does not vary much ;
and if this can once be determined from sufficient
evidence, the result may be extended to those parts
which are independent of other testimony. The
chief differences between the first and second books
lie in the account of the campaigns of Lysias and
Timotheus. Differences of detail will always arise
where the means of information are partial and
Mparate; but the differences alleged to exist as to
these events are more serious. In 1 Mace. ir. 28-35
we read of an invasion of Judaea by Lysias from
the side of Idumoa, in which Judas met him at
Bethsura and inflicted upon him a severe defeat
n consequence of this Lysias retired to Antioch to
make greater preparations for a new attack, while
Judas undertook the restoration of the sanctuary.
In 3 Mace, the first mention of Lysias is on the
teceesion of Antiochus Eupator (x. 11). Not long
after this he is said to have invaded Judaea
and suffered a defeat at Bethsura, in consequence
]f which he made peace with Judas, giving him
favaable terms (xi.). A later invasion is men-
tioned in both books, which took place in the reigu
af Antiochus Eupator (1 Mace. vi. 17-50; 3 Mace.
tJH. 2 ft*.), in which Betlsura fell into the hands
rf Lysias. It is then ntcessary either to suppose
MACCABEES, BOOKS OF 1721
that there were three distinct invasions, of whlok
the first is mentioned only in 1 Mace., the second
only in 3 Mace., and the third in both ; or to eon-
aider the narrative in 3 Mace. x. 1 if. as a mis-
placed version of one of the other invasions (for
the history in 1 Mace. iv. 38-61 bears every mark
of truth): a supposition which is confirmed by the
character of the details, and the difficulty of recon-
ciling the supposed results with the events which
immediately followed. It is by no means equally
clear that there is any mistake in 2 Mace, as to the
history of Timotheus. The details in 1 Mace. v.
11 AT. are quite reconcilable with those in 3 Mace.
xii. 2 ff., and it seems certain that both books
record the same events; but there is no sufficient
reason for supposing that 1 Mace. v. 6 ff. is parallel
with 3 Mace. x. 34-87. The similarity of the
names Jazer and Gaxara probably gave rise tc the
confusion of the two events, which differ in tact in
almost all their circumstances; though the identi-
fication of the Timotheus mentioned in 3 Mace. x.
34, with the one mentioned in viii. 80, seems to
have been designed to distinguish him from some
other of the same name. With these exceptions,
the general outlines of the history in the two books
are the same; but the details are almost always
independent and different. The numbers given in
2 Mace, often represent incredible results: e. o. viii.
20, 30; x. 23, 31; xi. 11; xii. 16, 19, 23, 26, M;
xv. 27. Some of the statements are obviously in-
correct, and seem to have arisen from an erroneous
interpretation and embellishment of the original
source: vii. 3 (the presence of Antiochus at the
death of the Jewish martyrs); ix. (the death of
Antiochus); x. 11, Ac. (the relation of the boy-
king Antiochus Eupator to Lysias); xv. 81, 35 (the
recovery of Acra) ; xiv. 7 (the forces of Demetrius).
But on the other hand many of the peculiar details
seem to be such as must have been derived from
immediate testimony: iv. 29-50 (the intrigues of
Menelaus); vi. 2 (the temple at Gerizim); x. 13,
18; xiv. 1 (the landing of Demetrius at Tripolis);
viii. 1-7 (the character of the first exploits of Judas).
The relation between the two books may be not
inaptly represented by that existing between the
books of Kings and Chronicles. In esch case the
later book was composed with a special design,
which regulated the character of the materials
employed for its construction. But as the design
in 3 Mace, is openly avowed by the compiler, so it
seems to have been carried out with considerable
license. Yet his errors appear to be those of one
who interprets history to support his cause, rather
than of one who falsifies iu substance. The
groundwork of facts is true, but the dress in which
the facts are presented is due in part at least to the
narrator. It is not at all improbable that the error
with regard to the first campaign of Lysias arose
from the mode in which it was introduced by Jason
as an introduction to the more important measures
of Lysias in the reign of Antiochus Eupator. In
other places (as very obviously in xiii. 19 ff. ) the
compiler may have disregarded the historical de-
pendence of events while selecting those which
were best suited for the support of his theme. If
these remarks are true, it follows that 2 Mace.
viii.-xv. is to be regarded not as a connected and
complete history, but as a series of special incidents
from the life uf Judas, illustrating the providential
interference of God in behalf of his people, true in
substance, but embellished in form ; and this view
of the book is supported by the character of the
Digitized by
Google
J
1722 MACCABEES, BOOKS OF
chapters, in which the narrative Ii un-
eheeked by independent evidence. There U not
any ground Sir queetiooiug the main tacts in the
history of Heiiodorua (eh. iii.) or Meuelaus (nr.);
and while it ii very probable that the narratives
of the sufferings of the martyrs (vi., rii.) are highly
colored, yet the grounds of the accusation, the
replies of the accused, and the forms of torture,
in their essential characteristics, seem perfectly
authentic
8. Besides the di ffe rences which exist between
the two books of Maccabees as to the sequence and
details of oommon events, there is considerable
difficulty as to the chronological data which they
gin. Both follow the Seleucian era (" the era of
contracts; " "of the Greek kingdom;" 1 Mace i.
10, «V tr« . . . 0a<riAt(at "RAA^yax), but in
some cases in which the two books give the date of
tut same event, the first book gives a date one year
later than the second (1 Mace. vi. 16 || 9 Mace. xi.
81, 88; 1 Mace. vi. 20 || 2 Mace. xiii. 1); yet on
the other hand they agree in 1 Mace, vii 1 || 2
Mace. xiv. 4. This discrepancy seems to be due
not to a mere error, but to a difference of reckon-
ing ; for all attempts to explain away the discrepancy
an untenable. The true era of the Seleiicidas
began in October (Dim) b. c. 312; but there is
evidence that considerable variations existed in
Syria in the reckoning by it. It is then reasonable
to suppose that the discrepancies in the books of
a The following Is the parallelism which Patritlua
(fit torn. Htri. Ht. Mace. 176-244) endeavor* to estab-
lish between the common narratives of 1. and 11. Mace.
When two or more passages are placed opposite to one,
It Is to be understood that ihtjrti only has a parallel
hi the other narrative ; —
laUoo.
I U-1S.
1.17.
L 18-20.
L 21-2ea.
1. 246.
L 80-82; 88-88.
1. 40a; 406-42.
1.48; 44-48.
1. 49; 60,61.
1. 62-64; 66, 66;
1.68,64.
I. 86-67.
H. 1-80.
11.81; 82-87.
L8B.
1.89-70.
JL1-6; 1047.
67-63.
2HAO0.
... Iv. 7-12; 18-20.
... Iv. 21a ; 216-60 ; v. 1-4.
™ v. 6-10.
... t. 11-16; 17-20.
.- v. 21 ; 22, 28.
...v 24-38.
... t 27.
™ vi. 1.
-vi.2.
._ vL 8-7.
... tL 8, 9.
... vt 10; 12-17.
U. 88,89; 40, 41.
111.42.
In. 48-64.
Hi. 66; 66-60.
It. 112.
tv. 18-16; 17-32.
It. 28-26.
rt. la; It. 26, 27.
fl. 16-4.
rv. 28-86.
■v. S5-48a ; 486-46.
Iv. 47-61.
fl.6-8
r.Ma.
» •»• 6-8.
~.Tt
Ivi. 11a.
...villi.
-.vtl.1-42
... Tffl. 1-7.
-.vlll. 8; 9-11.
Z Till. 12a; 126-21
."vui.22.
Z! via. 28-26.
-.Tilt. 27; 28-88.
I Ix. 1-8; 4-10.
.". x. l-8a-
...x. 86-8; 9-18.
Zx. 14-18; 19-42.
...x.28.
MACCArfEKS, BOOKS OV
Maccabees, which proceeded from independent ana
widely-separated sources, are to be referred to this
confusion ; and a very probable mode of explaining
(at least in part) the origin of the difference has
been supported by most of the best chronologers.
Though the Jews may have reckoned two begin-
nings to the year from the time of the Exodus
[Chronology, voL i. p. 486], yet it appears that
the Biblical dates are always reckoned by the so-
called ecclesiastical year, which began with Nitca
(April), and not by the civil jear, which was after-
wards in oommon use (.Jot. A«L i. 3, § 3), which
began with Titri (October: comp. Patritias, Dt
Coat. Mace. p. 33 ft). Now since the writer of 1
Mace, was a Palestinian Jew, and followed the
ecclesiastical year in his reckoning of months (1
Mace iv. 62), it is probable that he may have com-
menced the Seleucian year not in autumn ( Titri),
but in spring (ATtVm).' The narrative of 1 Mace,
x. in fact demands a longer period than could be
obtained (1 Mace, x. 1, 21, fourteen days) on the
hypothesis that the year began with Titri. If,
however, the year began in JVunn (reckoning from
spring 312 B. c.), c the events which fell in the last
half of the true Seleucian year would be dated a
year forward, while the true and the Jewish dates
would agree in the first half of the year. Nor it
there any difficulty in supposing that the two events
assigned to different years (Wemsdorf, Dt fide
Mace. 5 9) happened in one half of the year. Oa
IHaoo.
vi. 9-18.
vi. 14, 16.
vi. 16; 17a.
t.9; 90-1* ; 14-20. I
vi. 17*.
v. 21a; 28a; 24; 26-28. .
v. 29. .'
v. 80-84 ; 2U-28a; 88,86..
v. 66-62.
v. 87-89 ; 40-4Sa.
v. 489-44.
v. 46-660.
v. 656-68; vi. 18-87.
vi. 28-80.
vi. 81 ; 82-48.
tL 49-64; 66-69.
vi. 6&62a.
vi 626-68; vB. 1-24.
vU.26.
tU. 26.
vU. 27-88.
vU. 89, 40a.
Til. 406-60.
2Maoo.
,lx. 11-17; 18-37.
x. 24-88; xi. 1-4.
. lx.28.
.id. 6-12; 18-16*.
. xll.1-6.
.'xll.6-17; lx.29.
!xl. 166-28; 27-88.
.xU.176; 18,19.
. xll. 20,21.
xii. 22-26.
. xu. 27-88 ; 84-48.
' xffl. 1, 2 ; 8-17
.xill. 18-2L
. xill. 22,28a.
. xul. 286-34.
. xill. 26,26.
. xiv. 1-3.
.xiv. 8-6; 6-11.
. xiv. 12, 18 ; 14-39.
. xIt.80-86;87-46;xt.1-21
! xr. 22-40.
This arrangement, however, Is that of an apologist
for the books ; and the tamliaon of passages, no lass
than the large amount of passigas pananar to each
book, Indicates how little real parallelism than Is
between them.
6 In 2 Msec. xv. 86 the same reckoning of months
occurs, but with a distinct reference to the Palentlnuu
decree.
• It Is, however, possible that the yean may haw
been dated from the following spring (811 a. a) ; to
which ease the Jewish and true years would coincide
tar the last half of the year, and daring the tost half
the Jewish date would tall short by one year (fills! M
Oar*. </. raises Jsr. t 449).
Digitized by
Google
MA0CABJ5BS, BOOKS OF
sthu grounds, indeed. It ii not unlikely that th>)
difference in the reckoning of the two books is still
greater than is thus accounted for. The Chaldeans,
as is proved by good authority (Ptol. Hry. train.
ap. Clinton, F. B. Ill, 850, 870), dated their
Seleucian era one year later than the true time
from 311 B c, and probably from October (Dim;
eomp. 3 Mace. xi. 91, 33). If, as is quite possible,
the writer of 9 Msec — or rather Jason of Cyrene,
whom he epitomized — used the Chaldean dates,
there may be a maximum difference between the
two books of a year and half, which is sufficient to
explain the difficulties of the chronology of the
events connected with the death of Antiochus
Epiphanes (Ideler, i. 531-534, quoted and sup-
ported by Browne, Ordo Saclorum, 489, 490.
Comp. Clinton, Fasti HdL iii. 367 ff., who takes a
different new; Patritius, I e. ; and Wemsdorf, §
ix. ff., who states the difficulties with great acute-
oeas).
9. The most interesting feature in 9 Mace, is
its marked religious character, by which it is clearly
distinguished from the first book. " The manifes-
tations (iTHpdyttai) made from heaven on behalf
of those who were zealous to behave manfully in
defense of Judaism " (3 Mace. ii. 31) form the
staple of the book. The events which are related
historically in the former book are in this regarded
theoeratically, if the word may be used. The
calamities of persecution and the desolation of God's
people are definitely referred to a temporary visita-
tion of his anger (v. 17-90, vt 13-17, vii. 33, 33),
which shows itself even in details of the war (xii.
40; eomp Josh. vii.). Before his great victory
Judas is represented as addressing " the Lord that
worketh wonders " (T#oaroiro«fs) with the prayer
that, aa once his angel slaw the host of the Assyr-
ians, so then He would " send a good angel before
his armies for a fear and dread to their enemies "
(xv. 99-34; eomp. 1 Mace. vii. 41, 43). A great
" manifestation " wrought the punishment of He-
liodorus (iii. 34-99): a similar vision announced
his euro (iii. 83, 34). Heavenly portents for " forty
days" (iwnpirtux, v. 4) foreshowed the coming
judgment (v. 3, 8). » When the battle waxed
strong five comely men upon horses " appear, of
whom two cover Maccabeus from all danger (x. 99,
30). Again, in answer to the supplication of the
Jews for " a good angel to deliver them," " there
appeared before them on horseback one In white
slothing," and "they marched forward " to triumph,
' having an helper from heaven " (xi. 6-11). And
there no special vision is recorded, the rout of the
demy is still referred to " a manifestation of Him
tat seeth all things " (xii. 33). Closely connected
t» 1th this belief in the active energy of the beings
of the unseen world, is the importanoe assigned to
dreams (xv. 11, fmpov i^iiwurrm Ihrap); and
the distinct assertion, not only of a personal " resur-
rection to life" (vii. 14, ludurraaii <i> (crt\v\ v. 9,
ataVras amPlwrii (aiijf), but of the influence
which the living may yet exercise on the condition
of the dead (xii. 43-45 ). The doctrine of Providence
is carried out in a most minute parallelism of great
crimes and their punishment Thus, Andronicua
was put to death on the very spot where he had
murdered Onias (iv. 88, ro» Kuplov tV ittew
aery idKura) bwoSivrot): Jason, who had "driver
saury out of their oountry," died an exile, with-
nt " solemn fimeral," as he had " cast out many
jnbmied" (v. 9, 10)- the torments suffered by
aatioohus are likened to those which he had
MAOOABEBS, BOOKS OF 1729
inflicted (ix. 5, 6); Menelaus, who " had comtnittet
many sins about the altar," " received his death
in ashes" (xiii. 4-8): the hand and tongue of
Nicanor, with which he bad blasphemed, were hung
up " as an evident and manifest sign unto all of
the help of the Lord " (xv. 83-35). On a largo
scale the same idea is presented in the contrasted
relations of Israel and the heathen to the Divine
Power. The former is "God's people," "God's
portion " (fi ptpls, i. 38 ; xiv. 15), who are chas-
tised in love: the latter are left unpunished till the
full measure of their sins ends in destruction (n.
13-17). For in this book, as in 1 Mace., there are
no traces of the glorious visions of the prophets,
who foresaw the time when all nations should be
united in one bond under one Lord.
10. The history of the book, as has been ahead)
noticed ($ 8), is extremely obscure. It is first
mentioned by Clement of Alexandria (I e.); and
Origen, in a Greek fragment of his commentaries
on Exodus (Philoc. 36), quotes vi. 12-16, with very
considerable variations of text, from " the Macca-
bean history" (t4 McucKajBaucd: eomp. 1 Macc.
$ 6). At a later time the history of the martyred
brothers was a favorite subject with Christian
writers (Cypr. Ep. lvi. 6, Ac.); and in the time of
Jerome (ProL Guleat.) and Augustine (Dt Doetr.
CkriA ii. 8; Dt Civ. Dei, xviii. 36) the book was
in common and public use in the Western Church,
where it maintained its position till it was at last
definitely declared to be canonical at the counci 1
of Trent [Cakoh, vol i. p. 363.]
11. The Latin version adopted in the Vulgate.
as in the case of the first book, is that current be-
fore Jerome's time, which Jerome left wholly un-
touched in the SDOcryphal books, with the exception
of Judith and Tobit The St Germain MS., from
which Sabatier edited an earlier text of 1 Macc.
does not, unfortunately, contain the second book,
being imperfect at the end ; but the quotations of
Lucifer of Cagliari (Sabatier, ml Capp. vi., vii.) and
a fragment published by Mai (Spirit. Rom. 1. c
1 Macc. § 10), indicate the existence and character
of such a text The version is much less close to
the Greek than in the former book, and often gives
no more than the sense of a clause (i. 13, vi. 91,
vii. 5, 4o.). The Syriac version is of still leas value.
The Arable so-called version of 3 Macc. is really
an independent work. [Fifth Book or Mac-
cabees.]
13. The chief commentaries on 9 Macc. ban
been already noticed. [First Book op Macca-
bees, § 11.] The special edition of Hasse (Jena,
1786) seems, from the account of Grimm, to be
of no value. There are, however, many valuable
historical observations in the essay of Patritius (Dt
Contauu, etc. already cited).
III. The Thikd Book or the Maccabees
contains the history of events which preceded the
great Macoabtean struggle. After the decisive
battle of Kapbia (b. c. 317), envoys from Jerusalem,
following the example of other cities, hastened t*
Ptolemy Philopator to congratulate him on his sue-
oess. After receiving them the king resolved to
visit the holy city. He offered sacrifice in the
Temple, and was so mueh struck by its majesty
that he urgently sought permission to enter the
sanctuary. When this was refused be resolved to
gratify his onriosit) by force, regardless of the con-
sternation with which his design was received
(oh. i.). On this Simon the high-priest, after the
people had been with difficulty restrained frota
Digitized by
Google
1724 MACCABEES, BOOKS OF
violence, kneeling in front of the Temple implored
divine help. At the conclusion of the prayer the
king fell paralyzed into the arma of hia attendant*,
and on hia recovery returned at once to Egypt
without proaecutiug hia intention. But angry at
hia failure he turned hia vengeance on the Alex-
andrine Jews. Hitherto these had enjoyed the
highest right* of citizenship, but the king com-
manded that those only who were voluntarily
initiated into the heathen mysteries should be on
an equal footing with the Alexandrians, and that
the remainder should be enrolled in the lowest claes
(ail Kaoypa^lan koI outrucV StiStaw aytKJKu,
H. 88), and branded with an ivy-leaf (en. ii.).
[DioKTsotk] Not content with this order, which
wis evaded or despised, he commanded all the Jewa
in the country to be arrested and sent to Alexandria
(eh. iii.). This was done aa well aa might be,
though the greater part escaped (iv. 18), and the
gathered multitudes were confined in the Hippo-
drome outside the city (comp. Joseph. Ant xvii.
6, § 8). The resident Jews, who showed sympathy
for their countrymen, were imprisoned with them ;
and the king ordered the names of all to be taken
down preparatory to their execution. Here the first
marvel happened : the scribes to whom the task was
assigned toiled for forty days from morning till
evening, till at last reeds and paper failed them,
and the king'a plan waa defeated (ch. iv.). How-
ever, regardless of this, the king ordered the keeper
of his elephants to drug the animals, five hundred
in number, with wine and incense, that they might
trample the prisoners to death on the morrow.
The Jews had no help but in prayer; and here a
second marvel happened. The king was over-
sowered by a deep sleep, and when he awoke the
Mxt day it was already time for the banquet which
he had ordered to be prepared, so that the execution
was deferred. The Jews still prayed for help; but
when the dawn came, the multitudes were assembled
to witness their destruction, and the elephants stood
ready for their bloody work. Then was there an-
' tier marvel. The king was visited by deep forget-
Uneas, and chided the keeper of the elephant* for
the preparations which he had made, and the Jewa
were again aaved. But at the evening banquet the
ting recalled hia purpose, and with terrible threats
prepared for its immediate accomplishment at day-
break (ch. v.). Then Eleazer, au aged priest,
prayed for his people, and as he ended the royal
train came to the Hippodrome. On this there was
seen a heavenly vision by all but the Jews (vi. 18).
The elephants trampled down their attendants, and
'he wrath of the king was turned to pity. So the
Jewa were immediately set free, and a great feast
waa prepared for .them ; and they resolved to ob-
serve a festival, in memory of their deliverance,
during the time of their sojourn in strange lands
(oh. vi.). A royal letter to the governors of the
provinces set forth the circumstances of their escape,
and assured them of the king's protection. Per-
mission was given to them to take vengeance on
their renegade countrymen, and the people returned
to their homes in great triumph, ■' crowned with
Sowers, and singing praises to the God of their
•then."
8. The form of the narrative, even in this bald
outline, sufficiently shows that the object of the
oook has modified the facts which it records. The
MAOOABEBrA, BOOKS OF
writer, In hia seal to bring out the action of Provi
dence, has colored his history, so that it baa lost
all semblance of truth. In this respect the book
often an instructive contrast to the book of Esther,
with which it is closely connected both in its pur-
pose and in the general character of it* incident*.
In both a terrible calamity ia averted by faithful
prayer; royal anger is changed to royal fovor; and
the punishment designed for the innocent is directed
to the guilty. But here the likeness nub. The
divine reserve, which is the peculiar characteristic
of Esther, is exchanged in 3 Mace, for rhetorical
exaggeration; and onoe again the words of inspira-
tion stand ennobled by the presence of their later
counterpart
8. But while it Is impossible to accept the de-
tails of the book as historical, some basis of truth
must be supposed to lie beneath them. The yearly
festival (vi. 86; vii. 19) can hardly have been a
mere fancy of the writer; and the pillar and syn-
agogue (w0oo-cvx4) •* Ptolemaia (vii. 90) must
have been connected in some way with a signal
deliverance. Besides this, Josepbus (c Ap. ii. 5)
relates a very similar occurrence which took place
in the reign of Ptolemy VII. (Physcon). " The
king," a* he says, " exasperated by the opposition
which Onias, the Jewish general of the royal army,
made to hia usurpation, seized all the Jews in Alex-
andria with their wives and children, and exposed
them to intoxicated elephants. But the animal*
turned upon the king's friends ; and forthwith the
king saw a terrible visage which forbad him U
Injure the Jews. On this he yielded to the prayers
of his mistress, and repented of his attempt; and
the Alexandrine Jewa observed the day of their
deliverance as a festival." The essential points of
the story are the same as those in the second pan
of 3 Mace., and there can be but little doubt that
Josephus has preserved the event* which the writer
adapted to his narrative. If it be true that Ptolemy
Philopator attempted to enter the Temple at Jeru-
salem, and waa frustrated in his design — a sup-
position which ia open to no reasonable objection —
it is easily conceit-able that tradition may hava
assigned to him the impious design of bis successor;
or the author of 8 Mace, may have combined the
two event* for the sake of effect
4. Assuming rightly that the book is an adapta-
tion of history, Ewald and (at greater length)
Grimm have endeavored to fix exactly the cireum-
stances by which it was called forth. The writings
of Philo, occasioned by the oppressions which the
Alexandrine Jews suffered in the reign of Caligula,
offer several point* of connection with « it; and tha
panic which was occasioned at Jerusalem by the
attempt of the emperor to erect his statue in the
Temple is well known (Joseph. AnL xviii. 8, $ Si-
lt ia then argued that the writer designed to por-
tray Caligula under the name of the sensual tyrant
who bad in earlier times held Egypt and Syria,
while be sought to nerve his countrymen for then
struggle with heathen power, by reminding them
of earlier deliverances. It is unnecessary to urge
the various details in which the parallel between the
acts of Caligula and the narrative fail. Such dif-
ferences may have been part of the writer'a dis-
guise; but it may be well questioned whether tha
position of the Jewa in the early time of the empire,
or under the later Ptolemies, was not generally sock
• an pointed oat at -length by Grimm (Eini.
§Q; sat the relation of tha Alexandrine Jew* to a
■ansBUting civil power would, perhaps, always
Digitized by
Google
MACCABEES, BOOKS OF
2at m narrative like 8 Mace, would find a ready
6. The language of tile book betrays moat clearly
Ha Alexandrine origin. Both in vocabulary and
construction it ia rich, affected, and exaggerated.
Some words occur nowhere else (Kaoyptupia, ii. 28;
■poe*vaT&A«r8ai, 11. 99 ; tnritppucos, Ti. 20 ;
Xfnipia, iv. 30; ftuforptcpjit, vi. 8 ; Jivx»vA-
tttitrDtu, t. 85; uiaifipu, vi. 9 ; rovrdtipoxos,
vi 4; fitya\OKparup, vi 9; /lupofiptxbtt '»• 6;
wpoKonacKippowrBai, It. 1 f aynrurrpiwrtst, i.
SO); others are used in strange senses (iKwofur,
Jfet iii. 99; irapa/huriAsPa, ri. 94; i/mprAu,
Met. rii. 6); others are very rare or characteristic
of late Greek writers (iwiffiSpa, ii. 81; cardwrat-
«t, ii. 14; tutta/un, i>- 91; dnpdVrorros, iii
14; dAo-vurrfa, v. 49; Awoporo'Surrofi vi. 98;
fyixaaiiii, iii. 17; p*ya\o)ttpSi, vi. 33; mtvA/uis,
iii. 95; ma-s-tyvAAoy, U- 99; ^aroo^roA.r), iv. 4).
The form of the sentences ia strained (e. g. i. IB,
17, ii 31, UL 93, iv. 11, vti. 17, 19, Ac.), and every
description is loaded with rhetorical ornament (e. g.
it. 9, 6; vi 45). As a natural consequence the
meaning ia often obscure («. y. i 9, 14, 19, iv. 6,
14), and the writer is led into exaggerations which
are historically incorrect (rii. 9, 20, v. 9; comp.
Grimm).
6. From the abruptness of the commencement
(4 Si +iAoraVa>o) it has been thought (Ewald,
Gtsch. iv. 635) that the book is a mere fragment
of a larger work. Against this view it may be
urged that the tenor of the book is one and dis-
tinct, and brought to a perfect issue. It must,
however, be noticed that in some MSS. (44, 125,
Parsons) the beginning is differently worded : " Now
in these dags king Ptolemy " ; and the reference in
ti. 95 (rSf TpoavoSttttyiihuv) is to some passage
not contained in the present narrative. It is possi-
ble that the narrative may have formed the sequel
to an earlier history, as the HeUenica continue,
without break or repetition, the history of Thucy-
dides (fitrli Si tsSto, Xen. Httt. i. 1) ; or we may
suppose (Grimm, EM. § 4) that the introductory
chapter has been lost.
7. The evidence of language, which ia quite
sufficient to fix the place of the composition of the
book at Alexandria, ia not equally decisive as to
the date. It might, indeed, seem to belong to the
early period of the empire (b. c. 40-70), when for
a Jew all hope lay in the record of past triumphs,
which assumed a fabulous grandeur from the con-
tract with present oppression. But such a date is
purely conjectural ; and in the absence of any direct
proof It is unsafe to trust to an impression which
cannot claim any decisive authority, from the very
imperfect knowledge which we possess of the relig-
ious history of the Jews of the dispersion. If, how-
ever, Ewald's theory be correct, the date falls within
tiie limits which have been suggested.
8. The uncertainty of the date of the composi-
tion of the book corresponds with the uncertainty
of Us history. In the Apostolical Canons (Can.
86) " three books of the Maccabees " are mentioned
Maiutafialvv rpUt, one MS. reads 80, of which
.his is probably the third, as it occupies the third
•ewe in the oldest Greek MSS., which contain also
the so called fourth book. It la found in a Syriae
MAOOABBBS, BOOKS OB 172-5
translation, and is quoted with marked respect by
Theodoret (ad Dan. xi 7) of Antioch (died cir
A. D. 467). "Three books of the Maccabees"
(M<ucKa0ai«& y) are placed at the head of the
mtilegomena of the O. T. in the catalogue of
Nicephorus; and in the Synopsis, falsely ascribed tc
Athanasius, the third book is apparently described
as " Ptolemalca," from the name of the royal hero,*
and reckoned doubtfully among tbo disputed books
On the other hand the book seems to have found
no acceptance in the Alexandrine or Westers
churches, a fact which confirms the late date as-
signed to it, if we assume its Alexandrine origin.
It is not quoted, as far as we know, in any Latin
writer, and does not occur in the lists of canonical
and apocryphal books in the Gelasian Decretals.
No ancient Latin version of it occurs ; and as it is
not contained in the Vulgate it has been excluded
from the canon of the Romish church.
9. In modem times it has been translated into
Latin (first in the Complutensian Polyglott) ; Ger-
man (De Wette and Augusti, Bibetabersetamg,
1st ed. ; and in an earlier version " by Jo. Circem-
berger, Wittenberg, 1554;" Cotton, Five Boob,
tie., p. xx.); and French (Calmet). The first
English version was appended to " A briefe and
compendious table . . . opening the way to the
principal] histories of the whole Bible . . . London,
1550." This version with a few alterations (Cotton,
p. xx.) was included in a folio Bible published next
year by J. Day ; and the book was again published
in 1563. A better translation was published by
Whiston in his Authentic Document! (1797); and
a new version, with short notes by Dr. Cotton ( The
Fiet Bucks of Maccabees in English . . . Oxford,
1832). The Commentary of Grimm (Kurtgef.
Handbuch) gives ample notices of the opinions of
earlier commentators, and supersedes the necessity
of using any other.
IV. Thb Fourth Book or Maccabees
(MoKKa/Sofair V, tit Wtuocafiaiovt \Aym) con-
tains a rhetorical narrative of the martyrdom of
Eleaser and of the " Maccatxean family," following
in the main the same outline as 2 Mace. The sec-
ond title of the book, On the Supreme Sovereignty
of Reason (tttpi avroitpaWopos Koytcuov), explains
the moral use which is made of the history. The
author in the introduction discusses the nature of
reason and the character of its supremacy, which
he then illustrates by examples taken from Jewish
history (§§ 1-3, Hudson). Then turning to his
principal proof of the triumphant power of reason,
he gives a short summary of the causes which led
to the persecution of Antiocbus (§ 4), and in the
remainder of the book describes at length the death
of Eleazer (§§ 6-7), of the seven brethren (8-14),
and of their mother (15-19), enforcing the lessons
which he would teach by the words of the martyrs
and the reflections which spring from them. The
last section (20) is evidently by another hand.
9. The book was ascribed in early times to Jo-
sephus. Eusebius (H. E. iii. 10, wtwoVerw Si «ol
S\Ao o4k aytrvtt <nro&tajua t«7 a>8pl — i- t.
'lm<rlff — srtpi abronpeWopot Xoyurpov, t rim
MaKxaiaJa-er <V4wa T <ar), and Jerome, following
him (De Vir. UL 13, " Alius quoque liber ejus, qui
inseritntur wtp\ abrempdropes \oyurfioi vatte
a Thb tkle occurs only hi the Synvpsii of the
fsemto-AUianaiius (p. 482, ed. Wane). Athanasius
I the Maecabaes In his detailed list. The text at
•sands Main»al»ia« «^A(a t nrafcvuua*.
But Oradnar (Zur Ouch. d. Kan. 144 nets) conjectural
with gnat probability that the true reading Is Van.
Mk. «al DtbA. : Kal and f can frequently I
hi
Digitized by
Google
1*26 MACCABEES, BOOKS OF
akgana habetnr, in quo «t HaceabaBorum aunt
xigesta martyria," eomp. Jerome, ode. .Pal iL),
•bo Pbotius (ap. Philostorg. B. £. 1. to psWarys
rtrapror fcrk 'Iawrpro yiypaQtai ml asVoi
rmnfia\oymr, so that at that time the Judgment
an* disputed), and Suidat («. r. 'laVirros) — gin
thia opinion without mm; and it b found under
hb name iu many MSS. of the great Jewbh hb-
torian. On the other hand, Gregory of Nadanzns
quotes the book ( Oi at. it 82) ai thoogh he ni
■naeqoainted with the author, and in the Alexan-
drine and Sinaitic MSS. it b called simply « the
Imrth of Maccabees." The internal evidence againat
tha authonhip by Joaephus b to gnat at to out-
weigh the testimony of Eusebius, from whom it b
probable that the bter statements were derived;
and there can be no reaionabb doubt (hat the book
was assigned to Joaephus by a mere conjecture,
which the style and contents alike show to be
unfounded. It b possible that a tradition was
pres cind that the author's name was Josepbut
('IaVirrer), in which case the confusion would be
■ore easy.
8. If we may assume that the authorship was
attributed to Josephus only by error, no evidence
remains to fix tbe date of the book. It b only
certain that it was written before the destruction
of Jerusalem, and probably sfter 2 Mace. The
character of the composition leads the reader to
suppose that it was not a mere rhetorical exercise,
bat an earnest effort to animate the Jewish nation
to bee real perib. In which case it might be re-
ferred, not unnaturally, to the troubled times which
immediately preceded the war with Vespasian {dr.
A. D. 67).
4. As a historical document the narrative b of
no value. Its interest centres in the I'sct that it
b a unique example of tbe didactic use which the
Jews made of their history. Ewald (Gaeh. ir.
EM) rightly compares it with the sermon of bier
times, in which a Scriptural theme becomes the
subject of an elaborate and practical comment.
The style b very ornate and labored; but it b
cornet and vigorous, and truly Greek. The rich-
ness and boldness of the vocabulary b surprising.
Many words, coined in an antique mould, seem to
be peculiar to the book, as cwroSeVireroi, i$v6-
a-A.i|Kroj, irrafi^Taip, K<xr/iow\riHis, KoapoQv
ftiy, iuAcuco^ux'i"< oUrrpnKiurla, waBoitpaTUO-
6ot, etc.; others belong to bter types, as ofrre-
(ovmorij?, Apxtc paV0cu ; others are used in mean-
ings which are found in late writers, as s-nSoAiov-
X*'*, iryurrtla, ifrfiyjifiai and the number of
uiepoaitional compounds b very lsrge — irawotr-
Qpayifcty, «*{< v/uWfcu', It iKOfrro\oy tToiku, trip-
puyoKoy*7a9ai, rpotrentKararttyny.
5. The philosophical tone of tha book b essen-
tially stoical ; but the stoicism b that of a stem
legalist. Tbe dictates of reason are supported by
the remembrance of noble traditions, and by the
hops of a glorious future. The prospect of the
Ife to come b clear and wide. The faithful are
seen to rise to endless bibs; the wicked to descend
to endless torment, varying in intensity. But white
the writer shows, in tbb respect, the effects of the
mil culture of the Alexandrine school, and in part
advances beyond hb pi ede u easo rt , he offers no trace
of that deep spiritual insight which was quickened
ty Chriitianity. The Jew stands alone, isolated
by character and by blessing (eomp. Gfrorer,
PJUb, etc., ii. 173 ff ; Daehne, JicL-Jkx. RtUg,
nUfes.1' 190 ff.J.
MACEDONIA
6. The original Greek b the only ancient taxi
in which the book has been published, but a Syria*
version b said to be preserved in MS. at Mibt
(Grimm, Ami. J 7). In recent times the work
has hardly received so much attention as it de-
serves. Tbe first and only complete commentary
b that of Grimm, (Extg. HrmdtmcA), which em
only by extreme ebborateneas. An English trans-
lation has been published by Dr. Cotton (The Fin
Boob of Maccabees, Oxf. 1839). Tbe text b given
in the best form by Bekker in hb edition of Jose-
phus (Lips. 1855-66).
7. Though it b certain that our present book b
that which old writers described, Sixtus Senensb
(BibL Sancta, p. 87, ed. 1676 ) gives a very interest-
ing account of another fourth book of Maccab e es ,
which be saw in a horary at Lyons, which was after-
wards burnt It was in Greek, snd contained the
history of John Hyrcanua, continuing the narrative
directly after tbe close of tbe first book. Sixtus
quotes the first words: col /wt4 to aVoa-rojiwifvau
to* Xiiunra iytrtfin 'IvdVns vlbs aiirov Apx"/*"*
irr' atrrov, but this b the only fragment which
remains of it The history, be says, was nearly the
same as that in Jos- Ant. xiii., though the styte
was very different from hb, abounding in Hebrew
idioms. The testimony b so exact and explicit,
that we can see no reason for questioning its accu-
racy, and still less for supposing (with Calmet)
that Sixtus saw only the so-called fifth book,
which b at present preserved in Arabic.
V. The Fifth Book op Maccabees Just
mentioned may call for a very brief notice. It b
printed in Arabic in the Paris and London Poly-
glotta ; snd contains a history of the Jews from the
attempt of Heliodorus to the birth of our Lord.
The writer made use of tbe first two books of Mac-
cabees and of Joaephus, and has no claim to be con-
sidered an independent authority. Hb own knowl-
edge was very imperfect, and he perverts tbe state-
ments which he derives from others. He must have
lived after the Ml of Jerusalem, and probably out
of Palestine, though the translation bears very deal
traces of Hebrew idioms, so that it has been sup-
posed that the book was originally written in He-
brew, or at least that the Greek was strongly mod-
ified by Hebrew influence. The book has been
published in English by Dr. Cotton (/Twe Bookt,
etc.). B. F. W.
• MACCABETTS, more correctly Maoca-
bjsob (M«ira/Jaibr: Machabaut) occurs repeat-
edly in 1 and 2 Mace, as the surname of Judas the
son of Mattathbs (1 Mace, it 4, iii. 1, v. 24, viii.
20; 2 Mace. ii. 19, v. 27, viii. 1, xiv. 6), but mora
frequently alone, as the rendering of A Manro/huos,
" the Maccabee " (2 Mace viii. 6, 16, x. 16, 19, 21,
25, 30, 38, 36, xi. 6, 7, 15, xii. 19, 20, xiii. 24,
xiv. 27, 80, xv. 7, 21), Judas, however, being al-
ways referred to. In 2 Mace. x. 1 the article b
omitted, and so in 1 Mace. v. 34 in tbe Romsn
edition (but Alex, i Max*.). On the name and
family see the art. Ma ccabeks. >
MACEDONIA (MMtSorfa), the first par:
of Europe which received the Gospel directly from
St Paul, and an important scene of hb subsequent
missionary labors and the labors of hb companions.
So closely b tbb region associated with apostolii
Journeys, sufferings, and epistles, that it has truly
been called by one of our English travellers a kins'
of Holy Land (Clarke's TravtU, ch. xi.). F«
dstaib see Nkapous, Paxum, AwttPtM.ii
Digitized by
Google
MACEDONIA
traxoxiA, Theualohuu, and Bejuca. We
Maine ourselves hen to explaining the geograph-
leel and political impart of the term " Macedonia "
as employed in the N. T., with tome allusion to
ita earlier use in the Apocrypha, and one or two
jeLeral remarks on St. Paul's journeys through the
district, and the churches which he founded there.
In a rough and popular description it is enough
to say that Macedonia is the region bounded inland
bj the range of Htemus or the Balkan northwards,
and the chain of Pindus westwards, beyond which
the streams flow respectively to the Danube and
the Adriatic ; that it is separated from Thessaly on
the south by the Cambunian hills, running easterly
from Pindus to Olympus and the Jigean ; and that
it is divided on the east from Thrace by a less
definite mountain-boundary running southwards
from Htemus. Of the space thus enclosed, two
of the most remarkable physical features are two
great plains, one watered by the Axiua, which
comes to the sea at the Thermaic gulf, not far
from Thessalonica; the other by the Strymon,
which, after passing near Philippi, flows out below
Amphipolis. Between the mouths of these two
rivers a remarkable peninsula projects, dividing
itself into three points, on the farthest of which
Mount Athos rises nearly into the region of per-
petual snow. Across the neck of this peninsula St.
Paul travelled more than once with his companions.
This general sketch would sufficiently describe
the Macedonia which was ruled over by Philip and
Alexander, and which the Romans conquered from
Perseus. At first the conquered country was di-
vided by -lEmilius Paulus into four districts. Mace-
donia Prima was on the east of the Strymon, and
had Amphipolis for the capital. Macedonia Secunda
stretched between the Strymon and the Alius, with
Thessalonica for its metropolis. ' The third and
fourth districts lay to the south and the west.
This division was only temporary. The whole of
Macedonia, along with Thessaly and a large tract
along the Adriatic, was made one province and
centralized under the jurisdiction of a proconsul,
who resided at Thessalonica. We have now reached
the definition which corresponds with the usage of
the term in the N. T. (Acta xvi. 9, 10, 12,
xviii. 5, xix. 91, 22, 29, xx. 1, 3, xxvii. 2; Rom.
zv. 96; 1 Cor. xvi. 5; 2 Cor. i. 16, ii. 13, vii. 6,
viii. 1, ix. 2, 4, xi. 9; Phil. W. 15; 1 These, i.
7, 8, It. 10; 1 Tim. 1. 3). Three Roman provinces,
all wry familiar to us in the writings of St. Paul,
divided the whole space between the basin of the
Danube and Cape Matapan. The border-town of
Illtricum was Lissus on the Adriatic. The
boundary-line of Achaia nearly coincided, except
In the western portion, with that of the kingdom
of modern Greece, and ran in an irregular line
from the Acroeeraunian promontory to the Bay of
Thermopylae and the north of Euboea. By sub-
tracting these two provinces, we define Macedonia.
The history of Macedonia in the period between
the Persian wars and the consolidation of the Roman
provinces in the Levant is touched in a very in-
teresting manner by passages in the Apocrypha,
In Esth. xvi. 10, daman is described as a Mace-
donian, and In xiv. 14 he is said to have contrived
his plot for the purpose of transferring the kingdom
rf the Persians to the Macedonians. This suffi-
ciently betrays the late date and spurious character
of these apocryphal chapters: but it is curious thus
to have our attention turned to the early struggle
if Persia and Greece. Macedonia played a gnat
MACEDONIA
1727
part in this struggle, and there is little doubt thai
Ahaauerus is Xerxes. The history of the Macca-
bees opens with vivid allusions to Alexander the
son of Philip, the Macedonian king ('AA«'{<u'Soci
i toO ♦lAhnrov i /WiAsCf 6 MaxiS&v), who
came out of the land of Chettiim and smote Da-
rius king of the Persians and Medes (1 Mace. 1. 1),
and who reigned first among the Grecians (ib. vi.
2). A little later we have the Roman conquest ol
Perseus " king of the Citims " recorded (to. viii.
6). Subsequently in these Jewish annals we find
the term " Macedonians " used for the soldiers of
the Seleucid successors of Alexander (9 Mace. viii.
20). In what is called the Fifth Book of Macca-
bees this usage of the word is very frequent, and
is applied not only to the Seleucid princes at An-
tioch, but to the Ptolemies at Alexandria (sea
Cotton's Fa* Book* of Maccabtu, Oxford, 1832).
It is evident that the words " Macedonia " and
" Macedonian " were fearfully familiar to the Jew-
ish mind; and this gives a new significance to the
vision by which St. Paul was invited at Troaa to
the country of Philip and Alexander.
Nothing can exceed the interest and impressive-
ness of the occasion (Acts xvi. 9) when a new and
religious meaning was given to the well-known
lw))f> Maxftiir of Demosthenes (Phil. i. p. 43)
and when this part of Europe was designated aa
the first to be trodden by an Apostle. The account
of St. Paul's first journey through Macedonia
(Acts xvi. 10-xvii. 15) is marked by copious de-
tail and well-defined incidents. At the close of
this journey he returned from Corinth to Syria by
sea. On the next occasion of visiting Europe,
though he both went and returned through Mace-
donia (Acts xx. 1-6), the narrative is a very slight
sketch, and the route is left uncertain, except as
regards Philippi. Many yearn elapsed before St.
Paul visited this province again ; but from 1 Tim.
i. 3 it is evident that he did accomplish the wish ex-
pressed during his first imprisonment. (Phil. ii. 24.)
The character of the Macedonian Christians is
set before us in Scripture in a very favorable light
The candor of the Bereans is highly commended
(Acta xvii. 11); the Thessalonians were evidently
objects of St Paul's peculiar affection (1 Thess. ii
8, 17-20, iii. 10); and the Philippians, besides
their general freedom from blame, are noted as re-
markable for their liberality and self-denial (Phil.
iv. 10, 14-19; see 2 Cor. ix. 2, xi. 9). It is worth
noticing, as a fact almost typical of the change
which Christianity has produced in the social Ufa
of Europe, that the female element ia conspicuous
in the records of its introduction into Macedonia.
The Gospel was first preached there to a small con-
gregation of women (Acts xvi. 13); the first con-
vert was a woman (ib. ver. 14); and, at least at
Philippi, women were prominent as active worktrs
iu the cause of religion (Phil. iv. 2, 8).
It should be observed that, in St. Paul's time,
Macedonia was well intersected by Roman roads,
especially by the great Via Egnatia, which con-
nected Philippi and Thessalonica, and also fed
towards Ulyricum (Rom. xv. 19). The antiquities
of the country have been well explored and de-
scribed by many travellers. The two best warka
are those n Jousinery I Voyage dan* la Macedoine,
Paris, 1831, and Leake (Traveh in Nortktm
Gretc*, London, 1836). J. S. H.
* It is atill a question whether Lake's usage
distinguishes Macedonia and Threes frmn sash
other or regards them as one. This deproda ia
Digitized by
Google
1728
MACEDONIAN
put on the interpretation of the controverted «>«i
eWl *y>tSrn rq> utpltos rrjt McurvSorfai irdAi*
(Acta xri. 13). Rettig ( Quastiones PhUippienses)
• maintains that Thrace was not attached to Ham-
Ionia till the time of Veipaaian, and that Luke,
consistently with that feet, speaks of Philippi as
the first city in Macedonia which Paul reached
after crossing from Asia into Europe. Hence
Neapolis (Kavalla), where be landed, belonged to
Thrace and not to Macedonia, as was true at a
later period. On one side see Lechler's Der Apot-
tel Geichichten, p. 281 f. (Dr. Schaeffer's tranal.
In Lange's Commentary, p. 304), and on the other,
Meyer's Apoetetgeichichte, p. 203 f. (1854). There
la another supposition. Instead of speaking of
Philippi as topographically " first " in Macedonia,
because Luke meant to assign Neapolis to Thrace,
he may hare thought of the city and its harbor as
one, whether this distinction of provinces existed
at that time or not. That Luke was familiar with
this identification of town and port is manifest;
for in Acts ivi. 11, he says that Paul and bis
companions sailed to Philippi (tiiSvopofiiioafitr),
whereas they went thither by land from Neapolis,
and in Acta xx. 6, that they sailed from Philippi
U{vw\«»Va/««e), whereas they went down to the
coast, and embarked at Neapolis.
Other reference*. — Forbiger, Handbuch der
alien Geogr. iii. 1049-1071. Hoffmann, Griechen-
land u. die Griechen, i. 1-133. Paul), Henl-Kn-
eyebpadie, ir. 1132-1142. H. Holland, Travels
in the Ionian hies, Albania, Thtttaly, .Macedonia,
ate. (1812 and 1813). Pouqueville, Voyage dant
la Greet (1820). Revue Archeobgique (1860), two
brief articles entitled Daton, Neapolii, lee mines
de Philippes. Two numbers have appeared (1865)
of the Mission Archeobgique de Macedoine, by
MM. Heuaey and Daumet (published by order of the
French emperor). They relate chiefly to Kavalla,
the ancient Neapolis, but contain also a map of
Philippi and the neighborhood. See also A Journey
to Neapolit and Philippi in the BibL Sacra, xviii.
866-898; and the article "Macedonian" in Her-
sog's Real-Encyk. viii. 688-638. H.
Goto of Macedonia.
MAOBDO'NIAN (MutiMr : [Macedo])
aocnrs in A. V. only in Acts xxvii. 2. In the
other cases (Acts xvi. 9, xix. 29, 3 Cor. ix. 8, 4),
our translators render it " of Macedonia."
* " Macedonian " occurs also several times in
the A. V. in the Apocrypha, namely, 1 Mace. i.
1, Ti. 3; 3 Mace. viii. 20; Esth. xvi. 10, 14. For
the wide sense in which It is used in 3 Mace. viii.
a • Josephus says (Ant. xvffl. 5, f 1), that
roa was In the power of Arstas at the tuna of his
laughter's flight thence. Borne deny therefor* that
John's martyrdom could hare taken place then ; but
as Josephus states that tt did (raihjj urbowrat, Ant.
seta 6, 1 3), the contradiction, If then be any , falls on
MACxLfiBUB
10, see the note of Grimm in be., and the restouk*
in the art. Mackdokla, p. 1727 6. A.
* MACHjETITJS (MajfcupoDi) is the umn*
of the castle in which, according to Josephus (.->?.t.
xviii. 5, § 2; B. J. vii. 6, {$ 1-4), John the Bap-
tist was imprisoned and put to death by Herod
Antipas. (See Matt. xiv. 3-5.) lu 1806 Seetzen
identified the place with the ruins of the present
Mkauer, east of the Dead Sea, on a lofty
crag overhanging the southern Zrtlca-Ma'in.
See Arisen, U. 372 f. It was originally a tower
built by Alexander Janneus as a check on the
Arab freebooters in that quarter. It is surrounded
by ravines, at some points not less than 175 feet
deep, and in addition to its natural strength, was
strongly fortified. In Herod's time it was rendered
still more attractive by its splendid porticos and
reservoirs, and is known to hare been a favorite
retreat of this luxurious prince. Pliny speaks of
it as ■' secunda quondam arx Judex ab Hieroaoly-
niis " ( Nat. Hist. r. 15). It has been said that
Machserua, though transferred from one occupant
to another, was never actually reduced by seige «
taken by storm. Its supplies of water are almost
unfailing. After the destruction of Jerusalem it
fell into the hands of the Sicarii, a band of out-
laws of whom we read in Acta xxi. 38.
The Evangelists state that John was cast into
prison, but do not mention where the prison waa
situated, or where the feast was held at which the
order was given for his execution. As nothing in
their narrative, however, contradicts that view, we
may conclude that Josephus was well informed,
and that John was incarcerated and beheaded in
Macherus (Tiberias)." His confinement was not
so strict as to exclude the visits of friends (Matt.
xi 2 if.; Luke vii. 18); and hence it was from
this castle, in all probability, that he sent two of
his disciples to Christ to inquire of him whether
he waa the Messiah, or they should look for an-
other (Luke vii. 20). Into one of the deep ravines
beneath the fortress the headless body of John
(to TTiiua abrov, Mark vi. 29) may have been
cast, which his disciples took up and buried, and
then went and told Jesus (Matt. xiv. 13; Mark vi.
89). It was from this castle that the Arab wife of
Herod, repudiated by him for the sake of Herodias,
fled to her father, Aretas king of Arabia, out of
which grew the war between Herod and Aretaa
which resulted in the defeat of Herod (Ant. xviii
5-1), and the capture of Damuscus (alluded to
in 2 Cor. xi. 32). The crag on which the old
fortress stood is said to be visible from Jerusalem.
[See Jkrusalkm, ii. 1278, note.] It was a saying
of the Jews that the torches on Olivet announcing
the appearance of the Passover moon could be seen
from Tabor and the rocky heights of Machaerua
(Scbwarts, Dai heil Land, p. 54).
The history of Machaarus is well sketched hi
Gams (Johannes der T&ufer im Gefangmne, ft
50-83). For other notices, mainly historical or topo-
graphical, see Jost's Getchtchte der /sraehten, ii.
321 ff. ; Sepp's Dot Leben Chritti, ii. 400-414, and
Dai heiL Land, i. 678; Milman's Binary of the
him, and not on the Evangelists. Soma tune nli|»in
between the flight and Herod's war with Aretaa (which
was before John's death), and daring the interval
Herod may In soma way hare become mastr* of w»
fortress. John need not however be i nput — u so nan
bass kept all the am* In one place. at
Digitized by
Google
MAOHBANAI
/sue, B. 188 f. ; Rittar, Otogr. ofPttkitht, Gage's
traniL Ui. 8ft, 70) Robinson's Pky. Geogr. p.
17. It was » long two days' Journey from Ma-
dura to Tiberias, the capital of Herod's te-
trarohy. H.
MACH'BANAI 11 syL] ("P??n [one
/IK, (Mot, Flint]: MsAx«&>">t (T*^ Mt*x«-
fimrrt; FA. Mf\y«3arr«o;] Alex. Mox«3a«u:
MndUmuil), one of the lion-hoed warrian of Gad
who joined the fortune! of David when living in
retreat at Ziklag (1 Chr. xil. 18).
MACHBBTiAH («J1?5 [Ktoe*, *«»¥>,
mnt]: M«xa0*>>; Alex. Maxww! [Comp-
MsnrjaVtf:] Maekbena). Shevs, the father of
Maahbena, is named in the genealogical list of
Jadahas the oflbpring of Maachah, the oononbine
of Caleb ben-Hesron (1 Chr. li. 48). Other names
similarly mentioned in the passage are known to
be thon not of penona but of towns. The mort
fcaaitiln inference from thit is, that Maehbena waa
founded or colonised by the family of Maanhah.
To the position of the town, however, whether
near Gasah, like Madhaxhar, or between Jeru-
aalem aid Hebron, like Gibba, we pooaen no
elew. It ia not named by Eusebiut or Jerome, and
dote not leem to hare bean met with by any later
traveller. G.
MACHPELAH
1729
i/UHI 0?9: Itarxf, Abo. Max" M *
«*•"), the lather of Geuel the Gadite, who went
with Caleb and Joshua to apy out the land of Ca-
naan (Mom. xili. 16).
MA'OHIB C"1"?V [«*A ocjwired] : [Bom.
M«XV' ^ at ' Alex.] Max«f> : Machir), the eld-
eet eon (Joah. xrii. 1) of the patriarch Manaiseh
by an Aramite or Syrian concubine (1 Chr. rii. It,
and the LXX. of Gen. xlvi. 30). Hie children
are commemorated at baring been careewd a by
Joseph before hii death (Gen. L 33). Hb) wife's
name la not preserved, but she was a Benjamite,
the " sister of Huppim and Shuppim " (1 Chr. vil.
16). The only children whose names are given
an bis son Gilead,* who Is repeatedly mentioned
(Num. xxvi. 39, xxvii. 1, xxxvi. 1; 1 Chr. vil. 14,
Ac), and a daughter, Abiah, who married a chief
of Jndah named Heron (1 Chr. li. 31, 34). The
connection with Benjamin may perhaps have led
to the selection by Abner of Mahanaim, which lay
on the boundary between Gad and Manaaseh, as
the residence of Ishbosheth (3 Sam. U. 8); ani
that with Jndah may have also influenced Davii
to go so far north when driven out of his kingdom.
At the time of the conquest the family of Machir
had become very powerful, and a large part of the
country on the east of Jordan was subdued by
diem (Num. xxxii. 39; DeuL UI. 16). In fact to
their warlike tendencies it is probably entirely due
that the tribe was divided, and that only the In-
ferior families crossed the Jordan. So great was
their power that the name of Hachir occasionally
s up ersedes that of Manaaseh, not only for the east-
ern territory, but even for the western half of the
tribe also: see Judge v. 14, where Macbir occurs
in the enumeration of the western tribes — " Gil-
ead " apparently standing for the eastern Manaasen
in ver. 17 ; and still more unmistakably in Josh,
xiii. 81, compared with 38.
>. The son of Ammiel, a powerful sbeykh of one
of the trans-Jordanic tribes, but whether of Manas-
ash — the tribe of hit namnsake — or of Gad, must
remain uncertain till we know where Lo-debar, to
which place he belonged, was situated. His name
occurs but twice, but the part which he played was
by no means an insignificant one. It was his for-
tune to render essential service to the cause of Saul
and of David successively — in each case when they
were in difficulty. Under his roof, when a cripple
and friendless, after the death of his uncle and the
ruin of his house, the unfortunate Mephibosbeth
found a home, from which he was summoned by
David to the honors and the anxieties of a resi-
dence at the court of Jerusalem (3 Sam. ix. 4, 6).
When David himself, suiue years later, was driven
from his throne to Mahaiialm, Macbir was one of
the three great chiefs who lavished on the exiled
king and his soldiers the wealth of the rich pastoral
district of which they were the lords — " wheat,
and barley, and flour, and parched oorn, and beans,
and (entiles, and parched pulse, and honey, and
butter, and sheep, and eows'-milk cheese " (3 Sam.
xviL 87-38). Josephut calls him the chief of thav
eountry of Gilead (Ant. vii. 8, $ 8). G.
BtA'OHIRITBB, THB FT?**)"} fr**-]'
i Karfi; IT»*0 Alex, o Merei*i: MaekirUm).
The descendants of Mackib the father of Gilead:
(Num. xxvi. 39).
MAGH'M.AS (Max**: Mackmat), 1 Mace.
Ix. 73. [HlCHMASH.]
MACHNADTSBAI [4 eyL] 03"j39l« [o#r
efthenaMt, Fttret; what Ute ue Bberall Ges.Jt
MaxaoVajSeS; Alex. Marrao'sa/tov: AfeeAaeoW-
•as), one of the sons of Bani who put away hie-
foreign wife at Ezra's command (Ear. x. 40). The
marginal reading of A V. ia Mnbnadtbai, whtnh
is found in some oopies. In the corresponding Hat
of 1 Esdr. ix. 34 the place of this name is occupied
by " of the sons of Oaora," which may be patty
traced In the original.
MAOHPETLAH (always with the aitistb —
nb$5lpn [(As norhoa, lot]: to 8iwAoS» r also
re mniKcuor re SiwAovr: dtpkx, also $pehmca
duplex), the spot containing the timbered field, in
the end of which was the cave which Absaham
purchased « from the Bene-Heth [sons of Heth],
• The Targum ctu u a o s si l eu eaUy says "eircum-
• There an several eonslderattoaa which may lead
us to doubt whether we an warranted by the Biblical
narrative In aflxlng a personal sense to the name of
CKlaad, aaeh u the very remote period from which that
aaass as attached to the district dates (Gen. ml),
and else soon pa ss age s as Num. mil. 38, sad Dent.
U. 16. (B» Bwald,0«c*. U. 477, 478, 498.)
e The story of the purchase eumnt amongst the
aaooarn Arabs of Hebron, ss tt.d by Wilson (taarfs,
Me., L 3pl\ la a counterpart of ih> legend of the
108
by which the PhesnWaa Dido obtained land
enough for her city of Byna. K Ibrahim asked only
aa much ground as could be covered with a cow's
hide ; but after the ag r ee m e n t waa concluded) he out
the hide Into thongs, and surrounded the whole of the
apeee now forming the Hiram." The story la samark*
able, not only for Its repetition of the older Semitic
tale, but for lta completB departura from the simple
and open character of Abraham, as aat math, la the
Biblical narrative, A similar story ia told of other
places, but, like Byna, their names contain — "i"-'-!
suggestive of the bide. Tha-writer- haa-oot bean ahla-
Digitized by
Google
1730
MACHPELAH
and which became the burial-place of Sarah, Abra-
ham himself, Isaac, Rebekah, Leah, and Jacob.
Abraham resided at Bethel, Hebron and Gerar,
Int the field which contained his tomb was the
only spot which positively belonged to him in the
Land of Promise. That the name applied to the
general locality, and not to either the field or the
cavern,' 1 is evident from Gen. xxiii. 17, " the field
of Ephron which was in Machpelah ... the field
and the cave which was therein," although for
convenience of expression both field and cave are
occasionally called by the name. Its position is —
with one exception uniformly — specified as "lacing
P3? J ?7) Mamre" (Gen. niii. 17, 19, m. 9,
xUx. JO, 1. 13). What the meaning of this ancient
name — not met with beyond the book of Genesis
— may be, appears quite uncertain. The older
interpreters, the LXX., Vulgate, Targums of On-
kelos and Pseudo-Jonathan, Peehito, Veneto-Greek,
etc., explain it as meaning " double " — the double
care or the double field — but the modern lexicog-
raphers interpret it, either by comparison with the
MACHPE1AH
Ethiopic, as Gesenius (Tka. 7046), an allotted m
separated place; or again — as Furst (Handtck
733 a) — the undulating spot. The on* is probably
as near the real meaning as the ether.
Beyond the passages already cited, the Bible
contains no mention either of the name Machpelah
or of the sepulchre of the Patriarchs. Unless this
wss the sanctuary of Jehovah to which Absalom
had vowed or pretended to have rowed a pilgrim-
age, when absent in the remote Geshnr (3 Sam.
xv. 7 ), no allusion to it has been discovered in the)
records of David's residence at Hebron, nor yet
in the struggles of the Maccabees, so many ot
whose battles were fought in and around it. ss
is a remarkable instance of the absence among
the ancient Hebrews of that veneration for holy
places which is so eminently characteristic of
modern Orientals. But there are few, if any, of
the ancient sites of Palestine of whose genuine-
ness we can fed more assured than Machpelah.
The traditional spot has everything in its favor as
Auras position goes ; while the wall which incloses
j
Mosque at Hebron.
i Haram, or sacred precinct in which the sepul-
ies themselves are reported, and probably with
truth, still to lie — and which is the only part at
present accessible to Christiana — is a monument
certainly equal, and probably superior in age to
anything remaining in Palestine. It is a quadran-
gular building of about 200 feet in length by 115
In width, its dark gray walls rising 60 or 60 in
height, without window or opening of any descrip-
tion, except two small entrances at the S. E. and
S. W. comers. It stands nearly on the crest of the
hill which forms the eastern side of the valley on
the slopes and bottom of which the town is strewn,
and it is remarkable how this venerable structure,
quite affecting in its hoary gray color and the
archaic forms of its masonry, thus rising above the
meaner buildings which it has so often beheld in
ruins, dignifies, and so to speak accentuates, the
to trine any connection «f «ns kind in any of the " The LXX. Invariably attach the nana to the cote
i of Mschasliai or sntjeen. i see xxui. 19, f» ty anpjjuf t»i iypov »y tur»o> Ton
i Is followed by ."
Digitized by
Google
MACHPELAH
general monotony of the town of Hebron. The
ancient Jewish tradition • uerlbei its erection to
David (Jichut ha-Aboth in Hottinger, dppi Betr.
p. 80), thus making it coeval with the pool in the
taJJey below; bat, whatever the worth of this
tradition, it maj well be of the age of Solomon,* for
the masonry is even more antique in its character
than that of the lower portion of the south and
south w es t e rn walla of the Haram at Jerusalem,
sad which many critics ascribe to Solomon, while
•sen the sev ere st allows it to be of the date of
Uerod. The date must always remain a mystery,
bat there are two considerations which may weigh
In fetor of fixing it very early. 1. That often as
the town of Hebron may hare been destroyed, this,
bents; a tomb, would always be spared, 3. It can-
not on architectural grounds be later than Herod's
lime, while on the other hand it is omitted from
the catalogue given by Joeephus of the places which
he rebuilt or adorned. Had Herod erected the
uclosure round the tombs of the fathers of the
nation, it is hardly conceivable that Joeephus would
hare omitted to extol it, especially when he men-
tions apparently the very structure now existing.
His words on this occasion are » the monuments
(ainjsuw*) of Abraham and his sons are still to be
seen in the town, all of fine stone and admirably
wrought " (tin mAtf t pa p/t d pn eel «VAorf/u»s
tlfyiriUm, B. J. iv. 0, $ 7).
Of the entente of this incksure we have only
the most meagre and c onfus ed accounts. The spot
is one of tbe most sacred of the Moslem sanctuaries,
and since the occupation of Palestine by them it
has been entirely closed to Christians, and partially
so to Jews, who are allowed, on rare occasions only,
to look in through a bole. A great part of the
area is occupied by a building which is now a
mosque, and was probably originally a church, but
of its date or style nothing is known. Tbe sepul-
chres of Abraham and Sarah, Isaac and Rebekah,
Jacob and Leah, are shown on tho floor of the
mosque, covered in tbe usual Mohammedan style
with rich carpets; but the real sepulchres are, as
they were in tbe 12th and 16th centuries, in a
cave below the floor (Benj. of Tudela: Jichut ha-
Aboth : Monro). In this they resemble the tomb
ef Aaron on Mount Hor. [See p. 1087.] Tbe
cave, according to tbe earliest and tbe latest testi-
mony, opens to the south. This was the report of
Monro's servant in 1833; and Arculf particularly
mentions the fact that tbe bodies lay with their
heads to tbe north, as they would do if deposited
from the south. A belief seems to prevail in the
town that tbe cave communicates with some one
of the modern sepulchres at a considerable distance,
sntside of Hebron (Loewe, in Zettmng du Judenth.
June 1, 1839).
The accounts of the sacred indosure at Hebron
■ill be found collected by Ritter (Krdhmdt, PaL
mima, 809, Ac., but especially 836-860); Wilson
{Landt, etc., 1. 363-367); Robinson (BM. Bet. ii.
MACHPELAII
1781
a According to hap-Parchl (Ashert Benj. p. 437),
* the stones had formerly belonged to the Temple."
Meter ( SnUamtU, PaUttt. p. 340) goes so fcr as to sug-
gest Joseph !
!• The peculiarities of the masonry are Urns : (1.)
lame of the stones are very large : Dr. WUaon men-
tions one 38 It. long, and 8 ft. 4 in. deep. The lar-
gest m the Haram w.'l at Jerusalem Is 94) It But
yet (2) the surface — in splendid preservation — Is v»-y
Jsariy worked, more so than the unast of the stones at
she ssulli and southwest portion of the inelosure at I
78-79). The chief authorities are Arculf (a. n.
700); Benjamin of Tudela (a. d. cir. 1170); th»
Jewish (net Jichut ha-Aboth (in Hottinger, Cyj*
Htbratei; sod also in Wilson, I. 366); AD Bay
(Travrk, A. n. 1807, ii. 838, 833); Giovanni
FInati (Zt/e by Bankes, ii. 836); Monro (Summer
BambU in 1833, 1. 843); Loewe (in Zeitung du
Judenth. 1839, pp. 878, 288). In a note by Asher
to his edition of Benjamin of Tudela (ii. 92), men-
tion is made of an Arabic MS. in the Bibliotheque
Royals at Paris, containing an account of tbe con-
dition of tbe mosque under Saladin. This MS.
has not yet been published. Tbe travels of Ibrahim
ei-Khijari in 1669-70 — a small portion of which
from tbe MS. in the Ducal Library at Gotha, has
been published by Tueh, with Translation, etc
(Leipzig, Vogei, I860) — are said to contain a
minute description of the Mosque (Tuch, p. 3).
A few words about the exterior, a sketch of the
masonry, and a view of tbe town, showing the in-
dosure standing prominently in the foreground,
will be found iu BarUetta Walk*, etc., 216-219.
A photograph of the exterior, from the East ( ?) is
given as No. 63 of Palatine at it is, by Rev. G. W.
Bridges. A ground-plan exhibiting considerable
detail, made by two Moslem architects who lately
superintended some repairs in tbe Haram, and
given by them to Dr. Barclay of Jerusalem, is
engraved in Osboru's Pal Putt and Ptttent, p.
384. O.
• It Is since the above article was written that
this Moslem sanctuary over the cave of Machpelah
was visited and entered by the Prince of Wales and
some of his attendants. We are indebted to Dean
Stanley, who accompanied the party on that occa-
sion for an interesting report of this visit (Sermons
in the Katt, etc., p. 141 S.) of which we make the
following abstract : —
To overcome tbe difficulties which tbe fanaticism
of the inhabitants of Hebron might place in the
way of even a royal approach to the indosure. a
Finnan was first requested from the Porte. But
the government at Constantinople cautiously gave
them only a discretionary letter of recommendation
to the Governor of Jerusalem. It was necessary
therefore to obtain the sanction of this intermediate
functionary. This was not easily done. The
Turkish governor not only had his own scruples
with reference to such a profanation of the sacred
place, but feared tbe personal consequences which
he might suffer from the bigotry of the Moham-
medans. After a refusal at first and much hesita-
tion be consented, as an act of national courtesy,
that tbe Prince should make the attempt to enter
the Mosque (to guarantee his safety was out of the
question), but unaccompanied except by two or
three of his suite who were specially interested as
savant and antiquaries.
The day of the arrival at Hebron was the 7th
of April, 1862. They psssed into and through ths
town strongly escorted, through streets deserted
; the sunken part round toe edges (absurdly
catted tbe " bevel ") very shallow, with no res em blance
at all to more modern "rustle work." (8.) The cross-
Jotnts are not always vertical, but some an at an
angle. (4.) The wall U divided by pilasters about Sit.
6 In. wide, and 6 ft apart, running the snore height
of the ancient wsIL It is very much to be wished
ths) eanftil large photographs were taken of thsss
walls Bom a near print The writer Is not aware thai
any taehye> i
Digitized by
Google
1782
MACHPELAH
except by the soldiery, whose presence wu imressry
to guard against any fanatical attempt to avenge
the supposed sacrilegious act Arriving within the
mcloeuie, they were ceremoniously received by the
representatives of the forty hereditary guardians
of the Mosque, into which they were immediately
shown. The architecture of this plainly indicates
Its original use ss a Christian church. The tombs,
or rather cenotaphs which cover the actual sepulchres
of the patriarchs, are inclosed each within a sep-
arate shrine closed with gates. On the right of
the Inner portico before entering the main building,
la the shrine of Abraham, and on the left that of
Sarah, each closed with silver gates. The shrine
of Abraham, after some manifestations of delay and
of grief on the part of the guardians, was thrown
open. It is described as a coffin-like s tru c tur e,
shout six feet high, built of plastered stone or
marble, and hung with three green carpets em-
broidered with gold. The shrine of Sarah, as of
the rest of the women, they were requested not to
enter. Within the mosque are the tombs of Isaac
and Rebekah, under separate chapels with windows
in the walls, and inclosed with iron Instead of silver
gates. The shrines of Jacob and Leah in r ecesses
corresponding to those of Abraham and Sarah, but
opposite to the entrance of the mosque, are in a
asperate cloister inclosed with iron gates, through
which may be seen two green banners resting
against Leah's tomb, the meaning of which is un-
known. The general structure of Jacob's tomb
resembles that of Abraham, but the carpets are
The correspondence of these monuments with
the Biblical narrative is remarkable, In view of
Mussulman ignorance and prejudice, and precludes
the idea of a fanciful distribution of them. For,
In the first place, the prominence given to Isaac
is contrary to their prejudice in favor of lshmael ;
and again, if they had followed mere probabilities,
Rachel would have occupied the place of the less
favored Leah.
Besides these six shrines, hi a separate chamber
reached by an aperture through the wall, is the
shrine of Joseph, the situation of which varies from
the Biblical account, but is in accordance with the
tradition of the country, supported perhaps by an
ambiguous expression of Josephus, to the effect
that the body of Joseph, though first buried at
Shechem, was afterwards brought to Hebron.
There are also two ornamental shrines on the
northern side of the mosque. But no traces of
others were seen within the Inclosure.
To the cave itself there was no access. One
indication of it in the shape of a circular hole at
the corner of the shrine of Abraham, about eight
inches across, one foot of the upper part built of
strong masonry, bnt the lower part of the living
rock, was stone visible. This aperture has been
left in order to allow the sacred air of the sepulchre
to escape into the Mosque, and also to allow a lamp
to be suspended by a chain and burn over the
grave. Even this lamp was not lighted because,
as they said, the saint did not " like to have a
lamp in full daylight." Whether the Mussulmans
themselves are acquainted with any other entrance
la doubtful.
The reader will find the same Information also
■i Stanley's Jeans* Church, 1. Appendix U. p.
• Hots the chance of m into », unusual in the
tan. are, which usually follows the Hsbrew aeon
MADMANKAH
585 ff. A plan of the mosque accompanies tin
narrative. On the purchase of the cave of Maeh
pehth, see Efhrox (Amer. ed.). Of the satiqutt)
of the site, says Thomson (Land and Book, it. 885,
" I have no doubt. . . . We have before us the
identical cave, in which these patriarchs, with their
wives, were reverently gathered • unto their people,'
one after another by their children. . . . Such a
cave may last as long as the ' everlasting hills ' of
which it is a part; and from that to this dsy it has
so come to pass, in the providenoe of God, that no
nation or people has had possession of Mirhpwlah
who would have been disposed to disturb the ashes
of the illustrious dead within it" H.
MACHOS" (MaVpw: Maeer), the surname
of Ptoleroeus, or Ptolemee, the son of Durymenas
(1 Mace. iii. 88) and governor of Cyprus under
Ptolemy Philometor (9 Mace. x. 13).
MATJAI [3 syL] ("HO: MM [MoSofe,
Alex. HaSai, MaSals] Madai), which occurs in
Gen. x. 9 [and 1 Chr. 1. 6] among the list of the
sons of Japhet, has been commonly regarded as a
personal appellation ; and most commentators call
Madai the third son of Japhet, and the progenitor
of the Medea. But it is extremely doubtful whether,
in the mind of the writer of Gen. x., the term
Madai was regarded as representing a person.
That the genealogies in the chapter are to soma
extent ethnic is universally allowed, and may be
seen even in our Authorized Version (ver. 16-18).
And as Gomer, Magog, Javan, Tubal, and Meeheeh,
which are conjoined in Gen. x. 3 with Madai, are
elsewhere in Scripture always ethnic and nut per-
sonal appellatives (Es. xxvii. 18, xxxviii. 6, mix.
6; Dan. viii. 31; Joel iii. 6; Ps. exx. 6; Is. IxvL
19, Ac), so it Is probable that they stand for
nations rather than persons here. In that case no
one would regard Madai as a person; and we must
remember that it is the exact word need elsewhere
throughout Scripture for the well-known nation of
the Medea. Probably therefore all that the writer
intends to assert in Gen. x. S is, that the Medea,
as well as the Gomerites, Greeks, Tibareni, Moschi,
etc., descended from Japhet Modern science has
found that, both in physical type and in language,
the Medea belong to that family of the human race
which embraces the Cymry and the Greco-Romans.
(See Prichard's PAs*. Hit. of MantM, iv. 6-60 ;
Ch. i- §8-1; and comp. the article on the Mkdes.)
G. B.
MADI'ABUN ('H|ia8«u3oo» ; Alex. Irprra
HuaaajSwr; [Aid. ttaXta$ovr])- The sons of
Msdiabun, according to 1 Esdr. v. 58, were among
the Levites who superintended the restoration of
the Temple under ZorobabeL The name does not
occur in the parallel narrative of Ear. iii. 9, and it
also omitted in the Vulgate; nor is it easy to con-
jecture the origin of the interpolation. Our trans-
lators followed the reading of the Aldine edition.
MA'DIAK ([Rom. AM. MoSidV; Vat Sin.
Alex.] MaSiafi: Madian, but Cod. Amlat of N. T.
Madutm), Jud. u. 86; Acta vil. 29. [MnnAX.]
MADMAN'S AH (TtyQTO [aMoMBr
Rom. Maxapfp, Mai>ijrd' s Vat] Uaxapfm,
[Maun) re.;] Alex. BsOfjSnra, [Ma;rBf!sr» :]•
Meatmiuui, [Jfaatoiia] ), one of the towns in the
south district of Judah (Josh. xv. 81). It is i
eloaary than the ordnarr LXX. text:
Digitized by
Google
MADMKN
with Hormah, Ziklag, and other remote pUoes, and
therefore cannot be identical with the Madmenah
a Isaiah. To Euaebiua and Jerome ( OnomatUoun,
■ Hedemana ") it appear* to have bent well known.
It wai called in their time Menola, and was not far
from Gaza. The first stage southward from Gasa
la now eUMmgig (Rob. 1. 60S), which, in default
of a better, ia suggested by Kiepert (in his Map,
1886) as the modern representative of Menols, and
therefore of MnHm«wn «h
In the genealogical lists of 1 Chrocu, Madman-
aah is derived from Caleb-ben-Hetron through his
eoncubine Haachah, whose son Shaaph is recorded
« the founder of the town (ii. 49).
For the termination compare the neighboring
place Sansannah. G.
MADTOBN (JBT9 [dmghUt]:' roW
stbnt), a place in Moab, threatened with destruc-
tion in the denunciations of Jeremiah (xlviii. S),
but not ahawhere named, and of which nothing is
yet known. G.
MADME'NAH (n^OfO [as above]:'
If at</3i)vd: Ifcdemma), one of the Benjamite vil-
lages north of Jerusalem, the inhabitants of which
were frightened away by the approach of Sen-
nacherib along the northern road (Is. x. 81). Like
others of the places mentioned in this list, Mad-
menah is not elsewhere named; for to Madnan-
xah and Madmen it can have no relation. Geae-
nius (Junta, p. 414) points out that the verb in the
sentence is active — " Madmenah flies," not, as in
A. V., " is removed " (so also Michaelia, Bibeifir
Cngelehrten).
Madmenah is not impossibly alluded to by Isaiah
(xxv. 10) in his denunciation of Moab, where the
word rendered in A. V. "dunghill" ia identical
with that name. The original text (or Cetkib), by
a variation in the preposition C&3 and TO3),
reads the " waters of Madmenah." If this is so,
the reference may be either to the Madmenah of
Benjamin — one of the towns in a district abound-
ing with corn and threshing-floors — or more ap-
propriately still to Madmen, the Moabite town.
Gesanius (Jetaia, p. 7M) appears to have overlooked
this, which might have induced him to regard with
mora favor a suggestion which seems to have been
first made by Joseph Kimehi. G.
* The places on the march of Sennacherib to
Jerusalem have usually been supposed to occur in
a direct line; on this supposition Madmenah must
have stood between Gibeah or Saul and Nob. But
the army possibly may have moved in parallel
columns, and thus some of the places mentioned
have been lateral to each other and not suooessire.
[Non.] For an elaborate defense of this theory
on topographical grounds, the reader may set
Dr. Vslentiner's art entitled Beitrag tor Topo-
graphs da Btammes Benjamin, in Zdttehr. dtr
ieuttck. Morg. GaelUeh. xii. 114 ft, 189). H.
MADNESS. The words rendered by •' mad,"
" madman,'! u madness," etc., in the A. V., vary
sonriderably in the Hebrew of the T. In Deut.
txvili. 18, 34, 1 8am. xxi. 18, 14, 13, Ac. (porta,
ate., In the LXX.), they are derivatl.es of the root
MA DON
178*
T)2&, » to be stirred or excited; " in Jer. xxr IB,
L 88, H. T, Eecl. L IT, Ac (rtaioxiod, LXX.), from
the root b?n, " to flash out," applied (like tk%
Greek fXiyttr) either to light or sound; in Is.
xliv. 8S, from ^31?, " to make void or foolish "
(payMuW, LXX.); in Zeoh. xii. 4, from Plffl,
"to wander" (fmraait, LXX.). In the N. T.
they are generally used to render ualrttrtai or
porta (as in John x. SO; Acta xxrl. 24; 1 Cor. xrr.
28); but in 2 Pet. ii. 16 the word is waempporia,
and in Luke vi. 11 oVoio- These passages show
that in Scripture " madness " is recognized as a
derangement, proceeding either from weakness and
misdirection of intellect, or from ungovernable
violence of passion ; and in both cases it is spoken
of, sometimes as srising from the vrifl and action
of man himself, sometimes as inflicted judicially by
the hand of God. In one passage alone (John x.
90) is madness ex pres s ly connected with demoniacal
possession, by the Jews in their cavil against our
Lord [see Demoniacs] : in none is it referred to
any physical causes. It will easily be seen bow
entirely this usage of the word is* acoordant to the
general spirit and object of Scripture, in passing
by physical causes, and dwelling on the moral and
spiritual influences, by which men's hearts may be
affected, either from within or from without.
It is well known that among oriental, as among
most semi-civilized nations, madmen were looked
upon with a kind of reverence, as possessed of a
quasi-sacred character. This arises partly no doubt
from the feeling, that one, on whom God's hand is
laid heavily, should be safe from all other harm;
but partly also from the belief that the loss of
reason and self-control opened the mind to super-
natural influence, and gave it therefore a super-
natural saeredness. This belief was strengthened
by the enthusiastic expression of idolatrous worship
(see 1 K. xviii. 26, 28), and (occasionally) of real
inspiration (see 1 Sam. xix. 21-24; comp. the ap-
plication of " mad fellow " in 2 K- ix. 11, and see
Jer. xxix. 96; Acts ii. 18). An illustration of it
may be seen in the record of David's pretended
madness at the court of Aehiah (1 Sam. xxl. IS-
IS), which shows it to be not inconsistent with a
kind of contemptuous forbearance, such as is often
manifested now, especially by the lurks, towards
real or supposed madmen. A. B.
MA'DON (flip [contention, *rtft: Bom.
MooaV; Vat] Mappaw; Alex. MeuW, Mapav [?]:
MaJony, one of the principal cities of Canaan be-
fore the conquest. Its king joined Jabin and his
confederates in their attempt against Joshua at the
waters of Merom, and like the rest was killed (Joah.
xi. 1, xii. 19). No later mention of it ia found,
and beyond the natural inference drawn from its
occurrence with Haeor, Shimron, ete., that it was
in the north of the country, we have no clew to its
position. Sehwars (90) proposes to discover Madon
at Kefr Mania, a village with extensive ancient
remains, at the western end of the Plain of Bvtiauf,
4 or S miles N. of Sepphoris. His grounds for
tld identification are of the slightest: (a) the fre-
• The LXX. kave transUtad she aaaas as If from
ass anas root with the verb wbxih accompanies It —
•IJtftF) 1979, nw» oash ma ax m which they
are MXnred by the Tulfats — but the roots, (hones
shnnar. ass really oasnnet (Baa Qsamius, This. 844 a
846 o.)
* for the chans* of m Into * eomo. """*"""»
Digitized by
Google
1784
MA-BLUS
smart transposition of letters in Arabic, wut (») a
statement of the early Jewish traveller hap-Parchi
(Asher's Bmj. of Twltia, 430), that the Aiaba
identify Safer Meodi with "Mldian," or, at
Sohwara would read it, Hadan. The reader may
judge for himeelf what worth there ie in than
suggestions.
In the LXX. version of 9 Sam. xxi. 90 the He-
brew wordi yVVf tifQi " a man of stature," an
tendered cWhp Ma&tV, '" a man of Madon." Thb
may refer to the town Madon, or may be merely an
instance of the habit which these translators had
of rendering literally in Greek letters Hebrew words
which they did not understand. Other Inrtanm
will be found In 9 K. vi. 8, is. 13, xlL 8, *v. 10,
*c,*c G.
MABTLUS (MoqAot; [V**. MtAnAot:] *K-
ene/ut), for MiAiiut (1 Esdr. ix. 96; eomp. Ear.
I. 95).
• MAGADAN. [Magdala.]
MAG3ISH (Bfrn?S [o gaiktrmg, Gee.]:
May<&lf, [Vat. May*$Ji :] Mtgbu). A proper
name in Kir. ii.«JU, but whether of a man or of a
place is doubted by some; it is probably the latter,
as all the names from Ear. u. 90 to 34, except
EUm and Herim, are names of places. The mean-
ing of the name too, which appears to be " freesuig "
or u congealing,'' seems better suited to a place
than a man. One hundred and fifty-six of its
Inhabitants, called the children of Magbish, are
included in the genealogical roll of Ear. H., bat
have &Bon out bom the parallel passage in Neh.
rii. Maopiash, howerer, is named (Neh. z. 90)
as one of those who sealed to the covenant, where
Anathoth and Nebo (Nebal) also appear in the
midst of proper names of men. Why in these three
eases the names of the places are given instead of
those of the family, or house, or individual, as in
the ease of all the other signatures, it is impossible
to say for certain, though many reasons might be
guessed. From the position of Magbish in the list
in Ear. ii, next to Bethel, Ai, and Nebo, and be-
fore Lod, Hadid, Ono, and Jericho, it would seem
to be in the tribe of Benjamin. A. C H.
MAG/DALA (Mvyo35t><> in MSS. B, D, and
SinaiL — A being defective in this place; but Bee.
Text, MtrvSoAti: Syr. Magahm: Vuhj. Magtdan).
The name Magdala does not really exist in the
Bible. It is found in the received Greek text and
the A. V. of Matt. xv. 80 only; but the chief MSS.
and versions exhibit the name as Magadan.
Into the limits' of Magadan Christ comes by
boat, over the lake of Genneaaret, after his miracle
of feeding the four thousand on the mountain of the
eastern side (Matt. xv. 39); and from thence, after
a short encounter with the Pharisees and Sad-
dueees, He returned in the earns boat to the oppo-
site shore. In the present text of the parallel nar-
rative of St. Mark (viii. 10) we And the " parts
of Dalmanulha," though in the time of Enaebius
a It is sot necessary to do mora than mention the
hypothesis of Brocardns, who Identifies Magadan and
Datmviutba with the well-known circular pool called
Mnala (or, as ha calls It, grala), out of Jauuas, which
ae says Che Saracens call Ma-Dan, or water of Dan.
Bee Broeaidus, Doer. cap. ill.)
* Taipw. Thus the present ^Mt/M— whether
Manvbal with Magadan or Magdala or not — Is aur-
■semaed by ttV Ard d-Mtjdd (YVKeaa, Xnaab, ft. M6>
MAGDALA
end Jerome the twc were in agreenatnt, both read-
j Magadan, as Mark still does in Codex D. The)
place it ■' round Genua " (OmmaMicm, sub voce)
as If the Maoid or Makxd of Maccabees; but
this fa) at variance with the requirements of the
narrative, which indicates a place dote to the watts,
and on its western side. The same, as far as dis-
tance is concerned, may be said of Megiddo — in
its Greek farm, Mageddo, or, a* Josephs*) spalls it,
Magedo — which, as a weft-known locality of Lower
Games, might not unnaturally suggest itself.
Dalmanulha was probably at or near Am tt-Ba-
rioVA, about a mile helow a-Mgdtl, on the western
edge of the lake of Genneaaret. El-Mtjdel in
draibtleai the representative of an ancient MJgdca or
Magdala, possibly that from which St. Mary came.
Her native place waa possibly not far distant from
the Magadan of our Lord's history, and we can
only suppose thai, owing to the familiar recurrence
of toe word Magdalene, the Ices known name waa
absorbed in the better, and Magdala usurped tha
name, and possibly also the positiun of Magadan
At any rate it has prevented any search being;
made for the name, which may very possibly still
be discovered in the country, though so strangely
superseded in the records.'
The Magdala which conferred her name on
"Mary the MagdaVene" (M. 7, MeryBoAnrs;), one
of the numerous Migdok, i. s. towers, which stood
in Palestine — such as the Migual-kl, or tower
of God, in Naphtan, the Migdau-gad and Migdal-
kdab of Judah — was probably the place of that
name which is mentioned in the Jerusalem Talmud
as near Tiberias (Otho, Ltx. Rati. 353; Sehwara,
189), and this again is as probably the modern
tl-Afejdel, "a miserable little Muslim village,"
rather more than an hour, or about three miles,' 1
above Tw&ariyeA, lying on the water's edge at tha
southeast comer of the plain of Genneaaret (Bob.
ii. 308, 897). Professor Stanley's description
seems to embrace every point worth notice. ** Of
all the numerous towns and villages in what most
have been the most thickly peopled district of Pal-
estine one only remains. A collection of a few
hovels stands at the southeast comer of the plain
of Genneaaret, its name hardly altered from the
ancient Magdala or Migdol, eo called probably from
a watch-tower, of which ruins appear to remain,
that guarded the entrance to the plain. Through
its connection with her whom the long opinion of
the church identified with the penitent sinner, the
name of that ancient tower has now been incorpo-
rated into all the languages of Europe. A large
solitary thorn-tree stands beside it. The situation
otherwise unmarked, is dignified by the high lime-
stone rook which overhangs it on the southwest,
perforated with caves; recalling, by a curious though
doubtless unintentional coincidence, the scene of
Correggio'e celebrated picture." These eaves an
said by Schwarx (189) — though on no clear au-
thority — to bear the name of Teliuian, i. e. Tat
manutha. " A clear stream rushes peat the rock
« The original form of the name may have ban
Mlgrou ; at least to we may Infer from tha LXX ver-
sion of Mlgron, which is Magedo or Magdon.
«" The statement of the Talmud la, that a pansa
Pitting by Magdala could hear tha vales of Mae era*
In Tiberias. At three milas distant* this wank)
not be lmpoasiMe in Paleetbw, when sound travels at
a distance fcr greater than to thai country. (See Bat
m. IT J Stanley, 8. ( ». ; Thomson, Land ami R> ak
Digitized by
Google
MAGDIEX,
otto the sea, issuing in a tangled thicket of thorn
and willow from a deep ravine at the back of the
plain " (<S. 4 P. pp 382, 388). Jerome, although be
plays upon the name Magdalene — " reete vocatam
Magdalenen, id eat Turritam, ob ejus dngularem
Bdei ae ardori* constantiam " — doee not appear to
eonnect it with the place in question. By the
Jew* the word NTT3Q is used to denote a person
who platted or twisted hair, a practice then much
in use amongst women of loose character. A cer-
tain u Miriam Magdala " is mentioned by the Tal-
mndiata, who is probably intended for St. Mary.
(See Otho, Lex. Bobb. "Maria;" and Buxtorf,
Lex. Toon, pp. 389, 1449.) Magrialiim is mentioned
as between Tiberias and Capernaum, as early as by
WiDibald, A. o. 783; since that time it U occa-
BMially named by travellers, amongst others Quares-
■nina, JCluadotio, p. 866*; Sir K. Guylforde, Pgigry-
moge ; Breydenbach, p. 29 ; Bonar, Land ofProm-
tse, pp. 483, 434, sod 64S. Buchanan (Oeriool
Furlough, p. 375) describes well the striking view
at* the northern part of the lake which is obtained
from d-Mtjdtl. A ruined site called Om Moghdoia
is pointed out at about 3 hours S. of Jerusalem,
apparently N. W. of Bethlehem (Tobler, 3te Wand.
p- 81). U.B.H.
MAG1)IEL (^735 [H (God) it rowan,
Flint: Bom.] MoyeMA; [Vat] in Chron.
MscUaA; Alex. M«to»«jA, [MsrwtiaA:] Magdiel).
One of the " dukes " of Edom, descended from Esau
(Gen. xxxvi. 43; 1 Chr. i. 64). The name does
not yet appear to have been met with, as borne by
either tribe or place.
* Flint suggests that it may have been the
place of a temple, Identical with the station ad
Diana* (Peutinger's Tab. 9, e.), seven hours
north of Aila [Elate]. H.
MA'GED (Mac A, in both MS8.: Ifageth),
the form in which the name Maked appears in
the A. V. on its second occurrence (1 Mace. v. 36).
* The form Maged seems to have no support
from Greek MSS. Our translators may hare de-
rived it from the Genevan version, where it also
i in ver. 96. A.
MAGI
1735
MAGI (A. V. "wise men:" Kiyof. magi).
H does not foil within the scope of this article to
enter fully into the history of the Magi as an order,
and of the relation in which they stood to the
religion of Zoroaster. Only so for as they come
within the horizon of a student of the Bible, and
present points of contact with it* history and lan-
guage, have they any claim for notice in this place.
As might be expected, where two forms of faith
and national life run on, for a long period, side by
side, each maintaining its distinctness, those point*
■re separated from each other by wide intervals,
and it is hard to treat of them with any apparent
eentinuity. What has to be said will be best
arranged under the four following heads: —
• la the Pahlvi dialect of the Zand, Uogb _ priest
Pa/da, Xttig. VI. Pm. e. 81) j and this Is ooonected by
philologist* with lbs Sanskrit, mahat (gnat), iUyt,
and magna ((tasenlus, ». v. 3Jp ; Anqaoal da Pur-
■en's ZtndavtHa, U. 666). Tbe coincidence of a Seo-
tbit maya, In the sense of •■ illusion, macio," is re-
IsarfcaM* ; bat It Is probable that this, as well as the
as Greek word, la the derived, rather than the ',
m ea ning (oomp. JCuihhoff, rtrgUicJucng atrl
I. The position occupied by the Magi in the hat
toryoftheO. T.
II. Tbe transition -stages in tbe history of tbt
word and of tbe order between the close of the O.
T. and the time of the N. T., so for as they effort
the latter.
Id. Tbe Magi as they appear in tbe N. T.
IT. The later tradition* which have gathered
round the Magi of Matt. ii.
I. In the Hebrew text of the 0. T. the word
occurs but twice, and then only incidentally. In
Jer. xxxix. 3 and 13 we meet, among the Chaldean
officers sent by Nebuchadnezzar to Jerusalem, one
with the name or title of Bab-Mag (^"S']).
This word is interpreted, after the analogy of Kab-
shakeh and Bab-saris, sa equivalent to chief of the
Magi (Ewald, Prophtlm, and Hitzig, i» loc., taking
it as the title of Nergal-Sharezer), and we thus And
both the name and tbe order occupying a conspic-
uous place under tbe government of the Chaldean*
Many question* of some difficulty are suggested by
this fact
Historically the Magi are conspicuous chiefly sa
a Persian religious caste. Herodotus connects them
with another people by reckoning them among the
six tribe* of tbe Medea (i. 101). They appear in
his history of Astyage* as interpreters of dream*
(i. 120), the name having apparently lost its ethno-
logical and acquired a caste significance. But in
Jeremiah they appear at a still earlier period among
tbe retinue of the Chakuean king. The very word
Bab-Mag (if the received etymology of Magi be cor-
rect) presents a hybrid formation. The first sylla-
ble is unquestionably Semitic, the last is all but un-
questionably Aryan." The' problem thus presented
admits of two solutions: (1.) If we believe the
Chaldseans to have been a Hamitic people, closely
connected with the Babylonians [Chaldjcahs],
we must then suppose that the colossal schemes of
greatness which showed themselves in Nebuchad-
nezzar's conquest* led him to gather round him
tbe wise men and religious teacher* of the nations
which he subdued, and that thus the sacred tribe
of tbe Medea rose under his rule to favor and
power. His treatment of those who bore a like
character among the Jews (Dan. i. 4) makes this
hypothesis a natural one; and the alliance which
existed between tbe Medea and the Chaldeans at
the time of the overthrow of the old Assyrian
empire would account for the intermixture of relig-
ious systems belonging to two different races.
(2.) If, on the other hand, with Kenan (Hittoir*
da Languti Semiliqua, pp. 66, 67), following
Lassen and Ritter, we look on the Chaldaeans as
themselves belonging to the Aryan family, and pos-
sessing strong affinities with the Modes, there is
even less difficulty in explaining the presence among
the one people of the religious teacher* of the
other. It is likely enough, in either esse, that the
simpler Median religion which the Magi brought
with them, corresponding more or less closely to
*KK*«,ed Kaltsehmldt, p. 281). Hyde (». «.) nones*
another etymology, givin by Arabian authors, whka
makes the word — cropt-eared (parvu aurihus), but
rejects It Pridesux, on the other hand (Connection,
under *. 0. 622), aooepts It, and seriously conneots It
with the story of the Pseudo-Smerdis wfco had lost hit
ears in Herod. in. 89. Spanhaim (Dub. Kvanr. xvUI.)
•peaks Bbvorably, though not decisively of a Hebrew
etymology.
Digitized by
Google
1786 MAGI
Ik* faith of the Zendaveata, lot tome measure of
lU original purity through this contact with the
darker superstitions of the old Babylonian popula-
tion. From thia time onward it is noticeable that
the namee both of the Magi and Chaldeans an
identified with the astrology, divination, interpreta-
tion of dreams, which had impressed themselves on
the prophets of Israel as the most characteristic
features of the old Babel- religion (Is. xliv. 86, xlvii
18). The Magi took their places among "the as-
trologers and star-gazers and monthly prognostica-
tes!."
It is with such men that we have to think of
Daniel and his fellow-oiks sa associated. They
are described as "ten times wiser than all the
magicians (LXX. ud-yovr ) and astrologers " (Dan.
1.20). Daniel himself so far sympathises with the
order into which he is thus, as it were, enrolled,
as to intercede for them when Nebuchadnesxar
gires the order for their death (Dan. ii. 24), and
accepts an office which, as making him "master
of the magicians, ■ astrologers, Chaldeans, sooth-
sayers" (Dan. v. 11), was probably identical with
that of the Bab-Mag who first came before us.
May we conjecture that he found in the belief
which the Magi had brought with them some ele-
ments of the truth that had been revealed to his
fathers, and that the way was thus prepared
the strong sympathy which showed itself in a
hundred ways when the purest Aryan and the
purest Semitic faiths were brought face to fees with
each other (Dan. vi. 8, 16, 26 ; Est. 1. 1-4; Is. xHv.
88), agreeing as they did in their hatred of idolatry
and in their acknowledgment of the "God of
Heaven"?
The name of the Magi does not meet us in the
Biblical aeoount of the Medo-Persian kings. If,
however, we identify the Artaxerxea who stops the
building of the Temple (Ear. iv. 17-98) with the
Psftido-Smerdis of Herodotus [Artaxkrxks] and
the Gomates of the Behistun inscription, we may
see here also another point of contact The Magian
attempt to rsMseit Median supremacy, and with it
probably a corrupted Chaldaiaed form of Magian-
Istn, in place of the purer faith in Ormuad of which
Cyrus had been the propagator,' would naturally
be accompanied by antagonism to the people whom
the Persians bad protected and supported. The
immediate renewal of the suspended work on the
triumph of Darius (Ear. iv. 84, v. 1, 2, vi. 7, 8)
falls in, it need hardly be added, with this hypoth-
esis. The story of the actual massacre of the
a J'TSlp'Tn 2*1; imorrt.hmoiimriu.fmr, LXX.
e Comp. Sir Henry Bawlinsoo's translation of ths
Behistun inscription : " Ths rites which Oomates'tbe
Uaghm had Introduced I prohibited. I restored to ths
ttats the chants, and ths worship, and to those fcmllteo
which Gomates the Marfan had deprived of them "
Jomnml of Asiatit Soc., voL x., and Blakcalay'a He-
eiotu, Excure. en ill. 74).
e The opinion that Zoroaster (otherwise Zsrdusebt,
or Zarathrust) and his work belonged to the 6th cen-
tury a. o. rests chiefly an the mention in his lift and
In the Zsndavesta of a king Qustarp, who has been
toenailed with Hystatpes, the nvtber of Darius (Hyde,
s. 9* ; Dn Perron, Znunreuia, I. 28J. On ths other
hand, the name of Zoroaster does not appear in any of
me monumental or historical notices of Darius ; and
Baetria, rather than Persia, appears ss ths scene of his
Mors. The Magi, at any rate, appear ss a disUnot or-
t*r, and with a definite nJth, betore this urns ; and hie
sxatk In ralstton tr them, if conte m po r ary wtth Darius,
MAGI
Magi throughout ths dominions of Darius, and at
the commemorative Magopbooia (Herod. UL 7»>
with whatever exaggerations it may be mixed up
indicates in like manner the triumph of the Zoro-
astrian system. If we accept the traditional data
of Zoroaster as a contemporary of Darius, we may
see in the changes which he effected a revival of the
older system. ' It is at any rata striking that the
word Magi does not appear in the Zendaveata, ths
priests being there described aa Atharva (Guardians
of the Fire), and that there are multiplied pro-
hibitions in it of all forms of the magic which, la
the West, and possibly in the East also, took its
name from them, and with which, it would appear
they had already become tainted. All such arts,
auguries, necromancy, and the like, are looked jsj
as evil, and emanating from Ahriman, and are pur-
sued by the hero-king Feridoun with the most per-
sistent hostility (Du Perron, ZsaoVrsesta, voL L
part 9, pp. 968, 484).
The name, however, kept its ground, and with it
probably the order to which it was attached. Under
Xerxes, the Magi occupy a position which indicates
that they had recovered from their temporary de-
pression. They are consulted by him as soothsayers
(Herod, vii. 19), and are aa influential as they had
been in the court of Astyages. Tbey prescribe ths
strange and terrible sacrifices at the Strymon and
the Nine Ways (Herod, vii. 114). They wow said
to have urged the destruction of the temples of
Greece (Cic Dt Lrngg. ii. 10). Traces of their in-
fluence may perhaps be seen in the regard paid by
Mardonins to the oracles of the Greek god that
offered the nearest analogue to their own Mithras
(Herod, viii. 134), and in the like reverence which
had previously been shown by the AfceKoa Datia
towards the island of Deloe (Herod, vi. 97). Thar
come before the Greeks as the representatives of ths
religion of the Persians. Mo sacrifices may be
offered unless one of their order is present chant-
ing the prescribed prayers, as in the ritual of ths
Zendaveata (Herod, i. 182). Mo great change is
traceable in their position during the decline of ths
Persian monarchy. The position of Judsaa as a
Persian province must have kept up some measure
of contact between the two religions systems. Ths
histories of Esther and Mehemiah point to the in-
fluence which might be exercised by members of
the subject-race. It might well be that the relig-
ious minds of the two nations would learn to
respect each other, and that some measure of ths
prophetic hopes of Israel might mingle with ths
must have been that of the restorer rather than the
founder of a system. The hypothesis of two Zors s se a rs
Is hardly mere than an attempt to dfeantaagla the con-
flicting tradition that cluster round the name, so aa
to give some degree of historical ersdluary to seen
group. Mast of these traditions He outside the range
of our present Inquiry, but one or two cams within the
harkna of Biblical legend, If not of Biblical history.
Unable to account for the truth they recognised in his
system, except on the hypothesis that it had been de-
rived from the adth of Israel, Christian and Moham-
siriain writers have seen hi him tbedfntple of owe of
the prophets of the O.T. The leper Oehasi, Barak
the Mend and dlserpte of Jeremiah, same unnamed shv
dole of Kara, — these (wild ss It may sound) have.
each In hk torn, been identified with the Baetram
e. His name will meet us again In coaneetion wtta
the Magi of the H. T. (Hyde, I. c rMdsaux, I
a. 0.621-488:
Digitized by
Google
MAOI
Mfiaf of Uw Magi. As in order they perpetuated
themselves under the Parthian kings. The name
rim to fresh honor under the Sassanidae. The
ehastflcatioq which was ascribed to Zoroaster was
recognized as the basis of a hierarchical system,
after other and lower elements had mingled with
the earlier Dualism, and might be traced even in
the religion and worship of the Parsces. Accord-
ing to this arrangement the Magi were divided —
by a classification which has been compared to that
of bishops, priests, and deacons — into disciples
(Harbeda), teachers (Mobeds ), and the more per-
fect teachers of a higher wisdom (Destor Mobeds).
This, too, will connect itself with a tradition further
on (Hyde, o. 38; Du Perron, Ztndavttta, 11. 688).
II. In the mean time the word was acquiring a
new and wider signification. It presented itself to
the Greeks as connected with a foreign system of
divination, snd the religion of a foe whom they had
conquered, and it soon became a by-word for the
worst form of imposture. The rapid growth of
this feeling is traceable perhaps in the meanings
attached to the word by the two great tragedians.
In .ffiscbylus (Perm, 991) it retains its old sig-
nificance as denoting simply a tribe. In Sophocles
(Oed. Tyr. 887) it appears among the epithets
of reproach which the king heaps upon Tdresias.
The fact, however, that the religion with which
the word was associated still maintained its ground
as the faith of a great nation, kept it from falling
into utter disrepute, and it is interesting to notice
how at one time the good, and at another the bad,
aide of the word is uppermost. Thus the jmytla
of Zoroaster is spoken of with respect by Plato as
a tt&v ttpartla, forming the groundwork of an
education which he praises as far better than that
of the Athenians (Ateib. 1. p. 128 a). Xenophon,
in like manner, idealizes the character and func-
tions of the order (Cyrap. It. 6, § 16; 6, § 6).
Both meanings appear in the later lexicographers.
The word Magos is equivalent to krariaiv xei
Qapftaitfvrbs, but it is also used for the 8nxr»/3))j
teal 9ti\oyot kit! Uptit (Hesych.). The Magi as
an order are ol wopa Tlt/xriut <pt\6<ro<pot *o)
ftKiStoi (Suid.). The word thus passed into the
Mods of the LXX., and from them into those of
the writers of the N. T., oscillating between the
two meanings, capable of being used in either.
The relations which had existed between the Jews
and Persians would perhaps tend to give a promi-
nence to the more favorable associations in their
use of it. In Daniel (i. SO, ii. 3, 10, 37, v. 11) it
is used, as has been noticed, for the priestly diviners
with whom the prophet was associated. Philo, in
like manner ( Quod omnit probut liber, p. 793),
mentions the Magi with warm praise, as men who
gave themselves to the study of nature and the
contemplation of the Divine perfections, worthy of
being the counsellors of kings. It was perhaps
natural that this aspect of the word should com-
mend itself to the theosophic Jew of Alexandria.
There were, however, other influences at work tend-
ing to drag it down. The swarms of impostors
that were to be met with in every part ol the
Soman empire, known aa "Cbaldau," "Mathe-
aatici," and the like, bore this name aha. Their
arts wen "artes magicss." Though philosophers
• The word « Hobed," a contraction of the feller
tern Hafomd, is apparently HenUnal with that which
Wea r s m Omsk as su-ps.
• • Instead of "sorowr," Aets xtll. 8, 8 (A. T.),
MAGI ITS'
and men of letters might recognize the better mean-
ing of which the word was capable (Cic. Oe Mem
i. 33, 41), yet in the language of public document!
and of historians, they were treated as a class al
once hateful and contemptible (Tacit. Ann. i. 33,
ii. 37, xii. 23, •xii. 69), and as such were the victims
of repeated edicts of banishment.
III. We need not wonder, accordingly, to find
that this is the predominant meaning of the word
as it appears in the N. T. The noun and tits
verb derived from it (jtaytia and fiaytia) are used
by St. Luke in describing the impostor, who is
therefore known distinctively as Simon Magus (Acta
viii. 9). Another of the same class (Bar-jesus) is
described (Acts xiii. 8) as having, in his cognomen
PJymas, a title which was equivalent to Magus.*
[Eltkas.]
In one memorable instance, however, the word
retains (probably, at least) its better meaning. In
the Gospel of St. Matthew, written (according tc
the general belief of early Christian writers) for
the Hebrew Christians of Palestine, we find it, not
as embodying the contempt which the frauds of
impostors had brought upon it through the whole
Roman empire, but in the sense which it had had,
of old, as associated with a religion which thty
respected, and an order of which one of their own
prophets had been the head. In spite of Patristic
authorities on the other side, asserting the Mtryoi
4t4 kvaroKAv of Matt ii. 1 to have been sorcerers
whose mysterious knowledge came from below, not
from above, and who were thus translated out of
darkness into light (Just. Martyr, Chrysostom,
Theophylact, in Spanheim, Dab. Etnng. xix. ;
Lightfoot, Har. fteb. in Matt, ii.), we are justified,
not less by the consensus of later interpreters (in-
cluding even Maldonatua) than by the general tenot
of St. Matthew's narrative, in seeing in them men
such ss those that were in the minds of the LXX.
translators of Daniel, and those described by Philo
— at once astronomers and astrologers, but not
mingling any conscious fraud with their efforts
after a higher knowledge. The vagueness of the
description leaves their country undefined', an I
implies that probably the Evangelist himself had
no certain information. The same phrase is used
as in passages where the express object is u> include
a wide range of country (comp. &to IwaroKSr,
Matt viii. 11, xxiv. 27; Luke xiii. 29). Probably
the region chiefly present to the mind of the Pales-
tine Jew would be the tract of country stretching
eastward from the Jordan to the Eaphrates, the
land of "the children of the East" in the early
period of the history of the 0. T. (Gen. xxix. 1 ;
Judg. vi. 3, vii. 13, viii. 10). It should be remem-
bered, however, that the language of the O. T.,
and therefore probably that of St Matthew, in-
cluded under this name countries that lay consid-
erably to the north as well as to the east of Pasts-
tine. Balaam came from " the mountains of the
east," i. e. from Pethor on the Euphrates (Num.
xxiii. 7, xxii. 6). Abraham (or Cyrus?) is the
righteous man raised up " from the east " (Is. xii.
3). The Persian conqueror is called " from the
east, from a far country " (Is. xlri. IX).
We cannot wonder that there should have bean
very varying interpretations, given of words that
payee enooM be rendered MagUn ; lor it Is the man*
uiofenmnil Hue, like Vlymai, and Implies nothing;
tfu pr obrio ns . This Bar-jesus is stigmatised as an tat
pastor ra befog sailed "-a. (use prophet" K
Digitized by
Google
1788
MAGI
allowed so wide a field for conjecture. Some of
Iheee are, for varioua reasons, worth noticing. (1.)
The feeling of some early writer* that the coming
of the wise men wu the fulfillment of the prophecy
which spoke of the gift* of the men of Sbeba and
Seba (Pa. lxxii. 10, 16; comp. Ii. lx. 6) led them
to fix on Arabia aa the country of the Magi (Just.
Martyr, Tertullian, Epiphanius, Cyprian, in Span-
heim, Dab. £vang. L c.),° and they have been
followed by Baronius, Maldonatus, Grotius, and
Lightfoot. (3.) Others hare conjectured Mesopo-
tamia aa the great seat of Chaldean astrology
(Origen, Son. m Mali. vi- and vii.), or Egypt aa
the country in which magic waa moat prevalent
(Meyer, ad foe). (3.) The historical associations
of the word led others again, with greater proba-
bility, to fix on Persia, and to see in these Magi
members of the priestly order, to which the name
of right belonged (Chryaostom, Theophylact, Cal-
vin, Obhausen), while Hyde (Rtl Pen. L c.) sug-
gests Parthia, as being at that time the conspicuous
eastern monarchy in which the Magi were recog-
nized and honored.
It is perhaps a legitimate infer* .e from the
narrative of Matt. ii. that in these Magi we may
recognize, as the Church has done from a very early
period, the first Gentile worshippers of the Christ.
The name, by itself, indeed, applied as it is in Acts
xiii. 8, to a Jewish false prophet, would hardly
prove this; but the distinctive epithet "from the
east " waa probably intended to mark them out aa
different in character and race from the western
Magi, Jews, and others, who swarmed over the
Roman empire. So, when they come to Jerusalem
it is to ask not after " our king " or " the king of
Israel," but, as the men of another race might do,
after " the king of the Jews." The language of
the 0. T. prophets and the traditional interpreta-
tion of it are apparently new things to them.
The narrative of Matt. ii. supplies us with an
outline which we may legitimately endeavor to fill
up, as far as our knowledge enables us, with infer-
ence and illustration.
Some time after the birth of Jesus 6 there ap-
peared among the strangers who visited Jerusalem
these men from the far East. They were not idol-
aters. Their form of worship was looked upon by
the Jews with greater tolerance and sympathy than
that of any other Gentiles (comp. Wisd. xiii. 6, 7).
Whatever may have been their country, their name
indicates that they would be watchers of the stare,
seeking to read in them the destinies of nations.
They say that they have teen a star in which they
recognize such a prognostic. They are sure that
one is born King of the Jews, and they come to
pay their homage. It may have been simply that
the quarter of the heavens in which the atar ap-
peared indicated the direction of Judaea. It may
have been that some form of the prophecy of Ba-
laam that a "star should rise out of Jacob"
a This Is adopted by meet Bomiah Interpreters, and
Is all but authoritatively recognised In the services of
the l»tin Church. Through the whole Octave of the
Bplnnany the ever-recurring antiphon Is, « Beges
fhanis et Insula monera offcrrat Alleluia, Alleluia.
Beges Arabum at 8aba dona adducent. Alleluia, Alle-
luia." — D-rc. Rom. in J$>tpA.
1 The discordant views of eeounentaton and bar-
saotdits Indicate the absence of any trustworthy data.
As shoe of their arrival at Bethlehen has been fixed
to sash ease on grounds so utterly Insufficient, that it
Itetdteteaxamuiatheea. (1.) As m the Obwreh
MAGI
(Num. xxlr. 17) had leeched them, either throng*
the Jews of the Dispersion, or through traditions
running parallel with the O. T., and that thai lad
them to recognize its fulfillment (Origen, c. CeU
i. ; Horn, in Hum. xiii.; but the hypothesis is
neither n ece ss ar y nor satisfactory; comp. Qbcott,
Huktan Ledurtt, p. 77 ). It may have been, lastly,
that the traditional predictions ascribed to their
own prophet Zoroaster, leading them to expect
a succession of three deliverers, two working sa
prophets to reform the world and raise up a king-
dom (Tavernier, Travtb, iv. 8), the third (Zosioab),
the greatest of the three, coming to be the head of
the kingdom, to conquer Ahriman and to raise lea
dead (Du Perron, Ztndav. i. 2, p. 46; Hyde, e. 31)
EUioott, Bulttan Ltd 1. c), and in strange nn-
tastie ways connecting these redeemers with the
seed of Abraham (Tavernier, I c ; and D'Herbelot,
Biblioth. Orient, s. v. " Zerdascht "), had roused
their minds to an attitude of expectancy, and that
their contact with a people cherishing like hopes on
stronger grounds, may have prepared them to sea
In a king of the Jews, the Oshanderbegha (Homo
JlfuncH, Hyde, La.), or the Zoeiosh whom they
expected. In any case they shared the " vetus et
constant opinio " which had spread itself over the
whole East, that the Jews, sa a people, crushed and
broken as they were, were yet destined once again
to give a ruler to the nations. It is not unlikely
that they appeared, occupying the position of Destur-
Mobeds in the later Zoroastrian hierarchy, aa the
representatives of many others who shared the buds
feeling. They came, at any rate, to pay their
homage to the king whose birth was thus indicated,
and with the gold and frankincense and myrrh,
which were the customary gifts of subject nations
(comp. Gen. xliii. 11; Pa. lxxii. 15; 1 K. x. 3, 10;
3 Chr. ix. 34; Cant iii. 6, iv. 14). The arrival of
such a company, bound on so strange an errand,
in the last years of the tyrannous and distrustful
Herod, could hardly fail to attract notice and excite
a people, among whom Messianic expectations had
already begun to show themselves (Luke ii. 35, 38).
" Herod was troubled, and all Jerusalem with him."
The Sanhedrim was convened, and the question
where the Messiah was to be born was formally
placed before them. It was in accordance with tha
subtle, fox-like character of the king that be should
pretend to share the expectations of the people in
order that he might find in what direction they
pointed, and then take whatever steps were neces-
sary to crush them [comp. Hkrod]. The answer
given, based upon the traditional interpretation of
Mic v. 3, that Bethlehem was to be the birthplace
of the Christ, determined the king's plana. Ha
had found out the locality. It remained to deter-
mine the time: with what was probably a teal
belief in astrology, he inquired of them diligently,
when they had first seen the star. If be assumed
that that was contemporaneous with the birth, ha
Calendar, on the twelfth day after the nativity (Baro-
nl is. Ana. I. 9). (2.) At some tune towards tha eloea
of the fbrty days before the Purification (Spanhcam
and Stolberr). (8.) Four months later (Qnswell), on
the hypothesis that they saw the star at the nativity,
and then started on a journey which would take that
time. Or (4) as an inference nan Matt. II. 16, at sons
thus m the second year after the birth of Christ (earn*
gnenhsun, Be*. Same-. I. e.). On the attempt In tad
a chronological datum In the star Itself, emnf Baal
mm But; also Janus Camus, rei. B. a. IfM »
Digitized by
Google
MAGI
maid not be fcr wrong. The Magi accordingly
ire eent on to Bethlehem, as if tbej were but the
forerunner* of the king's own homage. Ai they
journ ey ed they again saw the ttar, which for a
time, it would seem, they had lost light of, and it
guided them on their way. [Comp. Stab in the
East for this and all other questions connected
with it* appearance.] The pressure of the crowds,
which a fortnight, or four months, or well-nigh
two year* before, had driven Mary and Joseph to
the rude stable of the caravanserai of Bethlehem,
had apparently abated, and the Magi entering
"the bouse" (Matt. ii. 11) fell down and paid
their homage and ottered their gift*. Once more
they receive guidance through the channel which
then* work and their studies had made fcmaw to
them. From first to last, in Media, in Babylon,
in Persia, the Magi had been famous as the inter-
preters of dreams. That which they received now
need not have involved a disclosure of the plans of
Herod to them. It was enough that it directed
them to "return to their own country another
way." With this their history, so for as the N. T.
carries us, conies to an end.
It need hardly be said that this part of the
Gospel narrative has had to bear the brunt of the
attacks of a hostile criticism. The omission of all
mention of the Magi in a gospel which enters so
fully into all the circumstances of the infancy of
Christ a* that of St. Luke, and the difficulty of har-
moniaing this incident with those which he narrates,
have been urged as at least throwing suspicion on
what St. Matthew alone has recorded. The ad-
vocate of a "mythical theory" sees in this almost
the strongest confirmation of it (Strauss, Lebtn
Jem, I. p. 372). "There most be prodigies
gathering round the cradle of the infant Christ.
Other heroes and kings had had their stars, and so
mat he. He must receive in his childhood the
homage of the representatives of other races and
creed*. The Cut* recorded lie outside the range of
history, and are not mentioned by any contemporary
historian.'' The answers to these objections may
be briefly stated. (1.) Assuming the central fact
of the early chapters of St- Matthew, no objection
lies against any of it* accessories on the ground of
their being wonderful and improbable. It would
oe in harmony with our expectations that there
should be signs and wonders indicating its presence.
The objection therefore postulate* the absolute in-
credibility of that fact, and begs the point at issue
comp. Trench, Star of the Wit Men, p. 124).
|2.) The question whether this, or any other given
narrative connected with the nativity of Christ,
bears upon it the stamp of a mytfiut, is therefore
one to be determined by its own merit*, on its own
evidence; and then the ease stands thus: A mythi-
cal story is characterised for the most part by a
.hrge admixture of what is wild, poetical, fantastic.
A comparison of Matt. ii. with the Jewish or Mo-
mmraedan legends of a later time, or even with the
Christian mythology which afterwards gathered
a It Is perhaps not right to pan over tb« supposed
testimony of heathen authors. These are found .*),
la the saying of Augustus, recorded by Mecrobf us r* Tt
Is better to be Herod's swine than his son "), as eon-
■arted with the slaughter of a child under two yean
af age. (2.) In the remarkable passage of Cha'cldlus
Omuneiu. w Timaaun, vtl. J 126), alluding to **1* star
•Men had heralded the birth not of a conqueror or
w*T " <v*r , nut «f a divine and rlgtataoas king The
MAGI
1789
round this very chapter, wiU show bow wide is Is*
distance that separates its simple narrative, without
ornament, without exaggeration, from the over
Sowing luxuriance of those figments (comp. IT
below). (S.) The absence of any direct ounfirma.
tory evident* in other writers of the time may be
accounted for, partly at least, by the want of any
full chronicle of the events of the later yean of
Herod. The momentary excitement of the arrival
of such travellers as the Magi, or of the slaughter
of some score of children in a small Jewish town,
would easily be effaced by the more agitating events
that followed [comp. Herod]. The silence of
Josephus is not mora conclusive against this Cast
than it is (assuming the spuriousneas of Ant. xviiL
4, J 8) against the fact of the Crucifixion and the
growth of the sect of the Naxareiiee within the wall*
of Jerusalem. (4.) The more perplexing absence
of all mention of the Magi in St. Luke's Gospel
may yet receive some probable explanation. So
far as we cannot explain it, our ignorance of all, or
nearly all, the circumstances of the composition of
the Gospels i* a sufficient answer. It is, however,
at least possible that St. Luke, knowing that the
tacts related by St- Matthew were already current
among the churches,' 1 sought rather to add what
was not yet recorded. Something too may have
been due to the leading thought* of the two Gospels.
St- Matthew, dwelling chiefly ou the kingly office
of Christ as the Son of David, seizes naturally on
the first recognition of that character by the Magi
of the East (comp. on the fitness of this Mill, Ptm-
thtutic Principle*, p. 375). St. Luke, portraying
the Son of Man in his sympathy with common
men, in his compassion on the poor and humble,
dwells as naturally on the manifestation to the
shepherds on the hills of Bethlehem. It may be
added further, that everything tends to show that
the latter Kvangvlist derived the materials for tins
part of his history much more directly from the
mother of the Lord, or her kindred, than did the
former; and, if so, it is not difficult to understand
how she mi<;ht oome to dwell on that which con-
nected itself at once with the eternal blessedness of
peace, good-will, salvation, rather than on the hom-
age and offerings of strans-ers, which seemed to be
the presage of an earthly kingdom, and had proved
to be the prelude to a life of poverty, and to toe
death upon the cross.
IV. In this instance, as in others, what is told
by the Gospel-writers in plain simple words, has
become the nucleus for a whole cycle of legends. A
Christian mythology has overshadowed that which
itself had nothing in common with it. The lots
of the strange and marvelous, the eager desire to
fill up in detail a narrative which had been left in
outline, and to make ever; detail the representative
of an idea — these, which tend everywhere to the
growth of the mythical element within the region of
history, fixed themselves, naturally enough, precise-
ly on those portions of the life of Christ where the
written records were the least complete. Tbestsgas
tacts of the Qoope, history may have been mixed up
with (1), but the expression of Augustus does not point
to anything beyont, Herod's domestlo tree- lies. The
genuineness of (2) Is questionable ; and both are toe
Mcmte In time to be of any worth as evidence (comp.
W. H. Mill, Fuuhtutie Prinapla, p. 873).
6 It will be noticed that this Is altogether a dlstmet
hypothesis from that which assumes that he had ths
Oeapsl of St. Matthew in its present form bate* haw
Digitized by
Google
1740
MAGI
sf this development present thernserres in regular
succession.
(1. ) The Magi an no longer thought of aa simply
< wiae men," members of a sacred order. The propb-
eeiea of Pa. lxzii.; b. zliz. 7, 23, lz. 16, must be
fulfilled in them, and they become princea (" reg-
uli," TertulL c. Jiui. 9; e. Marc 6). Thia tends
more and more to he the dominant thought. When
the arrival of the Magi, rather than the birth or
the baptism of Christ, as the first of his mighty
works, comes to be looked on as the great Epiphany
of his divine power, the older title of the feast
receives as a synonym, almost as a substitute, that
of the Feast of the Three Kings. (3. ) The number
of the Wise Men, which St. Matthew leaves alto-
gather undefined, was arbitrarily fixed. They were
three (1*0 Magn. Serm. ad Epipk.), because thus
they became a symbol of the mysterious Trinity
(Hilary of Aries), or because- then the number cor-
responded to the threefold gifts, or to the three
parts of the earth, or the three great divisions of
the human race descended from the sons of Noah
(Bede, Dt CollectX (8.) Symbolic meanings were
found for each of the three gift*. The gold they
offered as to a king. With the myrrh they pre-
figured the bitterness of the Passion, the embalm-
ment for the Burial. With the frankincense they
adored the divinity of the Son of God (Suicer, Tht «.
a. t. Mti-yoi; « JBrtv. Rom. in Epiph. passim). (4.)
latter on, in a tradition which, though appearing in
a western writer, is traceable probably to reports
brought back by pilgrims from Italy or the Kast,
the names are added, and Gaspar, Melchior, and
Balthazar, take their place among the objects of
Christian reverence, and are honored as the patron
saints of travellers. The passage from Bede (dt
Collect.) it, in many ways, interesting, and as it is
not commonly quoted by commentators, though
often referred to, it may be worth while to give it. 6
■* Primus dicitur raises Melchior qui senex et canus,
barba prolixa et capillis, aurum obtulit regi Domi-
no. Secundus, nomine Gaspar, juvenia imberbis,
rubicundus, thure, quasi Deo oblatione dignU, Deum
honoravit Tertius fuscus, integre barbatus, Bal-
taaear nomine, per myrrham filium honiinis mori-
turum profeasus." We recognize at once in this
description the received types of the early pictorial
art of Western Europe. It is open to believe that
both the description and the art-types may be
traced to early quast-dramaticjepresentationsof the
facts of the Nativity. In any such representations
names of some kind would become a matter of
necessity, and were probably invented at random,
familiar aa the names given by Bede now are to
oa, there was a time when they had no more au-
thority than Bithisarca, Melchior, and Gathaspar
(Moroni, Dizion. a. v. "Magi"); Magalath, Pan-
MAOI
gahth, Saracen; Appeliiua, America, and Dams*
cus, and a score of others (Spanheim, .Deo. Ewamg
ii. p. S88).o
In the Eastern Church, where, it would saaaa,
there was less desire to find symbolic meanings
than to magnify the circumstances of the history,
the traditions assume a different character. The
Magi arrive at Jerusalem with a retinae of 1000
men, having left behind them, on the further bank
of the Euphrates, an army of 7000 (Jacob. Edesa.
and Bar-hebneus, in Hyde, L c). They have
been led to undertake the journey, not by the star
only, or by expectations which they shared with
Israelites, but by a prophecy of the founder of their
own faith. Zoroaster bad predicted <* that in the
latter days there should be a Mighty One and a
Redeemer, and that his descendants should an the
star which should be the herald of his coming.
According to another legend (Opvt imptrf. in
Matt. ii. apud ChrytctL t vi. ed. Montfaneon) they
came from the remotest East, near the borders of
the ocean. They had been taught to expect the
star by a writing that bore the name of Seth.
That expectation was handed down from father to
son. Twelve of the holiest of them were appointed
to be ever on the watch. Their post of observation
was a rock known as the Mount of V ictory. Night
by night they washed in pure water, and prayed,
and looked out on the heavens. At hut the star
appeared, and in it the form of a young child bear-
ing a cross. A voice came from it and bade them
proceed to Judesa. Tbey started on their two yean'
journey, and during all that time the meat and the
drink with which tbey started never failed them.
The gifts they bring are those which Abraham gam
to their progenitors the sous of Keturah (this, of
course, on the hypothesis that they were Arabians),
which the queen of Shebahad in her turn pi (suited
to Solomon, and which had found their way back
again to the children of the East (Epiphan. m Comp.
Doctr. in Moroni, Dubm. 1. c). They return from
Bethlehem to their own country, and give them-
selves up to a life of contemplation and prayer.
When the Twelve Apostles leave Jerusalem to carry
on their work aa preachers, St. Thomas finds them
in Parthia. They offer themselves for baptism, and
become evangelists of the new faith ( Opm imptrf.
in Matt. ii. I c). The pilgrim-feeling of the 4th
century includes them also within its range.
Among other relics supplied to meet the demands
of the market which the devotion of Helens bad
created, the bodies of the Magi are discovered some-
where in the East, are brought to Constantinople,
and placed in the great church which, aa the
Mosque of St Sophia, still bears in its name the
witness of its original dedication to the Divine
Wisdom. The favor with which the people of
a This was the prevalent interpretation : but others
read the symbols differently, and with coarser Ming.
The gold helped the poverty of the Holy Family . The
Incense remedied the noisome air of the stable. The
myrrh was used, It was said, to give strength and
■rmness to the bodies of new-bom Infants (Snker,
<■«.).
& The treatise De CoUtetaneu Is In fact a miscel-
laneous collection of memoranda In the form of ques-
tion and answer. The desire to find names for those
who have none given them Is very noticeable m other
Instances as well as In that of the Magi : t. j., he gives
moss of the penitent and Impenitent thief. The pas-
saga quoted In Hie text Is followed by a description of
Mr d i sss, taken obviously either from some early
painting, or from the decorations of a miracle- play
(comp. the account of such a performance m Trench,
Star of Me "TTje Mm, p. 70). The account of the
offerings, it will be noticed, does not agree with the
traditional hexameter of the latin Church : —
M Gasper flirt tnjrrham, thus Melchior, Bslthueu- una."
° Hyde quotes from Bar Bahlul the names of the
thirteen who appear In the Xastem traditions. The
three which the legends of the West have made f
are not among them.
* " Vos antem, O 8111 met, ante omasa gn
ejus perceptmi estis " (Abulpharfgtas, Dywmtt. IM
in Hyde, c 81).
Digitized by
Google
MAGIC, MAGICIANS
Milan had motived tin emperor's prefect Eustorglas
■died for some special mark of favor, and on his
sonsecration as bishop of that city, he obtained for
it the privilege of being the resting-place of the
precious relics. There the fame of the three kings
increased. • The prominence given to all the feasts
oonnected with the season of the Nativity — the
transfer to that season of the mirth and joy of the
old Saturnalia — the setting apart of a distinct day
for the commemoration of the Epiphany in the 4th
century • — all this added to the veneration with
which they were regarded. When Milan fell into
the hands of Frederick Barbarossa (a. d. 1163) the
influence of the archbishop of Cologne prevailed on
the Emperor to transfer them to that city. The
Milanese, at a later period, consoled themselves by
forming a special confraternity for perpetuating
their veneration for the Magi by the annual per-
formance of a " Mystery " (Moroni, i c); but the
glory of possessing the relics of the first Gentile
worshippers of Christ remained with Cologne. 6 In
that proud cathedral which is the glory of Teutonic
art the shrine of the Three Kings has, for six cen-
turies, been shown as the greatest of its many
treasures. The tabernacle in which the bones of
some whose real name and history are lost forever
lie enshrined in honor, bears witness, in its gold
and gems, to the faith with which the story of the
wanderings of the Three Kings has been received.
The reverence has sometimes taken stranger and
more grotesque forms. As the patron- saints of
travellers they have given a name to the inns of
earlier or later date. The names of Melchior, Gas-
par, and Balthasar were used as a charm against
attacks of epilepsy (Spanheini, Dub. t'vang. xxi.).
Comp., in addition to authorities already cited,
Trench, Star of the Wise Men ; J. F. Miiller, in
Herxog's Reai-EncykL, s. v. " Magi; " Triebel, De
Magi* adoenient, and Miegius, De Stella, etc., in
CriL Sacri, Thee. Nov. ii. Ill, 118; Stolberg,
DitterU it Magi* ; and Bhoden, De primit Sabe.
teneraL, in CrU. Sacri, Tka. TktoL Phil ii. 69.
[On the Magi and on Magism among the Baby-
lonians, see especially Kawlineon's Ancient Mon-
archic*, iii. 125-136; among the Medea, iota', in.
U8 ft".; among the Persians, ibid. iv. 391-395.—
On the representations of the Magi (the Three
Kings) in works of art, and the legends concerning
them, see Mrs. Jameson's Legend* of the Madonna,
3d ed., pp. 210-323. — H-l E. H. P.
MAGIC, MAGICIANS. The magical art*
spoken of in the Bible are those practiced by the
Egyptians, the Canaanites, and their neighbors,
the Hebrews, the Chaldeans, and probably the
Greeks. We therefore begin this article with an
endeavor to state the position of magic in relation
to religion and philosophy with the several noes of
mankind.
The degree of the civilisation of a nation is not
the measure of the importance of magic in its con-
victions. The natural features of a country are
not the primary causes of what is termed super-
stition in ita inhabitants. With nations as with
s»en, — ami the analogy of Plato in the " Republio "
is not always false, — the feelings on which magic
• The institution of the Feast of the Three I"rujs Is
tagrwed to Pope Julio*. A. o. 886 (Moroni, Dixion
•.)■
• for the later meaueval developments of me tra-
vnons. comp. Joan, von Hllaashdm in f^uaUriy S*v.
«xvu». p. 438.
MAGIC, MAGICIANS 1741
fixes its bold an essential to the mental oonstita
tioo. Contrary as are these assertions to the com-
mon opinions of our time, inductive reasoning for-
bids our doubting them.
With the lowest race magic is the chief part of
religion. The Nigritians, or blacks of this race,
show this in their extreme use of amulets and tbeil
worship of objects which have no other value in
their eyes but as having a supposed magical char-
acter through the influence of supernatural agents.
With the Turanians, or corresponding whites of
the same great family, — we use the word whit*
for a group of nations mainly yellow, in contra-
distinction to black, — incantations and witchcraft
occupy the same place, shamanism characterizing
their tribes in both hemispheres. In the days of
Herodotus the distinction in this matter between
the Nigritians and the Caucasian population of
North Africa was what it now is. in his remark-
able account of the journey of the Naeamonian
yonng men, — the Nasamones, be it remembered,
were " a Libyan race" and dwellers on the north-
ern coast, as the historian here says, — we are told
that the adventurers paused through the inhabited
maritime region, and the tract occupied by wild
beasts, and the desert, and at last came upon a
plain with trees, where they were seized by men
of small stature who carried them across marshes
to a town of such men black in complexion. A great
river, running from west to east and containing
crocodiles, flowed by that town, and all that nation
were sorcerers («i rolls otVoi InrUovro Mpehrovi,
yinrea that rdVru, u. 32, 33). It little matters
whether the conjecture that the great river was tha
Niger be true, which the idea adopted by Herod-
otus that it was the Upper Nile seems to favor: •
it is quite evident that the Nasamones came upon
a nation of Nigritians beyond the Great Desert and
were struck with their fetishism. So, in our own
days, the traveller is astonished at the height to
which this superstition is carried among the Nigri-
tians, who have no religious practices that are not
of the nature of sorcery, nor any priests who are
not magicians, and magicians alone. The strength
of this belief in magic in these two great divisions
of the lowest race is shown in the case of each by
its having maintained ita bold in an instance in
which its tenacity must have been severely tried.
The ancient Egyptians snow their partly-Nigritian
origin not alone in their physical characteristics
and language but in their religion. They retained
the strange low nature-worship of the Nigritians,
forcibly combining it with more intellectual kinds
of belief, as they represented their gods with tha
heads of animals and the bodies of men, and even
connecting it with truths which point to a primeval
revelation. The Ritual, which was the great treas-
ury of Egyptian belief and explained the means
of gaining future happiness, is full of charms to be
said, and contains directions for making and for
using amulets. As the Nigritian goes on a journey
hung about with amulets, so amulets were placed
on the Egyptian's embalmed body, and his soul
went on ita mysterious way fortified with incanta-
tions learnt while on earth. In China, although
• It Is perhaps worthy of note that Jtscbjlus
the Upper Nile mrapoi Aifto^r, as though the
SthJopUo river (rreas. Timet. 809 ; corns. Sola.
80).
Digitized by
Google
1742 MAGIC, MAGICIANS
Buddhism has established itself, and the system
•f Confucius hu gained the power its potitiTism
would insure it w ; tb a highly-educated people of
low type, another belief still maintains itself
which there is strong reason to hold to be older
than the other two, although it is usually supposed
to have been of the same age as Confucianism ; in
this religion magic is of the highest importance,
the distinguishing characteristic by which it is
known.
With the Shemites magic takes a lower place.
Nowhere is it even part of religion ; yet it is looked
upon as a powerful engine, and generally unlawful
or lawful according to the aid invoked. Among
many of the Sheiuitic peoples there linger the
remnants of a primitive fetishism. Sacred trees
and stones are reverenced from an old superstition,
of which they do not always know the meaning,
derived from the nations whose place they have
taken. Thus fetishism remains, although in a kind
of fossil state. The importance of astrology with
the Shemites has tended to raise the character of
their magic, which deals rather with the discovery
of supposed existing influences than with the pro-
duction of new influences. The only direct asso-
ciation of magic with religion is where the priests,
as the educated class, have taken the functions of
magicians ; but this is far different from the case
of toe Nigritians, where the magicians are the only
priests. The Shemites, however, when depending
on human reason alone, seem never to have doubted
the efficacy of magical arts, yet recourse to their
aid was not usually with them the first idea of a
man in doubt Though the case of Saul cannot be
taken as applying to the whole race, yet, even with
the heathen Shemites, prayers must have been held
to be of more value than incantations.
The Iranians assign to magic a still leas impor-
tant position. It can scarcely be traced in the relics
of old nature- worship, which they with greater skill
than the Egyptians interwove with their more in-
tellectual beliefs, as the Greeks gave the objects of
reverence in Arcadia and Crete a place in poetical
myths, and the Scandinavians animated the hard
remains of primitive superstition. The character
of the ancient belief is utterly gone with the as-
signing of new reasons for the reverenoe of its sacred
objects. Magic always maintained some hold on
men's minds; but the stronger intellects despised
it, like the Roman commander who threw the sa-
cred chickens overboard, and the Greek who defied
an adverse omen at the beginning of a great battle.
When any, oppressed by the sight of the calam-
ities of mankind, sought to resolve the mysterious
problem, they fixed, like iEechylus, not upon the
ihildish notion of a chance-government by many
■onflicting agencies, but upon the nobler idea of a
dominating fate. Hen of highly sensitive temper-
aments have always inclined to a belief in magic,
and there has therefore been a section of Iranian
philosophers in all agea who have paid attention to
til practice; hut, expelled from religion, it has held
bat a low and precarious place in philosophy.
The Heorews had no magic of their own. It
was so strictly forbidden by the Law that it could
sever afterwards have had any recognized exist-
<noe, save in times of general heresy or apostasy,
and the same was doubtless the case in the patri-
trekal ages. The magical practices which obtained
a Th* 118th chapter of the Kur-an was written
than Mohammad believed that the
MAGIC, MAGICIANS
among the Hebrews were therefore borrowed frost
the nations around. The hold they gained was
such as we should have expected with a Shemite
race, making allowance for the discredit throws
upon them by the prohibitions of the Law. From
the first entrance into the land of Promise until the
destruction of Jerusalem we have constant glimpses
of magic practiced in secret, or resorted to, not
alone by the common but also by the great 11m
Talmud abounds in notices of contemporary magic
among the Jews, showing that it survived idolatry
notwithstanding their original connection, and was
supposed to produce real effects. The Kur-an in
like manner treats charms and incantations as
capable of producing evil consequences when used
against a man.' It is a distinctive characteristie
of the Bible that from first to last it warrants no
such trust or dread. In the Psalms, the most per-
sonal of all the books of Scripture, there Is na
prayer to be protected against magical influences.
The believer prays to be delivered from every kind
of evil that could hurt the body or the soul, but
he says nothing of the machinations of sorcerers.
Here and everywhere magic is passed by, or if
mentioned, mentioned only to be condemned (oomp.
Ps. cvi. 88). Let those who affirm that they see
in the Psalms merely human piety, and in Job and
Ecclesiastes merely human philosophy, explain the
absence in them, and throughout the Scriptures, of
the expression of superstitious feelings that an in-
herent in the Shemite mind. Let them explain the
luxuriant growth in the after-literature of the He-
brews and Arabs, and notably in the Talmud and
the Kur-an, of these feelings with no root in those
older writings from which that after-literature was
derived. If the Bible, the Talmud, and the Kur-an,
be but several expressions of the Shemite mind,
differing only through the effect of time, how can
this contrast be accounted for? — the very opposite
of what obtains elsewhere; for superstitions an
generally strongest in the earlier literature of a nee,
and gradually fade, excepting a condition of barba-
rism restore their vigor. Those who see in the Bible
a Divine work can understand how a God-taught
preacher could throw aside the miserable fears of
his race, and boldly tell man to trust in his Maker
alone. Here, as in all matters, the history of the
Bible confirms its doctrine. In the doctrinal Scrip-
tures msgic is passed by with contempt, in the his-
torical Scriptures the reasonableness of this con-
tempt is shown. Whenever the practicers of magio
attempt to combat the servants of God, they con-
spicuously fail Pharaoh's magicians bow to the
Divine power shown in the wonders wrought by
Moses and Aaron. Balaam, the great enchanter,
comes from afar to curse Israel and is forced to
bless them.
In examining the mentions of magic in the
Bible, we must keep in view the curious inquiry
whether then be any reality in the ark We
would at the outset protest against the idea, once
very prevalent, that the conviction that the seen
and unseen worlds were often more manifestly in
contact in the Biblical ages than now necessitates a
belief in the reality of the magio spoken of in the
Scriptures. We do indeed see a connection of s
supernatural agency with magio in such a case as
that of the damsel possessed with a spirit of divina-
tion mentioned in the Acts; yet there the I
of certain persons bad I
atad ban with n kind w
Digitized by
Google
MAGIC, MAGICIANS
appear* to have been involuntary in the damsel,
■nd shrewdly made profitable by her employers.
This does not establish the possibility of man being
able at his will to use supernatural powers to gain
hi* nwn ends, which is what magic has always pre-
tended to accomplish. Thus much we premise,
lest we should be thought to bold latitudinarian
opinions because we treat the reality of magic as
an open question.
Without losing sight of the distinctions we have
drawn between the magic of different races, we shall
consider the notices of the subject in the Bible in
the order in which they occur. It is impossible in
every case to assign the magical practice spoken of
to a particular nation, or, when this can be done, to
determine whether it be native or borrowed, and
the general absence of details renders any other
system of classification liable to error.
The theft and carrying away of Laban's tera-
phim (a^BTT)) by Rachel seems to indicate the
practice of magic in Padan-aram at this early time.
It appears that l-aban attached great value to these
objects, from what he said as to the theft, and his
determined search for them (Gen. mi. 19, 80,
89-35). It may be supposed from the manner in
whkh they were hidden that these teraphim were
not very small. The most important point is that
Laban calls them his "gods" (ibid. 30, 32),
although he was not without belief in the true God
(24, 49-53); for this makes it almost certain that
we have here not an indication of the worship of
strange gods, but the first notice of a superstition
that afterwards obtained among those Israelites who
added corrupt practices to the true religion. 11 The
derivation of the name teraphim is extremely ob-
scure. Geseniiu takes it from an " unused " root,
11^1 wn feh he supposes, from the Arabic, prob-
ably signified "to live pleasantly" (Thet. s. v.).
It may, however, be reasonably conjectured that
such a root would have had, if not in Hebrew, in
the language whence the Hebrews took it or its
derivative, the proper meaning "to dance," cor-
responding to this, which would then be its tropical
meaning.* We should prefer, if no other deriva-
tion be found, to suppose that the name teraphim
might mean "dancers" or " causers of dancing,"
with reference either to primitive nature-worship '
a Laban's expression In Gen. xxx. 27, "I have
I " (VlBJna), may refer to divination ; but
ikas it more nasonable not to take it in
a UUnl anus.
'The Arable root
*v
certainly means "he
•bounded In the comforts of life," and the like, bnt
lb* corresponding ancient Egyptian word TBECF or
TftaV, '< to danoa," suggests that this Is a troptoal
signification, especially as in the Indo-European lan-
guages, If our « to trip" preserve the proper sense and
the Sanskrit trip and the Greek rip™ the tropical
ssnas of the root, we have the same word with the
two meanings. We believe also that. In point or age,
precedence should be given to the ancient Egyptian
word before the Semitic, and that In the former Ian-
page an objective sense Is always the proper sensa
■d a subjective the tropical, when a word is used in
«6ch significations. We think that this prlodplo U
squally true of the Semitic group, although It may
as contested with reaVrevos to the Indo-JCuropsau
MAGIC, MAGICIANS 1748
or its magical rites of the character of shamanism
rather than that it signifies, as Gesenius suggest*
" givers of pleasant life." ' There seems, however,
to be a cognate word, unconnected with the " un-
used " root just mentioned, in ancient Egyptian,
whence we may obtain a conjectu**! derivation.
We do not of course trace the worship uf teraphim
to the sojourn in Egypt. They were probably those
objects of the pre-Abrahamite idolatry, put away
by order of Jacob (Gen. xxxv. 2-4), jet retained
even in Joshua's time (Josh. xxiv. 14); and, if so,
notwithstanding his exhortation, abandoned only
for a space (Judg. xvii., xviii.); and they were also
known to the Babylonians, being used by them for
divination (Ex. xxi. 21). But there is great reason
for supposing a close connection between the oldest
language and religion of Chakuea, and the indent
Egyptian language and religion. The Egyptian
word TER signifies "a shape, type, transforma-
tion," <* and has for its determinative a mummy:
it is uaed in the Ritual, where the various transfor-
mations of the deceased in Hades are described
(TvdUnlmeh, ed. Lepsius, ch. 78 ff.). The small
mummy-shaped figure, SHEBTEE, usually made
of baked clay covered with a blue vitreous varnish,
representing the Egyptian as deceased, is of a na-
ture connecting it with magic, since it was made
with the idea that it secured benefits in Hades;
and it is connected with the word TER, for It
represents a mummy, the determinative of that
word, and was considered to be of use in the state
in which the deceased passed through transforma-
tions, TERU. The difficulty which forbids our
doing more than conjecture a relation between
TER and teraphim is the want in the former of
the third radical of the latter; and in our present
state of ignorance respecting the ancient Egyptian
and the primitive language of Chaldea in their
verbal relations to the Semitic family it is impos-
sible to say whether it is likely to be explained.
The possible connection with the Egyptian religious
magic is, however, not to be slighted, especially as
it is not improbable that the household idolatry
of the Hebrews was ancestral worship, and the
SHEBTEE was the image of a deceased man or
woman, as a mummy, and therefore as an Osiris,
bearing the insignia of that divinity, and so in •
manner as a deified dead person, although we do
not know that it was used in the ancestral worship
c In the fragments ascribed to Sanchonlatho, which,
whatever their age an*i author, cannot be doubted to
be genuine, the Bartulla are characterised In a nm,w—
that Illustrates this supposition. The Bastulla, It most
be remembered, were seared stones, the reverenos of
which In Syria in the historical times was a relic at
the early low nature-worship with which fetUhlsm or
shamanism is now everywhere associated. The words
used, 'Emporia* ftroc Ovparb- BcurvAja. KiBovs 4p^i vovf
pijxai'vffapfvoc (Cory. Ane. Frcg. p. 12), cannot be held
to mean more than that UranUM '■ontxived living stones,
but the idea of contriving and the term " living " Imply
motion In these stones.
d Egyp'-'ogiats nave generally read this word TIB.
Mr. Birch, however, mads It RHBP3B. (SHEPXR accord-
ing to the writer's system of transcription). The bal
ance is decided by the discover} of the Coptic equiva-
lent TOT, " bmuamuttre," In which the absence
of the final B la explained by a peotllar bnt regular
modification which the writer was the ArsT to potaf
out (ilnaoGjrvHios Jmcycfepw&o AioaaiM Me, e*
P-42W.
Digitized by
Google
if 44 MAGIC, MAGICIANS
of the Egyptians. It is important to notice that
no singular la found of the word teraphim, and
2iat the plural form la once used where only one
statue seems to be meant (1 Sam. xix. 13, 16): in
thia cue it may be a " plural of excellence." If
the latter inference be true, thia word must hare
become thoroughly Setniticuted. There ia no de-
scription of these images; but from the account
of Hichal'a stratagem to deceive Saul's messengers,
it is evident, if only one image be there meant, as
ia very probable, that they were at least sometimes
of the size of a man, and perhaps in the head and
shoulders, if not lower, of human shape, or of a
similar form (Id. 13-16).
The worship or use of teraphim after the occu-
pation of the Promised Land cannot be doubted
to have been one of the corrupt practices of those
Hebrews who leant to idolatry, but did not abandon
their belief in the God of Israel Although the
Scriptures draw no marked distinction between
those who forsook their religion and those who
added to it such corruptions, it is evident that the
latter always professed to be orthodox. Teraphim
therefore cannot be regarded as among the Hebrews
necessarily connected with strange gods, whatever
may have been the case with other nations. The
account of Micah's Images in the Book of Judges,
compared with a passage in Hoses, shows our con-
clusion to be correct. In the earliest days of the
occupation of the Promised Land, in the time of
anarchy that followed Joshua's rule, Micah, " a
man of Mount Ephraim," made certain images and
other objects of heretical worship, which were stolen
from him by those Danites who took Laish and
called it Das, there setting up idolatry, where it
continued the whole time that the ark was at
Shiloh, the priests retaining their post " until the
day of the captivity of the land " (Judg. xvii.,
xviii., esp. 30, 31). Probably thia worship was
somewhat changed, although not in its essential
character, when Jeroboam set up the golden calf at
Dan. Micah's idolatrous objects were a graven
Image, a molten image, an ephod, and teraphim
(xvii. 3, 4, 5, xviii. IT, 18, SO). In Hosea there
is a retrospect of this period where the prophet
takes a harlot, and commands her to be faithful to
him "many days." It is added: "For the chil-
dren of Israel shall abide many days without a
king, and without a prince, and without a sacrifice,
<nd without an image [or "pillar," H^BIJ], and
rithout an ephod, and teraphim: afterward shall
he children of Israel return, and seek Jehovah
their God, and David their king; and shall fear
Jehovah and His goodness in the latter days " (iii.
esp. 4, 5). The apostate people are long to be
without their spurious king and false worship, and
in the end are to return to their loyalty to the
nouse of David and their faith in the true God.
rhat Dan should be connected with Jeroboam
"who made Israel to sin," and with the kingdom
which he founded, is most natural; and it is there-
fore worthy of note that the images, ephod, and
jeraphim made by Micah and stolen and set up by
the Danites at Dan should so nearly correspond
with the objects spoken of by the prophet. It has
been imagined that the use of teraphim and the
a Kallsehi in bis Commttilaiy <m Gtnrsit (pp 538,
184), eonsklare the use of tenphlm as a comparatively
aaniims form of Idolatry, and explains the passage
hi Bssaa quoted abova as mining that the Israelites
MAGIC, MAGICIANS
similar abominations of the heretical Israelites an
not so strongly condemned in the Scriptures aa the
worship of strange gods. This mistake arises from
the mention of pious kings who did not sup p ress
the high places, which proves only their timidity,
and not any lesser «inft,ln— » m the spurious religion
than in false systems borrowed from the peoples of
Canaan and neighboring countries. The cruel rite*
of the heathen are indeed especially reprobated, but
the heresy of the Israelites is too emphatically de-
nounced, by Samuel in a passage to be soon exam-
ined, and in the reported condemnation of Jeroboan
the son of Nebat " wno made Israel to sill,'' for it
to be possible that we should take a view of it eoa-
slstent only with modern sophistry."
We pass to the magical use of teraphim. By the
Israelites they were consulted for oracular answers.
This was apparently done by the Danibs who
asked Micah's Levite to inquire as to the success
of their spying expedition (Jndg. xviii. 5, 8). In
later times this is distinctly stated of the Israelites
where Zechariah says, " For the teraphim have
spoken vanity, and the diviners have seen a lie, and
have told false dreams " (x. S). It cannot be sup-
posed that, as this first positive mention of the use
of teraphim for divination by the Israelites is after
the return from Babylon, and as that use obtained
with the Babylonians in the time of Nebuchadnas-
xar, therefore the Israelites borrowed it from their
conquerors; for these objects are mentioned in
earlier places in such a manner that their connec-
tion with divination must be intended, if we bear
mind that this connection is undoubted in a
subsequent period. Samuel's reproof of Saul for
his disobedience in the matter of Aroalrk, asso-
ciates "divination" with "vanity," or "idols "
O.lfc}), and " teraphim," however we render tha
difficult passage where these words occur (1 Sans
xr. 22, 33). (The word rendered "vanity," ,!><,
ia especially used with reference to idols, and even
in some places stands alone for an idol or idols.)
When Saul, having put to death the workers in
black arts, finding himself rejected of God in bis
extremity, sought the witch of Endor, and asked
to see Samuel, the prophet's apparition denounced
his doom as the punishment of this very disobedi-
enoe as to Amalek. The reproof would seem,
therefore, to have been a prophecy that the self-
confident king would at the last alienate himself
from God, and take "efuge in the very abominations
he despised. This apparent reference tends to coo-
firm the inferenoe we have indicated. As to a later
time, when Josiat's reform is related, he is said to
have put away " the wizards, and the teraphim,
and the idols " (3 K. xxiii. 24) ; where the mention
of the teraphim immediately after the wizards,
and as distinct from the idols, seems to favor the
inferenoe that they are spoken of as objects used in
divination.
The only account of the act of divining by tera-
phim is in a remarkable passage of Eztkiel relating
to Nebuchadnezzar's advance against Jerusalem.
" Abo, thou son of man, appoint thee two ways,
that the sword of the king of Babylon may coma:
both twain [two swords] shall come forth out of
should be dsprlvad not alona of true raUgkm, bat
even of the nsonree of their mild household sasar
rttttoM. Be thus entirely misses the sense of ate
and makes th* Bible oontradlrtorjr.
Digitized by
Google
MAGIC
ma land : and choose thou a place, ohoon [it] at
the head of the way to the city. Appoint a way,
that the sword may come to Rabbath of the Am-
monites, and to Judah in Jerusalem the defonced.
For the king of Babylon stood at the parting of the
way, at the head of the two ways, to use divina-
tion : he shuffled arrows, he consulted with teraphiui,
he looked in the liver. At his right hand was the
divination for Jerusalem " (xxi. 19-22). The men-
tion together of consulting teraphim and looking
into the liver, may not indicate that the victim was
ofisred to teraphim and its liver then looked into,
but may mean two separate acts of divining. That
the former is the riant explanation seems, however,
probable from a comparison with the LXX. ren-
dering of the account of Michel's stratagem."
Perhaps Michal had been divining, and on the
Mining of the messengers seised the image and
liver and hastily put them in the bed. — The ao-
oonnta which the Rabbins give of divining by tera-
phim are worthless.
Before speaking of the notices of the Egyptian
magicians in Genesis and Exodus, there is one
passage that may be examined out of the regular
order. Joseph, when his brethren left after their
second visit to buy corn, ordered his steward to
hide his silver cup in Benjamin's sack, and after-
wards sent him after them, ordering him to claim
it, thus: " [Is] not this [it] in which my lord
drinketh, and whereby indeed he divineth ? " * (Gen.
xliv. 5). The meaning of the latter clause has
been contested, Gesenius translating, " he could
surely foresee it " (ap. Barrett, Synopsis, in foe.),
but the other rendering seems far more probable,
especially as we read that Joseph afterwards said
to his brethren, " Wot ye not that such a man as
I can certainly divine?" (xliv. IS), — the same
word being used. If so, the reference would prob-
ably be to the use of the cup in divining, and we
should have to infer that here Joseph was acting
on bis own judgment [Joseph], divination being
not alone doubtless a forbidden act, but one of
which he when called before Pharaoh had distinctly
disclaimed the practice. Two uses of cups or the
like for magical purposes have obtained in the East
from ancient times. In one use either the cup
Itself bears engraved inscriptions, supposed to have
a magical influence, 11 or it is plain and such in-
scriptions are written on its inner surface in ink.
In both cases water poured into the cup is drunk
by those wishing to derive benefit, as, for instance,
.he cure of diseases, from the inscriptions, which,
if written, are dissolved. 1 ' This use, in both its
forms, obtains among the Arabs in the present day,
and cups bearing Chaldsean inscriptions in ink have
MAGIO
1746
a The Mworetic text reads, « And Michal took the
tamphlm, and laid [ltj upon the bad, and the mattress
( ?T*5?) of ihe-goata [or goats' hair] she pot at Its
.Mad, and she corered [it] with a cloth " [or garment]
(1 Bam. six. 13). The LXX. has « the lirer of goats,"
batlug apparently found 1^? iMtead °f *T^335.
(Kai iXo&tv if McAgoA tA mporttyta, vol «0fro M *4jr
•tAunjv, Mai ^irap rity oiyitv SBtro woo. M^aAijf avTOv,
sal tdoAtfsffvi' aura IfJATitf,)
» 'la era* arria.
<* Ttw modem Persians apply the word Jam, signi-
fying a enp, mirror, or even globs, to magical vemels
ef this kind, and relate marvels of two which they say
I to their ancient king Jenuhesd a 1 to A-ex-
110
been discovered by Mr. Layard, and probably show
that this practice existed among the Jews in Baby-
lonia in about the 7th century of the Christian era.'
In the other use the cup or bowl was of very sec-
ondary importance. It was merely the receptacle
for water, in which, after the performance of
magical rites, a boy looked to see what the magician
desired. This is precisely the same as the practice
of the modem Egyptian magicians, where the dif-
ference that ink is employed and is poured into the
palm of the boy's hand is merely accidental. A
Gnostic papyrus in Greek, written in Egypt in the
earlier centuries of the Christian era, now preserved
in the British Museum, describes the practice of
the boy with a bowl, and alleges results strikingly
similar to the alleged result* of the well-known
modern Egyptian magician, whose divination would
seem, therefore, to be a relic of the famous magio
of ancient Egypt./ As this latter use only is
of the nature of divination, it is probable that to
it Joseph referred. The practice may have been
prevalent in his time, and hieroglyphic inscriptions
upon the bowl may have given color to the idea
that it had magical properties, and perhaps even
that it had thus led to the discovery of it* place of
concealment, a discovery which must have struck
Joseph's brethren with the utmost astonishment.
The magicians of Egypt are spoken of as a class
in the histories of Joseph and Moses. When
Pharaoh's officers were troubled by their dreams,
being in prison they were at a loss for an inter-
preter. Before Joseph explained the dreams he
disclaimed the power of interpreting save by the
Divine aid, saying, " [Do] not interpretations
[belong] to God? tell me [them], I pray you"
(Gen. xl. 8). Iu like manner when Pharaoh had
his two dreams we find that he had recourse to
those who professed to interpret dreams. We read :
" He sent and called for all the scribes of Egypt,
and all the wise men thereof: and Pharaoh told
them his dream ; but [there was] none that could
interpret them unto Pharaoh " (xli. 8 : conip. ver.
24). Joseph, being sent for on the report of the
chief of the cupbearers, was told by Pharaoh that
be had beard that he could interpret a dream
Joseph said, " [It is] not in ma: God shall give
Pharaoh an answer of peace" (ver. 16). Thus,
from the expectations of the Egyptians and Joseph's
disavowals, we see that the interpretation of dreams
was a branch of the knowledge to which the ancient
Egyptian magicians pretended. The failure of the
Egyptians in the case of Pharaoh's dreams must
probably be regarded as the result of their inability
to give a satisfactory explanation, for it is unlikely
that they refused to attempt to interpret. The two
andsr the Gnat. The former of these, called J&m-I-
J«m or Jam-1-Jeuubeed, Is famous In Persian poetry.
D'Herbolot quotes a Turkish poet who thus alludes to
this belief In magical cups : " When X shall have been
Illuminated by the light of heaven my soul will be-
come the mirror of the world. In which I shall dis-
cover the most hidden secrets " (Bibliothiqm OrientaU,
s. v. « Ohm ").
d Modrrn Egyptian!, 5th edit. chap. xl.
e ivtnrre* and Babylon, p. 609, to. There is an
excellent paper on these bowls by Dr. Levy of Breslau,
In the Zeitschrifi tter Deulsck. Morgmland. Uesetlxkaft^
Ix. p. 466, fce.
/ Bee the Modern X^yptiana, 6th edit. chap. xO. for
an account of the performances of this magician, and
Mr. Lane's opinion as to the causes of their <
appam* suc c ess.
Digitized by
Google
J
1746 MAGIC
sards used to designate the interpreter* lent for
by Pharaoh are O.tt"]?, «,cribei"(?) and
D'O jn, " wise men." ■
We again hear of the magicians of Egypt in the
narrative of the events before the Exodus. They
were summoned by Pharaoh to oppose Hoses. The
account of what they effected requires to be care-
fully examined, from its bearing on the question
whether magic be an imposture. We read : ** And
the Lord spake unto Moses and unto Aaron, saying,
When Pharaoh shall speak unto you, saying, Show
a miracle for you : then thou shalt say unto Aaron,
Take thy rod, and cast [it] before Pharaoh, [and]
It shall become a serpent." 6 It Is then related that
Aaron did thus, and afterwards: "Then Pharaoh
also called the wise men' and the enchanters:''
now they, the scribes • of Egypt, did so by their
secret arts:/ for they cast down every man his rod,
and they became serpents, but Aaron's rod swal-
lowed up their rods " (Ex. vii. 8-12). The rods
were probably long staves like those represented on
the Egyptian monuments, not much less than the
height of a man. If the word used mean here a
serpent, tbe Egyptian magicians may have feigned
a change : if it signify a crocodile they could scarcely
have done so. The names by which the magicians
are designated are to be noted. That which we
render "scribes" seems here to have a general
signification, including wise men and enchanters.
The last term is more definite in its meaning, de-
noting users of incantations. On the occasion of
the first plague, the turning tbe rivers and waters
of Egypt into blood, the opposition of the magicians
again occurs. " And the scribes of Egypt did so
by their secret arts " (vii. 22). When tbe second
plague, that of frogs, was sent, the magicians again
made the same opposition (viii. 7). Once more
they appear in the history. The plague of lice
came, and we read that when Aaron had worked
the wonder the magicians opposed him : « And the
scribes did so by their secret arts to bring forth the
lice, but they could not : so there were hoe upon
man and upon beast. And the scribes said unto
o The former word Is difficult of explanation. It la
to bo noticed thai it Is also used for a clam of the
Babylonian magi (Dan. 1. 20, il. 2) ; so that It ean
scarcely be supposed to be an Egyptian word Hebrsi-
sfxed. Egyptian equivalents have however been sought
for; and Jablonaky suggests CpXUAJU., **•"-
maturgus, and Ignatius Bosai C&.p€ CTtUAt.
"guardian of secret things" (&p. Gee. Tkes. s. v.),
both of which are far too unlike the Hebrew to nave
any probability. To derive it from the Persian
(V :*. v ^ "endued with wisdom," when occur-
ring in Daniel, Is puerile, sa Oesenlns admits. He
suggests a Hebrew origin, and takes it either from
B^n, "a pen or stylus," and Q — formative, or
supposes It to be a quadrlllteral, formed from the
trIUteral CHP, the « unused " root of tS^Ct •»*
D^n, " he or it was sacred." The former seems our
more probable at first sight ; sad the latter would not
Have had any weight were it not for its likeness to
the Greek ie^oypojtMiirtw, used of Egyptian religious
•Bribes ; a resemblance wtjlch, moreover, loses much
•fits value when we find that in hieroglyphics then
at no exactly corresponding expression. Notwith-
these Hebrew <tertrsUoa», Oesenius inclines
MAGIC
Pharaoh, This [is] the finger of God: but Pkamuh'a
heart was hardened, and he hearkened not ante
them, as the Lord had said" (viii. 18, 19, Hob. 14,
15). After this we hear no more of the magicians.
All we can gather from the narrative is that the
appearances produced by them were sufficient to
deceive Pharaoh on three occasions. It is nowhere
declared that they actually produced wonders, sines
the expression " the scribes did so by their secret
arts " is used an tbe occasion of their complete
failure. Nor is their statement that in the wonders
wrought by Aaron they saw the finger of God any
proof that they recognised a power superior to tha
native objects of worship they invoked, for wc find
that the Fgyptians frequently spoko of a supreme
being as God. It seems rather as though they bad
said, " Our juggles are of no avail against the work
of a divinity." There is one later mention of then
transactions, which adds to our information, but
does not decide the main question. St Paul men-
tions Jannes and Janibrea as having "withstood
Moses," and says that their folly in doing so be-
came manifest (2 Tun. iii. 8, 9). The Egyptian
character of these names, the first of which is, in
our opinion, found in hieroglyphics, does not favor.
tbe opinion, which seems inconsistent with the
character of an inspired record, that the ^p"* 1 *
cited a prevalent tradition of the Jews. [Jakhks
and Jamukks.]
We turn to the Egyptian iDustrations of this
part of the subject. Magic, as we have before re-
marked, was Inherent in the ancient Egyptian
religion. Tbe Kitual is a system of incantations
and directions for making amulets, with the object
of securing the future happiness of the disembodied
soul. However obscure the belief of the Egyptian*
as to the actual character of the state of the soul
after death may be to us, it cannot be doubted that
the knowledge and use of the magical amulets and
incantations treated of in the Ritual was held to be
necessary for future happiness, although it was not
believed that they alone could ensure it, since to
have done good works, or, more strictly, not to bare
committed certain sins, was an essential condition
to the Idea that a similar Egyptian word was ho
ltated: instancing Abrech, Hoses, and behemoth
0D3& n#B, n'lOnj): but no one of that*
can be proved to be Egyptian In origin, and there I*
no strong ground for seeking any but a Hebrew ety-
mology for the second and third (Xaes. 1. e.). Ih*
most similar word is Hashmannim, D N 3DtTn (Ps.
lxvili. 81, Heb. 82), which ws suppose to be Egyptian,
meaning HermopoUtas, with perhaps, in the one plaos
where it occurs, a rsferenes to the wisdom of the
clUsens of Hennopolia Magna, the city of Thoth, tha
Egyptian Hermes. [Hisaauxttnt.] We prefer to keep
to the Hebrew derivation simply from tS^P, and to
read r scribes," the ides of magicians being probably
understood. The other word, D^DDP, does not
seem to mean any special class, but merely the wise
men of Egypt generally.
• o^ato-ir. / orn§nb.
P The word D^torT?, elsswhere O'lpb (rer. 9
vtti. T, 18, Heb. 8, 14), signifies "secret" or «hk"
arts," from t»b (BN^, BH 1 ?), « be or It ei
over, hid, or wrapped op."
Digitized by
Google
/
MAGIO
if the acquittal of the soul in the greet trial in
Hades. The thoroughly magical character of the
Ritual it moat strikingly evident in the minute
directions given for making amulets ( Todttnbuch,
eh. 100, 189, 134), and the eecresy enjoined in one
caw to thoae thua occupied (133). The later
ehapten of the Ritual (163-165), held to havi been
added after the compilation or composition of the
rest, which theory, as M. Chains has well remarked,
does not prove their much more modern date (Le
Papyrus Mayiqxt //orris, p. 162). contain mysti-
cal names not bearing an Egyptian etymology.
These names have been thought to be Ethiopian ;
they either have no signification, and are mere
magical gibberish, or else they are, mainly at least,
of foreign origin. Besides the Ritual, the ancient
Egyptians had books of a purely magical character,
such as that which M. Chabas has just edited in
his work referred to above. The main source of
their belief in the efficacy of magic appears to hare
been the idea that the souls of the dead, whether
justified or condemned, had the power of revisiting
the earth and taking various forms. This belief is
abundantly used in the moral tale of " The Two
Brothers," of which the text has been recently
published by the Trustees of the British Museum
(Stkct Papyri, Part II.), and we learn from this
ancient papyrus the age and source of much of the
machinery of mediieval fictions, both eastern and
western. A likeness that strikes us at once in the
case of a fiction is not less true of the Ritual; and
the perils encountered by the soul in Hades are the
first rude indications of the adventures of the heroes
of Arab and German romance. The regions of
terror traversed, the mystic portals that open alone
to magical words, and the monsters whom magic
alone can deprive of their power to injure, are here
already in the book that in part was found in the
reign of king Mencberes four thousand years ago.
Bearing in mind the Nigritian nature of Egyptian
magic, we may look for the source of these ideas in
primitive Africa. There we find the realities of
which the ideal form is not greatly distorted, though
greatly intensified. The forests that clothe the
southern slopes of snowy Atlas, full of fierce beasts ;
the vast desert, untenanted save by harmful rep-
tiles, swept by sand-storms, and ever burning under
an unchanging sun ; the marshes of the south,
teeming with brutes of vast size and strength, are
the several zones of the Egyptian Hades. The
creatures of the desert and the plains and slopes,
the crocodile, the pachydermata. the lion, perchance
the gorilla, are the genii that hold this hind of fear.
In what dread must the first scanty population
have held dangers and enemies still feared by their
swarming posterity. No wonder then that the
imaginative Nigritians were struck with a super-
stitious fear that certain conditions of external
nature always prodo.ee with races of a low type,
where a higher feeling would only be touched by
the analogies of life and death, of time and eternity.
No wonder that, so struck, the primitive race
imagined the arils of the unseen world to be the
recurrence of those against which they struggled
while on earth. That there is some ground for our
heory, besides the generalization which led us to
It, is shown by a usual Egyptian nam* of Hades,
"the West;" and that the wild regions west of
MAGIO
1747
a For the outs respecting Egyptian mafia her*
stated we am greatly indebted to H. Chabas' remark-
sal* work. We do not, however, agree with some of
Egypt might directly give birth to such fancies a*
form the common ground of the machinery, not
the general belief, of the Ritual, as well as of the
machinery of medieval fiction, is shown by the
fables that the rude Arabs of our own day tell of
the wonders they have seen.
Like all nations who have practiced magic gen-
erally, the Egyptians separated it into a lawful kind
and an unlawful. M. Chabas has proved this from
a papyrus which be finds to contain an account of
the prosecution, in the reign of Rameses III. (B.
C cir. 1220), of an official for unlawfully acquiring
and using magical books, the king's property. The
culprit was convicted and punished with death (p.
169 ft).
A belief in unlucky and lucky days, in actions to
be avoided or done on certain days, and in the
fortune attending birth on certain days, was ex-
tremely strong, as we learn from a remarkable
ancient calendar (StUct Papyri, Part I. ) and the
evidence of writers of antiquity. A religious prej-
udice, or the occurrence of some great calamity,
probably lay at the root of this observance of days.
Of the former, the birthday of Typhon, the fifth of
the EpegomensB, is an instance. Astrology was
also held in high honor, as the calendars of certain
of the tombs of the kings, stating the positions of
the stars and their influence on different parts of the
body, show us; but it seems doubtful whether this
branch of magical arts is older than the XVIIIth
dynasty, although certain stars were held in rev-
erence in the time of the I Vth dynasty. The belief
in omens probably did not take an important place
in Egyptian magic, if we may judge from the ab-
sence of direct mention of them. The superstition
as to " the evil eye " appears to have been known,
but there is nothing else that we can class with
phenomena of the nature of animal magnetism.
Two classes of learned men had the charge of the
magical books: one of these, the name of which
bat not bean read phonetically, would seem to cor-
respond to the " scribes," as we render the word,
spoken of in the history of Joseph; whereas the
other has the general sense of " wise men," like the
other class there mentioned. 11
There are no representations on the monuments
that can be held to relate directly to the practice
of this art, but the secret passsges in the thickness
of the wall, lately opened in the great temple of
Dendarah, seem to have been intended for soma
purpose of imposture.
The Law contains very distinct prohibitions of
all magical arts. Besides several passages con-
demning them, in one place there is a specification
which is so full that it seems evident that its object
is to include every kind of magical art. The
reference is to the practices of Canaan, not to those
of Egypt, which indeed do not seem to have been
brought away by the Israelites, who, it may be
remarked, apparently did not adopt Egyptian idol-
atry, but only that of foreigners settled in Egypt.
[Rkmpkas.] *
The Israelites ore commanded, in the place re-
ferred to, not to learn the abominations of the peo-
ples of the Promised Land. Then follows toil
prohibition: '• There shall not le found with the*
one who offereth his son or his daughter by fire, a
bis deductions ; and the theory we have put fbeth el
she p-'sjn of agypttan maglo is purely our owe.
Digitized by
Google
1748 MAGIO
practioer of divinations (O^O^f? OD|7), a worker
of hidden arts ()3TOQ), auaogurer (tPIHJ^p), in
enchanter (F)V?9)t or » fabricator of charms
Ojn "1 3T), or an inquirer by a familiar spirit
(SIN btftB), or a wizard ("3* T.), or a oonsulter
of the dead (Q^nffin-brJ tiD/l)" It it added
tiut these an abominations, and that on account
of their practice the nations of Canaan were to be
driven out (Deut. xviii. 9-14, esp. 10, 11). It is
remarkable that the offering of children should be
mentioned in connection with magical arts. The
passage in Micah, which has been supposed to pre-
serve a question of Balak and an answer of Balaam,
when the soothsayer was sent for to curse Israel,
should be here noticed, Ibr the questioner asks,
after speaking of sacrifices of usual kinds, " Shall I
give my first-born [for] my transgression, the fruit
of my body [for] the sin of my soul? " (ri. 6-8).
Perhaps, however, child-sacrifice is specified on ac-
count of its atrocity, which would connect it with
secret arts, which we know were frequently in later
times the causes of cruelty. The terms which fol-
low appear to refer properly to eight different kinds
of magic, but some of tbem are elsewhere used in
a general sense. 1. 3*£ ^ D£|7 is literally
"a diviner of divinations." The verb OJP is
used of false prophets, but also in a general sense
for divining, as in the narrative of Saul's consulta-
tion of the witch of Endor, where the king says
"divine unto me (2'lK3} ^? MpipipjJ), I pray
thee, by the familiar spirit " (1 Sam. xxvili. 8).
8. ]y\ «Q conveys the idea of >• one who acts oov-
ertly," and so "a worker of hidden arts." The
meaning of the root 13 2 is covering, and the sup-
posed connection with fascination by the eyes, like
the notion of " the evil eye," ss though the original
root were "the eye" (^5), seems untenable."
8. ttfrotp, which we render " an augurer," is
from UJCJ, which Is literally <• he or it hissed or
whispered," and in Pid is applied to the practice
of enchantments, but also to divining generally, as
in toe case of Joseph's cup, and where, evidently
referring to it, be tells his brethren that he could
divine, although in both places it has been read
nore vaguely with the sense to foresee or moke trial
|Gen. xliv. 6, 1ft). We therefore render it by a
term which seems appropriate but not too definite.
The supposed connection of 1^113 with ttfll3,
"a serpent," as though meaning serpent-divina-
tion, must be rejected, the latter word rather com-
ing from the former, with the signification "a
kisser ."» 4. F1&920 signifies "an enchanter:"
MAOIO
the original meaning of toe verb was probably"**
prayed," and the strict sense of this word " otw
who uses incantations." 6. "l^JTI I^Tl seocns)
to mean '• a fabricator of material charms or amu-
lets," if "Q^i when used of practicing sorcery.
means to bind magical knots, and not to bind a
person by spells. 6. 3"W 7HU7 is " an inquirer
by a familiar spirit" The second term signifies a
bottle, c a familiar spirit consulted by a soothsayer,
and a soothsayer having a familiar spirit. The)
LXX. usually render the plural DISH by t-,yutr-
TptfiiBot, which has been rashly translated ventril-
oquists, for it may not signify what we understand
by the latter, but refer to the mode in which sooth-
sayers of this kind gave out their responses: to this
subject we shall recur later. The consulting of
familiar spirits may mean no more than invoking
tbem; but in the Acts we read of a damsel pos-
sessed with a spirit of divination (zvi. 16-18) in
very distinct terms. This kind of sorcery — divin-
ation by a familiar spirit — was practiced by the
witch of Endor. 7. MVVj which we render "a
wizard," is properly "a wise man," but is always
applied to wizards and false prophets. Gesenius
( Tlirt. s. v.) supposes that in Lev. xx. 87 it is used
of a familiar spirit, but surely the reading " a wiz-
ard " la there more probable. 8. The last term,
0\lEiJ~ /$ u9"^\ I* wj explicit, meaning « a
consulter of the dead:" necromancer is an exact
translation if the original signification of the latter
is retained, instead of the more general one it now
usually bears. In the Law it was commanded that
a man or woman who had a familiar spirit, or a
wizard, should he stoned (Lev. xx. 27). An "en-
chantress" (nBBPJJ?) was not to live (Ex. xxii.
18; Heb. 17). Using augury and hidden arts was
also forbidden (Lev. xiz. 26).
The history of Balaam shows the belief of some
ancient nations in the powers of soothsayers. When
the Israelites had begun to conquer the Land of
Promise, Balak the king of Hoab and the elders of
Midian, resorting to Pharaoh's expedient, sent by
messengers with " the rewards of divination
(? ONS^"/) in their hands " (Num. xxii. 7) for
Balaam the diviner (CD'jvn, Josh. ziii. 22),
whose fame was known to tbem though be dwelt in
Aram. Balak's message shows what he believed
Balaam's powers to be: " Behold, there is a people
come out from Egypt: behold, they cover the foes
of the earth, and they abide over against me: come
now therefore, I pray thee, curse me this people;
for they [are] too mighty for me: peradventure I
shall prevail, [that] we may smite them, and [that]
I may drive them out of the land : for I wot that hs
whom thou bleasest [is] blessed : and he whom thou
cursest is cursed" (Num. xxii. 6,6). We aie
told, however, that Balaam, warned of God, first
a The ancient Egyptians seam to have held the
superstition of the <vll eye, for an eye is eh* determin-
ative of a word which appears to signify some kind of
■logic (Chabas, fapynu Magiqut Harru, p. 170 and
•oast).
* Tit name Nahshon (piPPlS), of a prince of
'Blah m the ueond yearafwr the&odus (Num.1. 7;
K enchanter *
In a vagus
fa. Ti. 28: Ruth It. SO, fco.), mes
It was prooably used ss a proper
c This meaning suggests the probability that uw
Arab idea of the evD Jinn having been Inclosed In MS
ties by Solomon was derived from some Jewish «■
Digitized by
Google
MAGIC
■id thai be ounid not apeak of himself, and then by
Inspiration blessed those whom he had been eent
for to curse. He appeal* to hare received inspira-
tion in a Tiaion or a trance. In one place it ia aaid,
" And Balaam aaw that it was good in the eyes of
the Lord to bleaa Israel, and he went not, now aa
before, to the meeting enchantments (D^HJTT?),
but he aet hie face to the wilderneaa " (xxiv. 1).
From this it would seem that it was his wont to
use enchantments, and that when on other occasions
hi went away after the sacrifices had been offered,
he hoped that he could prevail to obtain the wish
uf those who had sent for him, but was constantly
defeated. The building new altars of the mystic
■umber of seven, and the offering of seven oxen and
erven rams, seem to show that Balaam had some
such idea; and (be marked manner in which he
declared "there ia no enchantment (B?n3) against
Jacob, and no divination (CD|?) against Israel "
(xxiii. 33), that be bad come in the hope that they
would have availed, the diviner here being made to
declare hia own powerlesanesa while he blessed those
whom he was sent for to curse. The case Is a very
difficult one, since it shows a man who was used as
an instrument of declaring God's will trusting in
practices that could only have incurred his dis-
pleasure. The simplest explanation seems to be
that Balaam was never a true prophet but on this
occasion, when the enemies of Israel were to be sig-
nally confounded. This history affords a notable
instance of the failure of magicians in attempting to
resist the Divine will.
The account of Saul'a consulting the witch of
Emkr is the foremost place in Scripture of those
which refer to magic. The supernatural tenor
with which it is full cannot however be proved to
he due to this art, for it baa always been held by
sober critics that the appearing of Samuel was per-
mitted for the purpose of declaring the doom of
Saul, and not that it was caused by the incanta-
tions of a aorcereas. As, however, the narrative
is allowed to be very difficult, we may look for a
moment at the evidence of its authenticity. The
details are etrictly in accordance with the age:
there ia a simplicity in the manners described that
ia foreign to a later time. The circumstances are
agreeable with the rest of the history, and especially
with all we know of Saul'a character. Here, aa
ever, he is seen resolved to gain his ends without
earing what wrong he does; he wishes to consult
a prophet, and asks a witch to call up his shade.
Most of all, the vigor of the narrative, showing ua
the scene in a few words, proves its antiquity and
genuineness. We can see no reason whatever for
supposing that it is an interpolation.
"Now Samuel was dead, and all Israel had
stmented him, and buried him in Ramah, even in
Us own city. And Saul had put away those that
bad familiar spirits, and the wizards, out of the
land. And the Philistines gathered tbemselvea
together, and came and pitched in Sbunem ; and
Haul gathered all Israel together, and they pitched
in Gilboa." That the Philistinea ahouW have ad-
vanced ao far,. spreading in the plain of Esdraelon,
Jbe garden of the Holy Land, showa tbe atraita t.
rhich Saul had come. Here in times of faith
Wsera was defeated by Barak, and the Mldianitee
rare smitten by Gideon, some of tbe army of the
termer perishing at En-dor Itself (Pa. lxxxiii. 9, 10).
> And when Saul saw the hoat of the Philistines.
MAGIC
1749
he was afraid, and his heart greatly trembfcxl. And
when Saul inquired of the Lord, the Lord ao-
awered him not, neither by dreams, nor by Urim,
nor by prophets. Then said Saul unto hia aervanta,
Seek me a woman that hath a familiar aj-irit, that
I may go to bar, and enquire of her. And bis
servants said to him, Behold, [there is] a woman
that hath a familiar spirit at En-dor. And Saul
disguised himself, and put on other raiment, and
be went, and two men with him, and they oaine to
tbe woman by night." En-dor lay in tbe territory
of Issachar, about 7 or 8 milea to the northward
of Mount Gilboa. Its name, the " fountain of
Dor," may connect it with tbe Phoenician city Dcr,
which was on the coast to the westward." If an,
it may have retained Its stranger-population, and
been therefore chosen by tbe witch aa a )ilace where
she might with less danger than elsewhere practice
her arts. It baa been noticed that tbe mountain
on whose elope the modern village standa is hol-
lowed into rock-hewn caverns, in one of wbich the
witch may probably have dwelt. [En-dor.] Saul'a
diaguise, and bla journeying by night, aeem to have
been taken that be might not alarm the woman,
rather than because he may have passed through a
part of the Philistine force. The Philistinea held
the plain, having their camp at Shunem, whither
they had pushed on from Apbek : tbe Israelites
were at first encamped by a fountain at Jexreel, but
when their enemies had advanced to Jesxeel they
appear to have retired to the slopes of Gilboa,
whence there was a way of retreat either into the
mountains to the south, or across Jordan. The
latter seems to have been the line of flight, as,
though Saul was slain on Mount Gilboa, hia body
was fastened to the wall of Beth-ehnn. Thus Saul
could have scarcely reached En-dor without passing
at least very near tbe army of the Philistinea.
" And he said, Divine unto me, I pray thee, by tha
familiar spirit, and bring me [him] up, whom I
shall name unto thee." It is noticeable that here
witchcraft, the inquiring by a familiar spirit, and
necromancy, are all connected as though but a
single art, which favors the idea that the prohibition
in Deuteronomy specifies every name by which
magical arts were known, rather than so many
different kinds of arts, in order that no one should
attempt to evade the condemnation of such prac-
tices by any subterfuge. It is evident that Saul
thought he might be able to call up Samuel by the
aid of the witch ; but this does not prove what was
his own general conviction, or the prevalent con-
viction of tbe Israelites on the subject. He was In
a great extremity: bis kingdom in danger: himself
forsaken of God : he was weary with a night-
journey, perhaps of risk, perhaps of great length
to avoid the enemy, and faint with a day'a fasting:
he was conscious of wrong aa, probably for the first
time, he commanded unholy ritea and heard in the
gloom unholy incantations. In such a strait no
man's judgment is steady, and Saul may have
asked to see Samuel in a moment of sudden desper-
ation when he had only meant to demand an
oracular answer. It may even be thought that,
yearning for the counsel of Samuel, and longing to
team If the net that be felt closing about him wen
one from which he should never escape, Saul had
that keener sense that some say conies in the hat
a Dor Is ssM to bare taken its name from Doras, a
son of Neptune, whose name reminds oca of Tama, Um
Digitized by
Google
L750
MAGIC
boors of Hfe, «nd so, oonadom that the prophet's
ihmde wm nor, or wia about to come, at once
sought to' see and apeak with it, though this had
trot Been lefore purposed. Strange things we know
occur at the moment when man feels he Is about
to die," and if there be any time when the unseen
world is felt while yet unentered, it is when the
soul comes first within the chill of its long-projected
shadow. " And the woman said unto him. Behold,
thou k no west what Saul hath done, how he hath
cut off those that hare familiar spirits, and the
wizards, out of the land: wherefore th?n layest
thou a snare for my life, to cause me to die? And
Saul swan to her by the I/jbd, saying, [As] the
Lord liveth, there shall no punishment happen to
thee for this thing." Nothing more shows Saul's
desperate resolution than his thus swearing when
engaged in a most unholy act — a terrible profanity
that makes the horror of the scene complete.
Everything being prepared, the final act takes place.
"Then said the woman, Whom shall I bring up
unto thee ? And be said, Bring me up SamueL
And when the woman saw Samuel, she cried with
a loud voice : and the woman spake to Saul, saying.
Why hast thou deceived me ? for thou [art] Saul.
And the king said unto her, Be not afraid : for
what sawest thou? And the woman said unto
Saul, I saw gods ascending out of the earth. And
be said unto her, What [is] his form ? And she
said, An old man cometh up; and he [is] covered
with a mantle. And Saul perceived that it [was]
Samuel, and be stooped with [his] face to the
ground, and bowed himself. And Samuel said to
Saul, Why hast thou disquieted [or - disturbed "]
me, to bring me up? And Saul answered, I am
sore distressed ; for the Philistines make war against
me, and God is departed from me, and auswereth
me no more, neither by prophets, nor by dreams :
therefore I have called thee, that thou mayest make
known unto me what I shall do. Then said
Samuel, Wherefore then dost thou ask of me, seeing
the Lord is departed from thee, and is become
thine enemy ? And the Lord hath done to him,
as he spake by me : for the Lokd hath rent the
kingdom out of thine hand, and given it to thy
neighbor, [even] to David : because thou obeyedst
not the voice of the Lord, nor eiecutedst his fierce
wrath upon Amalek, therefore hath the Lord done
this thing unto thee this day. Moreover, the Ix>rd
will also deliver Israel with thee into the hand of
tbe Philistines: and to-morrow [ahalt] thou and
thy sons [be] with me: the Lord also shall deliver
he host of Israel into the band of the Philistines,
lien Saul fell straightway all along on the earth,
'tnd was sore afraid, because of the words of Samuel :
and there was no strength in him ; for he had eaten
uo bread all tbe day, nor all the night" (1 Sam.
ixviii. 3-30). Tbe woman clearly was terrified by
an unexpected apparition when she saw Samuel.
She must therefore either have been a mere juggler,
* one who had no power of working magical won-
« We may Instance the well-known circumstance
*aat men who have been near death by drowning have
userted that In the hut moments of consciousness all
4m events of their lives have passed before their minds.
1 friend of the writer assured him that he experienced
Ala sensation, whenever he bad a very bad fall la
hunting, while he was actually tailing. This la alluded
tela the epitaph —
*■ BetwMB lh« uddla and the from t,
I aarer Bought, and marey neat."
MAGIC
Jen at wilL The right of Samuel at once rhcrarusj
her who had come to consult her. Tbe pro.ihet'a
shade seems to have been preceded by some inav'estic
shapes which the witch called gods. Saul, ae it
seems, interrupting her, asked his form, and ibe
described tbe prophet as he was in his last days oc
earth, an old man, covered either with a mantle,
such as tbe prophets used to wear, or wrapped in
bis winding-eheet. Then Saul knew it was SamueL
and bowed to the ground, from respect or fear. It
seems that the woman saw tbe appearance*, and
that Saul only knew of them through ber, perhaps
not daring to look, else why should he have naked
what form Samuel had ? Tbe prophet's complaint
we cannot understand, in our ignorance as to the
separate state: thus much we know, that state ia
always described as one of perfect rest or sleep-
That tbe woman should hare been abbs to call him
up cannot be hence inferred; ber astonishment
shows the contrary ; and it would be explanation
enough to suppose that he was sent to give Seal
the last warning, or that the earnestness of the
king's wish had been permitted to disquiet him in
his resting-place. Although the word " disquieted **
need not be pushed to an extreme sense, and seems
to mean the interruption of a state of rest, our
translators wisely, we think, preferring this render-
ing to " disturbed," it cannot be denied that, if
we hold that Samuel appeared, this is a great dif-
ficulty. If, however, we suppose that the prophet's
coming was ordered, it is not unsurmountabfe.
Tbe declaration of Saul's doom agrees with what
Samuel had said before, and was fulfilled the next
day, when the king and his sons fell on Mount
Gilhoa. It may, however, be asked — Was tbe
apparition Samuel himself, or a supernatural mes-
senger in his stead ? Some may even object to our
holding it to have been aught but a phantom of a
sick brain; but if so, what can we make of the
woman's conviction that it was Samuel, and the
king's horror at the words he heard, or, as these
would say, that he thought he heard ? It was not
only the hearing his doom, but the hearing it in a
voice from the other world that stretched the faith-
less strong man on tbe ground. He must have felt
the presence of the dead, and heard the sound of a
sepulchral voice. How else could the doom hare
come true, and not the king alone, but his sons,
have gone to tbe place of disembodied souls on the
morrow? for to be with the dead concerned the
soul, not tbe body: it is no difficulty that the king's
corpse was unbuned till the generous men of JabeuV
gilead. mindful of his old kindness, rescued it from
the wall of Bethshan. If then the apparition was
real, should we suppose it Samuel's? A reasonable
criticism would say it seems to have been so; (for
the supposition that a messenger came in his stead
must be rejected, aa it would make the speech s
mixture of truth and untruth ;) and if asked what
sufficient cause there was for such a sending forth
of the prophet from his rest, would reply that wi
If this phenomenon be not Involuntary, but tbe remit
of an effort of will, then then la no raaaon »by 1*
should be confined to the butt memento of conadooa
neaa. A man aura of his doom might be In this peca
liar and unexplained mental state long before. Panuat
however, the mind before death experiences a ebaasjf
of condition, just as, cooveraely, every physical tunc
Hon dots not earn at ones with what we tana la
Digitized by
Google
MAGIC
know not the reason for aoch warnings n abound
m the Bible, and that perhaps even at the eleventh
hoar, the door of repentance was not closed against
the king, and hia impiety might have been par-
doned haid he repented. Instead, he went forth in
despair, and, when hia sons had fallen and his army
put to the rant, sore wounded fell on his own
HAOIO
1751
From the beginning to the end of this strange
history we hare no warrant for attributing super-
natural power to magicians. Viewed reasonably,
It refers to the question of apparitions of the dead,
as to which other places in the Bible leave no
doubt. The connection with magic seems purely
accidental. The witch is no more than a bystander
after the first: she see* Samuel, and that is all.
The apparition may hare been a terrible fulfillment
of Saul's desire, hut this does not prove that the
measures he used were of any power. We hare
examined the narrative very carefully, from its
detail and its remarkable character: the result
leaves the main question unanswered.
In the later days of the two kingdoms magical
practices of many kinds prevailed among the He-
brews, as we especially learn from the condemnation
of them by the prophets. Every form of idola-
try which the people had adopted in succession
doubtless brought with it its magic, which seems
always to hare remained with a strange tenacity
that probably made it outlive the false worship with
which it was connected. Thus the use of teraphim,
dating from the patriarchal age, was not abandoned
when the worship of the Canaanite, Phoenician,
and Syrian idols had been successively adopted.
In the historical books of Scripture there is little
notice of magic, excepting that wherever the false
prophets are mentioned we have no doubt an indi-
cation of the prevalence of magical practices. We
are especially told of Josiah that he put away the
workers with familiar spirits, the wizards, and the
teraphim, as well as the idols and the other abomi-
nations of Judah and Jerusalem, in performance
of the commands of the book of the I.aw which
had been found (3 K. xxiii. 34). But in the
prophets we find several notices of the magic of the
Hebrews in their times, and some of the magic
of foreign nations. Isaiah says that the people
had become " workers of hidden arts (D^?!?)
like the Philistines," and apparently alludes in the
same place to the practice of magic by the Bene-
Kedem (ii. 6 J. The nation had not only abandoned
true religion, but had become generally addicted to
magic in the manner of the Philistines, whose
Egyptian origin I'Caphtor] is consistent with such
a condition. The origin of the Bene-Kedem is
doubtful, but it seems certain that as late as the
time of the Egyptian wars in Syria, under the XlXth
dynasty, n. o. cir. 1300, a race, partly at least
Mongolian, inhabited the valley of the Orontes,"
among whom therefore we should again expect a
national practice of magic, and its prevalence with
their neighbors. Balaam, too, dwelt with the Bene-
Kedem, though he may not hare been of their nee.
In another place the prophet reproves the people for
seeking " unio them that hare familiar spirits, and
a L«t these who doubt this examine the i sprss e otv
don in HoMllinl'i Monummli Soriej, I. fJL ixxxrln.
nq. of the great battle between Ramasss E an? tht
Hlitites and their oonbderstss, near KITKBH, os *Jm
onto the wizards that chirp, and that mutter" 1
(rill. 19). The practices of one class of magicians
are still more distinctly described, where it is thai
said of Jerusalem : ■• And I will camp against thee
round about, and will lay siege against thee with a
mount, and I will raise forts against thee. And
thou shalt be brought down, [and] shalt speak out
of the ground, and thy speech shall be low out of
the dust, and thy voice shall be, as of one that
hath a familiar spirit, out of the ground, and thy
speech shall whisper out of the dust " (xxix. 3,4).
Isaiah alludes to the magic of the Egyptians when
he says that in their calamity "they shall seek
to the idols, and to the charmers [D , t9N ?],» and
to them that have familiar spirits, and to tht
wizards" (six. 3). And in the same manner he
thus taunts Babylon : " Stand now with thy charms,
and with the multitude of thine enchantments,
wherein thou hast labored from thy youth ; if so
be thou shalt be able to profit, if so be thou mayeat
prevail. Thou art wearied in the multitude of thy
counsels. Let now the viewers of the heavens [or
astrologers], the stargazers, the monthly proguos*
ticators, stand up, and save thee from [these
things] that shall come upon thee " (xlrii. 13, 13).
The magic of Babylon is here characterized by the
prominence given to astrology, no magicians being
mentioned excepting practice™ of this art; unlike
the case of the Egyptians, with whom astrology
seems always to hare held a lower place than with
the Chaldean nation. In both instances the folly
of those who seek the aid of magic is shown.
Micah, declaring the judgments coming for the
crimes of bis time, speaks of the prevalence of
divination among prophets who most probably were
such pretended prophets as the opponents of Jere
raiah, not avowed prophets of idols, as Abab's seem
to have been. Concerning these prophets it is
said, " Night [shall be] unto you, that ye shall
not have a vision : and it shall be dark unto you,
that ye shall not divine; and the sun shall go £ywa
orer the prophets, and the day shall be dark over
them. Then shall the seers be ashamed, and the
diviners confounded : yea, they shall all corer their
lip; for [there is] no answer of God" (iii. 6, 7).
■Later it is said as to Jerusalem, "The heads
thereof judge for reward, and the priests thereof
teach for hire, and the prophets thereof divine for
money : yet will they lean upon the Lord, and say,
[Is] not the Ix>rd among us ? none eril can come
upon us" (ver. 11). These prophets seem to have
practiced unlawful arts, and yet to have expected
revelations.
Jeremiah was constantly opposed by false props
eta, who pretended to speak in the name of the
Lord, saying that they had dreamt when tliey kkl
false visions, and who practiced various magical
arts (xiv. 14, xxiii. 35, ad Jin., xxrj. 9, 10,— where
the several designations applied to those who coun-
selled the people not to serve the king of Babylon
may be used in contempt of the false prophets —
xxix. 8, 9).
EzekieL as we should hare expected, affords some
remarkable details of the magic of his time, in the
clear and forcible descriptions of hia visions. From
him we learn that fetishism was among the Idola-
tries which the Hebrews, in the latest days of the
» This »)ri may mean whiter an, If It be the atam)
of ISrJ, "a munsusr."
Digitized b'
fC
1752
MAGIC
kingdom of Judah, bad adopted from thair neigh-
bors, like the Komans in the age of general cor-
ruption that cauaed the decline of their empire.
In a viaioa, in which the prophet m the abomina-
tions of Jerusalem, he entered the chambers of
imagery in the Temple itself: " I went in and saw ;
and behold every form of creeping things, and
abominable beasts, and all the idols of the house
of Israel, portrayed upon the wall round about."
Here seventy elders were offering incense in the
dark (viii. 7-19). This idolatry was probably bor-
rowed from Egypt, for the description perfectly
answers to that of the dark sanctuaries of Egyptian
temples, with the sacred animals portrayed upon
their walls, and does not accord with the character
of the Assyrian sculptures, where creeping thins?
an not represented as objects of worship. With
this low form of idolatry an equally low kind of
magic obtained, practiced by prophetesses who for
email rewards made amulets by which the people
were deceived, (xiii. 17, ad Jin.). The passage must
be allowed to be very difficult, but it can scarcely
be doubted that amulets are referred to which were
made and sold by these women, and perhaps also
worn by them. We may probably read: "Woe
to the [women] that sew pillows upon all joints of
the hands [elbows or snuholes?], and make ker-
chiefs upon the head of every stature to hunt
souls t " (xiii. 18). If so, we have a practice analo-
gous to that of the modern Egyptians, who hairg
amulets of the kind called "heg&b" upon the right
aide, and of the Nubians, who hang them on the
upper part of the arm. We cannot, in any case,
aee how the passage can be explained as simply
referring to the luxurious dress of the women of
that time, since the prophet distinctly alludes to
pretended visions and to divinations (ver. 23),
using almost the same expressions that he applies
in another place to the practices of the false
prophets (xxil. SB). The notice of Nebuchadnex-
ear's divination by arrows, where it is said " he
shuffled srrows " (xxi. SI), must refer to a prac-
tice the same or similar to the kind of divination
by arrows called El-Meysar, in use among the
pagan Arabs, and forbidden in the Kur-nn. [See
Hospitality.]
The references to magic in the book of Daniel
relate wholly to that of Babylon, and not so much
to the art as to those who used it Daniel, when
taken captive, was instructed in the learning of the
Chaldeans and placed among the wise men of
Babylon (ii. 18), by whom we are to understand
the Magi (b^} V^SIT), for the term is used
as including magicians (O'ffitpnn), sorcerers
(D'SWN), enchanters (D'BtpSC), astrologers
0"HT J), and Chaldeans, the last being apparently
the most important dsss (ii. 8, 4, 6, 10, 12, 14,
8, 34, 87 s comp. i. SO). As in other cases the
true prophet was put to the test with the magicians,
and he succeeded where they utterly failed. The
ease resembles Pharaoh's, excepting that Nebuchad-
leczar asked a harder thing of the wise men.
."■laving forgotten his dream, he not only required
sf them an interpretation, but that they should
make known the dream itself. They were perfectly
ready to tell the interpretation if only they heard
the dream. The king at once saw that they were
Impostors, and that if they truly had supernatural
i they oould aa well tell him bis dream at Its
MAGIC
meaning. Therefore he decreed the death of ah
the wise men of Babylon; but Daniel, praying
that he and his fellows might escape this destruc-
tion, had a vision in which the matter was revealed
to him. He was accordingly brought before the
king. Like Joseph, he disavowed any knowledge
of his own. " The secret which the king hath
demanded, the wise men, the sorcerers, the magi-
cians, the astrologers, cannot ahow unto the king;
but there is a Uod in heaven that revealeth secrets"
(w. 27, 28). " But as for me, this secret is not
revealed to me for [any] wisdom that I have more
than any living " (30). He then related the dream
and its interpretation, and was set over the prov-
ince as well as over all the wise men of Babylon.
Again the king dreamt: and though he told them
the dream the wise men could not interpret it, and
Daniel again showed the meaning (iv. 4, ff.). In
the relation of this event we read that the king
called him "chief of the scribes," the second part
of the title being the same aa that applied to the
Egyptian magicians (ir. 9; Chald. 6). A third
time, when Belsbaxaar saw the writing on the wall,
were the wise men sent for, and on their failing,
Daniel wss brought before the king and the inter-
pretation given (v.). These events are perfectly
consistent with what always occurred in all other
cases recorded in Scripture when the practicers of
magic were placed in opposition to true prophets-
It may be asked by some how Daniel could take
the post of chief of the wise men when he had
himself proved their imposture. If, however, ss
we cannot doubt, the class were one of the learned
generally, among whom some practiced magical
arts, the case is very different from what it would
have been bad these wise men been u-agiciani
only. Besides, it seems almost certain that Daniel
was providentially thus placed that, like another
Joseph, he might further the welfare and ultimate
return of his people. [Maoi.]
After the Captivity it is probable that the Jew*
gradually abandoned the practice of magic. Zecha-
riah speaks indeed of the deceit of tersphim and
diviners (x. 2), snd foretells a time when the very
names of idols should be forgotten and false proph-
ets have virtually ceased (xiii. 1-4), yet in neither
case does it seem certain that he is alluding to the
usages of his own day.
In the Apocrypha v/e find indications that in the
later centuries preceding the Christian era magic
was no longer practiced by the educated Jews. In
the Wisdom of Solomon the writer, speaking of the
Egyptian magicians, treats their art as an impos-
ture (xvii. 7). The book of Tobit is an exceptional
case. If we hold that it was written in Persia or
a neighboring country, and, with Ewald, date its
composition not long after the fall of the Persian
empire, it is obvious that it relates to a different
state of society to [from] that of the Jews of Egypt
and Palestine. If, however, it was written in Pales-
tine about the time of the Maccabees, as others sop-
pose, we must still recollect thai x refers rather to the
superstitions of the common people than to thov
of the learned. In either case its pretensions make
It unsafe to follow as indicating the opinions of the
time at which it was written. It pro fess e s to relate
to a period of which its writer could have known
little, and borrows its idea of supernatural agency
from Scripture, adding aa much as was Judgxi safe
of current superstition.
In the N. T. we read vary little f magie. Ths
coming of Magi to worship Chris' 1 Indeed i
Digitized by
Google
MAGIC
.Matt H. I- 19), but we hare no unut for rap- 1
posing that they wore magicians from their Dame, !
which the A. V. not unreasonably renders « wiee
men " [Magi]. Our Lord U not (aid to have been
nppoeed by magicians, and the Apostles and other
early teacher* of the Goepel teem to hare rarely
encountered them. Philip the deacon, when be
preached at Samaria, found there Simon a famous
magician, commonly known ai Simon Hague, who
had had gnat power over the people; but he U not
■aid to bare been able to work wonder*, nor, had
it been so, is it likely that he would have eoon been
admitted into the Church (Acts viii. 9-34 ). When
St. Barnabas and St. Paul were at Paphos, as they
preached to the proconsul Sergius Paulus, Elymas,
» Jewish sorcerer and false prophet (run ivSpa
akyor ^eytowpc^mv), withstood them, and was
•truck blind for a time at the word of St. Paul (xiii.
(-13). At Ephesus, certain Jewish exorcists sig-
nally failing, both Jews and Greeks were afraid, and
abandoned their practice of magical arts- " And
many that believed came, and confessed, and showed
their deeds. Many of them also which used curi-
ous arts brought their books together, and burned
them before 'all: and they counted the price of
them, and found [it] fifty thousand [pieces] of
silver " (xix. 18, 19). Here both Jews and Greeks
teem to have been greatly addicted to magic, even
after they had nominally Joined the Church. In
all these cases it appears that though the praetieers
were generally or always Jews, the field of their
success was with Gentiles, showing that among the
Jewa in general, or the educated class, the sit had
fallen into disrepute. Here, as before, there is no
evidence of any real effect produced by the magi-
dans. We have already noticed the remarkable
ease of the "damsel having & spirit of divination "
dxmmm nti/ia aveWa) "which brought her
masters much gain by foretelling " (/uiKrtuoptVn),
from whom St. Paul cast out the spirit of divina-
tion (xtL 1A-18). This la a matter belonging to
another subject than that of magic.
Our examination of the various notices of magic
in the Bible gives us this general result: They
do not, as far as we can understand, once state
positively that any but illusive results were pro-
duced by magical rites. They therefore afford no
evidence that man can gain supernatural powers to
use at his will. This consequence goes some way
towards showing that we may conclude that there
is no such thing as real magic; for although it is
dangerous to reason on negative evidence, yet In
a case of this kind it is especially strong. Had
any but illusions been worked by magicians, surely
the Scriptures would not have passed over a mot of
so much imparlance, and one which would have
MAGOG 1768
rendered the prohibition of these arts far more
necessary. The general belief of mankind in magie,
or things akin to it, is of no worth, since the hold-
ing such current superstition in some of its branches,
if we push it to its legitimate consequences, would
lead to the rejection of faith in God's government
of the world, and the adoption of a oread far below
that of Plato.
From the conclusion at which we have arrived,
that there is no evidence in the Bible of real results
having been worked by supernatural agency used
by magicians, we may draw this Important infer-
ence, that the absence of any proof of the same in
profane literature, ancient or modern, in no way
militates against the credibility of the miracles re-
corded in Scripture. R. S. P.
MAGIDTH) ([Rom.] MayiUat; but Mai
[i, e. Vat], furk 'AMovi; and Alex." MeraeS-
Saouf : Jfagtddo), the Greek form of the name
Mjeqiddo. It occurs only in 1 Esdr. i. 39. [M*>
giddoh.] G.
• MAGISTRATES has its generic sense of
rulers, civil officers, in Ear. vii. 36; Luke xii. 11;
Tit iii. 1; but in Acts xvi. 90 ff. is a specific) term
(e-rpariryo') referring to the duumriri or proton
at Philippi [see Colour, Amer. ed.]. H.
• MAGNIFICAL = magnificent, according
to the present usage, applied to Solomon's Temple,
only in 1 Chr. xxii. 5. Jt is the rendering of the
Hiph. inf. of b?|. H.
MA'GOG 0XlQ [eee below] : MoytVy; tin
Ex. xxxix. 6 Tmy, Alex. <r<; in 1 Chr., Alex. Ma-
yua- Magog]). The name Magog is applied in
Scripture both to a person aud to a land or people.
In Gen. x. 3 [and 1 Chr. 1. 6] Magog appears as
the second son of Japheth in connection with Co-
rner (the Cimmerians) and Madai (the Modes): U>
Ex. xxxviii. 3, xxxix. 1, 8, it appears aa a country
or people of which Gog was the prince, 6 in eon-
junction with Meehech • (the Mcaehiei), Tubal (the
Tlbareni), and Rosh (the Roxolani). In the latter
of these senses there is evidently implied an etymo-
logical connection between Gog and Ma= gog,
the Mn being regarded by Erekiei as a prefix sig-
nificant of a country. In this ease Gog contain*
the original element of the name, which may pos-
sibly have its origin in some Persian root.' The
notices of Magog would lead ua to fix a northern
locality : not only did all the tribe* mentioned in
connection with it belong to that quarter, but it i*
expressly stated by Exeklel that he was to come up
from •' the sides of the north " (xxxix. 8), from a
country adjacent to that of Togarinah or Armenia
(xxxviii. 6), and not far from " the isles " or mari-
■ 1Mb Is cos of a great number of cans la which
the readings of Mai's edition of the Vatican Oodex
•■part than th* ordinary " Vatican Text," as usually
edited, and agree more or lias closely with the Alex-
andrine (Codex A),
» Von Bohlen (htrod. U> Ben. U. 211) represents
Sag u the people, and not th* prinea. Tbw» can be
no doubt that In Bev. xx. 8 the name doa* apply to
a people, but this le not th* earn In aaas l i l .
e In th* A. T. Gof '• represented a* " the chief
mines - of Meehech and Tubal : bat It Is pretty weu
agreed that the Hebrew wards ttW"1 r^DJJ cannot,
ssar th* nwanlng thus amxed to them. Th» true ren-
iarlng Is " prion of Rosh," *s given In the IXX.
Megs* i ■ T«i) 1>* other reus* was adopted by the
Vulgate In eooseqoeneo of th* nam* Scab not occur-
ring elsewhere In Scripture. [Boss.]
d Various *tvmologles of the nam* have baan sug-
gested, none of which can bs absolutely accepted.
Knobel ( ntkert. p. 68) proposes th* 8anskrlt ml or
maha, ** great," and a Persian word signifying n moun-
tain," In which ess* the ratkronee would h* to th*
Caueasku tangs. Th* terms ghcfk and mtfktf are
still applied to some of the heights of that range.
This etymology Is supported by Von Bohleo (Jktrad.
fOen.fi. fay On th* ochar liand, Hltelg ( Cbmm. m
A.) oooneete th* tret syllable with the Coptic ma,
< place." or the Sanskrit mw, " land," and to* as**
jod with a Persian root, anin, « >he moon," aa t
th* term had leawenns to moon-wonhippaf*.
Digitized by
Google
1754
MAGOG
time regions of Europe (zxziz. 6). lh<s pecple of
Magog further appear u having a force of cavalry
(xxiriii. "5), and a* armed with the bow (xxxix.
3). From the above data, combined with the con-
sideration of the time at which Esekiel lived, the
conclusion has been drawn that Magog represents
the important race of the Scythians. Josephus
(.Ani. i. 6, § 1) and Jerome ( Quasi, in Gen. x. 8)
among early writers adopted this view, and they
have been followed in the main by modern writers.
In identifying Magog with the Scythians, however,
we must not be understood as using the latter term
In a strictly ethnographical sense, but as a general
expression for the tribes living north of the Cau-
casus.* We regard Magog as essentially a geo-
graphical tenn, just as it was applied by the Syrians
of the Middle Ages to Asiatic Tartary, and by the
Arabians to the district between the Caspian and
Euxine seas (Winer, Smb. s. v.). The inhabitants
of this district in the time of Ezekiel were un
doubtedly the people generally known by the clas-
sical name of " Scythians." In the latter put
of the 7th century B. c. they had become well
known as a formidable power through the whole
of western Asia. Forced from their original quar-
ters north of the Caucasian range by the inroad of
the Massageta;, tbey descended into Asia Minor,
where they took Sardis (b. c. 629), and main-
tained a long war with the Lydian monarchs:
thence they spread into Media (b. c. 624), where
they defeated Cyaxares. They then directed their
course to Egypt, and were bribed off by Psam
metichns; on their return * tbey attacked the tem-
ple of Venus Urania at Ascalon. They were finally
ejected b. c. 696, after having made their name a
terror to the whole eastern world (Herod, i. 103 ft".).
The Scythians are described by classical writers as
skillful in the use of the bow (Herod, i. 73, iv. 183:
Xen. Anab. iii. 4, § 16), and even as the inventors
of the bow and arrow (Plin. vil. 67); they were
specially famous as mounted bowmen (hnrorof AVai ;
Herod, iv. 46; Thueyd. il. 96); they also enjoyed
Bovthian horseman (from Ksrtak).
in ill-fame for their cruel and rapacious habits
(Herod, i. 106). With the memory of these events
yet fresh on the minds of his countrymen, Exekiel
selects the Scythians as the symbol of earthly vio-
lence, arrayed against the people of God, but meeting
with a sign*! and utter overthrow. He depicts their
> and violence (xxxviii. 7-13), and the fearful
MAHALALBttti
vengeance executed upon them (rxrvilL 14- S3) —
a massacre so tremendous that seven mouths woakl
hardly suffice for the burial of the corpses in the
valley which should thenceforth be named Hamon-
gog (xxxix. 11-16). The imagery of Eiekiel has
been transferred in toe Apocalypse to describe the
final struggle between Christ and Antichrist (Rev.
xx. 8). As a question of ethnology, the origin of
the Scythians presents great difficulties : many emi-
nent writers, with Niebuhr and Neumann at their
bead, regard them as a Mongolian, and therefore a
non-Japhetic race. It is unnecessary for us to en-
ter into the general question, which is complicated by
the undefined and varying applications of the name
Scythia and Scythians among ancient writers As
far as the Biblical notices are concerned, it is suffi-
cient to state that the Scythians of Ezekiel's age —
the Scythians of Herodotus — were in ail probability
a Japhetic race. Tbey are distinguished on the one
hand from the Argipptei, a dearly Mongolian race
(Herod, iv. 23), and they are connected on the other
hand with the Agathyrai, a clearly Indo-European
race (iv. 10). The mere silence of so observant a
writer as Herodotus, as to any striking features in
the physical conformation of the Scythians, must
further be regarded as a strong argument in favor
of their Japhetic origin. W. L. B.
MA'GOR-MIS'SABIB (S^B "l'"UD:
Mereutos: Pavor wuKque), literally, " terror on
every side : " the name given by Jeremiah to Pash-
ur the priest, when he smote him and put him in
the stocks for prophesying against the idolatry of
Jerusalem (Jer. xx. 8). The significance of to.
appellation is explained in the denunciation with
which it was accompanied (ver. 4): "Thus aalth
Jehovah, Behold I will make thee a terror to thy-
self and to all thy friends." The LXX. must have
connected the word with the original meaning of
the root "to wander," for they keep up the play
upon the name in ver. 4. It is remarkable that
the same phrase occurs in several other passages of
Jeremiah (vi. 26, xx. 10, xlvi. 6, xlix. 29; Lam. ii,
22), and is only found besides in Pa. xxxi. 13.
MAGTIA8H (aty*?? l i [perh. morAJsfler] :
Mryaftii ; Alex. M<rya^j)r;'[Vat.] FA. Btrytupitj:
Mtgphiat), one of the beads of the people who
signed the covenant with Nebemiah (Keh. x. 20).
The name is probably not that of an individual,
but of a family. It is supposed by Calmet and
Junius to be the same as Magbuii in Ear. ii. SO.
MA'HAXAH (nbqO [riehuu]: M«\d;
Alex. MooXa: Afohola), one of the three children
of Hammoleketh, the sister of Gilead (1 Chr. viL
18). The name is probably that of a woman, as
It is the same with that of Mahlab, the daughtet
of Zelophehad, also a descendant of Gilead the
Manassite.
MATIALAIiEEL (VpbbPTp [praise of
God]: MaAfArfjA.: Mnlahrl). £* The fourth iu
descent from Adam, according to the Sethite gen-
ealogy, and son of Cainan (Gen. v. 12, 13, 16-17;
1 Chr. i. 2). In the LXX. the names of Habasv
leel and Mehujael, the fourth from Adam in the
• Id the Koran Gog and Mages; are hnalfard north
■ST trie Oaneesus. Then appears to have been from
the eatuest Hates a legend that the «nsmies of religion
rat etvUtaatka lived in that quarter (KtntsuM'i
lYOea tfti* Qmeana, p. 66).
b Tbe name of Borthopons, by which Beth-shsae
was known In our Saviour's tuna, was regarded as
trace of the Scythian occupation (Plin. r. 19): *Mt
however, is doubtful. [Scrraoroiis.J
Digitized by
Google
MAHALATH
nnealogy of the descendants of Cain, an identlea.
bwald recognizes in Mahalaleel the sun-god, or
Apollo of the antediluvian mythology, and in hia
■an Jared the god of water, the Indian Varuna
(Oetch. L 367), but his assertion! are perfectly
arbitrary.
2. ([Vat.] FA. MaAtAiui.) A descendant of
Perec, or Phares, the son of Judah, and ancestor
of Athaiah, whose family resided in Jerusalem after
the return from Babylon (Neh. zi. 4).
MA'HALATH (.H^fTD [ perh. harp, lyre] :
Ma«A«fl: ifaheleth), the daughter of Iabmad, and
one of the wires of Baau (Gen. xxviii. 9). in the
Edomite genealogy (Gen. xxxvi. 8, 4, 10, 13, IT)
•he is called Bashkmath, sister of Nebajoth, and
mother of Reuel ; but the Hebmo-Samaritan text
has Mahalath throughout. On the other hand
Basbemath, the wife of Esau, is described as the
daughter of Elon the Hittite (Gen. zxvi. 84).
[Bashkmath.]
MA'HALATH (nVlTl [harp, lyre] : [Bom.
MooAdV); Vat.] MoXoof; Alex. Mo\a»: Maha-
lath), one of the eighteen wives of king Kenoboam,
apparently his first (3 Chr. xi. 18 only). She was
her husband's cousin, being the daughter of king
David's son Jerimoth, who was probably the child
of a concubine, and not one of bis regular family.
Joasphua, without naming Mahalath, speaks of her
as "a kinswoman" (cvyytvri rum, Ant. viii. 10,
f 1). No children are attributed to the marriage,
nor is she again named. The ancient Hebrew text
(Cethib) in this passage has u sou" instead of
« daughter." The latter, however, is the oorrection
of the Kri, and is adopted by the LXX., Vulgate,
and Targum, as well as by the A. V. G.
MA'HALATH (."lbqQ [see below]: Mor-
Ki6: Malltth). The title'of Pa. liii., in which
this rare word occurs, was rendered in the Geneva
version, "To him that excelleth on Mahalath;"
which was explained in the margin to be "an in-
strument or kind of note." This expresses in short
the opinions of most commentators. Connecting
the word with VlTTTp, mdchdl (Ex. xv". 90; Ps. cL
4), rendered " dance" in the A. V., but supposed
by many bom its connection with instruments of
music to be one itself (Dance, vol. i. p. 538 o),
Jerome renders the phrase " on Mahalath " by
» per chorum," and In this he is supported by the
translations of Theodotion (urip ttji x°P^<"^
Symmachus (8ia x«f>°^< a,)d Aquiht (M xop«/a),
quoted by Tbeodoret ( Comm. in Pt. 1U.). Augus-
tine (Enarr. m Pt. Hi.) gives the title of the
Psalm, "In finem pro Amakch intelleotns ipsi
David; " explaiiiiog " pro Amsleoh," as he says
torn the Hebrew, " for one in labor or sorrow "
(pro parturients sire dolente), by whom he under-
stands Christ, as the subject of the psalm. But
ji another passage (Knurr, in Pt. lxxxvii.) he gives
the word in the form meltch, and interprets It by
the Latin chorut: having in the first instance
node some confusion with 7Q7, 'dmal, "sorrow,"
whieh forms part of the proper name - Amalek.'
The title of Ps. liii. in the Chakiee and Syria,
•anions contains no trace of the word, whioh is
law omitted in the almost identical Ps. xiv. From
his fact alone it might be interred that it was not
intended to point enigmatically to the contents of
he psalm, as Hcngstenbe-g and oths-s are inclined
MAHALATH 1755
to believe. Vben Ezra understands by it the name
of a melod) to which the paahn was suug, and It
Solomon Jarehi explains it as " the name of a
musical instrument," adding however immediately,
with a play upon the word, " another discourse on
the tiehneu (machalih) of Israel when the Temple
was kid waste." Calvin and J. H. Micbaelis,
among others, regarded it as an instrument of
music or the commencement of a melody. Junius
derived H from the root V?n, chalal, " to bora,
perforata," and understood by it a wind instrument
of some kind, like NehHoth in Ps. vi. ; bat his ety-
mology is certainly wrong. Its connection with
mdchdl is equally uncertain. Joel Bril, in the sec-
ond prs&ee to his notes on the Psalms in Men-
delssohn's Bible, mentions three opinions as current
with regard to the meaning of Mahalath; some
regarding it as a feminine form of m&chdl, others
as one of the wind instruments (the flute, according
to De Wette's translation of Ps. liii.), and others
again as a ttringed instrument. Between these
conflicting conjectures, he says, it is impossible to
decide. That it was a stringed instrument, played
either with the fingers or a quill, ia maintained by
Simonis (Lex. HtSr.), who derives it from an un-
used Arabic root oJLsfc, to sweep. But the most
probable of all conjectures, and one which Gesenius
approves, is that of Ludolf, who quotes the Ethiopic
michlet, by which the KiBipa of the LXX. is ten-
dered in Gen. iv. 21 (Simonis, Arcanum Fonnarum,
p. 476). Fiirst (Handw. s. r.) explains Mahalath
as the name of a musical corps dwelling at Abel-
liehoiah, just as by Gittith he understands the
band of Levite minstrels at Gaih Kimmon.
On the other hand, the opinion that Mahalath
contains an enigmatical indication of the subject
of the psalm, which we have seen hinted at in the
quotations from Jarehi given above, is adopted by
Hengeteiiberg to the exclusion of every other. He
translates " on Mahalath " by " on sickness," re-
ferring to the spiritual malady of the sons of men
( Comm. alter die Ptaim.). Lengerke (die Ptabnen)
adopts the same view, which had been previously
advanced by Arias Montanua.
A third theory is that of Delitzseh (Comm. M.
d. Ptalter), who consilient Mahalath as indicating
to the choir the manner in which the psalm was
to be sung, and compares the modern terms metto,
andante metto. Ewald leaves it untranslated and
unexplained, regarding it as probably an abbrevia-
tion of a longer sentence (Dichter d. Alt. Bundet,
174). The latest speculation upon the subject is
that of Mr. Thrupp, who, after dismissing as mere
conjecture the interpretation of Mahalath as a musi-
cal instrument, or as netnett, propounds, ss more
probable than either, that It is « a proper nan.*
borrowed from Gen. xxviii. 9, and used by David
as an enigmatical designation of Abigail, in the
same manner as, in Psalms vii., xxxiv., the names
Cush and Abimelech are employed to denote Sbimei
and Achish. The real Mahalath, Esau's wife, was
the sister of Nebajoth, from whom were descended
an Arabian tribe famous for their wealth in sheep;
the name eight be therefore not unfitly applied to
one who, though now wedded to David, had till
recently been the wife of the rich sbeep-owner of
the village of Carmel" (Introd. to the Ptaimt, 1.
314 '. It can scarcely be said that Mr. Thrapr
has replaced conjecture by certainty.
W. A, W.
Digitized by
Google
1758 MAHALATH LBANKOTH
MAHALATH LEA1CNOTH (nVjD
rPSjfr : MacAM rev iroKpi^rat- Jfaluidh ad
rtqxmitndum). The Genera version of Ps. lxxxviii.,
hi the title of which theee words occur, he* '• upon
HeJath Leannoth," and In the margin, " that is,
to humble. It was the beginning of a song, by the
lune whereof this Psalm was sung." It is a re-
markable proof of the obscurity which envelops the
former of the two words that the same commenta-
tor explains it differently in each of the passages in
which it occurs. In De Wetto's translation it is a
"mite" in Pa. liii.. a "guitar" in Ps. lxxxviii. ;
and while Jarchi in the former passage explains it
as a musical instrument, be describes the latter as
referring to " one sick of love and affliction who
was afflicted with the punishments of the Captivity."
Symmachus, again, as quoted by Theodoret ( Comm,
in Pi. 87), has 8ix<W>> vnl<** this be a mistake
of the copyist for Sia xopoC, as in Ps. Gil. Augus-
tine and Theodoret both understand kamoth of
responsive singing;. Theophylact says " they danced
while responding to the music of the organ."
Jerome, in his version of the Hebrew, has " per
ehorum ad pnecmendum." The Hebrew H'37,
in the Piel Conj.. certainly signifies "to sing," as
in Ex. xxxil. 18; b. xxvii. 2; and in this sense it
is taken by Ewald in the title of Ps. lxxxviii. In
like manner Junius and Tremeliius render " upon
Mahalath Leannoth" "to be sung to the wind
instruments." There is nothing, however, in the
construction of the psalm to show that it was
adapted for responsive singing; and if leiitmatk be
simply "to sing," it would seem, as Olahausen
observes, almost unnecessary. It has reference,
more probably, to the character of the psalm, and
might be rendered " to humble, or afflict," in which
tense the root occurs in verse 7. In support of this
•nay be compared, " to bring to remembrance," in
the titles of Pas. xxxriii. and but. ; and " to thank,"
1 Chr. xvi. 7. Mr. Thrupp remarks that this
psalm (lxxxviii.) " should be regarded as a solemn
exercise of humiliation; it is more deeply melan-
choly than any other in the Psalter " (Jntr. to Me
Psalnu, il. 99). Hengstenberg, in accordance with
the view he takes of Mahalath, regards Pa lxxxviii.
as the prayer of one recovered from severe bodily
sickness, rendering Utmnoth "concerning affliction,"
and the whole " on the sickness of distress." Lertg-
erke has a similar explanation, which is the same
with that of Piscator, but is too forced.
W. A. W.
MA'HALI C'jng [sfct, mjirm]: MooKl;
[Vat] Alex. MooA«: Moholi), Maiiu, the son
if Merari. Hi* name occurs in the A. V. but once
in this form (Ex. vi. 19).
MAHANAIM (Q^qD = new conns or
hottt: [naptpftoKi,] TlaptiifioKoJ, [Rom. KopO,
Vat] Kcuuiv; hWfi, Maraffp, [Haarafp,
♦to. .J Joseph. Btov arpvrix*to»- [Mahanaim,]
Manaim, [Cnjtra]), a town on the east of the
'ordan, intimately connected with the early and
Middle history of the nation of Israel. It purport*
to have received its name at the most important
a This paragraph U added In the LXX.
» For this observation the writer Is indebted to a
Msmen by Prof. Stanley (Mastborough, 1843).
* Jabbok, P2?; wrestled," p3N\
IfAWtTffATHf
rida of the lifo of Jacob. He had parted frose
Laban in peace after their baxardous encounter as
Mount Gifead (Gen. xxxL), and the next step ia
the journey to Canaan brings him to Mahanaim
" Jacob went on his way; and he lifted up his eyes
and saw the camp of God" encamped; and the
angels (or messengers) of God met him. And
when he saw them he said, This is God's host
(mdhaneh), and he called the name of that place
Mahanaim." It is but rarely, and in none but the
earliest of theee ancient records, that we meet with
the occasion of a name being conferred; and gen-
erally, as has been already remarked, such nar-
ratives are full of difficulties, arising from the)
peculiar turns and involutions of words, which form
a very prominent feature in this primeval literature,
at once so simple and so artificial. [Beer lahai-
koi, Eh-hakkork, etc.] The form in which the)
history of Mahanaim is cast is no exception to this
rule. It is in some respects perhaps more charac-
teristic and more pregnant with hidden meaning
than any other. Thus the "host" of angels —
"God's host" — which is said to have bean the
occasion of the name, is only mentioned in a cur-
sory manner, and in the singular number— "the
[one] boat; "while the "two hosts" into which
Jacob divided bis caravan when anticipating an
attack from Esau, the boat of Leah and the host
of Rachel, agreeing in their number with the name
Mahanaim ("two hosts"), are dwelt upon with
constant repetition and emphasis. So also tbe same
word is employed jbr the " messengers " of God
and tbe "messengers" to Esau; and so, further
on in the history, the "face" of God and the
" face " of Esau are named by the same word (xxiii.
30, xxxili. 10). It is as if there were a correspond-
ence throughout between the human and the divine,
the inner and outer parte of the event, — tbe host
of God and the hosts of Jacob ; the messengers of
God and the messengers of Jacob; the face of God
and the face of Esau. 6 Tbe very name of the tor-
rent on whose banks the event took place seems to
be derived from the " wrestling " ' of tbe patriarch
with tbe angel. The whole narrative hovers be-
tween the real and the ideal, earth and heaven.
How or when the town of Mahanaim arose on
the spot thus signalized we are not told. We next
meet with it in the records of the conquest. The
line separating Gad from Manasseh would appear
to have run through or close to it, since it is named
in the specification of the frontier of each tribe
(Josh. xiii. 26 and 80). It was also on the southern
boundary of the district of Bashan (ver. 80). But
it was certainly within the territory of Gad (Josh,
xxi. 88, 39), and therefore on the south side of the
torrent Jabbok, as indeed we should infer from the
history of Genesis, in which it lies between Gilead
probably the modern Jtbtl J Had — and the tor-
rent. The town with its " suburbs " was allotted
to the service of the Mcrarite Levites (Josh, xx*.
39; 1 Chron. vi. 80). From some cause — the
sanctity of its original foundation, or the strength
of its position'' — Mahanaim had become in the
time of the monarchy a place of mark. When-
after the death of Saul, Abner undertook the estab-
lishment of the kingdom of Ishboabeth, unable tc
d To the latter Joavphus tesanc* : Haacafwaaf-
so he ranters the Bebraw Milmislai i»»»f« i a*
t>XvawrdT( >«*« (.Ant. vii. 9, f 8).
Digitized by
Google
MAHANAIM
sceupy any of the town* of Benjamin or Ephraim,
which wen then in the bands of the Philistines,
ha fixed on Mahanaim as fail head-quarters. Then
the new king was crowned orer all brad, east a*
well a* watt of the Jordan (S Sam. li. 9). From
thence Abner made hia diaiutrotu expedition to
Gibson (tar. 13), and there apparently the unfor-
tunate Ishbosheth was murdered (iv. 5), the mur-
derer* making off to Hebron by the way of the
valley of the Jordan.
The aame causes whieh led Abner to fix Ish-
boabeth'a residence at Mahanaim probably induced
David to take refuge there when driven out of the
we st e rn part of hii kingdom by Absalom. He pro-
ceed* thither without neritation or inquiry, but as
if when Jerusalem was lost it was the one alternative
(3S«m.xvii. 34; lK.il. 8). It was than a walled
town, capacious enough to contain the " hundreds "
and the " thousands " of David's followers (xviii.
1, 4; and eompare " ten thousand," ver. 8); with
gates, and the usual provision for the watchman of
s fortified town (see the remark of Josephua quoted
in the note). But its associations with royal per-
sons were not fortunate. One king had already
been murdered within its walls, and it was here
that David received the news of the death of Ab-
salom, and made the walla of the u chamber over
the gate " resound with his cries.
Mahanaim was the seat of one of Solomon's
commissariat officers (1 K. iv. 14); and it is alluded
to in toe Song which bears his name (vi. 13), in
terms which, though very obscure, seem at any rate
to show that at the date of the composition of that
poem it was still in repute for sanctity, possibly
turnout for some ceremonial commemorating the
original vision of the patriarch : " What will ye see
in the Shulamite ? We see as it were the dance
(nuckolak, a word usually applied to dances of a
religious nature ; see vol. I. p. 689) of the two host*
of Mahanaim."
On the monument of Sheshonk (Shishak) at
Karnak, in the 33d eartouch — one of those which
are believed to contain the names of Israelite cities
conquered by that king —a name appears which is
read as Afa-ha-n-m*, that is, Mahanaim. The ad-
joining cartouches contain names which are read
M Beth-sbean, Shunem, Hegiddo, Beth-boron,
Gibeon, and other Israelite names (Brugsch, Geogr.
der Noekbartitndtr jEgyptent, etc., p. 61). If this
interpretation may be relied on, it shows that the
invasion of Shishak waa more extensive than we
should gather from the records of the Bible (3 Chr.
xii), which are occupied mainly with occurrences
at the metropolis. Possibly the army entered by the
plains of Philistia and Sharon, ravaged Esdraelon
ind some towns like Mahanaim just beyond Jordan,
.jid then returned, either by the aame route or by
the Jordan Valley, to Jerusalem, attacking it hat.
This would account for Rahoboam's non-resistance,
and also for the fact, of which special mention Is
made, that many of the chief men of the country
bad taken refuge in the dty. It should, however,
be remarked that the names occur in most promis-
cuous order, and that none has been found resem-
bling Jerusalem.
As to the identification of M»»»'!»''n with any
modern dte or remains, little can be add. To
Eussbius and Jerome it appears to have been un-
anown. A place sailed Makntk doss certainly
exist among the villages of the east of Jordan,
though Its exact position is not so certain. The
mention of H appears to he that of the
MAHANAIM
1757
Jewish traveller hap-Parchi, according to whom
•• Hachnajim is Machnth, and stands about half a
day's journey in a due east direction from Beth-
san " (Zunx, in Aaher*s Ac*/, of Tndela, p. 408)
Mahnth is named in the lists of Dr. Hi Smith
among the places of Jasef AjUm(Kob. BibL Ret. 1st
sd., Hi. App. 166). It is marked on Kkpsrt's map
(1856) as exactly east of Beth-shan, but about 80
miles distant therefrom — «. e. not half but a long
whole day's journey It is also mentioned, and
its Identity with Mahanaim upheld, by Porter
(Handbook, p. 833). But the distance of Makntk
from the Jordan and from both the Wady Zirln
and the Yarmik — each of which has claims to
represent the torrent Jabbok — seems to forbid thi)
conclusion. At any rate the pdnt may be recom-
mended to the investigation of future travellers
east of the Jordan. 6.
• Mr. Porter's remark (Handbook, B. 833) is
merely that " perhaps " Mahnth may be the ancient
Mahanaim ; but he cannot be add to " uphold " that
identity (see above). In his more recent artidi>
on this name in Kltto's Cyclop, of Bibtieal Lilera-
tart (1866) he suggests that " the ruins of Gerssa,
the most extendve and splendid east of the Jor-
dan, may occupy the rite of Mahanaim." On the
other hand, Mr. Tristram, who vtrited Mahnek,
regards the other sa altogether the better opinion.
He describes the place as near •' a fine nature!
pond, with traces of many buildings, grass-grown
and beneath the soil," and " sufficiently exten-
dve to have belonged to a considerable place,"
though "there is no trace of a waD, such ss
must have been there when David sat in the gats
and wept for his son Absalom." He admits that
the situation of Makntk so for north of the
Jabbok presents some difficulty, but argues that
this and other objections are not insuperable.
'• Mabneh is on toe borders of Bashan (see Josh.
xlU. 30), and though to the north, it is also to the
east of the Jabbok, and therefo r e outride of the
line where the river was the boundary of Oilead
and Bashan. It is probable, also, that in Genesis
the ■ Mount of Gilead ' may be used in a general
signification — not confined to Jebd Osha, but In-
duding also Ajlfin, which was certainly a portion
of Gilead. Considering the geography of the region,
it would have been more natural for Jacob to take
this course in his flight from l-aban, than to bar*
gone south to Jebd Osha, and then turned nortn
wards agdn to cress the deep ravine of the Jabbok.
There is therefore, I conceive, every probability
that the name of Mahanaim has been preserved in
Makntk, and that these grass-grown mounds repre-
sent all that Is left of the capital of Ishbosbetk
(8 Sam. U. 8) and the refuge of David " (LandoJ
Itrael, 2d od., p. 487 f.).
Mr. Grove also, who writes the above article,
represents Mabneh as probably Mahanaim in his
Index to Clark's Bible Allot, p. 108. It must be
that he would abate something at present from the
force of Ms own objections ss urged above. Thi
region is still remarkable for its forest* of oaks. It
was in the boughs of such a tree that Absalom was
caught by his hair, and, thus entangled, was shun.
" As I rode under a grand old oak tree," says Mr.
Tristram, " I too lost my hat and turban, which
were caught by a bough " (Land of Itratl, p. 467).
The defeat, too, of Absalom and his army was the
mors oompsKS because "the battle was scat tared
over the foes of all the country, and the wood
Digitized by
Google
1758
MAHANEB-DAN
favoured more people that da; tan the sword
ierunred " (8 Sam. xviii. 8). The mini of Mak-
mA are on one of the branches of fVndg d-JItmiit,
which b known as Wady Mahmh on that account
(Rob. Phft. Googr. p. 88). U.
MA'HANKH-DAN Q"TTr?r]9: n-aptn-
JJoAaj AaV: CVwtra Am.- Catnp-of-Oan : Lath.
•4m £ajrer Dam), a name which commemorated
the hut encampment of the band of six hundred
Danite warriora before setting out on their expedi-
tion to Latah. The position of the spot is specified
with great precision, aa '•behind Kirjath-jearim "
(Jndg. xriii. 18), and as "between Zorah and
Eshtaol" (xiii. 15; here the name is translated in
she A. V.). Kirjath-jearim is identified with toler-
able certainty in Kttriet d-Enad, and Zorah in
Sur'a, abont 7 miles S. W. of it But no site
baa yet been suggested for Eshtaol which would be
compatible with the above conditions, requiring as
they do that Kirjath-jearim should lie between it
and Zorah. In KwhU, a ••remarkable conical hiU
about an hour from Kuritt ti-Ennk, towards Jeru-
salem," south of the road, we have a site which is
not dissimilar in name to Eshtaol, while its position
sufficiently answers the requirements. Mr. Wil-
liams (ffaty Ctlg, I. It note) was shown a site on
the north side of the Wadg ImniL, N. X. K. from
Dtir et-ffowa — which bore the name of Bat
Mahrmem, and which he suggests may be identical
with Mahaneh Dan. The position is certainly very
suitable ; but the name does not occur in the lists
or maps of other travellers — not even of Tbblex
(Orille Wandermng, 1869); and the question must
be left with that started above, of the identity of
Ktutul and Eshtaol, for the investigation of future
explorers and Arabic scholars.
The statement In xviii. It of the origin of the
name is so precise, and has so historical an air,
that it supplies a strong reason for believing that
the events there recorded took place earlier than
those in xiii. 35, though in the present arrange-
ment of the book of Judges they come after them.
G.
MA'HARAI [8 ayL] OTOQ [*«*», $wjfi\:
Noses'; Alex. MocpMi, in t Sam', xxiil. 88; Mapaf,
[Tat FA. Nc<0«,] Alex. Moopu, 1 Cbr. xi, 30;
MriMwl, Alex. Moopmi, 1 Chr. xxvii. 13 : Maharat,
Marai, 1 Chr. xxvii. 13), an inhabitant of Neto-
phah in the tribe of Judah, and one of David's
captains. He was of the family of Zerah, and
commanded the tenth monthly division of the
army.
MA'HATH (nntl [pern. Jtnpan, centr]:
Madfl; [Vat Met:] Mahalk). 1. The son of
Amaaai, a Kohathita of the house of Korah, and
ancestor of Heman the singer (1 Chr. vi. 35). In
ver. 36 he is called Ahimoth (Hervey, QmtaL p.
116).
8. (Alex. HatB, 8 Chr. xxlx. 18; [Tat, by inclu-
aVn of the following word, Oanuftmraias, t Chr.
xxxi. 13.] ) Also a Kohathita, who, in the reign of
Hezekiah, was appointed, as one of the representa-
tives of his house, to assist in the purification of
the Levites, by which they prepared themselves to
(leanse the Temple from the traces of idolatrous
worship. He was apparently the same who, with
vther Levites, had the charge of the tithes and
ledicated offerings, under the superintendence of
Sarwuiah and Shitnei.
MAHMTB8, THE
MA'HAVTTB, THE (CMqjpn, I «. >thi
Macharitra " : [Rom. i Haiti; Vat FA.] o Mmi
Alex. • Maawty: Mahnmilet), the designation of
Elid, one of the warriors of king David's guard,
whose name is preserved in the catalogue of 1
Chron. only (xi. 46). It will be observed that the
word is plural in the Hebrew text, but the whole
of the list is evidently in so confused a state, that
it is impossible to draw any inference from that
circumstance, The Targum has H1JQ9 V%"\i
"from Machavua." Kennicott (Dissert 831) con
jectures that originally the Hebrew may have stood
O^inrTO, "from the Hivitea." Others have pro-
posed to Insert an N and read " the Mahanaimite "
(Furst, Ham*, p. 781 a; Bertbeau, Carom*, p. 136).
G.
MAHA'ZIOTH (n'WTTTg [vuim]: M«-
f<Ml [Tat in ver. 4, Vlt\(a»h Alex. Maa(u*:
Jtiikarioih), one of the 14 sons of Heman the
Kohathite, who formed part of the Temple choir,
under the leadership of their father with Asaph
and Jeduthun. He was chief of the 83d course of
twelve musicians (1 Chr. xxv. 4, 30), whose office
it was to bbw the horns. [Hothih, Amer. ed.]
MA'HER-BHA'LAL-HASH'-BAZ
(T$ Brn bbl^irTQ: Tax4s>ts-ir»AfweF«t«ws
*po»6*tmr: Acctltra tpolia dttrahtrt fatina),
son of Isaiah, and younger brother of Shear-jashub,
of whom nothing more is known than that bis
name was given by Divine direction, to indicate thai
Damascus and Samaria were soon to be plundered
by the king of Assyria (Is. viii. 1-4; comp. p.
1153). In reference to the grammatical construc-
tion of the several parts of the name, whether the
verbal parts are imperatives, indicatives, infinitives,
or verbal adjectives, leading versions, as well as the
opinions of critics, diner, though all agree aa to
its general import (comp. Drechsler in be.).
E.H— e.
MAHXAHtnbrTQ [dSjense]: MoAd,Num.
xxvi. 33; Haaki, [Alex. MoXa,] Num. xxvii 1;
Josh. xvii. 3; MoAai, Num. xxxvi. 11; MaeAa';
Alex. MooA.a, 1 Chr. vii. 18: Afantn in all cases,
except Mtihotn, 1 Chr. vii. 18), the eldest of the
five daughters of Zelopbehad, the grandson of
Manasseh, in whose favor the law of succession to an
inheritance was altered (Num. xxvii. 1-11). She
married her cousin, and received as her share a por-
tion of the territory of Manasseh, east of the Jordan.
MAHT.I OVre [aicef,, pining]: n-*J;
[Tat -Xei, and once Mow*.;] Mohoti). L The
son of Merari, the son of Levi, and ancestor of the
family of the Mahutbs (Num. ill. 80; 1 Chr. vi.
19, 89, xxiv. 86). In the last quoted verse there
is apparently a gap in the text, IJbni and Shinies
belonging to the family of Qerabom (comp. ver. id,
43), and FJeasar and Kish being afterwards to
scribed as the sons of Mahli (1 Chr. xxiii. 31,
xxiv. 38). One of bis descendants. SheraUah,
was appointed one of the ministers of the Temple
in the days of Kara (Ear. vtii. 181. He is called
Mahau in the A. T. of Ex. vi. 16, Mou in 1
Esdr. viii. 47, and Machu in the margin.
3. The eon of Mushl, and grandson of Merer
(1 Chr. vi. <•/, xxiil. 33, xxiv. 60).
MAHTJTB8, THE (^rprr £•" •*•»•]
Digitized by
Google
MAHLOK
f HtaKt [Vat -A«; in eh. xxvi,, LXX. omit] :
ifo/uHto, MohoS), the descendants of Mabli the
■on of Henri (Num. iii. 38, xxvi. 58).
MAHIiON (l'l^nO [piningy. MooJuir:
Mwibn), the Snt husband of Ruth. He end hie
brother Chilion were sons of Elimelech end Naomi,
and are described, exactly in the aune terms with
a eubaaquent member of their home — Jean, — aa
" Ephrathitee of Bethleheni-judah " (Ruth i. 9, b;
It. 9, 10; oomp. 1 Sam. xrii. 13).
It ia uncertain which waa the elder of the two.
In the narratire (i. 2, 6) Hahlon ia mentioned lint;
but in hia formal address to the elders in the gate
(it. 9), Bou says " Chilion and Habkm." Like
hia brother, Mahlon died in the land of Moab with-
out offspring, which in the Targum on Ruth (i. 5)
ia explained to hare been a Judgment for their
transgression of the law in mamring a Moabiteaa.
In the Targum on 1 Chr. It. 39, Mahlon ia identi-
fied with Joaah, possibly on account of the double
meaning of the Hebrew word which follows, and
which signifies both " had dominion" and "mar-
ried." (See that passage.) [Chiliok, Amer. ad.]
O.
MA"HOL (VriJp [« donee]: McU; Alex.
MaovA: ifakot). The father of Ethan the Ezrah-
Ite, and Heman, Chalcol, and Darda, the four men
most famous for wisdom next to Solomon himself
(1 K. ir. 81), who in 1 Chr. ii. 6 are the sons and
Immediate descendants of Zerah. Mahol ia evi-
dently a proper name, but some consider it an
appellative, and translate " the sons of Mahol " by
" the sons of song," or " sons of the choir," in
reference to their skill in music, lu this case it
would be more correct to render It " sons of the
dance; " michdl corresponding to the Greek rif»
hi its original sense of " a dance in a ring," though
it has not followed the meanings which hare been
attached to its derivatirea " chorus " and •' choir."
Jarchi says that " they were skilled in composing
hymns which were recited in the dances of song."
Another explanation still is that Ethan and his
brethren the minstrels were called "the sons of
Mahol," because m&chdl is the name of an instru-
ment of music in Ps. cL 4. Josephus (AnL riii. 9,
| 6) calls him *H><W. W. A. W.
MAIA'NEAS (MmdVvoj; [Aid. MouuWu:]
em. in Vulg.) = Maabkiaii, 7 (1 Eadr. ix. 48);
probably a corruption of Maasias.
•MAIL. [Arms,!!. 1.]
• MAINSAIL, Acta xxrii. 40. [Ship, (6.)]
M A'KAZ (y^O [end, perh. oorrfer-fosjn] :
[Rom. Max/t; Tat.] Mayniat; Alex. Mavjias:
MacetB), a place, apparently a town, named once
wily (1 K. It. 9). in the specification of the juris-
diction of Solomon's commissariat officer, Ben-
Dekar. The places which accompany it — Shaal-
blm, Beth-shemesh. and Ekm-beth-hanan — seem
to bare been on the wes tern slopes of the moun-
tains of Judah and Benjamin, >. '. the district
occupied by the tribe of Dan. But Makac has not
been discovered. MIchmash — the reading of the
LXX. (but of no other version) — is hardly possible,
both for distance and direction, though the posi-
tion and subsequent importance of Mishmash, and
MATTIfgnAIT
1759
• f(. aideon >, Baal's, abl Darn's attacks. (Bee
aVriwrxxxra, i. 788 ft.]
» Tns Moslem tradition is that the aMaek teak asses
the great fertility of its neighborhood, render it
not in unlikely seat for a commissariat officer.
Q.
* MAKE has the sense of " do," « be occupies.
with,"— •> What makat thou In this place " (Judg.
xviii. 8). The use alao of " make " as signifying
" pretend," " feign " (Josh. riii. 15, ix. 4; 9 Sam.
xiii. 6; Luke xxir. 28), deserves notice. H.
MA'KBD (Mews); Alex. M«e0: Syr. .Motor.
Vulg. Magtlh), one of the "strong and great"
cities of Gilead — Josephus aayj Galilee, but this
most be an error — into which the Jews were driven
by the Ammonites under Tlmotheus, and front
which they were delivered by Judas Maccabans (I
Mace t. 98, 88; in the latter passage the name U
given in the A. V. Magku). By .Josephus (Aaf.
xii. 8, f 8) it is not mentioned. Some of the ctbst
cities named in this narrative have been Identified;
but no name corresponding to Maked has yet been
discovered; and the conjecture of Sehwarz (p. 930)
that it is a corruption of Muucmt (1*110 for
nDQ), though Ingenious, can hardly be accepted
without further proof. G.
MAKHETLOTH (nbiipQ: MarnAaM:
MncthMh), a place only mentioned In Num. xxxiii.
95 as that of a desert encampment of toe Israelites.
The name is plural in form, and may signify
" places of meeting." H. H.
MAKKEDAH IprfflQ [place tf +tp
he.rrlt]: Moxntti, once [Josh. xv. 41] McurnSdV
[Vat also Josh. x. 28]; Alex. MaurnSa-' Syr.
Afolcw, and Nakoda: Maeeda), a place memor-
able in the annals of the conquest of Canaan as the
scene of the execution by Joshua of the fire con-
federate kings: an set by which the victory of
Beth-horon was sealed and consummated, and the
subjection of the entire southern portion of the
country insured. Makkedah is first mentioned
(.Tosh. x. 10) with Azekah, In the narrative of the
battle of Beth-horon, as the point to which the
rout extended ; but it is difficult to decide whether
this refers to one of the operations in the earlier
portion of the fight, or is not rather an anticipa-
tion of its close — of the circumstances related in
detail in vv. 11 and 18, Ac. But with regard to
the event which has conferred immortality on Mak-
kedah — the " crowning mercy " — (if we may ho
allowed to borrow an expression from a not dis-
similar transaction in our own history) — there ia
fortunately no obscurity or uncertainty. It un-
questionably occurred in the afternoon of that
tremendous day, which " was like no day before or
after it" The order of the events of the twenty-
four hours which elapsed after the departure froia
the ark and tabernacle at the camp seems to havt
been aa follows. The march from the depths of
the Jordan Valley at GikmL through the rooky
clefta of the ravines which lead up to the central
hills, was msde during the night. By or before
dawn they had reached Gibeon ; then — at the
favorite hour for such surprises <* — came the sud
den onset snd the first carnage' ; then the chase
and the appeal of Joshua to the rising sun, just
darting his level raya orer the ridge of the hill of
on a Triday, and that the day was prolonssd by one
half, to prevent <h.e Sabbath being encroached uveal
(See JaUaddu, ZVmafc a/ Jewesses, r 917 )
Digitized by
Google
1760
MAKKEDAH
MALACHI
Gibeon in the rear; then the furious storm
tog «iid completing the rout. In the man time
the detection of the five chiefs in their hiding-piece
lis been communicated to Joshua, and, aa soon as
the matter in hand will allow, he rushes on with
he whole of his force to Makkedah (ver. SI ). The
tat thing to be done is to form a regular camp
ronD). The next to dispose of the five chiefs,
sod that by no hurried massacre, but in so delib-
jnte and judicial a manner as at once to infuse
terror into the Canaanites and confidence into his
own followers, to show to both that " thus shall
Jehovah do to all the enemies" of Israel. The
save in the r ece ss es of which the wretched kings
wen hidden was a well-known one." It was close
ko the town ;* we may safely conclude that the » hole
proceeding was in full view of the walls. At last
the ceremonial is over, the strange and significant
parable has been acted, and the bodies of Adoni-
■edek and his companions are swinging ' from the
trees — possibly the trees of some grove sacred to
the abominable rites of the Canaanite Ashtaroth —
in the afternoon sun. Then Joshua turns to the
town itself. To force the walls, to put toe king
and all the inhabitants to the sword (ver. 28) is
to that indomitable energy, still fresh after the
gigantic labors and excitements of the last twenty-
four hours— the work of an hour or two. And
now the evening has arrived, the sun is at last
sinking — the first sun that has set since the depar-
ture from Gilgsl — and the tragedy is terminated
by cutting down the five bodies from the trees, and
restoring them to the cave, which is then so blocked
up with stones as henceforth never again to become
refuge for friend or foe of Israel.
The taking of Makkedah was the first in that
series of sieges and destructions by which the Great
Captain possessed himself of the main points of de-
base throughout this portion of the country. Its
situation has hitherto eluded discovery. • The cata-
logue of the cities of Judah in Joshua (xv. 41)
places it iu the Shtftlah or maritime plain, but
unfortunately it forma one of a group of towns of
which few or none are identified. The report of
Eusebius and Jerome ( Onomasticon, " Haceda " ) is
that it lay 8 miles to the east of Eleutheropolis,
Beit-Jibrin, a position irreconcilable with every
requirement of the narrative. Porter (Handbook
884, 251) suggests a ruin on the northern slope of
the WaHy e> Burnt, bearing the somewhat similar
name of ei-Kttdiah ; but it is difficult to under-
stand bow this can have been the position of Mak-
kedah, which we should imagine would be found,
if it ever is found, considerably nearer Ramleh or
Jimzu.
Van de Velde ( Memoir, p. 333) would place it at
Burnett, a village standing on a low hill 6 or 7
miles N. W. of Beit-Jibrin ; but the only claim of
this site appears to be the reported existence in the
a It is throughout dlldnfuiihed by the definite artj-
■"> rrjy&Jft, ''rtscave."
» The preposition used Is the suns as that employed
to describe the position of the five Hugs In the can —
H ipSa, "tolsa»ksaah»-rn»na ) "In the
save."
« The wort H^JJ, rendered "hang" fat ver. 38,
has the tone of suspending. See Ps. cxxxvH. 3 ; 3
lam xvU. 1Q| aad other passages where It mast have
neighborhood of a large cavern, while its i
at least 8 miles further from Beth-boron than i
eUKUdiah — would make the view of the narrative)
taken above impossible. G.
MAKTESH (H&35a?T, * with the .let ar
tide [see below] : * umuimufUwn: Pila), a place,
evidently in Jerusalem, the inhabitants of whict
are denounced by Zephaniah (i. 11). Ewald con-
jectures (Prop/ielen, 364) that it was the " Phoe-
nician quarter " of the city, in which the traders
of that nation — the Canaanites (A. V. " mer-
chants "), who in this passage are -m-intH with
Ma ctes h — resided, titer the custom in oriental
towns. As to which part of the city this quarter
occupied we have little or no indication. The
meaning of « Mactesh " is probably a deep hollow,
literally a <• mortar." • This the Targum identi-
fies with the torrent Kedron, the deep basin or
ravine of which sinks down below the eastern wmH
and southeastern corner of the city. The Targum,
probably with an eye to the traditional unclean-
ness of this valley, and to the idol-worship perpe-
trated at its lower end, says: « Howl ye inhabitants
of the torrent Kedron, for all the people are broken
whose works were like the works of the people of
Canaan." But may it not, with equal probability
have been the deep valley which separated the
Temple from the upper city, and which at the time
cf Titus' siege was, as it still is, crowded with the
« bazaars " of the merchants? (See p. 1306 a.)
G.
MAI/AOHI PDN^D: M^^«, in the
title only : Malachiae),' the last, and therefore
called "the seal " of the prophets, as his prophecies
constitute the closing book of the canon. His name
is probably contracted from Malachijah, « messenger
of Jehovah," as Abi (3 K. xrili. 8) from Abjjah
(3 Chr. xxix. 1). Of his personal history nothing
is known. A tradition preserved in Peeudo-Epi-
phanius (De ITris Praph.) relates that Makchl
was of the tribe of Zebulun, and born after the
captivity at Sopha (Zoom) in the territory of that
tribe. According to the same apocryphal story he
died young, and was buried with his fathers in bis
own country. Jerome, in the preface to his Com-
mentary on Malnchi, mentions a belief which was
current among the Jews, that Malachi was identi-
cal with Ezra the priest, because the circumstances
recorded in the narrative of the latter are also men-
tioned by the prophet. The Targum of Jonathan
ben Uzziel, on the words '• by the hand of Malachi "
(i. 1), gives the gloss '• whose name is called Ears
the scribe." With equal probability Malachi has
been identified with Mordecai, Nebemiah, and Ze-
rubbabel. The LXX. render " by Malachi " (Mat
i. 1), "by the hand of his angel; " and this trans-
lation appears to have given rise to the idea that
Ma la chi , as well as Haggai and John the Baptist,
It Is an entirely distinct term from
S|2J, which, though also translated by
the A. T., really means to crucify.
rf One of the few oases In which eur translators have
rep rese n ted the Hebrew letter Cap* bj K, which tusy
oommooiy rese r v e for Kopk. (See slso afjotoxia.]
< The literal AqulU renders tin words bj ah reVllL-
per; Theodotton, sViygMn. The Hebrew sua k
ssthat employed m Jodg. xr. 19 for the
hollow basin or combe In Lshl from which the sattaj
hent forth for the relief of f
Digitized by
Google
MAliACHI
was an angel in human shape 'comp. Mai. ill. 1 ;
2 Eadr. i. 40; Jerome, Comm. in Bag. i. 13).
Cyril alludes to this belief only to express his dis-
approbation, and characterizes those who held it as
romancers (ot juotwk ifiWfM)**""' *• T. *.)•
Another Hebrew tradition associated Halachi with
Haggai and Zechariah as the companions of Daniel
wheu he saw the vision recorded in Dan. x. 7
(Smith's Seltel Di*com$es, p. 214; ed. 1660), and
as among the first members of the Great Synagogue,
which consisted of 120 elders.
The time at which his prophecies were delivered
Is not difficult to ascertain. Cyril makes him con-
temporary with Haggai and Zechariah, or a little
later. Syncellus (p. 240 B) places these three proph-
ets under Joshua the son of Josedec. That Mal-
aehi was contemporary with Nehemiah, Is rendered
probable by a comparison of ii. 8 with Neh. xiii.
16; 11. 10-16 with Neh. xiii. 23, Ac.; and iii. 7-12
with Neh. xiii. 10, Ac. That he prophesied alter
the times of Haggai and Zechariah is inferred from
his omitting to mention the restoration of the
Temple, and from no allusion being made to him
by Kara. The Captivity was already a thing of the
.ong past, and is not referred to. The existence of
X» • ecpUrservice is presupposed in i. 10, iii. 1, 10.
Tho Jewish nation had still a political chief (i. 8),
distinguished by the same title as that borne by
Neliemiah (Neh. xii. 26), to which Gesenius assigns
. Tertian origin. Hence Vitringa concludes that
Matachi delivered his prophecies after the second
return of Nehemiah from Persia (Neh. xiii. 6), and
subsequently to the 32d year of Artaxerxes Longi-
maaus (cir. B. c. 420), which is the date adopted
by Kennicott and Hales, and approved by Davidson
(Introd. p. 08-5). It may be mentioned that in the
zzrar Olam Rabba (p. 65, ed. Meyer), the date of
Malachi's prophecy is assigned, with that of Haggai
and Zechariah, to the second year of Darius ; and
his death in the Seder Olam Zuta (p. 105) is
placed, with that of the same two prophets, in the
62d year of the Medes and Persians. The prin-
cipal reasons adduced by Vitringa, and which appear
conclusively to fix the time of Malachi's prophecy
as contemporary with Nehemiah, are the follow-
ing: The offenses denounced by Malachi as pre-
vailing among the people, and especially the cor-
ruption of the priests by marrying foreign wives,
correspond with the actual abuses with which
Nehemiah had to contend in his efforts to bring
about a reformation (comp. Mai. ii. 8 with Neh.
xiii. 29). The alliance of the high-priest's family
with Tobiah the Ammonite (Neh. xiii. 4, 28) and
Sanballat the Horonite had introduced neglect of
the customary Temple-service, and the offerings and
tithes due to the Levites and priests, in consequence
of which the Temple was forsaken (Neh. xiii. 4-13),
and the Sabbath openly profaned (id. 16-21). The
short interval of Nehemiah'a absence from Jerusa-
lem had been sufficient for the growth of these
corruptions, and on his return he found it necessary
to put them down with a strong hand, and to do
over again the work that Eras had done a few
yean before. From the striking parallelism be-
tween the state of things indicated in Malachi's
prophecies and that actually existing on Nehemiah'a
return from the court of Artaxerxes, it is on all
accounts highly probable that the efforts of the
secular governor were on this occasion seconded by
the preaching of •' JehovaL a messenger," and that
Kabchi occupied the same position with regard u>
the reformation under Nehemiah, which Isaiah held
1U
HALACHI
1761
in the time of Hezekiah, and Jeremiah in that of
Josiah. The last chapter of canonical Jewish his-
tory is the key to the last chapter of its prophecy.
The book of Malachi is contained in four chap-
ters in our version, as in the LXX., Vulgate, and
Peshito-Syriac. In the Hebrew the 3d and 4th
form but one chapter. The whole prophecy nat-
urally divides itself into three sections, in the first
of which Jehovah is represented as the loving father
and ruler of his people (i. 2-ii. 9); in the second,
as the supreme God and father of all (ii. 10-16);
and in the third, as their righteous slid final judge
(ii. 17-end). These may be again subdivided into
smaller sections, each of which follows a certain
order: first, a short sentence; then the skeptical
questions which might be raised by the people;
and, finally, their full and triumphant refutation.
The formal and almost scholastic manner oi uie
prophecy seemed to Ewald to indicate that it wat
rather delivered In writing than spoken publicly.
But though this may be true of the prophecy in its
present shape, which probably presents the sub-
stance of oral discourses, there is no reason for sup-
posing that it was not also pronounced orally in
public, like the warnings sod denunciations of the
older prophets, however it may differ from them in
vigor of conception and high poetic diction. The
style of the prophet's language is suitable to the
manner of his prophecy. Smooth and easy to a
remarkable degree, it is the style of the reasoner
rather than of the poet. We miss the fiery pro-
phetic eloquence of Isaiah, and have in its stead the
calm and almost artificial discourse of the practiced
orator, carefully modeled upon those of the ancient
prophets : thus blending in one the characteristics
of the old prophetical and the more modern dia-
logistic structures.
I. The first section of the prophet's message eoa-
sists of two parts: the first (i. 1-6) addressed to
the people generally, in which Jehovah, by his
messenger, asserts his love for them, and proves is,
in answer to their reply, " Wherein hast thou k»ved
us? " by referring to the punishment of BJjiu a*
an example. The second part (i. 6 — ii. 9) is ad-
dressed especially to the priests, who had despised
the name of Jehovah, and had been the chief movers
of the defection from his worship and covenant
They are rebuked for the worthlessness of their
sacrifices and offerings, and their profanation of the
Temple thereby (i. 7-14). The denunciation of
their offense is followed by tho threat of punish-
ment for future neglect (ii. 1-3), and the character
of the true priest is drawn as the oompanion pio -
ture to their own (ii. 5-9).
II. In the second section (ii. 10-16) the prophet
reproves the people for their intermarriages with
the idolatrous heathen, and the divorces by which
they separated themselves from their legitimate
wives, who wept at the altar of Jehovah; in viola-
tion of the great law of marriage which God, the
father of all, established at the beginning.
HI. The judgment, which the people lightly
regard, is announced with all solemnity, ushered in
by the advent of the Messiah. The Lord, preceded
by his messenger, shall come to his Temple sud-
denly, to purify the land from its Iniquity, and to
execute swift judgment upon those who violate their
duty to God and their neighbor. The first part
(ii. 17-iii. 6) of the session terminates with the
threatened punishment; in the second (iii. 6-12
♦he faithfulness of God to his promises is vindi-
cated, and the people- eshosssd to nspentanos, with
1
Digitized by
Google
1762
MALACHT
tti attendant blessings; in the third (iii. 13-fv. 6)
thej are reproved for their want of confidence in
God, and for confusing good and eril. The final
severance between the righteous and the wicked is
then set forth, and the great day of jndgmcnt u
depicted, to be announced by the coming of Eighth,
or John the Baptist, the forerunner of Christ (Matt.
xl. 14, irii. 10-13).
The prophecy of MalacM is alluded to in the
N. T., and its canonical authority thereby estab-
lished (corap. Mark i. 3, ix. 11, 12; Luke i. 17;
Rom. ix. 13). W. A. W.
* It has been made a question (not distinctly ad-
verted to above) whether the Hebrew term for Mak-
ehi in i. 1 denotes the actual name of the prophet or
his mission and office. According to this form of
the question the writing may be anonymous, and
yet that not affect at all its canonical character or
authority. This idea of the appellative import of
the nan* probably appears in in x«f>l kyyiXov
abrov of the LXX. Jerome also entertained this
view. Vitringa, among other later writers, sup-
ports essentially the same view ( OiiervatL Sacra,
ii. 363 ff.); while Hengstenberg (denying the ref-
erence to the prophet either as a personal or a
symbolic name) maintains that it is identical with
" my messenger " in iii. 1. ( Christologie, iii. 583 ff.,
8» Ausg.; or Keith's transl. iii. 372 ff) The
correspondence between the name and Mslachi's
errand as "Jehovah's messenger" or "my mes-
senger," i. e. of Jehovah, does cot show the name
to be fictitious; for this correspondence between
names and history or vocation is a well-known
characteristic of Hebrew names (for example, Ettjah,
Isaiah), and may be accounted for sometimes as
accidental and sometimes as a change of the original
name (subsequently lost) for the sake of the con-
formity. [Names, Amer. ed.] Hengstenberg urges
that the title (i. 1) says nothing of the parentage or
birth-place of the prophet. But this omission is
not peculiar to Halachi ; for of the sixteen prophets
whose writings are preserved in the Canon, the
fathers of only eight are named. The birth-place
of only three (Amos, Micah, and Nahum) is men-
tioned, and in the case of Habakkuk and Hagg&i,
nothing is added to the names except " the prophet"
i H^DSiT). Another of his arguments is that Nehe-
miah, the contemporary of Malachi, makes no men-
tion of him. But history shows innumerable in-
stances in which writers of the same period who
are known in other ways to hare been personally
connected with each other, have left in their works
no evidence of this knowledge and intimacy. Be-
sides, in this case Nehemiah may possibly have
been absent from Jerusalem at the time of Malachi'a
greatest activity (see Neh. xiii. 6), and hence would
have had so much less occasion for speaking of him.
Further, the use of the same expression as a proper
name in one place is not inconsistent with its literal
sense in another place: and still mora questionable
is this identification if the Hebrew expression in
i. 1 differs from that in iii. 1, as " messenger of
Jehovah" diners from "my messenger." Hengsten-
berg denies, in opposition to the best authorities
(FUrst, Ges. ».«.), that *^f?B Is abridged from
r^JMraj. In support of 4hat etymology see
rUvemick's EinL in dot A. Tat., U. 431, and espe-
cially Nagelsbach'a article on "Maleachi" in Her-
■sag's SeeU-Encgkl viil. 756. .Bleak remarks that
MALCHAM
" the form Itself of the name leads as much i
to think of an actual name, as also by far most of tbs
interpreters understand it " {JlM. m dot A. TetL
p. 666).
The unity which characterizes the oantenfa of
Halachi is unusual. Instead of being co mp ose d
of detached messages or themes, as in the ease of
the other prophets, the parts here arise out of
each other by a natural gradation. The ground-
thought which pervades the book is that of the
relations of God and his chosen people to each other
under the ancient and the new economy.
Literature. — For the older writers on Malarial
either separately or as one of the minor prophets
(among whom may be mentioned Calvin, Bahrdt,
Seb. Schmid, Faber, Pococke), see Winer's Bandk
der IheoL literatur, i. 222 f. The later commen-
tators (most of them in connection with the Minor
Prophets) are RosenmUller, Ewald, Umbreit, Hit-
rig, insurer, Keil (Bd. iv., BibL Comm. 1866),
Lour. Reinke, Henderson (Amer. ed., 1860); ami
in this country Noyes, T. T. Moore (Prophttt of
the Restoration, New York, 1856), and Cowles. (See
the lists under Amos and Habakkuk.) Reinke's
work (Der Prophet MaleacH, Giessen, 1860) eon-
tains an introduction, the Hebrew text, and a
translation, together with philological and historical
notes, and Is the most complete modem work on
this prophet. On the Christology of the book, one
may see Hengstenberg's Chrittobgy of tie 0. TetL
iii. 273-364 (Keith's transl); Stfthelin's Die Mtt-
tianuchen Wtiuagmgen, p. 136 t; HSrernick,
Vorlemngen us. die Theologie dee A. T. p. 173 f.;
and J. Pye Smith's Scripture Tatimcmy to the Met-
sum, 5th ed., i. 395 f. H.
MAI/ACHY (MaUichiai), the prophet Mal-
achi (2 Esdr. i. 40).
MAI/CHAM (D3bn [their Hng] : k«a-
yiti Alex. McXytut: ttolchom). \. One of the
heads of the fathers of Benjamin, and son of
Shaharair* by his wife Hodesh (1 Chr. viii. 9),
whom the Targum of R. Joseph identifies with
Basra.
3. (e ffcuriAfOf a&rSr: Mtldiom.) The idol
Moiech, as some suppose (Zeph. i. 5). The word
literally signifies " their king," as the margin of
our version gives it, and is referred by Gesenius to
an idol generally, as invested with regal honors by
its worshippers. He quotes Is. viii. 31 and Am.
v. 86 in support of this view, though he refers Jer.
xlix. 1, 3, to Moiech (as the LXX., the present
reading being evidently corrupt), and regards MaU
cham as equivalent to Milcom (1 K. xl. 5, Ac).
Hitzig (Kurtg. Hdb. Jeremia), while he considers
the idol Milcom as unquestionably intended in Jer.
xttx. 1, renders Makham literally » their king" in
ver. 8. The same ambiguity occurs in 3 Sam, xB.
30, where David, after his conquest of the Am-
monites, is said to have tsken the crown of " then
king," or " Malcham " (see LXX. and Vulg. on 1
Chr. xx. 3). A legend is told in Jerome's Quae-
tionet Hebr. (1 Chr. xx. 8), bow that, as it was
unlawful for a Hebrew to touch anything of goM
or silver belonging to an idol, Ittai the Gittite, who
was a Philistine, snatched the crown from the head
of Milcom, and gave it to David, who thus avoided
the pollution. [Ittai; Molxch.1
Again, in 3 Sam. xU. 81, the CeMb has l? 1 ???
when the Ken is I? 1 ??? (A. V. "through tbs
Digitized by
Google
MALCHIAU
hrfc Utibj *'). Kimehi'i note on the passage b u
foUt/W*: u i. e. in the place of Molech, in the fire
which the caildrfcn of Amnion made their children
saw through to Molecb ; for MUcom na the abom-
ination of the children of Ammon, that ii Molech,
and MUcom and Maioen are one."
W. A. W.
MALCHTAH (n^Q [Jdmah't Unf,
I. e. inaugurated by him] : MsAxfai [Vat M«A-
5«a:] Mtlchiai). L A descendant of Gerahom
io ton of Ijeri, and anoeitor of Aaaph the minstrel
(1 Chr. ri. 40).
• The A. T. ed. 1611 here reads Mdohlah j the
Biahope' Bible Melehia. A
S. ([Vat. FA M.Ax««a:] Melehia.) One of
the sons of Paroah, who had married a foreign wife,
and pat her away at the command of En (Ear.
x. 86). Mbxchias in 1 Esdr. is. 26.
3. ([Vat Alex. FA. M.Ar««:] Melrhiat.)
Hnnmerated among the aons of Harim, who lived
in the time of Ezra, and had intermarried with the
people of the land (Ear. x. 81). In 1 Esdr. z. 83
he appean as Mklchias, and in Neb. iii. 11 at
Malchuah 4.
4. [Vat Alex. M«Ax«io-] Son of Rechab, and
ruler of the circuit or environs of Bethhacoerem.
He took part in the rebuilding of the wall of Jeru-
salem under Nehemiah, and repaired the Dung
Oate (Neb. iii. 14).
5. [Vat FA. M«Xx«a-] "The goldsmith's
eon," who assisted Nehemiah in rebuilding the wall
of Jerusalem (Neh. iii. 81). The word rendered
" the goldsmith " is taken as a proper name by the
LXX. (3apt<pl), and in the Peshito-Syriac Mal-
chiah is called "the son of Zephaniah." The
A. V. has followed the Vulgate and Jarchi.
«• (MsAx'ot; [Vat KA] Alex. M«Ax«<«
Mdchia.) One of the priests who stood at the
left hand of Erra when he read the Law to the
people in the street before the Water Gate (Neh.
riii. 4). In 1 Esdr. ix. 44 he is called Mel-
CHIAS.
7. [In Neh.. Vat M. MfAxtra; FA M«Ax««a-]
a. priest the father of Pashur^ Malchuah 1
(Neh. xi. 13 ; Jer. xxxriii. 1), and Melchiah (Jer.
xxi. 1).
8. OlTTJS^n [see abores Alex. M«Ax««])
The son of Hara-melech (or •' the king's son," ai
It is translated in 1 K. xxii. 26; 3 Chr. xxriiL 7),
into whose dungeon or cistern Jeremiah was east
(Jer. xxxriii. 6). The title " king's son " is ap-
plied to JerahiueU (Jer. xxxvi. 28), who was among
those commissioned by the king to take prisoners
Jeremiah and Bunch ; to Joash, who appears to
have held an office inferior to that of the governor
af the city, and to whose custody Micaiah was com-
mitted by Ahab (1 K. xxii. 86); and to Maaseuh
vho was slain by Zichri the Ephraimite in the
.nrasion of Judah by Fekah, in the reign of Ahas
(3 Chr. xxriiL 7). It would seem from these pas-
sages that the title " kh\g's son " was official, like
that of " king's mother," and applied to one of the
loyal family, who exercised functions somewhat
similar to those of Potiphar in the court of
Pharaoh. W. A. W.
MAI/CHIEL fr<y} [ixxfs long, i. •
appointed by him]: MtAxifA, Jen. xlvi. 17; M.A
rt>A in Num. and Chr., as Alex, in all
MALCHI-SHUA
1768
[Vat in Num. M«Ax«qA. In Chr. MfAA«»i> ]
VefaUal), the son of UarhJi the sou of Asbsr, and
ancestor of the family of the Malcihelitiui (Nam
xiri. 4ft). In 1 Chr. rii. 31 he is called the father,
that is founder, of Birzsvith or Benuith, as is the
reading of the Targura of R. Joseph. Josepnus
(AaL ii. 7, f 4) reckons him with Heber among
the six sons of Asher, thus making up the number
of Jacob's children and grandchildren to seventy,
without reckoning great-grandchildren.
MAIi'OHIBLITBS, THB O^TVsH :
M<Ax<i?Af; [Vat M«Ax««|A«0 Meichiehla), the
descendants of Malchiel, the grandson of Asher
(Num. xxvi. 48).
MALOHI'JAH (n;S^Q [Jehovah't Icing]:
H«Ax(a; [Vat MoAx«ia;] Alex. McAyias: MeL
chiai). L A priest, the father of Paahur (1 Chr.
ix. 13); the same as Malchiah 7, and Mjcl-
CHIAH.
2. ([Vat M«Ax«oO Mdchia.) A priest, chief
of the fifth of the twenty-four courses appointed by
David (1 Chr. xxiv. 9).
3. ('A<ra0fa; [Vat omits; FA. Xafiut; Coinp.
MfAxior : Mtlchia,] Jammtbiai [ ?] ) An Israelite
layman of the sons of Parosh, who at Ezra's com-
mand put away his foreign wife (Ezr. x. 25). In
1 Esdr. ix. 26 he is called Asibias, which agrees
with the reading of the LXX.
4. (MsAx'o" l Vat - FA 'l A3ex - M«Ax«i«:
Milchuit.) Son, that is, descendant of Harim, who
with Hasbub repaired the Tower of the Furnaces
when the wall of Jerusalem was rebuilt by Nehe-
miah (Neh. iii. 11). He is probably the aamr as
Malchiah 3.
». (MsAx'oi IT**-] Aia - MsAx«ia.) One of
the priests who sealed the covenant with Nehemiah
(Neh. x. 3). It seems probable that the names in
the list referred to are rather those of families than
of individuals (comp. 1 Chr. xxiv. 7-18, and Neh.
xii. 1-7), and in this case Mslchyah in Neh. x. 8
would be the same with the head of the fifth course
of priests = Malchuah 2.
6. (Om. in Vat MS. [also Rom. Alex. FA>];
Alex, [rather FA.>] MsAxnas-' Melehia.) One
of the priests who assisted in the solemn dedication
of the wall of Jerusalem under Ezra and Nehemiah
(Neh. xii. 42).
MALCHIItAM (Vyt&TQ [king of exalt*.
tioti]: MeAx<pd>; [Vat MfA.x«W : ] MelcM-
ram), one of the sons of Jeooniah, or Jehoiachin,
the hist but one of the kings of Judah (1 Chr. IH.
18).
MAL'OHI-SHU'A (Jinr'?^? [king of
help] : [Rom. Alex. Mt\x«rovi ; Vat'l Chr. riii.,]
M(Ax<o*ev«, [1 Chr. ix., x., MsAx«io*ove ; Sin.
1 Chr. x. 2, McAxio~e8«tO Mtlchitwi), one of the
sons of king Saul. His position in the family can-
not be exactly determined. In the two genealogies
of Saul's house preserved in Chronicles he is given
as the second son next below Jonathan (1 Chr. riii.
83, ix. 39). But in the account of Saul's offspring
in 1 Samuel he is named third — Ishui being be
tween him and Jonathan (1 Sam. xiv. 49), and on
the remaining occasion the same order is preserved,
but Abinadab is substituted for Ishui (1 Sam. xxxL
3). In both these latter passages the name is
erroneously given In the A. V. as Melchl-ehna.
Nothing Is known of Malchi-shua beyond the fact
that he feu, with his two brothers, and before his
Esther, in the rarly part of the battle of Gilbon.
O
Digitized by
Google
1764
MALCHTJ8
MAI/CHUS (M«IXx<>'=' , P^9i Mabueh, in
1 Chr. vi. 44, Neh. x. 4, 4o , rwfer or councillor ;
LXX. MaAcir or MaXoiry; and Joseph. MdAroi,
Ant xiii. 5, § 1. xiv. 14, § 1) is the name of the
warrant of the high-print, whose right ear Peter
tot off at the time of the Saviour's apprehension in
the garden. See the narrative in Matt xxvi. 51 ;
Hark xiv. 47; Luke xxii. 48-61; John xviii. 10.
He was the personal servant (SouAss) of the high-
priest, and not one of the bailiffs or apparitors
(forqplTni) of the Sanhedrim. The high-priest
intended is Calaphas no doubt (though Annas is
called hpxitptis in the same connection) ; for John,
who was personally known to the former (John
xviii. 15), is the only one of the Evangelists who
gives the name of Halchua. This servant was prob-
ably stepping forward at the moment with others
to handcuff or pinion Jesus, when the zealous Peter
struck at him with his sword. The blow was meant
undoubtedly to be more effective, but reached only
the ear. It may be as Stier remarks (Rtden Jttu,
vi. 868), that the man seeing the danger, threw his
head or body to the left, so as to expose the right
ear more than the other.
The allegation that the writers are inconsistent
with each other, because Matthew, Mark, and John
say either arior, or briptov (as if that meant the
lappet or tip of the ear), while Luke says oil, is
groundless. The Greek of the New Testament age,
uke the modern Romaic, made no distinction often
between the primitive and diminutive. This is
especially true of terms relating to parts of the
human body. (See Lobeck ad Phryn. p. 211.) In
(act, Luke himself exchanges the one term lor the
other in this very narrative (vv. 50 and 51). The
Saviour, as his pursuers were about to seize Him,
asked to be left free for a moment longer (^Sre Sat
roeVov [Luke xxii. 51]), and that moment He
used in restoring the wounded man to soundness.
The tyAfuvat roD eVrfov may indicate (which is
not forbidden by iuptTKtv, aWfroiffoO that the ear
still adhered slightly to its place. It is noticeable
that Luke the physician is the only one of the
writers who mentions the act of healing. It is a
touching remembrance that this was our Lord's
last miracle for the relief of human suffering. The
hands which had been stretched forth so often to
heal and bless mankind, were then bound, and his
beneficent ministry in that form of its exercise was
finished for ever. H. B. H.
MALEXEEL (MaXtM*: Malalat). The
tsme as Mahalaleel, the son of Cainan (Luke
hi. 87; Gen. v. 12, niarg.).
MAI/LOS, THEY OP (MoAAStoi: MnU
fcfts), who, with the people of Tarsus, revolted from
Antiochus Epiphanes because be had bestowed them
on one of his concubines (2 Mace. iv. 30). The
absence of the king from Antioch to put down the
Insurrection, gave the infamous Menelaus the high-
M ALLOWS
priest an opportunity of purloining some of tin
sacred vessels from the Temple of Jerusalem (vr.
32, 39), an act which finally led to the murder of
the good Onias (vv. 34, 85). Hallos was an Im-
portant city of Cilicia, lying at the mouth of the
Pyramus (Sahun), on the shore of the Mediter-
ranean, N E. of Cyprus, and about 20 miles from
Tarsus ( Tertit). (See Did. of Geography.)
Q.
MALLOTHI 0nSv>9 [perh. Jehovah si
Vendor, Fiirst] : MaAAiOl; [Vat. Marfet, Metet-
0«i:] Alex. MfoAutfi, and MiXAnOi: MeUothi\ %
Kohathite, one of the fourteen sons of Heman the)
singer, and chief of the nineteenth course of twelve
Levites into which the Temple choir was divided
(1 Chr. xxv. 4, 96). [Hothor, Amer. ed.]
MALLOWS (CPlVl?, 6 ma«u«e*.-« a\tua:
heria ei ariorum corticet). By the Hebrew word
we are no doubt to understand some species of
Orache, and in all probability the AtripUx hatimm
of botanists. It occurs only in Job xxx. 4, when
the patriarch laments that he is exposed to tha
a • The Greek expression died above is singularly
ambiguous. It Is uncertain what the verb (tin)
means. It Is uncertain whether Christ's disciples or
toe soldiers are addressed, and whether the pronoun
(tmItov) ream to a person, or place, or an set. For
the diffluent interpretations, an Meyer's Kornm. •*.
tat N. T. 1. (2.) 678 f. (1867). But though the words
in so doubtful as written, they were perfectly explicit
M heard at the moment, because they were aoeoat-
tanlsd by some tone or gesture which is lost to vs.
Jew's Mallow (Cbnaoras Moron).
derision of the lowest of the people, " whose fathers
he would have disdained to have set with the dogs
of his flock," and who from poverty were obliged
to seek their sustenance in desert places amongst
wild herbs — " who pluck off the tea omens near
the hedges d and eat the bitter roots of the Spanish
broom." Some writers, as R. Levi (Job xxx.) and
Luther, with the Swedish and the old Danish ver-
sions, hence understood " nettles " to be denoted
by malhutch, this troublesome weed having been
from time Immemorial an article of occasional diet
6 From
S •
n 1 ?^ (*»b. ^JU), «
sals."
e Old editions of the text read 2Aip«, testes* of
iXifia, as from i prtr. and Auiet, "hunger." 8e
Chrysostom, Ouaa floraVs, rft eem>, t»x» aAsjas tW «s>
l eW or ra ,
d rTtfr^J »ome translate "en Uts 'J lisih
See Lie's Comma*, on Job, fc s.
Digitized by
Google
HALLOWS
uaongst tb» poor, even as it is amongst ourselves
it this day (PUo. //. JV. xxi. 15; Atben. ir. e. 16).
Other* hare conjectured that some species of " mal-
low" (wifco) is intended, as Deodatius, and the
A. V. Sprengel (But Set Aero. 14) identifies the
"Jew's mallow" (Corchorvt otUoriut) with the
mnliuach, and Lad; CallcoU (Script. Herb. p. 255)
is of a similar opinion. " In Purchase's Pilgrims,"
observes this writer, " there is a letter from Master
William Biddulph, who was travelling from Aleppo
to Jerusalem in lff&O, in which he says, < we saw
many poor people gathering mallows and three-
leaved grasse, and asked them what they did with
H, and they answered that it was all their food and
they did eate it ' " (see also Harmer's Observations,
■ ill. 10$). There is no doubt that this same mallow
ia (till eaten in Arabia and Palestine, the leaves
and pods being used as a pot-herb. Dr. Shaw
(Travels, 1. 258, 8vo. 1808) mentions Mcllow-
Keahs, which he says is the same with the
Corchonis, as being cultivated in the gardens of
Barbary, and draws attention to the resemblance
of this word with the mattuaeh of Job, but he
some other plant of a more saltish taste "
MAMMON
1766
Atriplex haUrma.
m> rather intended. The Atriplex halimus has un-
dooMsdly the best claim to represent the maltiutch,
u Bochart (Hierot. ii. 223), and before him Drusius
(Qaatt Hear. L qu. 17) have proved. Celsius
(Bierob. ii. 97), Hiller (Hierophyt. i. 467), Rosen-
Briiller (SchoL in Job m. 4, and Botany of the
Bible, p. 115), and Dr. Kitto (Pictar. Bible on
Job) adopt this opinion. The Greek word used by
•he LXX. is applied by Dioseorides (i. e. 120) to
toe Atriplex haBmus, a* Sprengel (ComtiK.nl. in
. c.) has shown. Dioseorides says of this plant,
that "it is a shrub which is used for hedges, and
assembles the Rhamnus, being white and without
horns; its leaves are like those of the dive, but
sroader and smoother, they are cooked as vegetables ;
lh» plant grows near the sea, and in hedges." Ser
ilsolbe lucUtion from the Arabian botanist, Aben-|
Beitar (in Bochart, I c. above), who says that tat
plant' which Dioseorides calls " kaamus" is tbt
same with that which the Syrians call mahiek,
Galen (vi. 22), Serapion in Bochart, and Prosper
Alpinus (De Plant. jEgypL cxxriiL 45).
The Hebrew name, like the Greek, bas reference
either to the locality where the plant grows — " no-
men Gneeum a loco natali kxi/itp, nupaBaXaaatif,"
says Spreugd — or to its saline taste. The Atri-
plex halimtu is a shrub from four to five feet high,
with many thick branches ; the leaves are rathe
sour to the taste ; the flowers are purple and very
small; it grows on the sea-coast in Greece, Arabia,
Syria, etc., and belongs to the natural Order Chen-
opodiacea. Atriplex hortensis, or garden Orach, ii
often cooked and eaten as spinach, to which it is
by some persons preferred. W. H.
• >< The best authorities," says Tristram (Nat
Hist, of the Bible, p. 466), "are in favor of a
species of Sea Purslane (Atriplex halimtu), which
grows abundantly on the shores of the Mediterra-
nean, in salt marshes, and also on the shores of the
Dead Sea still wore luxuriantly. We found thick-
ets of it of considerable extent on the west side of
the sea, and it exclusively supplied us with fuel for
many days. It grows there to the height of ten
feet — more than double its size on the Mediterra-
nean. It forms a dense mass of thin twigs without
thorns, has very minute purple flowers close to the
stem, and small, thick, sour-tasting leaves, which
could be eaten, as is the Atriplex hortensis, or
garden Orache, but it would be very miserable
food." Prof. Coiiant renders rWvD "salt-plant"
(Book of Job, in loc.). H.
MALXUCH CH^O [rw&r orco«ii»e»»r]i
M«A«sV: Moloch). L A Levite of the family of
Meran, and ancestor of Ethan the singer (1 Chr
vi. 44).
2. (MeAeex: [Vat, »'"> preceding word, M«-
k»vaa r taJi.ti>n :] Mtllucfi.) One of the sons of
Bent, who put away his foreign wife at Ezra's com-
mand (Est. x. 29). He was probably of the tribe
of Jodah and line of Pbarez (see 1 Chr. ix. 4). Ia
the parallel list of 1 Esdr. ix. 30, be is called Ma-
huchus.
3. (BoXowx: [Vat.] Alex. MaX»vx : Moloch.)
One of the descendants of Harim in the time of
Ezra, who had married a foreign wife (Kzr. x. 39).
*- (MoA*4x : Melluch.) A priest or family of
priests who signed the covenant with Nebemlah
(Neh. x. 4).
5. One of the "heads "of the people who signed
the covenant on the same occasion (Neh. x. 27).
6. [Vat Aaova-] One of the families of priests
who returned with Zerubbabel (Neh. xii. 2); prob-
ably the same as No. 4. It was represented in the
time of Joiakim by Jonathan (ver. 14). The same
as Melicu.
MAM AT AS [Ssyl.] (Xapudns: Bamea),stf
narently the same with Shemaiah in Ear. vili. 1*.
In the Geneva version of 1 Esdr. viii. 44, it is
written Bamaian. [See also Masmav.]
MAMTMON fl'TOl} : Mo,u»at: Matt. vi.
24, and Lake xvi. 9), a word which often occurs in
the Chaldee Targums of Onkdos, and later writers,
»nd in the Syriac Version, and which signifies
riches." This meaning of the word is given
by TertuUian, Adv. Marc. iv. 83, and by Augustine
and Jerome nommenting on St- Matthew; Angns-
Digitized by
Google
1766
MAMNITANAIMTJ8
lint adds that it mi Iniutui Pnsie, and Jerome
«dd» that it was a Syriac word. There U no reason
to •uppoae that any idol received divine honors in
the east under this name. It i» used in St Mat-
thew as a personification of riches. The derivation
of the word la discussed by A. Pfeifler, Opera, p.
474. W. T. B.
MAMNrTANAITMUS (MaxuriTdmtpoi;
[Vat. MopTarai/uu:] Maihnntm), a name which
appears in the lists of 1 Eadr. ix. 84, and occupies
the place of " Mattaniah, Hattenai," in Ear. z. 37,
of which it is a corruption, as is still mora evident
from the form " Mamnimatanalns," in which it
appears in the Geneva version.
MAM-RE (S^qn [perh. fatnat, and then
itrtngth, mnnlineu, Gee] : Mafi&frfi ; Joseph.
Haufiprjs: Sfamre), an ancient Amortte," who
with his brothers Esheol and Aner was in alliance
with Abram (Gen. xiv. 18, 84), and under the
shade of whose oak-grove the patriarch dwelt in the
interval between his residence at Bethel and at
Beer-eheba (ziii. 18, zvili. 1). The personality
if this ancient chieftain, unmistakably though
slightly brought out' in the narrative just cited —
a narrative regarded by Ewald and others as one
of the most ancient, If not the most ancient, docu-
ments in the Bible — ia lost in the subsequent chap-
ters. Mamre ia there a mere local appellation —
•' Mamre which faces Machpelah " (zxiii. 17, 19,
izv. 9, xliz. 30, L 13). It doea not appear beyond
the book of Genesis. Eshcol survived to the date
of the conquest — survives possibly still — but
Mamre and Aner have vanished, at least their
names have not yet been met with. If the field
and cave of Machpelah were on the hill which
forma the northeastern side of the Valley of Hebron
— and we need not doubt that they were — then
Mamre, as " facing " them, must have been on the
opposite slope, where the residence of the governor
now stands.
In the Vulgate of Jud. ii. 14 (A. V. ii. 94),
" terrene Mambre " ia found for the Abronat of
the original text. G>
MAMTJ'CHTJS (MsuioBjfo*: Mahckw), the
same as Malluch S (1 Eadr. ix. 80). The LXX.
waa probably MoAAoSxor at first, which would
easily be corrupted into the present reading.
MAN. Four Hebrew terms are rendered " man "
n the A. V. 1. Ad&m, ~~}\. (A.) The name of
MAN
the man created in the image of God. It
to be derived from daVrai, « " he or it was red or
ruddy," like Edom."* The epithet rendered by as
" red " has a very wide signification in the Semitli
languages, and must not be limited to the EngBsfc
sense. Thus the Arabs speak, in both the literary
and the vulgar language, of a "red "camel, using the
term ahmar, « their common word for " red," jot
aa they speak of a "green " ass, meaning in the
one case a shade of brown, and in the other a kind
of dingy gray. When they apply the term " red "
to man, they always mean by it " fair." Th»>
name Adam has been supposed by some to bo 4a
rived from adimih,/ "earth," or "ground,"
because Adam waa formed of "dost of the ground''*
(Gen. ii. 7); but the earth or ground derived tlb)
appellation from it* brownnesa, which the Hebrews
would call •• redness." In Egypt, where the alb-
vial earth of the Nile-valley is of a blackish-brown
color, the name of the country, KEM, signifies
" black " in the ancient Egyptian and in Coptic.
[Egypt.] Others have connected the name of
Adam with drmuth, * " likeness," from damik, •
" he or it was or became like," on account of tie
use of this word in both narratives of his creation :
" And God said, Let us make Adam in our image,
after our likeness " * (Gen. i. 86). " In the day
of God's creating Adam, in the likeness' of God
made He him" (v. 1). It should be observed that
the usual opinion that by " image " and " likeness "
moral qualities are denoted, ia perfectly in accord-
ance with Semitic phraseology: the contrary idea,
arising from a misapprehension of anthropomor-
phism, ia utterly repugnant to it. This derivation
seems improbable, although perhaps more agreeable)
than that from doVim with tie derivations of ante-
diluvian names known to us. (B.) The name of
Adam and his wife (v. 1, 8; comp. i. 27, in which
case there is nothing to show that more than one
pair is intended). (C.) A collective noun, inde-
clinable, having neither construct state, plural, nor
feminine form, used to designate any or all of the
descendants of Adam.
8. /aft, B^N> apparently softened from a form
unused in the singular by the Hebrews, cms*, »
" man," " woman," " men." It eorresponda to
the Arabic ins, « " man," nurfn, » softened form
ee«nt,p •' a man," " a woman," and " man " col-
lectively like Aw,- and perhaps to the ancient
Egyptian at, " a noble." « The variant fans*
(mentioned in the note) occurs as the proper name
a The LXX., except In xiv. 34, give the nama with
the feminine article. They do the same In other
saaes ; t. g. Baal.
* In the Jewish traditions ha appeals as encoureg-
ng Abraham to undergo the pain of circumcision, from
•hfch his brothers would have dissuaded him — by a
referent* to the deliverance ha had already experienced
from far greater trials — the furnace of Nimrod and the
iwordofChedorlaomer. (Beer, Leben AtrnAonu, 86.)
» »ijiD7?. » naa"ja.
. ttfyjjl-a. mt% pi D"tt?JB,
enttk, BJiaj?, which soma take to be the prlndthe
form.
• .• • .- •
• • •
V It has bsan darlvad from tTJS, "ha waa stek,"
so as to mean weak, mortal ; to which Qeesntus objsets
that this verb comes from the theme B73 {.U*. • »•
tt?3M). Tneoppodte signification, strength and robaa*
nsas, has bean suggested with a reference to the th a w s
U7M Cunt, Concord, a. v. ttfat). It aseaaa aaase
reasonable to suppose, with Oasemaa, that this k
primitive word (is*, s. v. tP N H). Perhaps the Mas
of being may Us at Its fonnrtatkw
Digitized by
Google
KAHA&N
)f a ion of Seta and grandson of Adam (Gen. iv.
26; 1 Chr. i. 1). In the A. V. it U written Enos.
It might be supposed that thia was a case like
that of Adam's name ; but thia cannot be admitted,
since the variant 1th and the fern, form liktkik
are used before the birth of Enosh, m in the caaea
of the naming of Eve (Gen. ii. 23) and Cain (iv. 1).
If it be objected that we must not lay too much
■treat upon verbal criticism, we reply that, if to, no
■treat can be laid upon the name of Enoah, which
might even be a translation, and that audi forma
at Methuaael and Methuselah, which have the
ohancteriatict of a primitive state of Hebrew,
oblige us to lay the greatest stress upon verbal
MANA&T
1767
3. Gtbtr, " 1 35» "a man," from gibar, * "to
be strong," generally with reference to his strength,
eorresponding to rar and AWjo.
4. MHhim, D\"]E}, « " men," always masculine.
The singular is to be' traced in the antediluvian
proper names Hethusael and Methuselah.* Per-
haps it may be derived from the root milk, " be
died," < in which case its use would be very appro-
priate in la. xli. 14, " Fear not, thou worm Jacob,
ye men of Israel."/ If this conjecture be admit-
ted, thia word would eorreapond to ffporit and
might be read " mortal."
MAN'AEN (Mwbv>: Mannhen) it men-
tioned m Acta xiii. 1 as one of the teachers and
prophets in the church at Antioch at the time of
the appointment of Saul and Barnabas as mis-
sionaries to the heathen. He is not known out of
this passage. The name signifies consoler (S^r,
2 K. xv. 17, ate.); and both that and his relation
to Herod render it quite certain that he was a Jew.
The Herod with whom ho is said to hare been
brought up (<rvrTfx><t>os) could not have been Herod
Agrippa II. (Acta xxv. 13), for as he was only
seventeen years old at the time of the death of his
father, Herod Agrippa I. in A. D. 44 (Joseph. Ant.
xix. 9, § 1 ), a comrade of that age would have been
too young to be so prominent as a teacher at
Antioch as Manaen was at the data of Paul's first
missionary journey (Acts xiii. 3). The Herod in
question must have been Herod Antipaa, under
whose jurisdiction the Saviour as a Galilean lived,
and who beheaded John the Baptist. Since this
Antipaa was older than Archelaus, who succeeded
Herod the Great soon after the birth of Christ,
Manaen (his virrpoQos) must have been somewhat
advanced in yean in A. p. 44, when he appears
kefbra us in Luke's history — older certainly than
irty-flve or fifty, as stated in Lange's Bibelwerk
(v. 183). The point of chief interest relating to
ban concerns the sense of cirrpopot, which the
historian regarded as sufficiently remarkable to con-
nect with hit name. We have a learned discussion
a The naming of Cain ()^|7) may suggest how
■nosh came to bear a name signifying " nun." « I
lava obtained a man (BTH WOO) from the Loan '*
fho.lT. 1). *
» TS?.
* MMJvo dnp, from an unused singular HO
* no.
■ btfPVnp -a n^tjfcini?, where Urn word
of this question In Walsh's Diutrtatwntt a* Acta
Apottolorum (de Mtnachano, ii. 195-252). Fo»
the value of thia treatise see Tboluok's Clank
toirdigkeit, p. 167.
The two following are the principal views that
have been advanced, and have still their advocates
One is that trirrpofas means comrade, associate,
or, more strictly, one brought up, educated wit*
another. Thia is the more frequent sense of the
word, and Calvin, Grotius, Schott, Baumgarten,
and others, adopt it here. It was very common in
ancient times for persons of rank to associate other
children with their own, for the purpose of sharing
their amusements (hence avpnralicrapts in Xenoph.
Cyropad. i. 3, § 14) and their studies, and thus
exciting them to greater activity and emulation.
Josephus, Plutarch, Polybius, and others speak of
this custom. Welch shows it to have existed
among the Medea, Persians, Egyptians, Greeks, and
Romans. Herod might have adopted it from the
Romans, whom he was so much inclined to imitate
(see Raphel's Annotatuma, ii. 80, and Wetstein,
Nov. TetL ii. 632).
The other view is that ntrrpoipos denotes fotter-
brother, brought up at the same breast (ojio-ydAa-
KTOf, coUnctaneut), and, aa so taken, Manaen a
mother, or the woman who reared him, would have
been also Herod's nurse. So KuinoeL Olsbausen,
De Wette, Alfbrd, and others. Walch'a oonclusion
(not correctly represented by some recent writers),
combines in a measure these two explanations. He
thinks that Manaen was educated in Herod's family
along with Antipaa and some of his other children,
and at the same time that he stood in the stricter
relation to Antipaa which <rirrpo<pos denotes as
coUacianeus. He calls attention to the statement
of Josephus (Ant xvii. 1, § 3) that the brothers
Antipaa and Archelaus were educated in a private
way at Rome ('A/>WA.aor S* /col 'An-brat M
Pdiuns wapJi run iSieVrn Tpmp&s e?xor), and
though not supposing that Manaen accompanied
them thither he thinks we may infer that Manaen
enjoyed at home the same oourse of discipline
and instruction (<ruvrpo(pt>i in that sense) ss the
two brothers, who are not likely to have been sep-
arated in their earlier, any more than in their utter
education. Yet as Manaen is called the avrrpo<po\
of Herod only, Walch suggests that there may have
been the additional tie in their case which resulted
from their having had a common nurse.
It is a singular circumstance, to say the least,
that Josephus (Ant. xv. 10, § 6) mentions a certain
Manaem (MavdiMioj), who was in high repute among
the Essence for wisdom and sanctity, and who fore-
told to Herod the Great, in early life, that he was
destined to attain royal honors. After the fulfill-
ment of the prediction the king treated the prophet
with special favor, and honored the entire sect on
his account (wdVrat Ax' Utlrov root 'Eovwroe*
Is not, as Oessnius would make it, changed by the
construct stats, but has a case ending !|, to bs com-
pared to the Arable cast ending of the Mmlnaare, tat,
• The • eujaoture of Oessnius (Lex. a. v.), that the
middle nudoal of TOO la softened from r Is not
boras out by the Igrpttan fan, whleh Is Mart " a
tsadone."
/ bjTltJP VI? i e*iy<>Tt< 'IvpaaX Tot the
word " worm " compare Job xxv. 6; Ps. xxtL •
Digitized by
Google
1768
MANAHATH
rtitmr StertXti)- There ty a elan of the Estates
who had families (Waleh, 237 f.), though othen
dad oot; and it hag been conjectured with tome
plausibility that, at one of the remit! of Herod'i
friendship for the lucky soothsayer, he may have
adopted one of hie eons (who took the father's
name), so tar as to receive him into his family, and
make him the companion of bis children (see
Welch, p. 284, Ac). Lightfoot surmises, at one
of the possibilities, that the Hanaem of Josephus
may be the one mentioned in the Acts (nupidcncm
<xl lerem cieri potat ktmc iMtfrum esse etmdtm);
but he deems it more probable (if it be certain that
the Essence bad wives) that a son or some kinsman
of the soothsayer may bare been the prophet at
Antioch. (See Hora Hebr. ii. 738 f.) The inevit-
able disparity in age which must have existed be-
tween the Essene of Josephus and Antipat, the son
of Herod the Great, to say nothing of other dif-
ficulties, puts the former of their suppositions out
of the question.
The precise interest which led Luke to recall the
Herodian connection is not certain. Meyer's sug-
gestion, that it may hare been the contrast between
the early relationship and Hansen's later CkritHan
position (though be makes it of the first only),
applies to one sense of drrpoQot as well as the
other. A far-fetched motive need not be sought.
Even such a casual relation to the great Jewish
family of the age (whether it was that of a foster-
brother or a companion of princes) was peculiar
and interesting, and would be mentioned without
any special oliject merely as a part of the individual's
history. Welch's citations show that trivrpotyos,
as used of such intimacies (rrvrrfiotptat), was a title
greatly esteemed among the ancients ; that it was
often borne through life as a sort of proper name;
and was recounted among the honors of the epitaph
after death. It is found repeatedly on ancient
monuments.
It may be added that Manaen, as a resident in
Palestine (he may have been one of Herod's
courtiers till his banishment to Gaul), could hardly
fail to have had tome personal knowledge of the
Saviour's ministry. He must have spent his youth
at Jerusalem or In that neighborhood ; and among
his recollections of that period, connected as he
was with Herod's family, may have been the tragic
scene of the massacre at Bethlehem. H. & H.
MAN'AHATH (nPJQ [«*•]: [Yat]
Maxorafki; [Rom. -0f; Alex. Mavax a0,: ] MttM-
hath), a place named in 1 Chr. viii. 6 only, in con-
nection with the genealogies of the tribe of Ben-
jamin. The passage is very obscure, and is not
made less so by the translation of the A. V. ; but
the meaning probably is that the family of Ehud,
he heads of the town of Geba, migrated thence,
under the guidance of Naaman, Ahiab, and Germ,
tnd settled at Hanachath. Of the situation of
Uanachath we know little or nothing. It is tempt-
jig to believe it identical with the Menuchah men-
ioned, according to many int erpr e t e r s, in Judg.
a. 43» (in the A. V*. translated "with ease").
This has In its favor the close proximity in which
the place, if a place, evidently stood to Gibeah,
which was one of the chief towns of Benjamin, even
MANAS8EH
if not identical with Geba. [Mknuchaii, Anwt
ed.] Manachatfi is usually identified with a plact
of similar name in Judah, but, considering how
hostile the relations of Judah and Benjamin wen
at the earlier period of the history, this identifiea
tion is difficult to receive. The CbaJdee Targum
adds, " in the land of the house of Esau," t. e. in
Edom. The Syriac and Arabic versions connect
the name with that immediately following, and
read " to the plain or pasture of Naaman." Bat
these explanations are no less obscure than that
which they seek to explain. [lUBAHlTHim.]
G.
MAN'AHATH (nllSt? [rest]: in Gen.
xxxvi. 23, MaraxiS'- Alex. MarvaxaB'- Maaaha.
1 Chr. i. 40, Kax»vi»\ [Vat Maxowui;] Ale*.
Maraxtu?: Manahath), one of the sons of Shobal
and descendant of Seir the Horite.
MANA'HBTHITES, THE (nTI^pn,
i. t. the Menuchoth, and "'WHS^jn, the ManachU
[in 62, Bom. Alex. 'Aufuw'lS, Vat H»roi;l in 64,
[Vat] rat MaAoeVi [Rom. -e(] ; Alex, r*r Mora*:
Vulg. translating, tSmitHum reqvUtitmtm). " Half
the Manahethites " are named in the genealogies
of Judah as descended from Shobal, the father of
Kirjatb-jearim (1 Chr. ii. 62 [A. V. marg. " Menu-
chitet"]), and half from Sauna, the founder of
Bethlehem (ver. 64). It seems to be generally
accepted that the same place is referred to in each
passage, though why the vowels should be to dif-
ferent — as it will be seen shore they are — is not
apparent Nor has the writer succeeded in dis-
covering why the translators of the A. V. rendered
the two differing Hebrew words by the same Eng-
lish one.
Of the situation or nature of the place or places
we have as yet no knowledge. The town Maka-
hath naturally suggests itself, but it seems impos-
sible to identify a Benjamite town with a place
occurring in the genealogies of Judah, and appa-
rently in close connection with Bethlehem and with
the house of Joab, the great opponent and murderer
of Abner the Benjamite. It is more probably iden-
tical with Hanocho (Ma»x<> = HTT3C), one of
the eleven cities which in the LXX. text ere in-
serted between verses 69 and 60 of Josh, xv., Beth-
lehem being another of the eleven. The writer of
the Targum, playing on the word as if it wen
Afmckah, " an offering," renders the passage in 1
Chr. ii. 62, " the disciples and priests who looked
to the division of the offerings." His interpreta-
tion of ver. 64 is too long to quote here. See the
editions of Wilkins and Beck, with the learned
notes of the latter. O.
MANASSE/A8 (Mcaxunrtat ; [Vat Aid.]
Alex. Moyosvr/ai: J/anna>et)=MA»ABlKn I, of
the sons of Pahath Moth (1 Esdr. ix. 81; eomu.
Eir. x. 80).
MANAtVSEH (n$3Q, i «. M'nassheh [ses
below]: MoMtre-Q: Ifanaatet), the eldest ton of
Joseph by bis wife Asenath the Egyptian (Gen. xli
61, xlvi. 20). The birth of the child was the first
thing which had occurred since Joseph's banish-
« • The Hebrew (bra of this name Is the same at
Bat of the personal name which follow*, except the
lengthened penult from Its being In pease. H.
» The Tat LXX. has aire Neva.
e They sometimes follow Juntos and TremalHaa
bat in this passage those translators have asaesrr
ravened the A. V., and In both cases use r» tana
ikfarochot
Digitized by
Google
HANAiKBH
Mat from Canaan to alleviate hli aornnn and AD
the void left by the father and the brother he so
longed to behold, and it waa natural that he should
commemorate fail acquisition in the name Mahab-
bbh, . " Forgetting " — " For God hath-made-me-
brget (mrnanai) all my toil and all my father'!
house." Both he and Ephraim wart born before
the eommeneement of the famine.
Whether the elder of the two win me inferior
in form or promise to the younger, or whether there
was any external reason to justify the preference
of Jaoob, we are not told. It If only certain that
when the youths were brought before their aged
grandfather to receive his bleating and his name,
and be adopted as foreigners' into his family,
Ifsnuanh waa degraded, in spite of the effort* of
Joseph, into the second place. [Ephraim, vol. i.
p. 788 o.] It is the first Indication of toe inferior
rank in the nation which the tribe descended from
him afterwards held, in relation to that of his more
fortunate brother. But though, like his grand-
ancle Esau, Manasswh had lost his birthright in
favor of his younger brother, he received, as Esau
had, a blessing only inferior to the birthright itself.
Like his brother he was to increase with the fer-
tility of the nsh" which swarmed in the great
Egyptian stream, to " become a people and also to
be great " — the " thousands of Manasseh," no less
than those of Ephraim, indeed more, were to be-
come a proverb c in the nation, his name, no leas
than that of Ephraim, was to be the symbol and the
expression of the richest blessings for his kindred.''
At the time of this interview Hanasseh seems to
have been about 28 years of age. Whether he
married in Egypt we are not told. At any rate the
names of no wives or lawful children are extant in
the lists. As if to carry out most literally the terms
of the blessing of Jaoob, the mother of Machir,
his eldest, indeed apparently his only son — who
was really the foundation of the " thousands of
Msnsssrh " ttu no regular wife, but a Syrian or
Aramite concubine (1 Chr. vii. 14), possibly a pris-
mer in some predatory expedition into Palestine,
tike that in which the sons of Ephraim lost their
Uvea (1 Chr. vii. SI). It is recorded that the chil-
dren of Machir were embraced • by Joseph before
his death, but of the personal history of the patri-
arch Msnaaseh himself no trait whatever is given
in the Bible, either in the Pentateuch or in the
curious records preserved in 1 Chronicles. The an-
cient Jewish traditions are, however, leas reticent.
According to them Hanasseh was the steward of
Joseph's boose, and the interpreter who intervened
MANASSEH
1769
a This seems to follow from the expressions of xlrlli.
B and 9 : " Thy two sons who were born unto thee In
the land of Egypt" — "My sons whom God hath given
me in this place," aed from the solemn invocation
over them of Jacob's " name," and the " names " of
Abraham and Isaac (ver. 16). combined with the feet
of Joseph bavins; marr ie d an Egyptian, a person of
different racs from his own. The Jewish commentators
overcome the difficulty of Joseph's marrying an entire
foreigner, by a tradition that Asenath was the daughter
of Dinah and Bhecham. Bee Targum Pseudojon. on
Sen. xli. 46.
» « And Use fish become a multitude." Booh is
we literal rendering of the words a'lb 12"!^ (Gen.
tlvtU. 16), which in the text of the aT V. am '"grow
Into a multitude." The sense le preserved in the
margin. The expression is no doubt derived from
'ha'whlehli S> this day one of the most ehaiaeisrlsMc
between Joseph and his brethren at their interview,
and the extraordinary strength which he displayed
in the struggle with and binding of Simeon, ftrs\
caused Judah to suspect that the apparent Egyp-
tians were really his own flesh and blood (see Tar-
gums Jerusalem and Pseudojon. on Gen. xlii. 83.
xBii. 15 ; also the quotations in Weil's BibL /.eoeiM*,
p. 88 ejote).
The position of the tribe of Minssseh during the
march to Canaan was with Ephraim and Benjamin
on the west side of the sacred Tent. The standard
of the three sons of Rachel was the figure of a boy
with the inscription, " The cloud of Jehovah rested
on them until they went forth out of the camp H
(Targ. Pseudojon. on Num. ii. 18). The Chief of
the tribe at the time of the census at Sinai was
Gamaliel ben-Pedshzur, and its numbers were then
83,800 (Num. i. 10, 36, ii. 80, 81, vii. 54-69).
The numbers of Ephraim were at the same data
40,600. Forty years later, on the banks of Jordan,
these proportions were reversed. Hanasseh had then
increased to 58,700, while Ephraim had diminished
to 33,600 (Num. xxvi. 34, 37). On this occasion
it is remarkable that Manasseh resumes his position
in the catalogue as the eldest son of Joseph. Pos-
sibly this in due 1 1 the |irowess which the tribe had
shown in the conquest of Gilead, for Manasseh wsa
certainly at this time the most distinguished of
all the tribes. Of the three who had elected to re-
main on that side of the Jordan, Reuben and Gad
had chosen their lot because the country was suit-
able to their pastoral possessions and tendencies.
But Machir, J air, and Nobah, the sons of ManseA
aeb, were no shepherds. They were pure warriors,
who had taken the moat prominent part in the con-
quest of those provinces which up to that time has)
been conquered, and whose deeds are constantly
referred to (Num. xxxii. 39; Deut. ill. 13, 14, 15)
with credit and renown. " Jair the son of Manas-
seh took all the tract of Argot . . . sixty great
cities" (Deut- iii. 14; 4). "Nobah took Kenath
and the daughter-towns thereof, and called it after
hia own name " (Num. xxxii. 48). " Because
Machir was a man of war, therefore he had Uilead
and Baahan " (Josh. xvii. 1). The district which
these ancient warriors conquered was among the
moat difficult, if not the most difficult, in the whole
country. It embraced the hills of Gilead with
their inaccessible heights and impassable ravines,
and the almost impregnable tract of Argob, which
derives its modern name of Ltjah from the secure
'• asylum " it affords to those who take refuge within
its natural fortifications. Had they not remained
things in Egypt. Ortalnly, next to the vast I
Itself, nothing could strike a native of Southern Pales,
tine more, on his first visit to the banks cf the Nile,
than the abundance of its fish.
e The word " thousand " (*)5S), in the sense of
P family," seems to be more trequently spilled to
Mamueeh than to any of the other tribes. Bee Dent
mill. 17, anl compare Judg. vL 16, where " family "
should be rf thousand " — " my thousand la ths poos
one In Manasseh ; " and 1 Chr. xli. 20.
d Ths Targum Pseudojon. on xlvHl. 90 seems to
intimate that the words of that verse were used si >
part of the formula at the rite of etraumclskm. They
do not, however, sonar In any of the accounts of thai
ceremony, as given by Buxtorf and others, that the
writer has been able tr» discover.
« The terrain nhsmstrntoMsaD/ seyse
Digitized by
Google
1770
MANASSEH
b then wild and inaccessible districts, but bad
gone forward and taken their lot with the net,
who shall say what changes xnifrht not have oc-
curred in the history of the nation, through the
presence of such energetic and warlike spirits?
The few personages of eminence whom we can with
certainty identify as Manamitrn such as Gideon
and Jephthah — for EUjah and others may with
eqnal probability have belonged to the neighboring
tribe of Gad — were among the most remarkable
characters that Israel produced. Gideon was in
net " the greatest of the judges, and his children
all but established hereditary monarchy in then-
Own line" (Stanley, S. o* P. p. 830). Bat with
the one exception of Gideon the warlike tendencies
of Manaaseh seem to hare been confined to the east
of the Jordan. There they throve exceedingly,
poshing their way northward over the rich plains
of JaiMn and Jtd&r — the Gaulanitia sod Itunea
of the Roman period — to the foot of Mount Her-
moD (1 Chr. v. 33). At the time of the corona-
tion of David at Hebron, while the western Manas
ash sent 18,000, and Ephraim itself 90,800, the
eastern Manasseh, with Gad and Reuben, mastered
to the number of 120,000, thoroughly armed — a
remarkable demonstration of strength, still more
remarkable when we remember the net that Saul's
bouse, with the great Abner at its head, was then
residing at Mahanaim on the border of Manasseh
and Gad. But, though thus outwardly prosperous,
a similar fate awaited them in the end to that which
befell Gad and Reuben ; they gradually assimilated
themselves to the old inhabitants of the country —
they " transgressed against the God of their fathers,
and went a-whoring after the gods of the people of
the land whom God destroyed before them " (<6.
86). They relinquished too the settled mode of life
and the defined limits which befitted the members
of a federal nation, and gradually became Bedouins
of the wilderness, spreading themselves over the
mat deserts which lay between the allotted posses-
lions of their tribe and the Euphrates, and which
had from time immemorial been the hunting-
grounds and pastures of the wild Hagarites of
Jetur, Nephish, and Nodab (1 Chr. v. 19,22). On
them first descended the punishment which was
ordained to be the inevitable consequence of such
misdoing. They, first of all Israel, were carried
away by Pul and Tiglath-Pileser, and settled in the
Assyrian territories (to. 88). The connection,
however, between east and west had been kept up
to a certain degree. In Beth-shean, the most east-
erly city of the cis-Jordanic Manasseh, the two
portions all but joined. David had judges or offi-
cers there for all matters sacred and secular (1 Chr.
xxvi. 32); and Solomon's commissariat officer, Ben-
Geber, ruled over the towns of Jair and the whole
district of Argob (1 K. iv. 13), and transmitted
their productions, doubtless not without their peo-
ple, to the court of Jerusalem.
The genealogies of the tribe are preserved in
a If this Is correct. It may probably famish the daw
to the real meaning of the dUBcult allusion to OUead
In Judg. vli. a [8m p. 9204.]
b « Bethsan In Manasseh » (Hap-Parehl, In Albert
B. e/T. 401).
e The nam* of Asms, as attached to a town, Inde-
pendent of the tribe, was overlooked by the writer at
the proper time ("ItTM : Ankara*: Alex. ktn»:
Urn,) It Is mentioned in Jesh. xvii. 7 only as the
SeMwag uilnt— .ovlaontly at Its ■eajtasB end— of the
MANASSEH
Num. xxvl. SB- U; Josh. xvtt. 1, At.; and 1 Chi
vii. 14-19. But it seems impossible to unravel
these so as to ascertain for instance which of the
families remained east of Jordan, and which ad-
vanced to the west. From the tact that Abi-esot
(the family of Gideon), Hepher (possibly Ophran.
the native place of the same hero), and Sbecbem
(the well-known city of the Bene-Joseph) all occur
among the names of the sons of Gilasid the son of
Macbir, it seems probable that Gilead. whose noma
is so intimately connected with the eastern, was
also the immediate progenitor of the western half
of the tribe.*
Nor la it leas difficult to fix the exact position of
the territory allotted to the western hah*. In Josh,
xvii. 14-18, a passsge usually regarded by critics
as an exceedingly ancient document, we find the
two tribes of Joseph complaining that only ana
portion had been allotted to them, namely, Mount
Ephraim (ver. 15), and that they could not ex-
tend into toe plains of Jordan or Esdraebn, because
those districts were still in the possession of the
Oanaanitea, and scoured by their cl ariote. In reply
Joshua advises them to go up into the forest (ver.
16, A. V. " wood " ) — into the mountain which is
a forest (ver. 18). This mountain clothed with
forest can surely be nothing but Cabkkl, the
" mountain " closely adjoining the portion of
Ephraim, whose richness of wood wss so proverbial.
And it is in accordance with this view that the
majority of the towns of Manasseh — which as the
weaker portion of the tribe would naturally be
pushed to seek its fortunes outside the limits origi-
nally bestowed — were actually on the slopes either
of Carmel itself or of the contiguous ranges. Thus
Taakach and Meoiddo were on the northern
spurs of Carmel; Ibleam appears to have been on
the eastern continuation of the range, somewhere
near the present JenSft. Eh-doh was on the slopes
of the so-called '• Little Hermon." The two re-
maining towns mentioned as belonging to Manaa-
seh formed the extreme eastern and western limits
of the tribe; the one, Betb-sheah* (Josh xvii.
11), was in the hollow of the Gkdr, or Jordan-
Valley; the other, Dor (ibid.), was on the coast of
the Mediterranean, sheltered behind the range of
Carmel, and immediately opposite the bluff or
shoulder which forms its highest point. The whole
of these cities are specially mentioned as standing
in the allotments of other tribes, though Inhabited
by Manasseh ; and this, with the absence of any
attempt to define a limit to the possessions of the
tribe on the north, looks as if no boundary-line had
existed on that side, but as if the territory faded off
gradually into those of the two contiguous tribes
from whom it had borrowed its Surest cities. On
the south side the boundary between Manaaseh and
Ephraim is more definitely described, and may be
generally traced with tolerable certainty. It be-
gan on the east in the territory of Tssarhsr (xtB.
10) at a place called Atom*,' (ver. 7) now TaUr,
boundary line separating Ephraim and ■Tsn sass h TJ
cannot have been at any great distance from Shechem,
because the next point In the boundary Is « me affen-
methath racing Shechem." By BuseUus and Jerome
la the Onmwriam («e* voce « Aesr »), It b mentioned
evidently from actual knowledge, as still retaining Us
name, and lying on the high read from Neapolis(Jva».
Ju>), that la Shechem, to ScythopoHs (Btissa), the
ancient Beth-sbeaa, fifteen Roman nines Braes the
In the Atiwanen JxTirM. (687) It ocean
Digitized by
Google
MANASSEH
13 miles N. E. of Nabbu. Thence it ran to Mioh-
awthah, described as facing Sbechem (NablAt),
though now unknown ; then went to the right, i. e.
apparently ° northward, to the ipring of Tappuah,
also unknown; there it fell in with the watercourses
of the torrent Kanah — probably the Nahr Faiaik
— along which it ran to the Mediterranean.
From the indication! of the history it would ap-
pear that Manasseh took very little part in public
attain. They either left all that to Ephralm, or
were ao far removed from the centre of the nation
ai to hare little interest in what was taking place.
That they attended David's coronation at Hebron
has already been mentioned. When hia role waa
established over all Israel, each half had its distinct
ruler — the western, Joel ben-Pedaiah, the eastern,
Iddo ben-Zechariah (1 Chr. xxvii. 90, 31). From
this time the eastern Hanasseh fades entirely from
our view, and the western is hardly kept before ua
by an occasional mention. Such scattered notices
as we do find have almost all reference to the part
taken by members of the tribe in the reforms of the
good kings of Judah — the Jehovah-revival under
Asa (3 Chr. xv. 9) — the Passover of Hezekiah
(xxx. 1, 10, 11, 18], and the subsequent enthusiasm
against idolatry (xxxi. 1), — the iconoclasms of
Josiah (xxxiv. 6), and his restoration of the build-
ings of the Temple (ver. 0). It is gratifying to
reflect that these notices, faint and scattered as
they are, are all colored with good, and exhibit
none of the repulsive traits of that most repulsive
heathenism into which other tribes of Israel fell
It may have been at some such time of revival,
whether brought about by the invitation of Judah,
or, as the tide in the LXX. would imply, by the
dread of invasion, that Pe. lxxx. was composed.
But on the other hand, the mention of Benjamin
■a in alliance with Ephraim and Manasseh, points
to an earlier date than the disruption of the two
kingdoms. Whatever its date may prove to be,
there can be little doubt that the author of the
psalm was a member of the house of Joseph.
A positive connection between Hanasseh and
Benjamin Is implied in the genealogies of 1 Chr.
vii., where Machir is said to have married into the
family of Huppim and Sbuppim, chief bouses in
the latter tribe (ver. 15). No record of any snch
relation appears to have been yet discovered in the
historical books, nor is it directly alluded to except
in the genealogy just quoted. But we know that a
connection existed between the tribe of Benjamin
and the town of Jabesh-Gilead, inasmuch as from
that town were procured wives for four hundred
out of the six hundred Benjamites wbo survived
the slaughter of Gibeah (Judg. xxi. 13); end if
Jabesh-Gilead was a town of Manasseh — as is very
probable, though the fact is certainly nowhere stated
— it does appear very possible that this was the
MANASSHH
177*
between •> etvitai Sciopoll » (». «. BerthopoUs) and « civ.
Neapolis" as « A»r, ubl rait villa Job." Where It
lay then. It lies still. Sxectlv In this position M. Tan
to Velds (Syr. and Pal. 11. 838) has discovered a village
sailed Tadr, lying in the centra of a plain or basin,
surrounded on the north and west by mountains, but
jo the east sloping ewav Into a "Tody called ths Bait
Taller, which forms a near and direct de s cen t to the
Jordan TaUsy. Ths road from ATaalu to sVjoh passis
ay ths village. Porter (Jttas. 848) gives the naiaj
as Tti/Mr.
It doss not seam to have been important enough to
■Dow us to •nppcse that its Inhabitants are the Asz-
astsss, or Asherltae of 1 Ram. II. V.
' relationship referred to in the genealogies. Accord-
ing to the statement of the narrrative two-thirds
of the tribe of Benjamin must .have been directly
descended from Manasseh. Possibly we have hers
an explanation of the apparent connection between
King Saul and the people of Jabeah. No appeal
oould hare been more forcible to an oriental chief-
tain than that of his blood-relations when threat-
ened with extermination (1 Sam. xi. 4, 5), while no
duty was more natural than that which they in
their turn performed to his remains (1 Sam. xxxL
11). G.
MANAS'SBHO'lt&Q [see sbove]: Moms-
<rijt: Manaua), the thirteenth king of Judah.
The reign of this monarch is longer than that of
any other of the house of David. There is nous
of which we know so little. In part, it may be,
this waa the direct result of the character and
policy of ths man. In part, doubtless, it is to be
traced to the abhorrence with which the following
generation looked back upon it as the period of
lowest degradation to which their country had ever
fallen. Chroniclers and prophets pass it over, gath-
ering from its horrors and disasters the great, broad
lessons in which they saw the foot-prints of a
righteous retribution, the tokens of a Divine com-
panion, and then they avert their eyes and will sea
and say no more. This is in itself significant. It
gives a meaning and a value to every fact which
has escaped the sentence of oblivion. The very
reticence of the historians of the O. T. shows bow
free they were from the rhetorical exaggerations
and inaccuracies of a later age. The struggle of
opposing worships must have been as fierce under
Manasseh as it was under Antiochns, or Decius, or
Diocletian, or Mary. Men must have suffered acd
died in that struggle, of whom the world was not
worthy, and yet no contrast can be greater than
that between the short notices in Kings and Chron-
icles, and the martyrologies which belong to those
other periods of persecution.
The birth of Manasseh is fixed twelve years
before the death of Heiekiah, B. a 710 (3 K. xxi.
1). We must, therefore, infer either that there had
been no heir to the throne up to that comparatively
late period in hia reign, or that any that had l«en
born had died, or that, as sometimes happened in
the succession of Jewish and other eastern kings,
the elder son was passed over for the younger.
There are reasons which make the former the more
probable alternative. The exceeding bitterness of
Hezekiah's sorrow at the threatened approach of
death (3 K. xx. 3, 8; 3 Chr. xxxii. 34; Is. xxxviil
1-3) is more natural if we think of him as sink-
ing under the thought that he was dying childless,
leaving no heir to bis work and to his kingdom
When, a little later, Isaiah warns him of the cap-
Tan ds Velds suggests that this may hare been ths
spot on which the afldianltes encamped when surprises'
bv Gideon ; but that was surely further to the north,
nearer the spring of Uharod and the plain of Bsdra-
elon.
■ Ins right (pOjn) is generally taken to sig-
nify the South; and so Kail understands it In ths
Bases: but it seems more oonsonant with eommosi
sens* and also with ths probable course of the bowssV
ary — which oould hardly have gone south of SherheiD
-to take it as ths right of ths parson treeing this
Mas from Rut to We* {.(.North.
Digitized by
Google
1772
MANASSEH
thrKy end nieme which will Ml on his children, he
speaka of thou children aa jet future (2 K. xx. 18).
Thin circumstance will explain one or two fact*
In the contemporary history. Hezekiah, it would
•cem, recovering from his sickness, anxious to avoid
the danger that had threatened him of leaving his
kingdom without an heir, marries, at or about this
time, Hephzibah (3 K. xxi. 1), the daughter of one
of the citizens or princes of Jerusalem (Joseph. AtU.
x. 8, § 1). The prophets, we may well imagine,
would welcome the prospect of a successor named
by a king who had been so true and faithful.
Isaiah (in a passage clearly belonging to a later
data than the early portions of the book, and appar-
ently suggested by some conspicuous marriage), with
Me characteristic fondness for tracing auguries in
names, finds in that of the new queen a prophecy
of the ultimate restoration of Israel and the glories
of Jerusalem (Is. hrii. 4, 5 ; comp. Blunt, Scriptural
Comdi. Part iii. 5). The city also should be a
Hephzibah, a delightsome one. As the bridegroom
rejoiceth over the bride, so would Jehovah rejoice
over his people.* The child that is born from
this union is called Manaaaeh. This name too is
strangely significant. It appears nowhere else in
the history of the kingdom oi Judah. The only
associations connected with it were, that it belonged
to the tribe which was all but the moat powerful
of the hostile kingdom of Israel. How are we to
account for so singular and unlikely a choice ? The
answer is, that the name embodied what had been
for years the cherished object of Hezekiah's policy
and hope. To take advantage of the overthrow of
the rival kingdom by Shahnaneser, and the anarchy
in which its provinces bad been left, to gather
round him the remnant of the population, to bring
them back to the worship and faith of their fathers,
this had been the second step in hia great national
reformation (3 Ohr. xxx. 6). It was at least par-
tially successful. '• Divers of Asher, Afcmmth, and
Zebulnn, bumbled themselves and came to Jeru-
salem." They were there at the great pasaover.
The work of destroying idols went on in Kphraim
and Manatsth as well as in Judah (3 Chr. xxxi. 1 ).
What could lie a more acceptable pledge of his
desire to receive the fugitives as on the same foot-
ing with his own subjects than that he should give
to the heir to his throne the name in which one of
their tribes exulted ? What could better show the
desire to let all past discords and offenses be for-
gotten than the name which was itself an amnesty ?
(Geeeniua. )
The last twelve years of Hezekiah's reign were
not, however, it will be remembered, those which
were likely to influence for good the character of
jis successor. His policy bad succeeded. He had
thrown off the yoke of the king of Assyria, which
Ahaz had accepted, had defied bis armies, had been
delivered from extremest danger, and Lad made
himself the head of an independent kingdom, re-
ceiving tribute from neighboring princes instead
of paying it to the great king, the king of Assyria.
But be goes a step further. Not content with
independence, he enters on a policy of aggression
He contracts an alliance with the rebellious viceroy
of Babylon agiinst their common enemy (2 K. xx.
IS; Is. xxxix.). He displays the treasures of his
sjngdom to the ambassadors, in the belief that that
• The bearing of this pasasge on the euutim s r e j as
to the authorship and data of the later chapters of
Isaiah Is, at least, worth considering.
MANASSEH
will show them how powerful an aly he eaa proas
himself. Isaiah protested against this step, but the
ambition of being a great potentate continued, and
it waa to the results of this ambition that the boy
Manasseh succeeded at the age of twelve. His ac-
cession appears to have been the signal for an entire
change, if not in the foreign policy, at any rate in
the religious administration of the kingdom. At
so early an age he can scarcely have been the
spontaneous author of so great an alteration, and
we may infer accordingly that it was the work of
the idolatrous, or Ahaz party, which had been
repressed during the reign of Hezekiah, but had
all along, like the Romish clergy under Edward VI.
in England, looked on the reform with a sullen
acquiescence, and thwarted it when they dared.
The change which the king's measures brought
about was after all superficial. The idolatry which
was publicly discountenanced, waa practiced pri-
vately (Is. i. 29, ii. 20, lxv. 3). The priests snd
the prophets, in spite of their outward orthodoxy,
were too often little better than licentious drunk-
ards (Is. xxriii. 7). The nobles of Judah kept the
new moons snd Sabbaths much in the same way aa
those of France kept their Lents, when Louis XJV.
had made devotion a court ceremonial (Is. i. 13,
14). There are signs that even among the king's
highest officers of state there waa one, Shebna the
scribe (Is. xxxvii. 2), the treasurer (Is. xxii. 16)
"over the house," whose policy was simply that
of a selfish ambition, himself possibly a foreigner
(comp. Hunt's Script. Cvinc. iii. 4), and whom
Isaiah saw through and distrusted. It was, more-
over, the traditional policy of " the princes of
Judah" (comp. one remarkable instance in the
reign of Joash, 2 Chr. xxiv. 17) to favor foreign
alliances and the toleration of foreign worship,
aa it was that of the true priests and prophets
to protest against it. It would seem, accord-
ingly, as if they urged upon the young king
that scheme of a close alliance with Babylon which
Isaiah bad condemned, and as the natural conse
quence of this, the adoption, as far as possible, of
its worship, and that of other nations whom it was
desirable to conciliate. The morbid desire for
widening the range of their knowledge and pene
crating into the mysteries of other systems of belief,
may possibly have contributed now, as it had done
in the days of Solomon, to increase the evil (Jer. ii.
10-25; Ewald, Ouch. In: iii. 666). The result
was a debasement which bad not been equaled even
in the reign of Ahaz, uniting in one centre the
abominations which elsewhere existed separately.
Not content with sanctioning their presence in the
Holy City, as Solomon and Kehoboam had done,
he defiled with it the Sanctuary itself (3 Chr. xxxiii.
4). The worship thus introduced was, as has been
said, predominantly Babylonian in its character.
" He observed times, and used enchantmenta, and
used witchcraft, and dealt with a familiar spirit,
and with wizards " (ibid. ver. 6). The worship of
"the host of heaven," which each man celebrated
for himself on the roof of his own bouse, took the
place of that of the Lord God of Sabaoth (8 K.
xxiii. 13; la. lxr. 3, 11; Zeph. i. 6; Jer. viii. %
six. 13, xxxii. 29). With this, however, there was
associated the old Molech worship of the Ammo-
nites. The fires were rekindled in the Valley of
Ben-Hinnom. Tophet waa (for the first time,
apparently) built into a stately fabric (3 K. xvi. *
Is. xxx. 33, as compared with Jer. vil. 81, x s. 1
Ewald, GtMch. lir. iii. 667). Even the king's sons
Digitized by
Google
MANA88EH.
of being presented to Jehwah, received a
horrible fire-baptism dedicating them to Moiech (3
Cbr. zxziiL 6), while othen wen actually ■laugh-
lend (Ex. xxiii. 37, 89). The Baal aud Ashtaroth
ritual, which had been imported under Solomon,
from the Phoenician!, waa revived with fresh splen-
dor, and in the worship of the " Queen of heaven,"
Axed ita note deep into the habita of the people
(Jer. vil. 18). Wane and more horrible than all,
the Aaherah, the image of Aatarte, or the obeoaue
symbol of a phallio worship (comp. Asherah, and
In addition to the authorities there cited, Mayer,
De Reform. Jon*, ate, in the The*. IkeoL phtloL
Amstel. 1701), waa aeen in the house of which
Jehovah had aaid that He would there put His
Name for ever (8 K. xxi. 7). All this was aooom-
panied by the extremeat moral degradation. The
worship of those old Eastern religion* has been well
described as a kind of "sensuous intoxication,"
■imply sensuous, and therefore associated inevitably
with a fiendish cruelty, leading to the utter annihi-
lation of the spiritual lift of men (Hegel, Philm.
ef Biliary, L 3). So it waa in Jerusalem in the
days of Manaaaeh. Rival priests (the C'hemarim
of Zeph. i. «.) were consecrated for this hideous
worship. Women dedicating themselves to a adtm
like that of the Babylonian Mylitta, wove hang-
ings for the Aaherah, as they sat there (Mayer, cap.
ii. J 4). The Kadeshim, in closest neighborhood
with them, gave themselves up to yet darker abomi-
nations (8 K. xxiii. 7). The awful words of Isaiah
(i. 10) had a terrible truth in them. Those to
whom he spoke were literally " rulers of Sodom and
princes of Gomorrah." Every faith waa tolerated
bat the old faith of Israel. This was abandoned
and proscribed. The altar of Jehovah waa displaced
(8 Chr. xxxili. 16). The very ark of the oovenant
waa removed from the sanctuary (8 Chr. xxxv. 8).
The sacred books of the people were so systemati-
cally destroyed, that fifty years later, men listened
to the Book of the Law of Jehovah as a newly
discovered treasure (2 K. xxii. 8). It may well be,
according to a Jewish tradition, that this fanaticism
of idolatry led Manaaaeh to order the name Jeho-
vah to be erased from all documents and inscrip-
tions (Patrick, ad lac.). All this involved also a
systematic violation of the weekly Sabbatic rest
and the consequent loss of one witness against a
merely animal life (la. Ivi. 8, Iviii. 13). The tide
of corruption carried away some even of those who,
as priests and prophets, should have been steadfast
in resisting it (Zeph. iil. 4; Jer. ii. 26, v. 13, vi. 13).
It is easy to imagine the bitter grief and burning
indignation of those who continued faithful. The
fiercest teal of Huguenots in France, of Covenanters
in Scotland, against the badges and symbols of the
Latin Church, is perhaps but a faint shadow of
that which grew to a white heat in the hearts of
the worshippers of Jehovah. They spoke out in
words of corresponding strength. Evil waa coming
on Jerusalem which should make the ears of man
to tingle (2 K. xxi. 12). The line of Samaria and
the plummet of the bouse of Ahab should be the
loom of the Holy City. Like a vessel that had
•nee been full of precious ointment (comp. the
tXX. aAa0aVrrp«v), but had afterwards become
foul, Jerusalem should be emptied and wiped out,
and exposed to the winds of heaven till it was
alsa n ae d Foremost, we may well believe, among
•Mas who thus bore their witness, was the old
erophet, now bent with the weight of fourscore
, who had in his earlier days protested with
MAKAS8BH
1T78
equal courage against the crimes of the king a
grandfather. On him too, according to the old
Jewish tradition, came the first shock of the perse-
cution. [Isaiah.] Habakkok may have shared
his martyrdom (Keil on 2 K. xxi.; but comp.
Habakkok). But the persecution did not atop
there. It attacked the whole order of the true
prophets, and those who followed them. Every
day witnessed an execution (Joseph. Art. x. 3, § 1)
The slaughter was like that under Alva or Charles
IX. (9 K. xxi. 16). The martyrs who were faith-
ful unto death had to endure not torture only, but
the mocks and taunts of a godless generation (la.
lvii. 1-1). Long afterwards the remembrance of
that reign of terror lingered in the minds of men
as a guilt for which nothing could atone (2 K. xxfrr.
4). The persecution, like most other persecutions
carried on with entire singleness of purpose, was
for a time successful (Jer. ii. 80). The prophets
appear no more in the long history of Manasaeh's
reign. The heart and the intellect of the nation
were crushed out, and there would seem to have
been no chroniclera left to record this portion of its
history.
Retribution came soon in the natural sequence
of events. There are indications that the neigh-
boring nations — Philistines, Moabites, Ammonites
— who had been tributary under Hezekiah, revolted
at some period in the reign of Manaaaeh, and
asserted their independence (Zeph. ii. 4-15; Jer.
xlvii., xlviii., xlix.). The Babylonian alliance bore
the fruits which had been predicted. Hezekiah had
been too hasty in attaching himself to the cause of
the rebel-prince against Assyria. The rebellion of
Merodach-Baladan was crushed, and then the wrath
of the Assyrian king fell on those who had sup-
ported him. [Esarhaddon.] Judaea waa again
overrun by the Assyrian armies, and this time the
invasion was more successful than that of Sen-
nacherib. The city apparently waa taken. The
king himself was made prisoner and carried off to
Babylon. There bis eyes wen opened, and he
repented, and his prayer was heard, and the Lord
delivered him (2 Chr. xxxiii. 12, 13; comp. Maurice,
PropheU and King; p, 362).
Two questions meet us at this point. (1.) Have
we satisfactory grounds for believing that this state-
ment is historically true 1 (9.) If we accept it, to
what period in the reign of Manaaaeh is it to be
assigned ? It has been urged in regard to (1) that
the silence of the writer of the books of Kings is
conclusive against the trustworthiness of the narra-
tive of 8 Chronicles. In the former there is no
mention made of captivity or repentance or return.
The latter, it has been said, yields to the tempta-
tion of pointing a moral, of making history appear
more in harmony with his own notions of the
Divine government than it actually is. His anxiety
to deal leniently with the successors of David leads
him to invent at once a reformation and the cap-
tivity which is represented aa ita cause (Winer,
Rob. a. v. Manaaaeh ; Rooenmuller, Bibl. Alter*, i.
8, p. 131; Hitaig, Btgr. d. Krilik, p. 130, quoted
by Keil). It will be neoeaaary, in dealing with this
objection, to meet the skeptical critic on his own
ground. To say that his reasoning contradicts our
belief in the inspiration of the historical books of
Scripture, and is destructive of all reverence for
them, would involve a pttitio principii, and how-
ever strbugly it may influence our feelings, we are
bound to find another answer. It ia believed that
that answer is not for to seek. (1.) The autoes at*
Digitized by
Google
1774 MANASSEH
i writer who sunn up the history of a reign of 55
years in 19 vena u to one alleged event In it li
nraly a weak ground for refusing to accept that
•vent on the authority of another historian. (9.)
The omission Is in part explained by the character
of the narrative of 3 K. xxi. The writer delib-
erately turns away from the history of the days of
shame, and not less from the personal biography of
the king. He looks on the reign only as it con-
tributed to the corruption and final overthrow of
the kingdom, and no after repentance was able to
undo the mischief that had been done at first.
(8.) Still keeping on the level of human probabil-
ities, the character of the writer of 3 Chronicles,
obviously a Levite. and looking at the facts of the
history from the Levite point of view, would lead
him to attach greater importance to a partial rein-
statement of the old ritual and to the cessation of
persecution, and so to give them in proportion a
greater prominence, (4.) There is one peculiarity
in the history which is, in some measure, of the
nature of an undesigned coincidence, and so eon-
firms it. The captains of tbe host of Assyria take
Msnssseh to Babylon. Would not a later writer,
inventing the story, have made tbe Assyrian, and
not the Babylonian capital, the scene of the cap-
tivity; or if the latter were chosen for the sake of
harmony with the prophecy of Is. mix., have made
the king of Babylon rather than of Assyria the
captor?" As it is, the narrative fits in, with the
utmost accuracy, to the facts of oriental history.
The first attempt of Babylon to assert its inde-
pendence of Nineveh failed. It was crushed by
Esarhaddon (the first or second of that name;
comp. Esarhaddon, and Ewald, Gttck. Itr. iii.
675), and for a time the Assyrian king held his
court at Babylon, so as to effect more completely
the reduction of the rebellious province. There is
(5) the fact of agreement with the intervention of
the Assyrian king in 2 K. xvii. 94, just at the same
time. The king is not named there, but Errs iv.
8, 10, gives Asnappar, and this is probably only
another form of Asardanapar, and this = Esarhad-
don (comp. Ewald, Getch. iii. 676; Tob. i. 31 gives
Sarchedonus). The importation of tribes from
Eastern Asia thus becomes part of the same policy
as the attack on Judah. On the whole, then, the
objection may well be dismissed as frivolous and
vexatious. Like many other difficulties urged by
the same school, it has in it something at once
captious and puerile. Those who lay undue stress
on them act in the spirit of a clever boy asking
puzzling questions, or a sharp advocate getting up
a case against the evidence on the other side, rather
than in that of critics who have learnt how to
construct a history and to value its materials rightly
(comp. Keil, Comm. mil xxi.). Ewald, a critic
of a nobler stamp, whose fault is rather that of
fkntastie reconstruction than needless skepticism
(Ouch. Itr. iii. 678), admits the groundwork of
truth. Would the prophecy of Isaiah, it may be
asked, have been recorded and preserved if it had
sot been fulfilled ? Might not Hanasseh's release
have been, as Ewald suggests, the direct consequence
of the death of Esarhaddon?
The circumstance just noticed enables us to re-
• It may be noticed that this was actually dona m
«tar apocryphal traditions (nee below).
» A comparison of ths description of these fbrtHlca-
stass with Zeph. 1. 10 gives a special Interest and tbrae
s> the prophet's words.
MANASSEH
turn an approximate answer to the other <
The duration of Esarhaddon's Babylonian reign Is
calculated as from B. c. 680-667; and Manasseh'a
captivity must therefore have fallen within those
limits. A Jewish tradition (Seder Olam Rabba, c
94) fixes the 93d year of his reign as the exact
data; and this, according as wa adopt the earlier or
the later date of his secession, would give a. a
676 or 673.
The period that followed is dwelt upon by the
writer of 9 Chr. as one of a great change for the
better. The discipline of exile made the king fed
that the gods whom he had chosen wen p owerless
to deliver, and he tamed in his heart to Jehovah,
the God of his fathers. The compassion or death
of Esarhaddon led to his release, and he returned
after some uncertain interval of time to Jerusalem,
It Is not improbable that his absence from that city
had given a breathing-time to the oppressed adhe-
rents of the ancient creed, and possibly had brought
into prominence, as the provisional ruler and de-
fender of the city, one of the chief members of the
party. If the prophecy of Is. xxii. 16 received, as
it probably did, its fulfillment in Shebna's sharing
the captivity of his master, there is nothing extrav-
agant in the belief that we may refer to tbe same
period the noble words which apeak of Euakim the
son of Hilkiah as taking the place which Sbebna
should leave vacant, and rising up to be "a father
unto tbe inhabitants of Jerusalem and to the house
of Judah," having " the key of the house of David
on his shoulder."
The return of Msnssseh was at any rate followed
by a new policy. Tbe old faith of Israel was no
longer persecuted. Foreign idolatries were no longer
thrust, in all their foulness, into the Sanetoary itsett
The altar of the Lord was again restored, and peace-
offerings and thank-offerings sacrificed to Jehovah
(9 Chr. xxxiii. 15, 16). But beyond this the refor-
mation did not go. The ark was not r estored
to its place. The book of the Law of Jehovah
remained in its ooneealment. Satisfied with the
feeling that they were no longer worshipping the
gods of other nations by name, they went on with
a mode of worship essentially idolatrous. "The
people did sacrifice still in the high places, but to
Jehovah their God only" (ibid. ver. 17).
The other facts known of Manasseh's reign con-
nect themselves with the state of the world round
him. The Assyrian monarchy was tottering to its
fall, and the king of Judah seems to have thought
that it was still possible for him to rule aa the head
of a strong and independent kingdom. If he had
to content himself with a smaller territory, he might
yet guard its capital against attack, by a new wall
defending what had been before its weak side, "to
the entering in of the fish-gate," and completing
the tower of Ophel,* which had bean begun, with
a like purpose, by Jotham (9 Chr. xxvii. 8). Nor
were the preparations for defense limited to Jeru-
salem. " He put captains of war in all the fenced
cities of Judah." There was, it must be remem-
bered, a special reason for this attitude, over an/
above that afforded by the condition of Assyria.
Egypt had emerged from tbe chaos of the Dodee-
arohy and the Ethiopian intruders, and was become
the dry when It was most open to attack. Esphauah
points to the deansss, and says that they shall aval
nothing;. It Is iswlaw to trust to these:
be ths notss of a ory from UufiA gm t . "
Digitized by
Google
MANA88BH
strong lod aggressive under Psammitichus. Push-
ing his anna northwards, he attacked the Philis-
tines; ind the twenty-nine years' stage of Aeotus
raott have Mien wholly or in part within the reign
of Mainaseh. So for hie progress would not be
unacceptable. It would be pleasant to see the old
hereditary enemies of Israel, who had lately grown
Insolent and defiant, meet with their masters.
About this time, accordingly, we find the thought
of an Egyptian alliance again beginning to gain
finer. The prophets, and those who were guided
by them, dreaded this mora than anything, and
entered their protest against it Not the less,
however, from this time forth, did it continue to
be the favorite idea which took possession of the
minds of the lay-party of the princes of Judah.
The very name of Manasseh's son, Amon, barely ad-
mitting a possible Hebrew explanation, but identi-
eal in form and sound with that of the great sun-god
of Egypt (so Ewald, GeseA. iii. 666), is probably an
indication of the gladness with which the alliance
of Psammitichus was welcomed. As one of its
consequences, it involved probably the supply of
troops from Judah to serve in the armies of the
Egyptian king. Without adopting Ewald's hy-
pothesis that this is referred to in Dent xxviii. 68,
It is yet likely enough in iUelf, and Jer. ii. 14-16
seems to allude to some such state of things. In
return for this, W a nss s eh , we.may believe, received
the help of the chariots and horses for which Egypt
was always famous (Is. xrri. 1). (Comp. Aristeas,
EpuL ad Pkilocr. in Havereamp's Jotphut, ii. p.
104).' If this was the close of Manasseh's reign,
we can well understand how to the writer of the
books of Kings it would seem hardly better than
the beginning, leaving the root-evil uncured, pre-
paring the way for worse evils than itself. We can
understand how it was that on his death he was
buried as Ahaa had been, not with the burial of
a king, in the sepulchres of the house of David,
but in the garden of Una (2 K. xxi. 26), and
that, long afterward*, in spite of his repentance,
Jhe Jews held his name in abhorrence, as one
sf the three kings (the other two an Jeroboam
and Ahab) who had no part in eternal life (S<m-
hedr. ch. xi. 1, quoted by Patrick on 3 Chr. xxiiii.
18).
And the evil was irreparable. The habits of a
sansoous and debased worship had eaten into the
life of the people; and though they might be
sspresaed for a time by force, as in the reformation
sf Josiah, they burst out again, when the pressure
was removed, with fresh violence, and rendered even
the teal of the best of the Jewish kings fruitful
chiefly in hypocrisy and unreality.
The intellectual life of the people suffered in the
same degree. The persecution cut off all who,
trained in the schools of the prophets, were the
a The passage reawnd to ocoun in the opening para-
graphs of the letter of the Pieudo-Ariiteas. Us is
•peaking of the large number of Jews (100,000) who
had bean brought Into Egypt by Ptolemy, the son of
Vagus. n They , however," he says, " wen not the only
tews there. Others, though not so many had oome
in with the Persian. Before that, troops had own sent,
by vh.ue of a treaty of alliance, to help Psammitichus
against the Ethiopians.'' The direct authority of this
mater Is, of course, not very gnat ; but the joeence
ef any motive for the Invention of such a fact maker it
srebefcie that he was following mm historical records.
•sakl, it should be mentioned, claims the credit of
■a the fast to dumber the bearing of this
MANAS8EH 1775
thinkers and teachers of the people. The reign of
MaMssah witnessed the close of the work of Isaiah
and Habakkuk at its beginning, and the youth of
Jeremiah and Zephaniah at its conclusion, but no
prophetic writings illumine that dreary half cen-
tury of debasement.' The most fearful symptom
of all, when a prophet's voice was again heard
during the minority of Josiah, was the atheism
which, then as in other ages, followed on the con-
fused adoption of a oonfluent polytheism (Zeph. L
13). It is surely a strained, almost a fantasia)
hypothesis, to assign (as Ewald does) to such ■
period two such noble works as Deuteronomy and
the Book of Job. Nor was this dying-out of ■
true faith the only evil. The systematic persecu-
tion of the worshippers of Jehovah accustomed the
people to the horrors of a religious wsr; and when
they in their turn gained the ascendency, they used
the opportunity with a fiercer sternness than had
been known before. Jehoahaphat and Hexekiah in
their reforms had been content with restoring the
true worship and destroying the instruments of the
false. In that of Josiah, the destruction extends
to the priests of the high places, whom be sacrifices
on their own altars (3 K. xxiii. 30).
But little is added by later tradition to the O. T.
narrative of Manasseh's reign. The prayer that
bears his name among the apocryphal books can
hsrdly, in the absence of any Hebrew original, be
considered as identical with that referred to in 3
Chr. xxxlii., and is probably rather the result of an
attempt to work out the hint there supplied than
the reproduction of an older document. There are
reasons, however, for believing that there existed
at some time or other, a fuller history, more or less
legendary, of Hanaaseh and his conversion, from
which the prayer may possibly have been an excerpl
preserved for devotional purposes (it appears for the
first time in the Apostolical Constitutions) when
the rest was rejected as worthless. Scattered hen
and there, we find the disjecta membra of such a
work. Among the offenses of Manasseh, the moat
prominent is, that he places in the sanctuary aa
orvaA^a reroawpoVanroy of Zeus (Suidas, s* V.
Morao-oSji ; Georg. Syneellus, Chronograph. L
404). The charge on which he condemns Isaiah
to death is that of blasphemy, the words, " I saw
the Lord " (Is. vi. 1) being treated as a presumptu-
ous boast at variance with Ex. xxxiii. 80 (Nic. de
Lyra, from a Jewish treatise: Jebamatk, quoted by
A mama, in CriL Sacri on 9 K. xxi.). Isaiah is
miraculously rescued. A cedar opens to receive
hiiu. Then comes the order that the cedar should
be sawn through {ibid.). That which nude this
sin the greater was, that the king's mother, Heph-
sibah, was the daughter of Isaiah. When Manas
sen was taken captive by Merodaeh and takes to
Babylon (Suidas), be was thrown into prison sod
fact on the history of ktanaaseh's reign. Another
Indication that Ethiopia was looked on, about this
time, as among the enemies of Judah, may be found
In Zepb. U. 12, while in Zeph. 111. 10 we have a cleat
statement of the faot that a gnat multitude ef the
people had found their way to that remote country.
The story told by Herodotus of the nvolt of the Aula-
moll (II. 80) Indicates the necessity which led Psammt-'
tichus to gather mercenary troops from all quarters tat
defense of that frontier of has Bjngdorv.
» Then Is a possible exception to this la the exist-
ence of a prophet Bceal (the Tulg. rendering, whose
the LXX. has w hpirrmr, and the A. T. "the seers'-
(8 Chr. xxxiii. 18); but nothinr alas is known of hm>
Digitized by
Google
1776
MANASSEH
fed daily with a scanty allowance of bran-bread and
water mixed with vinegar. Then came fail con-
demnatiou. He wai encased in a brazen image
(the description suggest* a puniihment like that
of the bull of Perillue), bnt he repented and prayed,
and the image clave asunder, and he escaped (Suidas
•wd Georg. Syncellua). Then he returned to Jeru-
jalem and lived righteously and justly.
E. H. P.
2. (Mwwnrij i [Vat Mareuren :] Manaste.)
One of the descendant* of Pahath-Moab, who in
the days of Exra had married a foreign wife (Ear.
i 30). In 1 Eedr. ix. 81 he is called Mahas-
BEA8.
3. One of the laymen, of the family of Hashum,
who put away his foreign wife at Ezra's command
(Ear. x. 88). He is called Mamasbes in 1 Eedr.
Ix. 88.
*. ([Morao-ffT/ ; -Alex. Mamurcrn :] Moyeei.)
Iu the Hebrew text of Judg. xviii. 80, the name
of the priest of the graven image of the Danites is
given as " Jonathan, the son of Gerahom, the too
of Manasseh"; the last word being written ntP^Q,
and a Masoretic note calling attention to the " mm
suspended." "The fate of this superpoeititions
letter," says Kennioott (Diu. ii. 58), " has been
very various, sometimes placed over the word, some-
times suspended half way, and sometimes uniformly
inserted." Jarcbi's note upon the passage is as
follows: " On account of the honor of Moses he
wrote Nun to change the name; and it is written
suspended to signify that it was not Manasseh but
Moses." The LXX., Peshito-Syriac, and Cbaldce
all read " Manasseh," but the Vulgate retains the
original and undoubtedly the true reading, Moyut.
Three of De Rossi's MSS. had originally HOTQ,
" Moses; " and this was also the reading " of three
Greek MSS. in the Library of St. Germain at Paris,
of one in the library of the Carmelites of the same
place, of a Greek MS., No. 331, in the Vatican,
and of a MS. of the Octateuch in University Col-
lege Library, Oxford " (Burrington, Genealogies, i.
86). A passage in Theodoret is either an attempt
to reconcile the two readings, or indicates that in
some copies at least of the Greek they must have
coexisted. He quotes the clause in question In this
form, '\mvA8av . . . viol Mayatrori vlov Tripoan
vlov Manrij; and this apparently gave rise to the
assertion of Hiller (Arcanum Keri et Kelhib, p.
187, quoted by Rosenmiiller on Judg. xviii. 80),
that the " Nun suspended " denotes that the
previous word is transposed. He accordingly pro-
poses to read vara p rwan p inairp :
out although his judgment on the point is accepted
es final by Rosenmiiller, it has not the smallest
authority. Kennioott attributes the presence of the
Nun to the corruption of MSS. by Jewish tran-
seribers. With regard to the chronological dif-
teuHy of accounting for the presence of a grandson
if Moses at an apparently late period, there is every
reason to believe that the last Ave chapters of
Judges refer to earlier events than those after which
they are placed. In xx. 28 Phinehaa the son of
Eleazar, and therefore the grandson of Aaron, is
■aid to have stood before the ark, and there is
therefore no difficulty in supposing that a grandson
" Bwald (Sue*. Ml. 679) Is Inclined to think that
fee Greek mar have been bases on the Hebrew. Then
MANAS8E8, TfflE PRAYER 0#
of Moses might be alive at the tame tune, which
was not long after the death of Joshua. Josephs*
places the episode of the Benjamites before that of
the Gadites, and introduces them both before the
invasion of Chuahanrisbathaim and the delivennoa
of Israel by OthnieL narrated in Judg. iii (Ant. r.
8, § 8-v. 3, § 1: see also Kennioott's Dietertathm,
ii. 51-67; DiuerL Gener. p. 10). It may he a*
well to mention a tradition recorded by R. Uavid
Kimchi, that in the genealogy of Jonathan, Manas-
seh is written for Moses because he did the deed
of Mnnnoseh, the idolatrous king of Judah. A ncto
from the margin of a Hebrew MS. quoted bj Ken-
nicott {Diu. Gen. p. 10) is as follows: "H» is
called by the name of Manasseh the son of He vrHhh
for he also made the graven image in the Teuple."
It must be confessed that the point of this it not
very apparent W. A. W.
MANAS-BES (Morao-arjf ; [Vat Monunrn:]
Manatees). 1. Maxasszh 4, of the sons of
Hashum (1 Esdr. ix. 88; eomp. Ear. x. 33).
8. Masassxh. king of Judah (Matt i. 10), to
whom the apocryphal prayer is attributed.
3. Maxasoeh, the son of Joseph (Rev. vii. 6).
4. A wealthy inhabitant of Bethuha, and bus-
band of Judith, according to the legend. He was
smitten with a sunstroke wbilo superintending the
laborers in his fields, leaving Judith a widow with
great possessions (Jud. viii. 8, 7, x. 8, xvi. 82, 88,
84), and was buried between Dotfaan and Baal-
MANAS'SBS, THB PRAYER OF
(■wpofftvxh Mavoo-or))- 1- The repentance and
restoration of Manasseh (2 Chr. xxxiii. 18 f£)
furnished the subject of many legendary stories
(Fabric. Cod. Apoer. V. T. I 1101 I). "His
prayer unto his God " was still preserved " in the
book of the kings of Israel " when the Chronicles
were compiled (3 Chr. xxxiii. 18), and, after this
record was lost, the subject was likely to attract
the notice of later writers.* " The Prayer of Man-
asseh," which is found in some MSS. of the LXX.,
is the work of one who has endeavored to express,
not without true feeling, toe thoughts of the re-
pentant king. It opens with a description of the
majesty of God (1-5), which passes into a descrip-
tion of bis mercy in granting repentance to sinners
(6-8, ifio) ry afuurruXQ). Then follows a per-
sonal confession and supplication to God as •' the
God of them that repent," u hymned by all the
powers of heaven," to whom belongs " glory for
ever " (9-15, cov tarty 4 W{« *b rohs alums)-
" And the Lord heard the voice of Manatees and
pitied him," the legend continues, " and there came
around him a flame of fire, and all the irons about
him (to, wtp) afrror e-iSnpa) were melted, and the
Lord delivered him out of his affliction" (Const
ApotL ii. 82; eomp. Jul. AfHe. ap. Routh, KtL
Sae. H. 888).
8. The Greek text is undoubtedly original, and
not a mere translation from the Hebrew; and even
within the small spaee of fifteen verses some pecu-
liarities are found (oVrcmis, xKbrtir yen coe-
Stas, wapopytfcir tov Sv/uir, rttwBai ueratwa*
rin). The writer was well acquainted with the
LXX. (to. KOTdrraTa tv/i ■»?»> re wAijeW twi
Xp))e*rerwr^i am, raira 4 tmuut Ws> oipswaV;
but beyond this there is nothing to ilisisiiiwi the
Is at least a* <
armed an orejSa of to* «sms
Digitized by
Google
MANA88ITES, THE
jat* at which he lived. The allusion to the
patriarch* (ver. 8, SUaiei ; ver. 1, to OTtipiia avrir
r« iimuor) appears to fix the authorship on a Jew;
bat the clear teaching on repantanoe point* to a
time certainly not long before the Christian era-
There i» no indication of the place at which the
Prayer wa* written.
3. The earliest reference to the Prayer is con-
tained in a fragment of Julio* Africsona (cir. 331
A. o.). but it may be doubted whether the words
in their original form clearly referred to the present
composition (Jul. Afric. fr. 40). It is, however,
given at length in the Apostolical Constitutions
(ii. 33), in which it is followed by a narrative of
the same apocryphal facta (§ 1) as are quoted from
Africanua. The Prayer is found in the Alexandrine
MS. in the collection of hymns and metrical prayers
which is appended to the Psalter — a position which
it generally occupies; but in the three Latin MSS.
used by Sabatier it is placed at the end of 3 Cur.
(Sabat. Biil Lot. iii. 1038).
4. The Prayer wa* never distinctly recognized
as a canonical writing, though it was included in
many MSS. of the LXX. and of the Latin version,
and has been deservedly retained among the apoc-
rypha in A. V. and by Luther. The Latin trans-
lation which occurs in Vulgate MSS. is not by the
hand of Jerome, and has soma remarkable phrases
(mitutaUoMlu, importnbili$ (iwwitrrarot), omnit
virtut aalorum) ; but there is no sufficient internal
evidence to show whether it is earlier or later than
his time. It does not, however, seem to have been
used by any Latin writer of the first four centuries,
and was not known to Victor Tunonensis in the
6th (Ambrosias, iv. 989, ed. Migne).
6. The Commentary of Fritzsche (t'xeg. Bandb.
1861) contains all that is necessary for the inter-
pretation of the Prayer, which is, indeed, in little
need of explanation. The Alexandrine text seems
to have been interpolated in some places, while it
shn omits a whole clause; but at present the ma-
terials for settling a satisfactory text have not been
soUected. B. F. W.
MANAS'SITES, THE PUfJlpn, {.«.•> the
Maiuusite": i MaKurcn) [or -o-r)f ; Alex, in Deut.
and Judg. Mavraav* or -o-»t:] Manaat), that
is, the members of the tribe of Msnaaseh. The
word occurs but thrice in the A. V. namely, Deut.
Iv. 43; Judg. xii. 4; and 3 K. x. 33. In the first
and last of these the original is a* given above, but
in the other it is " Mauaateh " — " Fugitives of
Ephraim are you, Gilead ; in the midst of Ephraim,
in the midst of Manaueh." It may be well to
take this opportunity of remarking, that the point
of the verse following that just quoted is lost in the
A. V., from the word which in ver. 4 is rightly
rendered " fugitive " being there given as " those
which were escaped." Ver. 5 would more accu-
rately be, " And (jilead seized the fords of the
Jordan-of-Ephraim ; and it was so that when fugi-
tives of Ephraim said, ' I will go over,' the men of
Uilead said to him, ' Art thou an Ephraimite ? ' "
- the point being that the taunt of the Ephraimitea
was turned against themselves. Q.
MANDRAKES 1777
MAS DRAKES (□""rTplV oWdto.; „\m
fiarSparyopiy, of fiaytpayipat'- mandrogora). " ft
were a wearisome and superfluous task," says Oed-
mann ( Vtrmuch. SammL L v. 95), " to quote and
pass judgment on the multitude of authors who
have written about duiaim ; " but the reader who
cares to know the literature of the subject will find
a long list of authorities in Celsius (Hienb. i. 1 ft)
and in Rudbeck (D» DudMm Jtubtitu, CpsaL
1733). See also Winer (BibL RtalwtrL " Alraun ").
The dudiim (the word occurs only in the plural
number) are mentioned in Gen. xxx. 14, 15, 16,
and in Cant. vii. 13. From the former passage we
learn that they were found in the fields of Mesopo-
tamia, where Jacob and his wives were at one time
living, and that the fruit (/irjAa narSpayopay,
LXX.) was gathered " in the days of wheat-
harvest," i. s. in May. There is evidently also an
allusion to the supposed properties of this plant to
promote conception, hence Rachel's desire of ob-
taining the fruit, for a* yet she had not borne
children. In Cant vii. 13 it is said, " the thul&lm
give a smell, and at our gates are all manner of
pleasant fruits " — from this passage we learn that
the plant in question was strong-scented, sod that
it grew in Palestine. Various attempts have bean
made to identify the dud&im. Rudbeck the younger
— the same who maintained that the quails which
fed the Israelites in the wilderness were "flying
fish," and who, as Oxlmann has truly remarked,
seems to have a special gift for demonstrating
anything he pleases — supposed the dvditm were
" bramble-berries" (Rubut aeauis, Linn.), a theory
which deserves no serious consideration. Celsius,
who supposes that a kind of Rhamnus ia meant, Is
far from satisfactory in his conclusions; be identi-
fies the duddbn with what he calls Lvtm Cyrauaca,
the Sidra of Arabic authors. This appears to be
the lotus of the ancient*, Zisyphut lotut. See
Shaw's TravtU, i. 363, and SprengeL Bi$t. Rri
S •
Aero. i. S51 ; Freyteg, Ar. Lex. *. v. « Juw
Celsius's argument is based entirely upon the an-
thority of a certain Rabbi (see Buxtorf, Lex. Tabu.
p. 1303), who assert* the dudMm to be the fruit of
the mayiek (the lotus?);' but the authority of •
single Rabbi is of little weight against the almost
unanimous testimony of the ancient versions. With
still leas reason have Castell (Lex. Htpt. p. 3052)
and Ludolf (Hiit. jEth. i. c. 9), and a few others,
advanced a claim for the Mva pmadmaai, the
banana, to denote the dwJAbn. Faber, following
Ant. Dousing (Dissert, dt Dudmm), thought the
duddXm were small sweet-scented melons ( Cucumu
dudaim), which grow in Syria, Egypt, and Persia,
known by the Persians as duttntlngth, a word
which means "fragrance in the hand;" and
Sprengel (Wet. i. IT) appears to have entertained
a similar belief. This theory is certainly more
plausible than many others that have been adduced,
but it is unsupported except by the Persian version
in Genesis. Various other conjectures have from
time to time been made, as that the dm/Mm are
» lilies," or « citrons," or " baskets of figs " — all
sm theories.
a Various etymologies bavs bsan proposed far that
mmt ; the most probable is that it romas from the
■art Ttt, " to love," whence TVT, < love.''
I lt>v*D. Thb plant, aesordliig to Abulfad). ror-
113
nevonds with the Arable ijakAjO, whlea,
Bpnuxel Idsntinss with Zityphui Palwrw.
Digitized by
Google
1778 MANDRAXK8
The most satisfactory attempt at identification
U certainly that which luppoeei the mandrake
(Atropa mandragora) to be the plant denoted by
the Hebrew word. The LXX., the Vulg., the Sy-
ria*, and the Arabic versions, the Targums, the moat
learned of the Rabbis, and many later commenta-
tor!, are in favor of the translation of the A. T.
The argument! which Celaiua has adduced againat
the mandrake being the dudalm hare been moat
ably answered by Michaeli* (aee Sup}>. ad Lex. Btb.
No. 451). It ia well known that the mandrake la
Car from odoriferoua, the whole plant being, in
European estimation at all event*, very fetid ; on
this account Celaiua objected to Ha being the
dudiim, which he supposed were aaid in the Canti-
clea to be fragrant. Michadia baa ahown that
nothing of the kind ia asserted in Scripture: the
dmdMm "give forth an odor," which, however, may
be one of no fragrant nature; the invitation to
Hit Mandrake {Atropa mandragora).
the "beloved to go forth into the field " la full of
force if we suppose the duddtm ("love plante")
to denote the mandrake." Again, the odor or
flavor of plant* ia after all a matter of opinion,
for Schuli (LeUmg. da HBduten, v. 197). who
found mandrake* on Mount Tabor, saya of them,
"they have a delightful aroell, and the taste ia
equally agreeable, though not to even/tody." Hariti
( 1 rnv. iii. 146) found on the 7th of May, near the
hamlet of St. John in Mount Juda," mandrake
a " (Jul quidein quod birdnus eat quodammodo, vt-
raaque mandragorae In Aphradudacla laudantur, amort
Mm aura* perflare vk'stur et ad eoa Mimulare."
MANDRAKES
plant*, the fruit of which he <ay* " ia of the tin
and color of a small apple, ruddy and cf ft stosl
agreeable odor." Oedmann, after quoting a num-
ber of authorities to show that the mandrakes wen
prized by the Arab* for their odor, makes the fol-
lowing just remark: " It is known that Orientals
set an especial value on strongly smelling things
that to more delicate European senses are n. pii—
ing . . . . The intoxicating qualities of the man-
drake, far from lessening its value, would rather
add to it, for every one knows with what rehab, the)
Orientals use all kinds of preparations to p xodnut
intoxication."
The Arabic version of Saadias has hfadt > »
mandragora; in Onkelos yabruchin, and in Sytise
yabruch' express the Hebrew duddhn: now W€
learn from Mariti ( Trav. iii. 146, ed. Loud. 1798),
that a word similar to this last was applied by the
Arabs to the mandrake — he saya, " the Arabs call
U jabrohat." <* Celsius asserts that the mandrake
has not the property which has beei. attributed to
it: it is, however, a matter of common belief in
the East that this plant has the power to aid in
the procreation of offspring. Schulz, Haundrell,
Hariti, all allude to it; compare also Dioscorides,
iv. 76, SprengeTs Annotations; and Theophraatus,
Hut. Plant, ix. 9, § 1. Venus was called Uan-
drngoritis by the ancient Greeks (Heaych. «. v.),
and the fruit of the plant was termed " apples of
love."
That the fruit was fit to be gathered at the time
of wheat-harvest is clear from the testimony of
several travellers. Schulz found mandrake-apples
on the 16th of May. Haaaelquiat saw them at
Nazareth early in May. He says: " I had not the
pleasure to are the plant in blossom, the fruit now
[Hay 5, O. S.] hanging ripe on the stem which
lay withered on the ground " — he conjectures that
they are Bubal's dmlatm. Dr. Thomson (The
Land and the Book, p. 577) found mandrakes rips
on the lower ranges of Lebanon and Hermon to-
wards the end of April.
From a certain rude resemblance of old roots of
the mandrake to the human form, whence Pythag-
oras is said to have called 'he mandrake aripenri-
lioffor, and Columella (10, 19) eemihomo, soma
strange superstitious notions have arisen concerning
it. Joaephus (B. J. vii. 6, § 3) evidently alludes
to one of these superstitions, though he calls the
plant baarat. In a Vienna MS. of Dioscorides Is
a curious drawing which represents Euresis, the
goddess of discovery, handing to Diosoorides a root
of the mandrake; the dog employed for the pur-
pose is depicted in the agonies of death (Daubeny's
Roman Htubandry, p. 27S).<
The mandrake ia found abundantly in the Gre-
cian islands, and in aome parte of the south of
Europe. The root is spindle-shaped and often
divided into two or three fork*. The leaves, which
are long, aharp-pointed, and hairy, rise immediately
from the ground ; they are of a dark-green color.
The flowers are dingy white, stained with veins of
purple. The fruit ia of a pale orange color, and
about the size of a nutmeg: but it would appear
that the plant varies considerably in appearance
c a
7Tjny. M>ta*
d The Arabs call the fruit tupkaek *U*tntaa,* , ths
devil's apple," from in power to excite vol ut in—
< Oomp. also Bhaksp. Henry If., Ft. TJL Act L Is
3; Rom. and Jul., Act iv. Sc. 8; D'Barbalot, T~
Orient, a. T.
Digitized by
Google
MANBH
Mending to the localities whan it growi. The
siandrake (Atropa numdngora) is closely allied to
Iba well-known deadly nightshade (.4. itftufcima),
tod belong! to the older Solanacta. W. H.
* The Aral* of Mt. Lebanon alao call the Man-
dragora offiematu (i. e. Atropa mandragora),
j^wi-l (JO-AJ (Baidh ul-Jinn) — tggt of Genu,
ao doubt in allusion to then- supposed virtues.
G.E.P.
MANEH. [Wkiohts and Mkasckh.]
HANGER. This word occurs only in con-
nection with the birth of Christ, in Luke ii. 7, 12.
16. The original term is «)<rm), which is found
bat ones besides in ths N. T., namely, Luke xiii.
16, where it ! s rendered by "stall." The word in
»>—'■-' Greek undoubtedly means a manger, crib,
or feeding-trough (see Liddell and Scott, Lex.
s. r.)i but according to Schleusner its real signifi-
cation in the N. T. is the open court-yard, attached
to the inu or khan, and enclosed by a rough fenoe
of stones, wattle, or other slight material, into
which the cattle would be shut at night, and where
the poorer travellers might unpack their animals
and take up their lodging, when they were either
by want of room or want of means excluded from
the house. This conclusion is supported by the
rendering of the Vulg. — pratepe — and of the
Peshito-Syriao, M»0), both which terms mean
" enclosures," — and also by the customs of Pales-
tine." Stables and mangers, in the sense in which
we understand them, are of comparatively late
introduction into the East (see the quotations from
Chardin and others in Planner's Obtertxitwni, ii.
405, 806), and although they bare furnished mate-
rial to painters and poets, did not enter into the
circumstances attending the birth of Christ — and
are hardly leas inaccurate than the " cradle " and
the "stable," 6 which are named in some descrip-
tions of that event. [Cbib, Amer. ed.]
This applies, however, only to the painters of the
later schools. Toe early Christian artists seem
almost invariably to represent the Nativity as in
an open and detached court-yard. A crib or trough
ts occasionally shown, bnt not prominently, and
more as if symbolic of .the locality than as actually
existing.
The above interpretation of iparrn is of course
at variance with the traditional belief that the
Nativity took place in a cave. Professor Stanley
has however shown {S. f P. pp. 440, 441; see also
163) how destitute of foundation this tradition is.
And it should not be overlooked that the two
apocryphal Gospels which appear to be its main
foundation, the Protevangelion and the Gospel of
the Infancy, do not represent the cave as belonging
to the inn —in fact, do not mention the inn in
connection with the Nativity at all, while the former
Joes not introduce the manger and the inn till a
later period, that of the massacre of the innocents
[Prole*, chap. xvi.). G.
MA*NI (Mar/: Brnmi). The same as Baki,
4 (1 Esdr. ix. 30; oomp. Ear. x. 98).
MANNA
1779
MAN1JU8, T. [l-fror MdVXior: Alex. Aid.
with 6 MSS. T. MdViot : Tittu McaiHtu]. In ths
account of the conclusion of the campaign of
Lysias (B. c. 1S3) against the Jews given in i
Msec, xi., four letters are introduced, of which the
last purports to be from "Q. Memmius and T
Manlius, ambassadors (wp«c/3Drai) of the Romans"
(w. 34-38), confirming the concessions made b)
Lysias. There can be but little doubt that ths
letter is a fabrication. No such names occur among
the many legates to Syria noticed by Polybius;
and there 1 is no room for the mission of another
embassy between two recorded shortly before and
after the death of Antlochus Epiphanes (Polyb.
xxxi. 9, 6; 12, 9; Grimm, ml be). If, as seems
likely, the true reeding is T. Hanius (not Manlius),
the writer was probably thinking of the former
embassy when C. Sulpicius and Manius Sergius
were sent to Syria. The form of the letter is no
less fatal to the idea of its authenticity than the
names in which it is written. The use of the era
of the Setaicidas to fix the year, the omission of
the name of the place at which it was dated, and
the exact coincidence of the date of this letter with
that of the young Antiocbus, are all suspicious
circumstances. Moreover, the first intercourse be-
tween the .lews and Humans is marked distinctly
as taking place two years later (1 Msec. viii. Iff.),
when Judas heard of their power and fidelity.
The remaining letters are of no more worth
though it is possible that some facts may have sug
gested special details (e. g. 9 Maoo. xi. 29 ffi).
(Wemsdorf, lie Fide Mace } 66; Grimm, ad
be. ; and on the other side Patritius, Dt Cam.
Mace, pp. 142, 280.) B. F. W.
MAN7JA (JD, mitt: Mama: Manhu, Man,
Miuma). The most important passages of the O.
T. on this topic are the following: Ex. xvi. 14-36 ;
Num. xi. 7-0; Deut. viii. 3, 16: Josh. v. 19; Ps.
lxxviii. 24, 25; Wisd. xvi. 20, 21. From these
passages we learn that the manna came every morn-
ing except the Sabbath, in the form of a small
round seed resembling the hoar frost; that it most
be gathered early, before the sun became so hot as
to melt it; that it must be gathered every day
except the Sabbath ; tLat the attempt to lay aside
for a succeeding day, exoeptou the day immediately
preceding the Sabbath, foiled by the substance be-'
coming wormy and offensive; that it was prepared
for food by grinding and baking; that its taste was
like fresh oil, and like wafers made with honey,
equally agreeable to all palates; that the whole
nation subsisted upon it for forty years; that it
suddenly ceased when they first got the new corn
of the land of Canaan ; and that it was always
regarded as a miraculous gift directly from God,
and not a product of nature.
The natural products of the Arabian deserts and
other oriental regions, which bear the name of
manna, have not the qualities or uses ascribed to
the manna of Scripture. They are all condiments
or medicines rather than food, stimulating or pur-
gative rather than nutritious; they are produced
only three or four months in the year, from May tc
August, and not all the year round ; they come only
in small quantities, never affording anything lis*
Those wbo desire to ess all that can be said on the
of +i*r» In the N. T. and In the LXX as
«s theN T.. will no! ItntoelS'k Mtasesr
of *he 2d book of P. Homos, Mucrll. trirtnrwm Mr
duo, Uovardte, 1738.
» Sm Ibr example, Milton's Ifrmsi oa Us fferiiv*
Digitized by
Google
1780
MANNA
11,000,000 of poundi a week, which must 1mm
mob nquiiite for the suIisjsViiwb of the whob
(nraelitiah camp, linea each man bad an omer (or
three Eng iu quarts) a day, and that for forty
years; the; can be kept for a long time, and do not
become uac eat in a day or two; they are jut a*
Uakle to deteriorate on the Sabbath at on any other
day; nor does a double quantity Ml on the day
preceding the Sabbath ; nor would natural product!
cease at once and for ever, ai the manna U repre-
sented u ceating in the book of Joshua. Tha
manna of Scripture we therefore regard at wholly
miraculous, and not in any respect a product of
nature.
The etymology and meaning of the word nomas
are bent given by the old authorities the Septuagint,
the Vulgate, and Jowphus. The Septuagint uraut-
lation of Ex. xvi. 15 is this: 'Uorrsr »i ofrro si
viol Irpaiik tlnw ersjxw re? Moet, rt dm
toSto ; *v yif pttunr rl a>. " But the children
of Israel, seeing it, mid one to another, Whit is
Ms t for they knew not what it tout." Tbe Vul-
gate, with a very careful reference to the Hebrew,
thus: " Quod cum vidissent fllii Israel, dizerunt
ad invicem manhu, quod lignincat: Quid eat hoe?
ignorabant enim quid enet :" i. e. " Which what
the children of Israel sum, they i liilme to another,
Man ho, vhich signifies, What is this t for they
knew not what it was." In Joeephu* (Ant. ill. 1,
§6) we hare the following: KoAovci U 'E/Sooux
rb Bp£/M rovro uivpst, rb yap fsiuf twtptrrtHTU
*ot4 tV fi/urioar StdAfrrec, rl toSt' terra',
ircucplrowa- " Now the Hebrews call this food
manna, for the particle max, m our language, is
the asking of a question. What is this? "
According to all theee autboritie*, wjth which
the Syriac aUo agrees, the Hebrew word man, by
which this substance U always designated in the
Hebrew Scriptures, is the neuter interrogative pro-
oou:> (what V), and the name is derived from tha
inquiry MSH ]Q (man An, what is this?), which
th > Hebrews made when tbey first saw it upon the
{round. Tbe other etymologies, which would de-
rive the word from either of tbe Hebrew verbs
njQ or 1_P> are more recent and less worthy of
amfidenee, and do not agree with the sacred text;
a literal translation of which (Ex. xvi. 15) Is this:
" And the children of Israel saw and said, a mum
to his neighbor, what is this (man ho); for they
knew not what it was."
The Arabian physician Avicenna gives the fol-
lowing description of the manna which in his time
was used as a medicine: " Manna Is a dew which
fells on stones or bushes, becomes thick like honey,
and can be hardened so as to be Hke grains of corn."
The substance now called manna in the Arabian
desert through which tbe Israelite! passed, is col-
lected in tbe month of June from tbe tnrfn or
tamarisk ihrub (Tamarix galUcn). According to
Burckhardt it drops from the thorns on the sticks
and leaves with which the ground is eovered, and
must lie gathered early in tbe day, or it will be
melted by tha sun. The Arabs cleanse and boil it,
strain it through a cloth, and put it in leathern
battles, and in this way it can be kept uninjured
sbr several yean. Tbey use it like honey or butter
with their unleavened bread, but never make it into
takes or eat it by itself. It abounds only in very
tret years, and in dry seasons it sometimes disap-
en'irelv. Various shrubs, all through the
MANNA
oriental world, from India to Syria, yie a a saaV
stance of this kind. The tamarisk gum is by saaas
su ppos e d to be produced by tbe puncture of a smell
insect, which Ehrenbarg has examined sad da-
scribed under the name of Coccus uumniparus. See
Symboks Physical, p. L ; Transact, of Literary
Society of Bombay, L 951. This surely could not
hare been the food of the Israelites during their
forty years' sojourn in the wilderness, tutmjjk was
name might barn been derived from some rati a
ftuded ratemblanca to n.
Kanwob* ( True. i. 94 ) and some mora recent trav-
ellers have observed that the dried grains of the
oriental manna were like the corian der s e ed Gmehn
(7'ro». through Russia to Persia, pi. iii. p. 98) re-
marks this of tbe manna of Persia, which be says
is white as snow. Tbe peasants of Ispahan gather
the leaves of a certain thorny shrub (the mat
thorn) and strike them with a stick, and the grains
of manna an received in a sieve. Niebubr ob-
served that at Mardin in Mesopotamia, the manna
lies hke meal on tha leaves of a tree called in the
East ballit and afs or as, which be regards at a
species of oak." The harvest is in July end August
and much mora plentiful in wet than dry a n te nn a
\, which Itevtag, however, losntsnss wits
Etna spsetss of Cnnaris.
• The ballot bare spoken of la tha ant*
Digitized by
Google
MANNA
It U sometimes collected before sunrise by shaking
it from the leaves onto a cloth, and thus collected
It remains very white and pure. That which is
<wt shaken off in the morning melts upon the
leaves, and accumulates till it becomes very thick.
The leaves are then gathered and pot in boiling
water, and the manna floats like oil upon the sur-
face- This the natives call manna tutmma, 1. e.
ktarenly manna. In the valley of the Jordan
Bnrckhardt found manna like gum on the leaves
sod branches of the tree gharrob* which is as large
at the olive tree, having a leaf like the poplar,
thoogr jomewhat broader. It appears lik* dew
Mkagi
apon the leaves, is of a brown or gray color, and
drops on the ground. When first gathered it is
sweet, but in a day or two becomes acid. The
Arabs use it like honey or butter, and eat it in
their oatmeal gruel. They also use it in cleaning
their leather bottles and making them air-tight.
The season for gathering this is May or June.
Two other shrubs which have been supposed to
yield the manna of Scripture, are the Alhagi mm-
noram, or Persian manna, and the Alhagi deterto-
rwav, — thorny plants oommon in Syria.
The manna of European commerce comes mostly
from Calabria and Sicily. It is gathered during
MAS O AH 1781
the months of June and July from some (pedes of
ash (Omui Kurvpaa and Orruu rohmdiJbUa\
from which it drops in consequence of a punt tun
by an insect resembling the locust, but distinguished
from it by having a sting under its body. Tbt
substance is fluid at night, and resembles the dew,
but in the morning it begins to harden.
Compare Boaenmuller's AltaHmmtkundt, iv. pp.
816-39; Winer, Realwfrierbucli, ii. pp.63, 54; and
the oriental travellers above referred to. C. E. S.
MANCAH (mjp [re*]: McuW; Joseph.
Mart&xqt : Manue), the father of Samaon j a Dan-
ite, native of the town of Zorah (Judg. xiii, 2).
The narrative of the Bible (xiii. 1-23), of the cir-
cumstances which preceded the birth of Samson,
supplies us with very few and faint traits of Man-
oah's character or habits. He seems to have had
some occupation which separated him durirg part
of the day from his wife, though that was not field
work, because it was in the field that his wife was
found by the angel during his absence. He was
hospitable, as his forefather Abram had been before
him ; he was a worshipper of Jehovah, and reverent
to a great degree of fear. These faint lineaments
are brought into somewhat greater distinctness by
Joeepbus (Ant. v. 8, {§ 2, 3), on what authority we
have no means of judging, though his account is
doubtless founded on some ancient Jewish tradition
or record. " There was a certain M anoches who
was without controversy the best and chiefest per-
son of his country. This man had a wife of ex-
ceeding beauty, surpassing the other women of the
place. Now, when they had no children, and were
much distressed thereat, he besought God that
He would grant unto them a lawful heir, and
for that purpose resorted often with hia wife
to the suburb* (to rpodurrtwv) of the city.
And in that place was the great plain. Now the
man loved his wife to distraction, and on that ac-
count was exceedingly jealous of her. And it came
to pass that his wife being alone, an angel appeared
to her . . . and when he had said these things he
departed, for he bad come by the command of God.
When her husband came she informed him of all
things concerning the angel, wondering greatly at
the beauty and size of the youth, insomuch that ha
was filled with jealousy and with suspicion thereat.
Then the woman, desiring to relieve her husband
of his excessive grief, besought God that He would
send again the angel, so that the man might behold
him as well as she. And it came to pass that
when they were in the suburbs again, by the favor
of God the angel appeared the second time to the
woman, while her husband was absent. And she
having prayed him to tarry awhile till she should
fetch her husband, went and brought Manoches "
The rest of the story agrees with the Bible.
We hear of Hanoah once again in connection
with the marriage of Samaon to the Philistine of
Tlmnath. Hia father and his mother remonstrated
with him thereon, but to no purpose (xiv. 2, 3)
They then accompanied him to TbnnaUi, both on
*'
Jo*Ju< "h' 00 ■gnlfies acorn, and has come to bs
tppued to various special of oak, while the wort* aft*
\jaJiA no* oL«fit, as lnoorrectly printed In toe
vote, efcnuta « galto," and si often used for the tree
on which the galls grow, which Is some spades of tha
oak. 0. B. P.
a Bprongel (Hi*. Hei Htrb. 1. 270) idenlmw the
fkarb or gkarab with the Sola babylmica.
» Po~tbljr to ooaralt the Levltes, whose spsehtl prop
•rtr *b» suburbs ■" the city were. Bat Zona. Is aw
where stated to have bssn a l«vltas> city.
Digitized by
Google
1782
MANSIONS
the preliminary visit (w. 5, 6), and to the marriage
lUelf (9, 10). Manoeh appears not to have sur-
vived his son : not he, but Samson's brothers, went
Jotrn to (iaea for the body of the hero, and bring-
ing it up to the family tomb between Zorah and
Eahtaol, reunited the father to the son (zvi. 31),
whose birth had been the subject of so many
prayers and bo much anxiety. Hilton, however,
does not take this view. In iSnnuun Agonittet
Manoah bears a prominent part throughout, and
lives to bury his son. G.
* MANSIONS Oioraf: mantumn) in the
A. V. John air. 9 (" in my Father's house are many
•Kinnoiw") is used in its primary signification of
"abodes" or " places of abode," not in the more
specific sense which now belongs to the term.
Mr. Norton translates, " There are many rooms in
my Father's house." The reference is to the
abundant provision made for the future blessedness
of the followers of Christ, not to the different de-
grees of their reward, a thought which is foreign
from the context. A.
MANSLAYER." The principle on which the
" manilayer " was to be allowed to escape, namely,
that the person slain was regarded as " delivered
into his hand " by the Almighty, was obviouoly
open to much willful perversion (1 Sam. xxiv. 4, 18;
xxvi. 8; Phtto, De Spec. Leg. Hi. 81, vol. ii. 820),
though the cases mentioned appear to be a suffi-
cient sample of the intention of the lawgiver, (a.)
Death by a blow in a sudden quarrel (Num. xxxv.
23). (A.) Death by a stone or missile thrown at
random (to. 22, 23). (c.) By the blade of an axe
flying from its handle (Deut xix. 6). (d.) Whether
the case of a person killed by falling from a roof
unprovided with a parapet involved the guilt of
manslaughter on the owner, is not clear; but the
law seems Intended to prevent the imputation of
malice in sny such case, by preventing as for as
possible the occurrence of the fact itself (Deut. xxii.
8). (Michaelis, On the Lnum of Motet, arts. 223,
280, ed. Smith.) In all these and the like cases
the manslayer was allowed to retire to a city of
refuge. [Crrfss of Refuge.]
Besides these the following may be mentioned as
oases of homicide, (a.) An animal, not known to
be vicious, causing death to a human being, was to
be put to death, and regarded as unclean. But if
H was known to be vicious, the owner also was
liable to fine, and even death (Ex. xxi. 28, 31).
(4.) A thief overtaken at night in the act might
lawfully be put to death, but If the sun had risen
the act of killing him was to be regarded as murder
(Ex. xxii. 2, 8). Other cases are added by the
Hishna, which, however, are included in the defini-
tions given above. (Sank. ix. 1, 2, 3 ; Maccoth,
\. 2; Otho, Less. Sabb. » Homlcida.") [Hvbdkk.]
H. W. P.
MANTLE. The word employed in the A. V.
sl translate no less than four Hebrew terms, en-
tirely distinct and independent both in derivation
and meaning.
1. rn"^t t V, I'mfedA. This word occurs but
• fTf\ part, of n?r,
•as. p- 1807 : tomHjt : KomUUa; used slso In ths
KM of murderer. The phrase HJJtpS, inwlw,
aw ignomntiam, Qet. p. 18(9, must therefore be fn-
slnjrd, to denote the distinction which ths Law drew
as ftafadv b stwisu malicious sod Involuntary nomHfle.
MANTLE
ones, namely, Jndg. iv. 18, where it deposes lbs
thing with which Jael covered Siaera. It has the
definite article prefixed, and it may therefore be
inferred that it was some part of the regular furni-
ture of the tent. The clew to a more exact signi-
fication is given by the Arabic version of the Poly-
glott, which renders it by alcattfah, SjLJslaJI,
a word which is explained by Dozy,* on the au-
thority of Ibn Batuta and other oriental authors,
to mean certain articles of a thick fabric, in shape
like a plaid or shawl, which are commonly used for
beds by the Arabs : " When they sleep they spread
them on the ground." " For the under part of
the bed they are doubled several times, and cot
longer than the rest is used for a coverlid." On
such a bed on the floor of Heber's tent no doubt
the weary Sisera threw himself, and such a coverlid
must the temicah have been which Jael laid over
him. The A V. perhaps derived their word
"mantle'- from the pallium of the Vulgate, and
the mantel of Luther. [Purst thinks that it was
the '• tent-carpet," which Jael threw over Sisera,
Handb. s.v. — H.]
a. V?lp, meti. (Rendered "mantle" in 1
Sam. xv. h\ xxviii. 14; Ear. ix. 8, 5; Job i. 90,
U. 19; and Ps. cix. 29.) This word is in other
passages of the A. V. rendered "coat," "cloak,"
and "robe." This inconsistency is undesirable;
but in one case only — that of Samuel — is it of
importance. It is interesting to know that the
garment which his mother made and brought to
the infant prophet at her annual visit to the Holy
Tent at Shiloh was a miniature of the official
priestly tunic or robe; the same tliat the great
Prophet wore in mature yean (1 Sam. xv. 97), and
by which he was on one occasion actually identified.
When the witch of Endor, in answer to Saul's
inquiry, told him that " an old man was come up,
covered with a meti," this of itself was enough to
inform the king in whose presence he stood —
" Saul perceived that it was Samuel " (xxviii 14).
3. n^t'5 1 ?) ma/Uaphak (the Hebrew word is
found in Is. iii. 22 only). Apparently some article
of a e lady's dress [" mantles," A. V.] ; probably
an exterior tunic, longer and ampler than the in-
ternal one, and provided with sleeves. See Gesenius,
Jetaia, i. 214; Schroeder, de Vaiitu Htbraanun,
ch. xv. § 1-6.
But the most remarkable of the four is: —
4, fVTON, addereth (rendered "mantle" to
1 K. xix! 18, 19; 9 K. U. 8, 18, 14; elsewhere
"garment" and "robe"); since by it, and it only,
is denoted the cape or wrapper which, with the
exception of a strip of skin or leather round his
loins, formed, as we have every reason to believe,
the sole garment of the prophet Eljjah.
Such clothing, or absence of clothing, is com-
monly assumed by those who aspire to extraordinary
sanctity in the East at the present day — " Savagt
figures, with ' a cloak woven of camels' hair thrown
over the shoulders, and tied in front on the breast,
(Ix. xxi. 18, 14; tev. It. 91; Ran. xxxr. 83, M.
Dent. xix. 4, BO
» Dirtimamin On Vttementt Jrabtt, p. Ml W«
gladly sens this opportunity to express our obUaanaes
to this admirable work.
e But ass ths curious speeulauous of Dr. Mil
(Assym fWst P/oresm, p. 178. "V
Digitized by
Google
MAOOH
Hiked except at the waist, round which ii a girdle
if akin, the hair flowing loots about' the head.' "
Bat • description atill more exactly in aceordanoa
with the habit of the great Israelite 'dervish, and
mpporting in a remarkable manner the view of the
LXX., who render nddtreth by uriKurfis, i- t.
" sheep-ekin," is found in the account of a French
traveller* in the 16th century: " L'enseigne que
las dervis portent pour montrer qu'ils sont rellgieux,
tat une peau de brgbia sur leurs epaulet: et ne
portent antre vehement sur eux ainon une teule
peau de mouton ou de brlbis, et quelque chose
(levant leur parties honteuses.''
Inaccurately as the word " mantle " represents
each a garment as the abort, it has yet become so
Identified with Elijah that it is impossible now to
alter it. It is desirable therefore to substitute
u mantle" for "garment" In Zech. xiil. 4; a pas-
sage tun which It would appear that since the
line of EUjah his garb had become the recognized
shri of a prophet of Jehovah. Q.
MA'OOH (TpSp [a poor one, Fttret: a
Irrtattbnndt Ges.J : 'Ktuiix ; Alex. Mvo/3 :
Mnock), the fether of Aehish, king of Gath, with
whom David took refuge (1 Sain, xxvii. S). In the
8yriac version he is called Maachah; and in 1 K.
ii. 39 we And Maachah described as the lather of
Aehish, who was king of Oath at the beginning of
Solomon's reign. It is not impossible that the
tame Aehish may be intended in both cases (Keil,
Comm. on 1 K. ii. 89), and Maoch and Maachah
would then be identical; or Aehish may have been
a title, like Abimeleoh and Pharaoh, which would
•till leave Maoch and Maachah the same; " son "
In either case denoting descendant.
MA'ON (XW? [haoUatum]: Morfo, Kaiv,
[Vet. in 1 Sam. Moor, in Chr. MfWi] Alex.
Matty- Mam), one of the cities of the tribe of
Judah, in the district of the mountains; a member
of the same group which contains also the names
of Cannel and Ziph (Josh. xv. 56). Its Interest
for us lies in its connection with David. It was in
the mUOar or waste pasture-ground of Maon (A. V.
" wilderness ") that he and his men were lurking
when the treachery of the Ziphites brought Saul
upon them, and they had the narrow escape of the
cliff of ham-Machlekoth (1 Sam. xxiii. 34, 28). It
teems from these passages to have formed part of a
larger district called " the Arabah " (A. T. rer. 34,
" plain "), which can hardly hare been the depressed
locality round the Dead Sea usually known by that
name. To the north of it was another tract or
spot called " th» Jeshlmon," possibly the dreary
bumt-up hills lying on the Immediate west of the
Dead Sea. Close by waa the hill or the cliff of
Hacilah, and the midbnr itself probably extended
jver anil about the mountain (rer. 86), round
which Saul was pursuing his fugitives when the
sudden alarm of tbw Philistine incursion drew him
iff. Over the pastures of Maon and Cannel ranged
he three thousand sheep and the thousand goats
if Nabal (xxv. 3). Close adjoining was the mtdbar
it Paran. which the LXX. make identical with
Mann. Josephus's version of the passage Is curious
MAOKITBS, THE
1788
• light, TVorWi m KrW, ate., quoted by Btanlsy,
* Bat the Instructive and suggastlve lamarks of Dr.
VauT, en the points of eorrsspood enet t e l aat u the
eataaal Prophet* and tbi modem Dervishes (Irawit.
— "a eertaln man of the Ziphites from the est)
Emma" (Art. ri. 13, § 6).
rhe name of Maon still exists all but unchanged
in the mouths of the Arab herdsmen and peasants
in the south of Palestine, ifabi a a lofty conical
hill, south of, and about 7 miles distant from,
Heoron. To the north there is an extensive pros-
pect — on the one hand over the region bordering
the Dead Sea, on the other as far at Hebron. Clots
in front is the lower eminence of Kurmul, the
ancient Cannel, no less intimately associated with
David's fortunes than Maon itself (Rob. i. 498, 494).
It is very much to be desired that some traveller
would take the trouble to see how the actual locality
of Jfatn agrees with the minute indications of the
narrative cited above. See also Hachilak.
In the genealogical records of the tribe of Judah
in 1 Chronicles, Maon appears as a descendant of
Hebron, through Rekem and Shammai, and in its
turn the " lather " or colonizer of Beth-zur (ii. 48).
Hebron is of course the well-known metropolis of
the southern country, and Beth-zur hat been
identified in Beit-tir, 4 miles north of Hebron, and
therefore about 11 from .lirrin.
It should not however be overlooked that in the
original the name of Maon is identical with that
of tiie Mehunim, and it is quite possible that before
the conquest it may hare been one of their towns,
just ss in the more central districts of Palestine
there were places which preserved the memory of
the Avites, the Zemarites, the Ammonites, and
other tribes who originally founded them. [Bra-
jahin, vol. i. p. 377.] O.
MA'ONITES, THE (fW^, t e. Maon,
without the article [see above] : MaSidp in both
MSS. : Chnnnan), a people mentioned in one of the
addresses of Jehovah to the repentant Israelites, as
having al some former time molested them : " the
Zidnnians also, and Amalek, and Maon did oppress
you, and ye cried to me, and I delivered you out
of their hand " (Judg. x. 19). The name agrees
with that of a people residing in the desert far
south of Palestine, elsewhere in the A. V. called
Mehchim ; but, as no invasion of Israel by this
people is related before the date of the passage in
question, various explanations and conjectures have
been offered. The reading of the LXX. — >• Mid-
ian " — is remarkable as being found in both the
great MSS., and having on that account a strong
claim to be considered as the reading of the ancient
Hebrew text. Ewald (6'eaga. 1. 323 nctc) appears
to incline to this, which hat also in its favor, that,
if it be not genuine, Midian — whose ravages ware
then surely too recent to be forgotten — it omitted
altogether from the enumeration. Still it is remark-
able that no variation has hitherto been found in
the Hebrew MSS of this verse. Michaelia (Bibd
fir UngtUhrte, and Svpplm. No. 1437), on tot
other hand, accepts the current reading, and ex-
plains the difficulty by assuming that Mam it
included among the Bene-Kedem, or " children
[sons j of the East," named in ri. 8: leaving, how-
ever, the equal difficulty of the omission of Israel's
great foe, Midian, unnoticed. The reason which
would lead us to accept Midian would lead us te
tie., 1. 488 ; aleo 839, 681) j and Stanley's East. Cheat
p. 887.
i Baton, Msirsart— s (fans, 1688), |«atai by Buy
JXcftMiua-t, ets.. p. M
Digitized by
Google
1784
MARA
reject the reading of toe SjTiae Peahito — «Am-
mon," — the Bene-Anunon having been already
named. - Canaan " waa probably a conjecture of
Jerome'*. [Mkhonimb.]
A tiaoe of the residence of the Maonita* in the
south of Palatine is perhaps extant in Maoh, dot
Main, the city of Judah so well known in con-
nection with David. G.
MA/RA (**^}> or, according to the correction
of the Kri, n^ZJ), the name which Naomi adopted
in the exclamation forced from her by the recogni-
tion of her fellow-citizens at Bethlehem (Ruth i.
90): "Call me not Naomi (pleasant), but call me
Mara (bitter), for Shaddai hath dealt-very-bitterly
(hamfr) with me." The LXX. have preserved the
phy .... wucpdy, Sri iirutpAyOn • ■ ■ • A txaror;
though hardly as well as Jerome, " Voeale me Mara
(floe en omaram) quia amarkudine me replevii
Omnipotent." Marah is often asaumed to have
been the origin of the name Mary, but inaccu-
rately, for Mary — in the N. T. Mariam — is merely
a corruption of Miriam (see that article). G.
MATRAH (rni^ [Wtterness] : M«/J*S. Hucpla,
tliKolm [Vat Tlucptuu): ifara), a place which
lay m the wilderness of Shur or Etham, three days'
Journey distant (Ex. xv. 33-84, Num. xxxiii. 8)
from the place at which the Israelites crossed the
Red Sea, and where was a spring of bitter water,
sweetened subsequently by the casting in of a tree
which " the Lord showed " to Moses. It has been
suggested (Burckhardt, Syria, p. 474) that Moses
made use of the berries of the plant GhOikAd,"
and which still it is implied would be found sim-
ilarly to operate. Robinson, however (i. 67), could
not find that this or any tree was now known by
the Arabs to possess such properties; nor would
those berries, he says, have been found so early in
the season as the time when the Israelites reached
the region. It may be added that, had any such
resource ever existed, its eminent usefulness to the
supply of human wants would hardly hare let it
perish from the traditions of the desert. Further,
the expression " the Lord shewed " seems surely to
inply the miraculous character of the transaction.
As regards the identity of Marah with any modern
site, all travellers appear to look out for water
which is bitter at this day, whereas if miraculous,
the effect would surely have been permanent, as it
clearly is intended to be in 3 K. ii. 31. On this
supposition, however, Hawarah, distant 16J hours
(Rob. BUI. Ret. i. 67) from Ayoun Mauta, has been
by Robinson, as also by Burckhardt (April 37, 18161,
Schubert (374), and Wellsted, Identified with it,
apparently because it is the bitterest water in the
neighborhood. Winer says (». v.) that a still bit-
terer well lies east of Marah, the claims of which
Teschendorf, it appears, has supported. Lepsius
prefers Wady GhSrmdel Prof. Stanley thinks that
the claim nay be left between this and Howarah,
but adds In a note a mention of a spring south of
Uovxirah, « so bitter that neither men nor camel*
" Robinson says (L 96), " Peganum rttunan," Torsk.,
flora JEg. Arab. p. lxvi. Mors correctly, " Nitraria
Wdrafaia " of Derftmtauns, Flora Mam. I. 873.
» 1. G?lj0, or VJyjf : H4pu>T, TUpam User: mar-
am Pmrhtm; ftom CiinJ, to shins (0«s. ISM). 3.
"pnb, tat "irip, to trawl round, ettbsr a stone
MARBf.K
aould drink it," of which « Dr. Gtanl (voL B. a
254) was told." The Afom Mouta, "wells of
Moses," which local tradition assigns to Marah, an
manifestly too close to the head of the golf, and
probable spot of crossing it, to suit the distance of
" three days' journey." The soil of this region it
described as being alternately gravelly, stony and
sandy; under the range of the Oebei Wardan chalk
and flints are plentiful, and on the direct line of
route between Ayoun Mama and Houarak no
water is found (Robinson, i. 67). H. H.
MAR'ALAH (H^5H5 [perh- taHhquakt,
Ges.; declivity, Furst] : McrytAtd; Alex. MafuAo;
[Comp. MapaKi-] Merala), one of the landmark*
on the boundary of the tribe of Zebulun (Josh,
xix. 11), which, with moat of the places accom-
panying it, is unfortunately hitherto 1 unknown.
Keil {Jotua, ad loc.) infers, though on the slightest
grounds, that it was somewhere on the ridge of
OarmeL G.
MARANATH'A (Maoorotfd), an expression
used by St. Paul at the conclusion of his first
Epistle to the Corinthians (xvi. 22). It is a
Greoked form of the Aramaic words KHN. I^Q,
"our Lord oometh." In the A. V. it ie'eombtoed
with the preceding "anathema;" but this is un-
necessary ; at all events it can only be regarded as
adding emphasis to the previous adjuration. It
rather appears to be added " as a weighty watch-
word " to impress upon the disciples the important
truth that the l.ord was at hand, and that they
should be ready to meet Him (Alford, Gr. Tett. in
loc.). If, on the other hand, the phrase be taken
to mean, as it may, " Our Lord Airs come,' ♦hen
the connection is, " the curse will remain, for Mm
Lord has come who will take vengeance on those
who reject Him." Thus the name " Maronite" is
explained by a tradition that the Jews, in expecta-
tion of a Messiah, were constantly saying Moron,
i. e. Lord; to which the Christians answered
Martin alha, the Lord is come, why do you still
expect Him ? (Stanley, Corinthian*, ad loc).
W. L.B.
MARBLE 6 Like the Greek pAppapos, No. 1
(see foot-note), the generic term for marble may
probably be taken to mean almost any shining
stone. The so-called marble of Solomon's archi-
tectural works, which Josephus calls Affloj Acute*,
may thus have been limestone — (a) from near
Jerusalem; (o) from Lebanon (Jura limestone),
identical with the material of the Sun Temple at
Baalbec ; or (c) white marble from Arabia or else-
where (Joseph. Ant. vili. 8, § 3; Diod. Sic ii. 63;
Plin. B. N. xxxvi. 12; Jamieson. Mineralogy, p. 41;
Raumer, Pal p. 38; Volney, Trat. ii. 241; KJtto,
Phyt. Otogr. of Pal pp. 78, 88 ; Robinson, ii. 493,
iii. 608; Stanley, S. e» P. pp. 307, 424; Welhtod,
Trav. i. 426, ii. 143). That this stone was not
marble seems probable from the remark of Jose-
phus, that whereas Solomon constructed his build-
ings of " white stone," he caused the roads which
used In tessellated pavements, or one with envois*
spots (Q*s. 947). 8. TJ : rtmm Attn: probably
a stone with pearly appsanuwa, like alabaster (Os*
866). 4. CHJ : oiutpaytCrtn M#ot: hnfam»mgm
fuii (Geo. 182). The three last words mad only »
■elk. L 6. 6. M*MW*t: Mennsr (Bar xvH 13).
Digitized by
Google
MARCHESHVAN
ad t< Jerusalem to be made of "black (tone,'
probably the black basalt of the Haur&n ; and alio
bom hu account of the porticoes of Herod's ten.
pie, which he says wen narikiBoi AtvKordrns
uapuipov (Joseph. Ant. I. o., and B. J. v. 6, § 1,
8; Kittc, pp. 74, 76, 80, 89). But whether the
"costly stone" employed in Solomon's buildings
was marlJe or not, it seems clear from the expres-
sions both of Scripture and Joeephus, that some
at least of the " great stones," whose veight can
scarcely have been less than 40 tone, must have
come from Lebanon (1 K. t. 14-18, rii. 10; Joseph.
Ant. riii. 2, § 9).
There can be uo doubt that Herod, both in the
Temple and elsewhere, employed Parkin or other
marble, liemains of marble columns still exist in
abundance at Jerusalem 'Joseph Ant. xv. 9, §§ 4.
5, and 11, §§ 8, 5; Williams, Uolg CUg, 11. 830;
Sandys, p. 190; Robinson, 1. 301, 306).
The marble pillars and teasers of various colors
of the palace at Suaa came doubtless from Persia
itself, where marble of various colors is found,
especially in the province of Hamadan, Susiana.
(Esth. 1. 8; Marco Polo, Travels, p. 78, ed. Bobn;
Chardin, Vuy. Hi. 280, 308, 368, and viii. 463; P.
deOa Valle, Viaggi, ii. 360; Winer, «. ». "Mar-
mor.") H. W. P.
MARCHESH-VAN. [Mouth.]
MAR'CUS (Hd>««: Marc*). The Evange-
list Hark, who was cousin to Barnabas (Col. iv.
10), and the companion and fellow-laborer of the
Apostles Paul (Philem. 34) and Peter (1 Pet v. 13).
[Makk.]
MARDOCHE'US (MopSoyaiof: Mardo-
chams). 1. Hokdecai, the uncle of Esther, in
the apocryphal additions (Esth. x. 1, xl. 9, 19, xii.
1-4, xvi. 13; 9 Mace. xv. 88). The 14th of the
month Adar, on which the feast of Purim was
celebrated, is called in the last passage " Mar-
iocheus' day" (r) MapSoxoIxr/ iuUpa* Mardo-
dtcd dies).
2. (Mardocheus,) — Mordboai, who returned
with Zerubbabel and Joshua (1 Eadr. v. 8; comp.
Ear. iL 9).
• MARE SHA is the reading of the A. V.
ed. 1611, and other early editions, in 1 Chr. ii. 49,
instead of Markshah (9). A.
MARE'SHAH (ntTrTia [possession, Ftirst;
at the head=* elevated city or fortress, Ges.], In
Josh, only; elsewhere in the shorter form of
HOng : Bo*V«>, [in Chron. Mapiri, Mapurrji,
Mapnaii Vat. Mapmaa, tSapsurnt, MapuraW]
ilex. Madura; [in Mie. i. 16, LXX. Aavcfr:]
Mures*). 1. One of the cities of Judah in the dis-
trict of the Shtfeluh or low country ; named in the
tan* (roup with Kkilaii and Nkzib (Josh. xv.
44). If we may to interpret the notices of the 1
Chronicles (see below), Hebron itself was colonized
from Mareshah. It was one of the cities fortified
and garrisoned by Rehoboam after the rupture with
the northern kingdom (9 Chr. xi. 8). The natural
inference is, that it commanded some pass or
weitiou of approach, an inference which is sup-
oorted by the fact that it is named as the point
■b widch the enormous horde of Zerah the Cushite
toadied in his invasion of Jades, before ha was |
MARESHAH
1785
met and repulsed by Asa (9 Chr. xhr. 9). A
ravine (ver. 10; Gt: A. V. "valley ") bearing the
name of Zephathah was near. In the rout which
followed the encounter, the flying Cusbitea wen
pursued to the Bedouin station of Gerar (vv. 14
18).
Mareshah is mentioned onoe or twice in the his
tory of the Maecabasan struggles. Judas probabl)
passed through it on his way from Hebron to avengi
the defeat of Joseph and Azarias (1 Mace. v. 66).
The reading of the LXX. and A. V. is Samaria;
but Joeephus, Ant. xii. 8, § 6, has Marissa, and
the position is exactly sultabls, which that of Sama-
ria is not. The same exchange, but reversed, will
be found in 9 Mace. xii. 86. [Mabisa.]
A few days later it afforded a refuge to Georgia!
when severely wounded in the attack of Dositheas
(9 Mace. xii. 36: here, as just remarked, the Syria*
version would substitute Samaria, — a change quite
unallowable). Its subsequent fortunes were bad
enough, but hardly worse than might be expected
for a place which lay as it were at the junction of
two crocs-roads, north and south, east and west,
each the constant thoroughfare of armies. It was
burnt by Judas in his Idumasan war, in passing
from Hebron to Azotus (Ant. xii. 8, § 6). About
the year 110 b. c. it was taken from the Idumaeans
by John Hyrcanus. Some forty years after, about
B. c. 63, its restoration was decreed by the clement
Pompey (Ant. xiv. 4, § 4), though it appears not
to have been really reinstated till later (xiv. 6, J 3).
But it was only rebuilt to become again a victim
(b. c. 39), this time to the Parthians, who plun-
dered and destroyed it in their rage at not finding
in Jerusalem the treasure they anticipated (Ant.
xiv. 13, $ 9; B. J. i. 13, § 9). It was In ruins
in the 4th century, when Eusebius and Jerome
describe it as in the second mile from Eleuthe-
ropolis. S. S. W. of Beit-fibrin — in all probability
FJeutheropolis — and a little over a Roman mile
therefrom, is a site called Marnsh, which is very
possibly the representative of the ancient Mareshah.
It is described by the indefatigable Tobler (Drittt
Wand. pp. 129, 142) as lying on a gently swelling
hill leading down from the mountains to the great
western plain, from which it is but half an hour
distant. The ruins are not extensive, and Dr.
Robinson, to whom their discovery is due,' has
ingeniously conjectured (on grounds for which tbs
reader is referred to Bibl. Res. ii. 67, 68) that the
materials were employed in building the neighboring
Eleutheropolis.
On two other occasions Mareshah comes forward
in the O. T. It was the native place of Eliezei
ben-Dodavah, a prophet who predicted the destruc-
tion of the ships which king Jebnahapbat had built
in conjunction with Ahaziah of Israel (9 Chr.
xx. 37). It is included by the prophet Micah
among the towns of the low country which be
attempts to rouse to a sense of the dangers their
misconduct is bringing upon them (Mic. i. 16).
Like the rest, the apostrophe to Mareshah ia a
play on the name : " I will bring your heir
(yoresh) to yon, oh city of inheritance" (Mare-
shah). The following verse (16) shows that the
inhabitants had adopted the heathen and forbidden
custom of cutting off the back hair as a sign of
a^'iraing.
a Benjamin of Tudala (Asher, l. 77) IdentUlei Ha-
wlu " Batt Oebrln." Parent, with unusual
Inaccuracy, would place It In the mountains Bast >
Jans.
Digitized by
Google
1786 MARIMOTH
1. ([Rom. Mapura, Vat.] Maptura: [Alex. Ma-
•ie"n».) ) Father of Hebron, and apparent!; a aon
er descendant of Caleb the brother of Jerahmeel
(1 Chr. U. 42), who derived hu descent from Judah
through Pharez. « The aona of Caleb were ■ ■ ■
Mesha, the fr>ther of Ziph, and the aona of Mareaha
father of Hnbron." It is difficult not to suppose
that Mesha may have been a transcriber's variation
for Mareaha, especially as the text of the I. XX. —
both MSS. — actually stands so. It is however
only a probable conjecture. The names in these
Hats are many of them no doubt those not of per-
sons but of towns, and whether Mesha and Mare-
ahah be identical or not a dose relationahip is
eqcaUy denoted between the towns of Helron and
Mareahafa. But,
8. ([Rom. Itapuri ; Tat] Hotra ; Alex. M«-
pria-a.) in 1 Chr. iv. 21 we find Mareshah again
named as deriving its origin from Shklah, the
tliird son of Judah, through Laadah. Whether
this Mareshab be a man or a place, identical with
or distinct from the last mentioned, it ia impos-
sible to determine. G.
MAR'IMOTH (Marimoth). The same as
Mkkaioth the priest, one of the ancestors of
Ezra (2 Esdr. i. 2; comp. Ear. vii. 3). He is also
called Mkrehoth (1 Esdr. viii. 2).
• MARINER, Jon. i. 5. [Ship (U.), Amer.
ed.]
MARI/SA (MofiW Marat,), the Greek form
sf the name Markshah, occurring 2 Mace. xii. 35
wly. G.
• MARISHES, Ez. xlra. 11, an old spelling
rf " marshes," found in the A. V. of 1611 (and the
Bishops' Bible), but changed in the current edi-
tions. The Hebrew is rO?. elsewhere only in Is.
in. 14, translated •• pit."' '' H.
MARK (MaV«ot: Marau). Mark the Evan-
gelist is probably the same as " John whose sur-
name was Mark " (Acta xii. 12, 25). Grotius in-
deed maintains the contrary, on the ground that
the earliest historical writers nowhere call the
Evangelist by the name of John, and that they
always describe him as the companion of Peter
and not of Paul. But John was the Jewish name,
and Mark, a name of frequent use amongst the
Romans, was adopted afterwards, and gradually
superseded the other. The places in the N. T.
nable us to trace the process. The John Mark
uf Acta xii. 12, 25, and the John of Acta xiii. 5,
13, becomes Mark only in Acts xv. 89, Col. iv. 10,
1 11m. It. 11, Philem. 24. The change of John
to Mark ia analogous to that of Saul to Paul;
.-ad we cannot doubt that the disuse of the Jewish
name in favor of the other Is intentional, and has
reference to the puttiug away of his former life,
and entrance upon a new ministry. No incon-
sistency arises from the accounts of his ministering
to two Apostles. The desertion of Paul (Acts xiii.
13) may have been prompted partly by a wish to
rejoin Peter and the Apostles engaged in preaching
In Palestine (Benson; see Kuinoel's note), though
nrtly from a disinclination to a perilous and
loubtful journey. There ia nothing strange In
.he character of a warm Impulsive young man,
drawn almost equally towards the two great
teachers of the faith, Paul and Peter. Had mere
aowardice been the eaose of his withdrawal, Bar-
esbas would not so soon after ban chosen biro
MIRK
for ai other journey, nor would he hare acespssa
the choice.
John Mark waa the son of a certain Mvy, wnc
dwelt at Jerusalem and was therefore probably
born in that city (Acts xii. 12). He was th«
cousin (iwuViof ) of Barnabas (Col. iv. 10). [Si»
tbb'8 Son, Amer. ed.] It was to Mary's house
as to a familiar haunt, that Peter came after his
deliverance from prison (Acts xii. 12), and there
found "many gathered together praying;" and
probably John Mark waa converted by Peter from
meeting him in his mother's house, for he speaks
of " Marcus my aon " (1 Peter v. 13). Thia uat
ural link of connection between the two passages
ia broken by the supposition of two Marks, which
is on all acoounta improbable. The theory that he
waa one of the seventy disciples is without any
warrant. Another theory, that an event of the
night of our Lord's betrayal, related by Mark
alone, ia one that befell himself (Olshauaen, Lange),
must not be so promptly dismissed. •' There fol-
lowed Him a certain young man, having a linen
cloth cast about his naked body ; and the young men
laid bold on him : and he left the linen cloth, and
fled from them naked " (Mark xiv. 61, 62). The
detail of frets is remarkably minute, the name only
is wanting. The most probable view is that St.
Mark suppressed his own name, whilst telling a
story whhh he had the best means of knowing.
Awakened out of sleep, or just preparing for it in
some house in the Valley of Kedron, he comes out
to see the seizure of the betrayed Teacher, known
to him and in some degree beloved already. He ia
so deeply interested In his fate that be follows Him
even in his thin linen robe. His demeanor is such
that aome of the crowd are about to arrest him ;
then, "fear overcoming shame" (Bengel), be
leaves his garment in their hands and flees. We
can only say that if the name of Mark is supplied,
the narrative receives its moat probable explanation.
John (1. 40, xix. 26) introduces himself in this
unobtrusive way, and perhaps Luke the same (xxir.
18). Mary the mother of Mark seems to bare
been a person of some means and influence, and
her house a rallying point for Christiana in those
dangerous days. Her son, already an inquirer,
would soon become more. Anxious to work for
Christ, he went with Paul and Barnabas as then
"minister" (farnpf'rnr) °° their first journey; but
at Perga, aa we have seen above, turned back (Acts
xii. 26, xiii. 13). On the second journey Paul
would not accept him again as a companion, but
Barnabas his kinsman was more indulgent; and
thus he became the cause of the memorable " sharp
contention " between them (Acts xr. 36-40).
Whatever was the cause of Mart's vacillation, H
did not separate him forever from Paul, for we
find him by the side of that Apostle In his first
imprisonment at Rome (Col. ir. 10; Philem. 24).
In the former place a possible journey of Mark to
Asia ia spoken of. Somewhat later he ia wit)*
Peter at Babylon (1 Pet. v. 13). Some consider
Babylon to be a name here given to Rome in a
mystical sense; surely without reason, since the
date of a letter is not the place to look for a figure
of speech. Of the causes of this visit to Bahywti
then ia no evidence. It may be conjectured that
he made the journey to Aaia Minor (Col. It. 10k
and thence went on to join Peter at Babylon. Ox
his return to Asia he aseuis to have been with Thsv
otby at Epbeaus when Paul wrote to him dnrio|
Digitized by
Google
MARK, GOSPEL OF
ah second imprisonment, and Paul was anxious for
his return to Home (3 Tim. iv. 11 ).
When we desert Scripture we find the facie
doubtful and even inconsistent. If Papiaa be trusted
(quoted in Eusebius, H. E. iii. 39), Mark never
was a disciple of our Lord ; which he probably in-
fers from 1 Pet. v. 13. Epiphanius, on the other
hand, willing to do honor to the Evangelist, adopts
the tradition that he was one of the seventy-two
disciples, who turned back from our Lord at the
hard saying in John vi. ( Cont. liar. ii. 6, p. 467,
Dindorf 's recent edition). The same had been said
of St. Luke. Nothing can be decided on this point.
The relation of Mark to Peter is of great impor-
tance for our view of hi» Gospel. Ancient writers
with one consent make the Evangelist the inter,
prefer (ipfiriytrrhf ) of the Apostle Peter (Papias
in Euseb. //. E. iii. 39; Irenuus, liar. iii. 1,
iii. 10, J 6 j Tertullian, c. Hare. iv. 5; Hieronymus,
ltd lltdib. ix. Ac.). Some explain this word to
mean that the office of Mark was to translate into
the Greek tongue the Aramaic discourses of the
Apostle (Eichhorn, BerthoJdt, etc); whilst others
adopt the more probable view that Mark wrote a
Gospel which conformed more exactly than the
others to Peter's preaching, and thus " interpreted "
it to the church at large (Valesius, Alford, Lange,
Kritzsche, Meyer, etc.). The passage from Euse-
bius favors the latter view; it is a quotation from
Papias. "This abo [John] the elder said: Mark,
being the interpreter of Peter, wrote down exactly
whatever things he remembered, but yet not in the
order in which Christ either spoke or did them;
for be was neither a hearer nor a follower of the
Lord's, but he was afterwards, a* I [Papias] sail,
a follower of Peter." The words in italics refer
to the word interpreter above, and the passage de-
scribes a disciple writing down what his master
preached, and not an interpreter orally translating
his words. This tradition will be further examined
below. [Mark, Gospkl or.] The report that
Mark was the companion of Peter at Home is no
doubt of great antiquity. Clement of Alexandria
is quoted by Eusebius as giving it for a "tradition
which he bad received of the eldeis from the first "'
(waptiocuf rip art/cad** •Kpt9$\nip<jov y Eusebius,
//. E. vi. 14; Clem. Alex. Hyp. 6). But the force
uf this is invalidated by the suspicion that it rests
in a misunderstanding of 1 Pet. v. 13, Babylon
oeing wrongly taken for a typical name of Rome
(Euseb. H. E. ii. IS; Hieron. lie Ylr.ilL 8). Sent
. n a mission to Egypt by Peter (Epiphanius, /far.
Ii. 6, p. 457, Dindorf; Euseb. H. E. ii. 16), Mark
there founded the church of Alexandria (Hieron.
De Vir. UL 8), and preached in various places
(Nieeph. //. fc. ii. 43), then returned to Alexan-
dria, of which church he was bishop, and suffered
a martyr's death (Nieeph. ib'uL, and Hieron. As Vir.
UL 8). But none of these later details rest on
lound authority. (Sources — The works on the
Gospels referred to under Luke and Gospels; also
I'ritzache, In Marcum, Leipzig, 1830; Lange,
Sibelaerk, part ii. etc.) W. T.
MARK, GOSPEL OF. The characteris-
tics of this Gospel, the shortest of the four inspired
records, will appear from the discussion of the va |
■ious questions that have been raised about it I
L Source* of thu Gospel. — The tradition that '
R gives the teaching of Peter, rather than of the
feat of the Apctles, has been alluded to above.
taw witdati of John the Presbyter, quoted by
MARK, GOSPEL OF 178?
Eusebius (H. E. iii. 39) through Papias, has beta
cited. [See Mark.] Irens-us calls Mar* •' iater-
pres et sectator Petri," and cites the opening and
the concluding words of the Gospel as we now poa
seas them (iii. 10, § 6). He also alludes to a sect (the
Corinthians?) who hold " impassibilem perscreraaac
Christum, passum vero Jesum," and who prefer the
Gospel of St Mark to the rest (iii. 11, $ 7). Euse-
bius says, on the authority of Clement of Alexan-
dria, that the hearers of Peter at Kome desired
Mark, the follower of Peter, to leave with them a
record of his teaching; upon which Mark wrcte)
his Gospel, which the Apostle afterwards sato-
tioned with his authority, and directed that r t
should be read in the Churches (Eus. R. E. ii. 16'. .
Elsewhere, quoting Clement again, wo have tl *
same account, except that Peter is there described
as " neither hindering nor urging " the undertak-
ing (U. £. vi. 14). The apparent contradiction
has been conciliated by supposing that Peter nei-
ther helped nor hindered the work bef>re_ it was
completed, but gave his approval afterwards (" Host
fieri ipsum non jusserit, tamen factum non pro-
bibuit," Ruffinus: see note of Valesius t* loe.
Eus. ). Tertullian ( Cont. Marcionem, iv. 5) speaks
of the Gospel of Mark as being connected with
Peter, '• cujus interpres Marcus," and so having
apostolic authority. Epiphanius says that, imme-
diately after St. Matthew, the task was laid on St.
Mark, "the follower of St. Peter at Kome," of
writing a Gospel {Har. Ii.). Hieronymus (De Vir.
ill. 8) repeats the story of Eusebius; and again
says that the Gospel was written, " Petro narrauta,
et illo scribente " (Ad lledib. 2). If the evidence
of the Apostle's connection with this Gospel rested
wholly on these passages, it would not be sufficient,
since the witnesses, though many in number, are
not all independent of each other, and there are
marks, in the former of the passages from Euse-
bius, of a wish to enhance the authority of the
Gospel by Peter's approval, whilst the latter pas-
sage does not allege the same sanction. But then
are peculiarities in the Gospel which are best ax- *
plained hy the supposition that Peter in some way
superintended its composition. Whilst there is
hardly any part of its narrative that is not com-
mon to it and some other Gospel, in the manner
of the narrative there is often a marked character,
which puts aside at once tbe supposition that ws
have here a mere epitome of Matthew and Luke.
The picture of the same events is far more vivid ;
touches are introduced such as could only be noted
by a vigilant eye-witness, and such as make us
almost eye-witnesses of tbe Redeemer's doings.
The most remarkable case of this is the account
of the demoniac in the country of the Gadarenes,
where the following words are peculiar to Mark'
"And no man could bind him, no, not with chains:
because that he had often been bound with fetters
and chains, and the chains had been plucked asun-
der by him, and the fetters broken in pieces : neither
could any man tame him. And always night and
day he was in the mountains crying and cutting
himself with stones. But when he saw Jesus afar
off, he ran," etc. Here we are indebted for the
picture of the fierce and hopeless wanderer to the
Evangelist whose work is the briefest, and whose
style is the least perfect. He sometimes adds to
the account of the others a notice of our Lord's
look (iii. 84, viii. 38, x. 81, x. 93); ha dwells
on human feelings and tbe tokens ef them; on
oar Lord's pit; fbr the leper, and Us atrial
Digitized by
Google
1788 MARK, GOSPEL OF
eharge not to publish the minds (I. 41, 44); Ha
"kind " the rich young man for his anawera (x.
II); He " looked round " with anger when another
occasion called it out (iii. 5); He groaned in spirit
(vii. 34, viii. 12). All these are peculiar to Mark;
and they would be explained roost readily by the
theory that one of the disciples most near to Jesus
had supplied them. To this must be added that
whilst Hark goes over the same ground for the
most pert as the other Evangelists, and especially
Matthew, there are many tacts thrown in which
prove that we are listening to an independent wit-
nets. Thus the humble origin of Peter is made
known through him (i. 16-20), and his connection
with Capernaum (L 29); he tells us that Levi was
« the son of Aiphseus " (ii. 14), that Peter was
toe nunc given by our Lord to Simon (iii. 16), and
Boanerges a surname added by Him to the names
o* two others (iii. 17); he assumes the existence
ef another body of disciples wider than the Twelve
(iii. 32, h. 10, 36, viii. 34, xiv. 51, 52); we owe to
him the name of Jairus (v. 22), the word " car-
penter " applied to our Lord (ri. 3), the nation of
the " Syrophoenician " woman (vii. 26) ; he substi-
tutes Dalmanutba for the " Magdala " of Matthew
(viii. 10); he names Bartimreus (x. 46); he alone
mentions that our Lord would not sutler any man
to carry any vessel through the Temple (xi. 16);
and that Simon of Cyrene was the lather of Alex-
ander and Kufus (xv. 21 ). AU these are tokens of
an independent writer, different from Matthew and
Luke, and in the absence of other traditions it is
natural to look to Peter. One might hope that
much light would be thrown on this question from
the way in which Peter is mentioned in the Gospel ;
but the evidence is not so clear as might have been
expected. Peter is often mentioned without any
special occasion for it (i. 36, v. 37, xi. 20-26, xiii.
I, xvi. 7); but on the other hand there are passages
from which it might seem that the writer knew less
of the great Apostle. Thus in Matt. xv. 15, we
have " Peter; " in the parallel place in Mark only
the disciples." The Apostle's walking on the sea
u omitted: so the blessing pronounced on him
(Matt. xvi. 17-19), and the promise made to all
the Apostles in answer to him (Matt xix. 28).
Peter was one of those who were sent to prepare
.he Passover; yet Mark omits his name. The
word " bitterly " of Matthew and Luke is omitted
by Hark from the record of Peter's repentance ;
whilst the account of his denials is full and circum-
stantial. It has been sought to account for these
omissions on the ground of humility; but some
may think that this cannot be the clew to all the
places. But what we generalize from these pas-
sages Is, that the name Peter is peculiarly dealt
with, added here, and there withdrawn, which
would be explained if the writer had access to
tpt-cial information about Peter. On the whole, in
spite of the doubtfulness of Kusebius's sources, and
the almost self-contradiction into which he falls, the
Internal evidence inclines us to accept the account
that this inspired Gospel has some connection with
St. Peter, and records more exactly the preaching
which be, guided by the Spirit of God, uttered for
the instruction of the world.
II. Relation of Mark to Mntthem ami Luke. —
the results of criticism as to the relation of the
three Gospels are somewhat humiliating. Up to
this day three views are maintained with equal
tidor : («) that Mark's Gospel is the original
Gospel out of which the other two hare been de-
MABK, GOSPEL OF
▼eloped; (4) that it was a compilation from lbs
other two, and therefore was written last; and (e
that it was copied from that of Matthew, and fonns
a link of transition between the other two. (a.) Of
the first view Thiersch may serve as the expositor
•' No one," he says, " will now venture to call Mark
a mere epitomizer of Matthew and Luke. Were
his Gospel an epitome of theirs, it would bear the
marks of the attempt to combine in one the excel-
lences of both ; else the labor of epitome would have
been without an object. But the very opposite is
the case. We miss the peculiarities of Matthew
and Luke. We find that which is common to both.
And therefore, were Mark's Gospel a mere epitome
of the others, we should have a third repetition of
that which had been already twice related, with so
little additional or more exact matter, that the
intention and conduct of the writer would remain
a riddle. This difficulty disappears, and a great
step is made in threading the labyrinth of the
Gospel harmony, when we see that Mark formed
the basis of Matthew and Luke. Where they fol-
low him they agree. Where they do not, as in ths
history of our Lord's childhood, in his discourses,
and in his appearances after his resurrection, they
differ widely, and each takes his own way "
(Thiersch, Ckwrck History, p. 94, Carlyle's trans-
lation). But the amount of independent narrative
is too great, in each of the others, to admit of their
having derived their Gospels from Mark ; and in
the places which they have in common, each treats
the events in an independent way, and not u a
copyist. Still this opinion hss been held by Herder,
Storr, Wilke, Weisse, Keuss, Ewald, and others.
(6. ) The theory that Mark's Gospel Is a compilation
and abridgment of that of Matthew is maintained
by Augustin, and after him by Euthymius and
Michaelis. The facto on which it rests are clear
enough. There are in St. Mark only about three
events which St. Matthew does not narrate (Mark
i. 23, viii. 22, xii. 41); and thus the matter of the
two may be regarded as almost the same. But the
form in St. Mark is, as we have seen, much briefer,
and the omissions are many and important. The
explanation is that Mark had the work of Matthew
before him, and only condensed it But many
would make Mark a compiler from both the others
(Griesbach, De Wette, etc.), arguing from passages
where there is a curious resemblance to both (see
De Wette, Hnndbuch, § 94 a), (c.) Lastly, the
theory that the Gospel before us forms a sort of
tranaition-link between the other two, standing
midway between the Judaic tendency of Matthew
and the Universalis or Gentile Gospel of St Luke,
need not trouble us much here [see above, p. 1697].
An aocount of these views may be found in Hilgen-
feld's fSvrmgtlien. It is obvious that they refute
one another: the same internal evidence suffices to
prove that Mark is the first, and the last, and the
intermediate. Let us return to the facts, and,
taught by these contradictions what is the wort)*
of " internal evidence," let us carry our speculations
no further than the facts. The Gospel of Mark
contains scarcely sny events that are not recited by
the others. There are verbal coincidences with
each of the others, and sometimes peculiar words
from both meet together in the parallel place in
Mark. On the other hand, there are unmistakabls
marks of independence. He hss passages peculiar
to himself (as iii. 20, 21, iv. 26-29, vii. 31-37, viii
22-26, xi. 11-14, xiv. 51, 52, xvi. 9-11), and
peculiar fullness of detail where he goes over tat
Digitized by
Google
HARK, GOSPEL OF
■ma ground as the others. The beginning cf hi*
Gospel b peculiar; to ii the end. Remarkable it
the abeence of passages quoted from the Old Testa-
ment by the writer himself, whc, however, raeitea
vuch passages when need by our Lord. There are
only two exception! to this, namely, the opening
rente of the Gospel, where Mai. iii. 1 and h. xl. 3
are cited ; and a verse in the account of the cruci-
fixion (xv. 28), where he quotes the words, " and
He was numbered with the transgressors " (Is. liii.
12): but this is rejected by Alfbrd and Tiscbendorf
as spurious, inserted here from I.uke xxii. 37. After
deducting these exceptions, 23 quotations from or
references to the 0. T. remain, in all of which it is
either our Lord Himself who is speaking, or some
one addressing Him.
The hypothesis which best meets these bets it,
that whilst the matter common to all three Evan-
gelists, or to two of them," is derived from the oral
teaching of the Apostles, which they had purposely
reduced to s common form, our Evangelist writes
as an independent witness to the truth, and not as
a compiler; and that the tradition that the Gospel
was written under the sanction of Peter, and its
matter in some degree derived from him, is made
probable by the evident traces of an eye-witness in
many of the narratives. Hie omission and abridg-
ment of our Lord's discourses, and the sparing use
of O. T. quotations, might be accounted for by the
special destination of the Gospel, if we had surer
data for ascertaining it ; but it was for Gentiles,
with whom illustrations from the O. T. would have
lets weight, andS the purpose of the writer was to
present a clear and vivid picture of the acts of our
lord's human life, rather than a full record of hit
divine doctrine. We may thankfully own that,
with little that it in substance peculiar to himself,
the Evangelist does occupy for us a distinct position,
and supply a definite want, in virtue of these char-
acteristics.
m. Thit Gotpel written primarily for Gentilet.
— We hare seen that the Evangelist scarcely refers
to the 0. T. in his own person. The word Law
(vifiat ) does not once occur. The genealogy of our
Lord is likewise omitted. Other matters interesting
chiefly to the Jews are likewise omitted ; such as
the references to the O. T. and Law in Matt. xii.
8-7, the reflections on the request of the Scribes
and Pharisees for a sign, Matt. xii. 38-45; the
parable of the king's son, Matt xxii. 1-14; and
the awful denunciation of the Scribes and Pharisees,
in Matt, xxiii. Explanations are given in some
places, which Jews could not require : thus, Jordan
it a "river" (Mark i. 6; Matt. iii. 6); the Phari-
sees, etc " used to fast " (Mark ii. 18; Matt ix.
14), and other customs of theirs are described
(Mark vi. 1-4; Matt. xv. 1, 9); " the time of figs
as not yet," i. e. at the season of the Passover
Mark xl. 13; Matt xxi. 19); the Sadducees' worst
tenet is mentioned (Mark xii. 18) ; the Mount of
Olives is " over against the temple " (Mark xiii. 3 ;
Matt xxiv. 3); at the Passover men eat "un-
leavened bread" (Mark xiv. 1, 12; Matt xxvi. 2,
17), and explanations are given which Jews would
not need (Mark xv. 8, 18, 42; Matt xxvii. 15, 87,
57). Matter that might oflhnd is omitted, as Matt,
x. 6, 6, tL 7, 8. Pa ssag es, not always peculiar to
Mark, abound In bit Gospel, in which the an-
« \uus has 3B sections common to all thro- 28
etartn to bin. and Matthew; and 18 common u.hta.
MARK, GOSPEL OF 1789
tagonism between the pharisaic legal spirit and the
Gospel come out strongly (i. 22, ii. 19, 32, x. 6,
viii. 15), which hold out hopes to the heathen at
admission to the kingdom of heaven even without
the Jews (xii. 9), and which put ritual forms bekiw
the worship of the heart (ii. 18, iii. 1-6, vii. 6-23).
Mark alone preserves those words of Jesus, " The
Sabbath was made for man, and not man for the
Sabbath " (ii. 27). Whilst he omits the invective
against the Pharisees, he indicates by a touch of
his own how Jesus condemned them " with anger "
(iii. 5). When the Lord purges the Ten: pie of
those that polluted it. He quotes a passage of Isaiah
(Ivi. 7); but Mark alone reports as part of it the
words " of all nations " (xi. 17 ). Murk alone makes
the Scribe admit that love is better then sacrifices
(xii. 33). From the general testimony of tbnw
places, whatever may be objected to an inference
from ons or other amongst them, there is little
doubt but that the Gospel was meant for use in the
first instance amongst Gentiles. But the facts give
no warrant for the dream that the first Evangelist
repr e sents the Judaic type of Christianity, and tbo
third the Pauline; and that Mark occupies an in-
termediate position, marking the transition from
one to the other I In St Mark we have the Gospel
at it was preached to all the work), and it is so
presented as to suit the wants of Gentiles. But
there is not a trace of the wish, conscious or un-
conscious, to assist in any change of Christian
belief or modes of thinking. In all things it is a
calm history, not a polemical pleading.
IV. Tim* when the Gotpel wat written. — It
will be understood from what has been said, that
nothing positive can be asserted as to the time
when this Gospel was written. The traditions an
contradictory. Irenaeus says that it was written
after the death {l(o9or, but Grabs would translate,
wrongly, departure from Rome) of the Apostle
Peter (Eusebius, H. K. v. 8); but we have seen
above, that in other passages it is supposed to be
written during Peter's lifetime (Eus. H. E. vi. 14,
and ii. 15). In the Bible there is nothing to decide
the question. It Is not likely that it dates before
the reference to Mark in the Epistle to the Colos-
siant (iv. 10), where he is only introduced as a
relative of Barnabas, as if this were his greater*
distinction ; and this epistle was written about A. D.
62. If after coming to Asia Minor on Paul's send-
ing he went on and joined Peter at Babylon, ha
may have then acquired, or rather completed, that
knowledge of Peter's preaching, which tradition
teaches us to look for in the Gospel, and of which
there is so mnch internal evidence; and soon after
this the Gospel may have been composed. On the
other hand, it was written before the destruction
of Jerusalem (xiii. 13, 24-30, 33, Ac.). Probst Jy
therefore, it was written between a. d. 63 and 70.
But nothing can be certainly determined on this
point
V. Place where the Gotpel toat written. — The
place it as uncertain as the time. Clement, Euse-
bius, Jerome, and Epiphanlus, pronounce for Rome,
and many modems take the same view. The Latin
expressions in the Gospel prove nothing; for then
it little doubt that, wherever the Gospel was written,
the writer had been at Rome, and so knew its lan-
guage. Chrysostom thinks Alexandria; hut thit
is not confirmed by other testimony.
VI. Language. — The Gospel wss written in
Greek; of this there can be no doubt if ancient
t es tim o n y it to weigh. Baronius indeed, M lbs
Digitized by
Google
1790 MARX, GOSPEL OF
authority of an old Sjriae translation, Slants that
Latin in the original language; and some HSS.
referred to in Scbolz (Crtek TnL p. xxx.) repeat
the same: but this arises no doubt from the belief
that it was written at Home and for Gentiles. This
opinion and its grounds. Wahl has travestied by
supposing that the Gospel was written at Alex-
andria in Coptic. A I-atin Gospel written for, the
use of Roman Christians would not have been lost
without any mention of it in an ancient writer.
VII. GtmdnenaioftheGotpfl.— Schleiermacher
ana the first perhaps to question that we have in
our present Gospel that of which Papias speaks, on
the ground that his words would apply to a simpler
and less orderly composition (Studien u. Ktitiktn,
1883). Accordingly the usual assumption of a later
editor is brought in, as in the case of St Luke's
Gospel [see p. 1687]. But the words of Papias
require no such aid (Euseb. //. E. ili. 89), nor
would such authority be decisive if they did. All
ancient testimony makes Mark the author of a
certain Gospel, and that this is the Gospel which
has come down to us, there is not toe least his-
torical ground for doubting. Owing to the very few
sections peculiar to Mark, evidence from patristic
quotation is somewhat difficult to produce. Justin
Martyr, however, quotes ch. ix. 44, 46, 48, xii. 80,
and iii. 17, and Ireneus cites both the opening
and closing words (iii. 10, 6). An important tes-
timony in any case, but doubly so from the doubt
that has been cast on the closing verses (xvi. 9-19).
Concerning these verses see Meyer's, Alford's, and
Teschendorf's notes. The passage is rejected by
the majority of modern critics, on the testimony
of MSS. [particularly the Vatican and the Sinaitic]
and of old writers and on the internal evidence of
the diction. Though it is probable that this sec-
tion is from a different hand, and was annexed to
the Gospel soon after the time of the Apostles, it
must be remembered that it is found in three of
the four great uncial MSS. (A C D), and is quoted
without any question by Ireneeus. Among late
critics Olshausen still pronounces for its genuine-
ness. With the exception of these few verses the
genuineness of the Gospel b placed above the reach
of reasonable doubt.
VIII. Style and Diction. — The purpose of the
Evangelist seems to be to place before us a vivid
picture of the earthly acta of Jesus. The style is
peculiarly suitable to this. He uses the present
tense instead of the narrative aoriat, almost in every
chapter. The word t!>$4as, " straightway," is used
oy St. Mark forty-one times. The first person is
preferred to the third (iv. 30, v. 8, 9, 13, vi. 8, 8,
81, 33, ix. 85, 33, xii. 6). Precise and minute de-
tails sa to persons, places, and numbers, abound in
the narrative. All these tend to give force and
vividness to the picture of the human life of our
Lord. On the other aide, the facts are not very
exactly arranged; they are often connected by
nothing more definite than ml and -riKir- Its
conciseness sometimes makes this Gospel more
tbseure than the others (i. 18, ix. 5,6, Iv. 10-84).
Many peculiarities of diction may be noticed;
amongst them the following: 1. Hebrew (Ara-
aaa'e) words are used, bat explained for Gentile
readers (ill. 17, 88, v. 41, rU. 11, 84, ix. 43, x. 40,
riv. 36, xv. 83, 34). 8. Latin words are very fre-
roent, as Sipapior, \rytir, ore KovAsVraip, mrr
•lair, injrToj, KotpdVrns, oyary-veAAsw, wpwrar-
Ci{c / o*Ti|f. 8. Unusual words or phrases are found
; as i'toWa, ix. 8; fWvrrp«x« r > •*• •*!
MARK, GOSPEL OF
rovwrfif, xi. 34; raptor me-Turrj, xiv. 8; sVeiXsW
xv. 46; 1j<p,t, i. 34, xi. 16; rpomcaprtpftr (of s
thing), iii. 9; M to a-poewfa^dAuor xaeVuoWr.
iv. 88; -rpoika&t uypiaai, xiv. 8. 4. Diminutives
are frequent. 5. The substantive is often repeated
instead of the pronoun; as (to cite from ch. ii.
only) ii. 16, 18, 80, 38, 87, 88. 6. Negatives are
accumulated for the sake of emphasis (vii. 13, ix.
8, xii. 34, xv. 6, i. 44 (oua-fVi ob ill), xiv. 85, etew,
etc.). 7. Words are often added to adverbs for
the sake of emphasis; as roVe in Utitnp rg i,n4pa
ii. 30; Siamyrbs ruxror col iipipas, ver. 6; ti-
eVvf jtrra vwovSrjs, vi. 35; also vii. 31, viii. 4, x.
80, xiii. 39, xiv. 30, 43. 8. The same idea is often
repeated under another expression, as, i. 43, ii. 35,
viii. 15, xiv. 68, etc. 9. And sometimes the rep-
etition is effected by means of the opposite, as in
i. 32, 44, and many other places. 10. Sometimes
emphasis is given by simple reiteration, as in ii.
16, 19. 11. The elliptic use of Tre, like that of
{wot in classical writers, is found, ver. S3. 13.
The word Arcporrar is used twenty-five times in
this Gospel. 13. Instead of av/ifioi\i»p \ap$4r
rtiy of Matt., Mark has mififioiXiw woMir, iii.
6, xv. 1. 14. There are many words peculiar to
Mark; thus (AaAet, vii. 87, ix. 17, 35; fcOop-
0e«rflai, ix. 15, xiv. 83, xvi. 6, 6; fWyjcoAiffO-Scu,
ix. 36, x. 16; mrrvpfwr, xv. 39, 44, 45; no/up-
■prf>, xiii. 11; upeantoptieaSai, x. 35; oriA/hir,
ix. 3; trroi&is, xi. 8; e-w6\l$*ur, r. 84, 81;
<r«aUi)(, ix. 44, 46, 48; muSuftfcr, ix. 31, *yi r
r(f>, xv. 83.
Toe diction of St. Mark presents the difficulty
that whilst it abounds in Latin words, and in ex-
pressions that recall Latin equivalents, it is still
much more akin to the Hebraistic diction of St.
Matthew than to the purer style of St. Luke.
IX. ItmXatitm from the Old TeetamenL —The
following list of references to the Old Testament is
nearly or quite complete: —
Mark i. 2.
Hal. lit. L
1. 8.
Is. xl. 8.
i. 44.
Lev. xtv.3.
Ii. 26.
1 Sam. xxi. 6.
iv. IS,
ls.vi.10.
Tit. 6.
Is.xx1x.lt.
vH. 10.
Ex. xx. 12, xxi. H.
ix. 44.
Is. urri. 24.
x. 4.
Drat, xxiv. L
x. 7.
Gen. U. 24.
x. 19.
Xx. xx. 17.
xi. 17.
Is. in. 7 ; Jar. vfl. 0.
xii. 10.
Ps.cxvlU.21
xii. IS.
Deut, xxv. 5.
xU. 86.
Ex. 111. 8.
xtt.28.
Drat. vt.4.
xii. 81.
Uv.xU.18.
xii. as.
Pa. ex. L
xlH.14.
Dan. ix. 27.
xiii. 24.
Is.xttl.10.
xiv. 27.
boh. xiii. 7.
xiv. 62.
Dan. vtt.lt.
rr. 28 (?) Is. 1111.12.
xv. 84.
Ps. xxll. J.
X. CotUtnti of the Geepel — Though Una Gos-
pel hat little historical matter which is not sharer
with some other, it would be a great error to sup-
pose that the voice of Mark could have bean
silenced without injury to the divine haraany.
The minute painting of the scenes in which the
Lord took part, the fresh and lively mode of the
narration, the very absence of the predcos dis-
courses of Jesus, which, interpoard between Vt
Digitized by
Google
MASK, GOSPEL, OF
I wh, would hare delayed the action, all gin to
this Gospel a character of its own. It Is the his-
tory of the war of Jesus against sin and eril in the
world daring the time that He dwelt as a Man
among men. Its motto might well be, as Lange
observes, those words of Peter : " How God anointed
Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with
power; who went about- doing good, and healing
all that were oppressed of the Devil; for God was
with Him " (Acts x. 38). It develops a series of
acta of this conflict, broken by times of rest and
renvshins;, in the wilderness or on the mountain.
It records the exploits of the Son of God in the
war against Satan, and the retirement in which
after each He returned to commune with his
Father, and bring back fresh strength for new
encounters. Thus the passage from ii. I to til. 6
describes his first conflict with the Pharisees, and
it ends in a conspiracy of Pharisees and Herodians
for his destruction, before which He retires to the
sea (iii. 7). The passage from iii. 13 to vi. 6 con-
tains the sccouiit of his conflict with the unbelief
of his own countrymen, ending with those remark-
able words, •' And He could there do no mighty
work, save that He laid his hands upon a few sick
folk and healed them ; " then, constrained (so to
speak) in bis working by their resistance, He retired
for that time from the struggle, and " went round
about the villages teaching '' (vi. 6).
The principal di visions in the Gospel are these : —
1. John the Baptist and Jesus (i. 1-13). 9. Acts
of Jesus in Galilee (i. 14-ix, 60). 8. Teaching in
Pertea, where the spirit of the new kingdom of
the Gospel is brought out (x. 1-34). 4. Teaching,
trials, and sufferings in Jerusalem. Jems revealing
Himself as Founder of the new kingdom (x. 35-
and xv. 47). 6. Resurrection (xvt.).
Sources. — The works quoted under Luke, and
besides them, Davidson, Introduction to tf. T.
(Bagster, 1848); Lange, Bibelaerk, part ii., and
Leben Jesu; Fritzsche on St. Hark (Leipzig,
1830); Kuhn, Ltben Jtsu, vol. i. (Mainz, 1838),
and Sepp, Leben Christ! (1843-16). W. T.
* Additional Literature. — The most important
works on the Gospel of Mark are mentioned in the
supplement to the article Gospels, vol. ii. p. 969
ff. In addition, however, to the critical works of
Wilke (1838), Hilgenfeld (1860), Baur (1861),
James Smith of JorUanbill (1833), Holtzmann
(1863),Wcizsacker (1864/, with others there re-
ferred to, and the commentaries of Kuinod, Ols-
hausen, DeWette, Meyer, Bleek, Lange, Nast, etc.,
the following deserve to be noted: Knobei, Dc
Ev. .Ward Origine, Vratisl 1831; Hitzig, Ueber
Johanna Marctu u. seine Schriften, oder welcher
lokannes hat die Offenbarung ver/atstt Zurich,
1843; Giider, art. Marcus Evangelist, in Herzog's
Rad-EncyU. ix. 44-61 (1858); Kenrick, Tie Cos-
pet of Murk the Prottvanyelium, in his Biblical
Essiys, Lond. 1864, ISmo, pp. 1-68; Hilgenfeld,
Alt Marcus- Evangeiiumu. die Marcus- Hypotheee,
in his Zeitschr.f. wise. TheoL, 1864, vii. 387-3-13;
and Marcus swischen Matthaus u. Lucas, Ibid.,
1866, ix. 82-113; Zeiler, Zum Marcus- Evange-
Uum, in Hilgenfeld's Zeitsckr.f. wits. TheoL 1865,
«tti. 308-328, 386-408; H. U. Maijboom, Ges-
ehiederds en Critiek der Marcus- Hypothese, Amst.
1866; J. H. A. Michdsen, ftet Evangelic van
Morbus, l'gedeelte, Amst. 1807; Aug. Kloeter-
■ann, Das M trkusevangeliun nach seinem Quet-
' e m s t itte /. d. evang Geschichte, Ovtt 1867)
BLABOTH
1791
J. H. Seholten, Bet oudste tvangeUt Crituok
onderioek naar it samtnstcUmg . . . de hist,
aaarde enden oorsprong der evangtUm naar Mat-
thew en Marcus, Leiden, 1869; Davidson, Intrad.
to the Study of the If. T., Loud. 1888, ii. 76-123.
For an historical outline of the discussions respecting
the relation of Mark's Gospel to those of Matthew
and Luke, see Holtzmann in Bnnsen's Bibehetrk,
vol. viii. (1866), pp. 29-65. Many recent critics,
besides those mentioned in the preceding article
(p. 1788 4), as Smith of Jordanbill, Kenrick, Ritsohl
(TheoL Jahrb. 1861), Holtzmann, Weiss (7»eot
Stud. u. KriL 1861), SchenkeL WeizsScker, and
Meyer in the later editions of his Kommentar, n
gard Mark as the earliest and most original of lbs
first three Gospels, most of them, however, resort-
ing to the hypothesis of an earlier, perhaps I'etrina
Gospel, which forms its basis. The subject has been
discussed with great fullness by Holtzmann. On the
other hand, Hilgenfeld strenuously maintains the
secondary and derivative character of Mark's Gos-
pel, and Davidson, in his new Introduction (1868),
as well ss Bleek, adheres substantially to the view
of Griesbsch, arguing that it wss mainly compiled
from Matthew and Luke. Against the supposition
that any one of the Evangelists copied from the
others, see particularly the dissertation of Mr. Nor-
ton, " On the Origin of the Correspondences among
the First Three Gospels," in his Evidences of the
Genuineness of the Gospels, 2d sd. (1846), vol. L
Addit- Note D., pp. cvi.-ccxiii.
Among the special commentaries we may notice
the following: Victor Antiochenus (fl. A. o. 401).
ed. by C. F. Matthasi (Biirrooor wptaB- 'Arr. sad
&\Xvw rimy mtrlowv ithynffis sir to Kara Mdp-
«or ty- *lmyi\u>r), Moscow, 1775, Latin trans-
lation in Max. Bibl. Patrum, iv. 370 ft (comp.
Lardner, Works, iv. 681 ff., ed. 1829); Possinus,
Catena Gracorum Patrum in Marcum, Roma,
1673, fol.; Cramer, Catena Gracorum Patrum
in Evv. Mulih. et Mara, Oxon. 1840; Eafehymins
Zigabenus (in Migne's Patrol. Graxsa, vol. exxix.),
and Theophylact (ibid, vol exxiii.); see more fully
under Luke, Gospel op, p. 1699 ; G. A. Heune-
lius, Hard Evang. Notts gram.-hist.-crit. illus-
tratum, Argent 1716; J. FJsner, Com. philoL-crU.
in Ev. Marti, Traj. ad Khen. 1773; a F. A.
Fritzsche, Evang. Mara recensidt et cum Comm.
perpetuis edidit, Ups. 1830, a very elaborate philo-
logical commentary; James Ford, The Gospel of St.
Mark illustrated from Ancient and Modern Au-
thors, Lond. 1849; J. A. Alexander, The Gospel
according to Mark explained, New York, 1868,
perhaps the best commentary in English, being at
the same time scholarly and popular; (N. N. Whit-
ing,) 7"Ae Gospel according to Mark, translated
from the Greek, on the Basis of the Common Eng-
lish Version, with Notes, New York, 1868 (Anier.
Bible Union). The translation of Lange' s Com-
mentary by Prof. W. & T. Shedd, New Yctk,
1866, forming, with Oostersee on Luke, vol. ii. of
the N. T. series, and the new (5th) edition of Mey-
er's Krit. exeg. Uandb. ab. d. Evv. des Markus et
balms (Gott 1867), should also be mentioned
here. A.
MAffMOTH (MapiueBl; Alex. Mapuatf
Marimoth) =Mehemotb the priest, the son ot
Uriah (1 Esdr. viii. 62; oomp. Ear. viii. 33>.
MATIOTH (n'T«9 [bitterness, pi. Ges.]i
Mrn in both MSS.i and so also Jsrosse, sw
Digitized by
Google
r
i
1792
MARKET
Amaritudhubut), one of the town* of the western
lowland of Judah whose names are alluded to or
played upon by the prophet Micah in the warning
with which his prophecy opens (i. 12). The allu-
sion turns on the signification of Haroth — " bit-
ternesses. 1 ' It is not elsewhere mentioned, nor
has the name been encountered by travellers.
Schwarz's conjecture (107), that it is a contraction
of Maarath, is not very happy, as the latter con-
tains the letter ain, which but very rarely disap-
pears under any process to which words are sub-
jected. G.
* MARKET occurs in the 0. T. only in the
17th chap, of Ezekiel (vt. 13, 17, 19, 86), where it
b the rendering of the Hebr. 3^SQ, which in
the same chapter is flee times' (in w. 9, 97, 83, 34)
translated " merchandise." In the N. T. it is used
aa the equivalent of the Greek word inopd, which,
however, is rendered market-place in Matt. xx. 3 ;
Mark xii. 38; Luke vii. 39; Acts xvi. 19; and in
Mark vi. 56 is translated "ttrett " (apparently after
the Vulg. in ptateit).
The market was not only a place of traffic, but
also of general resort It was frequented by per-
sons in search of amusement (cf. Matt xi. 16 ; Luke
vii. 39) or of employment (Matt xx. 3), and in
tint., of calamity (Eocles. xii. 5 LXX. ; cf. Is. xv. 8).
There justice was commonly administered, and
many other public affairs transacted; there, too,
prophets and public teachers found their auditors
(efc Jer. xvii. 19; Prov. i. 20 (, viii. 1 fc; Luke
xiii. 26). They were " market-loungers " (a/yopaibi)
who aided the Jewish persecutors of Paul at rhes-
siJonica (Acts xvii. 5). Accordingly, the word
sometimes appears to designate little more than a
place of publicity (Matt xxiii. 7; Mark xii. 38;
Luke xi. 43, xx. 46).
The marketplaces in the cities of Palestine, at
least in the earlier times, lay just within the gates
[Gates, vol. i. p. 871 ; see also Thomson's Zand
and Book, i. 29 ft".]. They sometimes consisted of
something mora than a bare, open apace, if we
may judge from 1 Esdr. li. 18 (17), where we read
of "building (oUoSo/uivffi) the market-places:"
ef. Joseph. B. J. i. 21, § 8. And it is doubtful
whether they were always situated close to the city
gates (Joseph. B. J. v. 4, { lj v. 18, § 3; Vita, p.
19). Certainly in Jerusalem trade seems not to
km been confined to the neighborhood of the
MARKET
gates,- for we read In Jar. xxxvii. 21 of the bakaH"
•treet (YTl) (ef. also Neh. ill. 38), in Josephna
(B. J. v. 8, § 1), of the wool-mart, the copper-
smiths' shops, the clothes market, and (B. J. v. i.
§ 1) of the valley of the cheese-makers, while in
the rabbinical writings still other associated trades
are mentioned, as the corn-market, meat-market,
etc. (For illustrations of modern usages, see Tobler't
UenkbltiUcr mu JenanUm, pp. 139 ff., 148 f., 873 f.,
Ac.) Accordingly, the supposition is not an im-
probable one that in the larger cities a market for
the sale of country produce, cattle, etc., was held
in piaxze near the gates, while traffic in manufac-
tured articles was grouped in bazaars, or collections
of shops within — a usage not unknown in the East
at the present day [Street] (see Hackett's lltut-
tratiotu of Scripture, p. 69 tf.). On the approach
of the Sabbath, or of a festival, a signal from a
trumpet was given " between the two evenings "
[Day, vol. 1. p. 568] that work should cease and the
markets be closed. They remained shut also on
days of public mourning. Foreigners seem to have
been free to engage in traffic (Neh. xiii. 16, x. 81);
indeed, the wandering habits of oriental traders
are indicated by the primary signification ("one
who travels about") of "TO and vj 4 !, two of
the most common Hebrew words to denote a mer-
chant, (see Jas. iv. 13, and Hackett's IlhutraHont,
etc. p. 70 f.). The falsification of weights and
measures was rigorously proscribed by Moees and
the prophets (Lev. xix. 35, 36; Deut. xxv. 18, 15;
Eeek. xlv. 10 ff. j Amos viii. 5; Micah vi. 10 f.; cf.
Prov. xi. 1, xvi. 11, xx. 10, 83). On the medium
of trade see Monet.
Respecting " the market" at Athens, where Paul
11 disputed daily," according to the practice of pub-
lic teachers, at least from the time of Socrates, see
Athkss, vol. i. p. 194. A detailed account (of
course somewhat conjectural) of- the place and its
environs is given in Conybeare and Howson's lift
and F.pp. of St. Paul, i. 354 f., Am. ed., and a lively
description of the scenes that were to be witnessed
there may be found in Felton's Lecturet on Ancient
and Modern Ureece, i. 375 IT. ; cf. Becker's Chari-
ctu, 3d Eng. ed., p. 277 ff. The " market-place "
of Philippi, and the proceedings before the •' pra-
ters " there, must derive illustration from the foren-
sic usages of Rome, of which Philippi as a Bomaa
eoktny was a miniature likeness. J. H. T.
Digitized by
Google
• in «k
. tit -.
i &.'■
- 1 J . >
-~-t
l->: j
*".'
«*
Digitized by VjOOQ IC
Digitized by VaOOQ IC
Digitized by VaOOQ IC
fill „,„,
Digitized by
Google
l'nii" s ' T * "' "'"km
390l50Tl|r5Sg
^ppa.Y\ rvtsby i f\sSo
^BWWiWITIITI'IME
T OP
■ACgL
■»?
*??-.?
13
■
Vi'^V
nSsis ■
■ ■
■ ■■!.&.- -^?>;-> I
Live Music Archive
Librivox Free Audio
Metropolitan Museum
Cleveland Museum of Art
Internet Arcade
Console Living Room
Books to Borrow
Open Library
TV News
Understanding 9/11